Introduction In this paper I discuss a number of learning and education theories in the context of the humanities scenario. The paper is structured around five key teaching areas. While effort has been made to stay within this structure, there is inevitable inter-bleeding between the sections as examples and theories mutually reinforce and depend on one another. For example, the ‘Assessment and feedback’ section is light, but this is to avoid repetition of content covered in other sections. Behaviourist reinforcement for example, could have been discussed in the ‘Behaviour management’ section, or the ‘Assessment and feedback’ section. Although, considerable emphasis has been given to certain theories I do not subscribe exclusively to any single school of education theory. Behaviourism for example, is given focus in the ‘Behaviour Management’ section - this is not to say that I am a ‘behaviourist’. I focus closely on behaviourism because the scenario contains excellent examples of this theory in application, and also because I understand behaviour management to be an important challenge to an early teacher. Similar reasons exist for other areas of focus in the paper. Importantly, I do not believe best practice involves the adoption of any one approach. Instead I hope to be a teacher that embraces appropriate elements many theories mentioned below, and to add theoretical perspectives to this base throughout my career. Individualized Learning / Differentiation James’ strategy of tiering project work based on student ability (i.e. ‘debate’ group – higher-ability vs. ‘vox pop’ group - lower ability) may be explained from a few theoretical perspectives. Firstly, the idea of students being at different levels of development is consistent with Piaget. Piaget proposed that development occurred through different stages that correspond with different age groups (O’Donnell et al., 2009). Applying this to James’ classroom, we might say that students in the lower group, working on the ‘vox pop’ project are still exhibiting characteristics of Piaget’s ‘concrete operations stage’ and haven’t yet reached the ‘formal operations stage’ that unlocks the capabilities required to complete an activity like the debate. While a Piaget approach explains the different stages of functioning in James’ classroom to some extent, the arbitrary way it links capability to such age-based stages of development is a major limitation of the theory (O’Donnell et al., 2009). Another way at looking at this strategy might be through the lens of Bandura. Bandura’s social learning theory emphasises the importance of observational learning. Bandura argued that learners replicate behaviour they observe in others (Bandura, 1977). These behavioural models may take the form of teachers, peers or parents. In the scenario, the high-achieving debate group may act as models of positive behaviour that is conducive to academic achievement. A Banduran view would argue that through the right reinforcement of this behaviour, other students will be motivated to replicate it. Ongoing reinforcement of this behaviour both in the models, and in new students replicating the behaviour is consistent with Bandura’s theory of vicarious reinforcement (Bandura, 1977). The use of behavioural models in the classroom in this way is something I hope to emulate. From reviewing NAPLAN data of my classes next year, I already have an indication of the variance between my most and least capable students in different areas. I hope to utilise Bandura’s vicarious reinforcement theory where appropriate and use high achieving students as models for those struggling in certain areas. Motivation and Engagement Experiential learning is something that I aspire to incorporate in my classroom to elicit motivation and engagement from my students. The scenario gives a few examples of this approach – the Sovereign Hill excursion, the proposed trip to Melbourne and also the use of songs, readings and artworks. All three of these aim to engage students by making learning part of a broader experience. This approach can be explained through the lens of Dewey. Dewey (1902) argued that education should focus on the quality of a learner’s experience rather than on the delivery of curriculum. James’ initiative to teach political theory and the systems of government by immersing students in the experience of the museum is an application of Dewey’s experiential focus. Further, Dewey’s work implies an emphasis of a student’s interest to the attainment of new learning (Dewey, 1902). This offers a perspective to view James’ approach to Tayla. James is very effective in engaging Tayla’s past experience; leveraging her interest in fashion and using this as the impetus for her motivation to work hard on the concept map task. This prioritisation of the learner’s experience over the content itself is something I aspire