One thing that costs nothing which would revitalise languages in England.

A sure-fire way, costing no money, to revitalise and reinvigorate take up of MFL at GCSE.

Do you see what this is?

It's anonymous targets for a random bunch of pupils in different GCSE subjects.

These targets may be given to pupils as they start their GCSE course. Or perhaps when they are considering their options to give them an idea of what they could be aiming for in each subject. Some schools may even give them to pupils in year 7. And they may be used throughout KS3 and KS4 to assess whether pupils are "on track" or not.

They are based on the pupils' KS2 SATs results in English and maths, and how this correlates to how pupils with similar scores go on to perform at GCSE. And by the law of averages, for the thousands of pupils in the year group, there is an overall correlation on average between the predictions and the GCSE grades awarded. Although you might want to look more carefully into just how many (how few) individual pupils get their "target" grade. Because the words "on average" includes... surprise surprise... some getting above and some getting below target. And of course there's another reason why the correlation is a good one: the same data is used to allocate the overall number of grades given. So it's not a coincidence, or a function of the correlation or averages. It's deliberately calculated that way.

What these targets do NOT show, is any reflection of an individual pupil's performance, past, present or future, in a language. The targets are not based on any knowledge of the pupil's study of languages. They are no reflection of the teaching they receive. No reflection of any government initiatives or new GCSE syllabuses or Ofsted Research Reviews. None of that will have any impact. They are set before they start their GCSE course; in fact they are determined before they even start KS3.

But they are a true reflection of something. They very clearly show one important thing.

Look down the column for the target for French. And compare it to the other subjects.

It is lower for French than for the other subjects in the range of grades 5 and above. For a pupil targeted a grade 3, it is more in line. But the higher the target grade, the more likely it is to be lower, often a grade lower, than in other subjects.

This is not a reflection of the pupil's performance in languages. It's nothing to do with the content of the course or the difficulty of the exam. So what is it a reflection of?

It is a true and accurate reflection of the fact that lower grades are given out in languages. It's right there, correctly presented to pupils to help them inform their options choices. And confirmed to them by the reports of exam results from older pupils, siblings and friends.

We can tell the pupils it is no reflection on them. And that the target grade doesn't limit what they can get. Although by then the damage is already done. The targets speak for themselves. 

But if we tell them the truth, we should explain to them that, although no reflection on them, the targets do accurately indicate that they are likely to be given a lower grade than in other subjects.

FFT have reported on the statistics of severe grading in MFL many times over the years. But to see it so starkly in the targets given to pupils drives home the fact that this is not some marginal statistical issue to be debated and tweaked by experts in ivory towers. It's right there in black and white in the targets given to pupils: "You are likely to get a lower grade in languages than in other subjects because that's how many high grades get given out."

So before we do ANYTHING else. Before we have a subject review, or national initiatives, or hubs, or an Ofsted Research Review, or a new GCSE. Before we spend another single pound of tax payers' money. Before we publish any more articles lamenting take up of MFL, or have a debate in the House or a committee. There's one thing we can do. Stop downgrading the performance of our pupils compared to the other subjects we compete with.

If an exam one year happens to be easy, and too many pupils get high marks, they use the grade boundaries to bring it into line. If one year an exam happens to be a bit difficult and not enough pupils get high marks, they use the grade boundaries to bring it into line. Except for modern languages. Where every year they use the grade boundaries to make sure the grades are out of line with other subjects.

And then wring their hands over woe is me, what is to be done.

Not one penny would it cost to put this right.