I was at the CPD talk. Thank you, and sorry my phone went off 😬

It doesn't seem particularly useful to me then. Long term memory implies the passing of time since first learning experience, so gives a better inferrence imo. I'm not sure a definition almost designed to give different outcomes depending on the observer is useful.

How do you distinguish that from performance?

Evaluate rigourously and fairly...
"I saw something that I have no knowledge of myself, but AI told me it was bad."

That puts the responsibility on the learner rather than the teacher and I'm not sure I like that balance. It also implies I should be moved, doesn't it?

I did read it (I skimmed some) I can see what and how not to teach, but I'm less clear on what should be taught.
As someone who wasnt really moved by poetry, asking me what it makes me feel isn't going to help me much.

So what do you actually teach the students in front of you?

This seems to hinge on a limited view of perquisite knowledge. When I check understanding of osmosis before doing the practical activity, I'm not really fussed if they can parrot "osmosis is...", but more interested that they understand supporting, concentration, particle kinetics etc.

I'm a science teacher, but I'm interested in English at the moment.
"an ‘informed personal response’ cannot be invalid, especially if there is evidence to support it."
If we expect a 16 year old to give a better response than a 10 year old, then what is it the 16 yo 'knows' and how is it taught?

How funny, out of if the blue I put on behind the mask this morning, an absolute belter.
Kayla? Tears in heaven?