Currently, education policies in many countries around the world are driven by the needs of the “knowledge society”, a term used to capture the focus on creative and critical thinking skills and dispositions which describe 21st-century learning goals. However, when considering the international predilection for predetermined knowledge standards, results can elicit anxiety for governments. In response to these pressures, in some countries education implements prescriptive models of pedagogy which mould and control the learning of children and youths. This chapter engages critically with the teaching method called Direct Instruction, which has been described as being a tightly prescribed program and appropriate to improve learning outcomes in primary schools across rural and remote areas of Australia (Wilson, 2014). The critique examines Direct Instruction in relation to the Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2014a) and discusses implications for teacher training and research. In the light of this discussion, the chapter examines examples of issues concerning the implementation of Direct Instruction in the Northern Territory of Australia. The chapter concludes by discussing the threads that it identifies as prevalent in education as a whole, which make it difficult for the field to take a strong stand regarding the implementation of Direct Instruction.
|Title of host publication||Challenges in Global Learning|
|Subtitle of host publication||Dealing with Education Issues from an International Perspective|
|Editors||Ania Lian, Peter Kell, Paul Black, Koo Yew Lie|
|Place of Publication||UK|
|Publisher||Cambridge Scholars Publishing|
|Number of pages||19|
|Publication status||Published - 2017|
Lian, A., Norman, A., Midgley, K., & Napiza, C. (2017). Direct Instruction for “At-risk Children” and the Australian Curriculum: Toward a better Understanding of the Appeal of Behaviourism in Cross-cultural Contexts of Learning. In A. Lian, P. Kell, P. Black, & K. Y. Lie (Eds.), Challenges in Global Learning: Dealing with Education Issues from an International Perspective (pp. 123-141). UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.