'Don't ignore all scientific studies on child development'

It is widely recognised within the neuroscience community that neuroscience is a very new science and that some tentative initial findings have been massively over-interpreted by educationalists, politicians and other commentators.

The proliferation of books claiming to offer 'brain-based' ways of teaching or parenting has been unhelpful and these are generally viewed with horror by neuroscientists. My own colleague at Cambridge, Professor Usha Goswami, who is recognised internationally for her important work on the neuroscience of dyslexia, has written extensively about 'neuromyths'.

To this extent I would support the position adopted by John Bruer. He is certainly correct that the ideas about the damaging effects of early deprivation derive from experiments with mice, who were subjected to very extreme deprivation, and cannot be used to infer anything about brain development among children brought up in what might be regarded as relatively poor circumstances, but whose physical and social environments are most likely perfectly stimulating enough to ensure normal physiological development of the brain.

However, in my view, to use the current limitations and over-interpretations of neuroscience to dismiss all scientific study of factors impacting on children's development is highly misleading.