Traditionally, children have begun studying foreign languages at secondary school,
but introducing them earlier is recommended by some educationalists. This policy
has been adopted by some educational authorities or individual schools, with both
positive and negative outcomes.
The obvious argument in its favour is that young children pick up languages much
more easily than teenagers. Their brains are still programmed to acquire their mother
tongue, which facilitates learning another language, and unlike adolescents, they are
not inhibited by self-consciousness.
The greater flexibility of the primary timetable allows for more frequent, shorter
sessions and for a play-centred approach, thus maintaining learners’ enthusiasm and
progress. Their command of the language in later life will benefit from this early
exposure, while learning other languages subsequently will be easier for them. They
may also gain a better understanding of other cultures.
There are, however, some disadvantages. Primary school teachers are generalists, and
may not have the necessary language skills themselves. If specialists have to be
brought in to driver these sessions, the flexibility referred to above is diminished.
If primary language teaching is not standardized, secondary schools could be faced
with a great variety of levels in different languages within their intakes, resulting
in a classroom experience which undoes the earlier gains. There is no advantage if
enthusiastic primary pupils become demotivated as soon as they change schools. However,
these issues can be addressed strategically within the policy adopted.
Anything which encourages language learning benefits society culturally and economically,
and early exposure to language learning contributes to this. Young children’s innate
abilities should be harnessed to make these benefits more achievable.