Ah I see. I will have a look. That is so interesting/telling regarding the hundreds of schools who eagerly adopted the failed approach because it appealed to their valued.
I just don’t get that personally. One would think heads would want students to make the most progress possible within the richest curriculum, but it would seem that these two concepts are often viewed as mutually exclusive?! Weird. You must find this very frustrating when you come up against this mindset.
Haha! Don’t be intimidated! I think both you and KB have a lot in common; to me you are both perspicacious magicians. You take the basics and common sense and work magic with them. You both have laser focus on the wood, where so many of us get so bogged down and distracted by the trees!
Of course I’ve never visited Michaela, and only know what I’ve seen in documentaries or read. I am a bit fascinated/obsessed by consistency though, and having worked in many different schools over the years (usually in deprived catchment areas with high numbers of SEND students) I can’t help thinking if some school policies were universal (well, within the UK anyway!), behaviour, learning and progress would be so much better. And Michaela is consistency taken to the extreme perhaps!
That is very interesting with regard to your daughter’s friend’s experience there. And rather sad too. I’m seduced though, by inner-city kids achieving what they do at Michaela, and escaping gang culture at Oxbridge etc.! Impressive as it is, I imagine there is no room for being slightly creative as a teacher in the classroom. Your methods and guidance still allow for creativity, and it’s obvious you are very creative. That must be what’s missing. If we could just marry the two! Not literally, as not sure Mrs Salles would be very impressed 😂😂.
Thank you for this very interesting piece Dominic. I’m not familiar with Voice 21, but what a shame. I take it it was an experiment and hadn’t been rigorously tested for the effect it had on student progress against government benchmarks (maybe not the best - but what we have to work with!)? In that case, what a waste of children’s and teachers’ time from a progress point of view.
On the other hand, your experience with redesigning the Spanish curriculum, so that there was much more clear, tangible progress than with the old curriculum, is depressing. I’m certain not an MFL expert, but your curriculum sounded like a more natural, immersive way of learning the language. It blows my mind that the teachers thought, “Well Dominic’s method leaves my class shooting ahead, but I like my less effective way better, so I’m going to let my ego win and let my students lose.” Grrr 😡!
Katherine Birbalsingh, my other educational hero, says her teachers have to leave their egos at the door.
That has really stuck with me. I wish more teachers would and fear that’s often what you might be up against when you’re trying to turn things round in schools. Fortunately, you have a very clear evidence base, I think, to show your methods hugely improve progress.
This is a really thought provoking comment! So, School 21 opened as a free school, around the same time as Michaela. It's oracy based curriculum was not evidence based, but ideologically based. Initially the school made great progress - parents opted in, huge numbers were EAL with a massive work ethic - but now, they make little progress. However, they exported their philosophy, or ideology, through Voice 21 - exporting their failed oracy approach to hundreds of schools.
This is only possible because we, as a teaching body, are constantly on the look out for ideas which meet our values, rather than ideas which have a proven track record of improving students' knowledge and progress.
My MFL experience is entirely normal. Does it fit my values? will always trump Does it lead to great progress?
I'm a little intimidated to be mentioned in the same breath as Katherine Birbalsingh. She is very admirable. In many ways she has had to find her own evidence - other schools just don't operate at that level. I visited when they had only year 7 and year 8. The work ethic was astonishing. But I wouldn't send my kids there, unless they asked to go. It works, but it feels a bit like a cult.
My daughter's friend was desperate to teach there - and had, she thought, 100% alignment with the school's approach. She lasted only one year - pushed out for being too child centred.
Ah I see. I will have a look. That is so interesting/telling regarding the hundreds of schools who eagerly adopted the failed approach because it appealed to their valued.
I just don’t get that personally. One would think heads would want students to make the most progress possible within the richest curriculum, but it would seem that these two concepts are often viewed as mutually exclusive?! Weird. You must find this very frustrating when you come up against this mindset.
Haha! Don’t be intimidated! I think both you and KB have a lot in common; to me you are both perspicacious magicians. You take the basics and common sense and work magic with them. You both have laser focus on the wood, where so many of us get so bogged down and distracted by the trees!
Of course I’ve never visited Michaela, and only know what I’ve seen in documentaries or read. I am a bit fascinated/obsessed by consistency though, and having worked in many different schools over the years (usually in deprived catchment areas with high numbers of SEND students) I can’t help thinking if some school policies were universal (well, within the UK anyway!), behaviour, learning and progress would be so much better. And Michaela is consistency taken to the extreme perhaps!
That is very interesting with regard to your daughter’s friend’s experience there. And rather sad too. I’m seduced though, by inner-city kids achieving what they do at Michaela, and escaping gang culture at Oxbridge etc.! Impressive as it is, I imagine there is no room for being slightly creative as a teacher in the classroom. Your methods and guidance still allow for creativity, and it’s obvious you are very creative. That must be what’s missing. If we could just marry the two! Not literally, as not sure Mrs Salles would be very impressed 😂😂.
That's very kind of you. I don't know the answer to the creativity vs consistency debate, but believe both are essential.
Thank you for this very interesting piece Dominic. I’m not familiar with Voice 21, but what a shame. I take it it was an experiment and hadn’t been rigorously tested for the effect it had on student progress against government benchmarks (maybe not the best - but what we have to work with!)? In that case, what a waste of children’s and teachers’ time from a progress point of view.
On the other hand, your experience with redesigning the Spanish curriculum, so that there was much more clear, tangible progress than with the old curriculum, is depressing. I’m certain not an MFL expert, but your curriculum sounded like a more natural, immersive way of learning the language. It blows my mind that the teachers thought, “Well Dominic’s method leaves my class shooting ahead, but I like my less effective way better, so I’m going to let my ego win and let my students lose.” Grrr 😡!
Katherine Birbalsingh, my other educational hero, says her teachers have to leave their egos at the door.
That has really stuck with me. I wish more teachers would and fear that’s often what you might be up against when you’re trying to turn things round in schools. Fortunately, you have a very clear evidence base, I think, to show your methods hugely improve progress.
This is a really thought provoking comment! So, School 21 opened as a free school, around the same time as Michaela. It's oracy based curriculum was not evidence based, but ideologically based. Initially the school made great progress - parents opted in, huge numbers were EAL with a massive work ethic - but now, they make little progress. However, they exported their philosophy, or ideology, through Voice 21 - exporting their failed oracy approach to hundreds of schools.
This is only possible because we, as a teaching body, are constantly on the look out for ideas which meet our values, rather than ideas which have a proven track record of improving students' knowledge and progress.
My MFL experience is entirely normal. Does it fit my values? will always trump Does it lead to great progress?
I'm a little intimidated to be mentioned in the same breath as Katherine Birbalsingh. She is very admirable. In many ways she has had to find her own evidence - other schools just don't operate at that level. I visited when they had only year 7 and year 8. The work ethic was astonishing. But I wouldn't send my kids there, unless they asked to go. It works, but it feels a bit like a cult.
My daughter's friend was desperate to teach there - and had, she thought, 100% alignment with the school's approach. She lasted only one year - pushed out for being too child centred.