Vivienne Griffiths, Carol Tingey, Manuela Thomae Canterbury Christ Church University Paper presented at the BERA conference, September 2011, Institute of Education, London

Outline of talk Introduction to the research Background on Graduate Teacher Programme (GTP) and primary languages Theoretical background - Lave and Wenger (1991) legitimate peripheral participation Methodology - what we will do What we have done so far Initial findings Implications for practice

The research A one-year Escalate-funded research project. The project aims to: investigate primary languages on university-led, employment-based Graduate Teacher Programmes identify what factors affect trainee teachers’ primary language learning, e.g. GTP provider, school context highlight ways in which GTP provision of primary languages can be enhanced.

Why the GTP? UK government policy Department for Education White Paper (2010) : We will provide more opportunities for a larger proportion of trainees to learn on the job by improving and expanding the best of the current school-based routes into teaching – school-centred initial teaching training and the graduate teacher programme. Our strongest schools will take the lead and trainees will be able to develop their skills, learning from our best teachers. Increased opportunities for school-based training will suit career changers, new graduates and existing members of the school workforce wanting to learn on the job and receive a salary as they train. (para. 2.21, p. 23)

Graduate Teacher Programme The GTP is an employment-based route into teaching University-led GTPs often run in parallel to postgraduate routes (PGCE) Little research on how GTP trainee teachers learn and develop a professional identity (Griffiths 2007 & 11) Novice teachers learn alongside experienced teachers Intensive and demanding way into teaching Can be highly effective for mature entrants to teaching, including former teaching assistants or career changers Less suitable for new graduates with little prior experience Depends on quality of schools and teachers involved

Primary languages UK behind rest of Europe in language capabilities Entitlement to language learning in primary schools since 2002; requirement by Languages for All & KS2 Framework for Languages (DfES 2002 & 2005) Vision to increase knowledge about language, language- learning skills and intercultural understanding through focused language teaching and integrated approaches, including community languages (QCA 2007) Huge progress: 1 in 4 primary schools now offer languages Uncertain future of primary languages under current UK government: no commitment to funding since March 2011

Teacher education, GTP and primary languages Driscoll et al (2004) found some good quality training but limited opportunities to observe good language teaching Issues include lack of good language models and specialist teachers; lack of confidence among generalists Tingey (2006) found that the primary GTP languages pilot for language specialists (2004-6): enhanced specialist trainees’ language skills through a European placement enabled them to contribute to language teaching and take language leadership roles in schools But what about generalist trainee teachers? Need to identify level of competence needed to ensure a generalist teacher can teach languages

Theoretical background Lave and Wenger (1991) legitimate peripheral participation is suited to this study because of focus on how: newcomers become part of a community of practice inexperienced learners develop proficiency and move towards full participation in the community novices /apprentices learn from ‘old-timers’ Ties in with work-based learning research: expansive or restricted workplaces (Eraut 2007, Fuller et al. 2007) Importance of context for learning on job

Methodology The research involves: online survey of trainees and early career teachers in 5 GTPs across England about language competence and experience in school interviews with language tutors and GTP leads follow up interviews with 10% sample in-depth case studies of at least 5 NQTs (1 per GTP) from interview sample identification of good materials, training etc

What we have done so far Conducted small pilot study (N=21) Responses to online survey: N=206 from 5 GTPs 160 GTP trainees: 114 f, 44 m; 46 early career teachers: 43 f, 3m Average age 38: oldest 55, youngest 22 Started telephone interviews : 7 so far Currently identifying case study teachers for school visits Difficulties in obtaining access: went to 3 GTP providers in person and then entered responses on to online survey Difficulties in setting up interviews: trainees and teachers are busy people with little time to spare

Initial findings: language competence Diversity and level of language competence: 73% have some knowledge of 2 or more languages 6 people know 5 languages including their 1st 26 languages are known across the sample, including Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, Punjabi, Urdu, Welsh BUT 27% only know English 51% have basic to good knowledge of French but most basic 20% have basic to good knowledge of German but most basic only 4 have language degrees

Languages on GTP 97% have had university session on languages Often join with primary post-graduates for this 3 providers have whole day, 2 have half day 16% have had school sessions on languages (e.g. school inset day) Sessions consist largely of: brief background on primary languages modelling of practical ideas to use in schools useful materials and online resources

Observing language teaching Primary languages observed in schools: 76% - as a separate subject, usually French 50% - integrated approach, e.g. register, counting 20% - cross-curricular approach, e.g. thematic 16% - after school clubs 10% - other, e.g. day trips Predominance of separate subject teaching, mainly French, can be limiting to multi-ethnic schools Integrated and thematic approaches often involve several languages, including community languages Separate teaching is often by visiting specialist

Teaching languages 48% teachers use integrated, 22% specialist approach 54% GTP trainees have taught some languages Most use integrated approaches and are enthusiastic: ‘I use French instruction on a daily basis and I always take the register in a wide range of languages.’ ‘Have taken register myself in French, Russian & Latin’ Found it more difficult if teaching a separate subject: ‘Couldn’t find relevant resources’ ‘French, it went very badly’

Support needed Practical ideas and access to resources Training in and revision of languages Enrichment days and inset More opportunities to observe and teach languages Range of confidence: ‘From observations and subject days, I’m pretty confident I could cope.’ ‘I think specialist teachers are a great idea. I’m happy to teach the basic French I know but don’t feel I’m giving the children the best possible start in languages.’

What we need: implications for practice More training in languages, though time is short Examples of good practice in schools and modelling by expert teachers Detailed insight into levels of language competence needed to be confident, good role model Useful resources and practical ideas Innovative approaches to language teaching: e.g. school where Arabic is main language schools where a wide range of languages are covered.

Thank you very much for listening Your ideas, suggestions and experience will be most welcome

References DfES (2002) Languages for All: Languages for Life, a Strategy for England. London: DfES. DfES (2005) Key Stage 2 Framework for Languages. London: DfES. Driscoll, P., Jones, J. & Macrory, G. (2004) The provision of foreign language learning for pupils at Key Stage 2. Griffiths, V. (2007) Experiences of training on an employment-based route into teaching in England, Journal of In-Service Education, 33(1) Griffiths, V. & Driscoll, P. (2010) ‘Languages, diversity and communities: language learning policies and primary practice in England,’ in C. Govaris & S. Kaldi (eds) Intercultural Education in Europe. Berlin: Waxmann, pp Tingey, C. (2006) Primary languages GTP: balancing generalist and subject specialist training in initial teacher education. Unpublished article.