Cognitive Similarity

Hey 👋

Hope things are marching on. Today, we’re jumping into a new snack series on effective inclusion, exploring some powerful ideas co-developed with big brain Dr Jen Barker…

Big idea 🍉

[High res version of the above Simple Model of Teaching diagram]

Two core ideas underpin effective inclusive teaching: cognitive similarity and instructional sensitivity. Let’s dig into both…

The first idea—cognitive similarity—helps us understand that: the way people learn is more similar than it is different. Despite its intuitive appeal (largely because it aligns with our modern liberal values), the notion that students learn best when taught in a way that is unique to their particular needs or preferences lacks empirical support and can even impede learning. Even the term ‘special’ inadvertently reinforces the misconception that certain students learn in fundamentally different ways.

While it is true that students do differ in their working memory capacity, sensory precision, and prior knowledge… it’s also true that they all learn through the same core cognitive processes, such as paying attention, perceiving similarities/differences, and retrieving ideas (as outlined in the Simple Model of Teaching above).

The main implication of cognitive similarity is that: the best thing we can do—for all our students—is to get clarity this shared mental architecture and then direct the majority of our efforts towards catalysing it via our teaching. This is why approaches such as explicit instruction, high-structure-high-routine environments, and retrieval practice have such robust empirical support—they align well with how learning works.

The second core idea—instructional sensitivity—helps us understand that: students with special educational needs are disproportionately impacted by the quality of our teaching. By definition, disadvantaged learners encounter greater challenges within educational systems, magnifying the effects of both good and bad instruction.

This is why practices such as explicit instruction (which reduces cognitive overload), high-structure-high-routine environments (which minimise sensory overload and enhance feelings of safety), and retrieval practice (which directly supports memory) are not only universally effective but are THE MOST POWERFUL TOOLS we have at our disposal for closing the disadvantage gap.

If we are serious about making inclusive teaching work, then we’ve got to put cognitive similarity (and instructional sensitivity) at the heart of our approach.

🎓 For more, check out this paper on cognitive similarity and its implication for teaching.

Summary

• Despite our instincts around individualism, the way people learn is actually way more similar than it is different.

• This ‘cognitive similarity’ means that our best bet for inclusive teaching is to direct most of our efforts at catalysing core learning processes.

• When we do this, ‘instructional sensitivity’ means that our disadvantaged students feel the benefits even more than others.

Little updates 🥕

• Study on Wales progressive early years curriculum → despite teachers predicting broad benefits for disadvantaged pupils, academic gains are limited.

• Paper on cross-age tutoring → finds small to moderate academic gains for both tutors & tutees, across varying subjects, tutor types, and student needs.

• Analysis of boredom, challenge & creativity → suggests boredom helps creativity when tasks are easy, but harms it when tasks are too difficult.

• Study on teaching students about different types of comparisons → finds that learning about such comparisons improves student confidence.

Support Peps & get more stuff → Learn about Snacks PRO