23 SES 05 D, European Policies on the School Curriculum (Part 1)
Paper Session: to be continued in 23 SES 06 D
Emergent subject since 2000, educational neuroscience has a fascination power especially for politics and the media. Seeing how the brain works through elaborate images and complex calculations makes us believe that we know how to link brain functions and learning (for example the “reading neurons" !) From a political point of view, these “discoveries” seem more efficient to implement reforms in the classroom than any educational research results. Why do politicians, or why do educative policy need to rely on what they call "scientifically-based research"? They may have the illusion (generally encouraged by neuroscientists themselves) that solutions for all educational issues will come out of the structured methods used in neuroscience experiments, with no regards what so ever for educational research. But technical tools used in neuroscience are not yet as accurate as we can expect and neuroscientific results in the field of cognition must be considered carefully, some of them waiting to be confirmed by the research community. Besides, many cognitive neuroscientific researches sometimes try to confirm what was already demonstrated by previous psychological researchers.
In this context, the gap between the on-going international researches and the extrapolated results may give birth to misinterpretations of neuroscientific facts, the neuromyths. Decision makers around the world as well as teachers (and parents) should therefore be more informed about neuroscientific discoveries and their limitations regarding pedagogical objectives.
Based on the raging discussion in France about the teaching of reading, we will discuss in this paper the following questions:
- can neuroscientific results be applied directly from the laboratory to the classroom?
- what are the consequences of any experiment on students from an ethical point of view and what is the responsability of policy makers in the interpretation of their results?
Ansari Daniel & Coch Donna (2006). « Bridges over troubled waters: Education and cognitive neuroscience ». Trends in cognitive sciences, vol. 10, n° 4, avril, p. 146-151. Bruer John T. (2002). Tout est-il joué avant trois ans ? Paris : Odile Jacob. Centre pour la recherche et l’innovation dans l’enseignement (CERI) (2007). Comprendre le cerveau : Naissance d’une science de l’apprentissage. Paris : OCDE. Claeys Alain & Vialatte Jean-Sébastien (2012). L’impact et les enjeux des nouvelles technologies d’exploration et de thérapie du cerveau. Rapport n°476. Paris : Office parlementaire d'évaluation des choix scientifiques et technologiques. Dehaene Stanislas (2011). Apprendre à lire. Des sciences cognitives à la salle de classe. Paris : Odile Jacob. Dehaene Stanislas (2012). « Que nous apprennent les neurosciences sur les meilleures pratiques pédagogiques ? ». Regards croisés sur l’économie, vol. 12, n° 2, janvier, p. 231-244. Eisenhart Margaret & DeHaan Robert L. (2005). « Doctoral preparation of scientifically based educational researchers ». Educational Researcher, vol. 34, n° 4, mai, p. 3-13. Goswami Usha (2006). « Neuroscience and education: From research to practice? ». Nature Reviews Neurosciences, vol. 7, n° 5, mai, p. 406–413. Howard-Jones Paul (2010). Introducing neuroeducational research: Neuroscience, education and the brain from contexts to practice. New-York : Routledge. Lindell Annukka K. & Kidd Evan (2011). « Why right-brain teaching is half-witted: A critique of the misapplication of neuroscience to education ». Mind, Brain, and Education, vol. 5, n° 3, p. 121-127. Masson Steve (2007). « Enseigner les sciences en s’appuyant sur la neurodidactique des sciences ». In Potvin Patrice, Riopel Martin & Masson Steve (dir.), Regards multiples sur l’enseignement des sciences, p. 308–321. McCabe David P. & Castel Alan D. (2008). « Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning ». Cognition, vol. 107, n° 1, avril, p. 343-352. National Research Council (2002). Scientific Research in Education. Washington : The National Academies Press. Pasquinelli Elena (2012). « Neuromyths: Why do they exist and persist? ». Mind, Brain, and Education, vol. 6, n° 2, p. 89–96. Schrag Francis (2011). « Does neuroscience matter for education? ». Educational Theory, vol. 61, n° 2, p. 221–237. Stein Zachary, Della Chiesa Bruno, Hinton Christina & Fischer Kurt W. (2011). Ethical issues in educational neuroscience: Raising children in a brave new world. New-York : Oxford University Press.
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.