Are Children Washing Machines? Or: To Frontload or Not to Frontload?

“We’ll need to frontload the children with this…”

It’s a phrase I’ve heard in planning meetings around the world — and I’m pretty sure I’ve said it more than once.

Frontloading is often used to activate prior knowledge and introduce key ideas or vocabulary ahead of a new unit. The intention is to help students feel more prepared and successful in their learning. But where does the term come from? As far as I can tell, it’s not attributed to anyone in particular and doesn’t appear in educational research literature.

What is well-researched is the idea that learners build stronger understanding when they connect new knowledge to what they already know. Schema Theory (Anderson, 1977) and Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development are foundational theories we learn early on as educators. They both highlight the importance of building on existing mental frameworks and guiding learners from what they know now to what they’re ready to learn next.

But is that really what frontloading does?

In practice, frontloading often looks like giving students vocabulary lists and key information to memorise — not actually connecting to what they know or can do yet. At times, I’ve done it so awkwardly that it felt more like: “Here’s the stuff you need to know so you can learn about it.”

Instead of this deductive approach, what if we tried something different?

What’s the Alternative?

Concept Formation.

Rather than pre-loading students with facts, concept formation encourages them to build understanding through exploration and pattern recognition. This is how the brain organises information — through concepts, not isolated facts. When students understand the concept behind something, they’re far more likely to retain it and apply it in new situations.

This is central to the work of Dr Lynn Erickson and Dr Lois Lanning, whose approach to concept-based inquiry invites more inductive learning. Students explore patterns and construct meaning for themselves, rather than being handed a definition and told what it means before they’ve had a chance to experience it.

A Cautionary Tale of Frontloading Gone Wrong

I remember planning a Grade 5 science unit on Energy. There wasn’t a clear progression of science learning across the school, so the team decided the unit should “get the kids ready for Grade 6.” (That phrase alone could be a whole article...)

We sent students home with a hefty vocabulary list. It included loads of technical terms that they’d supposedly need for the unit. We spent days going over those terms before students even got a chance to do any science.

But when they finally did start experimenting and making sense of energy, all the vocabulary emerged naturally — and much more meaningfully. I couldn’t help but feel we’d robbed them of deeper learning by insisting on frontloading first. It was also based on the assumption that every child needed the same frontloading, at the same time, in the same way.

A Different Approach: Messing About and Teacher as Researcher

Inspired by the Reggio Emilia approach, I believe children already bring rich knowledge and ideas to any unit. They may not have formalised this understanding yet, but it’s there.

In their book Concept-Based Inquiry in Action, Rachel French and Carla Marschall describe the “Mess About” and “Engage” phases — low-stakes opportunities for students to explore materials and ideas before formal learning begins. These early phases give the teacher a chance to observe what students already know and what they’re curious about.

I often say it’s a bit like being Jane Goodall — quietly watching and listening to what students reveal. In an Energy unit, one Mess About station might include a domino rally. Children explain to a friend how it works, what they notice, what causes what. These small glimpses give you incredibly rich data about where their understanding sits — and you haven’t had to frontload a thing.

The Neuroscience Behind Concept Formation

Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa builds on the work of Jo Boaler and Carol Dweck, showing how learning physically changes the brain.

Through neuroplasticity, the brain forms and strengthens connections as students explore and revisit concepts. These connections become myelinated over time — a process where the pathways are insulated so information can travel faster and more efficiently.

Poorly executed frontloading often skips over this process. If students memorise terms out of context, they’re less likely to recall them or use them meaningfully. So when we say, “But we taught them this last year,” we might actually mean, “They didn’t form the neural connections deeply enough to retain it.”

So What Can We Do Instead?

Let’s not treat children like washing machines where we cram them full of content, hit a cycle button, and hope it all comes out clean.

If we want learning to stick and transfer, we need to take a more brain-friendly approach. Here are three strategies I use that support concept formation:

1. Concept Quadrants

Give students four images. Three relate to a concept; one does not. Students discuss which is the odd one out and why. It sparks rich conversation and surfaces misconceptions.

2. Is / Is Not Charts

Option 1: Show a slideshow of images or phrases and ask students to silently decide which belong and which don’t. Once all are shown, students suggest what the concept might be. Option 2: Provide example and non-example cards and ask students to sort them into two columns. From there, they co-construct a definition of the concept.

3. The Frayer Model

Put the concept in the centre of a four-square grid. In each corner has a section for:

• Definition

• Characteristics

• Examples

• Non-examples

This helps students build a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the concept, supported by language that evolves alongside their thinking.

In Summary

If we want to support durable, meaningful learning, frontloading isn’t the answer. Let’s stop giving students all the answers before they’ve had a chance to ask the questions.

Children aren’t washing machines.

They’re thinkers, sense-makers, and idea-builders.

Let’s meet them there.