The philanthropic sector is now driving strong momentum on this front, with Snow Foundation intent on mobilising experts and researchers in a bid to close our widening education equity gap and to steer change at scale.

“We see that there’s room for depth, breadth and sequencing of the curriculum, and then quality assurance of the curriculum materials that are being used by schools and chosen by schools,” Jessica Del Rio from Snow Foundation tells EducationHQ.

The Australian Curriculum has recently come under fire, with Dr Ben Jensen warning our current offering is shambolic and putting extra pressure on teachers, while also fuelling the widening achievement gap between advantaged and disadvantaged students.

Poverty and disadvantage are not the real problems here, the CEO of education research consultancy firm Learning First has said.

Rather, too many students are progressing through school without ever acquiring the depth and breadth of background knowledge they need to succeed across all learning areas.

“[Our achievement gap problem] doesn’t exist because we have low SES students. This exists because of the structures and policies we put in place,” he told delegates at a recent school improvement summit.

Last month Snow Foundation hosted a workshop with philanthropists who are keenly interested in curriculum reform and “who see curriculum as a really powerful leaver for achieving equity”, Del Rio shares.

“We had (US author) Natalie Wexler, who was talking about how students [from] families with low levels of education often miss out on essential knowledge and vocabulary, which makes schooling much more important.

“We had (education policy expert) Julie Sonnemann, who’s championing the establishment of a new independent quality assurance body for curriculum materials – and she earned a three-year pilot to help schools identify high-quality curriculum materials and textbooks, which is a really practical reform and [something] that doesn’t currently exist in Australia but does in other countries.”

Speech pathologist Scarlett Gaffey, a director on Snow Foundation’s board, says she’s well aware people might question what philanthropists are doing working in the curriculum space.

“But I do think we can help, we have like a catalytic role where we can accelerate solutions or models, that then government can manage [and] scale nationally.

“We compliment the government by being independent and [by providing] evidence-based projects, infrastructure…”Gaffey told EducationHQ. 

The time is now for Australia to move to a knowledge-rich curriculum that aligns with other world-leading school systems around the world, Del Rio argues.

And with the Government’s recent announcement that the key national bodies of ACARA, AITSL, ESA, and AERO will be merged into one mega agency called the Teaching and Learning Commission, clear opportunities are happily opening up, she flags.

“With the amalgamation of those four small bodies, there’s an opportunity to look at the curriculum and to do it in an integrated way with an evidence-based approach so that what is taught is not separate to how it’s taught.

“So this could be a really good initiative, that mega agency,” Del Rio emphasises.

Some 86 per cent of Australian teachers are using un-vetted content adapted from Twinkle and Teachers Pay Teachers to create lesson plans, Gaffey flags. 

The national review of the F-2 maths curriculum, announced in October, suggests the Government recognises the growing interest in lifting the standard of the entire document, she adds.

“And obviously New Zealand has just announced a massive reform to their curriculum.

“So I think it’s timely to look at Australia in that context as well, and think about [how we could] move to knowledge-rich curriculum that aligns with international best practice.”

New Zealand’s Education Minister Erica Stanford recently unveiled the motivation and research behind the country’s huge reforms that are seeking to overhaul curriculum and teacher instruction. 

The pair also say philanthropy are keen to co-invest with government on a pilot initiative to establish a national quality assurance body that can guide schools towards evidence-based curriculum resources.

“This [goes to] Natalie Wexler’s point about how many disadvantaged students have come to school with limited vocabulary and background knowledge, and having high quality, knowledge-rich lesson materials is an effective tool to close that gap,” Del Rio says.

As it is, a significant proportion of teachers are turning to social media to build their lesson plans, and 86 per cent are using content adapted from Twinkle and Teachers Pay Teachers – this is a concern, Gaffey says.

“They don’t really have that classroom guidance, and disadvantaged students are the ones who have really been left behind because of that.”

Del Rio says we ought to be looking closely at an American model that is working well. 

“There’s a couple of philanthropically-funded mechanisms for looking at whether materials are quality assured, including Edreports and the Knowledge Matters Campaign.

We know this is a really effective way of closing the persistent equity gap, she says.

“There’s a 2023 study which shows that low income students taught with high quality curriculum can achieve reading scores equal to higher income peers.

“There’s another report which shows that students using high-quality materials can be two months ahead after one year, and six months ahead after two years.

“We also know it’s really cost effective – switching to better materials is 40 times more cost effective than reducing class sizes. And we just don’t have that in Australia. We do not have a national system to evaluate those materials.”

EdReports is a not-for-profit that reviews the quality of comprehensive curriculum materials and publishes the results.

Reviews are conducted by accomplished teachers, with 17 years of experience on average, who reportedly receive more than 25 hours of training before they join a review team. Staff spend four to six months reviewing each set of materials. 

This kind of set-up is something that Grattan Institute has long called for.

“It’s something that’s in Singapore and Japan and Poland, the US and the UK and Portugal, but not in Australia,” Del Rio says.

Indeed, research from Grattan Institute found it takes about 500 hours to develop a year’s worth of curriculum materials for one year level and subject, such as Year 7 English.

The proposed Australian quality assurance body would: 

  • Identify outstanding curriculum resources to lift standards.
  • Develop subject-specific criteria for content and pedagogy.
  • Operate independently to ensure rigour and avoid political constraints.
  • Build capacity in schools through professional learning.

Del Rio says Snow Foundation has already sponsored development of a business plan and market analysis for the pilot initiative, with philanthropic partners and other stakeholders now invited to co-invest to secure a $3.8 million target.