On the value of the Language A SSST course

An interesting posting was made in our Facebook group this weekend :

After a question was asked whether the Language B course can be self-taught, a response was posted along these lines :

"I was going to say something about how crazy it would be if students could self-teach Language B, but really why is it not crazy that the IB allows them to self-study Language A? Is it just a practical matter? I might be somewhat insulted if I were a Language A teacher." (author of this post known)

​Totally understood - why have a teacher if the students can self-teach a highly rigorous Literature course ?

​Here is my reflection on this :

The Language A SSST course exists in recognition that not all IB students have English as their mother tongue, heritage language or 'strongest' language. (Did you know that there are IB students doing English A Lit SSST ?)
The essence of the SSST course consists of two parts : school-supported and self-taught.
The idea is that students receive detailed and professional instruction about the study of Literature from their school (in a dedicated Language A SSST class or, also allowed until now, in a mainstream 'taught' Language A class (eg English A Lit)).
The "school support" consists of providing a Literature teacher (normally in the school's language of instruction), and a classroom, and a spot on the timetable, and resources, and a schedule for the SSST students to follow, etc...
The "self-taught" part of the course refers to the fact that the school may not have a teacher who can teach literature in every student's mother tongue, and therefore the school (or the parents, although personally I think the school should do this) must employ the support of a mother tongue tutor. The self-taught part of the course should never really be self-taught, it is better renamed 'mother tongue support'.
There is a problem in the name (School-Supported Self-Taught), not only because often it is abbreviated to simple "Self-Taught" (which it should never be - that is indeed an insult to all teachers of IB Literature), but also because it has allowed and continues to allow schools to simply tell their non-native English speakers to fill out the form, go self-study their mother tongue literature, and show up on exam day. If the school provides the "school-support" and the "self-taught" part is in reality a "tutor-support" part, then this course is just as challenging, valuable and meaningful as any other IB Literature course. And in that case, I think we can all agree that these students go through the same rigorous program as their English-speaking peers, and that the role of the teacher (and the tutor) is clearly emphasized.
We are working very, very hard to get some of these problems resolved ... we're in it for the long haul but we have the passion, the belief and the conviction that every IB student should be able to study their mother tongue / heritage literature in their own language.
Since I work very closely on this with the IB (with my limited influence ...), I welcome any views, opinions, thoughts and suggestions based on your personal experiences.
​A million thanks ! ;-)