Tag: languages

  • WEEKEND READING: The future of languages in a multilingual Britain

    WEEKEND READING: The future of languages in a multilingual Britain

    This blog was kindly authored by John Claughton, Co-Founder of The World of Languages and Languages of the World and former Chief Master of King Edward’s School, Birmingham.

    The other day, there was a big crowd packed into the Attlee Room in Portcullis House to celebrate the European Day of Languages – it was a comfort that no one had deemed it necessary to wear a sombrero or lederhosen. It was a co-production by the All Party Parliamentary Group for Languages and the All Party Parliamentary Group for Europe. The French and EU Ambassadors to London were the guests of honour, and the meeting was chaired by that rara avis, Darren Paffey, an MP who had been a languages academic. And he even has a wife who teaches languages. Is there, after all, a candle of hope for us all?

    The event was, like Gaul, divided into three parts. The first part was the noble land of diplomacy, with emphasis on the need for mutual understanding, co-operation and mobility in pursuit of global prosperity and harmony. At least everyone agreed that it was time for Erasmus to return – the programme, not the author of In Praise of Folly.

    Part Two was less to do with the noble sentiments of the Republic of Plato than the sewers of Romulus. It was about the grim facts of language learning presented by Megan Bowler, the harbinger of darkness, who wrote the HEPI report on the ‘language crisis’:

    • only 3% of A-level entries are in languages, and a mighty slug of those would come from independent schools;
    • undergraduate enrolments in languages are down by 20% in five years;
    • language teacher recruitment is less than half of what it needs to be;
    • there would still be language teacher shortages if every languages graduate went into teaching.
    • 28 out of 38 post-1992 universities have closed their language departments:
    • it is now quite common for Oxbridge colleges to get fewer than 10 applicants each for languages. That’s less than Classics, by Jove.

    Nor did the recent announcement about the end of IB funding bring any cheer: after all, every IB pupil has to study a language between the ages of 16 to 18.

    After the cold wind of reality had blown through the room, Vicky Gough, the Schools Adviser at the British Council, and Bernardette Holmes, the Director of the National College for Language Education (NCLE), talked of the tracks across this bleak terrain which might lead to better days. The HEPI report itself makes ten recommendations, and there are clearly things that universities can do to make languages more appealing – ‘Bring back Erasmus,’ they cry. However, the future of languages in university cannot lie in the hands of universities. The landscape can only be changed by a fundamental rethink about the teaching of languages at the very beginning of this journey. And that rethink has to reflect the fundamental change that has taken place in the pupils who now sit in our classes. Here are some ‘facts’ which show that fundamental change:

    • 20% of primary school pupils are categorised as EAL, i.e. English is not their first language;
    • this figure materially understates the percentage of pupils who are multilingual in our schools: for example, I know that over 50% of the pupils in the school where I was head were bilingual, even though none of them were categorised as EAL.
    • in many areas of many of our cities, there are primary schools where 90% of pupils are classed as EAL pupils.
    • there are many, many schools in London, or Birmingham, or Leicester, or Bradford where 30, or 40, or even 50 languages are spoken.
    • the schools with the greatest linguistic diversity are very often the schools in the most disadvantaged areas, areas where language uptake is at its lowest.

    And yet, little or no attention, or regard or honour is given to these languages, or to the pupils that speak them. Instead, in 96% of primary schools, it is French or Spanish which is taught, often by primary school teachers who don’t even have a GCSE in the subject. It may be no surprise that too few pupils arrive keen to study a language at GCSE when their language experience has been limited and, to their already multilingual minds, irrelevant.

    So, if there is to be progress, if there is to be a halt in the decline in languages and in the regard for languages, the answer may not lie in doing a bit better what we have always done, but in doing something different. If primary school pupils were taught not French and Spanish, but about languages, their own languages, as well as English and ‘modern foreign languages’ – and even Latin – the following things might happen:

    • pupils might see that languages are relevant, interesting, valuable, even fun;
    • pupils might learn more about themselves and each other, engendering mutual understanding and respect;
    • pupils might feel that they belong in school, and feel that there is not so great a gap between their life at home and their life at school;
    • parents might feel that what was going on at school had some regard for their history and their culture;
    • pupils might be more inclined to study languages, whether their own family/heritage language, and this could be a massive asset for their futures, in human and economic terms;
    • and, as these young people grow up, they might become the kind of adults who can build an integrated, cohesive, respectful and diverse society, and thus silence the voices of division in our political debate.
    • and this approach would demolish the hierarchy of languages which has so beset us for so long.

    Thus, it would place languages at the heart of our society. That would be nice, wouldn’t it? By strange chance, I have been working with some colleagues for several years to create a programme that does just that, but I’ve reached my word limit.

    But wait, dear reader. As a special dispensation, I have been granted more words in a HEPI blog. O frabjous day. So, I’d better be quick. It’s called WoLLoW, World of Languages, Languages of the World, a brilliant palindromic acronym with an Egyptian faience hippopotamus as a logo – just look at all those Greek words – in honour of the Hippopotamus Song by Flanders and Swan. So, if that’s its wondrous name, what does it do? Well, here are some examples:

    • a WoLLoW lesson can encourage boys and girls to talk about their own language, their own family, their own history.
    • it can explore why and how English is the most mongrel of all languages, a dog’s breakfast of Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, Viking, Norman French, and polysyllabic Graeco-Latin inventions.
    • it can prove that the pupils can learn the Greek alphabet more quickly than their teachers, and thereby discover why physics isn’t spelt fisiks and dinosaurs have such preposterous names.
    • it can ask why Tuesday is Tuesday here and lots of different things everywhere else – and a WoLLoW lesson might even ask why there are seven days in a week.
    • in a WoLLoW lesson pupils can learn braille and/or sign-language, or even create their own language.

    This looks quite good fun, and it turns out that it is. Another word limit looms, but I can say that it not only cheers up pupils but it also has an impact on those who teach it. The last of my words must go to a pupil at my old school, a Malaysian Muslim, who, whilst in Year 11, taught WoLLoW in a local, Birmingham primary school:

    Working on these lessons, from the very first session, has not only given the children we have taught the opportunity to have their languages and cultures represented in class discussions, but has also allowed me to reconnect with my language and feel more confident in reclaiming it as a part of who I am. I am someone who, like, I suspect, a lot of the children we have taught, has felt disconnected from his language for a long time, and has been given the chance to once again put it front and centre and find their sense of self within it again.

    The rest is silence.

    Source link

  • Think Like a Linguist: It’s time for a national conversation about the value of languages 

    Think Like a Linguist: It’s time for a national conversation about the value of languages 

    Author:
    Dr Charlotte Ryland

    Published:

    This guest blog was kindly authored by Dr Charlotte Ryland, Director of the Translation Exchange. 

    ‘Languages are not just a skillset, they’re a mindset.’ 

    I still remember where I was when a teacher friend made this comment, a few years ago, because it highlighted something I’d been worrying at for a long time. I felt that languages education for young learners undervalued the process of language learning itself, by underrating what it means to be a linguist. That value needed to be completely reframed: to move far beyond the notion that language learning gives you a set of useful communicative skills – the ‘utility argument’ – towards a more holistic and ambitious vision of the linguist’s mindset.  

    Fast forward to this summer, and a HEPI report by Megan Bowler highlighted a programme that I co-founded as doing just that: ‘[Think Like a Linguist offers] 12-13 year olds clear demonstrations of the value of a linguistic “mindset” and its real-world applications’.  

    That notion of the ‘real-world application’ is essential to how we think and talk about language learning and needs unpicking. I founded a languages outreach and advocacy centre (based at The Queen’s College, Oxford) because I was frustrated by existing languages outreach mechanisms run by universities. This frustration came in part from what I perceived as an over-emphasis on precisely those ‘real-world applications’: the outreach programmes I encountered tended to rely heavily on imagined futures – Keep learning your vocab and practising your grammar, then you’ll see! A life of travel, international business careers, slightly higher salaries awaits you! Yet this approach did not seem to be working for the year groups whose minds needed to be changed.  

    The cliff-edge for languages – in England and Wales – is now GCSE options, with over 50% of pupils opting out at the age of 13/14, i.e. at their first opportunity to do so. Languages presents university outreach with a special case, then: with a need to engage much younger learners than has traditionally been the case. Ideally, we start at upper primary and focus on lower secondary school learners, before pupils begin to think seriously about their GCSE options. My approach to working with this demographic has been to take a ‘show, not tell’ approach – to involve learners from age 8 in rich, creative, cultural activities that enable them to experience first-hand the pleasure and purpose of being a linguist.  

    That focus on showing is key to how we should treat the real-world applications, too. It is not enough to give pupils a learning experience based solely on communicative skills, while trying to tell them that this education will secure them a good job in our competitive, AI-soaked 21st-century economy. They don’t buy it, and the uptake statistics for formal language learning bear this out. Instead, we need to show those learners how relevant and in-demand the ‘linguistic mindset’ they develop will be, by integrating into the learning experience the broadest conception of what it means to be a linguist.  

    Higher Education institutions can do this. And they’ll do so much more effectively if they work together. They have access to a huge community of language graduates, who have between them generations of experience in the widest range of professions. With this community, the broadest conception of the linguistic mindset becomes tangible. In my experience, it falls into your lap the minute you ask one of these graduates about the impact of their languages education on their career path and life experience. 

    A standard response runs like this: they move quickly through the frontline benefits around communication in other languages – taking them as a given – and light instead on what Bowler refers to as ‘the irreplaceable advantages of the “linguistic mindset”’. For a lawyer, it includes the capacity to cope with frustration, to tolerate and work through uncertainty; for a consultant, it is being able to build trusted relationships and read between the lines. A civil servant might reference their ability to synthesise and analyse a large amount of information, seeking out potential biases and multiple perspectives. The list goes on and is underlined by the striking words of a 13-year-old participant in Think Like a Linguist: ‘I learnt that there is more to languages than speaking and listening. It’s also about thinking in your own way.’  

    If we have access to a form of education that stands to raise a generation of individuals able to think for themselves, and to do so on the global stage, then what are we waiting for? 

    The readiness of languages graduates to share these insights is one of the sector’s greatest assets. We need a national conversation about the value of languages for individuals and for society, fuelled by these stories and taking full account of the challenges currently being set us by AI. Duolingo have set us on an excellent path, with evidence in their user statistics and polling that the UK is a country of languages enthusiasts. As Duolingo’s UK Director Michael Lynas notes in his introduction to Bowler’s report, we need not be dogged by the negativity that often frames conversations about languages: instead, we must build on the tangible positives.  

    For this national conversation to make an impact, collaboration will be key. Shared learning from effective university outreach programmes to date can provide a basis for this conversation. And The Languages Gateway, a new cross-sector initiative dedicated to collating resources and supporting strategic collaboration, can host it. Further backing for this national conversation from higher education institutions and central government will support the Gateway in its work to raise the national profile of languages to where it belongs: delivering ‘irreplaceable’ value to 21st-century global Britain. 

      

    Source link

  • How the manufactured narrative of ‘failure’ is distracting us from resolving the systemic problems holding back the study of Modern Languages – Part 2. 

    How the manufactured narrative of ‘failure’ is distracting us from resolving the systemic problems holding back the study of Modern Languages – Part 2. 

    This post was kindly written by Vincent Everett, who is head of languages in a comprehensive school and sixth form in Norfolk. He blogs as The Nice Man Who Teaches Languages. 

    In Part 1, I looked at how the low grades given at GCSE languages – up to a grade lower than in pupils’ other subjects – is a manufactured situation, easily solved at the stroke of a pen. The narrative around languages being harder is nothing to do with the content of the course or the difficulty of the exam. It is simply a historical anomaly of how the grades are allocated. There is also a false narrative that this unfair grading is due to pupils’ individual ability, the nation’s ability, or the quality of teaching. And I made a subtle plea for commentators to avoid reinforcing this narrative to push their own diagnosis or solutions. 

    In Part 2, I will consider what happens in post-16 language learning. This has also been the subject of reporting in the wake of A-Level results and the recent HEPI report. I am not going to deny that A-Level languages are in crisis. But the crisis in A-Level and the crisis of language learning post-16 are not one and the same. 

    There are specific problems with the current A-Level specification for languages. The amount of content to be studied, comprising recondite details of every aspect of the Spanish / French / German speaking world, is unmanageable. Worse, as this post explains, the content is out of kilter with the exam. All the encyclopaedic knowledge of politics, history, popular culture and high culture which takes up the bulk of the course, is ultimately only required for one question in just one part of the Speaking Exam. The difficulty of the course is compounded by the extremely high standards required, especially for students who have learned their language in the school context. I personally know of language teachers and college leaders who have discouraged their own children from taking A-Level languages in order not to jeopardise their grades for university application. It is getting to the point where I can no longer, in good conscience, let ambitious students embark on the course without warning them of the overwhelming workload and doubtful outcomes. 

    So A-Level could be improved. But as an academic course, it will always remain the domain of a tiny few. Similarly, specialist Philology degrees at university – the academic study of the language through the intersection of literary and textual criticism, linguistics and the history of the language – only attract a very small minority. Neither university language degrees, nor A-Level, are a mainstream language learning pathway. 

    It is a particularly British mentality to only value language learning if its intellectual heft is boosted by the inclusion of essays, abstruse grammar, linguistics, literature, politics, history, and a study of culture. In other words, philology. Philology is not the same as language learning.  

    Universities do offer language learning opportunities for students of other disciplines. However, in sixth form, because of the funding requirement to offer Level 3 courses, there are no mainstream language learning options available to the vast majority of students who do not study A-Level languages. We have a gap in 16-19 provision where colleges do not offer a mainstream language learning pathway. 

    This gap is fatal to language study. It means GCSE is seen as a dead-end. It means that universities have a tiny pool of students ready and able to take up language degrees or degrees with languages as a component. 

    The crisis is not one of how to channel more people into studying A-Level languages. It is a question of finding radical new ways of offering mainstream language learning post-16, and how to make this the norm. We know from the HEPI report that young people in the UK are among the most avid users of the online language learning app Duolingo. Young people are choosing to engage with language learning, but in terms of formal education, we are leaving a two-year gap between GCSE and the opportunities offered by universities. 

    If this hiatus in language learning is the problem, is there a solution? I have two suggestions. One of which is relatively easy, if we agree that action is needed. If universities genuinely believe that a language is an asset, then they could send a powerful message to potential applicants. 

    Going to university means joining an international organisation, including the possibility of studying abroad, using languages for research, engaging with other students from across the globe, and quite possibly taking a language course while at university. The British Academy reports that universities are calling for language skills across research disciplines, so I hope that they would be able to send a strong message to students in schools and colleges. 

    The message around applications and admissions could be that evidence of studying a language or languages post-16 is something that universities look for. At the very least, they could signal that an interest in self-directed language learning is something they would value. 

    I understand that most universities would stop short of making a qualification in a language a formal entry requirement, because they fear it could exclude many applicants, especially those from disadvantaged groups. But a strong message could help reverse the situation where language learning opportunities are currently denied to many under-privileged school pupils, who aren’t getting the message around the value of pursuing a language. 

    And my second, more difficult suggestion? Would it be possible to plug the two-year gap with a provision at sixth form or college? An app such as Duolingo has attractions. There is the flexibility and independence of study, as well as the focus on motivation by level of learning, hours of study or points scored. It is very difficult to imagine how a sixth form or college could provide language classes for their varied intake from schools, with different language learning experiences in different languages. 

    Is there scope here for a new Oak Academy to step in and create resources? Or for the government to commission resources from an educational technology provider? Is there a role for universities here? The inspiring Languages for All project shows what can happen when a university engages with local schools to identify and tackle obstacles to language learning. The pilot saw Royal Holloway University working with schools across Hounslow, to increase participation at A-Level in a mutually beneficial partnership. Many of the strategies could equally apply to more mainstream (non A-Level) language learning partnerships. These included strong messaging, co-ordinated collaboration between colleges, face-to-face sessions and events at the university, and deployment of university students as mentors. 

    The aim would be to transform the landscape. Currently we have a dead-end GCSE where unfair grading serves as a deterrent, and where there is no mainstream option to make continuing with language learning the norm. A strong message from universities, along with an end to unfair grading, could make a big difference to uptake at GCSE. A realisation that A-Level and specialist philology degrees are not sufficient for the language learning needs of the country could lead to alternative, imaginative and joined-up options post-16. It could also boost the provision or recognition of self-study of a language and may even lead to the reinvigoration of adult education or university outreach language classes. And it could even see a larger pool of candidates for philology degrees at university. 

    Source link

  • Celebrating heritage means honoring students’ languages

    Celebrating heritage means honoring students’ languages

    Key points:

    Every year, Hispanic Heritage Month offers the United States a chance to honor the profound and varied contributions of Latino communities. We celebrate scientists like Ellen Ochoa, the first Latina woman in space, and activists like Dolores Huerta, who fought tirelessly for workers’ rights. We use this month to recognize the cultural richness that Spanish-speaking families bring to our communities, including everything from vibrant festivals to innovative businesses that strengthen our local economies.

    But there’s a paradox at play.

    While we spotlight Hispanic heritage in public spaces, many classrooms across the country require Spanish-speaking students to set aside the very heart of their cultural identity: their language.

    This contradiction is especially personal for me. I moved from Puerto Rico to the mainland United States as an adult in hopes of building a better future for myself and my family. The transition was far from easy. My accent often became a challenge in ways I never expected, because people judged my intelligence or questioned my education based solely on how I spoke. I could communicate effectively, yet my words were filtered through stereotypes.

    Over time, I found deep fulfillment working in a state that recognizes the value of bilingual education. Texas, where I now live, continues to expand biliteracy pathways for students. This commitment honors both home languages and English, opening global opportunities for children while preserving ties to their history, family, and identity.

    That commitment to expanding pathways for English Learners (EL) is urgently needed. Texas is home to more than 1.3 million ELs, which is nearly a quarter of all students in the state, the highest share in the nation. Nationwide, there are more than 5 million ELs comprising nearly 11 percent of the U.S. public school students; about 76 percent of ELs are Spanish speakers. Those figures represent millions of children who walk into classrooms every day carrying the gift of another language. If we are serious about celebrating Hispanic Heritage Month, we must be serious about honoring and cultivating that gift.

    A true celebration of Hispanic heritage requires more than flags and food. It requires acknowledging that students’ home languages are essential to their academic success, not obstacles to overcome. Research consistently shows that bilingualism is a cognitive asset. Those who are exposed to two languages at an early age outperform their monolingual peers on tests of cognitive function in adolescence and adulthood. Students who maintain and develop their native language while learning English perform better academically, not worse. Yet too often, our educational systems operate as if English is the only language that matters.

    One powerful way to shift this mindset is rethinking the materials students encounter every day. High-quality instructional materials should act as both mirrors and windows–mirrors in which students see themselves reflected, and windows through which they explore new perspectives and possibilities. Meeting state academic standards is only part of the equation: Materials must also align with language development standards and reflect the cultural and linguistic diversity of our communities.

    So, what should instructional materials look like if we truly want to honor language as culture?

    • Instructional materials should meet students at varying levels of language proficiency while never lowering expectations for academic rigor.
    • Effective materials include strategies for vocabulary development, visuals that scaffold comprehension, bilingual glossaries, and structured opportunities for academic discourse.
    • Literature and history selections should incorporate and reflect Latino voices and perspectives, not as “add-ons” during heritage month, but as integral elements of the curriculum throughout the year.

    But materials alone are not enough. The process by which schools and districts choose them matters just as much. Curriculum teams and administrators must center EL experiences in every adoption decision. That means intentionally including the voices of bilingual educators, EL specialists, and, especially, parents and families. Their life experiences offer insights into the most effective ways to support students.

    Everyone has a role to play. Teachers should feel empowered to advocate for materials that support bilingual learners; policymakers must ensure funding and policies that prioritize high-quality, linguistically supportive instructional resources; and communities should demand that investments in education align with the linguistic realities of our students.

    Because here is the truth: When we honor students’ languages, we are not only affirming their culture; we are investing in their future. A child who is able to read, write, and think in two languages has an advantage that will serve them for life. They will be better prepared to navigate an interconnected world, and they carry with them the ability to bridge communities.

    This year, let’s move beyond celebrating what Latino communities have already contributed to America and start investing in what they can become when we truly support and honor them year-round. That begins with valuing language as culture–and making sure our classrooms do the same.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • The Language Crisis: How can we increase working-class uptake in languages? 

    The Language Crisis: How can we increase working-class uptake in languages? 

    Author:
    Lee Marney

    Published:

    This blog was kindly authored by Lee Marney, a recent graduate of the University of Manchester.   

    Introduction 

    Megan Bowler’s recent HEPI report lays bare the problems that language educators are experiencing in the face of declining uptake of modern foreign languages (MFL) at both post-14 and post-16 levels since the removal of compulsory foreign language Key Stage 3 in 2004.  

    The report is a fascinating insight into how language learning is indeed more vital than ever in the face of artificial intelligence, and the skills acquired are beneficial not only to individuals who learn MFL, but also to local communities and the economy.  

    MFL and pupils for lower socioeconomic backgrounds 

    With just 6 per cent of AS/A- Level students studying French or Spanish being eligible for Free School Meals, policymakers must do more to remove barriers to entry to language learning for students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. This is imperative, given that MFL uptake at both post-14 and post-16 is most common among students whose household income was above the national average, with uptake notably highest among students from socioeconomically advantaged households (£78,000 or more). 

    The report recommends various measures to promote language educational uptake. However, more ought to be done to target groups of students who have disproportionately low participation in MFL to address the current language learning crisis, particularly through the form of:  

    • offering alternative qualification pathways; and 
    • reforming curriculum through utilising heritage languages (A heritage language is a minority language, migrant or indigenous, learned at home during childhood) to move away from a Eurocentric model of MFL across all Key Stages. 

    Beyond the Euro-centric approach 

    As far back as 1975, curriculum reformers have argued that languages spoken by migrant families are a cultural asset to the UK. Multilingualism is already ubiquitous in British society, with 90% of schools having students for whom English is their additional language, with over 20% of students having a first language that is not English. The most common first languages among these students are Romanian, Urdu, Polish, Punjabi, and Arabic. Indeed, schools already possess a rich linguistic tapestry that is, currently, being underutilised. 

    In the U.K, roughly 75% of ‘underrepresented groups’ have knowledge of a heritage language, including working-class and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) communities. Despite this, 82% decide not to pursue a formal qualification due to the push in schools towards the big three: French, Spanish, and German.  

    Overhauling the current Eurocentric MFL curriculum that understates the role of heritage languages is vital to aid the language crisis. The current exam-focused system fails students who speak heritage languages, restricting their ability to fully maximise their language capabilities. A new model that embraces the UK’s diverse tongues would boast both cultural and economic advantage, given that the UK’s lack of language skills cost the UK economy around 3.5% of GDP. 

    An applied approach to language learning 

    Megan Bowler’s report suggests a level three certificate in Applied Languages to boost post-16 participation in MFL. However, to appeal to working-class students, governmental policy should also encourage post-16 education institutes to incorporate language components in the new technical qualification T-Levels such as marketing, media, and management and administration. While not exclusively for working-class students, this would specifically benefit them by creating a pathway to use languages in professional settings. This is pertinent when considering that students from socioeconomic advantaged backgrounds have more opportunities to use their language capabilities when engaging in their international travelling lifestyle, conceptualising their MFL as useful outside of an academic setting, allowing for more opportunity to construct a world view. One such model is the diplôme de compétence en langue in France that takes a holistic approach to language learning for professional competence development. Bodies such as the British Academy have also recommended this. This type of linguistic competence development is essential to ensure UK competitiveness in a globalised economy, given that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are 30 per cent more successful in exporting when they utilise language capabilities. 

    Conclusion 

    While policy can be a useful top-down tool to encourage MFL uptake, Megan Fowlers report rightfully points out that it must be accompanied by an ethos that reformulates the way in which we view the skills accrued by MFL learning. However, one must also be able to acknowledge that policy is a vital tool in encouraging that ethos growth by uplifting the linguistic diversity of this country’s working class. By reforming qualifications and allowing curriculum content to reflect the linguistic diversity of the UK and beyond, policymakers can ensure MFL are a tool for social mobility.  

    Source link

  • How the manufactured narrative of “failure” is distracting us from resolving the systemic problems holding back the study of Modern Languages – Part One.

    How the manufactured narrative of “failure” is distracting us from resolving the systemic problems holding back the study of Modern Languages – Part One.

    Author:
    Vincent Everett

    Published:

    This post was kindly written by Vincent Everett, who is head of languages in a comprehensive school and sixth form in Norfolk. He blogs as The Nice Man Who Teaches Languages at https://whoteacheslanguages.blogspot.com.

    We have to bring an end to the Culture Wars in “Modern Foreign Languages” in England. Since 2019 we have been convulsed in an internecine political fight over whether our subject is about Communication or Intellectual Conceptualisation. Of course, it’s both. The same goes for Literature, Linguistics, Content Integrated Language Learning (CLIL), and Culture. Likewise, we can encompass transactional travel language, personal expression, professional proficiency, creative or academic language. Teachers have all of these on their radar, and make decisions on how to select and integrate them on a daily basis.

    Our subject benefits from the richness of all these ingredients, and to privilege one or to exclude others, is to make us all the poorer. Teachers work in the rich and messy overlap between Grammar and Communication, engaging with pupils at every stage through their encounters with and progression through another language.

    Meanwhile, we have allowed the culture wars to allow us to be distracted from the very real problems facing our subject. The first is unfair grading at GCSE. The allocation of grades in languages is harsher than in their other subjects. Above a grade 3, this widens to a whole grade’s difference compared to a subject like History.

    The narrative that it is harder to succeed in languages is accurate. Not because of the difficulty of the course content or the exams, but because of the determination of the allocation of grades. It’s not accurate to say that this is a reflection of pupils’ progress or the quality of teaching compared to other subjects. That calibration has not been made. In fact, grades are not calibrated one subject to another. The only calibration that is made, is to perpetuate grading within the subject year on year.

    This was most famously set up in advance when we moved to a new GCSE in 2018. The unfair grading of the old GCSE was carefully and deliberately transferred across to the new GCSE. So pupils taking the new course and the new exam, even though it was proposed to be a better course and a better exam, had no chance of showing they could get better grades. Furthermore, where under the old A-G grading system, the difference between languages and other subjects had been around half a grade, the new 9-1 grading meant that the difference in the key area of grades 4 and above, was now stretched to a whole grade, because of the way the old grades were mapped onto the new ones.

    The lower grades given out in languages are a strong disincentive for take up at GCSE. There is the accurate narrative that pupils will score a lower grade if they pick languages, which acts as a deterrent not only for pupils, but also for schools. One way to score higher in league tables is to have fewer pupils taking MFL. There is also the inaccurate narrative that this is a reflection of the pupils’ own ability, the nation’s ability, or the quality of teaching. The allocation of grades is a historical anomaly perpetuated year-on-year, not a reflection of actual achievement.

    This is the biggest issue facing modern languages. It would also be the easiest to fix. Grade boundaries in other subjects are used in order to bring standards in to line. If an exam is too easy  or too hard, and many pupils score a high mark or a low mark, the grade boundaries are used to make sure the correct number of pupils get the grade. Except, that is, in modern languages, where the thresholds are used to make sure that grades are out of line with other subjects. Imagine if languages grades were allocated in line with other subjects, would there be a clamour of voices insisting they should be made more difficult?

    There is a very real danger of misinterpreting this manufactured narrative of “failure” in languages. It features in every report or proposal, but often instead of identifying it as an artificial anomaly, it is used to diagnose a deficit and prescribe a solution. Often this is a solution taken from the culture wars, ignoring the fact that schools and teachers are already expertly blending and balancing the elements of our subject.

    Unfair grading at GCSE is the greatest of our problems, and the easiest to sort out. In Part 2, I shall look at the trickier question of what happens post-16.

    Source link

  • Why are universities cutting languages? – Campus Review

    Why are universities cutting languages? – Campus Review

    The University of Tasmania’s (UTAS) move to cut its Indonesian language program amid plummeting enrolments has been described as “shortsighted” and “strategically incoherent” by a long-running provider of study tours to the Southeast Asian country. 

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Can the sea’s rise be a language’s demise?

    Can the sea’s rise be a language’s demise?

    A language is not merely a collection of words; it is a symphony of memories, a melody that holds the heartbeat of a nation. It is a living chronicle of history, breathed across the ages, inscribed on the rhythms of life and sung by the winds that dance upon the sacred lands.

    Picture a serene village cradled among ancient mountains, where elders speak a tongue as timeless as the rocks beneath their feet. Each syllable is a thread, knitted into a rich tapestry of legends, lore and traditions that bind them to the soil they call home.  

    But what becomes of this language when the land itself starts to crumble? When the waves rise to consume coasts, or parched earth splits under a blistering sun, does the song fall silent? Today, as the planet warms, it is not only ice caps and forests that vanish — but languages, and with them, entire ways of perceiving the world.

    Around the globe, ancient languages — the essence of human history — are vanishing. Climate change, a tenacious force reshaping landscapes, frays the delicate cultural threads that root communities to their identity. Rising seas engulf islands where indigenous tongues blossom like rare flowers. Wildfires sweep away more than homes, reducing sacred spaces and oral histories to ash. Each vanished habitat is a stilled voice, an erased library of metaphors, idioms and songs that offered a unique lens on life.

    Language extinction

    According to a 2021 report by the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, more than 40% of the world’s estimated 7,000 languages are at risk of disappearing. “When a language dies,” said linguist K. David Harrison, “a unique vision of the world is lost.”

    While globalisation and modernisation are often blamed for the erosion of ancient languages, environmental destruction plays an even more insidious role, quietly displacing communities and severing their linguistic roots. When climatic disasters scatter people, they do not only lose their home — they lose the vessel of their shared soul. Dispersed and assimilating, their words, their tales, their melodies — once carried across centuries — fade into echoes long forgotten.

    Today, nearly half of all languages spoken globally are endangered. According to UNESCO, one language disappears every two weeks — a rhythm of loss as steady as the ticking of a clock. In this tide of vanishing voices, climate change surges as an unrecognised adversary, disrupting the habitats where these languages are rooted.

    Consider the small island nations of the Pacific — Tuvalu, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands — where languages are inseparable from the ocean’s ebb and flow. As seas rise up to threaten these vulnerable islands, the inhabitants must depart, and with them, their distinct vision of the world drifts away. Words that once named the tides, the winds, the colour of the sky before monsoon, these vanish as the speakers are displaced.

    Likewise, in the Arctic, the Sámi and Inuit communities confront an ugly truth: their languages, like their frozen lands, are melting under the pressure of a warming world. The vocabulary used to describe different types of snow, hunting rituals or the behaviour of migrating herds holds ancestral wisdom. As the landscape changes, the words that once matched its rhythms no longer apply — and are slowly lost.

    Worldviews and wisdom

    When languages are lost, they take with them entire worldviews and centuries of wisdom encoded in words. The knowledge of forests, of skies, of seas — how to farm to the beat of nature, how to heal using the plants that grow in secret groves — is lost.

    For instance, in the Amazon rainforest, indigenous languages such as Kayapo contain the secrets of life-abundant ecosystems. According to Survival International and linguistic researchers, these languages encode unique ecological wisdom that cannot be translated. Each word is a secret to decoding the harmony of nature and each lost language shelves an irreplaceable piece of the puzzle.

    In the Philippines, the Agta people hold oral traditions that teach sustainable fishing and forest stewardship. Their language contains knowledge passed down through chants and stories that teach children when to harvest, what to leave behind and how to give back. Without their land, without their rituals, such teachings dissolve.

    In Vanuatu, where the rising tide of the ocean promises to wash away land and language, communities are in a mad dash to record their heritage. Elders and linguists collaborate, transcribing words into digital platforms, preserving the poetry of their world for future generations. Stories once passed from mouth to ear around firelight are now finding their way into apps, audio archives and cloud storage — fragile vessels carrying ancient truths.

    A fading past and uncertain future

    Technology, too, becomes a bridge between the fading past and an uncertain future. Apps like Duolingo and platforms like Google’s Endangered Languages Project breathe new life into ancient words, making them accessible to the young and curious.

    Augmented reality and virtual storytelling spaces are beginning to preserve not just the language, but the experience of being immersed in it. But technology alone cannot carry the weight of this preservation. It must be paired with policies that protect the vulnerable — giving displaced communities a voice not only in language preservation but in shaping climate action itself.

    Governments must go beyond digitisation and invest in cultural resilience. Language must be taught in schools, inscribed in constitutions, spoken on airwaves and celebrated in ceremonies. We need climate policies that understand that saving ecosystems and saving languages are part of the same struggle. Both are about preserving what makes us human.

    In the end, saving a language is an act of defiance against the erasure of identity. It is a way to honour the past while forging a path to a sustainable future. These languages do not merely recount history — they carry the wisdom of living in harmony with the Earth. In their poetry and proverbs, in their songs and silences, they have answers to questions we have not even thought to ask yet.

    To preserve these voices, we must become their echoes. We must act before it’s too late. Before the last storytellers fall silent. Before the rivers can no longer remember the songs they once inspired. To save a language is to save a piece of ourselves — the spirit of who we are, where we’ve been and the dreams of where we might go.

    When we lose a language, we don’t just lose words — we lose the Earth’s voice itself. If these voices vanish, who will remember the names of the stars? Who will tell us how the mountains mourned or the forests sang? The Earth is listening and its languages are calling. 

    Let us not forget how to answer.

     

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why are languages at risk of extinction due to climate change?

    2. How are preservation of language connected to whole cultures?

    3. Why might someone want to master a language that is not widely spoken?

     

    Source link