Having carried out a thorough analysis of the proposed changes to the subject content and assessment objectives for Modern Languages
downloadable in a document here or
viewable on a web page here, I have now submitted my response to the 5 questions.
I would really urge people to
respond to the consultation here by the closing date (Tuesday 20th August) and to draw attention to the problems, doing so in the light of knowing what the
previous criteria were.
Please note also that this is a consultation about
what is to be tested, not
how it is to be tested. The Ofqual consultation on how it is to be tested will be taking place later.
My main concerns are as follows:
(1) lack of definition to allow for recognising full ability
range following the GCSE course
(2) omission of objectives (derive enjoyment and benefit
from language learning; provide basis for practical use of the language)
(3) Lack of differentiation according to language being
learnt e.g. languages with non-Roman scripts should have different demands.
(4) Confusion over contexts and settings for different skills
(5) Lack of clarity about the breadth of vocabulary expected and the exact nature of themes
(6) Inclusion of how the subejct should be tested (this is Ofqual's remit) e.g. mixed skill testing implied by the wording of the assessment obejctives, and the expectation that the target language should be used in testing
The criteria as they stand would make it extremely difficult for Awarding Organisations and Ofqual to ensure valid and reliable assessment in this extremely high-stakes public examination.
Here is my response:
Question 1: Do the proposed content and assessment objectives cover the
appropriate knowledge and understanding for GCSE in this subject?
NO
In summary, I give this response for three reasons which I
develop at length below.
(1) lack of definition to allow for recognising full ability
range following the GCSE course
(2) omission of objectives (derive enjoyment and benefit
from language learning provide basis for practical use of the language)
(3) Lack of differentiation according to language being
learnt e.g. languages with non-Roman scripts should have different demands.
The purpose of The General Certificate of Secondary
Education is to recognise the knowledge skills and understanding of the 16 year
olds who take it.
A broad range of ability profile takes the GCSE.
The proposed content and assessment objectives as they stand
describe what might be expected of native speakers. There are very few instances where allowance
appears to be made for the fact that the content and objectives are for people
at different stages of learning the language.
One example of a section
which makes allowance for non-native speakers is the description of the nature
of the speech which is to be understood: 'clear standard speech spoken at
normal speed using familiar language across a range of contexts'. ( I assume a
native speaker would be expected to understand obscure speech spoken quickly.) However, this description is at a high level,
as for most interactions with a 16 year old, (and indeed anyone who is clearly
not a native speaker), native speakers would usually 'slow down' in order to
aid comprehensions.
The lack of guidance for lower levels will be problematic
for Ofqual and the Awarding Organisations preparing assessments which still
have to cater for the wide range of ability and presumably will have to
extrapolate progression towards the goals and define grades for those who do
not match the upper boundary descriptions.
It is essential to value knowledge understanding and skills
appropriate to the abilities or experience of the candidates and to have
expectations of what can realistically be achieved by the end of a GCSE course. If this does not happen, the qualification
will only attract the very highest ability pupils.
I would expect the subject content to be described as a
'continuum', to provide indicators to those responsible for assessing the
content as to what boundaries might be considered reasonable for a candidate
who has followed a GCSE course.
It is essential to be able to describe a broader range of
outcomes in a way that can be useful for distinguishing different levels of
performance.
I suggest the following changes for each of the sections ( (a) Subject aims and learning
outcomes, (b) contexts and purposes, and
(c) scope of study) in order to ensure that the qualification is attainable
by a broad ability range of students (thereby satisfying the government
expectation that GCSE should still be the standard qualification).
(a) Subject aims and learning outcomes
Aims and learning outcomes can be expressed in a way that
makes them realistic for the full ability range.
Many of the aims and learning outcomes are the same in 2008
and 2016.
Additional in the 2008 criteria and omitted in the 2016:
·
derive enjoyment and benefit from language
learning
·
provide basis for practical use of the language
I strongly recommend
that these aims be re-instated - especially the 'practical use of language
learning'.
The 2008 aims and learning outcomes (points 6 and 7) are ordered
logically (an introductory paragraph summarising overall aims followed by a
list of specific skills), are worded clearly and succinctly, and are achievable
by pupils of any prior ability.
The 2016 aims and
learning outcomes mix aims and outcomes.
The opening paragraph (which presumably is to describe aims) omits
language learning skills, preparation for future study and work, and being able
to provide a basis for 'practical' use of language.
The bullet points describing outcomes describe skills, but by
attaching them to specific examples of aims, purposes and contexts this makes
them more limited in scope e.g. language learning skills is referenced only to
future contexts 'to prepare them for …'
(I would argue for example that language learning skills are useful for current
study and for practical purposes).
More importantly the skills are also limited in scope by reference to degree of accuracy, fluency,
range of language, range of contexts, which makes the outcome less achievable
by all e.g. listening and reading is described as 'acquire new knowledge, skills and ways of
thinking through their ability to understand and respond to a rich range of
authentic spoken and written material, including literary texts' (I would suggest a reasonable outcome for all
is to develop understanding in a variety of contexts)
(b) Contexts and purposes
Different contexts and purposes appear to be cited for
different skills. There may be a
rationale for this, but I cannot detect it.
It will be essential to be clear about the range and nature
of contexts and purposes in order to allow for comparability across examining
boards and fairness. Previous criteria
have required boards to set a defined content, with a number of words and
indication as to 'level' and a percentage of words which can be allowed beyond
the defined content. It seems fair to
have some sort of boundary set rather than expecting an infinite number of
words to be known and learnt.
It may be helpful to organise the description in a way which
spells out which skills relate to which purposes, or which registers of
language. And if the contexts are
applicable to all skills, then this could be made clearer.
e.g.
Which skills are to
be used (Point 10 2008)
GCSE specifications in modern foreign languages must require
learners to:
• listen and respond to different types of spoken language
• communicate in speech for a variety of purposes
• read and respond to different types of written language
• communicate in writing for a variety of purposes
• use and understand a range of vocabulary and structures
• understand and apply the grammar of the language, as
detailed in the specification.
Contexts (for all
skills - not confined to specific skills ..):
(1)
appropriate to their age, interests and maturity levels
(so contexts which a 16 year-old might reasonably be expected to operate e.g.
when entertaining a TL speaker in this country, when visiting the TL country,
(2)
appropriate for a scholar - when learning about languages
and the culture of the TL country and when deepening knowledge and
understanding of other subjects studied
(3)
appropriate for someone preparing for the world of
future employment
The following settings
must be included for all skills
·
personal
·
social
·
public
·
academic
·
employment-related
Skill-specific task requirements (according to the 2016
criteria)
Listening tasks
must include response to the following sources:
·
recorded material from authentic sources,
including the media [can it be abridged / amended as for literary texts?]
Speaking tasks
must include the requirement to give information and ask questions in an unrehearsed
situation (e.g. 10 minutes with access to a dictionary to prepare a response to
a task)
Reading tasks
must include response to the following sources: [can they all be abridged /
amended? or just the literary texts?]
·
personal communication (e.g. letter, emails,
texts)
·
public information (e.g. timetables, brochures,
newspapers, websites)
·
factual
(non fiction?) texts (e.g. leaflet, brochures, magazines, newspapers
·
literary texts: poems, letters, short stories,
essays, novels, plays from any period. (e.g. … give specific examples of authentic
literary texts which would be deemed appropriate for this level (NB
may be difficult in French - past historic - even Mr Men books are at a very high
level ….)
Writing tasks
must include the requirement to translate text from English into French.
It would be helpful to clarify the meaning of 'language
contexts will be organised in a specified number of themes'
Will the themes only relate to some contexts?
Will all contexts be used for all themes?
(I note that other subjects e.g. science, maths, history are
much more specific).
Perhaps it means that themes will be given, and for each
theme there will be a series of defined language contexts (e.g. as with
'Language tasks' listed by AQA 2004 linear specification under each theme). This
would then include the 'functions' needed for each Theme/ context.
e.g. Theme 1 - My World (identity and culture, lifestyle,
culture, beliefs)
·
exchange info about self, family, friends and
pets: name, age & birthday, nationality, likes & dislikes, appearance,
jobs
·
spell out own name, street, town
·
greet someone
·
etc. etc.
It would be useful to have an example of what is meant by
this.
I note that the following contexts from 2008 are omitted: 'GCSE
specifications in modern foreign languages must set out contexts and purposes
that:
•
reflect, and are appropriate to, the culture of
countries and communities where the language is spoken
•
relate, where appropriate, to other areas of the
curriculum'
I believe that the spirit of the 2016 criteria is to
maintain the emphasis on the use of 'authentic' sources, and therefore suggest
that this is made explicit in this section.
(c) Scope of study
The approach seems to be to write bullet points for each
skill which are loosely 'hierarchical' in describing the tasks demanded. This is not explicit and it not a consistent
approach across the skills:
•
Some skills have no examples of lower levels of
achievement (e.g. writing)
•
All skills have a majority of statements describing the
highest level of achievement.
•
Few skills describe any 'limits' which might reasonably
be expected of a learner (e.g. not totally accurate)
•
Some skills are associated with a particular task/text
type, others are not
There is inconsistency in the way the skills are presented and
at the very least, some revision needs to be made to make it clear as to
whether people would be expected to demonstrate all these skills in order to be
awarded a GCSE. (If this is the case,
there will not be many entrants or certificates awarded). As it stands, it appears that these are
'requirements' of all candidates.
Overall, the descriptions are mainly of what you would
expect a very high ability pupil to achieve. It may be helpful to give an
indication of the continuum / progression of what can be reasonably expected of
a 16 year old.
In the absence of grade descriptors which defined and A C
and F grade and provided 'anchors' for those writing a specification and some
sort of means of comparison, it is necessary to find some other means of
describing the continuum.
I note that in the mathematics 2016 criteria (maths a
similar 'linear' subject) higher levels are defined and denoted by emboldened
text.
I have outlined three possible approaches below.
APPROACH 1. Describe the lowest level, then have an over-arching
description of what can be expected at higher levels:
Learners should have
the opportunity to demonstrate the level which they have reached with respect
to what they know, understand and can do in different skills.
For all skills, at
higher levels they will be able to
·
cope with
a greater degree of unpredictability,
·
operate
with less support
·
understand
a wider range of vocabulary and
structures, including some unfamiliar language, and
·
operate in
a more abstract context
APPROACH 2 Define
the lowest (intermediate?) and highest performance expected for each element
which contributes to the skill:
Listening
See above for required sources
GCSE specification should require students to demonstrate:
·
the highest level of response they can achieve (ranging from identifying main points and
extracting some details through to identifying details, opinions, and drawing
conclusions, deducing meaning/inference, synthesis)
·
the broadest range of contexts they understand (ranging from defined, familiar contexts
to a wide range of defined contexts and a few unfamiliar contexts
·
the highest level of complexity of language they understand (ranging from simple
language spoken deliberately clearly by a sympathetic native speaker to complex
language spoken by native speakers, including adapted authentic media)
Speaking
GCSE specification should require students to demonstrate:
·
the broadest range of contexts in which they can operate (ranging from defined, familiar
contexts to a wide range of defined contexts and a few unfamiliar contexts)
·
the highest level of independent communication they can perform (ranging from giving
simple information in highly predictable situations through to initiating,
developing and sustaining conversations and discussions in situations which
have some unpredictable elements)
·
the highest level of complexity of language they can use (ranging from using simple
language in a limited range of topics through to using complex language and
extended sequences of speech using a variety of vocabulary across in a broad range of topics) (Complex is
defined in the higher grammar section, and includes a wide range of tenses and
moods; range could be defined by the guidance on themes)
·
the highest level of grammatical accuracy they can achieve (ranging from being usually understandable
despite inaccuracies through to being clear despite errors with more complex
structures)
·
the highest level of accuracy in pronunciation and intonation they can achieve (ranging
from being understandable by a sympathetic native speaker to having reasonably
accurate pronunciation and intonation)
·
the highest level of fluency they can achieve (ranging from frequent hesitations to
minimal hesitation through use of re-phrasing and repair strategies) (I like
the phrase re-phrase and repair!!)
·
the highest level of appropriate use of register (ranging from some awareness and skill
in appropriate register to full awareness and skill)
Reading
See above for required sources
GCSE specification should require students to demonstrate:
·
the highest level of response they can achieve (ranging from identifying main points and
extracting some details through to identifying details, opinions, and drawing
conclusions inference, synthesis)
·
the broadest range of contexts they understand (ranging from defined, familiar contexts
to a wide range of defined contexts and a few unfamiliar contexts)
·
the highest level of complexity of language they understand (ranging from simple, short text with simple structures deliberately
designed to be very clear (e.g. public notices, signs, adapted for learners)
through to extended text using complex language (e.g. adapted literary texts)
Throughout: complex is defined with reference to the higher
levels specified in the grammar list
Writing
GCSE specification should require students to demonstrate:
·
the highest level of independent communication they can perform (ranging from giving
simple information in highly predictable situations through to giving detailed
information in a situation which has some unpredictable elements)
·
the
broadest range of contexts they can
write about (ranging from using vocabulary and structures from a limited,
defined prescribed list to a variety of vocabulary and structures form an
extended defined list)
·
the highest level of complexity of language they can use (ranging from using simple
language through to using complex language and extended sequences of speech)
(Complex is defined in the higher grammar section, and includes a wide range of
tenses and moods; range is defined by the guidance on themes???)
·
the highest level of grammatical accuracy they can achieve (ranging from being usually
understandable despite inaccuracies through to being clear despite errors with
more complex structures)
·
the highest level of accuracy in pronunciation and intonation they can achieve (ranging
from being understandable by a sympathetic native speaker to having reasonably
accurate pronunciation and intonation)
·
the highest level of understanding of register (ranging from some awareness and skill in
appropriate register to full awareness and skill)
Language learning
skills
GCSE specification should require students to demonstrate
use of reference materials e.g. dictionary and grammar book (ranging from
finding words to making informed use of verb tables) [This gives a good justification for
including translation skills]
I note that scope of study does not make specific reference
to understanding of culture, and I approve of it not being specified in the
scope of study.
APPROACH 3
(closest to the 2016 approach I think)
Hierarchical statements combining all the elements: (note,
these become very long, so it may be worth breaking them down into separate
bullet points, but if this is done, it is still essential to indicate what
describes each level. Below I suggest
what may be the lowest and the highest, to match the heading of 'scope')
L
istening
•
Identify main points and extract some details from
defined, familiar contexts with simple language spoken deliberately clearly by
a sympathetic native speaker (lowest)
•
Identify details and opinions, draw conclusions, infer
and synthesis meaning from a wide range of defined contexts and a few
unfamiliar contexts with language spoken by native speakers, including adapted
authentic media. (highest)
Speaking
•
Give simple information in in highly predictable
situations covering a limited range of topics using simple language and
conveying the message in a way which is understandable to the sympathetic
native speaker despite inaccuracies
•
Initiate, develop and sustain conversations and
discussions in formal and informal situations which have some unpredictable
elements, using complex language, extended sequences of speech and a variety of
vocabulary across in a broad range of
topics, being clear despite errors with more complex structures, and speaking reasonably
fluently with a reasonably accurate pronunciation and intonation.
Reading
•
Identify main points and extract some details from
defined, familiar contexts with simple language (lowest)
•
Identify details and opinions, draw conclusions, infer
and synthesis meaning from a wide range of defined contexts and a few
unfamiliar contexts including adapted authentic literary texts. (highest)
Writing
•
Give simple information in in highly predictable
situations covering a limited range of topics using simple language and
conveying the message in a way which is understandable to the sympathetic
native speaker despite inaccuracies
•
Give detailed information in formal and informal situations
which have some unpredictable elements, using complex language, extended text and
a variety of vocabulary across in a broad range of topics, being clear despite
errors with more complex structures..
Question 2: Is the relative weighting of assessment objectives right?
I am in agreement with the principle of having a fixed rather
than flexible weighting for each skill, as this should lead to a fairer
comparison across examination boards.
Note that 2008 had a constraint
of 25%/60% rule for practical skills and the Dearing recommendation about Speaking
and Writing led to requirement that writing and speaking should be tested under
controlled assessment conditions. There
was an expectation that boards might take
advantage of flexibility to introduce
'mixed skill' testing (e.g. speaking test where 20% - speaking, 10% -
listening) however this did not occur and they all offered the identical
weighting of 30% speaking, 30% writing, 20% listening, 20% reading.
There is a case for making the weighting for listening and
reading relatively greater, as these skills are the most commonly used and the
most useful in all the contexts given. However, speaking and writing are the
skills which test 'grammatical' understanding an knowledge. Ideally I would suggest 20% speaking, 20%
writing, 30% reading and 30% listening.
My main concern here is that this section carries
assumptions / instructions about the way in which assessments will be carried
out. I believe that this is Ofqual's
remit.
Firstly, the wording of the assessment objectives implies
mixed skills tasks and testing: 'read/listen
and respond to, speak/write and interact'.
The objectives need to be stated simply.
There is no problem in carrying out mixed skill tasks in
teaching and learning activities, but they pose enormous difficulties in
assessment situations. They seriously constrain
the means, validity and reliability of the assessment in a test situation and
can lead to a double penalty. (For
example, if they hear a text and understand it, but do not understand the
target language question and cannot write the answer in the target language,
they will not be credited for their listening comprehension.
Secondly I note that the description of assessment
objectives specifies the level reached in the skills 'understand and respond to different types of language /
communicate and interact effectively'
I strongly recommend that the objectives be stated simply as
an objective to assess the skills of listening / speaking / reading / writing
Thirdly, I note that instructions are given about the means
of assessment.
'Assessment objectives
will be fully assessed through
external
assessment: awarding organisations can require teachers to conduct the oral
exams, and then send recordings to the awarding organisations for marking. They
are internally conducted, but not internally assessed.'
The decision about the means of testing in the most valid
and reliable way is Ofqual's remit.
I am extremely concerned about the prospect of a return to
target language testing, even though I am aware that this is a controversial
area. Target language testing leads to
convoluted, artificial test types which confuse the candidates in high pressure
test situations, and do not allow them to demonstrate what they know,
understand and can do with respect to the assessment objectives. Valid reliable forms of testing leading to
fair judgements of candidates' skills are vital for this high-stakes
examination. An examination should not
be used to promote a pedagogical ideal. I know that this view is shared by significant
people working for awarding bodies who have had the task of setting exam
questions and who in the past had to spend inordinate amounts of time and
effort finding pictures to represent lexical items clearly in order to avoid
the use of English.
I see no advantage in terms of assessment for using the
target language for testing.
Separately, I note that exceptions are given for Languages
using logographic systems or characters such as Mandarin Chinese and Japanese. Given the acknowledgment of relative
difficulty in these languages, should not other aspects of the criteria be
similarly adapted? (Allowance made for
this in 2008)
I note that there is no change to the grammar requirements
The 2008 specification
grammar list categorises and distinguishes core / more complex grammar, though
requirement to do so not specified in its criteria. I think it is a good idea
to include as a requirement.
Question 3: Do the proposed subject content and assessment objectives
provide assurance that the essential knowledge taught at the earlier key stages
is built upon and represented adequately?
Yes.
Question 4: Will the proposed qualifications secure sound progression
for the purposes of further academic and vocational study?
No
As the criteria stand, only the most able will achieve them,
and the qualification is therefore only suitable as a preparation for advanced
qualifications.
Question 5: Do any of the proposals have potential to have a
disproportionate impact, positive or negative, on specific pupil groups, in
particular 'protected characteristic groups'? (disability, gender reassignment,
pregnancy and maternity, race, religion, belief, sex and sexual orientation);
if they have a potential for adverse impact, how can this be reduced?
Yes.
If Awarding Organisations were forced to implement mixed
skill testing (as implied by testing in the target language, and the description
of the assessment objectives 'speak/write and interact … listen/read and
respond) this would disadvantage those with visual impairment or hearing
impairment.
