Two world views side by side
LAUNCH Humanities · Autumn 1 · Week 2 · 40 minutes
Today at a Glance
◆ Supported
Two cards, error circled, scribing permitted.
▲ Standard
Four cards, each with error, row and correction.
★ Stretch
Four cards corrected, plus one shared belief and one held by only one.
Teacher Print Tools — Week 2
Arrival Task – Retrieving what a key belief is
A key belief is one a world view could not do without. Take it away and the rest stops making sense.
A statement about a belief can be wrong in one phrase. Spotting that phrase is the skill for today.
Arrival decision: Take the belief grid and the four statement cards from the set. Everyone works from the same grid.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: Every correction is made from the grid on the table, and no learner speaks for a group. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At Arrival, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “Every correction is made from the grid on the table, and no learner speaks for a group” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “Every correction is made from the grid on the table, and no learner speaks for a group” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “Every correction is made from the grid on the table, and no learner speaks for a group” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: Starter: One wrong phrase
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
- Lundy Loop Lundy Loop — Your Voice in This Lesson SPACE stays available, VOICE is received, AUDIENCE names back exactly and INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
- Why: 🚪 SPACE , Space SPACE stays available, VOICE is received, AUDIENCE names back exactly and INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
- 📣 VOICE 👥 AUDIENCE ⭐ INFLUENCE
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.
Starter: One wrong phrase
A statement card says: Muslims believe in one God who is known in three ways.
Reading A says the card is fine, because both world views believe in one God.
Reading B says the card has an error. The phrase known in three ways sits in the Christian column of the grid, not the Muslim one.
Reading B is right, and the grid shows why. The first half of the sentence is true of both world views; the second half is true of only one. One stray phrase turns a true statement into a false one.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: A statement card says: Muslims believe in one God who is known in three ways. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At Starter, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “A statement card says: Muslims believe in one God who is known in three ways” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “A statement card says: Muslims believe in one God who is known in three ways” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “A statement card says: Muslims believe in one God who is known in three ways” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: I Do: Two columns, one grid
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.
I Do: Two columns, one grid
The diagram shows the grid. Each row asks the same question of both world views, and each column answers it in the words that world view uses of itself.
Modelled: card one says Christians believe there are many gods. I go to the God row, and the Christian column says one God, known in three ways. The error is the phrase many gods; the correction is one God. I did not argue from what I think; I pointed to the row.
We Do: Spot the error. Correct the statement.
Card A: both world views believe in many gods. Spot the error, then correct the statement from the God row.
Card B: Muslims believe there is no life after death. What is wrong here, and which row shows it?
Card C: Christians believe God lived on earth as a person, and Muslims believe the same. Spot the error in the second half and correct the statement from the central figure row.
Commit first: write the card letter, the wrong phrase and the row that corrects it on a whiteboard and turn it over. Everyone commits at the same time; nobody reveals until every board is down. Then we hold up together and correct the statement out loud.
Evidence check
We may not all spot the same phrase, and that is the design. On the reveal we ask which row of the grid shows the error. A correction that points to a row stands, whoever else disagrees.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: Spot the error, then correct the statement from the God row. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At We Do 1, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “Spot the error, then correct the statement from the God row” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “Spot the error, then correct the statement from the God row” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “Spot the error, then correct the statement from the God row” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: I Do: Shared ground and real difference
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.
I Do: Shared ground and real difference
Some beliefs sit in both columns of the grid, and some sit in one. A statement that says both world views hold a belief is only correct when the belief really is in both.
The commonest weakness at this level is to move a belief from one column to both because it sounds familiar. It is visible in a single sentence.
Modelled reply: the statement says both world views believe God is known in three ways. On the grid, the God row puts that phrase in the Christian column only. So the corrected statement is: Christians believe God is known in three ways; Muslims believe God is one with no equal. Both still believe in one God, and the correction keeps that.
We Do: Spot the error in a shared-belief statement
A statement on the board says both world views hold a belief. Everyone writes on a whiteboard whether that belief sits in one column or both, and corrects the statement if it needs it. Then we hold up together and spot the error as a room.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: A statement on the board says both world views hold a belief. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At We Do 2, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “A statement on the board says both world views hold a belief” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “A statement on the board says both world views hold a belief” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “A statement on the board says both world views hold a belief” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: Independent Work — Your record: statement, error, row, correction
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.
Independent Work — Your record: statement, error, row, correction
Produce one record. The row you point to carries more weight than the correction you write.
◆ Supported
Two statement cards, the error circled, using the grid. Scribing permitted.
▲ Standard
Four statement cards, each with the error, the row that shows it and the corrected statement.
★ Stretch
Four cards corrected, plus one statement true of both world views and one true of only one, each with its row.
Check yourself: does every phrase in your corrected statement sit in the right column?
Check yourself: did you keep the part of the statement that was already true?
⏸ Pens down — quick partner check!
Half way through: stop, swap with a partner, and check one thing on the list above together. Then carry on.
WAGOLL — what a good one looks like
A finished record: Card A. Statement, both world views believe in many gods. Error, many gods. Row, God. Correction, both world views believe in one God; Christians say God is known in three ways, Muslims say God has no equal.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: The row you point to carries more weight than the correction you write. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At Independent, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “The row you point to carries more weight than the correction you write” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “The row you point to carries more weight than the correction you write” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “The row you point to carries more weight than the correction you write” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: Exit Ticket — Audience receives; influence changes something
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.
Exit Ticket — Audience receives; influence changes something
Read one statement, the error and your correction to a partner. They say back which row of the grid you pointed to.
Did they point to a different row than the one you meant? Change one phrase. That change is your influence.
✅ Complete
Hand in your record and tick the learner confirmation on your sheet. That is the lesson done.
Feedback loop
SPACE available · VOICE waiting · AUDIENCE waiting · INFLUENCE waiting
Say or show what the source says here: Read one statement, the error and your correction to a partner. In-lesson edit; structured verbal response; for full essays, deferred edit.
At Exit, an adult receives it and names back what they heard, in your words. R goes on only after that.
Not yet / needs help → reduce the prompt: take the first step of “Read one statement, the error and your correction to a partner” with the smallest prompt that works, then wait.
Did it with support → same task, new example: “Read one statement, the error and your correction to a partner” again with a fresh example and one prompt fewer.
Did it independently → explain a reason: ask why for “Read one statement, the error and your correction to a partner” and take the reason in the pupil’s own mode.
Did it and explained → move on: Exit Ticket — Audience receives; influence changes something
SPACE stays available. VOICE is received. AUDIENCE names back exactly. INFLUENCE changes one real next action.
Feedback codes (staff): VF Verbal feedback given here · WS Worked with support · I Independent · NS + Next step — one specific thing · E Evidence on Earwig · R Responded — loop closed · // Self-edit point · ? Read this back to me
Space — the conditions that make response possible:
- Regulation first. A dysregulated student cannot respond to feedback. Co-regulation, sensory tools and time take priority over the technical content of the feedback.
- No public comparison. No grade boards, no "look how X has improved."
- Permission to refuse. A student who declines to respond today is not punished — refusal is information.
Earwig, lean capture (E): 30-second clip, photo, or one-line context note. Central tags only. Listen / look before tagging (Audience).
Feedback & Marking Policy 2025/2026 (Pilot), Issue 1 — body sections 5, 11, 12 and 13, quoted.