As school forums up and down the country decide on their local funding formulae from April 2013 and consider whether to include a one, two or three year 'EAL factor' and whether to exercise their right to retain a local EAL support service, NALDIC is urging them to consider the available evidence carefully.
One in six primary school pupils in England - 577,555 - do not have English as their first language. In secondary schools the figure stands at 417,765, just over one in eight. Once special schools and pupil referral units are taken into account, the total rises to just over a million at 1,007,090. These figures have doubled since 1997 (DfE, 2012) and look set to continue to rise
The government has acknowledged that pupils learning EAL often require additional support (DfE, 2012) and the OECD has noted that 'Proficiency in the language of instruction is a major tool and precondition for learning. It is essential that school practice is guided by an explicit coherent language policy that is informed by research and adapted to the different levels of the education system (OECD, 2010).
The government has argued that '3 years – from the point at which the pupil enters compulsory education in England – should be sufficient (support). With early intervention, pupils with EAL can achieve well, even earlier'. (DfE, 2012). International research has provided little evidence for this assertion.
With increased pressure on schools to ensure that standards of English are high and the increased focus on grammar, spelling and punctuation in the 2013 SATs and the new GCSE's, it is key that schools put appropriate arrangements into place for bilingual learners at all stages that support these learners to attain well.
Whilst central EAL services are by no means the only way to secure high quality EAL teaching, a recent report by the NASUWT has highlighted that, since the 'mainstreaming' of the ethnic minority achievement grant, 'half of school leaders stated that pressures on schools to meet the needs of English as an Additional Language pupils had increased over the past year, with a further 65% stating that current resources were insufficient to meet these demands'.(NASUWT, 2012)
For many schools, the flexibility offered by local EAL services to provide 'early intervention' in the form of expert specialist teaching at the point of need is key benefit of continuing to share a local service. This is especially the case as evidence suggests that the distribution of bilingual learners across schools is neither uniform nor predictable.(NALDIC, 2012)
We remain disappointed that the government has not heeded expert advice on how long it takes pupils to learn English within the curriculum nor recognised the negative impact of removing EAL funding from huge numbers of bilingual learners just as they are encoutering the academic language they need to be successful. This would appear to fly in the face of the OECD's recommendation, based on international evidence, that EAL provision must be guided by an explicit coherent language policy that is informed by research and adapted to the different levels of the education system. The negative impact of similar decisions in the 1990s is illustrated in the recent NASUWT report (NASUWT, 2012)
We urge representatives on schools forums to consider carefully the opportunity they have to ensure that EAL teaching continues to be available for this new generation of bilingual learners.
