Should we avoid subjects just because they are hard

[Kenlee]

I was reading in another thread that we shouldnt learn a language like Chinese as it is difficult.

I was of the thinking because it is difficult. We must learn it ...

I was taught by a very straight laced teacher who till this day I still stand in awe. ( Being educated in a very good CoE primary school)

He said and I quote.

" Always work to make your weakness subject your best"

I have all the way throughout my life pursued this policy and it works for me.

So should we avoid subjects just because they are hard and take the easy option?

I think what the poster on that thread was saying is that Chinese is so hard that DC are unlikely ever to become anything approaching fluent in a few years, whereas they might in a European language. In most subjects, though, your teacher's maxim is good. I wish I hadn't decided early in my school life that physics was impossible...

I think it's important to have a mixture. The most important thing to learn in education is not on the curriculum of any one subject: it's the skill of buckling down and learning stuff that doesn't come easy. If a child is lucky enough to find several subjects easy and just does these subjects at GCSE and A-level, they can get to University without ever having to have learned the discipline of persevering when the going gets tough. However, it's also important to enjoy learning so I wouldn't expect anyone to only choose the most difficult subjects.

I think describing any subject as 'hard' is wrong.

Chinese isn't a remotely complicated language. But it takes a lot of learning by rote. Not difficult, but requires effort. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that pupils cannot learn it as well as any other MFL.

The demonisation of maths as 'too difficult' is pretty pants too.

With Chinese it is not about whether it is hard per se: it is about whether it is worth selling as a practical subject that lots of people should take because it will give them career advantages.

If people are using that argument then it is worth asking whether the amount of teaching you can fit into your school career is likely to actually get you to the point where you can access those practical advantages. Or to put it briefly, what will I be able to do with my Chinese when I leave school.

But of course it is always going to be worthwhile for individuals who are interested enough to take their Chinese further and go the extra mile.

For pupils who need to learn a work ethic it will also be worthwhile, in the same sense as learning Old English or playing the harp.

Thats a good point that...Chinese does require a lot of rote learning. Would learning Chinese increase your rote learning ability.

And a subject thats hard for you, is easy for me!
It depends on your brain wiring.
Rote learning for me is hard work - brain like a sieve, but give me a few basic rules, and maths / physical sciences are easy! My little brother was the opposite 0 give him a page of sqiggles, and he could quote it back to you 30 min or 30 days later. Ask him to use this general idea to predict what would happen when, and he thought you were bonkers!

Many children find rote learning hard and this is why we have a poor record of young people continuing with any language. However, some people find languages enjoyable and are up for the challenge whilst others find Maths enjoyable. Just depends on your brain. Our style of education has moved away from rote learning whereas this is still the norm in some Eastern Countries where the pressure on the children to succeed is immense. Of course some children would be good at Mandarin or Arabic, from scratch, but languages should not just be chosen because you want to use them in a job. These opportunities are limited and although companies should be recruiting linguists, they prefer economists and mathematicians. Languages should be learnt because they improve our understanding of humanity, show dedication to something challenging in order to succeed and show a thirst for a real expansion of our knowledge and cultural boundaries.

It seems a pity that there is little rote learning in schools today, not because of what you actually learn but because it becomes easier the more you do. My school was a long time ago, and old-fashioned even for its day; as a result I have a brain stuffed with poetry, kings of England, catechism, K James' bible, and sundry other fairly useless pieces of information. I am a whizz as a quiz team member though! Alas, as age creeps on the facility for new learning is weakening but the earlier stuff is still there.

I disagree that all MFL involve a lot of rote learning.

One of the reasons why I sent my daughter to the UK was so that she could get away from rote learning. To learn analytical thinking.

The hypothesis being for the first 10 years she would study in a local selective school to learn Chinese and have a good grounding in rote learning.

The next 10 years would be to learn analytical thinking.

The results...no one knows... I will tell you n 10 years time.