"As pupils progress through an increasingly specialised secondary school curriculum, there is a growing need to ensure that pupils are trained to access the academic language and conventions of different subjects. Strategies grounded in disciplinary literacy aim to meet this need, building on the premise that each subject has its own unique language, ways of knowing, doing, and communicating.”
EEF, ‘Improving Literacy in Secondary Schools’ 

Language used in the classroom becomes increasingly sophisticated, specialised and subject specific as pupils progress from primary to secondary school. Disciplinary talk is a recognition that mathematicians, scientists, and geographers, communicate in subtly different ways, and that talk routines can be well matched to curriculum content in those different areas. 

Learning through disciplinary talk can include:

  • Reasoning in mathematics. Pupils verbally explain the steps they took to solve a problem (e.g., “I divided both sides of the equation by 2 because I needed to isolate the variable.”).
  • Hypothesis discussions in science. Pairs discuss their predictions for an experiment, explaining the science behind their reasoning (e.g., “I think the balloon will expand because heat causes air particles to move faster and spread out.”).
  • Decision-making exercises in geography. Groups discuss where to locate a new settlement based on geographical factors, justifying their choices.
  • Improvisation and reflection in drama. After an improvisation exercise, students explain their choices and evaluate the impact of their performance.
  • Analysing peer performances in PE. Pupils provide purposeful feedback on a peer’s performance in a skill, using technical vocabulary (e.g., “Your follow-through on the throw needs to be longer to increase accuracy.”).

Where does disciplinary talk fit with wider literacy approaches? 

Elements of generic talk routines – such as ‘Think-Pair-Share’ – can be intelligently adapted to meet subject specific needs, but such adaptations need to be clearly considered. School leaders should be wary of implementing whole school (or Trust) approaches to talk routines that are not sensitive to the needs of subject disciplines, alongside considering the diverse needs of their pupils. 

General literacy approaches, such as explicit vocabulary instruction, or developing reading fluency, can also be considered with subtle routine differences in mind. For example, in music, vocabulary instruction likely needs to encompass soundscapes, whereas in MFL vocabulary instruction may morph into teaching phrases and listening tasks. 

What is an obvious big benefit from focusing on disciplinary talk? Well, we do most of this stuff already. Even small adaptations, such as tweaking improvements to the quality of classroom dialogue, are likely available. Done well, small gains like building better dialogue and thinking, could add up over time and make a big positive difference over time. 

Some reflective questions include:

  • How well established is disciplinary talk across my school? For primary colleagues, how well are we developing the necessary foundations of talk? 
  • What subject supports are in place to develop the confidence, skill and practices of all teachers across different curriculum disciplines? 
  • What talk routines do we already do well and how can we build on them?