Search for: All records

Citizen science programs offer opportunities for K-12 students to engage in authentic science inquiry. However, these programs often fall short of including learners as agents in the entire process, and thus contrast with the growing open science movement within scientific communities. Notably, study ideation and peer review, which are central to the making of science, are typically reserved for professional scientists. This study describes the implementation of an open science curriculum that engages high school students in a full cycle of scientific inquiry. We explored the focus and quality of students’ study designs and peer reviews, and their perceptions of open science based on their participation in the program. Specifically, we implemented a human brain and behavior citizen science unit in 6 classrooms across 3 high schools. After learning about open science and citizen science, students (N = 104) participated in scientist-initiated research studies, and then collaboratively proposed their own studies to investigate personally interesting questions about human behavior and the brain. Students then peer reviewed proposals of students from other schools. Based on a qualitative and quantitative analysis of students’ artifacts created in-unit and on a pre and posttest, we describe their interests, abilities, and self-reported experiences with study design and peer review. Our findings suggest that participation in open science in a human brain and behavior research context can engage students with critical aspects of experiment design, as well as with issues that are unique to human subjects research, such as research ethics. Meanwhile, the quality of students’ study designs and reviews changed in notable, but mixed, ways: While students improved in justifying the importance of research studies, they did not improve in their abilities to align methods to their research questions. In terms of peer review, students generally reported that their peers' feedback was helpful, but our analysis showed that student reviewers struggled to articulate concrete recommendations for improvement. In light of these findings, we discuss the need for curricula that support the development of research and review abilities by building on students’ interests, while also guiding students in transferring these abilities across a range of research foci. 

Much of human learning happens through interaction with other people, but little is known about how this process is reflected in the brains of students and teachers. Here, we concurrently recorded electroencephalography (EEG) data from nine groups, each of which contained four students and a teacher. All participants were young adults from the northeast United States. Alpha-band (8–12 Hz) brain-to-brain synchrony between students predicted both immediate and delayed posttest performance. Further, brain-to-brain synchrony was higher in specific lecture segments associated with questions that students answered correctly. Brain-to-brain synchrony between students and teachers predicted learning outcomes at an approximately 300-ms lag in the students’ brain activity relative to the teacher’s brain activity, which is consistent with the time course of spoken-language comprehension. These findings provide key new evidence for the importance of collecting brain data simultaneously from groups of learners in ecologically valid settings.

 

We explored the COVID-19 pandemic as a context for learning about the role of science in a global health crisis. In spring 2020, at the beginning of the first pandemic-related lockdown, we worked with a high school teacher to design and implement a unit on human brain and behavior science. The unit guided her 17 students in creating studies that explored personally relevant questions about the pandemic to contribute to a citizen science platform. Pre-/postsurveys, student artifacts, and student and teacher interviews showed increases in students’ fascination with science—a driver of engagement and career preference—and sense of agency as citizen scientists. Students approached science as a tool for addressing their pandemic-related concerns but were hampered by the challenges of remote schooling. These findings highlight both the opportunities of learning from a global crisis, and the need to consider how that crisis is still affecting learners. 

Abstract The bulk of social neuroscience takes a ‘stimulus-brain’ approach, typically comparing brain responses to different types of social stimuli, but most of the time in the absence of direct social interaction. Over the last two decades, a growing number of researchers have adopted a ‘brain-to-brain’ approach, exploring similarities between brain patterns across participants as a novel way to gain insight into the social brain. This methodological shift has facilitated the introduction of naturalistic social stimuli into the study design (e.g. movies) and, crucially, has spurred the development of new tools to directly study social interaction, both in controlled experimental settings and in more ecologically valid environments. Specifically, ‘hyperscanning’ setups, which allow the simultaneous recording of brain activity from two or more individuals during social tasks, has gained popularity in recent years. However, currently, there is no agreed-upon approach to carry out such ‘inter-brain connectivity analysis’, resulting in a scattered landscape of analysis techniques. To accommodate a growing demand to standardize analysis approaches in this fast-growing research field, we have developed Hyperscanning Python Pipeline, a comprehensive and easy open-source software package that allows (social) neuroscientists to carry-out and to interpret inter-brain connectivity analyses.