Abstract
Educational neuroscience tries to bridge neuroscience and education. It tries to combat neuromyths: beliefs that appear grounded in neuroscientific research but that are not supported by empirical evidence. One such neuromyth claims that matching teaching style to students’ preferred learning styles (e.g., visual teaching to visual learning) will lead to improved academic outcomes. The only formal way to test this meshing hypothesis is by finding a statistical crossover interaction effect which shows that matching teaching and learning styles improves academic outcomes, while non-matching teaching and learning styles negatively affects academic outcomes. Several studies are reviewed and none of these yielded empirical support for the meshing hypothesis. Reviewed studies suggest that educators widely believe the veracity of the meshing hypothesis. Predictive factors are discussed: even having some formal knowledge of neuroscience does not protect educators from endorsing neuromyths like the meshing hypothesis. An elaboration on teaching focused neuroscience to future educators is provided as a potential solution.
Reference58 articles.
1. Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for laboratory education.;Abdulwahed;Res. J. Eng. Educ.,2013
2. Improving inventory learning style.;Al-Kadri;Neuroscience (Riyadh),2008
3. The modality-specific learning style hypothesis: A mini-review.;Aslaksen;Front. Psychol.,2018
4. The learning type makes the difference – the interrelation of Kolb’s learning styles and psychological status of preclinical medical students at the University of Erlangen.;Burger;GMS Z. Med. Ausbild.,2014
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献