Questions on Language Learning for Children

[LanguagesDad]

I won't mention the name of my company (not appropriate here) but as a brief introduction, we run language clubs in primary schools. As you can imagine, I spend a lot of my time presenting our product to parents and answering their questions.
Thought it might be useful to take my experience (I also have two bilingual kids at primary school) and share it here in a totally non-commercial way.
Happy to discuss, answer, share...!

Yes, please do share your experience raising two bilingual kids. A little background please? Language the are learning? Progress? Any ideas on teaching kids when you do not speak the language yourself?

Hi Mamabear12, thanks for asking. I'm happy to answer / discuss anything on this subject but will try to keep my replies short so it doesn't seem like I'm lecturing anyone!
Quite simply my wife, who's from Argentina, only ever speaks to our kids in Spanish. And that's all it takes. I call that "parent time", a concept we all understand where mum or dad just talk. And talk. And talk. We give commands, warnings, praise. We tell stories. We repeat. And we do it all in context (we only ever say "don't go near the fire", when they go near the fire). Give a child enough time in a language and they'll learn it (or "acquire" it, which is the more accurate term).
As long as the language exists in a world where the child wants or needs to communicate then it will all fit into place.
If you drop your child at the hotel kid's club and s/he doesn't speak a word of Spanish, s/he'll soon learn. The desire to join in coupled with the familiarity of the context will be enough.
This is the complete opposite of how we still teach languages in the UK. Like a throwback to the 50s, we still rely on homework, learning lists of vocabulary and filling in worksheets. And KS1 and KS2 don't really have space for more than 30-40 minutes language learning a week.
So, we're denying children time in the language... and the time we provide is not effective.
Now... what to do about that as well as an understanding of the short and long term benefits... we can talk about those too!

That's because bilingual children are acquiring language whilst children in schools are learning them. Using two different areas of the brain.

Most of us on this part of MN have used OPOL with our children.

Do your school projects only use L2 then? Because the schools of thought have moved on from that idea over the last few years. Previously there was a lot of emphasis on native speaker teachers wherever possible and only using L2. Thankfully the powers that be have realised neither of those are essential.

The biggest problem for language learning in the UK is that, as it's no longer compulsory beyond a certain age, teachers are no longer attracted to it.

I'm a secondary (and a bit of primary) languages teacher. I'd be fascinated to hear ideas about how we could change language teaching in UK schools. Are ypu suggesting that the way we teach MFL in the UK is very different from the way foreign languages are taught in schools in other countries?

Hi Eolian, my German teacher at school was my hero. There are plenty of examples of inspiring brilliance going on in schools up and down the country. The problem lies in the system (politicians) and what we're trying to achieve.
Firstly, for whatever historical reasons we choose to cite, languages are rarely more than an academic subject; one more on the list of GCSEs. Across Europe the days of "teaching" a language are almost over. Schools are either bilingual or adopt a policy of 25 - 50% CLIL. In other words, they don't teach the language but teach another subject IN the language.
It is expected that a school leaver in most European countries will be able to live, work or study in another language. In this country that is not the aim. In fact, I've met many young people who have "done" languages at University and are far from fluent (even if they can read Dante).
The worrying thing is that 15 years ago it was enough to "just have English" to be at the front of the queue. But the rest of the world has caught up, learned English and moved on to a third or fourth language. Today's kids in the UK will not be able to compete.
I'm sure if you had your students for 10 hours a week you could do wonders. And the result would be that you could send them into the world equipped to work, study and live wherever their talents took them.
Is there the political will to change this? No. And we're watching the lowest ever take up of languages at A Level.
Would love to know more about how you teach and why you love what you do.

ArtemisiaGentilleschi, we encourage the children to reply, chat to each other, ask questions etc in whatever language they choose. Our focus in our clubs (at KS1 / KS2 age), is to complete / take part in tasks, activities and games in a familiar context. Our teachers communicate in the target language almost all the time and the children are only encouraged to see this as one more problem solving activity within the session.
And yes, you are right... languages have slipped off the agenda. There's hardly any time dedicated to them at primary schools and it's disappearing at secondary.
The problem would be solved by some attempt at CLIL or similar.
In my research, I've only found one state bilingual primary school in the country.
What other suggestions, insights, ideas do you have?

I only speak English & 20 yr old GCSE french but would to encourage my DC's aged 11 & 9 with language learning. Firstly which language would you encourage and secondly what can we do to encourage proper learning beyond the basics?

scrappydappydoo, bonjour!

1. Which language? I do a lot of presentations to parents and, unsurprisingly, I'm asked this question a lot. I imagine you can predict my answer! Ask your kids in the same way you'd ask which instrument they want to learn, sport to take up or book to read. They might have some weird and wonderful reason why they want to learn a language. Is there somewhere you often go on holiday? Do they like something from a particular country... the food, football or films? Obviously, I could say that Mandarin and Spanish are the two most widely spoken languages and that must be worth something. But... tap into their interests first.
2. Don't worry about "proper learning". Think more about "same child, different language." In other words, if they like minecraft then they are doing brilliantly when they can follow a minecraft video in Spanish (or Mandarin, German, Gujarati etc). In my opinion, a language is useful when you can use it rather than explain it.

Well, I don't really love what I do, to be honest! These days I am mostly a non-subject-specific cover supervisor (a.k.a. babysitter/crowd control) but do some adult and primary MFL teaching too.

I'm a bit sceptical about the idea of the UK managing to adopt a more 'holistic' approach to language teaching really. You're dead right that it's pretty much impossible to learn a language the way we do it, but I can't see anyone agreeing to do it any other way.

For many other countries, English is presumably the obvious second language. For us it's not so obvious which language to choose. In many other countries, young people are surrounded by English. It is part of their youth culture and they need little persuasion to want to be able to speak it.

In the UK MFL is ranked low in importance by kids, parents and often senior management. The idea of teaching other subjects through an MFL would be considered preposterous by many non-MFL teachers (and possibly some MFL teachers)! But there isn't the curriculum time to devote more to MFL except through cross-curricular means.

Put simply, people simply don't want to do more MFL. And I don't see what would persuade them. Brexit is a pretty good indicator, sadly.

In spite of my cynicism, I haven't lost my own love of languages and am currently teaching myself Japanese! My disenchantment with teaching is more to do with the current state of thd education system rather than specifically the state of MFL teaching.

I agree with everything you say!

I set up my company quite simply because the political will is not there to make the necessary changes. The only way we can get to children and help them when they're young is through after school clubs. Unfortunately, real change needs a 20-year plan and clear policy thinking. And that's not going to happen with the calibre of people in the Education Dept!

David Graddol's report (link below) for the British Council, now 10 years old, looks at the rest of the world learning English. His conclusion is that we're almost at the stage where everyone will be able to speak the language and that this means monolingual English speakers (lots of kids in the UK!) will be at the back of the queue.

I've worked with govts in Spain and Italy, countries traditionally poor at language learning. They've got their act together. Not quite Sweden or Holland but they're on the way. The UK? It's becoming a backwater and this means our children will miss so many opportunities.

I'm not going to give up!

David Graddol - English Next - englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/attachments/books-english-next.pdf

I admire your determination! 20 years in the profession have worn me down...

I have brought up two bilingual children and have also worked with language teaching in different countries, with very different approaches from old-fashioned rote-learning of irregular verbs to the completely holistic natural learning approach.

Basically, my experience is that unless you have the time to recreate the full-on learning environment of a small child learning to speak their native language(s) from parents and playmates during all their waking hours then you are never going to get the same results teaching a foreign language to an older child in imitation of "natural learning".

Traditional grammar is simply a short-hand; a quicker way of doing things for people who have less time because they are older and nobody is going to spend 12 hours a day over several years giving them 1:1 attention and admiring everything they say.

I learnt English by using dictionaries and repeating irregular verbs, and only at a very late stage by exposure to actual natives. I speak it well enough to write books and articles in it, to teach and lecture in it, and to hold a normal conversation without drawing attention to myself.

When I was at school in Sweden 40 years ago, the mantra from above was all Natural Method language learning. It was considered very modern and avant garde in the 70s. But what teachers actually did, down at classroom level, was to quietly carry on with the traditional language learning that they had found worked for them. And I am very grateful to them as their approach made it a lot easier to learn more European languages after basic similarities had been pointed out to me.

My children were taught French without any recourse to grammar, in a supposedly natural way. They can't order a meal between them, let alone carry on the simplest conversation or read a basic newspaper article.

As a language teacher, first in Sweden, then in the UK, the main difference I find here is that undergraduates turn up at university without having been given the most basic tools to describe and think about languages. So at a time where we should be doing advanced academic thinking about the language, I have to sit down and teach them the basics. And I often get told how things they never understood about their German and French lessons suddenly make sense. Which is gratifying but also a waste of time in terms of what they are actually paying me to do for them. More grammar lessons in primary is something I would support.

Oh, and where do you find the evidence that Swedish schools are either bilingual or teach one subject exclusively in English? Not any school attended by relatives of mine, anyway.

Yes, these are things I already knew. Obviously, a child has to have/feel a need to learn the language. For example. My DD goes to bilingual school, where they are taught the curriculum one week in English and one week in French. This delays her learning French, because unfortunately, I only speak English and my husband does not speak French. The reason is because my dd does not have the NEED as, when she speaks English, the kids there respond in English, but can speak French with each other, as most come from families that speak French and they learned English when going to English nursery or having English speaking nannies. So this summer we have a French au pair, and I told my dd that the au pair does not understand or speak a word of English. And instantly from day one my dd has suddenly starting using all the French, she has been absorbing. I am very happy about this because some kids learn to just understand the language, but with out actually speaking it. She is now speaking French with the au pair in sentences and having conversations. I am amazed. If only I spoke the language and could help her. I am learning as she learns, but I am afraid I have to learn by looking at vocabulary. But at least this helps me understand mostly what is being said. I will not be able to speak fluently in sentences. In the future, when we go skiing, I am hoping to put my kids in ski school, and hopefully it will be French, as its in a French town.

I do wish schools would teach languages from a young age, like you describe so they could learn it naturally. At least they start introducing it young. When I was growing up we did not learn it until high school! Too late!

OP, can I please ask your view on bilingualism not suiting everyone?

I am bilingual and I my dc are bilingual too. One loves to speak in the 'other' language the other child refuses although he understands and speaks it when he has to.

In my experience people deal with different languages in different ways.

Some children (and grown ups) are happy to be bilingual and communicate in two languages whilst others feel uncomfortable doing this.

Some children are very reluctant to speak the additional languages, the one that their friends and teachers don't speak.

I think some people are brilliant at switching between languages but others are not, we all have different talents and barriers. I love languages and am bilingual and fluent in 2 other languages but am terrible at recalling the other languages when I am immersed in one language, in one country iyswim.

Also multilingualism is SO much more than just being able to communicate using words and grammar in different languages. It's also about acquiring different cultural and social skills and habits. For instance even though I speak English, a language I learned in school and whilst living in an English speaking country, nearly accent free and fluently, I have not been socialised to communicate in the "British way'.

I have lived long periods of time in 4 different countries and in my experience knowing different languages is a mixed blessing. It's useful and enriching in many ways but also complicated in terms of identity, communication style and mannerism and in terms of a sense of belonging.

Corythatwas - Funnily enough, I don't disagree with what you're saying. I started as a language teacher in 1988 and since then I've learned that there isn't one guaranteed method and although there is no evidence for "learning styles", I have seen that an individual's motivation is often the key to everything (and, of course, it could be their downfall as well as their success!).

What we're faced with in the UK is a number of factors that need addressing in order to help children develop the language skills that will benefit them in later life. More often than not this requires dealing with politics rather methodology.

My aim is to get to parents and give them the tools to encourage their children to learn languages. I then want children through primary school to see languages as something fun and relevant. In other words, it's not an academic subject that they can choose to do or be told their good or bad at. I doubt I'll be able to change the political will of either of the main parties, who seem more concerned with measuring success.

I see language learning at this age as something to compare to swimming lessons. We don't take our kids to the pool once a week in the hope that they'll be great swimmers or be in the Olympics. We want them to have no fear of the water, learn how to be safe and have as much fun as possible. And we want this to be something that they take through life.

There are people like you (and me!), who love grammar and understanding how language works. There are also people who love mechanics but you don't need to understand an engine to know how to drive. Unfortunately, in the UK, we seem to only encourage the language mechanics and lose all the language drivers.

Whether it be grammar translation, direct method or Suggestopedia, there have been many claims made about the best way to learn a language. And as we all know, each method has its success stories and cheerleaders.

I am much more concerned with providing access to language learning than making claims about methods. And so I am drawn to anything that is fun and rewarding, which builds confidence and motivates the young. This is why the central point of everything we do is to create meaningful tasks, games and activities that engage young minds and tap into their eagerness to take part and play.

Apologies if I got some information wrong about the education system in Sweden, I'm basing it on the hundreds of people from there I've taught and that might be misleading. Always happy to be corrected!

And as for undergraduates, I'm shocked that you can go to Oxford to study Italian barely being able to string two words together. But that's another matter!

How would you suggest engaging children in the UK (age 5 -11) in a system where they get 30 minutes' exposure to a foreign language a week (although many have it at home, of course)? All ideas greatly appreciated!

Mamabear12
It's difficult to balance what a child can do and parental expectations. Personally, I'd want nothing more than "same child, different language". In other words, is s/he likes Minecraft then they'll decode their way through a Minecraft video.
Ski school makes perfect sense. Everything will be in context and meaningful.

Often we're told that this doesn't work for adults because they need everything broken down and defined with grammar explanations. While I appreciate that position, I also noticed in my teaching years that adult students (18 - 30) would come to England to learn the language and enrol at a language school. They'd then study in a group according to their level and follow a step-by-step course. And they all learnt more! Of course, they did. It's impossible to learn less... or even stay in the same place, if you are concentrating on the language every day. However, those who got a job learned much more quickly. This is context and meaningful situations for adults. Nando's or XYZ School of English?!

Clipclopthisisthelifeforme - you raise a lot of interesting points and I'm not going to claim to know the answers.
Clearly, language and identity go together. I think of the way some people keep their accent and others, in a Zelig way, blend in. My grandparents had many friends who arrived in the UK as child refugees from mittel europe. Till their dying day they all kept their accents.
There are psychologists who will be much better placed to deal with your questions.
My interest is about opening up opportunities through language for young people to live, travel, work and study wherever their talents take them. And, in my opinion, the earlier we can get them on the right language path the better.
I have personal opinions about the role of culture in language learning (I steer clear!) but that's me.

Is German one of the languages your company offers? I think there are quite a lot of families in west London who would be interested.
Cheer

In your experience, is language tuition (when it exists) in primary schools adequate?
My Y3 and R kids complain that their French lessons just teach them the same bunch of words and rhymes and recap all the time, which sounds odd seeing as the teacher is a fluent speaker and a good teacher of other subjects, but I remember when I was at school there were years of learning the same few basics of French again and again, but never branching out into anything useful.

In comparison, started German in Y9 and by lesson 3 the teacher was making us write down the German for any sentence uttered in English and explaining why the sentence worked - we spent half an hour adapting "Ich habe meine Konkaktlinse verloren" and by GCSE were able to hold reasonable conversations (especially after being forced to stay with German host families for a fortnight!)

The kids' school have majority of kids with English as 2nd language - why is the language tuition in so many primaries so unambitious? And, I suppose, is yours or similar clubs better?

OP, I really don't get what you are saying about the English focusing on language mechanics: I teach undergraduates and the ones with any deeper understanding of language mechanics are few and far between.

I agree with NotCitrus that the level of ambition seems very low compared to that of other subjects and this in itself must be off-putting for the brighter students: how can you take a subject seriously when the intellectual effort required to pass an exam is so minimal compared to e.g. STEM subjects?

One thing for sure, for language learning that helps the most is repetition and using it! Bc I want my kids to learn, I have been learning all the basic phrases and use them all the time. So I have now learned these easily and remember because I used them. I have also learned tons of vocab easily for same reason. While trying to teach my kids, by pointing out and repeating etc. They stuck in my head. I do have au pair and in the past nanny to make sure kids learn correct pronunciation, as mine is not perfect. And of course, the school helps a lot for them to learn.

NotCitrus,
There are many reasons why language learning is unambitious at primary schools. Often it's just that the schools don't really have a chance because they're so focused on literacy and maths. There's also never been the same drive in the UK to be innovative about languages.

I set up our clubs because schools don't or can't dedicate enough time to language learning. If they did, I'd have to find something else to do! We try to build a love and interest in languages by engaging children in "doing things" in French, Spanish, German etc. rather than learning how the language works. There's plenty of time for the grammar at secondary school.

I love your question about whether our clubs are ambitious. The answer is yes... but all I really want is more time. That's all we need.

Ugene - if you want to message me directly then I can see if we can help in west London.
I'm being careful not to use this forum to advertise. I'm particularly interested in hearing all the stories and questions from parents.

Hi all - sorry to jump in but I thought it might of interest to some. I have a recommendation for an excellent language private tutor (Spanish tutor) who my family have been working with for a couple of years. She has extensive experience teaching children and adults and is bilingual herself. I am happy to recommend for anyone who might be interested as I know how hard it is to find the right person to teach your children in a meaningful way. As an aside, I'd add that I started taking lessons with her myself about 6 months ago. in that short space of time I feel like I have made great progress! Having had zero knowledge of the language before I can now hold short conversations with my children in Spanish, it is a very rewarding experience. Anyway if anyone is interested I am happy to do the link up! Best