A major new study has brought to light an enduring problem both globally and in Thailand: despite the growing influence of neuroscience in education, persistent misconceptions—so-called “neuromyths”—continue to misinform the way teachers, especially those in early childhood education, understand and apply brain science in their classrooms. The research, published on April 22, 2025, surveyed over 520 early childhood educators in Australia, revealing that many still believe debunked ideas, such as the necessity of catering to “learning styles” or the notion that students are either “left-brained” or “right-brained” thinkers. Experts warn these myths are not just harmless misunderstandings, but may actively undermine effective teaching and learning—an issue with clear implications for Thai educators and policymakers ScienceAlert.
The current surge in brain-based education approaches stems from a legitimate excitement about neuroscience discoveries and their potential to revolutionize learning. In Thailand, “Brain-Based Learning” (BBL) has become a buzzword among educators, with seminars and university programs aiming to prepare teachers for the 21st century, or “Thailand 4.0” era, by incorporating cognitive science into the curriculum Mahidol University. Yet, this push has also opened the door for misconceptions to take root. The persistence of neuromyths reflects a global challenge that many nations, including Thailand, have yet to overcome.
According to the Australian study, while most teachers correctly dismissed basic myths such as “our brains shut down during sleep” or that “mental capacity is purely hereditary,” troubling gaps remained. Only 7 percent of respondents accurately identified the statement “teaching to different learning styles will improve learning” as false, and just 15 percent recognized that “students are either left- or right-brained” is a myth. The researchers stress that although such statements have been disproven in multiple scientific studies, they continue to shape teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices.
The impact is not theoretical. For example, the notion of “learning styles”—that some children are visual, others auditory, and so on—has been prominent in teacher training workshops across the world, including Thailand. However, rigorous research has shown that there is no evidence to support the idea that matching teaching methods to supposed learning styles improves educational outcomes ResearchGate, [TLRP 2007]. Instead, tailoring instruction primarily based on learning styles may distract teachers from using evidence-based methods that benefit all students—such as engaging all senses, fostering collaboration, and building metacognitive skills.
Similarly, the “left brain/right brain” myth posits that people have a dominant hemisphere influencing their personality or abilities—creative on the right, logical on the left. In reality, both hemispheres are involved in most cognitive activities, and labelling students as belonging to one type can discourage them from exploring diverse learning opportunities. As Professor Kate E. Williams, author of the new study, notes: “The harm in this myth comes from students thinking they are ‘more left-brained than right,’ and teachers reinforcing this view. Young people might then feel they should only pursue art or only study maths, potentially limiting their self-confidence and future pathways” ScienceAlert.
These misconceptions are not just imported from overseas. In the Thai context, evidence suggests that neuromyths are also embedded in local pedagogical culture, in part due to a generational gap in teacher training and the popularity of commercialized “brain-based” courses and materials ResearchGate. For instance, Facebook pages such as BBL Brain-based Learning Thailand attract widespread attention with over 150,000 followers, but critical discussion about neuroscience myths is often lacking. Meanwhile, Mahidol University and other leading institutions emphasize the importance of up-to-date, research-based pedagogy, yet even reputable programs may sometimes perpetuate outdated concepts out of a desire to foster “innovation” Mahidol University.
A review of global and regional studies underscores that neuromyths are prevalent among both novice and veteran teachers, including in Asian societies. For example, a systematic review published by Frontiers in Education found persistent belief in neuromyths among educators across multiple countries and that professional training, while helpful, does not fully eliminate false beliefs unless it directly addresses them Frontiers in Education. Studies of teachers in Hong Kong and the general conclusions reflected in Thai discourse echo those findings, indicating the challenge is widespread throughout Asia ScienceDirect.
Why do these myths endure, even when debunked by neuroscience? One reason is that neuroscience is often seen as complex and inaccessible, making teachers receptive to simplified or commercialized interpretations—especially those promising dramatic gains. The danger is exacerbated in environments where critical discussion and scientific literacy are limited—a concern that applies to many schools in Thailand, particularly in rural provinces, where teacher support and ongoing professional development may be inconsistent.
Historically, Thai education has emphasized rote learning and hierarchies, which some scholars argue may make the system more susceptible to top-down adoption of fads and unproven educational theories Kenan Foundation Asia. For instance, past trends such as “multiple intelligences” workshops and “whole language” curricula—both inspired by partial interpretations of Western psychology—have sometimes overshadowed investments in critical scientific skills. Popularity-driven reforms can persist for years before robust evidence is considered.
Nevertheless, there is growing momentum in Thailand towards research-informed education. Ministries and universities are gradually integrating educational neuroscience into teacher-training curricula, and there is rising awareness that teachers need practical, evidence-based tools rather than catchy but misleading models. As part of the national education reform agenda, experts urge policymakers to screen and revise materials presented in teacher professional development to ensure accuracy and prevent the reinforcing of neuromyths.
Moving forward, what should Thai educators and parents do? Firstly, cultivate a healthy skepticism when encountering bold claims about learning “hacks” or “brain secrets.” As neuroscience expert Dr. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore told The Dana Foundation, “If it sounds too good to be true—it probably is” Dana Foundation. Thai teachers should seek reliable resources, such as open-access scientific summaries and research from local universities, and participate in ongoing professional development that highlights current evidence rather than perpetuating myths. Ministries and school administrators can play a vital role by collaborating with researchers to develop and disseminate clear, myth-busting guidance.
In practical terms, Thai parents and teachers can focus on creating supportive, stimulating, and inclusive learning environments—encouraging play, discussion, and curiosity. Rather than trying to match every lesson to imagined “learning styles” or labelling students as left- or right-brained, they can nurture diverse talents and recognise that all children are capable of developing wide-ranging abilities with encouragement and opportunity.
As Thailand strives to compete globally in education and innovation, the path forward depends on clear thinking and scientific literacy, not easy answers. By dispelling neuromyths and grounding policy in solid evidence, Thai society can ensure that today’s excitement about the brain actually benefits the minds of the next generation.
For more information and myth-busting guidance in English and Thai, see resources from Mahidol University and international educational neuroscience groups. ข่าวสารแบบนี้อาจจะฟังดู ยากนิดหน่อย แต่สำคัญจริงๆ—การเรียนรู้ที่ดียึดหลักวิทยาศาสตร์ต้องถูกต้องเพื่ออนาคตของเด็กไทยทุกคน.