Ofqual Consultation: Suggested Changes for the Assessment of A Levels and GCSEs in Modern Foreign Languages in 2021

Ofqual is currently conducting a very important consultation including proposals tomodify the assessment requirements for some GCSEs, AS and A levels in response to disruption to education caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

In the face of “lost” teaching time during lockdown, the proposals aim to free up teaching time and, in some instances, reduce what needs to be taught and take account of any public health restrictions relating to coronavirus (COVID19) that might be in place during the next academic year.

A “recovery” curriculum?

There have been lots of discussions about how current Year 10 and Year 12 pupils have been affected by the pandemic in the preparation for next year’s exams as they have had limited access to face-to-face teaching since the end of March. In particular, the debate has been around the need of a possible “recovery” curriculum or at the very least a “responsive” curriculum to deal with the knowledge gaps that may have developed and that could hinder students’ further progress. This has highlighted the differences between school settings and the pressure on some schools to narrow the curriculum for some pupils to ensure standards in Maths and English were not put at risk.

Consultation about assessment NOT Curriculum review

What this consultation is not, is some kind of a statement about the importance of subjects and their respective content and skills. However, you would be forgiven for believing this was the case, reading some of the online debates it has created.

Suggestions for Languages A Level and GCSE 2021 exams

Whereas no modifications have been put forward for A Level, the proposals for Modern Languages GCSEs are quite controversial : the Speaking examination would be replaced by a teacher “endorsement” for Speaking but it would not actually count in the exam, with the overall grade only taking Listening, Reading and Writing into account.

Although there is no denying that cancelling speaking exams would result in gained teaching time, this proposal also causes a number of issues:

Students do usually well in speaking even though it can be stressful for some ;

There would be a noticeable imbalance in the overall grade between the productive and receptive skills ;

Although speaking would still be taught, it may lose its priority in the face of further time constraints and the pressure of imposed subject targets ;

The class focus moving away from speaking would particularly affect pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds who may not have opportunities for further practice ;

The decision would most likely impact on A Level recruitment for 2021-22 as the perceived success in speaking the language is key for motivation and enjoyment. However, given that the basis for the decision to carry on with languages for many students is still “success” measured by exam outcomes, ensuring a fair exam and best outcomes might be just as important for A Level recruitment ;

There is also a worry that dropping the speaking exam could have a negative impact on attitudes towards speaking and languages in general in the future.

So, what is the way forward?

Look at the coverage of topics? The teaching of the Social Issues topic is usually kept at the end of the course and maybe could be scrapped to make up for lost curriculum time during the pandemic.

Go the “Welsh way”? Keep the assessment standards in all 4 skills and at the same level but make amendments such as streamlining the coverage of some of the topics or skills assessed. For instance, no translation in the reading paper or no Role-Play and Photocard in the speaking exam. I would still be against using dictionaries in any of the exams as I feel this could be very distracting for students.

We will all agree that students must not have their qualification devalued and it is important that the standards remain the same even if some aspects of the assessment are simplified. For this reason, I believe that the overall standard of GCSEs in modern languages cannot be maintained without any speaking being counted at all in the overall mark.  

Want to share your own views? Have your say and respond to the consultation before 16July at 11.45pm

Now is the time to join ALL, the Association for Language Learning, our subject association, to make sure our voice is heard.  

ALL is also organising a consultation webinar on Friday 10 July for all language teachers. To register, please click here.

Myths and Reality: Foreign Language skills for the 21st century?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/48977901@N00/149172094

This item was published on the Osiris Educational blog on 7th February 2014

I never really liked to describe the subject I teach as MFL. Modern? If you have to state something is modern, doesn’t it somehow make it sound old-fashioned? Foreign? The word never conjured up anything warm and accepting to me… 

Some people will then go on to tell me that MFL is a neat way to distinguish languages like French or Spanish from Community Languages. Does this mean that French is not a community language in London despite quite a large French community living there? Is this a polite but obvious way to discriminate between languages? After the Olympics and London being described as one of the most multilingual cities in the world, I had really hoped for this distinction to disappear. Languages are languages, aren’t they? 

If you are bilingual or multilingual, you have been given a special gift that needs to be celebrated. So why are so many school children hiding the fact they may be using a different language at home? 

The national debate about languages seems to be evolving in the UK and this is all good news. There is still a fair amount of myths circulating in and out of schools about how languages may not be “suitable” for all children and even a possible threat to the development of their language skills in English. Funnily enough, the vast majority of conversations I have had about this were with people who still consider that being monolingual is the norm. The thing is, there are now more multilingual people in the world and being monolingual is becoming more and more an exception to the norm. 

Some children will find learning a language easier than others but the truth is that proficiency in any language cannot be easily attained. It requires time, effort, resilience and equal opportunity of access as it is still optional in many schools. In addition, the examination system does not serve languages particularly well. It provides pupils with limited options-why can’t we study French for Food Studies at GCSE?-and does not always give pupils a positive recognition of their skills. 

There is indeed a language skills deficit in the UK at even the most basic level, probably the one some would say is not “worth bothering about”, justifying the narrow choice of language qualifications available, but is no skills at all better than some skills although limited? Clearly not. It would be like refusing to enter a race at school just for knowing that we could not possibly end up in the top 3. So what about the other benefits of taking part? Language learning needs to be embraced as an activity that will benefit all, in the same way as all children benefit from core PE. 

Is language learning a 21st century skill? Usually the discussions gravitate around the role of technology and core skills like literacy, numeracy and oracy, with no sign of language learning being included in the list. I find this odd as Language learning skills are part of literacy core skills-they also support the development of mother tongue literacy by allowing comparisons. 

Recently, the debate about languages for all has been hijacked by the “which language” debate. Do not allow yourself to get distracted-we have a language deficit in the UK and I am not sure whether stating publicly that some languages are more useful than other is helpful at all. We need more languages taught by qualified specialists in schools. If language skills are taught well, they are transferable so the “which language” discussion becomes redundant as we cannot predict accurately what will be of use by the time our current school children enter the job market. 

Language teachers should also be allowed to bring languages alive and tap into youth culture, which they cannot always do in the curriculum time they are given-one of the smallest in Europe. Languages, just like technology are in constant evolution. Using ICT and social media can provide very real opportunities to communicate quickly and effectively with different language speakers about all sorts of common interests. 

In schools, the question should not be whether all children should learn languages or which one but how language teachers can work with all areas of the curriculum to make language-learning an integrated literacy-enhancing experience. 

[I am looking forward to taking part in the languages conference organised by Osiris in the summer. For more information click  here and here. See you there...]

The Universal Panacea? Trusted to improve

http://www.flickr.com/photos/yinto/3213182939/

If I had the power to change one thing in the world of education in the UK, I would put trust at the centre of everything we do…

It all started about six years ago. I was running a Comenius school project and was invited along with two other colleagues and four students to meet with our partner schools in Finland. We were visited by OFSTED the week before and when asked about differences between educational systems, it was hard not to mention our inspection.

The headteacher enquired: “Do you mean, you still have school inspections?” I nodded. “Isn’t that a little archaic?”. I stopped dead and looked at him. “We don’t have these any more… very old-fashioned…”.  And then, the killer : “Why don’t they just trust you?”. All three of us started laughing nervously… but we could not really provide any immediate answer.

Why indeed? Is it really such an airy-fairy idea that the vast majority of teachers do a good job and want to constantly improve what they are doing? Maybe the vast majority is not enough, I will accept that, but more disturbing was the opinion from some of my colleagues that OFSTED could not be done without. I mean… How do we know we are doing OK? How do we know how good we are?

My response to that is that if we do not know deep down whether we have tried our utmost with a set of students or not, then our ability to reflect professionally is seriously lacking. Accountability is also a double-edged sword. It does safeguard children’s interests but it also dictates rules all have to play by as well as make attractive any loopholes and shortcuts to get to the same end result.

As for the second question, how good we are does not matter as much as how much better we can become. There is something dangerous about wearing an outstanding badge and not trying to change things for the better any more…

Trust does not just happen. It feeds through everything we do. Students should be able to trust us to be professional, prepared and constantly striving to get them to learn in more effective ways. Respect relies on trust, mutual trust, as that goes for students as much as it goes for staff.

Hyper-accountability can cause extreme stress and damage confidence, self-image and performance. The impact is negative all around but trusting is not providing excuses for poor performance. Trust contributes to setting up a context where improvement takes place not because it has to happen but because groups of individuals want it to happen. If improvement does not happen as planned, then the group agrees on further steps to be taken to rectify this rather than drop the whole process as it was unsuccessful and not meaningful.   

Acknowledging  context is not providing excuses, it’s humanising data. We do teach human beings who are probably at their most vulnerable emotionally and nothing saddened me more than the following comment I heard made by a student  “I am not a person, for some people I am just a walking A Grade”. 

Allowing committed teachers to sometimes feel disappointed rather than guilty is essential as guilt is a destructive downward spiral that affects teachers’ health and children’s education. Guilt erodes enthusiasm, energy levels as well as the willingness to take risk and be creative.

We don’t teach numbers, we teach children whose potential to learn can go up and down.

Simple but daring-Trust is the only way to improvement, a policy of openness where trying to paper the cracks is not a way forward.

Many more blog posts on "The Universal Panacea? The number one shift in UK education I wish to see in my lifetime" can be found on http://share.edutronic.net/ 

Enjoy the conversation...

Consultation: Making Primary Languages Compulsory at Key Stage 2

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ocs_camp/2171492103/

The deadline for the consultation is 28th September 2012 and all related documents can be downloaded here.

My own response is as follows…

...We are seeking to make provision under the 2002 Education Act to ensure that all maintained schools must teach a foreign language at Key Stage 2, from Year 3 to Year 6. This could be either a modern foreign language or an ancient language such as Latin or ancient Greek.

Q1 a) Do you agree with the Government's proposal that foreign languages should become compulsory at Key Stage 2 in maintained schools in England from September 2014?

Yes

Q1 b) Please explain the reasons for your answer:

Our world is multilingual and young children need exposure to other languages to be able to reflect more deeply about how their own language functions and strengthen their literacy skills. Research also shows that younger children are more willing to try languages than teenagers who are often even more self-conscious than adults. Last but not least, starting early is a way to promote languages as an important part of the curriculum and should encourage more pupils to carry on studying languages later in life. This, in turn, will have a positive impact on our country’s linguistic capacity and improve our ability to do business abroad.   .   

The Government is not minded to specify the language to be taught, but rather give full flexibility to schools in their choice of languages. We are therefore interested in finding out more about the language(s) that primary schools would be likely to provide.

Q2 a) If you are responding on behalf of a primary school, what language(s) would your school be likely to teach and why?

As a secondary teacher who goes to some of our feeder primary schools to teach languages, I often see a choice based on the strengths displayed by more than one member of staff.  I agree that the actual language does not matter as much as the ability to deliver quality provision with enthusiasm. French and Spanish are often taught by our feeder primary schools for that particular reason.

Q2 b) If you replied to the question above, would the language(s) your school teaches be likely to change over time and if so, why?

The only reason to change the language would be linked to change in staffing, hence the real need for all members of staff to get appropriate training rather than relying on one person to deliver the language in rotation to different classes. There is a real need for planning medium and long term for schools to develop their capacity to deliver modern languages effectively and fairly independently.

The proposal to make languages compulsory at Key Stage 2 should impact positively on all groups of pupils.

Q3) How might the proposals affect different groups of pupils?

Pupils from underprivileged background who may not have had any opportunities to go abroad will have a better exposure to foreign languages and cultures.

Pupils with low literacy levels will benefit from learning foreign languages as it provide them with an opportunity to revisit key literacy skills through the foreign language.

Bilingual pupils will see their linguistic skills valued and special needs pupils will be given a chance to start something new and feel on an equal footing with the other pupils.

High ability pupils will be stretched by the challenge posed by the study of a foreign language and will benefit from the opportunity to deepen their thoughts about language in general and broaden their horizons.

We will consider the challenges that requiring primary schools to teach a foreign language will pose and how schools might best meet them.

Q4) How might the proposal affect different types of schools? Please consider in particular small and large schools, rural and urban schools, those that already teach languages at Key Stage 2 and those that do not.

The proposal will affect schools differently depending on the way languages have been prioritised in their curriculum. If the schools have continued to embed the foreign language over the past few years through developing the skills of their own teachers rather than relying on visiting teachers only, the provision is likely to be good. However, schools that have been unable to do this until now will require substantial support in order to develop their teachers’ expertise and ability to develop quality in-house language provision. If schools rely on external providers only, the language provision will be more likely to be unsuccessful, with pupils making limited progress. 

Q5 a) If the proposals go ahead, what do you think the priorities will be for training and professional development of teachers?

Links with secondary schools must be strengthened by allowing secondary teachers to support primary colleagues’ training at their request and share their good practice through face-to-face meetings, online platforms and video-conferencing.

Primary colleagues must be made aware of where to find good quality resources, particularly to enhance their pupils’ pronunciation of the foreign language, an area which is often a challenge for non-specialists.

Adequate funding and time must be allocated for primary teachers to go to the target-language country to gain a better understanding of the foreign language and/or learn it for a formal qualification.

Q5 b) Do you have any suggestions for how schools and other stakeholders could work together to meet these needs?

The creation of MFL Primary/Secondary clusters would be useful to develop secondary teachers’ understanding of how to build on successful primary literacy practice and primary teachers’ knowledge of foreign language pedagogy.

Primary schools should also join forces to share the cost and expertise needed to develop appropriate schemes of work for KS2.

Q6) Please let us know if you have any further comments you would like to make about the proposals in this consultation document.

The allocation of time and resources is key to making Primary Languages a success especially for the schools that are lagging behind in terms of developing their own capacity to deliver languages.

The issue of assessment also needs to be tackled as well as some guidelines provided regarding expected content to ensure a smoother transition to secondary school.

Please share you views by uploading the questionnaire here.

If you are a member of ALL, the Association for Language Learning, you can  email them your views so that they can be shared through your subject association.

Not yet a member of ALL? Time to join! J

 

Training to become a Secondary Languages Teacher –What You Need to Know

http://www.flickr.com/photos/perspicacious/3839519283

This year I have been invited by one of my local universities to help out recruiting PGCE candidates for Modern Languages. The process has been really interesting to reflect on the reputation of teaching as a career in general and of language teachers in particular.

Throughout the process, I have been amazed at the range of backgrounds prospective candidates can come from. From native speakers straight from college to mature students and “career switchers” and every possible other set of personal and professional circumstances in between.

So, the first thing you would need to show is your personal motivation to train as a language teacher. There is really nothing surprising here but the challenge is to address both sides of the role-the teacher bit AND the language specialist bit.

Everybody has got an opinion about what a good teacher should be like, but the teaching role seen through the eyes of a student-or ex-student-can be really far from the truth. The only point of reference any non-teacher has is always their own experience of education, which will be either seen through rose-tinted glasses or at best-gasp-outdated. Even if you left school only 6 years ago as a student in the UK, I am sorry to say, but the vast majority of your experience as a student might be obsolete already. Yes, really.   

Whether you were educated or not in the UK, you will have to show that you have done your homework and you do know what the current situation is. Please do not mention motivational problems due to compulsory language learning at KS4 as this would now affect only a very small minority of schools.

So, what makes a good MFL lesson? Your only way to find out is really to see one so ask your local school if you can come in to observe. A bit of reading might help too and there are plenty of pointers available online on the Times Educational Supplement and Guardian websites as well as many resources for language lessons. So, how would you teach a Y9 class about transport in France? Just have a look at what practising teachers did. You just need to register to have free access to the site and be able to download any resources from it. Who knows, if you do get onto that PGCE course, you should be able to return the favour too…

What else would you need to keep in mind? Showing an awareness  of the qualities needed to teach children and the wider demands of the role is useful too.

You also need to show that you have thought about specific challenges like dealing with parents, teaching children with a wide range of needs and backgrounds as well as considered some strategies to deal with classroom management issues. No, you will not be expected to know it all but if you are aware of possible issues, you will be able to develop strategies more effectively to cope with them.  

Then, there are specific issues linked with native speakers. As a native speaker myself, my best advice would be to be honest and humble.   Yes, being a native speaker can be an advantage but you will also have to show that you can adapt to a different educational context and that you can empathise with your students and provide them with the appropriate support non-native speakers need to develop their own linguistic skills. I wrote about this back in 1997 at the beginning of my teaching career and many of the points I made then on p54, I would still make now…

Outstanding Teaching-Be the Best You can Be

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeanninestamand/5123201564/

Everybody wants to be outstanding, these days. The problem is that outstanding is, by definition, supposed to apply to a minority. This does not mean that we need to lower our sights. As we are human beings with fluctuating emotions and energy levels, the challenge of consistently being the best we can be should be the first step to get there. 

Considering key qualities to develop, I would aim to show:

*Enthusiasm-If we are not enthusiastic, who else is going to be?

*Expertise-As in "knows what they are talking about" but certainly not as in "fount of all knowledge". I believe that experts are people who are aware of the limits as well as the depth of their knowledge. As learning is never-ending, experts are only credible to me if they display some humility.

*Empathy-Understanding students and relating to them, being able to reach out for them-not making excuses for them.

*Ability to make students think for themselves and develop their independence-My aim is to enable students to be lifelong learners of languages and many other things...

*Ability to take risks and encourage students to take risks with their learning by creating an environment where making mistakes is something we all learn from.

My 2 main priorities would be:

to promote active engagement, where student co-operation supports the development of their learning skills and subject content knowledge, rather than just focus on student enjoyment that can be passive and just linked to content rather than skills.

to decrease my amount of "teacher talk"-start with 60/40 and aim for 80/20. Although students need to develop good listening skills, they can be doing that listening to other people than me. I feel this is very challenging for languages teachers as over-reliance on teacher talk and "over-modelling" is a traditional teaching default mode. So, how can we share lingustic input with our students in a different way?

For Listening and Speaking, developing students' knowledge of phonic patterns is essential. This needs to be taught systematically and in context, especially for more phonetically irregular languages like Enlish or French. It works quicker for more regular languages like Spanish or Italian and can make students feel a real sense of achievement as they can try to pronounce new words independently without entirely relying on the teacher. Using transcripts, making students compare what they hear to what is in front of them e.g. differences between audio and transcript, silent letters etc... also really helps students linking what they hear to the written word.

For Reading and Writing, training students to make effective use of resources such as dictionaries, verb tables and textbooks is key. Getting them to work in pairs or small groups can also help them to develop resilience as well as more general reading and writing strategies.

As regards developing student use of the Target Language, my view is that this can only be linked to speaking for a real purpose and I am planning to give students more opportunities to do this in class in a structured way. I feel these speaking activities are more likely to be successful if students are already starting to develop their independence as linguists. Students will then be able to manipulate better the language they know and make better use of resources at their disposal to find out independently the language they need to say what they want to say.

And what about being able to discuss and demonstrate progress in students' learning?

Many key elements to consider are linked with Assessment  for Learning:

*Effective learning objectives/ success criteria

*Effective questioning

*Peer and self assessment

*Reflection and self evaluation with students settig their own targets

*Verbal and written feedback from teacher and other students

Some tools like visualisers, flip cameras and mini whiteboards can help, but it is all about embedding their use in our classroom routines to make it more effective.

If traffic lights are used for mini-plenaries, rather than just focusing on whether students are red, amber or green on a specific objective, asking them why they think they are red, amber or green might reveal more about what they learnt in the lesson.

Likewise, comments from teachers and peers in students' books need to be refined and thought through in terms of impact on students' learning. Are the comments understood? What actions have been taken by the students to show they understood and acted upon the comments?

And more importantly... When have the students been given the time to respond to the comments? 

The more I think about it, the more obvious it seems to me that outstanding teaching is a journey rather than a destination. If we want students to grow as learners, it is only fair we tried to do the same through our practice.      

Foreign Languages to be Compulsory From Age 7

There was quite a bit of trepidation amongst languages teachers this morning as both the BBC and The Telegraph websites announced that Foreign Languages were going to be made compulsory from age 7.

From 7 ? Does that mean up to the age of 16? Both article seemed to focus on Primary without much being mentioned about KS4 although I did welcome the idea of “a new focus on spelling and grammar”- But is this really a new focus? As always, KS4 was reduced to “GCSE”, which is definitely NOT the best way forward to ensure all students have a reliable practical knowledge of a foreign language.

The plans will be put out to public consultation later in the year-during the Summer holidays- ahead of a planned introduction in 2014. “Under Mr Gove's plans, primary schools could offer lessons in Mandarin, Latin and Greek, as well as French, German and Spanish from September 2014”. Well, there was nothing stopping primary schools from doing this before-apart from the available teaching expertise, so I guess again, there is really nothing new here.

I was alarmed at The Telegraph’s hint that “A system in which all primary children learn a foreign language from age seven will give pupils a much stronger foundation, which they can build on in secondary school to become fluent”. Fluent? With less than one hour a week at primary and one of the smallest time allocation of the EC at secondary? I could be also mistaken but even at GCSE, I did not think the aim was to be fluent but to show some ability to understand and produce some language independently-quite different…

The Telegraph goes on to state that “By the age of 11, pupils will be expected to speak the language in sentences with appropriate pronunciation, express simple ideas with clarity and write phrases and short sentences from memory” and that “They will also be expected to understand basic grammar and be acquainted with songs and poems in the language studied”.

This is a sensible target but very difficult to deliver for a non-specialist teacher without support. So, where is the support going to come from? I hope the answer is revealed very soon…

However, I was really pleased with the mention of the “Research [which] also suggests that being taught a foreign language can help to improve conversation skills and literacy in English, as well as benefit study in other subjects”.

After years of repeating that other languages do not confuse children but support the development of their literacy, it is nice to see the message is filtering through…

Let me guess… the next topic to be discussed will be transition and which language is really worth learning. And of course…the announcement this week, which will be consulted on over the summer, is not expected to include any additional funding to help schools provide language lessons.

Plus ça change …

Language World 2012: Future Perfect?-A panel debate on the challenges ahead for languages education

The panel chaired this year by Rosie Goldsmith consisted of actor Larry Lamb, headteacher David Kennedy, young entrepreneur Lizzie Fane and EC Head of UK  Interpreters David Smith.

As somebody who is in the classroom, I always find debates about languages by non-teachers both fascinating and worrying. We are discussing languages education and the members of the panels often have a partial view of it depending on the degree of their direct involvement with it. It is sometimes difficult not to feel this is all too anecdotal but the truth of the matter is that anecdotes do shape our views-whether positive or negative.  

I found the idea of doing ICT through the medium of German discussed by David Kennedy a very interesting one. German is often seen as a more “boy-friendly” subject and ICT can also be seen that way. ICT-learning is naturally more student-centred and students can work at their own pace in a more naturally differentiated way.  In addition, ICT terminology is well defined, which means that it is easier to access in different languages.

I really enjoyed Larry Lamb’s account of his “personal encounter” with language learning. I particularly liked the fact that he challenged very openly the perceptions of languages of languages as “a middle class subject for posh kids”, as if working class children could not benefit from language learning, ignoring all the personal benefits language learning can bring ALL students.  

I totally agreed with David Kennedy when he pointed out that to encourage languages in general and at primary in particular, it is essential to remove barriers and develop more joined-up thinking from primary schools to secondary  languages departments.

Languages are seen as elitist and middle class and too hard, so all agreed that they need to be “popularised” in a similar way this has been done for science, for instance.

Larry Lamb controversially stated that he could not understand why Religious Studies are part of the “core” but it is OK to do without languages. In my opinion, there is certainly a case for giving languages the status of “core” to ensure that all students have access to some language studies regardless of ability.

All agreed that cross-curricular partnerships have a great potential to promote both languages and subjects like PSHE, which also often need promoting. In addition, joint degrees-e.g. marketing and French should also be given a higher profile.

Rosie Goldsmith defined Languages as “a passport to a broader life” and all members of the panels supported this stating how important it is for speakers to come in to talk about what they do with their languages so that students realise the real opportunities offered by studying a language.

David Smith from the EC interpreting service quoted that “36% employers recruit for language skills and cultural awareness”. So, in view of the generally anti-European stance in the UK, what can be done to recruit more interpreters? The service has looked into many ways of promoting interpreting as a career including a very popular Facebook page.

Understanding Languages-Why Teachers Need to Listen and Learn

In this week's MFL colum in the Times Educational Supplement, I tackle the perception of languages by non-specialist colleagues and what can be done to demystify our job.

Some subjects are scarier than others to non-specialist teachers. Languages are definitely in the scary category for many teachers, but a lot will depend on personal experiences, often dating back to their own school days.

Isn't it funny how most adults-whether they are teachers or not- and teenagers lose all common sense when they are presented with something they know is "foreign"? Anybody above the age of 9 will become more and more hindered as they grow up by the assumption that they WIL NOT understand.

They will forget they have a language of their own with which they can establish comparisons and make inferences from. They will ignore the visual clues, the cognates, the sound-alikes because let's face it, it is foreign and they cannot possibly understand this. That is why I believe before we even attempt to teach a foreign language, we must make students realise that it is not a threat to their identity.

Many adults behave in such manner and would rather deliberately mispronounce words rather than be seen to try to emulate the sounds produced by a native speaker. Speaking a foreign language then becomes a bit like karaoke singing: a high-risk business with strong potential for the participant to end up looking ridiculous.

It is therefore hardly surprising that some of my primary or secondary colleagues feel uncomfortable having to teach or supervise the learning of languages, particularly if their own experience was less than successful at school. So let's demystify!

Being supportive and non-judgmental is a good start but pointing at useful techniques and resources is key. This should be an exchange as both participants have as much to learn as each other. 

All teachers have a reasonable repertoire of cross-curricular learning and teaching strategies so no need to re-invent the wheel. After all,  languages are a medium, they can be learnt through any content...   

Mindset-The New Psychology of Success, Carol Dweck

Mindset by Carol Dweck is probably one of the best book I have read this year. It relies on practical examples to support a very simple theory. The theory in itself is quite straightforward as it looks at two approaches or possible mindsets which can define personal and professional philosophy.

The growth mindset is all about reflection and self-improvement whereas the fixed mindset is about proving that you are smart. This is underpinned by strong belief sytems about what being smart is really all about. The book provides many examples of both mindsets, how they can affect different areas of our lives and how the mindsets can be altered.

There is a chapter of particular interest to parents, teachers and coaches. It is both enlightening and terrifying as it stresses how our every word and action send messages to children. “It can be a fixed-mindset message that says: You have permanent traits and I am judging them. Or it can be a growth-mindset message that says: You are a developing person and I am interested in your development”

This different way to look at our actions also leads us to reflect on the way we give feedback to children as parents or teachers and on the way we praise them. A brilliant example is as follows “You learnt that so quickly! You’re so smart… You got an A without even studying ”. Depending on the child’s mindset this can be translated as : “If I don’t learn something quickly, I’m not smart….I’d better quit studying or they won’t think I’m brilliant.”

One of the strong messages is that praising for intelligence or talent rather than effort can switch children off difficult challenges. It can also make children lose their self-confidence as soon as anything is challenging or does not go the way they anticipated. However, I thought the examples of feedback felt slightly awkward e.g. “That homework was so long and involved. I really admire the way you concentrated and finished it” and it really made me think of strategies to provide effective growth feedback.

• Describe the effort and the process involved: strategies, effort or choices “you took on a challenging project” “you did research, you designed…, you wrote about” “you are going to learn so much from it”

• Give the idea that effort makes learning worthwhile: “Skills and achievement come through commitment and effort”

• Present tasks that are too easy as “a bit of a waste of time” and extension work as a way to provide real learning opportunities.

• Discuss how resilient and reflective learners get more out of their learning.

• Be tolerant of mistakes and do not aim to motivate children by sharing judgements about them “give them the respect and the coaching they need to develop”

• Provide constructive feedback focusing on specific aspect of the work that can be corrected

• Present topics in “growth framework”

• Be reflective and consider how you praise-working the “process praise” into our interactions is often NOT a natural reaction

I will be looking at our reward policy to ensure this is built into our practice as reading “Mindset” has made me realise how traditional praising sytems can really have the opposite effect to what is intended…

ALL Together For Languages: My Response

1. I would like the media and the decision-makers to move away from constant reports that we are not good at languages “as a nation”. Good linguistic role-models should be publicized more widely rather than make them look like the geeky exception. I find there is sometimes a snobbish attitude about monolingual people that makes you feel that, if you are making the effort to learn somebody else’s language, you are losing your Britishness and you are somewhat letting the side down… Monolinguism should be portrayed as an exception, not multilinguism. I feel there is also a lot to be done to educate the public so that they do not feel that teaching a child another language from a young age might “confuse” them or “hold them back”.

2. I find it incredible that despite the fact that so many of us are trying so hard to make our subject accessible and interesting, we are always hit by the argument that “language teaching puts most people off learning a language”. There are endless discussions about poor literacy and numeracy skills in the media but never any link with the teaching… I sometimes feel that this attitude is caused by some parents who are not aware of the sweeping changes that have occurred in the teaching of languages since they went to school and their bad memories are passed on to their children…

I cannot understand how languages are considered the least important in the curriculum when they overlap with so many key skills such as literacy and oracy. Then again, a serious information campaign is needed to get parents from all backgrounds to understand that languages are not just useful to order a drink whilst abroad… and to get rid of the “for middle class only” tag.

3. I am very worried that there is currently a very unequal access to studying a language in secondary schools. It seems that unless you are in a language college, where languages have the status of a core subject, the position of languages is far too vulnerable for such a strategically important subject. Some safeguards need to be offered by our government to ensure that studying a language is encouraged in ALL types of schools, as languages should be seen as a core skill. I am very excited at the prospect of an English “bacc” model of reporting exam results but I am also very worried that this would only take into account a GCSE, when it is clearly not an inclusive qualification.

4. Decision makers should reward schools who encourage ALL students to take some kind of qualifications in a foreign language, and not just a GCSE. Qualifications could be weighed but effort to study and take an examination in a language should be acknowledged and rewarded. If not studying a language cannot be used as a shortcut to better looking exam results for schools, there should be every incentive for senior teams in secondary schools to give languages the important place it deserves in the secondary curriculum.



The Decline of World Languages in The UK: Time to Reverse The Trend

In the wake of the best GCSE results ever, there has been a lot of discussions about the decline of languages in the UK, with a specific focus in French “no longer in the top 10 of popular subjects”.

I have been collecting such articles on Diigo and sharing them via my twitter account @icpjones.

More and more people are coming to the conclusion that leaving the development of such sensitive skills to market forces only will be detrimental to our educational system, our economy and our country in general.

This post is not about why languages are so essential, most educated people seem to agree they are. However, even if not studying a language is a common regret for a lot of adults, we seem to be getting a lot of mixed messages about languages in the media.

Languages are difficult

Nothing of value has ever been achieved without effort-the issue with languages is that the sense of true achievement is delayed over several years.

Languages are badly-taught

There has been sporadic “non-news” items claiming that you can’t get by using the skills taught for a GCSE. Speaking is usually the one targeted, the argument being that rote learning is encouraged to pass the exam. If the exam encourages rote learning, then the exam needs to be looked at. So, does that make languages too easy to pass? Only if you have an outstanding memory.

The topic-based National Curriculum was another subject of debate: too narrow and vocabulary-based. The New Curriculum is now virtually content-free. What is relevant content then? Relevant content is linked to what interests you and who you are... isn’t that a bit inward-looking? Challenging is better than relevant. 

Languages are marked harshly

There is a documented severe grading issue with languages but more confusion appears as the papers clamour “record numbers of A*-C”. So, is it easy to get a good grade or not? What it means is that your above average candidates move from very good to excellent whereas your average but decent linguists are finding it harder and harder to scrape through a C as the national co-hort becomes more and more selective.

The class divide

Private schools have kept languages on board as they know that a lot of parents value them and they are an asset for entering Higher Education. So why have state schools gone the other way?

League tables and tough A*-C targets have pushed schools into short-termism. This was mitigated by the introduction of the publication of figures including Maths, English and Science but as, unlike the publication of the Maths and English figures, the publication of the MFL statistics is devoid of any consequences for schools, there really is no incentive for schools other than Language Colleges to invest time, effort and money in languages.

Social labelling is rife: working class kids don’t wear blazers, they don’t study languages and they don’t go to university. Most of this labelling is self-inflicted and challenged in schools but deep down languages are still seen as something for the elite, something of a nice-but-not-essential luxury because, let’s face it, everybody speaks English abroad...

Social mobility cannot be achieved by developing a two-tier educational system, so ... back to compulsory languages?

Although I am a strong advocate of languages for ALL, I do not believe in GCSE for all. There is now a wider range of qualifications, like NVQs and Asset Languages, suitable for students who may not need a high level of foreign language proficiency in the future. The thing is, that should be their decision, not ours. By narrowing the curriculum and denying students the option to take languages, we are carrying on with social labelling and reinforcing the view that “languages are for posh kids”.

In addition, a move back to compulsion does not seem realistic in terms of staffing as I recall there was a staff shortage before languages were made optional...(coincidental, surely)

So, what about incentives for schools? ... and for students?

Students and parents need to know that languages will help them to get into ALL universities. This will give schools a clear message that a language-free curriculum would be detrimental to their best students.

The idea of a percentage of the cohort having to do languages seems a reasonable argument. How can we pretend to be on the Gifted & Talented list and not do a foreign language? That’s only 10%, so it is not even a very far-reaching target...

The key would be to ensure that ALL students can study a language if they want to. Recently, the demise of French was even mentioned on the French National Television. However, this information did not sound right: student do not always choose not to do French, it is more that they choose what they see as the easiest from a bunch of options or in some cases the choice has already been made for them by over-streaming the cohort (you are in the red stream, you can do Geography or Art).

The percentage of students studying languages at KS4 should be advertised with exam results, rather than the percentage of students getting A*-C at GCSE and other figures than can be affected by native speakers taking GCSEs in their home languages. I do believe bilingual students should gain recognition for their language skills, but the figure does not really show the school’s commitment to developing the language capacity in ALL students.

It is time to reverse the trend and political support is also key...

New Secondary Curriculum for Languages: Challenges and Opportunities

Painting the Sky
Originally uploaded by Stuck in Customs

Although I have been doing a lot of ed-tech work lately, I have not been able to blog about it much. I am currently proof reading some excellent materials that Language specialists Wendy Adeniji , Liz Black and Juliette Park have developed to support teachers wanting to move away from purely topic-based language teaching.

Wendy Adeniji is an experienced Language Consultant, Juliet Park is a Lead Practitioner for the SSAT and Director of Languages at Yewlands School, Sheffield and Liz Black is an AST, consultant for North Yorkshire LA and Head of Languages at Stokesley School.

It would indeed appear that although the New Secondary Curriculum has freed the UK languages teachers from the old topic-based "Areas of Experience", the general feeling is that topic-based teaching, with its prime focus on word level learning, is sticking around.

Why?
Well, has GCSE changed that much? As it is still felt that extensive vocabulary is a pre-requisite to a good GCSE grade, this approach feeds into KS3 and can be justified-students will not learn all the vocabulary they need in 2 years or less in the case of fast-tracked groups.

There are undoubtedly training issues here. There is a lot of willingness but also a lot of anxiety in front of what really is a mammoth task. We are free from content? OK, so what do we teach now? If you have been trained to teach in a certain way, moving away from topic-based learning and teaching may feel like diluting the quality of learning and its outcome.

So what's new?

I love the idea of "Teaching the usual in an unusual way" to quote a phrase used by Wendy Adeniji in her training sessions but really teaching skills explicitly is much more than just teaching the usual. And that is exatly what is encouraged through the new materials by using interesting cultural contexts.

When I was studying English in France, the focus was always on written accuracy, grammar and reading comprehension. The materials used were always aiming to represent the culture of a variety of English-speaking countries, rather than provide us with opportunities to use day-to-day language.

In England-granted, a fair few years later-the focus was on vocabulary and topics that were deemed of interest to teenagers-with not many opportunities to find out about the culture of French-speaking countries through these topics.

I see the New secondary Curriculum as a great opportunity to redress the balance and give students opportunties to open up to the world rather than use foreign words to talk about their own world.

The challenges?

Time and vision! The vast majority of Language Faculties are now small and do not have the time and manpower to design brand new materials to teach the whole of KS3. Many have started but this is a lengthy process that will take more time to get established. Collaborative curriculum planning and the development of more innovative commercially-produced resources is the only way to build on what is already in place...

Language Learning: Global Issues

I came across this post on languages learning a few days ago. It is from The linguist on Language blog, run by Steve Kaufman. I found interesting the key issues that were raised, showing that many of them are not local but global...

Steve was sent an email by a student who was doing a study "to determine how individuals acquire language and how the education system promotes language learning and language diversity”

You can see Steve’s answers here. My answers are as follows.

1) How do you feel language is presented in schools? Is it an important issue? Or is it sort of put on the back burner?
Steve thinks that it is poorly presented, with the teachers imposing their agenda and their content. I agree that we often “try to induce the learners to acquire language patterns and vocabulary, in which [they] have little interest” but this is often dictated by examinations. This is not our content but something that is prescribed. On the other hand, prescribed defined content can also be more reassuring to both students and teachers. The “content-free” opportunities offered at KS3 through our New Secondary Curriculum feel daunting to many –What do we do? What about linguistic progression? Do I have to change everything? The way language is presented is regularly debated as the key to student engagement.

2) What are the techniques you use for studying language? On the computer? Off the computer?
Like Steve , I think that “you need to spend a lot of time with the language”, which is a real issue as curriculum time is being cut in many schools. Steve’s advice is also to spend a lot of time on receptive skills and combine this with efficient vocabulary learning (words and phrases). However, I would disagree about the advice to “delay producing the language, (writing and speaking) until you have enough of a base”. I have always found active consolidation of new vocabulary and phrase through writing and speaking an effective way to ensure that the language can be “recycled” and some structures can be transferred across the four skills.
Digital resources are very useful as they can encourage all students to take risks with the language through doing things like reading a text out loud or performing role-plays. I particularly like the individual use of recording and text-to-speech tools to ensure students can develop productive skills avoiding excessive reliance on the teacher at an early stage.

3) Do you think that public education should offer classes in another language, if that language happens to be prevalent in that area? (ex. Spanish in southern Alabama)
Like Steve, I believe that “the choice of the language, and of content to be studied, should be up to the learner. A variety of options should be offered. The key is the interest of the learner, not whether that language is spoken locally, although for some people that would be motivating.”
The type of language spoken should also be considered, especially in the case of languages with a different alphabet/ script. It is nonetheless the case in the vast majority of British schools that there is no choice at all for the study of the first-and often only- foreign language.

4) Do you think globalization and international business are hurting or helping language learning? Why?
Steve thinks that globalization makes language learning more important. Unfortunately, globalization has also secured English as a Lingua Franca. I am always amazed that many global dimension projects do not see developing language skills as a priority.

5) How would you teach a language class? What techniques would you apply?
Steve considers the classroom as the place to encourage learners to get out and learn languages outside the classroom. I agree that “languages are learned outside the classroom and not in class”. I feel that the wider the range of techniques used, the better: ICT, games, Drama, Art, Music and other cross-curricular activities... Steve argues that “our brain learns all the time, and often in implicit ways, and not in response to pressure from teachers”, hence the potential of ICT and social media to create situations where languages are going to be used outside the classroom for real communication purposes...

What about you? How would you answer these questions?

Licenced to Teach: Which Qualifications?

teacher
Originally uploaded by AhavatHaEmet

There is currently a lot of debate about the amount of qualifications needed to be a good teacher-or should I say a “credible” one. Whether we are talking about qualifications on entry or whether a teaching MOT is a good idea, the consensus is that teachers

must have a secure knowledge of what they teach and be provided with regular opportunities to upgrade their knowledge. However, it is well known that you can be very knowledgeable and still unable to teach effectively and, conversely, that a good teacher with maybe less depth of knowledge will be able to take his/ her students a lot further.

A secondary school curriculum and staffing survey published by the NFER in 2007 showed how 23% of French teachers in England did not have a post -A level qualification in it. If you think it does not sound too good, this is better than German (28%) and a lot better than Spanish (40%), which shows how some teachers qualified to teach other subjects are asked to teach Spanish-although they will often be languages teachers qualified to teach other languages such as French. To put it into context, the figures were 25% and 21% respectively for Maths and English.

The University of Buckingham's Good Teacher Training Guide 2009 found a link between low entry qualifications and failure to find a teaching job.
However, what the research does not show is the percentage of teachers who have experiences demonstrating that their depth of knowledge is more developed than a teacher with just an A Level. In languages, it could be somebody who has lived and worked in the target language country for an extended period of time, it could be somebody who has had to build onto their GCSE skills in order to use the language while working in industry, it could be a dual heritage person who decided to use their languages only at a later stage of their studies... The possibilities are endless.

So what kind of teacher would you rather have? One with the current mix of skills, levelled out by the ability to meet Q standards? Or should the teachers without post A Levels qualifications be denied access? Is this sustainable, particularly for shortage subjects?

I know what kind of teacher I would rather have: a lifelong learner with a passion for their subject-that’s the easy bit- as well as someone who knows how to make each student feel special ...