The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

Original Article

Neuromyths Among Teachers and Student Teachers

Eric Tardif

Corresponding Author

University of Teacher Education, HEP Vaud, , Switzerland

Address correspondence to E. Tardif, University of Teacher Education, Avenue de Cour 33, 1014 Lausanne, Switzerland; e‐mail:

eric.tardif@hepl.ch

Search for more papers by this author
Pierre‐André Doudin

University of Teacher Education, HEP Vaud, , Switzerland

Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Lausanne, , Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
Nicolas Meylan

University of Teacher Education, HEP Vaud, , Switzerland

Institute of Psychology, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, University of Lausanne, , Switzerland

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 18 February 2015
Cited by: 8

ABSTRACT

Many so‐called brain‐based educational approaches have been strongly criticized for their lack of empirical support and occasionally for their use of pseudoscientific concepts. As a result, several use the term neuromyths to refer to false beliefs or misinterpretations regarding neuroscientific facts. We surveyed both teachers and student teachers concerning their agreement toward hemispheric dominance, modality dominance, and the Brain Gym© method. Results suggest that teachers as well as student teachers believe in the reality of hemispheric and modality dominance but only a few were aware of the Brain Gym© method. Correlation analyses show moderate relationships across different beliefs and/or their perceived benefits in education. Teachers believed more than student teachers in hemispheric dominance and its pedagogical relevance. Together with other studies, the results suggest that teachers and student teachers could benefit from appropriate training in this new field of research.

Number of times cited: 8

  • , Taking an educational psychology course improves neuroscience literacy but does not reduce belief in neuromyths, PLOS ONE, 13, 2, (e0192163), (2018).
  • , L’utilité des « styles d’apprentissage » VAK (visuel, auditif, kinesthésique) en éducation : entre l’hypothèse de recherche et le mythe scientifiqueOn the usefulness of VAK (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) “learning styles” in education: Between the research hypothesis and the scientific myth, Revue de psychoéducation, 10.7202/1054067ar, 47, 2, (409), (2018).
  • , Brain Knowledge and the Prevalence of Neuromyths among Prospective Teachers in Greece, Frontiers in Psychology, 8, (2017).
  • , A critical reflection on neuromyths in moral & character education, Journal of Curriculum and Evaluation, 20, 3, (51), (2017).
  • , The Perceptions about the Brain-Related Interest and Knowledge among Pre-service Teachers, The Journal of Korean Teacher Education, 33, 1, (119), (2016).
  • , Misconceptions Regarding the Brain: The Neuromyths of Preservice Teachers, Mind, Brain, and Education, 10, 4, (212-232), (2016).
  • , Educational Neuromyths Among Teachers in Latin America, "Mind, Brain, and Education", 9, 3, (170-178), (2015).
  • , Neuromyths as a Challenge and Opportunity for the Learning and Teaching of Neuroscience, Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 10.30703/cije.457302, 7, 4, (483-494), (2018).