All teachers of languages have their lessons observed at some time or other. It might be by Ofsted, by a school leader or by a colleague. It's quite common for a teacher of languages to be observed by someone who is not a language teacher or specialist, and who therefore has little or no knowledge of how a language should be taught. Over the years I have heard from and about some of this latter group of language teachers (primary and secondary), who have been criticised because the learners did not write in their books during the lesson. The assumption for some observers appears to be that learners should write in their books in every languages lesson. Are they right?
I was taught and have always followed the rule that writing in books (not the same as all writing, as I will discuss later) should only take place once aural and oral practice has taken place, and the children's knowledge and understanding of the new vocabulary, grammar, phonics and structures are secure.
Over the last two days I have been searching for some kind of official documentation to back up this rule. Unfortunately, there is nothing to be found. However it's certainly worth noting (and thank you to Vincent Everett for pointing this out!) that neither is there any official documentation saying that learners should be writing in books every lesson.
So when should learners be writing, and how should they go about it? Let's have a look at the evidence and the documentation that we do have.
I'm going to start with the documentation from Ofsted, since, like it or not, their inspection framework influences what we do in the classroom and how other professionals observe and judge our lessons. Two weeks ago, Ofsted published Curriculum research review series: languages, "a review of research into factors that can affect the quality of education in languages". Here are two excerpts:
The phrase "over time" is used in both these excerpts. Ofsted have made clear that they are no longer expecting to see progress made in one single lesson, but are looking instead for planning and evidence of progress across a series of lessons. As languages professionals, we know that it takes several lessons to introduce and practise thoroughly the new language before it is formalised in writing. Personally, I can often go three or four lessons without children writing anything in their books.
Dr Michael Wardle, Ofsted's languages lead, said at Language World 2021 that "building blocks in each subject [should be] carefully sequenced and practised until sticky". In other words, activities should be meaningful, in the right place in the sequence for a purpose. They should not be tokenistic, which is how I would consider writing in a book every lesson merely to tick a box. Dr Wardle has also said that the new curriculum and the new Ofsted framework is all about "knowing more and remembering more". We should only plan a writing activity if it is going to help children to know more and remember more at a specific stage in the sequence of learning.
There is further evidence on page 2 of the document Ofsted inspection - clarification for schools:
Ofsted recognises that no work in books does not mean that no learning has taken place, and it's clear that this should be shared by observers of any subject, not just languages.
There are, of course, mentions of writing in the National Curriculum programmes of study for languages. According to the purpose of study for both Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 3, a balance between the spoken word and the written word must be struck:
In the aims of the programme of study, again for both key stages:
In Key Stage 2 subject content, we are required to offer a balance of oracy and literacy:
The word "appropriate" is crucial here - a writing activity must be appropriate to the sequence of learning and not just there because there is an expectation that writing in books must be done.
We can also refer back to the Key Stage 2 Framework for Languages (a sadly technically obsolete but still very useful document, available here) for additional guidance as to the place of writing in the sequence of learning:
The inference here is that children will begin a unit of learning with speaking and listening, which will later be reinforced and further developed by reading and writing. Oracy is seen as a foundation for literacy, in other words it comes first, and children move on to literacy when it is appropriate to do so.
Written work, therefore, is down to the judgement of the teacher, taking into account the age and experience of the children in the class. It does not mention written work being done every lesson. It's always important to consider the "big picture of learning", where you are in the sequence, and whether it is appropriate and meaningful for children to write formally (writing in books can be considered formal writing) at this time.
This further section from the Key Stage 2 Framework brings me to my next point:
On Twitter yesterday I had a response to my question from
Ruth Swailes, an expert in the early years of education:
This alludes to James Britton's quotation from 1983: "Reading and writing float on a sea of talk", and the links to this can be seen clearly in the
national curriculum for English for Key Stage 1 and lower Key Stage 2. We always need to bear in mind how our learners have been taught previously, in primary as well as secondary, and to incorporate elements of those previous experiences in our lessons.
Among the statutory requirements of the Year 1 (age 5-6) English curriculum are:
and in Year 2 (age 6-7), children should be taught to:
This is then extended into lower Key Stage 2 (Year 3 and Year 4, age 7-9), where children should be taught to:
In English, then, children are taught to discuss their compositions orally before recording them with a pencil and paper. This strategy is good practice for language learning, and has also found its way into the primary languages classroom via Pie Corbett's popular
Talk For Writing. I would surmise that there are some English lessons in lower primary where writing in books does not take place, but where there is much discussion and rehearsal of what will be written at a future time.
As
Janet Lloyd says, writing or composition can often be an invisible activity that doesn't actually involve physically scribing:
In the languages classroom we build up the learning gradually via a series of carefully planned activities. We often show the written word early on, to assist us with sound-spelling link and phonics - we want learners' first stored image of the new word to be the correct one, and not one that is affected by English phonics. We explicitly practise spelling via strategies like writing in the sky. We might use sentence builders to drill the new vocabulary and the way in which it fits into our sentences. We might "write" initially using letter cards or word cards, which are less threatening in the early stages and can be easily edited. We also try out our first writing on mini whiteboards, which, again, can be easily edited. Writing in books is often the last step, the summative activity, once everything else is secure, once children are confident with the new language and proficient in its use.
So, what is the answer to my initial question? Should language learners be writing in books every lesson? No. Absolutely not. Writing should take place at an appropriate and carefully planned point in the learning, as a meaningful step towards the objective. If that means going several lessons without writing in books, so be it.
- take photos of children speaking and stick it in their books
- video children or record children speaking, attach it to a QR code and stick the QR code in their books
- stick a sticker in the books on which is recorded the learning that has taken place
- children complete a peer test or check activity, record the result on a post-it, and this is stuck in the book.
