Survey highlights trainee teachers' misconceptions about the brain

September 3, 2009
Survey highlights trainee teachers' misconceptions about the brain

( -- Many teachers appear to be leaving training college with serious misconceptions about how the brain functions, new research suggests.

A high proportion of trainee teachers questioned by University of Bristol researchers had accepted popular myths about the that have been discounted by neuroscientists.

Almost one in five of them thought that their brains could shrink if they drank fewer than six glasses of water a day - a misplaced fear. More worryingly, a substantial proportion of the 158 students surveyed near the end of their one-year postgraduate training course appeared confused about the link between mental activity and biological . Eleven per cent of the trainees thought that consciousness was possible without a brain, and 12 per cent were not sure.

Furthermore, only a minority of the trainees (43 per cent) agreed that it was necessary to pay attention to something in order to learn it, the research team led by Dr Paul Howard-Jones, Senior Lecturer in Education, will tell the British Educational Research Association Conference in Manchester today. "It is difficult to imagine how learning - in the educational sense - without attention can occur," the researchers comment.

The views of the trainees, who were studying at an institution in England, sometimes agreed with current scientific opinion. For example, 63 per cent said that new connections in the brain can be formed into old age. A majority (55 per cent) also agreed with neuroscientists that sensitive, rather than critical, periods exist for learning. In other words, there is no clearly defined window of opportunity for learning, just periods when learning is easier.

However, many seemed to have almost as strange notions as one serving interviewed during an initial investigation that preceded the main survey. There were "some components of walnut" that help to moisturize the brain, the teacher told the researchers when asked which foods were good for the brain.

The University of Bristol team believe that there are two reasons why the trainee teachers subscribed to so many "neuromyths".

First, neuroscience is not part of the initial teacher training curriculum. "In the absence of formal training, trainee teachers acquire their own ideas about brain function, many of which are potentially detrimental to their practice as teachers," the researchers point out.

Second, many trainees - and serving teachers - appear to have been influenced by the controversial “brain-based” educational products and programmes that have been adopted by many schools in the past two decades. Most trainees had already come into contact with approaches such as “Brain Gym" and “learning styles”, presumably through school placements, the researchers say.

"This may explain why 82 per cent of trainees considered that 'Individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style', even though an extensive review of the evidence was unable to support the educational value of identifying learning styles," they comment.

The researchers add that their study showed that higher levels of general knowledge about the brain were associated with increased resistance to such ideas. "This suggests that the inclusion of some basic neuroscience in initial teacher training may help to inoculate trainees against common educational neuromyths and the poor practice associated with them," they conclude.

"The neuroscience literacy of trainee teachers," by Paul Howard-Jones, Lorna Franey, Rasha Mashmoushi and Yen-Chun Liao, will be presented at the BERA conference today.

More information: The trainees were asked to complete a survey consisting of 38 assertions about the brain. They were asked to select either “yes”, “no” or “don't know”. The initial investigation that preceded the survey took the form of semi-structured, informal interviews with a primary school headteacher, six teachers (three primary, three secondary), each with several years' experience, and six trainee secondary teachers.

Provided by University of Bristol (news : web)

Explore further: What's the brain got to do with education?

Related Stories

What's the brain got to do with education?

October 29, 2007

Quite a lot -- according to teachers in a recent survey commissioned by The Innovation Unit and carried out by researchers at the University of Bristol. Although current teacher training programmes generally omit the science ...

Mobile phones help secondary pupils

September 11, 2008

Ask a teacher to name the most irritating invention of recent years and they will often nominate the mobile phone. Exasperated by the distractions and problems they create, many headteachers have ordered that pupils must ...

Recommended for you

New paper answers causation conundrum

November 17, 2017

In a new paper published in a special issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A, SFI Professor Jessica Flack offers a practical answer to one of the most significant, and most confused questions in evolutionary ...

Chance discovery of forgotten 1960s 'preprint' experiment

November 16, 2017

For years, scientists have complained that it can take months or even years for a scientific discovery to be published, because of the slowness of peer review. To cut through this problem, researchers in physics and mathematics ...


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.