Analysis from Brookings Nonresident Senior Fellow John, T. Bruer indicates that on the subject of using science to improve education, research is more effective than using neuroscience.

The paper, titled Research Base for Improved Classroom Learning: Brain or Behavior? found that traditional education research is more effective in improving classroom learning outcomes as opposed to the recently favored method of using educational neuroscience data.

Part of the reason behind this, however, could be because educational neuroscience is a young, still-developing field.

"In a literature review of 44,000 unique documents in education research and educational neuroscience, Bruer finds that education research provides the most insights into designing evidence-based interventions to truly improve classroom learning, noting that educational neuroscience is still at an early stage of development,” the Brookings Institution said in a statement.

"For example, he cites a January 2015 White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Workshop, Bridging Neuroscience and Learning, where no participants could list successful neuroscience-based interventions that addressed real-world educational problems.”

Results from the behavioral and cognitive sciences, he says, are more reliable at this point in time when looking to improve education.

While Bruer argues against completing dispelling educational neuroscience, he advises researchers to think twice before relying on the method on its own.

Read the full paper here.

Article by Nicole Gorman, Education World Contributor

12/17/2015