Teach the Brain Forums
Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Printable Version

+- 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: Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting (/Thread-Reflections-on-our-Lifelong-Learning-Network-meeting)

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - OECD - 14-06-2005

View the reflections by two educators present our Lifelong Learning Network meeting which was held in Tokyo in January 2005, and the response from a a renowned neuroscientist.
See especially the reflections by Frank Coffield and the response by Michael Posner, which touch on many of threads that have been discussed in these forums. We would be interested in any comments you wish to make on these reflections in this thread.

See: http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002109_1_1_1_1,00.html

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 15-06-2005

OECD Wrote:View the reflections by two educators present our Lifelong Learning Network meeting which was held in Tokyo in January 2005,

See: http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002109_1_1_1_1,00.html



From the song Dance of Love
Come on and do, do the dance of love
Everybody come on do, do the dance of love sweet love
One step up, two steps back
From Comments and comments on comments by
FC - Reflections of the Lifelong learning Meeting: Frank Coffield
http://www.oecd.org/document/42/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002026_1_1_1_1,00.html

MP - Comments on the paper by Frank Coffield: by Michael Posner
http://www.oecd.org/document/13/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_19394829_1_1_1_1,00.html


We are all talking in metaphors because there is no real field – education and the brain – to relate to. All we can do is refer to the concept as a relation to something that social groups will recognize.

FC
“COME DANCE WITH ME” WHISPERS THE NEUROSCIENTIST TO THE TEACHER

“ I’m not yet ready to ask my wife to join me in the new dance that’s all the craze among pensioners in Vienna: the zimmer waltz.”
MP
“Engineers don’t really rely upon physics to build their bridges, nor do they wait for physics to come up with principles that will tell them how to do so. Rather they study physics and adapt the principles in that field to the practical decisions that need to be made that include the cultural values governing vehicular travel that will eventually move over the bridge.”

All of the above are excellent examples of linguist communication in action. Posner is exactly right but I recommend the book “ Why Buildings Fall Down” by Matthys Levy and Mario Salvadori. The reality is that progress will not be made without failure and no one would say that the advances of the architects should not have been attempted. We have to move forward in ignorance because there is no choice.

So who will do the pioneering?

MP
“... a subset of educators, probably mainly young ones will, like Coffield, find neuroscience worth serious study and will be the vehicle for making educational decisions and arguments that take advantage of what we know and will learn about the brain.”

I know this statement is true because I have seen it in action. I have seen brain and cognitive science help students learn. It will be done by people like those in this forum.

Progress in the streets will start with creative, unencumbered, risk taking, individuals. All of the above comes from two cumbersome, highly constrained, highly inertial professions – scientific research and mass education. There will a lot of educational alchemy but somewhere great strides will be made, and soon.

I strongly recommend that everyone read the above articles. I will say more as soon as things come together.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Bea Esser - 16-06-2005

OECD Wrote:View the reflections by two educators present our Lifelong Learning Network meeting which was held in Tokyo in January 2005, and the response from a a renowned neuroscientist.
See especially the reflections by Frank Coffield and the response by Michael Posner, which touch on many of threads that have been discussed in these forums. We would be interested in any comments you wish to make on these reflections in this thread.

See: http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002109_1_1_1_1,00.html

I read the following in the Life Long Learning report.

“Despite the remarkable progress, brain research has not yet found an application in theory or practice of education. And yet, one of the major contributions neuroscience is capable of making is illuminating the nature of learning itself”.
(Blakemore and Frith, 2000:3)

Reflections of the Lifelong learning Meeting: Frank Coffield

Is it true that there are no applications for brain research to education? What would be the requirements for something to qualify as an application of brain research to education?

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 16-06-2005

OECD Wrote:View the reflections by two educators present our Lifelong Learning Network meeting which was held in Tokyo in January 2005, and the response from a a renowned neuroscientist.
See especially the reflections by Frank Coffield and the response by Michael Posner, which touch on many of threads that have been discussed in these forums. We would be interested in any comments you wish to make on these reflections in this thread.

See: http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002109_1_1_1_1,00.html

I keep seeing discussions that are similar to children playing cart and horse. First the try to figure out which is the cart and which is the horse. When that is determined they try to figure which goes in front. The following quotes are taken from

Reflections of the Lifelong learning Meeting: Frank Coffield
http://www.oecd.org/document/42/0,2340,en_2649_14935397_35002026_1_1_1_1,00.html


“What education needs from brain science is some public statement about what is common ground among neuroscientists, what is currently disputed territory, what are the controversial claims of eccentric individuals or ‘rogue’ teams, and what can be safely dismissed as ‘neuromyths’. Clearly, such a statement would need to be revised periodically as knowledge advances.”

I feel that this is asking brain science to be the driving force – the horse – and wants it to go in front. I do not feel that this is the way to view the present situation. Brain science is a totally separate field. It is well established with a solid peer group. It is doing some great things. Brain scans are the most complicated research I have ever seen and that includes some looks at magnetohydrodynamics, real time radar signal processing, and other such fields. We have to take brain science for what it is and let it be.

“Brain Science now has to face the dilemma which confronted experimental psychology 50 years ago: does it cling to experimental rigour and the scientific purity of blind, randomised controlled trials? If so, it will have to face the criticism that such laboratory conditions bear no resemblance to real classrooms. Alternatively, does it change its methods and conduct research in authentic contexts, thereby sacrificing control and rigour? Some workable compromise needs to be reached between these conflicting demands.”
Why should we put the burden of applications research and product design on research? What we should be asking is how do we develop new fields with new structures that can achieve the educational goals. What models for such groups exist in modern technological fields of development?

“I admit to being mildly niggled by what I see as a tendency for neuroscientists to enter fields about which they appear to know precious little, but still make sweeping generalisations without quoting any supportive evidence.”

Have you ever gone to a parent-teacher meeting of any size or type and found someone who is not an authority in education? This situation comes with working in public arenas. At least a brain researcher has an education that is in some way related to the problem.

“I would like to offer one early finding from an experiment I’ve conducted without controls (randomised or otherwise), and with both eyes open (rather than in a double blind condition). This research contradicts one of the established findings from neuroscience, namely, that the brain can compensate for the slow but sure deterioration with age. In sharp contrast, my evidence suggests that the over 60s can actually improve their performance significantly as they grow older. The only problem is that the size of my sample was one and the subject was myself.”

This is my point to members of this forum. Small samples without scientific design and rigorous analysis can lead to results that will change behavior and control thinking and be worthy of reporting to educated people. We are no longer in the horse and buggy era. It does not matter who is the horse and who is the carriage. We are now discussing levitation. The problem is how do you get off the ground.

Few science fiction writers were advanced researchers but they did have many ideas that are now a part of everyones life. The ideas came from cognition not theory.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Christina - 17-06-2005

In his response, Frank describes the need for a dynamic statement, capable of adapting in accordance with new knowledge. I would extend this conception to a dynamic exchange that is both capable of adaptation and bi-directional. Genuine dialogue is necessary to help this field “get off the ground.”

I would like to respond to the eager enthusiasm of your recent posts. It is quite energizing as I tend to share this sense of optimism. It is this excitement that will fuel the forward movement of this new field. However, it is critical that our eagerness is balanced by what Frank terms, “healthy skepticism.” The two working in tandem will safely guide this field forward. Thank you for your enthusiasm. We do not want to send our children on the levitational equivalent of the Titanic, but we also do not want to leave them on the shore.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Christina - 17-06-2005

Thanks Bea. Whether or not there have been applications of neuroscience to education certainly depends on the criteria used to define an application. It would be interesting and worthwhile for us to look into the criteria used by Blakemore and Frith.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 21-06-2005

Lifelong living is not a new concept. I remember being told about it in school, but the times they are a changin. There are a number things to contemplate now that were not around at that time. Some of the issues I want to get to are the exploration of Donald Schön's ideas on reflection, the ideas of practitioner research, open systems development, and the new technology of computers and communication (the internet) as they all relate to education reform. A good place to start is with a paper “ACTION RESEARCH:EXPLORING THE TENSIONS OF TEACHING” by Dr. Judith M. Newman. She taught teachers about reflection and has many things that I feel it would interesting to have the forum members respond to. I think that it also provides some ideas to think about for those who seek to work with teachers in the development of brain research in the classroom practice. There are some other points of view that I will introduce later. Newman's article is at

http://www.lupinworks.com/article/ar.html

I think that Schön's idea of single and double loop reflection may be a good starting point to describe my thinking relative to most others. I feel that the second loop that gets into more fundamental reflection and change is closer to how I feel. Newman is, I believe, discussing more of the inner single loop. I think this is important to consider because this is closer to the mind set of the practitioner.

An example of outer loop thinking is the establishment of the Open University in the UK. When the decision makers looked at what they wanted to do they thought it was too disruptive to traditional education and that it would be better to just start a whole new college. I am not sure but that the new Transfer Center for Neuroscience and Learning may not have an element of the second loop in it. I do not know enough about it to tell yet. I think that this type of action is also similar to some of the forms of education reform we see now such as charter schools and the expansion of home schooling.

The following are some quotes from Newman's paper. Look these up in the paper and share with us what your thinking is.


“before we can examine assumptions, we need to discover what they are. By exploring both familiar and unfamiliar situations we position ourselves to be able to interrogate our professional practice.”

“One of the reasons I encourage the graduate students to read widely is that, as they become more adept at thinking with published authors, they discover new ways of perceiving their own work.”

“An important aspect of doing action research, then, involves meeting regularly with other folks to talk aloud what's going on in your head”

“Action research is as much about uncovering our assumptions as it is about seeing new connections. Our interpretations of experience are shaped by our assumptions, by our biases,”

“We start out with our unexamined assumptions but slowly we come to see how our assumptions shape our decisions and our responses and we become able to contemplate alternate ways of acting.”

“Writing is crucial for making sense of experiences.”

“Traditional research paradigms are so deeply ingrained it's difficult persuading people to just start in.”

“The feature of action research, therefore, which poses the biggest obstacle for people is dealing with the uncertainty inherent in the process. You don't usually begin this kind of inquiry with a focused question. You don't know what matters, what to notice, or what to ignore. You don't know what information to collect, who to interview, where to look.”

“In the beginning, you just have to do a lot of messing around. That makes teachers very uncomfortable.”

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 22-06-2005

If brain research is going to get into the classroom then it will be brought in by the teacher. Practitioner research is an idea that has been around for quite a while and in many forms. What is important is that the education field has recognized that practitioners can do valid research.

Practitioner-researchers include teachers, tutors, aides, administrators, and college students. It is research conducted by people involved in the situation and the primary goal of the researcher is to become a more skillful educator.

It appears to me that there is potential in this idea. I would like to hear from anyone who has had experience with any programs related to this concept.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 22-06-2005

I believe that there is much to be considered that comes from the philosophy of open systems. (Open systems is just my effort to broaden the horizon of thought about open source.) There is much more to discuss about open systems but the following is an excellent article that relates to this thread.

O'Reilly is a company founded on the philosophy of open systems and is a conspicuous example of the potential and power of this philosophy. Of course Linux was the first to demonstrate the power of the internet and openness in the development of complex powerful projects. I will say more on this later.

The excerpts from the article below show that open source in the computer field is not that different from traditional science and research. It provides the same structures to assure quality. The remainder of this post is from the article.

Thought Experiment: Science as an Open Source Project
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2002/07/17/timo.html

Of course, there are imposters and charlatans, some of them abusing the Science brand to give their own shaky and improperly tested theories an aura of truth. But fortunately, not too many people mistake, say, the Social Science distribution for the real thing. Still fewer would ever entertain using those terminally buggy versions floating around that include infamous patches such as "Cold Fusion" or "Non-HIV AIDS."


Why? Because all patches (read "papers") have to jump through a series of hoops before they can be committed to the Science source-code repository. In particular, they have to gain the considered approval of a gatekeeper ("editor") and, usually, a couple of other hackers ("scientists") with special expertise in that particular part of the Kernel of Knowledge. These people check for a number of things:
The submitted code should not cause the system to crash. (The scientific conclusions should not fly in the face of existing scientific knowledge.)

It should add potentially useful functionality or increase the elegance of the code. (It should increase the range of phenomena explained or reduce the number of facts we need to explain all understood phenomena.)

It should be written in a robust, logically consistent way. (It should be supported by the data presented.)

It should be properly documented so that any competent programmer can understand it. (It should be accompanied by methods detailed enough for a competent scientist to replicate the experiment.)

Science has a process, based on peer review, for deciding what should--and what should not--be incorporated into the corpus of knowledge. This has evolved over centuries and generally works pretty well. But it isn't tailored to the online world and it's quite possible that the current "phase transition" in information dissemination brought about by Internet technologies may cause scientists to do such things very differently. Open source software development also has processes, many of them based on peer review, for deciding what should be incorporated into the code base. These processes are tailored to the online world because that's where open source development has always happened.


So my question is this: What lessons have been learned within open source software development that might be directly applicable to scientific peer review in the online world?

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - 4th grade teacher - 25-06-2005

I’m going to respond to three articles that have been under discussion in this forum.

Come Dance With Me – Frank Coffield

His article reflects the healthy skepticism everyone should have bonding brain research and education. I appreciate that he recognizes the types of questions teachers have, and that we need to prioritize what it is we want to know. He states his main priority is changing the intervention provided to students with learning impairments to be more inclusive of social justice and having a moral purpose. I agree that this is a big concern, but not a main concern.
His concern about the lack of culture being looked at in understanding human behavior is definitely correct in education. It is a very low priority when it gets down to being in the classroom with these kids. Curriculum companies usually add “hints” and supplemental activities for English as a Second Language students. And, schools have ESL programs that mostly provide pull out programs for these kids who are considered behind most of their school lives.
In his “Hopes for the Future” he states again his thoughts on priorities believing that teachers’ real hunger is providing for special needs students. Perhaps this is because he sees the physiology of learning problems being something neuroscientists can put their hands on. I’ve taught special education, and I know the needs these students have. But, at least they are given the consideration of a lot of documentation and assessment to have an IEP- Independent Educational Program. I’m more concerned about the kids who are not reaching grade level expectations and who do not have these special considerations.
In Suggestions for Policy, he correctly points out the problem with politicians picking out what they want from brain research to use in policy making. It’s not just happening in England.
Coffield’s question on going public with findings from brain science is a little late. We’re already there.
Posner’s reply gave appropriate response to the question of applications of brain research to education, and discussion on bilingualism. But,I was a bit disappointed with Posner’s reply in that he believes saving education will be carried out by the “young ones”. The teaching profession is one area of professionals that keeps working together as new standards and expectations are developed. We are all required to go to professional development meetings, workshops, and be on committees. Yes, there are times that at the age of 52 I’d like to think I knew it all, but I just keep finding out how much I don’t know.

Action Research – Judith Newman

The description of action research compares nicely with the teaching method of using projects. When students do projects, they are to come up with questions about a certain topic, decide on what questions they want to answer, use resources to come up conclusions, and then present their findings. They keep a journal to record their progress.

Writing is absolutely a necessary tool in learning anything. Her use of writing in action research is justified and practical in finding results with problems that come up in teaching. There is a lot of grumbling in the teacher’s lunchroom, but teachers know that to get the attention to a concern to get changes made, it requires writing. In fact, one of the differences between administrators and teachers is writing. Administrators become afraid of teachers who have documented what they are concerned about. If it’s documented, they might have to do something about it. Then comes the fear of the district finding out, parents finding out, the union finding out, bad publicity, etc….

But, I only point that out because she makes so many references to the inadequacies of teachers’ writing habits. She is stating that it is hard to know what to record, and fear of finding out about ourselves that keeps teachers from recording experiences. I’m certain there are some out there that fit that description, but I do need to point out that she is not describing teaching professionals accurately. In fact, it is demoralizing. At our school, we have action teams that get together in the evenings to discuss books on teaching that are new and productive. We have been given consent to use this as a means of professional development. We are required to provide our principal written records of our discussions. This is not a new idea.

Action research could combine well with the open source concept. I would like confirmation on my understanding of what open source is, though. It appears to be much like the forum we are using. Am I right? Instead of going through the lengthy requirements of publishing scientific theories and discoveries, it is opening up research to allow public comments. This would empower the intuition of teachers, and be less intimidating. But, it’s also opening up a risk factor that I’m concerned about. Confidentiality is very important when putting information about out there in cyberspace about students and communities. As a professional, I feel I can put own thoughts and results on line, but I want to be sure I am not compromising the privacy of others.

Reflections on our Lifelong Learning Network meeting - Karldw - 25-06-2005

4th grade teacher Wrote:At our school, we have action teams that get together in the evenings to discuss books on teaching that are new and productive. We have been given consent to use this as a means of professional development. We are required to provide our principal written records of our discussions. This is not a new idea.

Action research could combine well with the open source concept. I would like confirmation on my understanding of what open source is, though. It appears to be much like the forum we are using. Am I right? Instead of going through the lengthy requirements of publishing scientific theories and discoveries, it is opening up research to allow public comments. This would empower the intuition of teachers, and be less intimidating. But, it’s also opening up a risk factor that I’m concerned about. Confidentiality is very important when putting information about out there in cyberspace about students and communities. As a professional, I feel I can put own thoughts and results on line, but I want to be sure I am not compromising the privacy of others.


4th grade teacher

Your response was excellent with a lot to think about. We may differ on some things but this is the place for such discussion. All I want to address here are comments that you made relative to open systems.

Your comments about action teams in your school are very interesting. This is to me the beginning of openness and open systems. I would like to know more about how this idea became established, what sort of things you have achieved and/or worked on, and how it operates. I feel that this sort of cooperation in a single school would be a very important part of an overall open system program. How could this be duplicated in other schools?

I think your statement “ This would empower the intuition of teachers, and be less intimidating.” is the heart of the idea. An additional aspect is the support, both personal and informational, that could come from such an open system concept.
The following comes from the document:
Wide Open
Open source methods and their future potential
Geoff Mulgan Tom Steinberg with Omar Salem
First published in 2005 © Demos
Some rights reserved

This is a document that is published under a Creative Commons License which is a product of the open source movement.

“.... three broad categories of activity observed in projects inspired by open source ideas.

Open knowledge. These are projects where knowledge is provided freely, and shaped, vetted and in some cases used by a wide community of participants. In these cases the common value of the knowledge being created is the primary concern.

Open team working. The loose communities of interest that work together through the internet to build projects like Wikipedia and Linux merge into a wider family of semi-open teams rooted in organisations. These generally have a clearly defined end goal.

Open conversations. These extend traditional forms of public discussion by constructing online conversations capable of handing more participants in more effective ways than previously possible. In these cases the process is as important as any goal.”

This forum is an example of open conversation. Your action teams would be open team working if it were extended to the the internet. The type of operation I look toward is a combination of open team working and open knowledge.

These ideas are already being used in law, legislation, and newspapers. There are situations where openess is not appropriate. This is also discussed in the above paper. Your comment about privacy definitely is an issue, however, I do not think that it would prevent the use of an open system. It would only effect how the system would operate. This is an important issue that I would like to see discussed as I am contemplating the development of such a system as an extension of other things I have done.

Thanks for your good work
Karl