This document is an overview of a broad range of submissions on language education provided by 19 expert organisations, made up of subject associations covering English (NATE, EA), literacy (UKLA), EAL (English as an additional language at school: NALDIC), ESOL (English for adult speakers of other languages: NATECLA), Home, Heritage & Community languages (HHCLs; ALL, NATECLA), Modern Languages (ALL, BGA, L@MFL, UCFL), Classics (TCA), and bodies with a wide cross-curricular brief for languages (AQA, BC, BA, CIOL, CLE, CLiE, NALA, TBF, WoLLoW). These organisations had either published or agreed for their submissions (or summaries of their submissions (EA, TCA)) to be posted on a webpage hosted by the Committee for Linguistics in Education (CLiE) – 2024 C&A Review – Committee for Linguistics in Education – and this collection of texts provides the material for the digest that follows.

Although there are significant stakeholder organisations that are not included in this summary,1 these 19 submissions combine to provide a rather comprehensive view of what professional specialists in different areas of language education think of the current provision for 5-19 year olds in England, along with many of their ideas for improvement. The current text is intended to help navigate this substantial collection, and it identifies key commonalities, points of divergence, and areas calling for further discussion or evidence. It is offered in the first instance as a resource for language organisations themselves, facilitating further interaction and/or alignment as the CAR’s consultation unfolds. Beyond that, the text can be read as a snapshot of the current state of play and hopes for the future of curriculum and assessment in language education.

The first stage in the production of this document has been collaboratively undertaken by volunteers linked to the BA, BAAL, CLE, CLiE and LAGB.2 The second stage involved circulation to the associations and organisations whose submissions the document refers to, which have led to minor revisions in this final text. Because it follows the section headings in the CAR’s Call for Evidence and seeks accountability to the associations/ organisations and their submissions (which varied in the manner and detail of their responses), the main part of this digest is unavoidably repetitive. To help the reader track particular topics, there is an index at the end (digital searches may also be useful). Indeed, for their detailed arguments and their often extensive references to supporting research, readers should consult the individual submissions.

The views of the 19 expert organisations can, however, be drawn together more succinctly as follows