CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 33Digital Education and SocietyNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionGlobal Educational Policies and Reforms

Biosocial spaces and neurocomputational governance: brain-based and brain-targeted technologies in education

Open access
Williamson, Ben, Pykett, Jessica, Nemorin, Selena·2018·Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education
DOI 10.1080/01596306.2018.1394421
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recently, technologies based on neuroscientific insights into brain function and structure have been promoted for application in education. The novel practices and environments produced by these technologies require new forms of ‘biosocial’ analysis to unpack their implications for education, learning and governance. This article provides an original analysis of current ‘brain-based’ R&D by the edu-business Pearson to apply artificial intelligence in education, and by the computing company IBM to develop cognitive systems for learning. These forms of neurocomputation are examined as technologies designed to function according to neuroscientific understandings of the brain, and to impress themselves on the cerebral lives of learners. The brain-based educational technologies proposed by Pearson and IBM are intended to optimize human cognition as a technique of human capital development in order to enhance the performance of education systems to secure a comparative advantage in a globalizing policy space, exemplifying new forms of neurocomputational governance and capital.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01596306.2018.1394421

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Based on the proliferation of big data in education, such as learning or teaching behaviour, the system could self-adjust to meet users' dynamic requirements by upgrading its algorithms.

    “Based on the proliferation of big data in education, such as learning or teaching behaviour, the system could self-adjust to meet users' dynamic requirements by upgrading its algorithms [33].”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Pearson, AI & human capital development section describes growing volumes of educational data and AI tutoring tailored to learners’ needs. The IBM, cognitive systems & rewiring the brain section describes systems that learn from interactions and adapt. Neither section says that an educational system self-adjusts to changing user requirements specifically by upgrading its algorithms. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Only two qualitative studies suggested the integration of neuroscience and AI in the education sector.

    “However, only two qualitative studies [33,60] suggested the integration of neuroscience and AI in the education sector.”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [33]

    The Pearson, AI & human capital development section describes proposals to combine educational neuroscience with AI in learning systems. But the Conclusion treats these as emerging corporate ambitions requiring critical analysis, not as an integration the authors themselves recommend. The paper also does not establish the citing sentence’s count of two qualitative studies. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The IoT technology can simulate brain functions in physical context to sense and understand human's cognitive behaviours, which apparently optimizes human cognition and performance in two qualitative studies.

    “e IoT technology can simulate brain functions in physical context to sense and understand human's cognitive behaviours, which apparently optimizes human cognition and performance in two qualitative studies [33,60].”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [33]

    The section “IBM, cognitive systems & rewiring the brain” describes brain-inspired cognitive systems designed to learn from environmental input and reports IBM’s ambition to enhance human cognition. It does not identify those systems as IoT technology or report that two qualitative studies demonstrated improved cognition or performance. The paper presents optimization as an aim or claim, not an established outcome. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Pearson and IBM have proposed to investigate neurocomputation brain-based educational technologies based on neuroscientific understanding of the brain.

    “Based on the basis of neuroscientific understanding of the brain, Pearson and IBM have proposed to investigate neurocomputation brain-based educational technologies [33].”

    From A Review of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Education from 2010 to 2020 (2021) · cites this paper as [33]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Edited by M. Senellart, trans. G. Burchell. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  2. Youdell, D. 2016a. A biosocial education future? Research in Education: http://rie.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/09/16/0034523716664579

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Williamson, B., Pykett, J., & Nemorin, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Stirling (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science (GB)
Corresponding author
Williamson, Ben
ORCID
Venue
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2017-10-27
Volume
39
Issue
2
Pages
258-275
ISSN
  • 0159-6306 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-3739
DOI
10.1080/01596306.2018.1394421
OpenAlex
W2725956666
Cited by
33
References
60
Citations by year
2024: 10 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
3.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Discourse Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education (publishedVersion)
  • London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) (submittedVersion)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Educational Policies and Reforms
Keywords
brain-based education, artificial intelligence in education, Pearson, IBM, human capital development, educational technology, neuroscience and education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review