The president of the Australian Secondary Principals’ Association Andy Mison has called for a stronger partnership between the Australian Education Research Organisation and the education profession, warning of one-size-fits-all solutions being imposed from afar.
His comments, published on the ASPA website, follow the annoucement of a review of the national evidence-based education research body.
Mison said AERO needed to broaden its concept of evidence to “genuinely include the professional knowledge of teachers and leaders” and that professional expertise was most crucial form of evidence, “yet it seems to be the one most undervalued in the current discourse”.
“Currently, the debate suggests AERO promotes a narrow, hierarchical view, privileging quantitative studies like randomised controlled trials,” Mison wrote.
“While valid to an extent, this approach risks reducing the complex art and science of teaching to a set of technical, “what works” recipes. It positions educators not as the adaptive experts they are, but as technicians expected to implement pre-determined strategies.
“This top-down model feels disconnected from the dynamic and diverse contexts of our schools, where a “one-size-fits-all” solution rarely fits anyone perfectly.”
Mison said educators want AERO to give school leaders and teachers a more significant role in how the organisation designs research and prioritises its output.
“A healthier move would be to build a shared understanding of the complex ingredients of great teaching and learning, rather than simply searching for recipes,” he said.
Challenging the “decline” narrative in Australian schools
Mison also challenged the dominant “narrative of systemic failure” surrounding Australian education, often fuelled by selective interpretations of international test results. He pointed to research by Dr Sally Larsen, which suggests that a broader analysis – including NAPLAN, TIMSS, and PIRLS data – shows improvement in primary schools and stability in secondary, rather than widespread decline.
This “questionable narrative,” Mison argued, has driven decades of top-down reforms and a narrowing focus on literacy and numeracy, often at the expense of deeper, evidence-informed professional approaches. He linked this to declining morale among teachers and principals, noting that poor wellbeing contributes to ongoing staff shortages.
AERO responds
In a statement posted on LinkedIn, the chief executive of AERO, Dr Jenny Donovan wrote one of the misunderstandings about “evidence-based practice” is that it is contrary to teacher autonomy and professionalism.
“That couldn’t be further from the truth,” she said.
“At AERO, our work is built on partnerships with practising educators in the context of real schools and early childhood education and care settings.
Many of our resources and guides have been developed by working with teachers in their own schools – testing, refining, testing again – to support the implementation of effective teaching practice.”
Donovan said good research did not exist in a vacuum.
“It observes, works with, and reflects the experiences of many and allows us to access insights that extend our line of sight to the collective wisdom of our profession,” she said.
“In the busy and complex environment that is education, it only makes sense that we would work together to support the best possible outcomes for students, both in their schooling and beyond.”
A survey being conducted by KPMG as part of thr review closes on July 23.