Comments on: Brain Games: Neuroscience and Active Participation Teaching Methods at the ASCD Conference http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/ NSDL reaches out to individuals and organizations by exhibiting, attending and presenting at national and international STEM meetings and conferences. Read current first-hand reports about NSDL-on-the-road including photographs! Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:07:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Adela Solis http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8393 Adela Solis Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:49:42 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8393 What brain research has to offer to educators is absolutely facinating. But like all other research seeking to pin down the dynamic nature of the human being, it will never give us the ultimate answers about children and how we can best teach them. At best, research gives us interesting propositions which we our selves can test and reflect upon in the field. As for the strategies suggested by brain research, those too are subject to our own classroom based inquiry. Keep the insights coming. We will do our best with what we have. What else is there to do? What brain research has to offer to educators is absolutely facinating. But like all other research seeking to pin down the dynamic nature of the human being, it will never give us the ultimate answers about children and how we can best teach them. At best, research gives us interesting propositions which we our selves can test and reflect upon in the field. As for the strategies suggested by brain research, those too are subject to our own classroom based inquiry. Keep the insights coming. We will do our best with what we have. What else is there to do?

]]> By: Riazul Islam http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8336 Riazul Islam Sun, 13 Apr 2008 09:18:36 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8336 It provides me a new direction for teaching the disabled. It provides me a new direction for teaching the disabled.

]]> By: Judy Willis, M.D., M.Ed http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8308 Judy Willis, M.D., M.Ed Fri, 11 Apr 2008 03:15:06 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8308 Laurence poses some wonderful points to ponder. It is true that brain research is illuminating common networks and brain regions most associated with different learning tasks, such as executive function highly related to pathways in and out of the prefrontal cortex, the compelling research about neuroplasticity suggests that how information is presented, including its compatibility with students’ intelligences and preferred learning styles influences the success with which new information is processed and the success with which it is wired into these neural pathways and long-term memory. Students’ engagement, comfort, stress, personal connection to the information taught and they way it is presented is reflected in different activations in brain regions and these active networks correlate with cognitive testing and classroom learning. Neuroimaging and brain mapping are also suggesting brain regions that show variable activation associated with different types of information processing associated with multiple intelligences and learning styles. As more data are gathered about how specific learning strategies influence neural activity and the studies become more collaborative with cognitive tests and classroom data collection, it is likely that more specific recommendations with respect to strategies for students with defined learning strengths and challenges will come to light. I agree with Gardner’s theories about how those with different intelligence strengths learn more successfully when they can be engaged through those strengths. It may be a combination of which brain wiring is most active in children with different learning strengths and the positive influence that learning through strengths has on the brain’s information filters (reticular activating system and amygdala for example) and the brain’s neurochemistry (such as dopamine release in positive learning experiences). When students are able to enter a unit of study through their strengths, their brains are appear receptive and information filters more likely to pass the data through to the higher cognitive networks. Of interest is that although the top three current dominant intelligence styles of Linguistic, Visual-Spatial, and Tactile-Kinesthetic are the same that categorized most learners twenty-five years ago, but the percentage of students in each category has changed to a greater preponderance of visual learners and a drop in the proportion of linguistic (auditory) learners. Now Visual-Spatial intelligence strengths account for over fifty percent, thirty-five percent are Tactile-Kinesthetic, and the Linguistic dominant learners have dropped to fifteen percent. (Gardner 1999) Some attribute this to the influence of technology with students’ increased exposure to computers, television, and video games. The theory is that children no longer grow up visualizing images to accompany stories they hear (on radio or from parents) or books they read. The “visualizing” is done for them through video games, television, movies, computer illustrated books. In a study of the learning styles of teachers, over fifty percent of teachers sampled were strongest in Linguistic intelligence and classroom observations found many teachers still rely on verbal instruction much of the time. (Chavez 1999) These statistics illuminate the disconnect between the way many teachers prefer to learn (and possibly teach) and the way most students are best adept at learning. To better serve the changing learning dynamics of the student population, teachers and curriculum specialists are stepping out of the Linguistic learning comfort zones and including more Visual-Spatial and Tactile-Kinesthetic instruction to reach the majority of students. Many successful brain-compatible strategies for individualized learning include experiential learning, experimentation, exploration, movement, and the arts. These are areas where funding and time allotment have been cut and replaced with designated, highly structured curriculum geared to rote memorization of facts. The result is less time for the multiple intelligence compatible lessons. This limits many students’ options for accessing the information through their learning strengths. As a result of these limitations in students’ opportunities to access information through their dominant intelligence, the information may not efficiently reach their hippocampus, become encoded into relational memories, and directed to their executive function prefrontal cortexes – resulting in reduced memory retention. However, when lessons are adapted for multiple intelligences, the information students are offered is more likely to become personally meaningful and connect to relational memories for successful patterning. Preferred learning style instruction is also more likely to evoke positive emotional responses, so affective filters will not block information access to the brain’s processing centers and information can become knowledge. Gardner, H. (1991) The Unschooled mind: How Children Think and How Schools Should Teach. New York: Basic books. Laurence poses some wonderful points to ponder. It is true that brain research is illuminating common networks and brain regions most associated with different learning tasks, such as executive function highly related to pathways in and out of the prefrontal cortex, the compelling research about neuroplasticity suggests that how information is presented, including its compatibility with students’ intelligences and preferred learning styles influences the success with which new information is processed and the success with which it is wired into these neural pathways and long-term memory.
Students’ engagement, comfort, stress, personal connection to the information taught and they way it is presented is reflected in different activations in brain regions and these active networks correlate with cognitive testing and classroom learning. Neuroimaging and brain mapping are also suggesting brain regions that show variable activation associated with different types of information processing associated with multiple intelligences and learning styles. As more data are gathered about how specific learning strategies influence neural activity and the studies become more collaborative with cognitive tests and classroom data collection, it is likely that more specific recommendations with respect to strategies for students with defined learning strengths and challenges will come to light.
I agree with Gardner’s theories about how those with different intelligence strengths learn more successfully when they can be engaged through those strengths. It may be a combination of which brain wiring is most active in children with different learning strengths and the positive influence that learning through strengths has on the brain’s information filters (reticular activating system and amygdala for example) and the brain’s neurochemistry (such as dopamine release in positive learning experiences). When students are able to enter a unit of study through their strengths, their brains are appear receptive and information filters more likely to pass the data through to the higher cognitive networks.
Of interest is that although the top three current dominant intelligence styles of Linguistic, Visual-Spatial, and Tactile-Kinesthetic are the same that categorized most learners twenty-five years ago, but the percentage of students in each category has changed to a greater preponderance of visual learners and a drop in the proportion of linguistic (auditory) learners. Now Visual-Spatial intelligence strengths account for over fifty percent, thirty-five percent are Tactile-Kinesthetic, and the Linguistic dominant learners have dropped to fifteen percent. (Gardner 1999) Some attribute this to the influence of technology with students’ increased exposure to computers, television, and video games. The theory is that children no longer grow up visualizing images to accompany stories they hear (on radio or from parents) or books they read. The “visualizing” is done for them through video games, television, movies, computer illustrated books.
In a study of the learning styles of teachers, over fifty percent of teachers sampled were strongest in Linguistic intelligence and classroom observations found many teachers still rely on verbal instruction much of the time. (Chavez 1999) These statistics illuminate the disconnect between the way many teachers prefer to learn (and possibly teach) and the way most students are best adept at learning.
To better serve the changing learning dynamics of the student population, teachers and curriculum specialists are stepping out of the Linguistic learning comfort zones and including more Visual-Spatial and Tactile-Kinesthetic instruction to reach the majority of students.
Many successful brain-compatible strategies for individualized learning include experiential learning, experimentation, exploration, movement, and the arts. These are areas where funding and time allotment have been cut and replaced with designated, highly structured curriculum geared to rote memorization of facts. The result is less time for the multiple intelligence compatible lessons. This limits many students’ options for accessing the information through their learning strengths. As a result of these limitations in students’ opportunities to access information through their dominant intelligence, the information may not efficiently reach their hippocampus, become encoded into relational memories, and directed to their executive function prefrontal cortexes – resulting in reduced memory retention.
However, when lessons are adapted for multiple intelligences, the information students are offered is more likely to become personally meaningful and connect to relational memories for successful patterning. Preferred learning style instruction is also more likely to evoke positive emotional responses, so affective filters will not block information access to the brain’s processing centers and information can become knowledge.
Gardner, H. (1991) The Unschooled mind: How Children Think and How Schools Should Teach. New York: Basic books.

]]> By: Laurence Peters http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8271 Laurence Peters Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:19:34 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-8271 Dr Willis: Is brain research pointing to one way that the brain learns-or is it suggesting that differences in the way people learn are hard wired? In other words how relevant is Gardner's theories about different learning styles (this focus seems to have gone out of fashion recently). It seemed when Gardner wrote in the 1980sthat he had some powerful intuitive notions about how those with strengths in spatial -logical reasoning learned differently from those who learn in otherways and suggested that our schools were biased towards one kind of learner. I would appreciate hearing about this set of issues from you and the other commentators. Dr Willis: Is brain research pointing to one way that the brain learns-or is it suggesting that differences in the way people learn are hard wired? In other words how relevant is Gardner’s theories about different learning styles (this focus seems to have gone out of fashion recently). It seemed when Gardner wrote in the 1980sthat he had some powerful intuitive notions about how those with strengths in spatial -logical reasoning learned differently from those who learn in otherways and suggested that our schools were biased towards one kind of learner. I would appreciate hearing about this set of issues from you and the other commentators.

]]> By: Judy Willis, M.D., M.Ed http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7793 Judy Willis, M.D., M.Ed Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:10:06 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7793 As the presenter of the ASCD lecture with the designated topic, "What today’s neuroscience might mean for the classrooms of tomorrow" discussed in these thoughtful blogs, I'd like to offer anyone interested a copy of the text of that presentation. I was asked to speak of future possibilities and enjoyed the opportunity to envision the future, but most of my books, articles, and presentations are about how the brain appears to learn best and what strategies are most neuro-logical, based on my experience as a neurologist, neuroscientist, and classroom teacher. For those interested in that more practical information I can send you a handout from my RAD strategies presentations with much of that information. Also, my website has links to quite a number of articles I've written on the topic, links to free chapters from my ASCD books (Research-Based Strategies to Ignite Student Learning, Brain Research Based Strategies for the Inclusion Class, and my soon to be released, How the Brain Learns to Read), and links to my presentations. Keep Igniting! Judy Willis, MD, M.Ed www.RADteach.com As the presenter of the ASCD lecture with the designated topic, “What today’s neuroscience might mean for the classrooms of tomorrow” discussed in these thoughtful blogs, I’d like to offer anyone interested a copy of the text of that presentation. I was asked to speak of future possibilities and enjoyed the opportunity to envision the future, but most of my books, articles, and presentations are about how the brain appears to learn best and what strategies are most neuro-logical, based on my experience as a neurologist, neuroscientist, and classroom teacher.
For those interested in that more practical information I can send you a handout from my RAD strategies presentations with much of that information. Also, my website has links to quite a number of articles I’ve written on the topic, links to free chapters from my ASCD books (Research-Based Strategies to Ignite Student Learning, Brain Research Based Strategies for the Inclusion Class, and my soon to be released, How the Brain Learns to Read), and links to my presentations.
Keep Igniting!

Judy Willis, MD, M.Ed
http://www.RADteach.com

]]> By: Lyelle Palmer, Ph.D. http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7732 Lyelle Palmer, Ph.D. Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:38:11 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7732 Since educators and most psychologists have scant background in biology, their context for education is sociological/psychological and the biologic aspects are therefore mysterious, incomprehensible, threatening and unimportant (dismissed). When one takes a systems approach to education, the biologic systems are more basic and fundamental (although usually invisible from the educator's point of view). When one accepts the possibility that biology might have links to observable behavior, then deeper understandings and more tools become available. Neuroscience includes anatomy, physiology, biochemistry phenomena that relate to nutrition, toxins, emotions, attention, scheduling, sleeping/napping, and many more familiar topics. It is certainly threatening to think that there are other literatures to read, new terms to learn, bridging to discover, and an endless and increasing flow of articles to confront the too-busy-to-read reading American educators. Being overwhelmed/threatened by the prospect that my background is inadequate to approach this new linkage of the biologic and behavioral is understandable, but we do not all have to know everything--we have interpreters of the research and we can put to use the interpretations. Without a biological background, there are limits to immediate understanding, but with reading popular articles from 60 years of Scientific American written at the layperson's level, one can find reader-friendly articles for Americans (the Europeans say that "Americans don't read"--their professional literature). The researchers and brain science pioneers in education usually came from a clinical background and had a foundation in the biological brain contexts. Classroom teachers are hungry for the deeper understanding of the bridge between the biologic and behavioral aspects so let us welcome the readiness for brain awareness. Since educators and most psychologists have scant background in biology, their context for education is sociological/psychological and the biologic aspects are therefore mysterious, incomprehensible, threatening and unimportant (dismissed). When one takes a systems approach to education, the biologic systems are more basic and fundamental (although usually invisible from the educator’s point of view). When one accepts the possibility that biology might have links to observable behavior, then deeper understandings and more tools become available. Neuroscience includes anatomy, physiology, biochemistry phenomena that relate to nutrition, toxins, emotions, attention, scheduling, sleeping/napping, and many more familiar topics. It is certainly threatening to think that there are other literatures to read, new terms to learn, bridging to discover, and an endless and increasing flow of articles to confront the too-busy-to-read reading American educators. Being overwhelmed/threatened by the prospect that my background is inadequate to approach this new linkage of the biologic and behavioral is understandable, but we do not all have to know everything–we have interpreters of the research and we can put to use the interpretations. Without a biological background, there are limits to immediate understanding, but with reading popular articles from 60 years of Scientific American written at the layperson’s level, one can find reader-friendly articles for Americans (the Europeans say that
“Americans don’t read”–their professional literature). The researchers and brain science pioneers in education usually came from a clinical background and had a foundation in the biological brain contexts. Classroom teachers are hungry for the deeper understanding of the bridge between the biologic and behavioral aspects so let us welcome the readiness for brain awareness.

]]> By: Linda Nebbe PhD http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7692 Linda Nebbe PhD Tue, 18 Mar 2008 22:44:29 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7692 I attended your session at the ASCD conference. Thank you. I'm an assistant professor at the University of Northern Iowa in Counseling Education. For years I have followed the developments in neuroscience and am proud to say that when I started my graduate teaching career (after being a school counselor for a number of years) I was attempting to translate what I was reading for my students and sharing the exciting things we were learning about the brain and the relevance of this information to our profession. NOT being a neuroscientist, I've always felt a little vulnerable - - - wondering if the more complex things I read really translated into the more understandable language. I'm happy to say I have been validated over time (even checked out with "real neuroscientists). . . your presentation continued to validate, was fascinating, and sprinkled with some new leanings. I liked your comment at one point "as of this morning. . . ". It truly seems we are learning at a pace that is that fast. I enjoyed it so much. Now, reading other blogs.. . . I hope your critics will understand who your audience is. I have always wanted to make the information clear to my students as well as relevant. If it isn't, then our audience of educators will move on to something that is relevant and worth their time. Your method of presentation was completely appropriate for the target audience and I can't imagine any teacher, principal, or other educator left without some new basic understanding and application! I attended your session at the ASCD conference. Thank you. I’m an assistant professor at the University of Northern Iowa in Counseling Education. For years I have followed the developments in neuroscience and am proud to say that when I started my graduate teaching career (after being a school counselor for a number of years) I was attempting to translate what I was reading for my students and sharing the exciting things we were learning about the brain and the relevance of this information to our profession. NOT being a
neuroscientist, I’ve always felt a little vulnerable - - - wondering if the more complex things I read really translated into the more understandable language. I’m happy to say I have been validated over time (even checked out with “real neuroscientists). . . your presentation continued to validate, was fascinating, and sprinkled with some new leanings. I liked your comment at one point “as of this morning. . . “. It truly seems we are learning at a pace that is that fast. I enjoyed it so much.

Now, reading other blogs.. . . I hope your critics will understand who your audience is. I have always wanted to make the information clear to my students as well as relevant. If it isn’t, then our audience of educators will move on to something that is relevant and worth their time. Your method of presentation was completely appropriate for the target audience and I can’t imagine any teacher, principal, or other educator left without some new basic understanding and application!

]]> By: Laura Varlas http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7686 Laura Varlas Tue, 18 Mar 2008 20:07:45 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7686 hi Robert! Thanks for blogging Judy's session. We'll be posting some photos from her presentation, and links to her ASCD articles over at ASCD's Inservice blog (www.ascd.org/blog)--in addition to dozens of other ASCD Conference-related coverage. Please stop by and share your experiences! hi Robert! Thanks for blogging Judy’s session. We’ll be posting some photos from her presentation, and links to her ASCD articles over at ASCD’s Inservice blog (www.ascd.org/blog)–in addition to dozens of other ASCD Conference-related coverage. Please stop by and share your experiences!

]]> By: Teresa Durkin http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7684 Teresa Durkin Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:51:35 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7684 Teresa, Let's put this in our next newsletter. I'm thinking that when we have the web resources section, to include this article and website rather than printing the entire article. thanks, debbie Teresa,

Let’s put this in our next newsletter. I’m thinking that when we have the web resources section, to include this article and website rather than printing the entire article.

thanks,
debbie

]]> By: Bonnie Lesley http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7676 Bonnie Lesley Tue, 18 Mar 2008 14:35:08 +0000 http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/roadreports/2008/03/16/brain-games-neuroscience-and-active-participation-teaching-methods-at-the-ascd-conference/#comment-7676 What we at Creative Education Institute celebrate each time we encounter findings of cutting edge cognitive neuroscience research is that it tends to VALIDATE time-honored teaching practices. In other words, the findings are not necessarily new ideas, but for the first time now we have new scientific evidence to ground our work in education. Our programs for struggling learners (see www.ceilearning.com) incorporate multi-sensory processing strategies, varied and adequate practice opportunities, chunking/clustering, individualization, time-on-task, continuous progress monitoring, immediate corrective feedback, explicit instruction, emphasis on mastery and fluency in decoding and math facts, and other "brain-based" strategies. And they are remarkable in that they truly accelerate learning for kids who are economically disadvantaged, limited-English, learning disabled, or just due to specific situations find themselves behind their peers. The new brain research is going to prove helpful to teachers in teaching all students. What we at Creative Education Institute celebrate each time we encounter findings of cutting edge cognitive neuroscience research is that it tends to VALIDATE time-honored teaching practices. In other words, the findings are not necessarily new ideas, but for the first time now we have new scientific evidence to ground our work in education. Our programs for struggling learners (see http://www.ceilearning.com) incorporate multi-sensory processing strategies, varied and adequate practice opportunities, chunking/clustering, individualization, time-on-task, continuous progress monitoring, immediate corrective feedback, explicit instruction, emphasis on mastery and fluency in decoding and math facts, and other “brain-based” strategies. And they are remarkable in that they truly accelerate learning for kids who are economically disadvantaged, limited-English, learning disabled, or just due to specific situations find themselves behind their peers. The new brain research is going to prove helpful to teachers in teaching all students.

]]>