Search Results

This post was prompted by a post by Ian Astbury on LinkedIn . I often find myself reflecting on what truly transforms a language lesson from “just another class” into an experience that sticks. Over nearly twenty years in the classroom - teaching, observing and mentoring - I’ve noticed that the lessons students remember aren’t necessarily the ones that look perfect on paper. They’re the lessons where students are actively using the language, taking risks and seeing it as a tool, not just a subject. A great MFL lesson isn’t about ticking objectives or completing exercises; it’s about creating moments where language comes alive . It’s about building confidence, encouraging curiosity, and connecting words and structures to meaningful communication. It’s when the classroom feels a little chaotic, a little unpredictable, and a lot alive because students are discovering how to make the language their own. In this post, I’ll explore the elements that make language teaching effective, practical ways to bring them to life, and the subtle shifts that separate “good” lessons from truly great ones. I have to agree with Ian's reflections. So below I am looking at some of the points he raises in his post and more. 1. Students Must Speak More Than the Teacher One of the most common traps in language teaching is indeed letting the teacher dominate the target language . Even the most fluent French, Spanish, or German sounds beautiful, but if students are silent, learning isn’t happening. The hallmark of a great lesson is when learners are producing the language themselves, making mistakes, correcting each other, and gradually gaining fluency. To achieve this, structured opportunities for speaking are essential. Practical examples: Classroom routines Speed-dating conversations:  Students rotate partners every few minutes, asking and answering questions on familiar topics like hobbies, weekend plans, or school life. Each interaction is short but intensive, giving everyone a chance to speak repeatedly building spontaneity and fluency. Information gap activities:  One student has information that their partner needs. For example, student A has a timetable, student B has a list of questions. They must communicate to complete the task. This mirrors real-life use and encourages authentic dialogue. The teacher’s role is to facilitate, scaffold, and model tricky vocabulary or phrases, not to dominate . When students’ voices fill the room, learning is happening organically. 2. Real Communication Outweighs Worksheet Practice Worksheets, exercises, and drills are not without value, especially for consolidation. However, language becomes memorable when it’s used with purpose . Repetition alone is insufficient; repetition with meaning  makes language stick. Practical examples: Role-plays with stakes:  Students act out a scenario such as ordering food at a café, booking a hotel, or asking for directions. The unpredictability of real interaction forces them to think on their feet and use structures meaningfully. Problem-solving tasks:   Students might plan a weekend trip in TL, negotiate who will do what, or decide on an itinerary. They are compelled to use vocabulary and grammar in context, making the learning relevant and memorable. “Find someone who…” activities:  Instead of merely reciting sentences, students search for peers who meet certain criteria (e.g., “Find someone who has visited Germany”), creating genuine communication. The key is purpose. When language is connected to a task or problem, students are far more engaged. 3. Grammar Needs Clarity, Not Mystery Grammar often divides opinion in MFL teaching. Some believe students should “discover” patterns themselves, while others advocate explicit instruction. In my experience, clarity always wins and a careful balance between the implicit and explicit is needed. We teach in many different context and very diverse classes, so our approach should be also adapted to the students in front of us. My higher attaining students definitely want to know the WHY . Students learn best when rules are explained concisely and immediately applied . This doesn’t mean dumping endless tables of verb endings; it means short, clear explanations , illustrated in context , followed by purposeful practice to ensure transfer and application , so grammar doesn't exist in isolation. Practical examples: Mini-grammar focus:  A five-minute explanation of the difference between passé composé  and imparfait  in French, followed by a short storytelling exercise using both tenses. Embedded grammar practice:  Students describe images or sequences of events in Spanish using new verb forms, integrating grammar directly into meaningful communication. Lexico-grammar - see my previous post on this here and here . The goal is automaticity. Grammar becomes a tool, not a barrier. 4. Vocabulary and Grammar Should Be Interwoven Too often, lessons treat vocabulary, grammar, reading, writing, listening, and speaking as separate strands. But fluency grows when these elements are integrated. Students retain words and structures more effectively when they encounter them in multiple contexts . Practical examples: Dictogloss:  The teacher reads a short text, students take notes, then reconstruct it in small groups. This simultaneously reinforces vocabulary, grammar, and listening skills. Thematic projects:  For example, a “My Ideal City” project in German where students research, write, and present. They learn vocabulary for places, use adjectives, practice prepositions, and speak about their city. Integration encourages students to see language as a system , not isolated parts, which strengthens fluency and recall. 5. Culture and Creativity Are Essential Language is inseparable from culture. Lessons that ignore context risk producing students who can recite grammar and vocabulary but cannot communicate meaningfully in real life. Embedding culture increases motivation, retention, and engagement . Practical examples: Authentic resources:   Newspaper articles, song lyrics, podcasts, and YouTube clips provide exposure to natural language and real-life context. Analysing a French rap song or a Spanish travel vlog, for instance, can spark discussions about culture, identity, and language use. The caveat here is to make sure the authentic resource is accessible , in other words, adapted in a way, students can understand and use it. Creative projects:  Students produce short videos, podcasts, or blog posts in the target language about a festival, tradition, or local event. They apply language skills in authentic, creative ways. Cultural comparisons:   Lessons can explore differences and similarities between countries. For example, comparing school routines in Germany and the UK encourages discussion in the target language while broadening cultural awareness. My students love listening to the cultural differences and the discussions we have (not necessarily in TL) are always very rich. Culture is not an optional “add-on” ; it gives language meaning and makes learning memorable. 6. Judging Lesson Quality I have to agree with Ian here too, I also rarely assess lesson quality based on objectives on the board. Instead, I look for impact and evidence of genuine engagement. Indicators of a strong lesson include: Students speaking more and working harder than the teacher. Communication is meaningful - not just repetition or recitation of pre-learnt chunks. Structures and vocabulary appear naturally in students’ output. Students can still use the language after the lesson and in consecutive lessons. Risk-taking is encouraged: learners experiment with new words or phrases, even imperfectly. They learn from mistakes and have the 'I can' attitude. All four skills - listening, speaking, reading, writing - are integrated meaningfully (however, this doesn't mean they have to listen to a recording every lesson for example). Cultural content is integrated and encountered, it is not just about content coverage. Students are engaged and experiencing success. As he says, the best lessons often feel slightly messy. Mistakes are frequent, and the teacher doesn’t control every moment (this can be difficult for many of us, not controlling everything) - but that is precisely where learning flourishes. 7. Designing Lessons with Purpose To translate these principles into practice, I always consider the following framework for lesson planning: Set a communicative goal:   I start with a clear purpose, e.g., “Students will plan a weekend trip in Spain and present it to a partner.” Activate prior knowledge:   I begin with a quick retrieval practice task, using a quiz. Introduce new language clearly:  I highlight key vocabulary and structures in context. Move from guided and deliberate practice:  I begin with structured exercises, then progress to independent or paired practice. Monitor and feedback:   I circulate, listen, prompt, and correct constructively. Embed creativity and culture:  I try to include tasks that also require personal choice or cultural awareness. Conclude with reflection:  I have students demonstrate their learning or summarise key points. This framework helps ensure lessons are engaging, meaningful, and sustainable for GCSE preparation and beyond. Please, note that this is a framework for a sequence of lessons not just one lesson. 8. The Heart of a Great MFL Lesson A great MFL lesson is student-centred, purposeful , and connected to real-world communication. It balances input, practice, and creativity; it integrates grammar, vocabulary, and skills; it normalises mistakes as learning opportunities. Most importantly, it leaves learners feeling capable, curious, and confident in another language. I’ve witnessed lessons where students could speak continuously, create their own content, and laugh at their mistakes - and the learning stuck. These lessons may not look perfectly tidy, but they are effective in ways that exam scores and objectives alone cannot capture. As GCSE season approaches, remember: a truly great lesson isn’t about “covering the syllabus” - it’s about helping students use the language in ways that matter . I’d love to hear from other language teachers: How do you make your lessons purposeful? What strategies help students speak spontaneously? How do you balance explicit grammar teaching with communicative freedom? Language learning is too valuable to be passive. Great lessons make it active, creative and alive.

This blog post was written by Céline Courenq. About the author of the post: Céline Courenq is Head of World Languages (MFL and Home Languages) at a British international school in Bangkok, leading language pathways across KS3–IB She previously taught in comprehensive secondary schools in the UK, which continues to shape her commitment to inclusive practice and strong foundations. She has led the implementation of the EPI model across KS3 and KS4, is EPI accredited, and is also an IB examiner. Celine has organised EPI/Dr Conti-focused workshops through FOBISIA and has welcomed colleagues from other international schools for collaborative curriculum and practice-sharing. Her interests include curriculum coherence, cumulative retrieval, and the link between KS3 foundations and external assessment outcomes. In an inclusive, high-performing international context, language learning can look fine on the surface. Students are articulate, confident, and often multilingual. They participate readily and generally cope well with demanding tasks. Yet in our context, despite strong academic ambition, (I)GCSE outcomes began to reveal something we could no longer ignore: students were reaching Key Stage 4 with gaps in sentence-level control, grammatical accuracy, and spontaneous fluency . When confidence masks fragility Our student body includes a wide range of learner profiles. Behaviour is excellent, motivation is generally high, and verbal reasoning skills are often strong. Many students have experience of more than one language. But confidence is not the same thing as control . Students could infer meaning from context, sound fluent in familiar routines, and produce work that looked “successful” in the moment, yet lacked automatisation of high-frequency language . Over time, that created a gap between what they understood and what they could reliably produce , especially under pressure. What finally made it undeniable was Year 10: students arriving with shaky control of verbs you simply can’t do without. We kept seeing the same thing, students who had apparently been “fine” for years, but who could not manipulate core verbs such as avoir with confidence. That isn’t a KS4 problem but a foundation issue that has been allowed to sit quietly for too long. Rethinking what KS3 is for KS3 had drifted into “exposure and enjoyment”: lots of content, lots of reassurance, not enough cumulative security. Curriculum time was at times irregular, contact was sometimes non-consecutive, and there was a natural tendency to prioritise confidence over precision, particularly in contexts where everyone wants students to feel good about learning. Confidence built on insecure language doesn’t survive exam conditions. Without systematic recycling, retrieval, and sentence-level practice, early misconceptions fossilise. Students move forward with a sense of fluency that is, in reality, fragile. Once (I)GCSE introduces clearer success criteria and external benchmarking, those weaknesses can’t be smoothed over. What changed in practice At curriculum level, we have adopted an evidence-informed instructional framework (EPI) , moving from topic-led schemes to skill- and structure-driven sequencing. Each unit is built around a small number of core sentence patterns and grammatical features , selected for frequency and long-term utility . These are treated as non-negotiables : students are expected to retrieve them fluently before moving on. At both KS3 and KS4, sentence builders and knowledge organisers became central as a way of making the taught language concrete and retrievable . Examination board specifications provide vocabulary and grammar lists, but those lists are reference points, not an instructional plan. In practice, we introduced vocabulary through carefully selected sentence-level constructions , chosen for frequency, transferability, and grammatical leverage, and revisited them systematically over time. Rather than presenting lexis as isolated lists, we embedded vocabulary in chunks that students could immediately manipulate. Knowledge organisers stabilised this core language across units and year groups, so learning didn’t “reset” after an end-of-unit test. The goal was not to cover more content but to make fewer structures usable under pressure. Pronunciation , previously an inconsistent area in French, also had to be tackled properly . We embedded a structured phonics approach from KS3 onwards, because if students can’t reliably map sound to spelling (and vice versa), everything else becomes harder: listening, reading, and the confidence to speak. Assessment practices shifted too. Instead of relying mainly on summative judgements, we built in frequent low-stakes checks and formative checkpoints to make learning visible early. That meant gaps were identified while they were still fixable, rather than being discovered at the point where they start damaging KS4 outcomes. PHOTO 1-Sentence builders used to secure a small set of high-frequency constructions PHOTO 2 -extract from a Knowledge Organiser for Year 7 French Coherence across the key stage: non-negotiables and cumulative retrieval To sustain consistency across classes and year groups, each year group worked with a small set of clearly defined non-negotiables . These articulated the core language and structures that all students were expected to retrieve fluently by the end of the year. Importantly, these were not treated as one-off endpoints. They were deliberately revisited and retrieved across subsequent units and year groups . That shifted progression from linear “coverage” to cumulative security . Language introduced in Year 7 did not disappear once assessed. It stayed active through systematic retrieval in Year 8 and beyond. Teachers retained autonomy over pacing and classroom decision-making, but the non-negotiables provided a shared reference point that reduced drift, made gaps visible early, and ensured continuity. A KS3–KS4 causality example The clearest evidence for the impact of earlier curriculum decisions showed up not in headline grades, but in the types of errors students made under exam pressure. Patterns that looked like “KS4 issues” were often the predictable outcome of gaps in automatisation at KS3, especially where French structures don’t map neatly onto English. A simple but revealing example is the French perfect tense. Historically, many students defaulted to an English-transfer model-treating the past as either a direct translation ( je jouer ) or as a single “have + verb” pattern, without securely controlling auxiliary choice, past participle formation, and agreement. Under pressure, this produced predictable errors such as je jouer instead of j’ai joué, j’ai allé / je allé instead of je suis allé(e) , and inconsistent participle endings even when students could recognise the correct forms receptively. By securing the underlying constructions earlier, high-frequency avoir verbs in the perfect tense, the limited set of verbs that take être , and the agreement logic, students became markedly more reliable in both accuracy and fluency . The difference was not increased exam practice in KS4, but earlier automatisation of structures that do not map neatly onto English. This kind of error pattern is not a knowledge gap so much as a control gap and exam conditions are designed to expose control. In other words, underperformance was rarely caused by a lack of ambition or vocabulary, but by a lack of control of high-frequency structures when scaffolds fell away. Success criteria snippet showing focus on completion and complexity/range Impact and emerging evidence The change has been visible in students' written work, in speaking , and in the kind of mistakes that have all but disappeared . Notably, the impact has been most immediately visible among students who previously relied heavily on confidence, memory, or teacher scaffolding to “get by”. As expectations became clearer and retrieval routines more consistent, these learners showed particularly strong gains in accuracy and independence, suggesting that the approach reduced hidden barriers and made success more attainable for a wider range of students. More broadly, students show greater consistency in written work, increased confidence in spontaneous speaking, and a clearer grasp of the structures they are using. Importantly, they can explain why a sentence works, not simply whether it “sounds right”. (I)GCSE outcomes over the past two years have reflected this increased security, with more consistent performance across cohorts . Many variables influence results, but the alignment between KS3 foundations and KS4 demands has become markedly stronger . Equally significant has been the impact on teacher practice . Shared frameworks and clear non-negotiables improved coherence across the department, reduced variability, and strengthened collective accountability without undermining professional judgement. Reflections for similar contexts In high-performing international settings, it is tempting to assume language learning will take care of itself. Our experience suggests the opposite. Precisely because students are articulate and confident, gaps can remain hidden until external assessment makes demands explicit. By prioritising depth over breadth, and automatisation over exposure, we have been able to support learners more effectively while maintaining high expectations . This approach is not about lowering demands or over-structuring learning. It is about recognising the cognitive realities of language acquisition and designing a curriculum that respect them. In doing so, we have begun to reposition language learning as a serious academic discipline, rather than a subject that relies on confidence and presentation. Looking ahead Our next steps involve further embedding sentence builders and knowledge organisers at KS4, refining assessment alignment, and continuing to use evidence to inform intervention. Although the examples in this piece are drawn from French, we are now adapting the same principles across other languages in our department. The approach transfers, but the points of difficulty differ by language: French demands systematic attention to sound–spelling relationships; German often exposes gaps through case and word order; and languages such as Japanese and Mandarin introduce additional challenges around script, phonology, and how learners segment and retrieve language. For that reason, the methodology is being applied consistently, while the linguistic focus is tailored. When KS3 is treated as intellectually rigorous and structurally sound, KS4 outcomes follow. EPI provided the framework to make that connection explicit and, most importantly, effective.

From a GCSE examiner’s point of view, I believe most students do not underperform in writing because they lack ideas, motivation or effort. Much more often, they underperform because they have been taught a version of GCSE writing that does not reflect how writing is actually assessed. Year after year, the same issues surface in exam papers. Students rely heavily on scaffolds , they misunderstand what “complex language” really means and accuracy at sentence level is sacrificed in the pursuit of ambition . These problems are not separate; they are deeply interconnected. Unless we address them together, we risk systematically undermining students’ chances of success. Why students underperform in GCSE writing When I mark GCSE writing, I rarely think, “This student just doesn’t know enough vocabulary.”  Far more often, I think, “This student knows things, but cannot - what I call - control them.” In real exam scripts, this lack of control shows itself very clearly. Verb endings collapse under pressure, tenses are mixed unintentionally, high-frequency structures become inaccurate and errors multiply as the response goes on. A typical example might look like this: Ich habe letztes Jahr nach Spanien gefahren und ich habe viel Spaß und ich esse Paella jeden Tag. (Last year I travelled to Spain [wrong auxilliary verb] and I have lots of fun and I eat paella every day.) The student is clearly ambitious. There is a time marker, an attempt at the perfect tense, an opinion and some added detail. However, the message is undermined by a lack of grammatical control (accuracy) : bin gefahren , hatte viel Spaß , and consistent tense use are all missing. The intended meaning would require: Ich bin letztes Jahr nach Spanien gefahren und hatte viel Spaß und habe jeden Tag Paella gegessen. (Last year I travelled to Spain, had lots of fun and ate paella every day.) Examiners don't reward marks for spotting ambition. They reward marks for successful communication and accurate language . Ambition only helps when it is supported by control. What I believe works better is a narrower but deeper approach. Students need fewer structures, practised more often and in more contexts. Ten sentences that students can manipulate accurately will always outperform fifty phrases they half-remember under exam pressure of any GCSE exam board. The danger of over-scaffolding in GCSE preparation We all understand why we scaffold. Writing is cognitively demanding and as teachers we want students to feel successful . However, I believe over-scaffolding creates a false sense of security. When students always write with sentence starters, model paragraphs, sentence builders / substitution tables and pre-written chunks, they are rarely required to make real linguistic decisions for themselves. The thinking has already been done. Then the exam arrives. The scaffold disappears, cognitive load spikes and accuracy collapses. This pattern appears every year. In lessons, a student might confidently produce something like: Meiner Meinung nach ist meine Schule sehr gut, weil sie modern ist und die Lehrer freundlich sind. (In m y opinion, my school is very good because it is modern and the teachers are friendly.) But this response was created with sentence starters on the board, adjectives provided and connectives highlighted. In the exam, the same student writes: Meiner Meinung nach meine Schule ist sehr gut weil modern und Lehrer freundlich. (In my opinion my school is very good because modern and teachers friendly.) The issue here is not a lack of knowledge. It is dependency. Students have learned to rely on external support rather than internalised control. For this reason, I believe we need to rethink what we scaffold. Scaffolding should fade deliberately , focus on thinking rather than copying and build independence at sentence level. That might mean removing sentence starters but keeping verbs, removing adjectives but keeping structures, or asking students to adapt language rather than reproduce it wholesale. What “complex language” actually means at GCSE One of the most persistent myths in GCSE MFL is that complex language means long sentences and always some kind of sophisticated vocabulary. However, that simply is not true. Complexity is about control, not length . Ambition is valuable and some exam boards may reward the attempt , but when we consider language learning beyond GCSE, this approach is not enough. In my view, true best practice focuses on controlled, accurate use of language. A sentence such as: Obwohl ich hätte gehen sollen, ich bin geblieben weil es war interessant. (Although I should have gone. I stayed because it was interesting.) is not impressive if it is inaccurate. In this case, the intended meaning is clear, but the German word order and verb forms are incorrect. Often, such phrases are memorised by rote and inserted into writing to appear “complex,” yet students do not truly understand them, nor can they use or manipulate them correctly . Yes, this approach might be sufficient if the goal is simply to pass the exam - provided the phrase or structure can be recalled accurately - but in terms of genuine language learning, it falls short. By contrast: Ich habe nicht nur Sport gemacht, sondern auch neue Freunde kennengelernt. (I not only did sport, but also made new friends.) is more impressive precisely because it is controlled. The structure is clear, verb forms are accurate and the language has been successfully manipulated. Some of the most effective complexity in GCSE writing comes from relatively simpl e features used well: correct tense changes, justified opinions, negatives and accurate word order after connectives. For example: Früher habe ich Fußball gespielt, aber jetzt habe ich keine Zeit, weil ich viel lernen muss. (I used to play football, but now I don't havr any time because I have to study more.) This is not “fancy” language, but it is controlled and that is what earns marks. I tell students explicitly: “Complex means you can control it under pressure.”  If they cannot explain why a sentence works, they probably should not be using it in the exam. Bringing it all together in the classroom I believe strong GCSE writing grows out of sentence-level mastery, the deliberate removal of scaffolds and explicit teaching about what examiners actually reward. In practical terms, this means prioritising strategies such as rewriting the same sentence in multiple tenses, error-spotting using examiner-style mistakes and setting narrow but deep writing tasks. It also means introducing timed writing with no support much earlier in KS4 than we often feel comfortable with. Most importantly, I stopped praising writing that merely looks impressive but would not survive real exam conditions. What this means for KS3: prevention, not repair I believe GCSE writing success is largely decided long before Year 10. By the time students reach KS4, habits around accuracy, independence and risk-taking are already deeply embedded. When KS3 writing is dominated by heavy scaffolding, one-off creative tasks and a tolerance of inaccuracy, KS4 teachers are forced into repair mode rather than refinement . At KS3, students are often praised for length rather than accuracy, encouraged to “have a go” without correction, given writing frames that do all the thinking and moved on too quickly from insecure structures. Over time, this creates damaging beliefs: that writing is about filling gaps, that longer is always better and that mistakes do not really matter. These beliefs are extremely difficult to undo later. What I believe KS3 should prioritise instead First, KS3 writing should focus on sentence-level mastery rather than extended tasks. A smaller number of high-frequency structures should be practised repeatedly across topics and constantly rewritten, adapted and manipulated . Rather than asking for a full paragraph about school, I would much rather students can confidently adapt: Ich mag meine Schule, weil sie interessant ist. (I like my school because it is interesting.) into different forms: Ich mochte meine Schule, weil sie interessant war.(I liked my school because it was interesting.) Ich werde meine Schule mögen, weil sie interessant sein wird.(I will like my school because it will be interesting.) Ich mag meine Schule nicht, weil sie langweilig ist.(I don’t like my school because it is boring.) This builds exactly the control GCSE writing demands. Second, scaffolds at KS3 should be temporary and visible , not permanent and invisible. This means modelling a sentence, practising together and then removing support quickly. By Year 9, students should regularly experience unsupported writing, even if it is brief. Third, grammatical accuracy should become a non-negotiable habit. KS3 is where accuracy norms are set. This does not require endless red-pen correction, but it does require revisiting the same errors, analysing mistakes as a class and asking students to explain why one sentence works better than anothe r regardless of their prior attainment or PP / SEND / EAL or HA status - same high expectations for all. For example: ❌ Ich spiele Fußball gestern. (I play football yesterday.) ✔ Ich habe gestern Fußball gespielt. (Yesterday I played football.) Students should expect to explain why the second sentence is better. Finally, we need to redefine what challenge looks like at KS3. Challenge is not longer writing, more vocabulary or greater creativity. Real challenge lies in manipulating known language accurately, using one tense correctly in multiple contexts and justifying opinions clearly . A Year 8 student who can accurately write: Letztes Wochenende habe ich meine Freunde getroffen, weil ich Zeit hatte. is far better prepared for GCSE than one who produces a page of inaccurate writing. Why this matters for GCSE outcomes When KS3 gets this right, KS4 becomes about refinement rather than re-teaching, confidence rather than panic and independence rather than dependency. Students who are used to writing without scaffolds, valuing accuracy and controlling a "limited" repertoire of language (less really well is more) are far more resilient under exam pressure. Final thought I believe GCSE writing does not need to be “fixed” in Year 11. It needs to be built carefully from Year 7. When KS3 prioritises sentence control, fading scaffolds and accuracy as a habit, GCSE writing stops feeling like a cliff edge and starts to feel like the natural outcome of a well-designed curriculum .

Publications I am very proud to have my work published and acknowledged by my peers. 01 Succeeding as an MFL Teacher This publication, a part of the Bloomsbury Succeeding as a … series. Co-authored by myself and Jennifer Wozniak-Rush, it is the essential companion for language educators striving to inspire, engage, and excel. OUT NOW!!! Read more 02 Teacher Hacks Languages This publication, a part of the John Catt Teacher Hacks series. Co-authored by myself and Sinéad Moxham, it delves into twenty aspects of the curriculum that languages teachers might find challenging to teach. OUT NOW!!! Read more 03 Languages Today As a dedicated member of the Association for Language Learning (ALL) council and also serving as an honorary membership officer (HMO), I have contributed two articles to the ALL Languages Today magazine. One focuses on "Developing Skills of Language Retrieval" (Issue 40) , while the other delves into "Practice Making Better Listeners" (Issue 42) . Read more 04 German Primary Sentence Builders: A lexicogrammar approach: German Sentence Builders German Primary Sentence Builders is a workbook aimed at beginner students, co-authored by six modern languages teachers with over 90 years of extensive classroom experience between them, both in the UK and internationally. Order 05 Effective strategies to support novice and expert learners in MFL: The power of modelling It is a tremendous honour to be recognised as a Fellow of the Chartered College of Teaching. Additionally, I am privileged to have had the opportunity to contribute an article to the CCT Impact journal. Titled "Effective Strategies to Support Novice and Expert Learners in MFL: The Power of Modelling," it was published in the online version in issue 16 . Read more

Discover practical language teaching strategies for educators. Equip your classroom with engaging tips and actionable insights. OUT NOW!!! Teacher Hacks Languages A John Catt Publication Orders for this book are available directly from Hachette Learning, Waterstones or Amazon. Hachette Learning Order here Amazon Order here Mission At "Teacher Hacks Languages," our mission is to empower modern language teachers at every stage of their career with some practical strategies and language teaching hacks to overcome the challenges of teaching certain aspects of languages to students in our classrooms. Through our book, we aim to provide useful insights, actionable tips and creative solutions, equipping teachers with the tools they need to support, inspire, and engage their students with the learning process thus enabling them succeed in their language learning journey. We are committed to fostering a supportive community where teachers can share experiences, exchange ideas and continuously enhance their teaching practices for the benefit of both themselves and their students. Vision In our book 'Teacher Hacks Languages,' we aim to explore twenty concepts that pose formidable challenges for world language teachers. Following the ethos of the series, we will encourage self-reflection and share top hacks. Through the integration of scenarios, practical examples and evidence-informed practices, we will strive to offer not only classroom-proven strategies and approaches that are practical and achievable in terms of teacher workload but which have also demonstrated significant impact on students' self-efficacy, engagement, enjoyment, progress and outcomes.

Professional Development for modern languages educators FrauBastowMFL Subject specific professional development, resources, blog and consultancy for language teachers, schools and Trusts. Professional development and resources for language teachers Get in touch What I do ... BLOG I first launched my blog in October 2020, during the pandemic as a way to connect, reflect and grow professionally. What began on the Blogger platform has now evolved into this dedicated space, where all my previous posts have been carefully transferred and curated. This blog is more than just a collection of ideas; it's where I reflect on my own teaching practice, share insights and explore new approaches to language education. It's a space for ongoing professional development and I hope it inspires yours too. CPD FOR TEACHERS & SCHOOLS I’m passionate about delivering high-quality CPD - especially when it’s subject-specific and designed to support language teachers, departments and whole-school language provision. In this section, you’ll find an overview of the CPD programmes and topics I offer, all of which can be tailored to suit your specific context and priorities. RESOURCES Creating engaging, effective resources for my own students has always been a part of my practice and during the pandemic, I began sharing these freely with colleagues to support the wider teaching community in challenging times. What started as a gesture of support has grown into an ongoing commitment. I continue to create and share new content, designed to be practical, purposeful and rooted in classroom experience. About Silvia Bastow I am a teacher, subject leader, blogger, published author, content creator, CPD provider and speaker. I am currently teaching German at Ercall Wood Academy, where I have been the Subject Leader since 2011 and have 23 years of experience teaching languages in the Secondary sector. Learn More “ 🌟 A huge thank you for your amazing coaching and valuable advice! 🙌 Your sessions have been incredibly insightful, and I highly recommend them to anyone aspiring to become a Head of Modern Foreign Languages, or those already in the role seeking fresh perspectives and external dialogue." Patricia Parrouty, Head of French Previous work Be the first to know Subscribe to my exclusive monthly newsletter. Enter your email here Sign Up Thanks for submitting! Contact