Just because something is common doesn’t make it a good idea. It arises because people want a shortcut rather than because it develops high quality writing.

It’s limiting, it’s not scholarly, it’s tedious, it’s not sensitive to the demands of the subject or question, it disincentivises thought, it makes an artificial distinction between evidence and explanation etc.

It’s like a virus.

I think it stands for Point, Evidence, Explanation (or maybe Evaluation), Judgement.

Or do they mean explanation as the second E? But that doesn’t make much more sense. And one of them has written it out as evaluation.

Of course! It looks like this.

It might actually be true, of course.

Yeah I love that TT data that shows most teachers think they’re above average.

On a more serious note if you ever doubt the impact of Ofsted on leaders’ behaviour, look at this data. Guarantee the stats would have been the other way round 15 years ago and still would be if Ofsted hadn’t stopped grading lessons. That impact has been positive on this but isn’t necessarily.

I’ve had absolutely the same thought. I think it’s brilliant but I do question how scaleable.

Totally. When I started my career it was pretty common for teachers to strategically plan an easier lesson by setting some sort of extended task involving research and then perhaps a group presentation. Could take up the whole lesson. You just had to keep an eye on things. Not any more.

It’s just so grim! That’s really bad luck!Not great timing for me either as Head has been injured and out of school.

I find it wild that if you’re verbally abusive to a police officer or a nurse you can be prosecuted, but we are saying that when it happens to teachers it’s not even appropriate to send a child home.

Absolutely. I can think of occasions when we have arranged for a student to serve a suspension internally, but it has been logged as a suspension rather than an internal exclusion. That might be for safeguarding reasons, for example.

If the government wishes to make a case for expanding AP or making new venues available to supervise suspended students, with suitably qualified staff and well resourced to maximise the chances that the time is used productively, then I’m all ears.

…would sympathise with an argument that serving that time at home is frequently not the ideal scenario, but it doesn’t follow that it should simply be be pushed back to schools and schools cannot reasonably be expected to provide an alternative venue and supervise it.

You may well be right, but I think my argument would be that there needs to be a tier of consequence between internal exclusion and permanent exclusion, that this needs to be outside of school, and that it should not be reserved for violent offences only. I think many (most?) school leaders…