Having spent over two decades training teachers, Iveta Kovalcíková writes in this editorial that she has lately been attracted by ideas bridging the growing gap between neurological and psychological research findings and their practical application in practice. Here she argues that outcomes of research on learning processes are insufficiently projected in teacher training programmes. Kovalcíková focuses on the idea that the consequence of the insufficient links between basic and applied research in the field is a growing gap between those who generate research outcomes and those who are supposed to integrate the outcomes in applied education and subsequently bring them to life in educational practice. The reason for this gap, she explains, is straightforward: it is immensely important, though extremely demanding, to "translate" the outcomes of complex neurological and psychological research so that they are applicable in real classroom settings. Researchers' attitudes are frequently that their work ends once the research findings have been presented. Here, the question arises as to who should rise to the challenge of becoming the mediator or transmitter in the process of incorporating research findings in pedagogical practice. In response to this situation, the International Association of Cognitive Education and Psychology (IACEP) takes on new members from the field of education sciences. In a special issue of the "Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology," Sternberg (2013) suggested that the academic community will have to address the following questions in the near future: (1) What is cognitive education; (2) How should it be done and how should it not be done; (3) How should the effects of cognitive education be measured; (4) What, if any, examples exist of successful programs; and (5) What recommendations do you have for cognitive education?