Transforming the ‘hidden curriculum’

The phrase ‘hidden curriculum’ is sometimes used in relation to higher educational contexts. It refers to the supposed set of undisclosed knowledges, expectations, norms, and behaviours comprising the ‘way to uni’, which students are apparently assumed to either already know, or somehow absorb by osmosis, and shape themselves to fit. If this sounds vague, unfair, and undesirable, that’s because it is!

The very idea of a ‘hidden curriculum’ gives the impression of something pre-existing and opaque, which students are compelled to somehow absorb and learn – an arcane artefact which fuels the type of exclusionary elitism from which universities are rightly seeking to divest themselves in the service of equity. Addressing it is essential to aligning with the principles guiding education at the University, and to improving students’ experiences of university.

If students are assumed to know things which are not explained, or even articulated, how can they succeed?

In the slides accompanying her keynote at the 2026 Transition symposium: strategies for first year success, Professor Sally Kift renders the phrase in a B-movie horror-style font – each red letter dripping down the page. The comedic drama of this rendering belies the reality of the grave inequity created and perpetuated by the idea of a hidden curriculum, a contrast deployed with intention by Kift, as she highlights the ways in which the idea creates disadvantage – if students are assumed to know things which are not explained, or even articulated, how can they succeed?

Kift’s recommendation to address the inequity is simple and pragmatic – ensure that all the information that students need is complete, clear, and explicit. This doesn’t mean ‘dumbing things down’, but rather, not assuming prior knowledge, ensuring accessibility, explaining expectations and requirements, checking for understanding, and normalising seeking help. She provides a resource with practical tips, and suggests features of explicit curricula, including that they:

• are inclusive, coherent, scaffolded and relevant

• are optimally organised, sequenced, chunked and paced

• explicitly develop the skills and literacies needed for success, with opportunities to practise and receive feedback

• are relationship-rich for a sense of belonging and mattering

• proactively manage macro and micro transitions.

She also provides a second resource, one which encourages us to think more deeply about implicit features of learning environments which may affect students’ experiences. For educators working in transition (first year) units, an examination of, and attention to, any implicit features of unit design and classroom cultures is vital, to avoid perpetuating inequity.

So, to improve learning environments, how can we attend to their implicit features?

Implicit features of any learning environment should only be implicit if they are better felt than explained, better enacted than articulated.

Implicit features of any learning environment should only be implicit if they are better felt than explained, better enacted than articulated – the affective ingredients which are part of intentionally creating conditions conducive to effective and enjoyable learning. Some examples include:

• a welcoming environment

• care for each person’s needs

• appreciation and affirmation of diversity

• attention to each person’s contribution

• safety to risk making mistakes as part of learning.

These are the features of learning environments which must be infused, nurtured, and lived to have effect. Here, explicit approaches are less productive, or even counterproductive – for example, simply stating “this is a welcoming environment”, without the sustained, embodied effort needed to create it, produces a dissonance which is likely to engender the opposite impression.

Implicit features will be different in each learning environment, because while the tone can be set by the educator, each learning environment is created together, and perpetually anew, by each new combination of students and educators. When created with intention, implicit features become a set of beneficial norms, shaped, evolved, cared for, and lived by all participants to meet their individual and collective needs. The variety and shared care involved in this process of creation fosters agency, autonomy, and collaborative learning which we know from Self Determination Theory (SDT), and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) help improve students’ motivation, participation, and learning. And support student mental wellbeing and academic achievement!

As educators working with students in transition to university, we have a unique opportunity to help them develop the skills, knowledges, and agency they need to pilot successful trajectories through their studies and beyond. Giving clear and explicit information helps students manage the administrative aspects of their courses. Giving caring attention to creating beneficial ‘felt’ environments creates conditions conducive to learning. And encouraging this undertaking as a collaborative endeavour fosters the peer connections that ensure students don’t have to do it alone.

Jenna Roberts (she/her) AFHEA, works in educational design, with a focus on addressing the implicit assumptions embedded in curriculum and assessment. She collaborates with educators to develop approaches that make expectations clearer, support student agency, and contribute to more equitable learning environments.

Dr alessandra wollaston (she/they) FHEA, is an award-winning educator and ethical troublemaker who champions collaboration, creativity, and the courage to do things differently as vital to the kind of learning that can create change.

Toolkit for first year transition is a series to give educators practical, pedagogically sound, ideas and inspiration to use in their teaching practice. Read more in the series.

Share