The Use of Brain Based Learning Elements in a Teaching Approach for Scientific Understanding of Biology Concepts

Nektarios Lagoudakis^1, , Filippos Vlachos¹, Vasilia Christidou², Denis Vavougios³ and Marianthi Batsila⁴

¹Department of Special Education, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

²Faculty of Education, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

³Department of Physics, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece

⁴Department of Mathematics, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece

Cite this paper:
Nektarios Lagoudakis, Filippos Vlachos, Vasilia Christidou, Denis Vavougios and Marianthi Batsila. The Use of Brain Based Learning Elements in a Teaching Approach for Scientific Understanding of Biology Concepts. American Journal of Educational Research. 2024; 12(7):247-253. doi: 10.12691/education-12-7-5

Abstract

The attempt of a functional conflation of the knowledge originated from neuroscientific research with the educational practices has been supported by many researchers in the fields of education and neuroscience. Brain-Based Learning (BBL) encompasses teaching techniques that leverage neuroscience in designing educational methodologies. Regarded as a holistic approach to education, its defining traits are rooted in pivotal insights and extensive research findings. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a teaching approach based on BBL elements in improving secondary students’ conceptual apprehension of common biology concepts. A quasi-experimental design with two comparable groups (treatment group and comparison group) of seventh grade students, using pretest and posttest, was implemented so as to examine the extent to which the BBL teaching technique was effective enough for the learners’ understanding of the biology concepts and their conceptual change. The results revealed that the students of the treatment group displayed a statistically significant better conceptual understanding about conceptions concerning Biology than the students of the comparison group. These results are discussed in the context of supporting the use of BBL elements in constructing more efficient teaching practices for Biology courses.

Keywords:
brain based learning instructional practice conceptual understanding biology teaching biology concepts

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Vlachos, Μ. F. (2018). Egefalos, mathisi kai eidiki agogi [Brain, learning & special education]. Gutenberg.
[2]	Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2008). Understanding the brain: birth of a new learning science. new insights on learning through cognitive and brain science.
[3]	Tokuhama-Espinosa, Τ. (2011). Mind, Brain, and Education Science: A Comprehensive Guide to the New Brain-Based Teaching; W. W. Norton & Company: New York.
[4]	Willis, J. (2007). Review of research: Brain-based teaching strategies for improving students' memory, learning, and test-taking success. Childhood Education, 83(5), 310-315.
[5]	Bowers, J. S. (2016). The practical and principled problems with educational neuroscience. Psychological review, 123(5), 600–612.
[6]	Bruer, J. T. (1997). Education and the brain: A bridge too far. Educational Researcher, 26(8), 4–16.
[7]	Pickering, S.J., & Howard-Jones, P.A. (2007). Educators’ views on the role of neuroscience in education: Findings from a study of UK and international perspectives. Mind, Brain, and Education, 1(3), 109-113.
[8]	Samuels, B. M. (2009). Can the differences between education and Neuroscience be overcome by mind, brain, and education? Mind, Brain, and Education, 3(1), 45–55.
[9]	Dubinsky, J. M., Roehrig, G., & Varma, S. (2013). Infusing neuroscience into teacher professional development. Educational researcher, 42(6), 317–329.
[10]	Howard-Jones, P. A., Varma, S., Ansari, D., Butterworth, B., De Smedt, B., Goswami, U., Laurillard, D., & Thomas, M. S. (2016). The principles and practices of educational neuroscience: Comment on Bowers (2016). Psychological Review, 123(5), 620–627.
[11]	Immordino-Yang, M. H., Fischer, K. W. (2010). Neuroscience bases of learning. In V.G. Aukrust (Ed.), Learning and Cognition in Education. Academic Press.
[12]	Jensen, E. P. (2008). Brain-based learning: The new paradigm of teaching (2nd ed.). Corwin Press.
[13]	Lagoudakis, N., Vlachos, F., Christidou, V., & Vavougios, D. (2022). The effectiveness of a teaching approach using brain-based learning elements on students’ performance in a biology course. Cogent Education, 9(1).
[14]	Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Making Connections: Teaching and the Human Brain. Addison-Wesley.
[15]	Caine, R., Caine, G., McClintic, C., & Klimek, K. (2005). 12 brain/mind learning principles in action: The field book for making connections, teaching, and the human brain. Corwin Press.
[16]	Sousa, D. A. (2017). How the brain learns: A classroom teacher’s guide (5th ed.). Corwin Press.
[17]	Mekarina, M., & Ningsih, Y. P. (2017). The effects of brain based learning approach on motivation and students’ achievement in mathematics learning. Journal of Physics: Conf. Series, 895.
[18]	Thomas, B. M., & Swamy, S. S. (2014). Brain-based teaching approach-A new paradigm of teaching. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research, 3(2), 62-65. https://www.semanticscholar.org
[19]	Uzezi, J. G., & Jonah, K. J. (2017). Effectiveness of brain-based learning strategy on students’ academic achievement, attitude, motivation and knowledge retention in electrochemistry. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 21(3), 1-13.
[20]	Varghese, M. G., & Pandya, S. R. (2016). A study of the effectiveness of brain-based learning of students of secondary level on their academic achievement in biology, study habits and stress. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(2), 103-122. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/301816156
[21]	Vyas, K., & Vashishtha, K. C. (2013). Effectiveness of teaching based on brain research with reference to academic achievement of secondary school students. International Journal of Students Research in Technology & Management, 1(4), 383-397. https://www.academia.edu/4625058
[22]	Bawaneh, A., Nurulazam, A., Saleh, S., & Kanesan, A. G. (2012). The effect of a brain-based teaching method on conceptual change in students' understanding of electricity change agent for arab development and education reform. Eurasian Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 4(2), 79-96. https:// www.ijpce.org/ index.php/IJPCE/article/view/97.
[23]	Saleh, S. (2012). The effectiveness of Brain-Based Teaching Approach in dealing with the problems of students’ conceptual understanding and learning motivation towards physics. Educational Studies, 38(1), 19-29.
[24]	Arenson, M., & Coley, J. D. (2018). Anthropocentric by default? attribution of familiar and novel properties to living things. Cognitive Science, 42, 253-285.
[25]	Coley, J. D., Arenson, M., Xu, Y., & Tanner, K. D. (2017). Intuitive biological thought: Developmental changes and effects of biology education in late adolescence. Cognitive Psychology, 92, 1–21.
[26]	Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1994). Young children’s naive theory of biology. Cognition, 50(1-3), 171–188.
[27]	Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (2000). Domain-specific constraints on conceptual development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 24(3), 267 – 275.
[28]	Maeyer, J.R., & Talanquer, V. (2010). The role of intuitive heuristics in students' thinking: Ranking chemical substances. Science Education, 94(6), 963-984.
[29]	Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 45–69.
[30]	Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Open University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED393679
[31]	Duggan, D., & Matthews, P. (2002). The identification of students’ alternative conceptions in biology by the use of creative writing. Irish Educational Studies, 21(1), 79-96.
[32]	Franke, G., Scharfenberg, F.-J., & Bogner, F.X. (2013). Investigation of students’ alternative conceptions of terms and processes of gene technology. Hindawi Publishing Corporation ISRN Education.
[33]	Carvalho, G. S., Silva, R., Lima, N., Coquet, E., & Clément, P. (2004). Portuguese primary school children's conceptions about digestion: identification of learning obstacles. International Journal of Science Education, 26(9), 1111-1130.
[34]	Teixeira, F. M. (2000). What happens to the food we eat? Children’s conceptions of the structure and function of the digestive system. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 507–520.
[35]	Ozay, E., & Oztas, H. (2003). Secondary students’ interpretations of photosynthesis and plant nutrition. Journal of Biological Education, 37(2), 68–70.
[36]	Marmaroti, P., & Galanopoulou, D. (2006). Pupils’ understanding of photosynthesis: A questionnaire for the simultaneous assessment of all aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 383-403.
[37]	Stavy, R., Eisen, Y., & Yaakobi, D. (1987). How students aged 13‐15 understand photosynthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 9(1), 105-115.
[38]	Tamir, P. (1971). An Alternative Approach to The Construction of Multiple Choice Test Items. Journal of Biological Education 5(6): 305–307.
[39]	American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS; 2018, May 25). AAAS science assessment. https://www.aaas.org/programs/project-2061/assessment-resources
[40]	Anderson, C.W., Sheldon, T.H., & DuBay, J. (1990). The effects of instruction on college nonmajors’ conceptions of respiration and photosynthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 27(8): 761–776.
[41]	Clément, P. (2003). Situated conceptions and obstacles: The example of digestion and excretion. In D. Psillos, P. Kariotoglou, V. Tselfes, E. Hatzikraniotis, G. Fassoulopoulos & M. Kallery (Eds.), Science education research in a knowledge-based society (pp. 89–98). Kluwer Academic.
[42]	Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science: Research into children’s ideas. Routledge.
[43]	Granklint Enochson, P.G., Redfors, A., Dempster, E. R., & Tibell, L.A.E. (2015). Ideas about the human body among secondary students in South Africa. African Journal of Research in Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 19(2), 199-211.
[44]	Haslam, F., & Treagust, D. (1987). Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument. Journal of Biological Education, 21(3), 203-211.
[45]	Lee, Y.J., & Diong, C.H. (1999). Misconceptions in the biological concept of food: Results of a survey of high school students. In M. Waas (Ed.), Enhancing learning: challenge of integrating thinking and information technology into the curriculum. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Educational Research Association (pp. 825-832). Singapore: Education Research Association. http://hdl.handle.net/10497/14986
[46]	Lin, C. Y., & Hu, R. (2003). Students’ understanding of energy flow and matter cycling in the context of the food chain, photosynthesis, and respiration. International Journal of Science Education, 25(12), 1529-1544.
[47]	Mann, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2010). Students’ conceptions about energy and the human body. Science Education International, 21(3), 144-159. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ904865.pdf
[48]	Nunez, F., & Banet, E. (1997). Students' conceptual patterns of human nutrition. International Journal of Science Education, 19(5), 509-526.
[49]	Simpson, M., & Arnold, B. (1982). The inappropriate use of subsumers in biology learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4(2), 173–182.
[50]	Dry, H. A. (1998). Student misconceptions in science: The human digestive system. [Master's thesis, College at Brockport, State University of New York]. Brockport @ SUNY Open Repositories. https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/ehd_theses/1084
[51]	Smith, A. (2003). Accelerated learning in practice. Brain-based method for accelerating motivation and Achievement. Network Educational Press.
[52]	Hung, W. (2013). Problem-Based Learning: A learning environment for enhancing learning transfer. New directions for adult and continuing education, 2013(137), 27-38.
[53]	Perkins, D., & Salomon, G. (1988). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 22-32. http://www.ascd.org
[54]	Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Springer Science Business Media.
[55]	Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small Group Discussion in Physics: Peer Interaction Modes in Pairs and Fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099–1114.
[56]	Gurlitt, J., & Renkl, A. (2010). Prior knowledge activation: How different concept mapping tasks lead to substantial differences in cognitive processes, learning outcomes, and perceived self-efficacy. Instructional Science, 38(4), 417–433.
[57]	Rocha, E., Costa, B., Ferreira, I., & Fregni, F. (2018). Neural basis of learning / Bases neurais da aprendizagem. Rev Med (São Paulo), 97(1), 1-6.
[58]	Tileston, D. W. (2011). The ten best teaching practices: How brain research, learning styles, and standards define teaching competencies (3nd ed.). Corwin.
[59]	Vosniadou, S., Vamvakoussi, X., & Skopeliti, I. (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 3–34). Routledge.
[60]	Palmer, D.H. (1999). Exploring the link between students’ scientific and nonscientific conceptions. Science Education, 83(6), 639–653.