May 5, 2026

197. Is Setting In Maths Actually A Good Thing?

197. Is Setting In Maths Actually A Good Thing?
197. Is Setting In Maths Actually A Good Thing?
Teach Sleep Repeat
197. Is Setting In Maths Actually A Good Thing?

For about twenty-five years, the dominant message in teacher training has been clear. The research says mixed attainment is better. Setting damages confidence, harms low attainers, and widens the gap. Then in April 2026, the EEF published a study that complicates all of that.

Nine thousand pupils, 97 schools, two years of data. The finding: pupils in mixed attainment classes made roughly one month less progress in maths than pupils in sets. High prior attainers made two months less progress. And the team that produced this result is the same team that gave us most of the evidence against setting in the first place.

Dylan and Hayden get into what the study actually found and what it did not find, what they were both taught during training and whether they still believe it, and the honest classroom experience that the academic literature tends not to capture.

They also make the strongest possible case for both sides before landing somewhere honest. The mixed attainment argument does not collapse because of one study. The setting argument is not vindicated either. But the conversation has shifted and anyone working in secondary maths right now deserves to know how and why.

Sharp, properly researched, and the kind of debate that should be happening in every staffroom in the country.

🎧 New episodes every week. Leave us a review if you enjoy the show!

🔢 Want to boost maths fluency in your school? Book a free Maths Zoo trial at www.mathszoo.org

💬 Join our completely free WhatsApp community and connect with teachers from across the UK: https://chat.whatsapp.com/HB7n1PNGdGL5STACssEH1s

1
00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:01,880
Hello everyone, welcome back to
another episode of TC repeat.

2
00:00:01,880 --> 00:00:03,520
My name is Dylan and my name is
Hayden, and this week we're

3
00:00:03,520 --> 00:00:06,240
going to be diving into some
more research that appeared

4
00:00:08,160 --> 00:00:10,920
ruffle a few feathers.
We're going to be talking about

5
00:00:11,240 --> 00:00:16,880
what seems to be going against
10 years, 20 years, 30 years of

6
00:00:16,880 --> 00:00:21,960
advice around setting in maths,
mixed ability sets, streaming

7
00:00:21,960 --> 00:00:24,440
and setting by attainment.
We're going to be talking about

8
00:00:24,440 --> 00:00:27,960
it all because for most of my
career, and I think you can

9
00:00:27,960 --> 00:00:31,760
attest this, Hayden, we were
told that it's pretty much

10
00:00:31,760 --> 00:00:34,800
settled, we should be doing
mixed ability teaching when it

11
00:00:34,800 --> 00:00:37,720
comes to maths.
I feel like many teachers think

12
00:00:37,720 --> 00:00:42,680
that even if there are some pros
to that, the actual doing of it

13
00:00:42,680 --> 00:00:45,320
every single day, the
practicalities around it can be

14
00:00:45,320 --> 00:00:46,880
quite tricky for a number of
reasons we'll get into.

15
00:00:47,200 --> 00:00:50,680
But there was a recent study
that was released.

16
00:00:50,680 --> 00:00:52,560
Do you want to fill us in Hayden
on what was said?

17
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:54,120
Yeah, absolutely.
And before I do that, I'm going

18
00:00:54,120 --> 00:00:57,320
to preface this episode because
I can imagine a little offender

19
00:00:57,320 --> 00:00:59,680
me a fendometer on on the on the
bottom of this, because you've

20
00:00:59,680 --> 00:01:01,440
already said mixed ability
instead of mixed attainment

21
00:01:01,440 --> 00:01:02,880
twice then.
And I think people might be

22
00:01:03,080 --> 00:01:05,200
might be seriously questioning
whether they can listen to this

23
00:01:05,200 --> 00:01:06,920
episode now.
OK, all right, that's OK.

24
00:01:07,240 --> 00:01:11,360
So if anyone has a massive
problem with the word ability,

25
00:01:11,840 --> 00:01:14,600
please get over it for this
entire discussion.

26
00:01:14,960 --> 00:01:17,960
And and do you know what that
that that maybe that's

27
00:01:17,960 --> 00:01:21,040
provocative as well.
My point here is that very

28
00:01:21,040 --> 00:01:23,760
clearly everyone knows what
we're talking about when we say

29
00:01:23,760 --> 00:01:26,120
ability.
Mixed ability is a very common

30
00:01:26,120 --> 00:01:29,080
way of describing a group that
has mixed ability in it.

31
00:01:29,080 --> 00:01:31,760
In terms of the lesson we're
talking about, we're not talking

32
00:01:31,760 --> 00:01:34,520
about the child as a whole.
We're not saying inherently

33
00:01:34,520 --> 00:01:36,840
they're less or more able of
absolutely everything ever.

34
00:01:37,000 --> 00:01:39,160
But the fact of the matter is
that there are children who are

35
00:01:39,160 --> 00:01:41,880
more and less able when it comes
to maths and when people go,

36
00:01:41,880 --> 00:01:45,040
well, someone said, oh, you
can't, Ability is is stuck.

37
00:01:45,040 --> 00:01:46,800
You can't become more or less
able at something.

38
00:01:46,800 --> 00:01:49,400
Yes you can.
Yeah, of course you can, unless

39
00:01:49,400 --> 00:01:51,600
you choose to define it the way
that you're choosing and.

40
00:01:51,680 --> 00:01:53,480
Then.
So then it's just inherent, is

41
00:01:53,480 --> 00:01:54,480
it?
And then we really are talking

42
00:01:54,480 --> 00:01:56,160
about eugenics that you can't
meet.

43
00:01:56,160 --> 00:01:57,840
Of course you can move your
ability in something.

44
00:01:58,040 --> 00:01:59,960
You can increase your ability to
do something.

45
00:01:59,960 --> 00:02:04,240
Yeah, my ability to run has
increased when I trained to do

46
00:02:04,240 --> 00:02:06,840
some more running.
And mine, mine has decreased

47
00:02:06,840 --> 00:02:09,440
significantly continuously since
I was seven.

48
00:02:09,440 --> 00:02:11,280
Yeah, it's not offensive when
you just know.

49
00:02:11,280 --> 00:02:12,280
Exactly.
No, actually it's your

50
00:02:12,280 --> 00:02:13,720
attainment.
We should be measuring your okay

51
00:02:14,160 --> 00:02:16,400
running attainment.
Whatever you whatever you think

52
00:02:16,400 --> 00:02:17,480
the right word is.
Imagine I'm saying that.

53
00:02:17,480 --> 00:02:19,520
That's what I mean.
I mean that I'm talking.

54
00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:21,680
Yeah, I don't.
I don't inherently think

55
00:02:21,680 --> 00:02:23,560
horrible things about children
or think terrible.

56
00:02:23,560 --> 00:02:25,600
I don't.
A fendometer.

57
00:02:27,560 --> 00:02:30,120
Not what we're saying, anyway.
Yeah, this new study.

58
00:02:30,680 --> 00:02:31,920
Go on, Hayden, Tell us about it.
Cool.

59
00:02:31,920 --> 00:02:34,600
So this the study came out.
Dylan's also not reel on this,

60
00:02:34,600 --> 00:02:35,920
so check it out on our Instagram
as well.

61
00:02:36,000 --> 00:02:39,600
And equally provocative.
To teach the repeat podcast.

62
00:02:39,720 --> 00:02:41,080
Thank you for that
clarification.

63
00:02:41,080 --> 00:02:43,400
The most important bit probably
of pointing people towards our

64
00:02:43,400 --> 00:02:45,080
Instagram.
Anyway, it's think with that in

65
00:02:45,080 --> 00:02:45,680
mind.
You know what?

66
00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:48,000
You've literally absorbed this
more and you've done a whole

67
00:02:48,000 --> 00:02:49,520
real life.
You might as well summarise.

68
00:02:49,520 --> 00:02:51,000
Stop.
That's what I wanted you to say,

69
00:02:51,000 --> 00:02:51,520
right?
Hayden?

70
00:02:51,520 --> 00:02:53,480
Why don't you say it?
I'm just lazy.

71
00:02:53,680 --> 00:02:56,360
Well, essentially it came out.
It's the EEF, EF Education

72
00:02:56,360 --> 00:02:58,360
Endowment Fund.
They fund a lot of research to

73
00:02:58,360 --> 00:03:00,560
do education and a lot of the
things that you would have heard

74
00:03:00,640 --> 00:03:03,680
third of your career in in
education has probably come from

75
00:03:03,760 --> 00:03:04,960
from this as well.
And they've said, oh, it's

76
00:03:04,960 --> 00:03:06,920
backed by this.
It's it's proper, it's this,

77
00:03:06,920 --> 00:03:10,320
it's that.
And essentially what it said was

78
00:03:10,320 --> 00:03:15,000
it talked about how children and
OK, OK, lower attaining children

79
00:03:15,400 --> 00:03:19,480
very good aren't negatively
impacted when it comes to

80
00:03:19,480 --> 00:03:22,360
setting.
However, those with higher

81
00:03:22,360 --> 00:03:26,680
attaining outcomes can flourish
and make more progress in a

82
00:03:26,680 --> 00:03:29,680
setting environment.
For the sake of just in case you

83
00:03:29,680 --> 00:03:31,760
have listeners who are not
necessarily up to scratch with

84
00:03:31,760 --> 00:03:34,960
the jargon of of teaching, can
you just very quickly explain

85
00:03:34,960 --> 00:03:36,720
what setting actually is
complete that work?

86
00:03:37,040 --> 00:03:40,240
Yeah, so all we mean here is
with mixed ability, mixed

87
00:03:40,240 --> 00:03:40,720
attainment.
Sorry.

88
00:03:41,280 --> 00:03:43,240
What you have is you have a
classroom that's just simply

89
00:03:43,240 --> 00:03:44,520
based on when children were
born.

90
00:03:44,600 --> 00:03:45,080
Yeah.
OK.

91
00:03:45,080 --> 00:03:47,960
So from September one year to
August the next, all of those

92
00:03:47,960 --> 00:03:49,960
children are in a class of
maths, and you just teach all of

93
00:03:49,960 --> 00:03:52,200
them.
And it doesn't matter what their

94
00:03:52,320 --> 00:03:54,320
attainment is in maths.
It doesn't matter how much they

95
00:03:54,320 --> 00:03:56,600
understand, it doesn't matter
where they are, they should all

96
00:03:56,600 --> 00:03:58,840
be taught the same lesson.
That would be mixed and it would

97
00:03:58,840 --> 00:04:01,960
be down to what you teach them,
what we'll talk about this in

98
00:04:01,960 --> 00:04:04,200
the future about differentiation
and the things you give them and

99
00:04:04,200 --> 00:04:05,880
the support you give them and
the help that together is the

100
00:04:05,880 --> 00:04:07,920
point.
They're all together and they

101
00:04:07,920 --> 00:04:11,000
will have varying ability.
OK Then with setting, what

102
00:04:11,000 --> 00:04:14,600
happens is you in some way
figure out what their attainment

103
00:04:14,600 --> 00:04:17,040
is in maths and then group them
according to that and it can

104
00:04:17,040 --> 00:04:18,519
look, it can look very, very
different.

105
00:04:18,519 --> 00:04:21,000
It can look vastly different.
You might just have some setting

106
00:04:21,000 --> 00:04:23,720
where the children need the most
support or in a smaller group

107
00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:26,040
and the rest are mixed.
You might have just some setting

108
00:04:26,040 --> 00:04:27,760
where the children who are
gifted and talented are just

109
00:04:27,760 --> 00:04:29,960
together and they push each
other on and they and they're in

110
00:04:29,960 --> 00:04:31,200
a group and everyone else is
mixed.

111
00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:33,840
You might have setting which is
straight up, you almost list

112
00:04:33,840 --> 00:04:36,080
them in order based on an
attainment scale that you have,

113
00:04:36,240 --> 00:04:38,360
based on whatever you want to do
to find the information out.

114
00:04:38,360 --> 00:04:40,400
And then you just cut them up
into quarters and there's four

115
00:04:40,400 --> 00:04:42,280
classes.
Yeah, whatever it can be.

116
00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:45,000
Setting it takes into account
the attainment and the ability

117
00:04:45,000 --> 00:04:46,800
of the child in that in that
lesson.

118
00:04:46,800 --> 00:04:48,040
Which is where we get the term
sets.

119
00:04:48,040 --> 00:04:49,440
You know, when we say, oh,
you're in set one.

120
00:04:49,440 --> 00:04:51,760
When I was at secondary school,
it was set one, set two, set 3.

121
00:04:51,920 --> 00:04:53,560
Because you have, you have the
highest set, the lower set.

122
00:04:53,560 --> 00:04:55,240
And you have all these words
that offend people as well.

123
00:04:55,240 --> 00:04:56,680
Yeah.
And we probably use throughout

124
00:04:56,680 --> 00:04:59,560
this, you know, in terms of like
higher ability, higher children,

125
00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:01,720
most able, more able.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah,

126
00:05:02,120 --> 00:05:03,400
yeah.
Please, please, please

127
00:05:03,400 --> 00:05:05,040
understand.
Please give us, please give us

128
00:05:05,040 --> 00:05:07,240
the respect of understanding
that you know what we're talking

129
00:05:07,240 --> 00:05:08,720
about.
Please just think for more than

130
00:05:08,720 --> 00:05:10,320
10 seconds.
Other than what I don't like

131
00:05:10,320 --> 00:05:12,200
what said, all of these people
must be awful.

132
00:05:12,200 --> 00:05:14,160
We're not awful people.
Just think about what we're

133
00:05:14,160 --> 00:05:16,680
saying, please.
For more than 5 seconds anyway.

134
00:05:16,680 --> 00:05:19,120
The findings were in general
were pupils in mixed attainment

135
00:05:19,120 --> 00:05:23,360
classes are about made about one
month less progress in maths on

136
00:05:23,360 --> 00:05:25,480
average than pupils in sets.
So that's straight across the

137
00:05:25,480 --> 00:05:28,040
board.
In average pupils make less

138
00:05:28,040 --> 00:05:29,840
progress in mixed attainment
classes.

139
00:05:30,160 --> 00:05:33,320
High prior retainers made about
two months less progress in

140
00:05:33,320 --> 00:05:36,840
mixed attainment classes.
So it it gives those children

141
00:05:36,840 --> 00:05:41,440
who are more capable with maths
make far less progress when

142
00:05:41,440 --> 00:05:43,200
they're in mixed ability.
And that makes sense, right?

143
00:05:43,200 --> 00:05:45,040
That's just something teachers
have said for years that has

144
00:05:45,040 --> 00:05:47,440
always been batted off that
they're held back.

145
00:05:47,520 --> 00:05:49,480
Yeah, they are held back.
They have to be because it's

146
00:05:49,480 --> 00:05:51,520
just a practicality of teaching
a mixed ability class.

147
00:05:51,520 --> 00:05:54,400
Yeah, surely.
Surely low prior retainers and

148
00:05:54,400 --> 00:05:57,160
pupils from disadvantaged
backgrounds made similar

149
00:05:57,160 --> 00:06:01,120
progress in either model setting
did not significantly harm them,

150
00:06:01,240 --> 00:06:02,480
right?
This, this is the key here

151
00:06:03,160 --> 00:06:05,120
because again, I've had some
people push back and say, well

152
00:06:05,120 --> 00:06:06,960
this doesn't say it's better for
lower retainers.

153
00:06:06,960 --> 00:06:09,720
No it doesn't, it's the same,
it's the same.

154
00:06:10,000 --> 00:06:13,280
So if we have the option of it
staying the same but it's better

155
00:06:13,280 --> 00:06:15,120
for a different group then
that's obviously maybe

156
00:06:15,120 --> 00:06:17,600
potentially something that's
useful for the whole class as a

157
00:06:17,600 --> 00:06:18,760
whole.
This.

158
00:06:18,760 --> 00:06:21,440
This was the kicker for me.
self-confidence in maths was

159
00:06:21,440 --> 00:06:25,560
slightly worse in mixed
attainment schools than in

160
00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:28,040
setting schools.
It's a small effect overall but

161
00:06:28,040 --> 00:06:30,760
I can't tell you how much of my
career people have told me that

162
00:06:30,760 --> 00:06:32,640
if you set it ruins the
confidence of children.

163
00:06:32,880 --> 00:06:35,680
This study has found the
opposite, that when children are

164
00:06:35,680 --> 00:06:39,520
in mixed ability classes, what a
shock they see other children

165
00:06:39,520 --> 00:06:41,560
who can do things they can't and
become less confident.

166
00:06:41,920 --> 00:06:45,200
So that that for me was another
just a bit of vindication.

167
00:06:45,200 --> 00:06:46,880
I think for all those teachers
out there have been saying it

168
00:06:46,880 --> 00:06:48,800
for years that this is not the
case.

169
00:06:48,960 --> 00:06:52,000
So the EEF had these basic
recommendations, which I think

170
00:06:52,000 --> 00:06:53,120
were a really good place to
land.

171
00:06:53,600 --> 00:06:56,120
And it said if you set and if
you teach mixed attainment.

172
00:06:56,120 --> 00:06:58,160
So it wasn't saying you should
definitely do one if you want to

173
00:06:58,160 --> 00:07:00,160
make that clear to people.
Now, the point of this is that

174
00:07:00,160 --> 00:07:02,200
both can work.
And those people who spent the

175
00:07:02,200 --> 00:07:04,160
whole Caribbean on their high
horse saying that setting is

176
00:07:04,160 --> 00:07:06,120
disgusting.
We even had a quote later on

177
00:07:06,120 --> 00:07:08,920
that we'll talk about it being
it's violence against.

178
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:11,840
It's clearly none of that is a
case of both.

179
00:07:12,160 --> 00:07:15,720
If you set, do not concentrate
specialist teachers into the top

180
00:07:15,720 --> 00:07:18,960
sets and let pupils move between
those sets and have fluidity.

181
00:07:19,400 --> 00:07:22,120
If you teach mixed attainment,
you have to actively stretch

182
00:07:22,120 --> 00:07:24,800
those high attainers because
that's where the gap is open.

183
00:07:25,040 --> 00:07:27,800
Yeah.
So again, just one extra line

184
00:07:27,800 --> 00:07:29,280
that backs this as well.
Something they found was that

185
00:07:29,280 --> 00:07:31,720
the lesson observations showed
that mixed attainment classes

186
00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:36,440
were teaching content closer to
what the quote bottom sets get.

187
00:07:36,440 --> 00:07:38,440
You know what I mean?
The lower attaining sets get

188
00:07:38,440 --> 00:07:40,200
than what the high attaining
sets get.

189
00:07:40,200 --> 00:07:43,600
So it completely backs up
everything you said before that

190
00:07:43,600 --> 00:07:45,720
all like the all the teachers
that have been saying this for

191
00:07:45,720 --> 00:07:46,920
years.
I've been saying this for years

192
00:07:46,920 --> 00:07:50,240
of like, oh, if you've, if I've
got the entire range of of

193
00:07:50,520 --> 00:07:54,440
attainment in this class, it's,
it's really hard for me to do

194
00:07:54,440 --> 00:07:57,920
what I would have done if I only
had the top 25% of attainers.

195
00:07:57,920 --> 00:08:00,400
Or only the only the bottom
right.

196
00:08:00,400 --> 00:08:03,000
OK, actually, I think you'll
find, Hayden, that a rising tide

197
00:08:03,000 --> 00:08:04,480
raises all boats.
Yeah.

198
00:08:04,480 --> 00:08:05,640
OK.
I think you'll find that

199
00:08:05,640 --> 00:08:08,280
actually if we just have really
high standards, which clearly

200
00:08:08,280 --> 00:08:10,240
you don't if you want to set.
All right, you're just putting a

201
00:08:10,240 --> 00:08:11,760
ceiling on those children.
OK.

202
00:08:11,760 --> 00:08:14,720
So I think actually you'll find
that a rising tide raise all

203
00:08:14,720 --> 00:08:16,680
boats.
Love analogies that just sound

204
00:08:16,680 --> 00:08:19,320
kind of cool.
I don't really mean anything.

205
00:08:19,360 --> 00:08:20,880
I love them.
I love them.

206
00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:22,480
Yeah.
I'm inspired by that.

207
00:08:22,560 --> 00:08:24,600
Yeah, actually true.
I know I'm still in front of a

208
00:08:24,600 --> 00:08:27,120
class right now where I'm really
struggling to make, but someone

209
00:08:27,120 --> 00:08:28,800
mentioned the tide getting
higher and bloody.

210
00:08:28,800 --> 00:08:30,560
That is how bloody water.
Works.

211
00:08:30,560 --> 00:08:32,600
I I you know what, it must be
the case.

212
00:08:32,760 --> 00:08:35,559
How waterworks really does
reflect how old children learn.

213
00:08:35,760 --> 00:08:39,919
I want to, I really do just want
to just make the point here that

214
00:08:40,280 --> 00:08:43,760
what I am saying, my baseline is
not now this research says that

215
00:08:43,760 --> 00:08:45,640
settings better.
So we should all just what I'm

216
00:08:45,640 --> 00:08:48,280
saying here is that those people
who are genuine.

217
00:08:48,280 --> 00:08:50,480
I LED maths in school, I did
maths specialist, these courses,

218
00:08:50,480 --> 00:08:52,080
I still thought setting had its
place.

219
00:08:52,400 --> 00:08:55,520
There were people out there who
was edged on it, had on the side

220
00:08:55,520 --> 00:08:58,760
of snobbery who if they heard
the word setting, blood jump,

221
00:08:59,880 --> 00:09:02,120
not being trained in maths.
I don't think you understand

222
00:09:02,120 --> 00:09:04,640
maths mastery mate.
We do it all at the same time.

223
00:09:05,000 --> 00:09:07,680
Absolute utter nonsense.
There is a place for setting,

224
00:09:07,880 --> 00:09:09,320
there is a place for mixed
ability.

225
00:09:09,560 --> 00:09:12,440
Both have their pros, both have
their places and both can be

226
00:09:12,440 --> 00:09:15,040
really successful.
And you know, we'll come, we'll

227
00:09:15,040 --> 00:09:17,240
circle back round to this.
But if you have issues with

228
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:18,880
maths in your school, it's
probably because of other

229
00:09:18,880 --> 00:09:20,760
things.
It's not necessarily because of

230
00:09:20,760 --> 00:09:22,160
the way you're setting or doing
stability.

231
00:09:22,160 --> 00:09:23,680
Definitely.
There are a lot of factors that

232
00:09:23,680 --> 00:09:25,360
are.
Implying that hopefully will be

233
00:09:25,360 --> 00:09:27,080
the theme that comes through
this episode as we explore it

234
00:09:27,080 --> 00:09:28,720
deeper and deeper and deeper and
look into the whys.

235
00:09:28,720 --> 00:09:31,280
So let's just, let's just dive a
little bit more into our own

236
00:09:31,280 --> 00:09:32,840
experiences because I think it's
important, right?

237
00:09:33,080 --> 00:09:36,520
Because I equally spent the
entirety of my career and I

238
00:09:36,520 --> 00:09:38,880
think other people did as well.
Even if I think I could have

239
00:09:38,880 --> 00:09:41,480
been working in teacher for 20
years and I could have spent the

240
00:09:41,480 --> 00:09:46,280
entirety of that time thinking
mixed attainment is on this

241
00:09:46,280 --> 00:09:49,040
pedestal and is the best way of
doing it.

242
00:09:49,440 --> 00:09:53,640
If you set well, you might just
be a bit lazy.

243
00:09:53,640 --> 00:09:56,360
Maybe you don't do the work.
It's it is just worse for the

244
00:09:56,360 --> 00:09:59,040
children, like as if there is no
overlap whatsoever.

245
00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:01,760
And I think that's what that is
like you said, that's what this

246
00:10:01,920 --> 00:10:05,400
new research challenges.
I don't want to fall victim.

247
00:10:05,400 --> 00:10:08,800
I'm sure a lot of people will.
And I definitely started to do

248
00:10:08,800 --> 00:10:09,840
it.
And I first read the article of

249
00:10:09,840 --> 00:10:12,880
like, ha ha, you were all wrong.
It's actually, it's actually

250
00:10:12,880 --> 00:10:15,680
insert the complete opposite and
it's just not true.

251
00:10:15,960 --> 00:10:18,320
Like you said like and I would
say it again, the EEF

252
00:10:18,320 --> 00:10:21,840
recommendations were if you set
do this, if you do mixed ability

253
00:10:21,840 --> 00:10:23,320
do this.
The recommendations weren't

254
00:10:23,640 --> 00:10:25,280
everybody now stopped doing
mixed ability.

255
00:10:25,280 --> 00:10:27,320
We were totally wrong for the
last 25 years.

256
00:10:28,200 --> 00:10:29,720
Actually, we got it all
completely wrong.

257
00:10:29,720 --> 00:10:32,040
All the old research is now
redundant and in void.

258
00:10:32,200 --> 00:10:35,000
This new one piece of research
tells us how to do it this way.

259
00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:36,960
It's like, what are the chances
that will change in 25 years?

260
00:10:37,040 --> 00:10:38,560
And.
This is this is exactly what I'm

261
00:10:38,560 --> 00:10:39,960
leaning into.
Those people have seen research

262
00:10:39,960 --> 00:10:41,600
before and said, therefore
always it's bad.

263
00:10:41,600 --> 00:10:43,400
It's like I'm saying the same
thing.

264
00:10:43,640 --> 00:10:45,960
Like clearly it's not.
And clearly now I don't think

265
00:10:45,960 --> 00:10:47,840
those people who've been
championing mixed stability for

266
00:10:47,840 --> 00:10:50,200
25 years will read this and be
like, I'll drop that, then I'll

267
00:10:50,200 --> 00:10:52,240
move.
No, no, because exactly that.

268
00:10:52,240 --> 00:10:54,200
Therefore their own
preconceptions of what's right

269
00:10:54,200 --> 00:10:55,680
and wrong and they're going to
go along with it.

270
00:10:55,760 --> 00:10:58,120
And if you look at the history
of the research, right, this,

271
00:10:58,760 --> 00:11:01,240
we're not saying there wasn't
research that said mixed ability

272
00:11:01,240 --> 00:11:04,240
was great or better or that
setting maybe had no impact or

273
00:11:04,240 --> 00:11:05,440
maybe even low retainers were
worse.

274
00:11:05,920 --> 00:11:08,440
We had this in the past, which
is where this has come from.

275
00:11:08,640 --> 00:11:10,960
It's usually come from a good
place of people seeing research

276
00:11:10,960 --> 00:11:12,200
and going, actually it does say
this.

277
00:11:12,360 --> 00:11:14,960
So let's do that.
I think we just have to really

278
00:11:14,960 --> 00:11:18,800
just bake in here that the
experience of hundreds of

279
00:11:18,800 --> 00:11:21,920
thousands of teachers doing it
every single day is not

280
00:11:21,920 --> 00:11:23,880
automatically trumped by a
research paper.

281
00:11:24,360 --> 00:11:26,040
A research paper can be really
helpful.

282
00:11:26,040 --> 00:11:27,800
It can be really useful.
You've got to look at the

283
00:11:27,800 --> 00:11:29,240
methodologies, you've got to
look at the outcomes.

284
00:11:29,240 --> 00:11:30,240
You've got to look at who's
doing it.

285
00:11:30,240 --> 00:11:31,440
You've got to look at why
they're doing it.

286
00:11:31,440 --> 00:11:34,680
There's there's so many
different things that that come

287
00:11:34,680 --> 00:11:37,080
into effect when you're
interpreting research that

288
00:11:37,080 --> 00:11:39,320
clearly you cannot just look at
the headline and be like, OK,

289
00:11:39,320 --> 00:11:40,320
I'm doing that now.
Of course not.

290
00:11:40,320 --> 00:11:42,120
There is even like some like
going to the NTH degree of this.

291
00:11:42,120 --> 00:11:43,840
There's some really hard
limitations which just make the

292
00:11:43,840 --> 00:11:46,320
whole thing hilarious, like when
people just take the research,

293
00:11:46,600 --> 00:11:47,600
well, this is the only way to do
it now.

294
00:11:47,960 --> 00:11:51,200
Like the research typically
understandably fails to

295
00:11:51,200 --> 00:11:55,200
understand, fails to include the
context of every human ever.

296
00:11:55,560 --> 00:11:58,360
Like this research had some
internal context.

297
00:11:58,360 --> 00:12:00,600
It was, it was it was done in a
secondary school year 7 to 8.

298
00:12:00,600 --> 00:12:02,480
There was a certain amount of
pupils over a certain time

299
00:12:02,480 --> 00:12:04,160
period.
There's always going to be

300
00:12:04,160 --> 00:12:07,320
limitations and bias, right.
So, yeah, when that when that

301
00:12:07,320 --> 00:12:10,840
one form entry primary school is
looking at this research that

302
00:12:10,840 --> 00:12:12,960
now that and and they're
thinking it says, oh, we have to

303
00:12:12,960 --> 00:12:15,120
set, but I can't.
Yeah, of course you can't.

304
00:12:15,600 --> 00:12:17,920
Of course you can't.
There's situations where you

305
00:12:17,920 --> 00:12:20,280
literally can't set, and there
are probably situations where

306
00:12:20,640 --> 00:12:25,480
it's incredibly easier to have
sets than it would be to do

307
00:12:25,480 --> 00:12:27,600
mixed ability just based on the
context of your score.

308
00:12:27,600 --> 00:12:29,880
And I think you just have to
have that in your mind all the

309
00:12:29,880 --> 00:12:32,080
time when interpreting this.
Stuff and the outcomes of the

310
00:12:32,080 --> 00:12:35,800
children is not rooted only in
what you choose to have these

311
00:12:35,800 --> 00:12:37,200
two things.
There's so many other things

312
00:12:37,200 --> 00:12:39,720
that if you want to improve the
outcomes of your maths teaching

313
00:12:39,720 --> 00:12:42,880
in school, it's not as simple as
just going latest research

314
00:12:42,880 --> 00:12:46,880
paper, mixed ability, latest
research paper set the quality

315
00:12:46,880 --> 00:12:48,920
of teaching, who's where, who's
doing what.

316
00:12:48,920 --> 00:12:51,160
There's just so much more to it,
you know, home involvement,

317
00:12:51,160 --> 00:12:53,120
etcetera.
So I guess the point here is

318
00:12:53,120 --> 00:12:55,840
that, you know, throughout my
career is definitely definitely

319
00:12:55,880 --> 00:12:58,200
been the entire time of my
career.

320
00:12:58,200 --> 00:13:00,640
It's been, you know, it's been
looked upon as mixed abilities,

321
00:13:00,640 --> 00:13:02,960
better mixed.
Get everyone in the same

322
00:13:03,080 --> 00:13:04,480
classroom and you just
differentiate.

323
00:13:04,600 --> 00:13:06,040
Yeah.
And you just get, you know, give

324
00:13:06,040 --> 00:13:07,800
them opportunities to stretch
themselves or not.

325
00:13:08,040 --> 00:13:10,720
Clearly that's have a limiting
factor with children who are

326
00:13:10,720 --> 00:13:13,960
high, high retainers.
And it's nice to see that, you

327
00:13:13,960 --> 00:13:15,800
know, it's not automatically
you're doing a disservice to

328
00:13:15,800 --> 00:13:16,520
your low retainers.
Yeah.

329
00:13:16,520 --> 00:13:18,320
Because I've set for my whole
career, OK.

330
00:13:18,560 --> 00:13:20,600
And I, for the vast majority of
my career have been with those

331
00:13:20,600 --> 00:13:24,480
low retaining sets, OK.
And I have loved every second

332
00:13:24,480 --> 00:13:26,720
and I have not believed it when
people have said to me,

333
00:13:26,920 --> 00:13:29,200
therefore confidence is worse in
those kids.

334
00:13:29,760 --> 00:13:32,520
I've the confidence if if
anything, I'm not even just

335
00:13:32,520 --> 00:13:35,080
saying this because maths is my
passion and because I agree you

336
00:13:35,080 --> 00:13:36,800
have to have strong maths
teachers across the board.

337
00:13:36,800 --> 00:13:38,760
If anything, with those lower
attainers, I was with those

338
00:13:38,760 --> 00:13:40,280
lower attainers, I LED maths in
the school.

339
00:13:40,640 --> 00:13:44,440
I love maths.
I, I, I bred this whole series

340
00:13:44,440 --> 00:13:46,400
of just confidence and love for
the subject.

341
00:13:47,200 --> 00:13:49,560
The kids were getting way more
than if they were in a mixed

342
00:13:49,560 --> 00:13:51,280
ability.
Sure, and and it doesn't mean

343
00:13:51,280 --> 00:13:53,600
they couldn't have got it in a
mixed ability, but what it does

344
00:13:53,600 --> 00:13:55,200
mean is that you can still get
it from sets.

345
00:13:55,240 --> 00:13:56,960
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So if someone came into your

346
00:13:56,960 --> 00:13:59,960
classroom with that on that high
horse, right, and had said to

347
00:13:59,960 --> 00:14:03,280
you at that time, Oh no, no, no,
no, this isn't any good like

348
00:14:03,520 --> 00:14:05,840
setting is bad.
Actually the the confidence of

349
00:14:05,840 --> 00:14:07,840
the children in this, in this
class, you might not know it,

350
00:14:07,840 --> 00:14:10,440
Mr. Price, but the confidence of
the children in this class is

351
00:14:10,440 --> 00:14:11,960
actually being completely
diminished.

352
00:14:11,960 --> 00:14:15,120
Yeah, exactly that that that's
when I think that becomes this

353
00:14:15,120 --> 00:14:17,520
animosity towards the research.
And that's when you brought up

354
00:14:17,520 --> 00:14:19,120
and you're just like, you know,
you don't know anything.

355
00:14:19,120 --> 00:14:20,240
Yeah, you're right.
And it comes from an

356
00:14:20,240 --> 00:14:21,600
understanding, a broad
understanding.

357
00:14:21,600 --> 00:14:23,760
To be fair, from the same from
the teachers have to understand

358
00:14:23,760 --> 00:14:26,240
that research is generic.
It doesn't mean that every

359
00:14:26,240 --> 00:14:29,760
single time that what is said in
the research happens, it has to

360
00:14:29,760 --> 00:14:30,920
be that way.
There's always going to be some

361
00:14:30,920 --> 00:14:33,560
anecdotal evidence either side.
It's a generic trend, but

362
00:14:33,640 --> 00:14:35,640
clearly those trends are
different based on who's looking

363
00:14:35,640 --> 00:14:38,400
at what A. 100% and at the end
of the day, I will just finish

364
00:14:38,400 --> 00:14:41,840
this whole talk about research
by saying that this new research

365
00:14:41,840 --> 00:14:45,440
has come out really like in
essence, it has been done by the

366
00:14:45,440 --> 00:14:48,080
same team who are who have
originally researched and

367
00:14:48,080 --> 00:14:49,920
brought out all this other
evidence to say that the

368
00:14:49,920 --> 00:14:52,400
complete opposite.
You know that like, so you just

369
00:14:52,400 --> 00:14:54,880
have to take it with a pinch of
salt and, and it's not even

370
00:14:54,880 --> 00:14:57,240
unfair to say that that's kind
of the point of research.

371
00:14:57,240 --> 00:15:00,240
We, we like, we do as humans, we
do learn new things and change

372
00:15:00,240 --> 00:15:02,040
and adapt over time.
It's that doesn't mean

373
00:15:02,040 --> 00:15:04,200
inherently that research is now
bad because it contradicted

374
00:15:04,200 --> 00:15:06,760
itself from 25 years ago.
That kind of is the nature of

375
00:15:06,760 --> 00:15:09,760
things a lot of the time.
And with that in mind, you just

376
00:15:09,760 --> 00:15:14,560
have to accept that maybe, maybe
if you are on that high horse of

377
00:15:14,840 --> 00:15:18,720
this is the only way to do it.
You might have been wrong that

378
00:15:18,720 --> 00:15:20,000
that was the only way of of
doing it.

379
00:15:20,000 --> 00:15:21,720
And this research.
And if you are, if you are so

380
00:15:21,720 --> 00:15:23,760
hard on the research backing up
before, yeah.

381
00:15:23,760 --> 00:15:25,920
And now this new research by the
same people has come out saying

382
00:15:25,920 --> 00:15:27,600
something opposite.
You kind of have to jump off

383
00:15:27,600 --> 00:15:29,240
your high horse and just accept,
OK, you know what?

384
00:15:29,240 --> 00:15:31,120
Maybe I'll do it that.
Bit or stay in your high horse

385
00:15:31,240 --> 00:15:33,240
and just move to now the must do
setting.

386
00:15:33,520 --> 00:15:34,760
The opposite now.
Stay in your high horse.

387
00:15:34,760 --> 00:15:36,360
Yeah, Yeah, at least you're
consistent now, I suppose.

388
00:15:36,400 --> 00:15:37,440
That's that's true.
That's true.

389
00:15:37,440 --> 00:15:39,240
And it's nothing to do with your
practise or experience in the

390
00:15:39,240 --> 00:15:40,520
classroom.
It's only to do with the the

391
00:15:40,520 --> 00:15:43,120
paper that you read.
I think what we should do is go

392
00:15:43,120 --> 00:15:47,640
into setting and having mixed
ability classes and just look

393
00:15:47,640 --> 00:15:49,320
at, you know, the case for each
one.

394
00:15:49,320 --> 00:15:52,160
So I think you should start with
setting because I think I don't

395
00:15:52,160 --> 00:15:54,160
know you and I both, you know,
we both LED master in school.

396
00:15:54,160 --> 00:15:58,080
I know our opinions have always
been setting is good, Yeah, it

397
00:15:58,080 --> 00:15:59,600
can be done well, it can be done
bad.

398
00:15:59,600 --> 00:16:01,240
And we've never said that mixed
stability is bad.

399
00:16:01,240 --> 00:16:03,640
No, never really clear, never.
But we've always said it has

400
00:16:03,640 --> 00:16:05,200
limitations.
Yeah, and there's been

401
00:16:05,200 --> 00:16:07,840
limitations in our setting, but
not automatically.

402
00:16:07,840 --> 00:16:09,520
Doesn't mean that we should
therefore do mixed stability,

403
00:16:09,520 --> 00:16:11,480
because I think there's more.
Limitation in the context of our

404
00:16:11,480 --> 00:16:14,400
careers and the schools we have
worked in, we have always, we

405
00:16:14,400 --> 00:16:16,560
have always come to the
conclusion that some sort of

406
00:16:16,560 --> 00:16:18,360
setting has been a good
conclusion.

407
00:16:18,360 --> 00:16:19,600
That's basically the way we can
say it, isn't it?

408
00:16:19,600 --> 00:16:21,400
Yeah, right.
OK, so we're gonna we're gonna

409
00:16:21,400 --> 00:16:23,360
go through a few here.
I think this is really, really

410
00:16:23,360 --> 00:16:25,400
interesting.
So in terms of just pedagogical

411
00:16:25,400 --> 00:16:28,160
precision, right?
So you can tailor your pace,

412
00:16:28,160 --> 00:16:30,880
your depth, your language to a
narrower band of prior

413
00:16:30,880 --> 00:16:32,680
attainment.
So with the top set you can

414
00:16:32,680 --> 00:16:35,560
push, you know, really, really
push that abstract level.

415
00:16:35,560 --> 00:16:37,720
If you think about a lot of
training and mass concrete

416
00:16:37,720 --> 00:16:39,640
pictorial abstract to journey
through.

417
00:16:40,200 --> 00:16:42,160
If you're, if you get children
in the same room who are very

418
00:16:42,160 --> 00:16:45,360
much towards the end of that,
you can push way more into that

419
00:16:45,360 --> 00:16:47,360
abstract than that deeper
understanding because we've

420
00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:49,560
already made that journey.
So if we can already take

421
00:16:49,560 --> 00:16:52,160
advantage of that, it means we
can jump faster, we can assume

422
00:16:52,160 --> 00:16:54,280
more, we can get kids further.
Here's a good example.

423
00:16:54,440 --> 00:16:56,400
I have been, I was saying 6 for
a long time.

424
00:16:56,400 --> 00:16:59,720
And I have taught a variety of
different attainment sets, some

425
00:16:59,720 --> 00:17:01,520
more mixed than others.
Because again, by the nature of

426
00:17:01,520 --> 00:17:03,280
it, you've got to remember by
the way, that even when you have

427
00:17:03,280 --> 00:17:06,640
sets, you still have loads of
children in a class.

428
00:17:06,640 --> 00:17:08,319
And there's obviously going to
be a range still.

429
00:17:08,480 --> 00:17:09,680
So there's still some sort of
mixing, right?

430
00:17:09,920 --> 00:17:12,359
And I've taught the same
objectives at the same point of

431
00:17:12,359 --> 00:17:14,720
the year to different attainment
sets.

432
00:17:14,960 --> 00:17:20,319
And I felt like I've made the
best progress I can in, in both

433
00:17:20,319 --> 00:17:23,000
holistically confidence and
actual attainment with each of

434
00:17:23,000 --> 00:17:24,920
those sets.
And I've taught wildly

435
00:17:24,920 --> 00:17:27,640
differently in terms of my
approach to the lesson that even

436
00:17:27,640 --> 00:17:29,880
sometimes the, the, the layers
of content, like you said, the

437
00:17:29,880 --> 00:17:31,960
depth that I go into.
And I've come to the conclusion

438
00:17:31,960 --> 00:17:35,920
after that of thinking, if I had
to do both of those at the same

439
00:17:35,920 --> 00:17:38,640
time, neither of those groups
would have got the, the depth

440
00:17:38,680 --> 00:17:40,720
and like precision that I gave
them.

441
00:17:41,080 --> 00:17:43,000
And that simply it was the truth
of it.

442
00:17:43,000 --> 00:17:46,280
I just physically I can't be two
people and I can't talk to two

443
00:17:46,280 --> 00:17:48,280
groups of people at the same
time without all overlapping

444
00:17:48,360 --> 00:17:50,640
sounding ridiculous Exactly.
So I would have had to have

445
00:17:50,640 --> 00:17:53,200
compromised somewhere.
So I think that's a very strong

446
00:17:53,200 --> 00:17:56,920
argument for setting is you are
by definition, if you are the

447
00:17:56,920 --> 00:17:59,200
same teacher in this, someone
might argue and say, but if

448
00:17:59,200 --> 00:18:00,760
you've got a weaker teacher,
okay, you've added another

449
00:18:00,760 --> 00:18:02,960
variable.
If I'm the teacher in all these

450
00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:06,000
examples, I will be able to
deliver more depth and breadth

451
00:18:06,320 --> 00:18:09,320
if I have a much tighter focus
with the with the curriculum.

452
00:18:09,320 --> 00:18:11,000
And there's still going to be a
breadth there.

453
00:18:11,240 --> 00:18:12,840
We're not putting a ceiling on
anyone.

454
00:18:13,000 --> 00:18:15,800
What we're doing is increasing
the probability that the breadth

455
00:18:15,800 --> 00:18:18,160
of knowledge and understanding
is smaller.

456
00:18:18,160 --> 00:18:20,200
So I can target it more, but
more more effectively.

457
00:18:20,480 --> 00:18:23,520
When I've had classes lower
attaining classes before, there

458
00:18:23,520 --> 00:18:26,800
have been some children in that
class who are probably in that,

459
00:18:26,800 --> 00:18:29,400
in that, in that, in that small
step we're doing that day.

460
00:18:29,400 --> 00:18:32,400
Or maybe even that whole strand
that we're doing can achieve

461
00:18:32,400 --> 00:18:35,320
better than some children in the
set which we say is higher set,

462
00:18:35,320 --> 00:18:36,600
right?
It doesn't.

463
00:18:37,280 --> 00:18:39,680
So doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter because my

464
00:18:39,680 --> 00:18:42,000
breadth is so much smaller.
I'm not going to the highest,

465
00:18:42,000 --> 00:18:44,120
but the highest echelon of that
set anymore.

466
00:18:44,440 --> 00:18:47,120
It just means it overlaps a bit.
It's still more narrow for me as

467
00:18:47,120 --> 00:18:49,280
a teacher to focus on.
When you're with those

468
00:18:49,280 --> 00:18:52,160
foundation sets, you can really
slow down, you can give them

469
00:18:52,160 --> 00:18:54,600
exactly what they need.
I could hit those gaps so much

470
00:18:54,600 --> 00:18:58,320
more perfectly because they were
in the same kind of area.

471
00:18:58,600 --> 00:19:00,320
And you're right doing both.
It's just, it's just

472
00:19:00,320 --> 00:19:03,360
unrealistic, I think.
And, and I think what was good

473
00:19:03,360 --> 00:19:06,520
about the research was that it
just showed that there was a

474
00:19:06,520 --> 00:19:09,560
minimal effect on lower
retainers and a bigger effect on

475
00:19:09,560 --> 00:19:11,080
higher retainers if they managed
to go and set.

476
00:19:11,400 --> 00:19:13,920
That makes sense to me because
realistically, if you have a

477
00:19:13,920 --> 00:19:17,680
mixed class and you are
delivering a lesson to all 32

478
00:19:17,680 --> 00:19:22,000
children naturally, and I don't
care, you can say all you want,

479
00:19:22,000 --> 00:19:25,160
all your metaphors about tides,
riding boats, Naturally, if you

480
00:19:25,160 --> 00:19:28,520
don't want to alienate 1/3 of
that class, you have to be

481
00:19:28,520 --> 00:19:31,800
giving that input at a lower
level and therefore just hoping

482
00:19:31,800 --> 00:19:33,920
that the tops or the highs
stretch themselves.

483
00:19:34,400 --> 00:19:36,280
You have to be doing that.
Otherwise you're basically

484
00:19:36,280 --> 00:19:39,000
saying I'll leave you behind.
Maybe that's where, you know, if

485
00:19:39,000 --> 00:19:41,880
we think about mixed ability
classes and if it's had a

486
00:19:41,880 --> 00:19:45,320
detriment, A detrimental impact
on those lower retainers, maybe

487
00:19:45,320 --> 00:19:46,880
that's why because we're leaving
them behind, right?

488
00:19:47,200 --> 00:19:49,080
And it comes again into the
quality of teaching.

489
00:19:49,320 --> 00:19:51,280
There is way much more to be
said about the quality of

490
00:19:51,280 --> 00:19:53,320
teaching.
But inherently if you mixed, I

491
00:19:53,320 --> 00:19:54,760
just think it's harder to do
that.

492
00:19:55,120 --> 00:19:57,120
And you can talk about
stretching people, etcetera.

493
00:19:57,120 --> 00:19:59,640
And making sure that you know,
if you do set with lower

494
00:19:59,640 --> 00:20:02,320
attainers, how can you make sure
that they don't have a ceiling

495
00:20:02,320 --> 00:20:03,960
on them comes down to your
quality of teaching.

496
00:20:03,960 --> 00:20:05,720
Definitely.
I think a lot of this and I

497
00:20:05,720 --> 00:20:07,960
think some of the criticisms
we'll get to when we, when we

498
00:20:07,960 --> 00:20:10,800
talk about the pros for mixed
ability, a lot of this will link

499
00:20:10,800 --> 00:20:12,440
back to I think some of the
things we're saying right now.

500
00:20:12,440 --> 00:20:15,640
And I do think it links to like
the quality of teaching that

501
00:20:15,640 --> 00:20:17,960
what, what you're able to do.
And one other thing I'll say as

502
00:20:17,960 --> 00:20:21,520
well about the whole like mixed
ability, having your highest

503
00:20:21,520 --> 00:20:23,080
attainers and your lowest
attainers in one place.

504
00:20:23,080 --> 00:20:27,480
A lot of people will say the gap
is smaller in the classroom, and

505
00:20:27,480 --> 00:20:29,720
I find that I've always found
that really fascinating.

506
00:20:29,720 --> 00:20:31,200
What do you mean?
The gap, they'll say, the gap

507
00:20:31,200 --> 00:20:33,240
between your highest attain and
your lowest attain and the mixed

508
00:20:33,240 --> 00:20:36,480
stability set is a is a smaller
gap than it would be if you

509
00:20:36,480 --> 00:20:38,440
taught them in separate
attainment sets.

510
00:20:38,600 --> 00:20:40,640
And therefore they say, and
therefore that's a good.

511
00:20:40,640 --> 00:20:43,440
Thing as if the size of the gap
is the thing that matters.

512
00:20:43,560 --> 00:20:46,760
And, and yeah, and they always
fail to look at the only thing

513
00:20:46,760 --> 00:20:49,960
that actually matters, which is
OK, but if we're comparing those

514
00:20:49,960 --> 00:20:52,360
things, we just need to compare
the higher attainers to where

515
00:20:52,360 --> 00:20:54,240
they would have been in the
mixed stability set to where

516
00:20:54,240 --> 00:20:56,840
they are in the other set and
the lower attainers to the in

517
00:20:56,840 --> 00:20:59,080
the mixed stability set and the
non, because that's the thing

518
00:20:59,080 --> 00:21:00,200
that matters.
And yeah, the gap might be

519
00:21:00,200 --> 00:21:02,760
bigger, but like, OK, you got a,
you got a.

520
00:21:02,760 --> 00:21:06,480
So imagine a a very small gap,
but it's it's much lower down in

521
00:21:06,640 --> 00:21:08,200
average attainment.
Let's give it numbers quick.

522
00:21:08,240 --> 00:21:09,760
Let's go now.
So let's just say arbitrary

523
00:21:09,760 --> 00:21:10,440
lines.
Let's just say.

524
00:21:10,640 --> 00:21:13,960
So let's just say 3 out of 10 is
where your lower retainers are

525
00:21:14,520 --> 00:21:17,240
and they and then your higher
retainers are at 7 out of 10.

526
00:21:17,280 --> 00:21:18,800
Yeah, OK.
So you've got a gap of four.

527
00:21:19,600 --> 00:21:21,960
And in this other example, your
lower retainers, they're still

528
00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:23,680
at 3 out of 10.
So they've not got worse or

529
00:21:23,680 --> 00:21:25,000
better.
It's ah, that's frustrating.

530
00:21:25,000 --> 00:21:26,480
It's no different.
They're still at 3 out of 10,

531
00:21:26,480 --> 00:21:27,960
but your higher attainers are at
9 out of 10.

532
00:21:28,120 --> 00:21:29,600
Now there's a gap of.
Six much bigger gap much.

533
00:21:29,600 --> 00:21:31,560
Worse, the gap has increased.
And you look at the gap, you

534
00:21:31,560 --> 00:21:34,400
think, oh, the gaps increased,
that's bad, but it's not, is it?

535
00:21:34,400 --> 00:21:36,440
Yeah, it's not bad, right?
And that's what you're saying?

536
00:21:36,440 --> 00:21:39,920
In that situation, it's not bad.
It would be bad if it was the

537
00:21:39,920 --> 00:21:42,520
other way around.
If you had the gap of four, it

538
00:21:42,520 --> 00:21:45,920
was three and seven, and then
the gap was one and seven,

539
00:21:45,920 --> 00:21:46,840
right?
OK, cool.

540
00:21:46,840 --> 00:21:49,240
There's no benefit to anyone.
In fact, there's only a decrease

541
00:21:49,240 --> 00:21:51,440
that that's a bad gap.
And I think the context of the

542
00:21:51,440 --> 00:21:52,960
gap is important, but no one
ever does it.

543
00:21:52,960 --> 00:21:55,520
And everyone just says, well,
we've reduced the gap, so that's

544
00:21:55,520 --> 00:21:57,160
good.
So it's not good if it's at the

545
00:21:57,160 --> 00:21:59,600
detriment of 1/3 of.
Your class I've had, I mean, is

546
00:21:59,600 --> 00:22:00,920
this conversation?
Yeah, I remember this

547
00:22:00,920 --> 00:22:04,800
conversation so much where we
we, I vividly remember this is

548
00:22:04,800 --> 00:22:08,200
this literally happened, right?
We looked at data of the gap

549
00:22:08,200 --> 00:22:10,760
between pupil premium and non
pupil premium from the year

550
00:22:10,760 --> 00:22:12,760
before.
And then we looked at the gap

551
00:22:12,760 --> 00:22:15,520
now and the gap had decreased.
It got smaller, right?

552
00:22:15,720 --> 00:22:17,120
Everyone given themselves pat on
the backs.

553
00:22:17,120 --> 00:22:20,200
We've decreased this gap.
Looking at the raw data, both

554
00:22:20,200 --> 00:22:23,440
were lower, both were lower.
It was just that, it was just

555
00:22:23,440 --> 00:22:26,240
that the higher retaining that,
sorry, the the one that was

556
00:22:26,240 --> 00:22:29,680
higher had dropped more, right?
So the gap had become smaller

557
00:22:29,840 --> 00:22:31,640
and squeezed down or the gap
smaller.

558
00:22:31,880 --> 00:22:34,360
Everyone's down though,
everyone's lower.

559
00:22:34,360 --> 00:22:35,960
Yeah, but Pat on the back, Sir.
Yeah, Yeah.

560
00:22:35,960 --> 00:22:37,880
We've got to close that pupil
premium gap.

561
00:22:37,880 --> 00:22:40,440
And then if you looked at the
like the tables we'd look at it

562
00:22:40,440 --> 00:22:44,000
would say pupil premium gap
percentage and it would go 8%,

563
00:22:44,000 --> 00:22:46,200
four point 4%.
That's good.

564
00:22:46,400 --> 00:22:48,960
What?
Yeah, no, it's not Yeah, yeah.

565
00:22:49,120 --> 00:22:50,600
It's just, it's just so
simplistic, we.

566
00:22:50,600 --> 00:22:53,160
Get so obsessed as teachers with
certain metrics.

567
00:22:53,160 --> 00:22:55,680
That gap, kind of a gap, Yeah.
Well, do you know what do you

568
00:22:55,680 --> 00:22:56,680
know?
Do you know what I'm going to

569
00:22:56,680 --> 00:22:57,960
say?
It might be controversial.

570
00:22:58,280 --> 00:22:59,760
We can have a gap.
Yeah.

571
00:22:59,880 --> 00:23:01,840
We obviously can have a gap.
Yeah.

572
00:23:01,840 --> 00:23:04,240
What are you aiming for in life
if you don't want a gap of

573
00:23:04,240 --> 00:23:05,760
anything ever?
We'll never have any

574
00:23:05,760 --> 00:23:07,880
extremities.
We'll never have any amazing

575
00:23:07,880 --> 00:23:10,280
people at different things.
Oh, but I'm so jealous because

576
00:23:10,280 --> 00:23:11,960
the other people are just saying
the lower, the lower.

577
00:23:12,040 --> 00:23:15,080
I'm going to make sure everyone
is the same.

578
00:23:15,160 --> 00:23:17,840
No, we don't get better at
something else.

579
00:23:17,960 --> 00:23:20,040
We should be.
We should be nurturing those

580
00:23:20,040 --> 00:23:22,880
higher, those children who are
better at something, who have a

581
00:23:22,880 --> 00:23:24,880
passion about something, who
want to improve.

582
00:23:25,040 --> 00:23:27,200
It doesn't mean we don't help
other people improve.

583
00:23:27,480 --> 00:23:29,520
It just means that it's good to
celebrate people who are

584
00:23:29,520 --> 00:23:32,360
exceptional at things.
And we have this whole mindset

585
00:23:32,360 --> 00:23:34,640
of no, they can't make the gap
higher.

586
00:23:34,800 --> 00:23:37,280
Yeah, we can.
We can absolutely make the gap

587
00:23:37,280 --> 00:23:39,160
higher because the context of
the gap matters.

588
00:23:39,480 --> 00:23:42,320
Does it mean every single
instance of a widening gap is a

589
00:23:42,320 --> 00:23:43,960
good thing?
Obviously not.

590
00:23:44,120 --> 00:23:46,440
But does it mean every single an
instance of a gap widening is a

591
00:23:46,440 --> 00:23:49,040
bad thing?
Also dead brain behaviour?

592
00:23:49,360 --> 00:23:52,040
Of course, that's not true.
Exactly your your example there

593
00:23:52,040 --> 00:23:55,520
was an example of a gap
decreasing, but it was

594
00:23:56,000 --> 00:23:58,480
universally worse for everybody
involved, right so.

595
00:23:58,840 --> 00:24:01,320
And then initially we had an
example of a gap increasing.

596
00:24:01,480 --> 00:24:03,880
Yeah, that wasn't better for
everyone, but it wasn't worse

597
00:24:03,880 --> 00:24:05,560
for anyone.
No, like it was not worse.

598
00:24:05,560 --> 00:24:07,240
It was the same.
And some people push back on the

599
00:24:07,240 --> 00:24:09,640
reel and they were like, I don't
see any evidence here of why

600
00:24:09,640 --> 00:24:11,920
it's better for lower retainers.
No, there wasn't any.

601
00:24:11,920 --> 00:24:15,280
That's why it remained the same.
There was no impact.

602
00:24:15,280 --> 00:24:18,960
It was the same.
Do we, are we that obsessed with

603
00:24:18,960 --> 00:24:21,480
any kind of positive that has to
be positive for everyone always?

604
00:24:21,680 --> 00:24:23,360
Yeah, Yeah.
What obviously out of these two

605
00:24:23,360 --> 00:24:25,800
things?
Oh, typical high achievers

606
00:24:25,800 --> 00:24:27,520
getting more.
As always, once you're there,

607
00:24:27,520 --> 00:24:29,040
you're there, OK?
All right, let's be real.

608
00:24:29,040 --> 00:24:30,440
Money makes money, baby.
How much?

609
00:24:30,440 --> 00:24:32,120
How long did you spend in
school?

610
00:24:32,120 --> 00:24:33,560
10 years. 11 years.
Right.

611
00:24:34,000 --> 00:24:36,800
OK.
Is it typical that the high

612
00:24:36,800 --> 00:24:41,440
retainers get everything?
No, it's massively skewed.

613
00:24:41,960 --> 00:24:44,720
I'm not saying it shouldn't be.
No children, children from lower

614
00:24:44,720 --> 00:24:46,960
socio and economic backgrounds
get people premium funding and

615
00:24:46,960 --> 00:24:49,800
extra money in place for it.
All of the, all of the, all of

616
00:24:49,800 --> 00:24:52,320
the pressure and, and the move
towards is to getting people

617
00:24:52,320 --> 00:24:54,160
past entertainment level from
the bottom up.

618
00:24:54,600 --> 00:24:56,280
Everything that schools do is
about that.

619
00:24:56,480 --> 00:25:01,680
Yeah, the 90%, the the children,
the children who are higher

620
00:25:01,680 --> 00:25:03,240
achievers are forgotten.
Yeah, of course they are.

621
00:25:03,240 --> 00:25:05,360
They've got that's my .0, the
tops getting more again.

622
00:25:05,360 --> 00:25:08,720
The tops never get anything.
They never get anything and and

623
00:25:08,720 --> 00:25:10,000
they should get less.
Don't.

624
00:25:10,000 --> 00:25:11,120
This is it.
They should get less.

625
00:25:11,680 --> 00:25:13,000
They don't need as much support,
right?

626
00:25:13,440 --> 00:25:16,280
In terms of the I'm talking
about a difference now between a

627
00:25:16,280 --> 00:25:17,720
child who can't read and a child
who can.

628
00:25:18,200 --> 00:25:19,640
The children who can't read
should get more than the

629
00:25:19,640 --> 00:25:21,960
children who can, whether they
can read veraciously or or just

630
00:25:21,960 --> 00:25:25,640
about right.
But why do we pretend that that

631
00:25:25,640 --> 00:25:28,040
individual child is not
deserving of attention?

632
00:25:28,080 --> 00:25:29,600
I agree.
Is not deserving of pushing.

633
00:25:29,600 --> 00:25:31,640
It's not deserving of getting
the highest they can get.

634
00:25:31,880 --> 00:25:34,000
Because then oh, if they get the
highest they can get, the gap

635
00:25:34,000 --> 00:25:35,200
increases and the school looks
bad.

636
00:25:35,400 --> 00:25:37,040
Get over it.
Change your outlook because

637
00:25:37,040 --> 00:25:40,280
those kids deserve it as much as
anyone to get input and help.

638
00:25:40,480 --> 00:25:43,480
It's because, and I'll say this
now, and I hope if you're

639
00:25:43,480 --> 00:25:45,640
listening to this, you will
either reluctantly agree or

640
00:25:45,640 --> 00:25:50,000
agree passionately, it's because
we have been totally, totally

641
00:25:50,000 --> 00:25:52,360
brainwashed in education to
believe this fact.

642
00:25:52,960 --> 00:25:55,640
Progress only matters when it
crosses A threshold.

643
00:25:57,200 --> 00:25:58,880
That's it.
You're already over the top

644
00:25:58,880 --> 00:25:59,880
threshold, kid.
Cool.

645
00:25:59,880 --> 00:26:01,480
Do not care about your progress
anymore.

646
00:26:01,600 --> 00:26:03,560
It's 0 progress technically
because you've gone from

647
00:26:03,560 --> 00:26:07,320
expected to expected, right?
You, you could have made 15

648
00:26:07,320 --> 00:26:10,640
progress points individually of
how you're doing, but it's, it's

649
00:26:10,840 --> 00:26:13,040
still in the band of expected.
So it means nothing to me.

650
00:26:13,320 --> 00:26:16,280
A different child could have
made 2 progress points, 2

651
00:26:16,280 --> 00:26:18,960
percentage points, but they tip
over that expected band.

652
00:26:19,360 --> 00:26:22,800
That is more useful in terms of
a school's outlet and how it

653
00:26:22,960 --> 00:26:24,400
hooks and is perceived from the
outside.

654
00:26:24,720 --> 00:26:26,760
That gives you a boost, a move,
Absolutely.

655
00:26:26,960 --> 00:26:30,800
That two percentage point move
is more beneficial to a school

656
00:26:30,800 --> 00:26:32,720
than a 15 percentage point move
for someone else.

657
00:26:32,960 --> 00:26:35,000
And it is horrendous.
I wonder how many school I'd be

658
00:26:35,000 --> 00:26:36,720
really interested to know this
because I don't want to base it

659
00:26:36,720 --> 00:26:39,880
off my own experience because
it's just too small of a pool of

660
00:26:39,880 --> 00:26:41,600
information.
I wonder how many schools are

661
00:26:41,600 --> 00:26:44,640
still doing things like gifted
and talented groups.

662
00:26:44,640 --> 00:26:47,320
Remember when I started training
also when I was at school the

663
00:26:47,320 --> 00:26:49,880
whole term gifted and talented.
And maybe it's got to refresh

664
00:26:49,880 --> 00:26:52,120
that term now and I'm just not
whatever.

665
00:26:52,120 --> 00:26:53,680
But if that groups still exist,
right?

666
00:26:53,680 --> 00:26:55,400
I wonder how many schools are
still doing things while they

667
00:26:55,400 --> 00:26:58,400
actively go out of the way to
say this child or these children

668
00:26:58,400 --> 00:27:01,480
are like particularly talented
in this subject and we're going

669
00:27:01,480 --> 00:27:04,280
to do something extra to like
really try and like push it even

670
00:27:04,280 --> 00:27:06,280
further.
I remember you've done quite a

671
00:27:06,280 --> 00:27:08,360
few talented groups.
Last year, because it was and it

672
00:27:08,360 --> 00:27:11,760
always seemed to be Term 1 where
we know we're, we're finding out

673
00:27:11,760 --> 00:27:13,200
where the children are, we're
getting a bit more data,

674
00:27:13,200 --> 00:27:14,840
etcetera.
Time 1, I do a gifted and

675
00:27:14,840 --> 00:27:16,760
talented group where children
who just exceptional about

676
00:27:16,760 --> 00:27:19,360
maths, there was just six of
them and me and we'd do some,

677
00:27:19,520 --> 00:27:21,960
we, we would do whatever we
wanted, you know what I mean?

678
00:27:22,160 --> 00:27:24,480
Like I'd watch some #5 videos
and get some ideas about

679
00:27:24,480 --> 00:27:27,400
investigations and I'd give
these kids just some open-ended

680
00:27:27,400 --> 00:27:29,120
questions where we'd explore
different things.

681
00:27:29,560 --> 00:27:32,440
We did so much, it was so fun
and the kids got so much out of

682
00:27:32,440 --> 00:27:33,520
it.
And it wasn't about testing at

683
00:27:33,520 --> 00:27:34,880
the start and the end wasn't
about moving.

684
00:27:34,880 --> 00:27:36,840
It was just about saying your
exception on maths, let's push

685
00:27:36,840 --> 00:27:38,560
you, let's do some unbelievable
things.

686
00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:41,520
It's so fun.
And then after time too, I was

687
00:27:41,520 --> 00:27:44,000
literally told I can't really
measure this though, can't

688
00:27:44,000 --> 00:27:44,760
really measure this.
So.

689
00:27:44,840 --> 00:27:47,480
So can you start doing some
groups people with with children

690
00:27:47,480 --> 00:27:48,760
who we've seen are on the cusp
of expecting.

691
00:27:48,920 --> 00:27:50,440
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And it was like, you know what,

692
00:27:50,600 --> 00:27:52,240
those kids do need input and
help, right?

693
00:27:52,280 --> 00:27:54,080
Yeah.
But it's always, always, always

694
00:27:54,080 --> 00:27:55,520
at the detriment of the other
children.

695
00:27:55,520 --> 00:27:57,640
And I just, I just feel bad for
them because I'm not being

696
00:27:57,640 --> 00:27:59,560
funny.
I'm not being like boastful any.

697
00:27:59,560 --> 00:28:00,920
I was that I was that kid at
school.

698
00:28:01,200 --> 00:28:03,760
I was obsessed with maths.
I loved it was my thing.

699
00:28:03,760 --> 00:28:07,040
That's what I loved doing and I
always felt like I was given

700
00:28:07,040 --> 00:28:09,520
opportunities to push it, to
push it and it felt good.

701
00:28:09,800 --> 00:28:13,040
And if there's any child out
there who's getting this idea of

702
00:28:13,040 --> 00:28:15,800
being squashed, oh, no, no,
sorry, no, no, no, no.

703
00:28:15,880 --> 00:28:17,320
This me to me to put all our
help over here.

704
00:28:17,320 --> 00:28:18,480
You just get you crack on,
you're fine.

705
00:28:18,480 --> 00:28:19,520
Just do.
Just do your worksheet.

706
00:28:20,080 --> 00:28:21,560
That's sad to me.
It's sad.

707
00:28:21,560 --> 00:28:23,720
I, I just remembered you saying
that sort of reminded me.

708
00:28:23,720 --> 00:28:25,400
I thought about this for years.
You might have done the same

709
00:28:25,400 --> 00:28:27,680
because you only.
So Dylan and I went to the same

710
00:28:27,680 --> 00:28:29,800
secondary school and Dylan was
one year below me.

711
00:28:29,800 --> 00:28:32,040
So there's a good chance that
things that were in place for me

712
00:28:32,040 --> 00:28:33,120
are probably in place for you as
well.

713
00:28:33,120 --> 00:28:35,480
I don't know if you did this or
not, but I think, I think I was

714
00:28:35,480 --> 00:28:36,880
in year 7.
Maybe you're 8.

715
00:28:37,200 --> 00:28:41,400
And there was like a, they
picked the top 10 mathematicians

716
00:28:41,440 --> 00:28:45,200
of the year to go and do like
some origami paper folding

717
00:28:45,200 --> 00:28:46,600
thing.
And it was all like mathematical

718
00:28:46,600 --> 00:28:48,080
folding.
I don't know if your year group

719
00:28:48,080 --> 00:28:49,560
did.
That no, what I did was they had

720
00:28:49,560 --> 00:28:52,800
to pick one male and one female,
the best mathematicians, and we

721
00:28:52,800 --> 00:28:54,400
did a math Olympiad.
That's why I did.

722
00:28:54,680 --> 00:28:55,560
Yeah.
Oh, you're the top one.

723
00:28:55,560 --> 00:28:56,800
I was I.
Was top ten.

724
00:28:56,800 --> 00:28:58,360
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, me and Jodie, we went

725
00:28:58,360 --> 00:28:59,320
off, we did it.
Very nice.

726
00:28:59,320 --> 00:29:01,600
Yeah, but like wasn't.
But you remember that I loved

727
00:29:01,600 --> 00:29:03,200
that because maths was also my
favourite subject.

728
00:29:03,200 --> 00:29:06,960
And it is kind of sad to me the
idea that I, there's a reality

729
00:29:06,960 --> 00:29:08,040
now.
I could go through school and

730
00:29:08,040 --> 00:29:09,880
just none of that enrichment
happened to me because I,

731
00:29:09,880 --> 00:29:11,240
because I am already greater
depth.

732
00:29:12,400 --> 00:29:15,560
Okay, this kids going to get the
predicted grade that we want.

733
00:29:15,560 --> 00:29:18,280
Like let's just just leave them.
Let's focus on these again.

734
00:29:18,400 --> 00:29:20,160
It's I don't know what the
solution is because obviously we

735
00:29:20,160 --> 00:29:21,080
need to focus on those other
kids.

736
00:29:21,080 --> 00:29:22,800
I'm not saying we don't now
focus on the other kids.

737
00:29:23,240 --> 00:29:26,360
But that it's a symptom of of
diminishing budgets as well.

738
00:29:26,640 --> 00:29:28,040
Yeah, less and less and less
money.

739
00:29:28,080 --> 00:29:30,440
What's going to go first?
Yeah, yeah, exactly.

740
00:29:30,440 --> 00:29:32,480
Our scope of focus gets smaller
and smaller and smaller.

741
00:29:32,480 --> 00:29:34,880
At the end of the day, it's sort
of like, OK, if you've got to

742
00:29:34,880 --> 00:29:37,360
pick, am I going to pick the
child who's confident and

743
00:29:37,360 --> 00:29:39,240
already does maths or am I going
to pick the child who I might be

744
00:29:39,240 --> 00:29:40,680
able to make a difference for?
And they can, they can

745
00:29:40,680 --> 00:29:41,840
understand the fundamentals now
do.

746
00:29:42,040 --> 00:29:43,280
You know what?
Do you know what probably do you

747
00:29:43,280 --> 00:29:44,840
know what winds me up?
This is the problem.

748
00:29:44,920 --> 00:29:46,680
We're kind of going off a bit
tangent here, but it's good.

749
00:29:47,320 --> 00:29:49,880
This is what winds me up with
the obsession with the line.

750
00:29:50,280 --> 00:29:51,920
You know, I talked about that.
Two percentage point gets over

751
00:29:51,920 --> 00:29:53,320
the line, 15 percentage point
doesn't.

752
00:29:53,480 --> 00:29:55,600
Sure.
If we actually, if we actually

753
00:29:55,600 --> 00:29:58,080
do what you just said, which is
to build the confidence of the

754
00:29:58,080 --> 00:29:59,680
children at the lowest level who
can't do it.

755
00:29:59,680 --> 00:30:00,800
Think about children who can't
read.

756
00:30:00,880 --> 00:30:03,280
Yeah, think about children who
can't do their number ones to 10

757
00:30:03,280 --> 00:30:05,400
or can't aren't properly
sabotizing or can't count

758
00:30:05,400 --> 00:30:05,920
properly.
Right.

759
00:30:05,920 --> 00:30:07,920
Children who we deem
realistically and though the

760
00:30:07,920 --> 00:30:10,520
schools will deem them as we can
put as much time as we want, but

761
00:30:10,520 --> 00:30:11,520
they're not going to.
Get passed.

762
00:30:11,640 --> 00:30:13,680
This is exactly what I'm saying
now this is exactly what I mean

763
00:30:13,680 --> 00:30:16,400
where if we were actually
thinking about the foundations

764
00:30:16,400 --> 00:30:18,240
and and thinking about where it
should be going and like, oh, do

765
00:30:18,240 --> 00:30:19,000
you know what?
Fair enough.

766
00:30:19,000 --> 00:30:21,120
Kids who can't read should get
more support, right?

767
00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:24,040
We're not talking about them.
There's no child in the world

768
00:30:24,040 --> 00:30:27,040
who is just below expected level
of reading who could tip into

769
00:30:27,040 --> 00:30:29,160
expected level of reading who
can't already read well and

770
00:30:29,160 --> 00:30:31,640
understand the text.
They're already past that point.

771
00:30:31,720 --> 00:30:34,360
This is the arbitrariness of
this, what we're talking about

772
00:30:34,360 --> 00:30:35,720
here.
It's just this line that we

773
00:30:35,720 --> 00:30:37,160
said.
We're not helping kids read who

774
00:30:37,160 --> 00:30:39,320
couldn't read.
We're leaving them behind.

775
00:30:39,320 --> 00:30:42,200
We're not even doing that.
We're doing the only thing that

776
00:30:42,200 --> 00:30:44,880
ends up making schools league
tables look better.

777
00:30:44,880 --> 00:30:46,520
It's like the worst middle
ground isn't, It's the worst.

778
00:30:46,520 --> 00:30:48,480
So we're being forced and now
are our focus.

779
00:30:48,760 --> 00:30:51,200
And then in doing that, we've
this now limited focus.

780
00:30:51,200 --> 00:30:52,040
We're doing it in the wrong
place.

781
00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:53,720
Exactly.
It's like the worst of both

782
00:30:53,720 --> 00:30:55,840
worlds are not we've we're not
doing these things with these

783
00:30:55,840 --> 00:30:57,520
given talented children.
OK, we can go over that, but

784
00:30:57,520 --> 00:30:59,640
we're also not even helping with
this narrowed focus.

785
00:30:59,640 --> 00:31:02,440
The the lowest of able children
who will need this help the

786
00:31:02,440 --> 00:31:03,760
most.
And do you know what I think

787
00:31:03,760 --> 00:31:04,960
this does?
Do you know what I think that

788
00:31:04,960 --> 00:31:06,320
genuinely doesn't?
It's what I've always thought in

789
00:31:06,320 --> 00:31:08,080
my whole career.
That explains why setting works.

790
00:31:09,200 --> 00:31:11,200
Explain what you mean.
Because now those children who

791
00:31:11,200 --> 00:31:14,520
have been forgotten in the mixed
cannot be forgotten because

792
00:31:14,520 --> 00:31:15,680
they're the only ones in the
class.

793
00:31:15,840 --> 00:31:18,040
Yeah, we have a foundation group
of children who are learning to

794
00:31:18,040 --> 00:31:18,680
read together.
Still.

795
00:31:18,680 --> 00:31:21,320
True, True.
We have a group of children who

796
00:31:21,320 --> 00:31:23,040
are almost gifted and talented.
Fantastic maths.

797
00:31:23,920 --> 00:31:25,920
I can only stretch them.
They can do this stuff.

798
00:31:25,920 --> 00:31:28,160
It's fantastic.
I can only give them my full

799
00:31:28,160 --> 00:31:31,320
attention.
And then we give those children

800
00:31:31,400 --> 00:31:33,840
exactly what they need because
it's a more of a narrow focus.

801
00:31:33,920 --> 00:31:35,080
It forces it.
It's a good point.

802
00:31:35,080 --> 00:31:37,600
So I just think that's one or
more benefit of, of sets.

803
00:31:37,600 --> 00:31:39,120
I mean, we can.
As I say, it brings us nicely

804
00:31:39,120 --> 00:31:40,960
back to what we were doing,
which was just talking about if

805
00:31:40,960 --> 00:31:43,160
we're, if we're really trying to
argue the case for setting, that

806
00:31:43,160 --> 00:31:45,000
would be one of those points.
I think so confident I'll read

807
00:31:45,000 --> 00:31:46,600
through this one quickly because
we kind of touched on it.

808
00:31:46,840 --> 00:31:49,120
Confidence is another one.
And the reason it's in here now

809
00:31:49,120 --> 00:31:52,480
is because that that study
showed that actually it didn't,

810
00:31:52,480 --> 00:31:54,960
it didn't negatively impact the
confidence so badly that this

811
00:31:54,960 --> 00:31:57,280
the, the setting is the worst
thing that could possibly have

812
00:31:57,280 --> 00:31:58,760
happened to children.
It did the opposite.

813
00:31:59,040 --> 00:32:00,880
Like it actually really, really,
really challenged that and said,

814
00:32:00,880 --> 00:32:03,400
I actually know the confidence
was better when when we sat.

815
00:32:04,200 --> 00:32:05,800
Doesn't mean it's always the
case, right?

816
00:32:05,840 --> 00:32:07,800
But it does back up our
experience as teachers and

817
00:32:07,800 --> 00:32:10,600
probably thousands of listeners
right now who are also thinking,

818
00:32:10,600 --> 00:32:12,800
oh, I'm also a really competent,
passionate maths teacher.

819
00:32:12,960 --> 00:32:15,280
And whenever I've been in any
set, whether it's mixed or not,

820
00:32:15,400 --> 00:32:18,000
the confidence of the children
increases because that's what I

821
00:32:18,000 --> 00:32:20,720
bring to the table as a teacher.
And and also it just it just

822
00:32:20,720 --> 00:32:22,040
inherently.
I've always thought this

823
00:32:22,040 --> 00:32:24,920
inherently, if, if you have a
base level of you're doing

824
00:32:24,920 --> 00:32:27,640
nothing for confidence, right?
I do think that inherently if

825
00:32:27,640 --> 00:32:29,840
you have mixed ability and
you're not paying any effort

826
00:32:29,840 --> 00:32:31,920
into that confidence and you
have a set and you're not paying

827
00:32:31,920 --> 00:32:34,400
any effort into that confidence,
the confidence of the children,

828
00:32:34,400 --> 00:32:37,040
the mixed ability will be worse
because they're seeing other

829
00:32:37,040 --> 00:32:39,680
children be able to do stuff
that they really struggle with.

830
00:32:39,680 --> 00:32:41,600
By definition, that's going to
knock their confidence.

831
00:32:41,760 --> 00:32:43,560
Whereas if they're in a targeted
group and they just have a

832
00:32:43,560 --> 00:32:46,160
couple become more normal for
them, it'll be all getting

833
00:32:46,160 --> 00:32:49,000
support here.
It it, it, it was nonsense to me

834
00:32:49,000 --> 00:32:51,640
and it's just, that's the part
that frustrates me.

835
00:32:51,720 --> 00:32:53,880
I agree.
I always feel like when people

836
00:32:53,880 --> 00:32:56,040
when I have had debates and
arguments about mixed ability or

837
00:32:56,040 --> 00:32:58,760
not, but I feel like they always
go to this like level of

838
00:32:58,880 --> 00:33:02,160
completely unrealistic like
assumptions where they think

839
00:33:02,160 --> 00:33:04,400
because I'm doing setting, that
means what I'm going to do is

840
00:33:04,880 --> 00:33:08,360
I'm going to put hats on all the
children and say you're in set.

841
00:33:08,360 --> 00:33:09,840
Everyone needs to know you're in
set 2.

842
00:33:09,840 --> 00:33:13,240
And by the way, kids, set 2 is
the worst one.

843
00:33:13,400 --> 00:33:16,360
Let's make sure we all know it.
Like, no one's doing that.

844
00:33:16,480 --> 00:33:19,200
I know no one's doing that.
Especially in primary, it's

845
00:33:19,200 --> 00:33:22,040
easier to isolate and and and
also, But this is the thing.

846
00:33:22,280 --> 00:33:24,600
Kids can understand that and
know that, right?

847
00:33:24,960 --> 00:33:27,320
They also can understand and
know that in a mixed ability

848
00:33:27,320 --> 00:33:30,160
class, because oh that's weird,
We're all on the rectangle table

849
00:33:30,160 --> 00:33:32,320
and the rectangle table gets a
teaching assistant every single

850
00:33:32,320 --> 00:33:33,360
day and a different sheet to
everyone.

851
00:33:33,360 --> 00:33:34,680
Else, oh, no deal.
And we don't even do that.

852
00:33:34,680 --> 00:33:36,680
We just completely mix up the
children where they are in the

853
00:33:36,680 --> 00:33:37,280
classroom.
Cool.

854
00:33:37,280 --> 00:33:39,800
Now that's the child that can do
the other worksheet you've given

855
00:33:39,800 --> 00:33:41,280
them because in your mixed
ability, you say you've

856
00:33:41,280 --> 00:33:43,280
differentiated.
It's rated three ways and

857
00:33:43,280 --> 00:33:44,560
they've got this sheet and
they've got that one.

858
00:33:44,640 --> 00:33:45,640
Sorry.
Yeah, sorry.

859
00:33:45,800 --> 00:33:46,880
Why have I got a different
sheet?

860
00:33:47,160 --> 00:33:49,360
Oh, well, this has happened
before to me.

861
00:33:49,640 --> 00:33:51,080
Why have I got a different
sheet?

862
00:33:51,280 --> 00:33:53,080
OK, well, I'm obviously not
going to say to you right now

863
00:33:53,080 --> 00:33:55,960
because you are not of a certain
level of attainment.

864
00:33:55,960 --> 00:33:57,200
That means you can do it.
Yeah.

865
00:33:57,280 --> 00:34:00,080
But I also like, you're not
stupid.

866
00:34:00,080 --> 00:34:02,520
I can't lie to you.
What do you I end up saying?

867
00:34:02,880 --> 00:34:04,400
Oh, it's we're doing the same
thing.

868
00:34:04,400 --> 00:34:06,200
Just you might get a little bit
of help.

869
00:34:06,240 --> 00:34:08,080
Yeah.
Even me saying that means that

870
00:34:08,080 --> 00:34:09,280
they know they're getting more
help now.

871
00:34:09,280 --> 00:34:11,560
Like like I I don't feel like I
can answer that question

872
00:34:11,560 --> 00:34:12,639
truthfully.
It's so true.

873
00:34:12,639 --> 00:34:14,600
Do you know what that exam?
Because that's happened to be

874
00:34:14,600 --> 00:34:17,840
loads of hands as well.
The the situation where a child

875
00:34:17,840 --> 00:34:20,159
has asked me why they've got a
different sheet of someone else

876
00:34:20,320 --> 00:34:23,320
has cringed me out so much more
to the point where like that

877
00:34:23,320 --> 00:34:24,480
alone was enough to make me
think.

878
00:34:24,480 --> 00:34:27,120
I would rather they were just in
a group where everyone got this

879
00:34:27,120 --> 00:34:29,320
sheet and there was no, no, they
didn't know any different.

880
00:34:29,320 --> 00:34:30,840
Well, they just put them on
tables all together.

881
00:34:30,840 --> 00:34:33,920
So they've all got the sheet
together, that setting, that

882
00:34:33,920 --> 00:34:36,480
setting and it's setting without
different input.

883
00:34:36,719 --> 00:34:39,000
Yeah, which the worst of both
worlds.

884
00:34:39,000 --> 00:34:41,320
We do mixed ability classes, but
we just have each table as a

885
00:34:41,320 --> 00:34:42,400
set.
Yeah, right.

886
00:34:42,400 --> 00:34:45,600
OK, So you you are doing the
setting and then then you're

887
00:34:45,600 --> 00:34:47,320
giving them one input instead
of.

888
00:34:47,320 --> 00:34:49,320
If you did setting, you'd have
three or four different inputs

889
00:34:49,520 --> 00:34:52,040
at the level that they need.
I think, I think people that are

890
00:34:52,040 --> 00:34:54,719
still champions of own, like
mixed ability is the only way to

891
00:34:54,719 --> 00:34:56,000
go and there's no place for
setting.

892
00:34:56,199 --> 00:34:57,520
I think they need to go to the
next level.

893
00:34:57,880 --> 00:34:59,880
I think they need to in their
school.

894
00:34:59,880 --> 00:35:01,320
They need to say we're going to
get rid of year groups.

895
00:35:01,800 --> 00:35:03,440
They have to.
It's the only logical

896
00:35:03,440 --> 00:35:05,520
conclusion.
We don't set by year.

897
00:35:05,880 --> 00:35:08,600
We don't say that just when a
child is born determines their

898
00:35:08,600 --> 00:35:10,920
ability or not.
So we have a completely fluid

899
00:35:10,920 --> 00:35:12,200
system.
I think that's the only logical

900
00:35:12,200 --> 00:35:13,960
conclusion.
Just get them all in and every

901
00:35:13,960 --> 00:35:17,000
every single day, but boom,
split up into 30s.

902
00:35:17,240 --> 00:35:20,000
Yeah, you're doing long
multiplication today.

903
00:35:20,000 --> 00:35:24,360
I'm I'm full and I can't add
it's don't you know all mixed

904
00:35:24,360 --> 00:35:26,320
ability is better?
Oh dear, you're so naive.

905
00:35:26,320 --> 00:35:29,560
We don't split up the 30s, we
teach the entire school at once

906
00:35:29,720 --> 00:35:32,880
and we just differentiate 18
ways because everyone is

907
00:35:32,880 --> 00:35:34,400
learning place value at the same
time.

908
00:35:34,480 --> 00:35:35,840
Yeah, across our school.
True, true.

909
00:35:35,920 --> 00:35:38,120
So there's no reason why they
can't all be in the same room.

910
00:35:38,120 --> 00:35:40,000
Because I don't want some of the
children to realise that they're

911
00:35:40,000 --> 00:35:45,840
not as capable as others.
Year 5 and I'm in year 40.

912
00:35:45,840 --> 00:35:47,840
They're older.
Yeah, they're older.

913
00:35:47,840 --> 00:35:49,400
Oh, we just.
Yeah, we do just set them by

914
00:35:49,400 --> 00:35:51,720
year group and then maybe we
just go slightly deeper than

915
00:35:51,720 --> 00:35:52,880
that.
We do our tables and pretend

916
00:35:52,880 --> 00:35:54,440
it's.
No, the line is exactly where it

917
00:35:54,440 --> 00:35:56,440
is Hayden right now, which is
that we set by year group and

918
00:35:56,440 --> 00:35:57,600
then we don't do any more
setting at all.

919
00:35:57,600 --> 00:36:00,640
And that happens to be we set,
we set by age, which is the best

920
00:36:00,640 --> 00:36:02,080
way to set.
And then we don't set by

921
00:36:02,080 --> 00:36:07,000
attainment, which is awful.
Oh, I I I I reckon.

922
00:36:07,400 --> 00:36:10,560
I reckon setting by age is a
worse way to set children than

923
00:36:10,560 --> 00:36:12,360
attainment is.
Definitely, of course, I

924
00:36:12,400 --> 00:36:15,520
definitely taught children by
year six who who are

925
00:36:15,560 --> 00:36:19,760
significantly significantly of
of different attainment to the

926
00:36:19,760 --> 00:36:22,000
other children in that class.
We're talking years worth of

927
00:36:22,000 --> 00:36:24,600
gaps where really just putting
you in the classroom because

928
00:36:24,600 --> 00:36:26,560
they're in that year group was
actually probably the worst way.

929
00:36:26,560 --> 00:36:29,280
If we're going to do sets to do
that genuinely, genuinely that

930
00:36:29,280 --> 00:36:30,440
that is actually not where they
need to be.

931
00:36:30,640 --> 00:36:32,520
Yeah.
And I think this just sums it up

932
00:36:32,520 --> 00:36:34,960
here in terms of I think for
years and years and years.

933
00:36:34,960 --> 00:36:38,320
This new study suggests that the
headline of harm to the low

934
00:36:38,320 --> 00:36:40,840
attainers, which seems to be the
one that's banned about a lot as

935
00:36:40,840 --> 00:36:42,640
to why they don't do it.
We don't harm the low attainers.

936
00:36:43,080 --> 00:36:48,960
It it feels like it might not be
the actual truth all of the time

937
00:36:48,960 --> 00:36:51,520
to the extent where it can
really affect you as a school.

938
00:36:51,840 --> 00:36:54,200
I think we just have to look at
this and just go, OK, look,

939
00:36:54,480 --> 00:36:57,280
there's mixed research that we
can even just say that at this

940
00:36:57,280 --> 00:36:58,760
point.
There's mixed research here.

941
00:36:58,920 --> 00:37:01,600
Let's think about our setting.
Let's think about every other

942
00:37:01,600 --> 00:37:04,600
aspect to why we might do
setting or mixed ability and

943
00:37:04,600 --> 00:37:08,680
then make a decision that isn't
vilified from one side but is

944
00:37:08,680 --> 00:37:10,720
instead rooted in what we think
is best for our school.

945
00:37:10,720 --> 00:37:12,360
Definitely.
So here's the fun bit of the

946
00:37:12,360 --> 00:37:13,920
podcast episode.
Dylan, anyone listening, if

947
00:37:13,920 --> 00:37:16,120
you've been vehemently agreeing
or disagreeing of parts or

948
00:37:16,120 --> 00:37:18,840
complete disagreement ring, the
fun bit is we're going to

949
00:37:18,840 --> 00:37:20,920
completely switch it up now
because now we're going to talk

950
00:37:20,920 --> 00:37:23,240
through the pros of mixed
ability and I think this is.

951
00:37:23,360 --> 00:37:26,440
Oh, it's empty.
And even though we clearly have

952
00:37:26,440 --> 00:37:28,520
a bias towards the fact that
what we've done our whole career

953
00:37:28,520 --> 00:37:31,080
is I don't think mixed stability
is bad.

954
00:37:31,200 --> 00:37:34,120
Of course I don't just in fact,
in some situations, I know

955
00:37:34,120 --> 00:37:36,120
you're joking.
Some situations, I would almost

956
00:37:36,120 --> 00:37:38,360
always think mixed stability was
the best, the best outcome,

957
00:37:38,360 --> 00:37:39,960
like.
So let's go now.

958
00:37:40,080 --> 00:37:42,000
Now through then some some some
points about mixed ability, you

959
00:37:42,000 --> 00:37:44,600
can get a. 100 percent, 100%.
And you know what, Just just you

960
00:37:44,600 --> 00:37:46,160
know, we're going to come on to
workload in a second.

961
00:37:46,160 --> 00:37:47,640
People might be thinking what
about workload?

962
00:37:47,640 --> 00:37:50,600
There seems to be obvious
answers here why workload might

963
00:37:50,600 --> 00:37:52,320
be better or worse in these
different situations.

964
00:37:52,320 --> 00:37:53,880
We'll come on to that.
We're really just trying to talk

965
00:37:53,880 --> 00:37:55,200
about the actual impact of the
children here.

966
00:37:55,760 --> 00:37:58,160
So yeah, OK, so the labelling
problem we're talking about

967
00:37:58,160 --> 00:38:00,240
confidence doesn't go away just
because this study didn't pick

968
00:38:00,240 --> 00:38:01,440
up on it.
And what we're saying here is

969
00:38:01,720 --> 00:38:04,760
this was a very specific study.
For example, it just looked at

970
00:38:04,760 --> 00:38:07,560
maths, it's math specific.
self-confidence found a small

971
00:38:07,560 --> 00:38:09,240
negative effect in mixed
attainment schools.

972
00:38:09,400 --> 00:38:12,760
There's a lot of long standing
studies out there and research

973
00:38:12,760 --> 00:38:15,680
again, leaning into what we said
about there's mixed research,

974
00:38:15,680 --> 00:38:19,440
right, Of course, right that the
longer term self concept, it's

975
00:38:19,440 --> 00:38:21,680
more mixed.
OK, the headline here is very

976
00:38:21,680 --> 00:38:23,600
clear.
It says oh it's actually worse

977
00:38:23,600 --> 00:38:26,120
confidence when you do mixed.
But it was only over 2 years.

978
00:38:26,240 --> 00:38:27,880
Exactly.
And it was very specific, right.

979
00:38:27,880 --> 00:38:30,520
So, so in general, I think that
the point we're making here is

980
00:38:30,520 --> 00:38:33,760
that we can look at this study
and we can jump on a bandwagon

981
00:38:33,760 --> 00:38:35,200
and say, Oh yeah, it means this
all the time.

982
00:38:35,440 --> 00:38:37,480
There's a lot of research out
there, which is a lot of

983
00:38:37,480 --> 00:38:39,080
different, like you said,
methodologies, a lot of

984
00:38:39,080 --> 00:38:41,440
different backgrounds, a lot of
different, you know, types of

985
00:38:41,440 --> 00:38:43,640
school, etcetera.
I don't think you can just pick

986
00:38:43,640 --> 00:38:44,640
it up and wear it.
I agree.

987
00:38:44,720 --> 00:38:46,360
Yeah.
If we're going to the the most

988
00:38:46,360 --> 00:38:49,280
holistic view we possibly can,
which is over the child's entire

989
00:38:49,400 --> 00:38:51,920
career in education, like you
said, there are plenty of

990
00:38:51,920 --> 00:38:54,320
studies that say actually
overall though it does have a

991
00:38:54,320 --> 00:38:56,240
negative.
Impact to to and I can think in

992
00:38:56,240 --> 00:38:59,280
secondary school, you know, like
we were called, you know, I was

993
00:38:59,280 --> 00:39:02,920
in set one, there was set 7, but
I'm not being funny.

994
00:39:02,960 --> 00:39:05,520
Like you're 14.
I'm in set seven.

995
00:39:06,080 --> 00:39:08,120
I can imagine very much that had
detrimentary.

996
00:39:08,160 --> 00:39:10,080
But like you're gonna, you're
gonna have your confidence here

997
00:39:10,080 --> 00:39:11,520
in different ways, right?
Yeah.

998
00:39:11,520 --> 00:39:13,760
So that way, it's very, it's
very out there.

999
00:39:13,760 --> 00:39:15,640
It's very public.
You're in set seven, I'm in set

1000
00:39:15,640 --> 00:39:16,920
one.
That's obviously gonna hit you,

1001
00:39:16,960 --> 00:39:18,680
but your confidence will be hit
in a different way.

1002
00:39:18,680 --> 00:39:20,640
There's a mixed ability class.
Maybe there's a bit more quiet,

1003
00:39:21,040 --> 00:39:23,040
maybe a bit more like, you know,
introverted way.

1004
00:39:23,040 --> 00:39:24,240
Oh God, I can see those doing
that.

1005
00:39:24,240 --> 00:39:26,600
I know it's not gonna be a label
of set 7 on me, but my

1006
00:39:26,600 --> 00:39:28,320
confidence might be hit in a
different way where actually I

1007
00:39:28,320 --> 00:39:30,640
see how amazing these people are
at maths and I struggle with it.

1008
00:39:30,640 --> 00:39:32,080
Yeah, potentially.
So there's different ways

1009
00:39:32,080 --> 00:39:33,400
confidence.
But that scene is different,

1010
00:39:33,400 --> 00:39:34,440
isn't it?
Because like you said, you kind

1011
00:39:34,440 --> 00:39:37,040
of alluded to this before.
Like there are some topics

1012
00:39:37,040 --> 00:39:39,720
within maths though, where you
might find if you're that set

1013
00:39:39,720 --> 00:39:42,560
seven person, you might find
actually I'm not so bad at this

1014
00:39:42,560 --> 00:39:44,800
one and I can benchmark that I'm
not so bad about this because

1015
00:39:45,040 --> 00:39:47,160
because in this lesson, the
children around me, I feel like

1016
00:39:47,160 --> 00:39:48,760
I'm doing the same sort of level
of work.

1017
00:39:48,760 --> 00:39:51,520
Like there are opportunities
that ceilings removed in mixed

1018
00:39:51,520 --> 00:39:56,160
ability sets for children within
topics fluidly whenever the time

1019
00:39:56,160 --> 00:39:59,000
arises to show what they're made
of rather than just constantly

1020
00:39:59,000 --> 00:40:03,280
thinking I'm in set 7 therefore
I am bad at all maths and the

1021
00:40:03,280 --> 00:40:04,840
ceilings put on me straight away
by the teacher anyway.

1022
00:40:04,840 --> 00:40:07,280
I'm not even going to get to
explore potentially how I might

1023
00:40:07,280 --> 00:40:09,840
actually be good at this this
particular area of maths because

1024
00:40:10,080 --> 00:40:11,480
the teacher has assumed I'm in
set seven.

1025
00:40:11,480 --> 00:40:13,720
I'm not a good so the worksheets
already low ability for me.

1026
00:40:14,040 --> 00:40:16,200
I think we're we're, we're
touching a bit into quality of

1027
00:40:16,200 --> 00:40:18,640
teaching now as well.
But but you're right in terms of

1028
00:40:18,640 --> 00:40:20,800
that's just a reality.
This is for me one of the

1029
00:40:20,800 --> 00:40:22,200
biggest ones.
It's misallocation.

1030
00:40:22,560 --> 00:40:24,800
It's rampant.
What we're talking about here is

1031
00:40:24,960 --> 00:40:26,800
children in the wrong set.
Ah, yeah, yeah.

1032
00:40:26,800 --> 00:40:31,880
OK, So Connolly ETAL 2019 looked
over 9000 year sevens and found

1033
00:40:31,880 --> 00:40:36,440
that 31% of pupils were placed
in the wrong set based on look

1034
00:40:36,440 --> 00:40:38,280
at this, they're key stage 2
scores.

1035
00:40:38,560 --> 00:40:40,960
So I can see why there's a lot
of, you know, looking at this

1036
00:40:40,960 --> 00:40:44,920
and thinking this is just a very
specific, you know, year 7 based

1037
00:40:44,920 --> 00:40:47,360
on key stage 2 scores.
But in general we can see how

1038
00:40:47,480 --> 00:40:49,040
misallocation can be really
problematic.

1039
00:40:49,040 --> 00:40:50,640
Of course we can extrapolate
that easily, can't we?

1040
00:40:50,640 --> 00:40:53,800
To assume there's obviously,
obviously it's going to be a

1041
00:40:53,800 --> 00:40:56,360
problem that sometimes children
are going to be in the wrong

1042
00:40:56,400 --> 00:40:57,400
sets.
And and the whole point of

1043
00:40:57,400 --> 00:41:00,120
setting is it only works if kids
in the right place.

1044
00:41:00,120 --> 00:41:01,440
Yeah.
So if they're not in the right

1045
00:41:01,440 --> 00:41:03,680
place, it's a very obvious
counter argument to say, well,

1046
00:41:03,680 --> 00:41:05,480
setting's not very good then is
it in this situation because

1047
00:41:05,480 --> 00:41:08,320
there are lots of kids who are
now not in the right place.

1048
00:41:08,360 --> 00:41:12,120
Completely and whereas, you
know, it's I'm not sure and I

1049
00:41:12,120 --> 00:41:14,520
know we put this together.
I know the joke was that we

1050
00:41:14,520 --> 00:41:17,560
prefer setting and I do think
there's, there's definitely

1051
00:41:17,560 --> 00:41:21,480
mixed ability is good, but here
it feels more like a positive

1052
00:41:21,480 --> 00:41:23,720
for mixed abilities that some
people do setting badly.

1053
00:41:24,440 --> 00:41:26,720
It's like, oh, kids are
misallocated in the wrong place.

1054
00:41:26,720 --> 00:41:28,480
OK, right.
So if we're saying they're

1055
00:41:28,480 --> 00:41:31,080
misallocated, right?
Are they not constantly

1056
00:41:31,080 --> 00:41:32,920
misallocated if they're in a
mixed stability set because

1057
00:41:32,920 --> 00:41:34,680
they're not even allocated in
the 1st place, They're already

1058
00:41:34,680 --> 00:41:36,280
with the wrong people.
We're saying it's a

1059
00:41:36,280 --> 00:41:39,000
misallocation.
That's interesting if it if it's

1060
00:41:39,000 --> 00:41:40,920
inherently not set at all.
No.

1061
00:41:41,120 --> 00:41:42,400
Oh, but they're in the wrong
place here.

1062
00:41:42,400 --> 00:41:44,240
Like, yeah, oh, no, they need to
be in that set.

1063
00:41:44,320 --> 00:41:46,520
Let's put them all in one room
instead and just do one lesson.

1064
00:41:46,520 --> 00:41:48,520
I know, I think, I think there's
a flaw in that argument because

1065
00:41:48,520 --> 00:41:50,920
I think, I think the whole point
of the misallocation becomes

1066
00:41:50,920 --> 00:41:53,640
strong with setting because the
point of sets is there's clear

1067
00:41:53,640 --> 00:41:56,080
ceilings and.
This this is meant to be why

1068
00:41:56,080 --> 00:41:57,400
mixed ability is good.
Yeah, yeah.

1069
00:41:57,400 --> 00:41:59,600
But in mixed ability, the idea
is there is no floor and no

1070
00:41:59,600 --> 00:42:01,480
ceiling, right.
So the misallocation is kind of,

1071
00:42:01,840 --> 00:42:02,640
it's kind of.
Redundant.

1072
00:42:02,640 --> 00:42:04,400
Why is it misallocated?
If they're in the wrong set,

1073
00:42:04,400 --> 00:42:06,360
what does it mean?
What does misallocate so they're

1074
00:42:06,360 --> 00:42:08,040
in the wrong set?
They're misallocated.

1075
00:42:08,040 --> 00:42:10,720
Why is that bad?
Because in that set, inherently

1076
00:42:10,720 --> 00:42:12,840
they there will be ceilings on
the level of work they have.

1077
00:42:12,960 --> 00:42:14,560
Yeah.
Whereas in in the mixed ability,

1078
00:42:14,560 --> 00:42:17,120
there's complete fluidity.
So they only get fluidity of the

1079
00:42:17,120 --> 00:42:18,320
work.
No, it's not inherent.

1080
00:42:18,320 --> 00:42:21,080
It's not inherent.
In good setting teaching.

1081
00:42:21,080 --> 00:42:22,560
It's not OK.
OK, so this is.

1082
00:42:22,560 --> 00:42:25,400
Not what we're saying this is.
This is basically saying mixed

1083
00:42:25,400 --> 00:42:27,400
ability is good because if you
do setting bad then this is.

1084
00:42:27,400 --> 00:42:28,160
OK, cool.
So.

1085
00:42:28,320 --> 00:42:29,320
So ignore that.
I agree.

1086
00:42:29,320 --> 00:42:29,720
I agree.
I agree.

1087
00:42:29,720 --> 00:42:30,160
No, no.
So.

1088
00:42:30,160 --> 00:42:31,520
This is what I'm saying.
We should be ignoring that.

1089
00:42:31,640 --> 00:42:34,800
We can't be saying that because
if you do setting bad, the mixed

1090
00:42:34,800 --> 00:42:36,040
ability is good.
That's not a reason mixed

1091
00:42:36,040 --> 00:42:37,160
ability is good.
You're right, you're right.

1092
00:42:37,160 --> 00:42:39,400
So so in terms of there being a
misallocation, it's like, oh,

1093
00:42:39,400 --> 00:42:41,840
actually they're getting the
wrong input now they're getting

1094
00:42:41,840 --> 00:42:43,000
the wrong input and the wrong
task.

1095
00:42:43,120 --> 00:42:46,480
Hello, mixed ability.
There's one input and there's

1096
00:42:46,480 --> 00:42:49,800
seven different levels.
Inherently to me, this is not

1097
00:42:50,120 --> 00:42:52,440
this misallocation thing is not
a reason why mixed ability is

1098
00:42:52,440 --> 00:42:55,960
good It to me, if we're saying
this is a problem with setting,

1099
00:42:56,080 --> 00:42:57,680
then it's a huge problem for
mixed.

1100
00:42:57,680 --> 00:43:01,080
So the you're in the wrong place
here that this input's not for

1101
00:43:01,080 --> 00:43:02,520
you.
Yeah.

1102
00:43:02,880 --> 00:43:04,520
Wow.
So should we go to the one where

1103
00:43:04,560 --> 00:43:07,320
everyone's doing one input and
the vast majority are getting

1104
00:43:07,320 --> 00:43:09,560
the wrong input?
Yeah, it's true.

1105
00:43:09,560 --> 00:43:11,320
It's true.
I think I always it's not very

1106
00:43:11,320 --> 00:43:12,520
strong.
The input I think is a really

1107
00:43:12,520 --> 00:43:14,000
good argument.
I was thinking more of, and I

1108
00:43:14,000 --> 00:43:16,200
know there's a flaw in this,
which I'll say I was thinking

1109
00:43:16,200 --> 00:43:19,440
more along the lines of tasks.
Like quite often in sets, there

1110
00:43:19,440 --> 00:43:22,000
will be a set task because it's
already they're already

1111
00:43:22,000 --> 00:43:23,840
streamlined in terms of the
ability range in that in that

1112
00:43:23,840 --> 00:43:25,480
group.
So it'll just be a task that

1113
00:43:25,480 --> 00:43:27,240
everyone does.
Whereas in the idea in mixed

1114
00:43:27,240 --> 00:43:29,840
ability is that there are a
range of tasks and there's a lot

1115
00:43:29,840 --> 00:43:32,080
more fluidity between children,
what they can do within the

1116
00:43:32,240 --> 00:43:33,920
lesson, which is nonsense.
But I also think it's nonsense

1117
00:43:33,920 --> 00:43:35,880
because the end of the day,
that's bad setting.

1118
00:43:35,880 --> 00:43:38,680
Yeah, exactly.
Good setting will still account

1119
00:43:38,680 --> 00:43:41,120
for the children in your class
and constantly be re re

1120
00:43:41,120 --> 00:43:43,160
evaluating and thinking how can
I stretch these children?

1121
00:43:43,320 --> 00:43:46,120
And I, I I would still in my in
my setting, I'd still have a

1122
00:43:46,120 --> 00:43:47,160
couple of different things I'm
gonna.

1123
00:43:47,160 --> 00:43:48,480
Show me, that's exactly what I'm
saying.

1124
00:43:48,480 --> 00:43:50,560
So good setting.
Yeah, it's like, it's like

1125
00:43:50,560 --> 00:43:53,400
saying if you do setting worse
mixed ability is good.

1126
00:43:53,400 --> 00:43:55,440
Yeah, If we do mixed ability
worse, it's not.

1127
00:43:55,520 --> 00:43:57,280
It's not an inherent reason.
Yeah, yeah, I don't think.

1128
00:43:57,280 --> 00:43:59,320
I think it's an odd one.
OK, so not great evidence so

1129
00:43:59,360 --> 00:44:01,160
far.
So teacher allocation UK and US

1130
00:44:01,160 --> 00:44:03,400
evidence both suggests, as
experienced teachers tend to be

1131
00:44:03,400 --> 00:44:06,720
allocated to lower sets despite
those pupils arguably needing

1132
00:44:06,720 --> 00:44:09,160
the most expert teaching.
The new EEF guidance

1133
00:44:09,160 --> 00:44:11,480
specifically calls this out as
something that you have to fix.

1134
00:44:11,600 --> 00:44:13,480
So again, doing setting bad
right?

1135
00:44:13,520 --> 00:44:15,200
It is though, isn't it really?
I get it.

1136
00:44:15,240 --> 00:44:17,240
OK, so, so in this situation,
right.

1137
00:44:17,320 --> 00:44:21,440
OK, so let's say there's it's
four form entry, there are four

1138
00:44:21,440 --> 00:44:24,480
teachers and you've got an
order. 1 is the best, 4 is the

1139
00:44:24,480 --> 00:44:25,680
worst.
Just do right.

1140
00:44:25,680 --> 00:44:26,680
OK.
Yep.

1141
00:44:26,680 --> 00:44:29,560
If you do setting and you go OK,
the tops are gonna get teacher

1142
00:44:29,560 --> 00:44:31,800
one and we're gonna go down,
down, down, down, right?

1143
00:44:31,840 --> 00:44:32,480
Yeah, sure.
Cool.

1144
00:44:32,760 --> 00:44:35,240
OK, that's bad, isn't it?
That's bad.

1145
00:44:35,600 --> 00:44:37,320
That's bad.
They're getting teacher 4 at the

1146
00:44:37,320 --> 00:44:38,360
bottom.
OK.

1147
00:44:38,360 --> 00:44:40,800
Yeah, mixed ability.
Someone's still getting Teacher

1148
00:44:40,800 --> 00:44:43,240
4.
Someone still getting the

1149
00:44:43,240 --> 00:44:44,920
teacher was saying it's worse.
Yeah, it's true.

1150
00:44:44,920 --> 00:44:47,400
And within that class, there
still be children at the bottom

1151
00:44:47,400 --> 00:44:50,040
who need the most support who
actually are getting a worst.

1152
00:44:50,200 --> 00:44:52,320
If it was just teacher four with
those children who are low

1153
00:44:52,320 --> 00:44:55,560
retainers, or it's teacher four
with lower attainers and middle

1154
00:44:55,560 --> 00:44:58,120
attainers and higher attainers,
they're getting a worse deal.

1155
00:44:58,120 --> 00:45:02,360
Yeah, again, to me does not give
a reason as to why inherently

1156
00:45:02,360 --> 00:45:04,520
mixed abilities better.
It's just saying there's a

1157
00:45:04,520 --> 00:45:06,680
problem with with sets.
So we should just do mixed

1158
00:45:06,680 --> 00:45:08,800
ability.
The same problem exists.

1159
00:45:08,800 --> 00:45:11,600
If anything it just says oh this
is a nice way of fine tuning to

1160
00:45:11,600 --> 00:45:14,120
make sets even better.
And just to be really clear

1161
00:45:14,120 --> 00:45:16,280
here, I'm kind of pushing it to
the to the Max.

1162
00:45:16,560 --> 00:45:19,760
I actually do think that when
you do set, I do think it's good

1163
00:45:19,760 --> 00:45:22,160
practise to make sure your
strong teachers are with

1164
00:45:22,160 --> 00:45:23,440
children who need the most input
and support.

1165
00:45:23,880 --> 00:45:27,280
Because I think if you think
about that teacher #1 being with

1166
00:45:27,280 --> 00:45:31,480
the low attainers and four with
the high attainers that I think

1167
00:45:31,480 --> 00:45:33,800
would get better outcomes for
everyone than if you swapped it

1168
00:45:33,800 --> 00:45:35,560
around.
I think there's everyone.

1169
00:45:35,560 --> 00:45:38,280
There's more room for movement
with those lower retainers than

1170
00:45:38,280 --> 00:45:39,760
there is for movement with the
high retainers.

1171
00:45:40,000 --> 00:45:42,000
There's more room for building
confidence because a lot of the

1172
00:45:42,000 --> 00:45:43,280
high attainers already have the
confidence.

1173
00:45:43,440 --> 00:45:45,360
There's more room of getting
children, less foundational

1174
00:45:45,360 --> 00:45:48,440
knowledge and keys skills where
they should be because the tops

1175
00:45:48,440 --> 00:45:51,560
already have that.
So I think that you can still, I

1176
00:45:51,560 --> 00:45:54,960
think, have a preference.
And I do think strong teachers

1177
00:45:54,960 --> 00:45:56,880
should not be glossed over for
those lower.

1178
00:45:57,040 --> 00:46:01,240
It's kind of a, it's a, it's a
really annoying analogy really,

1179
00:46:01,240 --> 00:46:02,560
because it's like, it's like a
lose, lose situation.

1180
00:46:02,560 --> 00:46:05,560
Because I could easily counter
that by saying, well, by

1181
00:46:05,560 --> 00:46:09,080
definition, you're falling into
the trap of it's better for

1182
00:46:09,080 --> 00:46:10,560
everyone because the gap's
smaller at the end, because

1183
00:46:10,560 --> 00:46:11,880
you've put your strongest
teacher with the lowest

1184
00:46:11,880 --> 00:46:13,440
attainment, so they've made more
progress.

1185
00:46:13,680 --> 00:46:16,720
And if that stronger teacher was
with the top attainers instead

1186
00:46:16,720 --> 00:46:18,840
of the the weakest teacher, the
top attainers would have made

1187
00:46:18,840 --> 00:46:20,320
more progress than they did with
the weakest teacher.

1188
00:46:20,320 --> 00:46:23,280
So the gap smaller looks better.
Whereas realistically at the end

1189
00:46:23,280 --> 00:46:26,520
of the day though those top
attainers we chose, they were

1190
00:46:26,520 --> 00:46:29,120
the worst option for them.
So I think or everything we said

1191
00:46:29,120 --> 00:46:32,440
there is absolutely true of a
certain level, there's a certain

1192
00:46:32,440 --> 00:46:34,800
low attainment where I'm like,
yeah, what we just said is true,

1193
00:46:34,920 --> 00:46:38,040
everyone be brought up, right.
I think there is a level lower

1194
00:46:38,280 --> 00:46:40,880
where that is vital and comes
first.

1195
00:46:40,880 --> 00:46:43,400
Sure.
So if children can't add, if

1196
00:46:43,400 --> 00:46:47,720
children can't recognise number,
if children are that far behind

1197
00:46:47,920 --> 00:46:50,040
that they literally they can't
sabotize, right.

1198
00:46:50,360 --> 00:46:52,880
And they're in year 3-4 and
five, they need the strongest

1199
00:46:52,880 --> 00:46:54,040
teachers to get into a certain
level.

1200
00:46:54,040 --> 00:46:55,360
Yeah.
So I just think there's a little

1201
00:46:55,360 --> 00:46:57,800
cap there where I'm like, OK,
what?

1202
00:46:58,200 --> 00:47:00,800
You've just heard me explain it
exactly what I think when in

1203
00:47:00,800 --> 00:47:01,680
general.
Yeah, Yeah.

1204
00:47:01,680 --> 00:47:04,080
But if the lowest of the lowest
of the low, they need that

1205
00:47:04,080 --> 00:47:07,120
targeted really quality good
support to get to that level

1206
00:47:07,120 --> 00:47:09,640
where I'm saying that's cool, by
the way, that isn't the expected

1207
00:47:09,640 --> 00:47:11,240
level.
No, no, there's loads of

1208
00:47:11,240 --> 00:47:12,600
children working in the working
towards it's.

1209
00:47:12,600 --> 00:47:14,840
On their journey.
It's on it's on the maximising

1210
00:47:14,840 --> 00:47:16,920
their journey.
Like they need that really,

1211
00:47:16,920 --> 00:47:18,920
really specific input.
But I agree completely.

1212
00:47:18,920 --> 00:47:20,920
I agree completely.
I just, I think it's I think

1213
00:47:20,920 --> 00:47:24,760
it's a good thing to because
when you're constantly only

1214
00:47:24,760 --> 00:47:27,160
giving your best teachers to
your best children, you are

1215
00:47:27,160 --> 00:47:29,000
making that choice to exacerbate
it right?

1216
00:47:29,280 --> 00:47:31,720
Always.
And it's like what I'm saying is

1217
00:47:31,720 --> 00:47:34,400
there should be no preference.
It should just be who gets what.

1218
00:47:35,120 --> 00:47:36,600
It doesn't matter.
It shouldn't just always be the

1219
00:47:36,600 --> 00:47:38,920
lowest, always get what we
define as the worst teacher.

1220
00:47:38,920 --> 00:47:40,880
It shouldn't be like that.
No, no, it shouldn't really

1221
00:47:40,880 --> 00:47:42,280
matter.
What you should do is look at

1222
00:47:42,280 --> 00:47:43,680
your teachers and look at your
kids and see what they.

1223
00:47:43,680 --> 00:47:45,720
Need exactly it should it should
be bespoke every single year.

1224
00:47:45,760 --> 00:47:47,280
Yeah, genuinely, all of this
stuff should be bespoke.

1225
00:47:47,280 --> 00:47:48,720
We we, we did that were sets,
didn't we?

1226
00:47:48,720 --> 00:47:50,880
We always said when we we did,
we did setting.

1227
00:47:50,880 --> 00:47:52,840
You know, we had a free form
Junior School.

1228
00:47:53,600 --> 00:47:55,560
We did setting some years we
didn't.

1229
00:47:55,720 --> 00:47:57,960
Yeah, because we looked at the
data, we looked at the children,

1230
00:47:57,960 --> 00:48:00,600
we listened to the teachers from
last year and we would sometimes

1231
00:48:00,600 --> 00:48:03,680
say, let's do mixed, that would
happen.

1232
00:48:04,000 --> 00:48:06,120
We had a hybrid.
Most of the time we came to the

1233
00:48:06,120 --> 00:48:08,080
conclusion that setting was the
right thing to do.

1234
00:48:08,240 --> 00:48:11,840
But setting in year 4 and Year 5
and year 6 looked different,

1235
00:48:11,840 --> 00:48:13,760
looked completely different
because it was based on what

1236
00:48:13,760 --> 00:48:14,840
the.
Child, we always looked at the

1237
00:48:14,840 --> 00:48:17,040
cohort that's absolutely right.
And it was always, basically, it

1238
00:48:17,040 --> 00:48:19,480
was honestly, it was basically
always a hybrid because even

1239
00:48:19,680 --> 00:48:21,720
even setting, we didn't do it in
the traditional format of

1240
00:48:21,720 --> 00:48:23,520
literally chunk the children.
Not always the.

1241
00:48:23,520 --> 00:48:28,120
Children 1 to 96 and do the
direct chance quite often, at

1242
00:48:28,200 --> 00:48:31,240
least in my experience, we, we
literally just looked at the

1243
00:48:31,240 --> 00:48:32,960
cohort and then eased in their
attainment and just thought,

1244
00:48:33,320 --> 00:48:35,240
what do they, what do these kids
need?

1245
00:48:35,440 --> 00:48:38,440
Do we need to take the top 32
children and the next 30

1246
00:48:38,440 --> 00:48:39,600
children or can they just all be
mixed?

1247
00:48:39,880 --> 00:48:41,240
Sometimes they're like, they can
just be mixed.

1248
00:48:41,280 --> 00:48:43,800
That's, that's absolutely fine.
OK, but do we need to take the,

1249
00:48:43,800 --> 00:48:46,160
the, the lowest 60 entertainers?
Do you know what actually,

1250
00:48:46,160 --> 00:48:48,480
they've got significant gaps
here from this point onwards and

1251
00:48:48,480 --> 00:48:49,680
they can see they've got a lot
of similarities.

1252
00:48:49,680 --> 00:48:52,040
I think they'd benefit from
being in one, in one place

1253
00:48:52,040 --> 00:48:54,840
together with this particular
teacher who's, and we'd look at

1254
00:48:54,840 --> 00:48:56,840
that every single time and, and
that's how it should be done.

1255
00:48:56,840 --> 00:48:59,320
But anyway, back to this, this
is so I feel like we're just

1256
00:48:59,320 --> 00:49:02,280
kind of dismantling the, the
arguments for mixed ability.

1257
00:49:02,280 --> 00:49:05,520
But here's another one though,
that I, that I, I always, I feel

1258
00:49:05,520 --> 00:49:07,240
like I could dismantle this a
bit, but I feel like this is

1259
00:49:07,240 --> 00:49:10,680
what always got thrown at me
constantly my whole career.

1260
00:49:10,680 --> 00:49:12,520
I got told this was true and I
was a bad teacher, but I didn't

1261
00:49:12,520 --> 00:49:15,560
agree with it, right?
It's the whole effects of peers,

1262
00:49:15,800 --> 00:49:17,760
right?
So Vygotsky zone of proximal

1263
00:49:17,760 --> 00:49:19,480
development, all, all this
research you learn when you're,

1264
00:49:19,480 --> 00:49:21,120
when you're, when you're
training to be a teacher, right?

1265
00:49:21,560 --> 00:49:24,360
A lot of qualitative work
suggests that lower attainers

1266
00:49:24,680 --> 00:49:28,000
can and will benefit from being
around and surrounded by the

1267
00:49:28,000 --> 00:49:30,000
higher attainers.
OK.

1268
00:49:30,400 --> 00:49:33,720
And by being near, near those
more capable peers, they will

1269
00:49:33,720 --> 00:49:36,040
learn from them, also resolve
from them and, and people.

1270
00:49:36,040 --> 00:49:37,840
And, and that's, that's true,
right?

1271
00:49:38,520 --> 00:49:41,960
But what people say to me is
there's no loss in this.

1272
00:49:42,200 --> 00:49:45,560
This is a benefit to everybody
because the higher attainers

1273
00:49:45,800 --> 00:49:48,520
will learn more by teaching and
helping those children that are

1274
00:49:48,520 --> 00:49:50,360
lower attainers than them, and
the lower attainers will benefit

1275
00:49:50,360 --> 00:49:52,200
from it.
As if that's like the perfect

1276
00:49:52,200 --> 00:49:55,240
diss all solved.
And I have always, always

1277
00:49:55,240 --> 00:49:57,440
struggled with that.
And.

1278
00:49:57,800 --> 00:49:59,200
Yeah.
And I know you have as well and

1279
00:49:59,200 --> 00:50:01,240
you're probably just come in.
No, no, no, go on.

1280
00:50:01,240 --> 00:50:03,600
I'll jump in because I feel like
we've basically addressed this

1281
00:50:03,600 --> 00:50:06,400
already in this episode.
We've we have agreed, I don't

1282
00:50:06,400 --> 00:50:08,480
know if you agree as well
listening, but we have agreed

1283
00:50:08,480 --> 00:50:13,360
that if, if I set with the
higher attainers, I can push

1284
00:50:13,360 --> 00:50:16,000
them on more than I than I could
have done if they're enigibility

1285
00:50:16,000 --> 00:50:18,160
set and the research we started
with kind of backed that up as

1286
00:50:18,160 --> 00:50:21,240
well.
So what are we saying then,

1287
00:50:21,240 --> 00:50:23,080
which one's true?
Because if we're also saying

1288
00:50:23,080 --> 00:50:25,600
none of the higher achievers
will will achieve more in a

1289
00:50:25,600 --> 00:50:27,680
mixed ability set because they
can help the lower attainers.

1290
00:50:28,000 --> 00:50:29,840
This comes to a point, right
where I just thought in my

1291
00:50:29,840 --> 00:50:31,000
career I was like, oh, no,
that's not true.

1292
00:50:31,000 --> 00:50:32,720
We just say that, yeah, it's
that's not that's not true.

1293
00:50:32,720 --> 00:50:34,160
It's copium.
Yeah, yeah, exactly that.

1294
00:50:34,160 --> 00:50:35,760
It's copium.
Copium with the highest order,

1295
00:50:35,840 --> 00:50:37,560
yeah.
We just say that justify it.

1296
00:50:37,600 --> 00:50:38,760
Yeah, we just have to.
We have to.

1297
00:50:38,760 --> 00:50:41,400
We just don't want to accept the
fact that in a mixed ability set

1298
00:50:41,400 --> 00:50:44,200
in a lot of in a lot of
circumstances, those higher

1299
00:50:44,200 --> 00:50:45,760
achievers actually won't make as
much progress.

1300
00:50:45,760 --> 00:50:47,880
And actually, do you know what
the most beneficial thing for

1301
00:50:47,880 --> 00:50:51,120
them is actually not helping a
child who's who has lower

1302
00:50:51,120 --> 00:50:52,960
attainment than them.
That's actually not the best

1303
00:50:52,960 --> 00:50:54,680
thing for them to do.
The best thing to do is be

1304
00:50:54,680 --> 00:50:56,840
pushed even more completely and
not have anything to do that

1305
00:50:56,840 --> 00:50:58,400
other child.
Yeah, there is to say.

1306
00:50:58,440 --> 00:51:00,360
That no, there is, there is
definitely something to be said,

1307
00:51:00,360 --> 00:51:03,120
which is what this rooted in
again, where the ability to

1308
00:51:03,120 --> 00:51:05,160
explain what you're thinking or
understand.

1309
00:51:05,640 --> 00:51:07,680
So let's say a child is really
proficient with long

1310
00:51:07,680 --> 00:51:10,000
multiplication, right?
But the act of getting that

1311
00:51:10,000 --> 00:51:13,080
child to really explain in
detail what they're doing at

1312
00:51:13,080 --> 00:51:16,160
each step and why is a good way
of forcing a child to really

1313
00:51:16,160 --> 00:51:18,040
think about it, to express
themselves.

1314
00:51:18,040 --> 00:51:21,200
It's good oracy, it's good to
check for understanding and it's

1315
00:51:21,200 --> 00:51:23,800
actually good.
If you're able to explain

1316
00:51:23,800 --> 00:51:27,280
something at a lower and lower
level, then that shows it.

1317
00:51:27,520 --> 00:51:30,120
I think it's it's widely
accepted that shows a mastery of

1318
00:51:30,120 --> 00:51:30,520
the.
Subject.

1319
00:51:30,520 --> 00:51:31,680
Yeah, like conceptual
competence.

1320
00:51:31,680 --> 00:51:34,600
Yeah, like based on who's in
front of you, you can change how

1321
00:51:34,600 --> 00:51:36,880
you articulate something so they
understand it, right.

1322
00:51:37,080 --> 00:51:39,640
We've seen these videos online
of astrophysicists explained

1323
00:51:39,640 --> 00:51:42,080
like a black hole to five
different things.

1324
00:51:42,080 --> 00:51:45,280
And it's it's a four year old, a
10 year old, a 16 year old

1325
00:51:45,320 --> 00:51:47,080
graduate and a doctor.
True mastery.

1326
00:51:47,080 --> 00:51:48,520
Yeah.
And, and the conversations are

1327
00:51:48,520 --> 00:51:50,560
fantastic because they're
getting across the same point

1328
00:51:50,640 --> 00:51:52,760
but at different levels.
There's something to be said for

1329
00:51:52,760 --> 00:51:54,800
children who are really good at
maths, being able to do that and

1330
00:51:54,800 --> 00:51:58,160
support and help, right.
Not every single day of every

1331
00:51:58,160 --> 00:52:00,520
single lesson.
That becomes copium.

1332
00:52:00,520 --> 00:52:03,280
That becomes when I say copium
for anyone, it's not, it's not

1333
00:52:03,280 --> 00:52:04,680
an element.
I'm just saying it's cope.

1334
00:52:04,680 --> 00:52:07,520
It's the way we cope with the
fact that which we, we, we

1335
00:52:07,520 --> 00:52:10,160
really deep down, yeah, we deep
down we know it's not the best

1336
00:52:10,160 --> 00:52:12,440
for them, but we try and find a
way of coping with that.

1337
00:52:12,840 --> 00:52:14,800
And that's by us saying, oh,
it's good for them, isn't it?

1338
00:52:14,800 --> 00:52:16,120
No at.
Least they're developing this

1339
00:52:16,120 --> 00:52:18,000
little subset of skills that we
know is important.

1340
00:52:18,000 --> 00:52:19,840
But like you said, doing it all
the time, every single day,

1341
00:52:19,840 --> 00:52:21,880
every single day, probably not
the most beneficial thing for

1342
00:52:21,880 --> 00:52:23,640
them to be doing on an
individual level.

1343
00:52:23,880 --> 00:52:27,120
And it's always that battle to
me of like, how much do we care

1344
00:52:27,120 --> 00:52:29,160
about the meta?
And we're looking at, you know,

1345
00:52:29,160 --> 00:52:32,880
children in general.
Is it, is it just about bringing

1346
00:52:32,880 --> 00:52:35,000
the lower attainers up at any
cost?

1347
00:52:35,240 --> 00:52:36,880
Because if that's the case,
that's a good argument.

1348
00:52:37,760 --> 00:52:41,640
If if we look at individuals and
say what is best for this

1349
00:52:41,640 --> 00:52:44,600
individual at this moment,
regardless of any other factor,

1350
00:52:45,440 --> 00:52:47,600
I think there are situations in
mixed ability where you can't

1351
00:52:47,600 --> 00:52:50,480
say that's the best outcome for
that exact child in the.

1352
00:52:50,480 --> 00:52:51,040
Season.
Of course not.

1353
00:52:51,120 --> 00:52:53,040
Of course not.
And you know what, if you do set

1354
00:52:53,040 --> 00:52:55,320
and have a lower attainment
class like I used to have, they

1355
00:52:55,320 --> 00:52:57,160
can still talk to each other.
By the way, there are still

1356
00:52:57,160 --> 00:52:58,960
children who get things and
children who course there's a

1357
00:52:58,960 --> 00:53:00,360
range.
I help them.

1358
00:53:00,480 --> 00:53:04,080
Yeah, because it tends to be in
not always, but you can become

1359
00:53:04,280 --> 00:53:07,320
become aware of trends and ideas
of things which your children

1360
00:53:07,320 --> 00:53:08,920
might not get and you can help
them you can group them

1361
00:53:08,920 --> 00:53:10,080
together.
It's just more.

1362
00:53:10,200 --> 00:53:11,400
Effective.
Yeah, because it's because your

1363
00:53:11,400 --> 00:53:14,040
your understanding of the group
that you have as a teacher is

1364
00:53:14,040 --> 00:53:17,000
immediately reducing scope in a
lot of circumstances.

1365
00:53:17,000 --> 00:53:18,600
Not always.
This is the beauty of being an

1366
00:53:18,600 --> 00:53:20,240
adaptive teacher.
There'll be sometimes where you

1367
00:53:20,240 --> 00:53:22,400
think, crikey, they absolutely
could have coped in that other

1368
00:53:22,400 --> 00:53:24,760
set today, cool, you're a good
teacher because you recognise

1369
00:53:24,760 --> 00:53:26,800
that you adapted to it.
But a lot of the time you can

1370
00:53:26,800 --> 00:53:29,240
notice those trends and you can
really focus and nail down on

1371
00:53:29,240 --> 00:53:32,520
the thing that this group are
typically like to likely to find

1372
00:53:32,520 --> 00:53:33,920
hard.
Absolutely.

1373
00:53:33,960 --> 00:53:35,760
OK.
Another one here then for mixed

1374
00:53:35,760 --> 00:53:38,240
stability is about curriculum
compression in lower sets.

1375
00:53:38,400 --> 00:53:41,400
Again, it's a negative
offsetting, not necessarily a

1376
00:53:41,400 --> 00:53:43,960
positive for for for mixed
ability.

1377
00:53:43,960 --> 00:53:46,280
But let's have a look.
The research literature is clear

1378
00:53:46,280 --> 00:53:49,480
that lower sets often get
narrower, slower, and less rich

1379
00:53:49,480 --> 00:53:51,400
curriculum.
If your lower set is doing

1380
00:53:51,400 --> 00:53:53,960
arithmetic drills while the top
set is doing reasoning and

1381
00:53:53,960 --> 00:53:56,720
proof, the gap can never close
by design.

1382
00:53:57,360 --> 00:53:59,120
I fundamentally disagree with
that.

1383
00:53:59,800 --> 00:54:01,800
Why?
Because the because if the if

1384
00:54:01,800 --> 00:54:04,480
children can't do arithmetic,
then their reasoning and their

1385
00:54:04,480 --> 00:54:06,000
problem solving is going to be
shot to pieces.

1386
00:54:06,600 --> 00:54:08,360
There is a reason.
It's a foundational basis, a

1387
00:54:08,360 --> 00:54:10,160
reason one, the thing leads on
to another.

1388
00:54:10,480 --> 00:54:12,920
I'm not saying children should
never do reasoning at all.

1389
00:54:13,080 --> 00:54:14,880
You should always be doing
reasoning and problem solving

1390
00:54:14,880 --> 00:54:16,640
based on things that you're
proficient and fluent in.

1391
00:54:17,280 --> 00:54:20,600
But of course, of course what
you deliver is going to look

1392
00:54:20,600 --> 00:54:22,040
different in lower sets to
higher sets.

1393
00:54:22,440 --> 00:54:23,880
What's the point in doing it
otherwise?

1394
00:54:24,120 --> 00:54:26,400
And I think it's just naive to
think that.

1395
00:54:27,400 --> 00:54:29,520
So we use the words here,
narrower, slower and less rich.

1396
00:54:29,960 --> 00:54:31,400
No one wants a less rich
curriculum.

1397
00:54:31,440 --> 00:54:34,080
No, I think that, again, this is
a teaching problem, not a

1398
00:54:34,080 --> 00:54:35,440
setting problem.
It's a teaching problem.

1399
00:54:35,800 --> 00:54:37,440
I've taught lower sets.
We've had a really rich

1400
00:54:37,440 --> 00:54:38,400
curriculum.
We've covered the whole

1401
00:54:38,400 --> 00:54:40,440
curriculum.
Still slower.

1402
00:54:40,680 --> 00:54:45,000
Yeah, that's kind of the point.
Yeah, it was slower, obviously.

1403
00:54:45,160 --> 00:54:47,040
What?
Oh, you do lower sets, they'll

1404
00:54:47,040 --> 00:54:49,360
get a slower curriculum.
I'm just adapting to their.

1405
00:54:49,360 --> 00:54:51,640
Yeah, as I say, it's not slower
by design, it's slower by it's

1406
00:54:51,680 --> 00:54:53,400
it's adaptation.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

1407
00:54:53,400 --> 00:54:55,600
They needed to go more slowly on
this because they didn't

1408
00:54:55,600 --> 00:54:57,480
understand it.
Yeah, they needed to spend more

1409
00:54:57,480 --> 00:54:59,040
time doing the arithmetic
because they can't do.

1410
00:54:59,040 --> 00:55:01,360
It the idea that everyone knows
at the same pace is absurd.

1411
00:55:01,360 --> 00:55:03,680
It's what I mean and it's
basically saying, well, some

1412
00:55:03,680 --> 00:55:05,600
kids will get a slower ones to
get them in a mixed ability but

1413
00:55:05,600 --> 00:55:08,360
where they can't keep up.
Is that better to you just

1414
00:55:08,360 --> 00:55:10,040
because it's not got the word
slower in front of it?

1415
00:55:10,360 --> 00:55:13,640
So much of this and the
arguments I've always seen to me

1416
00:55:13,640 --> 00:55:15,440
has really sounded like virtue
signalling.

1417
00:55:15,720 --> 00:55:18,200
So you can't say ability.
Oh no, you can't go slower.

1418
00:55:18,200 --> 00:55:19,640
Oh no, it's less rich.
You can't do.

1419
00:55:20,520 --> 00:55:24,080
These kids can't do maths.
I'm helping them do maths.

1420
00:55:24,280 --> 00:55:27,000
I'm meeting them where they are
and being an adaptable teacher.

1421
00:55:27,080 --> 00:55:29,680
I am going slower and I'm going
into more detail where I need

1422
00:55:29,680 --> 00:55:30,880
to.
I'm giving them more chance to

1423
00:55:30,880 --> 00:55:34,280
practise the things they could
not do if they were just lumped

1424
00:55:34,280 --> 00:55:36,720
together in one homogeneous BLOB
where everyone's just mixed,

1425
00:55:37,040 --> 00:55:38,720
where it just happens to be.
They had the birthday between

1426
00:55:38,720 --> 00:55:42,760
September and August.
Why is that more of an adequate

1427
00:55:42,760 --> 00:55:45,480
way of grouping together
children than whether they can

1428
00:55:45,480 --> 00:55:48,840
actually do the thing or not?
That should be the only thing

1429
00:55:48,840 --> 00:55:50,560
that matters.
It shouldn't matter what their

1430
00:55:50,560 --> 00:55:52,680
backgrounds are like.
It shouldn't matter what age.

1431
00:55:52,720 --> 00:55:54,520
None of that should matter.
Can they do it?

1432
00:55:54,560 --> 00:55:55,600
Yes.
Cool.

1433
00:55:55,600 --> 00:55:56,520
Can they not?
Cool.

1434
00:55:56,520 --> 00:55:59,960
We're going to help them.
Have they got, you know, are

1435
00:55:59,960 --> 00:56:05,120
they, are they just children who
will struggle to work at that

1436
00:56:05,120 --> 00:56:07,200
pace?
Yes, go slower.

1437
00:56:07,200 --> 00:56:09,720
Then it's not a bad thing.
I guess the counter arguments,

1438
00:56:09,720 --> 00:56:12,000
what you just said is kind of
what you just said in terms of

1439
00:56:12,000 --> 00:56:14,680
people understandably say that
you shouldn't group children on

1440
00:56:14,680 --> 00:56:17,400
their prior attainment, which is
what setting equally is.

1441
00:56:17,400 --> 00:56:19,880
Is that understandable kind of
like because you're saying, you

1442
00:56:19,880 --> 00:56:21,400
know, can they do it or can't
they do it?

1443
00:56:21,400 --> 00:56:22,480
I don't know.
I haven't talked to me yet.

1444
00:56:22,560 --> 00:56:23,760
Yeah, but we can get a good
idea.

1445
00:56:24,320 --> 00:56:25,960
We can.
We can, but like.

1446
00:56:26,120 --> 00:56:27,840
That's why sets need to be fluid
as well.

1447
00:56:28,640 --> 00:56:30,560
That's an that's a very
important counter argument.

1448
00:56:30,560 --> 00:56:33,000
But I can, but I do.
I can empathise when people say

1449
00:56:33,680 --> 00:56:36,360
we are just assuming.
We're constantly assuming.

1450
00:56:36,360 --> 00:56:39,000
By putting a child into a set,
we are assuming what they can

1451
00:56:39,000 --> 00:56:41,160
and can't do across the entire.
Master, are we are we though?

1452
00:56:41,160 --> 00:56:44,000
Because what my point, no, my
point is that it's adaptable.

1453
00:56:44,360 --> 00:56:45,720
It's slow.
It's not slow because I've

1454
00:56:45,720 --> 00:56:48,160
already decided it's slower.
It's slow because that that

1455
00:56:48,160 --> 00:56:49,600
class needed to go slower at
that point.

1456
00:56:49,840 --> 00:56:51,840
And there would be some children
who needed to go quicker

1457
00:56:51,840 --> 00:56:54,000
probably, But in a mixed ability
class, there'd be far more

1458
00:56:54,000 --> 00:56:55,120
children who needed to go
quicker.

1459
00:56:55,320 --> 00:56:58,040
So we're just narrowing that.
We're narrowing that base of

1460
00:56:58,040 --> 00:56:59,800
like there are fewer children
not getting what they need.

1461
00:57:00,000 --> 00:57:01,280
Yeah, right.
We're just narrowing it.

1462
00:57:01,400 --> 00:57:03,240
Are we making assumptions?
You know, we make assumptions

1463
00:57:03,240 --> 00:57:05,760
all of of the time.
All of the time we're making

1464
00:57:05,760 --> 00:57:07,280
assumptions.
It's based on pattern spotting,

1465
00:57:07,280 --> 00:57:09,480
it's based on seeing what
children can do and we make that

1466
00:57:09,480 --> 00:57:11,440
assumption.
Then we assess, then we test,

1467
00:57:11,440 --> 00:57:13,400
then we gap analyse, then we
teach and then we move.

1468
00:57:14,000 --> 00:57:15,320
We move.
It has to be adaptable.

1469
00:57:15,320 --> 00:57:16,680
It has to be adaptable is the
word.

1470
00:57:16,680 --> 00:57:19,640
Adaptable covers everything.
We make predictions and

1471
00:57:19,640 --> 00:57:23,000
assumptions and then we adapt.
Whether that's moving children

1472
00:57:23,000 --> 00:57:24,840
from class to class, whether
that's my speed, whether that's

1473
00:57:24,840 --> 00:57:27,760
what I cover, Whatever it is,
it's quality first.

1474
00:57:27,760 --> 00:57:30,160
Teaching can make it work and
make it better.

1475
00:57:30,400 --> 00:57:32,960
But if we just say setting's bad
because sometimes teachers are

1476
00:57:32,960 --> 00:57:34,000
bad.
Yeah.

1477
00:57:34,360 --> 00:57:36,480
That that OK, Does that mean
setting's bad?

1478
00:57:37,040 --> 00:57:38,760
No.
Does that mean university's bad

1479
00:57:38,760 --> 00:57:40,640
because sometimes when people
finish university as bad

1480
00:57:40,640 --> 00:57:41,560
teachers?
No.

1481
00:57:42,120 --> 00:57:43,120
It's just a matter of.
Fact.

1482
00:57:43,120 --> 00:57:45,560
I reckon people's arguments have
generally can be summarised over

1483
00:57:45,560 --> 00:57:48,440
over the years of if you've got
the bad teacher, it's better for

1484
00:57:48,440 --> 00:57:51,040
them to be in a mixed ability
set than a than a than a than a

1485
00:57:51,160 --> 00:57:52,000
than a set set.
Why?

1486
00:57:52,000 --> 00:57:54,200
I think that's what people think
because because at least in the

1487
00:57:54,200 --> 00:57:57,600
mix of set, then if you're if
you're doing setting badly

1488
00:57:57,600 --> 00:57:59,200
because you've narrowed the
curriculum, you've made really

1489
00:57:59,200 --> 00:58:00,280
bad assumptions about the
children.

1490
00:58:00,280 --> 00:58:01,600
You've narrowed it so much.
They're not, you're not even

1491
00:58:01,600 --> 00:58:03,520
giving them a chance to excel in
areas like maybe could have

1492
00:58:03,520 --> 00:58:06,280
excelled in, right.
But in the mixed ability set by

1493
00:58:06,280 --> 00:58:09,000
design, you're forced to open
that, open that gap anyway.

1494
00:58:09,040 --> 00:58:11,440
There's fluidity built in with
within the class from them.

1495
00:58:11,600 --> 00:58:13,480
And those children that would
have been put in this horrible

1496
00:58:13,480 --> 00:58:17,200
ceiling before by design are now
by design, accidentally.

1497
00:58:17,320 --> 00:58:18,920
The teachers know it because
they're not a good teacher

1498
00:58:19,080 --> 00:58:20,440
accidentally.
If there's a bit more fluidity

1499
00:58:20,440 --> 00:58:22,760
and they can, they can access
some stuff that they that they

1500
00:58:22,760 --> 00:58:24,440
can actually do that maybe you
wouldn't have thought they could

1501
00:58:24,440 --> 00:58:25,600
do if you were based on
presumptions.

1502
00:58:25,840 --> 00:58:27,600
I think that's like the core
essence of this.

1503
00:58:27,680 --> 00:58:31,800
Potentially that is that is
still though different that that

1504
00:58:31,800 --> 00:58:33,480
person you're saying is not a
great teacher is still doing

1505
00:58:33,480 --> 00:58:35,640
different teaching styles
because in the mixed ability

1506
00:58:35,640 --> 00:58:36,960
they're planning for different
abilities.

1507
00:58:37,000 --> 00:58:38,960
Yeah, I still think within a set
you should be planning for

1508
00:58:38,960 --> 00:58:40,920
different abilities as well.
Yeah, it's still, it's still a

1509
00:58:40,920 --> 00:58:44,240
shortcoming of of, of of looking
a set to something different.

1510
00:58:44,640 --> 00:58:46,520
It's still a shortcoming.
There, but I can see why if you

1511
00:58:46,520 --> 00:58:48,400
know, if you're catering to the
lowest common denominator of

1512
00:58:48,400 --> 00:58:51,240
teaching ability, I can see why
people land on the idea of if

1513
00:58:51,240 --> 00:58:53,520
we're playing it safe.
I I got mixed ability on sets.

1514
00:58:53,600 --> 00:58:55,320
I really, yeah.
I mean, I really disagree

1515
00:58:55,560 --> 00:58:58,440
because I I, I fundamentally
think that if you make, if

1516
00:58:58,440 --> 00:59:00,360
you're going to make mixed
ability work, you need the best

1517
00:59:00,360 --> 00:59:02,360
teachers.
I think it's the yeah, yeah, No,

1518
00:59:02,440 --> 00:59:04,440
I think, I think it's.
The funny enough, I also think

1519
00:59:04,440 --> 00:59:05,840
that, but I do think that's what
people think.

1520
00:59:06,080 --> 00:59:09,040
Yeah, potentially and and let's
let's let's let's get on then I

1521
00:59:09,040 --> 00:59:11,280
make because of this episode's
really getting on and that when

1522
00:59:11,280 --> 00:59:12,840
mom and me and we planned out
loads more.

1523
00:59:12,840 --> 00:59:14,640
But I think we just need to wrap
it up with this next section

1524
00:59:14,640 --> 00:59:16,120
because I really want to talk
about reality.

1525
00:59:16,400 --> 00:59:18,560
That's kind of what this was.
That's what I was leading into

1526
00:59:18,560 --> 00:59:21,320
of that last bit.
The reality, we can sit here and

1527
00:59:21,320 --> 00:59:23,520
talk about pedagogical
approaches and ideologies all

1528
00:59:23,520 --> 00:59:25,520
day long.
And at the end of the day, the,

1529
00:59:25,640 --> 00:59:27,760
the hilarious pointless
conclusion is if you're a really

1530
00:59:27,760 --> 00:59:30,200
good teacher, it doesn't matter.
That's the conclusion really.

1531
00:59:30,200 --> 00:59:32,560
Oh, if you're a really good
teacher, none of these, none of

1532
00:59:32,560 --> 00:59:34,960
these things even come into
effect anyway.

1533
00:59:35,400 --> 00:59:36,680
It's like, OK, well, the
research says that not

1534
00:59:36,680 --> 00:59:37,520
everyone's a good teacher,
though.

1535
00:59:37,520 --> 00:59:39,560
That's why they found these
things exist in the 1st place,

1536
00:59:39,720 --> 00:59:42,440
because a chunk of teachers are
doing setting badly or are doing

1537
00:59:42,440 --> 00:59:43,920
mixed ability.
Right, right, right, right.

1538
00:59:44,160 --> 00:59:47,120
So the, the reality I want, I
want to get into now is the

1539
00:59:47,120 --> 00:59:49,320
manageability of these two
systems.

1540
00:59:49,600 --> 00:59:52,920
And this was a huge factor for,
for me personally as to why I

1541
00:59:52,920 --> 00:59:55,520
would always err on the side of
let's see if we can make setting

1542
00:59:55,520 --> 00:59:59,480
work because the workload is
greatly reduced, greatly

1543
00:59:59,480 --> 01:00:01,120
reduced.
Like you just said, that

1544
01:00:01,120 --> 01:00:05,160
teacher, if we're going to the
lowest common denominator and we

1545
01:00:05,160 --> 01:00:06,920
say, OK, we'll just put them in
a mixed ability because at least

1546
01:00:06,920 --> 01:00:08,600
the children then have got
accidentally, they've got

1547
01:00:08,600 --> 01:00:10,560
chances for a bit of mobility in
the tasks they do.

1548
01:00:11,160 --> 01:00:14,160
Well, not necessarily.
Not necessarily, because it is

1549
01:00:14,160 --> 01:00:17,920
incredibly, incredibly hard to
accurately and adequately

1550
01:00:17,920 --> 01:00:20,720
resource.
Yeah, a lesson that's pitched at

1551
01:00:20,720 --> 01:00:22,720
the entirety of the range of
ability within your year.

1552
01:00:22,720 --> 01:00:23,600
Group.
Well, what we're saying then,

1553
01:00:23,600 --> 01:00:25,480
because that would suggest to me
that mixed ability is more

1554
01:00:25,480 --> 01:00:27,520
workload.
That's exactly that's exactly

1555
01:00:27,520 --> 01:00:28,760
what.
I'm saying so, so, but I, I

1556
01:00:28,760 --> 01:00:30,960
always, I always thought mixed
ability is less workload because

1557
01:00:30,960 --> 01:00:32,880
you can share planning.
So it depends on your setting.

1558
01:00:32,880 --> 01:00:34,360
That's interesting.
I don't think there's, I don't

1559
01:00:34,360 --> 01:00:36,760
think there's, I don't, I don't
think there's, I don't think

1560
01:00:36,760 --> 01:00:38,320
that one jumps out than the
other.

1561
01:00:38,320 --> 01:00:39,400
So I'm really interested what
you think.

1562
01:00:39,560 --> 01:00:42,000
I I don't see one as more or
less workload in terms of

1563
01:00:42,000 --> 01:00:44,920
planning because I think for
example, we have four form

1564
01:00:44,920 --> 01:00:47,680
entry.
We did mixed ability classes in

1565
01:00:47,680 --> 01:00:49,720
year 3.
We shared planning the whole

1566
01:00:49,720 --> 01:00:51,240
time.
I did less math planning than

1567
01:00:51,240 --> 01:00:53,680
ever before because we were
sharing that across the board.

1568
01:00:53,880 --> 01:00:55,560
Yeah, okay.
Within the lesson, maybe it went

1569
01:00:55,560 --> 01:00:57,680
more deeply.
Maybe I had a different more

1570
01:00:57,680 --> 01:00:59,640
routes for children to go to and
if they finished early they

1571
01:00:59,640 --> 01:01:01,960
could get on to something.
But in general, I was planning

1572
01:01:01,960 --> 01:01:03,760
way less.
And then when I did my sets in

1573
01:01:03,760 --> 01:01:06,560
year 4, I, I was planning every
week because that was my

1574
01:01:06,560 --> 01:01:07,600
specific set.
And then children need

1575
01:01:07,600 --> 01:01:09,000
something.
So I had more workload when I

1576
01:01:09,000 --> 01:01:11,480
went to sets and less workload
when I was in, when I was in

1577
01:01:11,480 --> 01:01:12,880
mixed.
And, but I, I don't think it

1578
01:01:12,880 --> 01:01:13,960
automatically is one or the
other.

1579
01:01:13,960 --> 01:01:15,360
No, you're absolutely right.
And actually, it's a.

1580
01:01:15,360 --> 01:01:17,120
It's a good point to.
To consider because obviously in

1581
01:01:17,120 --> 01:01:19,080
a in a single form school that's
completely flipped again, it's

1582
01:01:19,080 --> 01:01:20,320
not it's not even flipped, is
it?

1583
01:01:20,320 --> 01:01:21,360
It's the same workload no
matter.

1584
01:01:21,360 --> 01:01:22,600
Well, it's.
Not because now you're you're

1585
01:01:22,600 --> 01:01:24,360
planning, if you're planning for
a set I, I, I.

1586
01:01:24,360 --> 01:01:26,480
I think if you don't, you're
think you're going right If you

1587
01:01:26,480 --> 01:01:28,600
were the only person planning I.
Think I think it's it's harder.

1588
01:01:28,600 --> 01:01:30,720
To planning, I think it's really
it's harder to plan from it's

1589
01:01:30,720 --> 01:01:32,120
but there are obviously
situations that you's right

1590
01:01:32,120 --> 01:01:34,080
yeah, so but there are obviously
situations like you just said

1591
01:01:34,080 --> 01:01:35,800
where if you've got share
planning and obviously.

1592
01:01:35,840 --> 01:01:37,600
Makes no You're right though,
because, because I'm not being

1593
01:01:37,600 --> 01:01:39,160
funny.
The the wider your breadth of

1594
01:01:39,160 --> 01:01:41,920
children, the more you feel like
you need to cater them, the more

1595
01:01:41,920 --> 01:01:43,360
you feel like you need to.
Plan, of course, it's just.

1596
01:01:43,360 --> 01:01:44,400
That so if you're not sharing,
it's.

1597
01:01:44,440 --> 01:01:45,360
Right.
That's the natural way of

1598
01:01:45,360 --> 01:01:46,240
things.
But you're right though, there's

1599
01:01:46,240 --> 01:01:48,080
obviously a scale there
depending on the context of your

1600
01:01:48,080 --> 01:01:49,680
school.
But the other one that I think

1601
01:01:49,680 --> 01:01:52,640
is less of a scale and maybe you
can come back with this one is

1602
01:01:52,640 --> 01:01:54,960
the manageability in general.
I don't think it makes a

1603
01:01:54,960 --> 01:01:57,480
difference between whether you
are single form or form entry

1604
01:01:57,480 --> 01:01:58,960
planning, sharing planning or
not.

1605
01:01:59,320 --> 01:02:04,120
But how easy it is to manage and
how effectively you can manage a

1606
01:02:04,120 --> 01:02:05,520
class.
I think is where the scale is

1607
01:02:05,520 --> 01:02:09,520
right in terms of teaching
ability is how effectively can

1608
01:02:09,520 --> 01:02:12,760
you manage a mixed ability class
in that hour that you're

1609
01:02:12,760 --> 01:02:14,240
teaching maths.
I think that's where the scope

1610
01:02:14,240 --> 01:02:17,600
massively changes.
There are two answers to this

1611
01:02:18,560 --> 01:02:21,960
managing in terms of what you're
preparing pedagogically in your

1612
01:02:21,960 --> 01:02:23,920
lesson.
Managing in terms of behaviour,

1613
01:02:24,280 --> 01:02:26,080
right.
In terms of behaviour.

1614
01:02:26,080 --> 01:02:28,040
A lot of people pushed back and
said mixed ability is better for

1615
01:02:28,040 --> 01:02:29,960
behaviour.
And the reason is because again,

1616
01:02:29,960 --> 01:02:31,720
if you just think about children
who are more reluctant

1617
01:02:31,720 --> 01:02:34,160
mathematicians, if they're all
in one room, they're all

1618
01:02:34,160 --> 01:02:35,480
bouncing off each other.
They don't want to do what

1619
01:02:35,480 --> 01:02:37,320
they're doing.
It can be harder to harder to

1620
01:02:37,320 --> 01:02:39,480
cultivate that that need.
That's what a lot of people said

1621
01:02:39,480 --> 01:02:41,480
on the real.
I've just found I've not found

1622
01:02:41,480 --> 01:02:43,280
that myself personally, but I'm
not saying that doesn't happen.

1623
01:02:43,280 --> 01:02:45,040
No, absolutely I can understand
it completely.

1624
01:02:45,360 --> 01:02:48,480
Whereas when you're talking
about managing it in terms of

1625
01:02:48,480 --> 01:02:51,640
just simply being able to
produce the less and, and like

1626
01:02:51,640 --> 01:02:56,240
literally in the lesson, getting
through adding two numbers

1627
01:02:56,240 --> 01:02:59,240
together with exchanging with
that breadth of, of ability in

1628
01:02:59,240 --> 01:03:03,320
your class or attainment, sorry,
is obviously harder than if it's

1629
01:03:03,320 --> 01:03:04,680
set.
And when they're set, there's,

1630
01:03:04,720 --> 01:03:07,400
there's still a breadth of
ability there, but it's smaller.

1631
01:03:07,600 --> 01:03:10,080
And the the simple way I can
just say to someone that that's

1632
01:03:10,120 --> 01:03:13,200
obviously true is that if you
then went for your mixed ability

1633
01:03:13,200 --> 01:03:15,520
year five class, if I said to
you, now you've got a mixed with

1634
01:03:15,520 --> 01:03:18,600
year 4, you gotta have a year
4-5 mixed class, which happens

1635
01:03:18,600 --> 01:03:21,360
up and down the country.
Is that is that going to be

1636
01:03:21,440 --> 01:03:25,480
easier, the same or harder to
manage the massively increased

1637
01:03:25,480 --> 01:03:26,560
pull of ability in your
classroom?

1638
01:03:26,880 --> 01:03:30,280
It's obviously harder.
Of course, let's go one step

1639
01:03:30,280 --> 01:03:31,760
further.
The whole of key stage 2IN1

1640
01:03:31,760 --> 01:03:35,080
classroom doing something, is
that easier, the same or harder?

1641
01:03:35,360 --> 01:03:38,880
Very clearly harder.
Why do we pretend that going one

1642
01:03:38,880 --> 01:03:42,120
step more granular within a year
group is suddenly the end of the

1643
01:03:42,120 --> 01:03:44,080
world and makes no difference?
It's stupid, it's bad, it's all

1644
01:03:44,080 --> 01:03:46,600
for it's violence.
Is it violence to have year 4

1645
01:03:46,600 --> 01:03:47,760
and five different?
Yeah.

1646
01:03:47,840 --> 01:03:53,280
No, it's complete nonsense.
Of course, of course it's harder

1647
01:03:53,480 --> 01:03:58,320
to manage a mixed ability with a
much wider range of children in

1648
01:03:58,320 --> 01:03:59,960
the.
Class I've taught, I had one

1649
01:03:59,960 --> 01:04:02,160
year of my career where I taught
in A1 form school when I was in

1650
01:04:02,160 --> 01:04:04,480
year 6 and it was a mixed
ability class obviously, because

1651
01:04:04,480 --> 01:04:07,160
it's one form.
And I can tell you right now

1652
01:04:07,600 --> 01:04:12,080
that the challenges I faced and
the imposter syndromes I got

1653
01:04:12,080 --> 01:04:14,840
sometimes where I've where it
because I found it so

1654
01:04:14,840 --> 01:04:19,000
unbelievably difficult to cater
adequately as I wanted to cater

1655
01:04:19,000 --> 01:04:20,960
for all of the needs in that
child for every single mouse

1656
01:04:20,960 --> 01:04:23,400
doesn't at all times.
And and it just got to the point

1657
01:04:23,400 --> 01:04:26,520
I was like, Oh, I can't.
You get to the point where you

1658
01:04:26,520 --> 01:04:28,640
realise, oh, of course I can't.
That's why sex exist.

1659
01:04:28,960 --> 01:04:31,760
Because if I did, if I had half
of these children and it was the

1660
01:04:31,760 --> 01:04:35,080
lowest attainers, I would
obviously tailor my input

1661
01:04:35,080 --> 01:04:37,040
differently to how I'm doing it
right now and it would be better

1662
01:04:37,040 --> 01:04:39,200
for them.
Yeah, so I've got, so it's to

1663
01:04:39,200 --> 01:04:41,400
push back there because my, my
gut instinct again, I'm going to

1664
01:04:41,400 --> 01:04:43,720
just stick to this because we've
definitely veered more towards,

1665
01:04:43,840 --> 01:04:45,200
we're going to be very neutral
in the middle.

1666
01:04:45,200 --> 01:04:47,160
Well, you obviously prefer sets.
We're geared towards sets.

1667
01:04:47,160 --> 01:04:48,560
You basically said you can't do
it.

1668
01:04:48,560 --> 01:04:50,440
I'm going to push back and say
you obviously can.

1669
01:04:50,720 --> 01:04:52,760
There are lots of schools out
there, lots of people listening

1670
01:04:52,760 --> 01:04:54,880
right now who are teachers who
are advocate for mixed ability,

1671
01:04:55,000 --> 01:04:57,360
who maybe even are advocates,
but have done it themselves for

1672
01:04:57,360 --> 01:04:59,200
years and they see that
obviously it can work.

1673
01:04:59,200 --> 01:05:01,400
So I just want to just make this
really clear to people and just

1674
01:05:01,400 --> 01:05:03,480
get your input.
Obviously can, right?

1675
01:05:03,520 --> 01:05:04,800
Yeah.
But I felt like I couldn't in

1676
01:05:04,800 --> 01:05:07,040
that moment because that,
because it was so hard to manage

1677
01:05:07,040 --> 01:05:09,160
is what I'm trying to say.
I felt like I couldn't manage,

1678
01:05:09,160 --> 01:05:10,200
which was the overall point
here.

1679
01:05:10,560 --> 01:05:13,440
I felt like I couldn't manage
keeping on top of everything in

1680
01:05:13,440 --> 01:05:15,640
that classroom.
It took a lot more energy and a

1681
01:05:15,640 --> 01:05:17,480
lot more time and it did
ultimately impact my workload

1682
01:05:17,480 --> 01:05:20,120
and stress.
And I think that's the reality

1683
01:05:20,120 --> 01:05:22,160
that I want to talk about.
I'm not saying you can't make

1684
01:05:22,160 --> 01:05:23,880
mixed ability work.
There are probably a lot of

1685
01:05:23,880 --> 01:05:26,360
better teachers out there than
me who in that situation would

1686
01:05:26,360 --> 01:05:28,080
have been, come on you novice
out of the way.

1687
01:05:28,360 --> 01:05:31,000
I know exactly how to manage the
situation and done a phenomenal

1688
01:05:31,000 --> 01:05:33,720
job.
But for me as a pretty good

1689
01:05:33,720 --> 01:05:37,640
maths teacher, I looked at that
situation and thought if I could

1690
01:05:37,640 --> 01:05:40,360
just split this class in half, I
would get more out of every

1691
01:05:40,360 --> 01:05:42,560
single child here.
And I just would.

1692
01:05:42,560 --> 01:05:46,680
And that is the reality for me.
And honestly a huge percentage

1693
01:05:46,680 --> 01:05:48,600
of teachers.
And I can't get over that fact.

1694
01:05:48,600 --> 01:05:50,840
And it is the one thing to me
whenever this argument comes

1695
01:05:50,840 --> 01:05:53,480
down, I'm always like, I always
on the side of streaming because

1696
01:05:53,480 --> 01:05:56,400
I'm like, do you know what?
Not everyone is the top 1% of

1697
01:05:56,400 --> 01:05:59,000
teachers.
They're just not like by

1698
01:05:59,000 --> 01:06:01,320
definition as I work.
So there are, there are going to

1699
01:06:01,320 --> 01:06:03,240
be hundreds of thousands of
teachers who I will struggle

1700
01:06:03,240 --> 01:06:05,600
equally like I do and actually
not do a very good job.

1701
01:06:05,600 --> 01:06:08,000
No one wants to say that but not
do a very good job for any of

1702
01:06:08,000 --> 01:06:09,400
the children in the class
because it was too hard to.

1703
01:06:09,400 --> 01:06:12,800
Manage and that's why earlier I
disagreed when I said that going

1704
01:06:12,800 --> 01:06:15,040
mixed ability means that your
weaker teachers are fine.

1705
01:06:15,440 --> 01:06:16,960
No, I think they flounder.
It's harder.

1706
01:06:16,960 --> 01:06:19,040
Yeah, it's much harder, I think.
I think, I think if it's if it's

1707
01:06:19,040 --> 01:06:22,280
set, if it's a set situation, it
just it just helps them because

1708
01:06:22,280 --> 01:06:24,040
it just shrinks it.
That's that's what I think.

1709
01:06:24,040 --> 01:06:24,720
And I think that's.
True.

1710
01:06:24,720 --> 01:06:26,560
And no one likes to hear that.
People don't like to hear that

1711
01:06:26,560 --> 01:06:28,960
because it's accepting.
It's accepting realities that

1712
01:06:29,160 --> 01:06:31,920
not every teacher is is an
incredible mathematician, or

1713
01:06:31,920 --> 01:06:33,880
incredible.
I'm sorry, you know, I'm, I'm

1714
01:06:33,880 --> 01:06:34,680
sorry.
Practitioner.

1715
01:06:34,760 --> 01:06:37,880
Have you met?
I trained with someone who was

1716
01:06:37,880 --> 01:06:41,000
teaching a year two class who
was about to do a lesson on time

1717
01:06:41,160 --> 01:06:43,320
and said to me before they
struggle with quarter past.

1718
01:06:45,360 --> 01:06:48,120
No, no, no, I'm sorry because
this is true.

1719
01:06:48,680 --> 01:06:50,680
This is real.
Yeah, it's awful.

1720
01:06:50,960 --> 01:06:54,480
And let's be honest, we have
both taught in lots of schools

1721
01:06:54,480 --> 01:06:56,640
and met lots of teachers who
say, oh, I could never do year

1722
01:06:56,640 --> 01:06:58,360
six.
Yeah, I could never.

1723
01:06:58,360 --> 01:06:59,960
I could never teach your six.
It's too tricky.

1724
01:07:01,000 --> 01:07:02,160
I'm not going to say anything
more about that.

1725
01:07:02,160 --> 01:07:03,520
I'll let you think what you
think about that.

1726
01:07:03,520 --> 01:07:06,200
But it does show there's
obviously a massive breadth of

1727
01:07:06,200 --> 01:07:08,920
teachers abilities across all of
the subjects and in general,

1728
01:07:08,920 --> 01:07:10,840
their pedagogy, their
practitioner ability.

1729
01:07:11,200 --> 01:07:16,120
It's a very complex job, so to
go with the ideology that works

1730
01:07:16,800 --> 01:07:20,160
when everyone is the best
practitioner in the world, to me

1731
01:07:20,160 --> 01:07:22,520
is a really, really annoying
argument that has pissed me off

1732
01:07:22,520 --> 01:07:24,680
over the last 10 years.
Because I'm like, yeah, but can

1733
01:07:24,680 --> 01:07:26,480
we stop ignoring the fact that
we're not, though?

1734
01:07:26,920 --> 01:07:29,160
Can we stop ignoring the fact
that most teachers actually

1735
01:07:29,200 --> 01:07:30,480
aren't this good?
It's right.

1736
01:07:30,480 --> 01:07:32,160
We've got a red sheet.
We've got a red sheet, red on

1737
01:07:32,160 --> 01:07:32,880
the green.
It's fine.

1738
01:07:32,880 --> 01:07:34,320
That's a differentiation.
It's all good.

1739
01:07:34,320 --> 01:07:35,000
It's all good.
It's fine.

1740
01:07:35,040 --> 01:07:37,080
We've got differentiation.
We've got three different tasks.

1741
01:07:37,080 --> 01:07:39,400
You can do the same input.
Everyone's going to, you know.

1742
01:07:39,400 --> 01:07:41,840
Hey, then I've always said it.
A rising tide raises all boats.

1743
01:07:42,880 --> 01:07:44,720
Say that again.
I thought it might be.

1744
01:07:44,720 --> 01:07:46,720
You're so right.
The, the line between reality,

1745
01:07:46,800 --> 01:07:49,960
it is it, it seems distorted.
And, and, and just to, just to

1746
01:07:49,960 --> 01:07:53,520
make this point, this rounding
off point here, OK, it's, it's

1747
01:07:53,520 --> 01:07:57,800
as straightforward as this.
People who've spent 10 years

1748
01:07:58,120 --> 01:08:00,960
telling me that setting is
inherently bad and awful and

1749
01:08:00,960 --> 01:08:04,200
terrible for the kids.
I just hope that what this does

1750
01:08:04,200 --> 01:08:07,880
is make them realise that
they're being over the top.

1751
01:08:08,200 --> 01:08:09,440
They're on a bit of a high
horse.

1752
01:08:09,880 --> 01:08:12,520
It's completely acceptable to
set because children can get

1753
01:08:12,520 --> 01:08:15,280
really good outcomes from it and
there are loads of other things

1754
01:08:15,280 --> 01:08:16,960
that you should be looking at
first.

1755
01:08:17,160 --> 01:08:19,439
If you're worried about your
school's outcomes in maths,

1756
01:08:19,880 --> 01:08:22,560
whether you do mixed ability or
setting should probably be about

1757
01:08:22,560 --> 01:08:25,120
5th on the list of what you want
to actually impact the quality

1758
01:08:25,120 --> 01:08:26,600
of teaching.
I I just can't go over the

1759
01:08:26,600 --> 01:08:30,240
quality of teaching the actual
the actual what is going on in

1760
01:08:30,240 --> 01:08:32,279
your lesson, how adaptive you
are, whether you're meeting the

1761
01:08:32,279 --> 01:08:34,439
needs of the children is so much
more important than

1762
01:08:34,439 --> 01:08:36,600
performative.
If you do mixed ability and it's

1763
01:08:36,600 --> 01:08:39,960
red, red amber green and oh look
I've got a table over there for

1764
01:08:39,960 --> 01:08:42,080
Deans and the children can just
go and get the Deans if they

1765
01:08:42,080 --> 01:08:44,359
want to get them performative
nonsense.

1766
01:08:44,560 --> 01:08:47,000
Children even need support or
they don't yeah, don't just

1767
01:08:47,000 --> 01:08:49,600
leave it up to them to Oh yeah,
well I've got the isn't this you

1768
01:08:49,600 --> 01:08:50,920
walk into my classroom.
It's fantastic.

1769
01:08:50,920 --> 01:08:52,160
There's children have all
abilities here.

1770
01:08:52,160 --> 01:08:53,600
Isn't this so inclusive and
amazing?

1771
01:08:53,600 --> 01:08:55,520
And and I've got all of the
manipulatives out and the

1772
01:08:55,520 --> 01:08:56,920
children.
There's there's three different

1773
01:08:56,920 --> 01:08:58,720
tasks and that that people
working with a teaching

1774
01:08:58,720 --> 01:09:00,560
assistant and I'm working with
this group and they're on a red

1775
01:09:00,560 --> 01:09:03,880
ambushy and they're a green
sheet performative nonsense.

1776
01:09:03,880 --> 01:09:05,920
It can look good.
This is what I'm saying.

1777
01:09:06,040 --> 01:09:08,680
It can be really good.
It's when it's performative.

1778
01:09:08,680 --> 01:09:10,000
I'm talking about when it's
performative.

1779
01:09:10,160 --> 01:09:12,560
So don't turn around and say to
me what I do isn't performative

1780
01:09:12,560 --> 01:09:13,520
good.
Thank fantastic.

1781
01:09:13,520 --> 01:09:16,160
You're probably doing mixed
ability really well, but it can

1782
01:09:16,160 --> 01:09:19,439
so easily slip into just being
performative to look like we're

1783
01:09:19,439 --> 01:09:21,840
being inclusive, to look like
we're helping everyone at once.

1784
01:09:22,040 --> 01:09:23,880
And isn't this so much better
than setting?

1785
01:09:24,040 --> 01:09:26,200
The answer is, it's not always
no.

1786
01:09:26,479 --> 01:09:27,399
I agree.
I agree.

1787
01:09:28,000 --> 01:09:31,200
And yeah, not there isn't one,
but I was trying to think that

1788
01:09:31,200 --> 01:09:33,560
if I had the perfect school for
the perfect situation, I have

1789
01:09:33,560 --> 01:09:35,680
the best, I've got the best ten
teachers in the whole country

1790
01:09:36,120 --> 01:09:38,319
and they can share planning and
workloads already managed.

1791
01:09:38,560 --> 01:09:41,080
I probably would go down the
route of let's let's let's go

1792
01:09:41,080 --> 01:09:43,240
down mixed stability because I
think there are clear benefits

1793
01:09:43,240 --> 01:09:44,399
to it.
We've talked, we've dismantled a

1794
01:09:44,399 --> 01:09:46,479
lot of them, but there are still
clear benefits to mixed

1795
01:09:46,479 --> 01:09:47,920
stability.
I swear I wouldn't.

1796
01:09:48,240 --> 01:09:50,240
Would you not?
No, all I would say is let's

1797
01:09:50,240 --> 01:09:51,600
look at the children.
True.

1798
01:09:51,600 --> 01:09:54,720
Yeah, just go to the children.
I think I'd go to that and my

1799
01:09:54,720 --> 01:09:57,640
baseline.
I I think the best practise is

1800
01:09:57,640 --> 01:09:59,160
to not have a baseline.
Yeah, Yeah.

1801
01:09:59,200 --> 01:10:00,880
It's like I need fantastic
teachers and you know, this

1802
01:10:00,960 --> 01:10:02,080
cool, let's see what the kids
need.

1803
01:10:03,280 --> 01:10:05,720
Oh, I think it seems, and this
is what I've done my whole

1804
01:10:05,720 --> 01:10:08,520
career, 80% of the time.
It turned out that I thought the

1805
01:10:08,520 --> 01:10:10,360
best thing for children would be
would be setting.

1806
01:10:10,360 --> 01:10:12,480
I don't think that would change.
I don't think that would change

1807
01:10:12,480 --> 01:10:13,360
to the best teacher in the
world.

1808
01:10:13,360 --> 01:10:14,480
I think I would still look at
the children.

1809
01:10:14,480 --> 01:10:17,040
I'd still go amazing, we've got
the best teacher in the world,

1810
01:10:17,040 --> 01:10:19,640
Fantastic on the whole for this
cohort.

1811
01:10:19,800 --> 01:10:23,280
Actually, let's set them and it
might be set slightly different

1812
01:10:23,280 --> 01:10:25,440
to last year, set different next
year, mixed ability one year.

1813
01:10:25,840 --> 01:10:30,440
In general though, I think we
can really do setting well in a

1814
01:10:30,440 --> 01:10:32,120
way that doesn't affect
confidence, that improves

1815
01:10:32,120 --> 01:10:34,320
outcomes for everyone.
Does it increase a gap?

1816
01:10:34,320 --> 01:10:36,600
Maybe, but that gap is making
everyone better.

1817
01:10:37,040 --> 01:10:38,440
Definitely.
Let me change what I said then

1818
01:10:38,440 --> 01:10:39,720
because you're absolutely right.
It is.

1819
01:10:39,720 --> 01:10:41,120
It is just about the context of
the cohort.

1820
01:10:41,600 --> 01:10:45,680
What I really truly meant there
was if I had the best school in

1821
01:10:45,680 --> 01:10:48,760
the world, the best teachers
ever, I would be significantly

1822
01:10:48,760 --> 01:10:52,080
more likely to be considering
mixed stability then I would be

1823
01:10:52,080 --> 01:10:53,680
streaming.
And even though still it's down

1824
01:10:53,680 --> 01:10:56,720
to the children, everything we
just said about the reality and

1825
01:10:56,720 --> 01:10:58,960
the workload and the
manageability to me does

1826
01:10:58,960 --> 01:11:01,320
actually play a part in my mind
as to whether I even want to

1827
01:11:01,320 --> 01:11:03,840
explore this concept or not.
Because I, there is, there are

1828
01:11:03,840 --> 01:11:06,680
realities where I think where I
imagine I could be in a school

1829
01:11:06,680 --> 01:11:09,240
where I think mixed ability
could work, You know, in this

1830
01:11:09,240 --> 01:11:13,680
situation, if I had the best,
most amazing practises in the

1831
01:11:13,680 --> 01:11:17,360
world, the top ten teachers.
But in this situation right now,

1832
01:11:17,480 --> 01:11:20,480
I actually think, given all
circumstances and reality of

1833
01:11:20,480 --> 01:11:23,240
the, the ability of the teachers
and the system and the, the

1834
01:11:23,400 --> 01:11:25,640
situation I've got, I think
streaming is going to be the

1835
01:11:25,640 --> 01:11:28,520
better outcome though, even
though ideologically maybe mixed

1836
01:11:28,520 --> 01:11:31,040
ability could be better.
Reality, sometimes Trump's the

1837
01:11:31,040 --> 01:11:32,120
ideologies, is what I'm trying
to.

1838
01:11:32,120 --> 01:11:35,360
Say almost always.
Yeah, that's real because one's

1839
01:11:35,360 --> 01:11:37,960
actually real.
Yeah.

1840
01:11:37,960 --> 01:11:39,320
Be really interesting.
I think in the future, what

1841
01:11:39,320 --> 01:11:42,960
would be great is to get some
people maybe to chat to Joe

1842
01:11:42,960 --> 01:11:45,400
Dennis, long time, who maybe,
you know, really, really

1843
01:11:45,560 --> 01:11:47,120
strongly for mixed.
Yeah.

1844
01:11:47,200 --> 01:11:48,160
Yeah, and that's why we're
wrong.

1845
01:11:48,200 --> 01:11:50,000
And have an argument.
Yeah, don't genuinely like.

1846
01:11:50,120 --> 01:11:52,800
I mean, like, I mean, a debate,
That's the word, yeah.

1847
01:11:52,800 --> 01:11:54,800
The debate the the polite
version of an argument.

1848
01:11:54,920 --> 01:11:57,480
Yeah, based on your, the real
you did the other day, I can

1849
01:11:57,480 --> 01:11:59,800
already tell that there's raffle
favours and there will be people

1850
01:11:59,800 --> 01:12:02,160
who vehemently disagree, like
absolutely.

1851
01:12:02,160 --> 01:12:03,160
And there'll be something we've
missed.

1852
01:12:03,160 --> 01:12:05,200
There will be there.
They'll just be a perspective we

1853
01:12:05,200 --> 01:12:07,280
only, you know, we explored like
a good 10 perspectives there,

1854
01:12:07,280 --> 01:12:10,160
but there will be more that we
didn't maybe take into account

1855
01:12:10,440 --> 01:12:12,560
and someone will tell us why
we're absolutely, completely

1856
01:12:12,560 --> 01:12:14,440
wrong and it'll be interesting.
My favourite thing was when

1857
01:12:14,480 --> 01:12:17,560
someone commented on Facebook
and said that I'd completely

1858
01:12:17,560 --> 01:12:20,160
misinterpreted it and I should
go and sit on the low ability

1859
01:12:20,160 --> 01:12:22,080
class low ability table for
teachers.

1860
01:12:23,640 --> 01:12:28,480
I mean, that was me.
Yeah, I was like, OK, it sounds

1861
01:12:28,480 --> 01:12:29,880
like you're the.
We found a high horse.

1862
01:12:29,880 --> 01:12:32,080
Everyone.
We found a high horse.

1863
01:12:32,280 --> 01:12:34,560
Here they are.
This is like I did a video

1864
01:12:34,560 --> 01:12:36,760
saying both were OK.
Yeah, and you and you're an

1865
01:12:36,760 --> 01:12:38,720
idiot user.
Oh, thank you.

1866
01:12:39,240 --> 01:12:41,320
I'm sure you help your child's
confidence all the time in your

1867
01:12:41,320 --> 01:12:43,680
mixed ability classes.
Anyway, let's finish up there.

1868
01:12:43,680 --> 01:12:45,560
Please, guys, share this with
someone you think might find

1869
01:12:45,560 --> 01:12:46,440
useful.
Send it to someone who

1870
01:12:46,440 --> 01:12:49,280
absolutely loves mixed ability
because they might think oh they

1871
01:12:49,280 --> 01:12:51,400
might get annoyed.
Who knows, maybe don't, because

1872
01:12:51,400 --> 01:12:52,920
they might not rate US five
stars, but you will.

1873
01:12:53,040 --> 01:12:54,920
Please do it right now guys, see
you next time.

1874
01:12:54,920 --> 01:12:55,840
Long old episode, bye.