via I. Camacho | Reduccionismos. En la sociedad de la simplificación no hay razonamiento que supere el poder de una etiqueta. La fuerza emotiva de la propaganda se impone con un empuje devastador ante cualquier argumento que exija una cierta complejidad comprensiva. Menos es más en un universo esquemático, intelectualmente autolimitado, en el que un buen eslogan garantiza la supremacía de su marco mental frente al engorroso esfuerzo de las premisas explicativas. En el mundo de twitter han muerto las subordinadas y se han llevado a la tumba los matices. En su lugar triunfan los sintagmas sencillos, las proclamas elementales, las consignas de consumo inmediato.

Por esa razón, la lógica jurídica del proceso a Garzón tiene perdida de antemano la batalla emocional contra la manipulación propagandística que reduce la cuestión a una venganza del tardofranquismo y a un ajuste de cuentas corporativo. Una pancarta —o un titular de prensa— que presenta al juez como la última víctima de la dictadura es mucho más eficaz en su persuasión que los tochos de apretados folios de un sumario sobre prevaricación judicial. Para explicar que se trata de un proceso instruido sobre la base de que el magistrado se empeñó en abrir una causa a sabiendas de que no tenía competencias ni base para ello se necesitan al menos varios párrafos cargados de casuismo jurídico. Para concluir que se juzga al magistrado por tratar de hacer justicia sobre el franquismo basta en cambio con una frase, con medio renglón, con un pareado que se grita a las puertas de los tribunales y se abre paso fácil entre la opinión pública.

Si esto es así en términos generales, el solo nombre de Franco tiene la virtualidad de convertir la consigna en un mantra ideológico. El simplismo de causa-efecto genera una fascinación magnética en la prensa internacional al evocar el estereotipo más extendido sobre España: la pervivencia entre las estructuras democráticas de los estratos de la dictadura. Entre nosotros, el nombre del tirano ejerce de catalizador para una de las modas políticas e intelectuales más gratas en los últimos tiempos: lo que Joaquín Leguina llama el antifranquismo sobrevenido, esa vocación de resistencia tardía y retrospectiva con que cierto progresismo expía sus remordimientos generacionales. Únase a ello la escenografía solemne y rancia de un juicio en el Supremo, con sus alfombras carmesíes, sus ropones, sus altos sitiales, y tendremos el marco perfecto para un reduccionismo de demoledora eficacia victimista.

En ese silogismo artificioso, adulterado, ventajista, se mueve con soltura un Garzón acostumbrado a mecerse entre las olas de la adulación y la autocomplacencia. Si lo condenan será una conspiración de sombras, una artera maniobra reaccionaria. Si lo absuelven, habrá triunfado la movilización democrática. Curioso concepto de la justicia en un hombre dedicado a impartirla.

via Alejandro Serrano | Where Spain stands and how it can break the current vicious circle it is trapped in

In a recent study by EF Education First, the English level of Spaniards was ranked 17th out of 19 European countries, representing 92% of the total European population excluding the UK and Ireland. Only Russia and Turkey obtain worse results than Spain in the ranking.

There is a strong positive correlation between level of English and GDP per capita. English level of countries, including Spain, is worse than what the GDP of the country would suggest.

Three years ago, the Spanish prime minister, Mr. Rodríguez Zapatero, announced a plan aimed at reaching an ambitious goal: “in 10 years, Spaniards leaving high school will speak fluent English,” he solemnly asserted. But reality is quite stubborn and gives today plenty of anecdotal evidence that this will not be quite the case. If you have visited or lived in Spain and tried to communicate in English in the street (no matter the age, old or young,) you know what I am talking about.

It is true that an effort is being done in private and public schools to put a remedy to this situation. A small, but increasingly portion of curricular time is already taught in English, and bilingual education is little by little gaining momentum in many schools. However, a huge problem to implement this plan is that there are not enough native teachers to teach English, thus students do not learn how to speak.

Try this: tell a 12-year-old good student to recite a list containing fifty irregular verbs (eat-ate-eaten and the like.) He or she will do it by heart, but will be incapable of correctly pronounce half of them. Let us face it: non-native teachers in Spain do not devote enough time to conversation in class (my group is too large is the usual excuse) and, even if they do, they lack the appropriate phonetics skills; even many of them speak English with an (often strong) Spanish accent.

In the business space, this unfilled educational gap leads to a clear situation of competitive disadvantage when Spanish firms try to compete with other firms in the international arena. It is not a coincidence that Spanish multinationals sell much more in Latin America than its European counterparts, who mainly sell in Europe, a much more natural market in terms of geographic distance. There is a huge language barrier, another one to add to the long list of Spanish barriers to achieve competitiveness.

How to break this vicious circle of low-skilled teachers and low-skilled students without spending enormous amounts of money on élite schools or “imported” teachers?

First, you have to start from the very beginning, taking care of the youngest by not translating cartoons on TV into Spanish  and movies for kids in theaters. Then you do the same for teenagers (first, the Harry Potters, then the twilights, then all the American movies, then…)

Second, the curriculum in schools has to be turned upside down. Start teaching only oral English in elementary school. Use cartoons, movies, and the internet to expose kids to native English. Start teaching writing skills to sixth or seventh graders, when they are ready to absorb grammar easily.

Finally, prevent students from digressing too much by learning other languages, such as German, or Italian, or French. Unless they have a clear vocation towards languages, English will be the only one they will most likely need at work. It is better to speak fluent English than intermediate German, English, Italian, and French.

Following these simple guidelines, in fifteen years, teenagers will have acquired the speaking skills that they lack today. The solution is not that original; see what the blue diamonds in the top-right part of the chart above (Norway, Denmark, Belgium, The Netherlands) have been doing for many years.

These are my two cents; it seems to me like a simple recipe for success. It is going to take a while, so the sooner they start, the better.