PowerPoint Presentation

[Audio] SAINT JOSEPH UNIVERSITY OF BEIRUT FACULTY OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES Thesis in Educational Sciences Examining Teachers' Knowledge and the Impact of Scientific Strategies on Enhancing Attention and Engagement of Grade 10 Students in Private Schools in Lebanon Presented by Rima Al Mohamad Supervised by: Dr. Viola Makhzoum Academic year 2024-2025.

[Audio] Background of the Study Neuroscience studies brain functions and their impact on behavior, emotions, and cognition (Nordqvist, 2018; Howard-Jones, 2012). Neuroeducation connects neuroscience, psychology, and pedagogy to optimize learning strategies (Doukakis & Alexopoulos, 2020). Neuropedagogy applies neuroscience to develop active learning, dual coding, and chunking techniques (Fragkaki et al., 2022). These strategies enhance synaptic connections through meaningful engagement (Zadina, 2014). This study examines teacher knowledge and application of NPS in Grade 10 classrooms in Beirut. Uses convergent-parallel mixed methods: surveys, observations, and interviews (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018). Focuses on six private schools of varying socioeconomic backgrounds..

[Audio] Statement of the Problem The Lebanese education system faces declining student engagement due to persistent use of traditional, teacher-centered methods (Dagher & Boujaoude, 2024; Yamak & Chaaban, 2021). Neuropedagogical strategies (active learning, dual coding, chunking) offer promising alternatives grounded in neuroscience (Tokuhama-Espinosa, 2015). However, research in Lebanon is limited regarding teacher knowledge and practical use of these strategies in private schools. Most existing studies focus on Western contexts, with minimal exploration in Middle Eastern educational systems (Fischer et al., 2012). Factors such as teacher expertise, access to professional development, and socioeconomic disparities are likely to impact effectiveness but remain underexplored in Lebanon. This study addresses the gap by evaluating Lebanese teachers' knowledge and implementation of NPS to guide educational reform and innovation..

[Audio] Purpose of the Study Investigate how Grade 10 teachers in Lebanese private schools understand and apply Neuropedagogical strategies (active learning, dual coding, chunking). Examine the impact of these strategies on student engagement and attention span in classroom settings. Explore how teacher expertise, professional development, and socioeconomic conditions influence strategy effectiveness..

[Audio] Variables Variable Definition Tools Neuropedagogical Knowledge of teachers Teachers' ability to identify and apply strategies that aligne with how the brain of students retains and cognitive processes the information (Inna Shvarts-Serebro, 2024) Likert-scale items, multiple-choice questions Professional Development of teachers Teachers' exposure to formal training that aims to enhances their skills and knowledge in order to improve students’ outcomes (Salo, 2024) Survey questions on training exposure Student’s Engagement The extent to which students are actively involved during lessons. Engagement is linked to classroom support and motivational climate (Millacci, 2025). Survey items assessing perceived student activity and classroom observation. Implementation Challenges of NPD Barriers to implementing neuropedagogical strategies such as time limitations, lack of materials, or school-level resistance (Sani Alkhasawneh, 2025) Likert-scale items, checklist of barriers Socioeconomic Status (SES) of Schools Schools are often classified as low, medium, or high based on tuition fees, which serve as a significant indicator of the overall student body composition. Higher tuition fees are generally associated with the range and quality of services provided to students (Zancajo, 2019). survey demographic data Student Attention Observed behaviors indicating attention, such as note-taking or eye contact. These are influenced by teacher gaze behavior and interaction quality (Chaudhuri, 2021) Observation checklist (4 items) Neuropedagogical Strategies Implementation Implementation of chunking(organize the task in small units and connect the prior information with the new one (Karunarathna, 2024), dual coding(using verbal and visual inputs to foster the learning (Karunarathna, 2024), and active learning observed in class (Pradeep, 2024). Classroom observation checklist with strategy-specific items.

[Audio] Research Questions and Hypothesis # Research Question Hypothesis RQ1 What is the current level of teachers’ knowledge of Neuropedagogical strategies, and what obstacles do they face in implementing them? H₄: Lebanese teachers face significant challenges in implementing Neuropedagogical strategies. H₀: Teachers face no significant challenges. RQ2 Are there differences in teacher professional development opportunities based on the socioeconomic status of the schools? H₃: Professional development significantly enhances teachers’ ability to implement Neuropedagogical strategies. H₀: No significant impact of professional development. RQ3 Is there a relationship between teachers' knowledge of Neuropedagogical strategies and the socioeconomic status of their schools? H₁: Significant difference in teacher knowledge based on school socioeconomic status. H₀: No significant difference based on socioeconomic status. RQ4 What is the impact of implementing Neuropedagogical strategies on students’ classroom engagement and attention? H₂: Implementing NPS significantly improves student engagement and attention. H₀: No significant effect of implementing NPS on student engagement and attention..

[Audio] Theoretical Framework Socio-Constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978): Constructivism (Piaget, 1950): Neuropedagogical Link: Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) and Neuropedagogical Strategies CLT (Sweller, 1988) explains how memory processes affect learning—dividing cognitive load into: Primary is acquired naturally (e.g., speaking); secondary needs structured teaching (Geary & Berch, 2016). Applying CLT through NPS creates engaging, brain-aligned learning environments and boosts performance (Papaleontiou-Louca, 2019)..

[Audio] Conceptual Framework Educators who adopt a brain-based learning philosophy employ NPS informed by cognitive load principles to enhance student engagement and comprehension. The goal is to create learning environments that minimize unnecessary mental effort while promoting deep, lasting learning by aligning instruction with the brain's natural mechanisms..

[Audio] Research Approach and Design Mixed-Methods Approach using a Convergent Parallel Design (Ivankova, 2006). Combines quantitative (surveys & classroom observations) and qualitative (focus group interviews) data. Enables a comprehensive understanding of teaching practices and student behavior (Creswell & Creswell, 2021). Quantitative data reveals patterns and relationships between teacher knowledge and classroom engagement..

[Audio] Sampling and Research Boundaries Study conducted in six private schools in Beirut, reflecting varied teacher preparation, student diversity, and resource inequality (BouJaoude & Baddour, 2022; LAES, 2023). Lebanese private schools enroll 71% of students and represent a dominant sector for examining Neuropedagogical Strategies (NPS) (Education, 2017). Sample: 60 Grade 10 teachers, selected via stratified random sampling for demographic and instructional diversity (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Grade 10 chosen due to its critical role in academic transition and cognitive development. Research Boundaries: Study conducted during 2024–2025 academic year—does not assess long-term impact (Menard, 2020). Findings may not generalize to public schools or non-Beirut regions due to differing policies and training access (Bryman, 2022)..

[Audio] Instruments Three tools used: Electronic Questionnaire Focus Group Interviews Classroom Observations Electronic Questionnaire Efficient tool to gather data from multiple schools (Dörnyei, 2020). Included knowledge-based and Likert scale items on dual coding, chunking, and active learning (Priya, 2023). Measured teacher knowledge, beliefs, and challenges, but limited by social desirability bias (Krumpal, 2013). Focus Group Interviews Provided deeper insights into teacher beliefs, barriers, and institutional context (Lohvynenko, 2023). Encouraged interactive discussion and helped clarify questionnaire responses (Krueger, 2015). More efficient than individual interviews. Classroom Observations Verified whether teachers actually implemented Neuropedagogical strategies. Assessed student engagement, instructional visuals, and teacher-student interaction (Kuh, 2020). Helped align reported vs. observed practices for greater validity..

[Audio] Validity and Reliability Tools are valid, reliable, and suitable for real classroom settings (Braun & Clarke, 2021). Questionnaire Expert-reviewed (5 faculty) for clarity and alignment. Strong content & construct validity. High reliability scores (e.g., α = 0.878 for NPS knowledge). Interview Protocol Reviewed by 3 experts; biased terms removed. Organized into 4 clear themes (e.g., strategy use, impact, support). Observation Checklist Piloted & revised for clarity and specificity. Measurable items (e.g., use of visuals, student attention). High inter-rater reliability confirmed..

[Audio] Ethical Approval Participant Recruitment Questionnaire Distribution Focus Group Interviews Classroom Observations Study Procedure Ethical Approval Obtained from Saint Joseph University Ethics Committee. Included informed consent, confidentiality Contacted 6 private schools in Beirut. Distributed information sheets and secured consent from 60 Grade 10 teachers. Questionnaire Phase Distributed via Microsoft Forms (mobile-friendly, anonymous). Collected over 4 weeks with polite follow-up reminders. Focus Group Interviews Conducted via Microsoft Teams in 6 small groups (3 teachers each).Sessions lasted 45–60 minutes Classroom Observations 16 sessions observed (3 per teacher). Documented strategy use (dual coding, chunking, active learning) and student behaviors. Participant Recruitment.

[Audio] Demographic Information of Participants 1.4. Socio Economic Status of School High Medium Low 0.37735849056603776 0.339622641509434 0.28301886792452829 Gender Distribution: 66.0% Female (n=35) 34.0% Male (n=18) Reflects national gender trends in education (UNESCO, 2020). Teaching Experience: 52.8% have 15+ years of experience 18.9%: 11–15 years | 15.1%: 0–5 years | 13.2%: 6–10 years Indicates a highly experienced sample (World Bank, 2021). Academic Qualifications: 49.1% Bachelor's | 37.7% Master's | 13.2% Doctorate Over 50% hold postgraduate degrees. School Socioeconomic Status: 37.7% High SES | 34.0% Medium SES | 28.3% Low SES Balanced sample across different school environments. 1.1. Years of Teaching Experience More than 15 years 11–15 years 0–5 years 6–10 years 0.52830188679245282 0.18867924528301888 0.15094339622641509 0.13207547169811321 1.3. Educational Qualification Bachelor’s Degree Master’s Degree Doctorate 0.49056603773584906 0.37735849056603776 0.13207547169811321.

[Audio] Quantitative Data Findings of the Survey Results 2.1. I am familiar with the concept of neuropedagogical strategies Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 5.6603773584905669E-2 0.169811320754717 0.22641509433962267 0.37735849056603776 0.169811320754717 Descriptive Statistics: Teachers’ Knowledge of Neuropedagogical Strategies Likert scale questions will be analyzed using a 5-point scale, where responses are rated as follows: 1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, and 5 = Strongly Agree. I am Familiar with the Concept of Neuropedagogical Strategies Overall Mean: 3.56 (Moderate to high knowledge) Familiarity with NPS: 54.7% agree/strongly agree Active Learning Training: 67.9% trained (M = 3.89) Use of Chunking: 60.4% apply it (M = 3.64) Brain Processing Understanding: 58.5% confident (M = 3.68) Linking Neuroscience & Pedagogy: 54.8% agree (M = 3.58) 2.2. I have received training on using active learning techniques in my classroom. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 1.8867924528301886E-2 0.11320754716981134 0.18867924528301888 0.32075471698113206 0.35849056603773582 I Have Received Training on Using Active Learning Techniques in my Classroom.

[Audio] 3.2. Teachers at my school are encouraged to attend workshops on neuropedagogical strategies. Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 7.5471698113207544E-2 0.41509433962264153 0.339622641509434 0.169811320754717 Key Findings: Professional Development & Student Impact of Neuropedagogical Strategies PD Access: Teachers generally perceive good access to professional development (M = 3.54); strong school support noted (M = 4.00). Training Gaps: Neuroscience-focused PD and resources are limited (M ≈ 3.15–3.21). Collaboration & Relevance: PD seen as relevant and collaboration highly valued (M = 3.83). Teachers at My School Are Encouraged to Attend Workshops on Neuropedagogical Strategies 4.1. Implementing neuropedagogical strategies significantly enhances students’ attention in class. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 1.8867924528301886E-2 3.7735849056603772E-2 0.18867924528301888 0.52830188679245282 0.22641509433962267 Implementing neuropedagogical strategies significantly enhances students’ attention in class..

[Audio] 5.1. Limited knowledge of neuropedagogical strategies is a barrier to their implementation. Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 3.7735849056603772E-2 0.28301886792452829 0.45283018867924535 0.22641509433962267 Key Challenges in Implementing Neuropedagogical Strategies Limited Knowledge: Most teachers report insufficient understanding of NPS (M = 3.87). Time Constraints: A common challenge in adapting new strategies (M = 3.66). Lack of PD: Insufficient training opportunities hinder implementation (M = 3.68). Socioeconomic Disparities: School SES affects strategy adoption (M = 3.47). Limited knowledge of neuropedagogical strategies is a barrier to their implementation 5.2. Lack of time to plan and implement these strategies affects my teaching practice. Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 3.7735849056603772E-2 1.8867924528301886E-2 0.30188679245283018 0.52830188679245282 0.11320754716981134 Lack of time to plan and implement these strategies affects my teaching practice..

[Audio] Inferential Statistics Analysis Reliability Normality N Skewness Kurtosis Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error Teachers' Knowledge of Neuropedagogical Strategies 53 -0.09 0.33 -0.57 0.64 Professional Development Opportunities 53 -0.01 0.33 -0.25 0.64 Impact of Neuropedagogical Strategies on Students 53 -0.79 0.33 1.16 0.64 Challenges in Implementing Neuropedagogical Strategies 53 -0.43 0.33 0.86 0.64 Construct Cronbach's Alpha N of Items Teachers' Knowledge of Neuropedagogical Strategies 0.88 7 Professional Development Opportunities 0.80 8 Impact of Neuropedagogical Strategies on Students 0.93 8 Challenges in Implementing Neuropedagogical Strategies 0.91 8 All four constructs showed high reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha ≥ 0.80), confirming consistent internal measurement. Normality assumptions were met (skewness/kurtosis within ±2), allowing valid use of parametric tests..

[Audio] Hypothesis Testing Kruskal-Wallis results: Teachers’ Knowledge: H = 1.77, p = 0.41 Professional Development: H = 0.69, p = 0.71 Perceived Impact: H = 3.29, p = 0.19 Implementation Challenges: H = 2.13, p = 0.34 → Null hypotheses retained – SES does not significantly affect these factors. H2: Implementation of neuropedagogical strategies significantly improves student attention & engagement One-sample t-test: t(52) = 3.09, p = 0.00, d = 0.61 → H2 accepted – Moderate, positive effect observed. H1: No significant difference in teachers' knowledge, PD access, perceived impact, or implementation challenges based on school SES Socioeconomic Status Mean Knowledge Score Test Used Test Statistic (H) p-value Low SES 3.66 Kruskal-Wallis 1.77 0.41 Medium SES 3.68 High SES 3.38 Variable Sample Mean Test Value Test Used t-value df p-value Impact of Neuropedagogical Strategies on Students 3.76 3.50 One-Sample t-Test 3.09 52 0.00.

[Audio] Impact of Professional Development on Teachers' Ability to Implement Neuropedagogical Strategies H3: Professional development significantly enhances teachers’ ability to implement neuropedagogical strategies Strong correlations: PD ↔ Teachers’ Knowledge (r = 0.547, p < .001) PD ↔ Impact on Students (r = 0.671, p < .001) Knowledge ↔ Impact on Students (r = 0.581, p < .001) → H3 accepted – PD plays a vital role in enabling effective NPS use. H4: No significant perception of implementation challenges reported One-sample t-test: t(52) = 0.07, p = 0.95, d = 0.01 → H4 rejected – Teachers’ reported challenges remain near baseline. Variables Compared Pearson Correlation (r) P-value Interpretation Professional Development * Teachers' Knowledge 0.547** 0.000 Strong positive, significant Professional Development * Impact on Students 0.671** 0.000 Strong positive, significant Teachers' Knowledge * Impact on Students 0.581** 0.000 Strong positive, significant Professional Development *Implementation Challenges 0.383** 0.002 Moderate positive, significant Teachers' Knowledge * Implementation Challenges 0.298* 0.015 Weak positive, significant Impact on Students * Implementation Challenges 0.655** 0.000 Strong positive, significant Variable Sample Mean Test Value Test Used t-value df p-value Challenges in Implementing Neuropedagogical Strategies 3.51 3.50 One-Sample t-Test 0.07 52 0.95.

[Audio] Quantitative Data Findings of the Observation results 5.9. Students solve problems or apply learning, not just listen. No Yes 0.3125 0.6875 Chunking Strategies 75% of lessons broken into clear steps 56.3% used summaries/pauses 100% checked student understanding Mean chunking score = 2.94/4 → moderately used Dual Coding Strategies 68.8% used images/charts/videos 93.8% explained visuals clearly 50% encouraged student drawing/visualization Mean dual coding score = lowest among strategies Active Learning Strategies 68.8% included application/problem-solving Only 18.8% used peer collaboration 37.5% allowed student choice/input 50% connected learning to real-life Mean score = 1.75/4 → uneven implementation Students solve problems or apply learning, not just listen 5.10. Includes group work or peer collaboration. No Yes 0.8125 0.1875 Includes group work or peer collaboration.

[Audio] Inferential Statistics: observation A Cronbach's Alpha value of 0.731 depict a moderate level of reliability, emphasizing that the items on the scale are reasonably consistent in measuring the intended construct. Cronbach's Alpha N of Items 0.731 4 Bivariate Correlation Analysis 🔍 Key Correlation Findings ✅ Strong Positive Relationships: 📘 Active Learning ↔ Engagement: Significant correlation (r = 0.591, p = 0.008) → More active strategies = Higher student engagement 🧠 Overall Strategies ↔ Engagement: Significant correlation (r = 0.566, p = 0.011) → Broader strategy use = Stronger engagement ❌ Non-Significant Results: No significant relationships found (p > 0.05) between individual strategies and student attention Variable 1 Variable 2 Spearman’s ρ (r) p-value Student Attention Student Engagement 0.458* 0.040 Student Attention Chunking Strategies 0.370 0.080 Student Attention Dual Coding Strategies 0.300 0.130 Student Attention Active Learning Strategies 0.300 0.130 Student Attention Overall Strategies Score 0.380 0.070 Student Engagement Chunking Strategies 0.300 0.130 Student Engagement Dual Coding Strategies 0.340 0.100 Student Engagement Active Learning Strategies 0.591 ** 0.008 Student Engagement Overall Strategies Score 0.566 * 0.011 Chunking Strategies Dual Coding Strategies 0.155 0.280 Chunking Strategies Active Learning Strategies 0.100 0.350 Dual Coding Strategies Active Learning Strategies 0.785 ** 0.000.

[Audio] Thematic analysis 🧠 Implementation of Neuroscience-Based Strategies All schools applied brain-based methods (e.g., chunking, active learning), mostly unconsciously. Adventist & Omar Ben Khatab: Experience-based use, little formal training. Ali ben Abi Taleb & Bayader: More collaborative, tech-supported, multi-sensory methods. Khadija Kobra: Greater awareness of memory aids (visualizations, flashcards). 📈 Outcomes & Benefits Teachers in all schools reported improved: Student performance Engagement Classroom participation 🚧 Challenges & Barriers Adventist & Bayader: Admin resistance, rigid systems, passive learning due to AI use. Omar & Khadija Kobra: Curriculum constraints limit long-term strategy use. 📊 Assessment & Monitoring Informal methods: Eye contact, body language, real-time feedback. Bayader & Khadija Kobra: Used digital tools (e.g., Google Forms). 🎓 Professional Development & SES Impact High demand for practical neuroscience training in all schools. SES shaped teacher development: High-SES: More seminars, parent support, better funding. Low-SES: Resource shortages, teacher overload, limited innovation.

[Audio] Triangulation of the results H1: Knowledge vs SES No significant difference in teacher knowledge across SES levels (H = 1.77, p = 0.41) Teachers in all SES settings used strategies like active recall & chunking Many unaware these were “neuroscientific” methods → knowledge often informal Observation showed gaps between perceived and actual use of strategies H2: Impact on Student Engagement Significant quantitative effect on attention & engagement (M = 3.76, t = 3.09, p < 0.01) Moderate effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.61) Qualitative data confirmed higher motivation, focus, and retention through active strategies Observations revealed better engagement with peer questioning, visual aids, hands-on learning H3: Role of Professional Development Strong positive correlation: PD ↔ teacher knowledge (r = 0.547), PD ↔ student impact (r = 0.671) Teachers requested neuroscience-focused PD; current PD seen as too general PD enhances implementation but doesn’t fully resolve classroom challenges H4: Challenges in Implementation Quantitative data showed no significant challenge level (M = 3.51, t = 0.07, p = 0.95) Qualitative insights revealed real barriers: rigid curricula, admin resistance, SES-related stress Challenges include emotional fatigue, tech distraction, lack of institutional support Conclusion: The integration of quantitative and qualitative data presents a cohesive narrative While surveys suggest moderate levels of perceived challenges, qualitative evidence provides the context and detail necessary to understand their practical implications..

[Audio] Summary of the Findings 🧠 Teacher Knowledge & Use Moderate awareness of neuropedagogical strategies Common intuitive use of chunking, dual coding, active learning 👀 Student Engagement & Attention Moderate levels observed Strong correlation between attention & engagement Peer collaboration remained low 📈 Impact on Learning Teachers observed clear positive effects Statistical evidence supports the value of active learning 🚧 Implementation Challenges Surveys showed neutrality; interviews revealed major obstacles: • Lack of training, time, resources • Rigid curricula and socioeconomic stressors 📚 Professional Development Neutral access perception Strong positive link between PD, teacher skill, and student outcomes Teachers request more practical, applied PD 💰 Socioeconomic Disparities No statistical SES differences, but qualitative differences exist High-SES schools had more support and training 🔬 Theoretical Insights Supports CLT, IPT, Constructivism, Socio-constructivism External stressors increase cognitive load, limit impact 🌍 Comparative Validation Findings align with Egypt & Croatia studies PD gaps and theory-practice disconnect shared across contexts ✅ Conclusion Neuropedagogical strategies are present but underutilized Addressing systemic and contextual gaps is essential for impact.

[Audio] Discussion 🧠 Teachers’ Intuitive Use of Brain-Based Strategies Moderate knowledge level (M = 3.56), below optimal Many teachers applied chunking, dual coding, and active learning without knowing formal theory 📚 Alignment with Learning Theories Cognitive Load Theory: Chunking & visuals reduce overload (Sweller, 1988) Information Processing Theory: Repetition & attention aid memory (Atkinson & Shiffrin, 1968) Constructivism & Vygotsky: Emphasis on experience & social interaction 🎯 Student Engagement & Attention Positive correlation: Attention ↔ Engagement (r = 0.458, p = .040) Active learning linked to high engagement (r = 0.591, p = .008) Teachers used observation (eye contact, verbal participation) as indicators ⚠️ Implementation Challenges Neutral mean (M = 3.51), but interviews revealed hidden barriers Constraints: rigid curricula, time limits, lack of resources, admin support Cognitive stress and distractions impacted learning and teaching quality 👩‍🏫 Professional Development (PD) Strong correlations: PD ↔ Knowledge (r = 0.547), PD ↔ Belief in strategies (r = 0.671) PD was often general, lacking practical classroom focus Teachers called for more continuous, relevant, and hands-on training 🏫 Socioeconomic Status (SES) Factors No significant SES differences in knowledge statistically Qualitative data: higher-SES schools had more resources & support Lower-SES teachers showed more self-reliance & creativity 🔍 Mixed Methods Value Quantitative data = moderate scores Qualitative interviews = rich insights, practical frustrations Triangulation exposed the gap between perception and practice 🌍 Cross-Country Comparison Similar patterns in Egypt (Rashwan, 2022) and Croatia (Živković et al., 2021) Teachers globally need better training to bridge theory–practice gap.

[Audio] Recommendations 🧠 Professional Development Train teachers in brain-based methods (chunking, dual coding, active learning) Offer practical, ongoing, and SES-inclusive PD sessions 🔧 Implementation Support Allow flexible curricula and schedules Provide time, tools, and admin support for strategy use 🎯 Boost Engagement Use active learning to increase motivation 🤝 Collaboration & Equity Encourage peer teaching and teacher networks Fund low-SES schools with tailored resources 📊 Policy & Data Embed neuroscience in teacher education Set national standards and use teacher feedback for PD improvement Manage digital distractions.

[Audio] . THANK YOU!.