Brain knowledge and predictors of neuromyths among teachers in Morocco

Neuroscience literacy in educators' training programs in Asia: A call to action

The center of learning is the brain and the disciplinary science that examines its structure and functioning, and the nervous system as a whole, is called neuroscience. The assimilation of essential neuroscience-related content by educational systems has gained global interest, given the relevance of learning to education. Recognizing the significance of frontline workers, several governmental agencies and educational institutions have launched initiatives to foster the inclusion of neuroscience literacy in educators' training programs. Their success, however, has depended on collaborative efforts among educators, researchers, and other educational stakeholders, and the process has involved considerable debate. Here, we aim to articulate a rationale to promote neuroscience literacy for educators. In doing so, we revisit prior arguments on the importance of training educators and build up on other reasons to advocate for this kind of endeavor considering cutting-edge research. Following this, we discuss critical elements to advance neuroscience literacy for educators and examine the most important challenges to execute successful initiatives. Finally, we appraise the significance for Asia, reviewing the scholarly literature on educators' prior experiences, and highlight the case of Singapore as an exemplar initiative that catalizes human capital, infrastructure, and strategies to advance neuroscience literacy. We conclude by arguing that governmental agencies and educational institutions should strengthen their efforts to accommodate their programmatic plans and agendas to embrace neuroscience literacy in educators' training programs. This global trend has arrived to stay.

The Prevalence of Educational Neuromyths among Hungarian Pre-Service Teachers

Teachers with poor neuroliteracy fail to distinguish scientific evidence from neuromyths (NM), which might lead to the implementation of pseudoscientific educational methods. The prevalence of NM and general knowledge about the brain (GKAB) among in-service and pre-service teachers has been assessed in multiple countries, but no such study has been performed in Hungary. The aims of this study were to (1) assess the neuroliteracy of pre-service teachers, (2) compare the results with those of previous studies and (3) analyze the factors influencing neuroliteracy. Our sample included 822 pre-service teachers from 12 Hungarian universities. We developed a survey including 10 NM and 13 GKAB statements, adapted from a widely used questionnaire. The average rate of incorrect answers to NM was 56.9%, whereas the average rate of correct answers to GKAB was 70.9%. Male gender and frequency of using Facebook as the primary information source about neuroscience were the only predictors of NM acceptance. In comparison with other studies, the Hungarian pre-service teachers had the second highest endorsement of NM. The most prevalent NM were linked to motor functions, which might be related to the widespread use and promotion of motor therapies in Hungary.

Prevalence of neuromyths among psychology students: small differences to pre-service teachers

Neuroscience will possibly aid the educational practice but neuromyths are prevalent worldwide. Certain misconceptions about learning, memory and the brain are prevalent in different groups and hard to dispel. Bridging the gap might be too far. However, Psychology may serve as a bridge between these distant fields. The present study examined neuromyth endorsement in psychology students. An online questionnaire based on 20 neuromyths and 20 neurofacts was used. Additionally, neuroscience exposure at university and media exposure was assessed. The sample consisted of psychology students (N = 116) in Austria and was compared to a teacher-training sample. The different groups were compared using Signal Detection Theory, Chi-square test, non-parametric correlation analyses, and independent sample t-test. No correlation between neuroscience exposure at university and leisure time for psychology students at the beginning of their studies could be found. Here, the same misconceptions were among the most prevalent-compared to the teacher-training students sample. Results show significant difference between the groups on discrimination ability and response bias. Although psychology students share the same most prevalent misconceptions, they differ significantly in their amount of agreement. The reported study reveals a better discernment ability and lower response bias on neuromyths in the Psychology students' sample. On the individual item level, they performed better at rejecting some neuromyths than pre-service teachers. In conclusion, some neuroscience and pedagogical psychology training improves the ability to discriminate between true and false statements. Therefore, directly addressing these misconceptions within the study program-Teacher Training and Psychology-could reduce neuromyth endorsement.

A cross-sectional study of neuromyths among teachers in a Caribbean nation

BACKGROUND

The current COVID-19 pandemic and proliferation of misinformation regarding science highlights the importance of improving general science literacy. The continued preponderance of neuromyths among educators is of concern, especially in lower- and middle-income countries.

METHOD

Using an adapted questionnaire, a cross-sectional survey was conducted among teachers in a small island developing state in the Caribbean.

RESULTS

Two-thirds of the sample were unable to recognise at least 50% of the myths. Regression analysis demonstrated that higher scores in brain knowledge and exposure to prior teacher-training increased belief in neuromyths. On the other hand, specific in-service training pertaining to educational neuroscience improved scores.

CONCLUSION

Neuromyths are prevalent among teachers and appear to inform their teaching practice. Further research needs to be conducted to explore not just the prevalence of these myths but in what ways they may be impacting teaching and learning outcomes in the classroom.