This year again, the results of the Written French Certification Test for Teaching (TECFEE) are disappointing. Voices are being raised to revise this test, seen as outdated or too difficult. What follows are the eternal complaints against what is perceived as a leveling down. However, neither the results nor the requests for change are new.
It should not be believed that students of yesteryear wrote without mistakes. The spelling specialist André Chervel recounts heated discussions held in the 19th century.e century around the level of spelling in France. In 1879, in the examination to obtain the elementary certificate leading to the teaching profession, 91% of students failed because of dictation.
The director of primary education, Ferdinand Buisson, wants to put a stop to what he calls “spelling fetishism”. “What culture did primary schools have to give up in order to be able to continue teaching double consonants, participle agreements and the plurals of compound nouns?” he asks. He changes the requirements: rather than rejecting copies that contain more than three mistakes (!), a “general assessment” mark is given.
Public opinion is inflamed: “Never have the brevet exams given a more disappointing result. Public and private schools are being filled every day with teachers who are inferior to their functions,” we read in The Educational Review from June 1884.
What does this foray into the past show us? First, that there was never a time when all French speakers mastered spelling. So let’s not be nostalgic for a time that never existed. Second, that quarrels over spelling are not new.
The historian of the language Mireille Huchon tells us about the one opposing the supporters of a spelling that more respects the alphabetic principle, nicely called the spelling “mirror of speech”, and the supporters of the so-called learned spelling, that is to say with links – real or supposed – with Latin. On May 8, 1673, the French Academy decided in favor of learned spelling “which distinguishes men of letters from the Ignorants and simple women”. If we would no longer dare to formulate the thing in this way, this elitist vision does not seem to me to have completely disappeared.
Finally, history shows us that school problems related to spelling are recurrent. And that the complexity of French spelling is not without social consequences. In their enlightening work Who is afraid of reform?Georges Legros and Marie-Louise-Moreau compare the reading and writing skills of students in several European countries. French speakers always come at the back of the pack. Finnish and Greek students obtain 98% in reading after one year of schooling. Spanish, Italian and German students: 95%.
French-speaking students? 34%. With sometimes triple the teaching time than other languages. However, this time devoted to spelling is stolen from fundamental aspects: reading comprehension, writing, argumentation, vocabulary, etc. What’s more, spelling will follow the student who has a poor command of it into other disciplines. This causes demotivation and could have consequences on school dropout.
The figures on illiteracy in Quebec, where education is compulsory until age 16, are alarming: according to the Literacy Foundation, 19% of Quebecers are illiterate and 34.3% have great difficulty reading. How can we explain that literacy rates in less fortunate countries are significantly higher, if we are to believe data from the World Bank? This is particularly the case in Spanish-speaking countries, despite sometimes very low GDPs. Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru: 94%.
The history of the Spanish language is similar in many ways to that of French: they are both languages that originated from Latin, which experienced a dialectal fragmentation at the fall of Rome, followed by a period of great variation, and which today have a vast geographical distribution. The major difference? Spanish regularly makes spelling changes.
Yes, French speakers make spelling mistakes. However, French-speaking students are no less intelligent than those speaking another language, and the teaching staff is no less dedicated here than elsewhere. We are neglecting the main factor in this problem: French spelling itself.
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that language is not just about spelling. If a student says they are “bad at French,” chances are it’s spelling. Data collected by the Quebec Ministry of Education also shows that spelling is the least mastered aspect of the language: at the end of their secondary studies, students obtain on average more than 80% for syntax and punctuation, more than 90% for vocabulary, clarity, argumentation, but only 55% for spelling.
As the linguist Pierre Calvé says, if certain things, like a mathematical theorem, are inherently complex, spelling is not supposed to be: “We must not confuse the tool with what we can do with it.” Spelling was supposed to be a key to learning: it has become a school subject. But spelling is not inevitable. We must not endure it without flinching, but rather perfect it, update it as Spanish, Italian, German have done…
It would not be a leveling down to improve the French spelling system. It is even urgent: for the literacy of society, but also for the integration of newcomers. If native French speakers have difficulty mastering the rules of agreement of the past participle, imagine the headache for allophones.