With the introduction of new GCSE and A level specifications for languages from 2016 (for French, German and Spanish – 2017 for other languages) Exam boards have announced their intention NOT to redevelop qualifications in a range of small-entry languages, such as Bengali, Modern Hebrew, Panjabi, Polish; Dutch, Gujarati, Persian, Portuguese, Turkish (A-Level) and Dutch, Gujarati, Persian, Portuguese, Turkish (GCSE). There are rumours that also Arabic, Modern Greek, Japanese and Urdu may not be redeveloped.

The main reasons given by Awarding Bodies are mainly dictated by budget. According to them a) a small number of entries means that it is not cost-effective to redevelop the qualifications under the new, tighter assessment requirements, and there are difficulties in the statistical underpinning of grade boundaries; b) the more rigorous conditions attached to the new A-level specifications, and the need to teach and assess cultural content as well as language skills; c) difficulties sourcing examiners and other experts.

In a multilingual society, these short-sighted reasons must be strongly challenged and vocally rejected.

Firstly, these reasons do not take into account figures and facts. These languages are currently taught both in mainstream state and independent schools, in adult and further education, as well as in supplementary schools provided by local communities. Candidates include a mixture of bilingual native speakers, learners who have experienced some ‘background exposure’ to the language, and those who have learnt the language from scratch in schools, colleges or adult education contexts. In 2014, nearly 4000 candidates sat the affected languages at A level: with the exception of Urdu, Gujarati, Greek and Bengali, entries for all the affected languages have increased since 2004. According to research by the National Resource Centre for Supplementary Education (representing 922 schools teaching over 67,000 pupils), these reforms will affect 59% of supplementary schools teaching a language (in addition to the 13% whose languages already lack a qualification).

Secondly, the decision by the Awarding Bodies would have serious social, cultural and economic implications for the future supply of language skills that Britain needs, as remarked by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Modern Languages in its Manifesto for Languages (2014). The decision would also have particular implications for schools which teach or wish to develop the teaching of a more diverse range of languages; communities which speak or learn the languages in which examinations are being withdrawn; individuals who wish to learn them. Briefly, this decision would be highly detrimental for individual cognitive improvement, community development, and social mobility.

CeLM – Reading strongly deplores the Exam Boards’ agenda. We strongly believe that more (and not less) resources should be allocated not only to generate new insights into the working of the multilingual mind as well as new perspectives on how literacy skills can be further in monolinguals, bilinguals and multilinguals, but also to sustain and support bilingual and multilingual families, to build a new sense of community in a multilingual world, and to promote equality and equal opportunities in our society.