Training Australian primary school teachers in phonics instruction should be prioritised over existing professional development programs, the Centre for Independent Studies has argued.

In a new paper on the allocation of Gonski 2.0 funding, the thinktank claims Australian education degrees do not equip teachers with “the language knowledge necessary to effectively teach reading”, and that professional development programs “specifically to improve teaching of reading and phonics instruction” should be introduced.

“This investment could be paid for – in full or in part – by prioritising phonics over other, less important, professional learning,” the paper argues.

After securing the passage of the Gonski 2.0 legislation through parliament in June, the federal government established a review of funding allocation.

Led by David Gonski, the review to achieve educational excellence in Australian schools has been tasked with determining the best ways to leverage extra school funding to improve education outcomes.

It is due to report to the government by March 2018.

In a new paper outlining how the funding should be allocated, Blaise Joseph, an education policy analyst at the thinktank, says funding should be directed at investing in “evidence-based” programs to help underachieving students.

He says teachers should be given fewer classes and more time outside of the classroom, as well as “classroom management training” to address Australia’s “high levels of classroom misbehaviour”.

The CIS has been an influential voice in Australian education policy under education minister Simon Birmingham.

Its senior research fellow in education, Jennifer Buckingham, was appointed the head of an expert panel which advised Birmingham to adopt a national literacy – focused on phonics – and numeracy check for year one students, a move he has backed despite reluctance from some states and criticism from the education union.

In his paper, Joseph argues that while Australian teachers spend more time in professional development than the average across Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries, there are “inconsistent standards for professional development providers”.

He says “best practice” in teaching literacy and numeracy “is not necessarily common practice”, and that some training should be redirected from “less-effective professional learning activities” to specific phonics instruction.

The paper also uses data from the program for international student assessment, or Pisa, to show that Australia has higher levels of student misbehaviour than high performing countries such as Finland and Singapore.



It argues Australian teacher education degrees “do not provide evidence-based classroom management practices to adequately prepare teachers to deal with misbehaviour” and that professional development “to learn and foster evidence-based classroom management techniques” would help improve outcomes.

“Classroom misbehaviour is especially prevalent among students from lower socio-economic backgrounds in Australia, so this initiative could help disadvantaged students in particular,” the paper finds.