Teachers do not always feel well-supported to implement teaching methods based on the science of learning, a new report has found.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The report by research fellow in education at the Centre for Independent Studies Trisha Jha found that most teachers had stumbled across the science of learning - a body of knowledge based on cognitive science and educational psychology - when their students weren't making enough progress.
"Some people are actually really frustrated and angry. There were a few people that said that it's something that they just felt was so clear, it made so much sense," Ms Jha said.
"It was backed by such strong evidence, and yet it wasn't something that they've been supported with, either throughout their initial teacher education, or throughout their life professionally."
The science of learning prioritises explicit instruction of a well-sequenced, knowledge-rich curriculum. Students learn new information in small steps through modelling and examples with frequent checking for their understanding.
The analysis of interviews with 19 educators from primary, secondary and vocational settings found many faced resistance from school or system leaders in implementing practices based on the science of learning.
While some school executives and department leaders were very supportive, other teachers felt like they had to hide their work from their superiors.
"At worst, some people described feeling quite isolated within their school networks and feeling like... the progress they were making was not being adequately recognised," Ms Jha said.
Senior English and history teachers said they found that explicit teaching helped to build up the students' skills and knowledge to the point where they could do more complex, higher-order tasks such as writing essays or doing analysis.
Teachers came across many myths and misconceptions about the science of learning, such as that it was not student-centred or did not allow for differentiation.
Change fatigue was also a major barrier to schools trying a science-backed approach with one participant describing an "elephant graveyard" of initiatives that had been abandoned.
"Most teachers recognise that change needs to be incremental in order to be sustainable," Ms Jha said.
"None of the teachers that we spoke to had managed to overturn their entire schools curriculum or teaching and learning style to the science of learning within the space of a year or even two."
The teachers said they needed adequate curriculum support and resourcing to be able to align their teaching to the science of learning.
They wanted clear guidance on what programs were evidence-based, including intervention programs for students struggling with maths and English.
Catholic Education Canberra Goulburn was the only known Australian example of an attempt to implement the science of learning at a system level, the report said.