The wrong answer to the wrong problem. Ignorant or just ignoring the current GCSE?

 I think I may have been a little unfair to the new GCSE panel. I have thought that their proposals were based on a Review carried out as far back as 2016, without really looking at the transformation in MFL teaching which has happened since then. I have talked about them ignoring or being ignorant of the developments in language teaching and learning since we got rid of the Controlled Assessment GCSE.

I was of the opinion that they were working from a Review of language teaching from a previous era where pupils didn't have to learn how to put language together for themselves. Where the speaking and writing "exams" consisted of rote learning long spiels of language whether or not the pupil knew what it meant or how the structures were formed. An exam where "amount of information" delivered slickly was rewarded rather than pupils who spoke spontaneously. An exam where "variety" of expression scored higher than having a core repertoire of language you could use for yourself. And, as I have written here, a perfect storm of targets, accountability, and hostile Academy takeovers all meant that a GCSE created with the good intentions of making the exam more accessible and less intimidating, led to the destruction of meaningful language-learning.

And I have said that since the introduction of the current GCSE, we have seen a flowering of pupils able to speak and write spontaneously. Successfully using their knowledge of the language to express themselves and develop their answers.

This may not be entirely true. And I have realised where my understanding may have been incomplete.

I teach AQA GCSE. And the AQA examiner's report after the introduction of the new GCSE did comment on how pupils were able to speak and write successfully in response to unexpected writing questions or skilled questioning from the examiner in the speaking exam.

But my own children's school do Edexcel. And their experience is very different. This may be down to their teachers being slow to move on, and a sign of the continuing woeful influence of the Controlled Assessment GCSE. But it is also to some extent driven by the current Edexcel GCSE.

So for AQA, I teach the Conversation by practising with the pupils. Making sure they can respond to questions with an initial short answer. And then knowing that once they have done that, I will follow up with and... for example... Why...? but what if...? so... to push them for more information and more language, developing their answers spontaneously. And this is rewarded by the markscheme. With marks for interaction and for developing answers. And for being able to deploy a core repertoire for giving and justifying opinions, narrating past events, and talking about the future.

Not for Edexcel. My children's teachers have them coming home and learning long answers from memory. Still. This may be down to the teachers, but it is rewarded by the Edexcel markscheme. The three key differences are: 

Edexcel breaks down the topic content in a different way, so you have to have much more detail prepared on any one single subtopic area, including the ones that aren't particularly well suited to a core of language. So for AQA you might get some questions on the Environment or Poor People but in and amongst questions on Travel and Tourism or Home Town as part of a conversation on Theme 2. Whereas with Edexcel you have to have extended answers ready on all these individual subtopics.

Edexcel specifically rewards fancy language. So you need expressions given to you by the teacher to sound fancy. Planned and learned and dropped in, in order to impress the examiner. Whereas with AQA, having a core repertoire and being able to use it spontaneously to express yourself and develop answers is more important.

Edexcel (according to my children's teachers) will mark you down for hesitating. So having prepared answers scores higher than speaking spontaneously. AQA rewards pupils who can interact and develop answers in response to the examiner's questioning.

There are similar small but important differences in the Role Play. For AQA, as long as you can work out what the card wants you to say (!?!?), it is usually possible for pupils to construct an answer from their core repertoire of language. For Edexcel, it does seem as if they expect you to have swallowed a phrasebook of parrot-learned expressions. Sometimes going way beyond the language pupils are expected to have mastered at GCSE. For example saying, My wallet has been stolen. A construction my A Level class are currently struggling with, as it highlights the different treatment of the past participle when it works with the auxiliary to have compared to the formation of the passive voice with one of the verbs to be. Ouch!

So, yes, maybe rote-learning of long fancy answers and expressions learned parrot fashion without understanding the component parts, is still alive and kicking. Maybe because of the long shadow of the Controlled Assessment GCSE. Or maybe in schools which teach the Edexcel specification.

I am focusing here on the Speaking and Writing exam, because the new GCSE proposals for Listening and Reading, while claiming to ameliorate a calamitous exam, actually offer more of the same. Compounding precisely the things that make the current exams so bad.

If the new GCSE panel start by by basing their outlook on the out of date 2016 Review, and then if they only have personal knowledge of the current GCSE (I don't see them quoting any research) based on the Edexcel version (and not AQA), then maybe we can understand their ignorance of much of what has been going on in language teaching. 

I wrote, back in April, that I thought they were forcing upon us the wrong answer to the wrong problem. It's still the wrong answer. But I can now understand why, if their personal knowledge of the new GCSE is limited to Edexcel, they might still be trying to answer the wrong question.