It has been a busy ten days for Australian education, with three stories arriving in quick succession and creating a strong sense of urgency. First came a report suggesting that teachers lose an average of nine minutes in every thirty-minute lesson to student misbehaviour. Five days later, the PISA 2025 results brought renewed attention to Australia’s long-term performance, classroom disruption and digital distraction. Then came the NSW Government’s announcement that screen use in public schools will be limited from 2028. Together, they suggest a growing determination to protect learning time and improve the daily experience of students and teachers.
The behaviour findings attracted attention because they put a figure against an experience that many teachers will recognise, although the figure itself needs to be treated with some care. The Centre for Independent Studies surveyed 377 teachers and reported that almost a third of lesson time was being lost to disruption, while an ABC report on the findings also noted concerns about the effect on teacher wellbeing. A survey of this size cannot describe every Australian classroom, and I am sure many schools maintain calm and productive learning environments. Even so, it has prompted useful discussion about the cumulative effect of calling out, slow transitions, repeated reminders and other low-level interruptions. A few minutes can appear insignificant within one lesson, yet become substantial when repeated across a day, a term and a child’s education.
When the PISA results followed on 8th September, they placed those concerns within a much broader picture. Australian students continue to perform above the OECD average in reading, mathematics and science, which deserves recognition. The results also point to persistent concerns about attainment, equity, attendance and the conditions in which learning takes place. 41% of Australian students reported noise and disorder in their mathematics lessons, while 39% said that their own use of digital devices distracted them. These figures cannot tell us precisely why outcomes have changed, although they add weight to the case for sustained attention to the learning environment alongside curriculum and teaching.
Commentary around PISA has understandably looked overseas, with England attracting interest after reaching the top ten in all three subjects. I followed that discussion with particular interest because, until moving to Australia, I worked as a school and system leader in England and experienced its reforms from within schools. Cross-country comparisons require care, but they can still help us notice the conditions that allow improvement to take hold.
From my perspective, I view alignment as one of England’s strengths. Over time, curriculum, assessment, early reading, initial teacher education, professional development, research and accountability began to draw upon a more consistent understanding of effective teaching. England continues to face significant difficulties, including disadvantage, attendance, additional needs, staff workload and uneven implementation, and maintaining this coherence requires continued attention. Even so, teachers increasingly encountered familiar principles as they moved from initial training into schools and through their professional development. Shared language and expectations made it easier for improvements in one area to support work elsewhere.
The NSW screen-time announcement offers an understandable early response to the concerns now being discussed because it turns a broad unease about technology into something concrete. From 2028, classroom screen use will be capped at fifteen minutes a day in Kindergarten to Year 2 and forty-five minutes in Years 5 and 6, with proportional limits in secondary school. Screen-based homework will be discouraged before Year 5, and schools will be expected to retain substantial opportunities for learning through handwriting, books and paper. I can see the appeal of a clear limit. It can interrupt established habits, reassure families and prompt schools to consider whether a device is genuinely improving the learning in front of the child.
The longer-term value of the policy will depend on the professional thinking that accompanies it. The Education Endowment Foundation does not prescribe a universal number of minutes because its guidance focuses on the purpose of technology within teaching. It considers whether technology improves explanation and modelling, strengthens practice, supports useful feedback or makes assessment more effective. This is a helpful way to think about classroom use because changing the medium does not automatically improve the task. A worksheet can be just as unproductive as an activity on a tablet, while well-chosen technology can offer access, practice or feedback that would otherwise be difficult to provide. Time limits can reset habits, but teachers will still need the knowledge and support to decide what should take their place.
Seen in this wider context, behaviour, PISA and screen use all lead us towards the quality of the educational experience pupils receive each day. Calm classrooms create more opportunities to teach, while a coherent curriculum and effective pedagogy help teachers use that time well. Technology forms one part of those decisions, as do teacher preparation, professional learning and the support available to schools. Lasting improvement depends on how successfully these elements reinforce one another.
There is already thoughtful work under way across Australia that could contribute to this coherence. The Strong Beginnings reforms have established core content for initial teacher education covering how students learn, effective pedagogical practices, classroom management and responsive teaching. AERO has developed a model of learning and teaching and is working with schools to translate research into practical classroom approaches. States and territories are strengthening curriculum, teaching resources, behaviour support and professional learning in different ways. This sustained work may attract less immediate attention than a new limit, yet it has the potential to shape what teachers experience throughout their careers.
I am still getting to know the Australian education system, so I offer these thoughts with humility. What I have seen so far includes considerable expertise in schools, universities, systems and research organisations, alongside a willingness to examine difficult issues openly. My recent experience in England has left me particularly interested in the connections between these different parts of the system, because stronger alignment helped good work travel further and last longer.
As these developments continue, I am curious to learn more about:
how the core content in initial teacher education is taught, practised and assessed across universities, and how closely it connects with the practice graduates encounter in schools;
whether curriculum, assessment, behaviour and teaching guidance increasingly reinforce a shared understanding of effective classroom practice while preserving professional judgement and responsiveness to local context;
how professional learning is followed by modelling, rehearsal, feedback, coaching and continued refinement;
whether schools receive the time, expertise, resources and funding needed to implement several developing reforms well;
how effective practice is identified and shared across schools without being reduced to disconnected strategies; and
how a strong universal offer is combined with early and precise support for pupils who need more, maintaining high expectations while recognising the additional help some children require.
These reflections are shaped by experience in one education system and a growing understanding of another. Australia already has strong educators, serious research capability and promising work in development. The current urgency offers an opportunity to connect that work more deliberately and give schools a clear, well-supported direction over time.
The significance of these ten days will become clearer through what happens next. If teacher preparation, curriculum, professional learning, research, funding and accountability continue to move into closer alignment, schools will be better placed to turn current concern into sustained improvement. I am hopeful that the urgency of this moment will help bring that work together and give it the sustained attention it deserves.
References
Australian Government Department of Education (2023), Strong Beginnings: Report of the Teacher Education Expert Panel.
Australian Education Research Organisation, Engaged Classrooms.
Centre for Independent Studies (2026), Classrooms in Crisis: Australian Teachers’ Perspectives on Student Behaviour.
Department for Education (2026), PISA 2025: National Report for England.
Education Endowment Foundation (2019), Using Digital Technology to Improve Learning.
Minns Labor Government (2026), ‘Screentime Limits in All Public Schools to Lift Our Game in the Classroom’, media release, 13 September.
OECD (2026), PISA 2025 Results, Volume I: Learning and Equity in Education.
