Skip to main content

JCQ report on low take-up at A-level and the A* grade issue

The JCQ is "a membership organisation comprising the seven largest providers of qualifications in the UK".

They have just released a report to look at the reasons for low and declining take-up of modern languages at A-level and the reasons for the relative lack of A* grades. Its chapters, produced by different people or agencies e.g. Ipsos Mori, contain a very thorough analysis of recent trends in languages, both at GCSE and A-Level, including, for example, the issue of "severe grading" as well as the key issue of why there has beena decline in take-up. There some very useful recommendations. I thoroughly recommend this report if you are interested in policy or qualifications.

Here is a concise summary of their findings as summarised by the AQA site:
  • students' motivations for choosing, or not choosing, to study a Modern Foreign Language (MFL) at A-level are wide ranging and include a perception of difficulty
  • some teachers feel the jump between GCSE and A-level is too great and can act as a deterrent
  • learning languages requires the ability to develop across a wide range of skills which all need to be mastered to achieve an A*
  • writing and speaking tasks are most likely to test stretch and challenge students and so a relatively weak performance in writing skill is a key factor in a student not achieving an A*.
From my own perspective as a long-standing (now retired) Head of MFL, a few points did occur to me on reading this. I have previously blogged about the take-up issue here.

The first bullet point above is very relevant. Motivations for not choosing a language at A-Level do vary a lot. I would mention that weaker students are more likley to choose other options, the number of which has risen over the years. Subjects such as psychology, media, religious studies and biology have grown hugely in the last twenty years. This has been at the expense of languages and other subjects (geography has seen a decline, though history has not). MFL IS perceived as hard and severe grading does not help.

The second point has been true ever since GCSE was introduced in 1987. AS level has evolved into more of a transitional qualification (subject content resembles that of GCSE in many ways), but students with grade B or C at GCSE find A-level tough. The proposed new A-Levels to be taught from September 2016 will do little or nothing to change this perception. Indeed, quite possibly the opposite will be true.

The third and fourth points relate to consistency across skills and in particular a weakness in writing. I must confess that I find this analysis odd. It would be a mere mathematical operation to raise the rate of A* grades to match that achieved in subjects like maths and science. It seems to me that the error was made when the A* grade was introduced and that it has not been put right. I taught some thoroughly excellent students who failed to achieve A*. I was left to conclude that Ofqual had got the sums wrong and that some of the A* grades may have gone to bilingual candidates, which would skew the results.

If you look into the detail of the chapters in the report some interesting points emerge with regard to low take-up.
  • Apparently students are still unaware of the economic benefits to them of learning a language. This is not the case for STEM subjects. In addition students are not sure what career paths they may follow with a language
  • 92% of students surveyed by MORI said they thought MFL was perceived as hard
  • 83% of teachers thought students considered you need a special talent for learning languages to gain proficiency
  • Controlled assessments at GCSE were thought by teachers to have a negative effect on attainment later
  • Students think the jump from GCSE to A-Level is greater than for other subjects. In particular they think you can get marks at GCSE by rote memory and that AS level demands more sophisticated skills
  • Most teachers thought that future reforms of A-level would have no impact, or a negative impact on take-up
  • Teachers felt decoupling of AS level from A-level may reduce take-up
  • Teachers felt A-level should take into account a wider range of ability levels
  • With regard to the A* issue "A* outcomes are often lower than those predicted from the students’ prior attainment scores, a phenomenon that cannot be changed using the current awarding process, even if it was deemed appropriate to do so". Put simply, the current mathematical arrangements (raw scores to UMS) cannot be changed!
NOW, the punchline:

IPSOS concluded that there were four major factors behind the decline in take-up of MFL at A-level:

1.  A-Level (and GCSE) is not focused enough on speaking and topics are not interesting enough. An academic focus on writing and assessments is off-putting. (Take note, Russell Group.) The balance of skills and content should be more engaging.

2. GCSE puts off students from continuing to A-level. It is too based on memory work Teachers feel that teaching to the test limits the possibility of producing inspiring lessons.

3.  MFL is a risky choice for A-level. Students think they work harder to achieve lower grades than in other subjects. they think it is virtually impossible to get a top grade (A*). A review of grading would be useful.

4.  Students do not appreciate the value of MFL qualifications. They are unaware of career options with languages. They note that STEM has been promoted to them more heaviliy. More work to promote languages is needed.


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,

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

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).

Pros and cons of pair and group work

Most teachers have made frequent use of pair and group work for many years, notably since the rise of communicative language teaching in the 1980s. Even before then it would have been common for pupils to work in pairs on simple role-play and dialogue tasks. So pair and group work is standard practice, if not universally supported by language teachers. It’s always worth evaluating, however, whether a practice works - whether, in this case, it helps students develop their proficiency. Pros Rod Ellis (2005) summarises the advantages of pair/group work (based on Jacobs, 1998) “1. The quantity of learner speech can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, the teacher typically speaks 80% of the time; in groupwork more students talk for more of the time. 2. The variety of speech acts can increase. In teacher-fronted classrooms, students are cast in a responsive role, but in groupwork they can perform a wide range of roles, including those involved in the negotiation of meaning. 3. There can

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,