2. What is the purpose, goals or desired outcome?
There are many reasons for studying how people learn. By learning about how people learn, students may be able to learn more effectively themselves and to know what difficulties they may face. Also, knowing about the limitations of human learning can help teachers to anticipate problems (their own and those of others) in learning how to teach children better.
Implications in the Subject Areas
Implications for Learning and Learning Disabilities
Implications for the Educators
Brain based learning is the informed process of using a group of practical strategies that are driven by sound principles derived from brain research. (Brain-Based Learning: Where’s the Proof? Jensen Learning Corporations http://www.jlcbrain.com/truth.html )Schools should not be run based solely on the biology of the brain. However, to ignore what we do know about the brain would be equally irresponsible. Brain-based learning offers some direction for educators who want more purposeful, informed teaching. It offers the possibility of less hit or miss in the classroom. We have learned about how environments impact our learning, the role of trauma and the effects of distress and threat. With additional clarity in research, brain-based approaches may soon suggest far better options for those struggling with learning. (Brain-Based Learning: Where’s the Proof? Jensen Learning Corporations http://www.jlcbrain.com/truth.html )
Brain research certainly will have more to tell us about how children's brains develop, but each small step, each specific finding, must be replicated by other studies. Hypotheses that generalize from MRI images to classroom teaching methods may be interesting and fun to read, but they should be regarded with a true scientist's skeptical eye. At the present time, the best judge of effective classroom practice is not the neuroscientist, but the knowledgeable and experienced educator. (Bergen 2002, 377)
Brain research is not the be all and end all that will solve all education problems. However, it is going to make us work harder and understand better. (Covino 2002, 25)
"Today, brain research is starting to confirm what many educators have known for years: Children learn better and remember more when their studies are mixed with music and drama, experience, emotion, and real-world context. The more regions of the brain that are involved and the more we engage our emotions, the more means we have for recalling information." (Covino 2002, 25)
Brain based research, though still in its infancy, could influence everything from how teachers deliver lessons in the classroom to how school buildings are designed or to how recess is scheduled. "It’s also throwing old myths out the window: that we use only ten percent of our brains and that children are either right-brained or left-brained." (Covino 2002, 25).
Implications in the Subject Areas
Brain research shows that learning mathematics is not a matter of memorizing times tables or theorems. Rather, it is a "matter of connecting new learning to previous learning and experience." When this can happen, learning mathematics "is very natural and very enduring." (Covino 2002, 26). In 2001, researchers at MIT used brain imaging techniques to determine how the brain processes different math functions. Exact calculations lit up the subject’s left frontal lobe which is the brain area used for verbal memory tasks. Estimation activated the parietal lobe which is the brain area associated with visual and spatial relationships. The parietal lobe is also responsible for finger control, and the findings could explain why children learning exact arithmetic often count with their fingers. (Covino 2002, 26). Although the brain is most "plastic" during early childhood, throughout life, the brain exhibits plasticity. That is, new experiences and learning modes at any age will continue to change brain characteristics. In social studies, that might mean continuing to use curricula methods that challenge and support thinking even among youth who are disengaged from school learning and whom seem disaffected as citizens. A teacher can never assume that any mind is truly closed. (Bergen 2002, 378). There are close connections between a child's emotional well-being and cognitive development, both of which we can measure with behavioral tests. Children will learn best in an environment that feels safe and has positive adult and peer interactions. Furthermore, curricula that engage children's interest, motivate them to seek challenges involving "safe" levels of risk, and provide warm, encouraging learning environments are probably most appropriate. In social studies, this might mean providing activities that are related to meaningful life events, encouraging active child engagement and initiative, and letting children "catch" the excitement and concerns of social studies educators about important concepts. (Bergen 2002, 377) "Synaptic connections are primarily developed during childhood, so curriculum opportunities that promote a wide range of experiences and require integration of cognitive, social, emotional, aesthetic, and physical activity are likely to further brain development. This range of opportunities should be available to both boys and gifts. In social studies, teachers might do well to use "integrated" curriculum approaches that draw on a range of children's talents, and to undertake extended projects that are historically and politically relevant and require children to search for resources, communicate ideas, and think critically (Bergen 2002, 378). The intense idiosyncratic interests that many children show in middle childhood may herald a stage of brain development. Such focused activity might be linked with the pruning of synapses that appears to accompany efficient, more mature thinking. Supporting student-motivated skill development in specific content areas may facilitate this development. In social studies, this might mean encouraging in-depth study generated by child interest, rather than using only a "content coverage" approach with predetermined assignments (Bergen 2002, 378). In Clayton County Georgia Public Schools, staff development coordinator Bobbi Ford demonstrates ways to teach reading in a "brain friendly way." Ford says that "vocabulary words must be placed in context for students to understand and remember them. To teach a word like ‘sorbet,’ for example, Ford puts the dictionary aside and brings in a pint of the smooth stuff, tossing out synonyms like ice cream, yogurt, and slushy. She also encourages small group learning, activities in which kids teach one another, and ‘word wheels’ that relate words like ‘minute’ to kid-friendly jargon like ‘teensy-weensy’ and ‘super small.’ It sounds like a lot more work, but changing instruction is not so difficult when teachers ‘see the payoff’." (Covino 2002, 26). Research shows that kids can learn a second language inductively and without formal instruction even as they are learning their first language. "The idea is that the brain has a certain plasticity during the early years and can be molded and shaped more readily." (Covino 2002 26). In 1997, Johnston, Iowa Community School District formed a committee to study the creation of a "K-6 foreign language program to capitalize on this early window." According to school superintendent Roger Scott, "We’ll use foreign language to teach current content, so we won’t be taking away from other instruction. For example, kids might learn the French words for ‘apple’ or orange while an instructor demonstrates the principles of density while dropping the pieces of fruit in a bowl to see if they sink or float." (Covino 2002, 26). Implications for Learning and Learning Disabilities
Brain imaging technology could influence how teachers reach out to students with ADD, auditory and speech disorders, and learning disabilities. Researchers at Yale have found that. compared to normal readers, dyslexic children use a different part of the brain to read, and they show less activity in the brain region that links print skills to the brain’s language areas. Brain scans can be used to help identify students whose problems are biological and brain based. (Covino 2002, 27). Imaging techniques that allow scientists to observe the brains of children as they solve academic problems may have implications for teaching reading to dyslexic children. Some research has shown that dyslexic children appear to have abnormal functioning of specific areas of the brain. Multisensory remedial teaching techniques used with dyslexic children have shown promise for specific individuals; this research may help explain why certain techniques work better than others. As further research connects teaching techniques to brain functioning, there may eventually be a well-documented "brain-based" reading approach (Bergen 2002, 378). Current brain studies underscore the important role that adults play in creating an early stimulating environment for children. This calls for classrooms that are closely related to real world environments and curriculum that includes numerous sensory, cultural, and problems layers that will stimulate a brain’s neural network. (Green 1999, 682). In regards to different learning styles (visual, kinesthetic, or auditory), children learn according to their own style which develops through interactions of biology and experience. Each child will process new information in ways that are related to environmental, emotional, sociological, physiological, and psychological elements, and therefore uniform teaching practices will invariably deny many students success in school. (Green 1999, 683) Implications for the Educators
Doris Bergen and Juliet Coscia, researchers at Miami University, researched brain based curriculums for their book Brain Research and Childhood Education. In their literature review, they found no long-term studies on whether preschool or elementary children’s exposure to a particular education experience promoted specific development of specific areas of the brain. Nor could they find any short term studies which documented specific areas of brain development as a result of a particular educational experience.(Bergen 2002, 377) The closest link Bergen and Corsica found between childhood experience and brain structure was research dealing with language comprehension and expression. Research indicated that "there are sensitive (some would say ‘critical’) periods in which exposure to language (but not to a particular language curriculum) is essential, namely in the first three years of human life."(Bergen 2002, 376) Throughout childhood, there are many opportunities for planned educational (as well as noneducational) experiences to influence brain development, and it is likely that various types of educational practices would be more congruent with brain development at particular ages or stages. At present, however, no undisputed claims for one type of curriculum over another can be made. The most we can say at this point is that all curricula are really "brain based," in that they affect existing brain structures and influence brain functions at each age of life, and that there is probably a cumulative effect of specific curricular experiences on unique individual brain construction. What the nature of the interaction between curriculum components and individual brains might be, however, remains a mystery. (Bergen 2002, 377) Regarding their research and evaluations of various brain-based curriculum programs, Bergen said, "Today, in no case, can we say that any "brain-based curriculum" can guarantee specific types of brain development." (Bergen 2002, 377) Rather than succumb to a bombardment of "brain-based" curriculum promises, teachers can learn about current brain research from journals and books written by educational psychologists, cognitive psychologists, and neuroscientists who strive to accurately portray this research and relate it to educational issues. Reading critical reviews rather than accepting the views of product manufacturers can provide a base of knowledge for individuals to better examine curriculum products. Are the suggestions given by the authors of a curriculum in line with the most recent research? Are claims made that are not supportable? If one chooses (for other reasons) to use a curriculum for which brain development claims have been made, one can have a more realistic perspective on its promises and its problems (Bergen 2002, 378). References
Bergen, Doris. "Evaluating ‘brain-based’ curricular claims." Social Education. 66, no. 6 (Oct. 2002): 376-79.
Covino, Jennifer K. "Mind matters: what brain-based research means for educators and for the future of math, language arts, foreign languages, the arts, and special education." District Administration. 38, no. 2 (Feb. 2002): 25-27.
Green, Fara E. "Brain and Learning Research: Implications for Meeting the Needs of Diverse Learners." Education. 119, no. 4 (Summer 1999): 682-686.
Jensen, Eric. Brain-Based Learning: Where’s the Proof? Jensen Learning Corporations. 2003. Internet on-line. Available from <http://www.jlcbrain.com/truth.html> [15 Sept. 2003]
Next: 3. What are the resources and materials required to implement it?
______________________________________________________
University of South Carolina
College of Mass Communication and Information Studies
School of Library and Information Science
Page last updated on 01/28/08