Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
DOI 10.1515/9781501503085-004
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 51
ing uptake. Therefore, this chapter will be divided into a conceptual and a data
section, addressing the following questions:
1. a. How does current UK language education policy relate to i) rationales for teaching
languages ii) UK language needs?
b. Which rationales underlie current UK language education policies? Would these
rationales favour widening access and comprehensive language learning?
2. What are the effects of UK current language education policy on widening access and
social equality in language learning
a. at Secondary school level?
b. at Higher Education level?
c. for the uptake of Latin/Classics in particular?
Part I will first briefly recount actual language policies and subsequent changes
in language uptake. The following section will appraise the rationales for teach-
ing languages, and their implications for a socially inclusive, or, conversely,
elitist agenda for languages, asking what rationales (if any) can be inferred. In
Part II, data is presented i) relating language uptake to school type, including the
uptake of Latin in schools, and ii) relating university uptake of languages, and
Classics, to measures of widening participation. The conclusion forecasts further
implications of current policy and socio-demographic and calls for for a need to
reconsider widening rationales of teaching languages.
Part I
How does current UK language education policy
relate to i) rationales for teaching languages,
and ii) UK language needs?
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
52 Ursula Lanvers
languages are also compulsory at the upper Primary school (age 7–11) level. Unless
otherwise stated, the following section on language uptake and policy reports on
England, with references to differences in the other nations where appropriate.
Language learning in England was confined to a minority until 1977, when
only 10 % of pupils studied a language up to GCE O – level (precursors of GCSE,
nationally standardized and accredited tests in a variety of subjects at age 16+)
(Hawkins 1981). With the move to comprehensive education and a National Cur-
riculum for all in the 1980s, compulsory languages up to age 16 were introduced in
1988. In 2004, in a general loosening of the National Curriculum, languages were
made optional again from age 14+ onwards. Uptake of GCSE languages dropped
to 40 % in 2011 (Tinsley and Han, 2012), with subsequent further year-on-year
reductions. For 2014, the percentage of GCSE German pupils was at the level of
those of 1985, and that of French as low as 1965 (McLelland & Smith, 2014). The
teaching of Classics, historically associated with both elitist private education
and the rationale of accessing “high culture” (Mitchell, 2003), has been in steady
decline since the second half of the 20th century. However, Latin has seen a small
revival in English state schools since the 2000s, as a result of a significant Gov-
ernment investment. As Latin seems to somewhat buck the trend of language
learning decline generally, and more specifically that in state schools, the case of
Latin will be considered specifically, at both Secondary and Tertiary level, in the
data section below.
In sum, language teaching is now only compulsory at upper primary (Key
Stage 2: age 7–11, KS2), and lower secondary Key Stage 3 (age 11–14, KS3) school
level in England. Individual schools can choose to make languages compulsory
up to age 16, and a minority of state schools do – currently, only 18 % of state, com-
pared to 76 % of private schools, have a policy of compulsory languages up to age
16 (Conversation, 2015) – but systemic conditions militate against this: schools”
achievements are measured in “league tables” compiled of overall school GCSE
results. As good grades in a language have been persistently 0.5 times harder to
achieve than in other GCSE subjects (Coleman, 2013), removing the requirement
to take a language GCSE can significantly improve a schools league table position.
Generally, the quest to improve education standards in the 2000s has seen
an increasing variety of school types working outside the National Curriculum
(“Academies” and “Free Schools”) (Morris, 2015). This move towards self-govern-
ing schools was introduced to improve school provision in areas of social depri-
vation (Higham, 2014). So far, however, especially concerning Academies, these
aims are unrealized largely because these schools are free to choose their admis-
sions, unlike comprehensive schools, whose cohorts typically represent a wider
social mix (Gorard, 2014). Both scholarly articles (Foreman-Peck 2007; Lanvers &
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 53
– a continuous decline in the uptake of language learning over the last decade (for all
modern languages except Spanish);
– a detrimental effect of the language skills gap on the economy;
– a plethora of initiatives instigated to address the decline (e.g. the Government-funded
university consortium “Routes into Languages”, the All Party Parliamentary Group on
Modern Languages, British Academy).
Functional use ⇔ Personal enrichment
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
54 Ursula Lanvers
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 55
tions into the state of language learning the last two decades. Specifically, the
following two reports address the issue of language needs: Languages: State of
the Nation: demand and supply of language skills in the UK (Tinsley, 2013) and
Languages for the Future: which languages the UK needs and why (Tinsley &
Board, 2013). The following two investigations review language teaching provi-
sion: Languages Review (2007) and Nuffield Languages Inquiry (Languages: the
next generation, 2000). The reports strongly focus on the functional rationale of
professional (business and trade) language use, not only to the detriment of per-
sonal enrichment rationales, but also overlooking functional benefits of a more
collective nature, such as fostering social cohesion in modern multicultural and
multilingual Britain, or European integration. Similarly, the recent Languages for
the Future report (British Council, 2013) concludes that the UK needs to develop
its citizens” language competencies by offering a wider range of languages to be
learned to a higher competency level “in order to reap the economic and cultural
benefits available to those who have these skills” (p. 3, emphasis by author); a
wording that reveals how language skills -and reaping the benefits that come
with them- are not considered for all.
The Achilles heel of the “trade and business” rationale comes in the form
of Global English, referred to in the Languages for the Future (Tinsley & Board,
2013), as balancing factors, negating the need for language skills if the UK trades
with countries with high English proficiency, notably Germany, the Netherlands
and other Northern European countries. We shall return to the implications of
this argument in the conclusion.
The Languages Review (2007) and Nufflield Language Inquiry (2000) refer to
investigations into the teaching of languages refer to wider sets of rationales. For
instance, the Languages Review (2007: 17) suggests to differentiate between per-
sonal, vocational and specialist rationales for language learning at KS4 and calls
for a “National Languages strategy [providing] a long term framework which is
still in development at all three Key Stages based on a new rationale for language
learning in an English speaking society”. This report urges to provide more stim-
ulating topics for discussions “about subjects that are of concern and interest to
young people” (p.39). Similarly, the Nuffield Languages Inquiry (2000: 7), despite
its overall emphasis on economic rationales for languages, specifically refers to
the societal contribution of modern languages (MFL) to foster intercultural toler-
ance and social cohesion.
To summarize, the Governmental rationales for introducing compulsory lan-
guages up to GCSE placed emphasis on functional use (DES, 1987), aligned with
broader educational principles that underpinned the comprehensive education
movement from 1960s onwards, and the communicative approach in language
teaching. Since then, the Government abolished compulsory languages up to age
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
56 Ursula Lanvers
16 in 2004, and, within the space of one year, introduced compulsory Primary
languages, underlining the lack of direction or clear rationales for language edu-
cation.
The fate of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) (English Baccaluareate, 2015)
might exemplify the continuing lack of direction: the EBacc, first applied in 2010,
designed to measure good achievement in five key subjects at GCSE, initially did
include a compulsory language, which was replaced, a year later, with the option
of including two sciences instead of a language. More recently, the Government
re-introduced a language as compulsory part of the EBacc qualification (the Con-
versation 2015).
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 57
fluency and accuracy. For instance, the new KS2 curriculum focuses on practical
communication. Regarding Classics, it adds: “If an ancient language is chosen,
the focus will be to provide a linguistic foundation for reading comprehension
and an appreciation of classical civilisation.” (New Curriculum, 2013).
For KS3, the changes include ending curriculum levels – in an effort to move
from assessment-driven teaching-, an emphasis on translation, transliteration
and writing in English generally, and a de-emphasis on cultural knowledge. The
new GCSE in MFL for KS4 (Association for Language Learning, 2015) puts greater
emphasis on studying literary texts, translation, English skills, as well as the cul-
tures of the target languages. Similarly, for A – level, the need to engage criti-
cally with literature has been introduced, and, for A – level Classics, new content
focuses on literature, history and culture.
Although the above changes do not easily align with any one specific ration-
ale for languages, two aspects stand out, namely the emphasis on using lan-
guages to teach English literacy skills, in particular at lower levels, and a greater
emphasis on literature and accuracy, at KS4 and A – level. The absence of a lan-
guage specific rationale is striking: languages are considered an opportunity to
push English skills, deemed important for employability, for all students. The
second emphasis relates to rationales traditionally reserved for the educated
elite and targets upper school levels only, where language learning has become
optional. Part II will show in detail the pervasion of inequality in language learn-
ing at these levels.
Part II
What is the effect of UK current language
education policy on widening access and social
equality in language learning?
a. at Secondary school level
b. at higher education level
c. for the uptake of Classics/Latin in particular?
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
58 Ursula Lanvers
Secondary schools
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 59
Latin
In recent years, Latin has shown a somewhat surprising revival, since 2006 in UK
state schools, helped by a £10 million Government investment. Therefore, this
section will report on the social divide in learning this language first, in order to
then debate possible Government motives for fostering Latin.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
60 Ursula Lanvers
Independent schools are much more likely to teach Latin than state schools
(60.5 % versus 12.9 %, CSCP, 2015). In 2014, half of all English schools teach-
ing Latin were state selective (Grammar) (CSCP, 2015). There is little difference
between Grammar schools (59.8 %) and private schools (60.5 %) teaching Latin
but only 9.1 % in non-selective secondary state schools offer Latin (all data: CSCP,
2008). Latin is taught up to A – level in 8 % of state versus 48 % of independent
schools, i.e. 6x more. (Tinsley & Board, 2013:104).
In the context of an increasing elitist divide for modern languages provision,
the state school increase of Latin seems welcome; indeed, justifying the invest-
ment into the subject, the then Education Secretary Michael Gove interprets the
Latin surge as a sign of “breaking down the “Berlin Wall” between state and
private schools” (Independent, 2015). This statement ignores the fact that only
selective state schools, mostly Grammar schools, with well above average SES
intake (Strand, Deary & Smith, 2006), are responsible for the apparent “breaking
down of the wall”. Nonetheless, the Latin surge in state schools offers politicians
an opportunity to appeal to both traditionalists (in terms of the subject) and pro-
gressive educators at once.
In line with the attempts to re – popularize the learning of Latin, language
pedagogues (Classics at Oxford, 2014) are at pains to move from rationales tradi-
tionally perceived as elitist, and instead refer to the development of literacy skills
and cognitive advantages (CSCP, 2008 & 2015; Lister, 2009). Notwithstanding
efforts by both Classicists and politicians to give the subject this “image change”,
Latin remains firmly rooted in those school attracting middle class intakes, as
above figures have shown.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 61
Table 1: Acceptances by subject group and educational establishment (UK domiciled only, aged
19 and under, 2013)
all subjects 83,905 45,118 12,933 34,184 65,912 83,294 n/a 369,473
Note: Further education and 6 form colleges are (typically state) schools specializing in
th
education age 16+to 18+, including academic subject A-level provision and vocational courses.
Academy, Grammar: see footnote 1. Data from http://www.ucas.com/sites/default/files/ucas-
2013-end-of-cycle-report.pdfhttp://www.ucas.com/sites/default/files/ucas-2013-end-of-cy-
cle-report.pdf
http://www.ucas.com/sites/default/files/ucas-2013-end-of-cycle-report.pdf
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
62 Ursula Lanvers
jects. Thus, entries into languages are predominantly from independent, followed
by selective state schools (Academies, Grammars). Regarding Classics and related
subjects, 15 % of applicants came from independent schools, 28 % from Acade-
mies, and 23 % from other state schools. In other words: while the cohort of uni-
versity applicants to study European languages largely mirrors the social divide
found at secondary level, applicants for Classics from selective state schools now
outperform those from independent schools in UCAS submissions. Thus, while a
representative (for all UCAS applicants) percentage of state educated pupils now
apply to study Classics, they almost exclusively come from selective state schools.
Table II lists the UK’s largest university modern languages departments
(defined by HESA principal subject codes), research ranking data (www.topuni-
versities.com/university-rankings), and widening participation data (percentage
of students from state schools admitted to that university, percentage of students
from lower socioeconomic backgrounds); as the latter data is not available broken
down by department, whole university percentages are given.
1 From http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings
2 2012/13 HESA data. From https://www.hesa.ac.uk/pis/urg
3 The Open University does not feature in UCAS data, hence widening participation data is not
available. It is therefore omitted from further analysis
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 63
Tab. 2 (continued)
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
64 Ursula Lanvers
Tab. 2 (continued)
Legend:
Other than Leeds Beckett, all modern languages departments are located in
institutions with at least one (mostly two) lower widening participation figures
than the UK average; Oxford and Cambridge, but also Durham, Edinburgh and
Kings College London perform poorest in both widening participation records,
and highest in research ranking. The table shows that the larger and more repu-
table their language department, the less likely the university is to have students
from poorer SES backgrounds, but more likely it is to have students from private
schools. Language students show lower social diversity than those studying other
subjects: In 2012/13, the percentage of university students from disadvantaged
social backgrounds studying languages was 25 % compared to 32 % across all
subjects (HESA, 2014). The gender gap observed at school level also intensifies
at university level; only 33 % of language graduates are male (CILT, 2010). The
overall picture regarding social division for modern language HE students is that
of a reinforcement of the comprehensive versus selective (both state and inde-
pendent school) divide.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 65
Classics
As HESA records on Classics students (as defined by HESA student records) are
merged with those studying Linguistics and other disciplines, comparative tables
for Classics alone are unavailable. Figures on the uptake of Classics do not suggest
that the subject might aid to counter the decline in languages in HE overall. As for
Table II, Table III lists the UK’s largest university Classics departments (defined
by HESA Principal subject codes), combined with institutional widening partici-
pation and research ranking data.
Top 10 UK ranked University Classics Departments (by 2014 research assessment score)
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
66 Ursula Lanvers
Tab. 3 (continued)
* Classics defined as the following HESA principal subject codes: Latin studies, Classical Greek
studies, Classical studies.
Legend:
Table III shows an even more skewed intake of Classics students than for modern
languages (Table II), regarding two measures for widening participation: seven
of the ten universities with largest UK Classics departments take over 20 % more
than the UK average of privately educated students, and all universities with large
Classics departments have lower than average representation of students from
socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Together with the evidence from
Table II, the findings show that while the percentage of Classics students entering
HE from state schools may look representative at first sight, it hides two important
differentiators. By virtue of skewed provision of Latin in state schools (see above),
students studying Classics come almost exclusively from selective state schools;
furthermore, the more reputable the university, and larger the Classics depart-
ment, the lower the participation from poorer SES at that university.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 67
Conclusion
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
68 Ursula Lanvers
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 69
SES background
valuing education
for personal
enrichment
school language
HE degree choice learning
less focused on opportunities
economic return (selective &
independent)
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
70 Ursula Lanvers
References
Allen, R. & A. Vignoles. 2007. What should an index of school segregation measure? Oxford
Review of Education 33(5). 643–668.
Association for Language Learning. 2015. New GCSE in Modern Foreign Languages. http://
www.all-languages.org.uk/news/news_list/reformed_gcses_in_languages_consultation_
launched. (accessed 06 July 2015).
Bawden, A. 2013. Modern foreign language degrees axed. The Guardian, 8 October 2013.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/08/modern-foreign-language-
degrees-axed (10 February 2015).
Board, K. & T. Tinsley. 2014. Language Trends 2013/14. The state of language learning
in primary and secondary schools in England. http://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/
britishcouncil.uk2/files/language-trends-survey-2014.pdf. (accessed 10 February 2015).
Broady, E. 2006. Languages and politics: a political football or a tool for empowerment?
Language Learning Journal 33(1). 3–7.
British Chambers of Commerce. 2012. Exporting is good for Britain – Skills. www.
britishchambers.org.uk/policy-maker/policy-reports-and-publications/exporting-is-good-
for-britain-skills.html#.UMDH-9vKdAM]. (accessed 10 February 2015).
Campbell, C. & C. McLean. 2002. Ethnic identities, social capital and health inequalities:
factors shaping African-Caribbean participation in local community networks in the UK.
Social Science & Medicine 55(4). 643–657.
Carr, J. & A. Pauwels. 2006. Boys and foreign language learning: Real boys don’t do languages.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chowdry, H., C. Crawford, L. Dearden, A. Goodman & A. Vignoles. 2013. Widening participation
in higher education: Analysis using linked administrative data. Journal of the Royal
Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 176(2). 431–457.
CILT. 2010. HE Language Students in the UK 2002–03 to 2008–09. Annual Analysis of HESA
Data.
Coleman, J. 2013. Are modern language degrees on the road to extinction? Paper presented to
the All Party Parliamentary Group on Languages, December 2013. http://www.ucml.ac.uk/
languages-education/he-languages. (accessed 31 January 2014).
Classics at Oxford. 2014. http://www.classics.ox.ac.uk/newsreader2/items/latin-state-schools.
html. (accessed 10 February 2015).
Conversation, The. 2 July 2015. Now students are expected to study a language until age 16, the
work to rebuild begins again. https://theconversation.com/now-students-are-expected-to-
study-a-language-until-age-16-the-work-to-rebuild-begins-43808. (accessed 04 July 2015).
CSCP. 2008. A survey of access to Latin in UK secondary schools. Cambridge: University of
Cambridge School Classics Project.
CSCP. 2015. Access to KS4 Latin qualification. http://www.cambridgescp.com/Upage.
php?p=ta^rsch^ks4quals. (accessed10 February 2015).
Demont-Heinrich, C. 2007. Globalisation, language and the tongue-tied American: A textual
analysis of American discourse on the hegemony of English. Journal of Communication
Inquiry 31. 98– 117.
DES. 1987. Modern Foreign Languages to 16. http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/
hmi-curricmatters/modforlang.html#2com/evidenceforeducation/PDF/Language%20
Trends%20Report.pdf. (accessed 15 March 2012).
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 71
Department for Education. (DfE.) 2011. Expert panel recommendations on the National
Curriculum. www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/
DFE-00135-2011. (accessed 25 March 2013).
English Baccalaureate. 2015. EBacc https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-
baccalaureate-ebacc/english-baccalaureate-ebacc. (accessed 06 July 2015).
European Commission. 2012. Europeans and their languages. Special Eurobarometer 386 /
Wave EB77.
Evans, M. 2007. The languages review in England: foreign language planning in the absence of
an overarching policy. Language Learning Journal 35(2). 301–303.
Foreman-Peck, J. 2007. Costing Babel: The contribution of language skills to exporting
and productivity in the UK. Cardiff: Welsh Institute for Research in Economics and
Development, Cardiff Business School.
Gallagher-Brett, A., H. Doughty & H. McGuinness. 2014. Social capital and modern language
initiatives in times of policy uncertainty. Scottish Languages Review 27. 39–52.
Garner, R. 2004. Languages not compulsory in two-thirds of state schools. The Independent,
5 November 2004. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/
languages-not-compulsory-in-twothirds-of-state-schools-6158607.html. (accessed 25
March 2013).
Garner, R. 2015. ‘Prep’ on school premises and an increase to Latin and Greek
teaching in secondary school: The Gove revolution continues. The Independent,
3 February 2015. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/schools/
prep-on-school-premises-and-an-increase-to-latin-and-greek-teaching-in-secondary-
school-the-gove-revolution-continues-9105080.html. (accessed 10 February 2015).
Gill, T. 2012. Provision of GCSE subjects. 2011. Statistics Report Series (43). http://prd.
cambridgeassessment.org.uk/Images/165763-provision-of-gcse-subjects-2011.pdf.
(accessed 10 February 2015).
Gorard, S. 2014. The link between academies in England, pupil outcomes and local patterns
of socio-economic segregation between schools. Research Papers in Education 29(3).
268–284.
Hawkins, E. 1981. Modern languages in the curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Hickman, M., H. Crowley & N. Mai. 2008. Immigration and social cohesion in the UK. York:
Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Higham, R. 2014. Free schools in the Big Society: The motivations, aims and demography of
free school proposers. Journal of Education Policy 29(1). 122–139.
Kramsch, C. 2005. Post-9/11: Foreign languages between knowledge and power. Applied
Linguistics 26(4). 545–567.
Lane, B. 2013. Doubling language students not enough, says University of Canberra. The
Australian, 4 June 2013. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/languages-
unviable-at-canberra-uni/story-e6frgcjx -1226656466307 (accessed 10 February 2015).
Lanvers, U. & J. A. Coleman. 2013. The UK language learning crisis in the public media: a critical
analysis. The Language Learning Journal, (ahead-of-print), 1–23.
Lanvers, U. 2016. Teaching languages ‘to instill the love of learning’: School management,
teacher and student voices in four UK schools. In C. Ehland, I. Mindt, & M.Tönnies (eds.),
Anglistentag Proceedings 2015 Paderborn. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier, 319–329.
Lightbown, P.M. 2000. Anniversary article. Classroom SLA research and second language
teaching. Applied Linguistics 21(4). 431–462.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
72 Ursula Lanvers
Lister, B. 2009. Latin in transition. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 8(2). 191–200.
LoBianco, J. (with Y. Slaughter) 2009. Second languages and Australian schooling. ACER Press
Australian Council for Educational Research. http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.
cgi?article=1007andcontext=aer. (accessed 03 September 2013)
Machin, S. & A. Vignoles. 2006. Education Policy in the UK. CEE DP 57. Centre for the Economics
of Education. London School of Economics and Political Science.
Malpass, D. 2014. The decline in uptake of A-level modern foreign languages: Literature review.
In Joint Council for Qualifications: A Review of Modern Foreign Languages at A-level. http://
www.jcq.org.uk/media-centre/news-releases/mfl-review-press-notice. (accessed 06 July
2015).
Martin, D. Investing in their children’s future: UK parents ‘biggest spenders in Europe’. The
Daily Mail, 1 August 2011. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2020951/UK-parents-
biggest-spenders-private-schooling-Europe.html. (accessed 25 March 2013).
McDowell, N. 2004. Levelling language: The politics of literacy in the English radical tradition,
1640–1830. Critical Quarterly 46(2). 39–62.
McLelland, N. 2013. a series of 7 PowerPoint display posters on the broad topic of history
of teaching and learning modern languages. http://historyofmfl.weebly.com/
uploads/1/0/4/5/10456380/the_history_of_teaching_and_learning_modern_
languages_1.pdf. (accessed 06 July 2015).
McLelland, N. & R.C. Smith. 2014. Towards a history of modern foreign language teaching and
learning (MFLTL). http://translatingcultures.org.uk/awards/research-networking-awards/
towards-a-history-of-modern-foreign-language-teaching-and-learning-mfltl/. (accessed 10
February 2015).
McPake, J. & I. Sachdev. 2008. Community languages in higher education: Towards realising
the potential. www.routesintolanguages.ac.uk/community/index. (accessed 12 February
2015)
Mitchell, R. 2000. Anniversary article. Applied linguistics and evidence-based classroom
practice: the case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics 21(3).
281–303.
Mitchell, R. 2003. Rationales for foreign language education in the 21st century. In S. Sarangi &
T. van Leeuwen (eds.), Applied linguistics and communities of practice, 114–131. London:
Continuum.
Morris, R. 2015. Free schools and disadvantaged intakes. British Educational Research Journal.
DOI: 10.1002/berj.3168.
National Curriculum in England (2013). Language programmes of study https://www.gov.
uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-languages-progammes-
of-study. (accessed 06 July 2015).
Nuffield Languages Inquiry, The. 2000. Languages: the next generation. http://www.
nuffieldfoundation.org/nuffield-languages-inquiry-and-nuffield-languages-programme.
(accessed 06 July 2015).
Pachler, N. 2002. Foreign language learning in England in the 21st century. The Language
Learning Journal 25(1). 4–7.
Pachler, N. 2007. Choices in language education: Principles and policies. Cambridge Journal of
Education 37(1). 1–15.
Payne, J. 2000. The unbearable lightness of skill: The changing meaning of skill in UK policy
discourses and some implications for education and training. Journal of Education Policy
15(3). 353–369.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58
Elitism in language learning in the UK 73
Pennycook, A. 1989. The concept of method, interested knowledge, and the politics of language
teaching. TESOL Quarterly 23(4). 589–618.
Ricento, T. 2000. Historical and theoretical perspectives in language policy and planning.
Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(2). 196–213.
Ryan, C. & L. Sibieta. 2010. Private schooling in the UK and Australia. Institute for Fiscal
Studies.
Stables, A. 2009. Should the debate about compulsory schooling be reopened? A fully semiotic
perspective. Philosophy of Education Archive. 153–162.
Strand, S., I. Deary & J. Smith. 2006. Sex differences in cognitive abilities test scores: A UK
national picture. British Journal of Educational Psychology 76(3). 463–480.
Swarbrick, A. (ed.). 2002. Teaching modern languages. London: Routledge.
Tinsley, T. 2013. Demand and supply of language skills in the UK. British Academy. http://www.
britac.ac.uk/policy/State_of_the_Nation_2013.cfm. (accessed 02 February 2015).
Tinsley, T. & K. Board. 2013. Languages for the future: which languages the UK needs
most and why. http://www.bing.com/search?q=Languages+for+the+Future&src=IE-
SearchBox&FORM=IE8SRC]. (accessed 08 February 2015).
Tinsley, T. & Y. Han. 2012. Language learning in secondary schools in England. http://www.cfbt.
com/evidenceforeducation/PDF/Language%20Trends%20Report.pdf. (accessed 15 March,
2012).
UCAS. 2013. https://www.ucas.com/ucas/pdf. (accessed 15 March 2012).
UCML Language Teaching Survey Report. 2012. http://www.ucml.ac.uk/sites/default/files/
pages/160/UCML%20language%20survey%20report%202014.pdf. (accessed 15 March
2012).
Wiley, T.G. 2007. The foreign language “crisis” in the United States: are heritage and
community languages the remedy? Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 4(2/3). 179–205.
Angemeldet | fernandoramallo@uvigo.es
Heruntergeladen am | 29.10.17 08:58