Should all high school student learn sign language?

Watch
Lars360
Badges: 10
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
Post answers respectfully
0
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
Over MFL? yes imo but how would it get taught?
0
reply
Bio 7
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
Would it really be useful for most people? I would say no, learning something like that isn't for everyone.
2
reply
gjd800
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
No. I know more limited English portuguese and Spanish than I do deaf people
1
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
But don't think that forcing pupils to learn and language beyond KS3 level should be a thing anyway. I would prefer it pupils started learning a foreign or sign language (not both only 1 and this excludes pupils with learning difficulties) from reception and then once a pupil is in KS4, they should not under any circumstances be made to do a language at GCSE level, it should be completely up to them. So start teaching kids languages earlier in school but let them drop earlier too.
1
reply
hungrysalamander
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
No.
1
reply
Hajora0505
Badges: 9
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Talkative Toad)
Over MFL? yes imo but how would it get taught?
MFL is more useful in the real world lol
1
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
(Original post by Hajora0505)
MFL is more useful in the real world lol
True but I'm saying that if Sign language were to become mandatory in secondary schools it needs be instead of MFL, students should not be made to do both if they don't want to, it's either one or the other. I personally wouldn't support mandatory sign language in schools if it means that pupils would have to do it on top of MFL or if schools can't afford to get teachers for it or if that means that pupils who want to do MFL well can't as result of sign language being mandatory. Also there should be no exam whatsoever (don't like this UK mentality whereby anything that you learn in school there's got to be an exam where possible, it's silly, even for MFL I believe that pupils should be able to learn a new language at school without having to sit a GCSE exam on it because you know some people like to learn a language purely for fun).

TLDR: I don't want schools to be like ok sign language is mandatory but so is MFL still. Can't have both sign language and MFL mandatory either one or the other, I want more people to speak another language but as a whole just don't believe that making languages mandatory at GCSE level is a good thing anyway.
Last edited by Talkative Toad; 1 month ago
0
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
Yeah I can agree with this too. Idk whether the OP believes that it should be a GCSE or not (I would strongly say no, I just think that I should be taught but no exam (this can apply to lots of other current GCSE subjects too tbh).
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
Nope, only if they want to.
Its not exactly a useful 'language'. Might be for a small minority of people but the vast majority will never use it unlike foreign languages which im all for seeing being taught more.
By all means offer it as an optional extra after school or whatnot but wasting students time which could be spent on something useful for this comes across as little more than a disservice to them. Especially when they have so many other things they actually need to learn these days.
0
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by Lars360)
Post answers respectfully
Do you believe that the sign language should have a mandatory GCSE exam or not?
0
reply
josie71202
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
I think so but not as a gcse, not fluent sign language just basic signs in PSHE, it'll probably reduce loneliness of the deaf community and it's also useful for communicating across rooms and for things you don't wanna say
2
reply
StriderHort
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
No, imo there's other more urgent/effective things in the queue if we're going to start extending the school day.
1
reply
Mesopotamian.
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
No, learning a whole language from scratch in secondary school will simply not work for a lot of students whom learning a foreign language doesn’t come naturally to. It would need to be taught over a consistent period of time but to replace MFL with BSL would probably be more inefficient in the grand scheme of things, given the significantly lower chances of someone needing to use BSL.
2
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
(Original post by Mesopotamian.)
No, learning a whole language from scratch in secondary school will simply not work for a lot of students whom learning a foreign language doesn’t come naturally to. It would need to be taught over a consistent period of time but to replace MFL with BSL would probably be more inefficient in the grand scheme of things, given the significantly lower chances of someone needing to use BSL.
Yeah needs to start in primary school not secondary.
0
reply
nnth
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#16
Report 1 month ago
#16
(Original post by Talkative Toad)
But don't think that forcing pupils to learn and language beyond KS3 level should be a thing anyway. I would prefer it pupils started learning a foreign or sign language (not both only 1 and this excludes pupils with learning difficulties) from reception and then once a pupil is in KS4, they should not under any circumstances be made to do a language at GCSE level, it should be completely up to them. So start teaching kids languages earlier in school but let them drop earlier too.
Yes, I do agree with your point about kids being taught foreign languages earlier, as your brain during the ages from 5-6 is very malleable. Hence, if you learn a foreign language in the infants in primary, you're more likely to learn it quicker.
0
reply
Talkative Toad
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#17
Report 1 month ago
#17
(Original post by nnth)
Yes, I do agree with your point about kids being taught foreign languages earlier, as your brain during the ages from 5-6 is very malleable. Hence, if you learn a foreign language in the infants in primary, you're more likely to learn it quicker.
Yeah I think that kids should learn a language the moment they start school (reception) bar those with learning difficulties. We need to be like other countries, Anglophone countries (no offense) make kids learn a second language too late (7+ years old/Y7+ is too late). Would prefer that kids learned a language the moment that they start school so that when they choose their GCSE options they can drop the language the moment that start their GCSEs (regardless of academic ability) rather than the current system that we have whereby kids learn MFL too late and then you get pupils complaining about the fact that they have to language at GCSE level but the school still makes then sit GCSE MFL because they are quote "academic enough" to do it or it "enhances" their applications (idk how I was academic enough to be put in pathway 1, but at least I like MFL).
0
reply
jonathanemptage
Badges: 21
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#18
Report 1 month ago
#18
After seeing the Last Leg last night I think as a MFL option only
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What do you find most difficult about revising?

Prioritising what to revise (16)
10.26%
Remembering what was covered in lessons (3)
1.92%
Finding the time to revise (10)
6.41%
Finding the motivation (44)
28.21%
Getting distracted (24)
15.38%
Procrastination (58)
37.18%
Having the tools you need (0)
0%
Something else (tell us in the thread) (1)
0.64%

Watched Threads

View All