[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
About the Journal & Policies
Editorial Board
Articles Archive::
Current Issue
All Issues
Guide for Authors::
Author instructions
Guide for publishing in journal
Submission Form
Author's consent form
For Reviewers::
Reviewers Section
Ethical Statements::
Registration::
Registration Form
Site Facilities::
Site map
Inform to friends
Contact us::
Contact Information
::
Indexed by
    
..
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
Copyright Policies

 

AWT IMAGE

 
..
Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.

..
:: Articles In Press ::
Back to the articles list Back to browse issues page
Compiling an Educational Neuroscience Training Program for Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers
Salaam Rahimi * , Javad Mesrabadi , Ramin Habibi Kaleybar , Abolfaz Farid
Department of Educational Sciences, Educational Sciences and Psychology Faculty, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran , salaam.rah@gmail.com
Abstract:   (68 Views)
Introduction: Educational neuroscience aims to integrate knowledge of the neural processes involved in development and learning with insights from the field of education, in order to enhance our understanding of how environmental factors influence brain structure and function, and ultimately, the conditions under which learning occurs. In this context, the present study was conducted to develop a training program in educational neuroscience for teachers. Materials and Methods: Using a systematic review approach, the theoretical foundations of the topic were first examined to establish inclusion criteria for selecting relevant studies. A structured search strategy was then developed, through which eligible studies were identified. Subsequently, the selected studies (n=21) were coded, assessed for quality, and synthesized to construct a preliminary framework for the Educational Neuroscience Training Program. To evaluate the face and content validity of the developed program, input was obtained from a panel of experts. Results: The resulting curriculum framework, validated through expert review, is based on Van den Akker’s curriculum model and includes ten core components: rationale, objectives, content, learning activities, teacher role, materials and resources, grouping, location, time, and assessment. Each component encompasses specific sub-elements and features tailored to the contextual conditions of program implementation. Conclusion: Grounded in theoretical and methodological principles, the developed program demonstrates both coherence and credibility. If proven effective in enhancing teachers' educational outcomes through controlled intervention studies, it could be integrated into official in-service training courses and teacher preparation programs.
 
Keywords: Curriculum, Systematic Review, Health Resources
Full-Text [DOCX 233 kb]   (14 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Systematic Review --- Open Access, CC-BY-NC | Subject: Psycology
References
1. Hart LA. Brain-Compatible Teaching. Today's education. 1978; 67(4): 42-5.
2. Bruer JT. Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational researcher. 1997; 26(8): 4-16. [DOI:10.3102/0013189X026008004]
3. Wilcox G, Morett LM, Hawes Z, Dommett EJ. Why Educational Neuroscience Needs Educational and School Psychology to Effectively Translate Neuroscience to Educational Practice. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 11. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.618449]
4. Craig HL, Wilcox G, Makarenko EM, MacMaster FP. Continued educational neuromyth belief in pre-and in-service teachers: a call for de-implementation action for school psychologists. Canadian Journal of School Psychology. 2021; 36(2): 127-41. [DOI:10.1177/0829573520979605]
5. Mason L. Bridging neuroscience and education: A two-way path is possible. Cortex. 2009;45(4):548-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.cortex.2008.06.003]
6. Coch, Daniel. Lost in Translation: Educational Psychologists as Intermediaries Between Neuroscience and Education. Frontiers in Education. 2020;5. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2020.618464]
7. Luque-Rojas MJ, Blanco Calvo E, Martín-Aragoneses MT. Editorial: Neuroscience, learning, and educational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022; 13. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.928054]
8. OECD. Understanding the brain: Towards a new learning science: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2002.
9. Nouri A, Mehrmohammadi M. Defining the Boundaries for Neuroeducation as a Field of Study. Educational Research Journal. 2012; 27(1/2): 1-25.
10. Amran MS, Rahman S, SURAT S, BAKAR AYA. Connecting neuroscience and education: Insight from neuroscience findings for better instructional learning. Journal for the Education of Gifted Young Scientists. 2019; 7(2): 341-52. [DOI:10.17478/jegys.559933]
11. Jolles J, Jolles DD. On Neuroeducation: Why and How to Improve Neuroscientific Literacy in Educational Professionals. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.752151]
12. Ansari D, König J, Leask M, Tokuhama-Espinosa T. Developmental cognitive neuroscience: Implications for teachers' pedagogical knowledge. 2017.
13. Jamaludin A, Henik A, Hale JB. Educational neuroscience: Bridging theory and practice. Taylor & Francis; 2019. p. 93-8. [DOI:10.1080/23735082.2019.1685027]
14. Zandkarimi G, Fazlali F, Hasanvand MB. Cognitive Abilities Preferment in Math Problem-Solving through Combined Neuro-Feedback and Trans Cranial Electrical Stimulation Therapy. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2022; 10(4): 20-31. [DOI:10.52547/shefa.10.4.20]
15. Broumand Esfangarh N, Rezayi S, Jahan A, Ghasemian Moghadam MR. Comparing the effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation program with transcranial electrical stimulation on brain waves of children with math learning disorder. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2024; 12(4): 43-55. [DOI:10.61186/shefa.12.4.43]
16. Shamsi Holasu M, Tabatabaei M, Azmodeh M. The Effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on the Executive Functions of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2023; 11(2): 20-31. [DOI:10.61186/shefa.11.2.20]
17. mohammadzadeghan r, Farid A, Chalabianlu Hasratanlo G, Mesrabadi J. Comparison of the Effectiveness of Mindfulness-Based Social-Emotional Learning Program with/and without Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Emotional Self-Regulation and Problem-Solving Performance in Students with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2023; 11(2): 52-64. [DOI:10.61186/shefa.11.2.52]
18. Dashtbozorgi Z, Dadashpour Ahangar M, Aminalsharieh S, Ashoori J, Alizadeh M. The Effect of Neurofeedback Training on Sustain Attention and Working Memory in Male Elementary School Students with Attention-Deficit/ Hyperactivity Disorde. The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam. 2017; 5(4): 5-13. [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.shefa.5.4.5]
19. Howard-Jones PA, Varma S, Ansari D, Butterworth B, De Smedt B, Goswami U, et al. The principles and practices of educational neuroscience: Comment on Bowers 2016. [DOI:10.1037/rev0000036]
20. Doukakis S, Sfyris P, Niari M, Alexopoulos E, editors. Exploring educational practices in emergency remote teaching. The role of educational neuroscience. 2021 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON); 2021: IEEE. [DOI:10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.9454143]
21. Howard-Jones PA. Neuroscience and education: A review of educational interventions and approaches informed by neuroscience. Education Endowment Foundation, Millbank, UK. 2014.
22. Zhang H, Yu L, Ji M, Cui Y, Liu D, Li Y, et al. Investigating high school students' perceptions and presences under VR learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments. 2020; 28(5): 635-55. [DOI:10.1080/10494820.2019.1709211]
23. Fernández G, Morris RG. Memory, novelty and prior knowledge. Trends in Neurosciences. 2018; 41(10): 654-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.tins.2018.08.006]
24. Baars M, Wijnia L. The relation between task-specific motivational profiles and training of self-regulated learning skills. Learning and Individual Differences. 2018; 64: 125-37. [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2018.05.007]
25. Doukakis S, Alexopoulos EC, editors. Knowledge Transformation and Distance Learning for Secondary Education Students. The Role of Educational Neuroscience. 2020 5th South-East Europe Design Automation, Computer Engineering, Computer Networks and Social Media Conference (SEEDA-CECNSM); 2020: IEEE. [DOI:10.1109/SEEDA-CECNSM49515.2020.9221821]
26. Cherrier S, Le Roux P-Y, Gerard F-M, Wattelez G, Galy O. Impact of a neuroscience intervention (NeuroStratE) on the school performance of high school students: Academic achievement, self-knowledge and autonomy through a metacognitive approach. Trends in neuroscience and education. 2020; 18: 100-25. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2020.100125]
27. Ergas O, Hadar LL, Albelda N, Levit-Binnun N. Contemplative neuroscience as a gateway to mindfulness: findings from an educationally framed teacher learning program. Mindfulness. 2018; 9(6): 1723-35. [DOI:10.1007/s12671-018-0913-4]
28. Brick K, Cooper JL, Mason L, Faeflen S, Monmia J, Dubinsky JM. Training-of-Trainers Neuroscience and Mental Health Teacher Education in Liberia Improves Self-Reported Support for Students. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2021; 15. [DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2021.653069]
29. Brick K, Cooper JL, Mason L, Faeflen S, Monmia J, Dubinsky JM. Tiered Neuroscience and Mental Health Professional Development in Liberia Improves Teacher Self-Efficacy, Self-Responsibility, and Motivation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2021; 15. [DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2021.664730]
30. Chang Z, Schwartz MS, Hinesley V, Dubinsky JM. Neuroscience Concepts Changed Teachers' Views of Pedagogy and Students. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.685856]
31. Schwartz MS, Hinesley V, Chang Z, Dubinsky JM. Neuroscience knowledge enriches pedagogical choices. Teaching and Teacher Education. 2019; 83: 87-98. [DOI:10.1016/j.tate.2019.04.002]
32. Runganurak W, Bunterm T, Uopasai S, Tang KN. The Effect of Design-Based Learning Integrated with Educational Neuroscience Instructional Model on Students' Learning Outcomes, Executive Functions, and Learning Stress. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. 2022; 30(2). [DOI:10.47836/pjssh.30.2.21]
33. Gutiérrez-Fresneda R, Pozo-Rico T. Aprendizaje inicial de la lectura mediante las aportaciones de la neurociencia al ámbito educativo. Literatura y lingüística. 2022(45): 281-98. [DOI:10.29344/0717621X.45.2212]
34. Amiel JJ, Tan YSM. Using collaborative action research to resolve practical and philosophical challenges in educational neuroscience. Trends in neuroscience and education. 2019; 16: 100-16. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2019.100116]
35. Sigman M, Peña M, Goldin AP, Ribeiro S. Neuroscience and education: prime time to build the bridge. Nature neuroscience. 2014; 17(4): 497-502. [DOI:10.1038/nn.3672]
36. Torrijos-Muelas M, González-Víllora S, Bodoque-Osma AR. The Persistence of Neuromyths in the Educational Settings: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 11. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.591923]
37. Torrijos-Muelas M, González-Víllora S, Bodoque-Osma AR. The persistence of neuromyths in the educational settings: a systematic review. Frontiers in psychology. 2021: 36-58. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.591923]
38. Rato JR, Abreu AM, Castro-Caldas A. Neuromyths in education: What is fact and what is fiction for Portuguese teachers? Educational Research. 2013; 55(4): 441-53. [DOI:10.1080/00131881.2013.844947]
39. Zhang R, Jiang Y, Dang B, Zhou A, editors. Neuromyths in Chinese classrooms: evidence from headmasters in an underdeveloped region of China. Frontiers in Education; 2019: Frontiers Media SA. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2019.00008]
40. Cui Y, Zhang H. Educational Neuroscience Training for Teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge Construction. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.792723]
41. Ruiz-Martin H, Portero-Tresserra M, Martínez-Molina A, Ferrero M. Tenacious educational neuromyths: Prevalence among teachers and an intervention. Trends in Neuroscience and Education. 2022. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2022.100192]
42. Grospietsch F, Lins I, editors. Review on the Prevalence and Persistence of Neuromyths in Education-Where We Stand and What Is Still Needed. Frontiers in Education; 2021: Frontiers Media SA. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2021.665752]
43. Rousseau L. Interventions to Dispel Neuromyths in Educational Settings-A Review. Frontiers in Psychology. 2021; 12: 719692. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.719692]
44. Im S-h, Cho J-Y, Dubinsky JM, Varma S. Taking an educational psychology course improves neuroscience literacy but does not reduce belief in neuromyths. PloS one. 2018; 13(2). [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0192163]
45. Valckx J, Vanderlinde R, Devos G. Measuring and exploring the structure of teachers' educational beliefs. Studies in educational evaluation. 2021; 70: 101-018. [DOI:10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101018]
46. Desimone LM. Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational researcher. 2009; 38(3): 181-99. [DOI:10.3102/0013189X08331140]
47. Merchie E, Tuytens M, Devos G, Vanderlinde R. Evaluating teachers' professional development initiatives: towards an extended evaluative framework. Research papers in education. 2018; 33(2): 143-68. [DOI:10.1080/02671522.2016.1271003]
48. Howard-Jones P, Jay T, Galeano L. Professional Development on the Science of Learning and teachers' Performative Thinking-A Pilot Study. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2020; 14(3): 267-78. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12254]
49. Timperley H, Wilson A, Barrar H, Fung I. Teacher Professional Learning and Development. Best Evidence Synthesis iteration (BES)2007.
50. Ansari D, Coch D. Bridges over troubled waters: Education and cognitive neuroscience. Trends in cognitive sciences. 2006; 10(4): 146-51. [DOI:10.1016/j.tics.2006.02.007]
51. Brookman‐Byrne A, Commissar L. Future avenues for educational neuroscience from the perspective of EARLI SIG 22 conference attendees. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2019; 13(3): 176-83. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12211]
52. Dubinsky JM, Guzey SS, Schwartz MS, Roehrig G, MacNabb C, Schmied A, et al. Contributions of Neuroscience Knowledge to Teachers and Their Practice. The Neuroscientist. 2019; 25(5): 394-407. [DOI:10.1177/1073858419835447]
53. Coch D. Reflections on neuroscience in teacher education. Peabody Journal of Education. 2018; 93(3): 309-19. [DOI:10.1080/0161956X.2018.1449925]
54. Fischer KW, Goswami U, Geake J, Neuroscience TFotFoE. The future of educational neuroscience. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2010; 4(2): 68-80. [DOI:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2010.01086.x]
55. Privitera AJ. A scoping review of research on neuroscience training for teachers. Trends in Neuroscience and Education. 2021; 24: 100-57. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2021.100157]
56. Tan YSM, Amiel JJ. Teachers learning to apply neuroscience to classroom instruction: case of professional development in British Columbia. Professional Development in Education. 2022; 48(1): 70-87. [DOI:10.1080/19415257.2019.1689522]
57. Hachem M, Daignault K, Wilcox G. Impact of Educational Neuroscience Teacher Professional Development: Perceptions of School Personnel. Frontiers in Education. 2022; 7. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2022.912827]
58. Gutshall CA. When Teachers Become Students: Impacts of Neuroscience Learning on Elementary Teachers' Mindset Beliefs, Approach to Learning, Teaching Efficacy, and Grit. European Journal of Psychology and Educational Research. 2020; 3(1): 39-48. [DOI:10.12973/ejper.3.1.39]
59. Leisman G. Neuroscience in Education: A Bridge Too Far or One That Has Yet to Be Built: Introduction to the "Brain Goes to School". MDPI; 2022. p. 40. [DOI:10.3390/brainsci13010040]
60. Newman M, Gough D. Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. 2020: 3-22. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_1]
61. Gough D, Thomas J, Oliver S. An introduction to systematic reviews. An introduction to systematic reviews. 2017: 1-352.
62. Zawacki-Richter O, Kerres M, Bedenlier S, Bond M, Buntins K. Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application: Springer Nature; 2020. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7]
63. Osanloo A, Grant C. Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Creating the blueprint for your "house". Administrative issues journal: connecting education, practice, and research. 2016; 4(2).
64. Nouri A. The NeuroEduTeacher program: An in-service teacher development program for promoting neuroeducation literacy of teachers. Advances in Cognitive Sciences. 2022; 24(3): 57-72.
65. Owen KB, Parker PD, Van Zanden B, MacMillan F, Astell-Burt T, Lonsdale C. Physical activity and school engagement in youth: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist. 2016; 51(2): 129-45. [DOI:10.1080/00461520.2016.1151793]
66. Hagger MS. Avoiding the "déjà-variable" phenomenon: Social psychology needs more guides to constructs. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5: 52. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00052]
67. Publishing-Research-Consortium. Publishing research consortium peer review survey 2015. London: Mark Ware Consulting. 2016.
68. Consortium PR. Publishing research consortium peer review survey 2015. London: Mark Ware Consulting. 2016.
69. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group* t. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Annals of internal medicine. 2009; 151(4): 264-9. [DOI:10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135]
70. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology. 1975; 28(4): 563-75. [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x]
71. Waltz CF, Bausell BR. Nursing research: design statistics and computer analysis: Davis Fa; 1981.
72. Procopio M, Fernandes Procopio L, Yáñez-Araque B, Fernández-Cézar R. Cooperative work and neuroeducation in mathematics education of future teachers: A good combination? Frontiers in Psychology. 2022; 13: 1005609. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1005609]
73. Miranda Feitosa L, Ferreira Alves C, Ramalho Figueiredo N, Leite Nascimento W, Beatriz Adriano da Silva A, Rivera Ikeda S, et al. Open Practical Laboratories in the Neurosciences: An outreach program for neuroscience communication in middle schools. Journal of Neuroscience Research. 2021; 99(6): 1504-14. [DOI:10.1002/jnr.24800]
74. Carey LB, Schmidt J, Dommestrup AK, Pritchard AE, van Stone M, Grasmick N, et al. Beyond learning about the brain: A situated approach to training teachers in mind, brain, and education. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2020; 14(3): 200-8. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12238]
75. Cherrier S, Le Roux P-Y, Gerard F-M, Wattelez G, Galy O. Impact of a neuroscience intervention (NeuroStratE) on the school performance of high school students: Academic achievement, self-knowledge and autonomy through a metacognitive approach. Trends in neuroscience and education. 2020; 18: 100125. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2020.100125]
76. McMahon K, Yeh CS-H, Etchells PJ. The Impact of a Modified Initial Teacher Education on Challenging Trainees' Understanding of Neuromyths. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2019; 13(4): 288-97. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12219]
77. Tham R, Walker Z, Tan SHD, Low LT, Annabel Chen S-H. Translating education neuroscience for teachers. Learning: Research and Practice. 2019; 5(2): 149-73. [DOI:10.1080/23735082.2019.1674909]
78. Roehrig G, Michlin M, Schmitt L, MacNabb C, Dubinsky J. Teaching neuroscience to science teachers: Facilitating the translation of inquiry-based teaching instruction to the classroom. CBE-Life Sciences Education. 2012; 11(4): 413-24. [DOI:10.1187/cbe.12-04-0045]
79. van den Akker J. 2. Curricular Development Research as a Specimen of Educational Design Research. Design Research. 2013: 53.
80. Samuels BM. Can the differences between education and neuroscience be overcome by mind, brain, and education? Mind, Brain, and Education. 2009; 3(1): 45-55. [DOI:10.1111/j.1751-228X.2008.01052.x]
81. Donovan MS. Generating improvement through research and development in education systems. Science. 2013; 340(6130): 317-9. [DOI:10.1126/science.1236180]
82. Ravet J, Williams JH. What we know now: Education, neuroscience and transdisciplinary autism research. Educational Research. 2017; 59(1): 1-16. [DOI:10.1080/00131881.2016.1272429]
83. Bell D, Darlington HM. Educational neuroscience: So what does it mean in the classroom? Educational Neuroscience: Routledge; 2020. p. 500-25. [DOI:10.4324/9781003016830-25]
84. Ferreira RA, Rodríguez C. Effect of a science of learning course on beliefs in neuromyths and neuroscience literacy. Brain Sciences. 2022; 12(7): 811. [DOI:10.3390/brainsci12070811]
85. Goldberg H. Growing Brains, Nurturing Minds-Neuroscience as an Educational Tool to Support Students' Development as Life-Long Learners. Brain Sciences. 2022; 12(12): 1622. [DOI:10.3390/brainsci12121622]
86. Buseri J, Dorgu T. The relevance of instructional materials for effective curriculum delivery in Nigeria. Journal of issues in professional Teacher Education. 2011; 2(2): 9.
87. Dorgu TE. Different teaching methods: A panacea for effective curriculum implementation in the classroom. International Journal of Secondary Education. 2015; 3(6): 77-87. [DOI:10.11648/j.ijsedu.s.2015030601.13]
88. MacNabb C, Schmitt L, Michlin M, Harris I, Thomas L, Chittendon D, et al. Neuroscience in middle schools: a professional development and resource program that models inquiry-based strategies and engages teachers in classroom implementation. CBE-Life Sciences Education. 2006; 5(2): 144-57. [DOI:10.1187/cbe.05-08-0109]
89. Vig J, Révész L, Kaj M, Kälbli K, Svraka B, Révész-Kiszela K, et al. The Prevalence of Educational Neuromyths among Hungarian Pre-Service Teachers. Journal of Intelligence. 2023; 11(2): 31. [DOI:10.3390/jintelligence11020031]
90. Grospietsch F, Mayer J. Pre-service science teachers' neuroscience literacy: Neuromyths and a professional understanding of learning and memory. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 2019; 13: 20. [DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2019.00020]
91. Toscano JÁ, Delgado LV, González KO, Torres AP, Pérez GE. Predictores de neuromitos y conocimientos generales sobre el cerebro en docentes colombianos. Psychology, Society & Education. 2022; 14(2): 20-8. [DOI:10.21071/psye.v14i2.14369]
92. Dekker S, Lee NC, Howard-Jones P, Jolles J. Neuromyths in education: Prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers. Frontiers in psychology. 2012: 429. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429]
93. Tovazzi A, Giovannini S, Basso D. A new method for evaluating knowledge, beliefs, and neuromyths about the mind and brain among Italian teachers. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2020; 14(2): 187-98. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12249]
94. Bissessar S, Youssef FF. A cross-sectional study of neuromyths among teachers in a Caribbean nation. Trends in neuroscience and education. 2021; 23: 100155. [DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2021.100155]
95. van Dijk W, Lane HB. The brain and the US education system: Perpetuation of neuromyths. Exceptionality. 2020; 28(1): 16-29. [DOI:10.1080/09362835.2018.1480954]
96. Grospietsch F, Mayer J. Professionalizing pre-service biology teachers' misconceptions about learning and the brain through conceptual change. Education Sciences. 2018; 8(3): 120. [DOI:10.3390/educsci8030120]
97. Deibl I, Zumbach J. Pre-Service Teachers' Beliefs About Neuroscience and Education-Do Freshmen and Advanced Students Differ in Their Ability to Identify Myths? Psychology Learning & Teaching. 2023; 22(1): 74-93. [DOI:10.1177/14757257221146649]
98. Macdonald K, Germine L, Anderson A, Christodoulou J, McGrath LM. Dispelling the myth: Training in education or neuroscience decreases but does not eliminate beliefs in neuromyths. Frontiers in psychology. 2017; 8: 1314. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01314]
99. Horvath JC, Donoghue GM, Horton AJ, Lodge JM, Hattie JA. On the irrelevance of neuromyths to teacher effectiveness: Comparing neuro-literacy levels amongst award-winning and non-award winning teachers. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9: 1666. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01666]
100. Krammer G, Vogel SE, Grabner RH. Believing in Neuromyths Makes Neither a Bad Nor Good Student‐Teacher: The Relationship between Neuromyths and Academic Achievement in Teacher Education. Mind, Brain, and Education. 2021; 15(1): 54-60. [DOI:10.1111/mbe.12266]

XML   Persian Abstract   Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Back to the articles list Back to browse issues page
مجله علوم اعصاب شفای خاتم The Neuroscience Journal of Shefaye Khatam
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.07 seconds with 47 queries by YEKTAWEB 4710