Skip to main content

Reflections on the new GCSEs in England and Wales (1)

One thing they got wrong with the design of the new GCSE exam which our 14 year year-olds will start in September was the mark weightings. Thet are as follows:

Listening 20%
Reading 20%
Speaking 30%
Writing 30%

I have come to believe that the primary skill to we should develop is listening. In child language acquisition it is the key to everything and second language learning learning should reflect this. Spoken fluency is dependent on listening. Our competence with grammar (our internalised rule system) is partly dependent on listening. It is the very way we learn languages. In the everyday use of a foreign language the skill most of us require is listening. We can only converse with people if we can understand what they are saying. Listening is the skill which should predominate in our classrooms.

The second most useful skill we need is probably speaking. Most people judge someone's ability with a language as their ability to speak it. In human language listening and speaking are primary, reading and writing were secondary developments. A case could be made for reading, since, like listening, it is a major source of input and in many jobs where language skills are needed, it is reading which is a key necessity.

Writing is the least important skill even though it has traditionally been highly valued in education.

The weightings we have for the new GCSE were forced upon us by the need for 60% of marks to be based on "controlled assessment" (i.e. a non-external test). If linguists could have chosen their own weightings, they may have gone for something like this:

Listening 30%
Speaking 30%
Reading 20%
Writing 20%

For a number of years we have allotted 25% to each of the four skills, which, although neat and tidy, gave too much weight to writing. Further back in time, when grammar-translation predominated, writing was accorded even greater importance.

I think we have once again been the victims of a need to comply with a system designed for all subjects. The same happened with modular A-levels which did not suit us and the same happens with school timetables where one hour lessons do not suit us. But the people who design, with the best of intentions, new systems enjoy rigidity, conformity and consistency. I dare say our colleagues in other subject areas could find their own issues which stem from rigid systems of this type.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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,

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).

12 principles of second language teaching

This is a short, adapted extract from our book The Language Teacher Toolkit . "We could not possibly recommend a single overall method for second language teaching, but the growing body of research we now have points to certain provisional broad principles which might guide teachers. Canadian professors Patsy Lightbown and Nina Spada (2013), after reviewing a number of studies over the years to see whether it is better to just use meaning-based approaches or to include elements of explicit grammar teaching and practice, conclude: Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective in promoting second language learning than programmes that are limited to a virtually exclusive emphasis on comprehension. As teachers Gianfranco and I would go along with that general view and would like to suggest our own set of g