Skip to main content

ALCAB's response to the A-level consultation

The very brief summary of the A-level consultation on new MFL A-levels and ALCAB's response is to be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/388784/Reformed_A_level_subject_content_Government_Response.pdf

I have already blogged about the revised subject content here, but you may be interested, as I certainly was, by what emerged from the consultation.

Of the 74 individuals or bodies who responded to the question "is the draft content appropriate?" only 18 agreed.

Three recurring points to emerge from the consultation were:
  • The amount of assessment in English should be reduced to allow for a greater focus on teaching foreign language skills (39% of respondents)
  • The themes suggested by ALCAB should be amended to make them more engaging and appealing for students at this level (24% of respondents)
  • ALCAB should reconsider the compulsory study of literary works to broaden the appeal of the qualification (15% of respondents) 
They all ring true from my point of view, particularly the first two. I am slightly surprised that even more teachers did not raise these issues.

So how did ALCAB react? Well, as we now know they did respond to point one by requiring that the literature/film essays be written in the target language. The new wording of the subject content does make it clear that essay titles will have to be more demanding than they are now. They clearly remain concerned that content may not be sufficiently "cognitively challenging".

With regard to the second point, they have reduced the number of general themes from three to two. They have also amended their list of "indicative themes". The new list, which looks much like the July version, is here: https://alevelcontent.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/alcab-revised-mfl-indicative-lists-december-2014.pdf. Much of it remains barely teachable if you want stimulating, communicative lessons. At least they removed "les mathématiques françaises". I really don't think ALCAB get the point about what constitutes a good A-level lesson - they are not secondary teachers. (Note that they add that it is up to awarding bodies to choose topics within the general themes - let's hope the exam boards interpret the indicative lists freely.)

I suppose that we should be grateful that ALCAB met teachers part of the way in terms of the English essay, but in my view, it remains the case that the new A-level is highly unlikely to attract more linguists. It is still too biased towards literature and film (ALCAB's concession to include biography, journals, diaries and letters is next to useless), still stuck in the past in its reaffirmation of translation and essay, as well as its neglect of listening (you need to look at the assessment objectives to realise this). This still looks too much like an undergraduate modern languages course and not something fresh which will attract more customers to A-level MFL.

Final note: if the government changes in 2015, this new A-level will be put on hold or may never even see the light of day. Fingers crossed.

Comments

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