What do teachers really know about the science of learning?
Teachers appear confident in their own practice, but less confident that their schools apply the science of learning consistently.
As part of my research for The Teacher Toolkit Guide to the Science of Learning, I’ve been gathering data from teachers to better understand current confidence levels in neuroscience, cognitive science and classroom practice.
You can also view past data collections – state of the nation – for all my book titles.
The data so far …
Over the last year, teachers and school leaders have responded to a detailed survey exploring their understanding of working memory, attention, metacognition, retrieval practice and neuroeducation. Collectively, respondents have provided over 1,500 data points to help inform the book and identify where schools and colleges may need more support with professional development.
Experience of respondents
The respondent group is largely made up of experienced professionals. Over 30 per cent have worked in education for more than 25 years, giving the findings considerable weight when thinking about long-term school and college culture.
- 37.8% have worked in education for 25 years or more.
- 24.3% have worked in education for 16–20 years.
- 18.9% have worked in education for 21–25 years.
- 10.8% have worked in education for 6–10 years.
- 5.4% have worked in education for 3–5 years.
- 2.7% have worked in education for less than one year.
The key finding …
The most interesting finding is the gap between personal confidence and institutional implementation.
Teachers report high levels of confidence in their own classroom practice. The highest “very confident” ratings were for engaging with research and CPD (44.2 per cent) and understanding how the brain learns (37.2 per cent).
This suggests that many teachers are not disengaged from research. Quite the opposite: they are actively interested in cognitive science, professional development and how learning happens.
Where are schools and colleges strongest?
Respondents rated their institutions most positively in areas linked to supporting emotional regulation and motivation, and adapting teaching for neurodiverse learners.
This is encouraging. It suggests that schools and colleges are increasingly recognising that learning is not just about memory and recall, but also about emotion, motivation, inclusion and student difference.
Where are the gaps?
The weaker areas tell us something important. Respondents reported that institutions still struggle to apply the science of learning across subjects and to challenge neuromyths. These were frequently rated as “weak” areas.
This is the implementation gap.
A teacher may understand retrieval practice, cognitive load theory or metacognition in their own classroom, but unless this language is shared across departments, year groups and leadership teams, the science of learning remains fragmented.
What does this mean?
The findings suggest teachers may be ahead of systems.
Many teachers are already experimenting with retrieval practice, cognitive load reduction, study strategies and metacognitive routines. However, schools and colleges often lack a shared language, a long-term implementation plan, or a consistent CPD model to support these approaches over time.
This is one key reason why I wrote The Teacher Toolkit Guide to the Science of Learning — to bridge the gap between complex research and classroom practice.
The early data collection suggests that many teachers already feel equipped to use practical approaches such as retrieval practice, spacing, modelling and metacognitive prompts.
The challenge is not simply teacher knowledge. The challenge is how schools and colleges build coherent systems that help every teacher apply these ideas consistently, ethically and effectively.
The growing interest in evidence-informed practice mirrors findings from the Education Endowment Foundation Teaching and Learning Toolkit.
