Prompt: Some experts believe that it is better for children to begin learning a foreign language at primary school rather then secondary school. Do the advantages outweigh disadvantages?

Some people claim that the foreign language should be taught at primary school, others, however, say that this is too difficult for children to comprehend and is better to be learnt at secondary school. Both opinions will be critiqued before the reasonable conclusion is drawn. Ċ To begin with, at young age, children are more adaptable to studying. The basis for the vast majority of future knowledge is acquired at primary school. For instance, the abilities to write and read are the two most essential parts in ones' lives. LThus, it is seemed reasonable for educators to teach foreign languages at the initial stages. Ċ In addition, the phenomenon of bilingual children is seen frequently throughout the globe. The good example here is Canada, where both French and English is spoken by many kids, inasmuch as inhabitants of France and the UK do. Thus, it is not seemed to be burdensome for many of young learners. Ċ However, a great number of primary pupils are not as good in studying new material as others. For example, more than a half of students from somewhere are struggling at school and having difficulties with grasping new information, therefore, it would be extremely complicated for them to comprehend an extra material. Ċ After analyzing both sides of the argument, it is felt that teaching overseas languages in primary school should be practiced in countries, where pupils do not usually experience difficulties. It is hoped, that the strugglers will receive an extra tuition, in order to become competent in speaking foreign languages.