Get Schooled

By decaturparent

March 4, 2008 9:46 AM | Link to this

You know, I was doing a little casual job hunting the other day and I was really surprised at how many jobs require fluency in another language. Any job seeker who is fluent in two languages can tap into a very large niche of job opportunities not available to the “average Joe.”

In Decatur schools, all children in grades K-5 have 30 minutes of immersion foreign language (Spanish) instruction every day of the week. They design the Spanish classes around the regular curriculum so that they reinforce the skills that the kids are learning in their regular classes. For instance, if the kids are learning about the solar system in science… they talk about the solar system in Spanish class too.

Foreign language is currently available as an elective in middle school here, but I believe that it will become mandatory in the next year or two when the middle school becomes an IB school.

Spanish is my oldest child’s favorite subject and she is quite good at it after all these years. My younger child loves Spanish also. From my observation, just the mental exercise of learning a second language helps them in all subjects - the mental discipline required is just good for the brain. Plus, as I mentioned earlier - it reinforces what they are learning in other classes.

I wouldn’t expect the bubbas around the GA legislature to get all that though so I wouldn’t expect much statewide. My guess is that the bubbas and their constituents feel that if their kids learn a second language it would attract “feriners” and we wouldn’t want that. ;)

By Jeff

March 4, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

Forget foreign language, bring back Social Studies!!

By SET

March 4, 2008 10:03 AM | Link to this

Foreign laguage classes support english fluency. Language classes of any kind educates in grammer and sentence structure. I won’t say whether they should be mandatory or optional. It’s a local decision.

By Justine

March 4, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

While I applaud the Decatur schools for providing foreign language instruction, 30 minutes a day does not qualify as “immersion.” Three hours a day might begin to qualify, but just barely. Immersion is what happens when you spend several weeks or more in a foreign country, away from tourist areas and are forced to speak and comprehend in order to get by.

That said, a foreign language was a high priority when I took my child out of school and began homeschooling. My 11 year old spends 3 hours a week in a class (taught by a native speaker) and 45 minutes a day or more on home study.

By Jeff

March 4, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

I was just reading a TV Guide interview with the Dane star of the new show New Amsterdam.

Why does this have any bearing? A quote from the article: One such flashback finds the immortal — who has also been a coachman, lawyer and artist — working as a field surgeon during the Civil War’s Battle of Antietam. Coster-Waldau already knew all about it. “In Denmark, we learned a lot about American history in school because it’s the engine that drives the Western world,” he explains, adding, “I did have to read up on New York history, though.”

Now, if the people of DENMARK know that American History is the key to the Western World, why don’t AMERICANS study it??????

By decaturparent

March 4, 2008 10:31 AM | Link to this

Justine, I’m sorry, I didn’t characterize that correctly. What I meant to say is the the teacher during that 30 minutes doesn’t speak English to the children unless it’s absolutely necessary to maintain order for some reason. I wasn’t using “immersion” as a term of art.

You are correct. My bad. My oldest is very good at understanding Spanish at this point, but gets tongue tied when she has to speak it. My husband was the same way until he spent a summer living with a family in Mexico in an immersion program. Now he is fluent in Spanish and very comfortable speaking it. He even knows some slang that would make you blush!

I took seven years of French. I can understand and read French but like my daughter, I get “shy” when I have to speak it because I was never immersed.

We hope to provide our kids with the same immersion opportunities that my husband had when they are older. But hey… 30 minutes a day every day is certainly a start and it has gotten results.

By mmm

March 4, 2008 10:55 AM | Link to this

My daughter does Spanish 45 minutes a day and my son French. My public school has to have a longer school day, and privately fund raise $500,000 per year to balance a budget that asks our teachers to work for 20% less that the “traditional public” school across the street. We do this because we believe it is important.

www.intcomschool.org

Please read the New York Times article about us and watch the video entitled “an unusual friendship” from that link.

It can be done, but it is not easy, certainly not free, and there are more issues that “additional teachers” to pay. Much of our longer school day is result of believing that the arts, recess, and language instruction are all part of what every child should have. The debate about language vs. social studies is based upon you both believing that the number of minutes you most shoehorn an education into is unchangeable. It is not. But then that would take BOLD ACTion—-which we have a shortage of these days.

By JustMe

March 4, 2008 11:13 AM | Link to this

I have no problems with K or even pre-K learning foreign languages. I believe that studies show that young brains can more easily learn other languages, so why not?

However, I feel that the HOPE money that funds pre-K should be used for this effort, not tax money. The GA Lottery money is flowing (over-flowing) and so, why not?

IMHO, our tax money for education should focus primarily on the essential subjects: math, science, English, social studies.

By Ernest

March 4, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

mmm, you are touching on an issue that is worthy of further discussion. Is now the time to press for a longer school day and/or year? One can easily present a value statement on the importance foreign languages in the curriculum. Heck, I’d like to see recess added back to the K-5 day, everyday. Doing so means reducing instruction in an area deemed to be ‘core’. How do we fit this request in an already full school day/year?

By teach1

March 4, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

2 different ideas here:

1- how many years do you think someone needs to be fluent? My HS daughter is looking at taking year 3 of spanish next year. She has no plans to have a job where she specifically needs the language but just wants to take it. Should I steer her into something I see more important? Computers the like?

2- Recess- As a first grade teacher, I MAKE time for recess. The students need it! Now it does mean generally science, social science and HEALTH may get cut short a bit, but what else do you do? It is so necessary.

By teacher

March 4, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

It is nice to add things all the time. But to add something must go. Most people do not realize that the state nor most systems do not require one computer course from highschool students. Only about 15 % of students that take them as electives have a course in computers or business. Now with the new graduation rules that percentage will be far less. Most schools will have to do away with the few business and computer electives they have. If foreign laguage was taught throughout elementary and middle school and the colleges would take that it would free up some slots to require computer and business courses in highschool. If we do not get these students in computer and business courses we are in trouble in the future. The trouble is already on us. Students in Georgia can download on a Ipod, make a cell phone talk, but talk to the business people who hire them and see what technology skills they really have.

By HB

March 4, 2008 1:41 PM | Link to this

Teach1, I would say it takes the equivalent of 4 college semesters (101, 102, 201, 202) for an American English speaker to achieve proficiency, but not fluency, in a Romance language (other languages like Chinese or Japanese may take longer for English speakers — I don’t know). After three years, your daughter should be well-prepared to enter a 201 class.

I am nearly fluent in French (my second major in college)and now do a great deal of computer and web work. I use both skill sets on a regular basis, and personally, I think you should encourage her to continue Spanish. If she’s a typical teenager, she likely has mastered basic computer skills already — these kids are tech-savvy! An elective or afterschool/summer course on basic html and current web software would be great to have and may help her determine if she has an interest in more advanced computer classes, but she also can probably learn a great deal on her own (building her own web page at home is a great learning experience), whereas a classroom setting with conversation is best for language. Mastering Spanish will also make learning other languages, especially French or Italian, an easy feat for her if she wishes to do so later. She likely will be able to read basic signs, websites, etc in those languages even without studying them (I can read basic Spanish pretty well — never took a class). Advanced French classes also somewhat improved my English writing skills and greatly increased my English vocabulary. And my computer skills! I think studying foreign languages really helped me in how I think through html code.

If you do encourage her to replace Spanish classes with computers, though, be sure that the classes teach nuts-and-bolts skills, general web/computer know-how, programming, etc, and not just how to use say Microsoft Word (I’ve seen a shocking number of people do this and consider themselves “computer experts”!). That type of commercial software changes, so broader concepts with transferable skills will help her far more over time than the specifics of a program or two.

By Teacher, Too

March 4, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

It’s a great idea, but first, let’s make sure our students can read, speak, and write standard English before teaching them a second language. (And I’m not talking about ESOL students.)

We have so many kids who cannot write a functional sentence, speak using standard English, or read fluently.

Students (and adults), no matter what race/nationality/gender, etc… need to speak standard English.

(additionally, students and adults need to lose “like” and “you know what I’m saying/talking about” from their vocabularies!)

By jim d

March 4, 2008 2:35 PM | Link to this

Ah yes,

Set can we safely associate this teaching with your “Brave New World Order”?

By JustMe

March 4, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this

Teach1

What you do (short changing science, specificall) is really horrible for your students. So many elementary teachers do not give science proper time in class for various reasons. The result is tons of kids coming into middle and high school that don’t have the basics in science. Yet, high school science teachers are expected to have some magic powder to sprinkle on the stduents so that they can pass the science part of the GSHGT? How can a science teacher in high school expect to teach a student 12 years of science in one semester??????

I wonder why you don’t short-change math in your class? I would guess the answer is because the CRCT includes math but not science. That is really sad if that is the reason!

By JustMe

March 4, 2008 3:23 PM | Link to this

IMHO, an extended day or year round school is really not necessary and is a bad idea….

First, where would the money come from? Do you really want more taxes to pay for this?

Second, why would you want schools to include more things that are not ‘core?’ Why don’t individual families provide the extra things (music, PE or sports, etc.) on their own? If schools really did just focus on the basics, the school day could actually be shortened and would cost less! Plus, the individual families could likely provide better music teachers, sporting events, etc. than the school.

I really hate that our society continues to seemingly put more and more responsibilities on schools - and many would argue that schools cannot properly do the responsibilities they currently have!

If I had my way, schools would only have math, science, English, and social studies. If schools could simply focus on those and not get distracted with all of the other ‘electives’ and ‘extra-curricular’ activities, then I would bet that the US would lead the world in education.

But, we expect schools to teach foreign language, we expect schools to provide for sports, we expect schools to teach music, we expect schools to provide for clubs, we expect schools to provide for everything under the Sun - the result is the dilution of schools until nothing is really accomplished.

Please understand that I do feel that these ‘other things’ are important. I just feel that they should be provided for other ways than schools.

By HB

March 4, 2008 3:25 PM | Link to this

That’s not fair, JustMe. Teach1 said he/she cut some time from those subjects — that does not necessarily equal short changing them. If a break helps students to better focus, then the lost time may not matter. What’s more efficient? 20 minutes of science instruction to children ready to focus, or 25 minutes to stir-crazy kids who have been stuck in desks all morning? I think it’s too much to expect kids to go without a break. I know I need to get up and walk around every few hours (even better if I can take 5-10 minutes outside the building) or my brain turns to mush. Otherwise, I find myself half-focused, staring at my screen, much like a break-deprived 6-year-old staring at a chalkboard…

By JustMe

March 4, 2008 3:39 PM | Link to this

HB Then why doesn’t Teach1 cut time in math? or in English? That is my point!!!!

By teach1

March 4, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

Thank you HB. If I make time for recess, I am doing what I need to do to have sucessful students. I firmly believe that reading and math are the essential skills for first grade and would devote an entire day to them if I could. If I send a student to second grade reading on or above grade level with math concepts that are firmly grounded in their minds, think about how far they could go with all the subjects. I am not taking anything away from the required GPS for science and social science.

I am just trying to create students who love school and are eager to learn. Not students that burn out at 3rd grade because school is boring or too hard. If that means students get a 20 minute break outside and a 20 minute science lesson so be it. The goal is to create students who look forward to their school day and want to learn everything they can about every subject.

Please look at what first grade science GPS covers before you assume I am short changing someone.

By jim d

March 4, 2008 4:25 PM | Link to this

I’m with you JM,

but let’s take it one step further and just eliminate public education altogether and let families provide it all.

By Ernest

March 4, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

JustMe, you touched on the intent of my earlier posting, if we add more responsibility to the schools, lengthen the day and/or year. If we want to improve current instruction, perhaps some ‘responsibilities’ should be eliminated from the school day and/or year. There needs to be some give and take on this.

I could support extending the school day for 20-25 minutes, particularly for K-5 if it meant having recess. I empathize with both the teachers and students at ESs as everything seems so structured. I also see value in teaching a foreign language to help prepare students to communicate in the growing, global workplace. Today’s students will need to collaborate with workers around the world and those who can speak two or more languages will have more opportunities.

Another way of looking at it, this could go a long way towards ‘keeping’ more jobs in this country. If that happens, tax revenues should grow. Dang, I’m starting to sound like a ‘supply side’ economist….

By Tony

March 4, 2008 4:38 PM | Link to this

Finally, a lawmaker proposing a new program that actually makes sense and matches the way kids learn best. I’ll add my voice to those agreeing this would be a good thing.

The mechanics of implementation would mean that something would have to go. Also, the methods for teaching young children a foreign language are not the same as those for high school students, so teacher training would be important.

What would have to give? Here is where each school should have some latitude to work with its staff and parents to make the decisions. State mandated, one-size-fits-all requirements do not work. Schools should have some flexibility in how things like this are implemented.

Finally, to the post expressing concern about the lack of science in elementary schools. As a high school science teacher, I valued the students’ abilities to read, write, calculate and think. I did not like unteaching badly taught science. Let the elementary schools focus on those skills of language development and mathematics.

By decaturparent

March 4, 2008 4:52 PM | Link to this

First of all, you can include recess, music, art and foreign language in your curriculum without lengthening the school day if you integrate the core subjects with each other and with your electives. There is no reason why you can’t work on several subjects together if your curriculum is project based. This practice reinforces skills repeatedly, covers more ground in a day than more traditional pedagogy and results in kids who get a better idea of how the world all fits together and enjoy school more.

Google Expeditionary Learning to see what I mean.

That being said, I agree that schools are trying to do too much. They seem to exist under the false assumption that they can and should be everything to kids. I love our school system, but I can provide far better enrichment than the school system can - either myself or through private providers. Public schools rarely do enrichment well.

By thomas

March 4, 2008 6:43 PM | Link to this

Here’s the deal- Every group wants MANDATORY daily instructional time at the elementary level. This includes PE advocates, art advocates, music advocates, technology buffs, character ed folks, and now the foreign language crowd.

The fact of the matter is that classroom teachers STRUGGLE to teach reading, writing, and math, much less the “required” social studies, science, and health. No one wants to increase the length of the school day, but yet they want to add, add, add.

By teach1

March 4, 2008 11:34 PM | Link to this

Let’s add “Good touch - Bad touch” and “Test-taking” compliments of our conseling departmentor even “anger management”. Then we have Kindness week, Black History Month, DARE, Mini relay for Life walk, “Arts Alive” “PTO presentation” “Computer lab” “picture day- 2 times a year” “Career Week” “Truck Day” “Character Ed” along with any other holiday ideas that come up and many topics that I am sure I am forgetting. There are fund raisers that cut into the day either by presenting the “sale” or collecting and tracking money, as well as a daily read over the intercom of classes with perfect attendance or star students for the week.

So you think my 20 minute recess is wasting education time? Get real!

Your 6 year olds are being asked to be quiet in the hallway, in the classroom, in the lunchroom, and in the restroom, when would you like them to be 6? Give them their 20 minutes of recess to be a child and don’t worry if they are missing a few minutes of a subject!

By teach1

March 4, 2008 11:40 PM | Link to this

Food for thought about the foreign language. I have had a number of Asian students who take their cultural language lessons on Saturday. Why put this demand on the public school? If it is important enough for your child to have the foreign language lessons arrange for them to take lessons like piano or voice or ball practice- after school hours.

By Love my 4 kids

March 5, 2008 2:08 AM | Link to this

My husband moved to a foreign country at the age of four and grew up bilingual. This has helped his career and has opened the door to work internationally. He actually had to learn two other languages for his current job, and already knowing two made this vastly easier. I decided to follow the Classical method for our home school and teach Latin and grammar from 3rd through 8th grade and then switch to Spanish in high school. From this base, learning French, Romanian, or Italian is much easier. My boys are also interested in studying science and Latin is a great help for learning nomenclature. The public schools will need to demonstrate that they can effectively teach reading and grammar in English before they add in a foreign language at the elementary level. Americans still have an edge though, as English is still one of the major trade languages. All of our foreign friends are fluent in English.

By Truth B Known

March 5, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this

Should be simple…In French just learn the phrase ” I surrender.” In German just learn the phrase ” I want the French to surrender.”

By JustMe

March 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Link to this

jd -

This is where our opinions diverge.

You don’t want our society to provide any education at all, and leave it up to individual families.

I feel (evidently along with most) that it benefits our society to provide basic education to the masses and ensure that each child is afforded this opportunity.

My point was that the ‘basic education’ provided by society should include math, science, English, and social studies…… not the ‘extras’ like PE, foreign language, music, art, etc. Please understand that I believe that these ‘extras’ are very important - they just should not be included in the ‘basic’ education provided for by society. They can be provided for by individual families that feel that they are important.

By jim d

March 5, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

Jm,

We’re not so different. My comment was made tongue in cheek.

But you bring up a rather intersting question. that being—Who should decide what is best for the masses? I have no problem in allowing the masses to decide what is individually most suited to them. Obviously a few bloggers here do have a problem with this and only want what they feel is a basic education provided to everyone.

In my opinon A basic education to one may not be the basic education of another. But then that brings us back to that 6 letter curse word that you so adamantly despise.

C-H-O-I-C-E

By jim d

March 5, 2008 4:17 PM | Link to this

JM,

“Just for the sake of discussion here, you said “I believe that these ‘extras’ are very important ——- They can be provided for by individual families that feel that they are important.”

So if families can decide what is important or not why can’t they decide what and where their children are taught in a public school system?

By JustMe

March 5, 2008 5:42 PM | Link to this

jd -

LOL. Well, usually, the basics at least include the “3 r’s.” Certainly you have heard of that, I hope! In addition to those, I would add science, considering how our culture/society is now so very dependent upon science. I would firmly believe that most everyone would agree that those subjects already mentioned: Reading/Writing (aka English), Math, Social Studies/History, and Science would be considered the most basic….. and that is why I feel those subjects should be the ones emphasized if not exclusive in public schools.

Besides, those subjects are also considered ‘core’ subjects - doesn’t that mean something to you?

To repeat, I feel that these ‘core’ or ‘basic’ subjects should be what our public education focuses on. The ‘others’ should be provided by the individual families as they see fit.

For example, if a family wants to focus their child on sports, they could enroll them in some sort of YMCA type sports program after school. Or, if a family wants to ensure that their child gets an education in the arts, they could hire some art teacher or music teacher/class for their child after school.

The reason I believe this is because our students in the US are falling so far behind in the core, it is sad. We seemed to have focused more on these ‘extras’ and have left the ‘core’ subjects behind. Schools try to provide everything for everyone and have forgotten about the most basic of subjects.

Heck, at my high school, the Fine Arts Department budget and the PE Department budget provided each year is bigger than the Science Department budget - does that really make sense????? Then, the Principal wonders why our science scores on the GHSGT are so low - go figure.

They are called ‘core’ for a reason!

By jim d

March 6, 2008 6:43 AM | Link to this

JM,

I guess where we really differ is in the “I believe”.

See I have no problem with teaching what you believe is important in say k-6 but would love to see HS’s specialize, allowing children that have shown an aptitude in certain areas of study to excel in those areas. Such as schools of mathematics, schools of arts, schools of science etc., etc.

I do take issue with the one size fits all mentality that permeates public education in this country and all of the people that insist they know what is best for everyone.

By JustMe

March 6, 2008 7:42 AM | Link to this

jd

Please understand that is it not just what “I believe.” EVERYONE calls them “core” classes. Why in the world do you think that they are called that???? I guess I am asking you to do something you may be unacustomed to here - think for yourself!

By HB

March 6, 2008 11:25 AM | Link to this

Actually, core classes can vary from one place to the next and are not necessarily limited to those subjects you named. At my high school, foreign language was a core class in the first and second year. Physics was not. So jim d is correct that the idea of what is considered “core” is not set and opinions can certainly vary on what is part of the core of a good education and what is just gravy.

By jim d

March 6, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

JM,

Let me ask you to do something you may be unacustomed to as well - think outside of the box!