The Instigator
Just_Me2002
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SongHaGin
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Not All Children Should Have to Learn a Second Language

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
SongHaGin
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/27/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 574 times Debate No: 80248
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Just_Me2002

Pro

A lot of kids are being forced to take second languages when they don't want to. I don't think children should be made to take a second language because it might be really hard for them, and they may hate it and won't understand it. Learning another language can take up a lot of time, too. If a child is struggling in a subject or busy with homework or extra curricular activities, they won't have time to learn another language. Plus, they haven't fully learned the English language of writing, reading, and speaking. If they did, they wouldn't have to learn it in school. Also, if you make someone do something unwillingly, chances are they won't enjoy it and won't bother to work at it. They'd be wasting their time doing nothing.
SongHaGin

Con

I think that children should have to learn a second language because it may benefit them later. They may not realize how much it can help them For example, if you speak Spanish, then you can communicate with 80 percent of the people in the world. Spanish is the most spoken second language. (http://www.pewresearch.org...). America is a brewing pot of many different cultures, so having the children learn a second language will help them communicate when it really matters. It may not seem fun to them now, but when they become older they will be lucky.
Debate Round No. 1
Just_Me2002

Pro

I know they should, but there are always conditions: to do something, you may have to let another thing go. It also depends on their feelings: Do they want to do it? Will they reject it? You can't force someone to jump off a cliff without violence or anger. Making someone learn a second language will be forcing them off a cliff. They won't enjoy it so don't make them do it. It may be best if the children do learn a second language. I agree with you there, but I don't think that it should be a have instead of a want. They must have time, effort, patience, and care about it. If they don't have time then when are they going to do it? If they don't try, how are they going to learn it? If they're not patient with it, it'll become to frustrating. If they don't bother, then they're never going to learn it. These four things must line up in order to learn a new language.
SongHaGin

Con

There will always be something in life that you don't want to do. Children must be taught that they can't just turn away from something that is too hard or unpleasant. They also need to understand that while this may be unpleasant, it will help them down the road. You should see this as any other subject that children may struggle with, an necessary evil. They can also implement tools that can make learning another language easier or even fun.
Debate Round No. 2
Just_Me2002

Pro

Kids will need to learn how to do things they don't like, but they get that everyday in school or in the outside world. Plus, you need to start early when learning a new language. And I know that they'll use this later on, but YOU CAN'T FORCE THEM TO LEARN A NEW LANGUAGE. I can't stress this enough. You can take them to classes and make them do it as homework, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're going to learn it. Everyone knows that they'll use it sooner or later in life, but you won't learn something you don't want to learn. Some kids are also limited in their minds and brains. They have trouble more than usual in studies. Let's first get the basics down and then try something new. They have a choice.
SongHaGin

Con

We're not forcing them to learn a whole new language, just enough so that they can use the language correctly in important situations. There's no way you can learn a whole new language in a semester or two. So, we're just giving them, in a sense, useful knowledge. when I learned English, I learned the important things first. If they want to expand after the class, they can do so on their own.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Jimbus 1 year ago
Jimbus
WolfTerrorists you forgot German, they have a lot of cognates with English
Posted by Just_Me2002 1 year ago
Just_Me2002
What I'm saying is that it shouldn't be required, but children still have a choice.
Posted by WolfTerrorists 1 year ago
WolfTerrorists
The issue when it comes to having children learn a second language is that it can be done with time, effort, discipline, etc. The dilemma that is faced when children learn their second language is that you have to add it in conjunction with children that are beginning to learn their native language. When you show people that, yes there is a breakthrough with language learning, you just have to be early enough to learn it just as easily as you would your native language. If we're talking about learning in schools, however, then you're basically giving the implication that they can translate just as easily as they would in their native language, which sadly since modernity struck, we're constantly stuck with one language and struggle understanding other languages.

There's also an implication of how related the language is to your native language. For instance, English. The easiest language for English speakers, statistically, is Dutch while the opposite is Japanese. While you mentioned Spanish in this debate. Well, yes Spanish has a lot of cognates in its language compared to English due to its relatedness with the, dead, Latin language. I believe if you are eager in learning new languages, go with Latin to begin because you'll be so far ahead once you understand the origin of words in our language and put them into context with languages, such as: Spanish, English, Dutch, French, Italian, Catalan, Romanian, Danish, Norwegian, Afrikaans, and Portuguese.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ax123man 1 year ago
ax123man
Just_Me2002SongHaGinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro brought some good arguments in round 1, but Con countered them well by saying children have to be pushed to do unpleasant things sometimes. Pro did not really counter this at all, but continued to reiterate points from round 1. I thought Pro also conceded to much in the debate.
Vote Placed by Jimbus 1 year ago
Jimbus
Just_Me2002SongHaGinTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: My beliefs stand with Pro, and even though Con was very, very convincing, it wasn't enough to win me over. The conduct is tied because no one forfeited. Both had equally correct grammar. Con made shorter, but more convincing arguments, however, not enough to win me over to his/her side. Con used the most reliable sources because she actually listed a source, while Pro listed none.