The COVID-19 pandemic produced widespread disruption to schooling, impacting 90% of the world’s students and moving entire school systems to remote and online learning. In the state of New South Wales, Australia, most students engaged in learning from home for at least eight weeks, with subsequent individual and intermittent school closures. However, while numerous claims have circulated in the popular media and in think tank reports, internationally, about the negative impacts on learning, there is limited empirical evidence of decreased student achievement. Drawing on data from more than 4800 Year 3 and 4 students from 113 NSW government schools, this paper compares student achievement during 2019 and 2020 in a sample of matched schools to examine the effects of the system-wide disruption. Somewhat surprisingly, our analysis found no significant differences between 2019 and 2020 in student achievement growth as measured by progressive achievement tests in mathematics or reading. A more nuanced picture emerges when the sample is examined by dis/advantage (ICSEA) and Year level. The Year 3 cohort in the least advantaged schools (ICSEA < 950) achieved 2 months less growth in mathematics, while the Year 3 students in mid-ICSEA schools (950–1050) achieved 2 months’ additional growth. No significant differences were identified for Indigenous students or students located in regional locations. These results provide an important counter-narrative to widespread speculation about alarming levels of ‘learning loss’ for all students. While the lower achievement growth in mathematics for Year 3 students in lower ICSEA schools must be addressed as a matter of urgency to avoid further inequities, most students are, academically, where they are expected to be. Our findings are a testament to the dedicated work of teachers during the 2020 pandemic to ensure that learning for most students was not compromised, despite unusually trying circumstances.

It is commonly assumed that experienced teachers are more proficient than beginners. However, evidence supporting this premise is complicated by diverging research traditions and mixed results. We explore the fundamental relationship between years of experience and teaching quality using a comprehensive pedagogical model. Our analysis of 990 lessons, taught by 512 primary teachers in New South Wales during 2014–15 and 2019–21, found no significant differences in pedagogy across the experience range (< 1–24 + years). We canvass two possible explanations: that initial teacher education (ITE) performs better than is typically assumed; and/or that experience, including ongoing participation in many forms of professional development (PD), has minimal impact on pedagogical quality. The important lesson from this study, however, is that the continual positioning of beginning teachers and ITE as deficient is unwarranted and, instead, we should focus on providing teachers with access to high-impact PD throughout their careers.

The COVID-19 pandemic has put unprecedented pressure on teachers around the world, raising significant concerns about their workload and wellbeing. Our comparison of 2019 (pre-pandemic) and 2020 (first year of the pandemic) survey data (n = 362) from teachers in New South Wales, Australia, demonstrates that their morale and efficacy declined significantly during COVID-19, even with the relatively short period of school closure (8 weeks) during 2020. Interviews with teachers and school leaders (n = 18) reinforced these findings and highlighted the depth to which teachers felt dispensable and unappreciated, despite working incredibly hard for their students. The pressure to adapt to online teaching and learning, in trying circumstances, also challenged their confidence in their teaching. We argue that practical and emotional support for teachers both during periods of remote learning and upon students’ return to the classroom is essential to support teacher’s wellbeing and a robust teaching workforce into the future.

Despite the diversity of entry points into academia, little research exists examining the experiences and impact of precarious employment at different life stages. Drawing on interviews with 19 academics employed casually or on fixed-term contracts in Australian universities, this paper illustrates how precarious employment is experienced at different life and career stages. Using Foucauldian understandings of power and discourse alongside a life-course sociological approach, we explore how parenthood, relationships and life decisions are shaped by precarious employment in the academy. Discourses around academic ‘pipelines’ and ‘early careers’ obscure the experiences of those entering academia as a second-career; and those in long-term precarious employment. These employment structures have deep personal, professional and financial impacts. By identifying the intersection between precarious employment and life stages, we argue that an understanding of the effects of precarious employment requires further, urgent attention to support the diverse needs of academics.