Misconceptions about neurodevelopmental disorders among Italian special education teachers
A mixed-methods study
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21577560 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Eva Bei (0000-0002-3093-0829, Ospedale Maggiore Carlo Alberto Pizzardi, corresponding author), Mikołaj Zarzycki (0000-0002-8357-563X, Liverpool Hope University), Oriana Incognito (0000-0001-5707-4447, Italian University Line), Chiara Pecini (0000-0003-2577-5980, University of Florence) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 133 |
| Pages | 102709 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Journal of Educational Research (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0883-0355 • E-ISSN: 1873-538X |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ijer.2025.102709 |
| OpenAlex | W4413095599 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 24 |
Neurodevelopmental neuromyths, misconceptions about development, were frequently endorsed by Italian SEND teachers. • On average, Italian SEND teachers endorsed 27.9 % of neurodevelopmental neuromyths. • Neuroscience training is linked to reduced belief in such misconceptions. • Instructional practices reflect both evidence-based and neuromyth-influenced approaches. • SEND teachers often lacked explicit neuroscientific rationale in their instructional decisions. Limited research explores Neurodevelopmental Neuromyths' prevalence and educational implications. This study examined Neurodevelopmental Neuromyths among 241 Italian Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) teachers and their potential instructional implications. A mixed-methods triangulated approach was employed, combining findings from the Neurodevelopmental Neuromyths questionnaire with qualitative open-ended responses on instructional practices. The results indicated a prevalence of approximately 27.9 % for Neurodevelopmental Neuromyths among teachers. Prior attendance in a neuroscience course and reading of scientific magazines served as protective factors. Qualitative analysis revealed four predominant themes in instructional practices to support needs of SEND students: (1) simplifying teaching, (2) personalizing teaching and assessments, (3) empowering school inclusion, and (4) modifying the school/classroom environment. While certain instructional practices aligned with evidence-based approaches, others appeared to be influenced by prevailing neuromyths. The study highlights the importance of targeted interventions, including increased neuroscience training to enhance the overall support for SEND students
Developmental psychology · Mathematics education · Medical education · Pedagogy · Special education · Educational and Psychological Assessments · Educational Leadership and Innovation · Medicine · Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function · Psychology
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |