Scrooge & The Gustav Stresemann Era: My Waltz with Tier 2 and 3 language

For example, I've recently been thinking about this in terms of my own teaching of 'misanthropic' (tier 2) in the context of A Christmas Carol (I've written about my happy accident journey with vocab here). My pupils' understanding increased when I embraced vocabulary instruction, but I've always been fascinated by the other aspects of my teaching that were developed as a result.

'Misanthropic' means a dis-like of one's fellow human. It's more than being a miserable individual. But consider this: Scrooge is a symbolic representation of Dickens' broader observations of society; does this turn the understanding of the term into tier 3? Indeed, the word takes on a much deeper, interesting meaning in the context of the novella being an allegory (tier 3).

The co-existence of tier 2 and 3 isn't difficult to find across the curriculum:

This has prompted me to reflect on how I speak to schools about disciplinary literacy. For me, it's wrong - and potentially damaging to teaching - to see tier 2 and 3 as distinct elements.

This week, I was fortunate to deliver a whole-school CPD session, focussing on how Bedrock Learning supports disciplinary literacy at scale.

As part of the session, I used a top-tier history essay answer from AQA:

Question, answer and examiner comment.

I'm not a history specialist, but I wanted to offer some linguistic insight into what appeared to be going on in this 'top-level' answer. Obviously, it's well written, but I asked myself how I unpack the language without fully understanding everything involved.

The knowledge (tier 3) is here, but I've been really interested in pulling apart the tier 2 language in this answer:

I was struck by the terms in yellow (tier 3) as concepts that can be taught in Bedrock's Mapper platform (including at the front of the classroom with our Classroom Hub). They're weighty, important terms you can't get away from. understanding these terms is critical, and having a means of outsourcing this is highly useful!

I think, though, that the way those terms are expertly woven together with academic expression is the key. I love the use of descriptive language (completely distinct from, say, a piece of descriptive writing) in the purple boxes- it adds a real sense of credibility and command to the piece. The synchronised sentence openers (red) also weave this together in the broadest terms- these openers are so simple, yet they clearly provide a clear basis for deeper exploration. Just take the time to read them now in isolation- you won't be disappointed!

Some key questions, then:

1. Tier 3 language is weighty and complex. What impactful mechanisms have you got in place to check this at scale in your setting? Are booklets and peer assessment enough? Can you understand 30 whiteboards giving you an answer in detail?
2. Tier 2 language ought to factor in words in isolation as well as the discourse function they perform; words like 'significant' and 'hugely' are fantastic because they add a sense of considered expertise. Are all colleagues encouraged to think in this way, or are they given a list of tier 2 words, and then picking the bones from those lists?
3. How are we supporting our teachers to explore the interplay between tier 2 and 3 words in across the curriculum? I believe this relationship is an extremely powerful one and one we should try to exploit more for the sake of our teaching, especially if we, as Shanahan advises, are to 'apprentice our students in our disciplines.'