The fact that from September 1, a second foreign language will become a mandatory part of the school curriculum starting from the 5th grade was announced by Education Minister Dmitry Livanov in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta the day before the start of the school year. Many schools learned about the introduction of the new standard from the media.

In fact, the issue is broader than the introduction of a second foreign language. The new educational standard (FSES) for grades 5–9, adopted last year and now coming into force, assumes, in addition to a second foreign language, the introduction of elements of career guidance (the development of secondary vocational education is assumed within the framework of the new standards) and the “subject area” of “Fundamentals of the spiritual and moral culture of the peoples of Russia” (in the form of lessons, clubs, excursions). By 2020, when children who have studied according to this standard will graduate from school, it is planned to include a foreign language in the list of subjects required to pass the Unified State Exam (currently there are two such subjects – Russian language and mathematics).

The authors of the Federal State Educational Standard emphasize that the standard is of a “framework nature”; it specifies the necessary results of educational activities, and how to achieve them is determined by the school and its own program. The Ministry of Education has yet to decide whether to turn the Federal State Educational Standards into stricter and more mandatory regulations or, on the contrary, to give schools more freedom.

In theory, the introduction of a second foreign language is a wonderful initiative. It is the standard of modern education in most countries, and, as the minister quite rightly notes, language is “not just a means of communication, but also a means of developing a child’s memory and intellect.” But practice, especially in the case of such a subject, differs greatly from theory.

Adding a second compulsory language would seem like a well-thought-out measure if it involved a corresponding strategy – changing the curriculum, reducing teaching hours in other subjects, training teachers, allocating a salary fund. In fact, the recommended workload is simply increased, not redistributed. According to teachers, this means that in most cases the second foreign language will turn into a sham. Good teaching of at least one foreign language is rare even in Moscow schools. In addition, teachers do not rule out that teaching a second foreign language will become an imposed paid service.

The introduction of a second compulsory language is in a strange antithesis with the orientation that emerged last year toward averaging requirements, merging weak schools with strong ones (where two or more languages are already taught), reducing hours for Russian and literature and increasing those for physical education.

But there is an important plus to this initiative, teachers say. Setting such a benchmark will allow, if not immediately and not everywhere, then at least to accustom teachers and children to the idea that two foreign languages are the norm, and not an excess.

Between the first and the second