Wednesday 28 July 2021

Leadership and Structures - Reviewing our Curriclum

 The posts in this series have been focused on aspects of language-teaching and language-learning from the Ofsted Research Review. I have looked at Target Language use, Grammar, Vocabulary, Assessment, Feedback, Phonics, Transition, and Communication. Also featured in the Research Review is a section on Leadership and Structures. This doesn't directly relate to language teaching and learning, and this blog isn't the place to be washing our linen in public, however clean it may be. But I will outline what I have picked up on as the main issues in the Review. And also describe some of our situation to help document and think-through how we measure up.

The issues around Leadership and Structures that I highlighted in the Ofsted Research Review are:

All pupils should be studying a language throughout KS3 as part of a broad and balanced curriculum.

The so called Ebacc (a schools performance measure, not a qualification) targets are for 75% to be entered for GCSE in 2024 and 90% by 2027.

That Leadership should understand the language-learning process. For example it is not just a process of learning a succession of sets of words.

I should start by saying that we are very lucky with the Leadership we have in our school. And if you know me at all, you know I won't say that just to be nice. Despite the title of this blog. The period of covid disruption has highlighted the extraordinary levels of trust, understanding, care, communication, support, and good sense permeating the school and which were already in place before the crises hit.

In terms of the Ofsted Review criteria, almost all pupils study a language from Year 7 to Year 9. There are one or two individual exceptions where pupils arrived at the school already disapplied from languages as part of a package to focus on individual needs.

At the moment, we have no particular plans to chase the 75% in 2024 ebacc target. This is the year group who will be starting Year 9 in September. No plans to change structures, apart from continuing to teach them a rich KS3 curriculum with clear progression that enables them to use their language with increasing fluency and independence.

We have made some decisions about the number of hours of lessons for Year 9 which I felt might have affected pupil confidence and take up at GCSE. Year 9 will have an increase in timetabled lessons in "core" subjects as part of a "catch-up" drive. This would have meant a reduction in French lessons, but we have avoided this by moving ab-initio Year 9 Spanish to an extra lesson once a week after the end of the school day. This in turn means that Spanish is available to all Year 9 pupils who want to be able to study it, instead of just certain selected teaching groups.

I personally feel the ebacc target has been brought into disrepute by being constantly moved back. Embarrassingly, I started talking to Leadership about planning staffing for the return of compulsory MFL at GCSE back in 2017, which turns out to have been 10 years before it is now supposed to happen. The latest surprise was in an Ofsted report on Primary MFL teaching, where it emerged that the target is for pupils "studying" for GCSE in 2025 but not taking it until 2027. It's hard to plan seriously when the target is literally a moving target.

I also wonder about the integrity of asking 90% of pupils to be entered for something that not only is not an actual qualification, but which by definition many of them cannot achieve. The grading is set so that 90% of pupils cannot possibly achieve a "good" grade in languages. The government policy seems dishonest and cowardly by focusing on a fake "ebacc" enforced by Ofsted rather than a clear statement that languages should be compulsory.

So the decision comes down to whether schools want more pupils to study a language. The answer in our context is that we would love more pupils to pick a language. But do we want to force them to take a language over another subject? Are the other subjects not just as valid and valuable? Of course they are. I think Leadership would argue that languages are as valued as other subjects. I am not sure they want to say that they are more valued.

Our current situation is that the number of option subjects that pupils can pick, has dropped from 4 GCSEs to 3. Without there being a drop in the numbers opting for languages. Since the end of the disastrous Learn fancy answers by rote and repeat the exam until you are perfect GCSE that destroyed language learning, our results have seen an improvement. We have yet to see what message feeds back about the experience of the new KS4 from older pupils, and how MFL compares to other subjects in terms of difficulty and grading. Our approach to developing spontaneous Speaking and Writing across KS3-4 fits much better with the new GCSE. We have had significant turbulence in staffing, but we also have a strong shared vision and a consistent approach across the department.

In September, we must redouble our efforts to gather feedback from pupils on their language-learning experience. And make sure we communicate clearly how they are making progress, including adapting our assessments to make sure they feel successful and aren't labeled as "good" or "bad" at languages based on their underlying literacy rather than what they are learning in language lessons. We are looking forward to a post covid return to a rich KS3 experience based on communication and creativity. One of the greatest incentives to continue with a language is visits and exchanges. We will see how quickly these can return and where they can be boosted by online virtual exchanges. As a school, we are building up to a major celebration of the school's history, ethos and role in the wider world which will help boost our sense of purpose and community cohesion...













No comments:

Post a Comment