Michael Walsh

This author has written 29 articles

Delayed gratification in LTE

Tom Leigh, long time LTE teacher reflects upon the different mode created in Let’s Think in English lessons.

I have been teaching Let’s Think in English for over a decade now, and for the majority of my career this has been in upper key stage 2, and year 6 in particular. I distinctly remember the first moment I fell in love with teaching LTE. I was a bright eyed, energetic NQT (as it was then) with a love of English, but I had yet to find what I was really looking for in English lessons. I think it was that ‘getting lost in a book’ feeling… when the eyes glaze over… when the child leaves the real world and enters the imaginary. In the old days they called it, ‘awe and wonder’. These days they call it, “Blimey… they are engaged!”
The first lesson I taught was ‘Lulu’. The Charles Causley poem, “What has happened to Lulu?” is written almost entirely in question form, and hints at something happening to Lulu, without ever letting on the full details. I remember reading the poem, trying not to give away my own reading of it by staying as neutral in tone as possible, which was part of the training. When I teach now, my internal ‘teacher’ dialogic is still constantly reminding me, “Don’t guide their thinking to your ideas, no right answers, don’t praise what they say overtly – it stops them thinking, the best praise is the taking up of the idea by their peers.” The training provided lots of small teacher ‘moves’ like this, tips that only really make sense when discussed face to face, rather than written on a guide online. I finished the poem, and then asked the first question, What has happened to Lulu?
A moment of silence… contemplation… then the groups of three burst into talk, testing out ideas, changing them, agreeing, confirming, challenging, and building upon their initial thoughts. They talked passionately about these ideas, and their eyes were glazed. They weren’t ‘performing’. They really wanted to say what they thought. They really wanted to listen to each other. They really wanted to ‘think’. And it was me who felt the awe and wonder.
Many years later, teaching Let’s Think still feels this. This year though, for the first time in my career, I am teaching year 4 in lower key stage 2. These days, and at risk of sounding like a grumpy old timer, you hear a lot of teachers (and parents) discussing the fact that it seems children’s attention spans are shorter. But it’s evident in the classroom. Many are more demanding of quick input and wanting instant reward. They talk to each other in memes, and flit between subjects of conversation naturally and easily. Many impulsively verbalise their thoughts, and discuss things as they are happening, not after. They struggle to listen for any lengthy period of time, and they seem to find it more difficult to listen to each other’s ideas, preferring to focus on their own. There is a certain competition, a need to be first, to be noticed more than others, to not want to wait.
I can feel the development difference Piaget delineated – they are more egocentric, they struggle to wait for attention and they compete for it. They battle with great ferocity to be the first in line when it comes to lining up for… well… anything! They also find it harder to move from their own perspective, to move on from their first thought. They often find it more difficult to abstract from their own concrete understanding, to generalise, to find themes and links. They are also extraordinarily fidgety, and incredibly adept and constructing complex buildings from stationery… but they are also harder to impress. Harder to surprise.
However, when we do Let’s Think, it’s different. They somehow move into a different mode. They are calmer, and listen more attentively. They still burst from contemplative silence into passionate discussion and idea building. They construct their ideas more carefully and build on each other’s. And they really like it. They enjoy Let’s Think, a lot.
Why? It doesn’t offer them instant reward. It isn’t split into short seven-second chunks. There aren’t even any rulers to make bridges out of. It made me think of that ‘awe and wonder’ thing. Maybe that happens when something is ‘new’. Something they haven’t seen before, something that isn’t easily assimilated. I was thinking about our Science topic on ‘Sound’. Kids aren’t as easily impressed by technology any more. The decibel meter wasn’t a moment of excitement. The YouTube videos on amazing sounds were passé. But the cup and string… that was properly exciting.
I wonder if maybe the mode of a Let’s Think lesson, a slowing down, a thoughtful contemplation in a social environment, feels ‘new’ to them. Maybe they experience it differently because it doesn’t instantly gratify, there is no right answer to check at a marking station, they can take their time together to form ideas. Crucially I think, they have time to predict. They can form those predictions carefully from the evidence available, and their wider knowledge of the world. They do it together, and then they get the pay-off of seeing if they were right, (though they often enjoy it most if they aren’t, because they are surprised!) Even if they aren’t rewarded with the truth, as is the case in “What’s happened to Lulu”, they are rewarded by their peers building on their ideas, or seeing that their idea was worthy of challenge. They also do it together, in collaboration. There isn’t a race, it’s a shared progression of thinking. Not one person’s opinion matters more, and rather the idea itself is most important. It’s we think, and a question of do we agree?
It begs a question, if children’s brains are in some part being re-wired by their social environment, how ought we to respond? Should we teach lessons in short chunks, feed their instant reward systems, or should we expose them to a ‘slowing down’, a more thoughtful mode. Time to stand and stare. Maybe both are right, but one thing’s for certain, they still really like Let’s Think lessons, and so do I.

LTE in BSAK Abu Dhabi

In this blog post, Luzardi Fisher at The British School Al Khubairat (BSAK) in Abu Dhabi explains their rationale for implementing Let’s Think in English and its impact.

As Head of the English Department at The British School Al Khubairat (BSAK) Abu Dhabi, the decision to introduce Let’s Think in English (LTE) programme was primarily driven by our commitment to maintaining the highest standards of educational excellence. In conjunction with this, the decision was influenced by my positive experiences with LTE during my tenure in Hampshire, UK. Understanding its potential firsthand, I was keen to leverage its strengths to further enhance our educational environment here at BSAK.

Another strong factor driving this initiative was to address specific challenges exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the noticeable decline in student engagement and their growing reluctance to share ideas aloud. The LTE programme was particularly attractive due to its comprehensive approach to pedagogical development. It’s designed to foster a reflective practice among teachers, encouraging them to critically assess and improve their teaching methods. We recognised the potential of LTE to complement our existing educational strategies, offering a structured pathway to further elevate our already strong teaching standards.

As a well-respected institution renowned for its high educational standards, BSAK constantly seeks innovative methods to elevate teaching and learning. The LTE programme’s emphasis on reflective practice and evidence-based teaching strategies promised to complement our existing methodologies while addressing the urgent need for adaptations post-COVID, enhancing both teacher adaptability and student participation. The LTE programme addressed a specific need for a structured professional development that was both reflective and iterative. It provided our teachers with tools to introspectively evaluate their teaching methods and adapt based on evidence-based practices. For our students, the introduction of LTE meant a more tailored and engaging learning experience, ensuring that teaching methods are not only effective but also inclusive.

The unique selling point of the LTE compared to other teaching and learning approaches was its adaptability and focus on sustained teacher growth. Unlike one-off PD workshops or seminars, LTE facilitated an ongoing process of development, allowing teachers to implement changes, evaluate outcomes, and refine their approaches. Leah and Michael have been absolutely amazing and we thoroughly enjoyed working with them and will continue to stay in touch. This ongoing cycle of improvement has been instrumental in helping develop pedagogical strategies that are dynamic and responsive to the needs of our students.

Comparatively, the LTE PD programme was more integrated and comprehensive than other PD initiatives we have tried. It was not merely about imparting knowledge but about creating a culture of continuous professional learning. The programme’s integration with our daily teaching practices rather than being an external addition meant that the learning and improvements were more organic and impactful.

Over the academic year, we observed discernible stages of development in both our staff and students. Initially, there was a learning curve as both groups adapted to the new methodologies and the reflective nature of the programme. However, as the year progressed, teachers became more adept at identifying effective strategies and customising their approaches. Students, in turn, benefited from more engaging and personalised learning experiences. Challenges included time management and aligning the diverse needs of our staff and student body with the structured approach of LTE. However, these were largely overcome through careful planning and open communication.

Today, the impact of LTE at BSAK is clearly visible. Students are more engaged and willing to participate in classroom discussions, showing marked improvements in their communicative abilities. The environment has become more dynamic, with teaching and learning continuously evolving through shared insights and experiences.There has been a noticeable enhancement in teacher effectiveness. Our teachers actively incorporate student suggestions into the lesson plans. This can be seen through teachers asking for student input on what topics they find most intriguing or challenging, and then adapting the curriculum to address these interests and difficulties. This makes the learning process more relevant and engaging for students, fostering a sense of ownership over their education. We also encourage our students to evaluate their own ideas and the ideas of others during our lessons. Teachers now focus more on formative assessments that are designed not just to test knowledge, but to promote deeper understanding. Feedback encourages students to think critically about their own work and the work of their peers. This could be observed in classroom discussions where teachers pose challenging questions that require students to defend their reasoning or consider alternative viewpoints.

For students, the benefits have been seen in terms of higher engagement levels and improved academic performances. While improvements in standardised test scores may not yet be evident, other qualitative changes in student outputs, such as written answers, have provided us with these insights. Teachers have noticed that students are constructing more complex, reasoned arguments in their essays, showing better use of evidence and a clearer understanding of the subject matter. The depth and insight of classroom discussions and written assignments indicate enhanced cognitive and analytical skills.

The culture of continuous improvement and reflective practice has become a hallmark of our educational ethos. The culture of reflective practice, crucial for continuous improvement, is now more embedded within BSAK’s English department ethos. Teachers and students regularly engage in reflection sessions where they discuss what works, what doesn’t, and how things can be improved. This ongoing dialogue helps everyone in the department stay aligned with evolving educational goals and practices.

The distributed leadership model we adopted for the LTE implementation has reinforced a more collaborative and inclusive approach to school leadership. It has encouraged a more collaborative and consultative style of leadership, promoting transparency and shared responsibility in pedagogical decisions. Leaders are now more receptive to feedback and more adaptive to changes, fostering a more dynamic and responsive educational environment.

To other international schools contemplating the adoption of LTE, I would emphasise the importance of commitment to the process. It requires a shift not just in teaching methods but in the cultural mindset of the institution. However, the benefits are substantial, offering a clear pathway to enhanced educational outcomes and teacher satisfaction. Commit to the process, ensure alignment with your school’s vision, and prepare for a transformative journey in your school’s teaching and learning dynamics.

LTE Case Study: Four Marks CE Primary School

As part of a Let’s Think in English submission to the Oracy Commission we’ve asked our LTE Network schools about the impact of the programme in their setting.

Here Veronica Stoodley, Headteacher at Four Marks CE Primary School in Hampshire shares their experiences with the programme.

Four Marks Primary School is an average sized school serving a predominantly white, middle class community. However, we have higher than national average number of children from a Gypsy/ Roma and Traveller background. We also draw children from the surrounding area and have a higher than average number of vulnerable children who transfer to us, often when they have been at risk of exclusion elsewhere.

Our school values underpin a strong principle and desire for social justice within the school and make a difference to the children who need us most. Our lived experience, backed up by research, was that for our most vulnerable and disadvantaged children, their language, oracy and vocabulary was less developed than their peers, placing them at an increased disadvantage over time. For children in this group, it was notable that even when the mechanics of reading were well developed as early readers, they often went on to struggle further up the school as higher order comprehension skills increased the demand on how they extracted meaning from text. Often, they fell behind their peers by the time they were moving on to secondary school. We found that the limited quality of talk and vocabulary put a ceiling on wider understanding and their ability to effectively express their learning and understanding. Our interest in LTE stemmed from this pattern of underachievement for this group of children. We initially piloted LTE as part of our Pupil Premium Strategy.

Let’s Think English has supported us to develop the coherence of children’s language and expression, as well as developing wider and more precise vocabulary to express their ideas and learning. Learning through talk, as well as learning skills for talking and expressing yourself coherently is integral to Let’s Think English. Teachers engaged in Let’s Think English developed greater awareness and clarity on the purpose of the talk for learning within lessons, developing explicit strategies for helping children to engage meaningfully in debate. It became evident that teachers were more aware of how to ‘orchestrate’ talk to move learning forward in a lesson, and they became increasingly skilled at sequencing questions to provoke cognitive conflict that challenged children to think deeply and engage meaningfully. One such strategy was agreeing a code of conduct for Let’s Think English lessons, teaching the ‘rules of positive engagement’ for discussion. Repeatedly revisiting these guidelines at the start of each Let’s Think English lesson, helped to embed this approach as part of wider teaching and learning practice and culture, across the curriculum.

· We listen and build on each other’s ideas.
· We make sure everyone takes part.
· We can disagree respectfully.
· We help each other to stay on topic.
· We give our group view, not our individual view.
· We are prepared to change our mind.
· We give evidence to support our ideas.

Over time, we noticed that the impact of Let’s Think English was far wider and more positive than we had originally anticipated, both for our pupils and staff: For pupils, there was a significant improvement in their ability to articulate their thinking. Tangible improvements in test outcomes at the end of Key Stage 2 SATS were evident, particularly in relation to higher order comprehension skills and maths reasoning. This was particularly notable for our disadvantaged children who were keeping up with their peers, and the drop off of progress that we had initially noticed was considerably reduced or eliminated. Children who struggled to demonstrate their understanding and learning through written means experienced renewed self-confidence and engagement in these lessons, participating in and benefiting from peer and group talk. The ‘freedom’ of learning through talk placed them on an equal footing with their peers, seeing that their contributions to discussion were equally as powerful as their peers.

We also noted a positive impact on children’s social and emotional wellbeing: Let’s Think English pushes children out of the egocentric phase more quickly as they routinely have to listen to different viewpoints and come to a group consensus- a focus on ‘we think’ rather than ‘I think’. Learning to identify and articulate the evidence for a viewpoint, enabled children to learn and practise the skills for disagreeing well. Children became more adept at looking at evidence to help form their opinion, and more readily accepted that it is healthy to change your mind and opinion if the evidence convinces you otherwise.

More recently, the upheaval created by the COVID pandemic not only widened the language gap with many of our younger children coming into school delayed spoken language development and limited vocabulary, it also had a significant impact on social and emotional communication. Children found it harder to share with others, to negotiate play, to express emotions and feelings appropriately. It seemed that the effects of being in a ‘bubble’ locked children in to the egocentric state again and for a time we saw a negative impact on their ability to compromise, negotiate and see things from alternative perspectives. Re-engaging with Let’s Think, as well as how this has influenced the whole culture of teaching and learning in our school, was an integral part of our Covid ‘Recovery’.

Understanding why and how schools commit to the ‘hard case’ of Let’s Think in English

Raising standards for all through challenge: understanding why and how schools commit to the ‘hard case’ of Let’s Think in English

Abstract

Teaching for the development of students’ thinking through a Cognitive Acceleration programme like Let’s Think in English has the potential to significantly raise standards, particularly for lower and lower-middle attainers, in whole class, mixed attainment settings.
Predictably it is no easy win. The requirement for teachers to re-engineer aspects of classroom pedagogy through a sustained, theoretical and challenging professional development programme needs focus and commitment from teachers and school leaders over several years. This multiple case study was conducted to better understand why both primary and secondary schools are choosing the ’hard case’ of Let’s Think, what supports
them through initial implementation and leads them to sustain the challenge. Findings suggest that when the programme takes hold, it is precisely because of the effects of teachers and students working through collaborative challenge not in spite of this.

Keywords: Cognitive Acceleration; Professional Development; Intervention; Case Study;Pedagogy
Authors: Leah Crawford, Laurie Smith, Michael Walsh,

To read the full paper click LTCS draft at 16.05.23 (1)

Sticking with it: how dialogic habits take time

Cath Dawson from Bexley Grammar School shares her thoughts on how Let’s Think in English helps develop cognitive and dialogic habits over time.

Early sessions of Let’s Think sessions can feel much more stilted and less satisfying than later sessions where the skills and practice have a deeper foundation…

Having taught Let’s Think consistently in KS3 for over a decade, I wanted to explore the characteristics of early Let’s Think lessons compared to Let’s Think lessons with a class who has been involved in Let’s Think practice for a long time in order to better understand the reasons why time and consistent practice are so important to valuable and enjoyable lessons and learning.

To begin, let’s compare the characteristics of a Y7 and Y8 class who both studied the Let’s Think lesson Mama Dott on the same day (November 2022) with the same teacher.

Learning behaviours present in Y7 lesson:
Students tend to be more egocentric in their observations: ‘I think’; ‘I thought’
Students need a few questions before their discussions start to engage with the text
Students interfering with each other’s ideas during feedback

Observations of deeper reasoning via social construction in the Y7 lesson:
Inability to remember group’s discussion on feedback sessions
Less flexible with their ideas and reasoning
A concreteness to their ideas

Learning behaviours in Y8 lesson:
Discussion is immediately animated from social construction: they are raring to go from the off
Animation – hand movement – cueing each other in from discussion; looking at the text; pointing out elements of the text; looking at the person speaking – both in small group and larger class discussion
An important understanding of what questions are a hands up question – knowledge builders and information building
As the lesson continues and the questions get harder, the discussion gets more animated
There are moments of leadership in the group: if discussion starts to wane, a student will say ‘how does…’ and bring it back to the poem

Observations of deeper reasoning via social construction in the Y8 lesson:
Collective thought demonstrated in whole class feedback: “we thought”… “we think”… “we discussed”
More democratic approach to the discussion: inclusive gestures and conversation frameworks
Eye contact is used in group discussions and class discussions
Eagerness for the next piece of material or question
Students in group discussion cue in from previous contributions: ‘as student a said…’

It is clear from the profiles of the lessons outlined above that the Y8 class are further developed in their deeper reasoning and learning behaviours and the correlation between the Let’s Think lessons and this is clear. But how do the Let’s Think lessons enable this?

The Let’s Think Forum mission statement expresses that Let’s Think aims ‘to transform education through high quality teaching and learning which accelerates pupils’ social, emotional and cognitive development.’ Here the connection between social and cognitive development is clear: cognitive development does not occur without social emotional thinking. Both Vygostky and Piaget underpin Let’s Think and in the pedagogy for both, the connection between social constructs and cognitive development is clear. Vygotsky states that ‘we become ourselves through working with others’ and this social construction of understanding indicates that the collaborative, teacher facilitated rather than teacher led, lessons over a long period of time has huge impacts on cognitive development. This is further corroborated by Piaget’s stages of cognitive development where we consider the formal operational stage: both the hypothetico-deductive reasoning and abstract thought descriptors of this stage indicate a flexibility and intellectual dexterity that is practised through collaborative lessons such that Let’s Think promotes.

Ultimately, when it starts to feel tough with a class, stick with it. But here are a few suggestions to help sticking with it a bit easier:
Early text choices in LTE lessons are significant. Try keeping them short to enable time to focus in on those skills early on
Grouping needs to be flexible: do not stay with a group dynamic out of tenacity
Try to ensure that Let’s Think lessons are taught by a teacher who knows the class well, not someone who only teaches them once a fortnight for the Let’s Think lesson

The Wavell School, Ofsted and LTE

The Wavell School in Hampshire was visited by Ofsted on the 9th and 10th November 2021. They saw English on the first day and you can read the full report here.

Megan Hill is English KS3 Co-ordinator and Pastoral Assistant at Wavell School. She started teaching Let’s Think in English in 2015, is a regular attendee at the LTE Network meetings and is a member of the LTE Steering Group.

In the following blog post she reflects upon Ofsted feedback on Let’s Think in English, how LTE has supported students through post-Covid challenges and how student and teacher confidence were developed and sustained in the programme.

‘Let’s Think sessions help to develop pupils’ confidence to question, debate and reflect on the world around them’. (The Wavell Ofsted Report November 2021).

I can honestly say that this little gem was in the main, the result of our Ofsted Inspector’s discussions with students. I had talked about Let’s Think in my interview with her, amongst other areas such as curriculum intent and implementation, encouraging reading for pleasure and our Covid recovery programme, but she did not observe any Let’s Think lessons. She was very interested in our observation that our classes have not been afflicted with a common post-covid ailment – refusal to speak or participate in discussion in the classroom, and that we credit the students’ familiarity with Let’s Think and discussion-based learning as a reason for this. She was also interested in the wide range of texts used in Let’s Think and how these benefit students’ reading skills and their confidence with approaching unseen texts.
Students and the teachers that she spoke to must have confirmed what I told her as she saw fit to include this in her summing up. I credit their confidence and enthusiasm for Let’s Think as the result of the following factors:
• Metacognition of the ‘rules’ and ‘benefits’ of Let’s Think lessons as on-going each year i.e. what we’re doing, why we’re doing it and how it will benefit the students themselves.
• Students like Let’s Think as they know the lesson is discussion based (they also like arguing and airing their opinions!).
• We run refresher training for staff and new staff every year, as well as monitoring the teaching of Let’s Think lessons across key stage 3 – this ensures equality of opportunity for all students (one Let’s Think lesson a fortnight) in terms of their Let’s Think lesson experience.
• We attend Let’s Think network events so we are up to speed with new lessons and pedagogy, which we disseminate across the Faculty via training sessions.
• We measure the impact of LTE through Student Questionnaires each year.
• SLT are very supportive of our LTE programme, and at their request we have also run a Let’s Think training session for staff during CPD sessions to allow staff to experience an LTE lesson for themselves and for us to explain the pedagogy and the pillars of LTE. This may have enabled staff to begin to use the open questioning style in other curriculum areas, so the style of Let’s Think teaching is familiar in areas across the school as well as being exemplified and led in English.