Skip to main content

MFL A-levels are not dire; they are rather good!

I blogged yesterday about remarks made about the current modern languages A-levels. The accusation was, essentially, that they are dumbed down, lack rigour and are not interesting enough. I categorically rejected that claim but did not go into why I believe the current A-level is very good.

  • The AS level offers a good bridge between GCSE and A2 level. ALCAB made this a criticism, claiming AS was too much like AS level. I think they underestimate how much students like the topics, how stimulating they can be and how weak many students are when they emerge from GCSE. ALCAB believed that the new GCSE might fix the latter issue. It will not.
  • The current A-level stresses target langauge use in nearly every respect, especially as far as the cultural topics are concerned. Discussion and assessment in the target language are best. If you set essays in the target langauge, you will practise them that way. If you set essays in English students will spend hours writing English, not the target language. Assessment through English will harm acquisition.
  • The current A2 topics approach - what I label "general studies through the target language" - has been established for years and it works. ALCAB worried that there was insufficient reference to the culture of the target language, but in practice teachers use resources which, in most cases, refer to the target language countries. In addition, the topics are of great relevance to the modern world and merit continued loyalty: integration, environment, development and so on. These are the issues of the day and they are of relevance in all countries.
  • The balance of communication and grammatical rigour is about right as it stands. If students emerge from A-level without a firm grammatical and lexical basis it is not because of the syllabus. It may be because they are not taught thoroughly enough or that some students do not retain structures as easily as others.
  • The current system of cultural topics gives teachers freedom to choose from a wide range of areas: history, film, drama, the novel, geography and so on. Not all students are motivated by film and literature. A-level need not reflect a university academic bias towards these areas. Prescribed lists may allow for a slightly more robust assessment and greater consistency, but they do sometimes force teachers to teach in areas they are less confident with or enthusiastic about. Any essay-based assessment will always leave room for subjectivity and complaint.
  • The current emphasis on translation is adequate. Indeed, I would remove it completely. You can achieve grammatical and lexical rigour without translation.
  • The current A-level is set at a reasonable level of challenge. I know this having taught students with a range of aptitudes, from E/U-graders to Oxbridge entrants. Noone ever complained it was too easy. Indeed, the grading regime places languages among the hardest subjects, along with sciences.
  • Students are challenged by and enjoy the current A-level. Low take-up at A-level has little to do with the A-level itself. As the recent JCQ report found, it is much more about previous experience of GCSE and the perception that languages are harder to get good grades in, therefore a risky choice. Most students want stimulating courses with a stress on speaking and listening.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Delayed dictation

What is “delayed dictation”?

Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music.

It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too.

Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating.

In our language teaching case, though, the earworm is a word, chunk of l…

Responsive teaching

Dylan Wiliam, the academic most associated with Assessment for Learning (AfL), aka formative assessment, has stated that these labels have not been the most helpful to teachers. He believes that they have been partly responsible for poor implementation of AfL and the fact that AfL has not led to the improved outcomes originally intended.

Wiliam wrote on Twitter in 2013:

“Example of really big mistake: calling formative assessment formative assessment rather than something like "responsive teaching".”

For the record he subsequently added:

“The point I was making—years ago now—is that it would have been much easier if we had called formative assessment "responsive teaching". However, I now realize that this wouldn't have helped since it would have given many people the idea that it was all about the teacher's role.”

I suspect he’s right about the appellation and its consequences. As a teacher I found it hard to get my head around the terms AfL and formative assess…

Sentence Stealers with a twist

Sentence Stealers is a reading aloud game invented by Gianfranco Conti. I'll describe the game to you, then suggest an extension of it which goes a bit further than reading aloud. By the way, I shouldn't need to justify the usefulness of reading aloud, but just in case, we are talking here about matching sounds to spellings, practising listening, pronunciation and intonation and repeating/recycling high frequency language patterns.

This is how it works:

Display around 15 sentences on the board, preferably ones which show language patterns you have been working on recently or some time ago.Hand out four cards or slips of paper to each student.On each card students must secretly write a sentence from the displayed list.Students then circulate around the class, approaching their classmates and reading a sentence from the displayed list. If the other person has that sentence on one of their cards, they must hand over the card. The other person then does the same, choosing a sentenc…

The age factor in language learning

This post draws on a section from Chapter 5 of Jack C. Richards' splendid handbook Key Issues in Language Teaching (2015). I'm going to summarise what Richards writes about how age factors affect language learning, then add my own comments about how this might influence classroom teaching.

It's often said that children seem to learn languages so much more quickly and effectively than adults. Yet adults do have some advantages of their own, as we'll see.

In the 1970s it was theorised that children's success was down to the notion that there is a critical period for language learning (pre-puberty). Once learners pass this period changes in the brain make it harder to learn new languages. Many took this critical period hypothesis to mean that we should get children to start learning other languages at an earlier stage. (The claim is still picked up today by decision-makers arguing for the teaching of languages in primary schools.)

Unfortunately, large amounts of rese…

Dissecting a lesson: teaching an intermediate written text

This post is a beginner’s guide about how you might go about working with a written text with low-intermediate or intermediate students (Y10-11 in England). I must emphasise that this is not what you SHOULD do, just one approach based on my own experience and keeping in mind what we know about learning and language learning in particular. Experienced teachers may find it interesting to compare this sequence with what you do yourself.

You can adapt the sequence below to the class, context and your own preferred style. I’m going to assume that the text is chosen for relevance, interest and comprehensibility. The research suggests that the best texts are at the very least 90% understandable, i.e. you would need to gloss no more than 10% of the words or phrases. The text could be authentic, or more likely adapted authentic from a text book, or teacher written. It would likely be fairly short so you have time to exploit it intensively, recycling as much useful language as possible.

So here w…