to think this government hasn't got a clue about education- why should all children be made to take MFL at GCSE?

[LuluJakey1]

What is it with the ill-thought out education ideas this government has? Why should every child take a GCSE in MFL? It is not something many children enjoy or feel has relevance to them.

Why should a school not be able to be outstanding if it does not make all students take a GCSE in MFL?

why is it being suggested that it should be compulsory to study a MFL and history or a MFL and geography but not compulsory to study history and geography?

I get that there is an argument for studying a MFL, but I don't get why it's so special compared to other subjects to the point of it being compulsory.

One of my son's GCSE was Food Tech. Why shouldn't that me compulsory?

The problem as I see it, is that not enough people are choosing MFL GCSEs. But there is a huge jump from not enough taking one to 100% taking one.

Working for international companies/institutions is virtually impossible unless you speak at least a second language.

DH works for an intl company, has to go to HQ in Europe every 3 months), and he doesn't speak no furrin. (Slinks off...)

The problem with primary MFL teaching in the UK is that the majority of primary school teachers aren't qualified to teach them in any way. It's an issue here in France, but at least anyone qualified as a French primary school teacher will have an absolute minimum of 8 years of study of one MFL and 5 years of a second.

If you insisted on UK primary school teaching candidates having a MFL qualification your recruitment pool would shrink dramatically.

Dh got offered a very senior role with a French company based in the UK - his ability to speak French didn't even get mentioned!
Vocab and grammar are important but learning to communicate with real people should be the goal not lists of words which was how we were taught French - we learned little by the way of conversational French. Language sticks and is more fun when you use it. We need more immersion.

"I don't think children should have to take a MFL. My DS is bright, at a super selective grammar school, but is hopeless at MFL . If he had to take one , he'd struggle to pass it"

No he wouldn't. Any NT child at a super selective grammar school would be able to pass a GCSE in a MFL. They really aren't hard for children working at that level.

But he might struggle to get an A in GCSE and kids who are that bright want a string of A's - there's been plenty of tears shed over a B.

Actually i think geography and history should be compulsory! Re is a pointless gcse to me.

I think a lot of subjects should be studied until 16 but students should choose which they take an actual gcse in.

I was born in Holland, where English is compulsory no matter what level of secondary school exam you end up taking. There is no choice, you MUST take English at the very least. This is why the Dutch are good at languages - it's part of our culture. It needs to become part of UK culture, or the UK will be left behind as the world becomes more globalised. Thinking everyone will always speak English is utterly complacent.

it was all grammer and vocab - dull, dull, dull!

Yep, that is how you learn a foreign language - you actually have to do some hard work. One of the (very few) good things the Coalition did was to really enforce the teaching of English grammas in primary school. Guess what? If you know and understand grammar in your own language, it isn't that hard to learn it in another.

Children with SEN and children who are not that academic manage to learn one MFL in Holland and in other countries. There's no reason why this isn't possible in the UK. There would however need to be changes: teaching to start at primary level for one MFL at least, teachers to be qualified in the language they are teaching, and yes, the introduction of solid grammar and vocabulary teaching. My DD2 is already getting this at her secondary, it can be done. And it should be done.

I have read the whole thread with interest as my DD goes into year 7 in September and whilst we are in the UK she is not in the standard school system. Throughout primary from nursery she has studied a language Carousel of French, Spanish, Italian and Mandarin. She can hold a reasonable conversation in all four languages as emphasis has been on speaking with specialist teachers and additional work with native speakers. For year 7 she has to choose one MFL as Latin and Ancient Greek are added in year 7, they then pick back up another MFL in year 8.
We have had a fair amount of hand wringing over the choice as she enjoys them all, oh and she is dyslexic with terrible processing speed.
There needs to be a total change in the way languages are introduced at primary to make a real difference in the UK.
Fir anyone who is interested she will continue Mandarin in year 7 and probably then Spanish from year 8.

freakonomics.com/2014/03/06/is-learning-a-foreign-language-really-worth-it-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

I think all kids should, mind you I think all adults should as not speaking the language or making an effort to of the counties you visit during your life is extremely rude and is one of the reasons we are, in my opinion, second class citizens in Europe.

I do not believe that children with sen as severe as my son's (cannot speak and have little understanding of their own language) manage to learn a mfl in other countries.

I agree MFL should be taught, from Foundation stage up.

But I also think there should be one main foreign language all children are taught...DS did some French at primary school, then was taught Spanish for three years at Secondary. As a result he's not good at either.

I wouldn't want to be the one to say which language it should be though.

I can see how children at "superseletives" may struggle with languages while being brilliant at Maths.

My own DCs school gives a language aptitude test to see if students should study a second language in Y8, rather than just offering it to those in the top sets.

Personally I think learning a language is something anyone is capable of and everyone can benefit from. It expands and exercises your mind, broadens your horizons, and is never a wasted effort, even if you don't "use" it very much. Apparently it is one the most valuable things you can do in old age to keep your mind active.

As with all things you are trying to learn - it takes some enthusiasm, and some imagination. I think as well you really benefit from being in very small groups where you can't hide and have to take part. And then it comes down to practice and confidence building.

Whether there is any value in taking an exam in it and getting a qualification is a whole other argument.

FWIW - I did latin (3 years), German (1 yr) and French (5yrs and O level) at school - a good school where some kids were really good at languages (mainly because they had been to France every summer since they were tiny). In comparison to them, I learnt I was bad at languages. In fact, I am quite good at languages. After many years of self teaching I am now fluent for reading at least) in French and Spanish, and pretty good at German.

Just to add my opinion - all children should do a language at GCSE. Sadly it looks like that my ds who's currently in year 7 will ONLY do one language due to a change of policy by the school. Which of course has a knock-on effect for A level and university if you wanted to do two languages (or more).

I think universities are going to have to offer a lot more beginners' courses, but it's sad because the younger you start learning the easier it is.

I don't believe that a bright boy at a super-selective grammar school is hopeless at MFL. He might dislike the teaching style and GCSE is a bit rubbish but it's the best we've got currently in schools and is a means to an end. Once you get to A level you make rapid progress.

I also believe languages should be compulsory in the interests of a balanced curriculum. I didn't like science and wasn't that great at it, but I had to do one science GCSE which I accepted as part of a balanced curriculum. So those who prefer science should accept MFL and humanities in the same way. I support the ebacc but my son's school has decided not to do that either.

Children with severe Sen sometimes love MFL. It all depends on the individual. Learning to emphasise with foriegners is a useful skill for anyone. Realising that learning a language is hard makes people understand how hard it must be for foreigners in our own land who cannot speak English.

I am not against children being made to study an MFL but its unrealistic to expect every child to achieve a GCSE. We need qualifications for children with low intelligence who cannot access GCSE French/ German.

". I support the ebacc but my son's school has decided not to do that either"

What do you mean? Most top set kids do the EBacc automatically- unless like many at my dd's school they choose to do RE as their humanity.........

Languages and sciences should not be mutually exclusive - certainly they aren't in other countries. If you go to any science research lab you will come across loads of non-native english speakers - they all successfully mastered their own language, as well as English, and often another language.

As a working scientist you often get to work with other nationalities and travel - any amount of the other language would be a bonus and never a hindrance.

I have found that MFL learning can be really useful to children with SEN - and not in the ways you'd expect.

In what other lessons can students be taught, really slowly, how to tell the time again? The order of the months? Phonics? Basic maths? How to guess what is meant by context, or gesticulation, or tome of voice?

A lot of what we do when teaching a MFL is similar to EYFS stuff. I have taught countless teenagers to (for eg.) tell the time. They missed it when they were 4/5 and no-one thought to go over it again.

*tone

With many students not encountering MFL until 11, then being able to.drop them at 14, it sends a loud message that they are unimportant for a rounded education (which I completely disagree with)

Primary school is the ideal time to learn a language as younger children are uninhibited about using strange words and risking sounding daft. Starting at secondary school is missing the best opportunity.

Once you've learned one MFL, it's much easier to pick up another, particularly from understanding grammatical structures.

I don't like the way the government is putting schools into a position where they have to push students into subjects that they are unenthused by. I'm in a subject that supposedly benefits from this policy, however the reality is that my class is hindered by underachieving, demotivated students that don't want to be there.

A healthy attitude to MFL is where students choose to be there after years of getting a solid background in it. Not pushed in by policy.

Mrsmook the problem was more that my dcs had been introduced to French at primary and hated it. I was very surprised and pleased when they declared a love for French in Year 7....learning at primary did nothing but put them off!

I applaud the idea of MFL at primary level - but it needs to be taught be specialists and not by the general primary teachers - who are not usual fluent themselves, and have enough other stuff to do. I am generally in favour of more specialists in primary rather than the generalist approach we take now.

My DS did 2 years of French in yrs 3 & 4 and learnt next to nothing. He would have done 2 years of spanish in yrs 5 & 6 but we left the school at the end of yer 4. In both cases the teachers we barely more than a step or two ahead of the kids themselves -albeit quite enthusiastic - they really didn't seem to achieve very much sadly.

I generally take the approach that the earlier you learn it the easier it is with a language - or at least the earlier you hear it spoken. It would have been the one time I would have been very happy for them to be watching lots of videos - eg Little Red Tractor in German (not found it in French), or others that they are familiar with are great - they pick up words without realising it, but still have enough understanding from the cartoon to enjoy it even with knowing all the words. But as far as I know they never did anything like that.