Evolutionary Mismatches Inherent in Elementary Education: Identifying the Implications for Modern Schooling Practices

Definition

For the majority of human history, humans lived in sustenance hunter–gatherer tribes. Due to rapid cultural evolution in the past few thousand years, our biological evolution has not kept up, and many of the adaptations are, as a result, better suited to ancestral conditions than they are to modern conditions. This is known as evolutionary mismatch. While evolutionary mismatches can be seen across many facets of contemporary human life (e.g., diet, exercise, online communication), evolutionary mismatches are particularly pervasive in our elementary schools. Due to the critical nature of social learning and cultural transmission, there is a long history of learning that has shaped the evolved learning mechanisms of children. Rather than learning from hands-on, collaborative experiences as was typical for our ancestors, children today often learn in age-segregated classrooms through passive instruction and standardized curricula. In this entry, eight common school-related issues are identified and the associated evolutionary mismatch is outlined. The goal is to provide educators with a model of how an evolutionary lens can be used to better understand, and potentially improve, modern schooling systems.

1. Evolutionary Educational Psychology

Schooling is a ubiquitous construct in modern, Westernized cultures. In these cultures, childhood is characterized by schooling demands, dynamics, and the school schedule [1,2]. Yet, schooling has not been such a domineering construct for much of human history. In the United States, schooling was made compulsory in all states by the year 1918 [3]. As such, it has only been within the past 100 or so years that formal schooling has become the norm for childhood.

While some children do just fine in a traditional educational setting, there are significant issues demonstrated in childhood that can be related to schooling practices. For example, children are demonstrating impaired social skills [4,5,6], there are high levels of generalized and academic anxiety in children [7,8,9], motivation and engagement are low [10,11], and children engage in antisocial behaviors [12]. It should come as no surprise that there has been innumerable research performed with a focus on the United States Educational System that aims to improve childhood and schooling outcomes [13,14,15]. Much work in schools focuses on adapting the system for individual children if and when they struggle (e.g., providing special education services). While work is being conducted in various fields, there remains no consensus on the systematic root causes of these school-related issues, nor is there guidance on a singular way to attempt to approach such issues [13].

The growing field of evolutionary educational psychology presents a novel way of attempting to tackle these school-related issues. Evolutionary educational psychology posits that the brain, and therefore the ability to learn, has been shaped by natural selection [1]. Evolutionary educational psychologists thereby study the connections between how our species has evolved to learn and how those evolved mechanisms play out in modern classrooms and contexts [1,2,16,17]. Researchers have studied areas such as the types of knowledge acquired in schools [18,19], social relationships and bullying [12], alternative school models [2,20], cognitive load [21], and so much more. Evolutionary educational psychology has the unique potential to help those involved in the education of children to approach educational concerns with a comprehensive understanding of human nature and long-standing evolved learning mechanisms. This entry is intended to provide guidance to those in the field of education as to how ideas from evolutionary educational psychology can be practically applied to better understand modern schooling practices.

2. Evolutionary Mismatch

The utility in applying evolutionary thinking to pedagogical practices lies in understanding both the ultimate and proximate explanations of learning and childhood behavior. Ultimate explanations pertain to evolved mechanisms and phylogenetic history. That is, such explanations are concerned with why certain behaviors have facilitated survival and reproductive success in humans over our evolutionary time. Conversely, proximate explanations relate to the immediate reasons as to how a behavior is expressed [22,23]. Outlined by Tinbergen, ultimate and proximate causes of behavior were first used to describe and understand animal behaviors [23]. But evolutionary psychologists use both ultimate and proximate explanations to understand human thought and behavior as well [24]. For example, language evolved because it facilitated communication and subsequent cooperation, ultimately leading to humans’ survival and reproductive success. The proximate ways in which language is expressed and taught, however, vary depending on time and culture [22].

Due to the discrepancies of slow biological evolution and rapid cultural evolution, there can be a marked difference between proximate and ultimate conditions. This discrepancy is known as evolutionary mismatch [24,25]. Adaptations that were helpful under ancestral conditions may no longer be advantageous in modern conditions; in fact, they might even be disadvantageous [25].

For the majority of the existence of the human species, human life was characterized by nomadic hunter–gatherer tribes [24,25]. As a result, our species adapted to the conditions defined by a hunter–gatherer lifestyle. Evolutionary psychologists refer to those conditions as the environment of evolutionary adaptedness (EEA) [26]. Ancestral humans lived in tribes of roughly 150 closely related kin, moved frequently, and spent much of their time and resources on food acquisition [27]. It was not until roughly 10,000 years ago that humans began to transition to an agriculturally based lifestyle, characterized by permanent, larger societies [28].

The modern human condition is full of the negative consequences resulting from evolutionary mismatch across various facets of life. These mismatches can be thought of as unintended consequences of expanded culture. For example, in terms of health, it was adaptive for our ancestors to crave high-fat and high-sugar foods, as those kinds of high-calorie foods were scarce, and people in the EEA needed to store fat in case of a subsequent famine. Now, in industrialized societies, there is an abundance of high-fat and high-sugar foods, yet we still have the same food cravings from our past. Today, unlike the EEA, those cravings are largely disadvantageous, with many chronic health concerns stemming from a diet of highly processed foods or from a lack of natural exercise and sedentary lifestyles [29,30]. Further, in terms of social behavior, humans evolved in small-scale societies in which it was easy to detect those who were taking advantage of the larger group, because group members saw each other constantly. Now, in many large-scale societies, people often engage in anonymous communication or one-off interactions, so the lack of social context can sometimes contribute to difficulty detecting others who are exploitative [31,32]. Overall, evolutionary mismatch is pervasive and impacts much of our daily lives. The present entry will explore evolutionary mismatch as it pertains to education.

3. Evolutionary Mismatch in Schools

Evolutionary mismatches are deeply embedded in our system of education. The way that children evolved to learn is remarkably different from the way children are being taught in schools today [1,33]. In regard to education, an understanding of our ultimate evolutionary roots helps educators understand how children learn best. Proximate explanations can be used to understand the implications of instructional design and modern school systems.

To understand these differences between ultimate and proximate conditions for learning, researcher Peter Gray [34] studied education in extant hunter–gatherer tribes. In evolutionary psychological research, hunter–gatherer tribes are seen as a proxy for understanding early nomadic societies. Accordingly, education in these tribes sheds light upon what education was like for the lion’s share of evolutionary history. None of the tribes Gray studied had any system of formal schooling like we see in Westernized countries today. Rather, children in these hunter–gatherer tribes learned by engaging in self-directed, mixed-age play groups with their peers. Adults largely did not intervene in children’s learning.

Contrasted with the above, modern schools typically educate children in age-segregated classrooms, with one unrelated adult teacher, using scripted or standardized curricula, and rely heavily on testing and assessment [2,16,17]. In just these few examples, it is clear that modern schooling, the proximate condition, is vastly different from ancestral learning, or the ultimate condition. By using both ultimate and proximate lenses to analyze learning and schooling, evolutionary educational psychology has the power to understand learning and schooling on a deeper level than most other fields [35].

Previous research has shown that students who had a more evolutionarily relevant early childhood education enjoyed school more and achieved higher levels of success than their peers with a less evolutionarily relevant early education [17]. Alternative school models that mirror aspects of ancestral education (e.g., Sudbury Valley Schools or Montessori Schools) have also demonstrated higher instances of student achievement and social–emotional development [2,36,37,38]. Overall, the existing research tends to support the idea that taking steps to reduce evolutionary mismatch in schools will lead to better outcomes, both academically and socio-emotionally, for modern students [2,17,33].

4. Common Issues and Associated Evolutionary Mismatches in Modern Elementary Classrooms

The sections below illustrate how evolutionary mismatches contribute to commonly observed issues in modern elementary classrooms. Each issue is briefly described and followed by the associated evolutionary mismatch. Thinking in terms of Tinbergen’s [23] ultimate and proximate explanations of behavior, the observable issues represent proximate explanations and conditions. Conversely, the mismatches represent the ways in which those proximate conditions contrast from the EEA conditions that ultimately led to humans’ survival and reproductive success. Teachers who understand the evolutionary roots of modern problems, such as those outlined below, are armed with the tools to address these common issues at a deeper level than their evolutionarily uninformed peers.

There is a high likelihood that these evolutionary issues cause overlapping and numerous adverse outcomes. Schools, and the education system at large, are complex and rife with evolutionary mismatches. The following sections are not an exhaustive list of potential concerns nor mismatches but instead serve as a model of how evolutionarily informed thinking can be practically utilized by educators to address school-related concerns. Appendix A aims to function as an outline of the mismatches in ultimate and proximate conditions as well as the associated implications for schooling and childhood. We recommend using the appendix as a guide to better navigate the information provided in this entry. Additionally, Appendix A can be reproduced for potential professional development or instruction for those involved in the field of education (e.g., teachers, administrators, parents, etc.).

It should be noted that while evolutionary mismatch does have the potential to contribute to observed adverse modern outcomes, it is not something that is likely to be completely eliminated. Researchers in the field of evolutionary psychology are not arguing for us to go back to ancestral conditions—modern life is more comfortable than it was for our ancestors, life expectancies are longer, and illnesses are less frequent or severe [25,28]. However, by using an evolutionary lens as demonstrated in the field of positive evolutionary psychology, we can continue to improve modern outcomes by being mindful of our evolutionary history and taking appropriate steps to reduce evolutionary mismatch [32]. The same understanding is true for education. We are not arguing that schools must completely mirror ancestral conditions to be effective (see Ref. [2] for a counterexample); the skills our children need to be successful in the 21st century are more cultural and complex than those of our ancestors (e.g., literacy, numeracy, etc.) [18,19]. As such, many of the examples in this entry address ways to make positive changes in primary, or evolutionarily linked skills such as social relationships, motivation, etc. It follows that improving these skills will impact secondary, or academic-based skills.

4.1. Issue 1—Low Intrinsic Motivation

There has been an ongoing concern in educational practice and research about the lack of intrinsic motivation for elementary school children to engage with their work [11]. Intrinsic motivation is defined as engaging in a task purely for curiosity, learning, or pleasure. Extrinsic motivation, on the other hand, involves engaging in a task for an expected outcome, such as a grade [39]. While the lack of intrinsic motivation is seen most starkly in secondary-aged students, there is a trend of decreasing motivation that begins around ages 8 or 9 and continues declining as a child moves into more advanced grades [40]. Some studies claim intrinsic motivation begins decreasing earlier, even down to the first grade [10]. At all levels, this decreasing intrinsic motivation affects academic achievement [11] and should thus be investigated at all levels. Working to retain intrinsic motivation in children for longer periods of time would have positive impacts on a wide array of educational outcomes.

A lack of motivation to engage with assignments can negatively impact children’s school achievements. But children who are more intrinsically motivated perceive themselves as more competent, experience less academic stress, and perform better in school [41]. In other words, children who have a greater sense of self-perceived competence have higher academic success. Indeed, intrinsic motivation was found to increase children’s self-perceived competence [42]. These findings indicate that having an interest in the task itself, rather than some external reward, helps children think more highly of what they are capable of and perform better in school.

Yet in recent years, there has been a greater focus on high-stakes assessments in schools. These assessments and resulting standardized curricula can be problematic because they leave children with no room to engage in tasks they find interesting and therefore motivating. Instead, children are forced to focus mostly on the extrinsic rewards of grades alone [43,44]. Research has demonstrated that children have been negatively impacted by the number of extrinsic factors, such as tests, that have been put on them [45]. These high-stakes assessments do not provide educators space to teach material outside the scope of the test [43]. In short, teaching to the test is an instance of evolutionary mismatch as it goes against the self-directed way humans traditionally would learn and decreases children’s natural intrinsic motivation.

4.2. Mismatch 1—Lack of Exploratory Learning and Autonomy

Many educators have argued that children have an innate desire to learn [46,47]. Under ancestral conditions, children were intrinsically motivated to learn important skills by observing the adults of their tribe engage in those critical skills [1]. The utility was apparent and thus motivated learning. Even in more recent educational history, educators have argued that intrinsic or natural motivators, not extrinsic motivators, should be the leading drive for education. Education should tap into children’s natural sense of inquiry [43]. More ancestrally aligned models of education may be the key to encouraging this passion for learning.

Early work in the field of evolutionary psychology proposes that play is the root of learning. Karl Groos [48] proposed that animals and humans develop the important skills required for survival through play and imitation. Play is intrinsically motivating by default as children do not engage in play with any goal or reward in mind. Play is passion-driven. There is also great flexibility and creativity because the rules are not strict [49]. This use of play and imitation for learning can still be seen today when looking at extant hunter–gatherer tribes, which serve as proxy examples of ancestral learning [49,50,51]. This freedom to explore and lead the learning experience was a big part of how ancestral children gained skills. The adults of hunter–gatherer tribes generally believe parents should not interfere with the teaching of children. Instead, children observe which skills need to be learned and will predominantly find ways to teach themselves and their peers [34]. Children are given the freedom and autonomy to observe and imitate adults or experiment with objects as they wish. The child initiates when and how they learn [51].

This autonomy makes learning more intrinsically motivating for children [45,52]. Children who have free choice as to which task they engage in or how they engage in it are found to be more intrinsically motivated [52]. In one study in a traditional preschool setting, children who were given the opportunity to draw with markers were much more intrinsically motivated when they were not expecting any sort of reward. Children expecting a reward from the start were less interested in the task and spent less time drawing than children who did not expect anything in return [53]. This study also found that even though the amount of drawings were the same, the quality of the drawings were better for the intrinsically motivated group compared to the extrinsically motivated group [53]. This finding implies that intrinsically motivated children are more likely to engage with the task fully. On the other hand, extrinsically motivated children focus more on getting the task done, rather than doing a good job. This problem is similar to that of teaching to the test—children may not focus as much on fully understanding the information. Instead, children might only focus on remembering the information that will get them a good grade [44,54,55].

This information can help restructure classrooms so children can get the most out of their education. Evolutionarily informed schools are effective at incorporating curricula that boost a passion for learning by being child-led and focusing on the inquiries of children [36,38,56]. For example, children in Montessori programs demonstrated a better mastery mindset—the Montessori children chose harder puzzles than control groups as they believed they were capable of handling greater challenges [38]. Therefore, children who experience more control over their education have greater confidence in their abilities and seek out further challenges than students in standard classrooms. This finding also aligns with the fact that children were more interested in school as a whole [38].

Many evolutionarily informed pedagogical adjustments can be made to maintain or even restore intrinsic motivation in elementary school students. Implementing exploratory activities that stray away from grades and prizes and more towards play and engagement as motivators can get children more involved. Providing children with choices of which activities to engage in can provide a greater sense of autonomy. Even finding tasks that reflect adult jobs can increase the involvement of children. In short, children have an innate desire to learn, and evolutionarily informed activities that reduce evolutionary mismatch may be the key to sustaining this innate desire.

4.3. Issue 2—High Levels of School Anxiety

In recent years, school-related anxiety and stress have become widespread concerns for parents and educators. Adverse cognitive, emotional, and physical responses have been reported [8]. These responses often manifest in children as tension, frustration, and even panic that is triggered by academic pressures such as performance, due dates, and social comparison [9,57]. These stressors include aspects of the modern academic environment that many children perceive as stressful or threatening.

Alarmingly, school stressors may also contribute to observable patterns of suicidality in children and teens. Suicidality rates often mirror the academic calendar patterns, with seasonal peaks typically occurring in spring and fall, highlighting the role of the school environment in mental health [58]. As mentioned above, one possible reason for this rising tide of school anxiety is the concept of evolutionary mismatch [25,34]. When considering school anxiety from an evolutionary context, this mismatch is at least partially related to rigorous and dictated curricula, learning standards, high-stakes testing, and play deprivation [33,59,60,61].

4.4. Mismatch 2—Dictated Learning Standards and Standardized Testing

Early humans evolved in small, tightly knit communities, where learning was more experiential and based on mixed-aged play, hands-on tasks, and imitation. Children learned skills that were immediately useful and pursued those skills in a self-directed manner, at their own pace [2,16,17]. Today, schools are designed around standardized, high-stakes testing and dictated curricula. Pressure to perform, submit assignments on time, and achieve high grades are unnatural stressors for children’s evolved minds. In the context of education, our brains’ survival mechanisms, such as the “fight or flight” response, can become easily activated by academic pressures, even though these pressures pose no immediate harm or physical danger [62]. The overemphasis on performance rather than long-term retention of learning may cause children to feel an increased fear of failure, leading children to associate their self-worth with academic success [63]. Unfortunately, this emphasis can stifle participation, creativity, and willingness to try new things, as learning often involves trial and error [64].

Promoting a growth mindset, where mistakes are seen as opportunities for growth rather than failures, can help reduce anxiety and empower students to embrace challenges [65]. Learning from failures and experience likely mirrors how children under ancestral conditions engaged in learning—hunter–gather children repeatedly practice a skill until they achieve mastery of the skill [2]. This shift is especially crucial for students’ mental health as it reduces the fear of failure that often fuels anxiety and stress [66]. When students are overwhelmed by anxiety, it becomes harder to focus, memorize information, or perform well on exams (e.g., test anxiety) [67,68]. The feeling of constantly being on edge can significantly impact a child’s ability to socialize or participate in class, leading to further isolation and stress. This vicious cycle of anxiety can lead to school avoidance and physical symptoms (e.g., stomachaches, headaches, panic attacks, etc.) creating a negative feedback loop [69].

The reliance on age-based standards also contributes to this anxiety. In ancestral environments, children’s development was guided by individual growth rather than rigid milestones [70,71]. However, modern education systems set uniform expectations, requiring elementary students to meet the same developmental standards at the same ages. For example, in New York, all students must be able to decode long vowel sounds in regularly spelled one-syllable words (e.g., final -e conventions and common vowel teams) by the end of first grade [72]. This mismatch between the inherent variability in children’s development and standardized expectations can cause stress, because children feel forced to meet these set expectations. When children are unable to meet these expectations, they may experience emotional responses similar to the stress reactions our ancestors had in the face of more immediate, physical threats.

In short, the theory of evolutionary mismatch may help to explain why students experience such high levels of school-related anxiety and stress in the modern education system. Our brains are still wired to respond to immediate threats, but the pressures of today’s academic expectations have co-opted those evolved survival instincts into emotional and physical stress. As we continue to highlight the effects of this mismatch, it becomes crucial for educators, parents, and policymakers to adopt strategies prioritizing students’ mental health and support [73,74]. While we should not expect educational changes to remove all instances of social comparison or age-based measures, steps can be taken to reduce the negative outcomes of these elements. Strategies include reducing the overarching emphasis on standardized learning and testing, as well as fostering growth mindsets and developmentally appropriate or individualized learning trajectories. Addressing the root or evolutionary causes of school-related anxiety by reducing evolutionary mismatch in contemporary education can create a healthier, more sustainable environment for students to thrive.

4.5. Issue 3—Competitive Antisocial Behaviors Among Peers

Another issue of widespread public and academic interest is the prevalence of academic competition and antisocial behaviors in classrooms. Due to the nature of contemporary schooling systems, students who outperform their peers on academic tasks are rewarded for their achievements, both socially and academically [75]. Elementary school students are able to compare themselves to those in their immediate classes, thereby utilizing competition as a motivating factor to advance. In turn, however, this comparison and competition create a perceived scholastic hierarchy in which students view their individual standing relative to others in their classroom [76]. Similarly, traditional standards-based curricula effectively cultivate a competitive class environment in that students are expected to learn at the same pace and achieve at the same level as their peers regardless of individual differences [77,78]. Success is reduced to a quantitative measure, overlooking individual differences in the process. An overemphasis on meeting specific grade-level standards can turn the learning process into a race, while discouraging collaboration [77].

This comparative atmosphere inadvertently puts pressure on students to distinguish themselves from their peers. As such, today’s children are in an environment that potentially cultivates unhealthy attitudes toward learning, which is also detrimental to interpersonal relationships and psychological well-being [76]. For instance, Sutton and Keogh [75] found that students with competitive attitudes also tended to hold pro-bullying attitudes. In other words, one’s own perception of where one stands in the hierarchical structure inherent to modern classrooms can lead to an individualistic, status-driven approach to academic achievement. This extrinsically motivated pursuit of dominance is linked to antisocial behavior and hostility towards others, including bullying perpetration [79]. As outlined below, addressing this evolutionary mismatch by allowing for mixed-aged opportunities in schools has the potential to positively address this school-related concern.

4.6. Mismatch 3—Age-Segregated Classrooms

For the bulk of humans’ evolutionary history, mixed-age socialization was the norm for children [80]. In small hunter–gatherer tribes of less than 150, it would have been difficult—if not impossible—for children to find same-aged peers to interact with [27]. As a result, children of all ages would have played, and consequently, learned together [36].

This mixed-age learning arrangement presents a stark contrast to today’s age-segregated classrooms, where students have few opportunities to interact with younger or older children, if any. In the traditional school setting, children of the same age are typically in the same grade for the efficient transfer of standardized skills [3]. As demonstrated above, this has deleterious effects on learning and motivation [36,38,56].

It is argued by evolutionary educational psychologists that age mixing is much more attuned to children’s natural predisposition to learn and thus can provide psychological and educational benefits [36]. For example, younger children are able to engage in more complex, sophisticated activities in their interactions with older children. Through peer support and modeling, they are challenged to think more critically and learn through imitating the behavior and language of someone more skilled [36]. This type of learning by example is a natural form of scaffolding. Similar to a temporary scaffolding in construction, educators use the term to refer to a temporary support, often provided by a teacher, to help a child engage in work that they are not yet capable of on their own [81]. We see similar ideas from scholars outside of the evolutionary field as well. From a Vygotskian perspective, scaffolding is a way for children to work in the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) [82]. In his model, Vygostsky defines the ZPD as just beyond what a child can do independently and, thus, where a child should be working towards with support to ensure appropriate growth. Children, who are naturally working at different levels at different ages, are able to provide natural scaffolding to their slightly less advanced peers [2].

It is not only younger, less-advanced children that benefit from age-mixed learning arrangements. Older, or more advanced students are able to practice a skill and demonstrate solid understanding by teaching it to someone else. In this scenario, older children gain status and increased confidence when working with younger students, regardless of whether or not they are meeting traditional grade-level expectations. In other words, older or more experienced children gain realistic and meaningful practice opportunities [36]. Older or more advanced children also practice social skills such as empathy by working with younger or less-skilled peers [34]. Lastly, when both students have a gap in understanding, peer learning has been shown to be generative and produce new understandings for both children [83].

These benefits can be seen in alternative schooling models such as Sudbury Valley Schools where there is minimal formal adult instruction and children of all ages are able to mix during the day [36,84]. It is unlikely that we will see a shift away from traditional ways of sorting children by age in public school models. But if we create opportunities for children to mix with children of other ages (e.g., additional recess opportunities, peer tutoring, reading buddies, clubs), we can reduce this instance of evolutionary mismatch and capitalize on the benefits of these mixed-age interactions during the school day.

4.7. Issue 4—Disengagement in Education

Another concerning trend in education is a diminishing focus on non-academic and non-tested subjects, such as the arts [85,86]. These subjects are instead replaced with more rigorous and time-intensive classroom instruction at earlier and earlier ages [87,88]. Free play, exploration, and clubs outside of the school day have all decreased in importance, while schools have begun to favor more academic activities and activities existing nearly solely for the purpose of college resume-building [2]. That said, it has been shown that the inclusion of arts-based activities and curricula leads to positive outcomes in school readiness [89] as well as feelings of belonging and engagement in school [90].

As discussed earlier, within an education system focused on grades and test performance, children can often be made to feel less accomplished when compared to their peers, especially if they cannot perform up to fixed academic standards [78]. These discouraging feelings are exacerbated by the significance placed on mastery in modern education and can impact school attendance, feelings of belonging, and achievement [63,69,90]. When we de-emphasize subjects that foster whole-child development, such as the arts, we are doing a disservice to children who find motivation and passion in those areas. This, in turn, impacts school engagement and performance [90]. Under ancestral conditions, education was focused on all aspects of daily life [2]. Thereby, when we decrease the availability of traditionally non-academic subjects in schools, we find another example of evolutionary mismatch with the above-mentioned deleterious impacts for students.

4.8. Mismatch 4—Prioritized Academics and Decontextualized Learning

Under ancestral conditions, there were no formal schooling practices [1,2,36]. Instead, childhood learning was a part of everyday life. Children developed skills through play and mimicry, often mimicking the tasks of older children and adults in their tribes [50].

In traditional school systems, emphasis is placed on academic skills and content mastery within the school day. Children are taught at a speed that is beneficial to the school system and required curricula, but potentially disadvantageous to their own learning experiences [87,88]. Such ideas of academic success and failure do not align with the ancestral conditions of childhood learning, which are built on collaborative exploration [34]. Ancestral education was not limited to children’s same-age peers and a single teacher, but encompassed community members of varying ages, thereby unifying the educational experience of childhood, the interactions of the surrounding societal group, and all domains of learning [91].

While subjects such as math, English, history, and science are typically seen as important markers of a well-rounded sphere of necessary education, subjects such as art, music, and sports are not as highly emphasized and can be seen as elective or supplementary content [85,86,87]. Prioritizing high levels of academic pressure early in a child’s education and ignoring the importance of creative interest-based subjects creates an even stronger mismatch between modern education and ancestral learning conditions, prompting children to become less interested and ultimately less successful in school learning [2,36,90].

Although not tested on traditional standardized tests, an arts education in school has been shown to have a positive impact on many aspects of student engagement and achievement and the overall school climate. Including arts in the school day has been shown to increase daily attendance rates and decrease the rate of chronic absenteeism—especially for minority and special education students [90]. Further, arts enrichment programs at the preschool level have been shown to positively impact school readiness skills and receptive vocabulary development [89]. These data suggest the importance of prioritizing arts-based education within the school day.

Conversely, a focus on early academics did not achieve the same positive outcomes outlined above. In one study comparing 2010 kindergarten expectations to 1998 kindergarten expectations, the researchers found that teachers in the later cohort were far more likely to believe that academic instruction needs to start prior to kindergarten, children should enter kindergarten with concepts about reading, and more time needs to be spent in kindergarten on “challenging” topics [87]. Even though research suggests students gained immediate benefits from academic prekindergarten programs compared to their peers who did not attend prekindergarten, those effects have been shown to fade or even reverse as a child progresses through their schooling careers [92]. As a result of this lack of interest, children lose the motivation to learn and interact with their peers academically, displaying a general attitude of hopelessness towards their skills [78].

Additionally, it is important to recognize the difference between personal interest and situational interest. Personal interest is raised from the genuine curiosity and search for knowledge about subject material, whereas situational interest is gained through the enticing elements of one’s environment (how funny a teacher is, how much they like the teacher, how relatively easy to understand a subject is rather than challenging) [93]. In order for educators to capture student interest, which propels their intrinsic motivation, it is important to foster their personal interest in the subject material rather than their interest in the situational elements of the classroom. Personal interest can be fostered by supporting and engaging students’ curiosity about curriculum material, integrating their personal interests helps in their search for knowledge. Many children find these personal interests in activities that lie outside the traditional curriculum [2].

Due to minimal interest in academic subjects ultimately being caused by the inflexible expectations of the modern school environment, children develop dual perspectives toward learning, either intrinsically for their personal benefit and goals, or extrinsically, to meet performance requirements [10,11]. Informing these perspectives is the mismatched idea that learning is uniquely developed in school, facilitated by teachers, and measured through grades [33]. Drawing on these listed ideas, we would benefit from recognizing that children learn equally as much important knowledge from their life outside school, imitating others by mimicking their actions. School-based, academic education is not enough to develop the whole child. Children evolved to learn through every activity and interaction. As such, we need to value all types of learning and continue to prioritize traditionally non-academic content such as the arts.

4.9. Issue 5—Lack of Self-Help and Problem Solving Skills

Another problem modern-day teachers face in the classroom is the lack of self-help and problem-solving skills demonstrated by students [94,95]. Students, even the youngest learners, often default quickly to over-reliance on the adults in their classrooms. Rather than attempting to solve challenges on their own, children seek adult help immediately. This learned helplessness impacts academic engagement, success, and attitudes towards learning and schooling [96,97]. But self-directed behavior is critical in the classroom because it teaches students to problem-solve and see challenges as steps towards learning, rather than opportunities for failure. In our modern culture, the willingness to take risks to solve problems and regulate one’s own behavior is one of the school-based skills most predictive of later success [95].

There are many factors that potentially contribute to the learned helplessness demonstrated by students. An evolutionary approach focuses on how our school system, with unrelated adult teachers, creates an instance of evolutionary mismatch that may lead to the adverse outcomes discussed above.

4.10. Mismatch 5—Unrelated Adult Teachers

As has been discussed throughout the entry so far, education in ancestral periods was widely child- and peer-led rather than adult-led [1,2]. Older children would pass on or teach skills to the younger children, and adults trusted that they were capable of this collaborative teaching process. Adults were not involved in the educational process [36]. In modern classrooms, children are exposed all day to adult teachers who are the “expert” in the room. The implicit message of the schooling system is that learning is a top-down process—children learn from teachers, not other children [98]. A common adage in education, when referring to this model, is “sage on the stage”—the teacher lectures to provide students with the information only they (the sage) have knowledge of [99].

Earlier in this entry we discussed how this adult- and standards-driven schooling model impacts students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Overall, the adult influence and lack of student autonomy leads to a higher emphasis on extrinsic motivators [45,51]. However, as outlined here, the adult-directed model also leads to lower problem-solving skills and a lack of self-determination for students. As a result, teacher influence should be considered carefully from an evolutionary perspective.

When it comes to the effects of an adult-directed evolutionary mismatch in education, we should consider self-determination theory [100]. Self-determination theory postulates that individuals need to feel autonomy, a sense of belonging, and competence in order to feel motivated and capable of success. Focusing on autonomy, an evolutionary lens shows this domain is critical for fostering motivation and competence in humans, particularly children. Children gain autonomy, and thus self-determination and problem-solving skills, when they learn to trust that they can accomplish tasks independent of their adult teachers. As such, it is important for parents and educators to not overly simplify their expectations or content [101] or to complete tasks that are hard for children [102]. If adults oversimplify children’s environments, then children do not build the problem-solving skills they need to navigate future challenging situations both in and out of the classroom.

Overall, this method of peer-supported, rather than adult-directed, education is important for boosting all three of the self-determination theory needs. Autonomy is supported because the children have more control over their learning. As the section on mixed-age learning suggests, belonging is supported because learning takes place in a supportive and collaborative community surrounded by peers. Lastly, competence is supported because when teachers demonstrate trust in students’ abilities, students grow to believe they have the skills necessary to achieve their goals and complete academic tasks [100]. As discussed earlier, a peer-supported method of education also helps push children to the intrinsic side of the motivation theory continuum, because children are not learning skills for unrelated extrinsic rewards or for the validation and approval of the adults around them; they trust that they are learning these skills more for their own interest and advancement and because they believe they have the sense of autonomy, belonging, and competence to be able to do so [100].

In comparison to the idea of “sage on the stage”, ancestral and hunter–gatherer adults functioned as more of a “guide on the side” supporting children’s self-directed education and learning [99]. Adults only intervened in learning when asked [50]. Even in this role, adults served as guides or tutors, rather than formal instructors or lecturers [36]. We see this in modern classrooms in inquiry-based practices or democratic schooling models such as the Sudbury School [36,84]. Knowing adults will only get involved with learning when necessary for safety or when requested, children develop a sense of ownership and responsibility over their own learning.

So how can educators address evolutionary mismatch in schools when it comes to addressing these theories or making their classrooms more child- and peer-directed? One way is by creating opportunities for more collaborative games and projects in the learning process that are in line with their curriculum, gauging the students’ interest to see what learning methods are most supportive of their success, and giving them a sense of power and responsibility over their own learning. By providing children with autonomy, we take steps to de-emphasize or remove the implicit message that children can only learn from a teacher and encourage the self-directed and problem-solving skills that foster learning over their whole lifespan.

4.11. Issue 6—Impaired Social Skills

Adding to the list of common concerns voiced by educators today is the diminishing level of social skills in young students [4,5]. It is reported that children, even as young as those entering kindergarten, struggle to relate to their peers and get along with classmates—thus impacting classroom functioning and academic achievement [6]. This lack of well-developed social skills is also problematic in a school setting because dealing with the resulting behaviors (e.g., blurting out, talking over instruction, arguing, etc.) eats up valuable class time [103] and creates increased instances of antisocial or even bullying behavior between children [12]. In turn, these challenges impact academic achievement in the classroom [104,105]. To be successful in school, children need to develop strong social and school-readiness skills such as empathy and turn-taking [1,6].

There is much research that points to different aspects of schooling and culture at large that may have impacts on social skill development in early childhood. This research includes parenting [106], technology [7], a lack of educational social–emotional programming [107,108], and even lingering effects from the COVID-19 pandemic [109]. However, it can be argued that these are all still small-scale or immediate contributors to the issue at hand. When considering the ultimate, or evolutionary reasoning, we must look at how ancestral children learned critical social skills.

4.12. Mismatch 6—Lack of Opportunities for Play

Under ancestral conditions, children did not attend any formal schooling system. Rather, children spent their day in mixed-age groups of hunter–gatherer children engaged in free-play and exploration [2,36]. Children had the autonomy in these play-based groups to freely leave and join games and play [34]. Under these conditions of voluntary play, children learn how to make agreed-upon rules, follow those rules, and monitor their own behavior in these play scenarios. Gray gives the analogous example of a modern game of pick-up baseball—children must agree upon the rules of the game and then follow those rules during play. Failure to do so will result in the end of the game, an undesirable outcome. In order to continue the game, children are forced to learn skills such as cooperation, perspective-taking, etc. [34].

In schools, children spend the vast majority of their days performing academic, classroom-based tasks. While major discrepancies exist, an average recess for children in the United States is less than 30 min [110]. This quantity is significantly mismatched from full days of self-directed play. Without the time to play, children miss the opportunity to explore and practice skills like those described above. There is not enough time to set up games and play, let alone enact the play and navigate challenges. Additionally, there is always a teacher or adult standing by to intervene if arguments arise [34]. With this model of recess, children miss out on the opportunity to authentically learn and problem solve together, free of adult influence [36].

Addressing this evolutionary mismatch may look something like extending the time allotted for recess, giving more frequent breaks during the day, or creating play clubs before or after the school day. Not only has increased time for recess and free play been shown to increase social–emotional skills and self-regulation [111], but recess time has also shown to increase cognitive performance as well [112]. Increased recess frequency or time has also been associated with higher instances of physical activity and overall student health [113,114].

Overall, this mismatch between the evolved need for play and the lack of emphasis on play in schools has negative implications on the development of social skills, and thus academic achievement. Increasing play during the school day can aid in addressing the lack of social development stemming from this instance of evolutionary mismatch.

4.13. Issue 7—Increased Behavioral Issues

In the modern-day classroom, it is not uncommon to see children who are disruptive or have a difficult time attending to instruction. As mentioned earlier, disruptive classroom behaviors are problematic in that they impact instruction and academic achievement [103,104,105]. Teachers also report seeing increases in instances of opposition and defiance—refusing to follow rules, lying, cheating, etc. [115]. Further, several studies have demonstrated that the effects of such behavior seem to compound from year to year. Children from classes that have high numbers of children that are described as poorly behaving are more likely to be identified as poorly behaving in the following years [116,117,118].

In addition to normal off-task or disruptive behavior, we see an increasing prevalence of behavior-related diagnoses such as Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). One study reports a 4% increase in the prevalence of ADHD in the past 20 years [119]. From an evolutionary mismatch perspective, increased behavioral concerns and associated diagnoses are likely attributable to sedentary and directed work.

4.14. Mismatch 7—Sedentary Pen-And-Paper Work

Under ancestral conditions, children were able to move freely while learning and exploring. There were no adults telling ancestral children what to do with their bodies, and children did not sit at desks [1,2]. As discussed so far, mismatch in classrooms includes practices such as having young children seated and working at a desk all day, rather than having the freedom to move and explore [120,121]. Mismatches also include the lack of freedom to explore one’s own interests, and instead expecting children to follow a set curriculum [9,57]. Lastly, a mismatch can be working in a workbook or textbook or learning through a lecture, rather than learning through hands-on experiences [122].

In general, sedentary work can be difficult for young children [123]. Our system of education takes essentially a one-size-fits-all approach to teaching the skills children need for success. Children who are naturally more active learners struggle to achieve in a setting where the skills that are valued include the ability to sit still, follow directions, and listen to others [1]. These were not skills needed by ancestral children and thus are not abilities that evolutionary history has honed for young children. Rather, many children benefit from the use of hands-on tools and manipulatives in learning (e.g., counting bears, alphabet tiles, puzzles, etc.) [124]. Children also benefit from movement breaks or activities that embed movement opportunities into learning activities [125]. The hands-on component of education is critical for many different types of learners.

This difficulty with sedentary work is especially true for children with diagnoses such as ADHD [126]. One possible explanation for why diagnoses of such issues are increasingly prominent in childhood is that children with ADHD score higher on personality traits such as curiosity and novelty seeking [126]. Children with these traits have a hard time in traditional modern-day classrooms as their curiosity drives them to explore their own interests rather than the curriculum, workbooks, and textbooks. Modern-day classrooms that have a set curriculum make it hard for learners to learn in their preferred way, causing students to have difficulty staying engaged and interested [126]. The same can be said for novelty-seeking behaviors. Children with ADHD are more interested and involved in environments where their curiosity can flourish. Similarly, opposition and defiance, also indicative of ADHD, may be another reaction to the unnatural feelings of modern-day classrooms. When students feel as though they do not have a choice as to what they learn or that they do not have control over their bodies, opposition and defiance may serve as ways of protesting outside influences [115].

Today, children are dealing with ADHD and other behavioral issues in high numbers. Is our modern-day education system partly to blame for this? While it is difficult to determine a cause-and-effect relationship when it comes to behavioral issues and ADHD, most children who are diagnosed with ADHD first start having noticeable symptoms in the classroom [127]. To help reduce the effects of mismatch in this situation, many children are put on medication for their ADHD. While this can alleviate the symptoms of this disorder, it is a highly debated course of treatment [127]. Overall, it seems plausible that the school environment and its mismatch from the freedom of evolved learning conditions is a contributing factor to both behavioral challenges and increased instances of behavioral diagnoses in schools today. Classrooms that allow movement, exploration, and options for body autonomy (e.g., flexible seating, such as standing desks) may help alleviate some of the issues associated with this mismatch.

4.15. Issue 8—Inattention and Reduced Focus

Teaching modalities have changed dramatically across time along with concomitant advances in educational technologies. Based on work in the field of evolutionary educational psychology, we know that hands-on and play-oriented activities—especially activities that include out-of-door elements—correspond to positive educational outcomes [17,33]. From this vantage point, it makes sense to be skeptical of computer-based instruction. While many forms of educational software may have pedagogical benefits necessary for success in the 21st century, it seems clear that when children become over-reliant on screens, across any domain, their attentional processes (and concomitant cognitive processes) will suffer.

While research on the impacts of technology is still in its infancy, we do begin to see some alarming patterns developing in childhood regarding the relationship between regular technological device usage and visual media consumption and increased conduct problems. These concerns include increased hyperactivity and inattention [128], increased externalizing behaviors [129], and poor self-regulation skills [130]. There is also evidence that increased screen time during early childhood is associated with lower white matter (myelin) in the areas of the brain associated with language and literacy [131]. As myelin is a component of efficient neural processing, these data need to be taken seriously.

Computer-based technologies in the classroom need to be considered very carefully in terms of outcome-based costs and benefits for the students [132]. In short, evolutionary mismatch gives us an understanding of how these new technologies compete with evolved educational mechanisms.

4.16. Mismatch 8—Focus on Computer-Based Learning

By this point, it should be clear as day to the reader that computer-based learning is deeply mismatched from the learning stimuli that characterized the EEA. In fact, until the advent of the written word, which first appeared only a few thousand years ago [133], face-to-face communication and interaction was essentially the only game in town—and this fact was true for the lion’s share of human history by any marker of human evolution [32].

Since the advent of television, which ultimately morphed into a medium characterized by communicating brief snippets of information in relatively rapid succession [134], communication-based technologies have been advancing at breakneck speed. As is often the case, said technologies (from old-school black-and-white TVs, with their famed rabbit-ear antenna, to the Apple Watch, which allows someone to communicate a thought with the entire world in a matter of seconds) have been advancing with what appears to be little to no input from scholars who study the effects of evolution on the modern human experience.

As is true in all spheres of life, modern computer technologies have infiltrated classrooms across the world. While there are highly innovative and efficacious software programs that have been shown to facilitate learning in elementary school children [135], having screen-related activities sit at the core of the learning process is something that needs to be considered with caution.

Computer-related teaching precludes in vivo collaborative play, out-of-door experiences such as recess, and a broad array of other evolutionarily natural ways that human children evolved to learn [33]. While some computer-assisted forms of learning may be helpful for particular issues (such as developing a sense of phonics or learning multiplication basics), an over-reliance on screen time in the classroom (as in all spheres of the modern human experience) seems to be associated with attentional, emotional, and hyperactivity-related problems [132].

In any modern discussion of evolutionary mismatch and technology, it is crucial to address the rise in generative artificial intelligence (AI) platforms. This technology represents a potential tool for redefining teaching and learning but is also a significant departure from the type of tools that would have been available to ancestral learners. Currently, there is only a small, inconclusive body of research available on the use of AI by elementary-aged students [136]. However, a growing body of research suggests negative effects from using this technology in the upper grades and into adulthood. For example, AI use in writing may be adversely linked with aspects such as cognitive development and critical thinking [137].

An evolutionary-mismatch framework can help us to understand both the positive and the adverse consequences of computer and other technology use in the classroom. As is true with any evolutionarily mismatched technology in general, it seems that the use of such technology in educational contexts needs to be considered in terms of our evolutionary heritage and, concomitantly, needs to be considered thoughtfully and with some level of caution.

5. Implications for Education

Much of the human condition is shaped by evolutionary mismatches [32]. As this entry demonstrates, education is no exception. By rapidly transitioning away from exploratory, self-directed, and collaborative-play-based learning to the compulsory educational model we have today, we have inadvertently created a system that is rife with evolutionary mismatches [1,2]. Children’s ultimate evolved learning mechanisms do not fit with the proximate conditions they experience in schools. These mismatches potentially result in many of the adverse schooling outcomes we see today, such as childhood mental health issues, antisocial behaviors, behavioral challenges, etc.

This entry provides a model for how teachers may view common issues in education as a result of discrepancies between classroom conditions and evolved educational mechanisms. Evolutionary thinking, while not often a lens that is used in education, clearly has the capacity to help educators better understand the underlying causes of many classroom-based issues. The examples provided in this entry are by no means exhaustive, but are instead intended to act as a model for this way of thinking and show the variety of issues that can be better understood with an evolutionary lens.

For teachers and administrators, taking steps to reduce the discrepancy between ultimate evolved mechanisms and proximate classroom conditions may help improve pedagogy and the educational system as a whole [33]. Based on the examples provided in this entry, systematic or pedagogical changes could improve many of the problems teachers face in classrooms today. For example, additional activities that build on children’s interests could increase children’s enthusiasm and motivation for learning. Providing child-led activities could decrease school-related anxiety. More opportunities for children to engage with other age groups could increase prosocial behavior. Implementing group activities for children to learn and explore a topic together could promote problem-solving and self-help skills. Lastly, allowing more time for play could lead to improved social skills. These examples provide a broad range of pedagogical adjustments based on an understanding of evolutionary mismatch. Overall, reducing mismatches has the potential to help to improve many of the issues teachers and other educational stakeholders find themselves tackling on a daily basis.

Another benefit of an evolutionary mismatch lens lies at the intersection of positive education [13] and positive evolutionary psychology [32]. Educational issues often are tackled from the perspective of student deficit [138,139]. In other words, solutions focus on what children are unable to do due to some sort of internal deficit, or, in the extreme case, disability. By identifying the evolutionary mismatch as the underlying cause of school-related issues, teachers shift the focus away from “fixing” the child and instead focus on fixing the system. When we focus on the child, that approach often highlights individual student deficits and can contribute to the disproportionate enrollment in special education services, use of discipline, and restrictive environments for minority students [138,140]. Shifting the focus to evolutionary mismatches allows for increased empathy and understanding for children who fail to thrive in a traditional school setting for a variety of reasons. This understanding better prepares teachers to come up with meaningful and equitable solutions for students who struggle in a traditional setting. Overall, an understanding of evolutionary mismatches helps shift the focus from individual student deficit to systematic concerns and improvements.

6. Conclusions

As demonstrated in this entry and outlined in Appendix A, there are many concerns within the realm of elementary education that can be better understood by using an evolutionary lens and the idea of evolutionary mismatch. Not only does an evolutionary mismatch perspective look at the immediate or proximate causes of school-related issues, but this perspective allows educators to also consider the underlying ultimate evolutionary reasoning as well. This dual perspective works to create a unifying and systems-focused framework that practitioners and policymakers can use to address school-related concerns.

Work needs to continue in the applied field of evolutionary educational psychology in two main areas: (a) conducting empirical research that furthers our understanding of the effects of applying evolutionary theory to better understand any potential educational reform and (b) educating teachers and other stakeholders on the connection between educational practices and evolutionary theory. The education of our children is a critical component of our culture and society, and thus, changes to the system need to be both thoroughly studied and meaningfully employed.

All this to say, an understanding of evolutionary mismatches is not just another theoretical concept. Rather, this understanding is a highly powerful, important, and practical tool for educators. Evolutionary thinking shines a light on many of the issues we see in education and can help teachers improve their individual practice and the education system as a whole by focusing on the root evolutionary causes of these problems. Equipping teachers with an understanding of evolutionary mismatches should be a fundamental priority of teachers’ professional development and education. Doing so will lead to a more informed and human-centered educational system.