Updated on
September 24, 2026
Barriers to Learning: Types, Causes and Classroom Strategies
Use a six-part Learning Barrier Map to identify learning barriers, preserve challenge and choose evidence-informed classroom support.
What are barriers to learning?
Learning barriers are conditions that make it harder for a learner to access, participate in or make progress in a specific task. They often emerge through the interaction between the learner, task, teaching, environment and available support.
A barrier to learning is a mismatch between a learner, a task and the conditions for learning. The practical starting point is to look for that mismatch, not a label. The same learner may access an idea through one route and get stuck through another.
A barrier to learning is anything that makes it harder for a learner to gain access, take part or make progress. It may come from teaching, the curriculum, assessment, the physical setting or the learner’s wider circumstances. The barrier arises when one of these factors interacts with individual needs (Booth and Ainscow, 2011).
For example, a Year 7 learner who cannot begin a dense written science task may understand the concept when it is explained aloud. The useful question is not, “What is wrong with this learner?” It is, “Which part of this task is blocking access, and what change will let us test that?”
The EEF’s 2026 Guide to Inclusive Teaching takes the same practical route. Start with strong everyday teaching, then add and review support where it is needed (EEF, 2026).
A 2025 review looked at 28 studies from Spain. It found positive teacher attitudes towards inclusion, but also recurring barriers such as limited training, segregation and scarce resources (Arranz-Sánchez and Espada-Chavarría, 2025). This system-level evidence from Spain does not prove that one classroom strategy will work everywhere. However, it shows why leaders must address staff learning and provision, as well as individual tasks.
Key takeaways
- Describe the learner-task mismatch before suggesting a cause.
- Keep the important learning goal while changing one likely source of friction.
- Use observation and learner voice to review support, not to diagnose a condition.
- Follow the legal duties and support processes that apply in your education system.
Learning barriers are mismatches, not learner labels
A learning barrier can affect access, learning, wellbeing or taking part. It may be brief, repeated or long term. Possible factors include prior knowledge, language, memory, sensory access, trust, relationships, teaching, assessment and life beyond school.
Context matters. The World Health Organization’s framework includes the effect of a person’s setting. CAST’s Universal Design for Learning Guidelines 3.0 also ask teachers to find barriers in tasks and systems. Bias and exclusion can create barriers, so the learner is not always the source of the problem (WHO, 2001; CAST, 2024).
Classroom example: A Year 4 learner can explain habitats aloud but writes only two words. The teacher checks science knowledge apart from writing speed. An oral answer, a labelled diagram and speech-to-text show what the learner knows. Handwriting is still taught as a separate goal.
A barrier is not a diagnosis. Teachers can record patterns, adapt teaching and seek expert advice. One classroom action cannot confirm dyslexia, ADHD, autism, trauma or a mental health condition.
The six-part Learning Barrier Map
Teachers often call organised lists like this taxonomies. The Learning Barrier Map supports structured thinking, but it is not a test. The rest of this section shows what that looks like in a lesson: what the teacher says and does, and what learners produce.
It gives teachers six areas to examine before they make a small change. A difficulty may appear in more than one area, and no category proves its cause.
1. Purpose and prior knowledge
Learners need to know what they are trying to learn and have enough background knowledge to begin. A vague goal, an unknown concept or a hidden prerequisite can make the next step inaccessible.
Classroom example: A Year 3 learner can copy number sentences but cannot solve them. The teacher checks the meaning of the equals sign before adding more practice. A balance model reveals the concept and gives the learner a way into three new examples.
2. Language and representation
A learner may know more than the task lets them show. Unfamiliar words, long instructions, figurative language, rapid teacher talk or one required format can block access. Multilingualism is not a deficit. In England, difficulties that arise solely because English is an additional language are not SEN. A multilingual learner can also have SEND.
Classroom example: Before a Year 6 lesson on evaporation, the teacher explains particle, energy and change of state. She uses diagrams and examples. Learners practise an answer with a partner before they write. The support builds subject language without making the science easier.
3. Task load and sequencing
A task may ask learners to hold too much new content and too many steps at once. They may know each part but not the order. This does not prove a fixed memory limit. A classroom note is not a cognitive test.
Classroom example: A Year 8 class must compare two sources and recall six questions. The teacher puts the questions next to each source. She models one comparison and removes decoration. Learners still judge origin and value, but they no longer have to recall every step.
See the related guides to working memory in the classroom and cognitive load theory.
4. Attention and regulation
Some tasks rely on starting, switching, checking or keeping focus. A problem may stem from the task, tiredness, stress, limited strategy use or an extra need. Treat the pattern as a clue, not proof.
Classroom example: A learner delays a Year 10 design task. The teacher replaces “finish your design” with a short sequence: choose a user, list three constraints, sketch two options, then compare them. The learner starts within one minute. That response supports a task-sequencing hypothesis, but it does not diagnose the learner.
Our guide to task avoidance shows how to explore the problem without assuming laziness or defiance.
5. Participation and belonging
Anxiety, fear of error, bullying, low trust or repeated failure can reduce participation. A learner may protect themselves by staying silent, copying, joking, leaving the task or refusing to begin. Behaviour tells us that something happened. It does not tell us why.
Classroom example: A fluent Year 5 reader stops volunteering after a public correction. The teacher provides private rehearsal time, invites paired responses and checks in with the learner. Participation returns, while the reading goal stays the same.
Belonging needs active design. A research review found that planned peer work, peer tutoring and well-briefed adult support can help learners with special educational needs take part (Garrote et al., 2017). Being in the same room is not enough on its own.
6. Access and environment
Low contrast, small print, noise and poor access to equipment can block learning. So can sensory overload or digital work that fails with assistive technology. Time, attendance, transport, poverty, staff, routines and policy also matter. Some issues need help from the SENCO, ALNCo, pastoral lead, family or an outside service.
Classroom example: During a Year 9 geography video, several learners miss key words. The teacher adds accurate captions, provides a transcript and pauses at three points. The geographical content and expected explanation stay the same.
Wider example: A learner misses the start of maths because school transport is late. A sanction will not restore the missed teaching. Staff use a clear entry routine and a short worked-example card. Leaders work with the family on the transport issue.
Intrinsic and extrinsic barriers need a clear caveat
Teachers often search for “intrinsic” and “extrinsic” barriers. These terms can guide an enquiry. They become harmful if “intrinsic” means a fixed fault in the learner and “extrinsic” means every outside factor.
- Intrinsic or personal factors may include current knowledge, communication, sensory access, health, memory demands or self-regulation.
- Extrinsic or contextual factors may include teaching methods, relationships, curriculum design, poverty, language of instruction, buildings, resources and policy.
These factors interact. A visual impairment may create little barrier when a digital text is compatible with a screen reader, then create a major barrier when a diagram has no description. The label stays the same; the access changes.
The terms also come from different policy traditions. South Africa’s SIAS policy uses “barriers to learning” within an inclusive system. It looks at the learner, home, school and wider setting. This is policy language, not a universal clinical test.
Classroom example: Do not write “intrinsic barrier: poor attention”. Record what happened: “In a ten-minute task with four spoken steps, the learner did step one and then watched peers.” Now test shorter instructions, a visual list, prior knowledge and the learner’s view.
The Learning Barrier Review
The Learning Barrier Review turns a broad concern into a small, testable classroom change. It follows four steps: notice, identify, scaffold and review. It is an observation tool, not a screening test or diagnostic instrument.
Notice the observable pattern
Write what happened without interpreting motive. Record the task, timing, support and learner response. Replace “unmotivated” with “started after six minutes and completed one of five questions”.
Teacher prompt: “What could another adult see or hear?”
Identify the learning barrier
Find the first point where access, taking part or accuracy changes. Check the instructions, key words, prior knowledge, memory load, sensory access, response method, sense of safety and setting.
Teacher prompt: “Can the learner explain the goal, begin the first step and show the relevant knowledge another way?”
Add one scaffold without lowering the goal
Choose the smallest useful change. Ask for the learner’s view before choosing it wherever this is safe and practical. Examples include modelling the first step, pre-teaching two words, changing the response format or reducing visual clutter.
When you can, agree one change with the learner. This makes its effect easier to judge. Do not delay safety action, access support or required adjustments. Put those in place at once, even if several are needed, and record them for the review.
Teacher prompt: “What can change around the learning while the important knowledge or skill remains?”
Review a visible success signal
Decide what progress will look like before the next try. Use a clear sign. Signs include starting within two minutes, doing three steps in order, sharing one useful idea or recalling the key concept tomorrow.
Teacher prompt: “What will tell us that access improved, and what will we try if it did not?”
Worked example: A Year 3 learner copies number sentences but does not solve them. The teacher notices that the learner cannot explain the equals sign, locates a concept gap, uses a balance model and checks three new examples. The learner solves two and explains one. The teacher keeps the model for guided practice and reviews transfer without it next lesson.
Free classroom resource
Learning Barrier Field Kit
Use three printable pages to notice a pattern, identify a possible learning barrier, choose a scaffold and agree what improvement will look like.
- Six-part Learning Barrier Map
- Neutral classroom observation sheet
- Scaffold-and-review planning page
Open the private Learning Barrier Analyser
It runs in your browser. Entries are not stored or sent anywhere.
Build universal teaching and targeted support together
The EEF’s 2026 Guide to Inclusive Teaching uses a two-part model. Schools consider strong universal teaching alongside adaptations and extra support. The two parts overlap and should be planned together, rather than used as steps in a ladder (EEF, 2026).
The guide also gives a useful warning. An adaptation can hinder learning if it removes worthwhile thinking. Too many changes can also weaken teaching for the whole class. Teachers therefore need to check whether support helps, rather than assuming that any adjustment is beneficial.
The EEF’s SEND five-a-day guidance also sets out five useful approaches: explicit instruction, cognitive and metacognitive strategies, scaffolding, flexible grouping and technology.
Use explicit instruction for unfamiliar content
State the goal. Model a full example. Check what learners grasp, guide practice and then reduce help. Examples and non-examples can show the limits of an idea.
Classroom example: In Year 7 mathematics, the teacher models one equation and narrates each decision. Learners complete the next equation with prompts before trying one alone. The teacher checks the exact step where errors begin.
Teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies in context
Do not tell learners only to “try a strategy”. Name, model and practise a subject-specific method. Ask learners to plan, monitor and evaluate when the task genuinely requires those actions.
Classroom example: Before a GCSE history paragraph, the teacher models how to select evidence, link it to the claim and check whether it answers the question. Learners use the same three checks on one paragraph, then remove the prompt card.
Fade instructional scaffolds; maintain access adjustments as needed
An instructional scaffold should target the current learning barrier and have a plan for fading. Too little support blocks access. Too much support can replace the thinking learners need to practise.
Continuing access adjustments are different. Captions, large print or assistive technology may remain for as long as they are needed. Success while an adjustment is in place shows that access improved; it is not evidence that the adjustment should be removed.
Classroom example: A Year 2 teacher provides picture cues for retelling a story. She removes one cue after each successful retelling and checks whether sequence is retained without the prompt.
Group flexibly around a current need
Use recent work to form short-term groups for one clear aim. Do not turn a brief need into a fixed label or a lower curriculum.
Classroom example: Four Year 8 learners who confuse mass and weight receive a five-minute reteach with contrasting examples. They then return to mixed groups for the main physics task.
Match technology to the barrier
Technology can help with access, recording and practice. Choose it to solve a known problem, not just because it is there. Check privacy, ease of access and whether the learner can use it alone.
Classroom example: Speech-to-text can help a learner give a long science answer when writing is the barrier. It does not replace spelling instruction when spelling is the goal.
Universal Design for Learning 3.0 as a planning lens
CAST released UDL Guidelines 3.0 in 2024. The framework covers ways to engage, present content, act and express learning. Version 3.0 gives more weight to identity, belonging, bias and exclusion. Its goal is learner agency.
Use UDL to plan for barriers while keeping the goal clear. To explain electrical resistance, learners can use a diagram, short text and teacher model. They can rehearse aloud before giving the same required science answer.
UDL is not a learning-styles system, and it does not require endless choice or a tick list. CAST describes the guidelines as suggestions rather than a set script.
A 2024 review of 32 school studies found that researchers used UDL unevenly and often made weak links to its theory (Zhang et al., 2024). Teachers should therefore use it carefully and check its effect.
Classroom example: A teacher uses audio, text and diagrams for a biology idea. All learners must still find the same cause and effect. She checks which route helps the answer, rather than giving each learner a fixed “style”.
Read the full guide to Universal Design for Learning.
Country terms and legal duties are not interchangeable
“Learning barriers” is used around the world, but legal terms differ. Follow the law and guidance for your setting. This table is a guide, not legal advice.
| System | Current language | Practical implication |
|---|---|---|
| England | SEND, SENCO, Education, Health and Care plan, reasonable adjustments, graduated approach | Use assess, plan, do and review. The teacher remains responsible for progress, including where support staff are involved. |
| Wales | Additional learning needs, additional learning provision, ALNCo, individual development plan | Use the Welsh ALN framework and learner participation. Do not substitute England’s Education, Health and Care plan terminology. |
| Scotland | Additional support needs and additional support for learning | Needs may arise for many reasons and for different periods. Use Scotland’s current statutory code and local procedures. |
| Northern Ireland | Special educational needs, SEN co-ordination and statements within the current framework | Use Department of Education and Education Authority guidance. Do not assume that England’s graduated approach is the statutory route. |
| South Africa | Barriers to learning, SIAS and learner-support processes | Consider individual and contextual factors together. Use the national SIAS process rather than a deficit-only interpretation. |
| Australia | Students with disability, consultation and reasonable adjustments | Adjustments should support access and participation on the same basis, with consultation under the Disability Standards for Education. |
Classroom example: A teacher who moves from England to Wales should not just rename an Education, Health and Care plan. She should use the Welsh process, speak with the ALNCo and family, and record the evidence that system needs.
Move from observation to graduated support
Start with normal classroom evidence. Use work samples, questions, attendance, learner views, family knowledge and the response to teaching. Compare tasks, times and settings. One low score or hard lesson rarely explains the problem.
- Assess: define the observable pattern and gather views from the learner and family.
- Plan: choose a specific adjustment, expected outcome, responsibilities and review date.
- Do: teach and provide the agreed support while keeping the learner connected to the class teacher and curriculum.
- Review: compare the agreed indicator before and after, then continue, change or escalate support.
In England, this matches the graduated approach set out in the SEND Code. Ofsted also refers to barriers to learning or wellbeing.
It says that leaders should take action while maintaining high aims. Inspection language should not become a show, because the aim is better access and learning.
Classroom example: A Year 6 teacher records that a learner answered one of six inference questions independently. After vocabulary pre-teaching and a modelled think-aloud, the learner answers four of six and explains the clue used. The team keeps the strategy, tests it with a new text and shares the evidence at review.
Common errors when responding to learning barriers
- Diagnosing from behaviour: refusal, silence or copying can have several explanations.
- Lowering the important goal: change access before removing the knowledge or thinking the lesson is meant to teach.
- Confusing scaffolds with access adjustments: plan how instructional scaffolds will fade, but keep access adjustments for as long as they are needed.
- Using fixed groups: group around current evidence, then regroup when the need changes.
- Confusing choice with inclusion: choices must remain manageable and aligned with the goal.
- Ignoring learner and family knowledge: ask what helps, what harms and what has already been tried.
- Treating a checklist as proof: observation tools generate hypotheses; they do not confirm conditions.
Classroom example: A learner avoids reading aloud. They may fear a public error, struggle to decode, have trouble seeing the text or not know its words. The teacher offers private reading, checks access and asks the learner. One action should lead to careful checks, not one label.
What the evidence can and cannot tell us
Research is clearer on specific teaching methods than on “inclusion” as one single treatment. Dalgaard et al. (2022) found small and mixed average effects when they compared inclusive and separate placements. The usable studies did not show a clear effect. Krämer et al. (2021) found gains in thinking and learning for learners with general learning difficulties in inclusive settings, but no clear social or emotional gain.
These findings do not settle every placement choice because learners, needs and settings differ. The reviews do not show that placement alone determines outcomes. Implementation and context remain important.
Teachers should check the teaching, opportunities to take part, relationships, staff expertise and available resources. However, the studies do not show which of these factors caused the results.
The research and guidance cited here do not offer a validated classroom map that can determine the root cause of every barrier. Our Learning Barrier Map and Scan are tools for thought. Use them with expert assessment, school processes and the views of learners and families.
Classroom example: A visual task card helps a learner start work. That result supports using the card. It does not prove a condition. Keep the helpful support while the wider team decides if more assessment is needed.
References
Arranz-Sánchez and Espada-Chavarría (2025).
Booth and Ainscow (2011).
EEF (2026).
Garrote et al. (2017).
Zhang et al. (2024).
Further Reading
- The EEF Guide to Inclusive Teaching. Education Endowment Foundation (2026).
- Five a day: supporting high-quality teaching for pupils with SEND. Education Endowment Foundation.
- CAST Universal Design for Learning Guidelines 3.0. CAST (2024).
- Unraveling Challenges with the Implementation of Universal Design for Learning: A Systematic Literature Review. Zhang et al. (2024), Educational Psychology Review.
- Teachers’ Attitudes and Perceived Barriers to Inclusive Education in Spain. Arranz-Sánchez and Espada-Chavarría (2025), a 28-study systematic review.
- The effects of inclusion on academic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing of children with special educational needs. Dalgaard et al. (2022), Campbell Systematic Reviews.
- Inclusive Education of Students With General Learning Difficulties: A Meta-Analysis. Krämer et al. (2021), Review of Educational Research.
- SEND code of practice: 0 to 25 years. Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care.
- Education is changing: additional learning needs. Welsh Government.
- Supporting Children’s Learning: Code of Practice, fourth edition. Scottish Government (2026).
- Special educational needs: code of practice. Department of Education, Northern Ireland.
- Inclusive Education and the SIAS policy. Department of Basic Education, South Africa.
- Supporting students with disability: information for educators. Australian Government Department of Education.
Next lesson, choose one learner-task mismatch. Agree one change with the learner where you can. Make any required access changes, then record one clear sign of better access.
If you want a simple place to plan and adapt learning tasks, sign up free to the new Structural Learning platform.
