|
Brain-based teaching and learning
Recently, the working of students’ mind and their learning process are turning into a new focus of the educators. A piece of survey conducted by Serpati & Loughan (2012) reported that 90% of teachers find the understanding of brain functions is essential to the design and delivery of teaching and educational programmes. Therefore, brain-based teaching and learning has now become one of the trends in the realm of education. The up-to-date scientific research of “how the learners’ brain work” has thus been demanded and encouraged, particularly in recent years when there is a paradigmatic shift from a teacher-centered learning environment to a student-centered pedagogy in higher education.
The research topics of Brain-Based Teaching and Learning are interdisciplinary, as these involve exploring concepts and knowledges related but not limited to cognitive neuroscience, individual learning as well as social environment. Understanding of this interdisciplinary area requires collaborative effort of experts from various academic fields, including neuroscientists, language specialists, cognitive psychologists, educational psychologists, sociologists, and frontline educators from all disciplines providing direct teaching to students.
Due to its interdisciplinary nature, Brain-Based Teaching and Learning requires a platform for researchers and frontline educators to start intellectual dialogues which can lead to mutual benefits. Educators can inform researchers about the real difficulties they and their students face. The researchers can then identify the neurocognitive mechanisms that can potentially cause these difficulties, and investigate them empirically. Researchers can provide invaluable knowledge concerning the brain mechanisms that affect learning, which frontline educators can then utilize to inform their teaching practice.
When knowledge derived from scientific research of Brain-Based Teaching and Learning is applied and translated into creative, practical and evidence-based teaching pedagogy, wide range of stakeholders in education can be benefited – Students could learn more effectively by utilizing their learning function appropriately as guided by the teachers, and their learning potentials would be maximized; Teachers could make good lesson planning and assist students’ learning by cognitive strategies, especially for those with learning problems; Researchers could implement their findings and suggestions, and they could also review their research process according to the evidences provided by the frontline educators. The collaboration between teachers and researchers to develop research projects examining the effectiveness of teaching strategies derived from research in brain science is exceptionally valuable.
The Interdisciplinary Research Platform at Shue Yan therefore provides opportunities for sharing and exchanging knowledge of Brain-Based Learning and Teaching, where we could bring experts together to discuss new insights and make contribution to the area.
Alarcon, J.B. & Frank, R.D. (Eds.). (2013). The psychotherapy of hope: The legacy of persuasion and hope.
Birke, R. (2010). Neuroscience and settlement: An examination of scientific innovations and practical applications. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution. 25(2), 477-529.
Chang, L.C. (2011). A comparison of Taiwanese and Philippine Chinese business negotiation styles. Social Behavior anr Personality: An International Journal, 39(6), 765-772.
Chang, L.C. (2012). Subcultural differences in Taiwanese and Burmese Chinese business negotiation styles. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 40(7), 1067-1074.
Dayan, E., Censor, N., Buch, E. R., Sandrini, M., & Cohen, L. G. (2013). Noninvasive brain stimulation: From psychology to network dynamics and back. Nature Neuroscience, 16, 834-844.
Frank, D. L., Khorshid, L., Kiffer, J. F., Moravec, C. S., & McKee, M. C. (2010) Biofeedback in medicine: who, when, why and how?. Mental Health Family Medicine, 7(2), 85-91.
Ganis, G., Keenan, J. P., Kosslyn, S. M., & Pascual- Leone, A. (2000). Transcranial magnetic stimulation of primary motor cortex affects mental rotation. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 175-180.
Gold, J.I., & Shadlen, M.N. (2007). The neural basis of decision making. Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 30, 535-574.
Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Izuma, K. (2013). The neural basis social influence and attitude change. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 23(3), 456-462.
Kalat, J. W. (2013). Biological Psychology (12th ed.). London: Cengage Learning.
Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Feeney, B. C. (2013). A Simple Guide to IBM SPSS Statistics for Version 20.0 (12th ed., International Edition). Wadsworth: Jon-David Hague.
Klucharev, V., Smidts, A., & Fernández, G. (2008). Brain mechanisms of persuasion: how ‘expert power’ modulates memory and attitudes. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 3(4), 353-366.
Maaravi, Y., Ganzach, Y., & Pazy, A. (2011). Negotiation as a Form of Persuasion: Arguments in First Offers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(2), 245-255. doi:10.1037/a0023331
Malhotra, D., & Bazerman, M. H. (2008). Psychological influence in negotiation: An introduction long overdue. Journal of Management, 34, 509–531. doi:10.1177/0149206308316060
Orth, U. & Gal, S. (2014). Persuasive mechanisms of nostalgic brand packages. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28(2), 161-173.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Roloff, M.E. (2009). Links between conflict management research and practice. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37(4), 339-348.
Schonberg, T., Fox, C.R., & Poldrack, R.A. (2011). Mind the gap: bridging economic and naturalistic risk-taking with cognitive neuroscience. Trends in cognitive sciences, 15(1), 11-19.
Silvera, D.H., & Austad, B. (2004). Factors predicting the effectiveness of celebrity endorsement advertisements. European Journal of marketing, 38(11/12), 1509-1526.
Serpati, L., & Loughan, A.R. (2012). Teacher perceptions of neuroeducation: A mixed methods survey of teachers in the United States. Mind, Brain, and Education, 6, 174-176.
Tandos, J., & Stukas, R. (2010). Identity negotiation in psychotherapy: The influence of diagnostic and rapport-building strategies on the effects of clinical experience. Self and Identity, 9(3), 241-256.
The Johns Hopkins University, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, & Johns Hopkins Health System. (n.d.). Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation. Retrieved August 17, 2017, from this link.
Tremblay, P.R. (2006). “Pre-negotiation” counseling: An Alternative model. Clinical Law Review, 13(1), 541-571.
Wall, J.C., & Spira, M.K. (2012). A conceptual framework of differential use of mediation and family therapy intervention with older adults and their families. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 55(3), 282-297.
Yursever, G., Ozyurt, B., & Ben-Asher, Z. (2013). Gender difference in buyer-seller negotiations: Emotion regulation strategies. Social Behavior anr Personality: An International Journal, 41(4), 569-575.