Educational Neuroscience

Initiatives and Emerging Issues

Kathryn E. Patten, Stephen R. Campbell, Kathryn E. Patten, Stephen R. Campbell

• Publisher: Wiley
• Year: 2011
• Print ISBN: 9781444339857
• eBook ISBN: 9781444345803
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education Theory & Practice

Educational Neuroscience provides an overview of the wide range of recent initiatives in educational neuroscience, examining a variety of methodological concerns, issues, and directions.

• Encourages interdisciplinary perspectives in educational neuroscience
• Contributions from leading researchers examine key issues relating to educational neuroscience and mind, brain, and education more generally
• Promotes a theoretical and empirical base for the subject area
• Explores a range of methods available to researchers
• Identifies agencies, organizations, and associations facilitating development in the field
• Reveals a variety of on-going efforts to establish theories, models, methods, ethics, and a common language

1

Introduction: Educational Neuroscience

Kathryn E. Patten & Stephen R. Campbell

This book provides an overview of a number of recent initiatives in a new area of research that is coming to be known as educational neuroscience. Educational neuroscience, as a first approximation, variously involves syntheses of theories, methods, and techniques of the neurosciences, as applied to and informed by educational research and practice. Contributions to this book were sought from principals involved in initiatives pertaining to educational neuroscience with common foci on 1) motivations, aims and prospects; 2) theories, methods, collaborations; and 3) challenges, results, and implications, both potential and actual, resulting from these initiatives. Contributors were asked to write position statements with special emphasis on the motivations, methodologies, and practical implications of their particular initiatives for educational philosophy and theory, as well as for educational research and pedagogy.

What emerges in this book is an indication of the wide range of initiatives related to educational neuroscience. This book presents a wide variety of initiatives and methodologies, as well as common goals, concerns and issues. Many topics raised herein are endemic to the emergence of a new discipline: for instance, a need for more coherent terminology, a struggle to identify and establish theoretical and philosophical foundations, a quest for practical empirically-based models, and a requirement for standards of ethical practice. Amplifying problems in establishing the new discipline of educational neuroscience is its cross-disciplinary nature and its consequential need to combine a variety of resources, methodologies, and results. In order to include as wide a variety of responses as possible, authors truncated their submissions to present brief overviews of their perspectives, purposes, portents, and projects. The authors examine a variety of concerns, issues, and directions relating to educational neuroscience; as well as revealing a need to establish theories, models, ethics, methodologies and a common language.

Stephen Campbell, an educational philosopher and researcher in mathematics education at Simon Fraser University, opens this book by considering the nature of educational neuroscience. In so doing, he identifies its proper object of study as the ‘mindbrain’. Campbell advocates a radical theory of embodied cognition that takes as a foundational assumption that any and all changes in subjective experience necessarily entail associated changes in brain and body behavior. Accordingly, he has been expanding his empirical research in mathematics education to include methods and techniques of psychophysiology and cognitive neuroscience in his studies of mathematical cognition and learning.

In Chapter 3, Anthony (Eamonn) Kelly, Professor and Coordinator of Instructional Technology at George Mason University, identifies many relevant factors contributing to educators’ growing interest in the findings of cognitive neuroscience. He asserts that neuroscience may well provide the empirical ‘primitives’ for theorizing anew about learning; in fact, spawning a revolution in our understanding of learning grounded in science. He emphasizes the need to debunk brain-based neuromythologies and replace vague theories of learning with mixed method research-based theories involving a range of disciplines, including the neurosciences. These new theories that incorporate empirical research will ground changes in pedagogy, as in such collaborations as Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) learning. STEM seeks to define fundamental aspects of learning based on neural processes and other biological foundations, and in so doing, to aid in clarifying, defining, and creating theories and models of learning. As well, he argues, STEM has a role to play in helping to establish research agendas and in disseminating resultant findings to various disciplines contributing to educational neuroscience.

In Chapter 4, Paul Howard-Jones, Senior Lecturer at the University of Bristol, argues that it is imperative to include brain function in current educational theorizing. He cautions that collaborations between neuroscience and education are fraught with philosophical, conceptual, methodological, and practical issues. He also cautions against ‘medicalising’ educational issues in our quest for understanding educational issues, and presents a ‘levels-of-action-model’ that incorporates the brain-mind-behaviour paradigm as a workable interface of the natural and social sciences by neuroeducational researchers. Specifically, Howard-Jones presents and discusses the Neuroeducational research network (NEnet) at the University of Bristol in its role to develop collaboration between the fields of neuroscience and education.

What follows in Chapter 4 is Michel Ferrari’s view of educational neuroscience as ‘an exciting renovation’ of cognitive neuroscience and other neurosciences that will advance our understanding of how knowledge and cognition is embodied. Michel, Head of the Centre for Applied Cognitive Science at the Ontario Institute of Studies in Education, advocates that while neuroscientific investigation typically addresses pathologies of learning disabilities, our focus as educational researchers should be to understand the larger underlying context of personal learning and development and to avoid neuroscientific labeling of atypical students in manners that are limiting and potentially stigmatizing. He cautions against an all-too-common practice of over-generalizing laboratory results to learning situations in situ, and against acceptance of frameworks that negate the presence and importance of agency. Ferrari argues, in some contrast to Howard-Jones, that educational strategy must follow the medical model in that pure research informs practice. Concomitantly, he argues that this strategy must also be socially imbedded and culturally mindful in that it reflects the values we espouse and the society to which we aspire.

Daniel Ansari, and associates Donna Coch (Dartmouth College) and Bert de Smedt (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) of his Numerical Cognition Laboratory at the University of Western Ontario, examine the role of cognitive neuroscience in informing education. They acknowledge that changing educational theories and models to be neuroscientific and grounded in biology will be complex and necessarily involves changes in teacher education and teacher training. Advocating that cognitive neuroscientists take an essential role in helping teachers to become literate in neuroscience, they concomitantly propose that teachers reciprocate by enabling cognitive neuroscientists to become literate in the issues and problems related to classroom practice. This process would replace the application of the myths of brain-based learning with interdisciplinary applied research and would generate new collaborations, new paradigms, and eventually, changes in pedagogy.

In Chapter 7, John Geake of the School of Education, University of New England, regards educational neuroscience as an interdisciplinary field both inspiring and inspired by educators’ questions pertaining to pedagogy and curriculum arising from educational problems and issues. To this end, he espouses the use of neuroscientific action research to both validate some current pedagogical practices and to provoke some new ones. Geake laments the lack of recognition of the function of the human brain in most education policy, curriculum and outcome documents. For Geake, it is the job of educational neuroscience to include brain function in education. Educational neuroscience, he asserts, needs its own discipline-specific methodology that addresses the issues, concerns, problems, and needs of educators and learners, but at the same time embraces the findings and expertise of cognitive neuroscientists. Geake briefly presents his research on fluid analogy-making as a basic cognitive process underlying creative thinking. These brain functions, such as analogy making, can be empirically validated using such instruments as fMRI. Geake and his colleagues have proposed a neuropsychological model of creative intelligence that features fluid analogizing.

As well as ascertaining the need for educational neuroscience, undertaking the task of defining it, and establishing its place in the realm of educational research, other contributors to this book address the problem of how research is to be conducted.

Hideako Koizumi, Director of the Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society in Japan, welcomes the biologically-grounded perspective of educational neuroscience. He regards learning as making neuronal connections in response to external stimuli from the environment, and education as the process of creating and/or controlling stimuli, as well as ‘inspiring the will to learn’. He discusses the use of longitudinal cohort studies using twins that chart the development of brain function with regard to environmental and genetic factors. He argues that such studies will enable researchers to contribute to educational policy making, reveal potential effects of technology, and help determine whether findings from animal studies can be applied to humans. Neatly summarizing several cohort studies, their objectives, and their methodologies, Koizumi presents the advantages of cohort studies, as well as possible issues and implications.

While there is agreement that multidisciplinary collaboration is needed, Zachary Stein and Kurt Fischer at Harvard University Graduate School in Education, next propose a model for the training of a new generation of educational researchers and practitioners in neuroscience. They present the idea of research school collaborations as the model of choice for Mind, Brain, and Education (MBE). They argue that research school collaborations embody the methodological innovations necessary to build a functional interdisciplinary research group. As well, Stein and Fischer identify important issues for MBE: the control of quality and interdisciplinary synthesis of methods; the development of pragmatic, comprehensive models of human development; the need to develop ethics that govern the use of neuroscientific research findings; and the need to create a common lexicon. They advocate problem-based research in the complex context of practice, involving methodological pluralism, both quantitative and qualitative analyses, with the goal of improving pedagogy.

Marc Schwartz and Jeanne Gerlach, at the Southwest Center for Mind, Brain and Education at the University of Texas at Arlington, further along the lines of Stein and Fischer, describe the reincarnation of Dewey’s laboratory school, a network of researchers, educators, administrators, and policy makers working collaboratively in what they term a Research Schools Network. This network is established to provide the forum for establishing conceptual frameworks, identifying educational challenges, developing experimental methodologies and ethics, clarifying research findings, interpreting conclusions, and monitoring suitable applications of results. Rather than call the new field educational neuroscience, they prefer the term Mind, Brain and Education, which they see as being more pedagogically focused. MBE shares the vision of educational neuroscientists: to improve our understanding of learning and to actualize this knowledge in pedagogy that reflects the multidisciplinary perspective of the mind, including planning, teaching, and assessment.

While many have been theorizing about the new field of educational neuroscience, asserting its place both in neuroscience and education, and examining the creation of research communities and their practice, others have forged ahead and used established methodology to apply to the examination of specific learning tasks. Some of these initiatives are particularly evident in the area of mathematics education research.

Fenna van Nes, in Chapter 11, discusses the Mathematics Education and Neurosciences (MENS) Project at the Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education. Van Nes advocates bidirectional collaboration between mathematics education researchers and neuroscientific researchers, with a view to improve children’s mathematical learning. She sees neuroscientific research and educational research not as a fusion of fields, but as an interdisciplinary sharing of insights. She and her colleagues combine qualitative ‘design research’ with quantitative ‘experimental research’ to arrive at a more comprehensive understanding of the prerequisites involved in the development of early spatial structuring and patterning ability in order to relate this early learning to later mathematical performance. While the mathematics education researchers examine the role of kindergarteners’ spatial structuring ability, the neuroscience researchers study the kindergarteners’ automatic quantity processing and its consequence on mathematical development. This combined knowledge of the sharing of these findings, she projects, will lead to better educational practice in the arenas of diagnosis, prevention, and intervention in the learning and teaching of mathematics.

Kerry Lee and Swee Fong Ng at the National Institute of Education in Singapore, also focus on neuroscience and the teaching of mathematics. They aim to differentiate among the neuroanatomical brain systems utilized for doing math, teaching math, and learning math. Advocating a mixed method approach to problem solving, they also raise the issue of transferring laboratory research findings to the real classroom and the imperative of pragmatic research in order to extend legitimate laboratory findings to pedagogy. Challenges they address include a condensation of issues related to teaching and learning mathematics into tasks suitable to the constraints of neuroimaging techniques, as well as the issues of drawing legitimate inferences for pedagogy from the research results. Specifically, Lee and Ng utilize neuroimaging techniques to investigate heuristics, namely the model method versus formal algebra, utilized in teaching algebraic word problem solving as well as to investigate the sequential steps in problem solving of progressing from model or equation to solution. Their neuroimaging studies have proven useful in providing insights into developing suitable interventions for improving students’ problem solving success in algebra. On the practical side, professional development courses are offered to share with teachers how they can improve their pedagogy to enhance mathematical learning.

Having predicated her doctorate with many years of classroom experience, Kathryn Patten, Outreach Coordinator of the Educational Neuroscience Laboratory at Simon Fraser University, believes that the education curriculum has detrimentally ignored the emotional needs of children. Arguing for the primal phylogenetic function of emotion over cognition, she examines both the neuroscience and neuropsychology of emotion to present the Somatic Appraisal Model of Affect (SAMA). Based upon Damasio’s somatic marker theory and borrowing from Lazarus’ appraisal theory, Patten differentiates among three levels of affect: dispositions or moods; basic universal, instinctive emotions; and feelings, both secondary and conscious. Feelings, she posits, involve cognitive appraisal regarding goals, cultural practices, beliefs, and a sense of self. SAMA is presented as a dynamic model to provoke change in how educators and researchers regard emotion and upon which to investigate possible changes in policy, curricula, and practice that will address the emotional needs of students.

Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, at the Brain and Creativity Institute and Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California, is committed to bringing neuroscientific evidence to inform educational theory and practice. As an educator, she regards our collective role in reconciling new neuroscientific findings with established theories, and uncovering how this new knowledge may be used to improve teaching and learning. Immordino-Yang places the embodied mind in the context of the polis, arguing educational neuroscientists must reconcile theories on which good practice is based with new neuroscientific evidence of mind/body functions that incorporate the foundations of development and involving emotional and social learning. Theories must incorporate research on emotion and social processing, as these functions modulate neural processing and, hence, learning. Immordino-Yang welcomes these imminent changes in educational theory, models, and practice evoked by educational neuroscience and anticipates that findings in affective and social neuroscience will have a profound impact on our understanding of development and learning. The evolution of educational theory and the resultant models will lay the groundwork for changes in educational practice and have implications for the design of new learning environments.

In conclusion, we wish to thank the authors of this book for their contributions. These chapters represent a limited number of snap-shots of a very rapidly developing field. There are many other initiatives than have been indicated here. We hope this special edition of Educational Philosophy and Theory on Educational Neuroscience will evoke discussion, prompt exploration, inspire research, and add spark to the continued emergence of this new, exciting field that holds promise to transform education as we know it. Implicit in collaborations that constitute and complement educational neuroscience is the challenge of accommodating various theoretical and philosophical stances of diverse disciplines. Despite these differences, initiatives in educational neuroscience share a common aim: to produce results that ultimately improve teaching and learning, in theory and in practice. It is our hope that this book will provide one of an increasing number of forums that will help document and facilitate the voyage of philosophers, theorists, researchers, and practitioners into this exciting new millennium of educational neuroscience.

2

Educational Neuroscience: Motivations, methodology, and implications

Stephen R. Campbell

Introduction

‘What does the brain have to do with learning?’ Prima facie, this may seem like a strange thing for anyone to say, especially educational scholars, researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. There are, however, valid objections to injecting various and sundry neuroscientific considerations piecemeal into the vast field of education. These objections exist in a variety of dimensions. After providing a working definition for educational neuroscience, identifying the ‘mindbrain’ as the proper object of study thereof, I discuss, dispel or dismiss some of these objections prior to presenting my motivations, aims, and prospects for this new area of educational research. I then briefly outline a positive case for educational neuroscience in terms of theories, methods, and collaborations, and conclude with a brief discussion of some challenges, results, and implications thereof. Naturally, the following considerations are but my own, some of which may be shared to some extent by others working in this area, as the case may be.

Defining Educational Neuroscience

In defining educational neuroscience, I do not presume to be putting forth anything more than an evolving working definition pertaining first and foremost to the approach I have been taking to some of the work I have engaged upon (e.g. Campbell, 2002; 2003; 2004; 2005; 2006a,b; 2007; 2010). My working definition attempts to go beyond thinking of educational neuroscience in a more narrow but quite legitimate sense, as an applied cognitive neuroscience. However, educational neuroscience can certainly be perceived and pursued as such, especially if there are no substantive differences in philosophical and methodological orientations to be found between educational and cognitive neuroscience. Moreover, educational neuroscience can also be considered more broadly than the working definition I am putting forth here, as concerning pretty well anything that involves some kind of rigorous (viz., methodological/scientific) synthesis concerning matters pertaining to mind, brain, and education. The term ‘neuroeducation’ encapsulates this latter view quite well (for a comprehensive treatment of these matters, see Tokuhama-Espinosa,...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Series page
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Notes on Contributors
• Foreword
• Chaprer 1: Introduction: Educational Neuroscience
• Chaprer 2: Educational Neuroscience: Motivations, methodology, and implications
• Chaprer 3: Can Cognitive Neuroscience Ground a Science of Learning?
• Chaprer 4: A Multiperspective Approach to Neuroeducational Research
• Chaprer 5: What Can Neuroscience Bring to Education?
• Chaprer 6: Connecting Education and Cognitive Neuroscience: Where will the journey take us?
• Chaprer 7: Position Statement on Motivations, Methodologies, and Practical Implications of Educational Neuroscience Research: fMRI studies of the neural correlates of creative intelligence
• Chaprer 8: Brain-Science Based Cohort Studies
• Chaprer 9: Directions for Mind, Brain, and Education: Methods, Models, and Morality
• Chaprer 10: The Birth of a Field and the Rebirth of the Laboratory School
• Chaprer 11: Mathematics Education and Neurosciences: Towards interdisciplinary insights into the development of young children’s mathematical abilities
• Chaprer 12: Neuroscience and the Teaching of Mathematics
• Chaprer 13: The Somatic Appraisal Model of Affect: Paradigm for Educational Neuroscience and Neuropedagogy
• Chaprer 14: Implications of Affective and Social Neuroscience for Educational Theory
• Index
• Download CD/DVD content