Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Gdp2 2013 14-13
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Gdp2 2013 14-13

389

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
389
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
17
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Neuromyths in Education: Prevalence and Predictors of Misconceptions among TeachersSanne Dekker,1,* Nikki C. Lee,1 Paul Howard-Jones,2 and Jelle Jolles1 2012http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3475349/
  • Transcript

    • 1. Can evidence-based education do more harm than good? How to deal with myths in education OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS REASONS INTEREST
    • 2. • 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. The central finding of the present paper however, is certainly the noticeably higher overall effect in studies performed by Rauscher and colleagues than in studies performed by other researchers, indicating systematically moderating effects of lab affiliation. On the whole, there is little evidence left for a specific, performanceenhancing Mozart effect. (Pietschnig, et al, 2010)
    • 4. Mr. Miller, a Democrat, proposed as part of his $12.5 billion state budget on Tuesday to spend $105,000 to make music available to each of the approximately 100,000 children born in Georgia each year. ‘‘No one questions that listening to music at a very early age affects the spatial, temporal reasoning that underlies math and engineering and even chess,'' the Governor said today. ''Having that infant listen to soothing music helps those trillions of brain connections to develop.’
    • 5. Origins of neuromyths 1. Distortions of scientific facts, undue simplifications 2. Offspring of scientific hypotheses that have been held true for a while, and then abandoned because of the emergence of new evidence 3. Use of scientific jargon with no scientific reference, even loose
    • 6. Specialization of the hemispheres “Equilibration of the hemisperes”, as in Brain Gym
    • 7. Origins of neuromyths 1. Distortions of scientific facts, undue simplifications 2. Offspring of scientific hypotheses that have been held true for a while, and then abandoned because of the emergence of new evidence 3. Use of scientific jargon with no scientific reference, even loose
    • 8. Sensible periods for the development of specific functions Synaptogenesis in early development Hyper-stimulation before 3 years
    • 9. Origins of neuromyths 1. Distortions of scientific facts, undue simplifications 2. Offspring of scientific hypotheses that have been held true for a while, and then abandoned because of the emergence of new evidence 3. Use of scientific jargon with no scientific reference, even loose
    • 10. Brain imaging shows only some spots as “active” Crap: from spoon benders to ESP
    • 11. Other myths Brain muscle Plastic brain Baby (techno)-mutants
    • 12. Definition of neuromyth Loosely inspired to neuroscientific fact and theoriess False belief Expressed in a scientific jargon Resilient to available knowledge
    • 13. Other scientific myths Other scientific myths
    • 14. Urban legends • • Stories that stick – Concern people – Have mystery – Involve the search for causes – Are emotional – Have a moral (Why not using them in education?)
    • 15. Illusions • • • • • Systematic Robust Perceptual and cognitive phenomena That provoke surprise Because they conflict with evidence/other appraisals of reality
    • 16. 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
    • 17. The risk of Neuromyths OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS REASONS INTEREST
    • 18. Reasons 1. Communication shortcomings a. Placebic information b. Sensationalism c. Missing information Longer explanations Langer et al 1978
    • 19. Placebic information The adolescent brain Localization of functions
    • 20. 1. Communication shortcomings a. Placebic information b. Sensationalism c. Missing information
    • 21. Sensationalism 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) Persistence in memory of false information Seifert 2002
    • 22. 1. Communication shortcomings a. Placebic information b. Sensationalism c. Missing information
    • 23. Missing information Expert images & the polaroid effect
    • 24. 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. (Weisberg 2008)
    • 25. Reasons 2. Neurophilia and the promotion of private agendas • Public interest • Newspapers, projects & reports • Private agendas • Commercial products • Proliferation of neuro-labels
    • 26. Reasons 3. Cognitive illusions and biases • Soothing function • Optimistic cognitive illusions • Confirmation bias • Correlation/causation illusions • Familiarity/Availability bias • Source amnesia
    • 27. Confirmation bias Correlation & causation illusions
    • 28. Familiarity/Availability/Repre sentativity biases Source memory/amnesia
    • 29. The risk of Neuromyths OVERVIEW ON NEUROMYTHS REASONS INTEREST
    • 30. Diffusion • Few studies about the diffusion of neuromyths among educators • But at least two flawed approaches are diffused, which incorporate neuromyths – Brain Gym – VAK Learning Styles
    • 31. Brain gym
    • 32. VAK learning styles
    • 33. • Ethical implications (because of the encounter between science and applications) – Money spent on phony interventions = money not spent on effective interventions – Interference with the understanding of the real processes – Misuse of science • Cognitive implications – Like illusions and other misconceptions, neuromyt hs reveal the functioning of our mind – when we come in contact with applied science

    ×