rss

<![CDATA[Test Center]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/favicon.pngTest Centerhttps://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/Ghost 6.54Thu, 23 Jul 2026 14:10:15 GMT60<![CDATA[Is the Duolingo English Test accepted in Scotland?]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/duolingo-english-test-accepted-in-scotland/6a56359a3a3e59000148a84cTue, 14 Jul 2026 13:32:01 GMT

Yes. The Duolingo English Test (DET) is an online English proficiency test accepted by more than 6,500 institutions worldwide. And many universities in Scotland accept the DET as proof of English proficiency for English-taught undergraduate and postgraduate programs.

Scotland welcomes international students

Scotland has long been a destination for students seeking academic excellence in a welcoming, international environment. Its universities combine world-class teaching with groundbreaking research, while cities like Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Aberdeen each offer their own unique blend of culture and student life.

With English-taught undergraduate and postgraduate programs spanning nearly every discipline, Scotland provides students with the opportunity to earn globally recognized degrees while experiencing everything from medieval castles and dramatic coastlines to vibrant arts festivals and innovative technology hubs.

Scottish universities that accept the Duolingo English Test

The Duolingo English Test is accepted by leading universities throughout Scotland, including:

These are just a few of the thousands of programs around the world that accept the DET as proof of English proficiency! See our complete list of 6,500+ accepting institutions to find your dream school.

Search 6,500+ accepting institutions

The DET can take you there!

Whether you're drawn to Scotland's historic universities, vibrant cities, spectacular landscapes, or world-renowned research, the Duolingo English Test offers a flexible, affordable way to demonstrate your English proficiency. With fast results and acceptance at leading universities across Scotland, the DET can help you take the next step toward studying in one of the world's great education destinations.

]]><![CDATA[Embedding security in digital assessment: An evidence base for institutional confidence]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/english-test-security-digital-assessment-compliance/6a2082b4a3f8520001808a7cWed, 10 Jun 2026 05:00:02 GMT

Ross Porter MCMI is Director of Visa Compliance and Financial Aid at London Business School and a member of the DET UK Advisory Board. Alongside his role at LBS, Ross is a UKCISA Trustee and provides independent consultancy on UKVI compliance and audit assurance. He also co-chairs the UCISA Immigration Community of Practice, bringing together compliance leaders from across the sector to share intelligence, respond to regulatory change, and shape collective approaches to UKVI requirements.

Compliance sits at the forefront of institutional strategy in a way it never has before. For many in the Higher Education sector, international student recruitment is essential to financial viability, yet this reliance brings exposure to unprecedented levels of regulatory risk at a time when the margins for error are narrowing sharply.

Read the DET Security and Score Integrity Report

Why compliance and English test security matter more than ever

Earlier this month, the Basic Compliance Assessment (BCA) metrics halved, with a much tougher sanctions regime not just for institutions who exceed the metrics, but also for those who merely come close to doing so. Against a backdrop of rapidly increasing refusal rates and visa delays, institutions find themselves navigating risks they don't fully control, in a competitive market characterised by declining student mobility, diminishing returns, and growing deficits. Recruitment strategies are being determined as much by risk appetite and external regulatory requirements from the Home Office, as by commercial opportunity.

In this context, online English language testing has, understandably, attracted scrutiny. There is a legitimate question about whether a test taken at home, on the individual's own computer, can match the security of one taken under traditionally invigilated exam conditions, or even surpass it.

Given the far-reaching consequences of getting it wrong – sponsor licence suspensions, curtailed CAS allocations, enforced action plans – caution is both rational and reasonable. Universities need robust assurance that the students they are sponsoring are genuine, with the right qualifications and level of English to meet visa thresholds and succeed academically. And they need to secure that assurance in a way that avoids unnecessary barriers to entry.

As technology continues to evolve, so do our students. And so too must the tools we use to assess them. Advances in technology provide new opportunities for those looking to secure admission through fraudulent means, and it's not just the Home Office looking to penalise those who fail to stay one step ahead. At the same time, these advances have unlocked new capabilities for detecting fraudulent behaviors.

Robust compliance does not have to be conservative; it’s about adopting processes which demonstrably manage risk, whilst maintaining academic and regulatory standards. Being compliant means demonstrating due diligence in our sponsor duties through evidence-based assessment of the tools and processes we rely on.

How digital assessment security supports institutional confidence

The Duolingo English Test (DET) Security White Paper, being released at DETCon London this month, offers a detailed account of how security and score integrity can be embedded within digital-first assessments. It provides assurance to compliance, academic, and recruitment professionals alike that digital accessibility can coexist with robust security standards.

Central to the DET framework is an understanding that effective digital security is not about replacing human judgment with technology, but about combining them. The DET employs what it terms a "human-in-the-loop AI" approach: a multi-layered system in which artificial intelligence flags potential issues, but trained human proctors retain final authority over all decisions affecting test integrity. This model demonstrates how technology can enhance rather than diminish the rigor of security oversight.

The report details the full architecture of this approach: environment lockdown, biometric identity verification, adaptive testing that mitigates content theft, encrypted communications, comprehensive audit trails, and continuous quality assurance through statistical analysis of proctor decisions. Most importantly, it demonstrates transparency in methodology, which is precisely what we need when evidencing due diligence in our sponsor duties.

Balancing accessibility, compliance, and assessment integrity

For institutions seeking to balance accessibility with accountability, the DET Security and Score Integrity Report offers a roadmap, providing the evidence base that compliance teams need to assess whether digital assessment meets the standard of assurance required for sponsor licence obligations. In an environment where regulatory scrutiny is intensifying, and institutions are held accountable for the robustness of their admissions processes, this level of transparency is essential.

The challenges facing the sector will not diminish. Regulatory scrutiny will continue to intensify, and the technological landscape will continue to evolve. What the DET Security White Paper offers is a transparent, detailed, and evidence-based account of how one assessment provider has approached these challenges. It is a helpful resource for those tasked with making informed decisions about the tools and processes that underpin institutional confidence in an increasingly complex compliance environment.

Read the DET Security and Score Integrity Report

]]><![CDATA[AI in admissions: Why most teams are using it wrong]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/ai-in-admissions-awareness-to-agency/6a28106ab8f72400012dd8ddTue, 09 Jun 2026 13:37:04 GMT

Patrick Wheeler is the Executive Director of the Center for Digital Strategies at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College. The From Awareness to Agency: Practical AI for Enrollment Teams webinar series is presented in partnership with the Duolingo English Test team and runs across Summer 2026.

Most of the visible debate about AI in admissions is about the applicant side: How do we detect students’s use of AI? Is using AI to write an essay cheating? Is the essay dead? These are important questions, but they're downstream. The bigger question is what admissions offices are doing on their side of the table. Because while many admissions teams may already be using AI to do things like polish their emails or summarize lengthy documents, they’re not getting the full value out of this powerful tool.

Register for "Practical AI for Enrollment Teams"

Why most admissions teams are struggling to get value from AI

There’s a lot of hype about AI. But the data on the value most organizations are actually getting out of AI is sobering. And two of the most credible global studies on enterprise AI adoption are pointing at the same problem.

Boston Consulting Group's September 2025 Build for the Future study, The Widening AI Value Gap, surveyed more than 1,250 companies globally. It found that only 5% are achieving AI value at scale. Another 35% are scaling their efforts and seeing some returns, but most of those companies admit they are not moving far enough or fast enough. Sixty percent have little or nothing to show for their AI investment: minimal revenue gains, minimal cost gains, despite substantial spending. Of those laggards, over 30% admit they have made no progress at all.

These results are consistent with McKinsey's most recent State of AI report, which reveals that nearly two-thirds of organizations have not yet begun scaling AI across the enterprise. Most are still in experimentation or piloting.

Stated as one finding: the vast majority of organizations (95%, according to BCG) are not yet generating value from AI at scale. And because Admissions offices operate inside institutions subject to the same dynamics BCG documents across every sector studied, Higher Education is not exempt from these challenges. Recent reporting in Forbes and the Associated Press makes a few things clear: AI is no longer a horizon technology in college admissions. It is already inside the function. Some institutions are using AI tools to score essays. Some are running candidate-evaluation models that surface ranked recommendations to readers.

Now run that finding through admissions. A meaningful share of applicants are already using AI to draft and polish essays. If your office is using AI to score those same essays, you are not measuring applicants. You are measuring how well their AI tool stylistically matches yours. That is not a bias you can train your readers around or rubric your way out of. It is baked into the model. And it is exactly the failure mode you would expect when one technology is deployed on both sides of an evaluation it was never designed to mediate.

Where AI can create the most value in admissions

This research should land as a stop sign. But despite a growing body of evidence that the resulting decisions are partly an artifact of toolchain alignment rather than candidate merit, recruiters in the corporate world and admissions teams in higher education are continuing to deploy AI at the evaluation point, at scale.

The cleanest defense against this failure mode is not better calibration or a different model. It is not to deploy AI at the point of evaluation in the first place. Because the high-leverage uses of AI sit elsewhere.

AI is genuinely valuable in admissions not for evaluation itself, but for the complex analytical work that surrounds it: Class shaping under multi-constraint pressure; Yield modeling and personalized yield campaigns; Waitlist optimization against tight financial aid budgets; Interview design that probes the actual open questions in a file; Reader calibration on the coded language in recommendation letters; Equity-aware policy stress-testing before a decision gets institutionalized. These are the use cases I build into workshops I run for admissions teams. They are largely absent from current coverage, and they are the use cases that would actually improve outcomes.

If you work in admissions, it’s the difference between a team that is quietly using ChatGPT to clean up emails while the rest of the function gets harder, and a team that can run more rigorous yield analyses, evaluate authenticity questions with consistency, and pressure-test policy decisions before they hit the inbox.

The admissions offices that move from AI awareness to AI agency this summer will spend the next cycle solving better problems. The ones that don't will spend it explaining why they fell behind.

Moving from AI awareness to AI agency

I hear two important concerns from admissions professionals: That AI will erode the professional judgment that makes this work meaningful, or that it will be used as cover for thinning out the team.

Both fears are reasonable, and both describe the same misuse pattern I named above: AI deployed at the point of evaluation rather than in service of evaluation. That is the failure mode. Luckily, it is not the only path.

Agency, in the sense I mean it, is the capacity to direct an AI toward a decision your team actually owns. The decision still belongs to the human; the AI is a force multiplier for the analysis behind it.

This might look like an admissions committee modeling a waitlist pull across three constraints (regional gaps, STEM mix, first-gen percentage) and stress-testing it against the financial aid budget in 30 minutes instead of three days. Or a reader using AI to decode the coded language in a recommendation letter or surface inconsistencies across a file, without outsourcing the final judgment. Or a director pressure-testing an authenticity or AI policy by working through five hard edge cases with an AI partner before the policy goes to committee.

These are examples of more high-leverage ways your team could be using AI. Every session in this series is grounded in the principle that AI expands what your team can do, particularly the high-judgment, high-context work that is the whole point of the function.

A practical AI training series for admissions professionals

This summer, in partnership with the Duolingo English Test team, I'm running From Awareness to Agency: Practical AI for Enrollment Teams , a three-part webinar series built specifically for admissions and enrollment professionals who want to move from the wrong side of that value gap to the right side.

Session 1. Building Your AI Foundation

Before tools, context. The single biggest determinant of whether an AI output is useful is not which model you're using. It's the context you have given it. We'll work through how to build personal, team, and institutional context documents that make every subsequent AI interaction better. We'll also talk about how to bring along skeptical colleagues, what team norms for transparency look like, and how to land on the right side of the value gap structurally rather than through individual heroics.

Session 2. AI for Admissions Professionals

A hands-on deep dive into the questions you are actually wrestling with this cycle. How do you evaluate application authenticity in a world where most applicants have access to AI? What does an equity-aware AI policy for application review actually say? How do you use AI for cohort-level analysis and waitlist modeling without baking in last year's biases? How do you generate synthetic applicant data for training new readers? These are the questions I keep hearing in conversations with admissions leaders. Session 2 is built around them.

Session 3. Advanced AI: Agents, Automation, and Risk

For teams ready to move past prompting and into building. We'll cover what agentic workflows actually are, where they belong inside admissions operations and where they don't, how to manage cost and governance at the team and institutional level, and how to draft an AI adoption roadmap that survives leadership turnover. This is the session that takes you from "I use AI" to "we have an AI capability."

Join us. Bring a colleague. You can attend one, two, or all three. The exercises and materials are designed so any practitioner can join at any point. You will leave with materials, frameworks, and a peer network that changes how your team works the following week.

Register for our webinar series!

]]><![CDATA[New research in Language Testing: Does test question order affect performance?]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-test-section-ordering-research/6a15c069433d730001279093Tue, 26 May 2026 19:57:17 GMT

Take almost any standardized language proficiency test, and you'll encounter a certain structure: a section on listening, then reading, then writing, then speaking (i.e., receptive skills before productive ones). In other words, items (that is, the questions and tasks that make up the test) are grouped by skill. But have you ever wondered why tests are organized this way? And whether there's actually any evidence that this approach to test design is optimal?

These are the questions we address in a new systematic review published in the journal Language Testing.

Read the full study

What research says about language test ordering

To find out what empirical research says about test ordering, we reviewed 88 studies published from 1933 to 2023 that examined how the ordering of items, tasks, and sections affects test-taker performance, perceptions, and affect (i.e., emotions, feelings, and moods).

What we found was striking: despite the field's emphasis on rigorous test validation, only three of the 88 studies we reviewed directly examined ordering effects in language proficiency assessment contexts. The vast majority of research has been conducted in university classroom settings, primarily on multiple-choice exams. Given the diversity of testing contexts and test formats, this research base is narrow in scope.

For a design decision baked into virtually every high-stakes language test, the empirical foundation is remarkably thin.

Do easier questions improve language test performance?

The most studied question in the ordering literature focuses on difficulty: should tests present items from easy to hard, hard to easy, or some other configuration? The evidence, while mixed, tends to favor starting with easier items: test takers who begin with lower-difficulty items perform modestly better on average, particularly under time pressure, and report lower anxiety levels. These effects vary across groups of test takers and testing conditions rather than applying uniformly, and are strongest among lower-proficiency and more anxious test takers. And when features of a test impact test-taker subgroups differently, there is potential for unfairness.

The Duolingo English Test's design reflects the easy-to-hard ordering approach. The test begins with relatively simple vocabulary tasks, and its computer-adaptive format ensures that each test taker receives items calibrated to their proficiency level throughout—neither so difficult as to be demoralizing, nor so easy as to be uninformative. This is one expression of the DET's broader commitment to the test-taker experience and to minimizing sources of test-induced anxiety.

Why do language tests have skill-based sections?

Beyond item difficulty, our review raises a more fundamental question: why do language tests group all listening items together, then all reading items, and finally writing and speaking items?

This arrangement is standard practice across the field. But we found essentially no empirical evidence that skill-based grouping leads to better measurement or fairer outcomes than, for example, alternating between task types. Section ordering in language testing appears to be driven largely by convention, intuition, and by practical constraints of paper-based and group-administered testing, not by research demonstrating it is optimal.

The DET does not strictly group items by skill. In the first half of the test, reading and listening tasks alternate; in the second half, writing and speaking tasks alternate. This structure reflects practical and psychometric design decisions rather than a claim that alternating task types is empirically superior to skill-based grouping—because, as our review makes clear, that evidence does not yet exist. What is clear is that the conventional approach deserves scrutiny rather than assumed superiority.

Why language test ordering matters for fairness and validity

For admissions offices and faculty who rely on language proficiency scores, these findings point to an important consideration: design choices that seem unremarkable, like the order in which sections appear, are not neutral. They can influence test-taker experience and, potentially, how accurately scores reflect actual proficiency.

Ordering is a fairness and validity issue, not merely a logistical one. A test that introduces unnecessary anxiety or disadvantages lower-proficiency test takers through its structure adds construct-irrelevant variance — noise that makes scores less meaningful. Institutions deserve to understand how the tests they accept are designed, and to ask whether those choices are grounded in evidence.

What comes next for language test design research

Perhaps the most important takeaway from our review is how much remains unknown. The research base on test ordering in language assessment is thin, raising more questions than it answers. Those questions matter especially for computer-adaptive and digital-first tests, which have a degree of technical flexibility that paper-based tests never did. The order in which content is delivered no longer has to be fixed, opening the door to dynamic ordering approaches and to rethinking assumptions about test design that have gone largely unexamined for decades.

We hope this review will serve as a starting point for more empirical work. And if you're a researcher interested in this area, we encourage you to consider applying for one of the DET's competitive research grants or doctoral dissertation awards!

Read the full study in Language Testing

]]><![CDATA[Are remote tests secure? How the Duolingo English Test approaches AI and fairness]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/remote-english-test-security-ai-fairness/6a060beec031b6000172facbFri, 15 May 2026 17:25:35 GMT

Remote high-stakes tests have become more common, and so have questions about how they work: Can someone use AI to cheat on a remote test? What happens if a test taker disconnects? How do you detect proxy test takers? Are online tests really as secure as tests taken in person?

Below are some of the most common questions people ask about remote testing, along with how the Duolingo English Test approaches security, identity verification, accessibility, and test integrity.

Does the Duolingo English Test use a secure browser?

Yes. Instead of a standard internet browser, the Duolingo English Test uses a proprietary secure testing application.

Early remote testing systems often relied on standard browsers with plugins or extensions. Those systems became increasingly vulnerable as cheating methods evolved. That’s why we designed our secure desktop application specifically for high-stakes remote assessment. The application helps prevent behaviors associated with outside assistance, including screen sharing, unauthorized software use, virtual machines, copy-paste behavior, and other forms of external interference during the exam.

But of course, we don’t rely on any one measure to secure the test! This application works in combination with additional layers of behavioral analysis and review, so that no one layer of our security is lode-bearing.

Learn how to set up your space for the DET

How does the Duolingo English Test verify identity?

The Duolingo English Test uses multiple layers of identity verification before and during the test. These systems include Government ID verification, facial recognition and facial matching, behavioral analysis, and device fingerprinting.

But it doesn't stop there! Rather than relying on a single ID check at the beginning of the exam, the DET continues identity verification throughout the testing process. This layered approach helps detect impersonation attempts, organized proxy testing operations, and repeated suspicious behavior across multiple test sessions.

Can AI detect cheating on the Duolingo English Test?

AI plays an important role in DET security systems, but human reviewers are, and have always been, essential. Human proctors use AI to enhance their ability to review the test session.

The DET uses AI-assisted security review to help identify things like suspicious behavioral patterns, possible impersonation attempts, behavioral patterns associated with unauthorized assistance, and potential deepfake manipulation. And we're always monitoring for repeated suspicious activity across administrations.

Our systems flag potentially suspicious behavior for our proctors, who use this diagnosis when they conduct their review of the test session. A real live human proctor reviews every test session, one at a time. This additional review helps distinguish between suspicious behavior and ordinary testing conditions such as background noise, connectivity issues, or natural test-taking behaviors.

The DET team also continuously updates security systems as AI-generated cheating techniques evolve.

Why did we deliberately hack the DET?

How does the Duolingo English Test prevent content leaks?

If test questions spread online, future test takers may gain advance access to prompts or answers. This can make scores less reliable and reduce confidence that test results accurately reflect a student’s English proficiency.

The DET was designed to make large-scale question sharing extremely difficult. Rather than relying on a small set of fixed forms that repeat across administrations, the DET continuously varies question selection and adapts the test in real time based on a test taker’s responses. Because the test is adaptive, no two test forms are alike. This makes large-scale content sharing significantly more difficult than on fixed-form exams that reuse the same questions repeatedly.

Several design features support this approach: not only our adaptive test design that pulls content dynamically from a pool of tens of thousands of items, but also our use of integrated speaking and writing tasks, and questions that require open-ended responses instead of heavily multiple-choice formats.

Learn more about adaptive testing

How does the Duolingo English Test detect proxy test takers?

Rather than relying on a single signal, the DET evaluates patterns across the entire testing session. We leverage multiple systems to identify behavioral patterns associated with proxy testing and impersonation, including facial matching technology, behavioral and typing pattern analysis, and tools that let us detect hidden devices that people may use to communicate remotely, like our patent-pending ear scan technology.

This layered approach helps identify suspicious behavior while reducing the risk of false positives.

What happens if someone disconnects during the Duolingo English Test?

Internet and other technical interruptions can happen during any remote assessment. Rather than treating every interruption as suspicious on its own, the DET evaluates disconnects in the context of overall testing behavior.

Security systems may review the frequency of disconnects, the timing of interruptions, repeated interruptions across multiple tests, and repeated restart patterns associated with attempts to disrupt or manipulate the testing session. This helps us distinguish between legitimate technical issues and possible attempts to manipulate the testing process.

Does the Duolingo English Test use live proctors?

Some remote testing systems rely entirely on live proctors monitoring multiple test takers simultaneously; others rely heavily on automation. The DET is unique in that it uses a combination of technology-assisted review and trained human proctors who individually review each and every test session, one at a time.

The DET’s layered review system combines AI-assisted detection, session recording, behavioral analysis, and human review. That means proctors can pause a test session recording, speed it up, or slow it down. This approach allows reviewers to examine flagged events carefully, rather than relying entirely on real-time monitoring.

Far from being a compromise, this asynchronous proctoring model is an upgrade to traditional systems! We designed our system intentionally so that our human reviewers are positioned to do what they do best: carefully evaluate behavior in context, investigate patterns across a full testing session, and make consistent certification decisions based on a complete record rather than a few moments observed in real time.

What is online proctoring?

How does the Duolingo English Test protect privacy?

Remote testing requires the collection of information such as video, audio, and identification documents. Because protecting that information is critical, the DET uses privacy protections designed to support secure testing while limiting unnecessary access to personal information.

These systems are built to support secure score certification, fair and accessible testing experiences, and protection of personal data. As remote assessment expands globally, these protections continue to evolve alongside changing privacy expectations and regulations.

Does the Duolingo English Test offer accommodations?

Yes. The DET provides accommodations for eligible test takers. DET accommodations may include extended time, screen reader compatibility, or other supports based on documented needs. The goal is to maintain both accessibility and test integrity.

Learn more about DET accommodations

How has the Duolingo English Test evolved over time?

As assessment science advances, the DET continuously updates its testing systems in response to new forms of digital fraud (such as AI impersonation or emerging cheating tools), as well as accessibility needs and expectations around digital privacy.

The DET’s layered approach to test security combines adaptive testing that pulls dynamically from large item pools, integrated skill assessment, sophisticated behavioral analysis, AI-assisted human review, and continuous security updates, to ensure that every test session is secure.

Click here for a deep dive on DET security!

]]><![CDATA[Languages are a strategic asset]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-danny-lopez/69f1145f3831450001626f5aThu, 30 Apr 2026 18:30:26 GMT

When people talk about learning a language, they mostly talk about communication: language helps people speak and understand one another, as well as do business. But in my experience, language is about something bigger. It’s about cultural understanding, nuance, and human connection. I was fortunate enough to be raised in a bilingual household, in English and in Spanish, and I value the understanding it gave me of both cultures just as much as the ability to speak each language.

This matters greatly for the UK. We are a globally connected country. We strive to increase our trade with the rest of the world, attract investment, and remain influential on the international stage. But none of that happens in a vacuum; it happens between people. And the stronger our understanding of other people’s cultures, the better we are at building trust and creating opportunity.

This is why language learning should not be seen as a narrow academic issue or a ‘nice to have’. It is a strategic capability. During my years in diplomacy and international trade, I saw time and time again that the real value of language is not simply transactional. Yes, it can help you navigate a meeting or interpret a conversation more accurately. But its deeper value lies in what it teaches you before you even enter the room. Learning another language forces you to engage with a different culture on its own terms. It teaches humility. It gives you a better instinct for what matters to other people. Our Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) is an example to the rest of the world when it comes to investing in its diplomats’ ability to speak a foreign language and understand its culture.

Countries that understand others well are better at forming partnerships, spotting risk, avoiding diplomatic missteps, and building durable commercial relationships. In trade, success rarely comes just from having a good product. It comes from understanding how decisions are made, how confidence is earned, and how relationships are sustained over time. Language gives you more than words; it gives you access to context.

That matters even more in a world shaped by AI, which is transforming how we communicate. Translation tools are improving rapidly, and they will become increasingly useful in widening access and helping people engage across borders. But we should not confuse the translation of words with the translation of meaning.

AI can help translate a language, but it cannot fully replace human judgement. It cannot reliably read cultural cues, historical sensitivity, or the subtle difference between what is being said and what is actually meant. It does not instinctively understand when a phrase carries political weight or when humour will land badly.

In a world of intelligent machines, understanding human behavior becomes more important, not less. And that begins with the basics; it begins with learning languages.

Because when you learn a language, you are not just memorizing vocabulary. You are training yourself to think more carefully about people. You are learning that concepts do not always map neatly from one culture to another. You begin to see that meaning depends on context, that behaviour is shaped by history, and that assumptions which feel obvious in one country may feel alien in another.

This is why Britain should worry about the decline in language learning. If we allow language capability to shrink, we are not just reducing our stock of speakers. We are narrowing our national ability to understand the world beyond ourselves. At a time of geopolitical uncertainty, technological change and intense competition for influence and trade, that would be a serious mistake.

We should instead treat language learning as part of the country’s long-term strategic strength. That means protecting provision, valuing language teachers, supporting pathways from school to university and recognising that some languages matter not only because they are popular, but because they are strategically important. It also means rejecting the false choice between technology and human learning. The right answer is both: use technology to support access and scale, while continuing to invest in the human capability that only real language learning can provide.

If the UK wants to thrive in a more connected, contested and AI-shaped world, we need more than tools that can translate sentences. We need people who can interpret context, understand behaviour and connect across cultures. That is what language learning helps us do. And that is why it matters more than ever.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[Lost momentum, new opportunity: Language learning and mobility in the UK]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-anne-marie-graham/69f1135a3831450001626f41Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:29:02 GMT

Recent research by the British Council and the Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) highlights a continuing challenge to formal language learning in educational settings, as well as disparities linked to learners’ socioeconomic backgrounds. Sadly, this is not a new phenomenon. What is different is that we have lost ground in recent years, as a number of positive initiatives and programs have fallen away. The UK’s return to Erasmus+ provides an opportunity to reinvigorate these efforts and ensure we take full advantage of renewed mobility opportunities.

There is a strong track record of policy support for language learning and mobility in the UK. The previous Labour government funded the National Centre for Languages (CiLT) and its project partners—directly and through funding agencies—to deliver initiatives from 2007 to 2011 across primary, secondary and further education, with the aim of inspiring language learning and fostering collaboration across the education sector.

These included the innovative Languages Work campaign and Business Language Champions project—both highlighting the value of language skills in the workplace—as well as the groundbreaking Routes into Languages (RiL) program. Under RiL, universities, colleges, and schools collaborated at a regional level to encourage student mobility and promote the take-up of languages at university and in schools.

Additionally, to help boost the number of students participating in study mobility, in 2013 the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) funded Universities UK International to deliver the UK’s first Outward Mobility Strategy through the Go International program. This helped build capacity across higher education, and produced important research on the benefits of outward mobility.

Managed by the University of Southampton, the RiL consortium of 67 English universities across nine regions was working with 2,300 schools and 87,000 young people by the end of its HEFCE funding in 2016, with a particular focus on those from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Meanwhile, Education Secretary Michael Gove’s introduction of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc), including a required foreign language, helped maintain uptake at the GCSE level.

Since 2016, challenges that RiL sought to address have remained largely unchanged. Fewer students experience the benefits of language learning, whether at a basic or more advanced level. School curricula, alongside an increasingly metrics-driven education culture, mean that learners and their advisers must balance competing priorities when selecting options for GCSEs and A levels, which can make it harder to continue language study.

More positively, pockets of RiL activity continue, driven by committed and resourceful practitioners at a local level.

In the same period, the UK left the European Union and the Erasmus+ program, removing a well-established incentive for language learning and changing the landscape of student mobility. At the same time, higher education institutions have faced significant financial pressures, leading to cuts in jobs and courses, with arts and humanities disciplines often reported to be more affected than STEM subjects. Furthermore, the current review of the GCSE curriculum creates some uncertainty around the future shape and status of language qualifications.

However, the recent news that the UK will return to Erasmus+ provides renewed hope for language skills development and student mobility.

The Welsh Government’s Taith program has successfully delivered inclusive, reciprocal mobility opportunities, while the Turing scheme has helped ensure that UK students can still study abroad for defined periods.

The UK’s return to Erasmus+ provides an opportunity to reinvigorate these efforts and ensure we take full advantage of renewed mobility opportunities.

At the same time, the growth of English-taught courses across Europe, alongside strong enthusiasm for informal language learning in the UK, provides grounds for optimism. Students across all disciplines may feel increasingly confident participating in Erasmus+ placements in non-English-speaking countries. Crucially, such experiences can, in turn, help strengthen the UK’s overall language capability over time.

The enthusiastic engagement with the Duolingo Westminster Language Challenge—and Duolingo’s own data on language learning habits in the UK—suggests that the public and policymakers retain a strong appetite for language learning. As the UK prepares to rejoin Erasmus+, an important question is whether a more accessible approach to learning—focused on languages learners are motivated to study, rather than only those available in school—could help encourage greater participation in study abroad opportunities.

Pressure on public finances means that a return to large-scale, centrally funded programmes to promote language learning may be challenging in the current fiscal context. However, the government has committed, through its International Education Strategy, to providing opportunities for UK students to study and collaborate internationally. Relatively modest, targeted investment could help refresh successful initiatives such as Routes into Languages and the Go International program, supporting universities to engage students from all socioeconomic backgrounds and enabling more young people to access transformative international experiences.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[Warming up the UK’s cold spots: Towards a blueprint for languages in UK Higher Education]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-emma-cayley/69f111f33831450001626f2bThu, 30 Apr 2026 18:25:01 GMT

As Chair of the University Council For Languages (UCFL), which represents the views of Departments and Schools of languages in higher education across the UK, and as Head of the School of Languages, Cultures and Societies at the University of Leeds, I very much welcomed the 2025 Higher Education Policy Institute (HEPI) report by Megan Bowler, sponsored by Duolingo, that underscored the urgent need for action to support and improve the uptake of languages at school level and beyond.

The report emphasised the numerous advantages of acquiring language skills and fostering a linguistic mindset: enhanced critical thinking, better communication, increased creativity, and improved intercultural understanding and empathy. It draws on insights from UCFL studies illustrating the vital role of collaboration between universities and schools, while stressing the necessity for more productive partnerships with policymakers and stakeholders.

Among the recommendations made in the report, UCFL particularly endorsed the idea of targeting government funding to support languages in higher education, with the goals of preventing the loss of strategic languages and tackling regional ‘cold spots’.

Perhaps most concerning, alongside the loss of national capacity in language and intercultural awareness skills that are essential for the UK’s growth, are the barriers to opportunity and choice that the increasing ‘cold spots’ in regional language provision at HE level present for local students.

A 2023 article by Becky Muradás-Taylor and Philip Taylor found large cold spots in the North, East and South West of England for universities offering languages at below average entry tariff. Muradás-Taylor is Chair of the Widening Participation Languages Network (WPLN), a Special Interest Group of UCFL, which convenes WP Universities to enable a broad overview of their language provision, avoiding the opening up of such cold spots.

As the authors outline, this is a social justice issue. The much-publicised closure and threatened closure of languages at the Universities of Leicester and Nottingham respectively, alongside earlier closures at Nottingham Trent and De Montfort, could leave students in the East Midlands with little or no opportunity to study languages and cultures to degree level.

In 2025, the British Academy undertook an exercise in mapping cold spots for Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences disciplines more broadly, based on Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) data. Among their recommendations were greater regulation of disciplinary provision in Higher Education, and the need for providers to seek ways to collaborate while remaining within Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) law.

The rapidly diminishing provision of language skills in this country is not due to a lack of interest, as the enthusiasm around learning on Duolingo and other platforms clearly shows. However we now need national oversight and coordination to avoid further attrition across the whole pipeline. As British Academy fellow for languages, Professor Charles Forsdick puts it in a Times Higher Education article from April, “the issue is the system, not the subject. Leaving decisions about what is taught and researched in our universities solely to market forces risks narrowing provision in ways that do not reflect national needs.”

UCFL particularly endorsed the idea of targeting government funding to support languages in higher education, with the goals of preventing the loss of strategic languages and tackling regional ‘cold spots’.

Whilst formal language learning in schools and universities has been in decline for the last twenty years at least, and the THE article cited above underlined the dangers of the rapidly accelerating loss of critical mass in staffing at HE level in languages (17% down on 2015-16 levels), there have recently been some encouraging signs that the numerous initiatives to champion languages are gaining traction. Not least among these is the excellent Languages Movement, launched by the DfE through the National Consortium for Languages Education (NCLE), to coordinate action across a range of educational levels and stakeholders.

Meanwhile, university linguists are working hard to refresh language degrees and make them even more relevant to today’s students and employers, demonstrating the links with the UK’s economic growth, security, and prosperity, and liaising with UCFL, the British Academy, the Institute of Languages, Cultures and Societies (ILCS), and the government through the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Modern Languages (APPG ML), and the Cross-Government Languages Group (XGLG).

At the same time, the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) has consistently reinforced efforts to reverse the decline and improve public understanding of the import and impact of research in languages and cultures with schemes such as the 2016-20 Open World Research Initiative (OWRI) or the 2022 Future of Languages Research fellows. These were followed last year by the launch of their 2025-26 Focal Awards scheme.

UCFL supports the calls for increased collaboration inter- and intra-sector, and for national oversight, including the development of a National Languages Strategy. We already sponsor partnerships with schools through initiatives such as Routes into Languages, and the Reach Foundation’s innovative Languages For All project. As firm believers in the power of concerted collective action, we remain optimistic about the future for languages at all levels in the UK.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[Bucking the trend: Universities collaborating to increase languages uptake in schools]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-charlotte-ryland/69f110f53831450001626f14Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:23:35 GMT

The crisis in language education in England is real, and much attention is paid to the number of students opting out of studying languages, voting with their feet the moment they have the first opportunity to do so. But this is not the story that matters right now.

Across the UK, there are university-led programmes bucking the trend by enthusing young linguists and increasing uptake in schools. These programs demand attention; if we can better understand what teachers and learners are seeking out and returning to, then we’ll have a proper basis for developing effective advocacy interventions and informing curriculum change.

What these programs have in common is that they show, rather than tell, young learners the value of learning a language. Universities are well placed to do this, because they have ready access to the rich cultural content needed to run these programmes, and the inspiring individuals to deliver it – in particular, their student body via ambassador programmes. Here, I look closely at one university-led programme that is seeing tangible impact on the uptake of languages in schools, and make recommendations that can turn this and similar programs into a strategic national approach to languages advocacy.

At The Queen’s College, Oxford, we have developed a suite of languages advocacy programmes that motivate thousands of young learners across the UK every year. The principle of these programmes is simple: they provide rich cultural content, with which learners interact creatively. These creative cultural activities embed advocacy in the learning experience, because they show learners how relevant and rewarding it is to be a linguist, rather than telling them so and hoping they will believe it.

Teachers and learners are voting in favor of this approach, with over 20,000 participants in the past year, and evidence of increased uptake at GCSE and A Level. A 12-year-old participant in one of our teacher-led programmes neatly sums up what we consistently hear from teachers: “Sir, this feels important.”

The content that learners encounter in the classroom matters hugely, and cultural content makes languages relevant and creative, while encouraging critical thinking. Many teachers also cite the opportunity this content provides to bring new voices into the classroom, diversifying an otherwise Eurocentric curriculum.

This increased interest and inclusion leads directly to increased uptake, with 87 teachers reporting improved GCSE uptake last year due to participation in one of our programs, and many also reporting positive impact on A level numbers. This impact on uptake is growing year on year, suggesting significant promise from a small, thinly resourced project. Imagine what could happen if we scaled this up and linked it to other successful projects, positioned strategically across the country.

Enough of the doom, then. Alternative stories are available, which suggest ready-made solutions. But these exist ad hoc in pockets of excellent practice across the UK. Because they are rarely joined up, they cannot build on shared learning, nor can they systematically target cold spots.

We do not need to invent new ways of engaging pupils; we need to scrutinise and scale up existing successful practices into one national, systematic, strategic effort.

Key players recognized this six years ago when ‘Towards a National Languages Strategy’ proposed what is now The Languages Gateway, a cross-sector initiative to raise the profile of languages and increase uptake. Inspired in part by the hugely successful STEM campaign, The Languages Gateway is currently mapping effective university-led projects like ours, drawing out common threads that help us to understand what works best and why. This will develop a basis for sustainable and systematic university-school partnerships that reach the schools where advocacy is needed the most.

What we ultimately learn from our projects is that the current curriculum is not giving teachers and learners what they need. Interventions of this kind are no real substitute for curriculum change, but they are an essential and very cost-effective staging post on the way there: they can inform that change by showing us what engages learners and improves uptake; and they can shore up the pipeline while we await refreshed curriculum content.

Two measures will immediately realise this potential:

  1. Funding for small-scale empirical research, to underpin an understanding of how and why these university-led programs increase uptake – both to improve advocacy and to inform curriculum change.
  2. Improved resourcing for the most impactful university-led advocacy projects, and for their coordination by The Languages Gateway, to ensure that these projects engage every school in a systematic way.

This strategic approach will have a palpable impact on languages uptake within the next three years, because it builds on existing good practice and capitalises on collaboration. This is how we can begin to forge a new kind of languages education: one imbued with meaningful content, in which every lesson feels ‘important’ to all.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[Spoken languages: Unlocking the UK’s hidden communicative competence]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-john-worne/69f10fea3831450001626f01Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:22:04 GMT

When we talk about the UK’s language challenges, we often focus on what is most visible: GCSE and A level entries, university department closures, and formal ‘educational’ learning. These matter greatly. But they are only part of the picture. If we want to arrest linguistic decline and build a more capable and outward‑facing UK, we also need to pay much closer attention to the spoken language skills of adults – and to the millions of people in the UK who already use other languages alongside English in their daily lives.

Speaking is what brings languages to life. Spoken language is the bridge between passively ‘knowing’ a language and actively ‘using’ it: between recognizing ‘words on a page’ and navigating travel, a workplace encounter, a hospital visit, a negotiation, or a moment of crisis. For individuals, use of spoken language builds confidence, employability, and cultural capital. For society, it underpins inclusion, mutual trust, and more effective communication. Yet in UK policy and practice, adults’ spoken languages and ‘communicative competence’ remain undervalued, under‑measured, and under‑recognized.

This matters because the UK is already profoundly multilingual. Speaking English is essential to life in the UK, but millions of people also grow up speaking other languages—Polish, Panjabi, Urdu, Arabic, Romanian, Somali, Portuguese and many, many more—at home and in their communities. These Home, Heritage and Community Languages (HHCLs) should be seen as a living national asset. What’s more, HHCLs represent an opportunity for the UK in trade, diplomacy, and national security. Too often, however, they are treated as being disconnected from the UK’s economic and civic life. The result is a paradox: The UK worries about declining formal language capacity, but at the same time, we are routinely failing to value, accredit, and use the spoken language skills already widely present across the country.

The crucial missing links are practical assessment, validation, and accreditation of communicative competence. Many adult speakers of HHCLs are fluent communicators, but lack a recognized and trusted way to evidence their skills to employers, educators, or public services. Without formal recognition, this linguistic talent remains untapped; with it, individuals could gain confidence and routes into using their languages in work, while organizations would gain access to verified and validated language capability.

Spoken language assessment for adults that is flexible, affordable, and focused on real‑world communication is an essential part of the solution. Fortunately, frameworks already exist to support this. For example, CIOL's Language Level Assessments are designed precisely to evaluate adults’ real-world spoken competence across a very wide range of languages.

Better recognition of spoken languages could also strengthen social mobility. Young adults who speak another language at home are often discouraged, implicitly or explicitly, from using it outside the home environment. Accrediting spoken competence would send a clear message that these skills are valuable, transferable, and worth being proud of. Assessment  and accreditation could enable the UK’s deep multilingualism to be seen as an asset in the labour market, rather than being hidden or wasted.

Technology and AI can help too. Digital language‑learning platforms like Duolingo have transformed the way people of all ages engage with languages. Generative AI increasingly enables spoken interaction in other languages, to further practice and develop spoken skills. Digital tools lower the threshold for day-to-day practice and participation, reward small daily habits, and help language speakers build confidence in using their languages. For many people, including adults returning to their languages later in life, these tools provide regular exposure and practice with spoken language that is vital to developing and maintaining communicative competence.

The result is a paradox: The UK worries about declining formal language capacity, but at the same time, we are routinely failing to value, accredit, and use the spoken language skills already widely present across the country.

The call to action is clear. If we want a more linguistically capable UK, we must broaden our understanding of where language skills come from, and how they are demonstrated. That means valuing the languages spoken by adults in our communities alongside those taught in formal language study, and finding ways to assess and accredit a wider range of spoken languages to integrate these capabilities into the UK’s workforce.

The UK does not start from zero. It starts from remarkable strength. By recognizing and activating the spoken languages already woven into everyday life in the UK, we can turn a perceived deficit into a strategic advantage for individuals, for communities, for the economy, and for UK society as a whole.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[The untapped resource: Multilingualism and the future of language education]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-charles-forsdick/69f10d933831450001626eedThu, 30 Apr 2026 18:17:58 GMT

Going back to the Leathes Report of 1918, a long series of policy documents have outlined the clear national benefits of second language acquisition and associated intercultural learning, not least in terms of capabilities in the areas of defence and diplomacy or the economy and trade. There has been much less recognition, however, of the ways in which pre- existing multilingual resources of the UK might more actively complement language skills acquired in more formal education contexts.

One of the positive outcomes of the radical transformations in language education in recent years has been the erosion of boundaries (and hierarchies) between different language areas. This has been accompanied by increased permeability between formal and informal language acquisition, and a more holistic commitment to the value of multilingualism as the hallmark of a society that is at once inclusive and outward-looking.

Linking everyday language use in wider society with questions of language education across the pipeline addresses two significant and interconnected impediments. On the one hand, such an approach demonstrates a disconnect between those languages and cultures taught and studied in the classroom, and the broader linguistic repertoires of the UK. On the other hand, it allows us to acknowledge the deep-seated tendency to view multilingualism as a challenge to be resolved rather than an opportunity which we should capitalise more actively.

This is particularly true in the area of primary education: linguistically superdiverse classrooms, to which pupils bring a multitude of different home languages other than English, require us to find ways of nurturing this linguistic diversity, which is of great value for individuals, communities and wider society, while ensuring that learners are also able to acquire the high standard of English they will need in their future lives.

A number of home, heritage and community languages (HHCLs) are also major world languages in their own right – subjects in which there is a perceived deficit in capacity in formal education. There have been initiatives that demonstrate the political will to acknowledge and address this mismatch. For instance, Scotland’s 1+2 policy, which entitles pupils to start a first additional language from P1 and to continue this until the end of secondary education, includes Cantonese, Mandarin and Urdu among the eight languages that pupils can take up to national qualification level.

Of course, such a significant rethinking of language offerings requires considerable resources and other major reforms, including in Initial Teacher Education. Then there is the further challenge of ensuring a continued pipeline, not least in terms of the provision of university qualifications in these subjects. Such an aspiration must be part of a longer-term commitment to reversing the decline of language education at the degree level, expanding provision in lesser-taught but strategically important languages, and addressing the emergence of cold spots where learners are prevented from studying languages within a reasonable distance from home.

Acknowledge the deep-seated tendency to view multilingualism as a challenge to be resolved rather than an opportunity which we should capitalize on more actively.

In the meantime, however, there are a number of shorter-term, practical measures that would allow us to begin to link more active acknowledgement of the importance of HHCLs with a broader and more inclusive commitment to multilingual learning in the UK.

First, we should ensure that learners’ pre-existing linguistic capabilities are reflected more purposefully in language pedagogy. An excellent start would be to cultivate multilingual awareness at KS2 alongside the progress in a single language currently required by the national curriculum. This would permit pupils with languages other than English to appreciate the ways in which their bilingualism matters, and foster a whole-school understanding of how important it is to encourage curiosity about a range of languages.

Secondly, while the number of registrations in HHCLs at GCSE has increased, these numbers remain relatively low, such that alternative qualifications are required. Drawing on earlier initiatives such as the Languages Ladder, stepped qualifications that allow multilingual speakers a flexible approach to accrediting their skills would not only encourage engagement with more active formal language learning, but also raise awareness of the value of these languages, both in the communities in which they are spoken, and in wider society.

Finally, there would be numerous practical and educational benefits to a joined up, cross-sectoral approach to language education that incentivised and resourced connections between schools, universities, colleges and complimentary education in HHCLs. For example, formal education establishments could provide classrooms and exam facilities for complimentary schools. Such an approach would permit closer collaboration and contribute to a more holistic approach to languages in the UK from which we would all benefit, individually and collectively, in multiple ways.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[The decline of language learning in UK schools: A head of languages’ perspective]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-jessica-weaver/69f10c9b3831450001626ed9Thu, 30 Apr 2026 18:16:10 GMT

Working in the same inner-London state secondary school over the past fourteen years, I have  witnessed several changes to the language learning curriculum. While most of these changes have been positive, we continue to experience a significant decline in both language uptake, and to a certain extent, achievement.

At St. Marylebone CE School, we are lucky to still be able to offer both French and Spanish to all our Key Stage 3 students, and over the past four years we have worked hard to successfully increase the number of hours given to MFL in Year 7 from three to four. It is easy to find support for MFL in our school given our Senior Leadership team’s excellent dedication to our department, but we are aware that other state schools are not nearly so fortunate, with focus moving further and further towards STEM subjects and now distancing itself away from the eBacc suite of qualifications.

Our Key Stage 4 uptake has hovered around 52% for the past 5 years. While we are very proud of these numbers given that MFL is not compulsory, this represents a 10% decline since 2017. A similar picture can be seen in our A Level numbers. In 2020, we entered 38 A level students for MFL (18 students for French and 20 students for Spanish). For the sake of comparison, 28 students were entered for Geography in the same year). In 2026, the MFL department will enter just 21 students (9 for French and 12 for Spanish), while Geography will enter 31 students.

These are real examples of how the much talked about decline in language learning is playing out in schools, and we are aware of several schools where running MFL at A Level is no longer viable. On top of this, financial constraints in UK education mean that schools are having to make significant cuts. Without policy intervention, we will be left even further behind our peers in Europe and the US, where young people’s mastery of multiple languages far exceeds that of the UK.

It is difficult to identify exactly why students are choosing not to take languages at A Level, but at Open Evenings for our sixth form, students often cite a fear of being compared to heritage speakers as a reason not to take the subject. Other students expressed concerns that the A Level curriculum seemed incredibly broad in comparison to other subjects.

In an academic field where almost all students choose only three A Level courses, the competition for students to choose MFL over STEM and humanities subjects is high. The curriculum offered at Post-16 is increasingly narrow compared to other nations. At the same time, the lack of alignment between Primary and Secondary language education means that students don’t have the opportunity to make consistent progress in Modern Foreign Languages (MFL).

Despite this, we are aware of hundreds of our students engaging in language learning on a daily basis with apps such as Duolingo. A short-course qualification in languages alongside other studies would surely be a welcome addition to students’ breadth of knowledge in Post-16 education.

In addition to this, over 20% of school-aged children are classed as speaking English as an Additional Language; these students would benefit hugely from greater access to formal qualifications in their own language. The cultural and linguistic diversity which already exists in our UK schools is something that sets us above and beyond other nations and should be both celebrated and recognized.

These are real examples of how the much talked about decline in language learning is playing out in schools.

The ability to learn another language is an essential tool for equipping our students with the skills they need to be successful, resilient, and globally aware communicators. Through learning a language, students learn to see things from the perspective of other cultures. It’s one of the most powerful ways to reconcile and connect different people; achieve social, political, and cultural understanding; and ensure peace and prosperity.

It is clear that more work must be done to convince students that language-learning is valuable, and can offer a broad range of career opportunities beyond the traditional roles of teacher, tour guide, and translator. In a culture where AI and technology advances seem to overtake many of our traditional learning needs, it is even more important that we teach our young people the creative and cognitive value of exploring other cultures through language learning.

Increasing exposure to languages from a younger age and broadening options for courses that are more accessible to all learners will allow our students to see more meaningful progress in MFL and encourage them to seek greater opportunities to study languages throughout their formal education and beyond. With better support, fairer systems, and more flexible options, schools can rebuild interest and help more students continue learning languages.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[The UK’s missing linguists: How collaboration can save A-level languages]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-michael-slavinsky/69f10aa13831450001626ebcThu, 30 Apr 2026 18:14:44 GMT

Every year as a language teacher in an inner-London state school, my headteacher was incredibly supportive and set a clear rule: if we could find five teenagers wanting to study a language at A-level, we could afford to run the class.

Like so many teachers across the country, I scrambled to hit that magic number. And in the years when only two or three students were willing, those teenagers watched their language learning journey come to a sudden end with the GCSE exam.

This is the broken promise of our upper secondary education system: we encourage sixteen-year-olds to specialise in the subjects they love, yet if they choose a modern language, there is no guarantee the course will actually run. These students are our "missing linguists", bright teenagers denied a fair opportunity simply because their individual school cannot afford small class sizes.

To find a truly sustainable solution to A-level modern languages, we need to accept that ours is a subject with small numbers. We cannot change this any time soon, so our focus should be on lowering barriers to access for those small numbers. By fixing this lack of access, we can create an incredible experience for the small cohorts that do want to learn.

We believe that some of the answer lies in the Languages For All hub model: local schools collaborate to share A-level teaching, cultural trips, and resources. By pooling students and teachers, schools can achieve vital economies of scale, making small numbers financially viable.

This is nothing new; sixth form consortium models exist already. But modern technology can further improve this approach. Combining in-person classes with online distance learning can bridge geographical divides. With the leadership of Royal Holloway University of London, our first pilot in Hounslow, west London increased the number of sixth forms offering an A-level in a modern foreign language from 4 in 2022 to 13 in 2026, and in 4 of those schools there are fewer than 5 linguists in total.

A byproduct of focusing on improving the experience for a small number of linguists is that uptake increased - from 35 Year 12 A-level linguists in 4 schools in 2022, to 80 and close to 70 in the current Year 12 and Year 13 cohorts. At Westcountry Schools Trust, part of the  pilot we ran in the South West region in partnership with the University of Exeter, A level numbers for 2026 more than doubled when it became possible for all 8 sixth forms in the Trust to offer a class. With 40% of the teaching delivered centrally by one teacher, three sixth forms in Devon are now able to guarantee Spanish A level to the small numbers of linguists joining Year 12 next academic year.

This collaborative approach is much more than a logistical fix: It transforms an isolated subject choice into a vibrant social community. By bringing the best linguists in a local area together we make them feel elite and valued. We invite partners like top universities and international employers to lead or join the hub, to celebrate the students and show them exactly where languages can take them.

We encourage every one of our A level linguists to visit their ‘home’ university multiple times, to meet their potential future language professors, and learn about the opportunities that studying a language can unlock in their future careers. We must praise the incredible innovation of institutions like Royal Holloway, University of London, and the University of Exeter. They have piloted this hub model, lending their prestige to show parents and pupils that these language skills are highly sought after.

These students are our "missing linguists", bright teenagers denied a fair opportunity simply because their individual school cannot afford small class sizes.

Ultimately, headteachers and university leaders must recognise they are operating at opposite ends of the same pipeline. We all care about the same young people. If schools fail to solve the access issue, and universities fail to support those schools, the entire system breaks down, and the UK will not have the professionals it desperately needs for national security, diplomacy, and global trade. Schools will soon find themselves with absolutely no new language teachers left to recruit. Individual students will miss out on the enriching opportunities that come along with studying a foreign language and culture.

The hub model is a sustainable solution because it is win-win. Schools can continue to provide a subject on their curriculum with small numbers of students. Universities can target recruitment and outreach efforts better because the best local state school linguists have been assembled for them. Teachers can promise their 13 year old students that if they pick the GCSE, the A level pathway is guaranteed. Parents of aspiring linguists are reassured that language study can lead to a top university and interesting career contacts.

Language learning remains popular outside the classroom, making it a massive shame to deny it within our schools. Through local collaboration, we can keep the promise of language education alive.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[A broader strategy for languages]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays-jean-coussins-phillip-harding-esch/69f109393831450001626eaeThu, 30 Apr 2026 18:12:06 GMT

One of the most striking of Duolingo’s statistics is that when they analyze data on their 500 million users worldwide, UK users perform extremely well against their international peers, with high rates of engagement, progression and interactions.

This is such a contrast with the typically negative headlines we read about the UK’s ‘poor’ language skills and the languages ‘crisis’ in our schools and universities.

The truth is, British people are motivated by languages; and we are a fundamentally multilingual nation with an estimated 2 million bilingual school pupils.

So is it a policy problem?

It is a myth that we Brits are somehow inherently programmed to be poor at languages. On the contrary, where we have the right policies in place, we have shown ourselves to be among the best in the world.

For example, the FCDO Language Centre is recognized for the quality of its training diplomats in highly sophisticated language skills. The Army implemented language training to facilitate the deployment of troops where sensitive communication is essential. And let us not forget the UK’s track record of scholarship in languages, cultures, and linguistics having shaped and led on international expertise, including the multilingual and language education policies of the European Union and the Council of Europe.

Since the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Modern Language published its National Recovery Programme for Languages in 2018, the sector has organised itself and is speaking in a more unified way. The British Academy, Association of School and College Leaders, British Council, and Universities UK published Towards a National Languages Strategy which has shaped the advocacy of languages. The Languages Gateway is a good example of a cross-sector effort to catalyze collaboration.

Within the government, GCHQ chairs the cross-government language group, bringing together officials from across the civil service, with targeted briefings from researchers to inform policy.

Innovation is emerging from across the sector. For example, excellent primary school practice rooted in established expertise, such as the Primary Languages Network and Hackney’s borough-wide program. Hackney’s initiative offers Spanish in all schools, boosting primary-secondary transition, GCSEs and A levels. Hounslow’s Languages For All programme allows Sixth Form Colleges to pool their young people to keep offering languages A levels through blended learning.

And the list doesn’t stop there. Cities of Languages are a grassroots-led movement harnessing the enthusiasm for languages in our communities, schools, and local leaders. In Scotland, Edinburgh College reaches communities across the Highlands and Islands remotely: a model for widening access. In Wales, the pioneering MFL Mentoring programme models university-school mentoring and ambassador collaborations, informing efforts across the UK.

There are signs the government is learning from this innovation. In recent official responses it has pointed to Hackney and Languages for All, for example. This can only be a welcome development. There are also signs that the government is matching their aspirations with funding. The National Consortium for Languages Education combines the structural advantages of organizing schools around ‘language network’ hubs with action research directed by experts at UCL Institute of Education; the UK’s return to Erasmus+ will transform young people’s opportunities; and planned future alternative, stepped qualifications in languages are widely welcomed as a step towards broadening participation.

However, the overall policy landscape can undermine these efforts in other ways.

Inequality of access to language education in schools and universities is entrenched: the languages offer, and take-up, is skewed towards affluent demographics and Russell Group universities. Brexit removed Erasmus+ and put up barriers to study, work and participate in reciprocal programs for a generation. While the UK’s return to Erasmus+ is a relief, many of the issues surrounding visa rules persist.

The truth is, British people are motivated by languages; and we are a fundamentally multilingual nation with an estimated 2 million bilingual school pupils.

The current crisis in teacher recruitment, reliant as it is on candidates from overseas, is another casualty of contradictory policies which both incentivize (through bursaries) and prevent (through immigration rules) the movement of students and young professionals for their studies and careers.

Perhaps most importantly, funding models for examinations, A levels and university provision treat subjects as commercial offers. In this competitive environment, we are seeing university closures, falling provision at A level and a washback effect on GCSE uptake when there is a shrinking onwards offer for pupils. How much language provision will be left in our institutions by the time the government’s plans are delivered?

There are reasons to be cheerful about languages in the UK, but only if there is broader action and recognition at the highest level of government. Yes, officials should learn from innovations on the ground; bring research into policymaking; and encourage cross-departmental cooperation. Above all, the government needs a broader strategy for languages that prevents policies from contradicting each other.

Read more essays in this collection

]]><![CDATA[Keep the streak: Sustaining language learning in the UK]]>https://blog.englishtest.duolingo.com/language-learning-uk-policy-essays/69eb173551e77c00019e28eaTue, 28 Apr 2026 20:18:00 GMT

Too often, the story we tell ourselves about languages in the UK is a negative one: that we are not very good at them; that young people are losing interest; that, in a world where English is widely spoken, they matter less than they once did. But the evidence points in a different direction.

At Duolingo, we see what people actually do. Millions of people across the UK are choosing to learn languages in their own time, often consistently and over long periods. Young people, especially, are highly engaged. They are not turning away from languages; if anything, they are finding new ways into them through culture, technology, and their own curiosity about the world.

The opportunity now is to connect that enthusiasm to deeper study and real-world opportunity. The routes that should carry people from early interest into more sustained learning are not always clear, or not always available.

In this essay collection, we have drawn on leaders from across the UK who are not only thinking about these challenges, but working on them: testing new approaches, building partnerships and finding practical ways to keep language learning alive and growing in difficult conditions.

Baroness Jean Coussins & Philip Harding-Esch

Baroness Jean Coussins and Philip Harding-Esch challenge the idea that the UK struggles with languages; data shows people are already motivated and engaged. They argue the real issue is policy, and call for a joined-up national strategy that matches public enthusiasm with meaningful action.

👉 Read their essay

Michael Slavinsky

Michael Slavinsky draws on his experience as a teacher to expose the UK’s “missing linguists”—students who want to study languages but can’t access A-level courses. He shows how collaboration, powered by the Languages For All hub model, can bring schools together, expand access, and keep language learning alive.

👉 Read his essay

Jessica Weaver

Jessica Weaver draws on 14 years in the classroom to show how the decline in language learning is unfolding in real schools—from falling A-level numbers to widening gaps in access. She argues that students still value languages, and calls for earlier exposure, more flexible pathways, and stronger policy support to rebuild uptake.

👉 Read her essay

Prof. Charles Forsdick, FBA

Professor Charles Forsdick reframes multilingualism as one of the UK’s greatest untapped assets, not a challenge to overcome. He explains how valuing home and heritage languages—and connecting them to formal education—can build a more inclusive, future-ready approach to language learning.

👉 Read his essay

John Worne

John Worne highlights a hidden strength in the UK: millions of people already use multiple languages in everyday life. He calls for better recognition and accreditation of spoken language skills, showing how unlocking this “communicative competence” could power social mobility, economic growth, and a more connected society.

👉 Read his essay

Dr. Charlotte Ryland

Charlotte Ryland spotlights university-led programs that are already reversing the decline in language uptake in schools. She shows how scaling these collaborative, culture-rich initiatives can turn isolated success into a national strategy for languages.

👉 Read her essay

Prof. Emma Cayley

Emma Cayley highlights a growing risk in UK higher education: “cold spots” where students lose access to language degrees altogether. She calls for coordinated national action and stronger collaboration to protect provision, expand opportunity, and rebuild the UK’s language pipeline.

👉 Read her essay

Anne Marie Graham

Anne-Marie Graham reflects on the UK’s lost momentum in language learning—and the opportunity to rebuild it. She highlights how a return to Erasmus+ and targeted investment in proven programs could expand access, boost mobility, and re-energize language learning nationwide.

👉 Read her essay

Danny Lopez MBE

Danny Lopez draws on his experience in diplomacy and trade to reframe language learning as a strategic national asset. He shows that beyond communication, languages build cultural understanding and human judgment—skills the UK needs to compete in an AI-shaped, globally connected world.

👉 Read his essay

Across these essays, we see examples of collaboration making provision viable where it might otherwise be lost. We see approaches that reconnect language learning with culture, creativity and real-world experience, making it more relevant and engaging. And we see consistent evidence that when learners are given the opportunity and the right support they respond.

Technology has opened the door to language learning for more people than ever before; this collection considers what should lie beyond that door. Not by restating familiar arguments about decline, but by bringing together practical ideas that, if implemented, can spark a resurgence.

If there is one message that runs through this collection, it is that the UK already has both the appetite for language learning and proven approaches that deliver results. The task now is for all of us - policymakers, educators and institutions - to match that ambition with equal intent, building on the practices that are already making a difference.

]]>