Skip to main content

NCELP resources and guidance

NCELP stands for the National Centre for Excellence for Language Pedagogy. You can find it at ncelp.org. You might recall that this is the DfE-funded initiative set up to raise standards in MFL teaching and learning in England. Based at York University, and with a number of ‘hub schools’ around the country, its aim is to disseminate best practice and resources.

More info in this blog https://frenchteachernet.blogspot.com/2019/01/national-centre-for-excellence-for.html

What is ‘best practice’ is open to debate, of course, but the remit of the NCELP is clear: to encourage teachers to put into practice the guidance provided by the TSC Review of MFL Pedagogy.

That TSC Review is not as well-known as it might be. At a recent CPD event I ran for MFL teachers, only a small minority had actually heard of it. It deserves to be read carefully and critically. You can find it at :

https://www.tscouncil.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/MFL-Pedagogy-Review-Report-2.pdf

I have blogged about the review here:

https://frenchteachernet.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-teaching-schools-council-mfl.html

And more analytically here:

https://frenchteachernet.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-tsc-view-of-second-language.html

In essence, among other things, the review called for more phonics, explicit grammar teaching and a planned approach to vocabulary teaching, moving away from a topic-based approach. And this is what you can already see in the resources uploaded so far to the NCELP site. The main writers so far seem to be Rachel Hawkes and Emma Marsden. Emma was the main university academic on the TSC Review and its findings are broadly in line with her research leanings.

What are the resources like? Well, it’s early days, but the PowerPoints and pdfs I have looked at certainly showcase the phonics plus grammar view of things. I hope there is better to come, because so far they look pretty unexciting and lacking in originality. Teachers will find much better elsewhere, in my opinion. You find word lists based on frequency counts, verbs in infinitive and first/third person form with translations, visual references to phonics, spot the difference picture tasks and picture sequences. I have only looked through a selection, but that seems to be the pattern so far. (When you use the site, if you wish to download a resource you need to tick a box to record in what capacity you are using the resources.)

I was interested in a particular PowerPoint presentation to be used by trainers at school hub events. It offers reasonably detailed advice on how to teach grammar, along with presenter notes so that the essential messages get across. These messages include:
- teach grammar explicitly up front, but simply, avoiding full verb conjugations, for example
- be aware that pupils vary and may not be developmentally ready to learn some grammar patterns
- there is no fixed order in which to teach structures; consider your class’s particular needs
- focus on meaning as much as possible, not just form
- do lots of practice before free production; practice is more important than explanation
- during copious practice (and input) get pupils to make form-meaning associations; make them notice grammatical forms
- make grammar ‘task-essential’ by removing other clues from sentences, e.g. time phrases
- exploit all skills for deeper processing, but be aware that practising grammar through listening may have more impact on listening than written performance
- practise grammar with a wide range of known vocabulary
- provide ample opportunities to practise patterns in different contexts and through different activities

Note that all of this advice, and the other resources, come with research evidence from eminent scholars. However, as I have commented on before, some research scholars would find the choice of research evidence weighted in one direction, i.e. in the skill acquisition hypothesis associated most notably with Robert Dekeyser, and supported famously by the Norris and Ortega (2001) metastudy which gave support for explicit grammar teaching. It has been pointed out to me that a more recent metastudy (Kang et al, 2018)* has contradicted the Norris and Ortega research.
Overall, despite any possible research bias, the general advice on teaching grammar seems sound to me: keep explanations simple, do LOTS of input/practice tasks, mix up the skills and avoid whole verb conjugations which give a false impression of mastery. Put the focus on input, interaction and practice. Use scaffolded tasks, building from the simpler to the harder, from the more controlled to freer. Some writers will reject this view of acquisition, but in the time-poor context of MFL teaching in England it makes sense to me. My one quibble, despite the limited evidence presented. is the idea that grammar points should be taught explicitly right at the start. I think teachers can use their judgment on this, allowing pupils, especially more bale ones, to seek out patterns themselves before explanations are given.
In sum, do go and have a look at the site and see how it evolves. I hope that the quality of the teaching resources gets better.
* Eun Yung Kang, Sarah Sok, Zhao Hong (2018) Thirty-five years of ISLA research on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research For a quite different view of the role of grammar teaching try this from Geoff Jordan
https://applingtesol.wordpress.com/2019/02/15/why-teach-grammar/





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,