Renovations to the ivory tower
One education professor asked, “How can you teach when you don’t know how people learn?”
Welcome to The Bell Ringer. We’ve got lots of exciting things coming up—an entire issue dedicated to how novices learn, plus evidence-based resources for educators, PTOs and parent groups. Get access to everything by becoming a paying subscriber. Thanks for supporting “how to understand” journalism about the science of learning!
Educator Nidhi Sachdeva stumbled onto the science of learning almost by accident, while working on her PhD in education. The more she learned about the evidence base for how the brain learns, she wondered why future teachers at her institution weren’t learning about it.
Now an education professor at the University of Toronto, Sachdeva teaches educators-in-training all the things she didn’t know. She’s launched a Substack explaining and examining education research with professor Jim Hewitt, aimed at educators who often don’t have the time to read dozens of complicated journal articles. She’s looking to reduce the gap between knowledge and practice, and dispel the notion that educational research belongs to scholars and “lives in ivory towers.”
“This knowledge should be the property of educators who actually have to apply it in the classroom,” Sachdeva said. “It's shocking, because we have like, 100 years worth of evidence about things that work,” and often, teachers don’t know about it.
The Bell Ringer spoke to Sachdeva about her discovery of how the brain learns, and her drive to share the information with other teachers. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The Bell Ringer: Let’s start with you and your work: what do you do? And what's your connection to the science of learning?
Nidhi Sachdeva: I am an educator at the University of Toronto. Currently I’m a teacher in the teacher education program, and I teach a course called “The Science of Learning.” We use the Kirschner and Hendrick textbook called How Learning Happens. It’s a brand-new course we started at the tail end of the pandemic. I also teach some undergrad courses at York University.
My connection to science and learning is actually not very old. Around the pandemic time, I was doing my doctoral degree at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto.
I wanted to investigate micro-learning in higher education. Jim Hewitt [who is a professor within the department of curriculum, teaching, and learning at the University of Toronto] gave me this book, How Learning Happens, and suggested, ‘Why don't you make five microlearning videos from this book?’ So I made micro-learning videos about the science of learning. And as I'm doing it, I think it transformed me: for example, I’m reading the chapter “Cognitive Load Theory and Problem Solving,” and I'm making a video on it, and I'm trying to condense that information, but not overload the memory!
Every video I made switched something in me. I was still trying to understand what micro-learning is, but I started thinking, “Oh my goodness, the science of learning is where it's at.” I started thinking about how I can learn more about it. So I went into more curriculum design and pedagogy, and switched my focus within the same field.
I got involved with the science of learning because I wanted to do something with micro-learning, and just happened to be given the book at the time.
The Bell Ringer: What exactly does the course cover, and who takes it?
NS: Our master of education students and master of teaching students take the 12-week course. We picked the essential things to know about the science of learning—we start from the information processing model, then talk about how novices and experts solve problems. Then we get into the notion of what is the importance of prior knowledge, and why it is really the single most indicator of future learning. We talk about sensory memory, and we look at dual coding theory as well, working memory, cognitive load theory. And then we go to the deeper long-term memory, we look at things like semantic processing, we explain things like retrieval practice, interleaving and spaced learning and how these lead to long-term retention.
In addition to various chapters from the Kirschner and Hendrick text, each week we assign students my videos and micro-lessons, developed especially for this course as additional reading material.We also talk about assessment for learning not of learning, and of course we discuss in detail the topic of direct/explicit instruction and its role in promoting and supporting learning for all. We also explore an educational myth each week.
The Bell Ringer: Have preservice teachers at your institution always taken a course in how the brain learns, or anything related to that?
NS: As far as I am aware, a course focused on the science of learning hasn’t been a part of the teacher education program. I do find it quite strange when I hear from many in-service and pre-service teachers in Ontario that they never really learned how learning happens in their teacher education program. How can you teach when you don't know how people learn? This was just such a bizarre idea for me when I first realized it. Strangely, I never thought about it before either, even though I have been an educator myself for almost 18 years now. I was lucky to have received some teacher training in India, but despite that, I never really learned the science behind learning until recently.
I have been co-teaching the science of learning course since fall of 2021, and every single term students come up saying, “Why have I never learned that in any other course?” They also often comment on the way the course is organized, and how it never feels overwhelming. One of the ongoing assessments in our course is through low-stakes, multiple-attempts quizzes. Students seem to enjoy these a lot and they find a lot of value in forms of penalty-free assessment.
The course design models what we teach. For example, each session begins with a quick retrieval practice. We also implement spaced learning by means of well-designed midweek microlessons. Students also develop their own microlessons in which they have an opportunity to apply Barak Rosenshine’s principles of instruction. Every aspect of the course design is informed by the science of learning.
The Bell Ringer: So you’re using science of learning techniques on your science of learning students?
NS: Yeah! The idea really messes with their minds at first! For example, during the introductory session, when we tell them that the quizzes in this course allow for multiple attempts, at first, they think we're lying or joking —but then we explain it to them, that research shows how low-stakes quizzes can help gain mastery of the content. When they do it once, they get it and by the second quiz they are very comfortable with the idea.
The Bell Ringer: What’s the climate for the science of learning in Canada? Here in the States, more than 37 states have enacted some kind of legislation, for example, that the science of reading must be taught to teachers. Has something similar happened in Canada?
NS: Thirty-seven states—that’s amazing. I wouldn't say it’s happening in the same capacity here in Canada, but discussions around the science of reading are definitely happening. I think we are now seeing some impact from podcasts like “Sold a Story,” and as a result discussions around the science of reading are more open here in Canada, too. This is the first year we have the new, updated Ontario Language Curriculum. We finally have terms like decoding and explicit instruction in the curriculum, and we are letting go of pedagogical practices like the three-cueing method. It’s far from perfect, but it’s a work in progress and I’m optimistic.
Recently the Ontario government has also announced that we are trying to go “back to basics,” whatever that exactly means is still unfolding. All this is to say I feel a certain wave of science of learning is taking place here in Canada, too. From the folks I interact with, I can see that there is a desire to know more and learn more so that we can apply that in our classrooms, in our schools.
I'm trying to ride that wave and spread the message of integrating evidence-informed practices in our classrooms. We owe it to our younger learners because they deserve to learn.
The Bell Ringer: So you have a course for preservice teachers, but now you are trying to reach even more teachers. Tell me about your work bringing the research conference researchEd to Toronto.
[researchEd is a grassroots group of teachers and researchers all focused on scientific evidence around teaching, learning and child development, that began in the UK but has spread around the world, including to parts of the US and Canada.]
NS: It all started with me asking one question: when's the next researchEd in Toronto? The joke is that I just wanted to attend a research conference in Toronto. I have three young kids, I was still in the middle of completing my dissertation at the time. And now I’m chairing the conference!
Researchers, educators and experts like Daniel Willingham, Barbara Oakley, Amanda VanDerHeyden, Anna Stokke, Carl Hendrick, John Mighton, the creator of Jump Math and many more—they’re all coming to speak at the conference in Toronto.
What’s amazing about researchED is that speakers don’t charge any fee to speak at this conference, which is how we can keep the conference tickets at such a low price— $50 for students and $100 for general admission, this is just to cover our costs. The goal truly is to make credible educational research accessible to all.
Another amazing thing about researchED is that it offers a stage to teachers as well. At most educational conferences, you’ll mostly see scholars sharing research, but at researchED you’ll often see teachers showcasing their evidence-informed classroom practices to other teachers. I think that’s such a differentiating thing about researchED as an educational event. It really works to reduce the gap between research and practice.
So you will see a number of teachers as speakers at rED Toronto. They’ll have a chance to present their own scholarship of teaching and learning. They could say, “I've done this in my classroom and it worked. And I want to share that with you.” I think that’s such an important discussion that often gets unnoticed, but luckily researchED provides a healthy space for such conversations.
The Bell Ringer: What are the ways to shrink the gap between research and practice?
NS: Academics look at things differently than teachers. But when you get teachers talking to teachers, it's a different thing. And this is exactly why I told everybody on the committee, we need to get people like Patrice Bain, because she is a classroom teacher who knows how to talk to teachers.
There are not many conferences that actually give a chance to teachers. You don't have to cite 500 papers, but you can tell me what you did in class because it worked. And I can tell you what the science behind that was.
I also want to highlight the role of parents in all this. Research on education is not just for teachers, learning designers, educators or policymakers. I think there's a lot of learning that parents can do as well.
Parents often don't know how to help, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't know how to help, right? Kids spend a lot of time at home. Parents can come to a conference like this and learn from teachers and academics. So I think there is that gap we could also fill.
Parents might think, “I can't go to an educational conference, that's for scholars.” No, no, this is a unique space where teachers and parents can actually learn how they can be a better team for their young learners.
I understand that not all parents can do it. But I am hoping that there is a group of parents who, let's say, sit on the parent council of public schools, maybe they can join and share what they learn within their school communities.
I believe in the power of the ripple effect. I feel you could throw the pebble - no matter how tiny it is, and watch it spread, and see it do its magic.