[lg policy] Scotland: Teachers ‘ill-prepared’ for primary language strategy

[Harold Schiffman]

Teachers ‘ill-prepared’ for primary language strategy
[image: Teachers are concerned the Scottish Government's languages strategy
lacks focus and that training is variable for primary teachers]

Teachers are concerned the Scottish Government's languages strategy lacks
focus and that training is variable for primary teachers

14 hrs ago / Andrew Denholm
<http://www.heraldscotland.com/author/profile/76703.Andrew_Denholm/>
<http://www.heraldscotland.com/my/account/emailthispage/>
5 comments
<http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15153661.Teachers____ill_prepared____for_primary_language_strategy/#comments-anchor>

TEACHERS have warned an ambitious strategy to expand language learning in
Scottish primary schools lacks direction.

The Educational Institute of Scotland
<http://www.heraldscotland.com/search/?search=Scotland&topic_id=8820> (EIS)
teaching union said training for school staff was variable and had led to
lower confidence levels in some areas.

The criticism centres on the Scottish Government
<http://www.heraldscotland.com/search/?search=Government&topic_id=8816>’s
flagship 1+2 languages policy under which primary pupils are to be taught
at least two modern languages in addition to their mother tongue, starting
in the first year of schooling and adding a second foreign language no
later than P5.

The government has argued primaries should incorporate as large a pool of
languages as possible, including Portuguese, Punjabi, Urdu and Polish.
ADVERTISING
inRead invented by Teads <http://teads.tv/inread-outstream/>

However, critics say schools and teacher training universities need a much
smaller group of languages to focus on to ensure continuity of study and
expertise among staff.

In a letter to councils, Andrea Bradley, EIS assistant secretary for
education, said information from primary teachers had identified training
that was not of a consistently appropriate standard.

She said members had highlighted a “lack of direction” as to which
languages would be taught at which stage as well as “variable quality of
teachers’ experience of training course delivery”.

She also said there was “inconsistency” in the duration of training courses
and therefore inconsistency in “outcomes for our members in terms of their
levels of confidence to teach foreign languages”.

She added: “The EIS therefore calls upon all local authorities to work with
Scottish Government to address the issues that are raised here, with a view
to ensuring coherence of approach and adequate resourcing in order that the
worthy aims of the policy can be met.”

The concerns were echoed by Gillian Campbell-Thow, chairwoman of the
Scottish Association for Language Teaching.

She said: “We have raised the issues of training before and we agree there
is variable access and quality. A lack of staffing available at authority
level to lead this is a huge issue.

“There are example of authorities sharing training resources, but the needs
of linguistically competent teachers are not being met and there are
instances of teachers with degrees in languages having to attend courses
for total beginners.”

A Scottish Government spokesman said local authorities were making good
progress towards expanding and improving language learning in schools
through 1+2.?

He added: “We have provided £21.2 million directly to local authorities
over the last three years to help them implement 1+2, recognising the
importance of teacher professional development within this.

“We welcome increased collaboration and strategic planning both within and
across local authority areas as a key means of establishing sustainable,
high-quality provision over time.”

The 1+2 policy was introduced against a backdrop of a historic decline in
the number of pupils taking modern language Higher exams which has put some
such as Russian and German at risk.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15153661.Teachers____ill_prepared____for_primary_language_strategy/


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its
members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or
sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal, and to write
directly to the original sender of any offensive message.  A copy of this
may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman, Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20170314/20c2825c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list