Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Do the advantage of this outweigh the disadvantages?

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 leaming 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-centered approach, thus maintaining learners enthusiasm. Their command of the language in later life will benefit from this early exposure. while leaming 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. lf specialists have to be brought in to deliver these sessions, the flexibility referred to above is diminished. lf primary language leaching is not standardised, secondary schools could be faced with a great variety of levels in different languages within their intake, resulting in a classroom experience which undoes the earlier gains. There is no advantage it 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 leaming 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.