An inclusive oracy approach

KRISTINA BETH LEWIS, DEPUTY HEAD (ACADEMIC), BLACKHEATH HIGH SCHOOL, GDST, UK

The Oracy Education Commission’s report We need to talk (2024a) highlights the urgent need for schools to prioritise oracy skills as a core component of the curriculum, in order to address inequalities and improve student outcomes across the UK. There are calls for oracy education to be seen as the fourth ‘R’.

Oracy, defined as ‘articulating ideas, developing understanding and engaging with others through speaking, listening and communication’ (Oracy Education Commission, 2024a, p. 14), plays a pivotal role in the delivery of my school’s civil discourse programme. I have been intentional and explicit in my teaching of oracy to help my Year 7 students to practise how to disagree well. I have written articles, delivered CPD (continuing professional development) presentations and been interviewed by the BBC, where I have proudly shared how we do this at Blackheath High School through our enrichment curriculum. It involves a weekly 50-minute lesson with a class of Year 7 students on an eight-week programme. The course runs on a carousel, so that by the end of the academic year, I will have taught every student in Year 7 the foundational skills of civil discourse. While the lessons are discretely taught, my aim is that the skills needed to ‘disagree well’ will be relevant in any subject, as well as in the playground and at the dinner table with family.

It was only after reading Speaking Volumes, a report published in advance of the Oracy Education Commission’s report, that I considered the true inclusivity of my civil discourse programme (Oracy Education Commission, 2024b). Speaking Volumes includes an insightful chapter by Louisa Reeves (Speech and Language UK) and Caroline Wright (Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists), outlining how crucial it is that everyone is included; this means students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND), who make up 1.6 million children in the UK – approximately 370,000 (Reeves and Wright, 2024) of whom have speech, language and communication needs (SLCN). I was particularly struck to learn that around eight per cent of all children stammer at some point in their childhood, and while this may not be considered a special educational need, it does require thoughtfully adapted teaching approaches to ensure that everyone is included, especially when focusing on student talk (Action for Stammering Children, nd).

Delving into the research has prompted me to reflect on my approach to oracy, ensuring that my civil discourse programme is truly inclusive by design and does not exclude students with communication needs and differences. This involves teaching strategies that place emphasis on active listening. I do this by explaining the importance of listening generously – listening with feelings, listening in a caring way, listening with the aim of learning something new. For me, this is the gold standard of oracy. I often tell my students that shouting the loudest and talking over another person in a conversation are not effective methods of communicating, nor are they effective ways of developing meaningful understanding. As my civil discourse programme focuses on helping students to manage skilful disagreement, I now spend more time exploring the strategies needed for genuine listening – for example, feeding back for correction what has been heard and asking students to check for understanding. This has had a positive effect on my students’ experience when disagreeing with each other, because it respects autonomy and allows students on both sides to control their own narratives.

I have been explicit in my use of the University of Cambridge’s oracy framework (Oracy Cambridge and Voice 21, 2020), which divides the oracy skills that young people need to develop at school into four distinct yet interrelated strands: physical, linguistic, cognitive and social-emotional. The latter is particularly valuable in group discussion; students need to be taught about the social-emotional dimensions of oracy, such as inviting contributions from those who have yet to speak and ensuring that everyone has a chance to contribute. I have been intentional here because groupwork can often result in one student dominating the discussion, while those less confident – or those with speech, language and communication needs – are often silent or distant. Without a true understanding of oracy, we run the risk of unintentionally harming the students who need our support the most. Alongside talk prompts, I always include visual aids and opportunities for writing to ensure that all students feel that they can contribute in meaningful ways. I respect the wishes of students who may not wish to speak, and I create a safe learning environment to reduce anxiety and avoidance as much as possible. Simple things, such as forewarning my students with SLCN about a lesson’s content, go a long way. Likewise, allowing my students to record their voices using their tablets, in their own time, has been an effective way of reducing the pressure of performing on the spot, while also celebrating their voices being heard.

I welcome the renewed focus on oracy education. As a history and politics teacher, the use of dialogue to foster and deepen students’ learning is central in my lessons, through exploratory talk and spoken reasoning. Alongside this, I am grateful for the research shared by experts in the field of SEND, who have reminded me to affirm and celebrate the many differences in communication and interaction styles, to ensure that everyone’s voice is heard.