Skip to main content

Universities maintain their grip on A-level languages

The recently revised framework for A-level modern languages has seen the universities maintain their conservative influence on the curriculum. Since A-levels began, languages courses have been based on a watered-down version of an undergrad degree, with the inclusion of traditional essay, literature (later film, history and other areas) and, of course, translation.

The relatively heavy bias towards reading and writing has remained throughout and even if listening and speaking have gained some ground in the assessment regimes, they are not given the emphasis they need and students want.

There was a period from around the 1980s when schools reversed the trend and began to set the agenda for undergrad teaching. A-level style mixed skill lessons were taught with an emphasis on communication, but the most recent reform has seen a return to the traditional "top down" agenda setting. This was due to Michael Gove's decision to allow the Russell Group universities to largely dictate the shape of A-level MFL. At least the recent consultation prevented the return to a 1960s/70s style essay in English.

How refreshing it would have been to take a completely different approach to A-level languages, one which took much more account of what might stimulate school students and encourage higher take-up of languages. This year's JCQ/IPSOS report suggested that students would be far more attracted by a course which emphasised the practical, face to face skills of listening and speaking.

It would not be hard to design a course with a rough balance of skills as follows: listening 30%; speaking 30%; reading 20%; writing 20%. There is nothing "dumbed down" about this; it is merely a change of emphasis. In any case, we know that students often find speaking and listening, with the great demands they place on internalised language and quick reactions, the hardest to master. The focus should be placed firmly on using the language for practical communication and understanding. It should be less "academic". We are still coloured by the perception that reading and writing are somehow more serious than listening and speaking.

A fresh approach might see the abandonment of whole works of literature, which are off-putting to many potential students. This would gain us time for a wider range of stimulating topics, a greater focus on the world of work, on the target language culture beyond literature and film, more personalised reading and listening, more immersion, more discussion, and, yes, more grammar (though not much via translation). There would be more situational and task-oriented activities. Communication would take priority over grammatical rigour. How often do we say to students that making yourself understood and having a go are the most important? So why do we still fret so much about accuracy? The answer to the last question is probably that we teachers were good at it and taught in old-school ways.

In my experience A-level students enjoyed their work and it was a good preparation for university. But nationally, the number of language students has fallen disastrously and shows no sign of recovering. The decoupling of AS level will probably exacerbate the situation. Languages have become an area of study for an even smaller, mainly middle class elite. This has implications for the economy, but more importantly means too few of our citizens reap the personal rewards of long term foreign language skill. This should be considered a serious issue by government, but in reality it is not.

The latest reform to A-level has, in my view, been a huge missed opportunity.





- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Comments

  1. Let's be honest; we're British and the whole world speaks English. Who needs a foreign language to get on as a banker, a solicitor or a doctor, or anything else for that matter apart from a MFL teacher or a translator?

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are either trolling or ill-informed. I could explain why, but shall not bother.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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…