Should we expect, let’s say in the next 10 years, AI to replace teachers in schools, or will the teacher remain at the centre of classroom instruction?
Over the next decade I expect AI to support rather than replace teachers. Technology can automate routine tasks, provide personalised feedback and free time for teachers to focus on instruction and relationships. But classrooms rely on human judgement, motivation, and social connection. These are areas where teachers remain central. AI will become a useful assistant, not a substitute for the professional expertise that drives effective learning.

Given your experience as a sport psychologist — what is the difference between a coach, a psychologist, and a teacher? And isn’t the ideal teacher meant to be 3-in-1?
A coach focuses on skill development and performance. A psychologist works on mindset, behaviour, and the mental processes that shape learning. A teacher blends subject knowledge with pedagogy to help students understand and apply ideas. While it sounds attractive to be a three in one professional, each role has its own depth. Teachers can borrow tools from coaching and psychology, but their primary value lies in adapting these ideas to the needs of the classroom.

Teachers often ask, “Where to begin?” So where does one start after reading your book?
A good starting point is to choose one principle that resonates and apply it consistently. Trying to use everything at once creates overload. Begin with a small routine that supports retrieval, spacing, or feedback. Test it for a few weeks, refine it, then add another element. Sustainable change grows from small habits. The goal is not to adopt every finding, but to embed a few that fit your context.

In Teaching & Learning Illuminated you summarized hundreds of studies. Which finding surprised you the most?
One finding that surprised me was how often students underestimate the value of struggle. Many assume that fluent learning feels easy, yet the evidence shows that desirable difficulties strengthen memory. This gap between how learning feels and how it actually works has major implications for classroom practice. It reminded me how important it is to help students tolerate short term challenge in order to gain long term understanding

Has the understanding of what makes teaching effective changed over the past 10—15 years? What contributed to it?
Over the past decade we have gained a clearer picture of how memory, motivation, and metacognition shape learning. Better research methods and larger studies have improved our confidence in certain strategies. We now understand more about spacing, feedback, and modelling. At the same time, the rise of cognitive science in teacher training has helped turn insights into classroom practice. The field has not been transformed yet, but it has become more coherent.

Cognitive sciences offer evidence-based insights into teaching & learning — do you encounter the view that they simply confirm what good classroom teachers already do?
There is some truth in that idea, since effective teachers often develop intuitions that match the evidence. However, research can sharpen those intuitions and correct blind spots. Evidence does not replace professional wisdom, but it helps teachers make more informed decisions and avoid relying solely on habit.

Is it therefore possible to teach effectively without a conscious understanding of the principles described in the book?
Yes, many teachers do. Experience, reflection, and observation can lead to effective practice even without formal terminology.

And can explicit knowledge of these principles help teachers in any way?
Explicit knowledge helps teachers understand why certain strategies work and how to adapt them. It also protects against adopting appealing but ineffective ideas. Knowing the principles offers a shared language for discussing teaching, which supports professional growth.

Should the teaching profession be evidence-based or evidence-informed? And what is the difference between the two approaches?
Evidence-based implies following practices that have strong empirical support. Evidence-informed means using research as a guide while also considering context, judgement, and student needs. I favour an evidence-informed approach, since classrooms are complex and rigid adherence to studies can be limiting. Research should shape decisions, not dictate them. Teachers blend evidence with experience to create solutions that fit their environment.

Teaching & Learning Illuminated focuses mainly on the cognitive aspects of learning. What role does the emotional dimension play — and is it sufficiently reflected in current research?I’d say the emotional dimension is absolutely central intertwined with cognition. Emotions influence attention, working memory, decision-making, and long-term retention. If a student arrives in class stressed or anxious, their cognitive “bandwidth” is reduced before any teaching has even begun. I would like to see more research on this from cognitive science. We have seen an increase in this in recent years, but there is still plenty more research to be done. For example, there are some studies about how retrieval practice can reduce test anxiety, but I’d like to see more.

Does teacher training take into account the findings of cognitive science?
Better than before, but still inconsistently. Many training programmes now include elements such as retrieval practice, cognitive load theory, metacognition, and effective feedback. This is great progress. The challenge is that it varies widely between institutions, and sometimes the translation from research to practice is patchy. Teachers might get the headlines of cognitive science without the nuance. Likewise, different countries are at very different stages on this, so you did get significant variation.

How come certain neuromyths persist, even though they were repeatedly debunked?
Neuromyths persist because they are simple, memorable, and offer comforting explanations. They also spread quickly through training sessions and popular media. Once an idea becomes part of a school culture, it can be hard to challenge. Another factor is that teachers often lack time to check original research. Combating neuromyths requires clear communication, better training, and a willingness to revise long held beliefs.

You have crafted a book that makes complex concepts accessible. Which (info)graphic should every teacher keep in sight each day?
If I had to pick one, I think the one showing the links between cognitive science and Rosenshine’s Principles. I like this graphic for two reasons. Firstly, it shows how common sense practical suggestions are underpinned by research. Secondly, it shows how it is messy and complex and nuanced. There are no simple solutions to complex problems. But by better understanding the underpinning theory, we can better apply the practical suggestions.

Michal Orság & EDLB