EDUC 775
Discussion Assignment Instructions
You must reply to both of the classmates post below with at least 200 words each. Any scholarly resource cited must have been published within the last five years. Acceptable sources include the course textbooks and articles from scholarly journals. Please avoid the use of websites.
For your replies, note that responses such as “I like what you said,” “That is a good comment,” and “I disagree with your comment” do not count as complete replies in and of themselves. Rather, state why you liked or disliked a peer’s thread, present additional thoughts or ideas, and provide alternative ideas/thoughts when you disagree. Courtesy in any disagreement is expected; however, you are expected to know and maintain proper online etiquette as outlined on the Student Expectations page in the Course Overview.
Response 1 (Kamili)
A quote from Immordino-Yang & Damasio (2007) best describes the intentions of how these two go hand in in. “Those of us in the field of education often fail to consider that the high-level cognitive skills taught in schools, including reasoning, decision making and processes related to language, reading and mathematics do not function as rational, disembodied systems, somehow influenced by but detached from the emotion and the body” (p. 3).
In Tommerdhal’s article, its primary focus on taking a bigger lens at looking at education through a scientific approach. He had proposed that when it comes to the role that that neuroscience plays in education. He describes neurosciences as “an excellent source of knowledge regarding learning processes” (2010, p.97). This encourages educators and psychologist to examine the ways that different parts of the learning process can be absorbed through studying one’s learning types and experimenting with the complexities of the brain and parts of the brain that adheres to learning language, music, and other critical paths. This article covers the pros and cons of trying to force the “lab” into the classroom setting due to the many variables that would be in play. ” For effective teaching methods which are based on neuroscientific findings and which are supported by a scientific evidence base, most or all of these levels of work, and possibly more in some cases, are necessary to their development” (p.99).
Some other research conducted by Clement and Lovat (2012) discussed the issues and challenges when it comes to designing curriculums based on neuroscience perspective. A critical part of a child/individual having a successful education depends on the curriculum crafted. For researchers and Educators trying to combine the two areas of expertise; one must consider that when it comes to the decision‐making process that focus on an intense process that involves the selection of content and the crafting of specific skill sets that are relevant to the targeted learners, and basically involves the selecting, sequencing, organizing, structuring and evaluation of knowledge, resources and activities. (p.536). This can have vast impact either via direct or indirect means upon the specific discipline one learns.
References:
Clement, N. D., & Lovat, T. (2012). Neuroscience and Education: Issues and Challenges for Curriculum.
Curriculum Inquiry,
42(4), 534–557.
to an external site.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. R. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: Therelevance of affect and social neuroscience to education. Mind, Brain, and Edu-cation, 1, 3–10.
Tommerdahl, J. (2010). A model for bridging the gap between neuroscience and education.
Oxford Review of Education,
36(1), 97–109.
to an external site.
Response 2 (Jessica)
The increasing integration of neuroscience into educational practices has sparked considerable interest among educators eager to enhance their teaching methodologies by incorporating insights from brain research. This growing trend highlights the potential for neuroscience to provide a deeper understanding of how students learn, leading to more effective educational strategies. Tommerdahl (2010) addresses the ongoing challenge of translating neuroscientific findings into practical applications within educational settings. Recognizing the complexity of this task, Tommerdahl proposed a five-level model designed to facilitate this integration. The model includes levels ranging from neuroscience, cognitive neuroscience, psychology, educational theory, and testing to the classroom. Each level represents a critical component of the educational process, and together, they promote collaboration among researchers and educators, foster professional development, and encourage effective communication across disciplines. By bridging these levels, Tommerdahl’s model seeks to ensure that the insights gained from neuroscience are effectively translated into teaching practices that directly benefit students.
In addition to Tommerdahl’s work, Schwartz and Goldstone (2015) delve into the concept that learning involves coordinating various cognitive processes. Their research in cognitive psychology emphasizes the importance of understanding these processes, such as attention, memory, and problem-solving, and how they interact during the learning experience. By applying cognitive psychology principles to educational settings, educators can develop strategies better aligned with how students naturally process information, leading to improved teaching and learning outcomes. Schwartz and Goldstone’s exploration of cognitive coordination underscores the need for a multidisciplinary approach to education that integrates insights from neuroscience, psychology, and educational theory to create a more holistic and effective learning environment. This approach enhances the teaching methodologies employed in classrooms. It contributes to a deeper understanding of the cognitive mechanisms that underpin learning, ultimately leading to more tailored and impactful educational practices.
Daugirdiene et al. (2024) argue that neuroscience offers valuable insights into the cognitive processes underlying learning, such as memory, attention, and perception. By understanding how these processes work, educators can develop teaching strategies more closely aligned with the brain’s natural learning mechanisms, ultimately enhancing educational outcomes. However, the relationship between brain sciences and teaching methods is intricate and multifaceted, as the application of neuroscientific findings in educational settings requires careful consideration and adaptation. Marope (2016) emphasizes that bridging this gap requires collaboration between educators and scientists. By working together, they can build a solid scientific foundation for learning, teaching, and assessment, ensuring that educational practices are current with the latest advances in brain research while remaining practical and effective in diverse classroom environments.
References
Corno, L., & Anderman, E. M. (2016).
Handbook of Educational Psychology. Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an Informa business.
Daugirdiene, A., Cesnaviciene, J., & Brandisauskiene, A. (2024). Insights from the active use of neuroscience findings in teaching and learning.
Behavioral Sciences,
14(8), 639.
Marope, P. T. (2016). Brain science, education, and learning: Making connections.
PROSPECTS,
46(2), 187–190.
Schwartz , D., & Goldstone, R. (2015). Chapter 5: Learning as coordination: Cognitive psychology and education. In
Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 61–75). essay, Taylor and Francis Group. Retrieved from
Tommerdahl, J. (2010). A model for bridging the gap between Neuroscience and Education. Oxford Review of Education, 36(1), 97–109.
