This article was first published in Sec Ed in their ‘SecEd best practice guide to teaching oracy in schools’.

Disciplinary oracy is the recognition that what it means to communicate effectively varies between disciplines (Moorghen, 2023).

The oracy skills we use, teach and value in the science classroom differ to those used, taught and valued in the history classroom. We cannot impose uniform expectations on the way students talk (explain, reason…) and expect that this will be educationally productive in every lesson, regardless of subject matter. These differences arise because “each subject has its own unique language, ways of knowing, doing, and communicating” (Quigley & Coleman, 2019). This is at its most apparent when it comes to the oracy we use and teach.

There is a tight relationship between talking and thinking. Through spoken language, we develop cognitively, we access new ideas, (disciplinary) modes of analysis, and conceptual understanding. The best oracy practitioners are those who mobilise their subject expertise – they understand the reasoning and thinking that students need to do to grapple with their subject, and use this to plan for the speaking and listening that students will need to do to in order to extend and expose this thinking. As such, the most meaningful oracy activities in the classroom are those that help students to access the thinking of the discipline: to talk, and therefore to think, like a specialist.

In support of learning

We know that learning through talk promotes student attainment across subjects (EEF, 2017). We also know that the type and quality of classroom talk matters. We are listening for classrooms where students explain and elaborate their reasoning, where their ideas are listened to and built on or challenged by peers, and where students are in discussion with one another – not engaging in a series of individual student- teacher interactions.

These rich discussions about curricular content – perhaps evaluating sources in history or solving a tricky problem in maths – deepen students’ knowledge, as they develop and practise using subject-specific reasoning skills and engage with new concepts. Further, these pedagogies extend teachers’ insight into student thinking and learning, enabling them to address misconceptions and ensure they are building on secure foundational understanding.

Confident, active learners

Disciplinary oracy is inextricably linked with students’ sense of confidence and agency over their academic performance. It makes explicit, through talk, the logics of the discipline. As a result, students are better at solving talk that strengthens their ability to “think something through”.

Equitable classrooms

For learning through talk to benefit all students, everyone has to be taught how to join in, especially on arrival in secondary school.

For some, anxiety around speaking spikes upon entry to secondary school. To address this, and ensure that every student can participate in discussions, or present on their learning, in every subject, every teacher (not just the English department or form tutors) must set clear expectations for classroom talk and support students to meet these.

Some expectations will be held in common across the school, some will be subject-specific. For example, teachers will draw on their understanding of oracy and their subject expertise to use narration, questioning and praise to help students develop their ability to engage in rich discussion that extends their subject-specific thinking.

These clear expectations, structures and scaffolds for talk (where needed) create more inclusive, thoughtful classrooms by disproportionately benefiting those who otherwise find it hardest to take part.

Linguistic repertoires

Within the classroom, correcting students’ use of language can hinder learning through talk (Snell & Cushing, 2022). However, classroom talk is not a free-for-all, where we offer no guidance or feedback on contributions. Disciplinary oracy helps us make sense of this. It offers a purpose – to induct students into the ways of talking (and thinking) of the discipline. For example, in a science classroom, using technical vocabulary accurately is important – and to pretend otherwise is to do students a disservice. On the other hand, to “speak like a scientist” doesn’t require that students speak “standard” English, or even in full sentences!

Final thoughts

I leave you with some questions that you will want to discuss:

• What should talk sound like in your subject area?
• What contexts for subject- specific talk might your students encounter when they leave school?
• What kinds of thinking and reasoning do you want to see in your students’ writing and hear in their discussions?
• Are there attitudes or values that you might instil through talk (e.g. a willingness to balance two opposing stances in history; an openness to sharing uncertain thinking in maths)?

FURTHER INFORMATION

EEF: Dialogic teaching, 2017: https://buff.ly/4kfLJfM

► Moorghen: Is every teacher a teacher of oracy? English: Journal of the English Association (72), 2023.

► Quigley & Colemen: Improving literacy in secondary schools: Guidance report, EEF, 2019.

► Simon-Caffyn et al: Confidence and Outcomes for Students and Teachers. In Oracy: The Politics of Speech Education, Wright (ed), Cambridge University Press, 2025.

► Snell & Cushing: ‘A lot of them write how they speak’: Policy, pedagogy and the policing of ‘nonstandard’ English, Literacy (56,3), 2022.