Tan Seng Chee

This book is written keeping in mind prospective educators as well as practicing educators who are seeking a good understanding of how technology enables, mediates or enhances learning. This book provides insights into the global trends as well as Singapore’s journey in the use of technology for teaching and learning. Readers will benefit from the various aspects of using technology for teaching and learning, including the theoretical underpinning, design methods, planning, managing learners, and related issues and challenges. Key considerations for integrating various technological tools are also discussed at length in these chapters.

With increasing interest in the possible contributions of neuroscience research to educational practice, the field of ‘educational neuroscience’ has emerged. Educational neuroscience (also known as ‘mind, brain, and education’ or ‘neuroeducation’) integrates the disciplines of neuroscience, cognitive psychology, and education, and it seeks to study the relationship between the brain, mental processes, and behaviours using a combination of neuroscience and behavioural methods (Szűcs & Goswami, 2007). Neuroscience and behavioural data can inform our understanding of learning and can therefore inform educational practice (Howard-Jones et al., 2016). Some examples are: neuroscience data alongside behavioural data constrain psychological theories (Gabrieli, 2016), neuroscience provides new insights into the learning processes (De Smedt, 2018), and neuroscience leads to the development of new instructions (Howard-Jones et al., 2016). However, challenges exist in applying theoretical knowledge from neuroscience research to inform educational practice in order to impact classroom outcomes in the real world (Bowers, 2016a, 2016b; De Smedt, 2018; Thomas, Ansari, & Knowland, 2019).

A major challenge in applying neuroscience research to inform educational practice is that there is a gap between the study of how the brain works and the practice in classroom, i.e., the neuroscience-education gap. Neuroscientists understand the relationship between brain and behaviour, but they have little knowledge about classroom instruction; educators understand classroom instruction, but they have little knowledge about the relationship between brain and behaviour (Ansari, De Smedt, & Grabner, 2012). The different languages used in the fields of neuroscience and education make the communication between the two fields and the understanding of each other difficult. Misinterpretations can occur when neuroscientists who have little knowledge about classroom instruction turn an experimental task into a classroom intervention or when educators who have little knowledge about the relationship between brain and behaviour over-interpret brain imaging findings (De Smedt, 2018). As a result, efforts to translate neuroscience research into meaningful educational practice have been quite limited.

Bridges can be built at multiple levels to bring the neuroscience-education gap closer, and one way of applying neuroscience research to inform educational practice is by developing educator brain literacy (Ansari & Coch, 2006). Brain literacy is the understanding of the relationship between brain and behaviour; developing educator brain literacy is helping educators understand how the brain learns. The rationale for developing educator brain literacy is: (1) the brain is constantly changing in response to the environment (e.g., Dubinsky, Roehrig, & Varma, 2013); (2) cognitive diversity is the norm (i.e., there are individual differences in the ability to learn) for all children (e.g., Hale, Fiorello, Kavanagh, Holdnack, & Aloe, 2007); and (3) designing instruction based on the understanding of cognitive diversity maximises a student’s learning and potentially prevents learning difficulties from developing into a lifelong disability (e.g., Koziol, Budding, & Hale, 2013).

Given that teaching changes the brain, brain literacy is potentially very useful for educators (Walker, Chen, Poon, & Hale, 2017). First, brain literacy can sensitise educators to individual differences in the ability to learn, which can help them differentiate instruction to meet the needs of diverse learners (e.g., Tomlinson, 2014). Specifically, brain literacy can help educators develop the skills to serve all students by recognising the impact of individual differences in the ability to learn on their instructional processes and student outcomes. Brain literate educators are more likely to understand and meet the diverse learning needs of students by recognising the signs and symptoms exhibited by students and applying alternative instructional strategies. Second, brain literacy enables educators to consider both brain and behavioural information when designing curriculum and instruction to improve student outcomes. Considering both brain and behavioural information may be more beneficial compared to considering behavioural information alone (Gabrieli, Ghosh, & Witfield-Gabrieli, 2015). Therefore, acquiring brain literacy has potential to empower teachers to re-evaluate the effects of their practices (Schwartz et al., 2019) in light of newfound neuroscience evidence, which although has yet to be empirically tested, may be beneficial for their students.