FEATURES
Taking languages
seriously?
Are teachers ready for a new
minimalist curriculum?
Shirley Lawes investigates
oreign language learning is not one of
the English school system's success
stories. As a subject area it has rarely
been seen as an essential part of every
pupil's educational experience and, both
within educational circles and in society in
general, there has always been a lack of
clarity about why foreign language learning
is important. The new national curriculum,
however, purports to bring languages back
from the margins of the secondary curriculum
and to make them a compulsory part of
the primary curriculum at Key Stage 2
(KS2; ages 7-11).
The new curriculum for languages, to be
implemented in 2014, appears to be an
attempt – if somewhat controversial – to take
the subject area seriously. For anyone
interested in education, it would have been
hard to avoid the heated debate that has
F
8
The Linguist
raged over the last few months over the
proposed changes.
It was quite clear, following the formation of
the coalition government in 2010, that
significant changes in the school curriculum
were afoot. The Schools White Paper 2010:
The importance of teaching,1 published a few
months after the general election, announced
sweeping changes across the educational
board and, in particular, 'a rigorous and
stretching curriculum' was promised. By the
end of 2011 work was well under way and
'The Framework for the National Curriculum', a
report by the Expert Panel for the National
Curriculum review,2 delivered a thorough
examination of the curriculum, making a range
of recommendations based on a set of
principles that included the notion that
'schools should be given greater freedom over
the curriculum'.
OCTOBER/NOVEMBER
While subject areas were not commented
on in great detail, the main recommendation
with regard to languages was that foreign
language learning should begin during
Key Stage 2 (although with some reservations
about the optimum age for this) and continue
through to the end of Key Stage 4 (ages
14-16). A broad consultation process
continued in all subject areas and, in
languages, a wide range of opinion and
expertise was sought, although the political
steer was clear and has emerged unchanged
at the end of the process.
Earlier this year, the draft for the new
national curriculum was published3 and, as
promised, the curriculum for languages was a
very pared-down document, intended to be
interpreted by modern foreign languages
(MFL) departments and individual teachers in
ways that suit their own context and the needs
of their pupils. Each key stage is outlined on
one side of A4, giving a brief summary of the
grammatical, vocabulary and linguistic
competence to be achieved.
What is entirely new is that literary texts,
stories, song and poems are included, with a
greater emphasis on creative writing. Such a
minimalist curriculum can be seen as both a
strength and a weakness. It is a strength
because it rightly hands back to teachers the
right to exercise their autonomy in curriculum
matters. The content, such as it is, represents
a significant departure from previous
frameworks and, as such, may present a
number of challenges to teachers, in terms of
the shift in subject matter and some aspects
of linguistic competence.
The way in which schools, languages
departments and individual teachers
understand each statement, however, may
yield unexpected and unintended
interpretations, unless accompanied by
additional guidelines, exemplification and
extensive training for teachers in both primary
and secondary sectors.
www.iol.org.uk
