​I was surprised, this week, when a post that I wrote last year passed by my Twitter timeline. In this, I looked at the impact of successive education secretaries over my career and how during the past forty years, education has become a central theme in politics. This could be because successive Governments have hived off other direct responsibilities leaving the rump of public service roles.

It is a truism that children are largely born into the world in the same ways as they always have, apart from medical interventions that are now available where they weren’t previously. They grow through whatever experiences their families offer then they enter school. They show variability at that stage, which might be an indicator of learning issues or perhaps of limited pre-school experience and interactions.

From entry, the teacher and other adults, through interacting with the children, begin to make judgements and fine tune their interactions to elicit detailed information. This may require a form of interpretation, unpicking the concept being experienced and tracking back in language forms, supported by manipulable resources or modelling, to a point where the child is able to engage at their personal level of understanding.

Where a child is in EYFS, the detail in records kept during that phase can be used to interrogate the possibility of the child having Special Educational Needs.

Tracking back and tracking forwards is a descriptor of a teacher life, in language and conceptual terms. We are continually told that “learning is not linear”, yet planning for teaching and learning is, with the examined implication of linear accommodation of each new element of learning. The year cohort approach to the National Curriculum assumes that each cohort should move as one, in a linear fashion, apart from the judgements that a child is, or isn’t at Age Related Expectation. If they aren’t, they will take forward a deficit, which has to be bridged, if they are to have any hope of keeping up with peers over time.

Therefore, in any classroom, at any one time, there will be a range of capabilities and understandings, even in a set or stream.

Inclusion was an item on the radio this morning, in the context of SEND. When the word was introduced, I was keen that the term should not just be used in this regard, but in a broader definition, which I framed as; an inclusive school is one that does it’s best, within the school capacity, to offer a quality education to each child, ensuring that any difficulty is identified, addressed and tracked, with clear evaluation underpinning decisions, including the use of external expertise. Where a school has utilised every available course of action, consideration should be given to alternative placement, where additional expertise or resources are available.

Labels and levels regularly flit by, as an addendum. If a child has a need, is that a label, or a descriptor? Levels, in the original National Curriculum, were clearly available as descriptors, and, where they were adopted as such, offered a language for discussion children’s learning. I blame the data bods for usurping the numbers of levels to supposedly predict progress, where, in reality, progress is effected in each classroom, a bit at a time, by a well-informed teacher with the skills and abilities to interact with the learning needs of each child, where this is evident. 

Progress is an interaction between the process of learning, including the quality of the teacher input of information into the lesson, and the outcomes from the child assimilating this information and being able to utilise it to fulfil a challenge, at whatever level is appropriate to the child. A post-activity evaluation can determine the next appropriate steps and the focus for the child.

This week, I have been making my last visit to School Direct trainees, and, in a couple of weeks’ time will host an interim meeting for Winchester University Post Grad mentors to review their progress to date. The essence of all the discussions can be refined to a few of the Teacher Standards; 2, 6&5, progress and outcomes, assessment and adaptation.

These, particularly standard 2, are critical to all decisions that affect learning in classrooms. If a teacher doesn’t know what “quality” outcomes look like for their year group, their underlying decisions may be faulty. This has implication for context expectation, so inter-school moderation is a key factor. With a young teaching force, breadth of experience may become a self-limiting factor. We are approaching the latter part of one year and schools are looking to the next, with decisions being made about teacher placement. PG and SD trainees may well be teaching year groups other than those in which they trained, and many will be in different school contexts, with structural differences to accommodate, as well as the different needs of children.

Quality awareness is a precursor to any form of quality control. This has to be a school-level discussion, so that every teacher is made regularly aware of potential expectations. Is it any wonder that many begin to struggle in their first years? It was a problem with sub-levels; what was the difference between a 4b and 4a?

Progress and outcomes are still subjects for debate among experienced teachers. Is it any wonder that trainees find this area fraught with possible issues? But, essentially, it is the single area that has the greatest impact across every decision, as per this diagram.

As the picture at the top of the blog says, we need these young teacher and their colleagues, to be the lead thinkers in their classrooms, to be capable of interpreting the needs of learners and to have the ability to adapt to these needs. They need to be aware; spotting and dealing with need at different levels, recording and tracking their concerns and their discussions with experienced peers, helping to make decisions about where a child’s learning journey will develop.

Interpretation takes time. Many of us, in using another language, make elementary errors, but, with practice, this becomes more refined and appropriate to need. Developing teachers need to be able to speak fluent “child-speak”, modelling and making appropriate links to “adult-speak” for those who struggle
.
So, if I was a Primary head today, what would I want to be doing?

• Create an inspiring range of challenging topic and project areas that would embed the necessary knowledge to be used in other scenarios. These would have time allocations, not necessarily to fill a half term, so that Science, History, Geography and Technology all had a secure place.
• Ensuring that each element was appropriately resourced so that it could happen and be of quality.
• Link the English and Maths curriculum in such a way that each could make use of the current and recent past topics, so that one fed the other, with opportunities to use and apply earlier skills and knowledge.
• Ensure that art, drama and music were deployed as interpretative subjects of worth and each capable of supporting the English and Maths curriculum.
• MFL, music and aspects of PE can be used to support the PPA needs of the school, by judicious use of specialists.
• Ask for teacher medium term plans, to see the direction of travel. Short term plans are for the teacher in the classroom, so can take any form that suits.
• I’d want children to know the focus for their personal efforts at any particular time.
• Create portfolios of moderated in-house examples that could support decision making in the school, be used to moderate against other school outcomes to validate judgements.
• I would have some kind of measure of capability, to support and focus decision making ability, especially of early career teachers. Every area of life is governed by a measure of capability in some form, from the kick around in the playground to academic and work achievement. “Can do” statements are a guide.

It is a consequence of the fact that there is no one size fits all approach to education that, at the tail end of a forty-plus year career, no-one has created a system that completely “works” for children from 4-18. The variables will always be the children and life itself. The shifts in the world impact on the learners, but the needs are the same; to understand the world we live in and have the skills to interrogate and explore it and communicate effectively.

Learners need interested adults to help them to interpret what they are experiencing, to give them the conceptual vocabulary that enables them to more fully participate in ongoing discussions which can allow further progress.
​
Linked blogs
When Blunkett trumped education. http://chrischiversthinks.weebly.com/blog-thinking-aloud/when-blunkett-trumped-education
Are you an inclusive school? (pdf download; checklists) http://chrischiversthinks.weebly.com/pdfs.html
Levelness and yearness. http://chrischiversthinks.weebly.com/blog-thinking-aloud/revisiting-if-level-ness-became-year-ness
Quality= a work in progress (and outcomes). http://chrischiversthinks.weebly.com/blog-thinking-aloud/quality-a-work-in-progress

The truism that was passed to me early in my career was to expect the unexpected and deal with things as they arise, or the variation to “have something up your sleeve”.

It has been a noticeable feature since 1997 and the National Strategies, that the literacy and numeracy “hours” have had an impact on Primary timetables, with singular lessons, again called Maths and English, in the mornings, with other subjects relegated to the after lunch spot.

Children enter school, perhaps to an early morning task, which they have to do while the register is being taken. This could be something like “Thunks”, to get the children thinking, a maths check, which could be quickly marked before starting the lessons proper, perhaps a word play game; how many alternative words can you find for...

Then they pack up in time for break and before they return to a new lesson, with the inevitable moving around, waiting to be taught and detailed to new areas of activity. For trainees, this can be the first level of challenge, quelling some restless children, especially if the football scenarios are still being enacted.

It was a feature of running my Primary classrooms, especially pre-1997, that tasks often “bridged” playtime, so that children on exiting for break would know that when they returned, they should continue with the task that they had left. Transition to the new lesson was then decided when quality had been assured. If the pre-break activities had been completed, and it was made easier after the IWBs were introduced, a picture related to the topic for discussion would be available with a need to interrogate the picture ahead of the lesson. A very good description of such an activity was recently written by Tim Taylor.  

It is probably true that there is a difference between teaching four year olds, or younger, in Early Years settings and catering for the needs of year 11 or 13.

At the early stage, experiences that embed the notion of the colour blue, or the number 6 might include activities that are exploratory, or perhaps expressive; match the shapes in the picture and count them, put all the blue objects in this circle. An observing adult will be looking for the security of understanding of these relatively simple concepts, to be able to move to the next challenge; green or 7-ness.
​
For a year 11 or 13, the colour choices of a Marc Chagall or Van Gogh painting might be the subject of a more philosophical discussion, linking different elements of their lives through their choice of colour.
​

Young children are at such an early stage in learning that they have to learn how to learn; to focus, to become organised, to share with others, to listen to a speaker. These skills are not necessarily easy or natural for some. They do not all hear the same, nor have the internalise experiences that allow each to fully participate in the process(ing) of the ideas being shared. Differences in processing could be seen as a determining factor in school success; those children who seem to learn quickly and easily, become “fluent” learners; their journey through learning is unhindered. Physical difference, such as hearing and sight can have a significant detrimental impact before it really comes to the attention of adults. The resultant delay might then be addressed.

Reflecting on my Primary classroom career, there was a mix of sharing necessary information, followed by tailored tasks that enabled children to bring to the fore those things that had been learned and to revise those things that could be identified as less secure. The tasking, in itself, was a form of test, in that knowledge had to be used and applied, or identified, by the adult or learners as in need of revisiting. The practical situation enabled links to be made that demonstrated the point of the earlier, formal learning.
​
As children get older and, hopefully, more mature in their approach to learning, it is easy to assume that they can concentrate for longer, can retain more information and are processing the information to be able to retain it. That testing can then show a lack of security might be down to a lack of linking activities, to enable the child(ren) to process the new against what they already know. Guided reflection, at any age, can scaffold information appropriately, with models developed that highlight those links. I do like sketch notes in this regard, with children developing their own personal methodologies, rather than just secretarial note taking. “Showing your thinking” is a very useful stage in securing learning, especially if it is then the subject of reflection and revision.
​

I know I came upstairs for some reason. I can at least now claim “senior moments”.

My problem, at the moment, is that there are usually several things competing in my head for the available space, which is the lot of the freelance. For that reason, I have lists and post-its to try to keep track of the different strands. Even then, something can be missed, especially if something grabs the attention and takes over the time available. Occasionally, it’s a product of reading something on or through Twitter. These items can be tangential, but sometimes then coalesce within a variety of experiences. This time it was Nancy Gedge's article in the TES on working memory.

Life requires us to remember things. Orientating ourselves, organising our personal spaces to be able to sort, find and return items, ensuring that those necessary things are done. Many of these are held as memories, such as how to get from the house to somewhere else, while others might need a list, especially when specific items are needed from shopping. There’s little worse than getting home and finding something really important has been overlooked. Yes there is. It’s when the shopping is for someone else, especially when preparing for a special event!

As much of my working life is visiting schools to supervise trainee teachers, I have to have an ordered diary, ensure that the trainees and schools are aware of my visit and then make sure I read my diary to be in the right place at the right time. Constant rejigging of times to suit unexpected situations can put pressure on even the most organised of systems, but adaptability is essential, in life and in work.

Watching and discussing with trainee teachers is a privilege. With this being the whole of their development year, to see them move from insecure to very able is more than encouraging. From time to time they forget to do something that is written on their plan. This can be a conscious decision, based on their understanding of the learners’ needs, but it can also be an oversight. A simple piece of advice to highlight those bits of their plan that they must not forget to do or say can often be enough. Some carry a post-it in the palm of their hand. Others will develop a series of PowerPoint slides with key questions to open up like a book.

Overt modelling, where diagrams are developed from manipulatives, that then are available throughout the lesson as memory reference points can be key to supporting children with memory issues.

Success criteria for that specific activity, based on the idea of “What a Good One Looks Like”, or WAGOLL, can become a scaffold for self-checking; have you done these things? This is a task level set of expectations that provides the context for personal needs.

The need of the teacher and the children to hold onto their development needs, in Primary across a range of subjects, can be challenging. Thirty children and ten plus subjects can mean several hundred development needs or “targets”. It’s the same for Secondary. It was to support this need, to enable teacher and learners to be prompted to a specific focus, that the “exercise books as personal organisers” approach was developed in my school. Essentially these are flaps to note the continuing need. Opened out when working, the supporting adults can interact with individuals to a fine-focus need, which they might otherwise ignore in the broader need. Neither the teacher, nor the child has to hold the information in their heads.

If all Primary writing is done in a single book, a clear writing focus is maintained throughout. The process can be supported by note making, lists, recipes, etc, which can become the basis for a first draft piece of writing. Exploring the process of writing holistically enables thought processes to be developed.

For reading, an “advisory bookmark” can be created, to remind the children and any adult engaging with their reading of areas to consider while or after reading.

Providing prompts is an important part of development. Intervention in-lesson to ensure a child remains on track can enable a quality benchmark to be achieved, against which future outcomes can be compared.

Showing progress can be challenging. “Progressive benchmarking” can be a very simple means of doing this. As a class teacher, pre-NC, I would ask children, every couple of weeks to look back to their previous work and to seek to do “better” in some specific way. The NC level descriptors, appended to the edge of their books and working within the National Writing Project approaches, meant that “progressive marking” through conversation allowed me to agree that they had demonstrated an area and to append their next development goal. It showed tracking of development, the advice given and the progress made.

Personally, I’d far rather develop schema that support memory, short and longer term, than to continually feel harassed that I had forgotten something.

Teachers are under considerable pressure to show that their children are achieving at the highest possible level. Looking at the underpinning schema can be the route to stripping out unnecessary elements.

Organisation is in school and teacher hands.

I wonder how you try to keep track of these needs.

Linked blogs (click to read)
Nancy Gedge TES article
Exercise books as personal organisers
Primary writing in a single book
Advisory bookmark
National Writing Project
Organisation
1)      Planning for learning over time
2)      School organisation of time

People are ingenious when it comes to overcoming the need to get across the barriers that a water course creates. It is rare that someone wanting to get across would want to spend an inordinate amount of time throwing rocks and debris into the water in order to step across. In fact, this might be inefficient, as the water would keep rising on one side of the barrier.
​
Paleolithic peoples would make stepping stones, by depositing stones large enough to poke through the water and allow steps to be taken in some safety. In some places, these stepping stones also had a flat top stone, to make a simple bridge. The bridge allowed regular and easy access from one side to another, supported on the simple pillars.
​

There is a current education mantra, “Bridging the Gap”, which appears to have morphed into “Diminishing the Difference”. I think some highly paid whizz-kid sits somewhere and comes up with these statements, without thinking through the impact on learners, or having to implement the outcomes.

Some children run faster, jump higher, sing better, find maths easier, read and write better than others. That is one of life’s realities with which even young children can engage. At the end of each school year, children achieve across a spectrum of achievement, in different area of the curriculum. Where an artificial barrier is erected, let’s call it Age Related Expectation, or ARE for short, this will mean that a proportion of the children will fall below the level and some will achieve above another artificial level that says they are higher than expected.

The problem is that those who don’t achieve will be seen as having a residual gap in their learning from that year, which suggests a need to fill in the missing elements. This could either be done by throwing everything again into the gap, to try to fill the space, but, as with water, tensions might rise and the good intentions might actually exacerbate the problem. Bridging the gap might start with establishing the security of the foundations and then seeking a means to bridge without having to put in too many interstitial pillars to give temporary support. Regular check questions or conversations are necessary.

It is a situation where the ability to analyse or assess minute by minute outcomes and to reflect and react to the evident need is a key aspect. However, this is often a role given to a classroom assistant. Unless this person is well trained and well-versed in this role, there is no guarantee that the vulnerable child will make the necessary progress, yet the reality is that these children have to run to catch up, to stay near their peers.

Where a significant proportion of the education dialogue can veer towards the traditional whole class approach across Primary as well as Secondary, a narrow lesson focus can have the impact of leaving a proportion adrift, unless rapid in-lesson intervention occurs.

That some argue against mixed ability groups, or grouping per se, can appear perverse, as any group of children is mixed ability. Children, especially younger learners, can share ideas within a task, with the aim of finding a mutual solution. That one child might contribute slightly more than another in a group is akin to some achieving higher in any other lesson. It all becomes a moot point after a while.

 The single most important factor in my experience is the quality of the challenge, requiring thought that proceeds towards finding a solution to the initial problem. Poorly designed tasks can become self-limiting.

In my last blog, I looked specifically at SEND issues. If issues are not addressed, vulnerable children might be left to flounder each year with the inevitable consequence of being labelled, not at ARE; shorthand “fail”. Unless the teacher can demonstrate that this is despite their best, recorded efforts, with quality teaching and intervention to need, it is possible to argue that the child may have been let down by the system.

An art exhibition is not something that suits everyone’s taste. Bobbie Bale is not a photo-representative kind of artist. She is immersive, interpretative, inventive and in touch with her inner feelings; this past few years she has been dealing with bereavement and working out her feelings in her art. It is technically of exceptional quality, her work is in a number of national collections, but can be challenging. Seeing her being challenged by someone with more traditional tastes, reminded me of Twitter spats, between “progs and trads”. That is made uncomfortable viewing for a number of other visitors, including the man’s wife, showed that the method of presenting the argument was critical, especially when the visitor chose some remarks that could be seen as personal. During the course of the day, the majority of visitors were somewhat awestruck by the works, even if they wouldn’t have the pictures on their walls. They could relate to the underlying feelings that had been captured in the images. Bobbie had found a way to communicate to them. For this one visitor, she may have needed a little more time to talk the process and the emergent outcome.
​
The SEND Built-in not bolt-on conference was a chance to engage with some of the leading minds in SEND; not all, but it was a privilege to be party to a wide range of presentations and discussions. It was developed to share the thinking that had emerged from the earlier Government discussion groups about the need for SEND to be a greater part of Initial Teacher Education.

We had the “Every teacher is a teacher of SEND” statement, from Stephen Munday. I am waiting for a revision that says, “Every teacher is a teacher of children, some of whom have known difficulties, for which plans can be made initially, some of whom have issues, as yet to be identified, which may show short or long term needs, but which need to be identified and addressed within the capacity of, first, the teacher, and second within the school capacity, eventually, and in more difficult cases, involving external expertise.”

Equally, from Anita Devi, presenting on behalf of NASBTT, The National Association of School-Based Teacher Trainers SEND toolkit, we had the SEND approach of assess, plan, do, review. Now, in seeking to take this for SEND, the process can ignore the fact that this approach underpins all teaching and learning, and, if it is seen as embedded in overall T&L, can be restated as refining assessment from interrogation, discussion and trying different approaches, which can be seen as the graduated approach. That a child has an observable need obliges the teacher to spot and deal with the need within their current skill base, referring to experienced colleagues as needed.
​

Inclusion by Nancy Gedge

I read this book with great interest, as a large part of my life over ten of the past twelve years has been spent working with schools seeking to improve their approach to ensuring they had a secure inclusive ethos, starting with supported self-assessment.

There is a truism in education that you will always think that you will never know enough, and as a result, the relentless searching for self-development becomes the hallmark of a very good teacher. A good teacher is a life-long learner, prepared to look at themselves to determine where they need to address professional or personal needs.

Nancy’s book is written with the 2014 SEND changes in mind. The book is a very good resume of the need for a teacher to see themselves as responsible for the progress of each child in their class, making best use of the available resources, to the best of their ability. It offers much food for thought in this regard, with regular points that suggest specific elements to ponder. It would certainly support a teacher seeking to develop their practice.

The first chapter looks at the inclusive teacher and this is probably the most significant element, as, especially in mainstream Primary, the class teacher is the adult who will have the greatest impact on a child’s life for ten months. Being a teacher is a complex activity, ranging across a wide range of knowledge domains and skills.

The mind-set of this person determines every learning aspect of the year. If the child is not sufficiently challenged, they may not make an appropriate level of progress. The experience level of this person will determine their capacity to understand the child’s need and to be able to set expectations appropriately. Mentoring by an experienced colleague will be needed.

Where I work with ITE trainees, this can be summed up with the teacher standards 2,4,6,5,2 (see blog); an understanding of what progress means, leading to effective planning, engagement and interaction with learners in-lesson and adjustment to evident need, establishing a new baseline for subsequent challenge.

Other chapters look at the specifics of the 2014 SEND Code of Practice and what it means in detail for a class teacher, the removal of barriers to specific needs, behaviour management and the specifics of certain special needs, relationships including with parents and teaching assistants, concluding with a jargon buster.

This is a wide ranging book, covering areas of teaching and learning alongside the needs of children with Special Educational Needs. It will be if use to early career trainees and NQTs, but would also provide a basis for self-reflecting within a school.

As well as encouraging people reading this book, I’d offer my own thoughts, looking at some broader aspects of an inclusive approach in detail, from visits to some 100 schools, which can be downloaded as a pdf, but also a pdf on SEN(D) which includes a crib sheet of areas (see below) that might be worthy of note and record when a child is causing some concern.

I have to say that, over the past twelve years, the Inclusion agenda moved from integrating SEND children into school to become a more holistic ethos that sought to ensure all children were included appropriately. This move was to counter earlier philosophies that could be captured in the question “Does your school have the capacity to take this child?” which was effectively asked within a SEN Statement development before a school was named. It was up to the school to say yes or no; a form of initial exclusion. Professional capacity in specific areas may still be a determining issue, and combined with the diminishing of Local Authority staffing may well run counter to the needs of individual children. That this is often the case is regularly documented in social media.

That you haven’t an easy answer to a child’s needs can be the case where a special need is suspected. Before the term SEN(D) was coined, teachers spoke of Specific Learning Difficulties (SpLD), describing needs in as much detail as possible, in order to support dialogue with external expert staff. The principle hasn’t changed, even if the title has.

As a rule of thumb, I’d encourage teachers to spot, record, think and talk about a child displaying anomalous behaviours or responses in a learning situation. Not all children come with a ready-made SEN(D) label identifying their needs. It will certainly make you think and can often be very challenging.

​Clarity is essential to good decision-making.

​Inclusion, at heart, is just doing your job, well.
 

Taking earlier time away meant that we were home for the school holiday. It took a few days to be aware of what appeared to be a campaign of blogging that daily sought to polarise and caricature one supposed extreme of the education spectrum, as a general free for all, while the other extreme was caricatured as exceedingly ordered. This extended on one day to the place of play in the Early Years Foundation Stage curriculum.

Sledgehammers to crack nuts?

It got a little tedious, as the methodology being deployed copied one that was visible during my training between 71 and 74, through the pamphleteer group, “The Black Papers Group”.
(Click for LINK)

The technique is simple. One member writes and publishes a pamphlet, or blog, others then write in agreement, following this up with their own pamphlets (blogs) which cite the original pamphlet. Despite this, often being nothing more than a recycling of opinion, by appearing regularly and then being quoted in the newspapers or in political speeches, it becomes something of a “truth”. In many ways the Brexit campaign on 2016 was a mirror image of distorted half-truths being repeated endlessly and is already visible in the first days after an election has been called.

That it sways opinion is evident.

It is sad that it devalues discussion, especially when one side seeks to state what the other side stands for in ways that are nothing more than caricatures.

For the 32 years of my school based career, I worked across a wide spectrum of schools, starting in secondary, then a succession of through primaries, or separate junior and first/infant schools, covering the 4-16 age range. Looking back, 24 years were spent in open-plan or semi-open plan schools; eight as a class teacher, 16 as a head (teaching). These were very successful years, both as a teacher and as a head.

​Underpinning success was considerable organisation, impacting on the classroom and the whole school. This was supported by good communication, across all categories of staff. There was a singular ethos, well understood by staff, children and parents. Success could be argued from SATs results, but also from continuous reports from receiving schools and parents of children’s pursuance of further success.

By mentioning open-plan organisation, some readers will have immediately surmised that it had something of the Summerhill or William Tyndale about it. Visitors were very surprised at how quiet the school was, even with children actively engaged on tasks. 240 children can make little noise. The order and organisation was remarked upon and disseminated across the local area.

Teachers, and I include myself in this, did a lot of DI, direct instruction, or “invited” celebrity voices to do so, through the IWB. For example if David Attenborough had an appropriate series on the TV, this might be used to offer image insights and specialist vocabulary. Other subjects had similar supportive resources, selected by the school subject managers, in conjunction with the County inspectorate. Images and artefacts were regular features of teaching, as were visits to special places, such as museums and galleries, or off-site environments.

Talk was valued highly. This may the point where a purist might wish to part company, but I’d be surprised, as dialogue, reportage, questioning at different levels, feedback and guidance have always been a part of a good teaching repertoire.

Teaching is, at heart, getting ideas across to an audience that we organise into a class. The narrative has to be ordered, organised and presented in an appropriate vocabulary/register, making links with earlier experience to strengthen understanding. It may require a variety of models to be drawn, or exemplified through concrete apparatus, to ensure deeper understanding. We have a habit, in this country, of withdrawing concrete apparatus too early, when it should be kept available to support deeper conceptualisation, eg Dienes blocks to show decimal values.

A high quality teacher will be scanning the class for tell-tale signs that there may be some confusion, as the learning bit may not be visible apart from externalisation in some form. That Dylan Wiliam now calls this reflective-reactive teaching, not just AfL, to me, is important, as the reflective part might include clarification questions to individuals, with some requiring additional in-lesson intervention or adaptation.

Learning may be more difficult to define, as it is invisible as a process and reliant on outward signs, such as verbal or physical outcomes. Some now call these "proxies".

Tasking, beyond the information sharing, should be appropriately challenging, across all abilities. Different challenges for different needs have been staples of my thinking since 1971. Children can be solution finders from an early age using “learned” skills and knowledge; they respond to challenge, can learn to order and organise themselves, with different levels of independence, as long as classrooms are ordered and organised with appropriate resources. They can also articulate when they are “stuck” and need support or guidance.

By providing challenge, then unpicking the various processes that led to success provides insights to all learners about how to think through to solutions. That, to me, is the means to “challenging up”, not just having a mantra of “high standards”. It’s a case of know-how with show-how.

The idea of thinking about thinking has been a part of my practice since the 70s. Now given the name metacognition, it has always been important, to me, that children should be active processers, not just passive receivers of information. That can only really be achieved with children as active participants in their learning journeys. That you can’t see learning is another truism, but you can see the outward displays that indicate that activity is being pursued, which might require closer scrutiny to see the detail. This is one reason why I think in-lesson interactions are so important, to provide the basis for ongoing teacher reflection about next steps.

My slightly tongue in cheek assessment guide, “get it, got it, good”, explored the need for interaction and decision making. If a group “got it” and others didn’t, then the next lesson might start with different demands for the two groups, with a checking task for some, while review teaching might be appropriate for the others.

I want teachers to have the right to choose the best approach for any particular situation, based on their (rapid) rationalisation of the needs. That, to me, should be the basis of every decision in every classroom.

As a head, if a teacher could tell me the reason why a particular approach was happening, that was fine. Why be dogmatic? It’s very illuminating when the rationale is weak, such as, “It won’t hurt them to go over this again…”

A quick anecdote.

The topic for a period of time was sports, as it was an Olympic year.

During one week, I decided to use the long, wide corridor near my classroom to set a challenge. On day one, the group of eight seven year olds whom I thought had the greatest independence were challenged to create (design and make) a crazy golf hole, using materials available within the classroom. They had the morning as their working time. TAs had not yet been invented; this was an independent task.

In the first fifteen minutes, they collected a range of items which might be useful. This was followed with a group discussion around a large piece of sugar paper, with ideas drawn and discussed. The build process started from the agreed plan, but soon adjustments were made, deigned to be improvements. After an hour, they had their golf hole.
A period of measuring and drawing secured the design for posterity and allowed later consideration of scale, as drawings were tidied onto squared paper. Photographs were taken for reference.

The main task was the use of the hole to see how many shots and how long it took for different class members to complete. This tally and timing data was later collated into charts. The group explained before starting what needed to happen to each class member, so everything was “fair”.

Before lunchtime, the group sat together to reflect on what had been achieved, both in terms of measureable outcomes, but also in terms of their personal development. The maturity levels of all were enhanced, as they saw the purposes of the different aspects of learning and set the tone for subsequent groups to follow.

Follow up included instruction writing, developed into reports, scale drawings for the more able, but sketch maps with measurements for all. The quality of discussion was very high, as children had had a shared experience.

During day three of this experience, the school was visited by the chief County Inspector and the new school Attached Inspector, as “they were passing”. The golf course was in full spate and prompted discussion. I was able to point out the wide range of skills and learning embedded in the activity, which was part of a longer term project. This was accepted.

I’d go back to my earlier point. All good teaching is based on order and organisation.

The use of flexibilities within each lesson is likely to be down to teacher awareness, experience and expertise in any particular subject. If all the children can only go at the pace of the teacher, the teacher can be the cause of many not learning, slowing the whole. Letting go can allow some children to make learning steps that can be used as exemplars for others; the whole becomes greater than the parts.
​
And this is likely to be the significant point of difference.

Investigative incrementalist

A huge amount of energy is currently being expended by groups on social media, using the written word, often through a series of 140 character tweets, to seek to score points over those they see as “opponents”. The sadness, to me, is that they are all, supposedly, on the side of educating children, seeking the maximum progress for each child for whom they are responsible.

It’s interesting seeing those who seek to identify as “traditionalist” seek to portray those that they would call “progressives” as having a laissez-faire attitude to all things learning, recycling the myth of Summerhill or William Tyndale-style education onto anyone who seeks to argue differently.

Sadly, I am of an age where my educational experience is now getting to the sixty year mark, as a pupil, then as a teacher. My Primary education, in the 1950s, would have been seen as traditional. Classes of 45 children with one teacher. In those days, one lesson for all was the norm, but, if you finished early, you were likely to be sent to the book corner, or to the art table to do some kind of time-filling activity, while the others had enough time to catch up, or not. I spent many happy days outside with Janet and John, having done my maths or English with time to spare.

I started teaching in 1974, with classes for several years that were close to 40, with no TA and no technology; even a single tape recorder was a luxury. Resources were very limited, not least by the relatively small budgets available to schools to by consumables. Conkers, buttons, pebbles and shells acted as counting materials.

An interesting side to the traditional/progressive debate today is that class sizes are significantly smaller, TAs are a regular support feature and resources, including technology are available to support every conceivable need that is identified. Whether the latter elements are used to best effect can be debated.

The curriculum has been a constant talking point, throughout my career, from Schools Council publications, through the 1987 National Curriculum, and the various incarnations thereafter.

One feature throughout my career has been the centrality of knowledge. Although this might have been less obvious to some, as topic headings might have been apparently non-specific, eg settlements, they were premised on the acquisition of information that would support a variety of activities that sought to embed this knowledge in longer term memory. The use and application of knowledge, in itself, acts as a form of test situation, where an engaged teacher can see, from verbal, written or diagrammatic outcomes, what children have secured over time. And yes, from time to time, tests were used, to look at specific elements.

Undertaking a secondment to the Assessment of Performance Unit (APU) looking at science investigation approaches with children, allowed considerable insights into children’s thought processes within an investigation, as the participants were encouraged to articulate their thinking through a problem.

I have taught in schools that have had a traditional slant and some that would have been seen as more progressive, even becoming head of an open-plan school…

In almost every setting, securing the maximum of progress in outcomes across all children has been a feature, and, to be honest, where this was compromised by top-down dictat of pedagogies, I left the school early, as I felt abused as a teacher, unable to deal with potentially significant needs appropriately.

Progress was premised on ordered and organised planning approaches that ensured the coverage required; it also embed a natural linearity of delivery, for any pedagogy.

In every situation, specific lessons would start with teacher input, to ensure that every child had a baseline of essential information; sometimes developing into the “three part lesson”. Dialogue, questioning, enabling articulation of thinking was necessary feedback to the teacher. It was important to know that children were secure before moving on.

In other lessons, children might be peeled away to specific tasks that allowed for some, independent challenges to use/apply knowledge, while others might have a greater scaffolded approach. When there’s only you and a class, using independence is an essential good.

Continuous tasks supported elements of independence. For example, a story might be developed over a whole day, a week, or a fortnight, within a National Writing Project approach of drafting, edition and redrafting before presentation. Art and DT tasking would also be longer term, capable of being returned to if time was created by early finishing of a singular task.

The freedoms of earlier education were available simply because fewer elements were so rigidly timetabled. Moving to the hall for PE and music/dance/drama, or the field for games were the main, immovable chunks. There was time to allow a child or children to have an extra ten minutes after play to finish one piece of work properly, before starting the next. Or if one task finished early, moving onto the next was sensible.

Fitting always purposeful tasks into a set period of time may actually mean, for some children, that they either finish early and have to fill time, or do not finish, so, either way, are regularly frustrated, or frustrating to the teacher.  

The underlying planning from 1990-2006 for my school, and as examples for the previous two, can be seen in this blog. Planning was a strong feature of the school, supported by what we called “Topic Specifications”. These are now being called “Knowledge Organisers”, but do similar things; stating the essential aspects to be covered. Every teacher had a file for their year group which they could organise in any order that they wished; some were particularly skilful in coordinating several topics into one theme. Our topic lasted as long as they needed, from one week to perhaps four or five. This flexibility allowed appropriate coverage and access to a broad curriculum.

Elements of my approach to school could be seen, by an outsider, as traditional. The difference was probably in the way in which children who struggled with learning, as presented in the regular input, were accommodated. Where there was a need to revisit an idea, this would be done, if necessary using a different resource or model. If this was unsuccessful, further adaptation might be tried, at each stage noting the working and thinking methodologies and outcomes. It was a constant state of investigating, in order to start making incremental improvements, from which the child might find a personal motivation for taking on the learning, rather than it being external exhortation to succeed.

Perhaps that’s the main difference between some teachers. Some are more presentational than others, while some are prepared to go deeper into investigation of pupil needs. But, and it is a big but, the need to be investigative, as a teacher, can be inferred from teacher standards 2, 6 and 5; getting progress and outcomes through engagement, advice and adaptation to needs. It is easy to make assumptions about children and learning. It is better to develop the skills of investigation, but also to be sufficiently humble, to ask colleagues for time to reflect, think and plan alternative methods.

I don’t like extremes. The trad-prog “debate is at best an irritation, at worst it is potentially destructive over time.

We encourage bright, creative, young people to become teachers. They bring with them enthusiasm and investigative potential that earlier cohorts would envy; just read a few blogs from newer teachers. If we tie them to a delivery model, we are effectively recreating aspects of the 1950/60s where radio or television lessons brought an “expert” into the classroom. Using the IWB, with centralised teachers and classroom behaviour monitors would not be my preferred methodology, but it could be seen as a natural progression, should pedagogy become more prescribed.

Thinking through challenge is an engaging activity. We need classrooms where high quality thinking, and dialogue within and across subjects is enabled and led by high quality thinking communicators.

Thinking, dialogue and investigation support all approaches and enable incremental improvement…   

It can appear, almost daily, that experienced teachers, on social media, bemoan some aspect of Initial Teacher Training. This can be behaviour management, planning, subject knowledge, working with parents, progress and outcomes or assessment.

Recently there has been some discussion on SEND; special educational needs and disabilities. It is almost as if a trainee teacher has to emerge from their period of training fully equipped for every eventuality that they will encounter, at least in their early career. It is important to view ITE as just that, an initial period of training. This has to be continued through a teacher’s career, with independent self-developing behaviours supported by schools.

From the list above, apart from certain elements of working with parents and generic national Curriculum directed subject knowledge, there is every likelihood that other aspects will be different in systematic terms in every school. The variability of the training context is likely to result in very different experiences for trainees.

It is the fact that every school is subtly, or sometimes significantly, different that has caused me to reflect on the role of the school and the professional mentor as a major factor in a trainee’s success or otherwise.

Today’s mentor is more likely to be an in-house tutor than just an experienced teacher with the skills to model good practice to an observer, but selected by the head as “their turn” to have a student. Most ITE providers offer training to mentors, including to Masters’ level. They need to be able to coach the trainee in every aspect of development as a professional teacher, ensuring that every one of the teacher standards is embedded into the teacher-to-be in a form that enables them to reflect and refine their practice in ways that benefit the children.

Where trainees struggle, it is usually because the mentor, often a member of SLT, or with specific responsibilities in a school, is pulled to other roles during a school experience, so that the trainee receives too little modelling of practice, support and guidance as well as challenge and reflective dialogue. While it is a truism, regularly expressed by trainees, that they valued the time when the mentor left the room, the need for in-lesson and post-lesson coaching discussions cannot be over-stressed.

There is also the question of the general context. Schools volunteer to take trainees and, as long as they have no significant weaknesses, universities often then place a trainee. From time to time, this does not work, so a trainee is moved. 

The school SENCo may, or may not, not be experienced, and have undergone SENCo training, so that the internal systems may not always be sufficiently mature to allow the trainee to anticipate significant support.

From the training provider, the ITE trainee receives a variation on the following thinking toolkit as a starting point.

1)      An understanding of child development across the subject range and abilities within the school setting; Primary age 4-11. This is the bedrock of all decisions, impacting on all classroom practices. This is summarised in two blogs.
24652 revisited
Build a Teacher; Structuralist to holistic

Teacher standard 2; progress and outcomes. Standard 4; planning. Standard 6; assessment. Standard 5; adaptation to evident need. The developmental continuum 24652 may well show up anomalies from specific children. These are the points for analysis and further refinement of challenge supporting investigation.

It is an area where significant collaborative work would be beneficial to teachers at every stage in their development. A very good understanding of the potential range of capabilities and an ability to frame expectations of the children in a specific year group or class is central to offering challenge and the potential for progress.

2)      An understanding of approaches to behaviour management and an ability to accommodate to the contextual demands of that school’s specific approach.
Behaviour management and ITE

3)      Understanding the SEND regulations, as per the 2014 framework.
The 2014 SEN framework

4)      An understanding that some children in any classroom will display individual needs that are outside the general range of class needs, or perhaps specific to a subject or context.
Individual needs
Individual needs; fine tuning

5)      They need to understand the need to keep careful records that may ultimately build into a case study that will add value to an application for additional support.
SEN Radio?
SEND Building an individual case study.

6)      And all this within a team ethic that starts with teacher, parent and child, extends to the broader school expertise, then supplemented with external expertise. Understanding a graduated approach.
SEND Tic-Tac-Toe

7)      Having a set of descriptors of learning and social behaviours and outcomes that might, over time suggest a pattern of need that can ultimately be categorised by an external expert, following the creation of a case study.
​

The school offers the real life opportunity to put this background thinking into practice. Trainee inexperience can mean an extended period of getting to know the nuances of the school system, which can be compromised by lack of shared time with an experienced mentor, or SENCo. The structural elements have to be considered within the whole. Systems understanding is an essential precursor to more holistic elements.

As an experienced Link Tutor, I am always concerned, after a couple of weeks of the school experience to unpick how well the trainee knows the children, as a class and as individuals. A level of security suggests that the practice will progress positively, as the trainee is beginning to show holistic thinking. Those still seeking to put the structures together cause more concern.

Colleagues at Winchester University have developed a ten week module for SEND that is a significant part of year 3 of the undergraduate course. This covers the above and also specifics of different identified needs. This module occurs directly before the final school experience, during which the trainee has to create a case study of one child chose with the support of the mentor and SENCo.

Learning needs are explored and described using a variety of criteria; social backgrounds unpicked with staff (teacher, SENCo, ELSA-emotional literacy support assistant) and parents through interview; discussions with children, where appropriate, underpin descriptors. Trainees have to seek to understand the needs of one child in detail. At the same time, they need to be acutely aware of the range of other needs in the class. This is particularly the case when trainees choose to do their final school experience in a special school environment.

Issues will always arise and can happen to anyone: -

Teacher standards 8, 7&1

Poor understanding of systems; schools are rapidly becoming single entities. Transfer between schools or changing year group within a school can cause concern. Dialogue and mentoring may be needed in self-organisation based on school systems, or sharing of information between colleagues, to enable deeper understanding of a child’s personal needs.
Class behaviour; understanding the school system, interpreting it into the practice of the class, ensuring that it is followed efficiently, and followed through where this is necessary. Involving senior colleagues as needed. Running a good classroom is key to every aspect of learner success.
Professional Relationships; getting on with colleagues, at all levels, is sometimes taken for granted. It’s easy to take this to an extreme and cause a tension, which can easily become exaggerated. Sometimes needs a quiet word, or, in severe situations, SLT intervention. Parent relations is a skill that is refined through experience, but there can occasionally be parents whose approach can be more challenging. Understanding is a key element of professionalism.  

Teacher standards 3 & 4

Being ordered and organised would seem to be needed as second nature in teachers, but cannot be taken for granted. Planning over different time-scales, resourcing appropriately, deploying available staff to predetermined need, are fundamental.
Subject knowledge appropriate to the needs of age and ability range of the children can be a variable, especially in Primary education, where the individual interest and expertise may vary considerably, but needs to be addressed.

Teacher standard 6&5

Responsive, analytical skill and the ability to adapt to evident need can be some of the last skills to be refined. It may well be evident between lessons, based on the relatively simple view of “They got it, or not; what’s next?” It is the in-lesson interactions, coaching, guidance and timely feedback, with, for some children a tweak down or up in the challenge to enable them to underscore some or additional progress.

Teacher standard 2
Progress and outcomes may be the last on this list, but it is the spine of every decision that a teacher makes. Going back to the 24652 dynamic, standard 2 is likely to encompass the teacher expectations, which, in turn, drives challenge, interaction and then expected outcome.

Getting teaching and learning right is a multi-layered and multifaceted reflective process. It is dynamic and ever-changing, permanently challenging.
​
Trainees need to start this process in training, then keep reflecting, with colleague dialogue and support, to refine their thinking, organisation and professional decision-making.

Or choices and consequences.

Resilience, to me, is the seeking of solutions to problems that are put before you, harnessing all the available knowledge, your own and from other sources, developing a plan of action, carrying it out, with in-action alterations to evident need, leading to an outcome that can then be evaluated, and if necessary remediated or refined following further reflection. Sometimes it is reflective, at other times it is reactive, dependent on the time constraints.

From my personal story, I think I have some insight into the potential for life to throw things at you. I am also well aware that some people have had greater things to cope with than me. For all the challenges I am content with my lot, not least because I survived them and also because each contributed to overcoming the subsequent issues as they arose and made me into the person that I have become.

Life offers challenges, opportunities and experiences at different levels to each and every one of us, unless we live in a self-contained bubble and don’t participate.
​
It is something of a truism that children today don’t enjoy the same freedoms which my generation did, to explore the surrounding area without worry, to play together, or climb trees, until caught, in a local recreation ground. I walked the couple of kilometres or so to school aged 5, crossing roads by myself, having been taken on the first few days by one of my parents. These experiences developed personal capabilities and a certain amount of self-reliance.

If children are not able to experience the world through their own eyes and through their own decisions, but have to rely on an adult to make the decisions for them, they can become somewhat disabled in their growing experiences. We want our children to be safe and secure and I do remember the first time my own children went off on their own into town, a kilometre away, in the days before mobile phones. That they went, got back safely and wanted to talk about what they had done in the interim was a rite of passage. Their confidence raised our confidence as parents. They had demonstrated their capability and independence in decision making. They took responsibility and grew as a result.

Regularly, we hear that about the need for “lessons” in “grit and resilience”. In a school system that has almost systematically embedded a spoon feeding culture, how will it be done?
​
Put children out on wet days without a coat, to see how it feels to be cold and wet? Deprive them of food for an extended time to experience hunger? Or will we see more cross-country running, or some other physical exertion, until children feel real physical exhaustion?

If they are given “Ladybird” or “Blue Peter” instruction (here’s one I made earlier, copy the recipe), how do they learn to make decisions and take account of resultant outcomes? They won’t always have a teacher or adult around to make the decisions for them. Because, in reality, grit, determination and resilience are internalised, personal to each and every one of us. Some have more than others. This can be our ability to tolerate discomfort or pain, in different forms, mental or physical. We sometimes don’t know what we can endure until we are tested.

Independent decision making is a part of this process; making appropriate choices when faced with a problem. Working together as a team can sometimes be problematic, requiring understanding of others, but success, as a result of collaboration, can be the source of personal growth. Life is after all a glorified team work exercise. Getting on with someone can be testing, at times.

Thinking back to my active teaching days, which extended through headship, my aim was always to harness and develop independence in learners, with children thinking, talking, decision-making and enacting their plans an integral part of as many learning challenges as possible.

My classroom organisation, some would occasionally have described as a “learning workshop”, enabled challenge such as “Make a picture to represent autumn” or “What’s the best material to wrap a parcel in the post?” This would allow children choices of materials, composition and the direction of their working together, as they always made such pictures in twos or threes, so decisions were corporate. Elements of other subject challenges were treated in the same way, because the talk, planning and decision were effectively “tests”, enabling children to demonstrate how much of the taught curriculum they had internalised.

As someone is likely to be asking if teaching occurred, the answer is a resounding yes, with the tasking checking that the teaching had been embedded, and remediated within the task as necessary.

Children will not become resilient through dictated lessons, which can then just become exhortations to finish the activity. Making learning challenges such that effort across a range of capabilities is needed, over time, so that grit, resilience and decisions are in-built, might just offer a greater chance of success.

Then again, life might already have given some of the children their life-time’s quota of resilience. Imagine a refugee child, who has had to flee conflict. School does not often mirror real life, so is not always a preparation for those things that might be encountered.

You just need to know them well, teach them well, support, guide and mentor to need and challenge appropriately, letting the cords loosen from time to time, to test their security.

This week, I have been able to have a number of conversations that have drawn on my teaching career and life experience in general. One of these was in the context of special educational needs and “inclusion”. The term inclusion rightly became a significant part of political and social life within the past twenty years, but I have always wondered if the label itself, defined as a state of being included, implies an “outsider” who has to be incorporated into a group, which in turn has to adapt to the new person; “Please can I be included?” It reminds me of playground games; who’s chosen first and who’s left until last?

That people are different is easily understood.

The differences can, at times, be exaggerated at the expense of similarities, to the point where accommodation is deemed impossible. This, in education terms, can amount to a form of exclusion; you don’t fit us, we can’t cope with difficulties like those.

However, finding the right educational setting for defined needs is key to success.

 My career has shown me that capacity creates capacity, in that schools which find themselves able to accommodate individual needs find the capacity to adapt to the needs of all children, so making themselves desirable and valued by parents and children. Schools operating in challenging areas, taking every child who comes through the door, often because they simply have space, with a positive adult workforce, can transform children’s lives. For the first time, some have space to grow, even if, from time to time, they rail against the system. Children are little humans and have, at their age, perhaps less self-control than adults are supposed to have. They make errors of judgement.

For eight of the past ten years, until two years ago, I did substantial work with Inclusion Quality Mark. This came up in conversation this week, as a Twitter acquaintance proudly told me that her school had recently received confirmation of the award. As I had been instrumental in developing the audit in use from 2015, I was aware of the qualities that the school would have displayed, as there were significant common themes that ran through each, although there were contextual adaptations to evident need.

It made me have a look at bits that I wrote during that time, after visits to schools. The following is an extract from one summary, anonymised.

To move from Special Measures to Outstanding in three years suggests that something special happens in London Primary School. Whilst working with the same staff, the school has seen a rapid turn-around. The principle can be easily stated, as Personalisation in everything, holding to the Every Child Matters ethos, although the practical aspects are more complex to describe. London encounters virtually every identifiable barrier to learning, seeks to identify root causes and then to find solutions which allows each child to feel valued and to develop self-esteem, from which learning needs can be addressed, as children have the skills to cope when errors are made. 

Passionate, articulate, hard-working, engaged, analytical, purposeful, creative, inspirational and visionary are all adjectives that can be attributed to the London staff. It was a pleasure to spend quality time in their company.

Equally, if I could nominate a school where Inclusion is lived and breathed, it would be London. It permeates every aspect of school life, perhaps, as the Head of School commented, “With so much need, we have no choice but to use inclusive approaches”. But inclusion at London is more than that statement; it is the raison d’etre, like a stick of rock, sliced anywhere, the word Inclusive would be seen, hearts, minds, bodies and souls are dedicated to the same aims. Although the end of term was in sight, there was still and energy and vibrancy to the school which belied its Victorian building, although even that had been imaginatively used to enhance all aspects of teaching and learning, from Nursery to eleven.

I came away from this visit to London Primary with two thoughts that summarise its outlook:-

 The staff give above and beyond what one can reasonably expect of them.
 Nobody is left out, child or adult. All are valued for their unique gifts and talents.
Two quotes from a parent and a teacher add to the summary:-
“Like a big family.”
“We offer a glimmer of hope in their lives. We are here to make a difference.”
While an external view was that:-
“The school makes excellent links with the community and other schools to deliver a high quality of service to families”.

The school aims for every child to have a happy and active primary education in an environment that is caring and supporting. It provides a stimulating and structured environment in which every child will be encouraged to reach their full potential.”

Teachers, at all levels of experience, take their responsibilities very seriously, working hard to improve themselves through personal reading and regular networking, where this is easily available. Some are prepared to spend part of a weekend at conferences. They want to offer the best of themselves, so that every child receives the best that they can offer. The best teaching context is collegiate, with expertise willingly shared.

External judgements on the system, schools or individual teachers often creates a negative image; for seemingly thirty years it has often been found wanting and “in need of improvement”, to use an Ofsted judgement, while children may be judged to “not be at national standard” at SATs. Some of these children may well be told this throughout their schooling. And yet, we are, as a profession, acutely aware that labels hurt children (people), this being one of the arguments for removing levels, but we’re in a cultural period where no-one quite knows exactly what to expect of children’s outcomes, as there isn’t, as yet, a common expectation that can be articulated and demonstrated. Teacher insecurity can lead to insecure advice and guidance. We are also at a point where long serving teachers are retiring, to be replaced by younger, less experienced staff. A recent post looked at different stages of teacher development, where less experiences professionals may be more likely to be concerned with getting structures right than the details of specific needs.

Collegiality, quality mentoring and high quality communication are key to safeguarding educational opportunities for each child.

Inclusion is a personal and school wide ethos. It cannot thrive in isolated pockets, without frustration creeping in. Poor communication and inaccessibility engender parent and teacher annoyance with each other. Frustration, on either side can lead to rapidly diminishing relationships, which then have to be tackled before the needs of the children can be addressed.
​

I’ve included again, the general outcomes from multiple visits to schools to look at Inclusion (above) and also a link to a post that looks at the underlying principles of inclusive practice.
 
 
It can be a salutary experience to really take a look at yourself first.
 

Have you ever had the experience of "corpsing" or "bottling it" during a public performance? How much rehearsal is "enough" or possibly too much?

​Some years ago, personal relaxation time was provided through plating in a performance folk dance group band, from which, occasionally, we morphed into a barn dance ensemble for special occasions. In addition to playing the Irish drum, the bodhran, which I'd played in France in front of an audience of 3000, I also stepped out from the band to sing folk songs appropriate to the occasion.

​This was fine, until the day that I literally froze mid-song. I’d sung this particular version of “As I walked out, one bright May morning” many times, but for some reason, the beginning of the next verse eluded me. In front of an audience of 100 people, I was stuck. Fortunately, the band discretely started to clap, as if the song had finished and I slunk back behind my drum. The experience was so stark and devastating, my confidence so dented, that it has stuck with me ever since.

We’re into observation season for ITT trainees. They are, during an observation, on show, demonstrating their current abilities. It’s very public, with an audience of children adding to the adults in the room; the TAs are as much part of the audience as the class teacher and, occasionally, an external tutor.

This has also heightened to me the ways in which we ask children to perform, every minute of every day, changing their focus from one lesson to another, often with just a few minutes’ hiatus. Some lessons are highly performance based; PE, dance, drama, music and art come to mind, but reading aloud could be seen as performance, as can being put on the spot to answer a question. It’s the immediacy that can cause a tension in an insecure child required to respond, perform and achieve. Where there is the potential for responses to be right or wrong, the insecure child may take time to respond.

Desert Island Discs interviewee on 10.3.17 was Jimmy Carr. Most people will know of the seemingly brash, confident comedian, prepared to say the unsayable. It was with great interest that I listened to him talking of his childhood that was marked by late diagnosed dyslexia that left him unconfident in class reading lessons. That he went on to exam success and to Cambridge was down to teachers later in his career who believed in his abilities and focused him in the right way.

Wait time; helpful or not?

I watched a class lesson, based on bible reading, with the teacher reading aloud from the bible, while every child had their own copy and had to “read along with the teacher”. For me, there were a number potentially issues built into this activity from the start; the readability level of the text and the reading ability of the class as a whole. While the additional adults were deployed with the readers with greatest need, there was no guarantee that the children were reading with any accuracy, or with understanding. Wait time is a useful technique, allowing a child a bit of thinking time before responding. Well used, it can be the difference between offering an answer and becoming tongue tied and unable, or unwilling to answer. When one of the struggling readers was asked a question, the pressure to answer was great and became more so as the wait time progressed. Fortunately, the teacher offered an opportunity to think longer by going to another child. An alternative would have been for the child to talk with her supporting adult, who could act as advocate for ideas.

Rehearsal time.

When I was a class teacher, the prevailing orthodoxy in reading was to hear individuals. Where this was planned, it was possible to think ahead and “line-up” readers, who would be called, by offering them time to come out of the activity that they were doing and allow some time to go back over a few pages of already read material, so that they were prepared to move onto the next few pages to be read aloud. This preparation, or rehearsal, was very valuable for vulnerable readers, for whom reading aloud can be sufficiently great to diminish their performance, meaning that they might receive less than flattering feedback.

Where any form of reading aloud is envisaged, I would always advocate a period of time where the children could do some personal practice ahead of the reading, especially if they have moved from one subject to another. Where an additional adult is available, some children could do this out loud, while others, if iPads are available, could record themselves reading aloud and listen back.

Responsive teaching.

Watching for the nuanced responses of children is a key element of responsive teaching. Spotting and responding to evident need in timely fashion is an example of quality teaching. It is very easy to miss tell-tale signs, especially if the teacher is in training or in their early career. As I wrote in an earlier blog, inexperienced, developing teachers move from structural considerations to more holistic, child-evidenced decisions.

Not everyone is a naturally outgoing personality.

We hope in schools, that we offer a safe environment where it is possible to make an error, in any aspect of life, without it being blown out of proportion. Should it become so, it can have a long term detrimental effect on future effort and outcomes.

Insecurity in any form can become debilitating. It is the teacher role to minimise the potential for learning opportunities to add to present insecurity. Children know if they struggle with learning; they don’t need it exaggerated. We need them all to be active participants, but not necessarily in a starring role.

In this regard, I do have some concerns about some 1:1 teaching; are these children potentially under too much scrutiny?  

​Images are of "Octan" playing and rehearsing for the Truffe de Perigeux; Chris Chivers, Paul Fane and Nick Manley.

Deconstruction of Walderton farmhouse

When Shakin’ Stevens sang “Ain’t gonna need this house no longer, ain’t gonna need this house no more, ain’t got time to fix the shingles, ain’t got time to fix the floor”, he obviously hadn’t met with the people who run the Weald and Downland Open Air Museum at Singleton, near Chichester. Their mission is to save old houses that otherwise would become derelict and their historical heritage lost.
​
These houses are painstakingly taken apart, marked, measured and mapped, so that they can be repaired as necessary and then put back together in such a way that they are accessible to a very large number of visitors during each year. The team also reconstructs buildings of archaeological interest, recently building a Saxon Hall from evidence of a 950AD structure from Steyning in West Sussex.

​When my children were young, being naturally inquisitive, they regularly asked “What does that word say?” The response was the whole word, with perhaps a side order of sharing the first letter sound. Children want to understand the world around them, and awareness of words is a significant part of that. For deconstructing, in current parlance, read decoding, the new orthodoxy. Young children don’t necessarily want to know that “Road” says “R-OA-D”, or worse “R-O-A D”; or perhaps try “Crescent”. They want the word, perhaps because they are also naturally seeking meaning, to make sense of the world. That they are aware that a written road name “says” something is a step to note, in itself?

I have already said that I can see great benefit in deconstructing to determine the parts that can then be put back together. A large number of words conform to rules according to how letters are linked together; equally, there are many that don’t. Listening to children read who are over-reliant on decoding can be a painful business, especially if this is their approach to each word. Reading requires some fluency, to enable sentences to create an overall meaning, which, in turn, requires retention of whole words, or significant chunks of words that allow rapid construction of the less secure parts.

To my analytical mind, deconstruction (decoding) leads to reconstruction (encoding), then to retention, for rapid retrieval when required in context, by definition the reconstructed word, in memory becomes a (recognised on) sight word, a form of word matching.

I can remember the pleasure of playing with words, within “word families”. Having learned a simple word like “at” beginning to add letters to make additional words: - bat, cat, fat, hat, mat, pat, rat, sat, tat, vat, or “it”: - bit, fit, git, hit, kit, lit, mit(ten), nit, pit, sit, tit, wit. Coupled with learning nursery rhymes and simple songs, words like this and the idea of rhyming allowed children to be explorers of words.

I have worried about the potential for approaches advocated since 1997, with the National Strategies and Assessing Pupil Progress (APP), that the curriculum, as a whole has become disjointed through deconstruction, requiring the learner to make sense of large parts of the journey, without a clear picture of where everything fits; a bit like trying to make a complicated jigsaw without sight of the picture.

I made this point, in this way, to Lord Dearing at a local curriculum review conference, because teachers were finding themselves in a similar position. The current curriculum approach has an even greater feel of an incomplete jigsaw. In fact, at times, it feels like someone decided to throw the bits out and ask people to find them first; not much fun playing an incomplete game.

A lack of overall narrative, or breadth of knowledge and understanding, allows smaller elements that are in place to assume greater prominence than each perhaps should have, as busy teachers seek to cement some simplicities into the complexities of the curriculum demand. Some schools seek to simplify further by giving some subjects greater prominence at the expense of others, diminishing the conceptual and vocabulary base.

Much mention has been made recently of the need to memorise, thoughts in working memory leading to storage in long term memory, with the potential for cognitive overload and dissonance thrown in for good measure.

There is the idea that the current simplicity ensures no cognitive overload, that working memory is only put to a particular use and that this is then stored and retained, for easy recovery when needed.
If only life and learning were that simple, we’d have been doing that forever. The narrative of sharing ideas with learners often leads, in the telling, to the leader making links with other ideas, some of which are aroused in memory simply in the telling, a link having been made by the use of a word, or seeing something in an image that jogs a thought. These tangents can sometimes be seen as new insights, which arise as much within discourse as in “deep reflection”.
This, for me, is one reason why teachers need to be excellent storytellers and children need to talk their ideas, in discussion with an adult, who can offer appropriate additional linked asides that add value to the retelling.

We don’t know the capacity of a child’s working memory, nor do we have any idea about their long term mental organisation, but we can assume that these will vary. Unless there is very good modelling of ideas in a framework that makes sense to the child, they will be struggling cognitively. As an adult, if you have been in a lecture and found an idea interesting or challenging and spent time reflecting on that, is that at the expense of the next few minutes of the talk? I know that I have, probably on many occasions.

Learning can be hard.
The problem, for a learner, in a deconstructed environment, where they have no clear map or picture, nor signposts to how things link together, is that they then have to try to put things together for themselves. It is not surprising if many find this very challenging; some may be experiencing working memory or cognitive overload or, in extremis, stress.
It can be made even harder if it isn’t articulately presented and effectively scaffolded, through appropriate concrete and visual modelling and examples that encapsulate the concepts that are embedded within the subject specific vocabulary and processes being espoused.

Learning is often hidden in the language used.
The teacher is, at times, an interpreter, even in a home language, where extended vocabulary needs to have a developmental relationship to earlier forms. This may be specific within subjects, but needs unpicking if gaps in learner understanding are to be bridged.
 
Deconstruction, without reconstruction, leads inevitably to gaps, as bits are not picked up and put back into place. If the gaps are in the teacher element, it’s not surprising if the learner demonstrates those gaps.
​
Put your learning jigsaw together with clarity, share the overall picture, then unpick the pieces as they become relevant during the journey.
​

Walderton farmhouse, reconstructed.

 
A simple idea that I used on a long ago teaching practice, thanks to Rolyat Trebor, enabled children to enter a world of pure imagination. The premise is a simple one; you take your name and write it backwards. In so doing, you become your anti-person, the complete opposite. This allows children to explore their own personality, so would have explored ideas that are now a part of Personal and Social elements of school.

for example, some personality traits are positive:

• Being honest no matter what the consequences.
• Having responsibility for all of your actions.
• Adaptability and compatibility can help you get along with others.
• Having the drive to keep going, and having compassion and understanding.
• Patience, so people say, is a virtue.
• Having the courage to do what’s right in those tough situations and loyalty to your friends and loved ones.

Read more at http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-personality-traits.html#wieQA3vRM9k4XYbi.99

So, obviously, the anti-person, in this case, would be dishonest, irresponsible, dogmatic, lazy, impatient, cowardly and disloyal.

The benefit is that it enables the exploration the language of opposites and opposition, but is also enables children to develop a reflective scenario where they meet their alter-ego.

Making masks accompanies this idea really well.
​Links to two different methods; one simple the other slightly more complex.

3D Masks made easily
Five fold 3D masks

I like this poem, I woke up this morning, by Karla Kuskin
​
I woke up this morning at quarter past seven.
I kicked up the covers and stuck out my toe.
And ever since then, that’s a quarter past seven,
They haven’t said anything other than “no”.

They haven’t said anything other than,
“Please dear, don’t so what you’re doing” or “Lower your voice.”
Whatever I’ve done and however I’ve chosen,
I’ve done the wrong thing and I’ve made the wrong choice.

I didn’t wash well and I didn’t say thank you.
I didn’t shake hands and I didn’t say please.
I didn’t say sorry when, passing a candy,
I banged the box into Miss Witelson’s knees.
I didn’t say sorry. I didn’t stand straighter.
I didn’t speak louder when asked what I’d said.

Well, I said that tomorrow at quarter past seven,
They can come in and get me, I’m staying in bed…

Or this one, Sulk, by Felice Holman.

​I scuff my feet along and puff my lower lip,
​I sip my milk in slurps and huff and frown and stamp around,
And tip my chair back from the table,
​Nearly fall down, but I don't care.
​I scuff, I pout and frown and huff,
​and stamp and pout,
​Till I forget what it's about. 
​

According to a report today, paraphrased by Icing on the Cake aka @JackMarwood on Twitter as
To paraphrase a report today, "Since 2012 pupils from high-income families have made more progress year-on-year than poorer classmates".

If this is, indeed an accurate summary, I began to speculate why this may be the case.

We are in a very strange economic period, with many people working in low paid jobs, more than likely renting in a market where costs appear to be rising significantly annually.

Where people are working in reasonably well paid jobs and may well have started to purchase a house, their mortgage rate is significantly lower than at any point that I can remember. Unless this has led them to borrow too highly, the repayments could still be manageable. I may not be alone in remembering when mortgage interest was at 15%. even on a relatively small mortgage, it meant pulling back on unnecessary spending. It was the point where my wife and I became vegetarian; half a kilo of pulses cost significantly less than half a kilo of meat.

In both cases, additional personal debts, through bank loans or credit cards may also be a drain on finances.

To me, a significant factor will always be the amount of disposable income, for discretionary spending, after all bills have been paid, with consequent decisions that are made as to how it will be spent or saved. It’s whether other demands, like children needing shoes, or other clothes, or perhaps replacing a specific piece of household machinery need to be considered first.

How does this impact on social mobility? I’d pose the view that children from better off families have greater access to social activities that cost money and fall within discretionary spending; sports and other activities, in and out of school, visits to places of interest, museums and galleries, with entry and transport costs. They may well share more social gatherings. They may also have greater access to personal ownership of books and other elements that aid learning, such as wifi and computer links.

Each of these opportunities provides valuable opportunity to talk within a family or a social group, generating a greater social vocabulary and to develop social awareness and confidence. It broadens their view of the world, of possibility and aspiration. If you have never had sufficient money to make decisions that can appear to be frittering it on fripperies, you’re likely to hold back in some way, a form of self-limiting.

It is for all these reasons that schools need to be aware of their communities, to make appropriate decisions to offer opportunity to address some embedded deprivation. It is easy for schools to espouse a “high expectation” mantra, but it is also a case for having high expectations of the school and the teachers to broaden horizons, open eyes to the potential around them and to harness the community, including parents, to support the children for whom they have joint responsibility to educate, formally and informally.

Why does London appear to do better that other areas? I’d suggest that free transport for children and relatively easy access to free world class galleries, museums and other culturally rich experiences is likely to have a part to play; something that might be unthinkable in other areas. I recall a trip to a Redruth (Cornwall) school, where teachers were aware of children who had not visited the sea, four miles away, purely because of transport costs.

​I could see a strong argument for a part of Pupil Premium moneys being allocated to providing social learning opportunity outside of the school experience, to address elements of the inequality, providing experiences that enhance formal school situations.

Social inequality? We have inequality in disposable income, but possibly also inequality of awareness. It's not the children at fault for being born into poorer families. It might be argued that it is a state responsibility to address the issues arising.  

That plays a significant part in a child accessing social experience, which, in turn becomes debilitating socially. Poverty creates poverty of opportunity.