When the English Baccalaureate was launched in 2011 the aim was to encourage students to study a combination of subjects that would, in the government’s words, “open more doors” in their future. 

The Department for Education was clearly confident that the EBacc would be seen that way by schools, too, with a target for 75 per cent of students to be studying the subject combination at GCSE by 2022, and 90 per cent by 2025. 

However, data released last month reveals that just 38.7 per cent of students were entered for the EBacc in 2021 - representing another year of declining numbers. The data shows that:

• 40 per cent of students were entered for the EBacc in 2019.
• 39.8 per cent of students were entered for the EBacc in 2020.

In fact, the number of students taking the EBacc combinations has never risen above 2019 levels.

So what is the story behind the lacklustre numbers?

First, it’s worth reiterating what the EBacc consists of: English language and literature, double science, maths, a humanities subject and a modern foreign language.

With the core curriculum subjects of English, maths and science essentially “freebies”, it is clear the problem lies with the option subjects.

However, it isn’t humanities, where the numbers of students taking either history or geography are increasing.

Figures released in November showed that only 12.4 per cent of students did not take a humanities component in 2021 and that was an improvement on figures for both 2020 (12.8 per cent) and 2019 (13.6 per cent).

From this we can deduce that the sticking point is languages.

And the problem is getting worse, not better.

November’s report says that in 2021 87.3 per cent of students were missing the languages component - an increase on 86.9 per cent in 2020 and 86 per cent in 2019. 

Natasha Plaister, who in her role as a statistician at FFT Education Datalab analyses the take-up of subjects at GCSE, A level and Btec, says the data is not surprising: “Languages have always been the subject struggling to make up the numbers since the EBacc formed,” she explains.

“When [the EBacc] was announced [in 2011], we at the FFT suggested more language teachers were needed to meet the target - and back then it was still possibly doable, but here in 2021 it seems very unlikely.”

So why is this?

EBacc problems: GCSE languages grading ‘too harsh’ 

Plaister says one reason why languages take-up is falling is because of the perception that grading is “too harsh”. Students believe they would be more likely to achieve a higher grade in a different subject.

This grading issue is one that David Blow, executive head of SESSET (South East Surrey Schools Education Trust) and someone who regularly liaises with Ofqual, the DfE, Ofsted and exam boards on such data points, says is key to the whole problem.

“MFL is a grade below the other EBacc subjects,” he says.

“If you take a typical student and look at the grades they obtain, on average, students of a similar prior attainment will get an MFL grade a whole grade lower than their other EBacc subjects.”

Blow says this causes a “perception from students and teachers” that the student is not doing as well in their language learning, when the truth is the problem is “a historical anomaly” that has been “baked into the system” to make the MFL grades “harder” than other subjects.

Until this is addressed, says Blow, we won’t see a reversal of the decline in MFL.

But how likely is it that MFL will have its grading adjusted?

Not very, says Blow, because of the prioritisation by Ofqual of “maintaining standards over time”.

Instead of changing the grading, the DfE has released a proposal for changes for languages with a focus on how the subject is taught in the classroom.

Blow, though, says the changes have been made not to bring MFL in line with other subjects but instead to “get their preferred pedagogy introduced throughout secondary schools”.

Will the changes make any difference to the uptake of MFL on the EBacc? No, says Blow. “Because of comparable outcomes, even if you worsened or improved the teaching, the grades would still stay the same,” he explains.

Staffing MFL

If the fact that the race is “rigged” from the start wasn’t bad enough, leaders also have to contend with the additional external challenge of finding staff to deliver the language GCSE in the first place.

Plaister says teacher shortages have been “made worse by Brexit” but they were already already a problem before that.

Jack Worth is the National Foundation for Educational Research’s lead economist and leads its work on the school workforce. He agrees that “insufficient teacher supply is the constraint on schools meeting the EBacc”.

He adds: “The number of MFL trainees has flatlined: only 6 per cent greater in 2019-20 compared to 2015-16, despite policy initiatives aimed at improving recruitment.”

So what should be done to overcome this? 

Enticing new teachers in with the promise of extra money when training could be a solution, says Worth. However, that doesn’t seem to be the approach the government is taking. In fact, it has done the opposite.

The cut to the MFL bursary in 2021 “looks inconsistent” with an ambition to increase EBacc participation, says Worth. Even though the bursary had a slight increase in 2022, he says it “shows a bit more commitment but doesn’t reflect a full-throated support”.

What’s more, in data released in November the government revealed that the target for MFL trainees has been reduced, which Worth says is ”inconsistent with the goal of meeting the 2022 EBacc target”.

Worth also agrees with Plaister’s point about Brexit, saying that “typically a third of MFL trainees are EU nationals, so difficulty getting a visa or the UK seeming less attractive might affect the numbers relocating”.

However, he also suggests that a solution might be found if administration changes were made.

“Last year the Migration Advisory Committee recommended adding MFL teachers to the shortage occupation list, which may help alleviate this to some extent,” he says.

Whether that happens, though, remains to be seen, and any change is unlikely to be waved through quickly.

Progress 8 vs EBacc

Even if this did happen, there are other problems to contend with. Both Plaister and Worth note how incentivising schools to increase EBacc entries is hampered by the Progress 8 (P8) measure, which Worth describes as one of “the main accountability measures” that schools focus on.

So why does the pressure of Progress 8 reduce entries to the EBacc?

Worth says it all comes down to the fact that MFL isn’t compulsory for P8, and therefore schools “are unlikely to encourage their pupils to do MFL if they can score higher in double science…[or] if there are three other subjects they are likely to do better in”.

Furthermore, even if a tweak to the P8 system was made that resulted in schools rushing to get their students to enter EBacc combinations, that wouldn’t mean it’s the right thing to do, says Plaister.

“Teachers aren’t available and there isn’t the demand to study the subject,” she says. “I’m not recommending messing about with P8 - it might incentivise schools but it would confuse everyone.”

What’s right for the students? 

This underlines how, even if all of the above issues were resolved, for some schools it is simply the case that the MFL component of the EBacc does not suit their context.

For example, at Clacton Coastal Academy, in Essex, only 5 per cent of students are entered for the EBacc.

The reason for this, says headteacher Jo Cookson, is that she prioritises subjects that are “right for her students”, and languages does not fit in this mix.

“To help our students to achieve their best and be successful in further education or work, we design a curriculum to meet their needs,” she says.

“For example, we have students in key stage 4 that have really low literacy and reading levels, so it wouldn’t be in their best interests to enter them for a foreign language when they can’t read or write well enough in English.”

Cookson makes the point that context is everything, and leaders need to “meet the needs of their cohort”.

As such, even if there was more of an incentive to push MFL, or more teachers to deliver it, many settings would still not be sold on the need for their students to study a language.

Organic interest 

Of course, other settings may be more keen for their student to take the EBacc, and would hope that the MFL option appeals.

In such a situation, Jude Hunton, headteacher of Skegness Grammar School - where EBacc uptake is at 73 per cent, with the aim of 100 per cent - says it is important to promote languages throughout a pupil’s time in school, rather than just waiting until Year 10.

“Giving students a choice of languages all the way through KS3 is key,” he explains.

“We teach both French and Spanish from Year 7, so by the time they’re in Year 11 it feels natural to them to opt for one at GCSE.”

To enable this to happen, Hunton has prioritised MFL on the timetable, and given more hours over to the subjects.

“It’s instructive to see the force for good the EBacc has been,” he says. “We are going to give more time to languages as we feel it’s important that our pupils have the opportunity to study a wide range of quality subjects.”

The “wide range of quality subjects” was, of course, the original intention of the EBacc, so it is clear that for some this ideal has spurred them into action.

Yet, as the DfE data shows, this is not happening for the majority, and the targets will almost certainly be missed.

Tes contacted the Department for Education for a response to the likelihood of missing the looming EBacc target, and a spokesperson reiterated some of the work it has been doing to increase MFL take-up and address teacher shortages.

“We are reforming the modern foreign languages GCSEs to encourage more students to take up these important subjects, helping to broaden their horizons. We have also increased bursaries for languages to attract more talented teachers to the profession and are investing £4.8 million in a pilot to boost quality and take-up,” they said.

This work may still not be enough, though - the proposals to reform MFL GCSEs met with strong opposition from language experts, teaching unions and exam boards earlier this year.

Time will tell but it appears very unlikely that any of these efforts will have a material difference on MFL uptake in time to help hit the government’s EBacc targets.

Shaking up the EBacc?

There is, of course, a nuclear option: remove MFL from the EBacc altogether and replace it with something else that is more “popular”.

If that were to happen it would no doubt result in every subject clamouring to claim it was worthy of that final spot.

For example, Kate Thornton-Bousfield, head of PE and achievement at the Youth Sport Trust, says it believes that physical education should be considered for the EBacc as it would “represent a broad and balanced curriculum”.

Meanwhile, Michele Gregson, general secretary for the National Society for Education in Art & Design, makes the case that the EBacc spot should go to the arts as they “allow all young people to not only appreciate the arts but to participate in, make and create the arts.”

However, Blow, despite all the issues outlined here around MFL uptake, believes it is right that languages are included in the EBacc.

“Every child has an entitlement to learn a language,” he says. “It enables them to be aware that they’re a citizen of a wider world - a world which goes beyond the community in which they live.”

It’s a noble view - but one that at present does not seem to resonate with the majority of schools or students, meaning that the government’s lofty targets are set to be missed.

As such, if the government is still truly committed to its goals, it is going to have to do something about it - and tout suite.