Effective Papers For learning

Having written a couple of posts focused on the language of leadership, I thought I'd go for the trilogy with a post on perhaps the most contentious phrase currently knocking around in education - the dreaded 'Requires Improvement'. In some ways, I can see what OFSTED were trying to achieve by bringing this wording into their approach. I was no fan of 'Satisfactory', on the basis that it really meant that only some children made progress in the lesson; the truth is that those children tended to be the higher-attaining, literate students from more advantaged homes, who were best able to deal with weak teaching whilst still making progress. I'm happy to accept that this is not, in fact, satisfactory. I'm also attracted to the idea of fostering greater openness and pragmatism in the discussions we have, formally and informally, on the genuine effectiveness of our lessons. If you are a (non-superhuman) practicing teacher, the likelihood is lessons which don'...

So - my attempt at a blog prior to SLTcamp. It's probably the English teacher in me, but on given the theme of 'igniting change', I'm immediately drawn to the language we use, as teachers and as leaders. I remember, for example, talking with one colleague who would repeatedly refer to efforts to improve learning and teaching as a 'crusade', 'a battle' or 'a campaign', with the vaguely sinister militaristic language revealing much about their fundamental conception of what leadership in schools is all about. Other typical examples of the language of leadership include such gems as 'driving change', 'driving up standards' and 'accelerating progress', all of which sound a bit Top Gear for my liking. 'Igniting' change - I'm not sure. Makes me think of... burns, maybe arson. It's a little bit explodey, a bit space-rockety for my liking. It seems to suggest a vision of the leader being the agent which brings ligh...