Oracy in state schools

It's also worth mentioning that it's easier to control the behaviour of a class when they're writing rather than being allowed to discuss. Some pupils find it difficult to concentrate for more than a few minutes even in teacher/pupil discussions.
Good point. It must be difficult trying to engage everyone.

At my DGC’s secondary school, drama was part of the curriculum, until they had to choose GCSE options, where it became an option. Debating is still in the English curriculum there.

In Primary, OFSTED inspectors meet with children to talk about what they’re learning and about school in general. Different governors meet with some children from each class (different ability groups) to hear about what the children like about a particular subject or what they’d like to see there.
We use WELLCOMM to assess children’s language needs and for work in school and with parents to improve S&L. I wonder what else will be in this newly titled Oracy project.

I’m an experienced Inspector of Schools and generally welcome Starmer’s contribution to highlight education.

Many,if not most teachers include what he is calling Oracy blended through their day-to-day teaching. As has been pointed out, it has been statutory for a long time and teachers are skilled at knowing where it works well.

I would dispute that secondary schools focus disproportionately on exams to the exclusion of Oracy.
Many continue to take wonderful trips abroad in MFL or Sports, inspite of everything governments have done to put difficulties in the way.
I’ve seen drama professionals would be proud of, with whole-school approaches celebrating those making props/ lighting/ front of house equally seen as major contributors.

I don’t think for one moment that teachers will welcome ‘new initiatives’ within the curriculum - most would love to just be able to get on with the job they love and do well.

Well said ImogenMac. I hope that the initiative will seek to understand and build on the good practice that is already there.

Let us hope the initiative starts close to home, with Angela Rayner. It seems her utterances in the House of Commons have baffled the writers of Hansard, and she has angrily refused to allow them to correct anything she has said as she wanted to be 'With the working people' or words to that effect. Good luck to KS - an excellent proposal and much needed.

Obviously, verbal communication is important, and it may well be it has suffered from the overuse of social media that begins earlier and earlier these days.

However, many years of teaching has shown me very clearly that the incentive to encourage school-children to use their verbal skills suffers if, as is so often the case now, it is hard to get a class to be quiet and listen.

Another thing, my experience has taught me, is to be very wary of these "buzz words" that politicians come up with regarding education. They never have clear ideas of how their good ideas (and many of them are sensible ideas) can be put into practice in the classsroom, nor are they either willing, or able, to find the funding to run seminars for teachers who need help putting the new directives into practise or funding for new teaching materials to use.

Without realistic aims to implement good ideas, they remain just that: good ideas that rarely can be of any practical use.

LovesBach

Let us hope the initiative starts close to home, with Angela Rayner. It seems her utterances in the House of Commons have baffled the writers of Hansard, and she has angrily refused to allow them to correct anything she has said as she wanted to be 'With the working people' or words to that effect. Good luck to KS - an excellent proposal and much needed.

I'm not sure your point is clear here, (sorry).

Are you saying that the proposal should allow people Angela Rayner to be treated the same as, say, Jacob Rees Mogg when it comes to the recording of her speeches, or should hers be corrected and his not? If so, why?

If you think that the initiative is much needed, would you hope for a result that meant that more people from working class backgrounds were able to be heard in their one voices and have their words stand, or that they should be 'corrected' by those whose speech patterns are different?

Sorry - that should be 'own voices', not 'one voices'.

When I taught reception class never mind speaking and listening the first job was to get them to sit down, then they had to listen and then be persuaded to speak. Many children could not stay sitting down for more than five mins at a time unless the programme was on TV.
Many years ago I walked into a classroom and a teacher had a cardboard box on her head made to look like a t.v. I got out quickly and she explained they took far more notice of her with the box on.
I always refused to mark the register while everyone was not sitting down, it took a week of sitting until break until one child finally gave in.
I don't think some politicians have a clue what it is to teach, though Starmer does have one that I know was a former teacher there must be others.
I also think Angela Rayner exaggerates her accent on purpose, I could speak to DH or a friend and most people would not have a clue what I was saying. When speaking formally I change to an accent and words that most people will understand.

LovesBach

Let us hope the initiative starts close to home, with Angela Rayner. It seems her utterances in the House of Commons have baffled the writers of Hansard, and she has angrily refused to allow them to correct anything she has said as she wanted to be 'With the working people' or words to that effect. Good luck to KS - an excellent proposal and much needed.

I really can’t believe that.
Angela Rayner is incredibly eloquent, and she speaks clearly and succinctly.
Do you have a source?
Thank you

i think angela rayner is an excellent communicator.
she listens carefully to questions and addresses them as well as any politician.
she is clear in her speech and without waffle.
such people carry credibility and enhance public life.

I’ve just found this, but there is no mention of being ‘baffled’
It’s just that her grammar isn’t always up to scratch.
SPaG is a different matter which is also covered in depth in primary education
www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/07/04/angela-rayner-wont-let-parliament-correct-working-class-grammar/

Exactly welbeck

why should she let them change her words for the record ?
if the meaning is perfectly clear, and i bet it is from having heard her, then there is no need.
to suggest it is faintly insulting, as if her mode of expression is not quite acceptable, or respectable !

Whitewavemark2

Lollin

Yes ronib I have heard the very real frustrations of teachers on just the basics like behaviour and speech in their young pupils. One of the problems is getting some families onboard otherwise things like communication are discouraged. It’s not a simple area to fix.

That is why Labour are concentrating on early years and sure start.

Babies go to nursery now at a very young age (-weeks or months) and it will be part of this curriculum as well, so that by the time children arrive at primary school a lot if these problems will be ironed out.

My experience of my grandson's nursery has not been positive in this respect. It's not a fancy establishment, but I feel that he's come through without much attention being paid to pronunciation or indeed to speaking in whole sentences.

I appreciate that there is more to oratory than this, but it must make life very difficult for the teachers in the Reception classes if children can't speak clearly. In my daughter's class (more than 30 years ago now) only one little boy started school unable to speak properly. Most of the others had been to nursery schools, though very rarely for more than half days at that time.

Sadly the better qualified staff have gradually left our nursery, it seems the only way to get better pay is to move to a nursery in a more middle class area. The staff who are left are, in some cases, little better than babysitters and little attempt is made to actually teach them anything. Some of the staff have English as a second language and their English and pronunciation leave something to be desired.

^why should she let them change her words for the record ?
if the meaning is perfectly clear, and i bet it is from having heard her, then there is no need.
to suggest it is faintly insulting, as if her mode of expression is not quite acceptable, or respectable !^

I agree wellbeck. Angela Raynor is far more articulate than Boris Johnson ever was. Did the writers of Hansard struggle to convey all his bumbling nonsense? I would suggest it’s her northern, working class accent that some people can’t cope with, rather than any grammatical inaccuracy! I find her clear, articulate and to-the-point; unlike many Eton educated toffs!

Whitewavemark2

ronib

Ww2 some problems will be ironed out then only to be replaced by other issues? For example poor family bonds and relationships.

Sorry, I don’t understand you?

Exactly *ronib - sone children go to school and don't actually know their own name as they aren't spoken to at home, seems unreal, but it's true ....

welbeck

why should she let them change her words for the record ?
if the meaning is perfectly clear, and i bet it is from having heard her, then there is no need.
to suggest it is faintly insulting, as if her mode of expression is not quite acceptable, or respectable !

I agree, for the record. I was giving LovesBach the benefit of the doubt, and the chance to rephrase her post as her own meaning was ambiguous.

I really like Angela Rayner

Incredibly shallow of me but her hair is gorgeous. I know I know I wouldnt say that about aman etc etc.

Also, when I were a lass, there was summat called the English Speaking Board. I did several exams with them from the age of 11 or so and got certificates (of which I was very proud ).

They came into schools and the exams were voluntary (or maybe the teachers put forward children they thought suitable - I can't remember, if I ever knew). You had to read a prepared piece from a book of your choice, read another unseen piece and give a short talk about something (again prepared, but you were asked questions about it by the examiner afterwards). I don't think they were looking for RP accents (I certainly didn't have one) but for clarity of speech, an ability to think aloud and show a level of comprehension of what you were reading.

This would have been the late 60s/early 70s. I don't know if they are still around, but I assume that this is the sort of thing that the initiative will encourage.

Galaxy

Incredibly shallow of me but her hair is gorgeous. I know I know I wouldnt say that about aman etc etc.

I would #shallowandproud . Or I would if any of the men in Parliament had hair worth mentioning. Michael Fabricant's barnet is living art, Keir's reminds me of Playmobil snap-on hair, and Johnson's was ridiculous.

Grooming is so much easier for men, so a bit of thought about their appearance would go a long way.

Ms Rayner's objection to Hansard arose when evidently it was suggested that something she had said wasn't clear. A headline in the Telegraph, quoting her own words 'Hansard have a bit of a nightmare’ with her speeches, but argues against ‘the professionalisation of politics’. I can't understand why Ms Rayner feels that clear and articulate speech - which is what Keir Starmer is pushing for - is professionalising politics - whatever that might mean. Clear speech is clear speech in whatever accent it is delivered, and surely the point of speaking is that others understand what you are saying. Does AR object to this too, if something she has said is confusing to others? Is she above correction? I don't think accents came into it - clarity did.

Like most of Starmer’s ‘ideas’ this is nothing new. Oracy has been part of the curriculum for years.
Judging by the twenty- somethings that I work with, they need to concentrate more on spelling and grammar. They all have plenty to say for themselves, but their writing is atrocious.

I will embrace my shallow nature. Keirs hair is quite unusual.