Skip to main content

Keeping A-level classes communicative


When I reviewed the three most popular A-level French text books aligned with the latest A-level specifications, one aspect struck me more than any other. To satisfy the requirement to cover Assessment Objective 4 (AO4) (cultural knowledge), written texts usually contain a good deal of information about the sub-themes, whether it be cinema, immigration, family or diversity. Texts, therefore, are now more fact-based than discursive or narrative. This can pose a problem when you are thinking; "How can I exploit this text?" Why? In my experience the best texts were ones pitched at the right level, interesting, but which also invited discussion of an interesting issue or students' personal experience. A text containing primarily information about a topic may not meet the last of those three criteria. It may be interesting enough, but how do you make it a source of communicative work? This means that lessons risk becoming less communicative, with the focus moving towards textual analysis and the memorisation of factual information and concepts.

Keeping in mind that acquisition best occurs when there is interesting comprehensible input and communicate interaction, I would be wary of this danger and look for ways to make factual texts a source of enjoyable communicative activity. How can this be achieved?

Here is one classroom activity which should work well. It's the "Ask and move" communicative task I described in my last blog and for which I gave a French example for GCSE level. For it to work you would need a group of reasonable size, say a minimum of about 12 students.

Write or obtain four paragraphs about the chosen sub-theme, each of which includes different factual information. For example, if the theme were the occupation of France during the Second World War, each paragraph could contain different aspects of the issue. These might be rationing, the Resistance, the division of France into different territories and collaboration. Four members of the class are given a printed TL paragraph each to read and keep. These for students are the "experts". The remainder of the class are each given the same set of TL questions. These students are the "information seekers".

The information seekers have to approach each expert and ask their questions. Now, they can either take notes from each expert, or, if the group is large enough, report back what they learn to a partner who acts as scribe. For the latter option I think you would need a group of at least 16 students.

Once all the information has been collected, you can then have a whole class discussion of the information, writing up key information and language on the board. A follow-up written task could be to do a write-up of the information. Remember that each expert only sees a quarter of the information, so the experts will need to listen carefully in the feedback part of the lesson. Almost the whole lesson would be conducted in comprehensible target language while incorporating AO4 material which can be reused at a later date.

A whole lesson could last about one hour, I would suggest.

This could be a relatively low preparation lesson if you have a ready-made written source. But even if you write the paragraphs yourself (possibly glossed with vocabulary), it would not take too long with some copy and paste and reworking, and could be reused a number of times. I intend to write a few examples for frenchteacher.net in the coming days.

Addendum: I have posted two examples on the topics of family life and internet use in France in  (lots of statistics.


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

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,