Skip to main content

The Teaching Schools Council MFL pedagogy review

The Teaching Schools Council (TSC) is not well known in the teaching profession. The government established the body in 2011. It co-ordinates Teaching Schools and their alliances. Its nine-member board has a mix of elected and co-opted members. Today the body published a review on MFL pedagogy, presided over by linguist and executive head teacher Ian Baulkham.

http://tscouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/MFL-Pedagogy-Review-Report-2.pdf

The review panel talked to teachers, heads, pupils, parents and researchers and emerged with fifteen recommendations. The ones I would like to pick out are as follows (with my gloss added):

The vast majority of pupils should do a language to 16.
(This is in line with government Ebacc policy. I still have my doubts.)

Grammar, vocabulary and phonics should be explicitly taught in a structured fashion. Practice and skill-building are recommended.
(The pedagogical bias in the review is clear and would suit those who favour a skill-acquisition view of second language acquisition. No reference is made to the comprehension hypothesis favoured by some researchers and teachers.)

Culture, history and literature should be taught without sacrificing the order of grammar teaching.
(Most teachers would support the teaching of culture, but I am not so sure about history and literature up to 16 - my first reaction was that this recommendation is suspiciously in line with DfE policy, but I am told the TSC is independent of government.)

Translation and reading literature should feature in courses.
(This represents a pedagogical bias which some would disagree with. Anyone who, like me, has written short adapted literature extracts for GCSE knows how hard to do and fruitless this is in practice.)

Meanings should always be absolutely clear to pupils.
(I detect an implicit criticism of a TL only approach and an encouragement to translate.)

The four skills should be taught together.
(I like this - there is an unfortunate tendency in some classrooms to divide sessions up by skill, e.g. "this is a listening lesson". The best lessons are often multi-skill and involve real communication in the target language.)

Two or, better, three sessions of 40-60 minutes per week are recommended.
(Perhaps they should have more forcefully recommended three. This recommendation is, however, very welcome given the woeful state of much school MFL timetabling. the report recognises the importance of distributed practice.)

Textbooks are recommended.
(Or more precisely, good textbooks which incorporate a rigorous progression and recycling of language. I would support this recommendation, but I wonder which textbooks they would recommend; the quality is variable and none are brilliant.)

Grouping by ability should ensure the needs of all pupils are met, notably those who wish to go on the A-level.
(It's not clear whether they advocate setting or not.)

Teacher trainers should ensure that there is a planned curriculum to incorporate the pedagogical framework laid out in the review.
(This implies that current training is patchy. My impression is that they are right on this.)

There should be a review of A-level grading.
(Severe grading is thus rightly acknowledged.)

Overall there is a lot to like in this thorough review. Their research sources are somewhat selective and take as read the idea that you can automatise skills through practice. (This is far from universally agreed by scholars.) The message to school leaders about timetabling is valuable and I welcome in general the reminder that a clear, structured progression of grammar and high frequency vocabulary is required. The review correctly identifies elsewhere that languages are unpopular with too many pupils, but whether arguing for more translation, history and literature is the correct antidote is very debatable.

There is no general academic consensus about which language teaching methods work best (as the review acknowledges) and I can imagine some scholars looking at this report very critically indeed. The review suggests a swing of the pendulum back towards traditional methods and alleged "rigour". the recommendations are in line with DfE subject guidance and Ofqual exam specifications. Is this pure coincidence?

The review is worth reading, but I have no idea how influential it will be. Since Ofsted now do not officially recommend any particular teaching methods it looks like another body has taken on that mantle.




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The latest research on teaching vocabulary

I've been dipping into The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (2017) edited by Loewen and Sato. This blog is a succinct summary of Chapter 16 by Beatriz González-Fernández and Norbert Schmitt on the topic of teaching vocabulary. I hope you find it useful.

1.  Background

The authors begin by outlining the clear importance of vocabulary knowledge in language acquisition, stating that it's a key predictor of overall language proficiency (e.g. Alderson, 2007). Students often say that their lack of vocabulary is the main reason for their difficulty understanding and using the language (e.g. Nation, 2012). Historically vocabulary has been neglected when compared to grammar, notably in the grammar-translation and audio-lingual traditions as well as  communicative language teaching.

(My note: this is also true, to an extent, of the oral-situational approach which I was trained in where most vocabulary is learned incidentally as part of question-answer sequence…

A zero preparation fluency game

I am grateful to Kayleigh Meyrick, a teacher in Sheffield, for this game which she described in the Languages Today magazine (January, 2018). She called it “Swap It/Add It” and it’s dead simple! I’ve added my own little twist as well as a justification for the activity.

You could use this at almost any level, even advanced level where the language could get a good deal more sophisticated.

Put students into small groups or pairs. If in groups you can have them stand in circles to add a sense of occasion. One student utters a sentence, e.g. “J’aime jouer au foot avec mes copains parce que c’est amusant.” (You could provide the starter sentence or let groups make up their own.) The next student (or partner) has to change one element in the sentence, and so on, until you restart with a different sentence. You could give a time limit of, say, 2 minutes. The sentence could easily relate to the topic you are working on. At advanced level a suitable sentence starter might be:

“Selon un article q…

Google Translate beaters

Google Translate is a really useful tool, but some teachers say that they have stopped setting written work to be done at home because students are cheating by using it. On a number of occasions I have seen teachers asking what tasks can be set which make the use of Google Translate hard or impossible. Having given this some thought I have come up with one possible Google Translate-beating task type. It's a two way gapped translation exercise where students have to complete gaps in two parallel texts, one in French, one in English. There are no complete sentences which can be copied and pasted into Google.

This is what one looks like. Remember to hand out both texts at the same time.


English 

_____. My name is David. _ __ 15 years old and I live in Ripon, a _____ ____ in the north of _______, near York. I have two _______ and one brother. My brother __ ______ David and my _______ are called Erika and Claire. We live in a _____ house in the centre of ____. In ___ house _____ …

Worried about the new GCSEs?

Twitter and MFL Facebook groups are replete with posts expressing concerns about the new GCSEs and, in particular, the difficulty of the exam, grades and tiers. I can only comment from a distance since I am no longer in the classroom, but I have been through a number of sea changes in assessment over the years so may have something useful to say.

Firstly, as far as general difficulty of papers is concerned, I think it’s fair to say that the new assessment is harder (not necessarily in terms of grades though). This is particularly evident in the writing tasks and speaking test. Although it will still be possible to work in some memorised material in these parts of the exam, there is no doubt that weaker candidates will have more problems coping with the greater requirement for unrehearsed language. Past experience working with average to very able students tells me some, even those with reasonable attainment, will flounder on the written questions in the heat of the moment. Others will…

Dissecting a lesson: using a set of PowerPoint slides

I was prompted to write this just having produced for frenchteacher.net three separate PowerPoint presentations using the same set of 20 pictures (sports). A very good way for you to save time is to reuse the same resource in a number of different ways.

I chose 20 clear, simple, clear and copyright-free images from pixabay.com to produce three presentations on present tense (beginners), near future (post beginner) and perfect tense (post-beginner/low intermediate). Here is one of them:





Below is how I would have taught using this presentation - it won't be everyone's cup of tea, especially of you are not big on choral repetition and PPP (Presentation-Practice-Production), but I'll justify my choice in the plan at each stage. For some readers this will be standard practice.

1. Explain in English that you are going to teach the class how to talk about and understand people talking about sport. By the end of the lesson they will be able to say and understand 20 different sport…