Skip to main content

What should trainee teachers have to learn?

In this post I want to summarise what I believe MFL teachers in England should learn about during their initial teacher training (ITT). As a starting point, I'm going to use the points suggested in the TSC Pedagogy Review (Bauckham, 2016). This can be found here. If you are not familiar with the review, I recommend reading it, since it remains the starting-point for the work of NCELP (ncelp.org) and the changes to GCSE which are coming soon.

Among the key recommendations of the TSC Review is the following:

Mentors should focus on the systematic development of trainees’ subject-specific knowledge and expertise in language teaching. Where schools have complete or shared responsibility for the initial training of modern language teachers, they should ensure that a clearly worked out curriculum is in place, which should include areas covered by this report, in particular the specific pedagogical knowledge and expertise required by language teachers (p.3-4).

In detail, according to the TSC Review (p.19-20)

A subject specific content for the initial training of modern language teachers should include at least:

1. Knowing the distinction between curriculum and pedagogy, and understanding the principles of curriculum planning in modern languages.

2. Understanding the role and nature of working memory, long term memory, meaningful practice and automatisation as applied to languages pedagogy.

3. Developing expertise at integrating language taught and practised into authentic communication in an incremental and planned way.

4. Approaches to the selection, planning, sequencing and teaching of vocabulary, including a strong basic repertoire of techniques to enable practising, memorising, retrieving and using new vocabulary.

5. Effective approaches for teaching grammar, including the components highlighted in this report, and including learning to teach, and practising teaching, specific features of the new language (tenses, cases, questions, negatives, agreements etc).

6. Planning and teaching new language phonics effectively.

7. Learning and applying techniques for error anticipation and correction, and understanding when error tolerance is appropriate, and why.

8. Understanding how to design language practice to be progressively less scaffolded and move from comprehension to production and use.

9. Developing a range of approaches for making content meaningful and stimulating.

10. Undertaking a critical evaluation of teaching materials, in particular textbooks.

11. How to use the new language effectively in the classroom, taking account of the recommendations in this report; understanding the role and limitations of memorised phrases in language progression.

12. Gaining knowledge and understanding of the principles of assessment in languages, including the range of approaches and techniques needed for different purposes.

13. Knowing what has been taught in primary schools in both English and modern languages and knowing how to build on this effectively in KS3.


Now, it should be said that the above recommendations are strongly coloured by the nature of the review and the view of language learning and teaching which the review espouses. This can be seen particularly in points 2, 6 and 11 (and to a lesser degree in some other points).

As a blueprint for teacher training the list is seriously lacking, however. Since the review was focused on pedagogy ("the method and practice of teaching") and that pedagogy requires a foundation of theory, it seems to me that a number of other fundamental areas ought to be part of every new teacher's training. Let me list 10 areas which strike me as essential and which could supplement the TSC Review list.

1. An introduction to some key principles from second language acquisition research. These would include: the Input Hypothesis (Krashen), the Output Hypothesis (Swain), the Interaction Hypothesis (Long), the Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt), Skill Acquisition Theory (DeKeyser) and developmental sequences, e.g. the Natural Order Hypothesis (Krashen, Dulay, Burt) and the Processability and Teachability Hypothesis (Pienemann). Included in this would be a basic introduction to some terminology from linguistics, including phonetics, phonology, lexis, grammar, lexicogrammar, morphology, syntax and semantics.

2. Implied in the above, but worth highlighting separately, the role of implicit and explicit learning and knowledge. This would include the nature of the so-called Interface between conscious and unconsciously learned language. (To what extent can consciously learned language become available for spontaneous use.) This would also require an explanation of the difference between declarative and procedural knowledge.

3. An introduction to the history of language teaching methods, including grammar-translation, the Reform movement, direct methods, audiolingualism, the oral-situational approach, natural approaches, CLIL, communicative language teaching, including task-based language teaching, and lexicogrammatical approaches (including Conti EPI). (The latter is a recent addition, but should be taught given its quite widespread use in schools.)

4. An introduction to theories of motivation as they apply to language learning and teaching, including the work of Bandura (Self-Efficacy), Deci and Ryan (Self-Determination Theory), Dörnyei (process-oriented model of motivation), and Gardner (instrumental and integrative motivation). This general area could include aspects such as foreign language learning anxiety and even Krashen's Affective Filter Hypothesis.

5. The use of technology. This would include a rationale for the use of tech tools, with examples of how they are used in practice.

6. An introduction to how specific skills are acquired. This could include Field's work on listening (the process approach to listening), Grabe's research on reading and Levelt's 'Speaking Model'. This would include an explanation of the difference between modelling and testing and the concept of how a skill can be broken down into sub-skills which can be taught and practised.

7. An introduction to research on corrective feedback, perhaps looking at the work of Rod Ellis. point (7) in the TSC Review list mentions this, without referring to research.

8. Although possibly implied in Point (2) from the TSC list, an introduction to Cognitive Load Theory (Sweller) and the Rosenshine Principles of Instruction, as they apply to language learning and teaching.

9. An introduction to metacognition and the use of metacognitive strategies, e.g. the work of Rebecca Oxford.

10. Advice about how new teachers can make sense of the complex area of second language acquisition and build their own repertoire of teaching procedures and techniques, in order to manage their own workload. This could include how to use questioning techniques, drills, sentence builders, aural and written texts, dialogues and vocabulary lists.


To sum up, my experience of mentoring new teachers was that they had a weak grounding in many of the above areas. School-based training, while hugely valuable for 'learning on the job', does not usually provide the theoretical input new teachers also need. This is largely because in-school mentors do not possess the knowledge of the theory themselves. Nor do they have the time to deliver the content. University-based ITT providers provide a mixed bag, depending on who is responsible for the curriculum.

Unless new teachers have a theoretical grounding, they have no foundation on which to base their pedagogy.



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).

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,

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