ESOL: Our calls for change and the evidence

As the Government undertakes its review of ESOL provision, the development of ESOL standards, informed by the latest evidence on second language acquisition, is the best way to promote effective teaching and learning, and to inform equitable and portable assessment across the country.  

Many ESOL providers have expressed the need for a reference framework for ESOL so that they can construct curricula for learning in a variety of settings, from community centres to colleges and for different purposes such as language for work, study, and daily life, as well as appropriate qualifications.   

The Common European Framework for Reference for Languages (CEFR), and its Companion Volume, should be used to inform these new standards. This is a widely used existing framework for language learning that supports a range of different purposes.

With devolution enabling mayoral strategic authorities to make their own decisions on budget allocation, including how and whether to fund ESOL, there is a clear need for a national vision, core principles, and clear accountability rules for enabling second or additional language learners to learn English.

This new set of national expectations should provide a clear framework around funding and eligibility rules for ESOL, and ensure accountability when monies are devolved.

ESOL provision is a sound financial investment. Over one in every 50 people of working age in England could benefit from the enhanced educational and employment opportunities offered by developing their proficiency in English. Almost half of this group are British citizens or long-term residents.  

Attending ESOL classes at the right level can be life-changing for many. For workers with long hours or shifts, for example, ESOL in the workplace could open up new opportunities to gain vital language skills.

Yet the main source of funding for ESOL, the Adult Skills Fund (ASF), has halved in real terms since 2009, and ESOL policy and strategy have lacked clarity and overall direction. This has left learners facing an ESOL “postcode lottery”.

England also needs funding models in further education to ensure colleges are not disincentivised from offering ESOL provision, and approaches which encourage employers to provide ESOL at work.

Many speakers of ESL are already qualified professionals or skilled tradespeople, so do not require training beyond language support, and familiarisation with working culture in the UK. This is comparatively low-cost and can be expected to pay for itself over time (once learners are in employment and paying taxes).

There is currently very limited accurate national data on the numbers of people post-16 who need to learn English and what their levels of proficiency are.

An additional field marker should be added to the individualised learning record (ILR), the data collected about learners from training providers in the Further Education and Skills sector in England, which identifies learners with other language backgrounds.

Sector stakeholders including ESOL providers and mayoral combined authorities agree on the need for better data on the number of people who need to learn English post-16. Accurate national data would help them plan and track students’ needs and progress better, as well as ensuring value for money.