The OECD’s Brain and Learning project (2002) emphasized that many misconceptions about the brain exist among professionals in the field of education. Though these so-called “neuromyths” are loosely based on scientific facts, they may have adverse effects on educational practice. The present study investigated the prevalence and predictors of neuromyths among teachers in selected regions in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. A large observational survey design was used to assess general knowledge of the brain and neuromyths. The sample comprised 242 primary and secondary school teachers who were interested in the neuroscience of learning. It would be of concern if neuromyths were found in this sample, as these teachers may want to use these incorrect interpretations of neuroscience findings in their teaching practice. Participants completed an online survey containing 32 statements about the brain and its influence on learning, of which 15 were neuromyths. Additional data was collected regarding background variables (e.g., age, sex, school type). Results showed that on average, teachers believed 49% of the neuromyths, particularly myths related to commercialized educational programs. Around 70% of the general knowledge statements were answered correctly. Teachers who read popular science magazines achieved higher scores on general knowledge questions. More general knowledge also predicted an increased belief in neuromyths. These findings suggest that teachers who are enthusiastic about the possible application of neuroscience findings in the classroom find it difficult to distinguish pseudoscience from scientific facts. Possessing greater general knowledge about the brain does not appear to protect teachers from believing in neuromyths. This demonstrates the need for enhanced interdisciplinary communication to reduce such misunderstandings in the future and establish a successful collaboration between neuroscience and education.

Relation Between Breakfast Skipping 2 AbstractBreakfast skipping is common in adolescents, but research on the effects of breakfast skipping on school performance is scarce. This current cross-sectional survey study of 605 adolescents aged 11-18 years investigated whether adolescents who habitually skip breakfast have lower end of term grades than adolescents who eat breakfast daily. Additionally, the roles of sleep behavior, namely chronotype, and attention were explored. Results showed that breakfast skippers performed lower at school than breakfast eaters. The findings were similar for younger and older adolescents, and for boys and girls. Adolescents with an evening chronotype were more likely to skip breakfast, but chronotype was unrelated to school performance. Furthermore, attention problems partially mediated the relation between breakfast skipping and school performance. This large-scale study emphasizes the importance of breakfast as a determinant for school performance. The results give reason to investigate the mechanisms underlying the relation between skipping breakfast, attention and school performance in more detail. Proper nutrition is commonly believed to be important for school performance; it is considered to be an essential prerequisite for the potential to learn in children (Taras, 2005). In the western world, where most school-aged children are well nourished, emphasis is placed on eating breakfast for optimal school performance. Eating breakfast might be particularly important during adolescence. Adolescents have high nutritional needs, due to brain development processes and physical growth, while at the same time they have the highest rate of breakfast skipping among school-aged children (Hoyland, Dye, & Lawton, 2009;Rampersaud, 2009). However, not much is known about the effects of breakfast skipping on their school performance. Reviews indicate that only few studies have investigated the relationship between breakfast skipping and school performance in adolescents (Ells et al., 2008;Hoyland et al., 2009;Rampersaud, 2009;Taras, 2005). Therefore, the current study investigated the relation between habitual breakfast consumption and school performance in adolescents attending secondary school (age range 11-18 years). In addition, we explored two potentially important mechanisms underlying this relationship by investigating the roles of sleep behavior and attention.Depending on the definition of breakfast skipping, 10-30% of the adolescents (age range 11-18 years) can be classified as breakfast skippers (Rampersaud, Pereira, Girard, Adams, & Metzl, 2005). Adolescent breakfast skippers are more often girls and more often have a lower level of education (Keski-Rahkonen, Kaprio, Rissanen, Virkkunen, & Rose, 2003;Rampersaud et al., 2005;Shaw, 1998). Adolescent breakfast skippers are characterized by an unhealthy lifestyle, with behaviors such as smoking, irregular exercise, alcohol and drug use. They make more unhealthy food choices and have a higher Body Mass Index (BMI) than breakfast eaters...

The Letter Digit Substitution Test (LDST) was administered to a sample of N=296 healthy children (aged between 8.03 and 15.87). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of age, gender, and parental educational level on LDST performance and to establish demographically corrected normative data. The results showed that the relationship between age and LDST performance was curvilinear (i.e., improvements in test performance were more pronounced for younger children than for older children) and was moderated by gender (i.e., the gender differences were small at younger ages but increased as a function of age, with girls outperforming boys). Moreover, children who had parents with a higher level of education outperformed their counterparts who had parents with a lower level of education. Regression-based normative LDST data were established, and an automatic scoring program was provided.

This study examined differences between boys and girls regarding efficiency of information processing in early adolescence. Three hundred and six healthy adolescents (50.3% boys) in grade 7 and 9 (aged 13 and 15, respectively) performed a coding task based on over-learned symbols. An age effect was revealed as subjects in grade 9 performed better than subjects in grade 7. Main effects for sex were found in the advantage of girls. The 25% best-performing students comprised twice as many girls as boys. The opposite pattern was found for the worst performing 25%. In addition, a main effect was found for educational track in favor of the highest track. No interaction effects were found. School grades did not explain additional variance in LDST performance. This indicates that cognitive performance is relatively independent from school performance. Student characteristics like age, sex, and education level were more important for efficiency of information processing than school performance. The findings imply that after age 13, efficiency of information processing is still developing and that girls outperform boys in this respect. The findings provide new information on the mechanisms underlying boy-girl differences in scholastic performance.

This study used a large sample (N=638) of 12-18 year old adolescents to investigate the relationship between academic achievement and temporal discounting, a behavioural measurement of delay of gratification abilities. Neuroscience studies have demonstrated development during adolescence of the areas of the brain involved in delaying immediate gratification in order to achieve long-term goals. This finding may have important consequences for educational practice, as students are frequently required to forsake attractive short-term rewards in favour of less attractive academic long-term alternatives. Results showed that adolescents with an increased ability to delay gratification achieved higher grades then those less able to delay gratification. This relationship was mediated by academic motivation, showing that the effect of delayed gratification abilities on grades was most effective when academic motivation was high. Our results show that the ability to delay gratification may be an individual difference variable that distinguishes high achieving students from their peers. It also highlights that understanding the development of neurocognitive processes can provide a valid contribution to understanding ways in which we can influence academic success.