tall&hurman_2002_using dictionaries in modern language gcse examinations

Educational Review, Vol. 54, No. 3, 2002

Using Dictionaries in Modern LanguageGCSE Examinations

GRAHAM TALL & JOHN HURMAN, University of Birmingham, UK

ABSTRACT In 1998 the GCSE examination boards permitted candidates to usebilingual dictionaries in their Modern Language written examinations. In the run-upperiod to this change several publishers updated their dictionaries and in the processit became uncertain whether the ‘playing � eld’ for candidates using differentdictionaries remained level. The dictionary project described here was funded by theQuali� cations and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and studies the effects of threegroups of candidates each using a different type of dictionary. In addition tocomparing the quantitative impact, time was also spent observing how the candi-dates used their dictionary and the impact the dictionary had on their use oflanguage.

Very little published research exists on the use of bilingual modern languagedictionaries and none provides statistical information on the effect of differentdictionaries in GCSE exams. Asher et al. (1999) evaluated how teachers werechanging their policies and developing class strategies in response to the decision toallow dictionaries in GCSE exams. Bishop (1998) found that Open Universitystudents were as concerned with grammatical usage as they were with using theirdictionaries in expressing meaning. In their exams, Open University students saidthat their dictionary reduced stress (Bishop, 2000). The QCA (1997) made a passingreference to unpublished research stating that the use of dictionaries had not changedthe � nal mark obtained.

The Quali� cations and Curriculum Authority (QCA) funded this research (Hur-man & Tall, 1998) when major decisions had been taken to write the rubric andexamination questions in the language being examined and to allow students to usedictionaries in their GCSE examinations. Though not stated, the underlying reasonwas the fact that new dictionaries gave far more assistance than those previouslyavailable and it could no longer be assumed that they would have a negligible effecton the mark � nally gained. The information provided by the QCA not onlyemphasised that the research design should be robust but, without using thedescriptive term, indicated the need to use the comparative agricultural-botanicalexperimental design.

Research Design

The time available to design and carry out the research was very short. The QCA haddisseminated the proposal just prior to the academic year when, for the � rst time,dictionaries were to be allowed in the examination, and a report was expected by the

ISSN 0013-1911 print; 1465-3397 online/02/030205-13 Ó 2002 Educational Review

DOI:10.1080/0013191022000016275

206 G. Tall & J. Hurman

FIG. 1. Comparative Research Design.

following Easter. In a matter of weeks, anyone wishing to submit a proposal had todiscover the types of dictionaries that schools intended to use and identify schoolsthat were comparable and prepared to take part in the research.

The underlying research design is illustrated in Fig. 1. All candidates took twoexamination papers, the � rst paper being taken without, and the second paper with,a dictionary. In a smaller number of schools the two examination papers werepresented in reverse order to avoid order effects, i.e. to ensure that any change inmarks on the second paper was not simply the result of either test experience, orconversely, of tedium. No noticeable effect was observed. To check the dif� cultylevel of the two parallel sets of papers a pilot experiment was carried out. Theunderlying guideline in the pilot experiment was that all students must take bothpapers under the same conditions.

Data Collection Methods

To � t the project outline set up by the QCA, the research design could have limiteditself to simply comparing the scores achieved on two comparable sets of examin-ation papers by candidates using different dictionaries in the examination. However,the researchers felt that that would not provide suf� cient explanation of the resultsfound. It was decided, therefore, to collect � ve additional kinds of data:

Candidate Questionnaire

Candidates were given a short questionnaire to ascertain their impressions on theirlevel of training and expertise in dictionary use, their degree of con� dence in theavailability of a dictionary in an examination and � nally their qualitative assessmenton the strengths and weaknesses of the dictionary used in the test.

Candidates Circling Words

Candidates were asked to circle words both in the question rubrics and in their ownwriting whenever they used the dictionary for help. This was one measure used todiscover the frequency of dictionary use.

207Using Dictionaries in GCSE Examinations

Observation Schedule

Because it was felt that the pupils might fail to circle all the words they had lookedup and in order to have a more reliable index of the extent and frequency of theirdictionary use, it was decided to use in vivo observation. Accordingly, a schedulesubdivided into time sectors was especially designed for the use of independent,non-participant observers.

Qualitative Assessment

(a) Dictionary Use by Students in Different Grade BandsTo determine the amount and type of help that each kind of dictionary afforded,the papers of students from different grade bands were analysed and comparedseparately. The bands were de� ned as the top 15% of candidates (those whowere expected to score A/A* in GCSE), the middle 20% (those who wereexpected to score approximately grade C) and the bottom 15% (those who wouldprobably obtain grade E or lower).

(b) The Appropriateness of Words Looked up in the Dictionary According to GradeBandA separate analysis of words circled by pupils was made of 600 papers acrossall grade bands in order to assess the number of effective dictionary consulta-tions.

Teachers’ Opinions on the Effect of Using a Dictionary

Whenever possible, observers used the time they were in the school for theexamination to discover teachers’ views about modern language policy with respectto dictionary training and the effect it might have on modern language learning.These records were made verbatim.

Selection of Schools

It is impossible in experimental research in education to assign schools randomly,still less candidates. However, it was considered essential to ensure that the schoolsusing different dictionaries were matched as far as possible. The matching processwas based on Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) performance tablesand the major criterion used for selection was the national average percentage ofpupils in those schools registering at least � ve subjects in the A–C grade range atGCSE, plus or minus 15%. By selecting schools with comparable GCSE results itwas thought that differences in candidate attainment would be controlled to someextent. Schools so identi� ed were then checked against their performance in modernforeign languages by means of the most recent OFSTED reports. Departments thathad received negative comments on teaching or on speci� c dictionary use wereomitted from the sample.

Once schools had been selected by the above methods it was decided to add threeothers to ensure � rst, that the range of dictionaries selected for the research wasadequately represented and second, that there would not be too few pupils in thehigher mark bands taking the tests. The total number of schools used was 26, ofwhich six were used for the pilot experiment.

In order to increase comparability between schools using the different dictionaries


TABLE I. Circled and observation totals amongst each tier ofcandidates

TIER Data Method Number Mean

Foundation Circled 110 7.0Observed 147 10.6

Higher Circled 136 9.7Observed 175 14.9

Notes:1: Foundation and Higher ‘Circled and Observed Totals’may not be compared directly as the Foundation paper waspermitted less time than the Higher paper.2: Candidates were observed for one minute in every two.3: Of the total number of 17 observations , 12 were carriedout by two observers simultaneousl y to allow an estimate ofinter-observe r agreement to ensure reliability of the data.

selected for these tests, � ve schools agreed to the use of two different dictionaries bytheir candidates.

Examination Papers and Marking

In view of the need to take into account the full range of pupil performance with andwithout a dictionary, it was necessary to create two sets of comparable papers at bothFoundation and Higher Tiers. Drafts of these papers were created by translatingSpanish and German specimen papers into French from four of the major GCSEboards. Cultural references were altered appropriately and questions were selectedand adapted to incorporate a balanced variety of different formats. The resultingpapers included form-� lling, postcard writing and letter writing at Foundation Tier,and letter writing (overlap question) and an essay at Higher Tier.

A common mark scheme for both sets of papers was worked out with theassistance of GCSE chief and assistant examiners. A 10% sample of each marker’swork was moderated and the same markers scored both dictionary and non-diction-ary tests taken in each centre.

Observation of Dictionary Use

Candidates’ use of their dictionaries was assessed in several ways. A quantitativemeasure was gained by counting how many words were circled and by in vivoobservation of candidates when they were taking the dictionary paper. A qualitativemeasure was obtained by studying the circled answers and analysing the candidates’responses to the questionnaire.

Although the strategy of asking candidates to put a circle round each word lookedup in a dictionary yielded valuable qualitative information, it was not deemedsuf� ciently reliable for judging the frequency of dictionary consultation during theexamination (Tall & Hurman, 2000). In Table I it can be seen that the number ofwords circled by candidates in the examination was much smaller than the numbernoted by the observers, which indicates that this method underestimates the numberof times that dictionaries were consulted.

The schedule allowed 16 candidates to be observed systematically throughout the


FIG. 2: Typical examples of the dictionary observation schedule .

examination. There was a one-minute lapse between observations so that the 16candidates under observation were observed every other minute. Reliability checkson 122 candidates showed a satisfactory level of agreement (88%).

Candidates who took the Foundation Tier paper were observed 20 times in eachexamination period of 40 minutes; Higher Tier candidates were observed 30 timesbecause their examination took one hour. A further check on the ef� ciency of theobservation schedule was made by observing how long 27 candidates, in threedifferent schools, actually consulted their dictionary. Table II shows that the largestnumber of observation periods lasted only between 20 and 40 seconds, many takingless than 20 seconds. Only 10% of the consultations took more than 60 seconds (twolasted longer than 100 seconds). This indicates that the one-minute interval betweenobservation periods was a practical way of ensuring that instances of the same eventof dictionary use would not be recorded twice.

Taking into account the different number of observation periods in each Tier, it isevident that according to the observed data, both Foundation Tier and Higher Tiercandidates used their dictionaries, on average, every other minute in the examinationperiod (see Table II).

Overall, 301 candidates were observed in 16 schools. The analysis in Table IIIshows that relatively few Foundation (10%) or Higher (12%) Tier candidates usedtheir dictionaries to check their answers at the end of the examination. The majorityof Foundation Tier candidates (40%) tended to use them more frequently at thebeginning of the examination. Since they were the weaker candidates this waspresumably to understand the rubric. On the other hand a greater proportion ofHigher Tier candidates (45%) consulted their dictionaries more frequently in themiddle section of the examination. A two-way chi-square test applied to these datashowed a signi� cant difference in practice between the two Tiers (chi-square 5 6.45;df 5 2; sig. 5 5%).

This difference between Foundation and Higher Tier candidates was con� rmed

TABLE II. Dictionary consultation time

Observations Time # 20 Seconds 20–40 Seconds 40–60 Seconds . 1 min

Number of occasions 32 53 18 11Percentage of occasions 28% 46% 16% 10%


TABLE III. Dictionary use by individual candidates by period of time*

Major period of time: First Middle Last Other Total

Foundation Tier candidates 59 (40%) 44 (30%) 15 (10%) 29 (20%) 147High Tier candidates 47 (30%) 70 (45%) 18 (12%) 19 (13%) 154

*In order to make comparisons between Foundation and Higher candidates the number ofobservation s was standardised to a maximum of seven for each of the following periods of time:(a) the � rst 1/4 hour; (b) the last 1/4 hour; and (c) the remaining period between (a) and (b).

FIG. 3. Number of circles in rubric and answer amongst bottom-band candidates .

when the students’ papers were examined for circling. This showed that bottom-bandcandidates (Fig. 3) used them more for understanding the rubrics than for their ownwriting, while the opposite was true for the top band (Fig. 4) candidates who usedthem mainly for composition.

Differences Between the Three Types of Dictionary

On the basis of an initial survey of 30 schools, three types of bilingual dictionarywere selected. They were Collins Pocket French Dictionary (1990/1995), CollinsEasy Learning French Dictionary (1996) and Your French Dictionary (MalvernLanguage Guides, 1996). Collins Pocket French Dictionary is a standard type ofdictionary of 600 pages, except that the head lexical items are printed in dark red,hence the subtitle ‘Colour Edition’. There is a very brief summary of the mainFrench verb forms: almost one-and-a-half pages list the chief forms of seven tenses.A further two and two-thirds pages give numbers, fractions and time expressions.

Collins Easy Learning French Dictionary has 575 pages and is totally different inpresentation. Different fonts are used for the various types of information, thus

FIG. 4. Number of circles in rubric and answer of the top range of pupils.


easing the task of searching for words and expressions. Different types of print andlayout are used. Translations of phrases and expressions are in small print. Theoverall impression is a clear and uncluttered presentation. Snippets of information onFrench cultural background are supplied (for example, that stamps are sold at a‘cafe-tabac’ and how to recognise it), in addition advice is printed at the head ofsome words pointing to possible misunderstandings (for example, ‘a’ should not beconfused with the preposition ‘a’). The middle section of this dictionary contains twopages of notes on verbs followed by 14 pages of full verb tables. Numbers andfractions occupy one page, while two more pages are devoted to the time of theclock, days and months and useful time phrases.

Your French Dictionary has only 255 pages, costs less and selects content withGCSE pupils in mind. Apart from the greater number of verbs in the tables, whencompared to the Collins Easy Learning version the chief additions in this dictionaryfor examination purposes are three-fold. An asterisk against their main entryindicates verbs conjugated with ‘etre’. There is a � ve-page list of rubrics orinstructions common to listening and reading, speaking and writing tasks; and fourpages are devoted to writing letters, formal and informal, advising users how to startand � nish letters and address envelopes, with examples of language and format.

The three dictionaries demonstrably supply different levels of help. The researchquestion was whether that help in� uenced the marks obtained.

Questionnaire Findings: students’ comments

Almost 90% of the students owned a French dictionary to use at home and wantedto have use of a dictionary in the examination. Surprisingly, although the researchpaper was being taken as a ‘mock’ paper, only 62% of the students felt that they hadbeen trained to use a dictionary, and only 42% claimed to have been trained to usethe dictionary they were to use in the examination. Whilst this latter � gure was verydisappointing, for research purposes it must be noted that virtually all candidates(95%) felt able to � nd the French equivalent of an English word and virtually thesame percentage (94%) stated they could do the converse. The additional informationon verb forms and the presence of phrases illustrated the differences between thethree types of dictionary; the traditional type trailing behind the other two withrespect to looking up a phrase, with the Easy Learning Dictionary emerging on top.Similarly, the responses to � nding verb forms showed candidates more positiveabout the ease of doing so with Your French Dictionary (70%) and to a lesser extentCollins Easy Learning (50%) than with Collins Pocket (40%).

The most interesting differences between the three types of dictionary came fromthe two open questions concerning what candidates liked and disliked about thedictionaries used in the examination. In interpreting the following data it must benoted that the students are NOT comparing the three types directly, but commentingon the dictionary they were using in the examination. The only comparison candi-dates could make was with any dictionaries they had used before.

In terms of usability, Collins Easy Learning was clearly favoured (40%) with YourFrench Dictionary not far behind (35%); Collins Pocket was mentioned by only 26%of candidates. One aspect for which Your French Dictionary was particularlycriticised was its limited range of vocabulary (43%).

Regarding the provision of phrases and examples, Collins Easy Learning wasdeemed to be the best, at 20%, with Your French Dictionary reaching only half that


percentage, while just 3% of the students using Collins Pocket commentedfavourably.

With respect to information on verbs, Your French Dictionary found most favour,with just over a quarter of candidates (26%) thinking it helpful and it is perhapssurprising that Collins Easy Learning was not better viewed in this respect (7%).

As Your French Dictionary has a speci� c section on writing letters, it might havebeen expected that candidates using this dictionary should mention its utility, butonly 12% of its users did so.

Fewer candidates using Your French Dictionary commented on the length of timetaken to use a dictionary in the examination (7%) than those using Collins EasyLearning; Collins Pocket seemed to be the least favoured with respect to the timetaken to consult it (18%).

Qualitative Assessment of Dictionary Use

On a qualitative assessment of scripts where words had been circled, it wasrepeatedly discovered that dictionaries were not used by the large majority ofcandidates for checking genders nor for verifying the spelling of individual words.With relatively few exceptions verbs were copied inappropriately in the in� nitiveform and there was a high degree of miscopying of nouns and phrases. The mainuses of the dictionary appear to have been to � nd words for completing a sentenceor idea once started, or to � nd past participles or phrases, the latter two functionsbeing con� ned largely to candidates in the top band, and to a lesser extent in themiddle band.

There was very widespread ignorance of the differences between verbs and nouns,made worse in many cases by a lack of understanding of dictionary abbreviations forword categories, which resulted in a great number of English expressions directlytransposed into meaningless French, for example:

‘J’ai propre/propu la chambre’ (cleaned)‘Je s’eteindre a 8h.’ (went out)‘Puis semaine’ (next week)‘Je gauche’ (I left)‘Je suis deborder des sur un madame’ (I spilt some on a lady)‘une � lle abattre duvet’ (fell down)

There were several reports of a fair number of phrases being taken directly from thedictionary:

‘la semaine derniere’‘c’est tellement genant’

Phrases copied directly from Your French Dictionary were particularly noticeable inthe letter (overlap) question, where candidates had used, for example:

‘En attendant de tes nouvelles. Amities.’

and

‘C’est tout pour aujourd’hui.’

A very large number of candidates, some from the top, but most from the middleand bottom bands, used the dictionary to � nd the meaning of several words in the


FIG. 5. Use of dictionary to understand the rubric by bottom-band candidates .

question rubrics or in the text supplied. Some were evidently unable to � nd particularword meanings due to the inability to recognise personal forms of verbs (e.g. ‘vousdepensez’).

Considering the circling of rubric words by all candidates, the results show nosigni� cant difference in the use of the three dictionaries. However, consideringbottom-band candidates (Fig. 5), it was very highly signi� cant that fewer candidateswith Your French Dictionary omitted to use it for looking up rubric words thancandidates using the other two dictionaries. The percentage use of Your FrenchDictionary on three or more occasions was more than double that of the other twodictionaries—a result that is very highly signi� cant (two-way chi-square 5 19.6;df 5 4; sig. 5 0.1%).

With respect to circling items in written answers by all candidates in the threebands taken together (Fig. 6), a highly signi� cant difference was found between YourFrench Dictionary and the other two dictionaries, in that much more use was madeof the former (two-way chi-square 5 13.53 at 4 df).

Whilst the differences in the use of dictionaries could be a consequence of trainingin schools, or of the extent to which candidates were reminded to circle words lookedup, the � ndings appear to indicate a difference in the accessibility of differentdictionaries. The frequency of use of Your French Dictionary could be ascribed toits simpler format and smaller volume of entries purposely tailored to the needs of

FIG. 6. Use of dictionaries in writing answers by all candidates .


TABLE IV. Band difference s in circling for rubrics and for written answers

Rubrics Answers

Mark Range 0* 1 5 N2* 3 1 * Total* 0* 1 5 N2* 3 1 * Total*

Top 66% 26% 8% 65 32% 8% 60% 65Middle 56% 23% 21% 289 40% 13% 47% 289Bottom 54% 15% 31% 239 69% 13% 19% 239All questionnaire s 56% 20% 23% 593 51% 12% 37% 593

*Number of words/phrases circled

GCSE candidates. For the majority of candidates, that is those in the middle band,this � nding also applied to Collins Easy Learning Dictionary.

Table V summarises the band differences in dictionary consultation for rubricwords and for help with answers. A clear progressive change in the number ofdictionary consultations is evident from the bottom to top-band candidates. Whiletwo-thirds of the top-band candidates did not consult the dictionary for rubric words,almost the same percentage (68%) used it at least once to write their answers. Almosta half of the bottom-band candidates circled at least some rubric items whilst farfewer used it to create their answers.

The Effect of Dictionary Use on Final Scores

This research was primarily designed to assess the impact of different dictionaries onmarks scored in GCSE writing examinations, but in the process it was hoped toobtain information on the impact of dictionaries per se. However, when the resultsof the two sets of papers were compared, it was evident that although great care hadbeen taken to make the papers equivalent in dif� culty, those papers in which adictionary was allowed were slightly harder.

To ensure a fair assessment of the impact of dictionary use, the results of matchedcandidates in the Main and Pilot experiments (Table VI) were compared. For bothFoundation and Higher Tier candidates the differences in achievement were statisti-cally signi� cant. Hence candidates using a dictionary in the study increased theirscores.

TABLE V. Matched pilot and main experiment groups at foundation tier

Pilot Expt. Main Comment

Foundation Tier Paper 1y Paper 2y Paper 1y Paper 2y The net difference inNumber 71 71 181 181 mark between the twoMean Score 18.25 16.52 18.42 19.97 papers is thereforeMean Difference* 2 1.73 1.55 ( 1 1.55) 2 ( 2 1.73) 5 3.28

Pilot Experiment Main Experiment CommentHigher Tier Paper 1y Paper 2y Paper 1y Paper 2y The net difference inNumber 69 69 338 338 mark between the twoMean Score 25.57 21.12 26.01 23.77 papers is thereforeMean Difference* 2 4.45 2 2.24 ( 2 2.24) — ( 2 4.45) 5 2.21

y Paper 1 used without a dictionary, Paper 2 used with a dictionary.*Mean Difference 5 Difference in the mean scores on the two papers.


TABLE VI. Comparison of Collins Pocket, Easy Learning and Your French Dictionary

Collins Pocket Collins Easy Learning Your French Dictionary

Paper 1 Paper 2y Paper 1 Paper 2y Paper 1 Paper 2yNumber 131 131 137 137 148 148Mean Score 19.38 20.72 16.18 17.39 19.44 19.69Mean Difference* 1.34 1.21 0.25

Notes: y Paper 2 was used with the named dictionary .*Mean Difference 5 Difference in the mean scores on the two papers.

From the matched data, it is apparent that when both Higher and Foundation Tierstudents use a dictionary their average � nal score increased by approximately twoand three marks respectively. With better training in dictionary use the improvementin score might well be higher.

The Effect of Different Dictionaries at Foundation Tier

Table VII gives the results for schools matched on the basis of DfEE and OFSTEDinformation and ignores the type of dictionary used. It is noticeable that all three ofthe new dictionaries overcame the extra dif� culty of Paper 2.

Although the mean difference varies by as much as a mark, it is not suf� cient toshow overall superiority. However, when the marks on individual questions wereconsidered (Hurman & Tall, 1998) it became apparent that the effect of thedictionaries differed. Question 1, which simply required one-word translations, wastackled better by below average candidates using Your French Dictionary and to alesser extent Collins Easy Learning—both smaller and simpler dictionaries to use.No differences were found with Question 2, which required a short postcard to bewritten. On Question 3, the letter question, Your French Dictionary was as effectiveas Collins Pocket; presumably the useful information on letter-writing counterbal-anced the larger vocabulary of the Pocket Dictionary.

The Effect of Different Dictionaries at Higher Tier

The structure of this analysis parallels that used with the Foundation Tier. Theincreased dif� culty of Paper 2 (the dictionary paper) identi� ed by the pilot exper-iment remained evident when the three dictionaries from comparable groups ofschools were considered (Table VIII). However, unlike the � ndings for the Foun-dation Tier, the mean differences between the three dictionaries are highlysigni� cant, with the Pocket Dictionary being least useful.

Hurman and Tall (1998) reported that on the individual questions, Collins Pocket

TABLE VII. Effect of three different dictionarie s at the higher tier (D-Exp)

Collins Pocket Collins Easy Learning Your French Dictionary

Paper 1 Paper 2 Paper 1 Paper 2 Paper 1 Paper 2Number 156 156 74 74 133 133Mean 23.00 19.65 22.68 21.85 26.58 25.11Mean Difference 2 3.35 2 0.82 2 1.47


appeared to be a less effective dictionary in the GCSE writing paper examination.Your French Dictionary stood out as the most helpful when candidates answered theletter question, even more than it was for Foundation Tier candidates.

In the second question on the Higher Tier Paper, the Easy Learning and to a lesserextent Your French Dictionary were more effective than the Pocket Dictionary.

Summary

The number of times candidates used their dictionaries was surprisingly high. Evenwhen candidates felt they knew the answer many seemed to feel it necessary tocheck. Foundation Tier candidates, in particular, found their dictionaries necessaryfor understanding the questions. The policy of writing the rubric and questions in thetarget language clearly disadvantages the least able candidates. Whilst Higher Tiercandidates did use their dictionaries primarily to answer the question, it wasdisappointing that they did not have the con� dence to use their dictionary towardsthe end of the examination. The extent of candidate dictionary use horri� ed classteachers, for example:

as I saw in the exam … panic takes over and the majority of my pupilsdon’t think rationally and looked up ridiculous things.

Another comment echoed this disappointment:

It was interesting to see how children used their dictionaries—i.e. howmany relied on them and failed to use them as a checking aid asadvised … the dictionary paper took pupils far longer and wasn’t alwayscompleted, yet everyone completed the non-dictionary paper.

In the study, the availability of a dictionary in a Modern Language examinationincreased mean scores on written examination papers. At Foundation Tier thereappears to be little difference as to which dictionary is used. At Higher Tier thedictionary effect is very clear, though candidates using Collins Pocket Dictionary arerelatively disadvantaged. When the achievements of candidates on different ques-tions were studied, the overlapping question involving writing a letter was moreeffectively answered by candidates using Your French Dictionary, whilst the ex-tended piece of writing was most effectively answered by those using Collins EasyLearning Dictionary.

Correspondence: Dr G. E. Tall, School of Education, University of Birmingham,Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK. E-mail: [email protected]

REFERENCES

ASHER, C., CHAMBERS, G. & HALL, K. (1999) Dictionary Use in MFL Examinations in the GCSE: HowSchools are Meeting the Challenge, Language Learning Journal, 19, pp. 28–32.

BISHOP, G. (1998) Research into the Use being made of Bilingual Dictionaries , Language LearningJournal , 18, pp. 3–8.

BISHOP, G. (2000) Dictionaries, Examinations and Stress, Language Learning Journal, 20, pp. 57–65.COLLINS (1995) Collins Pocket French Dictionary (Glasgow, HarperCollins).COLLINS (1996) Collins Easy Learning French Dictionary (Glasgow, HarperCollins).DfEE (1997) DfEE Performance Tables, available at: http://www.open.gov.uk/dfee /perform.htm


HURMAN, J. & TALL, G. (1998) The Use of Dictionaries in GCSE Modern Foreign Languages WrittenExaminations (French). A report for the Quali� cations and Curriculum Authority.

MALVERN (1996) Your French Dictionary (Malvern, Malvern Language Guides).OFSTED (1997) OFSTED Inspection Reports, available at: http://www.open.gov.uk/htm/seclea.htmQCA (1997) The Quali� cations and Curriculum Authority’s document inviting research proposals .

Unpublished.TALL, G. & HURMAN, J. (2000) Using a Dictionary in a Written French GCSE Examination: The

Candidates’ Experience , Language Learning Journal, 21, pp. 50–56.

tall&hurman_2002_using dictionaries in modern language gcse examinations

Documents