Brain Data: Scanning, Scraping and Sculpting the Plastic Learning Brain Through Neurotechnology

Neurotechnology is an advancing field of research and development with significant implications for education. As ‘postdigital’ hybrids of biological and informational codes, novel neurotechnologies combine neuroscience insights into the human brain with advanced technical development in brain imaging, brain-computer interfaces, neurofeedback platforms, brain stimulation and other neuroenhancement applications. Merging neurobiological knowledge about human life with computational technologies, neurotechnology exemplifies how postdigital science will play a significant role in societies and education in decades to come. As neurotechnology developments are being extended to education, they present potential for businesses and governments to enact new techniques of ‘neurogovernance’ by ‘scanning’ the brain, ‘scraping’ it for data and then ‘sculpting’ the brain toward particular capacities. The aim of this article is to critically review neurotechnology developments and implications for education. It examines the purposes to which neurotechnology development is being put in education, interrogating the commercial and governmental objectives associated with it and the neuroscientific concepts and expertise that underpin it. Finally, the article raises significant ethical and governance issues related to neurotechnology development and postdigital science that require concerted attention from education researchers.

[1]  N. Katherine Hayles,et al.  How we became posthuman , 1999 .

[2]  Alan D. Castel,et al.  Seeing is believing: The effect of brain images on judgments of scientific reasoning , 2008, Cognition.

[3]  Michela Ott,et al.  The potential relevance of cognitive neuroscience for the development and use of technology-enhanced learning , 2015 .

[4]  Rúbia M. W. de Oliveira.  Neuroplasticity , 2020, Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy.

[5]  Athanasios V. Vasilakos,et al.  Brain computer interface: control signals review , 2017, Neurocomputing.

[6]  J. Tambling.  How We Became Posthuman: Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics by N. Katherine Hayles (review) , 2001, Modern Language Review.

[7]  John Bone.  The Nature of Structure: A Biosocial Approach: , 2016 .

[8]  Maurizio Meloni.  A Postgenomic Body , 2018, Body & society.

[9]  D. Fitzgerald,et al.  Social Science and Neuroscience beyond Interdisciplinarity: Experimental Entanglements , 2015, Theory, culture & society.

[10]  C. Pollack,et al.  No brain left behind: consequences of neuroscience discourse for education , 2015 .

[11]  N. Katherine Hayles,et al.  Unthought: The Power of the Cognitive Nonconscious , 2017 .

[12]  Simon J Williams,et al.  The biosocial: sociological themes and issues , 2016, Sociological review monograph.

[13]  J. Pykett,et al.  Neuroliberalism: Behavioural Government in the Twenty-First Century , 2017 .

[14]  Sy Taffel.  Perspectives on the postdigital , 2016 .

[15]  Nikolas Rose,et al.  Foresight report on future computing and robotics: A Report from the HBP Foresight Lab , 2016 .

[16]  Yu-Hao Lee,et al.  Mind Your Errors , 2011, Psychological science.

[17]  M. Pickersgill.  The social life of the brain: Neuroscience in society , 2013, Current sociology. La Sociologie contemporaine.

[18]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power , 2015 .

[19]  Sven Bestmann,et al.  Transcranial electrical stimulation , 2017, Current Biology.

[20]  D. Bishop,et al.  Research Review: Emanuel Miller Memorial Lecture 2012 – Neuroscientific studies of intervention for language impairment in children: interpretive and methodological problems , 2013, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[21]  N. Rose,et al.  Governing through the Brain: Neuropolitics, Neuroscience and Subjectivity , 2014 .

[22]  Juha Suoranta,et al.  Postdigital science and education , 2018 .

[23]  Elizabeth A. Gagen.  Governing emotions: citizenship, neuroscience and the education of youth , 2015 .

[24]  J. Pykett.  Brain Culture , 2015 .

[25]  H. Zwart.  The oblique perspective: philosophical diagnostics of contemporary life sciences research , 2017, Life sciences, society and policy.

[26]  S. Katz,et al.  The Neuro-Complex: Some Comments and Convergences , 2011 .

[27]  A. Bradbury,et al.  Revisions to rationality: the translation of ‘new knowledges’ into policy under the Coalition Government , 2017 .

[28]  N. Rose.  Reading the Human Brain , 2016 .

[29]  D. Fitzgerald,et al.  Experimental Entanglements: Social Science and Neuroscience Beyond Interdisciplinarity , 2018 .

[30]  Kevin Warwick,et al.  Novel Neurotechnologies: Intervening in the Brain , 2013 .

[31]  Patrick Charland,et al.  L’utilisation de données psychophysiologiques pour mieux comprendre l’apprentissage en temps réel : le fragile équilibre entre la validité des données et l’authenticité des contextes de collecte de données , 2018 .

[32]  Susanne M. Jaeggi,et al.  Enhancing Working Memory Training with Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation , 2016, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[33]  Rob Kitchin,et al.  Code/Space: Software and Everyday Life , 2011 .

[34]  Victoria Pitts-Taylor.  The Brain's Body: Neuroscience and Corporeal Politics , 2016 .

[35]  Michael S. C. Thomas,et al.  A scientific strategy for life chances , 2017 .

[36]  Anna Wexler.  The Social Context of “Do-It-Yourself” Brain Stimulation: Neurohackers, Biohackers, and Lifehackers , 2017, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[37]  J. Vos.  The Death and the Resurrection of (Psy)critique: The Case of Neuroeducation , 2016 .

[38]  N. Rose,et al.  Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind , 2013 .

[39]  C. Kemner,et al.  Spatial Frequency Training Modulates Neural Face Processing: Learning Transfers from Low- to High-Level Visual Features , 2017, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[40]  T. Broer,et al.  Targeting brains, producing responsibilities: the use of neuroscience within British social policy. , 2015, Social science & medicine.

[41]  Kalervo N. Gulson,et al.  ‘Life’ and education policy: intervention, augmentation and computation , 2018 .

[42]  D. Youdell.  A biosocial education future? , 2016 .

[43]  N. K. Hayles.  How We Think: Digital Media and Contemporary Technogenesis , 2012 .

[44]  S. Jasanoff,et al.  Future Imperfect: Science, Technology, and the Imaginations of Modernity , 2015 .

[45]  Alan Rubel,et al.  Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI , 2017, Nature.

[46]  Brian A. Coffman,et al.  Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Modulates Neuronal Activity and Learning in Pilot Training , 2016, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[47]  Stefan Haufe,et al.  The Berlin Brain-Computer Interface: Progress Beyond Communication and Control , 2016, Front. Neurosci..

[48]  Alex Pentland,et al.  Privacy for Personal Neuroinformatics , 2014, ArXiv.

[49]  Marcello Ienca,et al.  Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology , 2017, Life Sciences, Society and Policy.

[50]  Annie Brookman-Byrne,et al.  IMBES Pre‐Conference: Using Insight From Research to Improve Education , 2018 .

[51]  R. Lent,et al.  The various forms of neuroplasticity: Biological bases of learning and teaching , 2016 .

[52]  Patrick Charland,et al.  The use of psychophysiological data to better understand real-time learning: the fragile balance between the validity of data and the authenticity of data collection contexts , 2018 .

[53]  David M. Berry,et al.  Post-digital humanities: computation and cultural critique in the arts and humanities , 2014 .

[54]  N. van Atteveldt,et al.  Transcranial Electrical Stimulation to Enhance Cognitive Performance of Healthy Minors: A Complex Governance Challenge , 2017, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[55]  Michael Wheeler,et al.  Thinking Beyond the Brain: Educating and Building, from the Standpoint of Extended Cognition , 2011 .

[56]  D. Poeppel,et al.  Brain-to-Brain Synchrony Tracks Real-World Dynamic Group Interactions in the Classroom , 2017, Current Biology.

[57]  O. Carter,et al.  Transcranial direct current stimulation: five important issues we aren't discussing (but probably should be) , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[58]  Michael S. C. Thomas,et al.  The principles and practices of educational neuroscience: Comment on Bowers (2016). , 2016, Psychological review.