We are pleased to announce that Prof. Dr. Gerry Leisman has been appointed Section Editor-in-Chief of the “Educational Neuroscience” Section in Brain Sciences (ISSN: 2076-3425).

Name: Prof. Dr. Gerry Leisman
Email: [email protected]
Affiliations: 1. Movement and Cognition Laboratory, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences Haifa University, Haifa, Israel; 2. Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Institute for Neurology and Neurosurgery, University of the Medical Sciences of Havana, Havana, Cuba
Homepage: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9975-7331
Research keywords: developmental neuroscience; computational neuroscience; cognitive neuroscience; fetal cognition; neuroplasticity; consciousness; neuroeducation hunter

Prof. Dr. Gerry Leisman is a full professor and a research fellow at the University of Haifa in Israel and a professor of restorative neurology at the University of Medical Sciences in Havana, Cuba. He studies the relation between movement and cognition development, examining the mechanisms of self-organizing systems in the brain when applied to fetal, neonatal, infant, and childhood development of sensation/perception, memory, cognition, consciousness, death, autism, movement, and gait. He was one of the first to identify functional disconnectivities in the brain. He has been involved in the promotion of consciousness as a scientifically tractable problem since the early 1970s, and has been particularly influential in arguing that a fundamental understanding of consciousness can be approached using the modern tools of neurobiology and mechanisms of theoretical physics. Together with Dr. Paul Koch, he developed the biomedical applications of continuum theory. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine (UK) and was elected Fellow of the Association for Psychological Sciences in 1990, a Senior Member of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society in 1986, and a Life Fellow of the International Association for Functional Neurology & Rehabilitation in 2010, in addition to receiving its Lifetime Achievement Award in 2011. He has published hundreds of papers and texts in the fields of neurosciences, developmental sciences, cognitive science, biomedical engineering, and in the systems sciences literature.

The following is a short Q&A with Prof. Dr. Gerry Leisman, who shared his vision for the journal with us, as well as his views of the research area and open access publishing:

1. What appealed to you about the journal that made you want to take the role as its Section Editor-in-Chief?
Brain Sciences is an open access journal that has been publishing high-standard research for about ten years. It is during this period of time that the journal has obtained high visibility through it being indexed in PubMed Scopus, Web of Sciences and other databases. The review processes are swift and effective. For example, in one paper that has been through the review process, the reviewer’s critique was significantly longer than the paper itself. It is for this and other reasons that the journal’s impact factor has steadily risen. Secondly, the diversity of the journal’s coverage is extensive. This is a factor important to me in particular as it is my intention to parlay the knowledge base in cognitive neuroscience, developmental cognitive neuroscience, human factors, experimental psychology, occupational and physical therapy, systems theory, neurology, rehabilitation sciences, industrial engineering, production management and operations research as well as many other not so obvious applications and to translate that knowledge base into practical translations in the education of neurotypical, impaired, aging and elderly learners. There is a saying, “The day is short and the work much.” So, another appeal of the Brain Sciences is its rapid publication coupled with its copious review process.

2. What is your vision for the Section?
It is astounding that the central model for knowledge acquisition within the educational system is, even today, the “talking head” while the student sits. What an embarrassment, given the huge literature in the cognitive neurosciences providing us with many alternatives. For example, we know that movement influences cognition and vice versa. Strong connections exist between movement, physical education, breaks, recess, energizing activities, and improved cognition. Movement can be an efficient cognitive approach to reinforce learning, improve memory and retrieval, and enhance learner motivation and morale.

Perhaps that is the reason that we have not effected change in public policy towards school-aged children, and why people are still required to retire in their sixties when we know that movement, social engagement and cognitive stimulation will reduce health care costs significantly in both the developing and developed world, is because we are busy doing what we have always done. We do not change when the data and evidence require it. There seems to be a disconnection between the world of science and public policy in this arena.

In times of shrinking financial resources, educators, health officials, government policymakers and employers must make difficult choices. In the school system, do dance, theater, recess, and physical education belong in the curriculum? Are they frills or fundamentals? What does brain research tell us about the relationship between the body and cognitive function? If movement and learning are connected, we should expect evidence to support the idea.

I see the Section “Educational Neurosciences” growing its board for inclusion of disciplines and research that directly or even indirectly affect the individual’s capacity to learn, retain, and apply what has been learned. I plan to develop Special Issues that focus on poorly understood application areas in educational neuroscience. I also see the Section “Educational Neurosciences” becoming the go-to interdisciplinary source for burgeoning theory and applications to the classroom and out-of-the-classroom learning and instructions. I plan for the journal to become integrally involved in university program development as well as form linkages with professional organizations pushing forward with the same vision and agenda.

3. What does the future of this field of research look like?
Cognitive neuroscience has made many strides over the past eighty years and the application to classroom-based instruction offers the possibility of a fundamental sea change in how the educational product is delivered and acquired. Recent advances in cognitive neuroscience have produced fundamental changes in how we understand nervous system structure and function as applied to thinking, cognition, memory, brain organization and behavior, and much more than previously thought. We now know that simplistic left-right differences and cerebral asymmetries are less important in understanding classroom learning but more multifaceted brain network, applications to instruction and external means of altering brain chemistry and neuroplasticity to facilitate learning have led to newly developed concepts and findings that have not found their way into the classroom, in teacher training and in educational policy.

We require the advancement of innovative models to better understand activities that can importantly affect motivation, learning, and memory as well as evaluation methodologies that can observe, study and assess these functions. We are slowly realizing that there exists a significant intersection between the problems of psychological, sociological, and educational processes and those of neurobiology, biochemistry, and neurophysiology, with the possibility of reciprocal assistance. Neuroscience has influenced school-based activity in various ways. For example, it has provided us with a better understanding of the nature of dyslexia and has offered insights into how diverse variables such as attention, sleep, relationships and anxiety can affect educational outcomes. Many difficulties exist in actualizing cognitive neuroscience applied to the classroom. Principally the various disciplines have different end goals such as prescriptive vs. descriptive or fact vs. solution oriented. Additionally, the neurosciences have been measuring effects in milliseconds to minutes whereas education has been more concerned with changes measured in days, weeks, and years. What is therefore necessary is the creation of a common language integrating what we know, what we have yet to learn, and mechanisms of translation to practice in the same way that the ancient Greeks required a common language for workers from various parts of the Greek world to understand each other in order to build “The Glory that was Greece and the grandeur that was Rome.” Plainly, we need to find a common language for education, learning, and study.

4. What do you think of the development of open access in the publishing field?
Science is paid for largely by governments and the results and applications of sciences, therefore, are owned by those who fund it – the people. Article 19 of the Declaration of human rights clearly states, “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” I think it is quite clear that the dissemination of information, including scientific ones, demands free access by the public and Creative Commons speaks directly to that. I see open access as a human right.

The editorial team warmly welcome Prof. Dr. Gerry Leisman in his role as Section Editor-in-Chief of the “Educational Neuroscience” Section, and we look forward to his leading Brain Sciences to achieve more milestones.