Constitutional Change: Referendums

Active learning transforms a complex topic like referendums into lived experience. When students simulate the process or analyse real cases, abstract rules become concrete choices they must defend. This topic demands more than memorisation, so hands-on tasks build both understanding and critical thinking.

• Year 10
• Civics & Citizenship
• 4 activities
• 30 min–50 min

Learning Objectives

1. Explain the constitutional requirements for a referendum to amend the Australian Constitution, including the double majority.
2. Analyze the historical reasons for the success or failure of specific Australian referendums, such as the 1967 and 1999 votes.
3. Evaluate the arguments for and against the current system of constitutional change through referendums in a federal context.
4. Compare the outcomes of referendums with other potential methods of constitutional amendment, considering their democratic implications.

Simulation Game

⏱ 50 min·Small Groups

Simulation Game: Mock Referendum Vote

Divide class into campaign teams for a fictional constitutional change, such as recognising local government. Teams create posters and speeches, then hold a class vote with state groupings. Tally results using double majority rules and discuss outcomes.

Prepare & details

Explain the process for amending the Australian Constitution.

Facilitation Tip: For the Timeline: Factors Analysis, have students arrange events on a large paper strip to visualise how delays and debates stretch over years before a vote.

Setup: Flexible space for group stations

Materials: Role cards with goals/resources, Game currency or tokens, Round tracker

• Apply
• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Social Awareness
• Decision-Making

Jigsaw

⏱ 40 min·Small Groups

Jigsaw: Historical Referendums

Assign groups one past referendum, like 1901 or 1999. They research process, arguments, and results from official sources. Groups teach peers via gallery walk, with notes on success factors.

Prepare & details

Analyze the factors contributing to the success or failure of referendums.

Setup: Flexible seating for regrouping

Materials: Expert group reading packets, Note-taking template, Summary graphic organizer

• Understand
• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Relationship Skills
• Self-Management

Formal Debate

⏱ 30 min·Pairs

Formal Debate: Referendum Legitimacy

Pose key question on democratic value of double majority. Pairs prepare pro/con arguments from historical evidence. Whole class votes and reflects on persuasion techniques.

Prepare & details

Evaluate the democratic legitimacy of constitutional change via referendum.

Setup: Two teams facing each other, audience seating for the rest

Materials: Debate proposition card, Research brief for each side, Judging rubric for audience, Timer

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Self-Management
• Decision-Making

Timeline Challenge

⏱ 35 min·Individual

Timeline Challenge: Factors Analysis

Individuals create timelines of three referendums, marking political, social factors. Share in pairs to identify common success patterns, then class synthesises findings.

Prepare & details

Explain the process for amending the Australian Constitution.

Setup: Long wall or floor space for timeline construction

Materials: Event cards with dates and descriptions, Timeline base (tape or long paper), Connection arrows/string, Debate prompt cards

• Remember
• Understand
• Analyze
• Self-Management
• Relationship Skills

Teaching This Topic

Teachers should anchor this topic in the lived experience of students, using simulations to reveal how rules shape outcomes. Avoid long lectures on procedure; instead, let students discover the double majority through role-play. Research shows that peer teaching—especially in jigsaws—deepens understanding of why referendums succeed or fail. Emphasise the role of wording in campaigns, as subtle changes can shift public opinion, and model how to analyse these choices with students.

What to Expect

By the end of these activities, students will confidently explain the double majority rule, evaluate referendum campaigns, and argue for or against its fairness. They will also see how regional voices shape national outcomes and why most proposals fail.

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

During the Mock Referendum Vote, watch for students who assume a simple national majority is enough. Redirect them to the state tally sheets to show how four states can block change even if most voters nationwide agree.

What to Teach Instead

After students tally their mock votes, pause the activity and ask each state group to report their majority. Use this moment to highlight how regional differences can override a national majority.

Common Misconception

During the Jigsaw: Historical Referendums, students may believe referendums pass if they are popular. Use this group work to uncover the reality that only 8 of 44 referendums have succeeded.

What to Teach Instead

Ask each jigsaw group to present not only the outcome of their case but also the campaign language and bipartisan support. Have students note which factors most often lead to failure.

Common Misconception

During the Timeline: Factors Analysis, students may assume the referendum process is quick once Parliament approves it. Use the timeline activity to reveal the procedural rigour and delays.

What to Teach Instead

During the timeline activity, have students mark the time between a bill’s introduction and the referendum vote. Ask them to identify stages where debates stall or public opinion shifts.

Assessment Ideas

Exit Ticket

After the Mock Referendum Vote, provide students with a card asking: 'What are the two main conditions a referendum must meet to pass in Australia? Name one historical referendum and state whether it passed or failed.' Use their answers to check understanding of the double majority and recall of a specific case.

Discussion Prompt

During the Debate: Referendum Legitimacy, facilitate a class debate using the prompt: 'Does the 'double majority' requirement for constitutional change fairly represent the will of the Australian people? Why or why not?' Listen for students to cite specific examples from their jigsaw cases or mock votes to support their arguments.

Quick Check

After the Timeline: Factors Analysis, present students with a short case study of a hypothetical referendum. Ask them to identify potential factors that might lead to its success or failure, based on the criteria discussed in class, and list them in a paragraph.

Extensions & Scaffolding

• Challenge early finishers to draft a mock referendum proposal that meets the double majority requirement and present it to the class for peer feedback.
• Scaffolding for struggling students: provide a partially completed timeline with key dates filled in to help them identify patterns in delay or success.
• Deeper exploration: invite students to research a current constitutional debate and map its likely path through Parliament and the public, noting where it might stall.

Key Vocabulary

Referendum	A national vote where the entire electorate is asked to vote 'Yes' or 'No' on a proposed law or question, in this case, to change the Constitution.
Double Majority	The requirement for a constitutional referendum to be approved by a majority of voters nationwide and by a majority of voters in at least four of the six Australian states.
Parliamentary Bill	A proposed law that must pass through both houses of the Commonwealth Parliament before it can be put to a referendum.
Constitutional Convention	A formal meeting where delegates debate and decide on proposed changes to a constitution, sometimes preceding a referendum.
Bipartisan Support	Agreement and backing for a proposal, such as a referendum question, from both major political parties.