Mr_Ed

Interests: teaching, curriculum & ed. reform; hence: 'Mr Ed'

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@sciantificnew It's basic game theory/prisoner's dilemma. If your kids will lose out because you won't inflate their grades like other teachers are, you're probably going to inflate their grades.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@tombennett71 I told my teachers to mark honestly in terms of the overall band, but always go for the highest mark WITHIN the band on the assumption that other schools will be gaming the system. That's what we are forced to do.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@English_TutorUK @tombennett71 It's not just the rampant cheating and constant battles over AI - the workload is worse for teachers. It is VERY heavy on the marking. Please let's not go downthis route again.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@data_depot @greg_ashman

[Gianni A. Sarcone @gsarcone]

Intonation changes meaning.

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

The EEF's new guidance on inclusive teaching is a very interesting piece of work. There is much to like, some bits to criticise, and one absolutely HUGE statement that should be getting a lot of attention.

Here are my thoughts:

- There is a lot there. Most won't read it.

- There is a heavy emphasis on explicit instruction, and the creation of simple routines and "calm classroom environments." This is what "trad" teachers have been banging on about for years, so is most welcome.

- There is very little that I can see about specific conditions/neurodevelopmental issues. If you want to know about how to support specific needs, the information isn't directly in this guide.

- This makes sense, because "While targeted interventions can help, they are most effective when they supplement – rather than replace – effective everyday teaching."

- This line is buried in one of the "myths" but is absolutely MEGA: "Strong universal provision reduces the number of pupils who require additional support..." I mean, let that sink in. I've said stuff like this before and been pilloried for it. It's a huge claim, and from what I've seen actually the most significant thing in the whole report.

- This is an important line: "Teachers should not be making assumptions about pupils’ learning rates based on their socio-economic background or SEND status." I have this conversation with people quite a lot. They say things to me like "how do your students with SEND respond to Name at End questioning?" or "how do your pupil premium students respond to your expectation that every student answers a question every lesson?" I always say the same thing, which is that the label tells me nothing, and that we need to reframe the relationship between label and issue. There is nothing causative there, it is all correlational.

- There aren't many concrete examples of good "inclusive practice" in the report itself. There is a link to other supporting resources, but you need a login for that. You can only log in with a school email account (odd choice for a research organisation), but I couldn't get it to work so 🤷

- Without concrete examples, it is almost guaranteed that people will do weird things, and cite the EEF in support.

https://t.co/jQCybyaVS5

[Greg Ashman @greg_ashman]

Why is it that so many teacher trainers are not familiar with the science of learning? Or even actively oppose it?
I think the case of differentiated instruction is useful. The *best* case that can be made for differentiated instruction is that the evidence is inconclusive. It is also hugely time-consuming for teachers to enact.
Yet it is enthusiastically endorsed everywhere from teaching standards to there being entire units on it at training colleges. If this is not a response to evidence, what is it?
It is a response to ideology. This ideology maintains that everyone is different and special—which is a pleasant idea—and so they need their own unique mix of teaching methods—which is probably untrue. Nobody ever explains what evidence a teacher would use to decide this mix. They just need to *know their students*.
And, of course, teacher trainers do not have to suffer the consequences of this approach. It is for others to do the suffering.

[Carl Hendrick @C_Hendrick]

This is depressing. A senior education academic referencing a debunked theory of learning at a national conference. These are the people training teachers and shaping national policy.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@greg_ashman Sometimes, it communicates disrespect for others and a need to dominate them.

[Greg Ashman @greg_ashman]

Expert: Behaviour is communication. It communicates a need.
Teacher: What is [Behaviour X] communicating?
E: I couldn’t say without knowing the student, the context, the lead up to the behaviour etc
T: Not a very effective form of communication then, is it?

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@greg_ashman @TTRadioOfficial Funding interventions would be a great use of taxpayer funds, but imo most public education advocates would rather throw NQTs into the bullpit with 34 kids including high SEN, with barely a few UDL "CPD" sessions as "support".

[Paul Kirschner @New_Old_Paul]

Speaking of teaching: It is bad enough to reinvent the wheel. What really hurts is when they reinvent the flat tire. (Lee Shulman)

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@greg_ashman That was my immediate thought. He wouldn't have been invited to Australia in the first place if not for Finland's 2006 PISA ranking (imo, it's not clear why he's still here).

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@greg_ashman It's baffling that education academics are opposed to the gathering of data - let's be clear, they want to scrap NAPLAN and do not just object to Newscorp using the results - that they could potentially use in their research.

[Barry Smith @BarryNSmith79]

I think schools should focus on delivering a narrow curriculum very well. It shocks me how many kids in secondary hold a pen poorly & write illegibly.

[Adam Robbins @MrARobbins]

I used to do a lot of student feedback. Now I tend to ignore it. Students tend to be poor judges of their own learning and have a poor grasp of external factors around curriculum progression. Combine that with demand characteristics means you have to be very careful to get meaningful data.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@MrNMFL The most vocal members of the PTA.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@BarryNSmith79 It depends on the curriculum structure for each subject - hierarchical or thematic? Probably doesn't matter much in humanities, but a big mistake in maths.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@mikesalter74 @greg_ashman They are fine with profit-making, so long as it's Twinkl, TPT etc.

[Mr_Ed @MrEd_81]

@amanda_spielman Clearly, Scotland must scrap its Curriculum for Excellence at once.