Michaela Community School (MCS) is a remarkable place. Legendary for its firm behavioural environment and commitment to no-nonsense teaching, MCS has shown what is possible given a little willpower. And willpower abounds. MCS is driven by Katharine Birbalsingh who has assembled an enviable all-star team of like-minded teachers.
Much cyber-ink has already been spilled about how MCS does things, and I would encourage all teachers and leaders to buy their book. At the bottom of this post I have also linked to my favourite blog pieces from their staff. In this blog, I just wanted to focus on two things which jumped out at me.
It is no secret that there is an ideological battle being fought over education. Fronts include philosophical areas like the role of knowledge and of the teacher, as well as more practical considerations like how classrooms and instruction are arranged.
One common debate surrounds group work vs. silent activity I am due to be talking this summer at the Teach First conference on this topic (would be great to see you if you can make it!). As part of my research I have been dipping into the concept of “Oracy,” which can be defined as “the development and application of a set of skills associated with effective spoken communication.”
Theoretically, oracy and group work do not necessarily need to go together, but oracy is often cited as a supporting factor in favour of increased group work in schools. Many would therefore argue that a “silent classroom” (like there are at MCS) and a lack of group work in lessons (like there is at MCS) fails to promote oracy in students and to develop vital speaking and listening skills which can address socioeconomic disadvantage (e.g. page 39 here). We would expect students at such a school to be quiet and poorly spoken.
This is not what I saw. The classrooms in MCS are indeed silent for large stretches of time. But oracy standards are consistently taught, modelled and inculcated. In every lesson I went to, teachers invited students to quietly talk to their neighbours about potential solutions to problems set. Student answers were corrected for grammar, diction, syntax, use of high level vocabulary and pronunciation. One student missed out on a merit for not “projecting” their answer, an activity promoted in each lesson I saw. Bearing in mind I saw around 15 classes each for a maximum of five minutes, seeing that level of oral discourse left a marked impression.
This attitude was continued at the odd-but-wonderful lunch session. Students belted out the lines to a poem in response to a teacher’s prompting. The teacher in charge insisted on a high energy recital, and modelled that behaviour himself. At lunch, conversations are structured around a topic and introduced by the same member of staff, who opened with an anecdote which was, again, perfectly orally executed. At the end of lunch he gave students the opportunity to stand up and make their “appreciations,” critiquing students for not addressing the room, using “umms” and other hesitations and not projecting well enough. He spoke about how important public speaking is and all students were explicitly encouraged to seize every opportunity to practise.
Take-home 1: You want to see oracy in action? Go visit MCS.
The other area that jumped out at me was the maintenance of relationships. The behaviour in lessons was obviously perfect. But this standard wasn’t established by cold and dispassionate teachers ready to pounce on any infraction in the name of “making an example” or “maintaining standards.” Early on in one lesson, a teacher approached a student who had not done their homework. Before issuing a detention, he spoke to him about how disappointed he was, how he expected more and how the student had let himself down. He spoke genuinely, and the relationship and warmth was clear to see. In every lesson I saw there was a warmth and a rapport with the students. The atmosphere was not tense in the slightest, teachers were freely joking and interacting positively with all students. Everyone was greeted, respected and treated with positive regard.
Deputy Head Katie Ashford spoke to us about how staff are expected to attend lunch and sit and talk with the students. This is a prime opportunity to build relationships with students, to extend the depth of feeling between the authority figures and those who they shepherd.
This is what Doug Lemov calls Warm Strict, an approach which enables teachers to build strong bonds with their students without compromising on sky-high expectations of behaviour.
Take-home 2: You want to see relationships in action? Go visit MCS.
In short, there is a narrative to be flipped here. MCS is not a silent cathedral of oppression; where mute students flit from A to B under the watchful eyes of stern imperators. It is a school where students are encouraged to express themselves, to be bold and to be brave, all the time encouraged by teachers who genuinely love them.
My best MCS blogs
Joe Kirby’s (who no longer works there) entry on Hornets and Butterflies is probably the single most important education blog ever written.
I love Jo Facer’s blog about how teaching has become over-complicated, and how it must be simplified.
Dani Quinn’s Drill and Thrill is a must read for anyone involved in instructional design (so everyone) and has been a massive influence on me when building SLOP.
Marking is of course a biggie, and for this I link to Lemov himself about how whole class feedback is carried out at MCS.
For a taste of Head Katharine Bibalsingh’s passion for her school, see here.
For science, you 100% need to check out Pritesh’s blog. His work on simplified but effective instruction is vital.
And if you were in need of any proof from someone who wasn’t a nasty card-carrying “trad”, see what Ofsted had to say here.
June 11, 2018 at 5:02 pm
Thank you for linking to my blog Adam. I’d like to clarify a couple of things if I may. Not all types of oracy are linked to group work of course, but many are. Another key argument in favour of group work and collaborative practice is Cognitive Load Theory – here is a quote from Paas and Sweller – names I have no doubt you will become familiar with as you enter your TeachFirst training:-
“The collective working memory effect reflects the finding that collaborating learners can gain from each other’s working memory capacity during learning. The effect has been demonstrated in cognitive load research comparing individual to collaborative learning environments. Recently, group or collaborative learning has been recognized as an alternative way of overcoming individual working memory limitations (Kirschner et al. 2009a, b, 2011a, b). Collaborative learners can be considered as a single information processing system (Hinsz et al. 1997; Tindale and Kameda 2000; Ickes and Gonzalez 1994), consisting of multiple, limited working memories which can create a larger, more effective, collective working space. The result is the collective working memory effect (Kirschner et al. 2011a, b; see also, Janssen et al. 2010).”
Best of luck with your teacher training.
LikeLike
June 11, 2018 at 4:04 pm
Thank you, I am aware of CME and Kirschner et al published another piece on the topic recently. As a point of information I am not about to start my training, I am presenting there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 11, 2018 at 9:39 pm
For anyone else interested, the recent piece from Kirschner et al is available here, and is an interesting read.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11412-018-9277-y
Suggests group work and collective working memory is a tricky balancing act; could be benefits in some circumstances (group members are experts rather than novices, specialised roles etc) but hinderance in others (extraneous cog load due to communication etc).
I’m going to read it again soon but get the feeling that it may be more helpful with cog load for a team of “experts” with specific skills (for example, The A-Team, The Avengers) than a class of Year 7s, but I guess context is everything. Further reading required.
LikeLiked by 1 person
June 15, 2018 at 1:00 pm
Adam. As I promised i have reread your blog in detail. I think much of what you say chimes with much of what I saw on my visit to Michaela where I received a very warm welcome from the staff I met especially Jess Lund and Barry Smith. I sat through a number of French lessons – I tend to stick to my own area of expertise. I saw talented teaching, good relationships and excellent use of French by the pupils. I had a frank and very good natured discussion with Barry afterwards and a shorter discussion with Jess, who is extremely talented and I think would be an asset to any MFL department. Am I allowed to say that publicly? I was up front in my conversations with them and praised what I liked, accepting that their methodology would perhaps not be to everyone’s taste or suit the style and needs of all teachers and students. I would have liked to see a little more independent practice of the language and more pupil to pupil use of the target language. I have seen literally hundreds of MFL lessons – all very different, many great, some definitely not great and I would argue that although MFL teachers could benefit from visiting Michaela then Michaela teachers may benefit from using their knowledge, talents and skills by being just a little less wedded to the “one true way” approach. Such was my appreciation of what they were doing and their openness that as soon as i got home I wrote to the staff, and the pupils thanking them and sent them 2 lovely French books for a French library .All this is just to point out that I am not a naysayer.
Some more general parts of dealing with the pupils worried me. These are not for public viewing but I believe them to be valid concerns – which is why I have never blogged about this.
The main things that I would welcome more discussion about based on your blog are these.
“It is no secret that there is an ideological battle being fought over education.”
I am not sure this is true. I think it is true mainly on Twitter which is why I do not feel it is helpful that Nick Gibb endorses this.
“The classrooms in MCS are indeed silent for large stretches of time.”
Now any MFL teacher will almost certainly tell you that MFL requires a lot of direct instruction and I being a bit of a Trad at heart would agree. However IMO MFL classrooms are the last places that should be defined by large chunks of silence. Obviously this depends to some extent on the activity being undertaken but in order to learn how to manipulate a language students need to talk – often to each other and to listen and to spot each other’s errors.
Although I enjoyed family lunch I am not sure that obliging students to talk about a specific topic truly improves oracy. It may help but I think that even a couple of times a week students should be given free rein to discuss that they want. Oracy is not all about public speaking.
I would love to see Mr. Gibb and others like yourself visiting more schools and promoting them on Twitter. I have had and continue to have the enormous privilege of doing this and I often have to challenge my own prior perceptions. It is the constant focus and need for promotion of a limited range of schools that worries me.
I am sorry for such a long comment but I am in nothing up front and I hope courteous. I am sure that if Twitter were real life this would be a fascinating and good natured debate.
LikeLike
June 15, 2018 at 1:11 pm
Hi Carmel, thank you for your comment. I didn’t actually see any MfL lessons so couldn’t tell you how much of the time in there was spent talking. I know in science that much of the time I was there was silent working which I think is extremely important.
I don’t think it is the case that the debate is only on twitter. There might be certain words and labels that are mostly used on twitter but that doesn’t mean teachers aren’t involved in the debate. In my experience all teachers are ideological and have certain beliefs and dogmas, which are often exclusive.
I do not speak for Mr Gibb. Unfortunately I rarely have the opportunity to visit other schools but if I did you can be sure if I liked what I saw I would write about it publicly.
LikeLike
June 15, 2018 at 2:00 pm
That is good to hear! As I say I am always guarded in what I say publicly about schools good or bad – but this is what I sent to Michaela pupils as soon as I got home. For me it was the most important thing to do. I am not a dogma person – much more of a pragmatist. But I am delighted that we have had the chance to correspond in more than 240 characters or tumbleweed. Best wishes! If you are at all interested in my pragmatic approach to life I am the author of the Teachers’ Guide to Ivrit published not too long ago and loved working with JCF and remember some lovely MFL teachers from JCoss.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rk4st8vh1t8b1nc/Dear%20Michaela%20pupils.docx?dl=0
LikeLike
June 16, 2018 at 9:42 pm
Thank you Carmel – I will pass on your regards to the team. We have a wonderful new head of Ivrit, I am also glad we managed to have a sensible conversation!
LikeLike
June 15, 2018 at 8:17 pm
Sorry Adam. Just read that last comment. That’s good was in reference to the fact that we seem to have some common ground and cilvilised approaches. Just occurred that I might have sounded a bit sarcastic. Certainly not meant to be!
LikeLike
June 16, 2018 at 9:42 pm
It didn’t!
LikeLike
July 1, 2018 at 11:48 am
Yes, the school is interesting; am looking forward to their approach applied to sixth form, to some referred as “the wasted years” (https://community.tes.com/threads/sixth-form-the-wasted-years.771221/)
LikeLike