BONJOUR, mesdames et messieurs!” is sadly going to be heard less often in Scottish classrooms, as the study of a modern language becomes an “entitlement” rather than a requirement. This astonishing change of policy is one which all Scottish teachers, not just modern linguists, should do all in their power to reverse.

It is argued that the change will lead to better motivated linguists. No doubt that is true, but the same argument could be applied to mathematics. How many S2 students would happily drop mathematics, given the chance?

So why is the change taking place? It can only be for two reasons. First, languages are, by and large, not well taught. Second, we do not have enough competent teachers. Ask any headteacher which subject is taught least well in their school, and the odds are the reply will be “languages”. We must be honest about this - four years’ teaching in secondary schools, plus in most cases two years at the end of primary schooling, is not yielding a good return. In fact, in some cases the return is negligible.

Why is this? On leaving school students will quickly find that prospective employers are increasingly looking for young men and women who can speak a foreign language. When we do business in Europe, our inability to converse in our hosts’ language is accepted with an air of resignation, but growing impatience.

We should embark on a three-pronged attack. First, we need to recognise that it cannot be solved with a quick fix; it requires a long-term strategy, so that we have teachers who are properly trained in the best methods. This cannot happen overnight, nor can it be achieved by sending them on six-week courses.

Second, we need to revolutionise our method of teaching languages. Anyone who has used the tape programmes published by Michel Thomas, the Canadian teacher who has for many years taught American and Canadian employees to speak a foreign language in a very short time, must have wondered why the same methods were not used at school. These tapes are now available in the UK and are the best preparation for a holiday in Europe that I have ever come across.

And last, there is the question of how early one should start teaching a foreign language. Children suffer from few inhibitions in their earlier years, and they don’t mind making mistakes (essential to the learning process). If the teacher is a native speaker, there is the added advantage of speaking the language with the correct accent. There can be a downside to starting so young - the onset of boredom. Part of the excitement of entering the secondary school is the prospect of starting new discrete subjects. If we are not careful, learning the language for a further four years could be a disincentive - but only if we stick to the traditional approach.

There could be several ways to counteract incipient boredom. Children could take up another language; we could reduce the time allocated to the language already learnt, concentrate on achieving real fluency and delay the concentration on grammar until S3 and S4.

We could develop immersion courses for the fag end of the summer term in S4 and S5; and we should not forget those who really do want to embrace the literature of the country, and ensure that they are appropriately stimulated. We could even try to ensure that every child spent, say, three to four weeks in the relevant country, further developing their oral skills.

We should not be talking about “entitlement” but about ambition. Let us hope that Jack McConnell will have the courage to think again.

Frank Gerstenberg is the former principal of George Watson’s College in Edinburgh.