There is an increasing enthusiasm on the application of Neuro‐linguistic programming (NLP) for etching and learning specifically among teachers. Is this idea scientifically supported and is there any educational implication?
I haven't read any scientific evidence. But peoples becomes more interested in Neuro linguistic programming. Some gets the results but not sure whether they are just a placebo effect or real effects due to this programming. Mostly still believes that this is pseudoscience.
Neurolinguistic programming is a pseudoscience, most (if not all) its claims regarding brain-computer analogies and brain programming are not sustained by empirical evidence and contradict the last 30 years of neuroscience research. There is no empirical evidence to support its efficacy in education, psychotherapy or any other field of application either.
Here's a short summary on the subject: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Neurolinguistic_programming
I reccommend looking for NLP articles in high impact, indexed and respected journals to confirm.
Dear Syed Zafar and Angel,
Thanks for your constructive feedback and clarifications about the NLP misconceptions. As both of you noted, this claim is not supported by valid evidence. However, there are some professions working in this area and individuals who trust to their recommendations. There is a need to inform teachers and other education practitioners about such brain-based- claims.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Mental Processes
- Learning