Featured Images

A Guide to Synthetic Phonics

Synthetic as normally used means building something up from two or more basic elements also has a more negative connotation as artificial not natural (or not analytic in synthetic proposition terms)

When I was a boy we learned to read and write by the old fashioned method chalk and talk. You talk or you get the chalk! When old Mrs Meredith (now sadly passed away to the rejoicing of countless generations of her former pupils – I just thought I can now slander her name with impunity) asked you to spell a word she followed it up within at most a second or two with a piece of chalk fired at your head . I used to marvel at the unnerving accuracy that this slight women managed to find the target (mostly Lyn Davies head as it happens) across a crowded classroom with rarely a off target projection. Strong in arm the chalk made its parabolic flight with ICBM accuracy to find the offending dim wits ear – there to explode in a satisfying plume of chalk dust. Such was the skill I often thought she should have made the first eleven she clearly had cricket in her blood – she must have been related to WC Fields – mainly because of the beard come to think of it.

If there is good structure to teaching of whatever style the student will learn quickly – We must not at the first sign that one of Labours’s chavs cannot fill in his benefit claim form change the entire process. Is it worth another method and changing the whole pedagogical approach if the evidence for outcomes at eleven would not materially differ if a good style of teaching delivered by effective professionals was in place? What we are doing with the initiative is extending the control of government (as they cannot trust teachers) from what is taught, the content of the teaching, to how it is taught in the context in the classroom where the innovation and creativity of teachers should be allowed full rein. What this whole approach shows us is the limited understanding government has about practice and no appreciation that students are individuals with different learning styles – and as a consequence a one size blanket initiative will not fit all. What is needed is for professionals to be empowered to use the full armoury of tools and techniques at their disposal (including synthetic phonics) to delivery effective teaching and not headline spin for ministers to give the illusion they are making progress with their education policy.

What is the difference between Inductive and deductive reports?

I was asked by some students this week about their assignment and the difference between inductive and deductive reports.

An inductive report involves moving from the specific issues of the case you are using to general summarised information shown usually in the conclusion and recommendations at the end.

In an inductive report you move from the specific to the general and the structure of the report looks like:

  • Introduction
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Recommendations
  • References

These reports are best for a reader who will read the whole report – from beginning to end. If the findings can be disputed or are controversial then you need to lay out a clear path from your propositions and arguments to the conclusion – the recommendations following from the conclusion are meant to be acted upon.

In a deductive report you move from the general to the specific and the structure of the report looks like::

  • Introduction
  • Conclusions
  • Recommendations
  • Discussion
  • References

This order is aimed at an audience who may not read the entire document but need to review just the conclusions and recommendations and then the discussion if further enlightenment is needed. These reports generally are best used for non controversial subjects.

The report asked for in a management report is an amalgamation of the two approaches above. In effect the Executive Summary of 1 to 2 pages is the deductive part of the report and the main body an inductive component.

So the structure of a management report is:

  • Executive Summary
  • Introduction
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Recommendations
  • References

Hope this helps clarify this issue

Roy



How to Write a High Scoring Essay – the guide for academic success

Writing a high scoring essay – essay guide for academic success

I am often asked by students and colleagues on courses to give a few practical lessons in writing an essay and getting the top marks. As always a clear strategy is needed and this article goes through the key points. Follow them and you’re sure to get straight A’s!

First of all read the question and prepare to answer this question and not the one you have revised for

Strategy : essay writing and preparation

* Reconnaissance and unpacking the question
* Unpack the question, underline all key words and check their definitions. Even seemingly innocuous terms such as ‘might’ should be assessed – does that mean there is the alternative option of ‘might not’? (Understand the purpose of word in the sentence *and why the questioner used the word in that way)
* Continue to deconstruct the question – what is the counter argument?
* When we see critically examine or similar constructs we are being asked to provide an alternative or being asked to probe for weaknesses and counter argument?
* What assumptions are being made behind the question?

Writing the assignment

* Read broadly at first, make notes of key things that will be important for the essay, but leave a column on the side so you can note counter arguments or alternative evidence that you find as your read.
* If you are not sure about an article, read the abstract, introduction and conclusion – that is often enough.
* If you see a quote that says it all make a very careful reference of the page number – it’s a devil of a job later finding the right page.
* Ensure your reading includes some very up to date articles (and always focus your reading on peer reviewed journal articles – use only sparingly the trade press like the HBR or Sloan Management Review they are not rigorous enough).
* Prepare a mind-map of all you think is relevant, then jot down potential order to be discussed (and be firm, cut out things that might not be relevant).
* Focus – on the specific question! The most common reason for failure is answering the wrong question answer this question – not everything you know about the subject.
* Summarise readings, don’t describe, use to answer question and be concise (use references to support).
* Use evidence and examples, (not personal experience) but again, be concise – one or two sentences and a reference not paragraphs of description.
* Check again that all your material is relevant, helps answer the question, sounds logical and minimises use of adverbs or covering words.
* After each paragraph, ask yourself how this is relevant to the question, and say so explicitly.
* At the end of a section state explicitly how what you have said answers the question. ( I have shown that …)
* Whenever you discuss ideas, concepts, or research – make sure you also analyse these, tell us what the assumptions are, problems with the method, counter-evidence you have found etc., be critical/analytical.
* Avoid any sweeping generalisations!

Post Writing Review

* Put aside for a week or two if possible and then come back to it – allows you to see it afresh.
* Read the marking guidelines, look at the example essays, and look also at the marking sheet – they can be very explicit about the need to define terms, develop an argument, take a critical approach etc.
* Get your partner to read it through – it is better to have someone unfamiliar with the subject to check for psychobabble

Review this pre-Flight checklist before you submit the essay:

* Have I answered this question – in an ongoing manner?
* If it is in two parts, have I answered both?
* Have I defined all key terms?
* Have I really unpacked the question, considered alternative arguments?
* Have I covered all the main aspects?
* Have I arranged the material logically?
* Is there a clear introduction saying how I will answer the question, flow between paragraphs, clear conclusion?
* Is each main point supported by examples, evidence, and argument?
* Have I acknowledged all sources and references, including page numbers for direct quotes?
* Have I written plainly and simply, and sorted out clumsy or muddled phrasing?
* Have I p

resented a convincing case which I could justify in a discussion?

General Points

* if a question comes in two parts I would construct the essay around the two parts (rather than trying to mix the answer) This leads the marker through the question in a logical flow – what we are going to say, say it, what have we said.
* Set down a plan in the introduction (First I am going to this , then I am going to do that, and close by considering …) then stick to the plan.
* Stick to the mainstream theory – and use any course materials. Be wary of bringing in theory from outside the bounds of your course.
* If we are only doing a 3000 word essay and the essay is literature based a rough guide would be: Intro 400, first part 1000, second part 1000 conclusion 600.
* Don’t be too rigid with this guideline but use it to make sure you answer all the elements of the question in enough depth.
* Rough guide for an academic essay at Masters level I like to see about 10 references per 1000 words.

Stick to this outline strategy and you will always be up there in the Stars – good luck