The topic of pedagogy has long been a contested one in education. While there is a level of agreement in terms of the importance of factors such as feedback and interaction, there are nevertheless fundamental disagreements between proponents of more constructivist and discovery-oriented approaches and those that lean on direct instruction and teacher-led approaches (Taber, 2011 ; Hirsch, 2016). In recent decades, there has also been increased dissonance around curriculum, with a skills- and competencies-based approach increasingly contrasted with knowledge-rich curricula (Guile, Lambert & Reiss, 2018). The two debates are often linked, in that a knowledge-rich curriculum is often seen as best delivered through direct instruction, while competency and skills-based curricula are associated with more constructivist approaches to pedagogy (see e.g. Hirsh's advocacy of direct instruction).  

 An ongoing question, however, is to what extent these perceived differences actually translate into differential practice in the classroom. In this study we make use of a ‘natural experiment’ to compare two jurisdictions that are culturally relatively similar, but have taken a radically different approach to curriculum over the past decade, England and Northern Ireland, with the former transitioning to a strongly knowledge-based curriculum since 2010, while the latter has since 2007 followed a strongly skills- and competency-based approach. The relative cultural similarity between these two English-speaking jurisdictions, which are both part of the UK, allows us to overcome some of the issues present when doing international comparisons. 

In this study we use data from PIRLS 2021 to compare the two education systems.

Theoretically we draw from a number of frameworks. Firstly, we draw on the distinction between the intended and enacted curriculum (Pak et al, 2020). This relates to the question to what extent we can expect national curriculum frameworks to actually be present in schools and classrooms. The second theoretical lens we will be employing is that of complexity theory in public policy, which will shine a light on the complexity of policy enactment, especially in multi-layered systems such as education (Cairney, 2012). 

To look at the relationship between curriculum and pedagogy we will ask the following questions:

1.     To what extent do official and espoused pedagogies and curriculum differ between England and Northern Ireland?

2.     To what extent do enacted curriculum and pedagogy accord with official curriculum in England and Northern Ireland, and to what extent do they vary within country?

3.     To what extent do enacted curriculum and pedagogy differ between England and Northern Ireland?

4.     What is the relationship between curriculum, pedagogy, and student attainment?

To answer research question 1 we will conduct a policy study, analysing official documents from England and Northern Ireland, such as curriculum documents, government policy papers, and guidance documents related to curriculum and pedagogy produced by education ministries or related bodies such as the Education and Testing Inspectorate in Northern Ireland or Ofsted in England To study research questions 2-4 we will use the PIRLS 2021 dataset. The PIRLS study provides us with a range of useful data, as in addition to the tests, the study utilised a curriculum questionnaire, comparing aspects of the curriculum in each country. PIRLS also contains a range of relevant scales and items in its surveys. The teacher survey contains a range of items and scales relating to pedagogy, both specifically in relation to reading (which of course has been a major area of pedagogical contention) and in relation to general pedagogy, as well as items relating to curriculum knowledge and implementation, as does the school questionnaire. The student questionnaire provides useful data on student views on teaching in their school. To analyse the data, items relating to pedagogy will first be theoretically assigned to the different pedagogical approaches. Confirmatory Factor Analysis will be used to test whether the data fit this structure, in itself a measure of the validity of the dualistic framework that often characterises educational debate. Multilevel regression models will be used to model relationships between pedagogy, curriculum and attainment, controlling for pupil and school characteristics.

The policy study, which has been completed, shows clear differences in curricular intent between England and Northern Ireland. The NI curriculum is based on a framework employing 6 cross-currricular areas of learning. According to the curriculum “teachers should, where appropriate, integrate learning across the six areas to make relevant connections for children” (CCEA, 2007, p.4). The English national curriculum for primary, by contrast, is organised around 11 separate subjects, and stresses the knowledge to be learnt in each subject in each year through separate programmes of study for each subject. The English curriculum in England puts a strong emphasis on phonics, while the ‘Language and Literacy’ strand of the Northern Irish curriculum tends to see this as one element of a broader approach. Similar differences can be seen in the approaches of the school inspectorates, with the English inspection framework having a strong focus on subject curriculum (through subject ‘deep dives’), while the focus in Northern Irish inspections is much more strongly on generic pedagogical strategies such as differentiation. The quantitative data analysis has not yet been completed, but will be presented in full at the conference.

Cairney, P. (2012). Complexity Theory in Political Science and Public Policy. Political Studies Review, 10(3), 346-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1478-9302.2012.00270.x Guile, D., Lambert, D. & Reiss, M. (2018). Sociology, Curriculum Studies and Professional KnowledgeNew Perspectives on the Work of Michael Young. Abingdon: Routledge Hirsch, E. D. (2016). Why knowledge matters: Rescuing our children from failed educational theories. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press. Pak, K., Polikoff, M. S., Desimone, L. M., & Saldívar García, E. (2020). The Adaptive Challenges of Curriculum Implementation: Insights for Educational Leaders Driving Standards-Based Reform. AERA Open, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858420932828 Taber, K. S. (2011). Constructivism as Educational Theory. In: Hassakah, J. (Ed.). Educational Theory. Pp. 39-61. New York: Nova Science Publishers