Today’s session brought together three things that are starting to feel increasingly connected: modelling, checking understanding and lesson planning.

We began with a simple idea: great teaching depends on both strong subject knowledge and strong instruction. Knowing something yourself is not the same as being able to make it understandable to somebody else.

This is where modelling comes in.

At its simplest, modelling is about making the how and why of a task visible. Rather than simply showing pupils the finished answer, the teacher exposes the thinking that gets them there.

We experienced this ourselves through a division problem. First, the lecturer modelled the method through a visualiser. Then we completed one together with his guidance. Finally, we attempted one independently:

I do

We do

You do

It was a useful reminder that modelling is not really about pupils watching the teacher perform. The goal is eventually for them to be able to grasp the process and apply it themselves.

This connects closely with Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction. Rosenshine argues for presenting new material in small steps, providing models, asking lots of questions, checking pupils’ understanding, guiding practice and only gradually moving towards independent work.

That gradual movement felt particularly important.

Modelling is more than demonstration

We discussed several tools that might sit within a teacher’s modelling toolbox:

  • Live modelling — completing a task step by step while explaining the decisions being made.
  • Worked examples — giving pupils a completed or partially completed example to study.
  • Metacognitive modelling — making the thinking process explicit: Why am I doing this? What am I looking for? How will I know if this is correct?
  • Scaffolding — temporarily providing support that can gradually be removed.

That last point made me think. Scaffolding is not really successful if it remains permanently in place. Its purpose is to help pupils achieve something they cannot yet manage independently, before that support is gently withdrawn over time.

Modelling alone is not enough

Perhaps my biggest takeaway came from comparing examples of teaching.

A teacher might provide a very clear explanation and model their thinking beautifully, but if they continue talking without checking what pupils have understood, the lesson can still lose people.

The stronger examples combined modelling with constant information gathering.

This might involve mini-whiteboards, cold calling, think–pair–share, asking pupils to identify an incorrect worked example, completing a step together, or simply stopping and asking a carefully chosen question.

The important thing is that the teacher is continually finding out:

Are they still with me?

That means lesson planning perhaps needs to move beyond simply thinking:

What am I going to explain?

and towards something closer to:

For me, that is probably the most useful connection to Rosenshine.

A good lesson is not simply a journey through content. It is a carefully managed journey from teacher support towards pupil independence.