Data_Sheet_1_Pre-service Science Teachers’ Neuroscience Literacy: Neuromyths and a Professional Understanding of Learning and Memory.pdf

Transferring current research findings on the topic of learning and memory to “brain-based” learning in schools is of great interest among teachers. However, numerous international studies demonstrate that both pre-service and in-service teachers do not always succeed. Instead, they transfer numerous misconceptions about neuroscience, known as neuromyths, into pedagogical practice. As a result, researchers call for more neuroscience in teacher education in order to create a professional understanding of learning and memory. German pre-service science teachers specializing in biology complete neuroscientific modules (human biology/animal physiology) during their studies because they are expected to teach these topics to their students. Thus, they are required to demonstrate a certain degree of neuroscience literacy. In the present study, 550 pre-service science teachers were surveyed on neuromyths and scientific concepts about learning and memory. Pre-service science teachers’ scientific concepts increased over the course of their training. However, beliefs in neuromyths were independent of participants’ status within teacher education (first-year students, advanced students, and post-graduate trainees). The results showed that 10 neuromyths were endorsed by more than 50% of prospective science teachers. Beliefs in the existence of learning styles (93%) and the effectiveness of Brain Gym (92%) were most widespread. Many myths were endorsed even though a large share of respondents had thematically similar scientific concepts; endorsement of neuromyths was found to be largely independent of professional knowledge as well as theory-based and biography-based learning beliefs about neuroscience and learning. Our results suggest that neuromyths can exist in parallel to scientific concepts, professional knowledge and beliefs and are resistant to formal education. From the perspective of conceptual change theory, they thus exhibit characteristic traits of misconceptions that cannot simply be counteracted with increased neuroscientific knowledge. On the basis of our study’s findings, it can be concluded that new teacher programs considering neuromyths as change-resistant misconceptions are needed to professionalize pre-service science teachers’ neuroscience literacy. For this, an intensive web of exchange between the education field and neuroscientists is required, not just to deploy the latest scientific insights to refute neuromyths on learning and memory, but also to identify further neuromyths.

将学习与记忆领域的现有研究成果应用于学校的"基于大脑"的教学实践，是广大教师高度关注的课题。然而，多项国际研究显示，职前与在职教师往往难以达成这一目标，反而会将诸多关于神经科学的错误认知——即所谓神经迷思（neuromyths）——引入教学实践。有鉴于此，研究者呼吁在教师教育体系中强化神经科学相关内容的教学，帮助教师建立对学习与记忆的专业认知。德国生物学方向的职前理科教师在培养阶段需修读神经科学相关模块（人体生物学/动物生理学），因其未来需向学生讲授此类内容，故需具备一定程度的神经科学素养（neuroscience literacy）。本研究针对550名职前理科教师开展问卷调查，内容涵盖神经迷思以及学习与记忆领域的科学概念认知情况。随着培养进程的推进，职前理科教师的科学概念认知水平有所提升，但他们对神经迷思的认同程度与其在教师培养体系中的阶段（一年级学生、高年级学生、实习研究生）并无关联。研究结果显示，有10种神经迷思获得了超过50%的准理科教师认同，其中最为普遍的是"学习风格存在差异"（93%的受访者认同）与"脑健身（Brain Gym）教学法有效"（92%的受访者认同）。即便大量受访者已掌握主题相关的科学概念，仍有诸多神经迷思被广泛认同；研究同时发现，对神经迷思的认同程度在很大程度上与专业知识、基于理论的学习信念以及基于个人经历的神经科学与学习相关信念均无关联。本研究结果表明，神经迷思可与科学概念、专业知识及信念并行存在，且难以通过正规教育加以改变。从概念转变理论（conceptual change theory）的视角来看，这类迷思具备错误认知的典型特征，无法仅通过增加神经科学相关知识就加以纠正。基于本研究结果，可以得出结论：需针对神经迷思这类难以转变的错误认知，设计全新的教师培养方案，以提升职前理科教师的神经科学素养。为此，教育领域与神经科学家之间需建立紧密的交流网络，这不仅是为了运用最新的科学研究成果驳斥学习与记忆领域的神经迷思，同时也为了发掘更多尚未被识别的神经迷思。