Another great article by the Hon Julie Bishop MP. Making it compulsory for students to learn a foreign language from any early age is a step in the right direction for Australia's place in the interconnected and inter dependent world. Linguistic skills need to be highly valued by students, parents and employers. Significant effort needs to be made in communicating this value and in helping Australian firms to better utilise these skills.

It is hoped that the Australian Government will find funding for a diverse range of languages including Macedonian which is now not available at University level.

Hi Julie, this is an interesting article on several levels and having worked in some 29 countries I can relate to these issues.

The three key issues for me would be the “need” for languages, the cultural value and the weighted value of the resources required.

In terms of needs Europe is very unique. The pan-European trade and employment created by the EU has driven much broader linguistic skills but in my experience, on a much smaller scale that many might have anticipated. Basically most just “get by”.

Canada and the US probably only need bi-lingual to cover French and Spanish respectively however, these are driven primarily by socio-domestic issues rather than for trade purposes.

In Australia we are perhaps motivated by trade with the emerging economies of Asia. But we have to recognize that these nations depend upon trade with the developed world and will drive much harder than us to acquire multi-language skills, their growth depends on it.

Culturally no language can prepare us to relate effectively. A business presentation to Indonesians by a “round eye” cannot be effectively conducted without the supply of red and green tokens. They won’t answer interactively even if you do speak their language.

In South Korea there is little business conducted in the office during business hours. They take you out for dinner and drinks, get you pie eyed and get the contracts out.

In any event from a business perspective, we were sent to a school in Cincinnati before going on assignment, within a month we were speaking the lingo.

The student resources used for languages should replace something and not add to the overall load.

In a comprehensive series of essays called “The Corruption of the Curriculum” written during 2007 by authors such as Frank Furedi, Shirley Laws, Michele Ledda, Chris McGovern, Simon Patterson, Alex Standish, Robert Whelan and David Perks. The conclusion of these authors, all of whom are experienced teachers, is that the curriculum is being drained of intellectual content in favor of promoting political issues such racism, the environment and gender.

Please dump these first.

Thanks.

I made both my daughters learn French. It had nothing to do with learning a new language. It had everything to do with teaching them grammar. The only way students can now learn the principles of grammar is by studying a foreign language.

As a bilingual person and a school teacher of many years experience I agree with Julie Bishop. Study of at least one foreign language should be made compulsory from the earliest age possible (kindergarten or pre-school) and it should be done on a daily basis in possibly two half hour sessions. The culture of Europe or China/Japan will then be appreciated and our citizens will become more tolerant and informed. Later the study of literature and history in English will have more meaning to students.

As aptly explained by another writer to these pages, grammar will become easier to understand and a better level of literacy will ultimately be attained by Australian students.

THE LIGHT

Learning another language does not make you more aware of the financial system which ensalves you.It is just another distraction which takes the focus off the really important issues like liberty of the individual.

Agreed Arjay.

Should there be good opportunities for kids to learn second languages? Yes. Strongly promoted? Yes. Pushed down their throats? No. Compulsory? No.