Evaluation of the Key Stage 2 Language Learning Pathfinders

More documents

Recommendations

Info

primary. But inevitably there would come a time when there was repetition of what had beendone in primary and then it would be interesting to measure the pupils’ attitudes, perhaps bymeans of a questionnaire with the Year 7 pupils, to elicit how they were finding languages atthe beginning of secondary school.In one Pathfinder where the SLC led the teaching of languages, starting early moved thewhole programme down a stage. Their aim was to get pupils to the end of KS3 at the end ofyear 8, start GCSE in Year 9, complete end of Year 10. They felt this would open up otheropportunities and they might end up with better GCSE results. At the end of KS2 pupilswould receive certificates to say they had reached the end of a unit and would bring theirportfolios to secondary school. Secondary staff would know what level they had beenworking at. This would allow for acceleration groups as well as support groups.Clearly language learning in the primary phase will have an impact on the secondarycurriculum and secondary schools need to plan carefully to adjust practice in KS3 andespecially in Year 7. It is particularly important that the two curricula for the top of KS2 andearly KS3 are aligned, both in terms of content and teaching style. This is especially so inYear 6 and Year 7 where a coherent approach and mutual understanding are crucial toprogression.One concern was entitlement at KS4. One French teacher commented: ‘When teachers inthe secondary school are saying, ‘They can drop their language,’ you think, Is it right to bestarting it earlier? I find this (optional status at KS4) disheartening.’ (primary teacher)99
3.5. Sustainability and Replicability3.5.1. SummaryIn most local Pathfinder authorities, there was a strong expectation that primary languageswould be sustained at least at the level achieved during the Pathfinder funding.Schools already providing a language learning experience to all pupils throughout KS2 werevery much in the minority. Provision in many schools depended on the location of staff withsome foreign language skill or with the willingness to get involved. Threats to sustainabilityand growth were often associated with staff movement either within the school or away fromthe school. Of those schools without languages already part of the curriculum through KS2,few had made plans for extending their current provision. Where local authorities hadresponsibility for deploying visiting teachers or assistants, provision was more likely to beplanned in a way that supported continuity of learning.While some primary teachers had risen admirably to the challenge of teaching languages,there was a significant number who did not yet appear ready to take on full responsibility forits delivery, relying heavily on visiting teachers. Without significantly more training, linguisticand pedagogical, it seems unlikely that they will be ready to ‘go it alone’ in three or fouryears’ time.Pupil interviews provided much evidence of positive attitudes towards their languagelearning but, occasionally, there were also signs that the enthusiasm and initial sense ofprogress were tempered with some concerns about the repetitive nature of their lessons andrecognition of increasing difficulties ahead, especially by Year 6 pupils nearing the end oftheir primary education.3.5.2. Recommendations• Primary headteachers need more information about the value of foreign languagelearning.• Similarly, a concerted campaign needs to take place targeting secondaryheadteachers so that the status of primary languages can be raised and steps can betaken to take account of the impact of primary provision on secondary schools.• There is need for better dissemination of good practice within and across localauthorities, especially involving headteachers, in order to support the integration oflanguages in the curriculum.100
Page 1 and 2:
RESEARCHEvaluation of the Key Stage
Page 3 and 4:
Contents1. Executive summary 32. In
Page 5 and 6:
practice and factors that might imp
Page 7 and 8:
of the experience. Individual feedb
Page 9 and 10:
• The analysis revealed the need
Page 11 and 12:
• Are pupils with SEN and gifted
Page 13 and 14:
Both respondent characteristics and
Page 15 and 16:
Interviews were recorded and a 25%
Page 17 and 18:
2.2. Advantages and disadvantages o
Page 19 and 20:
2.2.2. Languages Delivery by the Pr
Page 21 and 22:
2.2.4. Languages Delivery through a
Page 23 and 24:
Analysing these models, conditions
Page 25 and 26:
• Schools should be encouraged to
Page 27 and 28:
however, instances of schools where
Page 29 and 30:
3.1.3.4. Time allocated to language
Page 31 and 32:
‘French would not be taught now a
Page 33 and 34:
• beneficial for the subject’s
Page 35 and 36:
Many teachers remained very depende
Page 37 and 38:
Table 2: Integration and Communicat
Page 39 and 40:
‘We’ve written a letter and dra
Page 41 and 42:
‘it makes you realise that if acc
Page 43 and 44:
Table 5: Languages and Learning - Q
Page 45 and 46:
3.1.5. Pupils - Learning and Attitu
Page 47 and 48:
• useful for travelling abroad -
Page 49 and 50: • ‘Comments at the end to help
Page 51 and 52: ‘At times they find it difficult
Page 53 and 54: teacher who knew our level.’ In t
Page 55 and 56: In most Pathfinders, however, there
Page 57 and 58: 3.2.2. Recommendations• Primary t
Page 59 and 60: Effective staffing is essential to
Page 61 and 62: Martin and Mitchell 1993). In anoth
Page 63 and 64: Nineteen respondents had specialise
Page 65 and 66: As revealed in questionnaire 1, in
Page 67 and 68: However, some teachers were pleasan
Page 69 and 70: However, there were frequent instan
Page 71 and 72: • team-teaching on the ground•
Page 73 and 74: involved external bodies in the del
Page 75 and 76: Generally, there was a sense that s
Page 77 and 78: • Methods of recording progressio
Page 79 and 80: However, there were challenges in a
Page 81 and 82: In one Pathfinder one school cluste
Page 83 and 84: One example of assessment included
Page 85 and 86: trying to evaluate, prior to each u
Page 87 and 88: Case study: exemplar of a well deve
Page 89 and 90: In some Pathfinder schools effectiv
Page 91 and 92: ‘Only a very small number (6/7) g
Page 93 and 94: • transfer of more sensitive info
Page 95 and 96: ‘…I know the Year 7 teachers we
Page 97 and 98: 3.4.5. Links to KS3 Framework/Natio
Page 99: situation was especially difficult
Page 103 and 104: develop ‘effective and replicable
Page 105 and 106: 3.5.4. Leadership and managementThe
Page 107 and 108: on one aspect of delivery. This was
Page 109 and 110: 3.5.5. Staff and staff expertiseIn
Page 111 and 112: ‘Usually it is impromptu: 10 or 1
Page 113 and 114: ‘The reason why I have decided to
Page 115 and 116: c) there is obvious progression fro
Page 117 and 118: to be constrained. Methodologies ge
Page 119 and 120: Time spent on the project was gathe
Page 121 and 122: Estimating development costs of res
Page 123 and 124: There were significant differences
Page 125 and 126: on staff costs, with the impact on
Page 127 and 128: 5. CONCLUSIONSOverall, this evaluat
Page 129 and 130: 5.2. Teacher Competence• Primary
Page 131 and 132: o for training secondary teachers i
Page 133 and 134: ReferencesBell, E with Cox, K. (199
Page 135 and 136: Case Study 2Case study 2 is a compa
Page 137 and 138: channelled through this school. At
Page 139 and 140: Case Study 5This LA is a large auth
Page 141 and 142: Case Study 7Case study 7 is a joint
Page 143: Copies of this publication can be o
show all

Evaluation of the Key Stage 2 Language Learning Pathfinders

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?