Skip to main content

A-level French results 1993-2014

Here are grades and entry numbers for A-level French from 1993 to 2014.

Source: http://www.bstubbs.co.uk/a-lev.htm and JCQ figures for 2014.



French entries
                 A*    A    B    C    D    E    N    U   A - E  Entries 
       2014      6.6 31.0                                       10433                                     
       2013      6.5 32.0 30.3 17.9  9.1  3.4       0.8  99.2   11272
       2012      6.8 32.6 29.4 18.5  8.8  3.1       0.8  99.2   12511   
       2011      7.7 32.4 29.3 18.0  8.7  3.0       0.9  99.1   13196
       2010      7.7 31.4 28.5 18.2  9.6  3.7       0.9  99.1   13850
       2009          38.6 27.6 18.3 10.5  4.1       0.9  99.1   14333
       2008          37.3 27.7 18.9 10.6  4.3       1.2  98.8   14885
       2007          36.3 28.0 18.2 11.6  4.6       1.3  98.7   14477
       2006          34.7 27.4 19.5 11.8  5.3       1.3  98.7   14650
       2005          32.9 27.5 20.0 12.4  5.6       1.6  98.4   14484
       2004          33.4 26.8 19.8 12.6  5.8       1.6  98.4   15149
       2003          31.4 26.4 20.0 13.3  6.6       2.3  97.7   15531
       2002          29.3 25.2 20.9 13.8  7.7       3.1  96.9   15614
       2001          24.7 20.5 19.4 16.0 11.2  5.5  2.7  91.8   17939
       2000          23.5 21.5 20.1 16.3 10.5  5.6  2.5  91.9   18221
       1999          23.2 20.4 20.1 16.4 11.3  5.7  2.9  91.4   21072
       1998          21.6 20.7 19.6 17.3 11.6  6.2  3.0  90.8   23633
       1997          20.2 19.9 19.6 16.7 12.1  6.9  4.6  88.5   25916
       1996          20.9 18.0 20.3 17.3 12.5  6.9  4.1  89.0   27490
       1995          20.1 18.3 19.3 17.7 13.4  7.1  4.1  88.8   27563
       1994          19.9 17.7 19.0 17.4 13.4  7.8  4.7  87.5   28942
       1993          18.6 17.3 19.5 18.5 13.6  7.6  4.9  87.5   29886
A* grades remain relatively thin on the ground when compared with other subjects. The recent JCQ report on the A* issue explains that variations in writing performance and the way that grades are calculated from raw scores means that A* grades are bound to be lower in MFL. The headline figure of 6.6% for 2014 is only a couple of points short of, say, chemistry, but it is a much smaller proportion when you look at the comparison of A* and A grades. I would not be alarmed by the apparent grade inflation since 1993. Remember that in those days the average ability of A-level linguists was lower - just look at the entry numbers. There has been some inflation, but it has been greater in other subjects, so MFL still suffers from severe grading, but most noticeably at the A* point.

Incidentally, bearing in mind current worries about falling entries for French and German, there is no very strong correlation between the decision to make MFL optional at KL4 (a decision taken around 2004). That decision may have had some effect, but the serious decline was earlier. The JCQ report published in July, about which I recently blogged, looks into the reasons why students are rejecting languages at A-level. These reasons include a poor experience of GCSE, fear of getting a lower grade than for other subjects and the current popularity of STEM subjects.

Comments

  1. Flying Fantastic15 August 2014 at 18:20

    I think there is a perception that it's too hard to get a top grade so it's a risk. My niece has just narrowly failed to get into Oxford because her MFL grade let her down.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Steve Smith15 August 2014 at 18:33

    Did she need an A*? Oxbridge are aware that A*s are harder to get than in other subjects so may not demand one for MFL. An A in MFL is much more achievable - statistically about as hard as sciences. Sorry she did not get her place.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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,
4 comments
Read more

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).
Post a Comment
Read more

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
2 comments
Read more