与神经科学专家和普通大众相比,德国在职和职前教师中 "神经迷思 "的流行程度和使用情况

IF 1.9 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Mind Brain and Education Pub Date : 2024-01-28 DOI:10.1111/mbe.12401
Ann-Kathrin Hennes, Alfred Schabmann, Barbara Maria Schmidt
{"title":"与神经科学专家和普通大众相比,德国在职和职前教师中 \"神经迷思 \"的流行程度和使用情况","authors":"Ann-Kathrin Hennes, Alfred Schabmann, Barbara Maria Schmidt","doi":"10.1111/mbe.12401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the educational context, there are numerous “neuromyths” about how findings from neuroscience can be used to improve teaching and learning. International research has shown that the majority of teachers tend to believe in these and use them in the classroom. Since the belief in neuromyths might not enhance or even have adverse effects on students' learning, teachers need to be able to identify neuromyths. We examined the prevalence of beliefs in neuromyths among German in-service and pre-service teachers—compared to the prevalence among people with a certain expertise in neuroscience (“specialists”) or no connection to neuroscience (“general public”). A sample of 247 participants completed a German adaptation of the neuromyth questionnaire by Dekker et al. (2012). The results show that German teachers believe the majority of neuromyths to be true. Compared to teachers and the general public, specialists were more accurate in identifying neuromyths. About half of the in-service teachers reported that they generally use neuroscientific principles in the classroom—at least some of which seem to be based on NM. Possible approaches to disrupt neuromyths are discussed.","PeriodicalId":51595,"journal":{"name":"Mind Brain and Education","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Prevalence and Usage of “Neuromyths” Among German in-Service- and Pre-Service Teachers – Compared to Neuroscience Specialists and the General Public\",\"authors\":\"Ann-Kathrin Hennes, Alfred Schabmann, Barbara Maria Schmidt\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/mbe.12401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the educational context, there are numerous “neuromyths” about how findings from neuroscience can be used to improve teaching and learning. International research has shown that the majority of teachers tend to believe in these and use them in the classroom. Since the belief in neuromyths might not enhance or even have adverse effects on students' learning, teachers need to be able to identify neuromyths. We examined the prevalence of beliefs in neuromyths among German in-service and pre-service teachers—compared to the prevalence among people with a certain expertise in neuroscience (“specialists”) or no connection to neuroscience (“general public”). A sample of 247 participants completed a German adaptation of the neuromyth questionnaire by Dekker et al. (2012). The results show that German teachers believe the majority of neuromyths to be true. Compared to teachers and the general public, specialists were more accurate in identifying neuromyths. About half of the in-service teachers reported that they generally use neuroscientific principles in the classroom—at least some of which seem to be based on NM. Possible approaches to disrupt neuromyths are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51595,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mind Brain and Education\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mind Brain and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12401\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mind Brain and Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12401","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在教育领域,关于如何利用神经科学的研究成果来改进教学,存在着许多 "神经迷思"。国际研究表明,大多数教师倾向于相信这些神话,并在课堂上使用它们。由于相信神经迷思可能不会促进学生的学习,甚至会对学生的学习产生不利影响,因此教师需要能够识别神经迷思。我们调查了德国在职教师和职前教师对神经迷信的普遍程度--与具有一定神经科学专业知识的人("专家")或与神经科学毫无关系的人("普通大众")的普遍程度进行了比较。247 名参与者完成了 Dekker 等人(2012 年)改编的神经肌肉问卷的德文版。结果显示,德国教师认为大多数神经迷思是真实的。与教师和普通大众相比,专家在识别神经迷思方面更为准确。约有一半的在职教师表示,他们通常在课堂上使用神经科学原理--其中至少有一些似乎是基于神经迷思的。本文讨论了打破神经迷思的可能方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Prevalence and Usage of “Neuromyths” Among German in-Service- and Pre-Service Teachers – Compared to Neuroscience Specialists and the General Public
In the educational context, there are numerous “neuromyths” about how findings from neuroscience can be used to improve teaching and learning. International research has shown that the majority of teachers tend to believe in these and use them in the classroom. Since the belief in neuromyths might not enhance or even have adverse effects on students' learning, teachers need to be able to identify neuromyths. We examined the prevalence of beliefs in neuromyths among German in-service and pre-service teachers—compared to the prevalence among people with a certain expertise in neuroscience (“specialists”) or no connection to neuroscience (“general public”). A sample of 247 participants completed a German adaptation of the neuromyth questionnaire by Dekker et al. (2012). The results show that German teachers believe the majority of neuromyths to be true. Compared to teachers and the general public, specialists were more accurate in identifying neuromyths. About half of the in-service teachers reported that they generally use neuroscientific principles in the classroom—at least some of which seem to be based on NM. Possible approaches to disrupt neuromyths are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE), recognized as the 2007 Best New Journal in the Social Sciences & Humanities by the Association of American Publishers" Professional & Scholarly Publishing Division, provides a forum for the accessible presentation of basic and applied research on learning and development, including analyses from biology, cognitive science, and education. The journal grew out of the International Mind, Brain, and Education Society"s mission to create a new field of mind, brain and education, with educators and researchers expertly collaborating in integrating the variety of fields connecting mind, brain, and education in research, theory, and/or practice.
期刊最新文献
Need for Cognition, Neuromyths, and Knowledge about the Brain in Aspiring Teachers Sibling Effects on School Achievement: Evidence From Two Large French Cohorts Evidence, Policy, Education, and Neuroscience—The State of Play in the UK Underutilized Techniques and Underrepresented Samples in Educational Neuroscience Research: An Introduction to the Special Issue Fixation Disparity: A Possible Index of Visuospatial Cognition during Authentic Learning Tasks
×
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