��ɫ����

Scotland’s ‘1+2 languages’ policy, introduced in 2012, reflects the growing global need for multilingualism. It introduced learning a second language (L2) from age five and a third language (L3) from around age nine, but with different end goals, as summarised in table 1.

Table 1. Scotland’s ‘1+2 languages’ policy

While progressive, the policy faces challenges in primary schools where research indicates that many teachers feel less confident providing even one additional language, let alone two (Valdera & Crichton, 2018). Through a small-scale study of 38 teachers, this issue appeared in both the questionnaires and interview data around teachers’ self-perceptions. This situation raises an important question: Is our current approach to language learning effective? Or might innovative models, such as L3, offer a more inclusive way to inspire confidence in both teachers and pupils as they navigate their educational journeys?

Challenges in initial teacher education (ITE)

One significant challenge, in Scotland and beyond, is that many student teachers enter ITE programmes with limited experience of languages, largely due to decline in subject uptake. This issue is further compounded by the actual time available to engage in related ITE modules. With typically around no more than 20–30 hours of modern languages input in many such degree programmes, student teachers often struggle to build the necessary confidence and skills to realistically see themselves as ‘teachers of languages’ upon graduation.

‘Student teachers often struggle to build the necessary confidence and skills to realistically see themselves as “teachers of languages” upon graduation.’

This raises another question: How might issues around lack of time and space be addressed through more innovative ITE inputs?

A new perspective: The value of local languages

(Image generated through Word Cloud software)

Perhaps it’s time to reconsider the traditional focus on particular European languages, given increasingly diverse classrooms in Scotland and beyond. Instead of sticking to conventional models, we could embrace ‘local languages’ – those spoken within pupils’ communities, such as Polish, Urdu, Mandarin, or Gaelic through enhanced practices such as L3. Recent research shows that exposure to languages relevant to learners’ everyday lives can foster more meaningful and engaging learning experiences, summarised well by one teacher who commented, ‘All the children were engaged rather than just, you know, the one or two that people would ordinarily think would have been those children’ (Pedley et al., 2024, p. 28).

This shift would benefit both learners and teachers by tapping into the linguistic expertise and cultural resource already present when bringing members of the local community into classrooms to work alongside teaching staff. Such an approach could inspire a deeper connection with language learning, laying a stronger foundation for further study in secondary schools and beyond.

Empowering change through ITE

To truly effect such change, and avoid approaches such as L3 simply becoming scaled-down versions of L2, ITE courses should look beyond promoting language proficiency goals. Through partnering with local community members who speak various languages, student teachers can incorporate real-life experiences of other cultures into their lessons. Then, by integrating local languages into interdisciplinary projects, they can create more engaging and meaningful learning experiences. Such an approach fundamentally recognises primary teachers’ existing skills and expertise, potentially boosting their confidence in teaching languages in innovative ways.

One example, based on teaching Mandarin in a Scottish context, found that incorporating community languages into project-based learning significantly improved pupil engagement (Pedley et al., 2024). This aligns with ecological models of language acquisition, emphasising connecting language learning with learners’ real-world experiences (Chong et al., 2023).

Furthering innovation within language policies

While policies, such as the ‘1+2’, are often grounded in good intentions, adapting these to the realities of our classrooms will be key to future success. This means preparing both student, and in-service teachers, to manage a broader range of languages in innovative ways, particularly those that learners encounter in their daily lives.

This brings us to our final reflection: Is it time to rethink our approach to language learning in primary schools by shifting from a narrow focus on particular European languages to embracing the broader linguistic diversity present in our school communities? It’s a worthwhile discussion because today’s primary-aged pupils could be tomorrow’s enthusiastic language teachers.

References

Chong, S., Isaacs, T., & McKinley, J. (2023). Ecological systems theory and second language research. Language Teaching, 56(3), 333–348.

Pedley, M., Roxburgh, D., Anderson, L., & McPake, J. (2024). The transformative power of local language encounters: Implications for teacher education. In C. Leslie & S. Mourão (Eds.), Researching educational practices, teacher education and professional development for early language learning: Examples from Europe. Routledge.

Scottish Government. (2012). Language learning in Scotland: A 1+2 approach.

Valdera Gil, F., & Crichton, H. (2018). Mother tongue plus two languages: Are Scottish primary teachers confident to deliver? The Language Learning Journal, 48(4), 454–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2018.1448430