Hello Rebecca. It is good to see students writing articles on OLO.

<< The key is to make foreign language studies mandatory from an early age in Australia similar to the European or Asian countries that have made English a compulsory language. >>

Yes and no.

Actually, no and yes!

No, I don’t think it is a good idea to make a foreign language mandatory at school, in English-speaking countries.

But yes it is certainly a good idea for NES or ESL (Non-English-speaking or English as a second-language) countries to make English compulsory.

The key point is that English is now the global language. So it is a very good idea for it to be taught everywhere, in all countries around the world.

As for a second language in English-speaking countries, I feel that it should be entirely voluntary.

The benefits are not significant enough to render it compulsory. Whereas the benefits ARE significant enough in NES/ESL countries.

Multilingualism in English-speaking countries may well have some cognitive and communicative advantages. But compelling kids to learn stuff that they may not want to learn can have negative spin-offs. They should be free to learn whatever takes their interest, in this regard, so that they may follow their chosen or natural path in life, and not be hamstrung by having to learn stuff that they may not be interested in. Of course, other areas of education do need to be compulsory, such as English, maths, science, geography, etc.

If they spend their time and their intellectual capital learning what they want to learn, beyond the standard subjects of English, etc, then the benefits to them, and to society overall, will be greater than forcing a second language upon them.

Also, is it not more important to learn English really well than being forced to spend one’s time trying to get a below-average hold on a second language, which they may use very little in their everyday lives?

Each to their own. Freedom of choice. There should be no compulsion in this area of education.

Having 400 different languages resulted from the physical separation of populations of the old world. We really don't need that now. Having one language which most people can speak is a great advantage. Learning a second language is an interesting thing to do, But necessary? I hope not.

Rebecca, thank you for an interesting contribution, although I accept that I am biased towards your suggestion, because I am an improving student and speaker of Mandarin.
To me, the benefits of multi-linguism are worthwhile, even if they may not be apparent during the early learning stages at school.
Here I take a mild exception to Ludwig's assertion that children ought not be taught material in which they are not interested.
In life, there are many things which we must, or should, learn ,and in which we may not have an interest.
But I feel that the learning of additional languages has a tangible benefit in understanding the syntax of English better. I found this glaringly obvious at high school where I took up studies of French, Latin, and a little German. Latin was an enormous aid to my understanding of the "rules' and grammar of English,as it is the root of so much of it.
Being able to speak the language of countries with which we have close cultural or trading associations, is still a real value, despite English's widespread use an acceptance around the world.
Also, it's fun to be able to speak another language - Zaijian!

While it is nice (& highly PC) to know a number of languages –and as Ludwig said it may have some cognitive benefits.We would be much better served to direct the funding into maths & science.

If you know the buyers language it is impressive --but if you have better technology/expertise they will be even more impressed.

“Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door”: Ralph Waldo Emerson

Yes, I'd agree that learning a foreign language is an aid to understanding the grammar of one's native tongue. It broadens horizons in general.

There are numerous subjects taught in most curricula that would be rubbed out according to a child's individual preferences. If LOTE is voluntary, it would not be taken up at primary school level in most cases. Most subjects can be boring when delivered in a boring way, Languages like anything else can be made interesting and relevant.

In Western Australia, a language other than English is already part of the curriculum in primary school. As a homeschooler who wishes she'd taken more of an interest in a foreign language at a younger age, we do French, although I'm inclined to switch to Latin simply for the breadth contained therein as the root to much of Western literature, culture and development, not to mention it's the basis of many words in English.

I sponsor an Ethiopian girl and she is required to learn three languages - her local dialect, the national language of her country and English.

<< Here I take a mild exception to Ludwig's assertion that children ought not be taught material in which they are not interested. In life, there are many things which we must, or should, learn ,and in which we may not have an interest. >>

Ponder, I acknowledged that some subjects should be compulsory and I would think clearly explained why I think learning a second language in English-speaking countries should not be included amongst them.

I am very pleased to have not been burdened with learning a second language, but instead to have been free to concentrate on science and later to study my natural subject of botany.

This has had a big spin-off in etymological terms, as it has taught me a great deal of Latin and Greek derivatives, which abound in the scientific names and anatomy of plants and animals.

I was burdened with the subject of scripture at school, to a limited extent. I hated it and did very poorly at it, while doing very well at English and the other core subjects.

I’m sure the same would have been the case if I’d been required to learn French or Mandarin or whatever.

One of the big problems with compulsory subject matter is that we are all different and a portion of kids would just do very poorly through lack of interest, if not rebel completely.

We see enough of this in the core subjects. But of course, core subject are fundamentally necessary and should be compulsory.

Let's not compound this problem by making some non-core subjects compulsory.