Skip to main content

Good old days?

http://www.lawnswoodhighschool.com/lhs/Documents.html#GCE

Oldies (and maybe younger colleagues) may be interested to take a peek at a 1959 O-Level French papers, posted at the Lawnswood School site. The papers I took in 1973 were not hugely dissimilar, though I seem to recall we had some listening comprehension in there somewhere.

It would be tempting to say that the grammatical difficulty level of those papers (not far away from modern A2 standard) means that standards have fallen over the years. This would be a huge simplification, however. French exams in those days were aimed at a small percentage of the school population and some of them would have found such papers hard. In addition, there was far more emphasis on translation and grammar at the expense of oral and aural work. Most modern students would barely tolerate the type of preparation which was required to perform well in exams of that type.

To do well on the prose translation and picture essay students would practise set phrases and techniques to gain marks (sound familiar?). The translation and comprehension questions would have required a solid knowledge of vocabulary and structure gained after many hours of practice in class and at home. To perform well, rote learning was not sufficient; you had to adapt your knowledge so in that sense the tasks were more intellectually demanding than those which contemporary students have to do. But the 1950s and 1960s student did relatively less oral and listening work, so those skills were less developed. I would hazard a guess that the average student in those days was more bored too - much would have depended on the teacher.

I was rather lucky. My teachers were enlightened enough to do lots of oral work in class and used French most of the time. They then primed us well for the needs of the O-level exam, which did not resemble what we did most of the time in class hitherto. My memory is that it was only in Year 11 (Fifth Form) that we focused on the exam.

Those old papers belong in a museum and we would not want exams like that these days, but they are revealing of a methodology which had certain merits. That methodology assumed that a strong foundation of grammar and vocabulary was at the root of competence and that the listening and speaking skill could emerge from this later. For some it worked, for many it was a nasty shock to have to cope orally in a foreign land.

Comments

  1. An interesting post, Steve. I was lucky to have a truly inspirational teacher for O'level. Yes, we were in the top group in an affluent area, but by the end of the 3rd year we had covered pretty much all the grammar needed for O'level. Our class results (this was 1985, AEB board) were 17 As, 12 Bs and a C. One of my best friends was on of the recipients of an A, but she refused to take French for A'level because she was certain she could not speak it. She was very good at writing it, and, when we spent 2 weeks in France together aged 20, she could understand most things.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The significant element for me is "it was only in year 11 that we focused on the exam".

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,