Everybody’s talking about talk
Whatever your role in school, no doubt you’ll have noticed the rise in interest in oral language. Deemed by some as the ‘next big thing’ and by others as a passing trend, the topic is also encumbered by debates over definitions and practice.
There is a dizzying array of terms to describe aspects of oral language: talk, debate, dialogue, and oracy. These terms are accompanied by a huge breadth of practice that includes presentational talk, exploratory talk, paired or group work, literacy and debate. There are some well-evidenced programmes, such as ‘Dialogic Teaching’; however, the evidence base for many of these practices that broadly and loosely enacted in the system are weak. The strongest evidence consistently being found for the early years and literacy (namely, reading comprehension and vocabulary instruction).
Because oral language involves broad practices and unclear definitions, there are challenges and risks, including the danger of superficial and performative approaches. This means it’s crucial to interrogate the evidence for specific practices, rather than assume any practice focused on oral language will be impactful. As the Oracy Commission’s recent report, We Need to Talk, reflects, ‘we most definitely aren’t wishing to trigger a flurry of oracy gimmicks or supposed quick-fixes to be marketed to schools and colleges’.
Making the biggest difference for disadvantaged pupils
One way of guarding against superficial approaches which are likely to have little impact is to examine the area of consensus that oral language approaches (approaches that emphasise the importance of spoken language and verbal interaction in the classroom) are important and can make the biggest difference for our most disadvantaged pupils, especially in early life.
A focus on the evidence would show that Oral language interventions can have a positive impact at all phases of education, but the impact is highest in the early years (+7 months), and higher in primary schools (+6 months) than in secondary (+5 months).
Oral language approaches are based on the idea that comprehension and reading skills benefit from explicit discussion of either content or processes of learning, or both. They aim to support pupils’ use of vocabulary, development of ideas and spoken expression.
Effective oral language approaches are best integrated into the use of purposeful, curriculum-focused, dialogue and interaction and should be considered as a core element of developing literacy, rather than a distinct subject area in its own right.
The following diagram details some of these integrated practices.
Maximising impact
The attention to detail needed to maximise the impact of oral language approaches underlines the need for sustained training and high-quality implementation to avoid lethal mutations, inconsistent delivery, or ‘tick box’ compliance. For example, approaches which explicitly aim to develop spoken vocabulary work best when they are related to current content being studied in school. This needs to be delivered consistently and involve active and meaningful use of any new vocabulary.
So, is oral language ‘the next big’ thing or a passing trend? Tethering oral language approaches to a tight set of integrated, well-evidenced practices, both in relation to literacy and the curriculum more widely, means that targeting talk can stand the test of time.
EEF resources
Teaching and Learning Toolkit –Oral language interventions
‘Developing Oral Language’ EEF podcast
Early Years Evidence Store – Communication and Language