Education Preamble
Neurotechnology applications are already in use in the classroom, with more envisioned. Education means far more than school instruction, however; educational technologies centered on the brain may be able to advance learning and knowledge retention across settings, such as the home, the classroom, or the workplace, during every stage of lifelong learning. An individual’s learning guides one’s participation in society, so a focus on neurological functioning and cognitive liberty of individuals (OECD, 2023) [1].
Recent advances in neural technology have enabled their use in education, whether formally or informally, teacher-guided or self-instructed. To be formally self-instructed is no longer a contradiction with advancing software/AI-based instruction for individual access. While non-invasive electrical stimulation technologies and techniques such as electroencephalography (EEG) and transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) remain in the majority, new devices are emerging. The experience of learning through thinking, practicing, and testing can be supported by targeted brain assessments and modulations (van Kesteren & Meeter, 2020) [2].
Working knowledge of human capacities and interactions can benefit many aspects of pedagogy, such as assessment, intervention, training, and performance. Improved teaching and learning, guided by insights into teaching methods and learning readiness, can be expected from ethical neurotechnology applications. Looking to the near future, it is not hard to believe that practical neural technologies for education might emerge to improve learning in classroom settings, which now include guided learning while at home. Future approaches might find precise ways to evaluate teaching skills and assess student preparation and learning modalities.
Educational neuroscience/neurotechnologies potentially elevate learning and knowledge by using technological means to assess brain function and cognitive operations in a way that optimizes learning. Hereafter, “education” broadly means acquiring durable learning – intellectual abilities, information acquisition and retention, and knowledgeable expertise. This document does not address skills training and task improvement for specific performance outcomes.
Education is always valuable, but any application of neurotechnology should be ethical. Short-term and long-term techniques must prove to be safe, effective, and beneficial for all concerned. This is especially relevant for immersive learning education that uses neurotechnology, as it activates and engages the brain’s centers responsible for experiential, cognitive, behavioral, and emotional learning. Neuroethics is crucial for immersive learning to ensure that the use of such advanced technologies respects individual rights and promotes overall well-being. The activation of the centres means that impacts of the brain can be profound, especially the data collections during immersive learning, necessitating rigorous protocols and evaluation to ensure positive outcomes and the avoidance of potential harm.
Learners must not be treated as a generic population for a “one size fits all” user base for neurotechnologies. Currently, experimental trials for educational neurotech are conducted with three general types of subjects: (i) individuals classified as “learning challenged” due to developmental disabilities and neurodiversities; (ii) individuals pre-assessed with “modest intelligence” but without clinical diagnoses of cognitive or learning disabilities and neurodiversity; (iii) individuals with high educational attainment (high test scores, college experience, and the like), see, [28] There is enormous brain diversity within and between these populations. These different populations should not be conflated during the design, testing, and marketing stages of neuroscience / neurotechnologies learning aids.
Additionally, public funding for cognitively therapeutic devices should remain ample, but rapid consumer adoption for healthy users is doubtful within the education sector. Likely due to funding, technological access requirements, time for educators’ to become familiar with these neurotechnologies. As these technologies mature, private-sector funding (both research and technological development) will likely dominate, risking potential ethical oversight, especially in educational settings. This transition may be fragmented since education occurs in diverse settings.
Significant randomized control trials (RCT) and qualitative studies are essential to address long-term effects and prevent investment in ineffective products. However, funding for RCTs is scarce, making support crucial. Due to their complexity, RCTs in real-world classrooms are less feasible than in labs. Qualitative research is vital for understanding the ethics and benefits of neurotechnology in education.
