Unfair grading in Languages, where above a grade 4 pupils get on average a nearly a whole grade lower than in other subjects, is obviously a contributor to the narrative of "failure" that has seen a stream of government initiatives to supposedly solve a problem that largely miss their target. Is unfair grading also a pernicious obstacle to real progress being made in teaching languages? What do I mean by that?
Well there's a striking example in how I am writing my department plan this year.
Normally the exams analysis in Languages is taken up with explaining away apparently poor results. We explain how the results are skewed by unfair grading, the strange effect of native speakers on the curve, the effect of home languages GCSEs on Progress 8, the problem of tiering decisions, the spiky profile where pupils do well in some papers but not others, and the small group effect where one pupil's grades have a big overall impact. (I remember the year my Y11 class of less than 10 pupils was joined by one higher prior attainment disadvantaged male pupil from another school who sat the speaking exam but didn't turn up to the other three. The statistics looked terrible.)
And because our exams analysis is taken up with explaining away seemingly poor performance, protecting ourselves from criticism, then our department plan for the following year is also set up the same way. We focus on things we know we can achieve. We build the plan around things that we are already doing and things we do well. We have already given up on the idea that we can actually do anything to make a difference, because the odds are stacked against us.
Contrast that to this year. Off the back of a very good set of results, our exam report can actually look at things we did that made a difference. Our use of a range of assessments to guage performance, give useful information to pupils, and to make tiering decisions. Our analysis of the requirements of the exam to tweak our curriculum and to share with pupils the specific approaches that would make them successful when they lacked confidence, which inspired them to make the effort rather than give up.
But the real difference is in the department plan.
We can set about it in a completely different way. Instead of setting ourselves targets that we can guarantee we are going to be able to prove we have done, we can target things we know are issues. Starting from a position of strength and confidence means we don't sweep things under the carpet convinced that there's nothing we can do about them.
One example is pupil voice surveys. Normally when we do pupil voice surveys, what we are really doing is seeking evidence in validation of our work. This survey (click the link) was to show that pupils appreciate our approach to participation in lessons. A very important fact, and something we work hard on. But this year, off the back of strong results, we are doing something very different. We are doing a pupil voice survey on something where we are expecting much more mixed results. To what extent do pupils feel we give them good feedback on their work in KS3? We think we have well thought out and well timed feedback. But is this reflected in a coherent pupil experience that they feel really advances their learning? I suspect the pupils' responses will not be clear that this is the case. So we are setting out to get pupil voice for genuine purposes of finding out if our message is getting through, and if what we are doing is working. A genuine survey, not one for the purposes of providing evidence of what a good job we are doing.
And then we can take action in the light of what pupils tell us. We can either make our approach more explicit, more consistent and more prominent to show pupils the benefit and purpose of what we are doing. Or we can change what we do to come into line with what pupils tell us we are missing.
That will be one aspect of our department plan this year. Another element will be homework at KS4 and how it can evolve into independent exam preparation. And inclusion in Year 9, so that all pupils have the full curriculum even as motivation threatens to wane after the options process. We are looking at the things that we could easily dismiss as outside our control or risk making us look bad.
We are seeking out and highlighting things that we are going to struggle with. This is such a contrast to the normal package of explaining away and protecting ourselves. Unfair grading puts languages on the defensive, hit by a narrative of "failure". Take that away and we are actually empowered to make a difference.
