In his recent critique of Educational Neuroscience, Bowers argues that neuroscience has no role to play in informing education, which he equates with classroom teaching. Neuroscience, he suggests, adds nothing to what we can learn from psychology. In this commentary, we argue that Bowers' assertions misrepresent the nature and aims of the work in this new field. We suggest that, by contrast, psychological and neural levels of explanation complement rather than compete with each other. Bowers' analysis also fails to include a role for educational expertise-a guiding principle of our new field. On this basis, we conclude that his critique is potentially misleading. We set out the well-documented goals of research in Educational Neuroscience, and show how, in collaboration with educators, significant progress has already been achieved, with the prospect of even greater progress in the future.
- educational neuroscience
- mind, brain, and education
FingerprintDive into the research topics of 'The Principles and Practices of Educational Neuroscience: Comment on Bowers (2016)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
- Educational Futures Network
- Centre for Teaching, Learning and Curriculum
- School of Education - Professor of Neuroscience and Education
- Centre for Psychological Approaches for Studying Education
- Cabot Institute for the Environment
- Bristol Neuroscience
Person: Academic , Member