The English Baccalaureate
1. As a linguist, I accept the basic “direction of travel” indicated by the E-Bac. I have long argued that it is a national disgrace that so many students leave school without a basic competence in another language. This contributes in no small measure to the negative perception of British people abroad. Native speakers in other countries tend to assume I’m Dutch – they are always surprised when I say I am English – “But English people do not speak languages” they say in astonishment. So while I accept the idea that languages are “back in the frame” as a core subject, I am deeply concerned that the structure and implementation of the E-Bac are deeply flawed, and may prove counter-productive in the longer term
2. One of my main concerns about the E-Bac is that it has already become the only measure that matters in some schools, despite being applied, unfairly in my view, retrospectively. How can schools deliver against a measure that did not exist when the cohort of students being measured sat that series of examinations? As a result there have been several spectacular knee-jerk reactions by head teachers and governors across the country, for example
- a school that recalled all its Year 9 options booklets at the beginning of January and completely redesigned the Key Stage 4 curriculum
- schools that are now teaching history or geography to the whole of the current Key Stage 4 cohort in twilight time after school in an attempt to secure GCSE passes in the coming series (this was also suggested for French in one school, but it is physically impossible to do this given the enormous time pressures created by controlled assessment in modern languages GCSE examinations – there simply isn’t the time to fit it all in). These groups contain students who are in Year 11 and who thought that they had dropped history or geography eighteen months ago. What it must be like to teach them I can only imagine.
I am not in the least persuaded by the pronouncements that E-Bac is only one measure and that there are other measures, indeed parents can construct their own league tables. This is either shockingly naïve, or cynically disingenuous. A school rated outstanding by OFSTED, with 82% A*-C (67% with English and maths) which finds itself scoring 6% on the E-Bac measure will only react in one way, and for ministers to argue otherwise displays a woeful and worrying ignorance of the impact of these edicts on the day-to-day running of schools. I do, however, have to suppress a wry smile, however, when I see leading independent schools scoring 0% on this measure because their option systems were not set up to deliver it. And why should they have been? Independent schools were no better informed about this measure than anyone else, and in these schools there may be students appropriately following courses in two or three languages but no humanities, or both humanities and no language. This now has no value.
3. The selection of subjects is open to interpretation, as if these are the only subjects that can provide academic rigour. The omission of RE from the humanities is frankly baffling, despite arguments that as it’s compulsory it doesn’t need to be in the E-Bac. Does this argument also apply to English and maths, then? There is a worrying lack of logic. Leaving that aside, compulsory RE might make it difficult for smaller schools to provide the appropriate range of options to deliver the E-Bac. The lack of reference to information and communications technology is amazing – Latin is apparently more useful than ICT in the 21st century. The seminal presentation “Shift Happens” underlines clearly the explosion in technology over the last 30 years, and makes the point that we are preparing pupils for jobs that don’t yet exist using technologies that haven’t yet been invented to solve problems that we don’t yet know are problems. Where Latin fits in to this picture I have yet to determine. I have no qualms about Latin per se, (I studied it Advanced Level myself) but the “one-size-fits-all” model of the E-Bac does not serve the interests and capabilities of all pupils.
4. The E-Bac sits at odds with promises of greater freedom for curriculum planning. This is another example of muddled thinking, or a lack of awareness of the knock-on effect of introducing a new performance indicator into schools. Either way, this is both dangerous and disturbing. The E-Bac is already dominating planning in both the long and short term. So schools are free to teach what they like, as long as it’s the E-Bac subjects. Will this also apply to free schools and academies, and what will be the approach of OFSTED? Despite protestations of greater curricular freedoms, schools will be shoe-horned into this suite of subjects in order to deliver the measure. It’s curriculum design by league table, which is the worst of all possible scenarios. Furthermore, if we factor in the notion that this curriculum is based on the unsupported whim of one individual, based on anecdote and completely lacking in any objective evidence base, it’s almost Napoleonic in its breathtaking arrogance.
4. It is the modern languages offer that paradoxically I find the most disturbing, having said that I welcome the inclusion of languages in the measure. Yet again, a government, faced with catastrophic collapse in languages learning in Key Stage 4, has come up with the wrong answer to the right question – why do so many pupils abandon languages so readily? The elephant in the room is GCSE in the case of languages. The GCSE examination in a modern language is banal, reductionist and completely lacking in intrinsic interest for the age group. The latest changes have made it even worse, as it has now become 60% a test of memory through controlled assessment. Pupils are not encouraged to speak spontaneously, instead committing chunks of text to memory in the hope that they will be able to regurgitate it on the day. They lack the ability to react to tangential questioning, and rarely do they take the initiative in speaking assessments. And yet the E-Bac is entirely predicated on GCSE. No other accreditation is acceptable. This is a real slap in the face for the enormous amount of development work done to engage pupils in language learning by providing them with different routes. Anything with a vocational flavour is summarily dismissed, as if it doesn’t provide any academic rigour and challenge. The various work-related schemes available are by no means a soft option, and give pupils realistic, life-related contexts within which to work. If the languages component of the E-bac remains as it currently stands, it will be a train wreck waiting to happen. We’ve been here before, with reluctant adolescents coerced into following courses that have not the slightest relevance to their lives or any level of interest. Again, a startling ignorance of the reality of what the GCSE means in practice in Key Stage 4 language lessons. Once more this is either naïve, or is it a Machiavellian strategy to drive an even greater wedge between state and private education? Furthermore, I remain to be convinced that Latin, Ancient Greek and Biblical Hebrew are appropriate solutions to the issues of uptake of languages in secondary schools.
5. I am perplexed by the choice of “Baccalaureate” as the descriptor for this measure. In my experience a Baccalaureate is a qualification offered to 16-19 year olds, consisting of a broad spectrum of subject areas which ensures that students have a rounded experience of post-16 education prior to making their higher education choices. The International Baccalaureate has been adopted successfully by a number of English schools, and is a much more logical model than this arbitrary selection of subjects, which is not even a qualification and offered to the wrong age group. There is no coherence in the E-Bac, as it doesn’t address the 14-19 continuum in the way that the Welsh Baccalaureate does, with a clear progression route through Foundation, Intermediate and Advanced diplomas. The Welsh Baccalaureate combines personal development skills with existing qualifications like A levels, NVQs and GCSEs to make one wider award that is valued by employers and universities. The Welsh Assembly Government introduced the Welsh Baccalaureate to transform learning for young people in Wales. It gives broader experiences than traditional learning programmes, to suit the diverse needs of young people. It can be studied in English or Welsh, or a combination of the two languages. This is a true Baccalaureate, and a much more logical model than the one currently in force in England.
6. In conclusion, I would add that it is difficult to engage in rational debate on this issue, as those on the right automatically assume that any criticism of the E-Bac means that one is opposed to academic rigour and that one is actively engaged in preventing pupils from poorer backgrounds from attending a Russell Group university. In particular, the right wing press have taken gleeful delight in trashing state schools with headlines such as “Schools fail 85% of pupils”. This is not only malicious, but deflects attention from the successes achieved by state schools, sometimes in difficult and challenging circumstances, and is to be deplored. I also find it ironic that having spent all of my professional life arguing for greater opportunities for young people to embrace the learning of other languages I now find myself sometimes criticised for daring to suggest that the way this government is going about re-establishing languages is plainly wrong.
John Connor
Independent Consultant, modern languages, Stourport-on-Severn
Comments