The Impact of a Modified Initial Teacher Education on Challenging Trainees' Understanding of Neuromyths

Abstract

Initial teacher education (ITE) offers an underutilized opportunity for bridging the gap between neuroscience research and educational practice. This article reports on innovations embedded within an ITE program to support trainee teachers to recognize and challenge the persistence of neuromyths. Education researchers, neuroscientists, and psychologists collaboratively applied design‐based research to create, improve, and reflect on original neuroeducational teaching/learning resources for university‐based primary (elementary) ITE trainees. Encouragingly, pre and postsurveys showed reductions in trainees' beliefs in neuromyths and a shift to responses showing uncertainty that suggested their beliefs became unsettled. The most persistent neuromyths were those regarding fish oils, left brain/right brain, and learning styles/visual, auditory, or kinaesthetic (VAK). Trainees retained their initial interest in knowledge about the brain and education, gained confidence, and became more critical about applying the learning sciences in educational contexts.

The Persistence of Neuromyths in the Educational Settings: A Systematic Review

“…Using this as a theory or a valid explanation is just a teaching heuristic based on observations (Schwartz, 2015 ), an over-simplification (Purdy and Morrison, 2009 ), and a more than questionable practice (Bailey et al, 2018 ). In line with previous studies, this neuromyth still appears in training, education degrees, universities, or books (Gleichgerrcht et al, 2015 ; Lethaby and Harries, 2016 ; Kim and Sankey, 2017 ; Grospietsch and Mayer, 2018 ; McMahon et al, 2019 ; Tan and Amiel, 2019 ), sometimes as a general educational trend (Papadatou-Pastou et al, 2018 ).…”

“…The advances in neuroscience and its subfields (neuroeducation, educational neuroscience) progressed adequately, at the same time as researchers explored the educational community's knowledge in these areas. It was reported that the majority of teachers and students are interested in educational neuroscience and consider it useful in their professional work (Dekker et al, 2012;Ferrero et al, 2016;Düvel et al, 2017;Bailey et al, 2018;Falquez Torres and Ocampo Alvarado, 2018;McMahon et al, 2019;Zhang et al, 2019;among others), although a minority of teachers report currently using brain-based techniques in their classrooms (Rodrigues Rato et al, 2013) or, at least, they are eager to implement those (Zhang et al, 2019). However, neuromyths can affect teachers, students, and educators when implementing neuroeducation in the school.…”

“…This misconception is widely considered a fact, even more than that of the hemispheric preference (Tardif et al, 2015 ). Teachers report having been taught about VAK/learning styles during training courses organized by their schools or the educational authorities of their governments (Lethaby and Harries, 2016 ; Kim and Sankey, 2017 ; McMahon et al, 2019 ). Moreover, some teachers insist they intend to continue working under the VAK perspective in their classrooms, even knowing that it is a neuromyth (Newton and Miah, 2017 ; Tan and Amiel, 2019 ).…”

Prevalence, Predictors and Sources of Information Regarding Neuromyths in an Australian Cohort of Preservice Teachers

“…Having previously completed a target unit that explicitly addressed some neuromyths also significantly predicted more accurate neuromyth beliefs, but the effects were again modest. The small effects are not unexpected given the inconsistent findings in existing research for interventions designed to address neuromyths (see Grospietsch & Mayer, 2018;Im et al, 2018;McMahon et al, 2019;Sparks, 2018) and it is possible that more sustained intervention is needed.…”

Future Avenues for Educational Neuroscience From the Perspective of EARLI SIG 22 Conference Attendees

“…Efforts to bring the science of learning to teachers are also currently being trialed in a primary setting (McMahon, Etchells, & Yeh, ), where an interdisciplinary team of researchers in psychology, education, and neuroscience are developing materials to help teachers in both supporting children's learning, and assessing scientific evidence (McMahon & Etchells, ). Headway is therefore being made with regards to bringing the science of learning to teacher training in the United Kingdom, although we are still a long way from having this information across all ITT programs.…”