0
ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS           Origin      ...
ECC 2012                                     2012-13•  Rauscher, Shaw, Ky, 1993:•  effects of listening Mozart   Sonata fo...
ECC 2012                                   2012-13The central finding of thepresent paper however, iscertainly the noticea...
ECC 2012-13Mr. Miller, a Democrat, proposed aspart of his $12.5 billion state budget onTuesday to spend $105,000 to makemu...
ECC 2012-13
ECC 2012                                2012-13Origins of neuromyths1. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplificatio...
ECC 2012    2012-13
ECC 2012                              2012-131. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplifications2. Offspring of scien...
ECC 2012    2012-13
ECC 2012                                       2012-131. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplifications2. offspring...
ECC 2012    2012-13
ECC 2012                          2012-134. Bending facts towishes and fears
ECC 2012-13
ECC 2012                                           2012-13       Characteristics of neuromyths¤  A. Neuromyths have a spe...
ECC 2012-13Definition of neuromyth
ECC 2012                2012-13Illusions
ECC 2012-13Urban legends   Other myths
ECC 2012                                    2012-13  Memorable stories¤  Stories that stick    ¤  Concern people   ¤  H...
ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS           Origin      ...
ECC 2012-13   Reasons1. Communicationshortcomings    a.  Placebic        information    b.  Sensationalism    c.  Missing ...
ECC 2012-13Placebic information                           Langer et al 1978
ECC 2012-131. Communicationshortcomings    a.  Placebic        information    b.  Sensationalism    c.  Missing information
ECC 2012-13Persistence in memory of falseinformation                    There are many hypotheses in science,             ...
ECC 2012-131. Communicationshortcomings    a.  Placebic        information    b.  Sensationalism    c.  Missing information
ECC 2012-13Expert images & the polaroid effect
ECC 2012-13¤  (Weisberg 2008)   ¤  The neuroscience studies that we see in the news are regularly       accompanied by p...
ECC 2012                                  2012-13¤  All brains are shaped and organized slightly differently, just like  ...
ECC 2012-13¤  Another difference between brain images and photographs is that    fMRI technology does not measure brain a...
ECC 2012                                    2012-132. Neurophilia and thepromotion of private agendas   •  Public interest...
ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Cor...
ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Cor...
ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Cor...
ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Cor...
ECC 2012-13Education and the brain: 2approaches1. studies in education, the        2. Neuroscience as a body ofmind and br...
ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS           Origin      ...
ECC 2012-13Interest¤  Ethical implications          ¤  Cognitive implications    (because of the encounter         ¤  L...
ECC 2012-13
ECC 2012-13        Neuromyths in education¤  No studies about the    diffusion of neuromyths    among educators¤  But at...
ECC 2012-13
ECC 2012-13
ECC 2012-13¤  why do neuromyths persist   ¤  urge of application    independently of their    falsity and poor          ...
ECC 2012¤  Practical implications             ¤  Role for immediate    ¤  Instruction (general)              applicatio...
ECC 2012¤  There is growing evidence that people hold beliefs how they    learn that are faulty in various ways, which fr...
ECC 2012Questions¤  BRAIN GYM/VAK LS   ¤  Comment reasons why educators might embrace Brain       Gym/VAK LS   ¤  Comme...
Ecc2012 13 3
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Ecc2012 13 3

1,011

Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,011
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Ecc2012 13 3"

  1. 1. ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS Origin CharacteristicsREASONS Communication shortcomings Neurophilia Cognitive illusions and biasesINTEREST
  2. 2. ECC 2012 2012-13•  Rauscher, Shaw, Ky, 1993:•  effects of listening Mozart Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major (K.448)•  on adult spatial capacities•  8-9 points increase on IQ scale•  Short term effects•  Failed to be confirmed by other laboratories
  3. 3. ECC 2012 2012-13The central finding of thepresent paper however, iscertainly the noticeably higheroverall effect in studiesperformed by Rauscher andcolleagues than in studiesperformed by other researchers,indicating systematicallymoderating effects of labaffiliation. On the whole, there islittle evidence left for a specific,performance-enhancing Mozarteffect. (Pietschnig, et al, 2010)
  4. 4. ECC 2012-13Mr. Miller, a Democrat, proposed aspart of his $12.5 billion state budget onTuesday to spend $105,000 to makemusic available to each of theapproximately 100,000 children born inGeorgia each year.‘‘No one questions that listening tomusic at a very early age affects thespatial, temporal reasoning thatunderlies math and engineering andeven chess, the Governor said today.Having that infant listen to soothingmusic helps those trillions of brainconnections to develop.’
  5. 5. ECC 2012-13
  6. 6. ECC 2012 2012-13Origins of neuromyths1. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplifications2. Offspring of scientifichypotheses that have beenheld true for a while, andthen abandoned because ofthe emergence of newevidence3. Use of scientific jargon withno scientific reference, evenloose
  7. 7. ECC 2012 2012-13
  8. 8. ECC 2012 2012-131. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplifications2. Offspring of scientifichypotheses that have beenheld true for a while, andthen abandoned because ofthe emergence of newevidence3. Use of scientific jargon withno scientific reference, evenloose
  9. 9. ECC 2012 2012-13
  10. 10. ECC 2012 2012-131. Distortions of scientificfacts, undue simplifications2. offspring of scientifichypotheses that have beenheld true for a while, andthen abandoned because ofthe emergence of newevidence3. Use of scientific jargon withno scientific reference, evenloose
  11. 11. ECC 2012 2012-13
  12. 12. ECC 2012 2012-134. Bending facts towishes and fears
  13. 13. ECC 2012-13
  14. 14. ECC 2012 2012-13 Characteristics of neuromyths¤  A. Neuromyths have a special relationship with the science of the brain ¤  develop in a climate of neurophilia: the appetite for brain facts ¤  develop in a period of development of brain research¤  B. are diffused and resilient to change¤  C. are affected by explicit instruction about myths (Kowalski & Taylor 2009)
  15. 15. ECC 2012-13Definition of neuromyth
  16. 16. ECC 2012 2012-13Illusions
  17. 17. ECC 2012-13Urban legends Other myths
  18. 18. ECC 2012 2012-13 Memorable stories¤  Stories that stick ¤  Concern people ¤  Have mystery ¤  Involve the search for causes ¤  Are emotional ¤  Have a moral¤  (Why not using them in education?)
  19. 19. ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS Origin CharacteristicsREASONS Communication shortcomings Neurophilia Cognitive illusions and biasesINTEREST
  20. 20. ECC 2012-13 Reasons1. Communicationshortcomings a.  Placebic information b.  Sensationalism c.  Missing information
  21. 21. ECC 2012-13Placebic information Langer et al 1978
  22. 22. ECC 2012-131. Communicationshortcomings a.  Placebic information b.  Sensationalism c.  Missing information
  23. 23. ECC 2012-13Persistence in memory of falseinformation There are many hypotheses in science, which are wrong, that’s perfectly on right, that’s the opportunity of finding out what’s right. Science is a self- correcting process. For being accepted, ideas must survive the most rigorous standards of evidence and scrutiny. (Carl Sagan: Cosmos) Seifert 2002
  24. 24. ECC 2012-131. Communicationshortcomings a.  Placebic information b.  Sensationalism c.  Missing information
  25. 25. ECC 2012-13Expert images & the polaroid effect
  26. 26. ECC 2012-13¤  (Weisberg 2008) ¤  The neuroscience studies that we see in the news are regularly accompanied by pictures of the brain, showing colorfully "glowing" bits of neural tissue. ¤  As humans, we are highly visual creatures, accustomed to relying on the fact that what we see is actually happening in the world. ¤  Looking at these brain pictures often gives us the feeling that we have a window into the brain and that we can actually see what the brain is doing. But this is simply not accurate. An fMRI scanner is not a window or even a microscope; the output that it provides is not really a picture of the brain, at least not in the way that the output of a camera is a picture of a face.
  27. 27. ECC 2012 2012-13¤  All brains are shaped and organized slightly differently, just like other parts of the body. My brain might be slightly smaller than yours, or my hippocampus located slightly more to the left. This means that a scan of my brain and a scan of your brain would not overlap exactly.¤  But research studies require responses from multiple participants to ensure that the phenomenon under study is general, not subject-dependent. To solve the difficult problem of comparing the spatial structure of many brains when each of these structures is different, scientists have developed technical methods for standardizing each brain picture to fit a common template.
  28. 28. ECC 2012-13¤  Another difference between brain images and photographs is that fMRI technology does not measure brain activation directly. Those glowing brain pictures are not actually pictures of a glowing brain. The way that those pictures are created involves several steps of analysis and hence are several steps removed from the brain itself.¤  What fMRI scanners actually measure-and only indirectly at that-is the amount of blood flow to a given brain area, a reliable correlate of neural activity. To create a picture of brain activation from measures of blood flow, scientists first calculate the difference between the amount of blood flow in an area during one task and the amount of blood flow in the same area during a related task or a rest state.¤  Using a grid superimposed over the brain picture, they then perform statistical tests to see whether the difference in the two amounts of blood flow in each grid square is unlikely to be due to chance. Colors are assigned to the grid squares based on degree of statistical significance.¤  What we see when we look at the colored splotches in brain pictures are thus patches of statistical significance, not of activation itself
  29. 29. ECC 2012 2012-132. Neurophilia and thepromotion of private agendas •  Public interest •  Newspapers, projects & reports •  Private agendas •  Commercial products •  Proliferation of neuro- labels
  30. 30. ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Correlation/causation illusions•  Familiarity/Availability bias•  Source amnesia
  31. 31. ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Correlation/causation illusions•  Familiarity/Availability bias•  Source amnesia
  32. 32. ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Correlation/causation illusions•  Familiarity/Availability bias•  Source amnesia
  33. 33. ECC 2012-133. Cognitive illusions and biases•  Soothing function•  Optimistic cognitive illusion•  Confirmation bias•  Correlation/causation illusions•  Familiarity/Availability bias•  Source amnesia
  34. 34. ECC 2012-13Education and the brain: 2approaches1. studies in education, the 2. Neuroscience as a body ofmind and brain should hatch knowledge that can bea new interdisciplinary field of searched in order to findresearch, and devise new guidelines and/or easy fixesways for translating for education (Dennison &knowledge and evidence into Dennison, 2010; Dunn & Dunn,the design of instructional 1978)methods that work (Fischer, etal., 2007; Fischer, Goswami,Geake, 2010).
  35. 35. ECC 2012-13The risk of NeuromythsPOLICY-MAKING NEEDS (TO GET) SCIENCE (RIGHT)OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS Origin CharacteristicsREASONS Communication shortcomings Neurophilia Cognitive illusions and biasesINTEREST
  36. 36. ECC 2012-13Interest¤  Ethical implications ¤  Cognitive implications (because of the encounter ¤  Like illusions and other between science and misconceptions, applications) neuromyths reveal the ¤  Money spent on phony functioning of our mind interventions = money ¤  when we come in not spent on effective contact with applied interventions science ¤  Interference with the understanding of the real processes ¤  Misuse of science
  37. 37. ECC 2012-13
  38. 38. ECC 2012-13 Neuromyths in education¤  No studies about the diffusion of neuromyths among educators¤  But at least two flawed approaches are diffused, which incorporate neuromyths ¤  Brain Gym ¤  VAK Learning Styles
  39. 39. ECC 2012-13
  40. 40. ECC 2012-13
  41. 41. ECC 2012-13¤  why do neuromyths persist ¤  urge of application independently of their falsity and poor ¤  lack of neuroscience education in applicative value? the course of educators’ initial and professional training ¤  neurophilia can thus favor the myth that the translation of brain science into applications is just straightforward
  42. 42. ECC 2012¤  Practical implications ¤  Role for immediate ¤  Instruction (general) application of cognitive sciences (theory) ¤  Instruction (specific) ¤  Preventing mistakes ¤  Decisions based on based on having the research (science- science wrong informed and evidence-based) ¤  Debunking neuromyths ¤  Collaboration between educators and scientists
  43. 43. ECC 2012¤  There is growing evidence that people hold beliefs how they learn that are faulty in various ways, which frequently lead people to manage their own learning and teach others in non-optimal ways. This fact makes it clear that research – not intuition or standard practices – needs to be the foundation for upgrading teaching and learning. If education is to be transformed into an evidence-based field, it is important not only to identify teaching techniques that have experimental support but also to identify widely held beliefs that affect the choices made by educational practitioners but that lack empirical support¤  (Pashler et al. 2009)
  44. 44. ECC 2012Questions¤  BRAIN GYM/VAK LS ¤  Comment reasons why educators might embrace Brain Gym/VAK LS ¤  Comment reasons why they should not¤  Neuromyths: fight or flight? ¤  How?¤  List neuromyths that might affect education
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×