Skip to main content

Do you have to be such a slave to the syllabus?

If you are a language teacher working in a school you almost certainly have to follow a syllabus, such as, in England and Wales, the GCSE or A-level. Because of a real or perceived lack of time and an understandable sense of duty to the students, you probably stick fairly closely to the programme for fear of missing anything out.

The only problem with this approach is that you might spend too long on boring topics and deprive yourself of doing subjects or tasks you and the students would enjoy more. For instance, when I taught AQA AS-level one of the "sub-topics" was sport and I didn't feel it generated that much communication so I would pay lip service to it by doing a text on drug taking in sport and a discussion sheet to cover key vocabulary and likely exam oral questions. I ignored all the material in the bland text book we had available. This left time to look at different issues, show a movie, read a short story, do a task-based activity or play some useful games.

Similarly, if I came across boring or hard to teach sections of the KS3 and KS4 text books I would happily ignore them and do my own thing. It's about having a sense of what students will be motivated by, not about following the syllabus at all cost.

The thing is, much of the most useful high-frequency and salient vocabulary crosses topic areas so you should not feel you have to teach unstimulating material when you see it. You can choose to be more independent. What's more, events almost force you to move away from the set programme - it could be an election, a terrorist attack, a major scientific discovery, a sporting event or a natural disaster.

An AQA Chief Examiner once gave some good advice at a meeting I attended. Just imagine, he said, that A-level is general studies through the medium of the target language. Be prepared to do your own thing. The same should hold for the new A-levels from 2016. Not every topic you teach need to be rooted in the target language culture or the set themes. Be yourself, have confidence in your own judgment and teach what stimulates you and your classes.


- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics