Do you know your neuromyths from your neurotruths?
Tips for Facilitators
Many of the cards are worded to be provocative. Some will challenge long and deeply held beliefs. We want debate and discussion. Here are some guidelines for facilitators to help them create an impactful session:
- Facilitate thoughtfully; steer discussions back to safer ground when they go places where you are unsure what the research truly says.
- If you are unsure of an answer to a question, just say that you don’t know that yet and reach out to us at info@thecttl.org. This exercise is all about busting neuromyths, so avoid creating new ones or perpetuating ideas that are not backed by research evidence.
- Use one of the extension activities, or put your own spin on the experience, to give participants a space to unpack their thinking.
- Begin extension activities by helping teachers connect what they are already doing to positive things they have read on the cards, then move on to tweaks and changes in practice.
- Create an easy way for participants to raise questions with facilitators after the session has ended. Some people might have a thought burning in their mind as a result of a long-held belief being challenged, and being able to air that thought right away can be immensely helpful.
- If you want to know more about the topic on a card, match the letter on the back to the list of citations on this website.
Extension Activities
The goal of these activities is to help teachers unpack the experience they just had playing the card game. They should help teachers make connections to things they are already doing, and identify some next-step areas for change.
We estimate that these activities could take an additional 10 to 40 minutes. These activities could also be used for spaced practice at a later date.
Please feel free to modify these activities or create your own. Educators are fabulously creative, so we know you will come up with some great ideas. Please share them with us; we would love to hear from you. Email us at info@thecttl.org.
Extension Activity 1
Help teachers see how their current practice already aligns with MBE research. The journey of becoming an MBE research-informed teacher is not so daunting when you can see that you are already on the pathway.
Take a look at the cards in the Happy brain pile and see which ones you can sort into either of these two piles:
I ALREADY do or know this
I already purposefully AVOID doing this
Extension Activity 2
Help teachers plan an actionable next step.
- Instruct teachers to choose one card that really resonates with them, either because they were particularly jolted by the revelation or because they can see the great impact it could have on the needs of their students. Teachers could choose individually or as a group, your call.
- Have teachers write down what they can do in the next two weeks to put the strategy or idea on the card into action in their own class. Group members should help each other develop their action plans.
- Share out some ideas from the groups.
Extension Activity 3
Identify what really is resonating most with the group as a whole, which might help you identify priorities for systematic change in your school or district. Many neuromyths can be addressed with simple interventions, so have faith! Each card has a unique number on it. Use a word cloud polling app, like Mentimeter, Slido, or Poll Everywhere, and have audience members enter their top three most important neuromyths (as a digit, not text). The most-voted-on neuromyths will appear largest in the word cloud. Ask for volunteers who have the best “would-want-you-to-be-reading-a-book-on-Audible” voice, and ask them to read the top vote-getters out.
Alternative Games
Streak for the brain-cash
This game works well in person and online over video conferencing.
While it works well as a solo game, it is more fun played in small groups.
- If you are playing this online, distribute a deck of cards to a quarter of your faculty.
- Announce the rules to everyone, then put people in groups or breakout rooms of 4, making sure you have someone with a deck of cards in each group.
- The dealer should start by shuffling the deck well.
- The dealer reads the statement on the top card. As a group, decide whether the statement is true or false.
- Each group is allowed one “pass” that they can choose to use at any point.
- Flip over the card and see if you were correct.
- Count your longest streak of correct cards.
- If you are not correct, start building your streak again from zero. You get your one “pass” back.
- When you reach the end of the deck of cards, count your longest streak. If your streak was still active when you reached the end of the deck, you get a +5 bonus to your score.
- The team with the highest score wins. Think of some creative or delicious prizes for the winners.
Build your MBE inventory
This works very well as a solo game, but can also be played by a small group. It can be played online, either with one person who is in charge of the deck, or with everyone having their own deck and comparing answers at the end.
- Find the three brain cards and use them to make three piles:
- Happy brain: “This is true of me – I regularly do this”
- Sad brain: “This is not true of me – I never do this”
- Puzzled brain: “This is somewhat true of me – I sometimes do this”
- Shuffle the cards, answer side down, and deal yourself 24 cards.
- Put the rest of the cards away. You can play this game multiple times and get a different set of cards each time.
- Read the top card and decide which of the three piles you should put it on.
- Keep going until you have sorted all 24 cards.
- Now it is time to see how well you did. Turn over all the cards in your Happy brain pile – the things you regularly do – and look at the answers.
- Put all the cards with a Smiley brain on them in a pile to your right – you got these correct. They are already part of your MBE inventory.
- Look for all cards with a Sad brain on them and read the answers. Put them in a pile on to your left. These are things that you can work on removing from your practice.
- Now turn over your Sad brain pile and look at the answers.
- Put all the cards with a Sad brain on them in a pile on your right side – you got these correct as they are already things you avoid doing.
- Look for all cards with a Happy brain on them and read the answers. Put them in a pile on your left hand side. These are things that you can work at adding to your practice.
- The pile you have created on your right is your MBE Inventory – areas where your daily practice already aligns with research. Select your top three areas of strength.
- The pile you have created on your left represents your MBE Action Items – areas where you could tweak your daily practice to help align it with what we know from research. Select three to work on. Choose items that:
- Resonate with you
- Are readily doable
- Are likely to have a positive impact on your students
- Finally, turn over your Puzzled brain pile and look at the answers. For each card, determine whether it should be placed in your MBE Inventory or in your MBE Action Items.
Share with us
Please take pictures of your teachers working with the cards and share them on Twitter (tag us @theCTTL) along with a sentence about what you learned, or email it to us: info@thecttl.org. We love to hear your stories.
If you have any suggestions for a new card to add to our deck, a neuromyth you would love to see busted, or have thought of a new game to play with our cards, please send us an email.
References
Each card is supported by multiple pieces of research. The list below gives one citation for each card as a starting point for exploring more.
B1 TRUE
Language is a more common barrier to learning in your subject than lack of intelligence or effort.
1. Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–59.
Foundational paper on disciplinary literacy across subjects—free via Google Scholar
2. Quigley, A. (2018). Closing the Vocabulary Gap. Routledge.
Highly accessible, teacher-facing book on vocabulary and disciplinary language
3. Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing Words to Life: Robust Vocabulary Instruction (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Canonical text on the Tier 1/2/3 vocabulary framework
B2 TRUE
Activities that focus on spatial reasoning can help develop critical math skills.
1. Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402.
Comprehensive meta-analysis—free via ResearchGate; establishes spatial skill trainability
2. Mix, K. S., & Cheng, Y. L. (2012). The relation between space and math: Developmental and educational implications. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 42, 197–243.
Authoritative review of the spatial-mathematics relationship across development
B3 TRUE
Teachers have responsibility for managing the cognitive load of their students.
1. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
Original cognitive load theory paper—foundational; free via Wiley
2. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Highly cited and freely available—directly addresses cognitive load in instructional design
B4 MOSTLY FALSE
The strategies that help currently struggling students learn will also benefit your strongest students.
1. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 23–31.
Canonical paper naming and explaining the expertise reversal effect
2. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Seminal review of cognitive load theory and worked examples—explains why scaffolds hinder experts
B5 FALSE
Emotional factors like stress, identity threat, and belonging are separate from learning.
1. Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(1), 3–10.
Highly influential and freely available—foundational paper on emotion-cognition integration
2. Immordino-Yang, M. H. (2016). Emotions, Learning, and the Brain: Exploring the Educational Implications of Affective Neuroscience. W. W. Norton & Company.
Accessible book synthesising the research base on emotion and learning
3. Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2011). A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science, 331(6023), 1447–1451.
Landmark experimental study demonstrating belonging’s direct impact on academic outcomes
4. Steele, C. M. (2010). Whistling Vivaldi: How Stereotypes Affect Us and What We Can Do. W. W. Norton & Company.
Accessible, highly regarded paper that explains and supports identity threat
B6 TRUE
Memorization is a vital and underrated instructional strategy.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School? A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions About How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom. Jossey-Bass.
Highly accessible; chapter on factual knowledge and critical thinking directly relevant
2. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Makes the case for robust knowledge building as prerequisite for higher-order thinking—free online
B7 TRUE
Reflection and metacognition are too important to be homework.
1. Education Endowment Foundation (2021). Metacognition and Self-Regulation: Teaching and Learning Toolkit. educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk.
Free online—synthesises the evidence with practical guidance; effect size ~0.6
2. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Original paper coining and defining metacognition
3. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Comprehensive meta-synthesis ranking metacognitive strategies among the highest-effect interventions
B8 FALSE
Typing notes in class is just as effective as handwriting them.
Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168.
Primary research paper—widely available; demonstrates encoding advantages of handwriting through synthesis
B9 FALSE
Play is most impactful as a reward for hard work, not as a learning strategy in itself.
1. Whitebread, D. (2012). The Importance of Play. Toy Industries of Europe.
Free to download—accessible research summary from a leading play researcher
2. Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Berk, L. E., & Singer, D. (2009). A Mandate for Playful Learning in Preschool: Presenting the Evidence. Oxford University Press.
Comprehensive review of play research across age groups including cognitive flexibility and creativity
B10 FALSE
Belonging is a ‘nice to have’ but does not have a significant impact on students’ academic outcomes.
1. Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2011). A brief social-belonging intervention improves academic and health outcomes of minority students. Science, 331(6023), 1447–1451.
Landmark experimental study—highly cited; demonstrates belonging’s direct causal role in achievement
2. Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education: They’re not magic. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 267–301.
Free online—excellent overview of belonging interventions, mechanisms, and conditions for effectiveness
B11 FALSE
High challenge, low support environments produce the strongest academic results.
1. Yeager, D. S., Purdie-Vaughns, V., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., Brzustoski, P., Master, A., … & Cohen, G. L. (2014). Breaking the cycle of mistrust: Wise feedback in schools. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 804–824.
Demonstrates the power of combining high expectations with genuine belief in student capacity
2. Yeager, D. S., et al. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573, 364–369.
Free via Nature—large-scale study showing teacher support is the enabling condition for high challenge
B12 TRUE
Cutting recess and reducing passing time to maximize classroom time are counterproductive to learning.
1. Immordino-Yang, M. H., Christodoulou, J. A., & Singh, V. (2012). Rest is not idleness: Implications of the brain’s default mode for human development and education. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(4), 352–364.
Directly addresses the default mode network and its role in consolidation—freely available
2. Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A., & Shulman, G. L. (2001). A default mode of brain function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 676–682.
Original paper describing the default mode network—free via PNAS
B13 FALSE
Understanding whether students are visual, auditory, or kinesthetic learners helps teachers teach them more effectively.
1. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
The definitive debunking paper—freely available; rigorous review finding no evidence for the meshing hypothesis
2. Howard-Jones, P. A. (2014). Neuroscience and education: Myths and messages. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(12), 817–824.
Excellent overview of neuromyths including learning styles and left/right brain dominance—widely cited
B14 FALSE
Class size and quality of curriculum are the most important factors a school can control to improve student outcomes.
1. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Most comprehensive synthesis—teacher quality emerges as the dominant in-school factor
2. Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers: Evaluating bias in teacher value-added estimates. American Economic Review, 104(9), 2633–2679.
Landmark study quantifying the long-term impact of teacher quality—free via NBER
3. Hanushek, E. A. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466–479.
Compelling economic case for teacher quality over class size and resources
B15 FALSE
To help students learn, teachers should match teaching modality to each student’s preferred learning style.
1. Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2008). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105–119.
Definitive review—freely available; shows no benefit from matching modality to supposed learning style
2. Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2015). Matching learning style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(1), 64–78.
Experimental study directly testing learning style matching—found no benefit
B16 FALSE
Rereading notes with highlighters is a good way to prepare for a test.
1. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.
Free online—rates 10 learning techniques; rereading rated low utility; introduces the illusion of fluency
2. Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966–968.
Classic experiment demonstrating retrieval practice superiority over rereading
B17 FALSE
Homework should introduce students to new material in order to keep the class moving forward.
1. Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62.
Comprehensive meta-analysis on homework design and impact—quality and type matter more than quantity
2. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, Spring 2012.
Free online—includes guidance on practice and review as the most effective homework design
B18 FALSE
Students today are natural multitaskers—schools should harness this in instructional design.
1. Ophir, E., Nass, C., & Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583–15587.
Free via PNAS—landmark study showing heavy multitaskers are actually worse at task-switching
2. Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(4), 763–797.
Foundational paper demonstrating the cognitive transaction cost of task-switching
B19 TRUE
All students, even the strongest ones, can benefit from additional training in executive functioning.
1. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.
Free via PMC—comprehensive, authoritative review of EF development and malleability into adulthood
2. Zelazo, P. D., & Carlson, S. M. (2012). Hot and cool executive function in childhood and adolescence: Development and plasticity. Child Development Perspectives, 6(4), 354–360.
Accessible overview of EF development continuing into late adolescence and early adulthood
B20 TRUE
Retrieval practice, self-testing, and spaced practice are great ways to prepare for a test.
1. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255.
Seminal experiment demonstrating the testing effect over rereading—widely available
2. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.
Free online—rates practice testing and distributed practice as high utility; comprehensive evidence review
B21 FALSE
Homework has more impact on student outcomes than formative assessment.
1. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. King’s College London.
Free online—the foundational paper on formative assessment; effect sizes clearly presented
2. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Provides comparative effect sizes: formative assessment (~0.8) vs homework (~0.29)
3. Education Endowment Foundation (2021). Feedback: Teaching and Learning Toolkit. educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk.
Free online—accessible synthesis of formative assessment and feedback evidence
B22 MOSTLY FALSE
An effective way to help students develop a growth mindset is to put up ‘Have a Growth Mindset’ posters.
1. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
Original synthesis—distinguishes surface adoption of growth mindset language from genuine strategy-based implementation
2. Yeager, D. S., et al. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573, 364–369.
Free via Nature—shows growth mindset interventions only work when paired with appropriate challenge and support
3. Sisk, V. F., Burgoyne, A. P., Sun, J., Butler, J. L., & Macnamara, B. N. (2018). To what extent and under which circumstances are growth mind-sets important to academic achievement?. Psychological Science, 29(4), 549–571.
Important meta-analysis showing growth mindset interventions have small average effects—context and implementation matter enormously
B23 TRUE
Connection-making between new and existing knowledge is a skill so hard it needs planning for in every lesson.
1. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Foundational text on prior knowledge and meaningful learning—origin of the advance organiser concept
2. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Prior knowledge activation and surface-to-deep learning progression both appear as high-effect variables
3. Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School?. Jossey-Bass.
Accessible explanation of how new learning must connect to existing knowledge to be stored and retrieved
B24 FALSE
Teachers should eliminate stress because it shuts down learning.
1. Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18(5), 459–482.
Original paper establishing the inverted-U relationship between arousal and performance
2. Sapolsky, R. M. (2004). Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers (3rd ed.). Holt Paperbacks.
Highly accessible synthesis of stress biology including the challenge/threat distinction
3. Jamieson, J. P., Mendes, W. B., Blackstock, E., & Schmader, T. (2010). Turning the knots in your stomach into bows: Reappraising arousal improves performance on the GRE. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 208–212.
Experimental evidence for the challenge vs threat stress distinction and its effects on performance
B25 FALSE
AI has created a completely new set of problems for education that teachers have never had to face before.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2023). Outsmart Your Brain: Why Learning Is Hard and How You Can Make It Easy. Gallery Books.
Directly addresses the biology of effortful learning and what is lost when thinking is bypassed
2. Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. Worth Publishers.
Foundational paper on desirable difficulties—explains why cognitive struggle is the mechanism of learning, not a byproduct
B26 TRUE
Teachers should praise the process a student used rather than their ability.
1. Mueller, C. M., & Dweck, C. S. (1998). Praise for intelligence can undermine children’s motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(1), 33–52.
Classic experimental study comparing process and ability praise—widely available
2. Henderlong, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children’s intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 774–795.
Comprehensive review of praise research with practical implications for classroom use
B27 FALSE
Teaching knowledge before discovery or project-based learning spoils the surprise and undermines the experience.
1. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Free online—makes the research case for explicit instruction before open-ended tasks
2. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, Spring 2012.
Free online—concise, teacher-facing synthesis supporting knowledge-first instructional sequences
B28 TRUE
Teachers should avoid using simple labels like ‘lazy’ or ‘bright.’
1. Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the Classroom: Teacher Expectation and Pupils’ Intellectual Development. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Seminal study on teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecy
2. Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.
Directly addresses the harm of fixed ability labels on student motivation and performance
B29 FALSE
Sharing a list of which students are strong and which are weak at executive functioning is useful information for teachers.
1. Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.
Free via PMC—explains EF as a suite of context-specific, malleable skills rather than a single fixed trait
2. Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ‘frontal lobe’ tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49–100.
Canonical paper establishing EF as multiple distinct but related skills—explains why a single label misleads
B30 TRUE
The impact of teacher feedback is overrated.
1. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254–284.
Source of the 38% finding—meta-analysis of 607 feedback studies showing feedback often harms performance
2. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Highly cited—identifies conditions under which feedback helps or harms; free via ResearchGate
B31 TRUE
Cramming the night before can help you do well on a test.
1. Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380.
Meta-analysis establishing the spacing effect over massed practice—explains why cramming fades fast
2. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.
Free online—rates distributed practice as high utility and explains cramming’s short-term advantage but long-term cost
B32 FALSE
Student motivation is primarily the student’s responsibility—teachers can encourage it, but can’t really create it.
1. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
Foundational SDT paper—free via ResearchGate; frames teachers as architects of motivational conditions
2. Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109–132.
Authoritative overview of Expectancy-Value Theory—teachers’ role in shaping both expectancy and value
B33 TRUE
Even by grade 11 or 12, most students have not figured out effective and efficient study strategies.
1. Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Marsh, E. J., Nathan, M. J., & Willingham, D. T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58.
Free online—documents the persistent gap between effective strategies and actual student practice
2. Brown, P. C., Roediger, H. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. Harvard University Press.
Accessible synthesis of learning science with practical strategies for both students and teachers
B34 TRUE
Bloom’s pyramid is out of alignment with how learning happens.
1. Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(4), 212–218.
Free online—the official revision which makes clear the original was never intended as a hierarchy
2. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Longman.
Authoritative revision addressing the limitations and misuse of the pyramid interpretation
B35 TRUE
Feedback without time to act on it is not feedback.
1. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. King’s College London.
Free online—establishes the conditions for effective formative feedback, including the opportunity to act
2. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
Identifies feed-forward—actionable next steps with time to use them—as the most powerful form of feedback
B36 TRUE
A structured phonics method for teaching children how to read is much more effective than the whole language method.
1. National Reading Panel (2000). Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
Free online—landmark government-commissioned review establishing the evidence base for systematic phonics
2. Dehaene, S. (2009). Reading in the Brain: The Science and Evolution of a Human Invention. Viking.
Accessible neuroscience of reading; explains why phonics aligns with the brain’s reading architecture
3. Education Endowment Foundation (2021). Improving Literacy in Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2: Guidance Reports. educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk.
Free online—evidence-based guidance on phonics, oracy, vocabulary, and writing—directly relevant to the updated card
B37 TRUE
Direct instruction, done well, outperforms discovery learning, project-based learning, and inquiry-based approaches.
1. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, Spring 2012.
Free online—canonical, teacher-facing synthesis of direct instruction research; essential reading
2. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Free online—makes the research case for explicit instruction over minimally guided approaches
3. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Comprehensive meta-synthesis in which direct instruction appears as a high-effect strategy
B38 FALSE
You need to practice for 10,000 hours to become an expert on something.
1. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.
The original study—establishes that deliberate practice quality, not hours alone, drives expertise
2. Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Science, 25(8), 1608–1618.
Meta-analysis showing practice explains only a fraction of performance variance—directly challenges the 10,000 hour rule
B39 TRUE
The impact of homework is moderate at best and takes up a disproportionate amount of everyone’s time and energy.
1. Cooper, H., Robinson, J. C., & Patall, E. A. (2006). Does homework improve academic achievement? A synthesis of research, 1987–2003. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 1–62.
Comprehensive meta-analysis; effect is stronger for secondary than primary and depends heavily on design quality
2. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Effect size for homework (~0.29) puts it well below classroom instruction, feedback, and formative assessment
B40 FALSE
AI, Google, and other tools make knowledge-rich curricula obsolete—students need to find and use things rather than know them.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School?. Jossey-Bass.
Accessible; chapter on factual knowledge as the prerequisite for critical thinking is directly relevant
2. Hirsch, E. D. (2006). The Knowledge Deficit: Closing the Shocking Education Gap for American Children. Houghton Mifflin.
Influential case for knowledge-rich curriculum and its foundational role in reading comprehension
3. Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 16–20.
Classic baseball study demonstrating that prior knowledge overrides measured reading ability—widely cited
B41 MOSTLY FALSE
Banning phones in class solves the attention problem.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2026). Pay Attention, Kid! Has the Use of Digital Technology Impaired Students’ Ability to Focus?. American Educator, Spring 2026.
Free online—the most current and rigorous review of this question; directly addresses boredom recalibration and delay discounting as mechanisms underlying the attention problem in schools
2. Andrzejewski, D., Zeilinger, E., & Pietschnig, J. (2024). Is there a Flynn Effect for attention? Cross-temporal meta-analytical evidence for better test performance (1990–2021). Personality and Individual Differences, 216, 112417.
Meta-analysis of 179 studies using the d2 attention test—found no decline in attentional capacity over 30 years
3. Wojtowicz, Z., Chater, N., & Loewenstein, G. (2019). Boredom and flow: An opportunity cost theory of motivational attention. Social Science Research Network.
Free via SSRN—theoretical framework explaining how available alternatives unconsciously raise the boredom threshold
B42 FALSE
When we sleep, the brain shuts down.
1. Stickgold, R. (2005). Sleep-dependent memory consolidation. Nature, 437, 1272–1278.
Authoritative review of sleep’s active role in memory consolidation—widely cited
2. Walker, M. (2017). Why We Sleep: Unlocking the Power of Sleep and Dreams. Scribner.
Highly accessible synthesis of sleep science including memory consolidation, emotional processing, and metabolic waste clearance
B43 TRUE
Once a student can do it in class, they’ve learned it.
1. Hattie, J., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1, 16013.
Free via Nature—directly addresses surface, deep, and transfer learning as distinct phases requiring different strategies
2. Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I—Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11.
Original paper establishing the surface/deep learning distinction
3. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International Encyclopedia of Education (2nd ed.). Pergamon Press.
Authoritative overview of transfer research—explains why transfer must be deliberately taught, not assumed
B44 FALSE
Student engagement is a reliable signal to a teacher that learning is happening.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2009). Why Don’t Students Like School?. Jossey-Bass.
Distinguishes between students appearing engaged and actually processing content at a deep level
2. Willingham, D. T. (2021). Why do students remember everything that’s on television and forget everything I say?. American Educator, Summer 2021.
Free online—directly addresses the attention/engagement distinction and how to design for genuine cognitive engagement
B45 TRUE
Two minutes of personal writing before a high-stakes task has more impact than a two-minute targeted review.
1. Cohen, G. L., Garcia, J., Apfel, N., & Master, A. (2006). Reducing the racial achievement gap: A social-psychological intervention. Science, 313(5791), 1307–1310.
Landmark experimental study demonstrating the values affirmation effect on academic performance
2. Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2006). The psychology of self-defense: Self-affirmation theory. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 183–242.
Comprehensive theoretical framework explaining the mechanism behind values affirmation
3. Yeager, D. S., & Walton, G. M. (2011). Social-psychological interventions in education: They’re not magic. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 267–301.
Free online—excellent overview of values affirmation and conditions required for effectiveness
B46 TRUE
Cheating is not the number one AI problem that schools should be focusing their time on.
1. Willingham, D. T. (2023). Outsmart Your Brain: Why Learning Is Hard and How You Can Make It Easy. Gallery Books.
Directly addresses the biology of effortful learning and what is lost when thinking is bypassed
2. Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. Psychology and the Real World: Essays Illustrating Fundamental Contributions to Society. Worth Publishers.
Foundational paper on desirable difficulties—explains why cognitive struggle is the mechanism of learning, not a byproduct
3. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911.
Original paper coining and defining metacognition
B47 FALSE
Teaching children to write by hand is no longer necessary.
1. James, K. H., & Engelhardt, L. (2012). The effects of handwriting experience on functional brain development in pre-literate children. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 1(1), 32–42.
Demonstrates unique neural activation from handwriting compared to typing—directly relevant to literacy development
2. Mueller, P. A., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2014). The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science, 25(6), 1159–1168.
Primary research showing handwriting advantage for memory retention compared to typing
B48 FALSE
Teachers can do little to alleviate the impact of toxic stress and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs).
1. Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., … & Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258.
The original ACE study—one of the most cited papers in public health; free online
2. Shonkoff, J. P., Garner, A. S., & Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health (2012). The lifelong effects of early childhood adversity and toxic stress. Pediatrics, 129(1), e232–e246.
Free via AAP—authoritative statement on toxic stress and the role of trusted adults as protective buffers
3. Center on the Developing Child, Harvard University (2020). Supportive Relationships and Active Skill-Building Strengthen the Foundations of Resilience. developingchild.harvard.edu.
Free online—practical framework for how consistent warm relationships buffer toxic stress
B49 TRUE
The relationship a teacher builds with their students is one of the most powerful instructional strategies they have.
1. Roorda, D. L., Koomen, H. M. Y., Spilt, J. L., & Oort, F. J. (2011). The influence of affective teacher–student relationships on students’ school engagement and achievement: A meta-analytic approach. Review of Educational Research, 81(4), 493–529.
Meta-analysis of 99 studies—establishes the effect of teacher-student relationship on engagement and achievement
2. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Routledge.
Teacher-student relationship and teacher credibility appear as high-effect variables in the meta-synthesis
B50 FALSE
Students need grades on all assignments—a grade alone tells them what they need to know.
1. Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through Classroom Assessment. King’s College London.
Free online—foundational paper establishing that students must be able to act on assessment information for it to produce learning
2. Butler, R. (1988). Enhancing and undermining intrinsic motivation: The effects of task-involving and ego-involving evaluation on interest and performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 58(1), 1–14.
Classic study showing feedback-only outperforms grades alone or grades plus feedback for motivation and performance
3. Wiliam, D. (2011). Embedded Formative Assessment. Solution Tree Press.
Practical, research-grounded guide to formative assessment—directly addresses how students must act on information, not just receive it
B51 FALSE
Reading text on a slide aloud while presenting helps students learn as they get the information in two modalities.
1. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Definitive text on cognitive theory of multimedia learning—the redundancy effect directly addresses why reading slides aloud harms learning
2. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296.
Explains the split-attention and redundancy effects that underlie why reading slides aloud overloads working memory
B52 TRUE
Our active working memory can only hold a small number of items for a short time.
1. Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114.
Canonical paper revising Miller’s magic number 7 down to approximately 4—free via ResearchGate
2. Gathercole, S. E., & Alloway, T. P. (2008). Working Memory and Learning: A Practical Guide for Teachers. Sage Publications.
Teacher-facing book directly translating working memory research into classroom practice
Copyright © 2021 by The Center for Transformative Teaching and Learning (CTTL). All rights reserved. This work, or any portion thereof, may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author. The CTTL at St. Andrew’s Episcopal School, www.theCTTL.org