Learning a Second Language

Thank you for your rebuttals, Pro.1. "I believe that speaking a second language is far more important than learning let's say History."Well the issue with this argument is that 1) it's strictly based on opinion with no facts to support it, and 2) it does not take into account just how significant history really is. Contrary to what Pro is espousing, History is more than learning about humanity's past; it's actually about using History to shape the future. By teaching students history, teachers are enabling them to better understand the world around them - why their computer exists, why America is currently fighting two wars, why certain countries exist, and certain jokes, and what people are talking about on the news, and what political philosophies they would follow. History is a way to open up the floodgates for students become politically involved, which America needs now more than ever, but that's for a different day. This is also not taking into account that History is a significant aspect of a lot of different subjects: sciences [who discovered what], language arts [writing and explanation of context, etc]. 2. "I believe that the efforts of learning a second language should be put above other subjects."Yes, because before children learn how to add, multiply and divide, they need to learn how to speak a second language. Before students develop to understand basic sciences like evolution, how the weather works and what gravity is, they have to be concerned about being bi-lingual. This is simply unnecessary. The source I provided earlier explains the concept that mandating foreign language classes would actually be incredibly expensive for something that should, logically, be considered a huge waste of time. I am no true fan of 'core curriculums', but enough is enough when you are putting language arts of foreign languages above math and science, etc. 3. "Precisely because only 26% of people in the U.S. can only hold a conversation, don"t you think it would be better for people to learn more?"Not particularly. My whole intent in citing that percentage was to demonstrate that the knowledge of learning a second language would not be very applicable in "day-to-day" life, considering only 26% of the population can speak these languages well enough to reasonably hold a conversation. But you also seemed to dodge the 8% of students who actually manage to hang on to the languages they learn and manage to apply it in life. Once again, 90% of high school students took a language class at one point or another, and many fail to apply daily. Now, what also needs to be considered is exactly what this is saying: Pro is making the argument that when people immigrate to America, the American government must mandate languages of other nations to adjust to the status quo. Would it not be more appropriate for the immigrants to try and adopt to English and the language of the country they are immigrating to, not the other way around? Would it not make more sense to perhaps mandate the learning of the English language for foreign students who do not already speak it? 4. "People fail when applying knowledge of a language because they do not look for opportunities to improve and practice..."This might be a remotely credible and valid argument if Pro cited sources, but as one might observe they have failed to do so; therefore the point should be considered null, because no statistical data supports the claim that students who had learned the language fail to apply it in daily life. 5. ..."much like the other [language] classes that they took, they do what they need to get good grades and that is it."Okay, so two mandated years of learning a foreign language would enable students to just barely get by [i.e do the work without interest in the language], but giving obviously uninterested students who feel no need to learn a second language more years of mandatory language learning would somehow stop them from doing that exact thing? What about math classes? Students take math class for basically their entire school life, you don't think some of them are disinterested? It is more likely that more students will just do the work for the grades than not. Pass the class and you get out. Forcing students to do more work revolved around a difficult-to-apply subject is not necessarily going to encourage them to focus more on the subject at hand, enjoy, or remember it better. Nor it will make the knowledge anymore applicable. Once more, thank you.