Neuroscience And Learning In Education
September 15, 2026
Neuroscience and Teacher Education: a Portrait of Undergraduate Teacher Education Courses in the Brazilian Northeast Post Bnc-formation
Jaqueline do Nascimento Lopes; Carolina Matteussi Lino
DOI: 10.22167/2675-6528-202602231
Article derived from a Final Course Work (TCC), with content based on the student’s original work and adapted to the editorial format of the Revista E&S with the support of the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute for textual synthesis and organization.
Abstract
The understanding of learning processes, influenced by biological and neurobiological factors, is fundamental for teacher training. The presence or absence of topics related to Neuroscience in Pedagogy courses in the Brazilian Northeast was investigated. The research, of a qualitative and descriptive-exploratory nature, was carried out in 2026, based on documentary analysis. The Pedagogical Course Projects (PPC), the curricular matrices, and the syllabi of twenty-five Higher Education Institutions in the region were analyzed, in addition to the National Common Base for Initial Teacher Training for Basic Education (BNC-Formação). The results indicated a low presence of neuroscience content in initial teacher training, even after the promulgation of the BNC-Formação in 2019. It was observed that only 36% of the analyzed courses presented content related to Neuroscience in their PPC, while the majority did not mention the topic. The conclusions pointed to the imperative need to update the curricular matrices of Pedagogy courses, with the insertion of subjects and programs that address neuroscience. This aims to empower future teachers to understand brain function and apply scientific discoveries in their pedagogical practices, optimizing the teaching-learning process and student development.
Keywords: BNC-Formation; Curriculum; Neurosciences; Pedagogy.
1. Introduction
Learning is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, influenced by a set of biological, cultural, social, and affective factors. In the school context, the teacher plays a central role in mediating between students and knowledge, making teacher training a crucial element for the success of the educational process. Teaching is understood as work on the human, which highlights the profound implications of educational practice and teacher training on learning experiences (Tardif and Lessard, 2014).
For teaching practice to be effective and aligned with learners’ needs, it is essential for educators to understand the factors that affect learning processes, including cognitive, emotional, social, and neurobiological aspects (Costa et al., 2023). Neuroscience, as a natural science that studies neural structure and function, has offered significant contributions to understanding how attention, executive functions, memory, neuroplasticity, and emotions influence the acquisition and consolidation of knowledge (Cosenza and Guerra, 2014; Costa et al., 2023).
It is important to emphasize that Neuroscience does not replace Pedagogy, but complements it. While Pedagogy encompasses a broader range of factors, Neuroscience provides empirical bases that can support the improvement of teaching quality. The integration of these fields allows teachers to develop strategies that favor students’ attention, memory consolidation, and affective engagement (Cosenza and Guerra, 2014).
The understanding of learning processes begins in the teacher’s initial training, which constitutes the foundation for building knowledge and skills that will guide pedagogical practice throughout their professional journey (Tardif, 2014). In this context, the curricula of undergraduate teacher education courses are essential sources for investigating how this training is structured. In 2019, the National Common Base for Initial Teacher Training for Basic Education (BNC-Formação) was promulgated to improve curricular guidelines, seeking alignment with contemporary educational demands (Brasil, 2019). Although the BNC-Formação does not directly mention “Neuroscience” or “Neuroeducation,” it establishes the need for teachers to understand how people learn, using scientific evidence (Brasil, 2019).
Despite this normative advance, studies have indicated that the presence of neuroscientific content in the initial training of teachers is still incipient, fragmented, or nonexistent (Grossi et al., 2014; Grossi et al., 2019; Amaral et al., 2022; Grossi et al., 2024). This gap raises the question of to what extent the Pedagogical Projects of Pedagogy courses, especially those located in the Brazilian Northeast, contemplate neuroscientific principles, studies, and/or discoveries as part of initial teacher training.
The absence of neuroscientific knowledge in teacher training can limit the capacity of future educators to understand the bases of learning, such as sleep, emotions, memory, and attention, and to develop strategies that stimulate brain plasticity and executive functions (Sousa and Alves, 2017; Cosenza and Guerra, 2014; Grossi et al., 2024). This can also hinder the choice of effective pedagogical strategies and the recognition of students’ individual learning patterns (Dehaene, 2022; Markova, 2000). The outdatedness of curricular matrices, even after the BNC-Formation, and the disarticulation of neuroscientific content with pedagogical practice, highlight a structural fragility in Brazilian initial teacher training.
Given the relevance of teacher training that integrates Neuroscience discoveries for the construction of more grounded and effective pedagogical practices, this study aims to investigate the presence or absence of topics related to Neuroscience in the BNC-Formation and in the Pedagogical Projects of Pedagogy courses at Higher Education Institutions located in the Brazilian Northeast.
2. Material and Methods
The research, conducted in 2026, is descriptive-exploratory, qualitative in nature, and based on documentary analysis. This type of research was chosen to verify how Neuroscience knowledge is contemplated in the National Common Curricular Base for Initial Teacher Training in Basic Education (BNC-Formação) and in Pedagogical Course Projects (PPC) of Pedagogy.
The study was conducted in four stages. Firstly, a survey of Pedagogy courses from public and private institutions in the Northeast region was carried out. Subsequently, the courses whose PPCs would be analyzed were selected based on two criteria: I) accreditation by the Ministry of Education (MEC); and II) availability of the PPC in the institutional digital environment.
Subsequently, in the selected documents, the existence of disciplines or events that addressed topics of Neuroscience was verified, using the descriptors: “Neuroscience”, “Neuroeducation”, “Neuroscientific”, “Neurodevelopment”, “Neurolearning”, “Neurolinguistics”, “Neurological”, “Neurocognition”, “Neurodiversity”, “Mind”, “Brain”, “Biology and education”, “Memory”, “Attention” and “Executive Functions”. The results were then analyzed to propose contributions.
The research scope included 25 public and private Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) from the Brazilian Northeast, selected by non-probabilistic intentional sampling, ensuring the inclusion of at least one institution per federative unit. The BNC-Formation was consulted and downloaded from the Ministry of Education website.
During data collection, the following aspects were analyzed in the PPCs: a) presence or absence of content and/or disciplines related to Neuroscience; b) type of approach (mandatory subject, elective, event); c) allocated workload; and d) relationship with the BNC-Formation, especially regarding the planned skills.
For the data analysis, Bardin’s content analysis technique (2011) was used, in three stages: pre-analysis (data organization, content refinement through floating reading, corpus confirmation, objective formulation, and material preparation); coding (identification of record units for category creation based on semantic and expressive criteria); and inference and interpretation of data from the categories. The analysis units corresponded to the ementas, curricular matrices, and graduate profiles present in the PPCs, seeking to identify the insertion of Neuroscience content in the curricular proposal.
The collected data were organized and presented through analytical tables, systematizing information such as institution name, federal unit, PPC year, presence or absence of neuroscientific topics, approach type, workload, relationship with the BNC-Formation, terms found, and observations. The data interpretation was carried out through discussion with the scientific literature of the area, articulating empirical data with theoretical contributions, including the BNC-Formation.
The study did not require submission to the Research Ethics Committee (CEP), as there was no direct or indirect interaction with human beings and the collected data is of public domain and access.
3. Results and Discussion
The analysis of the Pedagogical Course Projects (PPC) of 25 Pedagogy courses in the Brazilian Northeast revealed that only nine Higher Education Institutions (IES), corresponding to 36% of those surveyed, updated their projects after the publication of the BNC-Formação. The deadline for this implementation, according to Resolution CNE/CP No. 1/2024, was March 20, 2024.
It was found that 36% of the analyzed courses include content related to Neuroscience in their PPC. In contrast, 60% make no mention of the topic, and 4% of the institutions, although they do not include the content in disciplines, cite neurolearning as the foundation of the Pedagogy course. This data is detailed in Table 1.Table 1. Presence or absence of Neuroscience in PPC.
| Institution | PPC Year | Presence of Neuroscience | Approach Type | Workload | Discipline |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| State University of Bahia [UNEB] | 2020 | Yes | Elective | 60h | Contemporary debates on literacy in Portuguese-speaking countries: contributions from cognitive psychology and neuroscience |
| Federal University of Recôncavo da Bahia [UFRB] | 2019 | Yes | Elective | 68h | Biological Aspects of Education |
| Federal University of Ceará [UFCE] | 2013 | Yes | Elective | 64h | Learning: processes and problems |
| Federal University of Paraíba [UFPB] | 2006 | Yes | Elective | 60h | Biological Foundations of Education |
| Frassinetti University Center of Recife [UniFAFIRE] | 2024 | Yes | Mandatory | 40h | Neuroscience and Education |
| University of Pernambuco [UPE] | 2025 | Yes | Elective | 60h | Neuroeducation |
| Catholic University of Pernambuco [UNICAP] | 2019 | Yes | Mandatory | 60h | Neuroscience and Learning Processes |
| State University of Piauí [UESPI] | 2023 | Yes | Mandatory | 60h | Neurodiversity* (covers topics from Neuroscience) |
| Federal Rural University of the Semi-arid Region [UFERSA] | 2016 | Yes | Mandatory | 30h | Cognitive Development and Acquisition of Reading and Writing in EJA* (the abstract is very focused on Neuroscience, including using the term directly). |
| Federal University of Alagoas [UFAL] | 2019 | No | |||
| Federal Institute of Alagoas [IFAL] | 2023 | No | |||
| State University of Southwest Bahia [UESB] | 2011 | No | |||
| Federal University of Bahia [UFBA] | 2012 | No | |||
| Federal University of Cariri [UFCA] | 2023 | No | |||
| State University of Ceará [UECE] | 2018 | No | |||
| State University of Maranhão [EUMA] | 2020 | No | |||
| Federal University of Maranhão [UFMA] | 2007 | No | |||
| Federal University of Campina Grande [UFCG] | 2009 | No | |||
| State University of Paraíba [UFPB] | 2016 | No | |||
| Federal University of Pernambuco [UFPE] | 2024 | No | |||
| Federal University of Piauí [UFPI] | 2009 | No | |||
| Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte [UFRN] | 2017 | No | |||
| Potiguar University [UNP] | 2024 | It depends | |||
| UNIFACEX | 2019 | No | |||
| Federal University of Sergipe [UFS] | 2008 | No |
Source: Original research results.
The analysis of Table 1 indicated that the presence of neuroscientific content in Pedagogy courses is limited and, frequently, optional in nature, allowing graduates to complete Higher Education without contact with the subject. It was observed that, in the PPCs that address Neuroscience, the terms appear sporadically and disjointedly, without explicit integration with pedagogical practices or teacher training. The approach tends to be linked to disciplines in the biological area, without interdisciplinary articulation with teaching and learning processes.
Neuroscientific themes may be addressed in broader-named disciplines, such as “Special Topics in Education” or “Emerging Topics in Pedagogy,” although there is no evidence to support this assumption. Universidade Potiguar (UNP), for example, establishes Neuroscience as the methodological basis of the course, without directly including it in the curriculum. Disciplines such as Psychology of Learning, Development and Learning, or Special Education were not considered linked to Neuroscience, as their focus is not neurobiological or neuroscientific.
The most recurrent descriptors in the PPCs were “Neuroscience”, “Neurosciences”, “brain” and terms related to biology. More specific terms such as “Neuroscientist”, “Neurolinguistics”, “Neurocognition”, “Neurolearning” and “Executive Functions” were identified with low frequency or absence. In summary, 64% of the surveyed HEIs do not include neuroscientific content in their curricula, which may limit the training of future educators in understanding students’ brain function.
This gap in teacher training can limit performance in several aspects, such as difficulty in understanding the bases of learning (sleep, emotions, memory, attention, brain plasticity) and, consequently, in planning experiences that explore students’ potential (Sousa and Alves, 2017). This can also compromise the development of executive functions, essential for autonomy and cognitive flexibility (Cosenza and Guerra, 2014).
Additionally, the absence of neuroscientific knowledge restricts the choice of effective pedagogical strategies that stimulate curiosity and engagement (Dehaene, 2022), hindering the recognition of students’ individual learning patterns (Markova, 2000) and the understanding of the relevance of active methodologies for learning consolidation (Dehaene, 2022).
Neuroscience, although it does not propose a new pedagogy, offers subsidies to substantiate pedagogical practices that respect brain functioning, making the teaching-learning process more scientific and efficient (Cosenza and Guerra, 2014). Knowledge about the brain, by itself, does not transform learning, but empowers the teacher to develop strategies that promote neural plasticity and executive functions, positively impacting student development (Grossi et al., 2024). Thus, teacher training must prioritize the appropriation of these discoveries.
The BNC-Formation, enacted in 2019, and Resolution CNE/CP No. 4 of 2024, which reinforces the mandatory integration of the National Common Base into PPCs, are important regulatory milestones for the initial training of teachers. The analysis of these documents revealed that, although the BNC-Formation does not directly mention “Neuroscience” or “Neuroeducation”, it establishes as a fundamental competence the understanding of how people learn, based on scientific evidence (Brazil, 2019).
This guideline implies that future professionals must understand development and learning at different stages, and that the inclusion of scientific knowledge in Education is crucial for the adoption of effective pedagogical strategies. Thus, the BNC-Formation, even without explicit terms, indirectly points to the relevance of Neuroscience in understanding the neurobiological bases of learning and in optimizing pedagogical practices.
The obsolescence of the PPCs is notable, with only 36% of HEIs having updated their projects after the BNC-Formation, and, of these, 55.55% still do not include Neuroscience disciplines. This situation reflects a structural fragility in Brazilian initial teacher training, characterized by curricular fragmentation and a deficiency in knowledge directly applicable to the school routine, as pointed out by Gatti (2010).
The main gap identified is the expressive absence of Neuroscience content in the curricular matrices, with 64% of the surveyed HEIs not including it. In institutions where the topic is present, it generally appears as an elective component, which does not guarantee that all future educators will develop an understanding of the neurobiological bases of learning.
A second gap is the disarticulation between neuroscientific content and pedagogical practice. Even when present, Neuroscience descriptors are isolated and without integration into the teaching-learning process, often linked to Biology disciplines, without an explicit interdisciplinary relationship. This prevents teachers from applying this knowledge in lesson planning.
The third gap is the persistent curricular obsolescence and non-compliance with the deadline of Resolution CNE/CP No. 4/2024. One hypothesis for this gap is the absence of direct mention of Neuroscience or Neuroeducation in the BNC-Formation, which may lead HEIs to not feel obligated to integrate such content. The construction of more specific normative documents could mitigate this obstacle.
Although there are paths for a more scientific approach to teaching and learning, its effectiveness depends on initial training that empowers teachers to apply this knowledge in planning and pedagogical practice.
This study presents limitations, such as the low representativeness of private institutions in the analyzed corpus, due to the unavailability of their complete PPCs to the public. In some cases, only the curricular matrix was accessible, which restricted the identification of neuroscientific descriptors and the scope of the results.
However, the research contributes to the debate on initial teacher training, highlighting the need for greater articulation between normative documents, Pedagogy curricula, and neuroscientific knowledge. The results can support future investigations and reflections on the qualification of teacher training, especially in understanding learning processes.
4. Conclusion
This study investigated the presence of topics related to Neuroscience in the National Common Curricular Base for Initial Teacher Training in Basic Education (BNC-Formation) and in the Pedagogical Course Projects (PPC) of Higher Education Institutions located in the Brazilian Northeast. It was found that only 36% of the Pedagogy courses analyzed included Neuroscience content in their PPCs, and even in these, the approach was often elective, sporadic, and disconnected from pedagogical practice, with a tendency to be linked to subjects in the biological area. It was observed that the BNC-Formation, although it does not explicitly mention Neuroscience, establishes the need for teachers to understand how people learn based on scientific evidence, which indirectly points to the relevance of neuroscientific knowledge. However, the outdated nature of the PPCs, with only 36% of institutions having updated their projects after the BNC-Formation, and the significant absence of neuroscientific content in 64% of the HEIs surveyed, revealed a structural fragility in initial teacher training. The study’s main contribution lies in highlighting the imperative need for curricular updating to integrate Neuroscience discoveries in a mandatory and interdisciplinary manner, enabling future educators to develop more well-founded and effective pedagogical practices.
The research presented limitations stemming from the low representativeness of private institutions in the analyzed corpus, due to the unavailability of their complete PPCs (Pedagogical Political Projects) in the public domain, and restricted access to only curricular matrices in some cases. This limited the identification of neuroscientific descriptors and the scope of the results. It is suggested that future studies explore the effectiveness of more specific normative documents that directly cite Neuroscience or Neuroeducation, in order to mitigate the identified curricular gap. It is recommended that Higher Education Institutions revisit their curricular matrices, incorporating mandatory subjects that discuss the contributions of Neuroscience to Education, integrated into lesson planning, teaching methods, and assessment. This aims to enhance the qualification of teacher training and the understanding of learning processes, promoting more scientific teaching aligned with students’ brain function.
Bibliographic References
Amaral, M. G. B.; Galvão, W. N. M.; Farias, I. M. S. 2022. Neurociência na formação de professores: uma análise das matrizes curriculares dos cursos de licenciatura de uma universidade pública do Nordeste. Interfaces da Educação, 13(38): 1–25.
Bardin, L. 2011. Análise de conteúdo. Edições 70, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Brasil. 2019. Resolução CNE/CP n.º 2, de 20 de dezembro de 2019. Define as Diretrizes Curriculares Nacionais para a Formação Inicial de Professores para a Educação Básica e institui a Base Nacional Comum para a Formação Inicial de Professores da Educação Básica (BNC-Formação). Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 20 dez. 2019, Seção 1, p. 142.
Cosenza, R.M.; Guerra, L.B. 2014. Neurociência e educação: como o cérebro aprende. Artmed, Porto Alegre, Brasil.
Costa, R.L.S. 2023. Neurociência e aprendizagem. Revista Brasileira de Educação 28 (280010): 1-22.
Dehaene, S. 2022. É assim que aprendemos: por que o cérebro funciona melhor do que qualquer máquina (ainda…). Contexto, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Gatti, B.A. 2010. Formação de professores no Brasil: características e problemas. Educação & Sociedade 31(113): 1355-1379.
Grossi, M.G.R.; Lopes, A.M.; Couto, P.A. 2014. Neurociência na formação de professores: um estudo da realidade brasileira. Revista da FAEEBA – Educação e Contemporaneidade 23(41): 27-40.
Grossi, M.G.R.; Oliveira, E.S.; Aguiar, F.A. 2019. A neurociência na formação inicial de professores: uma investigação científica. Ensino Em Re-Vista 26(3): 871-895.
Grossi, M.G.R.; Oliveira, E.S.; Fonseca, R.G.P. 2024. Currículo, neurociência e a formação de professores. Revista e-Curriculum 22(e59967): 1-26.
Markova, D. 2000. O natural é ser inteligente: padrões básicos de aprendizagem a serviço da criatividade e educação. Summus, São Paulo, SP, Brasil.
Sousa, Anne Madeliny Oliveira Pereira de; Alves, Ricardo Rilton Nogueira. 2017. Neurociência na formação dos educadores e sua contribuição no processo de aprendizagem. Revista de Psicopedagogia 34(105): 320-331.
Tardif, M. 2014; Saberes docentes e formação profissional. 17ed. Vozes, Petrópolis, RJ, Brasil.
Tardif, M.; Lessard, C. 2005. O trabalho docente: elementos para uma teoria da docência como profissão de interações humanas. 9ed. Vozes, Petrópolis, RJ, Brasil.
Article originating from a Final Course Work on Neuroscience and Learning in Education
To learn more about the course, click here and access the MBX Academy platform