Should ALL Houston-area schools adopt Kolter's language program?

[TheNiche]

If you're not bilingual you're ignorant. Period.

Everybody is ignorant of something. Fortunately, ignorance of many fields doesn't matter one bit if you're knowledgable of at least something in some field.

I am ignorant of the law, so I hire a lawyer.

I am ignorant of medicine, so I hire a doctor.

I am ignorant of Korean, so I hire a translator.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

If you're not bilingual you're ignorant. Period.

Lets go a step further. I am fluent in 3, good in one other and can get by in 1 other. Thats a total of 5. So if you dont know 5 languages, you are ignorant, period! Where does it end?

[sevfiv]

regardless of the business, political, and personal aspects, childhood is the optimal learning time for more than one's native language

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

regardless of the business, political, and personal aspects, childhood is the optimal learning time for more than one's native language

Agreed. My boys speak, read, write and comprehend 3 languages fluently and that is because we taught it to them and not because some school mandated it. If parents wish to have thier children learn another language (s), thats ok. To have some school entity mandating it for all kids is not ok. Some kids, regardless of age, just do not do well with learning another language. With that being the case, should they be forced, through school mandates, to learn a language other than english, especially since english speakers dominate the globe in business and other avenues?

Edited December 21, 2006 by Houston1stWordOnTheMoon

[sevfiv]

Agreed. My boys speak, read, write and comprehend 3 languages fluently and that is because we taught it to them and not because some school mandated it. If parents wish to have thier children learn another language (s), thats ok. To have some school entity mandating it for all kids is not ok. Some kids, regardless of age, just do not do well with learning another language. With that being the case, should they be forced, through school mandates, to learn a language other than english, especially since english speakers dominate the globe in business and other avenues?

i see what you're saying, and i agree that there are plenty of folks that just don't pick it up that well.

i do think it is valuable to have the option at least available to students to learn additional languages (and if not directly through school, maybe elsewhere)

in high school, we were required to take at least a couple (maybe three) years of a foreign language, but the option was available in middle school, too. it didn't seem to cause problems, either.

[webdude]

I dont believe in this anymore than i believe in kosher hogs or heavenly devils, its just not a truism!

Language protectionism will continue to force others to learn english. My line of work takes me outside of the USA, many times to non english speaking countries. EVERY single one of my counterparts from the non english speaking countries are fluent in english. They learn english because it is advantageous to do so in the business world.

BTW--The China is rising hype is way overated.

You seem to be more in the now, while I am talking about the future. Of course we can afford to have the 'they should learn english to talk to me' attitude now. But what about the future. Even if you take out the hype out of china, it is still accelerating ahead and becoming a formidable force. And china is just one of many other countries forging ahead.

We can debate all day whether china will overtake us or whether they are just hype (which BTW they are, by not that overrated), but all these countries don't have to be number one for us to depend on them. The big can depend on the small, especially when the economy is so interwined and will be even more so in the future. We will depend on each other even more, therefore it makes sense to learn other languages.

Learning a new language will help us understand cultures, customs and attitudes, the kind of stuff that translators can't translate; things that will help us communicate better, and gain advantage over those who don't put in that effort.

We don't want to lose out to other countries that are willing to learn and adapt to the global economy, while we sit there thinking everyone should learn our way, and not the other way round. Losing anything seems unlikely now, but if we don't start early, 15, 20 years now the road, it will be too late to play catch up.

Edited December 21, 2006 by webdude

[musicman]

If you're not bilingual you're ignorant. Period.

The above statement is ingorant. Period.

[DJ V Lawrence]

I am ignorant of Korean, so I hire a translator.

I charge $12 a word. Very lucrative

[musicman]

I charge $12 a word. Very lucrative

just make sure you hear a "kim" every once in a while.

[TheNiche]

15, 20 years now the road, it will be too late to play catch up.

No it won't. There is a market for translators. As translators' wages rise, more people will want to be translators. Equilibreum.

[webdude]

No it won't. There is a market for translators. As translators' wages rise, more people will want to be translators. Equilibreum.

Yes, it will, if we don't start early.

And also, already explained

Learning a new language will help us understand cultures, customs and attitudes, the kind of stuff that translators can't translate; things that will help us communicate better, and gain advantage over those who don't put in that effort.

If we depend on just translators, we will lose competitive advantage to those who speak the same language (literally and metephorically).

We don't have to look far to see it matters. In the case of china, people who got a leg up in china are from hk, taiwan, and the rest of south east asia, all because they speak the language. asian americans in the US are making big money from import export because 'they speak the language.' And bigger companies are rushing to sent their managers to learn mandarin so that they can sent them to work in china, those managers who can't catch up get brushed aside. The company is not going to have a private translator for every manager that they sent down there.

And that is just the beginning, add to that the growing economies of all the other up and coming countries, and our increasing depencies on each other, we can't afford to stand idle.

Which brings me to another rant, because of our same smug attitude, we have lost compeitive advantages in the science and engineering sector. It didn't matter for a while that we have less and less students interested in science and math, because we thought the rest of the world's smart students will keep on coming to our universities and stay to grow our economy. Not so much anymore. They still come but they go right back after graduation, and many don't even bother coming anymore as their universities have grown to easily rival even our Ivy leagues. We are stuck with engineering shortages as other countries are beginning to have more, all because we were complacent about learning. We continue to have this attitude where we give superstar status to high school and college sports while pushing aside subjects that made us economic powerhouses.

Edited December 22, 2006 by webdude

[TheNiche]

Yes, it will, if we don't start early.

And also, already explained

If we depend on just translators, we will lose competitive advantage to those who speak the same language (literally and metephorically).

How will labor markets not correct for these issues? If you've tried to explain it (and I can't detect that you have), it has not been at all convincing.

We don't have to look far to see it matters. In the case of china, people who got a leg up in china are from hk, taiwan, and the rest of south east asia, all because they speak the language. asian americans in the US are making big money from import export because 'they speak the language.' And bigger companies are rushing to sent their managers to learn mandarin so that they can sent them to work in china, those managers who can't catch up get brushed aside. The company is not going to have a private translator for every manager that they sent down there.

I've got news for you. Asians are often very racist, and if they detect a western accent (that is if they don't already know that you aren't Asian) and are trying to set up a trade relationship, you're more likely than not going to get screwed.

As for bigger companies, if they need their managers to speak Asian, then it is up to those managers to learn. If they don't learn, then their labor resources should be reallocated to a job for which they are better suited. I'm still not clear why this should be such a big concern of the government, when it is something that can be addressed by the promise of high wages if and when people with language skills become too scarce.

And that is just the beginning, add to that the growing economies of all the other up and coming countries, and our increasing depencies on each other, we can't afford to stand idle.

Sure we can. We can also afford to take action. We have deep pockets, one way or the other.

But what we're trying to do here is get bang for the buck. No sense in mandating that every child learn a foreign language, for instance, if some aren't well-suited for it (either as a matter of preference or ability) and only a fraction of them will practice, retain, and use it.

Which brings me to another rant, because of our same smug attitude, we have lost compeitive advantages in the science and engineering sector. It didn't matter for a while that we have less and less students interested in science and math, because we thought the rest of the world's smart students will keep on coming to our universities and stay to grow our economy. Not so much anymore. They still come but they go right back after graduation, and many don't even bother coming anymore as their universities have grown to easily rival even our Ivy leagues. We are stuck with engineering shortages as other countries are beginning to have more, all because we were complacent about learning. We continue to have this attitude where we give superstar status to high school and college sports while pushing aside subjects that made us economic powerhouses.

The truely important thing about engineering and science is that we have strong patent and copyright laws. As long as we retain the ability to ensure that there are incentives for innovative people, we will dominate those fields by virtue of demand, if not supply.

If anything, we have a surplus of engineering and science students, IMO. The majority of them are foreigners, granted, but the large supply of them is depressing wages in those sectors, freeing up the folks that otherwise would've been in engineering and science fields to contribute to other aspects of our economy.

I found out about this from personal experience. I was invited several months back to apply for an Economics Ph.D. program at UH. I did a lot of research into the costs, both out of pocket and in terms of opportunity, and the likely increase in earning power. For such a quantitative field, you'd expect to have a fairly high return on the investment because relatively few people have the ability or inclination to learn it. But that was not the case. There are in fact only a handful of western names amongst a sea of Asian, Russian, and Middle Eastern folks on their graduate roster. The market is flooded with foreigners. Where's the incentive for me to be in the graduate program if there are already so many people getting churned out? The answer: it isn't. I was in fact better off to forgo further education in favor of an extra five years of private-sector experience. Except for engineering, I'm fairly sure that the same labor market conditions apply to the pure sciences.

I don't see how trying to create an incentive for American students to take part in an already-flooded labor markets is somehow productive. Seems wasteful.

[webdude]

How will labor markets not correct for these issues? If you've tried to explain it (and I can't detect that you have), it has not been at all convincing.

I've got news for you. Asians are often very racist, and if they detect a western accent (that is if they don't already know that you aren't Asian) and are trying to set up a trade relationship, you're more likely than not going to get screwed.

As for bigger companies, if they need their managers to speak Asian, then it is up to those managers to learn. If they don't learn, then their labor resources should be reallocated to a job for which they are better suited. I'm still not clear why this should be such a big concern of the government, when it is something that can be addressed by the promise of high wages if and when people with language skills become too scarce.

Sure we can. We can also afford to take action. We have deep pockets, one way or the other.

But what we're trying to do here is get bang for the buck. No sense in mandating that every child learn a foreign language, for instance, if some aren't well-suited for it (either as a matter of preference or ability) and only a fraction of them will practice, retain, and use it.

The truely important thing about engineering and science is that we have strong patent and copyright laws. As long as we retain the ability to ensure that there are incentives for innovative people, we will dominate those fields by virtue of demand, if not supply.

If anything, we have a surplus of engineering and science students, IMO. The majority of them are foreigners, granted, but the large supply of them is depressing wages in those sectors, freeing up the folks that otherwise would've been in engineering and science fields to contribute to other aspects of our economy.

I found out about this from personal experience. I was invited several months back to apply for an Economics Ph.D. program at UH. I did a lot of research into the costs, both out of pocket and in terms of opportunity, and the likely increase in earning power. For such a quantitative field, you'd expect to have a fairly high return on the investment because relatively few people have the ability or inclination to learn it. But that was not the case. There are in fact only a handful of western names amongst a sea of Asian, Russian, and Middle Eastern folks on their graduate roster. The market is flooded with foreigners. Where's the incentive for me to be in the graduate program if there are already so many people getting churned out? The answer: it isn't. I was in fact better off to forgo further education in favor of an extra five years of private-sector experience. Except for engineering, I'm fairly sure that the same labor market conditions apply to the pure sciences.

I don't see how trying to create an incentive for American students to take part in an already-flooded labor markets is somehow productive. Seems wasteful.

First, that is not entirely true., and I don’t really want to debate whether they are racists or not.

Second, that was not the main point,. China is just an example, out of the other up and coming countries that we all have to deal with because we will depend on each other increasingly in the future. I hope you don’t say that all the other countries are also racists.

Third, I gave the example of science and technology, where because we didn't give enough emphasis to it in the past, we now depend on importing talent. The labor has been fixed but not the nation's competitive advantage. One, because we are depending on foreigners to fill the markets, and two, because they are declining in numbers anyway, as more choose to go back after studying or choose to study in their own country. Imo, there is nothing wrong with importing foreigners if they are willing to assimilate, but rather than spend the extra money, time and effort, hoping that they would stay and assimilate, a better solution would be to place emphasis on math and science education of our own young students.

I see even less competitiveness down the road if we choose to neglect second languages now. Personally, I do have issues with public education, that is another story, but if my tax money is going to schools, I would rather it be for promoting science, math, and learning another language, cause I think we already have enough emphasis on sports.

You keep mentioning labor market fixes, but just like our engineering folks, we might be importing translators, or importing people good at conducting international trades in the future. Yes, the labor market will automatically fix the supply, but when the supply is from overseas, that doesn’t fix our nation's competitiveness, it actually dilutes our global compeitive advantage.

And I think its great you make the analysis whether to go with the program. It does make sense for now, but perhaps you can use the same logic for the future of our country:

We have an increasingly intertwined global economy, we have other countries willing to learn another country’s language and customs to gain competitiveness. Shouldn't we as a country do the same, or should we not plant the seeds for global competitiveness in our young, since there will be other countries to fill that labor pool.

Do we wait for the day where other countries already flooded the market with international experts, then say its a waste to start now anyway.

Edited December 22, 2006 by webdude

[Subdude]

The same debate is going on the UK.

Nearly a quarter of the world's population speaks some English. That includes around 400m who speak it as their mother tongue and about the same number who speak it fluently as their second language. English is the global language of academic research, and perhaps 1,500 master's degrees are taught in English in countries where the language has no official status.

....

At first sight this means that things are about to get even cushier for native English speakers; they needn't lift a finger to learn other people's subjunctives. But there are two catches. The first is that they will lose the competitive advantage that once came with being among the relatively few to speak the world's most useful language. Competent bilinguals, many of whom have travelled in the course of acquiring English, can offer everything that English monoglots can

[sevfiv]

The same debate is going on the UK.

Economist article link

so there may be more independence and choice for students over a certain age (which isn't necessarily bad), but they're already saying that many are choosing not to continue foreign language classes (and the lack of availability doesn't help, either). maybe the pressures of college requirements will be the only motivation?

from the article:

Fewer young people are studying languages in school, a trend that has accelerated since 2004, when the government allowed English schools to make foreign languages optional for students aged 14 and over (see chart). Even those who are keen on languages often drop them at this stage now, as schools offer a narrower choice of languages and schedule them against other subjects. Around four in five of all English state schools allow their students to abandon languages at 14 and some private schools are starting to follow suit. In 2006 only half of all students took a foreign-language GCSE exam

[TheNiche]

First, that is not entirely true., and I don

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

maybe the pressures of college requirements will be the only motivation?

Yeah, that will go along way in attracting more students into the colleges and universities

[TheNiche]

Yeah, that will go along way in attracting more students into the colleges and universities

Hey now, that it can be a blessing in disguise. I couldn't get into UT-Austin because I couldn't stand to take a class with the bitchy Belgian woman that taught French 2 in McAllen back in my sophmore year of high school. If I'd jumped through the hoops and learned a foreign language, I'd still be burdened with student loans, would never have been able to compete in Austin's job market the way I have in Houston, and so I would also not have the nearly five years of quality work experience that I had coming right out of college. Owning a condo through college also wouldn't have been a very easy thing, given that they're more expensive in Austin...so that would've been money thrown away for rent.

Any way I look at it, the best decision I ever made was to not learn a foreign language. That's the truth! I'm actually not kidding at all.