This study examines how oral competencies are framed, and goals described in policy documents that determine activities in Danish integrated primary and lower secondary school, or determine how Danish teachers during teacher education are trained to support them.

Policy documents such as curricula or frameworks promote some important agendas in teaching but risk hampering others. Literacy is acknowledged as a key competence. However, although literacy “empowers people, enables them to participate fully in society and contributes to improve livelihoods” (UNESCO homepage), the importance of less acknowledged oral competencies is increasing as technologies help conquer problems related to literacy and changes the way we communicate. E.g. computers read texts aloud to users, smart phones and other devices react to voice commands, and collaboration takes place using online platforms like Zoom. Furthermore, oral competencies such as the ability to reason, to debate issues, to listen and to reconcile, are vital if we are to overcome crises – as individuals and societies. Most European countries take part in international literacy assessment programmes such as PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) or PIRLS (Progress in International Reading Literacy Study) to be able to monitor the quality of their educational system’s literacy effort. Oral competencies, however, are apparently not as high on the agenda of the international educational community.

In Scandinavian teaching and classroom research, the term “mundtlighed” (Danish spelling) is commonly used. It translates into orality, and covers a variety of meanings. It covers exploratory talk as well as any kind of oral text or genre, e.g. reading theatre and oral presentations, in classrooms. The latter appears frequently, but is difficult to deal with for teachers who lack tools to assess the quality of students' oral performance (Aksnes, 2016, Fjørtoft, 2016, Herzberg, 2003, Matre, 2009). Children learn to talk and to listen by doing from infancy, and therefore, it might seem less important to target talking and listening in educational systems beyond preschool. However, talk at home does not reflect talk in public, neither when it comes to content nor form. The term oracy, originally coined in 1965 (Wilkinson, 1968), is well known mainly through the works of British researchers from the Oracy Cambridge-group. Oracy refers to “the development of young people's skills in using their first language, or the official/educational language of their country, to communicate across a range of social settings” (Mercer, Warwick & Ahmed, 2016) or briefly, effective use of spoken language. Hence, oracy, defined as a set of skills, is describable, teachable and assessable, and thereby, would be integrable in curricula and frameworks. The Oracy Cambridge group (Mercer & Dawes, 2018) has suggested an oracy skills framework and recommendations for teachers. However, these are developed in a British context and it would be interesting to study how applicable they are in a Danish, or any other international, context.

Of particular interest to the study is the subject science in primary and lower secondary school, and science didactics in teacher education, as science is well known for its challenging vocabulary and specific genres that differ from everyday language.  E.g., Lemke’s socio-semiotic research into talk in science classrooms shows that teachers and students weave complicated subject specific semantic patterns together in classroom dialogue, often without being explicit about their nature. Therefore, Lemke’s recommendations for teachers include that they “explicitly discuss with students the fact that scientific language tends to use certain forms of grammar and argumentation, emphasize abstract principles rather than human actions, and avoid humor, fantasy, and many kinds of metaphor” (Lemke, 1990 p. 173). However, have insights like these entered Danish frameworks and curricula? In addition, if they have, how? 

This study is part of a Ph.D.-study, using a qualitative mixed methods approach, on science teachers’ approaches to oracy. It investigates the frames, teachers have to operate in, and how their training prepare them. The mixed methods study also contains a case study in three grade 6 classrooms led by experienced science teachers, and an interview study with pre-service teacher students who qualify to teach science. The document study will be carried out during February-June 2021. A systematic qualitative close reading and text analysis will trace oral language, oral competencies, orality and oracy through policy documents such as frameworks and curricula. Included documents are Danish Folkeskole/ primary and lower secondary education( retsinformation, LBK nr 1396 af 28/09/2020), Common Goals (Retsinformation, BEK nr 1217 af 19/08/2020), and Danish Teacher Education, Bachelors of Education of 240 ECTS, (Retsinformation, BEK nr 1068 af 08/09/2015). It is under consideration to include historical documents as well, going back to 1990. A qualitative approach is chosen because issues related to oracy, orality, oral competencies, and oral language are likely to manifest themselves through a variety of terms in included documents, some of which need to be interpreted. E.g., varying forms of collaboration or presentation in classrooms are implicitly oral. The analysis will focus on verbs describing any kind of oral activity, and nouns implying oral activity in order to clarify the nature of oral activity in classrooms in primary and lower secondary school as well as in teacher education. Based hereon, the purposes of oral activities will be evaluated and it will be discussed to which extent these oral activities are described as teachable and assessable competencies. Finally, it will be investigated how teacher education prepare teachers to teach and assess oral competencies. It is expected, that preparation for teaching oral competencies may be implicitly or explicitly present in descriptions of theoretical courses or practical courses at schools. Lynggaard (Lynggaard, 2020) inspires the document study methodology applied. This document study of Danish conditions can be perceived as a case study, and repeated in other European countries. This could contribute to a transnational discussion of the importance of oral competencies, and how we develop them.

It is assumed that the nature and significance of oral competencies are not presented in a consistent manner in Danish policy documents. However, it must be investigated thoroughly if the study shall contribute to ongoing quality discussions of the Danish educational system. To pursue this aim, the study will seek to develop an overview of oral competencies explicitly or implicitly described in present day policy papers, propose a suggestion for an oracy framework applicable to primary and lower secondary school, and present a brief paper for discussion of what is required of todays and tomorrow’s teachers.

Aksnes, L.M. (2016). Om muntlighet som fagfelt. I Kverndokken, K. (red.). 101 måter å fremme muntlige ferdigheter på – om muntlig kompetanse og muntlighetsdidaktikk. Fjørtoft, H.(2016). Vurdering af muntlighet I klasserommet. I Kverndokken, K. (red.). 101 måter å fremme muntlige ferdigheter på – om muntlig kompetanse og muntlighetsdidaktikk Hertzberg, F. (2003). Arbeid med muntlige ferdigheter. I Klette, K.(red.). Klasserommets praksisformer etter Reform 97 Lemke, J.L.(1990). Talking science. Language, learning, and values. Lynggaard, K. (2020). Dokumentanalyse. I Brinkmann, S. & Tanggaard, L: Kvalitative metoder, 3. udg. Matre, S.(2009). Vurdering av samtaletekstar som didaktisk utfordring. I Haugaløkken et al: Tekstvurdering som didaktisk utfordring, Universitetsforlaget, 2009 Mercer, N. & Dawes, L. (2018) The development of Oracy skills in school-aged learners. Part of the Cambridge Papers in ELT series. [pdf] Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Mercer, N., Warwick, P., & Ahmed, A. (2016). An oracy assessment toolkit: Linking research and development in the assessment of students' spoken language skills at age 11-12. Learning and Instruction, 48, 51-60 PIRLS, Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (n.n.). https://www.iea.nl/studies/iea/pirls Revisited 2021/01/28 PISA, Programme for International Student Assessment(n.n.). https://www.oecd.org/pisa/test/ Revisited, 2021/01/28 Retsinformation, BEK nr 1217 af 19/08/2020 (n.n.). https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2020/1217 Retsinformation, LBK nr 1396 af 28/09/2020 (n.n.). https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2020/1396 Retsinformation, BEK nr 1068 af 08/09/2015 (n.n.). https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/ft/200514L00552 Revisited, 2021/01/28 UNESCO (n.n.). https://en.unesco.org/themes/literacy-all Revisited, 2021/01/28 Wilkinson, A. (1968). Oracy in English Teaching. Elementary English, 45(6), 743-747. Retrieved September 8, 2020