Children should be taught to read and write their own language well before they are expected to attempt another. The general standard of the English skills of school leavers and the tertiary-trained is appalling. Many teachers do not have appropriate English skills, and standards of the written media are absolute rubbish.

I’m inclined to think that the most necessary language skills a student should be taught in Australian schools (other than English) should be note taking skills including shorthand.

Note taking skills such as shorthand would be of use throughout the person’s life, while learning a second language is really of use only if the person is living in a country that uses that language.

Note taking skills are best learnt before the student reaches senior high school or university, when note taking becomes a necessity, and it could be a case that many students fail or do not do well in these years because they do not have sufficient note taking skills or study skills.

So English 1st, note taking skills 2nd, second language 3rd.

As an export-orientated economy with a population of largely European descendants in an Asia-Pacific region, it is a act of damned foolishness that the population as a whole is not well-versed in the languages of the region.

As much as I am charmed by Esperanto (and not the least for its popularity among anarchists), I do not think it is the best choice for a second language among Australian school children. In my opinion, Bahasa, Mandarin, Vietnamese, Hindi (for example) are better choices.

There is no mention in this article of any other 'international' language. Esperanto is not the only one and there is another, of a different nature, in widespread use. The "Blissymbols" developed by Charles Bliss, an Austrian Jew who migrated to Australia by way of Dachau, Buchenwald and Hongkew. The Blissymbols are not well known but they were intended to be a type of non-spoken Esperanto where symbols and combinations of symbols could be used as a 'bridge' between languages. The Blissymbols are now used as (a) a tool for many people with severe communication impairments and (b) in emergency and disaster zones when there is no common language.
That is the first point I would like to make.
The second point I would like to make is that, as mentioned in the article, it takes far longer to learn Mandarin or Japanese - or almost any other Asian language. They also, despite many statements to the contrary have little relevance to Australian children. While we do not want to deny children the opportunities to learn these languages if they wish the reality is that they will do far better at languages with an Indo-European base and would do even better if we concentrated on using the resources already available in the community. We also need to strengthen trade ties with regions other than China (the only country Rudd has any real interest in). Spanish is spoken by approximately 20% of the world's population. It is rarely taught here. I suggest we need to urgently review our language teaching priorities and, unless we are prepared to devote ten times the time to Mandarin then it should be taken out of the curriculum as the level achieved is a waste of time and effort and does nothing to enhance language ability.

I would have thought teaching in general Linguistics (in particular, leaning the international phonetic alphabet) would be more useful than learning a language with limited applications. This would put students in a good position to learn any language. I'd question whether a mere 10 hours training in Esperanto would equip teachers to teach any language, especially given the abysmal level of English expression evident these days- where one assumes at least some of the teachers have at least tertiary level training, if not a major in English.

I would suggest that teaching Asian languages (especially those which don't use the Roman alphabet) would take up too much time at school when there are so many other important subject areas (like science), although there is some merit in teaching widespread languages like Spanish. My personal experience of learning German helped with English (English is after all, is a Germanic language, and German grammar so complex it made English seem easy) but of course German is of limited use outside Europe and scientific/academic literature.

I note Ms Vos' assertion that: [teaching Esperanto]"... models fairness, and equal respect for all cultures".

Why do all cultures have to be "respected equally"?

School systems need to work out whether cultural awareness is the goal of LOTE programs or that of language acquisition. If cultural awareness is the goal - can this not be delivered in a more effective and efficient manner? (in an already crowded curriculum) If language acquisition is the goal - follow the research, start them young and do it properly.

Cultural awareness can, and should, be taught in other ways. If language learning is to be about gaining competence in a second language - and that would imply actually being able to use the language to communicate with a native speaker - then Australian schools fail miserably and will continue to fail especially while we insist in the belief that all languages take an equal time to learn.
Schools in China and Japan spend more time on learning the mother tongue than we do. They have to do this in order for the students to gain basic skills. If we want to teach Asian languages then we need to devote greater time to them. If we spend five hours on French or Modern Greek then we need to spend ten hours on Mandarin or Japanese.
We don't. We fail at teaching French and Modern Greek in that space of time.
We are wasting valuable learning time with a narrow, ideologically driven Asia-centric view of the world that says we 'must' learn Mandarin first and other Asian languages second and the rest of the world can learn English. It is an extraordinarily arrogant way of thinking even while it gives in to pressure from Asian trading partners.
If we could get past this hurdle and concentrate on using community resources and set up a scheme to assist many more young Australians to spend an exchange year in Europe or South America or even French speaking areas of Canade then we would achieve a much higher level of linguistic competence overall. Some of those students could then be encouraged with scholarships to take on the challenge of an Asian language.
It is not a scheme likely to find favour with the present government so we will continue to fail.

Surely the point of learning a second language early in one's schooling is not the language learnt, but the skill of learning another language.

I think the best language to teach all children from Grade 1 of primary school is Auslan, the Australian sign language.

First, it is a language.
Second, with children learning it at school materials will become cheaper and easier to buy for the whole population to learn it.

A knowledge of signed language is very useful for communicating in the following situations:
fun, saying something without grown ups understanding,
when it is noisy
with preverbal children, - babies as young as 4 months can start signing back to their parents
if someone is deaf

Among my several objections to Esperanto is its false claim to universality: it is European in origin, style, substance and past application. But Europe itself has left Esperanto well behind.

I support your advocacy for Auslan Denise. My daughters have learned some and its inclusion in their curriculum is clearly a success.

However, you seem to contradict yourself. You claim that the skill of language learning - not which language - is the whole point of such education, but then you isolate Auslan as the best, before citing a few practical uses for its study (beyond "the skill of learning another language").

Nonetheless, Auslan should occupy a separate, though privileged, position in this debate due to its physical / non-verbal particularity and its value in connecting with our speech- and hearing-impaired fellows.

But so much effort spent justifying and advocating dead languages, artificial languages, and the mystical aura of an imagined linguistic DNA in "blood and soil" heritage languages of Europe! All the time we seem to forget where we are, where our future lies and where an increasing proportion of our business happens and even people come from: Asia.

Is such energetic avoidance a result of fear and loathing? In other words: “xenophobia” and “hatred”? Or in just one word: “racism”?

Yes. Time to grow up and take our place in the world.

Sign language is certainly useful at times - yes, I know a little although not enough.
My advocacy of European languages is based on ease of learning and the time given over to language teaching and learning in schools. The simple fact is that, if we want children to learn Asian languages, then we are going to need to devote at least twice, even three, times as much time to learning them to get even the poor results we get now. Simply because we live adjacent to the Asian region is not a reason to learn Mandarin. Modern communication means that we have to be able to communicate with the world, not just one part of it. We are leaning so far in the direction of Asia that we keep losing major opportunities to trade, work and live with the rest of the world. At times this focus is so narrow that we lose sight of our place in the world. If we had worked things well we could have been 'the middle man' - the bridge between east and west, between Asia and Europe. We failed to grasp that opportunity and now we seem to be content to be the lap-dog of China.

In this context of language skill, facts would contradict Communicat's notion that "we are leaning so far in the direction of Asia". ASAA is one source that details Australia's sorry recent situation in Asian languages, but many details have been publicized to illustrate the point. Tertiary level statistics have shown an alarming deterioration in what used to be a modest area of study, but not the dysfunctional scene it is now.

I categorize Communicat's view as that of a defeatist approach we may call "mediocre exceptionalism". Whereas Keith may claim the innate supremacy of European culture (he even implies that Latin and Euro-Aryan tongues make us smarter!) Communicat, on the other hand, seems to justify emphasis on European languages by seizing the low ground i.e., "we're too dumb" and "these Asian languages are too hard".

Simple comparison with languages in our immediate region should make it clear that Romance and Germanic languages are often like dialects with very strong lexical and grammatical similarities. Multilingual ability has always been common in European countries often for that reason, not because of some concerted, intensive educational strategy in that direction. Similarly, Australian language education has been very minimal even in European languages; that's because they are really such a minor challenge, especially when achievement is often tested so rarely – and only gently - because of our hemispheric distance!

Communicat's claims to efficient use of resources also seems puzzlingly inconsistent with the backing anecdote. The funds for those kids' trips to France, Quebec and French Polynesia would be spent far better by giving them – or those more able and willing – competent, professional instruction in a regional language to properly stretch the boundaries of their minds.

As for the matter of Rudd speaking Mandarin: it's not really his doing, but rather the publicity which itself arose because of the enormous contrast with his predecessors. Consider Downer's rehearsed but shockingly clumsy French monologue in the election campaign (“Je suis le ministre”, indeed). Note too that Rudd has personal form in devising national language strategy (for example, see http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/v4sp12007/henderson.htm for a thorough account).

Brilliant idea! Esperanto can be learn to the level of fluency in 6 or less months. That would give to a kid enough confidence and skill to learn another language. Mandarin? Why not? But put them in other order and force them to learn something difficult as Mandarin (German, Spanish or French) they'll end up with no language and with no desire to learn any language at all.

Good luck Australia

Ruslanko (Ireland)

By the way you are not alone. Here you can read on how some of the British schools started to include Esperanto in their curriculum.
http://www.springboard2languages.org/home.htm

When we introduce a subject to a child in Primary School we start with its simplest concepts and gradually build towards the more complex as they gain in understanding and maturity. Human languages have been evolving for thousands of years and are by nature very complex. We cannot expect a young child to succeed at deciphering this complexity unless we give them the skills to do so, and I believe Ms Vos has the right approach. Start with a language like Esperanto that has had many of the irregular complexities of natural languages taken out of it, while still retaining enough depth and flexibility to allow any idea to be fully expressed. Give them a chance to develop an understanding of how human language works (which incidentally could well help those struggling to conquer the vagrancies of the English language), and then with a feeling of success and accomplishment under their belts they can go on to tackle whichever of the world's languages seem important or attractive to them when they get to Secondary School. Ms Vos's suggestion of Esperanto is the most positive move towards a viable LOTE programme for Australia that I've heard in some time.

Mr. Right wants children to study their own language first. OK. However, when English becomes elaborate Esperanto is a great help for that very purpose; "propaedeutic" it is often called by teachers. What you had learnt by "rote", by imitation, unquestionably, you can fathom better when you learn another tongue.

Plus, Esperanto is like a MULTILINGUAL dictionary, with enough logical grammar to assemble the words (and no weight in your suitcase).

I fully support the comments outlining the propradeutic values of Esperanto. These are confirmed in Professor Claude Piron's Youtube video, which adds other detail on Esperanto as a non-national language. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YHALnLV9XU

And here is a very recent concrete example from the Isle of Man of the successful application of Esperanto as an "apprentice language" in a Manx elementary school:
http://www.iomtoday.co.im/west-news/Esperanto-project-success-at-Marown.4076954.jp
This is an application of the British Springboard to Languages program:
http://www.springboard2languages.org/home.htm

Also, it seems not to be known in Australia that for years Esperanto has been accepted, on a par with other languages, as fulfilling the foreign language requirement for highschool graduation:
http://esperanto.blahus.cz/cxej/vikio/index.php/Raporto_pri_la_meze?ropa_konsulti?o_2007#Hungara_Esperanto-Asocio

From personal experience as a lifelong language-learner and language teacher, I can attest to the value of Esperanto as an "apprentice language" or propedeutic in improving general language and cultural awareness, basic grammatical analytical skills, increasing interest in etymology and building confidence in one's language-learning ability - even if, in and of itself, its use is unfortunately still quite practically limited and its purpose as a common inter-language alongside all ethnic languages frequently misunderstood.