Most representatives and businessmen in other industrialized nations are already fluent in their native languages and English. Because of this among other things, the US is losing its competitive advantage with other nations. Fluency in two or more languages is always better than fluency in one.
There are other benefits as well, aside from the business competition aspects. For instance, US security would be better served, as we would have a far greater pool of linguists from which to draw in filling the ranks of our military specialists.
So shouldn't we make foreign language proficiency a requirement for high school graduation, or at least college entry?
And to the "waahh what about those kids who aren't interested or can't cut it" people, I say tough. For those kids we set up trade schools to teach them a trade, or let them drop out and take their lumps.
We start taking back our competitive advantage by getting tough where it starts, in the education trenches.
2007-05-31 06:05:44 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree, it should. To be able to survive in the international arena and land good paying jobs in the future it is going to be a necessity. You used to have to have 2 years of a foreign language in high school to be able to get into college, has that changed? With the rapidly advancing technologies parents should want to make sure there children are able to compete in the real world.
2007-05-31 06:18:53 · answer #1 · answered by Lori B 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, I do not think proficiency should be a requirement. A few classes could be required but there is no point in requiring proficiency for graduation, when so many graduating students are barely proficient in English. I think more focus needs to be put on teaching students how to read, write and speak properly in their own language.
2007-05-31 06:19:31 · answer #2 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Foreign Language should be required, for jobs and college courses that will take the person overseas. In high school, since the majoirty of graduates will NOT deal with other countries or foreigners, then proficiency in ENGLISH should be stressed. However, as the USG prefers FREEDUMB to FREEDOM, our schools will continue to be dumbed down because of Political Correctness and cost effectiveness....also to keep the poor poor and the rich rich, but that's another subject.
2007-05-31 06:12:04 · answer #3 · answered by Damien104 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Proficiency in High School PHYSICS should be a requirement. Perhaps then there wouldn't be so many dumb asses who believe the physically impossible official story about what happened on 9/11.
Anyone who would believe that THOUSANDS of tons of concrete and glass could spontaneously pulverize into fine powder in mid air in less than 15 seconds due to a mere gravitational collapse is a fvcking idiot.
And oh yeah, High School is too late to teach most people to become fluent in another language. You have to start that in elementary school.
.....
2007-05-31 06:16:44 · answer #4 · answered by ladykofnyc 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes, we should. For most colleges in Michigan, the requirement is 2 years or less, which I view as fair. That way, the people who want to go to college and further their knowledge can learn a new language for free and at least somewhat; yet, if one does not want to learn a new language, they can at least take the minimal and still be accepted into college.
2007-05-31 06:19:52 · answer #5 · answered by luvable2491 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes: English.
2007-05-31 06:09:26 · answer #6 · answered by me 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely. There are approximately 4 major languages spoken in this whole Hemisphere......do you think it would be a good think to know at least 2 of them.
I do.
2007-05-31 06:17:27 · answer #7 · answered by Peace Maker 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
if you want to teach a kid a foriegn language it needs to start in elementry school not highschool, its easier for the brain to absorb
2007-05-31 06:18:35 · answer #8 · answered by Adam of the wired 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋