Catherine

I teach English. Interested in trauma (SEMH), life-writing, + lots of different issues within educational theory+practice. A retweet ≠ endorsement.

[Natasha Porter OBE @NPorter_]

@KeeFeelosopher English and maths GCSE is the best protective factor against being NEET, and one of the most common shared factors for those in prison is illiteracy. Schools are best placed to deliver educational outcomes, and these can make a huge difference to life chances.

[beanie0597_2.0 @0Beanie05923291]

A lot of adults hire personal trainers, attend group exercise classes led by a teacher, or go to the gym with an “accountability partner”. They do this because consistent exercise can be hard and it goes against human nature to do “the hard thing” (even though they know it’s good for them). Many adults need someone else to motivate them.

If adults, with knowledge, wisdom, and life experience, need someone else to push them to do hard things, why do we think students, who lack wisdom, knowledge, and life experience, will choose to do hard things on their own?

Even if students knew what was best regarding their education, they likely wouldn’t choose it because it’s hard work, which goes against human nature.

It’s not being “authoritarian” when adults determine what students should learn, make them think about and practice what they are taught, and require them to demonstrate how well they’ve mastered it. That’s being a good teacher.

Schools need to set aside the notion that students will “discover” the knowledge they need to learn if they just create the right environment. That might be the path of least resistance for the adults in schools, but it’s not the path to a rigorous education that students deserve.

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

School leaders try to do too much. A never-ending kaleidoscope of new initiatives. It doesn't work, and there's a better way.

Read and share 🙏🙏

[Rachel Higginson FCCT @creativeHigg]

The Oracy debates derive from
1) Not speaking to a shared definition of what #oracy actually is.
2) Not sharing the same view on the purpose of education, or how we achieve that purpose.

Ironically, we need to engage in listening to each other to grow a shared understanding.

[Barry Smith @BarryNSmith79]

It’s the SEND industry.

[Pritesh Raichura @Mr_Raichura]

Completely disagree! It is neither ‘snobbery’ nor ‘policing’ to teach pupils standard English and grammar. We cannot be uncomfortable or squeamish about teaching children that, when discussing academic subjects, we use a consistent, shared grammar. It’s our duty.

[Daisy Christodoulou @daisychristo]

What's the point of school?

https://t.co/ttEgfB1m6A

[Dr Daniel Johnson @danjohnsonhymns]

When my son was 7 he had a series of operations. Our church was planted in 2017 with about 80, it’s now closer to 400. My pastor knew to bring a carton of M&S strawberry milkshake when he visited my son because he knew it was his favourite

[Pritesh Raichura @Mr_Raichura]

Today, I visited a school that I’ve been supporting. Prior to September they relied on cold call & mini whiteboards. In September they launched ‘I say you say’ and ‘choral response’. So much joy & energy in every classroom. I’ve also found unexpected benefits of these strategies:

[Amanda Spielman @amanda_spielman]

England is forgetting that education policy should be based on evidence and informed by experience - my first Substack piece
https://t.co/bPRLlXpX9v

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

I am going to try and explain my position on terms like oracy, metacognition, adaptive teaching and inclusive teaching.

These things are all desirable. We want students who can speak articulately. We want them to be able to be creative problem solvers. We want them to be and to feel included in our teaching, regardless of their starting points or particular needs. We want teachers to adapt and respond to students as their knowledge grows and develops.

I don't think any of that is controversial, but it's like saying "we want teachers who can teach" - ok, sure, but what does it mean? What are the things we want people to actually do in the classroom?

When you tell me my classroom should be an "oracy" classroom, what does that mean? What do you want me to do differently? Debates? Group work? Hot seats? Turn and Talk? Cold Call? Warm Call? No hands up? All hands up? Students showing proof of listening? Explicit vocabulary instruction? Expecting full sentences? Policing pronunciation? Teaching tonal variation? Encouraging humour?

Everything in this list can -and has!- been called "oracy". And the problem is that some are good ideas, and some are bad ideas. Even the ones which might be good ideas have specific parameters. Subject or disciplinary constraints. Lesson phases. Curricular placements. Behaviour management.

So you take a big fluffy thing that nobody could ever disagree with because it's obviously good, but then people do stuff in class that is often a bad idea or doesn't work, but it's fine, because it's oracy, and Oracy Is Good, Obviously.

The same is true of everything else on the list. Without specific definitions of what they actually mean, and what you then do in the classroom, you are absolutely 100% going to run into big trouble. It's logically obvious, but also empirical. I've seen this stuff in schools, where teachers are doing things that make no sense, and I ask why and they say because of oracy, or adaptive teaching or whatever.

And then none of that is even to mention assessment. How do we tell if a student has good "oracy" or "metacognition"? How do we *really* ascertain if a teacher is "inclusive" or "adaptive"? We can't, and all we can do is look at the specific things they are doing, which brings us right back round to the start.

Sometimes, I think we should ditch the terms altogether. Sometimes I don't, and think instead we should be specific about what we mean. People ask me to deliver training about "adaptive teaching", and I say "sure" and then just talk about checking for understanding, mini-whiteboards, thresholds for reteach etc. I'll rarely mention the term. Occasionally I will, and just say "...and all of these are critical components of what is commonly called adaptive teaching".

Either way, just chucking the terms out there is almost definitely going to cause harm and weird, weird things. How do I know? Because I've seen it. Lots. And I don't like it, because ultimately it just leaves teachers confused and cynical, and students worse off.

[Alex Quigley @AlexJQuigley]

💡 NEW POST 💡

'The problem with reading ages'

"Reading ages are seemingly intuitive and straight-forward, but they can be prone to being misread or more likely over-interpreted."

https://t.co/lYuo742wDp

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

I am interested in learning from a secondary school that currently embeds an "oracy" programme which is the type we are supposed to emulate.

What exactly do they do?
How do they assess it?
What are their general outcomes as a school?
Which demographic do they serve?

I think this will be the last post I do on oracy for the minute. It's important that if, as a profession, we are going to implement something we know exactly what it looks like and where it works.

Please share widely 🙏🙏

[Pritesh Raichura @Mr_Raichura]

To be clear, I’m a huge advocate for subject-specific talk in classrooms. E.g. I use turn & talk ~20 times per lesson so pupils rehearse the knowledge I explicitly teach. My issue is with *assessing* ‘oracy’. It’s a distraction from doing things that will actually improve oracy.

[Teacher's Manual @UnofficialOA]

There is now a significant section of millennial parents who befriend their kids, talk to them as if they're mates, and don't impose rules.

This, and instilling the view that everything is someone else's fault rather than enforcing personal responsibility.

[Barry Smith @BarryNSmith79]

But aren’t ALL of these behaviours clearly SEND? Unmet needs. Teacher not differentiating. Lesson not inclusive. Certainly not trauma informed. What about the neurodivergent?

[Catherine @HaphazardCat]

@XpatEducator Attention!

[Jamie Clark @XpatEducator]

📘 My new Teaching for Attention Playbook is a 70+ page, evidence-informed guide that breaks down the science of attention and provides 6 practical strategies to support teachers.

It covers how to:

🎯 Secure Attention: Create the conditions for students to focus
🎯 Direct Attention: Guide students towards important information
🎯 Orchestrate Attention: Manage where attention goes as learning unfolds

👉 Want a free copy? REPOST and comment ATTENTION below, and I’ll DM you the link.

⏰ Available free until Wednesday 30 September at 11:59pm AWST

[Catherine @HaphazardCat]

@Beno10_MFC Collar!

[Catherine @HaphazardCat]

@gracemim He sounds nice!!! Fingers crossed for you both in the future. But also sad that a man being strongly against assault is reassuring….. huuuuugs