为什么教师相信教育神经神话?

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES Trends in Neuroscience and Education Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tine.2020.100145
Brenda Hughes , Karen A. Sullivan , Linda Gilmore
{"title":"为什么教师相信教育神经神话?","authors":"Brenda Hughes ,&nbsp;Karen A. Sullivan ,&nbsp;Linda Gilmore","doi":"10.1016/j.tine.2020.100145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>It is not well understood whether qualified teachers believe neuromyths, and whether this affects their practice and learner outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A standardised survey was administered to practising teachers (<em>N</em> <em>=</em> 228) to determine whether or not they believe <em>fictional</em> (neuromyth) or <em>factual</em> statements about the brain, the confidence in those beliefs, and their application.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Although factual knowledge was high, seven neuromyths were believed by &gt;50% of the sample. Participants who endorsed neuromyths were generally more confident in their answers than those who identified the myths. Key neuromyths appear to be incorporated into classrooms.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p><span>Australian teachers, like their overseas counterparts, have some neuroscience awareness but are susceptible to neuromyths. A stronger partnership with neuroscientists would addresss the complex problem of disentangling brain facts from fictions, and provide better support for teachers. This study uncovered </span>psychometric weaknesses in the commonly used neuromyth measure that future research should address.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46228,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.tine.2020.100145","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why do teachers believe educational neuromyths?\",\"authors\":\"Brenda Hughes ,&nbsp;Karen A. Sullivan ,&nbsp;Linda Gilmore\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tine.2020.100145\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>It is not well understood whether qualified teachers believe neuromyths, and whether this affects their practice and learner outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>A standardised survey was administered to practising teachers (<em>N</em> <em>=</em> 228) to determine whether or not they believe <em>fictional</em> (neuromyth) or <em>factual</em> statements about the brain, the confidence in those beliefs, and their application.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Although factual knowledge was high, seven neuromyths were believed by &gt;50% of the sample. Participants who endorsed neuromyths were generally more confident in their answers than those who identified the myths. Key neuromyths appear to be incorporated into classrooms.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p><span>Australian teachers, like their overseas counterparts, have some neuroscience awareness but are susceptible to neuromyths. A stronger partnership with neuroscientists would addresss the complex problem of disentangling brain facts from fictions, and provide better support for teachers. This study uncovered </span>psychometric weaknesses in the commonly used neuromyth measure that future research should address.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.tine.2020.100145\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949320300211\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949320300211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

合格的教师是否相信神经神话,以及这是否会影响他们的实践和学生的成绩,目前还不清楚。方法对在职教师(N = 228)进行标准化调查,以确定他们是否相信关于大脑的虚构(神经神话)或事实陈述,对这些信念的信心及其应用。结果尽管对事实的了解程度很高,但仍有50%的人相信7个神经误区。认同神经神话的参与者通常比认同神话的参与者对自己的答案更有信心。关键的神经学迷思似乎被纳入了课堂。结论澳大利亚教师与海外教师一样,具有一定的神经科学意识,但容易受到神经学神话的影响。与神经科学家建立更紧密的合作关系,将解决将大脑事实与虚构区分开来的复杂问题,并为教师提供更好的支持。这项研究揭示了在常用的神经神话测量中心理测量的弱点,未来的研究应该解决这些弱点。
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
Why do teachers believe educational neuromyths?

Background

It is not well understood whether qualified teachers believe neuromyths, and whether this affects their practice and learner outcomes.

Method

A standardised survey was administered to practising teachers (N = 228) to determine whether or not they believe fictional (neuromyth) or factual statements about the brain, the confidence in those beliefs, and their application.

Results

Although factual knowledge was high, seven neuromyths were believed by >50% of the sample. Participants who endorsed neuromyths were generally more confident in their answers than those who identified the myths. Key neuromyths appear to be incorporated into classrooms.

Conclusion

Australian teachers, like their overseas counterparts, have some neuroscience awareness but are susceptible to neuromyths. A stronger partnership with neuroscientists would addresss the complex problem of disentangling brain facts from fictions, and provide better support for teachers. This study uncovered psychometric weaknesses in the commonly used neuromyth measure that future research should address.

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
6.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
22
审稿时长
65 days
期刊最新文献
Applying the science of learning to teacher professional development and back again: Lessons from 3 country contexts Mirror invariance in the subsequent acquisition of a script with separate forms for reading and writing Executive functions as predictors of learning prerequisites in preschool: A longitudinal study Integrating vision and somatosensation does not improve the accuracy and response time when estimating area and perimeter of rectangles in primary school The whole is greater than the sum of its parts: Using cognitive profiles to predict academic achievement
×
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