What does neuroscience have to do with classroom teaching?

Recently I was interviewed by a local t.v. personality on the topic of, "How a student's brain works." I am reluctant to mention it, because in the interview I was nervous and tongue-tied and gave vague, drawn-out answers.  I'd like to blame it on the fact that I had expected to be interviewed about a different topic and had to try to think of something meaningful to say on the spot, but my family and friends will tell you that vague, drawn-out answers are actually pretty common for me.  I'd much rather take a week or two to compose an essay on a topic like that than to respond orally off the cuff!

Don't worry, dear reader - I wouldn't dare inflict any such essay on you (at least not today; I don't have the time for anything like that).  If you are interested in the topics mentioned in that interview, however, I have several suggestions for where you might go to look.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

University of Lethbridge

The interview began with a discussion of the Masters of Education Inclusive Education and Neuroscience program in which I am currently enrolled.  This program is a new and innovative collaboration between the University of Lethbridge Education Department and the Department of Neuroscience.  That 3-year program is wrapping up this spring, but it looks like a new, fresh cohort will begin this summer. (If you are interested in applying for it, you'd better hurry, though; the deadline is today, Dec. 1, 2013!).  It has been a rewarding experience, but one that has challenged me as much as anything I've ever done (including first year teaching and parenting teenagers).

The best part of doing this MEd degree has been the wonderful cohort of classmates whom I got to know and who helped to encourage me through those tough times.  One of them has a fantastic blog that you really ought to read if the topics on my blog interest you (in fact, go there now and check it out.  Really - go now!) If you are interested in inclusive education, you should also check out the Inclusive Education Toolbox put together by another classmate.  I talked a bit about the cohort in the interview, but unfortunately they cut that part out.

Of course, you don't have to enroll in a Masters program to start learning about the brain.  There are are a number of great resources available online.  One free online course worth looking at is the Neuroscience & the Classroom from Annenberg Learner (thanks to another classmate for the link).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

One reason that I was interested in applying for the Inclusive Education and Neuroscience program initially was the that the U of L was home to the highly regarded Canadian Centre for Behavioural Neuroscience.  Here is one of the "rock star" founders of that facility, Dr. Bryan Kolb, giving a talk which more clearly and elaborately explains the point I was making in the interview about the effect of experience on the brain:

It is a fascinating presentation, if you can spare the hour to watch it.  Many people are shocked to hear his description of the effects of pre-natal experiences and even pre-conception experiences (i.e. experiences of the parents prior to conceiving a child) on later brain function of the offspring.  Dr. Kolb also goes on to show how these experiences clearly effect later academic performance.  Teachers, however, may be disappointed that the content of this talk does not quite match the title, since very little of it has to do with the classroom until about the 50 minute mark.  At that point, Dr. Kolb does briefly give some reasons why neuroscience is important in education.  Those reasons are to:

1. debunk myths
2. provide knowledge about brain development and function,
3. provide informed solutions to practical issues

These are good reasons, and the examples he provides are interesting ones, if somewhat too brief.  Although Dr. Kolb was not one of my instructors, his colleague Dr. Rob Sutherland made most of the same points and we were able to look at them in greater detail.  Even so, I will admit that it was often still difficult for my classmates and me to make the connections between the neuroscience discoveries and classroom practices, especially at first.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Where I really started to "get it" was in reflecting upon the courses from the education department where it became clear that the knowledge and ideas from our neuroscience classes were the foundation for understanding pretty much everything else.  They were critical for understanding different conditions that affected student learning and behaviour, such as Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.  They were very important in understanding emotional and behavioural challenges and and the effects of trauma, neglect, or addiction. They were, in fact, the key to understanding motivation, memory, and attention in all children.

As I learned about the assortment of neurological factors that could come into play, the number of different forces which could influence them, the complexity of possible interactions, and the range of possible outcomes, however, I began to understand why it was so difficult to jump directly from neuroscience studies to recommendations for classroom practices.  It became clear to me that there was tremendous diversity in student needs and abilities, and that no single set of teaching techniques could be effective for all.  Instead, I became convinced of the need for teaching which was flexible and responsive to student differences.

You may detect a similar progression of ideas and understanding in this presentation by Dr. David Rose of the CAST (Center for Applied Special Technology):

It was in the materials from CAST that I first began to see a direct connection between the neuroscience and effective classroom practices.  They describe 3 broad categories of brain networks: the recognition networks which receive and analyze information (the "what" of learning); the strategic networks which plan and execute actions (the "how" of learning); and the affective networks which evaluate and set priorities (the "why" of learning). They then translated this understanding into guidelines for designing curriculum which accommodate for differences in these 3 networks by encouraging multiple means of representation, of action or expression, and of engagement.  They refer to this educational approach as Universal Design for Learning or UDL.

It was through UDL that I began to more fully understand and appreciate student neurological diversity in terms of difference rather than deficit.  Rather than relying on research to find some "perfect" strategy which would work for the highest number of students, or on neuroscience to tell me how to "fix" student differences, I began to see it as a means of better understanding the various different ways that students learn so that I can plan more inclusive and responsive instruction.  I began to recognize that the "average learner" was a myth, and that variability was a potential advantage:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Of course, I never said anything quite so meaningful or profound in my little 3 minute t.v. interview.  I said something about the promise of diversity and needing to change the way we look at things.  I paused and stumbled over words while trying to think of what to say next.  Of course, now that I've studied a bit of neuroscience, I've got a pretty good idea of what was going on in my brain which resulted in those behaviours.  That knowledge didn't help me to avoid being tongue-tied, but it might help me to understand my students better when I am tempted to put them on the spot by asking them to verbally answer unexpected questions in front of their peers.  And perhaps I might just come up with more flexible ways of allowing them to respond to my questioning.  Maybe I'll let them compose a blog post about it...