Posted Date: June 16, 2013 7:26 PM
Subject: Luminosity/The Human Cognition Project
Ashley,
Sites like Luminosity are pretty popular and while the science seems appealing and the staff is full of PhDers, I couldn’t find any information about the validity of the program or the company’s Brain Performance Test which is use to measure and document client growth. The studies on the company’s website are from Lumos Labs which is affiliated with Luminosity. The company boasts an impressive roaster of partners. Even so, I’d expect some independent cooberation of Luminosity’s effectiveness.
Don
Posted Date: June 16, 2013 10:56 PM
Subject: Some Musings on a Collective Mind
Ashley,
I agree with the quotation but think it starts to break down when we hold the view that culture is static. If we believe culture constantly evolves then the act of downloading becomes a cultural force or change agent. Undoubtedly the invention of the written word and the advent of the printing press changed culture. Was the change good or bad? It’s worth considering… but would we undo all of the cultural changes that have occurred since their arrival? I agree that we fear the unknown and try to project history onto the future. I guess its because we can really only understand right now. It’s hard to know what we knew and to know what we don’t know.
Don
Posted Date: June 13, 2013 10:09 PM
Subject: Some Musings on a Collective Mind
Colin,
You are right. Socrates was very concerned about teaching students to read and write. The following is from the Phaedrus, a Socratic dialogue of around 370 B.C:
“For this invention will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it, because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them. You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they will read many things without instruction and will therefore seem to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise.”
Socrates. (Circa 370 BCE.) The phaedrus. Retrieved from http://wondermark.com/socrates-vs-writing/
By the way, I remembered the who and where but needed the internet so I could post the quotation. Was Socrates correct? Is everything old new again? Or is it about those darn kids today ’cause in my day….?
Thanks for the journey into the transactive memory collective. If I have time this weekend, I think I’ll watch The Matrix.
Don
Posted Date: June 13, 2013 9:35 PM
Subject: Google Brain
Michelle,
While I think the term is sometimes over used, I agree authenticity in teaching and learning makes all the difference. Involvement in real learning or learning real things, changes everything! Knowledge of the basics is embedded in higher learning. We made Fathers’ Day cards today. No need to encourage, motivate, or set criteria – it was some of the best writing produced this year! I have observed students will even engage in a less than stimulating activity (doing a phonics worksheet) when the reason is authentic (more tools to use when reading and writing).
Thanks for raising the point,
Don
Posted Date: June 13, 2013 9:15 PM
Subject: Are Venn Diagrams Still in Vogue?
I took a run at a question in our discussion guide about looking for information processing terms and behaviorist terms in one of Judy Willis’s blog posts. It proved to be a good way to review the article and I thought I’d try a trusted and true Venn diagram to present the information.
It was interesting how many behaviourist terms were used to described concepts presented in the blog post. It occurs to me that many behaviourist terms are so much a part of the everyday vocabulary used to describe learning and teaching they are not immediately associated with behaviourism. This is especially evident when we extend our definition of behaviour beyond operant (behaviour – reinforcement) conditioning.
Any thoughts?
Posted Date: June 12, 2013 8:59 PM
Subject: Transactive Memory
Heidi,
I agree with your observation that knowledge available through technology or other sources I easily forgotten. As I work through MET courses I frequently find that while I may recall the what, where, and who related to a topic, exact facts are quickly forgotten. I also agree remembering the how and, I would add, why of a topic are more easily recalled. Exact facts fade into the background when I focus on understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating and creating (Thank you, Bloom). When I need to support my argument, cite someone more brilliant, or make a link, I use the transactive memory embedded in technology. This is probably appropriate since I want the most up to date information. I think we need to break away from the idea that learning is developing factual knowledge.
Don
Posted Date: June 12, 2013 8:08 PM
Subject: Problems with the Gaming Analogy
Rachel,
I am planning an independent post but wanted to comment on your concerns about extending the gaming analogy to classroom and instructional design. I agree the analogy contains some strong and compelling evidence for just such an idea but the logistics of implementation for all subjects all of the time seems overwhelming.
I am reminded of a podcast made by Dr. Yong Zhao in which he discussed the notion that many studies show computer assisted instruction does not improve test scores. Rather than be alarmed at this idea, he suggested we accept it and turn over to computers the “teaching” of the low level, skill-oriented tasks which are the focus of many current assessment schemes. If a computer can do it as well as a teacher, then let the computer do it and save our expertise as teachers for high order, conceptual teaching.
And here is my example… I reported previously that my school has just completed a pilot of Mathletics which is a program that focuses on drill and practice to build numerical fluency. It is a good example of the game approach described by Judy Willis and I won’t repeat your excellent summary, Rachel. Enough to say that the class of students literally completed ten of thousands of practice equations; a level of practice above and beyond a single teacher’s ability to manage.
And this is the good part… The teacher reported significant improvement in her student’s ability to recall and work with basic facts. She reported setting up and maintaining Mathletics took minutes and she was able to use the available time to plan more enriching lessons about mathematical concepts, applications, and problem solving. She also said she had more time to move through the room addressing problems areas, flagged by Mathletics, with individuals and groups of students.
And it gets better…The teacher also reported the game intensity of Mathletics appealed to her students (You can’t deny that rush of dopamine!) and that it seemed to calm and help her students focus on more conventional classroom activities. A bit of time in this environment seemed to meet a lot of needs but the student were quite willing to take a break.
And so back to my point…I think there is a real niche in education for the approach described by Judy Willis. I also think we can take some cues from the approach when we design instruction. Like you, I worry about how overwhelming this may be…not only for teachers who must design this type of intense working environment but for the students who must learn in it.
Thanks for sparking a response,
Don
Posted Date: June 9, 2013 3:51 PM
Subject: Remaining Questions
Brett,
You’re correct it is leveled reading but sort of high octane leveled reading – or leveled reading that focuses on a student’s developmental level rather than the level of the text although it does figure into the equation.
At the beginning of my career I was very much the sage on stage. I believed that effective teaching resulted in effective learning; a bit like students being a blank canvas upon which I would paint skills and knowledge. Even so, right at the beginning I did start to question what I was being asked to do. PLO’s for young children seem to be constructed on the premise that they can’t think or least that they can’t think very deeply. When I taught middle school I felt the same.
Two experiences that shaped my practice – I was fortunate to work for the support services division in a small school district which meant I received a ton of professional development in my first ten years. It also meant, I was a classroom teacher, a resource teacher, a inclusion helping teacher, an elementary counsellor, and a school principal. Lots of hats meant lots of learning. But probably the most formative event was becoming a father. Fatherhood at 28, came with the opportunity for personal change. Trying to becoming a good father made me a better teacher and a better person. I also received the gift of a child with profound learning and behavioural challenges. Challenges that had me reconsider everything I believed. Not an experience I would go looking for but an experience that transformed me.
I agree that early in our teaching careers we are so caught up in “doing it all right” it is hard to know what is right – certainly it isn’t trying to do it all. I think we need to encourage new teachers to ask “why” more often. I had a student teacher this term and he spent a lot of time answering this question for me. Hard at first – it meant he had to recall and evaluate what he had been taught in class. As soon as he did, his lessons started to change. He started to think less about teaching and more about learning. Technique became art. It is interesting that the experience is called a teaching practicum. I am not all that hung up on labels but this one seems to ignore a whole lot of what happens in classrooms. You can see it in some of our posts this week – teachers taking on neurological understanding to change the way they teach…’if I account for this and design lessons for this, my students will be more successful”. It takes the focus off of the students who actually have to do the learning. I think we have to get to…’if I understand what is going on with student learning, I can respond better and help and them continue learning” A subtle but profound shift which I am still attempting to make.
As an aside, and without a reference. I once read some information about adult development. Sometimes the personal growth and journey of which I was so smugly proud, was just normal human development. My mom used to say…I remember thinking that way when I was forty…want to know how you’ll think when you are sixty? Kind of keeps development in focus.
Thanks for the though provoking questions,
Don
Posted Date: June 8, 2013 4:31 PM
Subject: Remaining Questions
Jennifer and Marianne,
Great comments. I think we are still challenged to step to the side in lessons, to move away from planning in a way where we attempt to predetermine every possible response and account for every learning style. The readings on information processing reminded me that students who learn concepts and strategies work through them in non-linear way: each responding in a unique way and using the bits and pieces that make sense to them as they learn the whole. If we accept that this process in neurologically based then we need to respond in a way that allows the process to occur while encouraging the application of new strategies to support brain development. This means we need to have a clear understanding of the big picture when we teach, the strategies that support it, and the developmental processes that help students get there. Learning becomes more student centered as we observe and coach.
I use this approach for teaching reading. I have a clear understanding of how adults read and this is my goal. I have developed a linear strategy for reading that is research and evidence based; this is my guide. I share this information with students and we learn to read simply by reading. The children begin with simple texts, moving through levels as they naturally develop. Everyone reads at their own level but everyone reads. They begin with a wonderfully organic and unorganized approach. My job is to observe and coach; supporting the student’s ability to recognize their success and supporting their use and development of strategies. Students read to themselves, to each other, to the class or to me everyday and no two students approach the task in the same way. Evaluation becomes about describing student learning and development. This sounds like a lot of work but it really isn’t. I spend less time planning (my students do this) and more time responding.
I have used this approach successfully in Kindergarten for the past three years. It also worked when I taught middle school.
Thanks for the chance to respond,
Don
Posted Date: June 8, 2013 3:56 PM
Subject: Drill and Practice
David,
What do you think happens in the “aha moment”? There were a few posts on this phenomenon and many recognize when it happens, but what is really happening? Do you see a tie to this week’s readings or to readings from the previous weeks?
Don
Posted Date: June 6, 2013 8:20 PM
Subject: With a Nod to Hercule Poirot
To continue…
I ended my previous post by describing the active process linking the brain and learning. I would add that since Thinking is one aspect of the behaviour we call learning (Doing, Feelings, and Physiology being the others) this process can be extended to include the links between mind, brain, and learning.
And so…what does all of this neuroscience mean to teachers? What does it mean to students?
First, it means the nine skills of Smart Learning (Close, n.d.): activating knowledge, connecting, questioning, imaging, inferring, determining importance, summarizing, and checking and rechecking describe behaviours we call learning and the neurological changes developing in tandem within the brain. This same observation could be made for Bloom’s Taxonomy. Knowing, understanding, applying, analysing, synthesising, and evaluating describe learning and brain function. They are mindful tasks based and reflected in the brain.
Secondly, it requires the appreciation that every task given to students affects their neurological development. It means teachers need to have firm grasp on the what, how, and why of teaching. Sure…simple repetition will help transfer particular learning from a conscious to automatic task as neural pathways and connections are formed, but powerful, deep, and meaningful learning will promote powerful, deep, and meaningful brain development which, in turn, promotes learning.
Thirdly, it means we need to rethink success and failure. All students have the ability and right to succeed. They have the responsibility to engage, and behaviourist techniques can help break through this barrier, but once they engage it is the teacher’s responsibility to help them succeed. I teach my students strategies and processes with the understanding we are creating brain structures. I have talked to my very young students about this idea and we have agreed it makes no sense to practice and repeat failure. It is counter-productive to learning to build neural networks based on failure. Moving from conscious learning to automatic learning requires the building of a successful brain – a brain full of success-based neurology. Very young children understand that success, not failure, builds more success.
Now don’t misinterpret… challenges and set-backs are part of learning. Successfully conquered, they can be powerfully motivating. So how do we handle them with the idea of focusing on success and avoiding failure? By being honest with our students about learning and development. My students understand they are five and six years old and I am fifty-two. They understand I have had more opportunities to practice and learn and my brain is more developed; just as their brains are more developed than their younger brothers’ and sisters’. Today we discussed (well actually they pointed out) knowing and being able to do more does not mean adults are smarter. My students and I recognize kindergarten spelling is not adult spelling, kindergarten reading is not adult reading, kindergarten math is not adult math, kindergarten ball catching is not adult ball catching. Their goal is to be successful kindergarten spellers, readers, mathematicians and athletes. They expect their teacher to act as a resource for successful strategies and that we will do everything we can to successfully practice and master these strategies. Errors are opportunities for all of us to try something new.
This time of year is great. Kindergarten becomes a collection of “old men and women reminiscing about the good ole days in September” when they couldn’t print their names, read a single word, count past 3, or catch a ball. We recognize where we were, how far we have come, and far we have to go. We recognize how much we have learned and how much our brains have developed. We celebrate being five, six, and fifty-two understanding that more learning and development awaits.
And fourthly, well I could go on but it’s time to give someone else a turn on the soapbox.
Close, S. (n.d.). Smart learning: Better tools. Better learning. Retrieved from http://susanclose.ca/index.shtml
Posted Date: June 5, 2013 10:23 PM
Subject: With a Nod to Hercule Poirot
Notwithstanding concerns associated with the validity of Functional Magnetic Response Imaging (fMRI), I find the topic of neuroscience and its relationship to learning fascinating.
The discussion of learning and teaching frequently focuses on their mental or mind aspects. Adding the brain to this equation adds a whole new dimension. It reminds us to consider the physical structures, pathways, and networks that support, underlie, and interact with these mental tasks and thereby contribute to learning.
This discussion is not limited to learning arithmetic. Zamarian et. al are not alone in their observation that, while some aspects of learning are associated with distributed networks within domain-specific areas of the brain, other areas of the brain are shared with learning in a number of areas. Simon Baron Cohen writes about the neuroscience of social learning, Marianne Wolf about the neuroscience of reading, and Norman Doidge about the neuroplasticity of the brain. All three authors talk about the role of the frontal lobe, the parietal lobes, and the angular gyrus in learning.
And certainly this is a discussion worth having. It is fascinating and a bit humbling when we are reminded
…it took our species roughly 2,000 years to make the cognitive breakthroughs necessary to learn to read with an alphabet, today our children are expected to reach those same insights about print in roughly 2000 days (Wolf, 2009, p.19)
or, as suggested in this week’s readings, the development of arithmetic abilities are based on mental magnitudes housed in developmental and evolutionary cerebral circuits (Zamarian, L. et al., 2009, p.914).
I do agree with Zamarian et al. (2009) that experience, language, culture and development all interact with the brain to affect learning. I also agree the shift in learning from novice to expert is associated with changes in the brain. I believe, specific to our approach and purpose, the elaboration that moves learning from short term to long term memory is reflected in changes in the brain and how it works.
However, I do not totally agree with the notion that “development is achieved through a fine-tuning of relevant neural systems” which seems to suggest experience, language, culture, and maturation act on existing neural networks to result in learning (Zamarian, L. et al., 2009, p.915). I think the brain is much more active in the process. I believe (and this is not my theory, but I can’t find the reference) the brain is programmed to learn; to seek out particular types of experiences and stimuli in order to develop and learn. Each step builds on the previous; one activates others. And while it may be helpful to think of the steps linearly like critical periods or stages of development, I am pretty convinced brain development and learning are more global, complex, and interconnected. The brain actively grows neurons, neural pathways, and neural networks as it seeks to develop connections, association, concepts, and skills. Reading and Math may not be hard-wired into our species but I think learning is.
So what does this all me to me as a teacher? What does it mean to my students? I’ll save that for another post…as my little gray cells need their rest…
Baron-Cohen, S. (1997). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Coch, D. & Ansari, D. (2009). Thinking about mechanisms is crucial to connecting neuroscience and education. Cortex, 45(4), 546-7. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010945208001585
Doidge, N. (2007). The brain that changes itself. New York, NY: Penguin Books
Wolf, M. (2007). Proust and the squid; The story and science of the reading brain. New York, NY: HarperCollins
Zamarian, L., Ischebeck, A., & Delazer, M. (2009). Neuroscience of learning arithmetic: Evidence from brain imaging studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 909-925. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763409000402