Explicit Instruction in Education Policy and Practice 

This call for contributions emerges from the conversations and concerns shared during SVC 2025, across panels, workshops, informal dialogues, and post-session reflections. A recurring theme has emerged in these discussions: growing unease about the way explicit instruction is being positioned in education policy and practice. 

Explicit instruction has emerged as the centrepiece of education policy in Australia. It is increasingly promoted as the most reliable approach to improving student outcomes, particularly in literacy and numeracy. Systemic commitments to explicit instruction now extend beyond classroom practice into curriculum policy, funding incentives, school improvement frameworks, and pre-service teacher education.

In many of these conversations, explicit instruction is presented as common sense, unquestionably ‘evidence-based,’ politically neutral, and pedagogically sound. This elevation carries significant implications, not only for teacher professionalism and pedagogical diversity, but also for the conditions in which student voice, agency, and empowerment can thrive.

Below, I outline some of the ideas and provocations that surfaced most often in these discussions. This list is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive and is intended to be a starting point for deeper reflection.

Provocations and Ideas for Discussion

1. Narrowing definitions of evidence

Current policy settings elevate a narrow definition of evidence which favours randomised trials and quantitative metrics, while marginalising practitioner wisdom, cultural knowledge, student experience, and relational pedagogies.

2. Confusion between explicit instruction and explicit teaching

Policy and media often conflate a specific, scripted model of explicit instruction with the broader practice of intentional teaching, fuelling misunderstandings about structured, student-centred learning.

3. Student knowledge and curiosity treated as disruptions

Many students report their questions and lived experiences being dismissed in class, reflecting pedagogies that position them as empty vessels rather than active, capable learners.

4. Influence of media portrayal and public discourse

The establishment of binaries in which certain practices (inquiry, student-centred learning) are portrayed as incompatible with or lacking any explicit teaching, and of inquiry-learning being void of any explicit teaching.

5. Assumptions of students as blank slates

By treating students as blank slates to be filled, rather than holders of identity, culture, and insight, certain pedagogies risk replicating the logic of terra nullius in our classrooms.

6. Reduction of teacher agency

As scripted approaches are embedded in policy, teachers face reduced autonomy and growing pressure to deliver content rather than respond thoughtfully to the learners in front of them. Without genuine teacher agency, student empowerment risks being relegated to extracurricular, non-instructional time.

7. Role of Parent Voice in pedagogy

School leaders report pressure from vocal, media-informed parents pushing for narrow pedagogical models, ‘shopping’ for schools, raising questions about which voices are legitimised, and whose are overlooked.

8. Shrinking pedagogical diversity

When one approach dominates policy and discourse, practices like inquiry, arts-based learning, and culturally sustaining pedagogy are pushed to the margins, along with genuine student partnership.

9. Competing purposes of education

There is increasing tension between democratic, participatory visions of education and dominant logics of competition, social mobility, and marketisation. When the system values performance metrics above participation, students (particularly those already marginalised) are pushed toward individualistic pathways at the expense of more collaborative and community-centred possibilities.

Many of the conversations agreed, the danger is not explicit instruction itself, but the way its dominance is narrowing the terms of the debate and eclipsing a broader conversation about what good teaching and learning require.

As part of continuing the conversations that emerged out of our recent conference, we are preparing a discussion paper that will explore these issues in greater depth and propose a more expansive vision of evidence-based, student-empowering education in Australia. As part of this work, we are seeking:

• Reflections or provocations from individuals or organisations (limited to 1000 words)

• Links to relevant research, practice, or policy work

• Expressions of interest to join a coalition of educators, students, researchers, and advocates committed to centring student voice in policy and practice

If you would like to contribute to this conversation, please reach out: mitch.sprague@studentvoice.org.au

To receive a copy of the forthcoming discussion paper, or to join the coalition of support, head to: studentvoice.org.au/engage/explicit-instruction