Crisis or variation in languages education provision in England?

By Zhu Hua, Elin Arfon and Ann-Marie Hunter

Language learning in the UK is often framed as being in a state of “crisis”, foregrounded particularly by declining language GCSE uptake and concerns about the long-term future of language learning in schools. But does this narrative provide a fair reflection of what is happening across all schools in England?

Our research set out to investigate what sits behind the headlines. We analysed survey data from 108 English state-maintained secondary schools and interview data with 10 educators from two case study schools. This led us to a more nuanced picture. When comparing Key Stage 4 (KS4) language learning between schools, there is significant variation in GCSE uptake and attainment figures. Importantly, these differences also extend to other factors such as the number of language teachers, weekly contact hours and student demographics. Our case studies further highlight how varied the experience of language provision can be. It is not just local context that matters, it is how various factors interact with one another. School leadership, parent and caregiver buy-in, teacher recruitment and retention, student demographics all play a crucial role in shaping language provision and driving changes. If we are to build upon existing pockets of success, this requires tailored support.

Languages GCSE uptake and attainment vary widely

Schools in England are operating in a context where languages at GCSE have not been compulsory in over 20 years (since 2004). While languages are encouraged through their inclusion in the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) performance measure, they are not automatically counted in other measures such as Progress 8.

Uptake figures for languages at KS4 (when pupils typically study for GCSE qualifications) differ dramatically from school to school. In 2024, the national average for languages GCSE entry sat at 45.6%. In our survey schools, the proportion of students entered for a GCSE in any language ranged from under 10% to over 90% in others (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: Languages GCSE entry 2024 for responding schools.

Wide variation across schools, not just in uptake and attainment, but also in teacher numbers, curriculum time and pupil demographics

A key factor influencing GCSE languages uptake is a school’s policy on languages at KS4 (see also Hunter, Zhu & Arfon, 2024; Forbes & Morea, 2024). Schools in our sample that made languages a compulsory subject – ‘Compulsory for All’ policy – unsurprisingly boasted the highest average GCSE entry figures (80%). This was followed by schools with a ‘Pathways’ policy, where a targeted selection of pupils study a language (46%), and then schools offering ‘Free Choice’ as to what pupils study at KS4 (26%).

Looking specifically at the ‘Compulsory for All’ (CFA) grouping, there was wide variation in student outcomes (from 26% to 98% achieving a pass grade) (Fig. 2), resources (teachers and timetabled hours) and pupil cohorts. While some of these schools had between two and four languages teachers per 100 pupils in Year 10, others had as many as seven to 11 teachers per 100 pupils. A similar pattern emerged for curriculum time for each language per week at Key Stage 3, ranging from 90 minutes in some schools to one school offering more than three times that amount. There was also great variation in terms of the school percentages of pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM), pupils with low prior attainment, pupils with English as an Additional Language (EAL), and pupils with Special Educational Needs (SEN).

Figure 2: Languages GCSE attainment 2024 for responding schools with a CFA policy.

Given this diversity among CFA schools, we wanted to explore the on-the-ground motivations and experience of these schools in greater depth.

Varying experiences of schools with compulsory languages

For our case studies we worked closely with two CFA schools with contrasting attainment results. We interviewed teachers, languages subject leaders and senior leadership team members in both schools. While each school had historical contexts and strong leadership commitment that supported compulsory language learning, they differed in several key areas: parent and caregiver buy-in; whole-school staff support; international engagement; teacher recruitment and retention challenges; pupil motivation; and pupil profiles. It emerged that all these factors were closely linked to both attainment and, ultimately, uptake. In fact, one of the schools was considering moving away from its CFA (GCSE) policy and exploring alternative certificates to recognise the achievements of students who were believed to struggle with (language) learning, an adaptation shaped by the specific challenges of their local context.

Uptake and attainment are just the tips of a ‘language education iceberg’

Our findings invite a more nuanced view of media and academic interest in GCSE language uptake and attainment. We see these as the two tips of a ‘languages education iceberg’ (Fig. 3), beneath which lie many interacting factors that sustain and challenge languages provision. The factors we discussed earlier, from leadership commitment to resources, and from parent and caregiver buy-in to pupil motivation, are prime examples. These factors are inter-related and form a dynamic whole.  There is no single, linear link between these factors and the visible tips of uptake and attainment. To fully understand the so called ‘crisis’, and, ultimately, to expand uptake and attainment, we must acknowledge not only variations but also the underlying complexity.

Figure 3: The ‘‘languages education iceberg’’.

Challenging the ‘crisis’ narrative

Our findings suggest that an overt focus on the “crisis” of declining languages GCSE uptake oversimplifies what is going on in English schools. They reveal that language learning provision is best described as highly variable and context-specific. In some schools, language learning is thriving with high levels of participation and success as well as supportive elements that sustain its success, while in others, challenging elements compel schools to adapt their approach.

What next?

Recognising this variation is crucial. Schools should be supported to develop ways of growing their language provision that are tailored to their own contexts and to make informed decisions about what works best for their pupils in the present national context where languages are not a compulsory subject on the curriculum. This is where targeted interventions, funded by the Department for Education, such as the National Consortium for Languages Education (NCLE), can make a tangible difference by offering focused, bespoke support and starting with each school’s unique contexts.

When we recognise the diverse, local realities of language learning, we can better respond to schools’ priorities, provide meaningful support and celebrate successes – big or small – wherever language learning is flourishing.

This article was originally posted on the UCL Institute of Education blog.