[!Cite] Della Sala, S., & Anderson, M. (2012). Neuroscience in EducationThe good, the bad, and the ugly. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199600496.001.0001

[!Synth] Contribution::

Related::

[!md] FirstAuthor:: Della Sala, Sergio Author:: Anderson, Mike ~ Title:: Neuroscience in EducationThe good, the bad, and the ugly Year:: 2012 Citekey:: dellasalaNeuroscienceEducationTheGood2012 itemType:: book Publisher:: Oxford University Press ISBN:: 978-0-19-960049-6

[!LINK]

PDF.

[!Abstract] .

Notes

.

Annotations%% begin annotations %%

Imported: 2025-02-18 3:36 pm

Quote

Our stance is that the scienti c domain that has most to o er education is the study of cognition and that neuroscience itself has quali ed value.

Quote

We believe that for educators, research indicating that one form of learning is more e cient than another is more relevant than knowing where in the brain that learning happens.

Quote

But that gap is not lled by the ‘interaction’ of neuroscientists and teachers (nearly always constituted by the former patronizing the latter) or ‘bridging’ the two elds by training teachers in basic neuroscience and having neuroscientists as active participators in educating children.

Quote

The ‘bad’ was the exploitation of the enthusiasm of educators for neuroscience that opened the door to the adoption of programmes and teaching aids apparently based on neuroscience but which no reputable neuroscientist would endorse. The ‘ugly’ was simplistic interpretation of cognitive theories leading to errors in their application.

Quote

Even solid scienti cally-based results cannot be applied without consideration of the multiple factors that in uence both student learning and the role that schooling plays within the culture.

Quote

Any half-baked idea is worth ‘giving a go’. So listening to Mozart (not the Sex Pistols) surely makes us more intelligent, so let’s give it a go. Neurolinguistic programming sounds pretty good and plausible (neuro is brains, linguistic is important for learning and computers are programmed) so let’s give it a go. We say no. If there are no sound empirical data supporting such claims (as there are not in these examples) they should not be given a go in the classroom. Sometimes ideas are intuitively attractive and easy to understand. But without evidence this should count for nothing. Moreover, if the claim that breathing through the left nostril to enhance creativity (right and left brains do di erent things, right?) not only has no empirical basis but ies in the face of well-established facts (in this case about anatomy), then it is especially not worth giving it a go. Education is too important to be hijacked by crazy ideas that gain currency only by hearsay.

Quote

Further a great deal of research motivated by this cognitive theory has demonstrated beyond doubt that phonics is the much more e ective method.

Quote

Consequently when teachers’ sincere intuitions about the nature of the way children are learning is contradicted by science, the result is usually a ght not an interaction and discussion.

Quote

Needless to say, the programme was endorsed by the media and educators alike and academics who dared to voice their scepticism were threatened with lawsuits (see e.g. http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/dore-the-medias-miracle-cure-for-dyslexia/ for a detailed exposition). The result? A non-e ective programme and (ultimately) a bankrupted company leaving parents out of pocket. Not to mention that the necessary corollary of any ine ectual programme is yet another experience of failure for a vulnerable child.

Quote

should children with learning disabilities be integrated in the mainstream population or should we create separate classes for them? Are we justi ed in conducting a study to see if such children fare better when segregated? Well the answer would depend on a moral calculus of educational bene t, social loss and the like.

Quote

children do exhibit individual di erences in their ability to learn from classroom instruction. The single most pervasive di erence is in what is called IQ but should more properly be referred to as general intelligence.

Quote

Many jurisdictions (Australia, for example) will not allow a number of techniques commonly used in studying adults (functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), for example) to be used for research purposes in children.

Quote

This group has also reported exciting new research that shows that some developmental disorders may result from characteristic deviations in this typical developmental pro le. For example, in the case of ADHD there is in e ect a delay of the trajectory of attaining peak cortical thickness and this is most pronounced in the prefrontal cortex.

Quote

It is relevant to note that plasticity does not refer solely to some increment, but, particularly in younger persons, it encompasses also the loss of brain cells and the pruning of their connections.

Quote

Think about our ability to acquire a second language; younger children will usually nd it easier, but older children could learn it too. Thus, it would be better to refer to these time windows as ‘sensitive periods’—periods of time during which it would be generally easier to apprehend a skill, which will need more e ort in other periods.

Quote

So sometimes you just need to know something before you can learn something else and of course this generates characteristic sequences of change that it is important to understand for educational planning. The acceptance of this view would of course take to task the idea of learning as much as possible as early as possible. None of this denies that some contingencies might depend on the maturation of fundamental processing machinery in the developing brain, but that this is likely to be the exception rather than the rule for the contingencies that are important for educational development.

Quote

Most obviously, scientists should take active roles as mythbusters. We should not presume to tell teachers how to teach but we should be prepared to point out situations where educational interventions are not based on any evidence.

Quote

We can think of no fact about the brain that a teacher might learn that might cause them to be better teachers (it might be of course that better teachers are interested but this reverses the causal relationship). Time spent learning arcane neuroscienti c facts or concepts is only likely to be time taken away from learning something useful.

Imported: 2025-02-18 3:37 pm

Quote

Our stance is that the scienti�c domain that has most to o�er education is the study of cognition and that neuroscience itself has quali�ed value.

Quote

We believe that for educators, research indicating that one form of learning is more e�cient than another is more relevant than knowing where in the brain that learning happens.

Quote

But that gap is not �lled by the ‘interaction’ of neuroscientists and teachers (nearly always constituted by the former patronizing the latter) or ‘bridging’ the two �elds by training teachers in basic neuroscience and having neuroscientists as active participators in educating children.

Quote

The ‘bad’ was the exploitation of the enthusiasm of educators for neuroscience that opened the door to the adoption of programmes and teaching aids apparently based on neuroscience but which no reputable neuroscientist would endorse. The ‘ugly’ was simplistic interpretation of cognitive theories leading to errors in their application.

Quote

Even solid scienti�cally-based results cannot be applied without consideration of the multiple factors that in�uence both student learning and the role that schooling plays within the culture.

Quote

Any half-baked idea is worth ‘giving a go’. So listening to Mozart (not the Sex Pistols) surely makes us more intelligent, so let’s give it a go. Neurolinguistic programming sounds pretty good and plausible (neuro is brains, linguistic is important for learning and computers are programmed) so let’s give it a go. We say no. If there are no sound empirical data supporting such claims (as there are not in these examples) they should not be given a go in the classroom. Sometimes ideas are intuitively attractive and easy to understand. But without evidence this should count for nothing. Moreover, if the claim that breathing through the left nostril to enhance creativity (right and left brains do di�erent things, right?) not only has no empirical basis but �ies in the face of well-established facts (in this case about anatomy), then it is especially not worth giving it a go. Education is too important to be hijacked by crazy ideas that gain currency only by hearsay.

Quote

Further a great deal of research motivated by this cognitive theory has demonstrated beyond doubt that phonics is the much more e�ective method.

Quote

Consequently when teachers’ sincere intuitions about the nature of the way children are learning is contradicted by science, the result is usually a �ght not an interaction and discussion.

Quote

Needless to say, the programme was endorsed by the media and educators alike and academics who dared to voice their scepticism were threatened with lawsuits (see e.g. http://www.badscience.net/2008/05/dore-the-medias-miracle-cure-for-dyslexia/ for a detailed exposition). The result? A non-e�ective programme and (ultimately) a bankrupted company leaving parents out of pocket. Not to mention that the necessary corollary of any ine�ectual programme is yet another experience of failure for a vulnerable child.

Quote

should children with learning disabilities be integrated in the mainstream population or should we create separate classes for them? Are we justi�ed in conducting a study to see if such children fare better when segregated? Well the answer would depend on a moral calculus of educational bene�t, social loss and the like.

Quote

children do exhibit individual di�erences in their ability to learn from classroom instruction. The single most pervasive di�erence is in what is called IQ but should more properly be referred to as general intelligence.

Quote

Many jurisdictions (Australia, for example) will not allow a number of techniques commonly used in studying adults (functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), for example) to be used for research purposes in children.

Quote

This group has also reported exciting new research that shows that some developmental disorders may result from characteristic deviations in this typical developmental pro�le. For example, in the case of ADHD there is in e�ect a delay of the trajectory of attaining peak cortical thickness and this is most pronounced in the prefrontal cortex.

Quote

It is relevant to note that plasticity does not refer solely to some increment, but, particularly in younger persons, it encompasses also the loss of brain cells and the pruning of their connections.

Quote

Think about our ability to acquire a second language; younger children will usually �nd it easier, but older children could learn it too. Thus, it would be better to refer to these time windows as ‘sensitive periods’—periods of time during which it would be generally easier to apprehend a skill, which will need more e�ort in other periods.

Quote

So sometimes you just need to know something before you can learn something else and of course this generates characteristic sequences of change that it is important to understand for educational planning. The acceptance of this view would of course take to task the idea of learning as much as possible as early as possible. None of this denies that some contingencies might depend on the maturation of fundamental processing machinery in the developing brain, but that this is likely to be the exception rather than the rule for the contingencies that are important for educational development.

Quote

Most obviously, scientists should take active roles as mythbusters. We should not presume to tell teachers how to teach but we should be prepared to point out situations where educational interventions are not based on any evidence.

Quote

We can think of no fact about the brain that a teacher might learn that might cause them to be better teachers (it might be of course that better teachers are interested but this reverses the causal relationship). Time spent learning arcane neuroscienti�c facts or concepts is only likely to be time taken away from learning something useful.

%% end annotations %%i

%% Import Date: 2025-02-18T15:37:47.618-05:00 %%

Coaching

General

Powerful Questions