I often wonder how the balance of instruction plays out in terms of fact vs flexibility (this would be my definition of fluency).

If it had to be one or the other, would you rather students (people) memorised TTs (to 12) or learnt strategies such as Darren suggests to work out TTs?

Maybe it's my bad luck, but I see more and more ITT and ECT who only consider procedures. Application is, at best, an afterthought. If I were dramatic, I'd call it a crisis.

Raises the question about distinction between mathematical skills and topics (even those terms warrant better definition). The skill/procedure is proportion, but the topic is it's own. Much like percentages.

Do you mean it hasn't been, or is poorly defined, or that oracy could not exist? Also, what do you mean by transferable skill? Thanks.

(Sorry I cannot DM) I was unable to make the live webinar, could I please have the recording link? Thanks.

I've left secondary education (after 10+ years) to study this further. I adapted my teaching to incorporate the ideas of Boaler/Lilljedahl/Wolfram/etc. but was always too constrained by dull linear curriculum.

I totally agree that KS3 (and earlier) should be driven by thinking skills not processes.

Do you mean that sanctions are, at least partly, an effort to induce a sense of shame that comes to others more naturally? If not, I interpret the post as, at least, stating that shame is a keen factor in student behaviour.

Creating and then buying the dip.

So frequent randomised seating popped up in my research and I gave it a go. Nothing has yet convinced me to go back.

I tried to find research and all that came up was that those nearest the teacher do better. (And don't let them choose for themselves). Does that mean we automatically sit lower attainers near the teacher?

My change was prompted by my daughter. She's a bright but quiet student, so guess where she was being sat? Where would you seat her? Where would I have sat her? She knew she was being used as a tool. This made me question the equity of how I was using seating plans.

Or randomised. When teachers create seating plans, I'm convinced they build in inequity. I started randomising this year, inspired by Building Thinking Classrooms, and other than more of a struggle to learn names, I'm glad I overcame my trepidation.

One 10 question spaced retrieval quiz per class per week. Students have already marked/corrected so I'm mostly just marking their marking and gathering data.

I think maybe you said it already, but also why so many headlines about Charlie Kirk?

🚨 Maths Giveaway! 🚨

Win a set of manipulatives, including Multilink Cubes, Counters, Base Ten, Fractions bars, Algebra Tiles & a 100 Square Popper – perfect for a classroom using @HUEcameras or mathswhiteboard.com webcam viewers.

📚✨ Follow & RT to enter. Ends 30/9.

@mathsjem.bsky.social #maths

Ep 14 - Sophie Bresciani Think Thank Thunk · Episode

open.spotify.com/episode/52Uz...

If you haven't already found it, you might like this episode of a podcast related to BTC.

There's clearly loads of great stuff to cover once the basics have been seen, but it's the initial, more abstract concepts on curricula I wonder about. I've no doubt a bit of direct instruction is ok, essential even, but if you can offer any insights, I'd really appreciate it.

I'm only 3 episodes in so maybe I'm jumping the gun with a question that has been addressed already, but here it is. I'm struggling to come up with a strategy to use BTC for something like trig. I can't see a way into the topic that doesn't need me to directly instruct, at least minimally, to start.

@vendi55.bsky.social @webbkyle.bsky.social @maegangiroux.bsky.social Hi all. I've recently discovered the BTC book and it's re-inspired me to build more collaborative problem solving into my practice. I'm really enjoying your podcasts to fill in gaps and help adapt my initial ideas.

Might it have something to do with security protocols? I don't doubt there exist adaptations, but they look like LHD vehicles brought with them so using default systems deemed safest?

Or maybe plain arrogance, or a subset of arrogance, but it seems too easy to assert the convenient narrative.

I had hoped your podcast might help me answer this question, and don't get me wrong, forcing me to ask the questions is a good thing, but I'd also have appreciated some help with the answers.

In any event, thanks for the podcast.

I think virtually all teachers would agree there can be no one-size-fits-all strategy, and that it would be naive to expect to read a book/research and expect to apply suggestions verbatim. So my thinking is always about how I can apply this to my situation.

I agree with your criticisms (and praise) but I'd have liked to hear your expert opinions on how the strategies could be adapted/improved in light of their shortcomings.

I'm sorry to say I was very disappointed with the podcast. Main gripe is that unless you'd read or read about the book (maybe that was your intent), listener would have little to no idea what the book is about so I think unlikely to foster engagement.

That I couldn't and probably shouldn't give problem solving an equal footing with direct instruction.

GIVEAWAY! We have a few copies of our - @carlhendrick.substack.com, Jim Heal, me - new book to give away. Bonus points if you reply to this tweet telling us something you used to believe about teaching and learning but don’t anymore. RT to be included in the draw. @hachettelearning.bsky.social

For both, it's going to take additional time and effort for me to catch those starting ahead of me. I can't do the same things as them and expect to close the gap.

I analogise most things to sport, and this holds for me that if I'm fitter/stronger to begin with, I can train harder/longer and will improve at a faster rate than others at a lesser starting point.

I've recently finished Willingham's Why Don't Students Like School? and I really buy into the idea that students (well anyone) will learn more if they know more to begin with, so any gap will only widen.