Lot of chat about instructional coaching. To get it right, don't underestimate the time it takes!

- There has to be a shared vision for effective T&L from the coaches. Keep revisiting this and keep unpicking all the elements so they are able to break them down and explain them.

We used the Evidence Review by @ProfCoe to create some effective teaching habits, using a lot of TLAC techniques and work from @every_lesson. Knowledge and expertise and ability to break this down is vital.
Lots of time then required with coaches to look at lessons and look at highest leverage point. In one training session our coaching team picked out over 30 tweaks in a 5 minute video. Where do you start? Why there? Consistency key. Leads to great debate.
Time needs to be built in. Time for visits, time for coaching sessions, time to practice. SLT need to all understand the process and buy-in and all live it. Putting staff development first is truly exciting and hugely powerful if actioned in the way it is desired.
Teachers/coaches need to have the process modelled for them. Staff need to understand the why behind IC, not just what it is. Worth talking through research on teacher's habitual practice from @mikehobbiss and @DrSamSims.
Build in common language around vision for effective T&L. This is where TLAC is great. Set habits that you are looking to perfect, but ensure there is an understanding of the why rather than just what the habit looks like.
Worth looking at Powerful Action Steps through @Josh_CPD for this purpose. With a combined understanding of all the action steps, teachers are getting consistency from coaches. Takes away subjectivity.
Spend time making sure you have the right coaching team and that an expertise around T&L is the focus, not because of position etc. Get this wrong and the process is highly likely to be undermined.
Reflect with coaches and watch coaching sessions back. Is the coaching following the IC model? Has it slipped? Is the modelling and practice happening to the level you want it to?
Finally it is a cultural change for the school. Dont underestimate the time this takes. Worth looking at having an implementation plan in place as per the EEF guidance on putting evidence to work. Keep reflecting and reviewing. Helps to ensure fidelity of long term change.
We are still in the early stages with IC and certainly haven't got everything perfect, so thought it would be useful to put down some reflections from our journey so far @TeamFHES.
Lastly, if you want chat more about implementation or logistics/training then please feel free to DM. Have had some great conversations with @RichieEmerson3 @MrsBallAP @PearceMrs and @LindaParryTeach already. Always great to chat T&L and teacher development.
I should add that there are aspects of what I have mentioned here that we are still very much working on and have by no means got it to where we desire. However, that's what the implementation plan supports. Constant reflection and review.
I also forgot to mention, that on reflection, I would start really small and master the process and the coaching training for a small group (perhaps ITT to 3 year experience teachers). Then push out wider once happy.

More from For later read

Daily Bookmarks to GAVNet 02/12/2021

Quantum causal loops

https://t.co/emX8OxKPl0

#loops #quantum

Large-scale commodity farming accelerating climate change in the Amazon

https://t.co/v3gA7OTP9E

#ClimateChange #forest #farm

Collapsed glaciers increase Third Pole uncertainties: Downstream lakes may merge within a decade

https://t.co/huAma56KeB

#glacier #lakes #ClimateChange

From trash to treasure: Silicon waste finds new use in Li-ion batteries

https://t.co/TkxKFDQMC6

#batteries #treasure #silicon #trash
This response to my tweet is a common objection to targeted advertising.

@KevinCoates correct me if I'm wrong, but basic point seems to be that banning targeted ads will lower platform profits, but will mostly be beneficial for consumers.

Some counterpoints 👇


1) This assumes that consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones.

This does not seem self-evident to me


Research also finds that firms choose between ad. targeting vs. obtrusiveness 👇

If true, the right question is not whether consumers prefer contextual ads to targeted ones. But whether they prefer *more* contextual ads vs *fewer* targeted

2) True, many inframarginal platforms might simply shift to contextual ads.

But some might already be almost indifferent between direct & indirect monetization.

Hard to imagine that *none* of them will respond to reduced ad revenue with actual fees.

3) Policy debate seems to be moving from:

"Consumers are insufficiently informed to decide how they share their data."

To

"No one in their right mind would agree to highly targeted ads (e.g., those that mix data from multiple sources)."

IMO the latter statement is incorrect.

You May Also Like