What is Interactive Teaching?

When someone asks me to "be interactive" before I lead a session, I usually nod and don't explain that I was going to be regardless. Interactive teaching isn't a setting I switch on for special occasions. It's the only way I know how to actually teach anything that sticks. Years of running Skypig, working with educators across the United States, and helping teachers as far away as in the classrooms I've spent time in adopt this style have only reinforced the conviction.

The label gets thrown around enough that it's worth being precise about what interactive teaching actually involves — and what it doesn't.

The Specific Moves of Interactive Teaching

Interactive teaching is the practice of structuring instruction so that students are constantly responding to, producing for, or interacting with the material rather than passively receiving it. The defining feature isn't any single technique. It's the underlying commitment to keeping students in active mode for as much of the class as possible.

The specific moves an interactive teacher uses tend to be repeatable. They include asking questions before giving answers, pausing frequently for students to discuss with a partner, building in short writing or sketching activities throughout a lesson, having students teach each other concepts they've just learned, and structuring class time so that the teacher's voice isn't the dominant one in the room. Research on active learning consistently shows these moves outperform lecture-based instruction on retention, transfer, and engagement.

The hardest move for most teachers is the first one — asking questions before giving answers. Most teachers were trained to lead with explanation. The interactive shift requires leading with questions instead, then letting students struggle for a bit before offering the formal answer. That struggle is the learning, even when it feels uncomfortable to watch. This is the principle I've written about in invention-based learning — productive struggle creates a kind of cognitive readiness that lectures alone can't.

How I Practice It Myself

When I lead a session — whether it's a classroom visit, a corporate workshop, or a keynote — I follow a fairly consistent structure. I start with a question, not a statement. I get the audience producing something within the first three to five minutes. I keep my own talking time below half the session length. And I build in moments where the audience interacts with each other, not just with me.

This is the same structure I built into Products: The Card Game. The game is essentially interactive teaching in physical form. Players are talking, inventing, pitching, voting, and reacting throughout. The teacher (or facilitator) sets the conditions and then stays mostly out of the way. The interaction is what makes the lesson stick.

This connects directly to what I've written about interactive education — interactive teaching is the classroom-level practice that makes interactive education possible. They're related but distinct. Interactive education is the broader approach. Interactive teaching is the moment-by-moment practice that delivers it.

If you're a teacher trying to develop a more interactive style, the shift takes practice. The first few times you try to lead with questions, your students will look confused. They've been trained to wait for the answer, and the silence will feel awkward. Sit through it. Within a few sessions, students adjust. They start volunteering ideas. The classroom dynamic changes.

The other shift that helps is reducing the amount of material you cover per class. Interactive teaching takes longer than lecturing because students are actually engaging with the content rather than just hearing it. Teachers new to this style often try to keep the same content load and end up rushing — which collapses the interaction. The fix is to cover less and let students actually work with what they cover. Counterintuitively, this usually results in more retention, not less.

My pieces on how to create an active lesson, how to create a fun lesson, and how to implement game-based learning all cover related territory — they're different angles on the same underlying conviction that students learn through engagement, not through reception.

Interactive teaching isn't a technique you learn once and apply forever. It's a habit you build over years of practice. But the habit pays off — for the teacher, who finds the work more engaging, and for the students, who actually remember what they learn. That's been the pattern in every interactive classroom I've ever worked with.