Educational Neuroscience: Issues and Challanges

Abstract

Learning is a process that causes neurophysiological changes in the brain because of electrochemical reactions. Therefore, it is crucial to considering the knowledge of the system through which the human brain operates for effective instructional design and skill development. Moreover, people actively use knowledge from different disciplines when designing teaching processes and determining pedagogical strategies. In this context, using findings from neuroscience studies for the design of teaching processes will provide information to all fields related to teaching—from creating course content to designing materials, identifying possible problems for individuals with learning difficulties, and suggesting solutions for them. In addition, this will make it possible to improve the learning performance of children with special needs who have learning difficulties as per the information obtained from the aforementioned neuroscience studies. The literature evinces an increase in the effects of these studies on the field of education. In this context, researchers attempt to integrate the information obtained from national and international studies into the field of education and determine new principles regarding instructional designs by considering existing pedagogical concepts in line with new information. Despite ontological differences between neurosciences that examine the brain dynamics at the biological, molecular, and systemic level, as well as educational sciences that aim to establish pedagogical strategies, it is unlikely to think that the ontological differences between these two disciplines would complicate the interdisciplinary cooperation. Understanding the structure of the neural system in which the learning and teaching procedures occur is of critical importance in terms of planning the teaching processes that cause neurophysiological changes therein. Thus, the findings of educational neuroscience studies that bring together the two varying fields at all stages of learning–teaching procedures should be carefully examined.

Keywords

• Education
• neuroscience
• educational neuroscience.

Educational Neuroscience: Issues and Challenges

Abstract

Learning is a process that causes neurophysiological changes in the brain because of electrochemical reactions. Therefore, it is crucial to considering the knowledge of the system through which the human brain operates for effective instructional design and skill development. Moreover, people actively use knowledge from different disciplines when designing teaching processes and determining pedagogical strategies. In this context, using findings from neuroscience studies for the design of teaching processes will provide information to all fields related to teaching—from creating course content to designing materials, identifying possible problems for individuals with learning difficulties, and suggesting solutions for them. In addition, this will make it possible to improve the learning performance of children with special needs who have learning difficulties as per the information obtained from the aforementioned neuroscience studies. The literature evinces an increase in the effects of these studies on the field of education. In this context, researchers attempt to integrate the information obtained from national and international studies into the field of education and determine new principles regarding instructional designs by considering existing pedagogical concepts in line with new information. Despite ontological differences between neurosciences that examine the brain dynamics at the biological, molecular, and systemic level, as well as educational sciences that aim to establish pedagogical strategies, it is unlikely to think that the ontological differences between these two disciplines would complicate the interdisciplinary cooperation. Understanding the structure of the neural system in which the learning and teaching procedures occur is of critical importance in terms of planning the teaching processes that cause neurophysiological changes therein. Thus, the findings of educational neuroscience studies that bring together the two varying fields at all stages of learning–teaching procedures should be carefully examined.

Keywords

• Education
• Neuroscience
• Educational Neuroscience.

References

1. Alderson, M., & Reid, C. (2009). Don't Forget About Levels of Explanation. Cotex, 45(4), 560-561. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2008.06.005
2. Alfernik, L. A., & Farmer-Dougan, V. (2010). Brain- (not) Based Education: Dangers of Misunderstanding and Misapplication of Neuroscience Research. Exceptionality, 18(1), 42-52. doi:10.1080/09362830903462573
3. Ansari, D., & Coch, D. (2006). Bridges Over Troubled Waters: Education and Cognitive Neuroscience. Trends in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 146-151. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.02.007
4. Ansari, D., Coch, D., & de Smedt, B. (2011). Connecting Education and Cognitive Neuroscience: Where Will the Journel Take US? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 37-42. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00705.x
5. Ansari, D., de Smedt, B., & Grabner, R. (2012). Neuroeducational a Critical Overview of an Emerging Field. Neuroethics, 5, 105-117. doi:10.1007/s12152-011-9119-3
6. Bruer, J. T. (2008). Building Bridges in Neuroeducation. In. K. W. A. M. Battro, & P. L. Lebna (Eds.), The Educated Brain: Essays in Neuroeducation (pp. 43-58). Cambridge: Cambridge Universirty Press.
7. Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J., Norby, M. M., & Ronning, R. R. (2004). Cognitive Psychology and Instruction (4th ed.). Pearson: Upper Saddle River: Nj.
8. Busso, D. S., & Pollack, C. (2015). No Brain Left Behind: Consequences of Neuroscience Discourse for Education. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(2), 168-186.

9. Campell, S. R. (2011). Educational Neuroscience: Mativations, Methodology, and Implications. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 7-16. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00701.x
10. Colvin, R. (2016). Optimising, Generating and Integrating Education Practice Using Neuroscience. Science of Learning, 1(16012), 1-4.
11. de Smedt, B., Ansari, D., Grabner, R. H., Hannula-Sormunen, M., Schneider, M., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Cognitive Neuroscience Meets Mathematics Education: It Takes Two to Tango. Educational Research Review, 6, 232-237. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2011.10.002
12. Ferrari, M. (2011). What Can Neuroscience Bring to Education? Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 31-36. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00704.x
13. Fischer, K. W., Goswami, U., & Geake, J. (2010). The Future of Educational Neuroscience. Mind, Brain, and Education, 4(2), 68-80. doi:10.1111/mbe.2010.4.issue-2
14. Freberg, L. A. (2006). Discovering Biological Psychollogy. Boston: MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
15. Friederici, A. D., & Gierhan, S. (2013). The Language Network. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 23(2), 250-254. doi:10.1016/j.conb.2012.10.002. Epub 2012 Nov 9. PMID: 23146876.
16. Geake, J. (2008). Neuromythologies in Education. Educational Research, 50(2), 123-133. doi:10.1080/00131880802082518
17. Geake, J., & Cooper, P. (2003). Cognitive Neuroscience: Implications for Education? Westminster Studies in Education, 26(1), 7-20. doi:10.1080/0140672032000070710
18. Goswami, U. (2004a). Neuroscience, Education and Special Education. British Journal of Special Education, 34(4), 175-183.
19. Goswami, U. (2004b). Neuroscience and Education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 1-14. doi:10.1348/000709904322848798
20. Goswami, U. C. (2008). Principles of Learning, Implications for Teaching: A Cognitive Neuroscience Perpective. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3-4), 381-399. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00639.x
21. Hall, J. (2005). Neuroscience and Education: A Review of the Contribution of Brain Science to Teaching and Learning. Glasgow: Scottish Council for Research in Education. Hille, K. (2011). Bringing Reseach Into Educational Practice: Lessons Learned. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(2), 63-70. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2011.01111.x
22. Howard-Jones, P. (2009). Specticism is Not Enough. Cortex, 45(4), 550-551. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2008.06.002 Howard-Jones, P. A. (2011). A Multiperspective Approach to Neuroeducational Reseach. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(1), 24-30. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00703.x
23. Howard-Jones, P. A., Winfield, M., & Grimmins, G. (2008). Co-Constructing an Understanding of Creativity in Drama Education that Draws on Neuropsychological Concepts. Educational Reseach, 50(2), 187-201. doi:10.1080/00131880802082674
24. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Kumova-Metin, S., & Kışla, T. (2020). Yapay Sinir Ağları. In. G. Tolga, Y. Halil, & Y. Soner (Eds.), Eğitsel Veri Madenciliği ve Öğrenme Analitikleri (pp. 127-146). Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
26. Kutas, M., & Schmitt, B. M. (2003). Language in Microvolt. In. M. T. Banich, & M. Mack (Eds.), Mind, Brain, and Language Multidisciplinary Perpectives (pp. 171-210). Mahwah: NJ - London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publisher.
27. Lovat, T., Dally, K., Clement, N., & Toomey, R. (2011). Values Pedagogy and Student Achievement: Contemporary Reseach Evidence. Dordrecht - Heidelberg - London - New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-1563-9
28. Meltzof, A. N., Kuhl, P., Movellan, J., & Sejnowski, T. J. (2009). Foundaditons for a New Science of Learning. Science, 235(5938), 284-288. doi:10.1126/science.1175626
29. Negnevitsky, M. (2002). Artifical Intelligence: A Guide to Intelligent System (1st. ed.). Addison Wesley Press.
30. OECD. (2002). Understanding th Brain: Towards a New Learning Science. Paris.
31. OECD. (2008). Understanding the Brain: the Birth of a Learning Science New Insights on Learning Through Cognitve and Brain Science. Centere for Educational Research and Innovation.
32. OECD. (2017). Center for Educational Research and Innovation (CERI). https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/.
33. Pearson, P. D. (2009). The Roots of Reading Comprehension Instruction. In. S. E. Israel, & G. G. Dufy (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension (pp. 3-33). New York - London: Routledge.
34. Perkins, D. (2009). On Grandmother Neurons and Grandfather Clocks. Mind, Brain, and education, 3(3), 170-175. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2009.01067.x
35. Purdy, N. (2008). Neuroscience and Education: How Best to Filter Out the Neurononsense From Our Classrooms? Irish Educational Studies, 27(3), 197-208. doi:10.1080/033233101802242120
36. Radach, R., & Kennedy, A. (2004). Theoretical Perspective on Eye Movements in Reading: Past Controversies, Current Issues, and an Agenda for the Future. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1/2), 3-26. doi:10.1080/09541440340000295
37. Radach, R., Reilly, R., & Inhoff, A. (2007). Models of Aculomotor Control in Reading: Toward A Theoretical Foundation of Current Debates. In. R. P. Gompel, H. M. Fischer, W. S. Murray, & R. L. Hill (Eds.), Eye Movements: A Window on Mind and Brain (pp. 237-269). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
38. Royal Society. (2011). Brain Waves 2: Neuroscience Implication for Education and Lifelong Learning. London : Royal Society.
39. Salmelin, R., & Kujala, J. (2006). Neural Representation of Language: Activation Versus Longrange Connectivity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(1), 519-525. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.09.007
40. Schrag, F. (2013). Can This Marriage be Saved? The Future of 'Neuro-Education'. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(1), 20-30. doi:10.1111/1467-9752.12015
41. Smith, E., & Kosslyn, E. (2014). Cognitive Psychology Mind and Brain. Essex: Pearson.
42. Vaninsky, A. (2017). Educational Neuroscience, Educational Psychology, and Classroom Pedagogy as a System. American Journal of Educational Research, 5(4), 384-391. doi:10.12691/education-5-4-6
43. Varma, S., McCandliss, B., & Schwartz, D. (2008). Scientific and Pragmatic Challenges for Bridging Education and Neurocsience. Educational Researcher, 37(3), 140-152. doi:10.3102/0013189X08317687
44. Ward, J. (2020). The Student's Guide to Cognitive Neuroscience (4 b.). London - New York: Routledge.
45. Watagodakumbura, C. (2017). Principles of Curriculum Desing and Construction Based on the Concepts of Educational Neuroscience. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(3), 54-69. doi:10.5539/jel.v6n3p54
46. Willingham, D. T. (2009). Three Problems in the Marriage of Neuroscience and Education. Cortex, 45(4), 544-454. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2008.05.009
47. Willingham, D. T., & Lloyd, J. W. (2007). How Educational Theories Can Use Neuroscientific Data. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(3), 140-149. doi:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00014.x
48. Yaltkaya, K. (2000). Bellek Bozuklukları. Bilim ve Teknik, 42-44.