Tim Surma, Paul A. Kirschner, Michiel Wils, Daniel Muijs*, Claudio Vanhees, Jasper Nijlunsing
Centre of Expertise Education and Learning, Thomas More University of Applied Sciences, Antwerp, Belgium; *Queen’s University Belfast, School of Social Sciences, Education and Social Work
Educational reform always sparks debate. That is healthy and necessary. And what we see today is no exception, as many countries embark on the development of what is known as knowledge-rich curricula. Yet, anyone following the discussions will notice a recurring problem: misconceptions. In our own development of new knowledge-rich minimum goals for Flemish primary education we have frequently encountered them. Understandably, not everyone is familiar with the details of what is changing or what exactly a knowledge-rich curriculum entails. As a result, false ideas take hold, suggesting for instance, that education will be reduced to mindless drills or that there will be a back-to-basics emphasis on language and mathematics to the exclusion of a broader curriculum.
In reality, the picture is very different. A knowledge-rich curriculum is a carefully designed way to give students systematic access to the broad base of knowledge they need to understand the world they live in and participate in it.
In what follows, we explore what a knowledge-rich curriculum really means for classroom practice, by addressing five persistent misconceptions.
Misconception 1: “A knowledge-rich curriculum is just a list of disconnected facts.”
This is perhaps the most common misconception: students memorizing lists of dates or words by rote, with no context or meaning. But this is not what a knowledge-rich curriculum is. Its foundation is coherence: knowledge is taught in a structured, meaningful sequence that builds understanding over time.
This coherence works in two directions. First there is vertical coherence where topics are sequenced logically across year levels: students first learn the basics before moving on to more complex ideas. You cannot explain the formation of the Himalayas without first understanding what a mountain is and how plate tectonics work. The same holds true in reading: comprehension depends on vocabulary and background knowledge. The second is horizontal coherence where concepts are connect across school subjects: magnetism in physics, for instance, ties to lessons about the North and South poles in geography.
Because memory works like a network, new knowledge is retained most easily when it can be connected to what is already known. If we don’t do this, facts quickly become “dead knowledge.” Far from being a jumble of trivia, a knowledge-rich curriculum ensures that learning is purposeful and lasting.
Misconception 2: “A knowledge-rich curriculum only focuses on language and math.”
It’s true that policymakers are currently highlighting a “back-to-basics” approach to teaching and learning, with extra emphasis on reading and arithmetic. And rightly so: these skills are essential foundations. Without decoding skills or number sense, students quickly hit barriers in every other subject.
But a knowledge-rich curriculum is much broader. It systematically expands children’s knowledge of the world. Once basic literacy is in place, language becomes a tool for learning in history, science, geography, technology, the arts, and beyond. Learning to read quickly becomes reading to learn! Reading and math are the keys, but the doors they open lead everywhere.
Even before children can read it is crucial to immerse them in rich knowledge. Preschoolers may not decode text yet, but they can listen to stories about dinosaurs, the Nile, or the seasons, build vocabulary, and develop concepts like “past” and “future”. This background knowledge is the foundation for developing deeper understanding later. For instance, a child who already knows that the Earth orbits the sun will find it much easier to grasp the concept of seasons in later years.
Misconception 3: “A knowledge-rich curriculum leaves no room for skills or creativity.”
On the contrary: a knowledge-rich curriculum deliberately builds both skills and creativity.
Consider the Primary Knowledge Curriculum in England (see above). Sewing skills are introduced gradually: young children make sock puppets using glue, older students learn to thread needles and stitch, and by sixth grade they can design their own garments using multiple techniques. This is not random crafting, but a deliberate sequence leading to mastery.
The same applies to cognitive skills. Creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving are not generic abilities you can train in the abstract. They are rooted in domain knowledge. You become creative in music by mastering musical knowledge and skills. You can solve physics problems when you understand the underlying concepts.
In this sense, knowledge and skills are inseparable. Knowledge makes skills meaningful – and a strong knowledge base makes creativity – and much more – possible.
Misconception 4: “A knowledge-rich curriculum is a straitjacket – teachers lose their freedom.”
Another concern is that a knowledge-rich curriculum will reduce teachers to script-followers. But this is not the case. A knowledge-rich curriculum specifies what should be learned, not how it should be taught. As Christine Counsell and Steve Mastin, founders of the Opening Worlds curriculum, put it: “A knowledge-rich curriculum is a collection of promises to the future teachers of the student.”
True professional autonomy is not about inventing all content from scratch. It’s about having the freedom to adapt, enrich, and make professional choices within a clear framework. In fact, many teachers today already rely heavily on textbooks, which means that their autonomy is often more limited in practice than it appears on paper. A well-designed knowledge-rich curriculum actually reduces workload, provides clarity of goals, and ensures all students get access to the same broad knowledge base.
And within the curriculum frameworks, teachers still have space to room to personalise the curriculum – whether by connecting content to local context, weaving in current events, highlighting a favourite text, or choosing an inspiring approach to teaching it. Research shows that the strongest teachers always adapt curricula using their own professional voice.
Specificity actually enhances autonomy. If students learn about Neil Armstrong, they gain the concept of “space travel,” which a Flemish teacher can expand by introducing Belgian astronaut Dirk Frimout, a Dutch teacher to Wubbo Ockels, or an English teacher by introducing Helen Sharman. Clear frameworks provide hooks on which teachers can hang their own expertise and creativity.
Finally, designing a curriculum is not something individual teachers, or even entire school teams, can realistically take on alone. It requires expertise, time, and technical capacity. Well-structured curricula and materials need to offer both coherence and professional flexibility, but are often best designed by curriculum design experts.
Misconception 5: “A knowledge-rich curriculum is too ambitious – some students can’t handle it.”
This concern often comes from a legitimate concern: fear that students will be overwhelmed or discouraged. But lowering expectations is far more damaging, especially for disadvantaged students. This is what is known as “the soft bigotry of low expectations”.
Research in fact shows the opposite: a knowledge-rich curriculum is not too hard, but is the most powerful route to success for all learners. Every child has the right to a broad base of knowledge, not just those children lucky enough to grow up with exposed to museum visits, books, and enriching conversations at home. And timing matters: the earlier children are immersed in knowledge, the stronger the impact.
Large-scale studies in the United States, for example, found that preschoolers randomly assigned to knowledge-rich schools achieved significantly better results in reading, maths, and science than peers who were not. The gains (an average of sixteen percentile points) were comparable to closing the gap between average U.S. performance and that of top-performing countries like Singapore. Most importantly, the effects were strongest for children from low-income backgrounds. In some schools, longstanding achievement gaps disappeared within just a few years.
A knowledge-rich curriculum is not elitist. It is the strongest lever for equity. And thus ultimately a matter of social justice.
education ruminations 