The Linguist

@CIOL_Linguists AUGUST/SEPTEMBER The Linguist 11 FEATURES are directed to focus first and foremost on individual building blocks of linguistic knowledge, is there a risk that they (or their learners) may lose sight of the bigger picture of language as a communicative tool? This problem may be compounded by the fact that knowledge of grammatical structures, symbol-sound correspondences and vocabulary is easily measurable. It is not hard to imagine these becoming the main focus of assessment (and hence teaching), rather than learners' ability to actually understand and express themselves in the foreign language. It is also important to recognise that there are alternative models of language learning. For example, research has shown that trying to communicate in a language using whatever resources the learner has to hand can promote language development. 3 This allows learners to test out hypotheses about how the language works, receive feedback from expert speakers and identify gaps in their knowledge. It also gives them opportunities to build resourcefulness as communicators, for instance by learning how to repair communication breakdowns. These are valuable life skills, transferable across languages, but it is conceivable that an over-zealous application of Ofsted's recommendations could limit opportunities for this kind of communicative interaction in the target language. CULTURE One of the most powerful and transformative aspects of foreign language learning is the opportunities it provides to develop understanding of one's own and other cultures. Indeed, Rachel Hawkes, on behalf of NCELP, argues that it is impossible to separate language and culture; in teaching the sounds, vocabulary and grammar of a language, "we lay the foundation for understanding other world views and for seeing ourselves through the eyes of others". 4 The OCRR, too, is framed by references to language learning as "a liberation from insularity" which "opens pupils' minds", "develops a deep cultural awareness" and helps them "broaden their horizons". 5 However, Ofsted appears to conceptualise progression in language learning as a "journey" leading to culture as its destination. I would argue that learners can encounter the cultural riches of a language from the start, and that this can be an incredible motivator for further engagement with the language. Written and spoken texts (including song and video) can be key resources here – but may lie beyond students' linguistic 'comfort zone'. The OCRR seems to rule out many such texts: "teachers need to ensure that pupils are not exposed to large amounts of unfamiliar language too early"; this could "demotivate them and may not maximise opportunities for learning". While a footnote softens this stance a little, I am worried that the message for teachers is to avoid linguistically challenging texts. If we restrict learners to (almost) entirely familiar language, it may take a very long time before they know enough to encounter texts that are engaging and cognitively challenging. There is then a risk that the journey takes so long that they lose interest in the destination. Tackling challenging texts can also help learners develop strategies, resilience and skills that are valuable beyond the languages classroom. Via the internet, they can access an unprecedented wealth of foreign language resources. It would be a shame if they were discouraged from exploring these riches just because they contain high proportions of unfamiliar language. Similar arguments could be made about the teaching of English literacy: should we delay the study of Shakespeare's plays until learners know all the words and structures in them? Or should we support them to enjoy these plays even though many words, and even whole passages, will be difficult (perhaps impossible) for them to understand independently? CONCLUSIONS Overall, if Ofsted's review stimulates debate about language pedagogy, this must be a good thing. And there are aspects that I see as positive. I agree that it is important to build learners' knowledge of high-frequency words that can be applied across topics, and I am pleased to see an emphasis on phonics after a period of neglect. In my view, however, some of the recommendations may constrain, or even hinder, successful language learning if taken too far. I may, of course, be wrong. We still lack sufficiently clear, unequivocal evidence from Second Language Acquisition research to provide definitive answers about how best to teach a foreign language. Besides, all classes – and all learners within them – are different, and teachers' contextualised, professional judgement will always be central to determining the most effective pedagogy for a particular classroom on a particular day. There is no 'one size fits all' approach. For these reasons, I would prefer to see the OCRR's recommendations not as 'rules' but as hypotheses which need further exploration and evaluation, and on which teachers can draw to inform their work. The review does "recognise that there is no single way of achieving high quality languages education", but in practice, given Ofsted's powerful status, it risks erecting barriers that will constrain teachers' professional judgement in potentially unhelpful ways and make teachers less responsive to the needs of their students. Ultimately, it is the learners' outcomes that matter most. Ofsted concludes each section by listing a number of likely features of "high- quality languages education". When judging the effectiveness of language teaching, however, the focus should surely be on what the students have learnt and how motivated they feel to continue learning. The routes by which these aims are achieved may vary. This article is adapted from a longer one by Woore, Molway and Macaro in The Language Learning Journal; tinyurl.com/TLLRWoore. Notes 1 Ofsted (2021) 'Curriculum Research Review Series: Languages'; tinyurl.com/OCRRLang 2 See e.g. Ellis, R (2005) 'Principles of Instructed Language Learning'. In System, 33,2; Murphy et al (2020) Foreign Language Learning and its Impact on Wider Academic Outcomes: A rapid evidence assessment, Education Endowment Foundation 3 See e.g. Loewen, S and Sato, M (2018) 'Interaction and Instructed Second Language Acquisition'. In Language Teaching, 51,3 4 Hawkes, R (2020) Culture and Cultural Capital in the Languages Classroom, National Centre for Excellence for Language Pedagogy (NCELP) 5 'National Curriculum in England: Languages programmes of study' (2013) DfE If we restrict learners to familiar language… then there is a risk that the journey takes so long they lose interest

• Cover