Skip to main content

Clarity is all

I began my teaching career believing that teaching almost always in the target language was the way to go to maximise pupil progress. I would still hold to this pretty strongly, but after many years of experience teaching quite able young linguists I came to realise more and more that pupils understood less of what I and my colleagues were saying than I had thought. So much for comprehensible input!

I also realised that some students were being put off the subject a bit because basically they didn't really know what was going on all the time. They felt confused and even a little alienated. Maybe, to put it technically, their "affective filter" comes into play, makes them feel uncomfortable and negative about the subject. This would occur typically when, after explaining an activity in French, you realised you had to do it again in English to ensure everyone was clear what they were doing and successfully on task. My conclusion was that, in order to maximise motivation and, ultimately, useful comprehension of the target language, you had to compromise on its use.

You see, clarity is vital for children, isn't it? They love to know exactly what is expected of them. If you confuse them before or during a task, they will switch off, learn little, get bored and behave worse. Now, having assumed that we use all the usual clues to aid with understanding of the TL - picture, gesture, mime etc - when would we be justified in using English without any feelings of shame?! When do we need to sweeten the pill?

  • When explaining grammar points orally or in writing
  • When setting up a complex pair, group or writing task
  • When giving pep talks to classes about why you use certain methods and what you expect from pupils
  • When correcting poor behaviour
  • When telling anecdotes or talking about the target language culture
  • When explaining exam specifications and mark schemes
  • When giving general feedback about homework
  • When doing translation or other "transfer of meaning" work
  • When explaining what the aim of a lesson is or was
  • When recapping what was learnt (plenaries)
  • When giving extra special praise (this could carry more weight than a run-of-the-mill comment in French)
  • Checking meaning of individual words
  • When greeting and saying goodbye to individual pupils - making personal contact, getting to know them better
  • When intervening in pair work to give personal support
  • When raising the voice for effect
  • When writing in detailed feedback in an exercise book
  • When discussing targets
  • When giving immediate feedback to a student after an oral presentation
The relationship between a teacher and a class is an immensely subtle one and, whilst I do not say it is impossible to work solely in the target language, I believe that using English judiciously will improve relationships and ultimately result in greater motivation and progress. I have read of a 90% rule and this does not seem unreasonable.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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).

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics

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,