Neuromyths about dyscalculia and dyslexia among educators in the UK

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION, SPECIAL British Journal of Special Education Pub Date : 2024-04-01 DOI:10.1111/1467-8578.12516
J. Van Herwegen, L. A. Outhwaite, E. Herbert
{"title":"Neuromyths about dyscalculia and dyslexia among educators in the UK","authors":"J. Van Herwegen,&nbsp;L. A. Outhwaite,&nbsp;E. Herbert","doi":"10.1111/1467-8578.12516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Dyslexia and dyscalculia are two examples of high-incidence specific learning difficulties (SpLDs) that have similar prevalence and can often co-occur. It is currently unclear how familiar educators in the UK are with dyscalculia and how this compares to dyslexia and what, if any, neuromyths educators might endorse. The current study examined the awareness and endorsement of neuromyths related to dyscalculia and dyspraxia with 229 educators in the UK. Educators were asked to complete a short online survey that included questions about their awareness of SpLDs and some neuromyths, as well as some background questions. Despite educators being more familiar with dyslexia, they endorsed more neuromyths related to dyslexia than dyscalculia. However, being more familiar with dyslexia and being a maths lead did result in the endorsement of fewer neuromyths. These findings suggest that greater awareness of SpLDs in general might not reduce the endorsements of neuromyths, but that to counter the limited awareness of dyscalculia, educators need information about the cognitive mechanisms of learning in these students.</p>","PeriodicalId":46054,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Special Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8578.12516","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Special Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8578.12516","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dyslexia and dyscalculia are two examples of high-incidence specific learning difficulties (SpLDs) that have similar prevalence and can often co-occur. It is currently unclear how familiar educators in the UK are with dyscalculia and how this compares to dyslexia and what, if any, neuromyths educators might endorse. The current study examined the awareness and endorsement of neuromyths related to dyscalculia and dyspraxia with 229 educators in the UK. Educators were asked to complete a short online survey that included questions about their awareness of SpLDs and some neuromyths, as well as some background questions. Despite educators being more familiar with dyslexia, they endorsed more neuromyths related to dyslexia than dyscalculia. However, being more familiar with dyslexia and being a maths lead did result in the endorsement of fewer neuromyths. These findings suggest that greater awareness of SpLDs in general might not reduce the endorsements of neuromyths, but that to counter the limited awareness of dyscalculia, educators need information about the cognitive mechanisms of learning in these students.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国教育工作者对计算障碍和阅读障碍的神经迷思
诵读困难和计算困难是两种高发的特殊学习困难(SpLDs),它们的发病率相似,而且经常同时出现。目前还不清楚英国的教育工作者对计算障碍的熟悉程度,以及与阅读障碍的比较情况,也不清楚教育工作者可能会认可哪些神经观念(如果有的话)。本研究调查了英国 229 名教育工作者对与计算障碍和阅读障碍有关的神经观念的认识和认可情况。教育工作者被要求完成一份简短的在线调查,其中包括有关他们对特殊学习障碍和一些神经神话的认识的问题,以及一些背景问题。尽管教育工作者更熟悉阅读障碍,但他们认可的与阅读障碍有关的神经迷思却多于计算障碍。然而,如果对阅读障碍更为熟悉,同时又是数学学科带头人,那么他们认可的神经迷思就会减少。这些研究结果表明,提高对特殊学习困难的总体认识可能不会减少对神经迷思的认同,但为了消除对计算困难的有限认识,教育工作者需要了解这些学生学习的认知机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
15.40%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: This well-established and respected journal covers the whole range of learning difficulties relating to children in mainstream and special schools. It is widely read by nasen members as well as other practitioners, administrators advisers, teacher educators and researchers in the UK and overseas. The British Journal of Special Education is concerned with a wide range of special educational needs, and covers all levels of education pre-school, school, and post-school.
期刊最新文献
Social barriers faced by students with sensory impairment in higher education in Tanzania Issue Information Translational science in the science of reading: A case study Education policy development in England: Effective ‘mainstreaming’ of SEND provision Editorial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1