Curriculum planning

Image: pixabay.com

Many MFL departments are talking about planning in response to whole school initiatives related to Ofsted's latest emphasis: CURRICULUM. This post is about how a department might respond to such an initiative. It's fairly broad-brush, given the nature of the issue, but not too airy-fairy, I hope.

Here is Ofsted's definition of the curriculum:

“The curriculum is a framework for setting out the aims of a programme of education, including the knowledge and understanding to be gained at each stage (intent); for translating that framework over time into a structure and narrative, within an institutional context (implementation) and for evaluating what knowledge and understanding pupils have gained against expectations (impact/achievement).” (My highlighting.)

So Ofsted wants schools to:

• know their curriculum – design and intent;
• know how their curriculum is being implemented;
• know what impact their curriculum is having on pupils’ knowledge and understanding.

(I'm grateful to Cath Murray for this summary on the Schoolsweek website.)

This is why departments are being asked to analyse what they are doing, how they are doing it and what it's achieving (not just in relation to exam results).

I'm sure it's a good idea to have a fundamental think about what a department's goals are and what they contribute to the whole school's intent, implementation and impact/achievement. By the way, a fashionable phrase occasionally used with regard to the content of the curriculum is that it should focus on "best which has been thought and said" (Matthew Arnold). This is a bit problematic for a subject such as MFL which is not really focused so much on content and concepts, as on the development of practical skill founded on knowledge of language. Another traditional view of the curriculum is that it should be a "selection of the culture". That one is pretty vague, so not too much use either.

So, if I had to carry out this exercise as a Head of Department, I would be considering the following issues (keeping in mind the three areas mentioned above):

1. Why and how are we teaching the language(s)?
2. Is our curriculum structure suitable, e.g. number of languages, when they are introduced and how they are timetabled?
3. What are pupils achieving as a result of the teaching?

In a bit more detail...

1.  Why and how are we teaching the language(s)?

• To what extent are we focused on developing practical skill rather than just knowledge of the language(s)? In a way, how does knowledge become skill?
• What do we want pupils to be able to do? (And what would they like to be able to do?) Hold simple conversations? Be able to read and listen to a basic level? To know more about the culture of the target language country? To prepare for later study of a language in adult life? To prepare for doing GCSE or A-level one day? To know more about other people's cultures? To be 'global citizens'?
• Do we have clear goals for all pupils or groups of pupils within the school? (These may not be the same.) Is the goal for some pupils to achieve a little conversational skill by the end of KS3? Is the goal for others to prepare for more advanced study? Does this influence how lessons are run?
• How does our chosen methodology meet the above goals? What is our focus on? If we want pupils to hold simple conversations are we focusing enough on listening and speaking? Is our approach in line we what we know about how languages are acquired? Do we have the expertise in the department (e.g. a "research lead") to be sure why we are employing a certain methodology? Should the same methodology be used with all classes?
• Do we group by ability or prior attainment? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Do we have resources, both human and material, to achieve our goals? Do we have the right text books (if we have them)? Do we have the basic equipment which can further our aims, e.g. visualisers, computers, mini-whiteboards?
• Are we giving appropriate attention to each of the four skills, ensuring these skills are use in an integrated way? Do we prioritise comprehensible input, spaced repetition, interleaving, a spiral curriculum and thorough processing of language? Do we have a default position on target language use with guidelines about when we would expect to use English?
• Are we firmly focused on the idea of maximum 'surrender value' for all activities? Do we use games for maximum learning or to just have fun? Do we use technology efficiently?
• Do we pay adequate attention to metacognitive strategies (learning about learning, thinking about thinking)? Do we have enough knowledge about assessment and a planned approach to exam preparation?
• Do we have a clear understanding that progress comes from hearing, reading and using language, much more than talking about the language via rule-giving? Are we clear that the best input is highly comprehensible to reduce anxiety and increase pupils self-efficacy? What other practices do we employ to maximise motivation, e.g. rewards, 'pupil of the week', etc?
• Do we cater adequately for all pupils, including those with specific needs? Are the most able pupils stretched enough?
• Are we too focused on isolated word learning, at the expense of using language in chunks and sentences?
• Does our classroom organisation maximise learning, e.g. seating arrangements and display?
• Are we clear on issues surrounding formative assessment? Is our teaching always 'responsive' to pupils' behaviour at all times? How are our cognitive and affective empathy skills? Do we have the knowledge of effective questioning and drilling to help all pupils do well (differentiation)?
• Are we all aware of the general advice on effective teaching, as explained for example in the TSC Review of MFL Pedagogy or the more generic Rosenshine Principles of Instruction? Do we all have at least a basic understanding of cognition - how learning and memory works, for example? Are we aware of cognitive load theory?

2.  Is our curriculum structure suitable?

• Do we wish to strive for excellence in one language from Y7? Do we wish to give pupils a taste of more than one language to the possible detriment of excellence? Are we providing equal opportunity to all pupils who wish to study at KS3 or beyond?
• Is the amount of time available appropriate? (Recall that the TSC Review recommended, ideally, three hours per week.) Are lessons of an appropriate length and intelligently spaced to best effect for memory retention? What can be done within the school's timetable framework to make learning more successful?
• Does SLT know that the 'little and often' principle applies strongly to language acquisition?
• Does our structure produce enough A-level linguists? Could it be adapted with this in mind, e.g. by having a system of sets or one accelerated class in each year?
• Is there enough homework being set within this framework, efficiently monitored? Do all staff stick to the agreed policy?

3.  What are pupils achieving?

• How successful are we in terms of pupil retention, attitudes and results?
• What is behaviour like? If disruptive behaviour is holding back achievement, what steps can be taken to improve it? Do staff all the CPD support they need? Are rewards and sanctions consistently applied? Is there, in general terms. a 'no excuses' attitude? (I am aware that the term is controversial.)
• Are SLT fully aware of the issue of 'severe grading' with regard to MFL?
• Do we measure success by what pupils can actually do with the target language? 
• How do pupils achieve in the separate skills? Do they perform better in listening, speaking, reading or writing? Does a bias in our teaching affect their scores? Do we need a departmental focus on one skill, e.g. listening? How could a departmental plan on this be approached?
• Do we contribute to the whole school ethos with enough focus on literacy, e.g. attention to phonics, spelling, grammatical terminology, plenty of reading (including reading aloud)?
• Do we use tracking data sensibly to check if our pupils are broadly achieving in line with expectations? Do we have processes in place to help pupils get on track?
• What are our GCSE and A-level numbers? Do we ask pupils what they like and don't like about MFL? How popular is the subject in whole school surveys? (Don't assume languages will be less popular than average.)
• How do we foster positive attitudes to MFL and other cultures? Do we make use of the full range of pupil experience in lessons, e.g. pupils with other languages and backgrounds?
• Do we organise overseas trips, study visits or exchanges? Do we invite visitors to talk to pupils, e.g. local TL speakers, university students or former pupils?

Conclusion

Now it may be that your department is running very efficiently, with positive pupil attitudes, good results and high retention rates to GCSE and A-level. So any curriculum review may amount to to confirming existing good practice, with some tweaks here and there. The current emphasis on 'learning science' (spacing, interleaving, cognitive load, etc) should give all departments reason for discussion and review, however. Don't forget that language learning is different in important ways to other types of learning, being what some call 'biologically primary' in key aspects (e.g. acquiring through listening and speaking are entirely natural human processes). Above all else, acquiring languages is about input and interaction.

Other departments will have issues to work on over time, with the main emphasis on what's happening in classrooms. Where some classrooms are working better than others, then good practice can be shared in a positive, developmental manner. Department meetings can focus less on administration, more on pedagogy.

It's quite a while since I ran a department, but I did the job for 24 years, so can perhaps offer some useful advice. If change is needed, it doesn't have to be revolutionary and there is a real danger of jumping on to Ofsted or SLT-driven bandwagons. So whatever you do, I would try to root in in effective pedagogy and protect the team from unnecessary work. Take pride in what is going well, while looking at any ways to improve.

This document from Scotland covers some good general ground.