职前教师的神经科学素养和循证实践:试点研究

IF 3.4 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Kristin Simmers, Ido Davidesco
{"title":"职前教师的神经科学素养和循证实践:试点研究","authors":"Kristin Simmers,&nbsp;Ido Davidesco","doi":"10.1016/j.tine.2024.100228","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>K-12 educators are susceptible to “neuromyths” or misconceptions about the brain and learning, yet how these beliefs relate to practice is not yet understood. This exploratory pilot study investigated how knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning relate to knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Preservice teachers (<em>N</em> = 29) completed an online survey that measured their knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, including belief in neuromyths, and their knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Pre-service teachers commonly endorsed several neuromyths, consistent with prior research. There was a strong positive correlation between participants’ knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, and knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Our findings suggest that new teachers with better knowledge of the brain and learning may also have more knowledge of evidence-based principles, though more research is needed to determine their impact on teaching.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46228,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","volume":"35 ","pages":"Article 100228"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949324000097/pdfft?md5=11c13f8dddec7d743766715c39d95468&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949324000097-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neuroscience literacy and evidence-based practices in pre-service teachers: A pilot study\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Simmers,&nbsp;Ido Davidesco\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tine.2024.100228\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Aim</h3><p>K-12 educators are susceptible to “neuromyths” or misconceptions about the brain and learning, yet how these beliefs relate to practice is not yet understood. This exploratory pilot study investigated how knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning relate to knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Preservice teachers (<em>N</em> = 29) completed an online survey that measured their knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, including belief in neuromyths, and their knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Pre-service teachers commonly endorsed several neuromyths, consistent with prior research. There was a strong positive correlation between participants’ knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, and knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.</p></div><div><h3>Discussion</h3><p>Our findings suggest that new teachers with better knowledge of the brain and learning may also have more knowledge of evidence-based principles, though more research is needed to determine their impact on teaching.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"volume\":\"35 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100228\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949324000097/pdfft?md5=11c13f8dddec7d743766715c39d95468&pid=1-s2.0-S2211949324000097-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Trends in Neuroscience and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949324000097\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Neuroscience and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211949324000097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 K-12 教育工作者容易受到 "神经迷思 "或有关大脑和学习的错误观念的影响,但这些观念与实践之间的关系尚不清楚。这项探索性试点研究调查了有关大脑与学习的知识和信念与循证教学原则的知识之间的关系。方法 在职前教师(29 人)完成了一项在线调查,该调查测量了他们有关大脑与学习的知识和信念,包括对神经迷思的信念,以及他们对循证教学原则的知识。讨论我们的研究结果表明,对大脑和学习有更多了解的新教师也可能对循证原则有更多的了解,但要确定这些原则对教学的影响还需要更多的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neuroscience literacy and evidence-based practices in pre-service teachers: A pilot study

Aim

K-12 educators are susceptible to “neuromyths” or misconceptions about the brain and learning, yet how these beliefs relate to practice is not yet understood. This exploratory pilot study investigated how knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning relate to knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.

Methods

Preservice teachers (N = 29) completed an online survey that measured their knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, including belief in neuromyths, and their knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.

Results

Pre-service teachers commonly endorsed several neuromyths, consistent with prior research. There was a strong positive correlation between participants’ knowledge and beliefs about the brain and learning, and knowledge of evidence-based teaching and learning principles.

Discussion

Our findings suggest that new teachers with better knowledge of the brain and learning may also have more knowledge of evidence-based principles, though more research is needed to determine their impact on teaching.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
6.10%
发文量
22
审稿时长
65 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信