The Educational Relevance of Research in Cognitive Neuroscience Export

@article{citeulike:247828, abstract = {The benefits of incorporating findings from cognitive neuroscience into the field of educational psychology are considered. The first section begins with arguments against the idea that one can ignore the brain when positing a model of student learning or motivation. The second section describes limitations in the methods used to reveal brain-cognition relations. In the third section, properties of the brain and brain development are described. The fourth section summarizes the cognitive neuroscientific research on attention, memory, reading, and math. Finally, areas of future research in cognitive neuroscience are suggested that would help answer important questions about individual and developmental differences in student learning.}, author = {Byrnes, James P. and Fox, Nathan A.}, citeulike-article-id = {247828}, citeulike-linkout-0 = {http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1023/A:1022145812276}, comment = {This article presents the argument that educational research needs to be informed by cogntivit neuroscience results. The implication is that if it is not, the resulting models describing educational learning may be inadequate. They argue that "in order to know how to improve student learning or student motivation, and educational psychologist has to have an accurate and sufficiently precise model of learning or motivation" (p299) and they argue that the needed specificity can be provided by neuroscience. The artilce discusses the various methods employed by cognitive neuroscience to investigate relationships between brain-cognition and then go on to discuss what is known (1998) regarding brain-cognition. This can be summarized by the quote: "Neuroscientific research suggests that higher-order cognitive Functions ... consist of a number of loer-order functions that seem to be localized in specific regions of the brain. These lower-order functions (a) become operative in a probabalistic manner, (b) operate in parallel, and (c) often produce redundant outputs that converge on the same conlusions" (p.316) and thus... "educational psychologists should expect the following outcomes in any given experiment with nondisabled students: (a) the correlation between performance on any one lower-order function and achievement is likely to be small (because the factor is likely to be neither neccessary nor sufficient for sucess), and (b) internventions that target a single loer-order function will probably have a small effect." (p316-317) Note finally, that the approach taken here seems to be that of brain-mind vs. body-mind taken by Alva Noe.}, doi = {doi:10.1023/A:1022145812276}, journal = {Educational Psychology Review}, keywords = {attention, brain, cognition, cognitive\_neuroscience, consciousness, memory}, number = {3}, pages = {297--342}, posted-at = {2005-07-06 15:17:39}, priority = {0}, title = {The Educational Relevance of Research in Cognitive Neuroscience}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1023/A:1022145812276}, volume = {10}, year = {1998} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:247828 L3 - citeulike-article-id:247828 N2 - The benefits of incorporating findings from cognitive neuroscience into the field of educational psychology are considered. The first section begins with arguments against the idea that one can ignore the brain when positing a model of student learning or motivation. The second section describes limitations in the methods used to reveal brain-cognition relations. In the third section, properties of the brain and brain development are described. The fourth section summarizes the cognitive neuroscientific research on attention, memory, reading, and math. Finally, areas of future research in cognitive neuroscience are suggested that would help answer important questions about individual and developmental differences in student learning. IS - 3 JF - Educational Psychology Review EP - 342 TI - The Educational Relevance of Research in Cognitive Neuroscience VL - 10 SP - 297 KW - attention KW - brain KW - cognition KW - cognitive_neuroscience KW - consciousness KW - memory N1 - This article presents the argument that educational research needs to be informed by cogntivit neuroscience results. The implication is that if it is not, the resulting models describing educational learning may be inadequate. They argue that "in order to know how to improve student learning or student motivation, and educational psychologist has to have an accurate and sufficiently precise model of learning or motivation" (p299) and they argue that the needed specificity can be provided by neuroscience. The artilce discusses the various methods employed by cognitive neuroscience to investigate relationships between brain-cognition and then go on to discuss what is known (1998) regarding brain-cognition. This can be summarized by the quote: "Neuroscientific research suggests that higher-order cognitive Functions ... consist of a number of loer-order functions that seem to be localized in specific regions of the brain. These lower-order functions (a) become operative in a probabalistic manner, (b) operate in parallel, and (c) often produce redundant outputs that converge on the same conlusions" (p.316) and thus... "educational psychologists should expect the following outcomes in any given experiment with nondisabled students: (a) the correlation between performance on any one lower-order function and achievement is likely to be small (because the factor is likely to be neither neccessary nor sufficient for sucess), and (b) internventions that target a single loer-order function will probably have a small effect." (p316-317) Note finally, that the approach taken here seems to be that of brain-mind vs. body-mind taken by Alva Noe. AU - Byrnes, James AU - Fox, Nathan PY - 1998/// UR - http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1023/A:1022145812276 ER -