What does a Book Look look like in MFL and what should it reflect?

In the world of MFL, book looks can sometimes feel like a tick-box exercise or a stressful scrutiny. Too often - and this can be the case for other subjects, they risk becoming about neat presentation, perfect colour-coding or aesthetically pleasing layouts rather than genuine evidence of learning. But a neat and beautifully organised book is not always a reflection of knowledge learned, retained or crucially, applied in communication.

This might sound a little controversial, because in MFL, the ultimate aim is communication – and language is spoken. Many essential elements of language learning (spontaneous speaking, listening strategies, pronunciation, confidence in interaction) will never be fully captured in an exercise book. That said, if we as subject leaders are tasked with quality assuring teaching and learning practice, book looks still have a role to play. The key is to know what we can and cannot reasonably expect to see.

What’s the purpose of a Book Look in MFL?

Unlike subjects such as English or History, where extended writing or detailed annotation are common, MFL books often show a balance of input and output: vocabulary building, grammar modelling, translation practice, retrieval and preparation for speaking. I believe, that a good book look in MFL should therefore aim to:

• Provide insight into curriculum sequencing and how pupils are progressing through it.

• Show evidence of interleaving and retrieval practice over time.

• Reflect feedback and pupil response to it.

• Demonstrate student understanding of key concepts (grammar, structures, vocabulary).

• Identify consistency across classes and year groups.

  
  

What should an effective Book Look look for?

This might look different from school to school / Trust to Trust, depending on expectations and policies that you follow in your setting.

Here are some key questions I use when guiding or conducting MFL book (or workbooklet) looks:

1. Curriculum coherence

• Can I see the curriculum journey? Is there logical sequencing from lesson to lesson?

• Is there a clear balance of: vocabulary, grammar and phonics?

• Are tasks building towards meaningful language use (e.g. dialogues, short written pieces, scaffolded translations)?

2. Progress over time

• Is there progression in complexity (e.g. moving from simple present to using multiple tenses)?

• Do tasks show a shift from guided to more independent work?

• Are high-frequency words and structures being recycled and retrieved?

3. Feedback and student response

• Is feedback regular, specific and actionable, in line with department feedback policy?

• Are students responding to feedback (correcting errors, re-drafting, re-practising)?

• Does feedback target key misconceptions (e.g. verb endings, word order, gender agreements)?

4. Quality and quantity of work

• Are students being given sufficient opportunities to produce language?

• Is the standard of work appropriate to the stage of learning?

• Does the amount of written output match the intended learning objectives?

5. Inclusion of listening and speaking evidence

• Can I see evidence of speaking preparation, such as practice dialogues or scripts to guide?

• Are listening activities linked to taught structures and vocabulary?

• Is there space allocated for phonics modelling or transcript work? This could be annotated sentence builders. Students are allowed to annotate read aloud tasks for their GCSE speaking exam so getting them used to this practice from KS3 is certainly valuable and not a waste of time.

  
  

What doesn’t need to be in MFL books?

Let’s be realistic and subject-specific. In MFL, not everything should be in a book. Here's what I don’t expect to see:

• Learning objectives copied out for the sake of it. I believe this is wasting of our teaching time.

• Explanations of grammar rules copied off the board or copied out - this could be a printed handout, so time is not wasted.

• Books filled mainly with stuck-in photocopied sheets rather than student-produced work.

• Art projects, poster work, or design-focused tasks with minimal language output.

• Pages of endless writing and grammar drills – if this dominates, where is the speaking practice? (I explored how to spot this balance in my February post on effective Learning Walks).

  
  

What can we prove through Book Looks?

An effective book look in MFL should provide evidence for:

• Compliance with expectations around the appearance of MFL exercise books. Are students taking pride in their work? While this may seem less important, it sets the tone for classroom culture and communicates clear expectations for how we work together.

• Curriculum intent and implementation in action: how the long-term plan plays out in day-to-day learning.

• Student engagement with key structures and themes.

• Consistency and equity: Are all students getting access to high-quality MFL teaching across classes?

• Learning, not just teaching: is there evidence that pupils are internalising and applying language, not just completing tasks?

  
  

Final thoughts

A book look is just one piece of the puzzle! It must sit alongside lesson drop ins, assessment outcomes, student voice, and teacher dialogue. In MFL, a well-conducted book look  can give insight into curriculum impact, retrieval practice and students’ developing confidence in language learning – but it cannot and should not attempt to capture everything, especially the spoken, interactive heart of our subject.

When I lead MFL book looks, I always ask:

“Is this book a reflection of a well-thought-out, progressive and purposeful curriculum that is helping students become better language learners and communicators?”

If the answer is yes, even if the pages aren’t Instagram-perfect, I know we’re on the right track.

I recognise that we often have to follow expectations set by our Trust or school policy, which may not always align with what we believe is most impactful for our subject. In these situations, it’s important to work collaboratively with senior leaders and provide evidence to support our professional judgment about what is purposeful and effective for our language learners.