Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Introduction
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Philosophy
Epistemology

Neuroscience and Education - an Incompatible Relationship

Profile image of Alka Sehgal CuthbertAlka Sehgal Cuthbert

2015, Sociology Compass

Abstract

To date there has been little opposition to the growing influence of cognitive neuroscience in education from the education profession itself. However there is growing criticism from the fields of psychology and philosophy. This paper aims to summarize the central arguments found in literature critical of the claims made by cognitive neuroscientists who advocate its potential to improve education. The paper is organised around three sections which draw together assessments from psychology, philosophy and sociology of education. The first, "Brain, Mind and Culture", lays out the general argument against neuroeducation and evaluates two common assumptions made by advocates of neuro-education: that there is a causal relationship between brain and mind; and that learning is a central tenet of education. The second section, "Promises and Problems", critically considers an example of neuro-educational research, and then goes on to discuss how neuro-education has detrimental consequences for two necessary conditions of liberal subject based education; disciplinarity and pedagogic authority. The final section, "Discourses of Risk, Vulnerability and Optimal Outcomes", considers wider sociological literature to locate neuro-education within its contemporary cultural context. The paper concludes with a summary of the main philosophical and moral objections to neuro-education.

Related papers

Il dialogo tra pedagogia e neuroscienze come nuova frontiera dell’educazione
Chiara D'ALESSIO

2015

Our work tries to demonstrate how neuroscience is gaining increasing spaces in pedagogy as biology of human mental processes; at the same time pedagogy can help neuroscience to define and clarify the processes that need to be studied to arrive at a deep understanding of biology of the human mind in educational processes. The attempt to achieve common epistemological basis in order to study and refine educational practices, urged by the availability of many neuroscientists to take charge organic layers of complex social behaviors, allows to predict the implications of this combination applied to educational processes, converging pedagogical, psychological, biological studies and correlating their scientific languages from theoretical to applied research. Our work is aimed at creating a new way of thinking in pedagogical sciences, without distinctions between mind and brain, biology and experience, nature and culture: it is is based on the idea that, despite the genetical and constitu...

View PDFchevron_right
Educational neuroscience: Neuroethical considerations
Stephen (Sen) R Campbell

International Journal of Environmental & …, 2012

Research design and methods in educational neuroscience involve using neuroscientific tools such as brain image technologies to investigate cognitive functions and inform educational practices. The ethical challenges raised by research in social neuroscience have become the focus of neuroethics, a sub-discipline of bioethics. More specifically here, we give an overview of neuroethical issues arising from brain imaging studies and neuropharmacology in education, from neuromyths to potential stigmatization of learners, and discuss the relevance of establishing the field of educational neuroethics. We argue that by integrating ethical positions to research design and methods in educational neuroscience, it would become possible to contextualize results and the diffusion of results, which in turn insure better credibility among the wide variety of stakeholders to new knowledge emerging from educational neuroscience.

View PDFchevron_right
Critical Explanation of the Place of Neuroscience in the Field of Educational Knowledge and Practice
Mahmoud Mehrmohammadi

ADVANCES IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE, 2010

8 : ADVANCES IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE SUMMER 2010; 12(2 (46)):83-100. CRITICAL EXPLANATION OF THE PLACE OF NEUROSCIENCE IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE NOURI ALI*,MEHRMOHAMMADI ...

View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience and education: myths and messages
Özge Karakuş Özdemirci

For several decades, myths about the brain — neuromyths — have persisted in schools and colleges, often being used to justify ineffective approaches to teaching. Many of these myths are biased distortions of scientific fact. Cultural conditions, such as differences in terminology and language, have contributed to a ‘gap’ between neuroscience and education that has shielded these distortions from scrutiny. In recent years, scientific communications across this gap have increased, although the messages are often distorted by the same conditions and biases as those responsible for neuromyths. In the future, the establishment of a new field of inquiry that is dedicated to bridging neuroscience and education may help to inform and to improve these communications.

View PDFchevron_right
The Future of Educational Neuroscience. Report. Summary Need for Infrastructure to Ground Learning and Teaching in Research Obstacles to Moving Forward Neuromyths, Ethics, and "Brain-Based Education" Reading Minds from Brain Imaging Constructive Bridging
Todd Rose

2020

Summary The primary goal of the emerging field of educational neuroscience and the broader movement called Mind, Brain, and Education is to join biology with cognitive science, development, and education so as to create a sound grounding of education in research on learning and teaching. To avoid misdirection the growing worldwide movement needs to avoid the many myths and distortions in popular conceptions of brain and genetics and focus on integrating research with practice to create useful evidence that illuminates the brain and genetic bases of learning and teaching as well as social and cultural influences. Scientists and educators need to collaborate to build a strong research foundation for analyzing the "black box" of biological and cognitive processes that underpin learning. Understanding the diversity of abilities and disabilities will help educators and parents to facilitate individual students' learning and development. Analyzing the mental models that per...

View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience and Education: Promises and Pitfalls
Kerry LEE

Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 2003

Notice: Changes introduced as a result of publishing processes such as copy-editing and formatting may not be reflected in this document. For a definitive version of this work, please refer to the published source.

View PDFchevron_right
Neurosciences and Education: One example of a two-way cooperation
Armando F Rocha, Fabio Rocha

The relationship between education and cognitive neuroscience is an old issue from which the idea of the ‘neuroeducators’ was proposed 25 years ago. The premise of this idea is that the knowledge about how the brain operates our learning could help teachers in the classrootm. Despite of being an old issue, there are yet some unsolved matters. Firstly, how neuroscience and education could integrate biological understanding about learning cerebral process has not been yet clearly discussed. The present paper presents the results from Enscer–Teaching the Brain Project – that has been developed in Brazil for five years. During that time educators attended to neuroscience courses conducted by researches involved in the project, and were taught about brain learning mechanisms, language and arithmetic neural circuits and how this knowledge may be used for teaching the brain. On the other side neuroscientists were informed by educators about social and cultural demands for optimized learning. Good results came from this mutual relationship making us to believe that neuroeducation is atwo-way traffic.

View PDFchevron_right
An awareness of neuroscience in education
Alex Elwick
View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience and Education: Issues and Challenges for Curriculum
Terence Lovat

Curriculum Inquiry, 2012

The burgeoning knowledge of the human brain generated by the proliferation of new brain imaging technology from in recent decades has posed questions about the potential for this new knowledge of neural processing to be translated into "usable knowledge" that teachers can employ in their practical curriculum work. The application of the findings of neuroscience to education has met a mixed reception, with some questioning its relevance for educational practice. Simplistic generalizations about neuroscience's application to education have been dubbed as neuromyths, and regarded as being at best irrelevant to or at worst counterproductive in bringing about good educational practice. In recent times, expansive literature generated in the area of educational neuroscience has drawn attention to a range of epistemological and conceptual issues pertinent to the attempt to translate neuroscientific research findings into usable knowledge that has the potential to improve curriculum practice. Issues involved in such a process include the place of neuroscience among the corpus of disciplines constituting the educational foundations; the conceptual framework required to translate knowledge between neuroscience and education; and, whether usable knowledge can be generated from neuroscientific information, so to be applied in curriculum work. These curriculum questions have direct bearing on curriculum work as the issue of usable knowledge relates directly to the teacher's role in the curriculum process. This article will consider the expectations and constraints in relation to the contribution of neuroscience to the production of usable knowledge for curriculum work.

View PDFchevron_right
Can the Differences Between Education and Neuroscience be Overcome by Mind, Brain, and Education
Boba Samuels

Mind, Brain, and Education, 2009

ABSTRACT— The new field of Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE)—sometimes called educational neuroscience—is posited as a mediator between neuroscience and education. Several foundational concerns, however, can be raised about this emerging field. The differences between neuroscience and education are many, including differences in their histories, philosophies, and epistemologies. Historically, science and education have demonstrated separate, but interwoven, influences on society; philosophically, the values by which they operate are often in opposition; and epistemologically, the fields have relied on different conceptualizations of knowledge. Discussion about these differences has been largely absent in attempts to promote MBE. Two steps are proposed to respond to this omission. First, encouraging discussion about disciplinary differences and assumptions may enable better understanding between disciplines and facilitate the establishment of a more collaborative research community. Second, a transdisciplinary framework that focuses on salient issues of interest across disciplines should be considered. Transdisciplinarity aims for the creation of an inclusive research environment that transcends traditional disciplinary approaches to complex problems. This article initiates an exploration of disciplinary differences and proposes commitment to transdisciplinarity as a guiding principle that may increase the viability of MBE as a mediating field between neuroscience and education.

View PDFchevron_right

References (74)

  1. Ansari, D., & Coch, D. (2006). Bridges over troubled waters: Education and cognitive neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(4), 146-151. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661306000556
  2. Ansari, D, Coch, D and De Smedt, B. (2011). Connecting Education and Neuroscience: Where Will the Journey Take Us? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 34(1).
  3. Arendt, H. (1993). Between past and future: Eight exercises in political thought. Penguin.
  4. Bailey, C. H. (2009). Beyond the Present and the Particular. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=cbGLAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=charles+ bailey+beyond+present+and+particular&ots=XLIJJRU078&sig=YGc6GIlZEo6kJMvgFXufjAEcs-E
  5. Ball, S. J. (1995). Intellectuals or technicians? The urgent role of theory in educational studies 1. British Journal of Educational Studies, 43(3), 255-271. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00071005.1995.9974036
  6. Ball, S. (2003). The Teacher's Soul and the Terrors of Perfomativity. Journal of Educational Policy, 18(2), 215-228.
  7. Barrow, R. (2009). Was Peters Nearly Right About Education? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 43, 9- 25. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2010.00736.x
  8. Beck, J. (1999). Makeover or Takeover? The Strange Death of Educational Autonomy in Neo-Liberal England. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20(2), 223-238.
  9. Berlin, I. (1969). Four Essays On Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Bernstein, B. (1975). Class, Codes and Control: Towards a Theory of Educaitonal Transmissions Vol. 3. London, Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
  11. Biesta, G. (2010). The End(s) of Learning. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Associaton, Denver, Colarado, USA.
  12. Blakemore, S.-J., Frith, U., & others. (2001). The implications of recent developments in neuroscience for research on teaching and learning. University of Exeter, Teaching & Learning Programme. Retrieved from http://leadership.mainesupportnetwork.org/docs/Neurosscience.pdf
  13. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron Jean Pierre. (1977). Reproduction in education, culture and society. London: Sage.
  14. Bruer, J.T. (1997). Education and the Brain: A Bridge Too Far. Educational Research, 26(8), 4-16.
  15. Busso, D. S., & Pollack, C. (2014). No brain left behind: consequences of neuroscience discourse for education. Learning, Media and Technology, (ahead-of-print), 1-19. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17439884.2014.908908
  16. Byrnes, J. P., & Fox, N. A. (1998). The educational relevance of research in cognitive neuroscience. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 297-342. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1022145812276
  17. Carew, T. J., & Magsamen, S. H. (2010). Neuroscience and Education: An Ideal Partnership for Producing Evidence-Based Solutions to Guide 21< sup> st</sup> Century Learning. Neuron, 67(5), 685-688. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627310006380
  18. Cassirer, E. (1957). The philosophy of symbolic forms: The phenomenology of knowledge (Vol. 3). Yale University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=I9k1OF3rK1MC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=cassirer+p hilosophy+of+symbolic+forms+vol+3&ots=XKQ05dhgRD&sig=tc0hZM- f9iOiMu7Rg8GwLSFb3fY
  19. Chitty, C. (1997). The School Effectiveness Movement: Origns, Shortcomings and Future Possibilites. Curriculum Journal, 8(1), 45-62.
  20. Christie, F. (2004). Authority and its role in the pedagogic relationship of schooling. In Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change. In Christie, F. in L. Young & C. Harrison (Eds.) (pp. 173-201). London, New York: Continuum.
  21. Davis, A. (2013). Neuroscience and Education: At Best a Civil Partnership: A Response to Schrag. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(1), 31-36.
  22. Elliott, J. G., & Gibbs, S. (2008). Does Dyslexia Exist? Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3-4), 475- 491. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00653.x
  23. Espinosa-Tokuhama, T. (2010). A Brief History of the Science of Learning: Part 2 (1970s-present). Retrieved from education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/journals/Winter2011/Tokuhama5
  24. Frowe, I. (2005). Professional trust. British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(1), 34-53. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00282.x/abstract
  25. Furedi, F. (2006). Culture of fear revisited. Bloomsbury Publishing. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=j_Gri3lTXEUC&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=paranoid+p arenting+furedi&ots=UAoVqquW40&sig=e55KFsVn_W0RYdOg1zPQ4_zTVZo
  26. Furedi, F. (2008a). Fear and Security: A Vulnerability-led Policy Response. Social Policy & Administration, 42(6), 645-661. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9515.2008.00629.x
  27. Furedi, F. (2008b). Paranoid parenting: Why ignoring the experts may be best for your child. Continuum London. Retrieved from http://www.weibnc.com/wp-content/uploads/brkpdfs/Paranoid-Parenting- Why-Ignoring-the-Experts-May-Be-Best-for-Your-Child-by-Frank-Furedi-Very-Insightful.pdf
  28. Furedi, F. (2009). Wasted: Why Education Isn't Educating. London, New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.
  29. Galton, M. (2008). : Teachers Under Pressure: The Impact of Government Policies on Teachers' Working Lives. Educational Review, 21(1), 39-49.
  30. Gazzaniga, M. (2012, March 18). Free Will Is An Illusion, But You're Still Responsible for Your Actions. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
  31. Geake, J., & Cooper, P. (2003). Cognitive Neuroscience: implications for education? Westminster Studies in Education, 26(1), 7-20. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0140672030260102
  32. Geerwitz, S. (1997). Post-Welfarism and the Reconstruction of Teachers' Work in the UK. Journal of Educational Policy, 12(4), 217-231.
  33. Geerwitz, S., Mahoney, P., Hexall, I. and Cribb, A. (2009). Changing Teacher Professionalism: International Trends, Challenges and Ways Forward. Oxon, New York: Routledge.
  34. Goldacre, B. (2013). Building Evidence Into Education (UK Government). Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/news/building-evidence-into-education
  35. Goswami, U. (2004). Neuroscience and education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 1-14. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1348/000709904322848798/full
  36. Goswami, U. (2006). Neuroscience and education: from research to practice? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7(5), 406-413. Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v7/n5/abs/nrn1907.html
  37. Goswami, U. (2008). Principles of Learning, Implications for Teaching: A Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective. Journal of the Philosophy of Educaiton, 42(3-4), 381-399.
  38. Hart, L. A. (1983). Human brain and human learning (Vol. 82283795). Longman New York. Retrieved from http://textbooks-savings.info/wp- content/uploads/pdfs/Human%20Brain%20%20Human%20Learning%20by%20Leslie%20A%20Ha rt%20-%20New%20Theory%20Of%20Learning.pdf
  39. Hirst, P. H. (1965). Liberal education and the nature of knowledge. Philosophical Analysis and Education, 2, 113-40.
  40. Howard-Jones. P. (2008). Fostering of Creative Thinking. ESCalate (Education Subject Centre Advanced Learning and Teaching in Education.
  41. Immordino-Yang, M. H., McColl, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. (2009). Neural correlates of admiration and compassion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(19), 8021-8026. Retrieved from http://www.pnas.org/content/106/19/8021.short
  42. Lee, E., Bristow, J., Faircloth, C., & Macvarish, J. (2014). Parenting culture studies. Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=CC3FAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=parentin g+culture+studies+ellie+lee&ots=mgG129pzUj&sig=oStD1B2RtvC2pIQWMxDHg2wiB5k
  43. Mareschal, D., Johnson, M. H., Sirois, S., Spratling, M., Thomas, M. S., & Westermann, G. (2007). Neuroconstructivism-I: How the brain constructs cognition. Retrieved from http://philpapers.org/rec/MARNI-3
  44. Marsh, R. W. (1985). Phrenoblysis: Real or Chimera? Child Development, 56(4), 1059-1061.
  45. McGilchrist, I. (1982). Against criticism. London: Faber & Faber.
  46. Molfese, D. L. (2000). Predicting dyslexia at 8 years of age using neonatal brain responses. Brain and Language, 72(3), 238-245. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093934X00922879
  47. Molfese, D. L., & Molfese, V. J. (1997). Discrimination of language skills at five years of age using event-related potentials recorded at birth. Developmental Neuropsychology, 13(2), 135-156. doi:10.1080/87565649709540674
  48. Moore, R., Christie, F., & Maton, K. (2011). Making the break: Disciplines and interdisciplinarity. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=amGcB4Z7BJMC&oi=fnd&pg=PA87&dq=moore+ making+the+break&ots=5_gEgPJ8Qt&sig=_goKTP-F9VpJ0yq6YjzOOz-8ZgU
  49. Moore, R., & Young, M. (2001). Knowledge and the curriculum in the sociology of education: towards a reconceptualisation. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(4), 445-461. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01425690120094421
  50. Muller, J. (2012). Reclaiming knowledge: Social theory, curriculum and education policy. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=xtp0BxMhikUC&oi=fnd&pg=PT8&dq=muller+rec laiming+knowledge&ots=7i1rtmossw&sig=FSdX3h-g3N3RkkIBrhy6JFL-7i0
  51. Muller, J., & Young, M. (2013). Disciplines, Skills and the University. Higher Education, 67, 127-140. doi:10.1007/s-10734-013-9646-4
  52. Muller, J., & Young, M. (2008). Truth and Truthfulness in Sociology of Educational Knowledge. Theory and Research, 5(2), 173-201.
  53. Oakeshott, M. (1971). Education: The engagement and its frustration. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 5(1), 43-76. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467- 9752.1971.tb00448.x/abstract
  54. Peters, M. L. (2013). Spelling: caught or taught?: a new look. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=1XInAAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=margaret +peters&ots=TSorbEnREe&sig=ziaPxoej92R4OQQ1epYNob78Sco
  55. Peters, R. S. (2007). Education as initiation. Retrieved from http://philpapers.org/rec/PETEAI
  56. Phenix, P. H. (1962). The Use of the Disciplines as Curriculum Content. The Educational Forum, 26(3), 273-280. doi:10.1080/00131726209338539
  57. Pickering, S. J., & Howard-Jones, P. (2007). Educators' views on the role of neuroscience in education: Findings from a study of UK and international perspectives. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(3), 109- 113. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00011.x/full
  58. Polanyi, M. (2012). Personal knowledge: Towards a post-critical philosophy. University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=NdcnAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=michael +polanyi+personal+knowledge&ots=TivusNSIqF&sig=3-pMDxTnuXpUgDGBfDkD21qPyfM
  59. Pollock, M.C. and Pressey, L.C. (1925). An Investigation of the Mechanical Habits in Reading of Good and Poor Readers. Educational Research Bulletin, 4(13), 273-275.
  60. Rose, S. (2005). The Future of the Brain: the Promise and Perils of Tomorrow's Neuroscience. USA: Oxford University Press.
  61. Rose, N. (2010). "Screen and intervene": governing risky brains. History of the Human Sciences, 23(1), 79- 105. Retrieved from http://hhs.sagepub.com/content/23/1/79.short
  62. Smith, R. (2002). Self-Esteem: The Kindly Apocalypse. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 36(1), 87-100.
  63. Standish. P. (2001). Data Return: The Sense of the Given in Educational Research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), 497-518.
  64. Tallis, R. (2011). Aping Mankind: Neuromania, Darwinitis and the Misrepresentation of Humanity. Durham: Acumen Publishing.
  65. Taschow, H. G. (1970). Using the Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic-Tactile Technique to Solve Spelling Problems in Elementary and Secondary Classrooms. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED046668
  66. Tinker, M. A. (1932). Diagnostic and Remedial Reading. I. The Elementary School Journal, 33(4), 293-306. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/996087
  67. Tokuhama-Espinosa, T. (2010). Mind, Brain, and Education Science: A Comprehensive Guide to the New Brain-Based Teaching. W. W. Norton & Company.
  68. Turkeltaub PE, Gareau L, Flowers DL, Zeffiro TA, Eden. (2003). Development of neural mechanisms for reading. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 767-773.
  69. Turner, D. A. (2012). Education and neuroscience. Contemporary Social Science, 7(2), 167-179. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21582041.2012.692096
  70. Wastell, D., & White, S. (2012). Blinded by neuroscience: Social policy, the family and the infant brain. Families, Relationships and Societies, 1(3), 397-414. Retrieved from http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/tpp/frs/2012/00000001/00000003/art00008
  71. Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E., & Gray, J. R. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(3), 470-477. Retrieved from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/jocn.2008.20040
  72. Wheelahan, L. (2012). Why knowledge matters in curriculum. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=hN- oLcG7tfwC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=leesa+wheelahan+knowledge&ots=gDPE- 4uqqO&sig=o2IeD_XUKAmDI9UEj-87O0dugUM
  73. Williams, J. (2013). Consuming Higher Education: Why Learning Can't Be Bought. London, New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  74. Young, M. (2007). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Q- wy43oEizoC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=michael+young+bringing+knowledge&ots=kblW- D1hpc&sig=ynUhiEWSPuKsHooS6-5LFTajcDk

Related papers

Neuroscience and Education: A Philosophical Appraisal (Routledge, 2016)
Derek Sankey, Minkang Kim, Clarence W. Joldersma, Deron Boyles, Bruce Maxwell

This volume makes a philosophical contribution to the application of neuroscience in education. It frames neuroscience research in novel ways around educational conceptualizing and practices, while also taking a critical look at conceptual problems in neuroeducation and at the economic reasons driving the mind-brain education movement. It offers alternative approaches for situating neuroscience in educational research and practice, including non-reductionist models drawing from Dewey and phenomenological philosophers such as Martin Heidegger and Merleau-Ponty. The volume gathers together an international bevy of leading philosophers of education who are in a unique position to contribute conceptually rich and theoretically framed insight on these new developments. The essays form an emerging dialogue to be used within philosophy of education as well as neuroeducation, educational psychology, teacher education and curriculum studies.

View PDFchevron_right
Educational Neuroscience and Educational Neuroscientism
Jon Beale

The 'BrainCanDo' Handbook of Teaching and Learning (London: Routledge), 2020

The greatest problem facing educational neuroscience and psychology is crossing the bridge between theory and practice: how to move from scientific theories and evidence to their practical application in education. Crossing this bridge too hastily leaves educational neuroscience and psychology open to the accusation of ‘scientism’: excessive belief in the power or value of science. Scientism would be manifested in attitudes such as the dogmatic assumption that scientific methods or findings can be immediately or straightforwardly applied in education. How can neuroscience and psychology be applied to education without risking scientism? Scientism is an elusive concept, so this chapter offers an account of what scientism is (§§1-3). It is argued that education should be included among the areas that are the most difficult to reduce to explanations in scientific terms (§3). The account of scientism is used to outline three examples of ways in which neuroscience and psychology could be applied in education that would be open to accusations of scientism (§4). Three indicators of scientism when scientific theories or evidence are applied in education are described. Alongside each indicator, suggestions are offered on what we should watch out for to avoid being scientistic when applying theories or evidence from neuroscience and psychology in education (§5) – or, to avoid what we might call ‘educational neuroscientism’. Book webpage: https://www.routledge.com/The-BrainCanDo-Handbook-of-Teaching-and-Learning-Practical-Strategies/Harrington-Beale-Fancourt-Lutz/p/book/9780367187057

View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience in Education: A Bridge Too Far or One That Has Yet to Be Built: Introduction to the “Brain Goes to School”
Gerry Leisman

Brain Sciences

There have been numerous detractors and supporters relating to attempts to merge the neurosciences and the knowledge base of related contributing disciplines with the field of education. Some have argued that this is a “bridge too far”. The predominant view is that the relationship between neuroscience and the classroom has been neither significantly examined, nor applied. What is needed is a specially trained class of professionals whose role it would be to guide the introduction of cognitive neuroscience into educational practice in a sensible and ethical manner. Neuroeducators would play a pivotal role in assessing the quality of evidence purporting to be relevant to education, assessing who is best placed to employ newly developed knowledge, as well as with what safeguards, in addition to investigating how to deal with unexpected consequences of implemented research findings. This special issue of the “The Brain Goes to School” aims to provide support for the development of trai...

View PDFchevron_right
The convergence between neuroscience and education: a pending challenge
Revista MedUNAB

MedUNAB Volumen 27, N° 3, diciembre 2024 – marzo 2025 Neurosciences; Cognitive Neuroscience; Human Development, 2024

ABSTRACT Neuroscience and education have long been seeking collaboration, with neuroscience offering insights into the brain’s mechanisms that impact learning. Despite this, the integration of these fields has not kept pace with the demands of modern education. Advances in neuroscience have revealed key processes like brain development, neuronal plasticity, learning, memory, and the effects of sleep and exercise, which significantly influence the educational process. These insights underscore the biological diversity in classrooms, where students’ cognitive abilities vary due to biological and experiential factors. Understanding neurodevelopment is crucial for designing effective educational strategies. However, differences in how neuroscience and education conceptualize knowledge and goals hinder collaboration between these fields. For successful integration, neuroscientists and educators must manage realistic expectations and work together to apply neurobiological insights in real-world classroom settings. This collaboration can enrich teaching practices, addressing diversity while promoting the wellbeing of students. Keywords: Neuronal Plasticity; Behavior; Students; Methods; Knowledge RESUMEN Introducción. Se ha buscado desde algún tiempo la colaboración entre la neurociencia y la educación, ya que la neurociencia ofrece conocimientos sobre los mecanismos cerebrales que influyen en el aprendizaje. Objetivo. A pesar de ello, la integración de estos campos no ha seguido el ritmo de las exigencias de la educación moderna. Temas de reflexión. Los avances en neurociencia han revelado procesos clave como el desarrollo cerebral, la plasticidad neuronal, el aprendizaje, la memoria y los efectos del sueño y el ejercicio, que influyen significativamente en el proceso educativo. Estos conocimientos subrayan la diversidad biológica en las aulas, donde las capacidades cognitivas de los alumnos varían debido a factores biológicos y experienciales. Comprender el neurodesarrollo es crucial para diseñar estrategias educativas eficaces. Sin embargo, las diferencias en la forma en que la neurociencia y la educación conceptualizan el conocimiento y los objetivos dificultan la colaboración entre estos campos. Conclusiones. Para que la integración sea exitosa, los neurocientíficos y los educadores deben manejar expectativas realistas y trabajar juntos para aplicar los conocimientos neurobiológicos en escenarios reales del aula. Esta colaboración puede enriquecer las prácticas docentes, atendiendo a la diversidad y promoviendo al mismo tiempo el bienestar de los estudiantes. Palabras clave: Plasticidad Neuronal; Conducta; Estudiantes; Métodos; Conocimiento RESUMO Introdução. A colaboração entre neurociência e educação é buscada há muito tempo, pois a neurociência oferece conhecimentos sobre os mecanismos cerebrais que influenciam o aprendizado. Objetivo. Apesar disso, a integração desses campos não acompanhou as demandas da educação moderna. Tópicos para reflexão. Avanços na neurociência revelaram processos importantes como o desenvolvimento cerebral, a plasticidade neuronal, a aprendizagem, a memória e os efeitos do sono e do exercício físico, que influenciam significativamente o processo educacional. Esse conhecimento destaca a diversidade biológica nas salas de aula, onde as habilidades cognitivas dos alunos variam devido a fatores biológicos e experienciais. Compreender o neurodesenvolvimento é crucial para a elaboração de estratégias educacionais eficazes. No entanto, as diferenças na forma como a neurociência e a educação conceituam o conhecimento e os objetivos dificultam a colaboração entre essas áreas. Conclusões. Para que a integração seja bem-sucedida, neurocientistas e educadores devem definir expectativas realistas e trabalhar juntos para aplicar o conhecimento neurobiológico em ambientes reais de sala de aula. Essa colaboração pode enriquecer as práticas de ensino, abordando a diversidade e promovendo o bem-estar dos alunos Palavras-chave: Plasticidade Neuronal; Comportamento; Estudantes; Métodos; Conhecimento How to reference. Maldonado-Arbogast P. The convergence between neuroscience and education: a pending challenge. MedUNAB [Internet]. 2024;27(3):258-261. doi: https://doi.org/10.29375/01237047.5345

View PDFchevron_right
Neuroscience, Education, and a Radical Embodiment Model of Mind and Cognition (PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION 2013, Cris Mayo, editor)
Clarence W. Joldersma

Philosophy of Education 2013, 2013

Recent research in neuroscience has a seductive appeal for quick applications to many everyday phenomena. 1 This research has also attracted educational entrepreneurs, who often create commercial programs that turn neuroscience into classroom practice. 2 Phrases such as "brain-based education" give them an air of respectability and authority, enticing educators to adopt them. However, basic brain research is often superficially understood, and thus translated too quickly into educational practices. 3 The large gap between neuroscience and practice is ignored too often by entrepreneurs selling their programs. They often end up making inflated claims about neuroscience's direct benefits in day-to-day teaching practices. Problematizing this is a good public service for philosophy of education.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Sociology
  • Epistemology
  • Opposition Politics
  • Communication and media Studies
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved