+- Teach the Brain Forums (https://www.teach-the-brain.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Teach-the-Brain (https://www.teach-the-brain.org/forums/Forum-Teach-the-Brain)
+--- Forum: How the Brain Learns (https://www.teach-the-brain.org/forums/Forum-How-the-Brain-Learns)
+--- Thread: Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning (/Thread-Neurobiologically-informed-philosophy-of-learning)
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - Christina - 09-06-2005
An understanding of the way the brain learns can help shape the evolution of the education community’s conception of the learning process. Below is an excerpt from a paper in which I discuss this.
The brain is not a stable, isolated entity but rather an active, dynamic system that is keenly responsive to experience. Elements of the brain involved in learning continually undergo experience-dependent structural reorganization with functional significance for how future information is processed. This continuous brain reorganization results in a unique architecture of each individual’s brain at a given time. This conception of an active, responsive brain supports the idea that the ability to learn is a malleable rather than fixed capacity, which informs a long-standing debate in education between an incremental (malleable) and entity (fixed) theory of intelligence. Furthermore, because the structure of the brain underlies its function, the fact that each individual’s brain has a unique structure suggests that knowledge is not passively stamped into the brain but rather uniquely constructively represented based upon its current architecture. This supports a constructivist view of learning whereby the learner makes use of experience to actively construct knowledge rather than passively acquiring it.
I would love to hear any reactions or thoughts about these specific ideas discussed above or about the process of using neurobiological knowledge to help guide the evolution of a philosophy of learning. For example: Do you think that most teachers in your country consider the ability to learn a fixed capacity? What do you think about the idea that each brain responds to a given learning experience with unique, functionally-significant structural alterations? Do you agree that this concept seems to suggest a constructivist-oriented view of learning? What do you see as obstacles in the development of neurobiologically-informed philosophies of learning? What do you foresee as obstacles in the implementation of such philosophies? Do you have any other questions or comments?
I look forward to hearing from you!
~Christina
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - segarama - 09-06-2005
Christina,Malleable vs.fixed brain theory is healthy. It provides discussion and an ongoing future to a possible eventual closure. The excerpt from a paper that you discussed provides more that just philosophical theory. It provides real prospective hope for 'inclusion' within the human race.
I remember hunting with my dad for crabs in the ocean when I was a young lad. We would remove the claws and throw the clawless viable living crab back into the ocean to regenerate new claws. Of course we ate the crab/leg for lunch. (after we cracked it open) Well, I asked my dad why the crab could regenerate his claw legs and we could not. The answer was obvious, 'human beings' do not regenerate parts of body.
We do know that plasticity does occur in the brain, but to what extent is yet to fully evolve in our research. Since I believe that the brain is malleable, this gives me hope for future amelioration of health and problems with pervasive developmental disorders etc., etc. along with building strategies for teaching the neurologically typical person.
Thanks for being here!!!!!!!
Be well,
Segarama - Rob
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - segarama - 09-06-2005
quote=Christina: For example Do you think that most teachers in your country consider the ability to learn a fixed capacity?.. Well, if we include preschool teachers, elementary school teachers, middle school teachers, secondary and university teachers etc. etc., I would not hazard a guess due to the omnipresent media in the United States.
quote= Christina: What do you think about the idea that each brain responds to a given learning experience with unique, functionally-significant structural alterations?... Each learner has different degrees of 'prior knowledge' and will respond individually based on the strengths and weaknesses of their neuronal networks and other systems eg. memory
quote=Christina: Do you agree that this concept seems to suggest a constructivist-neurobiologically-informed philosophies of learning?... If it suggests anything, it suggests a constructivist-neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning.
quote= Christina: What do you foresee as obstacles in the implementation of such philosophies?... I believe that we need to address 'causation' in the neurobiological area before we jump too quickly. However, I really do like where you are going?
... How do we address 'causation' in neurobiology?
Be well !!!
Rob
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - Christina - 10-06-2005
Thanks so much for responding to my developing ideas Rob. I am excited to begin flushing them out with feedback from interested educators.
This issue of causation is an important one. Too often, correlation (which is what many neurobiological studies provide) is misinterpreted to imply causation. This begins to have consequence when correlative studies are used as a basis for policy. There is a debate surrounding this issue. Some question whether understanding causation is necessary when correlation is strong. For example: If aspirin relieves headaches, does it matter how it works? Others caution that understanding mechanism is critical as a lack of knowledge leaves open the potential for unanticipated (and potentially harmful) consequences.
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - Karldw - 10-06-2005
OECD expert Wrote:An understanding of the way the brain learns can help shape the evolution of the education community’s conception of the learning process. Below is an excerpt from a paper in which I discuss this.
The brain is not a stable, isolated entity but rather an active, dynamic system that is keenly responsive to experience. Elements of the brain involved in learning continually undergo experience-dependent structural reorganization with functional significance for how future information is processed. This continuous brain reorganization results in a unique architecture of each individual’s brain at a given time. This conception of an active, responsive brain supports the idea that the ability to learn is a malleable rather than fixed capacity, which informs a long-standing debate in education between an incremental (malleable) and entity (fixed) theory of intelligence. Furthermore, because the structure of the brain underlies its function, the fact that each individual’s brain has a unique structure suggests that knowledge is not passively stamped into the brain but rather uniquely constructively represented based upon its current architecture. This supports a constructivist view of learning whereby the learner makes use of experience to actively construct knowledge rather than passively acquiring it.
I would love to hear any reactions or thoughts about these specific ideas discussed above or about the process of using neurobiological knowledge to help guide the evolution of a philosophy of learning. For example: Do you think that most teachers in your country consider the ability to learn a fixed capacity? What do you think about the idea that each brain responds to a given learning experience with unique, functionally-significant structural alterations? Do you agree that this concept seems to suggest a constructivist-oriented view of learning? What do you see as obstacles in the development of neurobiologically-informed philosophies of learning? What do you foresee as obstacles in the implementation of such philosophies? Do you have any other questions or comments?
I look forward to hearing from you!
~Christina
Christina
Your remarks are particularly interesting to me because of one of the things that I am presently looking into. I am looking at the early childhood development of numbers and arithmetic believing that there should not be such poor performance given the nature of human performance in the real world. This has lead to the review of brain processing in related matters. I have found the paper “Cognition is categorization“ by Stevan Harnad. It is available at
abstract at http://cogprints.org/3027/
paper at http://cogprints.org/3027/01/catconf.html
His contention is interesting to me because I am looking at the contention that categorization is the unrecognized process basis of cardinal numbers. Harnad's contention greatly expands this idea for an educational purpose.
Harned looks at how the brain processes and interprets information. He sees both the incremental and entity theories. Some of our categorization is hardwired in the brain whereas other is a learned process involving corrective feedback. He shows that much of the process of interpretation of inputs is underdetermined and is subject to ambiguity. It is only through various forms of trainging that this ambiguity can be removed, hence the social nature of Vigotsky. This can also be a constructivist implication.
Underlying all of this is the malleable or plastic nature of the brain. I am looking at this from my BMW perspective in which neural net patterns in the brain are interpreted to find meaning. Illusions provide a good way to investigate the interaction of the output of the brains processing of input data and the minds interpretation of this output.
The utility of the BMW model is that for educators it points to the fact that there are two components to the evaluation of performance. One is the nature of the category and the other is the nature of the interpretation. It appears that both are part of brain function and learning and are ameanable to learning.
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - Christina - 15-06-2005
Thanks very much for this Karldw. This adds a very interesting perspective.
Harnad offers a definition of learning in this paper: “Learning occurs when a system samples inputs and generates outputs in response to them on the basis of trial and error, its performance guided by corrective feedback.†I am interested in hearing reactions to this definition. According to this, learning is by definition a process similar to adaptation, motivated by arbitrary diversity and shaped according to feedback. Reactions?
Neurobiologically-informed philosophy of learning - segarama - 25-06-2005
OECD expert Wrote:Thanks very much for this Karldw. This adds a very interesting perspective.
Harnad offers a definition of learning in this paper: “Learning occurs when a system samples inputs and generates outputs in response to them on the basis of trial and error, its performance guided by corrective feedback.†I am interested in hearing reactions to this definition. According to this, learning is by definition a process similar to adaptation, motivated by arbitrary diversity and shaped according to feedback. Reactions?
Christina... Let's take a close look at Harnad definition of learning in this paper: If we are working in the field of stem cells then.........."Do we try to use differentiated stem cells in the place of undifferentiated stem cells?" Maybe it depends on how we sample inputs and generate outputs on a trial and error basis. Obviously we cannot make one fit all, but we can adapt to how we sample and on whom. [not withstanding undifferentiated stem cells] We would indeed not use a human to sample differentiated stem cells when knowing the target is not acceptable that we are trying to replicate. Maybe we are trying to put forth a universal theory that must be more adaptable. I hate to say this but maybe an attorney with adroit language skills would be able to apply a universal theory from what we are trying to say. http://www.mayoclinic.com/invoke.cfm?id=GA00012Be well,
Rob
Segarama