Crystal Ball: Educational Research for the Future

Norman Reid’s article, Educational Research for the Future, takes a critical look at the state of educational research and discusses its impact on teaching and learning. The paper builds on what he calls two major books published in 2020—our book (Kirschner & Hendrick; though I would recommend the 2024 revised second edition) How Learning Happens and his own book (Reid & Ali) Making Sense of Learning. Despite their different starting points, he writes that both books converge on key insights that expose weaknesses in contemporary educational research and offer a roadmap for improvement. Reid’s central argument is that much of today’s educational research lacks coherence and fails to integrate established cognitive science findings. As a result, education policies and teaching methods often rely on untested ideas rather than well-supported principles. [See also There is an Evidence Crisis in Science Educational Policy by Lin Zhang, John Sweller, Bill Cobern and me]. In the rest of this post I’ll try to coherently summarise his paper.

The Role of Working Memory in Learning

To Reid, one of the most significant findings in cognitive science is the central role of working memory in learning. Research from both cognitive psychology and neuroscience has shown that working memory—responsible for processing and storing information in the short term—has a fixed and limited capacity. Effective learning depends on how well students can process new information without overloading this limited cognitive resource.

Reid highlights the critical role of cognitive load theory, which explains how excessive demands on working memory can hinder learning. When teachers introduce too much new information at once, students struggle to retain and make sense of it. Conversely, when teaching strategies are aligned with the limits of working memory, students are more likely to process and understand new concepts. Reid argues that teachers should know how working memory functions so they can design instruction that supports, rather than overwhelms, students’ cognitive capacities. As John Sweller once said: Without an understanding of human cognitive architecture, instruction is blind.

The Importance of Prior Knowledge

Another foundational principle in educational research is the role of prior knowledge in learning. David Ausubel’s research in the 1960s and ‘70s on subsumption theory and advance organisers taught us that what a learner already knows is the most significant factor influencing their ability to learn new material. Learning is most effective when new information can be anchored to existing knowledge, allowing students to integrate new concepts into their cognitive schemata (the mental structures in our long-term memory that we use to organise knowledge and guide cognitive processes and behaviour).

Carl Hendrick and I explain how comprehension is guided by prior experience rather than the other way around. As I wrote in my PhD thesis back in the stone age: What you know determines what you see (and not the other way around). If students lack a strong foundation in a subject, introducing advanced concepts without adequate preparation leads to confusion and shallow learning. Reid and Ali critique educational approaches that emphasise discovery learning, where students are expected to explore and construct knowledge independently. While such methods may work for students with a lot of relevant prior knowledge, research shows that novice learners benefit far more from structured and explicit instruction. This contradicts the belief that students should learn through self-directed exploration.

Norman Reid also discusses how both verbal and non-verbal representations play a crucial role in learning (see Alan Paivio’s dual coding theory and Richard Mayer’s multimedia principle) and the role of assessment in learning; specifically how frequent, low- or actually no-stakes testing strengthens long-term memory (testing effect) by reinforcing retrieval processes.

The Student-Centred Learning Debate

Reid then addresses the never-ending debate over student-centred learning. Various models—including discovery learning, problem-based learning, and inquiry-based learning—are often promoted as superior to explicit instruction. However, research suggests that these methods do not inherently lead to better learning outcomes.

A pivotal study by me, John Sweller, and Richard Clark (2006) – Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching (open access) – found that minimally guided learning is ineffective because it ignores cognitive load constraints. When students are left to discover information on their own without sufficient guidance, they struggle to process and retain it. While student-centred methods can be beneficial in certain contexts (for example when students have a lot of prior knowledge or the learner can be seen as an expert), they are less effective for novice learners who require structured explicit instruction which builds strong foundational knowledge which students can later use for independent problem-solving.

The Need for Better Educational Research

Reid concludes by arguing that educational research needs to move beyond superficial observations and focus on uncovering fundamental learning principles. Many contemporary studies merely describe classroom dynamics without explaining why certain teaching methods work better than others. He stated that Carl and I emphasise that the best educational research builds on established cognitive science rather than attempting to invent new theories without strong evidence.

In his view, a major challenge in educational research is the prevalence of one-off studies that do not contribute to a coherent body of knowledge. Reid calls for a more systematic approach, where findings are tested across multiple contexts before being widely applied. He also emphasises that educational policy should be guided by rigorous research, not by trends or ideology.

Conclusion

I have clearly not done justice to Reid’s review of the literature highlighting the need for a more evidence-based approach to education and would recommend that you read it. By incorporating insights from cognitive science, memory research, and formative assessment, educators can design instruction that truly enhances learning. The discussion also challenges popular but flawed educational theories, such as discovery learning, learning styles, and digital-native assumptions.

For educational research to be truly impactful, it must move beyond descriptive studies and focus on fundamental principles. Policymakers, educators, and researchers must align their efforts to ensure that educational practices are rooted in scientific evidence rather than untested assumptions. Only then can education be meaningfully improved in the long term.

Here’s a link to our book: