Being explicit in class best way to lift results

Welcomed by parents but dreaded by children, the ‘Back to School’ signs have begun to emerge in shops of all kinds, a liturgical calendar for a secular age.

This time of year is also one for resolutions: things to start, stop and improve. And some education-themed resolutions might help to stem the slide we’ve seen in Australian students’ results over the past years.

While parents are not to blame for the problems in our education system, they can be part of the solution. For their children’s sake, parents can — and should — become more discerning consumers of education, particularly if they are able to choose their child’s school.

What do you know about what the leaders and teachers at your child’s school think about how children learn best? You might think that the answer doesn’t differ too much from one school or teacher to another, but that would be wrong.

Studies show that high proportions of teachers believe in ‘neuromyths’ — false facts about how students learn — like the misconception that ever child has their own ‘learning style’ that needs to be catered to in the classroom.

Believing in false information can inform teaching practices in ways contrary to the evidence for how children actually learn and succeed: the ‘science of learning’.

This uses findings from cognitive science and educational psychology about human cognition (memory, encoding and retrieval) and applies them to teaching practice.

A key takeaway from this body of research is that explicit instruction (where teachers direct student learning through explanations, modelling and frequent questioning) is highly effective. This method contrasts with the ‘student-led’ inquiry approaches that are often encouraged on the basis they promote student engagement and therefore learning.

Far from being dull and mechanical, explicit instruction is highly interactive, where teachers respond to student learning needs and students are constantly engaging with their learning. Because these practices are informed by science, they can help improve student outcomes.

It’s no wonder, then, that explicit teaching has a new lease of life, with many states and territories implementing reforms that aim to move classroom practice in the right direction.

In New South Wales, updates to the syllabus mean more detail about what students should know, and how knowledge should build on itself, with the result a more ambitious plan for student learning.

Victoria has announced a decisive shift towards evidence-based teaching of reading, and a new Teaching and Learning Model that uses the science of learning.

Tasmania launched its Lifting Literacy plan, Queensland its Reading Commitment, and the ACT finalised its Literacy and Numeracy Inquiry report.

But the difficulty for governments will be in implementation.

Addressing the classroom behaviour crisis is necessary to create fertile soil for well-intentioned reforms in teaching. OECD research shows Australian classrooms are among the most disruptive in the world, ranked 69th out of 76 countries and regions.

The solution involves proactive training for teachers and clear systems of sanctions and consequences for students. Buying back classroom time for teachers to actually teach is not only key to improving learning, but might help with teacher retention too.

Parents have a role to play here too. A simple test of how well your child’s school follows the evidence: how are the desks set up in classrooms? Are they in groups, in rows, or does the school leave this critical decision up to the teacher?

Desks in groups are the classroom equivalent of the open-plan office: great for chatting, bad for those who want to get some work done.

Despite a popular belief that ‘collaboration’ (whatever that means) is vital to help student learning, it also means more opportunities for distraction – and has the potential to spiral into a vicious cycle of poor behaviour and poor learning.

Seemingly small changes at the classroom level are vital if we want to see progress, but policymakers have a responsibility to get the settings right.

In line with the $16 billion federal funding deal currently on the table, states should agree to nationally consistent Year 1 checks in reading and number sense, targets improving NAPLAN performance and attendance, and use of evidence-based teaching methods that help prevent kids from falling behind, and providing the right kind of support if they do.

Governments are taking steps in the right direction, but 2025 must be the year of delivery. For the sake of our students, we can’t wait another year.

Trisha Jha is an education Research Fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies and a former teacher.

Photo by RDNE Stock Project.