Top of the tree

by Nancy Gedge @nancygedge

Nancy is brilliant at exploring topical issues in education through the telling of stories based on her experiences as a teacher and a parent. I always find her posts moving and memorable. Here she tackles the subject of assessing children according to a national standard by considering her experience of teaching her children, including her eldest, Sam, who has Down’s syndrome, to swim.

Nancy encourages her reader to consider a parent’s perspective without being in any way heavy-handed about it. Plus, she writes beautifully.

As far as teaching her children to swim was concerned: “For a short time I decided to teach them myself. I bought a book and everything. For a short time they valiantly, and successfully, resisted my efforts. In a very short time I gave up my attempts to teach and played with them; I stopped trying to force them before they were developmentally ready. They are all good swimmers now.”

Fasten your seatbelts

By Emma Kell @thosethatcan

Emma Kell is an assistant head who, like Nancy, demonstrates her values and her educational philosophy through the stories she tells. Here she pays tribute to a former head who died suddenly in the summer.

We learn a great deal about leadership from the role models that we meet throughout our lives, and this post demonstrates powerfully the influence a gifted leader can have, including beyond an untimely death. Kevin taught Emma the importance of leaders looking after their staff and according well-being a high priority.

Emma concludes that, ironically, this may have been at the expense of his own and she advises: “Look after yourselves, people. It’s the most important thing you can do. Then, and only then, can you be what you want to be for those you care about.”

Reading this post, I felt sorry I had never had the privilege to know Kevin.

The need to be open

by Roy Leighton @Roy_Leighton

Roy Leighton is new to me (and thanks to Jarlath O-Brien for recommending him).  In this post he explores the importance of being prepared to consider alternative viewpoints.

As I have grown older and my experience of education has developed I find myself less sure of what I think about a number of things; certainly Twitter and blogs regularly encourage me to rethink. Sometimes when arguments rage on Twitter I find myself amazed at how certain and inflexible some educationists appear to be.

In  Roy’s words: “If your response to opinions and possibilities that challenge you is to seek to reject, ridicule or block even a conversation that might force you to change yourself or your systems then you have plateaued in your thinking, learning and probably your life. This is unfortunate as an individual and disastrous for the work you do.”

Good advice for teachers everywhere. I do believe that working through doubt, including self-doubt, can make us stronger.

Interventions, AKA helping students 

by Shaun Allison @shaun_allison

Finally, Shaun Allison reports here on work he did with Andy Tharby (@atharby) on a recent staff day. The post considers what the word “intervention” actually means, and how interventions can be used to best effect to support learners.

Shaun and Andy suggest: “Interventions are not an add-on – it’s what we do to support students who are getting really stuck with their learning, that is, it’s about great teaching.”

Shaun goes on to describe a “waves of intervention” model designed to help teachers to support and “unstick” learners, (bearing in mind that the “struggle zone” is a healthy and productive place for students to be for a while).

The pair emphasise the importance of teachers knowing their students well, recognising when they are “stuck” (and when they are at risk of moving from the “struggle” into the “panic” zone) and adjusting teaching to help them to find the way forward. The post is full of practical advice and good sense. Sometimes the best ideas are simple ones.

I was pleased to see in the blurb, however, that this book does not focus on middle leadership as a panacea for every school issue. Rather, it seeks to demonstrate how teachers at all levels and stages of their career can become agents of change. Twenty-six teachers and leaders, from class teachers in the UK to education policy leads in Serbia, contribute accounts of the change they have led.

The book is divided into four sections, each with a slightly different focus. The first, and arguably most readable, is a selection of short stories (often just a few pages) about change projects organised by class teachers, each of which is prefaced by an introduction to their context and “key lessons about teacher leadership”.

Each of the section’s eight chapters recounts how main-scale teachers effected change through identification of an issue and how best to resolve it. In his introduction, the editor explains that the stories have been written not by the teachers themselves, but from evidence they were asked to document on the projects they led, so as not to put “an additional burden” on them. Not discussed, however, is the amount of time the projects took from teachers with already full timetables, although reference is made to their outstanding commitment in pressurised circumstances. Therefore, I assume that they volunteered to take part in their school’s leadership programme.

I couldn’t put the book down when I was reading this section; teaching issues were talked about with credibility and the enthusiasm for students’ holistic development came across clearly.

But by section two, it started to feel stuffy and less accessible — the introduction explains that these accounts have a more scholarly focus as the contributions come from the work of graduates of the MEd programme in Leading Teaching and Learning. The book loses a little of its genuine enthusiasm in longer and more clinical accounts of change projects, with more references to literature.

Section three is written from the point of view of those organised in facilitating teacher leadership programmes. While it still has a very scholarly feel, an optimism runs throughout each contribution and you are left quite convinced that teachers at all levels in different countries can have an impact where they take change into their own hands and, crucially, when they have needed support.

The last section discusses the importance of networking and sharing knowledge. This is not an unfamiliar concept to most of us, but convincing line managers of its worth when budgets are tight is a different story. The chapter suggests that event should be teacher-led to avoid the usual “top down” approach. In doing so it will increase ownership of learning.

Sections of this book are relevant and powerful for teachers at all stages of their careers, but some of the middle section feels more geared towards academics, middle and senior leaders. I liked that the earlier accounts were pithy and could be dipped in and out of, but you may need to re-read other sections before getting to the crux of an issue. Still, read this book and you will be reinvigorated to take charge of your own practice development and inspire others to do so.

]]> http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/book-review-transforming-education-through-teacher-leadership/feed/ 0 http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/edition-10/ http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/edition-10/#comments Sun, 30 Nov 2014 19:00:00 +0000 http://academiesweek.co.uk/?post_type=reviews&p=3426 The European people must first wake up, shake themselves and stop playing the game of the Sleeping Beauty, said Frantz Fanon.

The dreaming sleep is Europe’s colonial history, whose legacy continues to impact on our lives, assumptions and imaginations, whatever our racialised group. The context for sharing it here is its presence – articulated with raspy, magisterial precision by Lauryn Hill – in Concerning Violence, which opens this week.

Concerning Violence is an archive-driven documentary, scripted from the first chapter of Fanon’s book The Wretched of the Earth. It captures moments from the struggle for liberation in Africa during the 1960s and 1970s, and explores decolonisation. Spoken by Hill, Fanon’s words are woven through nine scenes, their titles providing the film’s structure, anchoring each scene in its geographical location.

The voiceover acts both as soundscape and organisational device, framing a narrative of contemporary footage that includes voxpop interviews and fly-on-the-wall recordings that encompass brutality, pathos and moments of wry, satirical humour.

It is a film of many layers and levels. Watching it is an engrossing and challenging experience, both aurally and visually, and I am unapologetically partisan on its behalf.

If you already know about Frantz Fanon, any words of mine are probably superfluous. Be reassured: the film will not let you down. And if you don’t know about Fanon, the film provides all that you need to know.

One possible answer is provided by a student in the short film, Why is my Curriculum White? (watch it on YouTube). The student describes feeling inferior in a London history lesson, uncomfortable with its tacit assumptions and limited viewpoints. It makes me ask whether I do enough in my English lessons to avoid this trap. I doubt it.

Fanon’s challenge — we have decided not to overlook this any longer — inspired the young people in the screening I attended, although some challenged whether the film positions itself as too remote from the present. It’s easy for white viewers to laugh at the extremes of unembarrassed Rhodesian racism and then distance themselves from the need for dialogue about contemporary attitudes.

But in a week in which a misguided Band Aid single evoking a 19th-century model of racial patronage has been released, the concerns of my fellow audience members are live and kicking, even if they don’t realise it. Please, before you play the track in school, think long and hard about the messages you are conveying to our children, particularly those of African diaspora heritage.

This film made me understand for the first time calls for reparation in Africa. Reparation is not about handouts. It requires commitment to repair, including educational repair. The larger forces of global inequity are daunting as a target – where do you start? — but the individual process of rethinking and decolonising both the content and the viewpoint of what we teach is a step anyone can take, right here, right now. I really hope you will be inspired to see the film. It packs a punch.

Concerning Violence opens in cinemas today.

Teacher spends two days as a student and is shocked at what she learns

Washington Post

It’s worth overlooking the Buzzfeed-style headline and reading this Washington Post article. Readers may differ over this veteran teacher’s interpretation and suggestions based on two days as a student; I hope they’ll recognise her humility and willingness to learn from the experience.

Letters to a new history teacher, no 8

Schools History Project

Wise words from Esther Arnott, starting her “second NQT year” (having taken a year off as a new mother). “I will not let myself fall into the same habits again – and I beg you to try the same,” she begins. She puts the wisdom she has accrued to good use, for example, on not using textbooks: “I’ve now been privy to the monumental task it is to write a textbook. The hours, thought and care that go into each one are staggering.” Arnott offers six tips every teacher might do well to follow.

Is this working?

A podcast by thisamericanlife.org

Eye-opening and balanced, this podcast considers discipline in American schools. Featuring a boy repeatedly excluded from kindergarten, a student-turned-teacher from one of the first “No Excuses” charters, and a school that exclusively employs restorative justice dealing with an altercation with police on a school trip, the programme eschews easy solutions and raises more questions than answers. It’s a must.

No I don’t personalise learning

by Cristina Milos, @surreallyno

Cristina Milos shares her thoughts and research into the genealogy, problems and place of differentiation, personalisation and individualisation. “Those who dismiss differentiation either do not work with a truly heterogeneous group of learners or simply can’t be bothered to improve their practice.” But while personalisation works for older learners, she argues that although it “sounds intuitively great… what stemmed from a rather noble concept has turned, in my view, into a complete caricature: a dry behaviourist model… a complete progressive failure… or a cult of technology.”

Learning from my mistakes: Pinstriped Intervention

by Chris Curtis, @xris32

For my money Chris Curtis writes one of the most readable and thoughtful blogs in education. As a recently appointed head of department, he is forced to grapple with two (sometimes overlapping) spectres: interventions and meetings. Questioning the value of taking students out of lessons to discuss their performance with them, or of interrogating teachers, when students should be the focus, he comes up with a simple, novel and potentially effective way to intervene. “Plus” he notes “I will not be taking any students out of lessons.”

physicsfocus

by Philip Moriarty

This wonderful post begins with a complaint: “This video has just added to the confusion about entropy.” Philip Moriarty, the video’s maker, asks whether this might not be a good thing. Offering well-evidenced heresy, he suggests that our efforts to increase clarity for students do them a disservice. When given a clear answer, one of five things happens: students think they know it, switch off, don’t recognise the differences between the answer and their idea, don’t learn anything or get more confident in their ideas. Reaching a point of confusion, Moriarty suggests, is a success, not a failure.

The proportion of female students studying economics A-level in the UK remains stubbornly low. But it was the marked decline in numbers taking the exam during the 1990s that triggered Ashworth and Evans’ research.

The pair surveyed 1,000 A-level students in 1996/7 across 35 schools, including all year 13 students studying economics and 767 students who were not.

Of those students studying economics A-level, females rated their interest in the subject at 3.72 on a scale of 1-5 whereas males rated it 3.56. Likewise, for those students studying economics but choosing not to take it at university, 55 per cent of females said that although they found it interesting, they performed better in their other subjects. This compared with 54 per cent of males.
Again, there was no significant difference, indicating that once taken, female students were no less likely to dislike the subject or perceive themselves to perform at a lower level compared with their other subjects.

The main difference came when analysing responses from students who had chosen not to study the subject at A-level. When asked why, the percentage of males who said that they knew nothing about the subject was 17 per cent compared with 31 per cent of female students: a significant difference.

The authors suggest that with more information, all students – and particularly females – may be more likely to take it. In addition to better information and a need for greater economics awareness in lower years at school, they also discuss introducing GCSE economics, re-examining the curriculum to consider how it might appeal more to females, and the importance of other females already studying economics in the school as potential levers for change.

As an economics teacher since 2004, I found this research interesting, first because of the trend data. I have seen increasing interest in the subject from both genders, particularly since things got interesting in the world economy in 2008.

Analysis by Geoff Riley of Tutor2U, who annually tracks the number of students studying economics from Joint Council for Qualifications (JCQ) data, reveals that there has been a significant change from the data reported in this 1999 paper, with an 87 per cent increase in the number studying the subject at AS and A2 since
2002, with 70,424 students sitting AS and A2-levels in 2014.

I took a closer look at the QCA data to identify any trends in gender uptake and although the numbers of male and female students have increased over this period, 58 per cent and 53 per cent respectively, the proportion of females remained consistently at 32 or 33 per cent each year, unchanged since Ashworth and Evans’ research. This suggests that, despite the subject’s increasing popularity, the question as to why more females don’t take it remains.

Like many other economics teachers I’m sure, I find that year 9 or 11 students consistently display misconceptions as to what the subject entails, be they male or female. Most consider it to be about money; few have an inkling that it centres on the allocation of scarce resources. I have wondered whether confidence may be at play here, that female students are more likely to admit their lack of knowledge.

GCSEs in economics or related subjects might reduce this knowledge gap. Likewise, PSHE or economics awareness programmes could do better at supporting knowledge of economics, rather than the typical diet of personal finance and budgeting. The suggestion of “feminising” the curriculum sits less well with me. I would be concerned that altering it on the chance that it might appeal to some female students would reduce the subject’s credibility for uncertain gains.

Overall, then, the economics A-level landscape has changed somewhat since Ashworth and Evans’ writing in 1999. However, although they are successful once they take up the subject, females still only make up a third of all students. Ashworth and Evans offer some sensible suggestions as to what work could be done to increase this proportion.

Hytner challenges the lack of recognition given to deputies and affirms those who resist temptation to become No 1. I have observed aspiring deputies in schools encountering disdain from some governors when declaring their reluctance toward headship. Hytner will give them heart. Aspiring headteachers who are damned with faint praise in interview feedback (“We think you should try being a deputy in a bigger school”) might be less deflated on reading Consiglieri. The author is clear they are leader-makers and leaders in their own right, and in a more rewarding place.

“How best to lead from the shadows is a question very rarely asked”, but Hytner puts in effort to provide answers and this is the most rewarding part of the book. It is done through an examination of the roles of bosses and Cs. The final section advises how to get the best out of each other, so Consiglieri is as much for bosses as deputies.

Some of the writing is witty and teasing. The author anticipates that leaders will be too busy to read the whole book so will cherry-pick chapters, not an option for the C.

The most practical points are the questions framed for those choosing their next leader. The highlight, however, is Hytner’s presentation of a humorous and moving template letter for a boss inviting a deputy to discuss their relationship. Three of the many questions asked are: “Which of my other Cs do you most admire and why?”; “When did you last squeak to your PA that I was an ungrateful bastard who….” and “Would I pass the Steve Peter’s toilet test?” This test is one of many memorable prompts that will inform the respective roles. One of the qualities in a boss that he cites is “inevitable narcissism” and so he also provides a similar framework for a deputy to offer the leader.

The book contains illustrations from fiction or entertainment but, with the honourable exception of Sergeant Wilson in Dad’s Army, the behaviours of Roald Dahl’s Twits or Laurel and Hardy did not edify me nearly as much as the real-life insights from the inner circles of political or national leaders, sports teams and businesses. Ofsted watchers will be interested to note ex-chair, Dame Sally Morgan, is described as a straight-talker and challenging to Tony Blair.

In the acknowledgements I noted the name of Jim O’Neil, the former Goldman Sachs economist who was appointed to counsel Michael Gove in 2013. I hoped for insights into that relationship but was disappointed, Mr O’Neil clearly understands the need to remain the shadows.

Eunuchs, sherpas, the baboon theory, snakes in suits, marriage counselling, Darth Vader, Hopi Indian elders, the Girls’ School Association, Yoko Ono, Elvis and Rasputin all feature in Consiglieri. It ends, however, with a notion I dispute: “… to be a complete leader one needs to have a long stint leading from the shadows.” A stint, yes, stints perhaps, but not necessarily a long one. Sergeant Wilson would, of course, phrase that in the style of a good C by whispering “Do you think that’s wise, sir?”

The Subtle Art of Giving Praise

by @theprimaryhead

Following the “controversial” blog on rewards written by an inexperienced primary teacher recommended in last week’s paper, @theprimaryhead wrote a dignified and intelligent reply. In the first piece, Quirky Teacher argued that it was wrong to give children a “puffed-up sense of importance” because they have achieved something after working hard. In contrast, Tim argues that teachers should “be grown up enough to recognise all levels of achievement”. He goes on to expand this idea and bust the myths perpetuated in the previous blog. He says: “Giving praise must not be a blanket experience that each child dutifully receives. It is a nuanced process and only the most Subtle-ist of subtle teachers will get it right. You must give praise effectively so that it does what it is intended to do: reward, motivate and teach everyone that perseverance is one of the most key elements to success.”

I’ve got my Mindset on You

by Sue Cowley

Problem with Growth Mindset

by @HuntingEnglish

Two blogs appeared on my computer feed this week, echoing some of my concerns regarding the current trend in schools to encourage a “growth mindset”. One blog from Sue Cowley addresses the extent to which growth mindset can ultimately determine student outcomes, and Alex (@HuntingEnglish) examines whether schools are actually making necessary changes or just paying lip service to them. Both explore difficulties around this growing movement.

I support the idea that hard work leads to achievement and that we can be masters of our own destiny but there’s always been a hesitancy in the back of my mind. Cowley perfectly articulates the potential problems: “I love the idea that effort is more important than attainment. However, I have some niggling concerns about the way that children and young people may interpret this message. When they hear us say ‘you’ll get better at this if you work harder’, will they hear ‘you didn’t get to the top because you didn’t try hard enough’?”

Alex doesn’t see the problems with mindset in the same way, arguing that “the very concept can help challenging low expectations and fills us with hope that with effort we can achieve what we may not have thought was possible”. Instead, his concerns are about how schools enact mindset activities and whether they superficially tick the latest “buzz box”. He argues: “when I hear people say we have done growth mindset I know they really haven’t — as they appear to misunderstand the concept at a fundamental level. In reality you have never ‘done’ growth mindset.”

Teacher Workload: Can it be sustained?

By @goldfishbowlMM

The topical issue of workload is addressed in this blog with the argument that workload is generated within schools: they should ask the question “will this increase teachers’ workload?” before they introduce new initiatives. Much of what is written is common sense but it’s reassuringly good common sense that should be read widely by all school leaders.

As an educational trade unionist, this is music to my ears and the idea of a workload policy in schools is something the National Union of Teachers is looking at. The author argues that when looking at continuing professional development for teachers the question needs to be asked whether it can be sustained for a year or over a teaching career? The author highlights that “we should also acknowledge that they [Ofsted] have made it abundantly clear that there are some ridiculous things that have been done in the their name,” I’d argue that the Ofsted myth busters document is essential, hard-fought-for reading and it should help teachers have workload conversations in their schools. The blog ends with the question that haunts me and often ends up with the wrong choices being made, “how can you decide what to sacrifice?”

]]> http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/week-commencing-17-november-2014/feed/ 0 http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/growth-mindset-pocketbook/ http://academiesweek.co.uk/reviews/growth-mindset-pocketbook/#comments Sun, 16 Nov 2014 19:00:58 +0000 http://academiesweek.co.uk/?post_type=reviews&p=2873 Carol Dweck’s discovery that some students have a “growth mindset”, the belief that intelligence or ability can be incrementally increased through effort and practice, has led to a degree of excitement within education. It holds the promise that our kids can do better both in and after school. The Growth Mindset Pocketbook seeks to summarise the research and give teachers a range of strategies that they can use to promote such a mindset with their students.

The book starts with a brief review of how students’ beliefs about their ability to learn affect their motivation in school. The authors make the case that children with a fixed mindset are likely to be motivated to look “clever”, seeking “quick wins” and avoiding tough challenges. On the other hand, children who have a growth mindset see setbacks as opportunities and are likely to try harder in the face of difficulties.

The pocketbook also usefully summarises some of the research showing that praise (especially person praise such as “You’re so clever!”) and rewards sometimes reinforce the wrong beliefs and behaviours. It also makes the valuable point that over-reliance on such “extrinsic” motivators can sometimes reduce children’s “intrinsic” motivation to learn.

These sections serve as a fair introduction to the psychology of motivation, though it is not entirely unproblematic. For instance, the authors propose that teachers can measure mindset using a three item self-report measure, rather ignoring the fact that children “wise up” to these questionnaires quite quickly (especially if lots of teachers use them) and can give socially desirable answers that may not reflect their true attitudes to learning.

I also didn’t like the pages relating to neuroplasticity (the fact that repeated behaviour and thinking processes act to subtly change neural pathways in the brain). They talk about learning as “laying down insulation” (referring to the myelination of nerves) increasing “electrical signal strength” and “brainpower”. They return to the neuroscience later in the book suggesting that learning causes a “wild revelry” of nerve activity (apparently, there’s a saying: “Neurons that fire together, wire together”). I recognise that the book is simplified for teachers with no biology background, but I found myself wincing at the strained metaphors. However, I guess they are no worse than the popular (and dreadful) “the brain is like a muscle” analogy that typically gets thrown into growth mindset presentations.

Most of the book looks at ways that teachers can challenge fixed mindsets and encourage the adoption of a growth mindset. This is an unenviable problem for the authors. Whilst the psychology of motivation is well-evidenced, there’s a great deal less robust evidence regarding successful ways of changing children’s attributions.

There’s some evidence to suggest that where growth mindset interventions work, it’s because they are subtle and brief. David Yeager at Stanford, for example, suggests that whilst “stealthy” interventions appear to work in shifting children’s mindsets, heavy-handed approaches run the danger of appearing like manipulation or conveying that the teacher feels the child is in need of help. Thus, I was dismayed by some of the suggested ways in which teachers could apply the growth mindset to their lessons. The worst involved dividing the class into three to roleplay a mock TV show called “Changing the Lives of Fixed Mindsets”. Other suggestions, such as “Mindset bingo!”, “Mindset Heroes” or creating a “Mindset wall”, displayed a similar level of subtlety.

Some of the suggestions about avoiding praise and structuring feedback were worthy, especially for inexperienced teachers. However, much of the advice felt like recycled Assessment for Learning strategies (it even suggested using traffic light cards).

How do we change mindsets? It appears through collaborative learning, peer and self-assessment, developing learning dispositions and a variety of strategies aimed at fostering meta-cognition. Though the key question of whether any of these suggestions actually leads to long-lasting changes in children’s attributions was, in my mind at least, poorly answered.

Schools are becoming more concerned about homophobic, biphobic and transphobic (HBT) bullying, so NatCen’s report for the Government Equalities Office sounds like a particularly important publication.

It brings together research, unfortunately largely from non-academic sources, but misses out quite a bit and mostly fails to do what it says on the tin. Although different approaches to dealing with bullying are listed, it repeatedly concludes that evidence of their effectiveness is limited. It also tends to assume that transphobia is much the same as homophobia and biphobia. The reality is not that simple.

The problem with finding evidence for the success or failure of anything is that it’s never as easy as people think. As an ICT coordinator, I remember suddenly being asked to evidence the effectiveness of interactive whiteboards in years 5 and 6. A host of other variables meant a team of experienced researchers would probably have taken months to get any reliable conclusions. The same is true, with bells on, for evidencing the effectiveness of combating HBT bullying.

So, short of some high-quality academic research comparing different approaches, reliable conclusions about what works are unlikely.

However, the elephant in the room for me, as a trans woman, are the assumptions made about trans kids; that their problems are similar to those of lesbian, gay and bisexual pupils when, in fact, they are usually different. This report was let down by its failure to take account, not merely of other research about trans kids but Cornwall County Council’s excellent guidance for schools about trans children.

A number of things are very different for trans children. First, many become aware of their gender at a much younger age than kids become aware of their sexuality. Second, trans children are much more likely to be bullied or discriminated against by school staff or other children’s parents. I know headteachers who have bullied young trans girls in primary schools and I was recently horrified by what a mum of an eight-year-old trans boy experienced at the school gate every time she picked up her son. I also know a trans girl in south London who was bullied out of her school at 13 because it didn’t take her physical protection seriously.

For trans kids there is a bigger problem to overcome before bullying, something that I described as “cisgenderism” in a research paper published last year by the British Psychological Society. Cisgenderism is a bit like “heteronormativity” compared to homophobia; it’s the unspoken erasure of trans people and the belief that gender is fixed at birth and decided by others. A tacit belief that we are the problem, not other people’s attitudes, is summed up nicely in a wonderful quote by Sass Rogando Sasot: “I am not trapped by my body, I am trapped by your beliefs.”

This belief is so ingrained in our culture that we don’t realise it exists. Yet trans kids, like most kids, have finely-tuned social radar and tune into this unspoken belief to somehow know that being trans is socially unacceptable. Oppressing yourself is always harmful.

So while the value of this research is, in my opinion, limited – especially from the point of view of trans kids – it has one reliable conclusion about tackling HBT bullying; teacher confidence. Teachers need to know about LGBT issues and people to prevent HBT bullying. This knowledge is vital: while something like 75 per cent of the population now know someone who is gay, lesbian or bisexual, only 13 per cent know someone who is trans. The implications of this are clear; teachers need more training in LGBT issues in general and trans issues in particular. By the time a school realises that it has a trans child, it is usually too late.

What I learned from ungraded lesson observations

By @frogphilp

A deputy headteacher in a primary school describes lesson observations in which no grades are given. While some teachers still want to be graded, he notes several advantages to observing without giving grades. Teachers appear to be more open and honest, avoiding following a formula or hiding their weaknesses. The writer also feels that the insight in his feedback has improved, as he can be less judgmental and more focused on the learning in the class.

Sugatra Mitra and Ken Robinson

By @vellemdiscord

An experienced Australian teacher aims his sights on Sir Ken Robinson and Sugatra Mitra, two education gurus who are lauded by many, but whose basic messages can be interpreted as hostile to actual teachers and the art of teaching. The writer despairs at “thousands of teachers applauding a man who had very nicely told them they had been approaching their life’s vocation completely the wrong way” and is equally unhappy at Mitra’s suggestion that children can learn effectively from the internet without being taught.

Character Education is a Waste of Time

By @SurrealAnarchy

In a post prompted by a public debate on teaching character, a drama teacher argues that he, and many other teachers, have already been teaching character to their students through the curriculum, particularly the arts. This does more for students’ development of virtues than formal lessons on character: “Separate lessons in character are wrong-headed because they will further narrow the already narrowed curriculum. School should help us reflect on who we are and what it is to be human, rather than give us an arbitrary list of state sponsored or company sponsored virtues…”

Anyone who doesn’t clap must be taken outside and shot

By http://thequirkyteacher.wordpress.com/

This blogpost, by the most controversial blogger in primary education, is a polemic against the use of rewards that are little more than bribes to get badly behaved or unmotivated children to comply. “The final result, after years of clapping in assemblies where thousands of certificates are given out, is utter sadness as the low achievers finally realise it was all a con: when they don’t get a job with mediocre exam grades, when they don’t get a pay rise just for turning the computer on and when they realise they are not fantastic after all.”

Engagement. Teach children how to engage

by @ManYanaEd 

In a post about the emphasis currently given to “engagement”, an education consultant argues that there is a difference between “engaging with the task and engaging with the learning”. The writer argues that it is a mistake to give a high priority to presenting students with enjoyable activities, when it is learning that they must actually engage with.

“We need a way of getting children to learn because they have the skills to learn, not because the teacher has managed to create a fireworks lesson which, I believe, might well distract from the learning rather than add to it.”

How to get booked for primary teaching conferences – an idiot’s guide.

By @MichaelT1979

This is a deputy headteacher’s guide to the common elements of the worst presentations he’s seen at primary education conferences. He recommends 25 features for those determined to be mediocre, including clichés (“Remind people that it’s all about the kids”), scapegoats (Michael Gove, Ofsted, secondary schools) and really terrible PowerPoints. While acknowledging some of the good speakers he’s heard, he wonders why audiences are happy to hear the same ideas and phrases endlessly recycled. Many of the points might also be familiar to secondary teachers, or those who read teachers’ blogs.