A not uncommon question discussed by 糖心动漫vlog is if teaching is an art or a science?
Today鈥檚 post kicks off a series with possible answers to that question.
鈥楢 Dynamic Interplay鈥�
Jennifer Serravallo is a New York Times bestselling author, award-winning educator, literacy consultant, frequent invited speaker at state and national conferences, producer of the To the Classroom podcast, and former member of the Parents Magazine editorial board:
Teaching, at its best, is a nuanced marriage of art and science, where evidence-informed practices meet real-time creativity, relationship-building, and in-the-moment responsiveness.
The Science of Teaching
The science of teaching includes a body of research about how learning happens. This scientific base enables us to ground our practice in what actually works鈥攗sing proven strategies and structures to support students in becoming proficient in whatever skills, strategies, and knowledge we are teaching. The most impactful teaching, research tells us, is explicit and engaging, clear and supportive, culturally responsive, and includes these elements:
- Connects existing knowledge to new knowledge
- Uses a gradual release of responsibility
- Breaks down concepts into clear steps or strategies
- Offers clear demonstrations, models, explanations, and instructions
- Ensures active engagement during all parts of the lesson and regularly checks for understanding
- Offers clear feedback in response to what students need
- Provides scaffolds when tasks are difficult
- Differentiates to meet students鈥� needs
- Supports student collaboration and independent practice
Teaching Like a Scientist
Teachers, too, are scientists. We approach students with curiosity. We study. We collect information. We hypothesize and we experiment with different methods, texts, prompts, feedback, and activities to meet our students鈥� needs and keep them highly engaged and learning.
The Art of Teaching
Yet, teaching is equally an art鈥攖he best teachers are highly creative, have sharp intuition, an ability to adapt, and perhaps above all, know how to connect and develop relationships with a diverse range of students. We are also deeply responsive: We watch students鈥� faces, read their body language and tone, notice when they鈥檙e lost, eager, or bored鈥攁nd then fluidly adjust the pace, mode, or scaffold. There鈥檚 artistry in our flexibility and on-the-spot adaptations.鈥�
Art and Science in Practice
Here鈥檚 a practical example, showing how art and science flow together during planning and teaching:
I know that a read-aloud lesson is a well-researched method to support comprehension, knowledge- and vocabulary-building, and improve speaking and listening skills so I use that knowledge of research to choose to spend 20 minutes on this lesson type. I begin my planning by carefully selecting a text aligned to my instructional goals and grade-level expectations, knowing the research around the importance of grade-level text exposure, but I also think about my students鈥� interests and backgrounds and what will engage them.
Then, I preview the text for tier 2 vocabulary, knowing the research behind these high-impact academic words, and plan research-aligned activities for helping students understand and deeply process those words. I also lean on the extensive body of research around comprehension-strategy instruction and select strategies that help bridge the gaps between what students know and are able to do and what this text is demanding of them.
Next, the lesson begins. I need to leverage my teacher artistry as I read the text in an engaging, expressive way. When I prompt students to turn and talk, I get down at eye level and listen in, connecting with them. I laugh with them at the funny parts and experience the text on an emotional level with my students.
All the while, I鈥檓 watching and collecting data like a scientist does, poised to adapt my plan like an artist when students are showing me they need more scaffolding or a different pace by adding in a model I hadn鈥檛 planned, offering a moment for a whole-class conversation, rereading a selection that caused confusion, or deciding to cut the lesson short if engagement is waning.
Teaching Is Both an Art and Science
Teaching is science when:
- We rely on evidence-based frameworks and research (like the science of reading, scaffolding structures, comprehension strategies).
- We collect data, test approaches, and design instruction intentionally (teacher-as-scientist stance).
Teaching is art when:
- We respond to the moment鈥攖o students鈥� expressions, energy, confusion, insight鈥攁nd adapt with flexibility.
- We deeply know our students鈥攖heir languages, cultures, interests, and identities鈥攁nd use that knowledge to make learning resonant and relevant.
Teaching well includes a dynamic interplay where research-based strategies provide anchors, and responsiveness to students鈥攖heir stories, strengths, and humanity鈥攂rings instruction to life. The scientific foundation gives us tools and direction; the artistic sensibility lets us connect, adapt, and inspire. When teachers honor evidence about how learning works and, at the same time, center relationships, culture, and real-time responsiveness, teaching becomes its most powerful: a compassionate, culturally attuned, data-informed practice that truly sees and supports each learner.
鈥楤eyond Art and Science鈥�
Joe Feldman has worked in education at the local and national levels for over 20 years in both charter and district school contexts and as a teacher, principal, and district administrator:
If you had asked me when I began teaching almost 30 years ago, I would have said teaching is mostly an art, an expression of individual style and personality. Designing a unit was technical, but teaching itself was a personal, idiosyncratic dance with students to engage them in learning. That鈥檚 what made it exciting and energizing despite the long days. You either had 鈥渋t鈥� or you didn鈥檛, and the challenge seemed to be finding enough of the special breed of 糖心动漫vlog every student deserves.
As I continued my career as department chair, assistant principal, principal, and then central-office administrator in both New York City and Northern California, and began working with a wide spectrum of teachers across backgrounds, personalities, subjects, grade levels, and career stages, I came to see teaching as more of a science鈥攌nowledge and skills that all teachers could learn to be more successful, regardless of personality.
Teaching was less a performance than a craft based on decades of research in pedagogy, development, psychology, sociology, and cultural responsiveness. We know how students learn best and how 糖心动漫vlog teach most effectively, with established approaches to create welcoming, sustaining classrooms, to expand opportunities for learning, and to accurately and fairly assess what students know and can do. The art doesn鈥檛 matter if there isn鈥檛 the science.
The challenge, therefore, isn鈥檛 a shortage of creative teachers; it鈥檚 that we don鈥檛 give them support to maximize their creativity. Teacher professional development is often reduced to scattershot tips and tricks: 鈥漈oday鈥檚 PD is three ways to lead group work; next month is IEP鈥檚; the following month, behavior-management strategies.鈥� Teachers rarely get to deeply understand the research on student learning and too often lack support to overcome challenges when trying something new.
For example, improving grading is reduced to a single edict鈥斺�淒on鈥檛 give zeros鈥濃�攚ithout allowing teachers to study the justification for questioning the 0-100% scale or receiving support to incorporate it into a larger ecosystem of research-based grading. They are left to implement an oversimplified, incomplete change, and when it predictably fails, they are frustrated at being set up with a half-baked policy. In other words, even though there are volumes of science to improve teaching, teachers rarely get access beyond superficial excerpts.
Lately, in the post-pandemic world, I find my opinion shifting again. Effective teaching doesn鈥檛 just depend on personality and art, nor is research and practice enough; it requires something deeper. The best teachers bring passion for their content鈥攖he beauty of formulae, the power of words, the eloquence of nature, the urgency of health and ethics. They also recognize and respond to the humanity of every child. Great teachers are empathetic listeners to students鈥� challenges, joys, and struggles, adjusting tone and language to create safety and care. They treat teaching as a collaborative relationship, believing this awesome project of teaching and learning only works if we connect. Calling these aspects 鈥渁rt鈥� doesn鈥檛 quite fit.
Beyond art and science, teaching is a love鈥攐f discipline and profession in all its challenges. Why else would we accept lower salaries and difficult conditions, persevering through a global pandemic and its aftermath, if not for love of what we do and who we do it with鈥攐ur students and colleagues?
My opinion may change again before my career ends, but as of now, the best teaching is grounded in science, allows for individual art, and is powered by love.
It鈥檚 Both
Abeer Ramadan-Shinnawi, M.Ed., is a Palestinian American educator, curriculum consultant, and founder of Altair Education Consulting:
In the ongoing debate over whether teaching is an art or a science, I argue that it is and must be 鈥� both.
Teaching is a dynamic, complex profession that cannot be boxed into a singular category. Educators operate at the intersection of creativity and evidence-based practice, blending imagination with cognitive research to ensure students not only absorb content but also connect to it in ways that are meaningful and transformative.
Teaching as an art: There is a deeply creative element to teaching鈥攐ne that requires intuition, creativity, and adaptability. No two classrooms are the same, and no two students learn in the exact same way. Teachers must read the room like an artist scans a canvas, constantly adjusting their methods, tone, and approach based on student responses. Lesson planning alone, true immersive lesson planning is an art form. Crafting a lesson that captures student interest, sparks curiosity, and invites diverse learners into a shared experience of discovery is no small feat. It takes storytelling, relationship-building, and a clear sense of audience. That鈥檚 art.
Teaching is a science: Every day, 糖心动漫vlog apply research from neuroscience, developmental psychology, and pedagogy to support student learning. Brain-based research tells us about the importance of retrieval practice, chunking information, movement breaks, and emotional safety in classrooms. Universal Design for Learning (UDL), for example, is grounded in cognitive science and provides frameworks for engaging all types of learners. Data from formative and summative assessments guide decisions, allowing teachers to redirect their teaching to meet the needs of the students. The data allow for adjustment and, just as a scientist uses evidence to form conclusions, teachers use the data to adapt their approaches.
The best teachers are constantly moving between these two modes鈥攖he instinctual (art) and the data-driven (science). They weave a narrative to introduce a concept, then pause for a brain break because they know students need time to process. They design assessments with creativity, yet analyze results with rigor. They understand that relationships, often the artistic glue that holds classrooms together, are crucial for learning. But they also know that relationships alone are not enough; instruction must be structured, strategic, and scaffolded.
In my experience as an educator, curriculum developer, and professional development facilitator, I鈥檝e witnessed how the most impactful teaching happens when we stop forcing a binary. We must celebrate the artistry that brings joy, connection, and voice into learning spaces, while also honoring the science that ensures our methods are effective, inclusive, and equitable.
When we reduce teaching to one or the other, we diminish the profession. If we call it only an art, we risk ignoring the importance of research, evaluation, and instructional design. If we call it only a science, we lose the humanity, the cultural responsiveness, and the improvisation that real classrooms demand.
Teaching is both a science that fuels our methods and an art that shapes our delivery. It is in this fusion that the true power of education lives, where evidence meets creativity and instruction becomes transformation.
Thanks to Jennifer, Joe, and Abeer for contributing their thoughts!
Today鈥檚 post answered this question:
What is your perspective on the question 鈥淚s teaching an art or a science?鈥�
Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at lferlazzo@epe.org. When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it鈥檚 selected or if you鈥檇 prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.
You can also contact me on X at or on Bluesky at .
Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via . And if you missed any of the highlights from the first 13 years of this blog, you can see a categorized list here.
