There's a scheme called Springboard to Languages to help primary school children in the UK start learning languages by introducing Esperanto as a first foreign language, which I think is interesting. I think it's a good idea, because earlier experiments in doing a similar thing have apparently shown that it does speed up language learning, so for example a class doing one year of Esperanto and three years of French will generally reach a higher or equal level to one doing four years of French, and will have also learnt a good amount of Esperanto.

I also think it's good for Esperanto, because the children who've taken part in this will know about it and be able to speak it to some extent, so if they encounter it somewhere afterwards they're more likely to be interested in it and less likely to dismiss it because of ignorance of what it is. It seems to me that a lot of negative attitudes towards Esperanto that you encounter are based on ignorance and misconceptions, such as thinking it's supposed to replace national languages. The Springboard website also mentions that learning Esperanto would give the children good opportunities for links with schools in other countries. That way they'll be able to see that Esperanto works and what its advantages are compared to using national languages (such as neutrality, and the smaller amount of learning required to be able to effectively communicate), and they'll have an introduction to Esperanto culture and how it can appeal to them, with things like Pasporta Servo.

So what do other people think of this? I've sent a email to my county councillor through the website WriteToThem, suggesting that they might want to consider introducing Springboard to schools in my county. If anyone else in the UK thinks it's a good idea it's probably worth doing the same with your councillors.

It IS a good idea. Springboard To Languages has been around a while now, and it always seemed like a fine way to introduce children to foreign languages.

However, as Claude Piron has pointed out, people are funny when it comes to languages. Strangely resistant.

I don't know how it is in the schools here in Oregon (USA) now, but back when I was a kid it was a requirement that every child learn to play a musical instrument, and to introduce them to the world of music, the first instrument that EVERY child was required to learn was the recorder. After that they could continue on with other instruments (clarinet, trumpet, flute, etc.), or drop music altogether, or whatever. But at the very least they would have had SOME experience in playing an instrument, even if they never went any further. It let kids get their feet wet with concepts of melody, notes, keys, playing in groups, etc., in an easy and regular way.

No one complained. No one said "Why would you want to teach anyone the recorder? NO one plays THAT!" There were no arguments that, hey, you don't find recorders in orchestras, or marching bands, or even in rock bands, and therefore it should not be taught. The general consensus was that everyone should have at least a little experience playing an instrument, the recorder is about the easiest instrument you can play, and starting with the easiest instrument is a great way to introduce kids to playing music.

Well... Esperanto is the recorder of the language world. It lets kids get their feet wet with concepts of grammar, vocabulary, structural differences between languages, etc., in an easy and regular way. But if you try to introduce it into the schools, the resistance will be immediate. "Why would you want to teach anyone Esperanto? NO one speaks THAT." There will be arguments that, hey, you can't find any countries where they speak it, not even as a dialect in isolated villages, and therefore it should not be taught. The general consensus will be that if the kids have to learn a language, that learning a real (albeit difficult) language will be the best way to introduce kids to speaking a foreign tongue.

Piron considers this attitude to be a cultural neurosis of sorts. Recorders aren't threatening. Esperanto is. But from an educational standpoint, it's the same. darn. thing.

Go figure.

RiotNrrd:It IS a good idea. Springboard To Languages has been around a while now, and it always seemed like a fine way to introduce children to foreign languages.

However, as Claude Piron has pointed out, people are funny when it comes to languages. Strangely resistant.

I don't know how it is in the schools here in Oregon (USA) now, but back when I was a kid it was a requirement that every child learn to play a musical instrument, and to introduce them to the world of music, the first instrument that EVERY child was required to learn was the recorder. After that they could continue on with other instruments (clarinet, trumpet, flute, etc.), or drop music altogether, or whatever. But at the very least they would have had SOME experience in playing an instrument, even if they never went any further. It let kids get their feet wet with concepts of melody, notes, keys, playing in groups, etc., in an easy and regular way.

No one complained. No one said "Why would you want to teach anyone the recorder? NO one plays THAT!" There were no arguments that, hey, you don't find recorders in orchestras, or marching bands, or even in rock bands, and therefore it should not be taught. The general consensus was that everyone should have at least a little experience playing an instrument, the recorder is about the easiest instrument you can play, and starting with the easiest instrument is a great way to introduce kids to playing music.

Well... Esperanto is the recorder of the language world. It lets kids get their feet wet with concepts of grammar, vocabulary, structural differences between languages, etc., in an easy and regular way. But if you try to introduce it into the schools, the resistance will be immediate. "Why would you want to teach anyone Esperanto? NO one speaks THAT." There will be arguments that, hey, you can't find any countries where they speak it, not even as a dialect in isolated villages, and therefore it should not be taught. The general consensus will be that if the kids have to learn a language, that learning a real (albeit difficult) language will be the best way to introduce kids to speaking a foreign tongue.

Piron considers this attitude to be a cultural neurosis of sorts. Recorders aren't threatening. Esperanto is. But from an educational standpoint, it's the same. darn. thing.

Go figure.

That's a very good illustration. I hope the Springboard To Languages idea catches on.

So I got a response from my local council about this. They just said that their language teaching is good enough already, and the number of students choosing languages in the UK in general is rising, so they don't need to use Springboard to Languages.

guyjohnston: my local council said that their language teaching is good enough and the number of students in the UK in general is rising, so they don't need Springboard..

Sounds defensive. The reason is not easy to guess - whether they saw it as unnecessary hassle, or some unintended word put the cat among the pigeons, or they were just prejudiced against E-o. Dio scias. Better luck next time!

I'm Chair of Governors in an English-speaking Primary school in Wales. I'd love to persuade the headteacher to try Springboard, but I don't know where it could be fitted into the curriculum. There is already the compulsion to teach Welsh in our school. I don't think that they'd be very keen to put another language in, even one with the benefits of Esperanto.

I'd be interested to find out if any research has been done on whether pupils in Wales do better with foreign languages than their English counterparts. All children in Wales have to learn Welsh from their first day in school.

richardhall:I'm Chair of Governors in an English-speaking Primary school in Wales. I'd love to persuade the headteacher to try Springboard, but I don't know where it could be fitted into the curriculum...

I know nothing about running schools, so this is only an idea:
would the school be interested in a Springboard club, which would be simply for people interested in learning languages. As a hobby, it need not interfere with the usual curriculum, and there would be no pressure to pass exams etc.

Miland:I know nothing about running schools, so this is only an idea:
would the school be interested in a Springboard club, which would be simply for people interested in learning languages. As a hobby, it need not interfere with the usual curriculum, and there would be no pressure to pass exams etc.

I think that's a good idea. When I was in infant school (around the age of six I think), I went to an after-school French club with basic lessons that they had, even though they didn't teach foreign languages normally. I expect I would have really enjoyed doing Esperanto rather than French at that age because of how much simpler and easier it is.

Also, I'm in Toulouse at the moment, and the Esperanto assocation here run this kind of extra-curricular Esperanto classes at some local primary schools. I haven't asked them much about it, but I know that some children do go to them.

Miland:I know nothing about running schools, so this is only an idea:
would the school be interested in a Springboard club, which would be simply for people interested in learning languages. As a hobby, it need not interfere with the usual curriculum, and there would be no pressure to pass exams etc.

It's a fine idea. The school does have after-school clubs for French and Spanish. If there was going to an after-school Esperanto club, I think I'd have to run it, and I don't know that I'm very qualified! In any case, I'll be leaving this area in the summer, so I don't think there's time to do anything sustainable.

richardhall:I'll be leaving this area in the summer, so I don't think there's time to do anything sustainable.

Here's the webpage for the E-o club of South Wales, if this is of any use in finding a local 'expert' who might be interested:

http://verdadrako.50g.com/