The combination of scientific research and practice helps us find research problems and produce useful knowledge. Taking medicine as an example, surgeons, nurses and other clinical medical workers have cooperated with biological researchers in teaching hospitals and other practical departments to combine research work with clinical diseases and health problems, and great progress has been made in the research and practice in contemporary medical fields such as intervention and treatment. The combination of research and practice has been standardized in many fields (Hinton &; Fischer, 2008). In the field of meteorology, science and practice are combined to analyze climate and predict weather (for example, National Center for Atmospheric Research,/). It seems that in an instant, the activities of combining biology with education have mushroomed in many parts of the world!
Research teams from all over the world have shown great interest in cooperation. In 2004, the International Mind, Brain and Education (IMBES) was established, and in 2007, the official academic journal Mind, Brain and Education was founded. The Vatican Academy of Sciences in Rome, which has more than 40 Nobel Prize winners in history, is also actively promoting the development of this new field. In 2003, when the Vatican Academy of Sciences celebrated its 400th anniversary, it invited Professor Kurt Fischer, who is in charge of the "Mind, Brain and Education" program at Harvard University, Antonio Batereau and other international scholars to hold a seminar on mind, brain and education. The conference also published an album "The Educated Brain: The Birth of Neuropedagogy". International large-scale research projects, meetings of brain science researchers and educators, professional books and various emerging activities have made this brand-new research field full of vitality. At present, there are many professional training programs in the world, for example, Dartmouth University (Coch, Michlovitz, Ansari, & Baird, 2009), University of Southern California (Immordino-Yang, 2007), University of Texas at Arlington (Schwartz &: Gerlach, 20 1 1), Cambridge University (Goswami, 2006), China East China Normal University (20 10), Harvard University (Hinton & Fischer, 2008) and other internationally renowned universities took the lead in launching the professional training plan of "Mind, Brain and Education". Trainers, researchers and educators of these professional training programs link biology with pedagogy. In addition, Paris, France and Tokyo, Japan are also planning further action plans.
Efforts to link practice, research and policy have become a hot issue in academic journals such as brain science, genetics and education. However, it must be pointed out that because the application of brain science can increase the sales of products, it is irresponsible for some profit-makers to promote so-called "brain-based" commercial products to school educators and parents under the banner of brain science (McCabe &: Castel, 2008). This situation is not only regrettable, but also leads to the prevalence of neural myths related to brain science and genetic mechanism (Fischer, Immordino-Yang, & ampWaber, 2007; Goswami, 2006; Hinton, Miyamoto and. Drachesa, 2008; Katzir & Paré-Blagoev, 2006). At present, most of the knowledge about brain and body is often wrong (OECD, 2007b), and many books on "brain-based education" published in the market are based on incorrect neural rhythms. Some so-called "brain-based education" is based on students' brains. The so-called "knowledge" of brain function they provide is unscientific, and they are not based on the real scientific knowledge of brain function. For example, people do not use half a brain (left brain or right brain), but use both the left brain and the right brain at the same time. Similarly, there is no huge gender difference between boys' and girls' brains. The "neural myth" produced by brain-based education is in sharp contrast with the research progress of DNA in biological science and brain science (Goldhaber, 20 12). Studies have shown that there are fundamental mistakes in the past about how heredity shapes the body and brain. At present, scientists have just begun to solve the mystery of how DNA and RNA shape the body and brain. Scientists' understanding of human heredity has returned to the level of the first grade of primary school.
Because of this situation in educational neuroscience and mind, brain and education, the training of educational neuroscience must make trainees form critical thinking and question whether the educational proposition based on brain is scientific. The first question educators and researchers should ask is: "What does the evidence show?" In short, researchers and educators must cooperate to apply the knowledge of biology and cognitive science to education and lay a scientific foundation for education. Only by establishing this cooperation between researchers and educators can we make full use of neuroimaging technology and tools to analyze learning, thus opening the black box of learning and making clear how teaching and learning work (Hinton &; Fischer, 2008; Rodriguez, 20 12).
Second, the cognitive model and the possibility of educational improvement
In the process of language and communication, people often use models to understand and analyze what is happening around them. These models form the basis of our thinking and perception patterns. For decades, anthropologists and cognitive scientists have analyzed how we use these models (Benedict,1934; Levi's, 1966). Recently, the research of cognitive science has explained how these models affect human thinking and how to form the neural myth of brain and learning. The most direct analysis comes from a framework of Lakoff and Johnson( 1980), which explains how people use the model of unconscious category to understand themselves and others, including all brain models formed in the 20th century (Vidal, 2007).
(A) brain network and knowledge transfer
At present, the human mental model regards the brain as the core of learning and consciousness, which Vidal called the shaping of brain lattice. The brain is the core of self and personality. From the most extreme point of view, a person is equivalent to his own brain. As described in the novel, a person is like a brain in a bucket, and the core part of a person seems to be his/her brain. According to this view, human body, interpersonal relationship and even human culture are only the core background of brain lattice. All of us are included in this model, as if learning only happens in the brain, ignoring the influence of the body on learning and the influence of the individual's environment on who he/she is and what he/she does. In this model, learning includes the process of storing knowledge in the brain. Knowledge is stored in the brain, waiting for us to use it. The brain is like a storage space like a library or computer memory. A cartoon may explain this pattern more clearly: I wake up in the morning and download all the information I need today, and then process it according to my job requirements. Is each of us just an information processor to get the job done?
Let's think about the teaching and learning activities of the school again. This myth or pattern is combined with the popular pattern in human culture, that is, knowledge is the transmission of information (Lakoff &; Johnson,1980; Reddy, 1979). People's learning is to get an object, such as an idea, a concept, an idea or a fact, and then have it and control it. If you want to teach this object to another person, you can simply transmit it, just like transmitting it through a catheter: they instill information into someone in this way, and then this person has the information. People can also put their knowledge in other places, such as books, websites or others.
People often use the metaphor of indoctrination to talk about learning and teaching activities, because in these common examples, people often use this metaphor unconsciously, sometimes for humor. Jon and Howard tell stories to each other. "Laura told Herman the idea, but he got mixed up." "Laura found the explanation online." "Bennett stole Megan's hypothesis." "I told you the answer, why don't you understand? Are you an idiot? " People can manipulate concepts, opinions and ideas, and they can also operate in their minds. "Hekimo can't get rid of this idea, he is addicted to it." "What are you thinking?"
According to this knowledge transfer model, teachers teach by sharing knowledge objects with students, and then students own these objects. At least students should have these knowledge objects. If a student can't use these tools skillfully, people will think he is stupid or lazy. Sometimes people will also blame this on teachers, because teachers can't convey information effectively. Broadly speaking, people regard knowledge as information that students must accept and use. Of course, many teachers and students also realize that teaching and learning do not follow this model, but metaphors instilled in human language and culture are hard to get rid of.
(b) Knowledge is constructed through activities.
Is learning really that simple? If so, to master a skill or theme, you only need to know some facts, such as where to find good land in Minnesota, when to plant a certain crop, how deep the seeds should be buried, whether it needs rain or irrigation, and so on. Can farmers who can put these facts together learn how to grow crops in Minnesota? But learning is not like this! Planting well is far more complicated than knowing some facts. Farmers should first use knowledge to coordinate and integrate a series of activities within a few months: planning, sowing, planting and harvesting, while continuing to learn how to improve growth conditions, prevent pests and so on.
The research of cognitive science strongly shows that knowledge is based on activities (Piaget, 1952). In order to do better in the world we live in, we must shape our behavior according to the requirements of this world. Brain science tells us that in order to learn to grow crops in Minnesota, we must actually change the physiological structure and function of our brains (and bodies): change neurons and synapses, and change the activation mode of our brains, all of which are beneficial to Minnesota's agricultural work (Hubel &; Wiesel,1970; Singer, 1995). Just touching information and events without acting on these objects cannot shape our brains and bodies, nor can we prepare for farming or any other activities in the environment.
School learning also begins with activities. If learning is simply to acquire some knowledge, then students can become laborers in 2 1 century without receiving so many years of education. Proficient reading requires years of study, as does explaining the cause of the war, writing a flower story or analyzing the landing action of a ball falling from a tower. The intergenerational transmission of knowledge needs to be rebuilt by each generation, not simply given or transmitted (Vygotsky, 1978). In this historical period when knowledge and technology are changing with each passing day, it is not enough to just remember the facts!
Happily, cognitive science researchers and brain science researchers have been studying for more than a century, analyzing how human beings create and use knowledge. If students want to study effectively, they must shape their brains through their own active activities (Baldwin,1894; Bartlett,1932; Piaget,1952; Singer, 1995). Instilling metaphor can describe the characteristics of learning, but if you use knowledge instead of just retelling information fragments, cognitive science researchers and neuroscience researchers have proved that instilling metaphor needs to be replaced by positive construction models. Human beings use knowledge to achieve their goals, thus creating knowledge. Piaget (1952)' s basic learning mode is to master concepts with his mind and manipulate them psychologically and physically. One of his favorite examples is math. The basic operations in mathematics include the combination and classification of objects by adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing the generated numbers. We humans use metaphor as a model to explain our thinking and activities, thus creating a tool for thinking.
Third, build bridges and create learning paths.
An example that strongly proves that models and metaphors play a powerful role in children's development is the way children intuitively establish the number axis model. Case and Griffin (1990, Griffin & amp case, 1997) first illustrated this point. They help children understand numbers by teaching them to use the number axis, which is a very effective educational intervention measure, and the number axis model lays the foundation for arithmetic. Clearly teaching children to use the number axis can promote children to effectively analogize numbers to a series of digital tasks and produce effective transfer. This kind of intervention is very effective, which explains 50% of the changes in the quantity problem.
Figure 0. Conceptual structure of1number axis
Based on the work of Keith and Griffin, the research of Susan Carey and her colleagues reveals the process of children using one number at a time to establish the mental number axis (Carey, 2009; Dehaene， 1997； LeCorre et al., 2006). They first use 1 to represent a real number, and then use a larger number (2,3,4) to represent "many". It will take several months for children to learn well before they can start to express real numbers with 2. Then use 3 and 4 to represent "many". Then, they take the number 3 on the number axis as a real number. When children learn 3 or 4, they generalize the rules, build a mental number axis model, add a number to one end of the number axis and move forward 1. This example is a good illustration of how children use activities to build a thinking model. In the process of processing, children actually construct a mental model of number axis.
Fourth, establish an educational research foundation.
Educational research should be a part of daily educational activities and a routine part used to guide educational policies and practices. The goal of Mind, Brain and Education Movement is to lay a solid foundation for educational research and scientifically improve the quality of learning and teaching by linking human development, biology, cognitive science and education. We have good tools to create this foundation, but grassroots organizations and traditions are very weak. John dewey (1896) called for educational research and development a long time ago to clarify the basis of learning and teaching, but so far, only Sesame Street (1974) and several research teams have responded to this call.
Many other industries have carried out extensive practical research to consolidate their practices, such as agriculture, chemistry, meteorology and even cosmetics. Improving the foundation of educational research needs to create a more stable grass-roots organization of educational research. This kind of research must be solid, useful and supported by scientific evidence. It must also be linked with learning in the teaching and educational environment, including schools, sports grounds, television and the Internet ... We put forward the following three suggestions to create a useful and meaningful educational research foundation.
Create a research-oriented school
Behind these suggestions is a simple fact: we must create an institution to support the beneficial cooperation between teachers and researchers, and to promote both sides of the research to ask questions that are useful for learning and teaching. Fortunately, we have a model for reference: teaching hospital. In these hospitals, researchers and practitioners participate in designing and modifying useful procedures and treatment schemes, producing effective methods to link research with practice, and training medical researchers and practitioners. Similarly, in the agricultural field, researchers and farmers work together to improve agricultural products and equipment through field experiments and try different planting methods. However, education lacks such grass-roots organizations to create a scientific foundation for learning and teaching, although the following explorations have been made in education: teachers purposefully design intervention tools to promote students' learning and teaching. But what we should do now is to directly test the effects of these interventions and see which ones are effective and which ones are ineffective.
Experimental research first creates a condition or intervention, and then evaluates its results. In medicine, intervention can be a treatment measure, such as medicine, surgery, vaccine or treatment scheme, and then the function or health status is detected. In school, teachers teach hard (an intervention), and then evaluate students' understanding or skill level by directly testing or observing their subsequent activities.
Although this is everyone's good wish, there are great differences in the evaluation methods of the relationship between research and practice in medicine and education. Around the world, every high-quality medical college has established a close relationship with at least one teaching hospital, which is the place where research and practice are combined. However, in the field of education, there are almost no research schools in the world, that is, research schools specializing in learning and teaching, whose purpose is to provide scientific basis for educational practice.
Education needs institutions like teaching hospitals, which is what we call research schools. Through the research school, we can establish a dialogue between educational practitioners and researchers and establish research questions and methods for educational practice (Hinton and Fischer, 2008). Research schools should be real schools (including public schools and private schools) and should be allied with universities (usually colleges of education). In research-oriented schools, teachers and researchers should cooperate in practical research and train future researchers and practitioners. Just like teaching hospitals, research schools must pay attention to practical problems and what is feasible and not feasible in educational institutions (including primary and secondary schools, kindergartens and higher education institutions).
The journal Mind, Brain and Education has published many articles by educators, who emphasize the practical problems that should be paid attention to when doing research in schools (for example, Coch, Michlovitz, Ansari, & Baird, 2009; Delacquis Jessa, Christopher and. Hinton, 2009; Kurilov, richert, Stout, and. Lavich, 2009; Kurilov, Andrews & Ravitch, 20 1 1). Research schools are based on Dewey's viewpoint (1896). He suggested that educators set up experimental schools a century ago. At that time, he planned to run them as educational research centers. Dewey (1900) established an experimental school at the University of Chicago, with the purpose of testing educational practice based on cognitive science and psychology and how they work in field practice.
Unfortunately, there are almost no real experimental schools now. Today, most schools called "experimental schools" do not do research, but serve the children of university teachers. Therefore, the problem of Dewey's definition still exists: although the excellent example of Sesame Street proves that educational research is quite effective, the whole world ignores scientific educational research. Now it is time to establish a real research-oriented school to provide a research basis for educational policy and practice.
(B) the establishment of learning and development database
Another key method to lay the foundation for educational research is to build a large database on learning and development. There is a good example to illustrate the important role of this database. The death analysis and reporting system is an American traffic accident and safety database (Hemenway, 200 1). This database was created in 1966 to collect traffic accident system data, especially the mortality rate. The system provides effective data for expressway engineering analysis and automobile design. The establishment of this database has greatly reduced the traffic accidents and casualty rates in recent 50 years to some extent.
With regard to American education, public service agencies and the federal government have begun to establish databases, including the National Assessment of Educational Progress (http://nces.ed.gov/NationsReportCard/) and the International Children's Corpus, focusing on language development (MacWhinney, 1996). Child Health Research Network of American Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1994, 2006), these databases are all established according to No Child Left Behind Act. However, these databases do not pay attention to classroom learning and teaching methods, nor to other learning environments. The ideal database should be a learning and teaching database in a real environment, similar to Sesame Street's pioneering work for children's TV learning. It is not enough to enter the standardized examination, because it does not represent the normal study of the school. We need to pay attention to the real learning in school, including the evaluation of classroom practice. We need to transcend ideology and general evaluation or viewpoint and realize real evidence-based practices and policies.
(3) training educational engineers
In addition, we need to cultivate a new type of educators who are responsible for establishing a beneficial connection between practice and research. They will turn education into a research-based career in a short time, which is the central goal of the course of mind, brain and education of Harvard University and the International Society of Mind, Brain and Education. These educators can combine neuroscience, cognitive science and classroom learning to create educational activities to improve learning under the background of diversified education, including the design of learning software or children's TV. In classical science, this transformation and connection play a very important role, such as the research results of chemistry, biology and physics, which are also very effective in dealing with practical problems. This knowledge can be used to build bridges, produce new soaps, or prevent species from invading waterways. In physics, such professionals are called engineers. Both the government and the business sector need engineers to turn scientific knowledge into practice.
Such experts will play an important role in education, and we can call them neuroeducationists or educational engineers (Gardner, 2008). Research schools can provide training for these experts. At present, in many institutions, professionals have established a link between practice and research. Sesame Street adopts practical evaluation, including formative evaluation, to decide its education plan (Lesser, 1974). Many non-profit organizations and companies specialize in hiring people with this kind of educational practical skills. For example, the American Center for Special Technology Application (www.cast.org) uses educational software to promote the development of various track learning (Rose &; Meyer, 2002).
Educational neuroscience has great potential, but we should not only stay on hope and potential, but also create institutions and create useful knowledge to connect practice and research. We must cultivate students who can do research in the new world, which directly links the research of mind and brain science with educational policy and practice, and lays a scientific foundation for education.
With the active support of governments and international organizations, the research on the integration of heart and brain education and educational neuroscience, a new discipline, are developing vigorously all over the world. So far, more than 40 professional research institutions, professional academic organizations and professional personnel training institutions have been born (Zhou Jiaxian, 20 13). The interdisciplinary integration of mind, brain and education is of great reference significance for China to realize its national policy from a talent country to a talent country. In view of this, we carefully selected the most authoritative and important books in this field and recommended them to readers according to the development of educational neuroscience in China and the needs of educational policy and practice. Some of the books selected in this series are cutting-edge research achievements of important international organizations, some are written by international educational neuroscience research experts based on their long-term research achievements, and some are systematic and comprehensive summaries of research achievements in this field. These books are of great pioneering significance in different fields. We believe that this series of books will play an important role in promoting the research on the integration of heart and brain education and the development of educational neuroscience, a new discipline in China. Teacher Zhou Jiaxian, the editor-in-chief of this translation series, has received systematic training in educational neuroscience and has interdisciplinary knowledge of pedagogy, cognitive neuroscience and psychology. He has published more than 60 papers, written, translated and co-published more than 20 books on educational neuroscience, and edited 4 series. This knowledge background is very suitable for the translation of this series of books. We expect that this series of books will enable researchers, educational policy makers and educational practitioners in China who are committed to educational neuroscience to better grasp the development trends and hot issues of international educational neuroscience and make positive contributions to the development of educational neuroscience in China.
On the occasion of the publication of this series of books, I sincerely thank the Social Science Department of the Ministry of Education of China, the Overseas Study Fund Committee of the Ministry of Education of China, the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation, the Shanghai Municipal Education Commission, the Shanghai Municipal Bureau of Human Resources and Social Security and the Beijing Municipal Education Commission for their strong support to emerging disciplines. Thanks to Academician, Vice Mayor of Shen Xiaoming, President, President Yu Lizhong, Vice President Ren Youqun, Academician Tang, Academician, Professor Zhong Qiquan, Professor Li Qiwei, Professor Zhou Yongdi, Professor Sang Biao, Professor Du Zuyi, Professor Huang Hong and Professor Jin Xingming for their efforts in the development of educational neuroscience in China. Thanks to the experts in the field of international educational neuroscience who recommended these excellent books to us, they are Professor stanislas Dehaene, academician of French Academy of Sciences, American Academy of Sciences, American Academy of Engineering and Art, Vatican Academy of Sciences, Professor Kurt Fisher of Harvard University, Professor antonia Batereau, academician of Argentine Institute of Education and Vatican Academy of Sciences, academician of Japanese Academy of Engineering and foreign academician of China Institute of Engineering. I sincerely thank President Peng of Educational Psychology Branch of East China Normal University Press for his strong support to this translation series, and thank the editors for their careful reading of each translation. Thanks to all the teachers and graduate students who participated in the translation work. They are conscientious and responsible, scrutinize every word repeatedly, and try their best to reproduce the essence of the original author's thought. We expect more researchers and practitioners in China to devote themselves to the field of educational neuroscience and make joint efforts to realize the Chinese dream of strengthening the country through talents.