The Balance Trap

'We have a balanced approach.’ 

I keep hearing it – the word ‘balance’ being used to reassure me that an inquiry approach is still alive in a school, as tables are reorganised into rows and cookie-cutter slide decks are distributed.  While the concept of balance is meant to feel comforting and agreeable, it can quietly erode very foundations on which a culture of inquiry is built.  In this context, the last thing we are going for is balance.

 Hear me out.

To say we are experiencing turbulent and tense times in education right now would be an understatement. I witness this tension played out daily in staffrooms and planning meetings, over coffee with teacher friends and, of course, in online spaces where a degree of anonymity seems, at times to override the art of respectful discourse.  While I have found myself gradually retreating from social media commentary, my work does require me at least keep a foot in that door.  And when I do step in, there it is – the ‘Punch and Judy show’ as Claxton describes it, replete with endless arguments about ‘best practice’ and ‘evidence’ and ‘what works’.

 Those of us less enamoured with the current push (and in some cases a mandate) for a return to direct instruction across the curriculum often suggest we need a more ‘balanced’ approach – a kind of compromise or ‘sweet spot’ between what continues to be placed as opposing ends of the pedagogical continuum. I have noticed the way this idea of ‘balance’ is used by those who might argue for a more student- centred pedagogy as an attempt to reconcile the tension between what can be called “direct” teaching and inquiry-based teaching or between agency and compliance.

 But what if balance isn't the goal? What if inquiry isn't something to be balanced with direct instruction, but rather a fundamental stance that determines when and how we use all pedagogical tools?

 Balance. It is such a comforting word - and often for good reason.  A balanced diet, work-life balance, a balanced view – these all suggest that we’ve managed to get it right – we have found a more agreeable place between extremes. Balanced is neat, satisfying and neutral. When we are balanced, we are not at risk of falling or failing.  We get to have our cake and eat it too.  Balance doesn’t rock the boat (literally!)  - everybody gets a prize.

 I’ve been having a good, long think about it.  I think our platitudes about balance are little more than thinly veiled fence-sitting, people pleasing or perhaps worse, a failure to bravely stand by a set of principles and values that guide our work  – and an understandable but worrying avoidance of a discourse ridden with conflict.

When a school community chooses to intentionally grow a culture of inquiry, they do so based on principles defining the purpose of school, the image of the child, and the role of the educator and the role of the environment.  The ethos of inquiry sees the ‘pedagogical compass’ underpinned by the values of agency, equity, democracy, collaboration and curiosity, drawing on the rich and impressive bodies of research that support the cultivation of an inquiry stance to both teaching and learning.

 The pedagogy of inquiry is characterised by a thoughtful and varied repertoire. Being ‘explicit’ (directly explaining, modelling, breaking something down step by step ,etc.) has always been part of the repertoire but to suggest that it is somehow ‘in balance’ is misleading at best and problematic at worst.  When the pedagogy of inquiry is strong, the educator spends much more time questioning, listening, facilitating, pausing. observing, scaffolding, negotiating  - within learning engagements designed for high interactivity, active engagement, deliberate cultivation of competencies, deep understanding, problem finding and solving and sustained dialogue.  This is sophisticated and deep work – and requires educators to be creative, collaborate and design in response to learners’ needs.  Scripted programs and pre-determined, generic slide decks simply do not align with those values.  It is highly intentional work that honours learner agency and voice as well as acknowledging the ‘100 languages’ available to the child as means of investigation and expression.

 Of course, Incorporating some explicit teaching into inquiry-based pedagogy is, quite frankly, a given. Positioning inquiry pedagogy as ‘minimal guidance’ and a free-for-all is an old, tired argument. In four decades of working with children and educators on cultivating an inquiry stance, I have witnessed abandonment of guidance and support on very few occasions. I think we can all agree that providing guidance is a key role of the inquiry teacher.  That guidance takes many forms – questioning, listening, observing, suggesting, modelling.

 But here’s the thing. I am not intending to strike a balance. It’s not a 50/50 thing.  And when we do talk about ‘balance’ in this way, we run the risk of perpetuating the false dichotomy at the root of so many current arguments.

 If I truly see the child as a capable, competent, curious learner with the right to be an active participant in their learning journey, and if I bring an inquiry stance to my teaching, planning and assessment,  then the pedagogy of inquiry will drive my work: influencing the way I curate the classroom environment, the assessment practices, documentation, the language I use and the kind of relationships I nurture with children and their families.  

 I make no apologies for employing a pedagogy that is driven by a belief that children deserve time to think, to be in dialogue with educators and peers, to play, experiment and problem solve.  Explicit teaching (explaining, demonstrating, modelling, step by step processes) are in my repertoire but they are used at the point of need, and for children who require additional or earlier support.  Like a pinch of salt or a teaspoon of chilli, well timed, direct teaching can add significant value to the process. Of course, I am fully aware that there are many educators in furious agreement with this and yet they are currently hamstrung by mandates that leave them feeling helpless. I understand the significance of the moral injury incurred.  But at the very least, we can keep asking questions, we can think carefully about the language we use to talk about pedagogy, we can raise the question of ‘balance’ in our conversations – we can be ‘half a shade braver.’

 Inquiry is not a subject. Inquiry is not something we do on Tuesday  and Thursday afternoons to balance the pedagogy of transmission used the rest of the week. Inquiry does not need to be ‘balanced’ with direct teaching. Inquiry is a stance, a culture and a way of being. That way of being evolves from and feeds a way of seeing … the child, the educator, the purpose of school and the concept of learning itself.

So before we promote a ‘balanced’ approach – let’s ask ourselves what we mean. Are we avoiding the contradiction of slavishly following a scripted program in the morning by “doing inquiry” in the afternoon?  Are we letting ourselves off the hook when we set the classroom up in rows (strugglers at the front, flyers up the back) but claim to ‘do lots of turn and talk’ so it is ‘balanced?’Are we appeasing anxious parents who read the headlines rather than being clear about the principles that guide our pedagogy and the research that supports it? Are we in danger of seeking balance as a form of conflict avoidance and ultimately eroding the power of inquiry?

 Just wondering …

Lessons from lessons: reflections and reminders from the classroom

“Teaching, like any science or art, demands craftsmanship. The complexity of teaching requires time and space for continuous learning and reflection, both individually and collectively.” (OECD, 2025:8)

I recently had the privilege of returning to the beautiful International School of Uganda to spend another week with the staff – supporting their work in building a culture of inquiry and, in particular, examining the role of pedagogy in nurturing deep, conceptual understanding and learner competencies.  Once again, while we engaged in some teacher workshops and planning sessions, the bulk of our learning time was spent in classrooms.  We designed/choreographed lessons and then met afterwards to discuss  and reflect on what we noticed, what we learned and what got us more curious.  On the third day, as I walked out of a classroom the wonderful PYP coordinator (shout out to Sarah!) turned to me and simply said: “I just love teaching!”  Four simple words that went straight to my heart. ‘Same here!’ I said as we walked upstairs to the meeting room, our arms laden with baskets, markers, chart paper, books, loose parts, post its up the stairs, ‘Aren’t we lucky to do this?’  Not for the first time, I felt the enormous privilege of the career I have chosen and to which I have dedicated almost 42 years. For me, teaching has never simply been a job – it is a vocation and it is a choice to work in service of the community.   I am not sure whether it is my imagination, or whether it is fact that I hear less about the joy and satisfaction of teaching than I used to.  I certainly hear a great deal more about its difficulties and I absolutely acknowledge that conditions and expectations have changed significantly over the last 40 years. But, at the risk of attracting the ire of my readers, I think there are times when we can become so lost in what is challenging and so in need of a download about the difficulties of the job we have chosen, that we can forget the power of acknowledging the joy it can bring. We may feel it – but we forget to say it out loud.  Yes – I am all too aware that I am not in the classroom full time … but I am in them enough to be reminded of the gift that teaching can be and I, for one, never want to forget that.  So thank you, Sarah, for that moment when you chose to say it out loud!

The first few months of 2025 have seen me in many different countries and many different classrooms.  Back home, now, I have taken some time to think over the hours and hours of ‘learning labs’ conducted in many different schools and to consider some of the reminders and insights these lessons have given me. Not just about the nature of inquiry pedagogy but simply about teaching itself.  So, in no particular order, I offer some lessons from lessons …

1.    It’s all about making connections!

Year 4, ISU

Yes, I know this already … but the more I teach, the more I understand about  facilitating opportunities for learners to make connections – with each other, with their prior knowledge, across learning areas and between concepts.  This is not new, of course. – connection making is the foundation for conceptual understanding, but it has been so fascinating to design tasks and power up our questioning to support this cognitive process in learners.  Here, the grade 4 learners are using concept mapping to check in on their understanding of some of the concepts central to their inquiry. This strategy continues to be one of my favorites. It is so revealing to both the educator and to the learner.   

2.    Opportunities for exploring, theorising, experimenting and predicting prior to direct explanation can heighten curiosity and the desire to find out.

Year 2, ISU

In many (not all) lessons, we opted for an immediate rather than gradual release of responsibility.  Exploration prior to explanation can pay off big-time. Giving learners a chance to do some ‘figuring out’, to draw on their prior knowledge and share their theories and ideas naturally activates curiosity, reveals uncertainty, generates a hunger to find out and, most of all, cultivates intellectual humility.   The children in year 2 at ISU are not only theorising about which material might be the most waterproof but discussing how they would design a test to find out. All this before we find out more about the concept of fair testing.  The beauty of this is in the way it supports a willingness to change our minds.

Year 4, Immanuel Primary School, SA

3. The language of materials is powerful

The benefits of loose parts to help learners explore and express their thinking is well known. Each time we open up opportunities for learners to share their ideas using intelligent, non-specific materials, I am reminded of the importance of flexible forms of communication. The ephemeral nature of loose parts gives increased permission to the learner to take risks, to revise thinking and the concrete and visual supports other ‘languages of expression’ including speaking and writing.  It was so great to see loose parts available to children in the upper as well as junior classrooms at Immanuel Primary in SA.

4. The best ‘provocations’ are often on our doorstep, and first-hand, direct, shared experiences are gold.

Year 1, International School of Manila

I have written about this before but recent lessons have reminded me that we often do not need to look too far or spend hours carefully curating our classrooms to provoke thinking.  Keeping it real and staying awake to the environment around us offers so much.  At the International School of Manila, year 1 students were fascinated by the fact there were plants randomly growing in seemingly inhospitable environments in the school yard  - the perfect provocation to lead into theorising about seed dispersal.

5.  A brave, intellectually stimulating classroom environment is built on a foundation of trust and connection – and fun.

Class games played in year 4, UWCSEA

The year 4 students at United World College of Singapore were deeply engaged in a collaborative game when I walked into their classroom to teach. There was shared laughter, encouragement, risk and delight. Their teacher made a conscious, daily effort to build connection, have some fun and create community. I can feel this community atmosphere seconds into walking into a classroom. When kids have each other’s back – when there is a spirit of ‘we’ over ‘me’, the challenging work of inquiry is so much easier to cultivate.  

6. Learner competencies such as collaboration, creativity and curiosity are amplified when we are intentional about how we are cultivating them. 

Split screen learning intentions for year 4 students at BCIS

The metaphor of the ‘split screen’ classroom is one I learned from my colleague Guy Claxton. It is SO helpful when I am introducing a session. It reminds both the learners and me that we are always inquiring into learning itself as we engage with the content of the lesson.  Each lesson I have the privilege of facilitating reminds me how important both my language and the clarity of intention are in maintaining a strong focus on the WHY behind the learning engagement.

7. Active learning doesn’t mean fast and frantic.  Slow and deliberate helps us go deep.

Year 1 students at the International School of Belgrade

The temptation to teach at a fast past is real - and understandable!  We want to keep children’s attention and manage the many competing demands of the day.  But engagement can be achieved as, if not more, effectively by slowing the pace – by allowing pauses, by welcoming silence, by encouraging revisiting and refining rather than moving on, by allowing children time to think and by modelling a slower, more considered way of being.  We were fascinated to watch how focussed and thoughtful the year 1 children at the International School of Belgrade were when encouraged to slow down and notice the detail as they observed fascinating invertebrates. 

8.  Building children’s capacity to reflect on and manage their own learning can be part of every lesson.  

Year 4 learners at Jakarta Intercultural School

I wish I had understood this more in my early years of teaching. I am sure that many of the children I taught were motivated by the desire to please ME rather than to own the learning themselves.  The longer I teach, the more I realise how simple it can be to empower learners to take more ownership of their learning. It may be through a couple of strategic questions or, something more extended such as the way the year 4 children at the Intercultural School of Jakarta ranked their collaborative competencies during the creation of a Rube Golberg Machine.

9. Every lesson, every day can be an opportunity for professional learning.

Kindergarten at IS Manila

The teacher as researcher is a concept very familiar to early years teachers in particular.   For me, years of teaching in a ‘learning lab’ environment (with other teachers observing or perhaps being filmed) has helped me embrace this concept so much more authentically.  The power of having more than one educator in the room, of intentionally observing the dance between teaching and learning is brought home every time I gather with those educators to reflect on the lesson.  We notice more. We wonder more. We learn more.  I know I am a better teacher for it – for having cultivated a kind of intentionality and ability to observe what is happening while it is happening.  Learning labs help me sustain my ‘beginners mind’  - seeing the art of teaching as if for the first time and staying open to the unexpected. Watching each other at work can be hard to organise in a busy school – but it is so profoundly worth it.

10. Good teaching is complex, challenging and deeply satisfying. Quality teaching can’t be scripted although it can, of course, draw on resources and guidelines. While I have a deep commitment to inquiry-based pedagogy, regular teaching continually reminds me of the role that explicit and even direct instruction have within a broader culture of inquiry. There is no ‘BEST’ practice as such – what works depends on what the objectives are (what works for what purpose?) and, of course, on the myriad differences between learners, contexts, environments and cultures.  As the recent OECD report I have referenced states “There is not one single approach that is ‘better’ than the others.” (2025:15) One thing I notice repeatedly about learning labs is that they help educators return to, what for most is their north star. Teaching. Many schools would do well to elevate the sacredness of the time we spend working directly with our learners, to value and celebrate and inquire into the fascinating and complex choreography and skill that underpins each lesson across the day and to see the classroom as the best context for professional growth.

 

“Teaching is inherently complex. Teachers need to navigate the complexity of the often unpredictable and sometimes chaotic realities of classrooms, where students have diverse needs and abilities, resources are limited, time is constrained, and numerous day-to-day challenges arise. They need a deep understanding of both content and pedagogical strategies informed by research, but also adaptability, creativity, and responsiveness. Teaching is a science, but so too an art and craft.”

OECD (2025), Unlocking High-Quality Teaching, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f5b82176-en.

Valuing children’s voices as we map the journey ahead ...

There are many reasons why this is my favourite time of the year. They are both personal (I get to pack away my suitcase and be at home for an extended period … and there are Jacaranda’s flowering everywhere!) and professional. This is the time of year when some of the schools I partner with here in Australia take the time to deeply reflect on the school year behind them and begin to make plans for the year ahead. The thinking involved in this process is rich and complex. We need to be critical, reflective and creative and there is something about the time of year that seems give us permission to take it slowly, to sink in to the conversations we need to have and to give ourselves time to consider the work we do more deeply. 

 One of the processes we use to support our reflection is to gather data from every single child in the school and to use that data not only to help us understand the strengths and challenges of the year behind us but to inform the ‘map’ we develop for the year ahead.  In a few of my partner schools, teachers have chosen to nothave a fixed scope and sequence or program of inquiry.  The “units” developed with and for this year’s children are just that – for this year. We recognise that contexts, interests and needs change and we want to be responsive to that.  We already have a ‘scope and sequence’ within the mandated curriculum – but we can be responsive and creative about the contexts we harness to uncover that curriculum.

 I have used this process for several years now and with several schools. We ask children (in various ways) to respond to a range of questions including what they would love to learn more about in the year to come, what they think is important to learn about (often linked to current events or issues in the local and global community), what they have found meaningful and engaging this year, what they hope to explore in more depth or what they hope they will continue doing/learning in the year to come. We gather data about their concerns and their joys and the skills and dispositions (learning assets) they feel are their strengths and challenges.  Every, single child contributes information (through 1-1 interviews, surveys, drawings, written responses) and each collaborative team of educators is given time to analyse, identify patterns and themes, reflect on what the data reveals and consider the implications on the journeys of inquiry that we tentatively project into the next school year.  The seeds for the process were planted in me many years ago when I read the work of Professor James Beane, Michael Apple and of course the late Garth Boomer here in Australia.  Negotiating curriculum with learners is certainly not a new idea but one that deserves revisiting.

 I love what this process reveals. Although we gather reflections and feedback from kids throughout the year, there is something powerful about this big moment of pause. I see teams of teachers delighted, surprised, challenged and affirmed but, best of all, I see teachers really listening and noticing - intent on honouring the voices of children. 

 In many ways, the current climate is rife with confronting contradictions for educators. On the one hand, policies champion the value of learner agency, student voice, diversity and differentiation. On the other hand, the current breathless zeal for direct instruction (in literacy and numeracy at least) has prompted a return to one-size-fits-all programs and scripts that favour whole-class teaching, with little or no attention given to the context and needs of particular group of learners. Not only is student voice stifled but teacher voice is too.   This is a time that is challenging us to re-examine our beliefs and understandings about children, pedagogy, curriculum and the purpose of school itself.  And to know what we stand for and why.

 One of the fundamental principles of inquiry as a stance is the right of the learner to participate in the decisions made about and for their learning and a belief in the expertise and insight of the educator to design for learning in response to observation and documentation. Does this mean children make all the decisions? Of course not!  But it does mean that educators must choose to listen - and to consider ways they can design learning experiences that both honour interests and take children’s thinking further.  This process supports the idea of ‘relational pedagogy’ which emphasises reciprocity, joint involvement, respect for children’s ideas and theories, and emphasises meaning making. (Hedges, 2022:125)

 There is so much that is revealed in the process we work through. There are definitely some key differences across contexts that mean the maps we create are bespoke for each school. But in each school, staff noticed some recurring themes that naturally lent themselves to journeys of inquiry.  And as I stood back to think about the data across schools, I found myself jotting down some of the overarching questions that framed the most prevalent interests we noticed. Children tend to ask more specific, focussed questions but the bigger conceptual ideas to which they connect can be summarised below:

  • What does it mean to be a friend? How can I build and sustain healthy relationships with others?  How can I manage the challenges of relationships?

  • How can we care for other living things?  How can I learn more about the natural world and the diversity of animals with which we share the earth?

  • What can we do about climate change? How will it affect us? Why don’t leaders do more to look after the planet?

  • What’s it like in other parts of the world? How do other people live? How are we the same and different?

  • How do things work?  What makes things function? How are the different parts of things connected?

  • What does it mean to belong? How can I belong?  How can I be brave and true to myself and be part

    What dof a group?

  • How can I use my creativity to express my ideas? How can I become a more accomplished artist (visual/performing)

  • Why do wars happen?  How can we keep ourselves safe? What can we do about conflict in our lives?

  • How can cope with the challenge of failure? 

 And, time and time again, children tell us that their learning is enhanced when:

  • Teachers are kind and make them feel seen

  • They get to go out of the school and have real, direct experiences in the world around them

  • They get to ‘do art’. – when they can design, make, create

  • They have time to play

  • They don’t feel rushed

  • They feel successful and proud of their learning and can share it with others

 In a beautiful article (link below) Educator Jane Style challenges educators to tap into the ‘scholarship in the selves’ in contrast to the ‘scholarship on the shelves’. She invites us to consider that the curriculum walks in the door with the children, reminding us that they come to school with their ‘life texts’.  Listening to the voices of hundreds of children over the last 2 weeks has been such an affirmation of this idea. And when we do listen, we are so often blown away by the depth and passion in children’s voices and are compelled to take them seriously.  And it is not too great a challenge to weave those interests, passions and concerns into our plans and to find connections with the curriculum.  This process helps bring the curriculum to life. As we acknowledge, for example, the sheer volume of children interested in and worried about their friendships and the navigation of their social world, we see connections to the health curriculum and the possibilities of linking to broader, transdisciplinary concepts such as connection, cause and effect, change and interdependence.

Inviting learner voice into the process of mapping for inquiry is energising, creative and connecting work. Each time we go through this process, I see teachers leave the room excited and uplifted about the prospect of the learning that lies ahead.  I feel both their sense of agency together with  a strong sense of connection to the children for whom we are designing the learning. And who have the right to be part of that process.

https://www.nationalseedproject.org/images/documents/Curriculum_as_Encounter.pdf

What role to children play in your designs for inquiry?

Just Wondering