Traditionally, children have begun studying a foreign language at secondary school, but introducing them earlier is highly recommended by some educationalists. This policy has been adopted by some educational authorities and schools, which I believe produces both positive and negative outcomes.
The obvious strength of this is that young children accumulate languages much more easily than teenagers. Their brains are still programmed to acquire their mother tongue with a high level of language aptitude, which also facilitates the process of learning new languages. Another plus point is that pupils, unlike adolescents, are not inhibited by shyness and self-consciousness. In fact, they are conventionally allowed for a communicative, play-centered approach rather than a grammar-focused one, thus they maintain great and consistent enthusiasm and progress. Thanks to this, their curiosity and command of the language in later life are boosted, which encourages their further pursuit of languages in the future. The language closely links to culture, therefore, earlier exposure to foreign language may also gain a better understanding of other cultures, forming a better understanding of the surrounding world.
There are, however, some unavoidable weaknesses. Primary school teachers are generalists, and may not obtain competent language skills as well as intensive language-related issues themselves. The required language competence for primary school foreign language teachers in Vietnam, for example, is B1; hence, they may lack thorough, intensive knowledge related to not only language itself but also the accompanying culture. Besides, if primary language teaching is not standardized and synchronized, secondary schools could face a great variety of levels of language proficiency, resulting in a classroom experience that undoes the earlier gains. This may debilitate students’ primitive enthusiasm and willingness to learn. However, these issues can be addressed strategically within the policy adopted.
In conclusion, being exposed to a foreign language earlier vastly contributes to fostering children’s passion for language and culture discovery. Young children’s innate abilities should be harnessed to make these benefits more achievable.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, hence, however, if, may, second, so, still, therefore, thus, well, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 41.998997996 71% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 8.3376753507 24% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1956.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 322.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 6.07453416149 5.12529762239 119% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23607819155 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29763363068 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.621118012422 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 603.0 506.74238477 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2760604473 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.25 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.125 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.375 7.06120827912 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.67935871743 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341362702916 0.244688304435 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0986818157 0.084324248473 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0676197212932 0.0667982634062 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196912301622 0.151304729494 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0532750185146 0.056905535591 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 50.2224549098 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.93 12.4159519038 144% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.32 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 78.4519038076 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.7795591182 167% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.