What does it mean to be knowledge-rich?
Learning First, an education research and consultancy group, recently hosted a conference titled “Enriching learning through quality curriculum”. At the heart of the discussion was the central idea that a strong curriculum forms the backbone of a solid education system, and a call to action to elevate the level of rigour and specificity in the Australian curriculum was a distinct throughline. Parallel to this were discussions around a term that has been becoming more prominent in recent years; that of a “knowledge-rich curriculum”.
What do we mean by a knowledge-rich curriculum?
In 2024, AERO published “A Knowledge Rich Approach to Curriculum Design”, in which it presents the evidence for the inclusion of a knowledge-rich curriculum, and how this might be achieved. Prior to this the work of many other prominent figures in education such as E.D. Hirsch and Christine Counsell have espoused a similar need. At its heart, a knowledge-rich curriculum is one that pays respect to the importance of building disciplinary knowledge sequentially over time, and aims to create powerful knowledge for students. A common strawman argument or misrepresentation of a knowledge-rich curriculum is that such a curriculum overemphasises the teaching of facts. Indeed, having students memorise disconnected lists of facts would seem rather cumbersome and meaningless. However, that is not what is meant by “knowledge”.
Rather, proponents of a knowledge-rich curriculum put forth the need to layer levels of meaning and depth around concepts and topics in an attempt to build a learner’s internal schema, or representation of the world. Knowledge is an emergent entity when multiple ideas, facts, and opinions are considered, analysed, and evaluated, which can only be done when students are explicitly presented with sufficient information and guided in creating meaningful connections. Knowledge is the picture that students are rewarded with when we present them with the right dots, and teach them how to join them.
The challenge of a knowledge-rich curriculum
One might then argue that if a knowledge-rich curriculum is so important, then why do we not already have one? Conversely, one might also put forward that the current Australian curriculum is already “knowledge-rich”. This article however, is not here to challenge the philosophical or systemic arguments. Rather, let us consider why the creation of a knowledge-rich curriculum is a herculean feat from the offset. For a curriculum to be knowledge-rich, content must be carefully sequenced in a way that allows prior knowledge to form the bedrock of subsequent understandings. This means intentional choices in how, where, and when topics are introduced, in ways that align with what we now know about effective student learning.
Curriculum cannot just be viewed in terms of “weeks”, “lessons” or “units”, but must take a more macroscopic view of how all the cogs should be placed to allow the cognitive machines to turn. This requires deep understanding of disciplinary and pedagogical content knowledge, coupled with enough time, focus, and energy to critically select, sequence, and specify knowledge that creates a coherent schema for students. Creating and curating such a curriculum is not only effortful, but a massive commitment that taps on the specific expertise of not only educators, but subject matter specialists or experts as well.
What does it mean for educators?
Realistically, the demands of creating a knowledge-rich curriculum mean the following for the educator in the classroom:
It is impractical and unfair to expect individual educators to be able to create their own knowledge-rich units and curriculums on top of teaching demands.
A knowledge-rich curriculum is not something one can “do” in a single classroom or year level.
Even at the school or organisational level, having the right individuals with enough bandwidth and expertise to oversee the construction of a full curriculum would be rare.
However, there is something within the discussions of a knowledge-rich curriculum that still remains valuable to our everyday pedagogy. While we may not be able to plan a coherent curriculum on our own, we can definitely employ the underlying principles within a knowledge-rich approach.
Moving away from the “lesson” as the unit of knowledge
All too often, we let the timetable decide what learning has to look like. We think in terms of 50-60 minute sessions, and make our best attempt to neatly package learning into those arbitrary units of time. There is nothing implicitly wrong with that, and it is a practical reality.
However, if we want knowledge to be our guiding impetus, then we have to be specific in terms of where we are going with each of these lessons. What is it that we are hoping students to take out from each of these lessons, and most importantly, where do these lessons lead?
In more hierarchical subjects like Mathematics, this may be more straightforward, but in the humanities and the sciences, being specific and intentional in which elements of the lesson are absolutely non-negotiable. Careful curriculum and pedagogical choices allow us to prioritise, reteach, and check for understanding in a way that allows each of our lessons to bring students closer to the intended endpoint. These choices cannot solely be centred around what happens within a single lesson, but what happens across lessons. Well-mannered decisions around rushing through a foundational piece of knowledge so that it fits neatly into a lesson, or spending excessive time on a tangent that is interesting don’t just affect a lesson; it affects the trajectory of a student's knowledge building.
How can we make sure classrooms are knowledge-rich?
Regardless of the desired endpoint, one thing is for certain; learning has to be secure before students are able to create any form of meaningful connections. For any form of new knowledge to emerge, prior knowledge has to be firmly in place within students’ minds. Before the puzzle can be put together, our students must have the pieces firmly in their grasp.
To this end, regular and meaningful retrieval practice, not just as stand-alone quizzes, but embedded within relevant topics and discussions as well, serves as a powerful tool to ensure that students come to a topic with firm foundations to build new knowledge. These should be focused on key ideas that are revisited and built upon across multiple lessons, and not a scattergun collection of disconnected facts.
If students arrive in the classroom equipped with secure prerequisite knowledge, and we were mindful enough to ensure that the most salient understandings were prioritised, then we create the opportunity for meaningful discussions and connections to be made. This is where disciplinary knowledge can be brought to the forefront. When students have mastered basic facts about a topic, we are able to model and guide them to apply those facts in ways that match the discipline.
To prioritise knowledge within our classrooms means to be specific about what it is we want students to know, and explicitly modelling how we can make connections between ideas. It is to appreciate that knowledge builds over time, and that with each instructional cycle, we are intentionally paving the way with stepping stones for our students to reach a destination. As we embark on a journey towards a truly knowledge-rich curriculum, we can first start by creating knowledge-rich classrooms.