Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school.
-
February 3, 2020 at 1:56 am
Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Mastering a second language is a necessary step for many students, and some are convinced that the process of language learning should be launched while children are in primary school. Though this arrangement may cause some problems, I still think it can provide a firm grounding for their development.
The first advantage is that primary school students are easier to learn a foreign language. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for human to completely acquire language, if people miss this opportunity, they will no longer able to speak another language natively. Therefore, as children in primary school are younger than secondary school students, their brain are closer to the key period, and more likely to understand grammars, remember vocabularies, and imitate the accent of native speakers, which will save a lot of time in further study.
Next, the curriculum in primary school are looser than it in secondary school. Students will absorb tremendous knowledge as soon as they enter secondary school, thus may resulting in inadequate time to learn a language. For instance, Chinese students will be taught some new subjects, such as physics, chemistry, biology, as well as a large number of homework need to be finished. On that occasion, they cannot be sufficiently exposed to foreign language environment and will fail to acquire it well.
On the other hand, learning another language too early may bring about some problems. It may burden well-off families. Some people can invite personal English teachers to help their sons or daughters, but that is unaffordable to normal families. Even if they did it, this would probably be an extra and heavy expenditure, because they seldomly go aboard and use second language.
However, this policy is suitable for most students. I think anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 4, 2020 at 2:52 amScore: 57.4
Issues:
- More than 40% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.
February 4, 2020 at 10:04 amMastering a second language is a necessary step for many students, and some are convinced that children should start learning language in primary school. Though this arrangement may cause some problems, I still think it can provide a firm grounding for their development.
The first advantage is that young children pick up languages more effortless than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for humans to acquire language, as their brains facilitate the entire process. In contrast, people who have missed out this crucial chance will have difficulty in leaning languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabularies, or imitate the accent of native speakers
Next, the curriculum in primary school is looser than in secondary school. Students will absorb tremendous knowledge as soon as they enter secondary school, thus may spend less time on learning languages. For instance, Chinese students need massive time to study new subjects, such as physics, chemistry, biology, as well as homework. On that occasion, their exposure to foreign languages will be insufficient, thus resulting in a failure to language acquisition.
On the other hand, learning another language too early may bring about some issues. It may burden well-off families. Some people can invite personal English teachers to help their sons or daughters, but that is unaffordable to deprived families. Even if they did it, it would probably be an extra and heavy expenditure, because people who live on a tight budget will not go aboard and use foreign languages.
In a word, though this policy is not suitable for all students, I think anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 4, 2020 at 6:09 pmScore: 59.5
I will get back to you shortly.
February 5, 2020 at 9:04 amThanks!
February 5, 2020 at 10:14 pmSome experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
Mastering a second language is a necessary step for many students, and some are convinced that children should start learning (missing article) language in primary school. Though this arrangement may cause some problems, I still think it can provide a firm grounding (change to “foundation”) for their development.
The first advantage is that young children pick up languages more effortless than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for humans to acquire language, (use – instead of ,) as their brains facilitate the entire process. In contrast, people who have missed out (missing preposition) this crucial chance will have difficulty in leaning (spelling) languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabularies (singular), or imitate the accent of native speakers
Next, the curriculum in primary school is looser (more flexible) than in secondary school. Students will absorb tremendous knowledge as soon as they enter secondary school, thus (they) may spend less time on (delete) learning languages. For instance, Chinese students need (have to spend a) massive (amount of) time to study new subjects, such as physics, chemistry, biology, as well as homework. On that occasion (In this case), their exposure to foreign languages will be insufficient, thus resulting in a failure to language acquisition (acquire a new language).
On the other hand, learning another language too early may bring about (result in) some issues. It may burden well-off families. Some people can invite (use a different verb) personal English teachers to help their sons or daughters, but that is unaffordable to (preposition error) deprived families (combine two previous sentences). Even if they did it (what is it? be more specific), it would probably (delete) be an extra and heavy expenditure, because people who live on a tight budget will not go aboard and use foreign languages.
In a word (conclusion), though this policy is not suitable for all students, I think anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 6, 2020 at 4:53 amMastering a second language is a necessary step for many students, and some are convinced that children should start learning languages in primary school. Though this arrangement may cause some problems, I still think it can provide a firm foundation for their development.
The first advantage is that young children pick up languages more effortless than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for humans to acquire language, as at that time their brains facilitate the entire process. In contrast, people who have missed out on this crucial chance will have difficulty in learning languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers
Next, the curriculum in primary school is more flexible than in secondary school. Students will absorb tremendous knowledge as soon as they enter secondary school. Thus, they may spend less time learning languages. For instance, Chinese students have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects, such as physics, chemistry, biology, as well as homework. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages will be insufficient, a factor which may cause a failure to acquire a new language.
On the other hand, learning another language too early may result in some issues. It may burden well-off families. Some people can employ personal English teachers to help their sons or daughters, but deprived families cannot afford this service. Even if they engage one, it would be an extra and heavy expenditure, because people who live on a tight budget will not go aboard and use foreign languages.
In conclusion, though this policy is not suitable for all students, I think anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 11, 2020 at 10:26 pmScore: 62.5
Mastering a second language is a (necessary step) [ unclear]for many students, and some are convinced that children should start learning languages in primary school. Though this arrangement may cause some problems, I still think it can provide a firm foundation for their[unclear pronoun ] development.
(The first advantage)[ unclear] is that young children pick up languages more effortless [ grammatical error]than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for humans to acquire language, as at that time their [unclear ]brains facilitate the entire process[unclear ]. In contrast, people who have missed out on this crucial chance (will have difficulty) [absolute writing ] in learning languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers
Next, the curriculum in primary school is more flexible than [lack a comparison ]in secondary school. [ lack connection from the prior sentence]Students will absorb tremendous knowledge as soon as they enter secondary school. Thus, they may spend less time learning languages. For instance, Chinese students have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects, such as physics, chemistry, biology, as well as homework[imbalanced concept ]. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages will be insufficient, a factor which may cause a failure to acquire[grammatical error ] a new language.
On the other hand, learning another language too early may result in some issues[unclear ]. [ lack connection]It[ unclear pronoun] may burden well-off families. [ lack connection]Some people can employ (personal English teachers) [ unclear] to help their sons or daughters, but deprived families cannot afford this service. Even if they (engage one)[ unclear], it [unclear pronoun ]would be an extra and heavy expenditure, [ punctuation error]because people who live on a tight budget will not[ absolute writing] go aboard and use foreign languages.
In conclusion, though this policy [ unclear]is not suitable for all students, I think anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 12, 2020 at 10:40 amA second language is a compulsory course in many countries; however, experts are not sure whether this subject should be set up in primary school or in secondary school. I believe that the former arrangement benefits children more.
Children in their early age pick up languages much more effortlessly than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for children to acquire language. At that time, young children are likely to receive input from unfamiliar things, such as foreign reading material or recordings. Due to this trait, people can master another language quickly. A person, on the contrary, who has missed out on this vital chance may have difficulty in learning languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers
Another advantage is that children can allocate more time and energy for learning languages in primary school. This is because the secondary school curriculum is tighter than that of primary school. Children hence need to absorb tremendous knowledge, as soon as they enter secondary school, and they may sacrifice their language learning time. For instance, Chinese students have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects, such as physics, chemistry and biology. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages may become insufficient, a factor which may lead to failure to acquire a new language.
In conclusion, I am convinced that young children’s innate abilities should be harnessed, and anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 14, 2020 at 4:28 amScore: 62.5
Issues:
- Nearly 40% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
A second language is a compulsory course in many countries [ wrong word]; however, experts [ wrong word]are not sure whether this subject [ wrong word] should be set up in primary school or in secondary school. I believe that the former arrangement benefits children more.
Children in [wrong preposition ] their early age pick up languages much more effortlessly than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for children to acquire language. At [wrong preposition ]that time, young children are likely to receive input from unfamiliar things [logical confusion ], such as foreign reading material or recordings [ logical confusion]. Due to this trait [wrong word ], people can master another language quickly. A person, on the contrary, [displacement ]who has missed out on this vital chance may have difficulty in learning languages. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers
Another advantage is that children can allocate more time and energy for [wrong preposition ] learning languages in primary school. This is because the secondary school curriculum is tighter than that of primary school. Children hence need to absorb tremendous knowledge, [punctuation error ]as soon as they enter secondary school, and they may sacrifice their language learning time. For instance, Chinese students [absolute writing ] have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects, [punctuation error ]such as physics, chemistry and biology. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages may become insufficient, a factor which [ wrong pronoun] may lead to [article error ]failure to acquire a new language.
In conclusion, I am convinced that young children’s innate abilities should be harnessed, and anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 19, 2020 at 9:02 am- Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather than secondary school. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?
A second language is a compulsory course in many schools; however, educators are not sure whether this subject should be set up in primary school or in secondary school. I believe that the former arrangement benefits children more.
Children pick up languages much more effortlessly than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for children to acquire language. During that period, they could not distinguish the first language from the second language, so they would treat or learn them in the same way. Also, young children’s brains are programmed to acquire their mother tongue. In this case, people can easily master another language at their early age, just like their native languages. In contrast, if a person missed out on this vital chance, they may have difficulty in learning another language. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers.
Another advantage is that children can allocate more time and energy to learning languages in primary school. This is because the secondary school curriculum is heavier than that of primary school. Children may sacrifice their language learning time in order to complete other subjects. For instance, many Chinese students have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects such as physics, chemistry and biology. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages may become insufficient, a factor that may hinder acquiring a new language.
In conclusion, I am convinced that young children’s innate abilities should be harnessed, and anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
February 20, 2020 at 2:20 amScore: 60.1 [last revision]
A second language is a compulsory course in many schools; however, educators are not sure whether this subject should be set up in primary school or in secondary school. I believe that the former arrangement benefits children more.
Children pick up languages much more effortlessly than teenagers. Most linguists believe there is a critical period for children to acquire language. During that period, they could not distinguish the first language from the second language, so they would treat or learn them in the same way. Also, young children’s brains are programmed to acquire their mother tongue. In this case, people can easily master another language at their early age,
just like their native languages. In contrast, if a person missed out on this vital chance, theymaywould have difficulty in learning another language. For example, they may fail to understand grammar, remember vocabulary or imitate the accent of native speakers.Another advantage is that children can allocate more time and energy to learning languages in primary school. This is because the secondary school curriculum is heavier than that of primary school. Children may sacrifice their language learning time in order to complete other subjects. For instance, many Chinese students have to spend a massive amount of time to study new subjects such as physics, chemistry and biology. In this case, their exposure to foreign languages may become insufficient, a factor that may hinder
acquiringtheir acquisition of a new language.In conclusion, I am convinced that young children’s innate abilities should be harnessed, and anything that contributes to language learning should be encouraged.
