It’s Your Time You’re Wasting

Who needs critical thinking? We've got books to win in a competition! Listen in and find out how to win David's new book! https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/104117215X/ref=cm_sw_r_as_gl_api_gl_i_2HSGGSTD9W7WTK75K5ES?linkCode=ml1&tag=thelearning07-21&linkId=8a1c9c357a01b11d4f9cae79c40bab00 Can you teach critical thinking? If you can, should we even try?

PISA has decided how well a country's schools teach creativity. They then go on to calculate what impact that will have on each country's economic performance. How well did the countries of the UK do? Have a butcher's in our latest podcast.

Should English Departments ditch their 'most popular' texts in order to leave room for books written by female authors? Can we really teach the best that has been thought and said if managers keep foisting texts on teachers that are short and accessible? We discuss this and more... The article that set us off: https://www.tes.com/magazine/teaching-learning/secondary/diversity-gcse-english-remove-popular-books

Chesterton's Fence - What do we lose when we use AI to make decisions for us?

The recent Bafta controversy tests the limits of inclusion in public places. Just how tolerant are we? How does inclusion work in classrooms up and down the country? Some links mentioned: https://open.substack.com/pub/johnsonphoenix/p/no-sign-says-it?r=1rvl5x&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web https://www.tes.com/magazine/teaching-learning/general/uta-frith-interview-autism-not-spectrum

Belonging is Ofsted’s latest preoccupation. In the 2025 framework it sits inside inclusion, now judged in its own right. Schools feel pressure to demonstrate how they notice and support pupils who meet friction in the system. Much policy treats belonging as an emotional climate. Warmth, smiles and pleasant corridors become the accepted tokens of attachment. This flattens a serious idea and overlooks the material pupils use to understand school life. Knowledge as the foundation of belonging Belonging grows from access to shared knowledge: the stories, concepts and cultural structures that let a community recognise itself. Language sits inside this larger inheritance. It is the most visible branch of a deeper stock of ideas. Without shared knowledge, pupils cannot interpret rules, routines or expectations. If belonging becomes a feeling, we lose sight of the material that gives the feeling something to attach to. Language as the medium of participation Every encounter at school arrives through words: rules, identity, aspiration, conflict. Pupils join the community by gaining control of its linguistic repertoire. To belong is to understand the meaning world the school inhabits. The older conversation The Civitas report argues for a renewed commitment to classical liberal education in the UK: The aspiration is to help children develop conscience, moral judgement, aesthetic sensibility, and a sense of belonging to a heritage. These qualities anchor personal freedom in responsibility and shared humanity Belonging.docx Classical societies bound citizens through a moral vocabulary and a shared account of the virtues. Christianity offered a narrative of creation, fall and redemption that gave communities long memory. In each case, belonging meant learning the knowledge and language of the tradition. The Civitas vision of education connects directly to our broader argument: belonging is not just emotional comfort or inclusion. It is entrance into a shared world of ideas, language, values and history. Without that shared knowledge and cultural inheritance, belonging risks degenerating into a patchwork of mood, sentiment or identity fragments. Reviving classical liberal education offers a way to rebuild the intellectual and moral basis of belonging: not as compliance, but as membership in a living tradition one that gives children more than qualifications: a language, a moral vocabulary, a sense of home in a community of meaning. The modern tension. The key question sits quietly behind the framework: belonging to what? Many schools treat belonging as free floating, detached from any story or stock of ideas.. This reflects the multicultural mosaic, which prizes openness but offers little shared meaning. The result can be a community held together by atmosphere rather than conviction. Without shared knowledge, belonging collapses into mood. Mood does not hold communities together. Common stories, common concepts and a common language do. When pupils lack the background knowledge to follow curriculum discussions, they drift to the margins. They may feel welcome, but they cannot participate fully in classroom life. Initiatives that focus on wellbeing surveys or displays of diversity, but do not teach the knowledge that unifies pupils, history, literature, civic ideas produce fragile cohesion. Children sit together but do not share a common frame for thinking. Public debate becomes incoherent without shared reference points. When citizens no longer recog nise the same historical events, moral concepts or civic principles, discussion dissolves into competing feelings. Communities with no common story struggle to integrate newcomers. Without shared civic knowledge, the constitution, national history, the duties of citizenship “inclusion” becomes a matter of sentiment rather than participation.. Societies that retreat from teaching their own traditions often see rising polarisation. Without a common inheritance, people fall back on subcultures, identities or moods that cannot be reconciled. Schools face a clear choice. They can induct pupils into a tradition with coherent knowledge, a shared story and a demanding moral vocabulary, or they can settle for a mosaic of disconnected narratives that offers little common ground. Language sits at the centre of this decision. A shared linguistic repertoire gives pupils access to the concepts, stories and virtues that shape the community they join. Without this, belonging has no anchor and no directi on. If Ofsted wants belonging to mean more than mood, it must address the deeper question: not whether pupils feel at home, but whether they are being given the knowledge and language that make a home possible. What do we want students to belong to?

In this episode we look at a cluster of articles, tweets and policy announcements, each tugging in a slightly different direction. On their own they’re fragments. Taken together they paint a picture of how schools try to make sense of contradictory signals about disadvantage, curriculum, SEND, misinformation and reform. We look at the top 75 schools based on progress 8 - what is their secret? We ask, can you teach kids to spot misinformation? We discuss what relevance neuroscience might have for schools And whether English teachers actually like Shakespeare? (Should they?) https://www.weareinbeta.community/posts/schools-with-strong-contextual-attainment-for-disadvantaged-students-in-2025 https://substack.nomoremarking.com/p/can-we-teach-students-to-spot-misinformation https://x.com/BarbaraBleiman/status/1988165932867612744?s=20 https://daviddidau.substack.com/p/the-promise-and-danger-of-neuroscience

Curriculum Wars, Again The 2025 Curriculum & Assessment Review – progress or regression? This week, we wade into the newly published Curriculum and Assessment Review — the biggest rethink of England’s education system since 2014. Chaired by Becky Francis, the report promises a “world - class curriculum for all.” But behind the polite phrasing lies a familiar battlefield: knowledge versus skills, rigour versus relevance, freedom versus control. Has the pendulum swung again? Or are we just circling the same deb ates under new branding? What Is English For, Anyway? The review calls for a clearer sense of purpose — including a firmer distinction between English and literacy .  Could this finally kill off the endless reproduction of GCSE question types at Key Stage 3?  Or will “clarity” just mean more bureaucratic fog?  Remember when KS3 had its own curriculum and the Year 9 SATs actually tested something worthwhile? Drama Returns to the Stage The report reintroduces drama — not as an afterthought, but as a formal part of English, alongside reading and writing.  Nostalgia or necessity?  Can English teachers still teach drama with confidence? Or has that expertise gone the way of the OHP and the acetate pen?  When it’s done wel l, drama deepens understanding and builds voice; when it’s bad, it’s awkward theatre therapy. The Oracy Framework: Finding Our Voices, Losing Our Minds? A new National Oracy Framework is coming to “complement” reading and writing.  The idea: oracy underpins learning, wellbeing, and citizenship.  The worry: it becomes another smorgasbord of “amuse - bouches” that distracts from the main course of English.  If it’s about real talk — debate, interpretation, Socratic dialogue — brilliant.  If it’s another round of la minated sentence stems and group talk rubrics, not so much. Grammar in Use, Not Grammar in Theory At last, someone’s said it: move theoretical grammar out of primary and focus on grammar in use at Key Stage 3.  Re - sequencing grammar so it’s taught when students can actually use it.  A revised GPS test focusing on application, not terminology.  Imagine a “literacy passport” — a driving theory test for writing — taken when students are ready. Diagnostics and the Year 8 Test A national diagnostic test in Engl ish at Year 8: to identify reading weaknesses before it’s too late.  Were SATs a good thing?  Because every child who can’t read at secondary is a failure of the system, not the child.  Measure it and it will come. GCSE English: The Return of Purpose (Maybe) The review proposes a total rethink of English Language and Literature at Key Stage 4.  More focus on the nature and expression of language .  Greater range of text types — possibly multi - modal or media - based.  But will this mean deep analysis or “describe yo ur favourite app” nonsense? Broadening the Canon Keep Shakespeare. Keep the 19th - century novel. Keep poetry. But add more “diverse and representative” texts.  Sounds fine, unless “diverse” just means “short and modern.”  Without a central list, we risk tokenism — or a slide back to the 1980s: Angel Delight, pastel colours, and low expectations. “The best that’s been thought and said — by everyone.” EBacc: The Empire Strikes Out The review doesn’t quite kill the EBacc, but it quietly prepares the obituary.  A “rebalancing” of accountability measures signals its long fade.  The arts and technical subjects might finally be allowed to breathe again.  But will schools trust that the accountability system really means it?  Is this the end of “five pillars o f rigour,” or just a rebrand before the next election? The Broader Frame: Inclusion, AI, and Moral Purpose Beyond English, the review leans heavily into digital literacy, sustainability, and moral education Are we educating people or optimising products?  Civic education from Year 1: universal virtue or creeping ideology?  AI readiness: the new “future - proofing” theology. Implementation and Irony The report promises “professional autonomy within entitlement.”  A phrase so elegantly meaningless it could only h ave been written by a committee.  Is it genuine trust, or centralisation in polite language?  And who will train teachers to deliver all this nuance? “It’s a middle path no one will walk.” “Or as we call it in schools — another thing to fake.” The review’ s English reforms are a time machine: part 1990s drama classroom, part 2010s accountability regime, part 2030s AI marketing deck. But the question remains the same: What do we really want English to do : teach communication, preserve culture, or save souls? From SATs nostalgia to Shakespeare’s survival, it’s all here — the eternal drama of English education. The cast has changed, the set is modernised, but the script? Still a tragicomedy of good intentions. Schools Week Link: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/interview-becky-francis-on-the-big-ideas-in-her-curriculum-review/

Breakfasts or Brains? Before we go into the notes, you can sponsor David and donate to cancer research here: https://fundraise.cancerresearchuk.org/page/davids-giving-page-28674978 Bridget Phillipson’s Labour Conference speech had all the feels: a moving supermarket anecdote about a “lost boy” saved by an inspirational FE teacher, a soaring rhetoric of freedom and opportunity, and a checklist of breakfast clubs, nurseries and teacher pay rises. But beneath the sentiment lies a silence. Phillipson talked about tomorrow’s “scientists and artists,” but never once mentioned the Francis Review — the live debate on what children should actually learn. So, is Labour feeding children while starving them intellectually? Do stories like Alan’s illuminate education policy, or sentimentalise it? And what would it take for a curriculum to truly create the “people of tomorrow”? Bridget Phillipson opened her conference speech with a story. Alan, an FE teacher from Sunderland, bumps into a former student in a supermarket. Years earlier, Alan had given this “lost boy” a chance on a building project funded by the last Labour government. Now the boy has his own business, a wife, a home, and a future. He tells Alan: without you, none of this would have happened. It’s a moving anecdote. But does it tell us what we need to know about education policy? Critical questions about the Alan story • Why is the success story framed through one boy, one intervention, one charismatic teacher? • Is this just survivorship bias? what about the other boys Alan didn’t bump into at the supermarket? • Does it prove that government schemes change lives, or that luck and personal relationships matter more than systems? • If Alan is the hero, what role does curriculum play in this narrative? What about the thousands of children who will never meet an Alan? Freedom and the “people of tomorrow” Phillipson pitched education as liberation: freedom to choose your path, freedom from poverty, ignorance and fear, freedom to be more than just a worker. She insisted education is about the people of tomorrow the scientists and artists, carers and campaigners, museum-goers and football fans. But then came the pivot: a long list of what Labour has already delivered — breakfast clubs, nurseries, Family Hubs, teacher pay, more apprenticeships. Good things, but not the stuff that turns children into scientists and artists. It all sounded rather less Tomorrow’s World and more The Tomorrow People - promising superpowers, but delivering little more than cereal and childcare. The missing piece: Curriculum What she didn’t mention - not once - was the Francis Review, the live question of what children should learn and how knowledge should be sequenced. This is the real engine of opportunity. Without it, promises about “the people of tomorrow” sound like aspiration without architecture. What she could have said: “The Francis Review is not some dry consultation. It is the question of our time: what knowledge do our children need if they are to become the scientists and artists, the carers and campaigners of tomorrow? The inheritance of our culture, the sciences that push the boundaries of what is possible, the arts that make life worth living — these are not luxuries, they are entitlements.” Instead, the Review risks drifting into bureaucratic fudge: shuffling qualifications, mouthing slogans about “skills for the future,” and quietly hollowing out the knowledge-rich curriculum children need. Breakfast fills bellies. Curriculum feeds minds. Starmer’s backdrop Starmer added his own twist: ditching the 50% university target and aiming instead for two-thirds of young people to secure either a university place or a “gold-plated apprenticeship.” But what makes an apprenticeship “gold-plated” without the intellectual preparation a rigorous curriculum provides? Key takeaway Phillipson’s speech was long on sentiment, short on substance. Until Labour can say what children will actually learn, and why, “the people of tomorrow” remain a rhetorical flourish, not a reality. Questions 1. Do personal stories like Alan’s illuminate education policy, or obscure the bigger picture? 2. Is education about creating “workers of tomorrow” or “people of tomorrow”? Can it be both? 3. What should the Francis Review actually deliver if Labour is serious about cultivating artists and scientists, not just workers? 4. Is “freedom” meaningful in education without a clear philosophy of curriculum? Katherine Birbalsingh on Phillipson: https://x.com/Miss_Snuffy/status/1974936660954767679 Amanda Spielman on Assessment reform: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/no-real-subject-inspection-left-spielman-slams-ofsted-reforms/

Should Kids Love Learning? • Should kids love learning? Is love even important? What actually matters? • Is this about engagement, motivation, wellbeing, stupidogenesis or something else? The Education Divide • Peter Hyman: the education divide that’s fuelling broader societal fractures. • Questions: o Is love of learning only available to the privileged? o Is “curiosity” a luxury or a universal right? • Social class, cultural capital, vocational vs academic, compliant vs questioning. • Are we educating students to be clever conformists or thoughtful dissenters? • If learning is about fitting in with the system, how do we preserve space for voices that challenge the system? • Is dissent too often mistaken for disruption in schools? Has the Love of Learning Been Lost? • Education Politics Substack: system squeezes joy out of discovery. • Do children love learning, or just discovery when it feels voluntary? • Has accountability (Ofsted, exams) killed off curiosity? • Should “love” be central, or is that a distraction from rigour? • Intrinsic vs extrinsic motivation. Deci & Ryan: autonomy, competence, relatedness. Is “love of learning” really a by-product of system design, not an individual trait? • How can schools create micro-environments of autonomy, competence, and relatedness even in a high-stakes culture? The APPG Report • All-Party Group on Love of Learning report. • Key themes: curriculum narrowing, testing, wellbeing, disengagement. • Can you legislate for “love”? Or is that sentimentalism? • Is “love of learning” measurable? Or just rhetoric? • What happens politically if schools churn out disengaged citizens? • Hirsch (joy through mastery) vs progressives (joy through exploration). Do we aim to give children joy now (exploration) or joy later (mastery)? Or is it possible to design curricula that combine both — structured knowledge with space for wonder? Is “joy through mastery” a more honest aim than trying to make every lesson “fun”? • Geary’s distinction: biologically primary vs secondary knowledge — kids may not “love” algebra, should we expect them to? maybe the goal shouldn’t be to make secondary knowledge feel fun, but to help students experience the delayed satisfaction that comes with having mastered it. • Is “love” even the right word, or should we be talking about respect, perseverance, or meaning? Should Kids Love Learning? • Aristotle’s distinction between what’s pleasant and what’s good. • Biesta: education as interruption of desire. o If a child learns but never “loves,” is that failure? o Do we confuse “loving learning” with “liking school”? o Should schools prioritise joy now, or dividends later? • Bjork on desirable difficulties — sometimes dislike in the moment = deeper love later. Bjork: “What enhances performance in the short term can often fail to support long-term learning.” International Perspectives • PISA/TIMSS on student attitudes. • Finland (“joy in learning”) vs East Asia (high performance, high stress). • Do we want kids to like school, or profit from it later? • Is there a trade-off between love and mastery? Towards Solutions • What could change? o Rebalance assessment: more formative, less punitive. o Guarantee a broad entitlement: arts, play, philosophy. o Restore teacher autonomy. • Do we want citizens who can love, argue, and think — or workers who can comply? Some links: https://educationpolitics.substack.com/p/has-the-love-of-learning-been-lost?r=1rvl5x&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true https://peterhyman21.substack.com/p/the-education-divide-thats-fuelling?r=1rvl5x&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true https://educationappg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/APPG-LoL-Report.pdf https://amzn.eu/d/fgWY2xB

Becky Francis chair of the Curriculum Review stated at Research Ed National Conference that ‘The review will not dumb down content, or infuse with issues or campaigns.’ Yet the review ‘will (her italics) ensure that every young person can see themselves in the curriculum, and that it challenges discrimination and extends horizons’ Is this contradictory? Arguably dumbing down content is achieved if you try to organise a curriculum in which every young person can see themselves. Not infusing a curriculum with issues or campaigns yet ensuring it challenges discrimination might also hint at a contradiction. At the time of recording we don’t know how she will try to achieve these aims but let’s examine what the argument might be. Seeing yourself in the curriculum is usually an identitarian call to arms in that curriculum material chosen and content covered should resist all being about dead white men. It should include more BAME representation, Women, ‘Otherwise abled’, LGBTQ, Working Class, ‘Young People’ etc. in a more positive and inclusive way. What possibly could be an argument against? Cultural transmission: The distortions to the curriculum needed to ensure this representation mean that the ‘great books’, ‘our island story’, great works of art, music etc, works of science, historical moments of importance, are no longer the grand narrative of curriculum design so that certain ‘great works’ are ignored in order to make space for ‘DEI’ works that either do not live up to the level of the works they replace and/or disrupt the curriculum narrative so that the importance of what was happening in, say, the Crimean War is replaced by an undue focus on Mary Seacole. Who could be against challenging discrimination? Well, I take it that discrimination is not seen as a bad thing because we want students to be discriminating in many ways. To favour certain things over other things. To develop a moral code, a sense of right and wrong, for example. But how far do we take this? Schools are places where we have to guard against bullying against racism, inappropriate behaviour, anti-semitism etc. but do we get into grey areas when we start either choosing texts in order to make these policies clear? Is this dumbing down? Or interpreting texts to eke out the messages - for example setting an essay about What can Romeo and Juliet teach us about anti-racism? What is our attitude towards Andrew Tate, Tommy Robinson, Donald Trump, Nigel Farage, Netanyahu, Putin, Jeremy Corbyn, Sultana and that bloke from the Greens? etc. Or are all acceptable? Where do we draw the lines? Should We Draw Lines?

Can we teach students how to disagree agreeably? What is the state of our nation (UK) and how does this impact our schools and colleges? Is our national/international situation so fraught and anxiety inducing that young people are over-anxious? Is this made worse by socail media and the us vs them that seems to be dominating a lot of the online space? Are schools suitably ‘dialogic’ are we able to develop schools where dialectic and discussion is the centrepiece - teaching them how to take their place in ‘The Great Conversation of Humankind’? Is there hope? How can schools help young people to see the humanity in each other, even those with whom you vehemently disagree?

What is the point of school? Is it changing? Should we focus on academic education or vocational? Are either right for the age of AI? Does creativity and play have a part to play or are we just in the business of filling up memories with Shakespeare and Algebra? All this and more in this episode! Listen on your favourite platform or watch here. Don't forget to like and subscribe!

Is AI dumbing us down? Are schools in danger of making kids 'stupider'? Should we make schools gymnasia of the mind? Will an education for leisure replace an education for work? All this and more in this episode! Some links to material discussed: Do our brains need knowledge in the age of AI? https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.11015 Scott Alexander's Misleading Victory: https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/scott-alexanders-misleading-victory?r=18455&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true Your Brain on Chat GPT: https://daviddidau.substack.com/p/the-cost-of-borrowed-thought TikTok and AI are Junk Food: https://archive.is/20250512191652/https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/tiktok-and-ai-are-junk-food-start-dieting-m7pbtcpdv#selection-1385.0-1519.694 Are We Living in a Stupidogenic Society? https://substack.nomoremarking.com/p/are-we-living-in-a-stupidogenic-society Flynn Effect and its Reversal: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6042097/ Reevaluating the Flynn Effect: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289625000121 Will AI Make You Stupid? - https://archive.is/20250826084540/https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2025/07/16/will-ai-make-you-stupid#selection-1105.0-1367.47

Conscientiousness is crashing, neuroticism is soaring, young people are far less agreeable and far more introverted - what have we done to our kids? David and Martin discuss this and more - is our on-screen and social media culture to blame? What can schools do, if anything? Does 'project based learning' have a role? Article by John Burn Murdoch can be accessed here: https://www.ft.com/content/5cd77ef0-b546-4105-8946-36db3f84dc43 His thread on Twitter/X can be accessed here: https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1953811277463122162

Is Dead Poets Society a great film? Does it have any lessons for contemporary teaching? Is Romanticism a bad influence on schooling? ALSO: Why not sponsor David on his half marathon for Cancer Research? https://fundraise.cancerresearchuk.org/page/davids-giving-page-28674978

Did you choose to watch this? If there is no free will who would ever discipline a child? It's not their fault! In this week's cornucopia of delights we look into Free Will and the implications of the science and the philosophy - do we have free will or not? We put Descartes before the Hume. Dennett and Searle, you name it we name drop it. We can't help ourselves!

Some links to articles mentioned: https://powerfulknowledge.substack.com/p/how-should-we-think-about-the-engagement https://schoolsweek.co.uk/curriculum-labour-is-on-the-right-path-but-its-a-tightrope/ https://daviddidau.substack.com/p/what-do-you-mean-by-engagement?selection=8e3325ff-837e-40fd-becb-cc379a5e3fb3 Fiona Millar was quoted from the RSA Journal Issue 2, 2025

In this episode, we take apart the myth that schools can paper over the cracks of a society in crisis with mindfulness sessions, gratitude journals and breathing techniques. We look at what the data really tells us: a fifth of children now meet the threshold for a probable mental disorder. Over a third of 17 to 19-year-old girls are struggling. Services are overwhelmed. Yet instead of fixing what’s broken, we offer sticking plasters and tell young people to breathe through the damage. We explore why wellbeing initiatives often individualise failure, how schools risk medicalising ordinary distress, and what we should be doing instead. If you’re tired of seeing schools made responsible for society’s failings, this one’s for you. Links Below: NHS Digital (2023) — Mental Health of Children and Young People in England: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/mental-health-of-children-and-young-people-in-england/2023-wave-4-follow-up#:~:text=Key%20Facts,36.9%25%20compared%20with%207.6%25 Mind — Facts and figures about young people and mental health: https://www.mind.org.uk/about-us/our-strategy/doing-more-for-young-people/facts-and-figures-about-young-people-and-mental-health/ Health Foundation — Understanding the crisis in young people’s mental health: https://www.health.org.uk/features-and-opinion/blogs/understanding-the-crisis-in-young-people-s-mental-health House of Commons Library — Children and young people’s mental health services: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7749/

According to the Times Newspaper, the English Department at Alleyn’s School in southeast London are in the process of diversifying their curriculum and are introducing students to the 'works of a drag queen and non-binary authors.' We're not sure that the Times approves… There is another question underlying the discussion here and that is ‘should children see themselves in the curriculum?” and in times of growing individualism and self-authorship is that even possible?   Some Links: https://www.thetimes.com/article/7c9a532d-c23e-4bcb-b649-d26562cda39a   https://www.thetimes.com/article/4611de82-f49a-47ef-9c43-7d7395e38105   https://www.them.us/story/uk-gender-identity-schools-proposed-ban   https://www.vox.com/scotus/408356/supreme-court-mahmoud-taylor-dont-say-gay   https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-lgbtq-books-religion-maryland-069d155fa862d2a16619fc7f513819ab 4a2e2a29e3729ef11c57c7d8e8cb044aa0c5855a

Is our obsession with testing failing students?

Is Oracy a fad or part of the ongoing tradition of Western Education? Links to some of the things mentioned in this episode: https://oracyeducationcommission.co.uk/oec-report/ https://www.education-uk.org/documents/pdfs/2021-appg-oracy.pdf https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-commission-conversations/id1739353277?i=1000658062482 https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-commission-conversations/id1739353277?i=1000659285974

What is the case for school uniforms? Would schools become chaotic places (more chaotic?) without them? Do they provide a ‘discipline distraction’ for some naughty pupils to hit out against? All this AND MORE in today's episode! Some links which are referred to: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14777071/parents-fury-school-ban-skirts-gender-neutral-options.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490&ito=social-twitter_mailonline https://www.newscientist.com/article/2417240-school-uniforms-may-prevent-children-from-getting-enough-exercise/ https://www.playscotland.org/play-scotland-backs-new-made-to-move-campaign-on-active-school-uniforms/ https://www.youthsporttrust.org/news-listings/news/youth-sport-trust-research-reveals-parents-and-teachers-support-an-always-active-uniform-policy#:~:text=Research-,Youth%20Sport%20Trust%20Research%20Reveals%20Parents%20and%20Teachers%20Support%20an,break%20time%20to%20active%20learning Guidance from NEU: https://neu.org.uk/advice/classroom/dress-code

A replay of our February 2021 interview with Professor Michael Young. The original is still viewable on our YouTube Channel, it has been reproduced here for new viewers but also for our growing band of listeners on sound only platforms, where the original wasn’t available… until now! NB: This broadcast takes the place of our usual Thursday broadcast this week. Hopefully you managed to catch our bonus episode earlier this week, if not, check it out, it's on AI in education.

Are you the maker or the tool? Is AI a threat to schooling or an extension to the accessibility of knowledge for humanity? (First there was writing, then the book, the library, printing, the internet and now AI...) Some references in the chat: The Ballad of Accounting, Sung by Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger: https://youtu.be/MY3kYU5CYmk?si=oMwecn8TQV2s9Xmz written by Ewan MacColl (I think we inadvertently said Pete Seeger wrote it, can we blame AI?!) What If AI is not Actually Intelligent? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTb2Q2AE7nA @InnerCosmosPod with David Eagleman and Alison Gopnik Andy Clark and David Chalmers 'The Extended Mind': https://web-archive.southampton.ac.uk/cogprints.org/320/1/extended.html Phil Beadle's AI post on SubStack: https://open.substack.com/pub/philbeadle/p/the-limits-of-ai?r=1rvl5x&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false Daisy Christodoulou's SubStack on How should England's curriculum and assessment review respond to AI? https://substack.nomoremarking.com/p/how-should-englands-curriculum-and?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Do schools contribute to whether we see ourselves as an Island of Strangers or not? Some links for your delectation: Our interview with ED Hirsch: https://youtu.be/H097vPnDpkI?si=erXALkeyInTYmRTY Our Interview with Michael Young: https://youtu.be/xi_AhfWjeis?si=oanbhXx4OC8vc_W8 EmanRTM: https://youtu.be/OXn4lFNVb-Y?si=nAQmw4B8cXkaA_tP Sutton Trust Report: https://www.suttontrust.com/our-research/the-opportunity-index/ Policy Exchange Report: https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/lessons-from-the-past/ More in Common Social Cohesion Report: https://www.moreincommon.org.uk/our-work/research/social-cohesion-a-snapshot/

Is the current vogue for coaching in schools a fad or fundamental part of good CPD?

Scripted lessons vs Teacher Autonomy Sam Gibbs article: https://www.tes.com/magazine/teaching-learning/general/teacher-autonomy-how-we-dumbed-down-teaching Greg Ashman Substack: https://fillingthepail.substack.com/p/on-scripted-lessons?r=18455&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true Curriculum Revolutions: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Curriculum-Revolutions-practical-guide-enhancing/dp/1913622983/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1CJAF8E626TLP&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.0WYdXLdKZ5VQvl_-FH5DYm2Wxdh93XhlojB_n2ij4knc0Z8T6zhPLC5LX5Rwg3SRxRvh4LKASdAyOwAD3lx7od4NsQl7NikqD2gxcysBpqvk5wtURf4u4hegd7rgi-Gzk72ZjWxo4Aghb8kD4BfIF82MVkfP78geMATSuWEcaTnmdGjvlV294NS1nQfH6bO9dI9G3VdwP10Ri_5yShBpeQ.obEGBWeDYbxld7sKy5C6xHi1IGULbXAkyCtmYA1_zNY&dib_tag=se&keywords=curriculum+revolutions&qid=1746720559&sprefix=curriculum+revolutions%2Caps%2C69&sr=8-1

Do the proposed changes to Ofsted’s inspection regime go far enough? (spoiler - no) Some of the articles mentioned in this episode: https://neu.org.uk/press-releases/close-ofsted-consultation https://schoolsweek.co.uk/can-ofsted-listen-its-way-out-of-its-political-bind/ https://daviddidau.substack.com/p/rewiring-inspection?r=18455&utm_medium=ios&triedRedirect=true

Autism, ADHD, and the burgeoning crisis in funding for schools. Are too many pupils being diagnosed with Special Needs? Some sources used in this episode: The Age of Diagnosis by Suzanne O'Sullivan (Review here: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/mar/12/the-age-of-diagnosis-by-suzanne-osullivan-review-do-no-harm) The Lost Girls of Autism by Gina Rippon (Here is an article by her in the New Scientist https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg26635372-400-a-revolutionary-new-understanding-of-autism-in-girls/) Why is There a Crisis in Special Educational Needs? The Briefing Room BBC Radio 4: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0028v06 The Discontinuous Mind. Does it Ever Get it Right? By Richard Dawkins: https://substack.com/home/post/p-159676728

What is more important in the teacher’s toolbox? Knowing how to teach or knowing what to teach?

In which we look at Sutton Trust data on private tuition, Cold Call - is it a good technique to use in lessons, and should schools show Adolescence to their pupils?

Martin & David discuss the differences between 'group work' (a set of pedagogical strategies) and 'working in groups' to see whether 'never doing group work' is a tenable position for a headteacher to take.

John Tomsett, Jane Manzone, Al McConville and David Medway reflect on the year in state secondary schools, an inner London primary school and an independent boarding school. Different experiences emerge but so do stories of human resilience. John Tomsett also talks about his book on Angling. ============================TIMESTAMPS========================= 0:00 Intro (no sound sorry!) 0:01:01 John Tomsett about Covid 0:13:25 Reflect 0:21:04 David Medway interview 0:25:51 Reflect 0:29:10 Jane Manzone 0:39:08 Reflect 0:42:02 Al McConville interview on Covid 0:50:48 Reflect 0:52:01 John Tomsett's fishing book - our Christmas treat! 0:59:14 Reflect & price draw

Including interviews with Sam Freedman and Toby Young, discussing exams, free speech for teachers to express their own views as well as the need for a range of perspectives to be presented to pupils. Also Martin and David discuss whether Inset days are a good thing. Including some items for discussion, this episode raises a lot of questions, join the chat below and keep a lookout for the full length interviews by subscribing.

We discuss Eton - free speech for pupils and teachers, Mantle of the Expert, Oracy, and Debating, with the Baroness of Buckley, Claire Fox, Tim Taylor, Mary Myatt and the John Catt book of the week author - Sarah Davies

What do parents want for their child's education, do they worry about curriculum and pedagogy? Ed Dorrell and Jonathan Simons have been finding out for their organisation 'Public First'. James Pembroke gives us his thoughts about Primary Schools and data including how to measure progress. Carl Gombrich talks about the soon to been launched new university - London Interdisciplinary School and argues for the need for students to have more breadth in their studies. TIMESTAMPS: 0:00 intro from Stonehenge 0:03:39 Ed Dorrel and Jonathan Simons about 'Public First and What Do Parents Want?' (full interview here: https://youtu.be/SKmH3G_OvO0 0:21:09 James Pembroke - Primary Schools and data (full interview: https://youtu.be/IS33pfgL2vA 0:42:50 Carl Gombrich about London Interdisciplinary School (full interview here: https://youtu.be/5RnjUFrdtfs 0:58:21 David and Martin closing thoughts

This week we have interviews with Barry Smith about leadership, Ros McMullen about Exams and her charitable venture 'Headrest' NB the web address for Headrest is https://www.headrestuk.co.uk (not the website referred to in the programme) and in the John Catt interview Tom Rees & Jennifer Barker talk about their contribution to the ResearchEd book on Leadership. Also David and Martin discuss workplace bullying and, also comments by the Shadow Education Secretary about traditional education. Check to see if you won - "10 Things Schools Get Wrong" by Jared Cooney Horvath & David Bott - in the prize draw. Unfortunately a small section of the Barry Smith interview is missing from the start, subscribe to make sure you don't miss out on the whole interview when it is released in the week.

#IYTYW This bumper edition explores the themes 'Progress and Tradition' - looking at rows with Conservative MPs and 'common-sense' in history teaching, and the challenges to schools on curriculum and behaviour policies following on from such movements as Black Lives Matter. A look at 'traditional' teaching of Latin and Classics and the 'John Catt book of the week '10 Things Schools Get Wrong'. With guests: Jonathan Mountstevens, Patrick Alexander, Ed Clarke, Jared Cooney Horvath and David Bott. Oh, and did you win the raffle this week?

#IYTYW Can the poor catch up with the rich or have they lost too much education due to Covid? Pedro De Bruyckere gives us some answers. Martin Robinson looks at John Lydon's (Johnny Rotten's) rant on Good Morning Britain about voting for Trump - 'the thickos vs the left wing intelligentsia' and David Didau interviews Dr. James Mannion and Kate McAllister about their book 'Fear is the Mind Killer' about Learning to Learn.

#IYTYW. A short look back at our first half term of interviews. news and views, a discussion about 'No More Exclusions' and a look into Covid safety in the classroom.

This week’s episode of It’s your time you’re wasting! with Principal of Oak Academy, Matt Mood, Andrew Doyle discussing Critical Race Theory and Zoe & Mark Enser talking about their book, Generative Learning in Action. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Fiorella-Mayers-Generative-Learning-Action/dp/1913622207/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=generative+learning+in+action&qid=1600534079&s=books&sr=1-1

***********************Show starts @10:00*********************** In this second episode of 'It's Your Time You're Wasting', Martin and David welcome Tom Bennett for a chat about Tom's new book 'Running the Room' (https://amzn.to/3201KAr) and will discuss what going back to school is like from a Governors perspective. Also what if the numbers go up!? To our live viewers: apologies for the technical difficulties and thank you for bearing with us! Guests: Tom Bennett & Naureen Khalid

In this first episode of 'It's Your Time you're Wasting' David and Martin discuss the return to school, a 'mutant algorithm' and an uncommon kerfuffle. We'll also find out what Martin has been reading.

A 'webinar' in which David Didau asks Martin Robinson questions about the book 'Curriculum: Athena versus the Machine'. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Curriculum-Athena-machine-Martin-Robinson/dp/1785833022/ref=sxts_sxwds-bia-wc-p13n1_0?cv_ct_cx=athena+machine&dchild=1&keywords=athena+machine&pd_rd_i=1785833022&pd_rd_r=966cd64c-7060-4ae9-88c0-a4de699a1573&pd_rd_w=su20B&pd_rd_wg=kspr2&pf_rd_p=9b1a9511-9af9-4d06-8643-d54ebec511ef&pf_rd_r=RWEQEGJQENTARDTKG1GT&psc=1&qid=1598197856&sr=1-1-fdbae751-0fa5-4c0f-900b-865654896618 Filmed 'live' this video also includes questions from a number of people who were able to view the event.

In which David Didau and Martin Robinson discuss culture

Martin Robinson and David Didau discuss attention, intuition, causality and 'being in the world'

A rambling, incoherent chat about meaning that takes in Michael Polanyi, John Keats, Michael Oakeshott, Frank Kermode, Toni Morrison, Michael Young, Carlo Rovelli and more...