Confronting Persistent Teaching Myths in Education: Moving Toward Evidence-Based Practices

Why do myths in education and teaching persist despite decades of research demonstrating what truly benefits learners? 

A recent visit to a middle school brought me face-to-face with a challenging realization. As I stepped into a veteran teacher’s classroom, I took a moment to observe how she had arranged her environment. Her walls were vibrant, filled with colorful decorations and instructional materials. Among them, a set of four laminated cards caught my eye. They read: Learning Styles: Visual. Auditory. Kinesthetic.

I paused, puzzled. Despite extensive research debunking the notion that students learn best when instruction is tailored to one of these three “styles,” it seemed this myth still had a foothold in her classroom. Curious about how widespread this might be, I decided to ask my daughter—who had recently graduated with a degree in Elementary Education—what she knew about learning styles.

Her response? “Oh, yeah, we learned about that in one of my courses.”

I was stunned. How is it possible that, despite decades of research clarifying how we learn best (including processing new learning in multiple and varied forms), some outdated practices and ideas continue to influence classrooms and teacher preparation programs?

The Quandary of the Persistent Myth

What keeps education myths alive, despite years of research showing what truly helps learners thrive? One explanation is that the gap between research and practice remains wide. Educators, pressed for time and overloaded with responsibilities, often find it difficult to access or interpret research in ways that are immediately applicable to their classrooms. Academic findings, while insightful, are frequently presented in formats that feel disconnected from the realities of teaching. For many, the question becomes: How does this research meaningfully impact my teaching and instructional decision-making process?

Another reason myths endure is that they often feel intuitively correct. Personal experiences, professional habits, and long-standing exposure to certain practices can reinforce the belief that these approaches work. For instance, if a teacher thrived under competitive learning environments or used learning styles in their own schooling, they might assume these strategies are universally effective. However, what works for some does not necessarily benefit all students—and relying on anecdotal evidence can perpetuate practices that fail to support the majority.

The challenge is amplified by the universal truth of education: time is a precious, scarce resource. With so much to do, educators may stick with familiar methods rather than invest in exploring or adopting new strategies. Yet, to maximize the impact of our efforts, we must sift through these myths, evaluate their validity, and commit to focusing on what research proves works for all students.

Letting go of persistent myths, such as the belief in learning styles or the notion that competition drives achievement, requires more than a willingness to change; it calls for a shift in mindset. By questioning our assumptions and embracing evidence-based practices, we can move toward more effective, equitable teaching methods.

Addressing Three Common Learning Myths

Three of the most common learning myths that need rethinking are: 

1. Competition drives learning
2. Remediation alone closes grade-level gaps
3. A growth mindset is simple to adopt 

Addressing these misconceptions is essential to building classrooms where every student has the opportunity to succeed.

Myth 1: Competition Drives Learning

The belief that competition among students is a powerful driver of learning is widespread, yet research tells a different story. According to John Hattie’s extensive meta-analyses of educational strategies, the effect size of competition on learning outcomes is generally small—often below 0.2—indicating little to no meaningful impact on student achievement.

In fact, promoting competition in the classroom can sometimes do more harm than good. Competition may heighten anxiety, stress, and an excessive focus on outperforming peers, all of which detract from the deeper, more sustained learning necessary for academic success. By contrast, collaborative learning, where students work together toward shared goals, consistently outperforms competitive or individualistic approaches. Collaboration fosters a sense of community, mutual support, and greater engagement with the material.

In Visible Learning: The Sequel, Hattie highlights the stark differences in outcomes between cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning environments. His research underscores that “in all comparisons, cooperative methods beat competitive and individualist learning.” The respective effect sizes are:

• Cooperative vs. Competitive: 0.58
• Cooperative vs. Individualist: 0.62

These findings emphasize that cooperative and collaborative approaches not only enhance academic performance but also build critical skills in communication, teamwork, and problem-solving—skills students will rely on far beyond the classroom.

Strategy Insight: If we want to maximize learning, we should shift our focus from pitting students against one another to creating opportunities for cooperative problem-solving and teamwork. This works especially well when we promote collaboration among partners in order to ensure equity in discourse and learning. For example, strategies like Collaborative Pairs or Numbered Heads encourage accountability and ensure equity in discussions by providing clear roles and directions for engagement. These activities shift students beyond simple “partner” work into meaningful, interdependent learning relationships. Such approaches are highly impactful, with collaborative learning boasting an impressive effect size of 0.92, making it one of the most effective strategies for fostering both academic and social-emotional growth.

Myth 2: Remediation Alone Closes Gaps

Another common misconception is that remediation—bringing students back to earlier grade-level content to address skill gaps—is the best way to support struggling learners. While this approach might seem logical, it is often ineffective in practice.

While it seems logical, research, including TNTP’s Accelerate, Don’t Remediate report, shows it often leads to low expectations and disengagement. Students achieve far greater gains when exposed to grade-level content with targeted support than focused primarily on catching up on past material. This highlights the importance of “just-in-time” scaffolding—providing support as students engage with grade-appropriate tasks.

Acceleration, unlike traditional remediation, looks forward. It prepares students for current and upcoming learning by addressing gaps within grade-level instruction. Key strategies include previewing content, building vocabulary, and scaffolding in real-time to support rigorous learning. These proactive techniques help students build the skills they need to succeed while keeping them on track with grade-level expectations.

By embedding remediation within acceleration strategies, educators can balance addressing foundational gaps with helping students succeed at grade level. This approach builds confidence and motivation, ensuring students experience success with challenging material. TNTP’s findings confirm that acceleration not only closes achievement gaps but also creates opportunities for all learners to thrive in rigorous academic environments.

Strategy Insight: Accelerating learning works best when used purposefully alongside other strategies. Four highly effective practices include Previewing, Vocabulary, Scaffolding, andEffective Assignments. These strategies ensure that students are not only prepared for new learning but also able to stay engaged with grade-level material.

An Acceleration Intervention Model incorporates all these strategies while using remediation selectively to support acceleration. For example, previewing key concepts before a lesson can help students anticipate and better understand upcoming material, while scaffolding offers targeted support as they tackle challenging grade-level tasks. By consistently implementing this model across classrooms and schools, educators create a cohesive system that proactively supports all learners, maximizing the impact on achievement. When used consistently and pervasively, this approach has a proven evidence-base in making it a powerful tool for closing gaps and advancing student success.

Myth 3: Growth Mindset Is Simple

The concept of a growth mindset—the belief that abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—has gained significant traction in education. However, fostering a genuine growth mindset in students and educators is more complex than simply encouraging phrases like “keep trying” or “you can do it.”

As Julia Galef discusses in The Scout Mindset, truly shifting our thinking requires more than surface-level optimism. It involves a willingness to revise our beliefs based on new evidence, treat mistakes as opportunities to learn, and view intellectual growth as an ongoing process. This mindset is not just about effort; it’s about embracing challenges, persisting through setbacks, and seeing failures as a natural part of growth.

For teachers, this means modeling reflective practices, showing how to “update” our thinking when presented with new information, and creating classroom cultures where students feel safe to take risks and learn from errors. This involves celebrating effort, persistence, and problem-solving rather than focusing solely on correct answers or grades. Practices such as encouraging students to share and analyze their mistakes, offering constructive feedback, and emphasizing the process of learning help build a supportive environment. Growth mindset isn’t a quick fix, it’s a deep, ongoing commitment to rethinking how we approach learning and teaching.

Strategy Insight: To overcome a fixed mindset, it’s essential to guide both teachers and students in ascending their “thought ladder,” transitioning from current beliefs to more constructive ones. Stemming from the Cognitive Behavioral Theory, this thinking progression addresses cognitive dissonance, the discomfort experienced when holding conflicting beliefs or attitudes—which can hinder acceptance of new ideas without supporting evidence.

Educators can create and utilize a thought ladder to model incremental shifts in thinking. For instance, a student or teacher may perceive mistakes solely as missed opportunities, which can perpetuate a cycle of lost learning experiences. Instead of attempting an immediate shift to a positive perspective on mistakes, it is more effective to progress through a series of increasingly encouraging thoughts, each supported by evidence. This approach helps individuals recognize and embrace the process of intentionally directing thoughts toward a more desired perspective—a form of metacognition that offers significant benefits across various aspects of life.

Thought Ladder Example (start at the bottom and work up to more desired beliefs):

• Desired belief: I use mistakes purposefully in learning, to improve my memory, or to sharpen my performance. 
•  Appreciation thought: I appreciate mistakes as they are opportunities for feedback.
• Neutral thought: Mistakes can lead to discussion, reflection, and goal setting.
• Open up thought: Mistakes are not inherently negative or positive; what matters is my thought process about them.
• Let go of thought: I am ready to let go of the idea that mistakes are a reflection of my intelligence or value.
• Keep thinking: I keep thinking that mistakes are missed opportunities for learning.
• Current belief: Mistakes are only proof of what I do not know.

The Path to Overcoming Teaching Myths: Embracing Evidence-Based Practices

As educators, we have limited time with our students. Every decision we make about instructional strategies and classroom practices matters. This is why we must prioritize approaches that are supported by research and have a proven impact on student learning.

The strategies discussed—shifting from competition to collaborative learning, embracing acceleration models over traditional remediation, and fostering an authentic growth mindset—are examples of proven practices that align with evidence-based insights and can transform student achievement:

• Collaborative Learning: Promoting cooperation among students encourages critical thinking, equity, and deeper engagement. Research shows that collaborative methods far surpass competitive or individualistic approaches, offering a more meaningful path to learning.
• Acceleration Intervention Model: Moving beyond remediation by providing “just-in-time” scaffolding and focusing on grade-level content ensures that students stay on track while addressing skill gaps. This proactive approach builds confidence and prepares students for future challenges.
• Growth Mindset: Teaching students (and ourselves) to see mistakes as opportunities for learning—not simply setbacks—encourages persistence, reflection, and intellectual growth. Modeling how to “update” thinking and embracing metacognition supports this journey.

To truly serve our students, we must be willing to let go of outdated practices—even those that may feel familiar or comfortable. By confronting persistent myths and embracing evidence-based practices, we can create classrooms that empower all learners, equipping them not just for academic success but for lifelong learning. Our students deserve nothing less than our best efforts—and the tools to realize their full potential.

Final Thoughts

Teaching myths persist because many feel deeply ingrained. However, by staying informed, reflecting on our practices, and focusing on evidence-based strategies, we can transform our classrooms into places of meaningful, impactful learning. Let’s commit to doing what’s best for our students—because they deserve nothing less.

Administrators:

• What steps are you taking to provide access to reputable educational resources to support teachers in implementing proven instructional strategies and teaching methods?
•  How do you plan and conduct conversations with teachers to address misconceptions about teaching and learning?

Teachers:

•  What educational practices do you question in regard to their impact? How can these be researched with other teachers in your school?
• How open are you to integrating new, effective strategies into your teaching?