There is a good amount of research on the cognitive psychology of learning and memory that has some translations in educational applications. See this synthesis by John Kihlstrom for an introduction http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/GSI_2011.htm 

I would be more careful regarding the applications of neuroscience in education, because the level of analysis is quite different in these two fields ( see here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46149279_Neuroscience_Viable_Applications_in_Education ) and, also, because current educational programes that claim to be neuro-based are quite unsuported empirically ( https://drive.google.com/a/psychology.ro/file/d/0B5JyY7bDUjP_ZWdrSEloZmVUVGc/edit ) and often lead to propagation of neuro-myths, rather than accurate knowledge ( http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429/full#B5 ). Thus, I believe that bridging the gap between neuroscience and education has to start with clarifying, for everybody involved in educational process, what neuroscience is and isn't and what it can and cannot offer. Otherwise, many unsupported practices could hide under the “neuro umbrella”.

Article Neuroscience: Viable Applications in Education?

There is a good amount of research on the cognitive psychology of learning and memory that has some translations in educational applications. See this synthesis by John Kihlstrom for an introduction http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~kihlstrm/GSI_2011.htm 

I would be more careful regarding the applications of neuroscience in education, because the level of analysis is quite different in these two fields ( see here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/46149279_Neuroscience_Viable_Applications_in_Education ) and, also, because current educational programes that claim to be neuro-based are quite unsuported empirically ( https://drive.google.com/a/psychology.ro/file/d/0B5JyY7bDUjP_ZWdrSEloZmVUVGc/edit ) and often lead to propagation of neuro-myths, rather than accurate knowledge ( http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00429/full#B5 ). Thus, I believe that bridging the gap between neuroscience and education has to start with clarifying, for everybody involved in educational process, what neuroscience is and isn't and what it can and cannot offer. Otherwise, many unsupported practices could hide under the “neuro umbrella”.

Article Neuroscience: Viable Applications in Education?

Marcel Ruiz, un tema que me apasiona te felicito por introducirlo. a mi me parece que si hay una correlación entre estas teorias y el aprovechamiento de los estudiantes. Como docente Universitario en la formación de Docentes nosotro  corroboramos que el 97% de los estudiantes de un curso logran demostrar a otros que si han mejorado en el desempeño  ya que el trabajo final hicimos un experimento como ellos los docentes que son estudiantes de Docencia Superior logran demostrar competencias al demostrar a sus pares.

el próximo año vamos a sistematizar esa experiencia en una investigación.

saludos. Arturo Rivera

Dear Razvan,

Thank you for your answer and your references. I agree totally to what you state here.

In the paper by Ian Devonshire and Eleanor Dommett they discuss different issues about what neuroscience can offer to teaching and what it can't, among other interesting topics such as how should be overcome the missunderstandings between researchers and teachers. This is one of the references that motivated me to post this.

In my opinion, the fact that students could be taught with some information about the structures and funtion of the networks involved in learning is critical. It may give them a degree of consciousness of the learning processes that make it meaningful for them, as it is directly changing their vision of learning, an ultimately their brains and self. Maybe this could be achieved via seminars or talks such as Devonshire and Dommett suggest. And that is a big leap that neuroscience can provide.

Estimado Arturo,

Gracias por la respuesta y por compartir la experiencia. Yo también creo que la correlación entre la neurodidáctica teórica y su efecto en la práctica está ahí, por eso creo que es muy importante la tarea de investigación en los centros de docencia y su difusión.

Thank you for your answer and for sharing the experience. I also believe that a correlation between theorical neurodidactics and their effect in practise is there, and that is why I think is critical a work in research in teaching centers and its dissemination.

This is much needed. Efforts to join up explicitly metacognition and pedagogy can better serve new generations of learners. 

Understanding cognitive education and teaching for thinking (late Professor Burden from Exeter University) have led to the establishment of ‘thinking schools’ - whole school approach to the teaching of thinking and thinking skills (Thinking Schools International). This involves teacher and students working together by placing thinking at the heart of the curriculum. However, this is based on incorporating  a 'tool kit'  (Lipman; Hyerle; De Bono; Costa; Gardner) into their curriculum practice in an attempt to make thinking visible.

However,  in order to contribute to significant educational reform there is need for convincing empirical evidence, as Razvan rightly mentioned in his comments. 

Dear Daniela,

Thank you for your answer. The idea of a 'thinking school' and the efforts on developing it is fascinating, and is something I will have to explore carefully. 

From your last comment, just highlight the need of encouraging teachers to perform evidence-based and quantitative research in the classroom at schools and universities. This is a powerful way to show the potential benefits of improving classical educational paradigms. 

Neuroscience is no doubt an emerging are within the field of education.

Going back to the main issue of this thread, your prefix "Neuro" to education and pedagogy, here are some of my views and questions:

1. The idea of brain-thinking-education could go back to the works of William James.

2. Brain as the main organ and object of inquiries  in education  has long been a taken for granted idea. Almost everything of certain relevance in education is brain-based XX.

3. So, what is Marcel's opinion on this: Is there a difference between Neuroscience applied in education (plus its subdisciplines such as pedagogy, curriculum) and Neuroeducation? 

4. Do you think prefix "Neuro" will follow the fate of "Electronic" like in the E-Mail & E-Learning?

Dear Jae,

Thanks for your comments. I agree that learning has been brain-brain based since always, as it is the effector and container of learning.

Now I respond to your question:

My opinion is that 'Neuroscience applied to education' and 'Neuroeducation' is substantialy the same, but first, 'Neuroeducation' is shorter and is more descriptive of an emerging field. And second, given that the definition of 'Neuroeducation' is the application of what is learned from observing the brain in the last decades to improve learning and education, maybe it shows some slight differences and connotations to just 'Neuroscience applied to education', such as that we haven't undisclosed the brain fine structure and activity until the last 20 years (with permission of the drawings by Ramon y Cajal in the 1900's).

This is crucial because with this information we can increase our consciousness of how is and what happens in our brain when we are learning -or doing other things if you want-, and take advantage of this to improve learning and live our lives, which consist in a great part on learning.  

To the second question:

I think for me is not a problem to have a lot of Neuro- prefixes everywhere. We can live nicely with the E-prefix, why not adding others?

Dear Marcel.

Thank you for adding this question.

In my opinion, it is not only necessary to create this area but its expansion in the coming years is unquestionable. In fact, I have some years working (I thought that one) in the scope of Superlearning in University classrooms. And particularly this year, I address a Educational Innovation Project, supported by my university, to see the extent of such techniques students first, second and third year of the degree in Economics and Business Administration. By June we will have the overall results, but I can say that preliminary results are very encouraging. I enclose a comunication to the EDULEARN international conference.

I hope my answer be useful for you.

Regards.

Dear Montserrat,

Thank you for your answer and for sharing your experience. It is very useful for me to see how you implemented the theory into practice.

Undoubtedly, it is of a great importance to keep on the efforts of applying new paradigms based on emotion, motivation and feedback from the practitioners.

I also observed in the classroom the good effect of music when performing an active learning project, generating immediately a climate of adequate energy, attention and performance.

Marcel, muy buenas tardes.

Con relación a tu pregunta, considero desde mi perspectiva que sí puede ser posible la creación de un campo de conocimiento dedicado a la neuroeducación aplicada a la enseñanza; para que esto sea posible es necesario el desarrollo de la investigación frente a esta problemática, ya que un campo de conocimiento tiene una condiciones específicas como tener un objeto de estudio, comunidades académicas dedicadas a esta problemática, procedimientos adecuados, entre otros.

Sin embargo, pienso también que si hablamos de ´neurodidáctica´, la temática misma debería estar incluida en el campo de la didáctica general y las didácticas específicas, dado que es un asunto relacionado con los procesos de enseñanza y de aprendizaje. 

an excellent resource is the book THE ART OF CHANGING THE BRAIN BY

Professor James Zull, a Biologist and faculty member (might be emeritus now-

wonderful review of relevant neuroscxience findings - also discusses teaching project 

in which group of faculty in hard sciences at Case Western Reserve University were

meeting regularly with the purpose of improving teaching effectiveness by focussing

on brain-compatible learning interventions-  another resource is Eric Jensen who  

has a website and markets workshops for grade school teachers and administrators 

with focus on brain friendly learning interventions- wish you well in your search-

Yes we can.

We are applying Quantum mechanics for study of neurons and interactions and naming the study as 'Neuro Quantology'. 

In the same way Education or teaching methods can be improved by studying the nature of interaction of neurons and the resultant cognitive behaviours. But it can be considered as a branch of education only. Not as a branch of neuro sciences.

Estimado Jairo,

Gracias por la respuesta y por tus opiniones. La idea de crear un campo de Neurodidáctica Aplicada tiene como objetivo el estímulo de esa investigación en los colegios a la que te 1refieres, así como su difusión. Esperemos que los profesionales de los colegios también lo encuentren útil.

Thank you for your answer and opinions. The idea of creating a field of Applied Neurodidactics has the aim of stimulating this research at schools that you refer, as well as its difussion. I hope professionals from schools may find it also useful.

Dear Herman,

Thank you for your comments and references. One of the aims of this post is to gather as many resources as possible in the topic.

Dear Siva,

Thank you for the feedback. As you and Jairo point out, Neuroeducation and Neurodidactics are subdisciplines of education in its widest meaning, as this is their object of study and pursue developing it. In contrast, the object of study of Applied Neurodidactics may be the practise of the pedagogic principles and uses of Neurodeducation, and its consequences -hopefully benefits- for students' learning. Indeed, all of them emerge from the intersection of Neuroscience, Cognitive Psychology and Education.

I agree with you, colleagues. As teachers we all practice Cognitive Psychology and Neuroscience can offer help to us and our students; we need to know if our teaching methods are supporting students with special needs at all times. I often had to discuss with experts particular cases of mental health issues of students in the last few years; we may need to discuss more often our case studies at international symposia in education so that some good literature could emerge in the near future.

Dear Eleni,

Thank you for your comment. This issue is something teachers face everyday and everywhere, and for me it would be very helpful to have some resources to direct our interventions. Even if there are good psychopedagogy services at schools, it might be crtitical to know how to act properly in the classroom with respect to students with specific health issues or learning disabilities. Maybe Neurodidactics and related disciplines can address this to give some useful strategies.

Happy New Year 2016 to everyone

A fascinating topic. For a number of years I have divided my classes into left and right hemispheric cognitive processors based on an assessment I developed over the past 35 years and teach the same material differently to two sides of a divided classroom.

Dear Edward,

Thank you for your interesting experience. I hope you don't mind if I ask some questions. How is the class performed concretely? Does it consist on alternate speeches or presentations? 

Dear Catherine,

Thank you for the information and resources. The work of Dr. Siegel is very insightful for me. It is fantastic to see these initiatives at institutions already teaching this way. Thanks again.

Dear Marcel;

I presented materials to the left hemispheric portion of the class always roughly 30% of the population based on a research n of 9000  in a verbal linear-sequential format, while for the right hemispheric processors, a holistic presentation is useful with heavy reliance on visual materials.

Thank you for your prompt answer. I try to integrate those ways of theaching to my classes, but I do it in a 'mixed' fashion. I think it is important to be aware of who are the left and right handed processers in the class.

Hi Marcel, 

I think you will find these two articles very interesting:

 http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2014/jan/07/myths-brain-education-teaching

http://qz.com/585143/the-concept-of-different-learning-styles-is-one-of-the-greatest-neuroscience-myths/

Best,

Wes

Si, es posible. Cotar conmigo para trabajar en ello.

Saludos,

Pedro Gil

Bonjour,

Personnellement, je suis très intéressée par cette problématique du transfert des connaissances sur le fonctionnement du cerveau dans la mise en œuvre de séquences d'apprentissage en classe et, plus particulièrement à l'école primaire. A ce niveau, je vous conseille les travaux et publications de Steve Masson de l'Université de Montréal, directeur de recherche du labo ARN (http://www.associationneuroeducation.org/)  ainsi que les publications de Pascale Toscani (uniquement en français) dont le plus connu est "Les neurosciences en classe" (voir aussi: http://recherche.uco.fr/departements/grene-groupe-de-recherche-en-neurosciences-educatives-31534.kjsp).Cette chercheuse travaille notamment avec des équipes d'enseignants qui construisent des séquences d'apprentissage dans une perspective de neuroéducation. J'ai moi-même développé un projet de ce type dans une classe de 2e année primaire (enfant de 7 ans) dans le contexte d'apprentissages en histoire (http://prezi.com/wq8rpjotiso_/?utm_campaign=share&utm_medium=copy)

Cordialement,

Sandra Hennay

Haute Ecole Robert Schuman.

 Dear Sandra Hennay · Haute Ecole Robert Schuman

Bonjour:

Me gustaría contactar con usted para este y otros temas.

[email protected]

Saludos

Dear Wes,

Thank you for your answer. The articles are very interesting. It is important to be aware of the myths in education to avoid fallinfg into out-of-evidence conclusions. Thats is why is important to perform research in education at schools and institutions.

Anna Forés and Marta Ligoiz (2014), point out in their book that to be conscious of dominance for one hemisphere in learning is important for compensating with the stimulation of the other hemisphere via combination of channels of communication, and thus use both hemispheres for learning, as we use two legs for walking.

Estimado Pedro,

Gracias por la respuesta. Espero que al menos alguien encuentre útil este post.

Thanks for your answer. I hope at least someone finds useful this post.

Dear Sandra,

Thank you for your answer. I think it is important to include primary school here, too.

Providing an educational environment that strategically expands students' working memory assists in their efficient thinking and problem-solving can also help to increase motivation and endurance when learning difficult concepts (Ashcroft & Kirk, 2001).  This efficiency, once shared, allows the students to make their thinking visible to their classmates and teachers thus enabling a greater understanding of the processes they used for their learning or resolution of a particular curriculum related problem.

The implications for developing lessons that train up an individual's effective thinking skills through expansion of the working memory, are two-fold.  Initially, teachers' instruction will be informed by their students' visible thinking, and, secondly through the practices that allow for the expansion of an individual's working memory.  Greater availability for working memory increases innovation for problem-solving and expedites human recall.  

Use of neuroscience research to provide pre-service and in-service teachers with the skill base that allows for this type of educational environment that fosters students' thinking and questioning, will lead to greater student achievement and teachers' improved instructional capacity (Alloway & Alloway, 2010).

Also please look at the work done at Harvard. http://www.gse.harvard.edu/masters/mbe

Dear Marcel:

             I am a neuroscientist with a long-standing interest in education.  My primary area of research is the cognitive neuroscience of the cerebral cortex, in particular the prefrontal cortex.  I agree with Räzvan, that the application of neuroscience to education must be approached at the proper level of analysis, lest we fall into or under what he amusingly calls a “neuro umbrella.”  In my opinion, the best neuroscientific level of analysis of the subject is what we call the “mesoscopic” level, that is, the level of neuronal networks and populations.  At that level, the most useful and well-substantiated neural model with respect to education is the Perception-Action (PA) Cycle.  Here I will describe it as briefly, clearly and cautiously as I can.

             1.  Memory and knowledge are made and stored in the brain in the form of widely distributed, overlapping and interactive cortical neuron networks called cognitive networks or cognits.   Their aggregate constitutes the cerebral substrate of cognition and of the educational PA Cycle.

            2.  The PA Cycle has deep biological roots. Essentially, it is the circular cybernetic processing of information that adapts the organism to its environment.  In the course of goal-directed behavior and language, the PA Cycle consists of the following series of processing steps: (a) perceptual information—coming through the senses—is analyzed of in posterior cortex; (b) the result of that analysis informs executive cortex for action; (c) action-induced changes in the environment produce renewed sensory input; (d) renewed perceptual analysis of those changes; (e) renewed adaptive or corrected action toward the goal; and so on, in circular fashion, until the goal is reached.

            3.  Paralleling and interacting with that cognitive PA Cycle is an emotional PA Cycle that runs also through the environment and through cortical and subcortical regions of the limbic system.  This cycle processes feedback and feed-forward signals related to reward, punishment and error.      

            4.  In education, both PA cycles operate in tandem through neural networks with the goal of acquiring, storing, and utilizing new knowledge.  Of course in the environmental parts of the cycles are the teacher, the parent, and the technological teaching aids, as well as the culture in which the student is immersed.

            5.  In the hierarchically higher cortex engaged in PA cycles, are mechanisms to make the cycles most efficient.  Among them are the mechanisms enabling the learning to learn.  This ability is supported by commonly designated executive functions of the frontal lobe: attention, working memory, planning, and decision-making.  All these functions are exercised under control of the prefrontal cortex in cooperation with other brain structures.  All can be trained to enhance the student’s good study habits.

             6.  Also formed at upper stages of the cerebral cortex are neuronal networks that represent higher values and principles of human ethics.  They are made in high-level PA cycles that incorporate, in the environment, the good counsel end example of fellow humans.

Cheers y un fuerte abrazo,

Joaquín

Dear Christine,

Thank you for your documented answer and for highlighting the importance of the relationship of working memory with higher cognitive skills. I hope also neuroscience may bring adequate training to teachers in order to provide a basis in the neurobiology of learning, brain structure and network scaffolding.

Dear Lora,

Thank you for your comment. To know that there are already programs about the topic in first order universities is encouraging.

Dear Joaquin,

Many thanks for the insightful explaination about this model of network organization in the context of education. Its a main topic of interest for me how the brain acquires new experiences via bottom up transmission of preceptions and how prefrontal cortex exerts its top down control for selective execution of calculations via specialized network assemblies. It may be very helpful also to include all this information in trainings about brain neurobiology for students and teachers.

Gracias y encantado de poder interaccionar contigo.

Marcel, thank you for asking this question!  Joaqin, thank you for your answer! (apologies to the other answerers, in the interest of time, I didn't read anything besides Joaquin's response and Marcel's summary). tl;dr.   :)

I am interested in the social aspects of how we learn.  While there is certainly science involved in learning, there is also the social context of the practice that is being learned.  When I read Joaquin's process in #2, I see places where the community of co-learners may play a part in the analysis processes. Especially when Joaquin mentions that the culture of the learning environment is taken into consideration.

Marcel, in what ways do you anticipate this level of neuroscience detail would help teachers teach?  How might publishers incorporate this understanding into their content? And Joaqin, how do you see your research informing education?  As a former teacher, it feels overwhelming to understand this level of detail about how my students learn individually when I have 30 at once that I need to progress on to the next grade. :) 

Dear Barb,

Thank you for your poins about social implications of learning. In response to your first question, the idea would be that the students and teachers have a basis in the general aspects of how their brains learn with some specific training. I think this would make them more conscious of the learning process and would help to make it more meaningful for them. This for example may also help to avoid propagation of false miths in education and neuroscience. I am sure that neuroeducation has many more educational implications which I don't know yet or did't think about them. The field is open to exploration.

To the second question, I think that the inclusion of this content from publishers has to start with evidence that neurodidactics principles work at schools via applied research in the classrooms, and in a second stage concrete policies should be undertaken by governments to extend it, I guess. The truth is that I don't know how that should be generally implemented, I think we need to know first if it works.

Dear Barb,

            I am myself and my circumstance (“Yo soy yo y mi circunstancia”).  So declared Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset, one of the most insightful writers of the 20th century.  By circumstance he meant the culture, history, collective memory, tradition, and ethics in which we are born and grow up.  In a broad sense, it includes all influences from the surround that shape our memory, our knowledge, our character and our habits.  In a narrow sense, with regard to education, it includes what you call the social context of the student.  That social context is an essential element of education, inseparable from formal education.  From the point of view of neuroscience, that social context is very much a part of the Perception-Action (PA) Cycle with both of its circular components, cognitive and emotional.  Now, what do we do with it?  That, I sense, is the critical question behind your post.

            As you probably noticed, I have no major trouble formulating and defending the neuroscience principles at a mesoscopic level (the only applicable level to education) behind the operations of the PA Cycle, which I consider essential to behavior, language and reasoning.  I have no trouble understanding how the social context enters and works in the pedagogic cycle of the child, with positive and negative feed-forward and feedback.  Unfortunately, however, given that each child comes to the school with a different social context, it is not always easy to integrate formal education with that context.  I can well appreciate, Barb, what it is to deal, individually or collectively, with 30 students in a class, some of them perhaps unruly, intellectually limited or worse.

            Some of the following methods or remedies may not sound scientific, but in my modest opinion they are: (a) as the teacher, get to know each student and the social context in which he/she lives and has lived; (b) facilitate parent/teacher contacts and associations, make of the parents allies--if necessary find a surrogate, friend or member of extended family;  (c) get to know what motivates each student, in addition to what has been customarily used and institutionalized; (d) attempt to use star students as models for others, avoiding the humiliation of those others; (e) do not attempt to achieve “uniform standards” that may be too high for some and too low for others; (f) consider at all times that the development of emotional intelligence is as important to society as that of cognitive intelligence; (g) educate school administrators and politicians about those things.

            Sorry Barb if you think all this is trite or commonplace, at best “useful but non-scientific.”  For I think it is all in consonance with sound modern neuroscience and with the way the PA Cycle works in the brain of the student.

            With warm regards, Joaquín

Bioneuroemotion has been questioned recently in Spain.

http://infocatolica.com/blog/infories.php/1601080636-el-colegio-de-psicologia-de-c

For good reason. It's an empty concept.  Joaquín

Dear Mariano, would you have some link in which I can read some sources in English or French? I shall appreciate your response.

Dear Mariano, 

Thank you for your piece of news.

Fortunately, psychology is a science which applies its interventions based on scientific evidence.

Thank you all for your kind contributions and encouraging comments.

As I understand, it might be worthy to start to speak about a field of Applied Neurodidactics, in case it is accompanied with evidence of its effects in students learning, traduced into research at schools and institutions.

I whish you all the best.

Marcel

Dear Joaquin,

Thank you for your thoughtful answer.  I apologize, if my earlier post came across as critical or condescending -- I have to chalk that up to my own ignorance as a novice researcher.  I hope you can forgive me.

I really do appreciate your contributions as I am personally trying to make the connections between social learning theory and neuroscience and the cognitive aspects of learning that are surely there.

I also have years of experience in corporate training where some firms are trying to make claims about learning from neuroscience research that  are not accurate.  So part of my quest in reading this thread was to get my own understanding of where the field is.

All the best,

Barb

Hi Marcel,

Having read your profile you have a rich and wide experience in neuroscience research and understandably, as a newly experienced teacher, you wish to see your previous experience influencing your classroom practice. Your first question raises negative historical issues around the exaggerated claims of teaching methods based on preliminary evidence from neuroscience such as learning styles and brain gym that are now unproven. These methods mainly derive from the USA which of course is profit driven - snake oil salesmen abound. So caution is a key word. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272477214_The_myths_surrounding_%27brain-based%27_learning

Your second question goes to heart of my thinking and experience about neuroscience and classroom practice, from age 5 to 18. There are a number of peer reviewed articles (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Crossland) publications list that were produced as a result of classroom based research with 4 advanced skills teachers (UK OFSTED outstanding) that looked at models of learning from cognitive psychology that were underpinned by any evidence from neuroscience. The 4 teachers were convinced this research greatly influenced their teaching and raised the level of engagement in their classrooms for all ages and abilities of learners. Their teacher assessments showed increases in outcomes. This research took place from 1998 to 2005 so it is not entirely up-to-date-now. However I have not seen any published research articles with this methodology that supersedes them.

The models were built into a programme used with over 100 primary and secondary schools in North Yorkshire. The teachers found the combination of models from cognitive psychology underpinned by neuroscience instrumental in continuing with the new focus on learning opportunities while the learners themselves struggled to learn how to make the most of these new opportunities.  

Some of the techniques were also built into Let's Think Secondary Science that is undergoing a randomised control trial of 50 secondary schools that is being funded by the charitable organisation Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) - https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk The results are due out later this year. The EEF recently commissioned 6 trials linking neuroscience to classroom practice that will be reported in 2017 or later.

Best wishes, John Crossland

Article The myths surrounding 'brain-based' learning

Dear John,

Thank you for your resources and for sharing all this research and initiatives.

I understand your message of caution, and I agree to the fact that the disclosure of myths is key in the understanding of what neuroscience can provide to education. There is a quite large amount of literature trying to dissect this topic, which in my opinion is crucial if one wants to translate the last learnings from the brain to classroom practice. In fact, 'brain-based' methods is not one of my favourite words, as stated before in the post, as brain has been and will be the subject and object of learning.

From my point of view, better than designing imaginative methods or strategies for teaching constructed de novo from the recent knowledge in the brain, neuroscience can try to fulfill the gaps of the ones that we already use, making them more meaningful to students. This could help to propagate the idea that the brain is something we directly and consciously can contribute to transform, to transform ourselves, rather than an unaccessible tool that is there because our bodies contain it. 

For me, it is more that neuroscience has something to explain, rather that something to invent.

I agree with your comment about neuroscience being made more meaningful to  learners of all ages. In this way they can see that they are not stuck with what they were born with - the intelligence approach - but plasticity allows for each person to develop and transform their competencies. Carol Dweck calls this a positive mind set. She carried out research which showed a positive mind set producing higher grades. However this requires effort from the learner and the acceptance that the brain learns more by failing than by answering questions about already learned concepts. It is now very clear that there are significant times of synaptic culling and regrowth https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273513058_Is_Piaget_Wrong

The brain development of the teenage years is particularly sensitive at this time and teaching learners about how they are developing with cognitive development leading emotional development can lead them to less risk taking and recognise when peer pressure can make them do things they would not normally do on their own. I put a bid into Education Endowment Foundation (EEF) to sponsor a project that looked at this particular issue but it was not successful.

Best wishes John Crossland

Article Is Piaget Wrong?

Hi John,

 I like your no-nonsense approach to cognition and your rather terse (in a good sense) and colourful articles. I already read most of your published papers and visited you consultancy site. Regarding metacognition I have a couple of comments:

First, your approach reflects the top-down functional view of cognition defined variously as socially/ culturally/ developmentally/ psychologically/ emotionally/ etc – based. This is in line with the objectives of education as a social activity. There is, however, another approach to cognition as a way in which multicellular organisms developed the ability to move. In other words, we have the brain for only one reason - to move our collective bodies (within the environment). This has been made abundantly clear by Daniel Wolpert in his TED presentation:

           https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_wolpert_the_real_reason_for_brains  

Second, one can investigate functioning of the brain by studying its (bodily/physical) expressions, which is a domain of cognitive linguistics. I used this methodology to study the brain as a means for movement.

Third, various human expressions suggest the common underlying structure associated with the movement of multicellular collections. This conceptualisation answers the following question – how the multicellular collections organise their own coordinated movement. According to this view, all experiences and their expressions are products of intensive (e.g. intensity of pain) and extensive (extent of this intensity) factors. This structure is also present in higher level thinking processes and their expressions.  

In my opinion, to address the subject fully, any research of metacognition should take into account the three issues listed above. I sent this post to your consultancy address. If interested, please feel free to contact me.

Best, Wes

Thank you John and and Wes for your insights. I am very happy that there is still debate on the post.

Dear Marcel,

I met Dr. Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa some years ago, she has done a big meta - analysis of neuroscience applied to learning - and from it developed a well sustained list of "best practices in the classroom". Her site is full of articles and information on Mind, Brain and Education; that is the convergence of psychology, neuroscience and education directed towards the practice of teaching and learning.

I hope that helps!

Inkeri

http://traceytokuhama.com/

Dear Marcel et al.

For my Spanish-speaking colleagues, I am attaching a dialog with José Antonio Marina on the relations between neuroscience and education to appear in the journal of the Consejo Escolar del Estado: Participación Educativa, 2:5-9, 2016.  I hope you will find it interesting.  Cheers, Joaquín

Thank you Inkeri and Joaquín for those interesting resources. 

Dear Joaquín,

For me are evident the parallelisms between your 'cognit' model and the constructivist theory formulated by Piaget, This is one example where neuroscience could give an underlying biological substrate to explain an educational theory with proven experimental evidence. Please, excuse my reductionism, I am aware that both your model and Piaget's theory have further dimensions.

I hope all these initiatives help to push up the Mind, Brain and Education emerging field, and let it flourish as expected.