Skip to main content

What if we have our whole approach to MFL teaching wrong?

Whenever I write about language teaching I try to maintain a pragmatic, open-minded view about methodology. This isn't always easy when you've been taught and trained in a certain way (for me the oral-situational approach based on a grammatical syllabus) and worked within an English system where the high stakes GCSE and A-level exams dominate the scene and, to an extent, dictate teaching approaches. Nevertheless I endeavour to present a range of methods as having value as long as they respect some basic principles to do with input and practice. I do this because I find it interesting and hope other teachers do too.

I quite recently wrote two blogs about the Teaching Schools Council report on MFL pedagogy. They are here and here.To remind you, that report came out strongly in favour of a skill-acquisition approach to classroom language teaching. The emphasis should be on explicit, structured teaching of grammar and phonics, along with high frequency vocabulary possibly at the expense of the topics. The report claimed that this emphasis was based on the latest research evidence.

Much of the report made sense to me (given my own bias mentioned above), but in my second blog I pointed out that the research evidence for the TSC report was cherry-picked. To support this view, let me quote to you from Geoff Jordan, a British applied linguist, who puts forward a theoretical position held by a number of influential scholars in the field. This is taken from a blog he's written and it sums up a view of second language acquisition which is the antithesis of the TSC's skill-acquisition position. Jordan attacks three assumptions about skill-acquisition. I quote almost verbatim:

Assumption 1

In SLA, declarative knowledge converts to procedural knowledge. Wrong! No such simple conversion occurs. Knowing that the past tense of has is had and then doing some controlled practice, does not lead to fluent and correct use of had in real-time communication.

Assumption 2

Second language acquisition is a process of mastering, one by one, accumulating structural items. Wrong! All the items are inextricably inter-related. As Michael Long says:

"The assumption that learners can move from zero knowledge to mastery of negation, the present tense, subject- verb agreement, conditionals, relative clauses, or whatever, one at a time, and move on to the next item in the list, is a fantasy."

Assumption 3

Learners learn what they’re taught when they’re taught it. Wrong – as every teacher knows! Pienemann (1987) has demonstrated that teachability is constrained by learnability."


Now, it should be made clear that far from all researchers agree wholeheartedly with the above, but it is fair to say that the evidence for TSC, skill-acquisition view is far from settled. Indeed, for academics in general teaching grammar is much less important than it seems to be for most teachers. They can, as yet, find little convincing evidence that explicit grammar instruction and practice is the best way to enhance acquisition.

Is learning a language like the learning of any skill? Do we build up skill by learning, one by one, the component skills until we master the whole? Can we turn declarative knowledge of grammar into procedural knowledge through practice? Can spontaneous speech be developed through structured practice and focus on form?

Or is language acquisition fundamentally different? Does it all happen at a sub-conscious level, largely or wholly immune to the order teachers present and practise material? Is the best thing we can do just provide interesting input at the right level and let the brain do its natural thing?

The jury is still out, I'm afraid.

In the meantime, in the UK classroom context where GCSE and A-level hold sway, your traditional mix of grammar and topics with a dose of CLT (and TLC) still has a lot going for it. Your big get-out clause is that even when you teach a grammatical syllabus you are providing comprehensible input at the same time, even if it may be less than perfect.

Geoff Jordan references:

Long, M.H. (2011) “Language Teaching”. In Doughty, C. and Long, M. Handbook of Language Teaching. NY Routledge.

Pienemann, M. (1987) Psychological constraints on the teachability of languages. In C. Pfaff (Ed.) First and Second Language Acquisition Processes. Rowley, MA: Newbury House. 143-168.

- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad


  1. 'let me quote to you from Geoff Jordan, a British applied linguist, who puts forward a theoretical position held by a number of influential scholars in the field.' If it's only a theoretical position, why do you give it any weight? Why not look to empirical research?

  2. Jordan's view is, he would say, supported by empirical evidence. If there is a consensus at the moment it is that comprehensible input is the basis of acquisition, supported by some focus on form.Thank you for commenting.

  3. hi
    from my quick look at report in addition to skill-aquisition,

    there is a recommendation based on input processing:
    "Practice of the grammar point in ‘input language’ (listening and reading), doing structured tasks which require identification of a grammatical feature and linking it to a meaning or function, normally with other contextual clues stripped away."

    possible usage-based theories:
    "Generally, teachers stated, and research shows, that language learning needs repetition to embed knowledge."

    possible interaction approach in the Errors: anticipation and correction section

    sometimes i got confused when report mentioned "practice" as to whether they meant practice in the input or practice in the output;

    so there is a case to say that there are more is one "theory" being referred to in this report?

    wonder if the DFE literature review is available yet? that may give a better ideas of theories being used in the report?


    1. Yes, the things you mention give a role to imput, but the emphasis is still on showing grammar in input, not laying the stress on meaning only. Yes, repetition is referred to, as one would expect. When practice is referred to I think the stress is on output. What they recommend is what you see in some textbooks - grammar built and repeated in short texts at the presentation stage, then quickly and explicitly taught.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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.


_____. 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 _____ …

Preparing for GCSE speaking: building a repertoire

As your Y11 classes start their final year of GCSE, one potential danger of moving from Controlled Assessment to terminal assessment of speaking is to believe that in this new regime there will be little place for the rote learning or memorisation of language. While it is true that the amount of learning by heart is likely to go down and that greater use of unrehearsed (spontaneous) should be encouraged, there are undoubtedly some good techniques to help your pupils perform well on the day.

I clearly recall, when I marked speaking tests for AQA 15-20 years ago, that schools whose candidates performed the best were often those who had prepared their students with ready-made short paragraphs of language. Candidates who didn't sound particularly like "natural linguists" (e.g. displaying poor accents) nevertheless got high marks. As far as an examiner is concerned is doesn't matter if every single candidate says that last weekend they went to the cinema, saw a James Bond…

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…

GCSE and IGCSE revision links 2018

It's coming up to that time of year again. In England and Wales. Here is a handy list of some good interactive revision links for this level. These links are also good for intermediate exams in Scotland, Ireland and other English-speaking countries. You could copy and paste this to print off for students.

Don't forget the GCSE revision material on of course! How could you?

As far as apps for students are concerned, I would suggest the Cramit one, Memrise and Learn French which is pretty good for vocabulary. For Android devices try the Learn French Vocabulary Free. For listening, you could suggest Coffee Break French from Radio Lingua Network (iTunes podcasts).

Listening (Foundation/Higher) (Foundation/Higher) (Foundation/Higher)