/
Brain Science in Science Education Brain Science in Science Education

Brain Science in Science Education - PowerPoint Presentation

isabella
isabella . @isabella
Follow
344 views
Uploaded On 2022-07-01

Brain Science in Science Education - PPT Presentation

The potential of the Neuron Box model Professor Jonathan Bacon and Dr Andy Chandler Grevatt University of Sussex Life Sciences and Department for Education T16 BERG Brain Science in Schools ID: 928458

amp education science brain education amp brain science models neuroscience system neuron biology nerves year understanding probe teaching 2012

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Brain Science in Science Education" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Brain Science in Science Education

The potential of the Neuron Box model

Professor Jonathan Bacon and Dr Andy Chandler-

Grevatt

University of Sussex

Life Sciences and Department for Education.

Slide2

T16 BERG: Brain Science in Schools

1100-1200 Muirhead 109 Teaching models that support learning of neurons, brain and behaviour for secondary schools are scarce. We used the Neuron Box in which each pupil in a class assumes the role of a neuron by operating their own neuron within an interacting network. We present the findings from a school. Andrew

Chandler-

Grevatt

& Jonathan Bacon - University of Sussex

Slide3

Contents

Introducing the projectIntroducing the neuron boxesThe evaluation projectA case for neuroscience in schoolPilot findingsProject interim findingsNext steps and implications

Slide4

Collaboration

Professor Jonathan BaconProfessor of NeuroscienceHead of the School of Life SciencesDr Andy Chandler-Grevatt

Teaching Fellow in Science Education

Department of Education, University Sussex.

Dr Jonathan Hare

Richard Robinson

Slide5

Where it began

Slide6

The Neuron Box

Slide7

Neuron Boxes in Action

Video will be embedded here

Slide8

Research Questions

So what?

Is there need for this intervention?

Does it have any impact

(affective or cognitive

)?

How does pupils’ knowledge and understanding of neurones, brain and behaviour change during Year 10

?

What effect does the use of Neurone Boxes as a teaching model on conceptual development and attitudes towards (neuro)science?

Slide9

Importance of Neuroscience

Slide10

Children’s understanding of the neurons

Relatively under researched Children’s mental models

Age 14

(Johnson & Wellman, 1982; Gottfried et al. 1999

)

(

Bartoszeck

&

Bartoszeck

,

2012 p

. 133)

(

Pasquinelli

, 2012)

(e.g. Adey and Dillon, 2012)

(Dekker et al, 2012)

Slide11

National Curriculum (England)

Key Stage 3 (11-14 year olds) does not include the nervous system (Department for Education, 2013a). Key Stage 4 (14-16 year olds) that pupils are expected to study the brain and the central nervous system (Department for Education, 2013b):GCSE biology specifications should require students to describe the structure and function of the brain [and] explain some of the difficulties of investigating brain function. (Department for Education 2013b, p.13).

These

were elaborated as reflex arcs, synapses and the structure of the brain by most examination boards (e.g. AQA, 2014).

Slide12

Current Teaching Modes and Models

Reaction times and touch-sensitivity of the skin (Cassidy, 2011 p.124). Labelled diagrams (Williams, 1996 p. 122)Three-dimensional models of the

brain.

Kohn (1993) describes an

allegory

of college life to help undergraduates learn, and remember, the principles of neural

conduction

Marchioni

(1995

):

dissection

of chicken

brains

, drawing a sensory homunculus from their own experimental data, a

role-play demonstration

of a nerve impulse to calculate its speed.

Griff

(2006) describes using the

analogy of a sparkler

to demonstrate an action potential and a frying pan to model synaptic function.

Slide13

Models and Modelling

Gilbert & Boulter (1998 p. 54) define what a model is, [A] simplified representation of a system, which concentrates attention on specific aspects of the system. Moreover, models enable aspects of the system, i.e., objects, events, or ideas which are either complex, or on a different scale to that which is normally perceived, or abstract to be rendered either visible or more readily visible.Gobert

& Buckley (2000 p. 1012) define what models

do

,

Analogical models comprise the scaled and exaggerated objects; symbols, equations and graphs; diagrams and maps; and simulations that facilitate scientific communication. They can be concrete, abstract or theoretical depending on the needs of their author and audience, but above all models must enhance investigation, understanding and communication and this makes them key tools in thinking and working scientifically.

Slide14

Pilot of the Evaluation Tool

3 schools: Year 9 [~ 50 responses] and Year 10 [76 responses]Two versions of questionnaires qualitative questions.Explain how your leg pulls up quickly if you step on a drawing pin.Explain how your eyes blink if a stone flies up towards your face.Explain how we keep breathing when we are asleep.Explain how we keep walking without thinking about it.

Explain how memories form.

Explain how we remember something

.

Questions to teachers about administration

Conclusions

Target

Group

:

Year

9 responses are very limited, so Year 10 is

the appropriate

year group to study.

Administration of Questionnaire: 20 minutes

maximum

Decides upon written questions (underlined above.

Initial Rubric trialled.

Slide15

Initial Rubric

RubricScore

Description

Notes

Number of

responses

0

Nothing drawn or written.

Incorrect or irrelevant to question.

Uncategorisable.

 

5

2

1

Some senses identified (drawn or labelled).

Some relevant organs drawn or labelled.

 

19

2

Unconnected brain, spinal cord or nerves drawn or labelled.

 

17

3

Simple system recognised showing connections between brain, spinal cord and/or nerves.

These may be correct or incorrect.

A variety of models were identified here.

This section could have sub-categories.

Students recognise that there are connections between the key organs, but may not appreciate exactly how they are connected.

28

4

Complex system recognised showing mostly correct connections between brain, spinal cord and/or nerves.

Differentiation between types of neurons (motor and sensory)

May include key words associated with the reflex arc or synapse, but not necessary correct.

5

5

Detailed response within the complex system, with a focus on a reflex arc or synapse.

 

 

Slide16

Emerging Misconceptions from Drawings

Alternative models provided by studentsBrain, spinal cord, sense organs and nerves are unconnectedNeurones start at top of spinal cord and radiate to rest of body The diffuse or unstructured model of nerves in the bodyMisconceptions identifiedNerves and veins being used interchangeably or conflated.Vertebrae

and nerves being used interchangeably or conflated.

Heart

as part of the nervous system.

Nerves

and hormones

conflated

See Handout for examples

Slide17

Main Study Methodology

One schoolA. Intervention before any nerves taught: JB & ACG ran three similar 1 hour lessons using Neuron Boxes.B. Normal teaching of Nerves Topic* Student evaluation of intervention session

Three intervention classes: top, middle, bottom sets.

Six control

classes: top, middle, bottom sets.

1

2

3

A

B

B

6 weeks

6 months

Probe

Probe

Probe

*

Slide18

Analysis

Based on Reiss and Tunicliffe (2001)Phase 1: Collect data from classesPhase 2: Jointly and repeatedly sort. Rank on scientific understanding.Phase 3: Decide on scoring system for aspects of each answer. Make rubric(s).

Phase

4: Independently and separately score each response. Into

Excel

spreadsheets.

Phase

5: Compare agreement (as percentage). Discuss differences.

Phase

6: Analyse data.

Slide19

Session Evaluation by Students

 Question

Strongly Agree

Agree

Neither agree or disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

1. I enjoyed this session

20

41

5

6

2

74

2. I found this session interesting

21

37

7

9

0

74

3. I learnt something new in the session.

35

34

3

2

0

74

4. It made me think about being a scientist.

2

12

29

20

10

73

5. It made me think about doing A-level biology

4

6

30

24

10

74

6. It made me think about becoming a neuroscientist.

1

5

27

24

17

74

7. I would recommend this session to other Year 10 classes.

18

36

15

2

3

74

Slide20

Session Evaluation by Students (Qualitative)

Write down or draw three things that you have learnt in the sessionHeadlines from first rough analysis (note pupils were asked to write three points)41% used the word ‘neuron’ (various spellings)38% quoted that the brain contains billions on neurons (variations to be analysed)

30% mentioned the shape of the brain is related to size/surface area (accuracy to be analysed)

12% mentioned that the number of neurons decreases with age

9% mentioned that neurons worked using simple rules.

7% mentioned that we use all of our brain/not 10%

7% attempted to draw a neuron from memory

5% mentioned there is a gap/synapse between neurones (accuracy needs further analysis)

4% mentioned a reflex arc.

Slide21

Next steps.

Administer Probe 2 in January 2016Administer Probe 3 in June 2016Analyse Probe 1 data and refine rubric, % comparisonAnalyse Probe 2 data, % comparisonAnalyse Probe 3 data, % comparisonCompare intervention and control groups changes in diagrams over time.Analyse one off data from other cohorts (Undergrads, Science ITE, Primary ITE)

Slide22

Implications

In the schoolIncreased awareness of neuroscience in control group.Feedback to science teachers to improve teaching and learning of the nerve topics.Neurone Box OutreachEvaluation of using the boxes to inform future sessions.Improvements to evaluation of sessions.Adaptations to Neuron Boxes for regular classroom use.

Science Education Research

Under researched, so adds to a field of knowledge.

Identification and challenging of misconceptions of nervous system.

Identification of possible progress pathways and pinch points.

Policy in Science Education

When and how to teach about neuroscience.

Inform STEM agenda and outreach programmes.

Slide23

References

Adey, P., & Dillon, J. (2012). Bad Education: Debunking Myths in Education. London: McGraw-Hill International.AQA (2014) GCSE Biology Specification B1.3 the use and abuse of drugs http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/science/gcse/biology-4401/subject-content [accessed 4/11/2014]Bartoszeck, A., & Bartoszeck

, F. (2012). Investigating children's conceptions of the brain: First steps. 

International Journal of Environmental & Science Education

7

(1), 123-139.

Becker, W. J., &

Cropanzano

, R. (2010). Organizational neuroscience: The promise and prospects of an emerging discipline.

Journal of Organizational

Behavior

,

31

(7), 1055-1059.Cassidy, M. (2011) Communication and Control

Chapter 5 in Reiss, M. (Ed) (2011)

Teaching Secondary Biology

. Second Edition. London: Hodder Education.

Charney

, D. S.,

Nestler

, E. J.,

Sklar

, P., &

Buxbaum

, J. D. (Eds.). (2013).

Neurobiology of mental illness

. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Department for Education, (2013a)

Science programmes of study: key stages 1 and 2 National curriculum in England.

DFE-00182-2013. London:

DfE

.

Department for Education, (2013b)

Science programmes of study: key stages 3 and 4 National curriculum in England.

DFE-00185-2013. London:

DfE

.

Dekker, S., Lee, N. C., Howard-Jones, P. &

Jolles

, J. (2012).

Neuromyths

in education: Prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers.

Frontiers in psychology

,

3, 1-4.Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P. & Wood-Robinson, V. (1993). Making Sense of Secondary Science: Research into Children’s Ideas

. Taylor & Francis. Retrieved 13 April 2014, from <http://www.myilibrary.com?ID=30909>Gathers, A. (2008). Using a passing game to teach nerve conduction. 

The American Biology Teacher, 70(1), 11-11.

Gilbert, J. K. (2004). Models and modelling: Routes to more authentic science education.

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

,

2

(2), 115-130.

Gilbert, J.K. & Boulter, C. (1998). Learning science through models and modelling. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.),

International handbook of science education

, 2, 53–66. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Gobert

, J. D. & Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education.

International Journal of Science Education

,

22

(9), 891-894

.

Goswami

, U. (2006). Neuroscience and education: from research to practice? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 7(5), 406-413.Gottfried, G. M., Gelman, S. A. & Schultz, J. (1999). Children's understanding of the brain: From early essentialism to biological theory. Cognitive Development, 14(1), 147-174.

Slide24

References continued

Griff, E. R. (2006). How Neurons Work: An Analogy & Demonstration Using a Sparkler & a Frying Pan. The American Biology Teacher, 68(7), 412-417.Hay, D. B., Williams, D., Stahl, D. & Wingate, R. J. (2013). Using drawings of the brain cell to exhibit expertise in neuroscience: Exploring the boundaries of experimental culture. Science Education, 97(3), 468-491.

Johnson, C. N. & Wellman, H. M. (1982). Children's developing conceptions of the mind and brain.

Child development

, 222-234.

Kohn, A. (1993). Neural communication in a mnemonic nutshell: A cognitive framework that improves understanding.

American Biology Teacher

,

55

, 21-21.

Lieberman, M. D. (2007). Social cognitive neuroscience: a review of core processes.

Annu

. Rev. Psychol.

,

58, 259-289.

Logothetis

, N. K. (2008). What we can do and what we cannot do with fMRI.

Nature

,

453

(7197), 869-878.

Marchioni

, W. (1995). The Brain: User-Friendly & a Fascinating Classroom Subject. 

The American Biology Teacher

, 365-369.

Obama, B. (2013).

http://www.whitehouse.gov/share/brain-initiative

[accessed 26 May 2014)

OECD (2002a).

Understanding the Brain: The Birth of a Learning Science.

Paris: OECD.

OECD (2002b). Dispelling "

Neuromyths

” in OECD,

 Understanding the Brain: The Birth of a Learning Science

, Paris: OECD.

Pasquinelli

, E. (2012).

Neuromyths

: why do they exist and persist?

Mind, Brain, and Education

,

6

(2), 89-96.

Reiss, M. J., &

Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Students' understandings of human organs and organ systems. Research in Science Education

, 31(3), 383-399.Weisberg, D. S., Keil, F. C., Goodstein, J., Rawson, E. &

Gray, J. R. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of cognitive neuroscience,

20

(3), 470-477.

Williams, G. (1996)

Biology for You. National Curriculum Edition for GCSE

. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.

Slide25

Contact

Professor Jonathan BaconJ.P.Bacon@sussex.ac.ukDr Andy Chandler-Grevatt

A.J.Grevatt@sussex.ac.uk