Rethinking challenge: A research-informed guide for schools

Written by: Mark Leswell
9 min read
MARK LESWELL, RESEARCH LEAD, SWALE ACADEMIES TRUST, UK This article explores research-informed approaches to implementing productive challenge in schools, distinguishing between helpful cognitive struggle and counterproductive difficulty. It offers practical strategies for educators to calibrate appropriate levels of challenge while avoiding working memory overload, and addresses common misconceptions about what constitutes effective challenge. Understanding challenge: Research perspectives Difficulty Difficulty refers to how taxing a task is, whereas challenge refers to the productive cognitive effort that leads to learning. As Soderstrom and Bjork (2015) note, tasks that create difficulties during practice can enhance long-term learning, provided that these difficulties are ‘desirable’ rather than arbitrary. Desirable difficulties Robert Bjork’s research on ‘desirable difficulties’ provides one theoretical foundation for understanding meaningful challenge. Bjork iden

Join us or sign in now to view the rest of this page

You're viewing this site as a guest, which only allows you to view a limited amount of content.

To view this page and get access to all our resources, join the Chartered College of Teaching (it's free for trainee teachers and half price for ECTs) or log in if you're already a member.

    • Agarwal PK, Nunes LD and Blunt JR (2021) Retrieval practice consistently benefits student learning: A systematic review of applied research in schools and classrooms. Educational Psychology Review 33(4): 1409–1449.
    • Cowan N (2010) The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and why? Current Directions in Psychological Science 19(1): 51–57.
    • De Koning BB (2024) Best of both worlds? Combining physical and mental self-management strategies to support learning from split-attention examples. Educational Sciences 14(3): 284.
    • Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) (2021) Metacognition and self‑regulated learning: Guidance report. Available at: https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/education-evidence/guidance-reports/metacognition (accessed 28 June 2025).
    • Gathercole SE and Alloway TP (2008) Working Memory and Learning: A Practical Guide for Teachers. London: SAGE Publications.
    • Kalyuga S and Sweller J (2014) The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In: Mayer RE (ed) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 247–262.
    • Mayer RE (2009) Multimedia Learning, 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    • Ouwehand K, Lespiau F, Tricot A et al. (2025) Cognitive load theory: Emerging trends and innovations. Education Sciences 15(4): 458.
    • Rosenshine B (2012) Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator 36(1): 12–19, 36.
    • Ryan RM and Deci EL (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55(1): 68–78.
    • Soderstrom NC and Bjork RA (2015) Learning versus performance: An integrative review. Perspectives on Psychological Science 10(2): 176–199.
    • Sweller J, van Merriënboer JJG and Paas FGWC (1998) Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review 10(3): 251–296.
    • Sweller J, Ayres P and Kalyuga S (2011) Cognitive Load Theory. New York: Springer.
    • Tetzlaff L, Simonsmeier B, Peters T et al. (2025) A cornerstone of adaptivity – a meta-analysis of the expertise reversal effect. Learning and Instruction 98: 102142.
    • Trypke M, Stebner F and Wirth J (2024) The more, the better? Exploring the effects of modal and codal redundancy on learning and cognitive load: An experimental study. Educational Sciences 14(8): 872.
    • Vygotsky LS (1978) Interaction between learning and development. In: Cole M, John-Steiner V, Scribner S et al. (eds) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, pp. 79–91.
    0 0 votes
    Please Rate this content
    0 Comments
    Oldest
    Newest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    From this issue

    Impact Articles on the same themes