A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
weak aptitude for language learning
This is such bullshit. As a Brit abroad, our problem is weak language education. We are taught to such a poor degree and we are not taught how to learn a language. It's been the biggest struggle of my adult life trying to get conversational and after a year I am still way behind my cohorts - it's not some genetic predisposition to being bad at language learning, but a lack of language infrastructure in childhood.
Amazingly native English speakers the world over seem to have this genetic predisposition! All of us just can’t seem to get it together when it comes to becoming multilingual.
OR… maybe it comes from being born into mastery of the language everyone else on earth is trying to learn. I get three words in Spanish out before my conversation partner asks to switch to English. What am I gonna do? Stamp my feet and demand I get to practice my hobby and deny them the opportunity to work on a valuable career skill. Nah. We’ll speak in English.
Your ancestors (assuming you are British) created a global language hegemony. My ancestors moved from southern Italy to the US and learned their language.
Not entirely sure what you're saying, sorry if I got it wrong, but it seems like you're implying I said the opposite of what I actually posted.
My point was there is no genetic predisposition to being bad at language learning but that the language education in the UK is woefully bad. I've spent more time learning how to learn Spanish than actually learning it because we're not taught the skill of language acquisition from childhood.
The reason the government hasn't invested in language skills is because it's the lingua franca (the irony of that phrase isn't lost on me), but the argument of "weak aptitude for language learning" used in the article is patently false.
I was agreeing with you and being a little sarcastic. Of course you are right, there is nothing genetic about it.
There is very little incentive for native English speakers to learn a second language because English is far and away the most popular second language.
Which I’m sure is a contributing factor to the complete lack of investment in second language education the anglophone world.
Ahh just misread then, all good :D
I did French for three years, and never got further than telling people my name, how old I was, and how many brothers and sisters I had.
Thing is, we don't need it. We go on holiday to a tourist trap, all the locals know enough English for us to get by. We import TV and movies, pretty much all in English. We go online, it's mostly English, and anything that isn't is a click to translate.
It's the real Esperanto.
Living and working in a big European country (e.g. France, Germany, Spain or Italy) would be a pain without knowing the language, and our lack of language skills is probably to blame for Brexit because most of us have never even considered moving away.
Edit: Plus we've stolen enough words from our neighbours that if you're reading something, there's probably the odd word you can recognise in there.
and our lack of language skills is probably too blame....
Not sure if this was on purpose or not XD
Swype typing be tricky. Works just enough that I don't proof read.
So if I am reading this correctly, the problem is that UK students are not interested in going abroad (weak foreign language skills) and many Continental European students want to come to the UK (as almost everyone is learning English).
This means the UK has to pay more money than it receives.
But with this money, they would be 'buying' the chance to hold the interest of highly educated young people, who might love the British way of life and come back to work in the UK...
Sounds like just another step into economical and cultural irrelevancy.
Saving some money short term, losing a whole bunch long term.
Jup, Brexit is full of these we pay more money than we receive kind of things. Like duh, you receive a whole lot more than just money. But somehow everything needs to be a monetary gain?
School I went to cost more than the school I did "study abroad" at. I was paying for someone else to go to my school while I was gone. Was study abroad great? Yes. I hope that other person had a good time too.
I went grocery shopping the other day but I ended up paying more money than I received so I guess I'll just starve because it's cheaper.
I guess they think speaking Galactic Basic is enough to get by everywhere
Can somebody explain how poor language skills relate to the UK paying more? The article just makes it seem obviously correlated
I’d bet because it requires adults with better language skills.
We had a few exchange students when I was growing up and if the student was considered “mostly fluent” they’d come alone and have a group they’d meet with.
Students who were barely fluent often time had an adult with them.
I’d gather the exchange groups with less fluency require more adults, even if they’re not paid they have transport costs and whatnot.
That said, you’re totally right. It’s wild the article just goes “and of course it’s more money” as if it’s common knowledge why.
The article also alleges a “poor aptitude” for language learning, without making any attempt to stand up such a staggering claim, which places the blame on students for being thick.
Terrible piece of writing
Erasmus = student exchange between universities.
If you end up hosting other people's students but nobody else hosts yours, then you end up spending more on education.
According to the article UK students are less likely to go overseas because they can't speak any of the languages.
It's a bit like if you kept having your kids' friends over to dinner but your own kids were too picky to ever eat dinner at their friends' houses.
Makes sense in that context
So do the government fully pay for the students they host? Or is it a subsidised thing?
I think most likely governments pay into Erasmus and then individual universities get fees reimbursed. The appeal of it for students is you don't pay international fees.
That makes sense, thanks!
If you go to a bar and you don't understand what the bartender is saying, you don't understand how much money they want, so you just hand them your wallet and they take as much as they want. It's like that probably. Yes.
Something's not right here, I can feel it.
and who's fault is that, smhsmh
whose
This is the best summary I could come up with:
BRUSSELS — The U.K. decided to leave the EU's Erasmus+ student exchange scheme because Brits’ poor foreign language skills made membership too expensive to justify, a senior British official has revealed.
Lower take-up of the scheme by British students compared to other nationalities — put down to a weak aptitude for language learning — meant London expected to pay in nearly €300 million more a year than it received back, Nick Leake, a veteran senior diplomat at the U.K. Mission said this week.
Leake was representing the British government at a meeting of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC), an EU advisory body drawn from civil society organizations across the bloc.
At the session of the body's external relations section on Wednesday, delegates approved a recommendation calling for the European Commission to “strengthen negotiations with the U.K. government for the full reintegration of the U.K. into Erasmus+.”
María Rodríguez Alcázar, president of the European Youth Forum, said: “We trust that all the recommendations in the EESC's opinion, including the U.K.'s reassociation to Erasmus+, will be discussed and implemented by decision makers from both sides of the channel.”
Jan Hendrik Dopheide, a senior EU official working on relations with the U.K., told the same meeting that the Commission was talking to member states about how to proceed on the issue of youth mobility in general.
The original article contains 710 words, the summary contains 225 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!