Ill-defined descriptions of how to teach (or manage) better often seem a bit silly to me. In these fields, people generally improve with a bit of experience an

Ill-defined descriptions of how to teach (or manage) better often seem a bit silly to me. In these fields, people generally improve with a bit of experience and effort, to the point where they're happy with the results they're getting. Having a fancy framework might help (by giving them some cognitive "pegs" to hang various observations on), or hurt (by distracting them with meaningless or biased assertions). It's like the four humours in medicine. Maybe it helped some doctors to spot patterns and offer treatment. Maybe it just gave them a toolkit to dismiss their failures with some silly hand-waves. Maybe it distracts them. Who knows. A good acid tests is whether teaching in red underpants could also be a good method. When you first start teaching in red underpants, it might seem a bit unusual, but you'll gradually learn to do it more proficiently. You'll have to wash them every day the right way (if you don't, you might experience some trouble in class, but at least you'll know how to fix things next time!). You can also develop some useful cognitive "pegs" to spot problems - maybe you realise at the start of a class that you're potentially "riding high" (whatever that would mean in terms of student behaviour) so you need to adjust your teaching to compensate - what the underpants are doing and how they impact the teaching is irrelevant, but at least you have a word for what you are seeing, right?