Is Good Practice Too Babyish for Big Kids? Or is that just a teacher misconception?

Kathryn D'Elia - Director of Learning Senior Years

If you’re reading this blog, you’re probably already familiar with the evidence underpinning cognitive load theory, explicit instruction, knowledge-rich curriculum and behaviour routines. There is little need to revisit the importance of applying cognitive load theory to lesson design, the enduring value of Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction, or why building knowledge enables students to learn more. You’re the choir and I won’t preach.

Yet knowing these ideas and implementing them consistently are two very different things.

If you’re in a leadership position, you’ve probably noticed the gap between staff understanding of the Science of Learning and what actually happens in classrooms. Teachers can often articulate the principles with confidence, yet applying them consistently—particularly in secondary classrooms—can prove much more difficult.

It is easy to assume that as students grow older they require fundamentally different teaching. Certainly the content becomes more sophisticated, the curriculum more specialised and the stakes much higher. Yet the cognitive architecture of learning does not suddenly change at Year 9. Working memory remains limited, prior knowledge continues to determine what students can understand, and attention remains the gateway to learning. The challenge for secondary teachers is therefore not abandoning evidence-informed practice, but adapting it to increasingly complex disciplinary content.

So what is it about secondary teaching that makes implementing these principles feel so much harder?

At our Year 5–12 coeducational school in regional Victoria, we have spent countless hours leading professional learning around evidence-informed practice. Staff have explored cognitive load theory, interactive explicit instruction within a gradual release model, checks for understanding, formative assessment, responsive teaching and the importance of consistent school-wide routines.

All signs would suggest that our staff understand these concepts intellectually. Pleasingly, they are implemented with reasonable fidelity in the younger year levels. Yet somewhere around Year 9 we begin to notice a gradual decline in how consistently these practices are enacted. Some senior classrooms continue to model exemplary practice, but implementation is far from uniform.

After discussing this with both colleagues and students, four broad themes have consistently emerged. Interestingly, each seems to reflect a misconception held more strongly by teachers than by the students themselves.

1. “It feels awkward.”

Teachers often report feeling uncomfortable asking Year 11 or 12 students to complete choral responses or respond to school-wide attention signals such as “3-2-1”. Asking a room full of almost-adults to respond in unison can initially feel unnatural.

The interesting finding, however, is that students don’t appear to share this discomfort.

Many explain that these strategies have simply become part of what school looks like. They have experienced them for years, understand their purpose and appreciate the clarity they provide. Far from feeling patronised, they see them as efficient classroom routines.

We have observed something similar during staff professional learning. Presenters frequently admit they feel awkward using choral response or attention routines with adult colleagues, yet participants consistently report appreciating the clarity, predictability and engagement these routines create.

The awkwardness, it seems, belongs almost entirely to the presenter—not the audience.

Similarly, teachers sometimes describe evidence-informed instructional routines as feeling “babyish” with senior students. Once again, the students themselves rarely describe them this way.

2. “It demands more from the teacher.”

Interactive explicit instruction is cognitively demanding—not for students, but for teachers.

Because attention is limited and working memory is finite, teachers must carefully direct students’ attention, anticipate misconceptions, present information in manageable chunks and continually check whether students are constructing accurate mental models before moving on. When checks for understanding reveal that fewer than around 80% of students have grasped a concept, effective teaching requires more than simply repeating the explanation. It requires presenting the content differently.

This level of instructional expertise demands deep subject knowledge.

By comparison, setting an open-ended research task can appear considerably easier. Students search the internet, gather information and produce something that resembles learning.

The difficulty, of course, is that many students lack the background knowledge needed to distinguish reliable information from unreliable information, relevant ideas from irrelevant ones, or superficial understanding from genuine comprehension. Inquiry approaches can therefore unintentionally widen achievement gaps because the students who already possess the strongest knowledge base are also the ones best equipped to benefit from independent research, while those who need the most support are left to flounder.

In a profession where teachers are increasingly asked to teach outside their area of expertise because the school needs a ‘body at the front of the room’, it is understandable why inquiry tasks can become attractive. They reduce the cognitive demand on the teacher, even while increasing it substantially for students.

3. “Good instruction isn’t always entertaining.”

Some teachers expressed concern that consistent routines, a knowledge-rich curriculum and explicit instruction leave little room for fun or personality in the classroom.

This assumes that enjoyment and structure sit in opposition.

Yet students consistently described something different.

To their thinking, predictable routines reduced uncertainty. Retrieval practice helped them reconnect with what they already knew before encountering new learning. Small, low-stakes checks for understanding allowed them to experience early success before progressively increasing challenge. Even when they couldn’t answer a question, they understood that the concept would be revisited and clarified.

Retrieval practice activates prior knowledge in long-term memory, reducing cognitive load as students encounter increasingly complex ideas. Successive questioning allows teachers to continually monitor understanding while strengthening memory.

Perhaps students don’t need every lesson to be entertaining.

Perhaps they need lessons where success feels achievable.

For many students—particularly those with additional learning needs—predictability, clarity and success are precisely what make learning enjoyable.

4. “We’ve lost our autonomy.”

Perhaps the most interesting theme was the perception among some teachers that they no longer had autonomy over what happened inside their classrooms.

Yet this perception often seemed selective.

Senior teachers readily accepted externally prescribed curriculum documents set by the governing body of the region. Few questioned teaching mandated content because they recognised the importance of equity and consistency.

Yet some of those same teachers expressed concern that adopting common evidence-informed instructional approaches somehow reduced their professional autonomy.

Students, however, viewed consistency very differently.

Many described previous experiences where different classes studying the same subject received vastly different content depending on who taught them. They appreciated the school’s low-variance approach because it reduced this “lesson lottery” and ensured everyone had access to the same knowledge and opportunities, particularly in high-stakes senior subjects.

Distinguished Professor Pam Snow and others have written persuasively about professionalism in teaching. Few professions would expect practitioners to operate entirely independently, without shared protocols, agreed standards or common approaches to practice. Education should be no different.

A final reflection

This is by no means a scientific study. These are simply observations gathered through informal conversations with staff and students in one school. However, discussions with colleagues across other schools suggest that these barriers are far from unique.

The most successful strategy we have found has been remarkably simple. Continue modelling evidence-informed practices during staff professional learning so they become normal rather than awkward. Give students opportunities to explain why they value these approaches. Keep returning to the research that reminds us how learning actually happens.

Perhaps the misconception is not that these strategies are too “babyish” for older students.

Perhaps the misconception is that adolescence somehow changes how people learn.

It doesn’t.

A Year 11 student’s working memory functions according to the same cognitive architecture as a Year 1 student’s. Older students bring greater knowledge, experience and maturity, but they still benefit from explicit explanations, retrieval practice, guided practice, checks for understanding, carefully managed cognitive load and predictable classroom routines.

The challenge for secondary schools is therefore not deciding whether these principles apply to older learners.

It is helping teachers feel confident enough to apply them consistently.

If we can move beyond the perception that good teaching looks fundamentally different simply because students are older, we may discover that what secondary students need is not less structure, but better structure.

---

Join the Think Forward Educators Secondary Network

These are exactly the kinds of conversations we want to foster through the Think Forward Educators Secondary Network. As secondary educators navigate increasingly complex curriculum demands, we believe there is enormous value in bringing together classroom teachers, curriculum leaders and school leaders to explore what evidence-informed practice looks like in Years 7–12.

Throughout the year, the Secondary Network will feature webinars, articles, classroom examples and opportunities to engage with leading thinkers from Australia and internationally. Together, we’ll examine how to adapt strong instructional principles to the unique demands of secondary subjects while strengthening consistency, teacher expertise and student outcomes.

If these are the questions your school is grappling with, we’d love you to join the conversation.

If you are keen to join the network and discussion - click on this link for a 3 min survey: TFE Secondary SOL Network. We are excited to connect with like-minded educators who are keen to develop evidence-based excellence across the secondary sector.

---

Think Forward Educators is a not-for-profit organisation working to improve outcomes for all students by making evidence-informed professional learning practical, accessible and affordable. Through national networks, events and resources, we support educators to translate research into meaningful classroom and school improvement. Learn more at www.thinkforwardeducators.org.

(AI was used to support editing and proofreading. All ideas, arguments and conclusions are the author’s own.)

Thanks for reading TFE’s Substack! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work.