View/ Open
Date
2021-07-21Subject
370 Education 570 Life sciences; biology GehirnNeurodidaktikLernenPädagogikBildungsforschungHirnforschungMetadata
Show full item record
Aufsatz
Review on the Prevalence and Persistence of Neuromyths in Education – Where We Stand and What Is Still Needed
Abstract
The buzzword brain-based learning emerged in the 1970s and continues to fascinate teachers and learners in schools and universities today. However, what interested teachers often fail to realize is that brain-based or brain-friendly learning can not only be a plausible concept, but also a myth when applied incorrectly. Numerous empirical studies reveal a high degree of support for misconceptions about learning and the brain, known as neuromyths, among both pre-service and in-service teachers. When applied in the classroom, these myths can waste the educational system’s money, time and effort. Even though the neuromyths issue has been known for two decades and the topic remains a focus of constant research, even today, the research discourse barely goes beyond replicating the earliest research findings. This review article provides an overview of the theoretical and empirical state of research on neuromyths. As part of this, ten neuromyths on the subject of learning and memory will be described in terms of content and the results of prior studies on neuromyths will be summarized. The overview of the theoretical and empirical state of research serves as a basis for highlighting controversies, fundamental concepts, issues and problems, current research gaps and potential developments in the field. Topics discussed include whether controversial research findings on correlations with endorsement of neuromyths are merely a methodological artefact, and why contradictions exist between the theoretical and empirical state of research. In addition, three central research gaps will be identified: First, studies should be conducted on whether and to what extent the endorsement of neuromyths really deprives teachers and students of opportunities to spend the education system’s money, time and effort on more effective theories and methods. Second, there is too little work on developing and evaluating intervention approaches to combat neuromyths. Third, a standard scientific methodology or guidelines for determining new neuromyths are lacking. As desirable future developments in the field, more work educating people on neuromyths, uniform vocabulary, and interdisciplinary cooperation are highlighted. This contributes to answering the question of to what extent interweaving neuroscience, educational science and cognitive psychology can contribute to reducing the prevalence of neuromyths in education.
Citation
In: Frontiers in Education Volume 6 (2021-07-21) eissn:2504-284XSponsorship
Gefördert durch den Publikationsfonds der Universität KasselCitation
@article{doi:10.17170/kobra-202110014837,
author={Grospietsch, Finja and Lins, Isabelle},
title={Review on the Prevalence and Persistence of Neuromyths in Education – Where We Stand and What Is Still Needed},
journal={Frontiers in Education},
year={2021}
}
0500 Oax 0501 Text $btxt$2rdacontent 0502 Computermedien $bc$2rdacarrier 1100 2021$n2021 1500 1/eng 2050 ##0##http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/13301 3000 Grospietsch, Finja 3010 Lins, Isabelle 4000 Review on the Prevalence and Persistence of Neuromyths in Education – Where We Stand and What Is Still Needed / Grospietsch, Finja 4030 4060 Online-Ressource 4085 ##0##=u http://nbn-resolving.de/http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/13301=x R 4204 \$dAufsatz 4170 5550 {{Gehirn}} 5550 {{Neurodidaktik}} 5550 {{Lernen}} 5550 {{Pädagogik}} 5550 {{Bildungsforschung}} 5550 {{Hirnforschung}} 7136 ##0##http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/13301
2021-10-18T16:15:49Z 2021-10-18T16:15:49Z 2021-07-21 doi:10.17170/kobra-202110014837 http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/13301 Gefördert durch den Publikationsfonds der Universität Kassel eng Namensnennung 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ neuromyths neurodidactics brain-based learning brain-friendly learning educational neuroscience neuroeducation MBE (mind, brain, and education science) 370 570 Review on the Prevalence and Persistence of Neuromyths in Education – Where We Stand and What Is Still Needed Aufsatz The buzzword brain-based learning emerged in the 1970s and continues to fascinate teachers and learners in schools and universities today. However, what interested teachers often fail to realize is that brain-based or brain-friendly learning can not only be a plausible concept, but also a myth when applied incorrectly. Numerous empirical studies reveal a high degree of support for misconceptions about learning and the brain, known as neuromyths, among both pre-service and in-service teachers. When applied in the classroom, these myths can waste the educational system’s money, time and effort. Even though the neuromyths issue has been known for two decades and the topic remains a focus of constant research, even today, the research discourse barely goes beyond replicating the earliest research findings. This review article provides an overview of the theoretical and empirical state of research on neuromyths. As part of this, ten neuromyths on the subject of learning and memory will be described in terms of content and the results of prior studies on neuromyths will be summarized. The overview of the theoretical and empirical state of research serves as a basis for highlighting controversies, fundamental concepts, issues and problems, current research gaps and potential developments in the field. Topics discussed include whether controversial research findings on correlations with endorsement of neuromyths are merely a methodological artefact, and why contradictions exist between the theoretical and empirical state of research. In addition, three central research gaps will be identified: First, studies should be conducted on whether and to what extent the endorsement of neuromyths really deprives teachers and students of opportunities to spend the education system’s money, time and effort on more effective theories and methods. Second, there is too little work on developing and evaluating intervention approaches to combat neuromyths. Third, a standard scientific methodology or guidelines for determining new neuromyths are lacking. As desirable future developments in the field, more work educating people on neuromyths, uniform vocabulary, and interdisciplinary cooperation are highlighted. This contributes to answering the question of to what extent interweaving neuroscience, educational science and cognitive psychology can contribute to reducing the prevalence of neuromyths in education. open access Grospietsch, Finja Lins, Isabelle doi:10.3389/feduc.2021.665752 Gehirn Neurodidaktik Lernen Pädagogik Bildungsforschung Hirnforschung publishedVersion eissn:2504-284X Frontiers in Education Volume 6 false 665752
The following license files are associated with this item: