Prompt: 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?

Many educationalists are in the belief that learning a foreign language at primary school do more wonders to children than at secondary school. While there are some arguments against this statement, I totally concur with the idea. Ċ Opponents point out some disadvantages of this policy, however there are answers to them. Learning a foreign language at primary school, as opponents suppose, would interfere with the process of learning mother-tongue as it it necessary to properly master a language before jumping to another. However, there is no scientific proof that learning a foreign language and mother-tongue at the same time would do harm to each other. It is also widely argued that children at primary school should be given more freetime to play, and including a foreign language in the curriculum would tie them down, but it worths considering that learning a foreign language should be given as much importance as learning rudimentary skills like counting or spelling, which are taught at a very early age. Ċ Moreover, early learning language presents some undeniable advantages. Scientists have proved that the most suitable ages for approaching speech is from six to nine, which are primary school years, therefore primary students would find it much easier to acquire language than secondary students. Another advantage is that young students' mind of this age is still full of enthusiasm and not inhabited by self-consciousness, thus further facilitate the process and better the result. Ċ For the reasons mentioned above, I strongly believe that exposure to foreign language at primary school should be encouraged as much as possible.