Robert Coe

Director of Research and Development at Evidence Based Education @EvidenceInEdu; Senior Associate @EducEndowFoundn; Previously Professor of Education at Durham

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

Slides from my #rED26 talk are here https://t.co/2oy9PBKkdY

[Evidence Based Education @EvidenceInEdu]

Tomorrow, we’ll be at the @researchED1 National Conference!

As one of the main sponsor we are looking forward to the event and we are also releasing our new paper tomorrow!

Professor Rob Coe will present We Need a Revolution in Professional Learning, the session named after our new paper of the same name.

Rob will explore what that looks like in practice including why professional learning needs to be protected, deliberately designed and evaluated for impact.

If you are there, we'll be giving away free copies from our stand.

https://t.co/iq2yK4Gp15

[Tom Sherrington @teacherhead]

Make teaching the job you want it to be. Be yourself, express yourself and have fun with it! https://t.co/FAcoQzBpHi via @teacherhead

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@olicav So sorry to hear that, Oliver. Deepest sympathies

[Evidence Based Education @EvidenceInEdu]

We Need a Revolution in Professional Learning.

Over the past nine months, Professors @ProfCoe and @ProfKime have been working on a new paper.

The paper argues that while our understanding of teaching, learning, curriculum and the science of learning has moved forward, professional learning has not always kept pace.

The opportunity is to create a new normal: professional learning that is protected, purposeful and designed to build expertise over time.

In this short preview, Rob and Stuart explore why that matters, what the revolution could look like, and how schools, colleges and educators can get involved.

The paper will be published on 5 September 2026. Stay tuned!

[Alex Quigley @AlexJQuigley]

This post chimes with my experiences with schools across England I’ve worked with over the past few years. Good challenge & constructive ways forward here from @teacherhead

[Evidence Based Education @EvidenceInEdu]

High-quality teaching is for everyone. But what does it look like in the context of SEND?

We've published a SEND guide for teachers looking to use the Great Teaching Toolkit (GTT) to improve inclusive practice and provision.

The guide provides questions teachers can use to shape collaborative conversations about teaching of learners with SEND, and signposts resources within the GTT to explore this area further.

Download here https://t.co/KpOqEoDKDX

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@5Naureen Thanks Naureen! Very kind

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@teacherhead @JustGiving Thanks so much, Tom

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

I’m running the Great North Run for #TeamMind with my daughter. Any encouragement for us, and support for a great charity, would be very much appreciated 🙏
https://t.co/BvCkgGMADY

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@RajEcon @adamboxer1 @HCFEprincipal The 84% figure is just a partitioning of variance in a ‘base’ model, ie with no covariates. So it doesn’t really tell you what people are interpreting it to mean. It is purely a measure of the amount of clustering of (raw) attainment at school level

[Tom Bennett OBE @tombennett71]

Sept 5th is the researchED national conference 2026 in London. A galaxy of brilliant minds :) Would be great to see you there.

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

I know it is bad timing (!) but if any KS2 teachers could answer this survey about your history curriculum, it would help a friend:

https://t.co/1DHtwteN1l

[Evidence Based Education @EvidenceInEdu]

What happens when teachers focus deliberately on improvement?

This summer, we set out to explore what might happen if teachers were given the opportunity to focus on just one aspect of great teaching.

The result was the Summer ’26 Great Teaching Questioning Challenge.

Over six weeks, 558 teachers from 80 schools – the majority experiencing the Great Teaching Toolkit for the first time – took part in a structured programme focused on improving classroom questioning.

Teachers selected a goal, explored evidence-informed techniques, applied them in their classrooms and reflected on the impact on their pupils.

The findings have been encouraging.

Read more here https://t.co/bjs1pBH7fv

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@Yorkshire_Steve @adamboxer1 I agree. Would be nice to hear their explanation though

[Robert Coe @ProfCoe]

@adamboxer1 @Yorkshire_Steve Does Ofsted explicitly say B? Can you point to where @Yorkshire_Steve ?

[Cass & Anna - The Educakers @theeducakers]

This pod was right up there! @ProfCoe was excellent (obvs) and the conversations around school improvement, both good and bad, have landed at a perfect time and made me re-think the angle of one of our SDPs for next year - cheers, Rob!

Tune into They Behave for Me if you don't already - great whilst commuting to school and lots of relevant content for Primaries too!

Always a pleasure @adamboxer1 and @amymayforrester. Happy Sunny Sunday, Cass

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

Because I was at a conference on Friday we didn't get this out till later than normal. If you can, please do share it with your chums - Rob's voice is so wise and sane that it deserves as big an audience as we can get 🙏🙏

[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

[Adam Boxer @adamboxer1]

What does @ProfCoe think about the current turn towards instructional coaching in schools as a vehicle to teacher improvement?

Tune in to full episode here: https://t.co/8LFXvpQJSF