Not teaching MFL to Y2/3

[BeansBeforeBedtime]

I'm leaving my current school - currently HLTA - and understand that next year, the three current Y1 and Y2 classes will be combined to create two Y2/3 classes. As a result, MFL will not be taught to Y3.

It was mentioned very briefly to me by the year group teacher (SLT) in an "I just want to let you know..." way, but at a time when I didn't feel I had a chance to reflect or give an opinion, although I don't think I was being asked for it. A couple of members of staff have since raised it with me, especially as a letter will be going home this week to tell parents that the curriculum is not affected by the classes being combined.

I don't know what to do! Is the Foundation curriculum something that can be more flexible? - I'm not a primary specialist. Who do I speak with if this is a problem? Do I wait until the letter goes out or raise it now? As a parent, I really don't want to create any difficulties in relationships with ex-colleagues, but as an MFL specialist, I am disappointed that they aren't thinking creatively about how to include MFL.

The letter goes out on Thursday, so I need to decide fairly quickly...

Secondary MFL teacher here. This is I'm afraid becoming par for the course. After all the pushing on languages in last ten years with the baccalaureate there's now a real air of they don't matter. It's sad because with the rising tides of xenophobia, this is when they matter most.

In secondaries it's manifesting itself in languages becoming optional at GCSE and also the numbers disapplied at KS3. I know many primaries pay languages lip service at KS2 despite it being an entitlement for 7-14 year olds. Schools get away with it because they're academies. It's wrong but just this morning the guardian had an article about how bad things are getting.

In your case, I'd argue they have an entitlement and some provision needs to be made for the year 3s to have some language input. I'm not sure if the year 2s could do it as well or if you could split the group. Depends on your school as to if it's worth the battle. You'd speak to the head and probably better cleared up before a letter goes out. Academies can, and often do, do what they like but if you aren't an academy you ought to be following the national curriculum.

You’re a HLTA and leaving? Why do people keep raising it with you? Do you lead MFL?

Yes, sorry - HLTA but MFL Lead and qualified teacher. Plus parent of Y3 pupil next year.

There is no statutory programme of study for languages for KS1 and although there is one for KS2 there is nothing in it to say that children must have MFL teaching in every year of KS2. You can feel that the children have a moral entitlement to MFL content in Y3 (and I'd agree with you) but there is nothing to compel the school to offer it.

Year 2 and 3 is a tricky combination and I don't envy the class teachers. The curriculum expectations from 2 to 3 are a big jump. It's likely that the curriculum will end up an extended KS1.

Most primary chools just don't have a teacher with the necessary MFL skills to meaningfully cover languages. Ours does spanish but its incredibly basic - counting to ten, saying hello and goodbye etc.

Year 2 and 3 is a tricky combination and I don't envy the class teachers. The curriculum expectations from 2 to 3 are a big jump. It's likely that the curriculum will end up an extended KS1.

This - if i was a y3 parent I'd be looking to move schools. Is there a reason they can't have one year 2 class and one year 3?

I think it's reasonable for you to speak to the HT in a non-accusatory "I’m disappointed to hear…" sort of way, and ask him/her to explain, but that’s all.

I do appreciate the importance of MFL but I am very dubious about its value in most primary schools. I have observed French lessons in a number of primary schools and seen some truly terrible things. Unless it is taught by a real specialist, children often get taught incorrect pronunciation and sometimes incorrect grammar or spelling because some generalist primary teachers simply know no better themselves. Rightly or wrongly, it is not a high priority.

Not all primary schools choose the same language to teach, so many secondary schools have a terrible time coping with the variety of experiences of the children who arrive in Y7. My sister-in-law, who is a secondary French teacher and a native French speaker, hates the fact that primary French is taught at all. She says that of the children coming into Y7, some have a fairly good level of French, some have some phrases but an appalling accent, some have been taught things that are just incorrect, and some know no French at all because their primary taught Spanish, Mandarin etc. The only way the secondary school French teachers can cope is to start them all again from scratch, which means some children will be bored and the primary MFL was a waste of time.

I know none of that is relevant to your query, though!

It was ever thus. We had fabulous primary French teaching in the 90s from someone with degree level French. I remember being horrified when starting high school and pupils from other primaries could barely say Je m'appelle etc. I honestly learnt next to nothing new in French in the first years of secondary.

This sounds harsh but MFL is the first thing to go in primary schools due to time restrictions and since the teaching is usually dire it doesn’t make any difference.
My counterparts in Spain teach English for an hour a day, it’s taken seriously. Here if we can squeeze in ten minutes every other week we’ve hit the NC requirement. What’s the point! Let’s either teach it well or not at all.
I’m the MFL lead!