Episode 3: Neuromyths

I am Dr. Gina D. Tulio, a new and listening to Brain Waves, exploring the intersection of neuroscience and education, a podcast dedicated to bridging the gap between cognitive neuroscience and classroom applications, providing educators, policymakers and parents with a comprehensive understanding of how the brain learns and how this knowledge can be leveraged to improve educational practices. In today's episode, Neuromis, we will explore 10 different over-generalizations of neuroscience research, the origins of those myths, what we know now, and the implications that knowledge has to teaching and learning. Hi everyone, thanks for joining me today for episode 3 of Brain Waves. You know, when neuroscience was in its infancy, there were those who saw a potential for this new understanding of the brain to inform education, making our profession more effective. They saw it as an opportunity to analyze our practices, keeping what works, throwing out what doesn't, and refining practices that were on track, but maybe an entirely aligned to brain research. There was a lot of excitement in the field of education. Scientists, however, were not all convinced that there was much for educators to glean from the research that would significantly impact or even change what psychology already knew. In an article written by John Moore in 1997 called Neuroscience and Education, a bridge too far, he argues that the gap between neuroscience and education is too far to traverse, but he posits that cognitive psychology could help to bridge that gap. Teachers often didn't have access to the scientific literature or studies, and even if they did, scientists cautioned that without the correct training, educators would not be able to decipher good research from bad research. They also warned about over-generalizations of research findings that could lead to neuromus, and that my friends is what we're going to be talking about today. In her book, Neuromus, debunking false ideas about the brain, Tracy Togahama-Spinosa explains a variety of neuromus. I happen to be a pretty big fan of her work, and this is an excellent book. It's really well organized and formatted, she is brilliant, and a fantastic writer. Maybe someday I can get her to come on my podcast and sit down with me for a chat. However, since this is only episode three, it's just me for now. I chose 10 myths, Togahama-Spinosa writes about in her book that I thought may be more familiar to educators, parents, and policy makers. I will share with you what she has to say about where each myth came from, and what we know now. Let's get started. Okay, myth number one. Most people use about 10% of their brains. This is a really common neuromus, and it's definitely false. Okay, so where did this myth come from anyway? Well, one possible root of the myth dates all the way back to the 1800s. A Harvard psychologist named William James suggested that humans use only a fraction of their potential. A second possible culprit of the myth was technology. When her imaging first emerged, it was common to see only small areas of the brain during experiments. The third possible origin of the myth according to Togahama-Spinosa may have been from the teachings of Dale Carnegie, self-help guru, as a way to inspire others to reach their full potential. So what do we know now? Well, there is no study that definitively defines what percentage of our brain we utilize. However, using scans such as PET MRI and FMRI, we now know that many areas of the brain are active all the time, even during sleep. The scans show that it's highly unlikely that we are only using to a percent of our brain, but rather constantly changing and growing thanks to neuroplasticity and pruning. Togahama-Spinosa tells us that this is good news for teachers because students excel when they believe in themselves and their ability to learn. Teachers who understand that intelligence is not fixed can help students to understand that while learning can sometimes be difficult, they have the potential to learn just about anything. Myth number two, the left and right hemisphere of the brain are separate systems for learning. This is probably one of the most cited myths according to Togahama-Spinosa. People often think that left and right hemisphere work independently instead of as an integrated system. You have likely heard people refer to being right brained or left brained. In her book, Togahama-Spinosa tells us that Roger Sparry can be credited with the origin of this myth as he was the first to label different functions for a two brain theory. When public autopsy's were first performed in the 1660s, which is kind of gross, but it was a thing, the brain appeared to have two halves. It was somewhat of a walnut shape. This resembled other parts of the body that came in pairs like our arms and our legs and our hands and our feet and our eyes. Because of the right and left side dominance in other parts of our bodies, there was speculation that the brain must also have a dominant side. Not true, but you can kind of see why with the little information they had, people would arrive at this conclusion. We know now that yes, there are certain functions that are located in one hemisphere or the others, or what is called lateralization for brain functions. For example, we know that brokers in where Nikkees areas are in the left hemisphere of the brain, and that these are key hubs for learning to express language and construct sentences. But there are other functions that help us understand and produce the correct intonation of words, interpret reality and delusion, and appreciate humor and sarcasm that cross areas of the brain. Ultimately, what we now understand is that the brain is a complex system of networks that work together in learning, and just because you may have an aptitude for language or mathematics or science does not mean that you cannot develop your skills in other areas. This is good news for teachers and students because for a long time, I have heard students say, "Well, I can't do math because I'm left brain." So they just stopped even trying to learn those skills. Debunking this myth means that teachers should encourage students to always work on building skills in all areas and understanding that they absolutely can learn anything. Even if it requires a bit more effort. Myth number three, individuals learn best when information is presented in their preferred learning style. Nope. So, yes, asking students to reflect on how they learn best is a wonderful way to help them learn how to develop those meta-cognitive skills. However, Tokohama Espinoza tells us that pigeon-holing them into a category, a style, or a type of learner based on their answers to a short questionnaire is just irresponsible. I think that learning styles is probably one of the most common neuromists out there. I can remember personally being a young teacher when this one gained popularity, and I felt like I had to find 13 ways to present every lesson. It was overwhelming and completely impractical. Our gardeners work with the concept was embraced by the education field, and well, we ran a little wild with it. In fact, Tokohama Espinoza writes that, according to Stephen Hughes, a medical researcher, there were 2,650 textbooks promoting learning styles in 2012, and worse yet, professional guidelines for physicians promoting their use. Helming him and colleagues wrote that people buy into the myth for two reasons. First, they believe that scientists have proven it. And second, there is a way to help them learn how to develop their own skills. is this confirmation bias because teachers are exposed to so many materials that supposedly reflect students' learning styles and claim scientific basis for their design. These two reasons lead to what to Gohama Espinoza refers to as a "circular reasoning for the Miss existence." I have a feeling this one will be around for a while. Okay, so what now? Well, first it's important to note that while encouraging students to explore different modalities and differentiating learning is a good idea, telling a student that his or her learning style is X, Y, or Z can be harmful in the long run. My recommendation is to stop thinking about learning as a style, but rather ask yourself how you can develop all areas of a child's brain using a holistic approach. I think we do a pretty well with this at the elementary level, exposing our students to a variety of subjects as well as art, music, physical education, and sports. School should also consider offering clubs like coding, robotics, beekeeping, gardening, chess, and other enrichment activities that help to develop children's brains in other important ways. Students need opportunities to explore and develop their brains and bodies in a variety of ways so that they can find out what their interests are and what they would like to learn more about. Less emphasis on learning styles, more emphasis on a holistic teaching approaches. Okay, moving right along myth number four. Students should be rewarded all the time to elicit dopamine. I think it's pretty safe to say that this myth likely emerged from classical conditioning and psychology. If you forgot what that is, think of Pavlov's dogs. He rang a bell, he gave them food, thus wiring those areas of the brain together and causing the dogs to salivate every time they heard about ring. Classical conditioning has been used in education for centuries, connecting external rewards to learning outcomes. One pervasive example of this is PBIS or positive behavior intervention systems. Many schools use these systems, rewarding students with tangible rewards for following rules, completing academic tasks, and academic achievement. In the 1950s, studies showed a relationship between motivation and addiction and reported that the reason that classical conditioning worked was because of something called a dopamine logic loop or a reward system in the brain. Teachers are told to get kids naturally motivated by stimulating the dopamine in their brains. More recent studies show that there is a link between dopamine and learning, indicating that and I quote, "Reward motivation promotes memory formation via dopamine release in the hippocampus prior to learning." You may remember that the hippocampus is a part of your brain that plays a key role in memory formation, learning, emotions, and spatial navigation. It is responsible for converting short-term memories into long-term memories. Dopamine is important for episodic memory consolidation. Here's what we know. There have been few very few studies on how teachers can influence the level of dopamine in students or how different instructional activities can influence the level of dopamine released. And it's important to note that not all situations will resonate with all students in the same way. Students can learn without being motivated and they can be motivated without learning. My advice educators should consider how to activate a student's natural curiosity and excitement rather than focus on dopamine release. Designing learning activities that ignite a student's prior learning and create the just right amount of challenge allows students to more actively engage and participate in the learning at hand. Avoid using external rewards unless you have a plan to win students away from them once the desired behaviors have been achieved. These types of rewards tend to stop working when they're used for extended periods of time. P.B.I.S. is not something I personally recommend to anyone based on the research and my own personal experience. A better approach is restorative practices directly teaching expectations for behavior and creating high quality lessons with a good amount of challenge that allows students to take ownership of their learning, engaging in high quality learning experiences. Okay, myth number five. Everything important about the brain is determined by age three. Toko Hama Espinoza writes, quote, "John Brewer, president emeritus of James S. McDonald Foundation, is a staunch critic of overarching statements in education with claims to neuroscientific backing." If you remember earlier in this episode, I told you that John Brewer is also the author of an article titled "A bridge too far in which he cautions that the transfer of information from neuroscience to education would be irresponsible. However, he has modified his position since that article was published and he does now acknowledge that there have been some advances that teachers can use." In fact, in his book The Myth of the First Three Years, he dismantles the popular claim that children must receive extra stimulation in their first three years or they will never live up to their potential. So, where did this myth come from? Toko Hama Espinoza points to two likely culprits first. Programs that were developed to help children born with problems often turned out to be beneficial for the entire population. Many interventions that were designed for the special populations were adopted for use with the general population under the assumption that it couldn't hurt and it might actually even help. Stories of neglect and abuse of small children also helped to fuel this myth. She also points to a study on rats that also helped to fuel the myth. They found that rats in impoverished environments had smaller brain volume due to fewer dendrites and synaptic connections caused by fewer stimuli. This particular study combined with horror stories about real children like Genie, which is a pseudonym, fuel parents into action. If you're wondering, Genie was strapped to a little seat for 14 years and once released was incapable of learning much more than basic language and social skills. So, this combination led to some very well-marketed stimulation programs that claimed everything important that children needed to learn had to be learned by the age of three. I will remind you of something called Baby Einstein, which came out, I want to say in the 90s, 1990s. Remember that? I'm pretty sure that lady's a millionaire. And that was all based on some faulty research. Alright, so what do we do now? First, a baby's brain has to be underdeveloped because otherwise its skull would not fit in the birth canal making a live birth impossible. Baby brains grow dramatically in the first years of life. There's no doubt that a lack of proper nutrition, social exchanges, neglect and abuse can damage the architecture of a child's brain. But generally, these children do not require extra stimulation in order for their brains to grow and learn. In fact, we know that humans learn and grow over a whole entire lifetime thanks to neuroplasticity. There are implications for parents, educators, and policymakers here though. Parents should talk to their children, read to them, label their environment, count with them, play with them, take walks outside and go to the local park or playground, put your phone down and interact with your children as much as possible during those early years. Do not put them on your phone to keep them quiet. We still do not know what the long-term effects of screens are on young developing brains. Sing to them. Young children do not need fancy toys to develop their brains. But they do need a healthy amount of human interaction. And we know that they thrive on exposure to language and play. There are many free resources in most communities such as your local public library that offer programming at no cost. Policymakers could consider ways to help mothers who are living in poverty and may not have the knowledge or access to resources to provide adequate stimulation for their young children. Parenting classes could be offered for new mothers before they leave the hospital and after they return home, along with books, songs, and possibly toys and a list of resources for supporting healthy brain development. Policymakers could also consider creating a hotline with resources for mothers who may be experiencing abuse or who are having other struggles such as postpartum depression that would require additional assistance and could potentially lead to the abuse or neglect of the child causing damage in their young brain. The applications for educators will would be around school programming, preschool specifically. In many states, preschool access begins at each three. Preschool programs should take advantage of the enormous capacity of a child's ability to learn and begin exposure to letters, sounds, nursery rhymes, songs and stories, immersing young children in a language rich environment and pairing that language with written text. So students begin to make those connections at an early age. Miss number six. When you sleep, your brain shuts down. Oh, no. If your brain shuts down, you die. Even though sleep and death have been used metaphorically in literature for hundreds of years and a likeness of sleep and death make people think that the brain stops functioning while at rest, doesn't mean that it actually does. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Sleep cycles are super important for healthy brain function. However, many people, especially college students, incorrectly believe that pulling an all-nighter will help them do better on the test the next day. False. The truth is that staying up all night will more likely inhibit your brain's ability to stay focused and recall the information you studied. People don't remember what they dreamed and also rarely think about sleep in the context of learning. Additionally, sleep hygiene is rarely a topic of conversation in teacher preparation programs. What we know is that sleep plays a large role in learning because memory and attention are fundamental to learning and without them there is no learning. Sleep helps you pay attention. When we sleep, our brains move memories from short term or working memory too long-term when the neuro pathways related to it are consolidated. This happens during REM sleep. We now know that getting enough sleep is vital to many aspects of life as well as memory. In a previous episode, we discussed that adolescent sleep patterns change and that school also changed their start times for adolescents to better correspond to these changing patterns in sleep. In fact, I can point to at least two examples in my own area where that happened. There is evidence that when adolescents get better sleep, general learning outcomes improve, healthy decision making increases, illness, suicide and school violence decrease and standardized test scores improve. Sleep is so important for memory consolidation that the National Institutes of Health suggests that we explicitly teach students about sleep hygiene and the role of sleep and memory consolidation. We also know that when the brain is asleep, it continues to work on problems. In fact, according to Tukohama Aspinosa, quote, "Many leading thinkers, planners, artists and renowned geniuses have stated that they solve problems in their sleep. Including Albert Einstein, Ludwig Beethoven, Thomas Edison, Billy Joel, Stephen King and Salvador Adali." So the implications are for parents and policymakers here. Parents don't let your kids be on their phones all night, regulate their use and make sure that they get into a regular sleep schedule. I had a rule in my house when my kids were in high school and that all phones had to be plugged in downstairs. Unthinkable, I know. They didn't love it, but they both had alarm clocks and because my husband and I were familiar with the research, we have always been very strict about protecting our children's sleep schedule. I would emphasize that young children have no need for electronics in their bedrooms, period. My advice to parents is to remove any and all electronic devices from bedrooms and have designated areas in the house as well as designated times for their use. Policy makers need to contemplate the possibility of start time changes and determine if it's possible to have younger students start earlier and older students start later. The research definitely supports the benefits of allowing for students that are a little bit older to get more sleep as their sleep patterns change. Educators consider how much homework you're giving students each night. Is it reasonable? Are you giving them so much work that they're up until the wee hours of the morning? That practice is actually hindering their ability to learn and not helping it. Not against homework, but please be reasonable about the amount that you are assigning. Myth number seven, neural plasticity is due to good pedagogy. Remember that neural plasticity is the brain's ability to prune old connections that are no longer in use and grow and strengthen new ones. This is the reason we are able to learn new things for our entire lives and do things like, oh, I don't know, a start-up podcast in our 50s. When our neurons grow new axons and synapses and link to other neurons, this creates permanent change in the brain structure. White matter is the myelin sheath that insulates these connections. The thicker the myelin sheath, the stronger and faster the connection. Our brains are always reacting to changes in our environment. As educators, we are creating environments that should allow for strong connections to be made. Neural plasticity can be developed in several ways. We learn through repeated actions, the rehearsal and retrieval of new information and from our environment and experiences. So good pedagogy can trigger plasticity, but learning doesn't always happen at school. This myth probably originated from work with damage brains. In the 1980s and 90s, brain-based learning books promoted the idea that the best way to increase brain power was through great teaching, enhancing the math that neural plasticity relies on good pedagogy. While neural plasticity can come from classroom learning, it can also come from therapy, rehabilitation or life experiences. So it does not rely solely on pedagogy. If, in fact, people can learn just as much from bad experiences as they can from good ones. This is because in general, mechanisms of plasticity are the same no matter whether they are initiated in a classroom with good learning or outside of the classroom. Plasticity is really just about our brain's ability to learn and grow connections as we interact with each other and with our environment. The good news here is that there are no critical periods for anything we learn in schools. Our brains have a high degree of plasticity throughout our entire lives. This is important for not only our teachers to understand, but also for our students. It also has implications for this idea of standardized educational systems and testing. The fact is, we don't all learn at the same rate at the same time. So we can look at our teaching a little differently and consider how to best teach our students based on their prior experiences and their mastery of goals. Also, teachers make a greater difference in learning. The experiences that we create in the classroom can have a significant impact on students' ability to form new connections. Stretching the brain is beneficial for all learning and we should be able to teach all of our students to learn all the important things that we want to teach them in school. Myths number eight, memorization is not necessary for learning and undesirable in modern education. Wrote learning fell out of fashion in the early 2000s. I distinctly remember sitting in the meetings and being told that our students didn't need to memorize their math facts. They just needed a find a way to get there if they couldn't remember them. I found this advice perplexing given the nature of higher mathematics, which relied heavily on higher order thinking. I couldn't imagine my students not being able to retrieve their basic math facts and being successful with algebra. Well, I do agree that memorization and learning are not ideal for all teaching situations. They certainly do have a role to play. We talk about moving students from surface learning to deep learning and while deeper learning and critical thinking are important, it is also important to understand that without some base of knowledge, there can be no deeper learning or critical thinking. The trick is to connect the content that the students have to memorize with the importance for learning it in the first place. So how did we get here? Well, according to Tukohama Espinoza, it probably had to do with the no-child thought behind movement and the increase in standardized exams, which became the norm. There was a backlash against learning for the sake of passing a test and teachers realized that multiple choice tests could measure a little more than facts the students had memorized. That said, these tests were not inaccurate. measure of student learning and as with much of what happens in education we threw the baby out with a bath water and declared no more road learning. We know that memorization is indeed an important part of learning. For example having your basic multiplication or or the addition and subtraction of facts memorized frees up working memory so that you can focus more of your attention on the more complex mathematics and less of your brain power on remembering six times eight. What we have to be careful of is memorizing for the sake of memorizing. If you're asking students to memorize the periodic table of elements for example then you also need to teach them the codification and help them understand the placement of elements on the table. Remember that before students can think critically they need to have something in their brains to think about. We don't want them to just recite information but rather acquire the knowledge so that they can use it to increase their comprehension of complex concepts. This means that educators must themselves understand what information students must memorize, explain why they need to memorize it and make connections from that information to the more complex learning that is coming, ensuring that students see the relevance of it and provide a variety of ways for students to practice recalling that information so that we can be sure those connections in the brain are adequately millenated, ensuring that students can access the information quickly when they need it during problem solving that requires that higher order thinking. So there are implications for policymakers. We need to understand the role that memorization plays in learning and stop making these sweeping decisions that disqualifies certain types of learning. Instead, policymakers need to take the time to understand the role that memorization plays in learning in the fine ways to help teachers understand how to enhance that learning with a variety of strategies that keep it fun and interesting for students even though it is technically wrote learning. Teachers need to understand what skills require memorization and clearly articulate to students why they are learning this information and how it will be used to solve more complex problems in future lessons. Okay, with number nine, learning can occur without attention. Definitely not. So why do people think this? Well, one likely answer is unconscious learning. Unconscious learning doesn't mean that you're not paying attention. Rather, it refers to the fact that you are not consciously aware of the cues or mental associations that prompted your learning in the first place. That's because our brains are always working in the subconscious. Were you ever in the middle of doing something mundane and suddenly remembering a name you were trying to recall earlier in the day or you remembered something you forgot to do the day before? That's your subconscious brain at work in the background. What's important to know as an educator is that there is a difference between attention and consciousness. We all know that just because a student looks like they're paying attention doesn't mean that they are and that sometimes when students appear to not be paying attention, they very well may be. Teachers can bring students often wondering attention back to the topic at hand. First, teachers need to stop relying on lecture for long periods of time. Teachers should integrate more writing and speaking on the part of students to more actively engage them in the learning. Using prompts from past information to push them to retrieve prior knowledge can increase engagement and attention as well as make the learning relevant and fun. The higher the levels of engagement, the higher the student attention. That is also about attention. Myth number 10, attention is a single network in the brain. So just like there are different memory systems in the brain, which we will talk about in an upcoming episode. There are also different attention systems. For example, Tokohama Aspenosa tells us that when we pay attention to allow noise, that calls on the alerting system of the brain. If you need to formulate a good debate question, that requires sustained attention and executive decisions. If you're distracted by your friends, ridiculous jokes, that is related to your orienting system and your executive systems choice to go off task. The myth probably originates from a lack of scientific literacy about the complexities of the human brain. According to Tokohama Aspenosa, she tells us that there are "multiple subsistems that can underlie aspects of cognition such as attention." She tells us that the myth has some roots in the idea that attention is selective and that people choose what to focus on, which is not always true. People often confuse attention with memory as well, blaming a faulty working memory for what are really attention problems. So what we know according to Tokohama Aspenosa is that different attention systems in the brain are triggered by different stimuli, like allowed noise calling on our alerting system. She says that novelty peaks our curiosity and our executive system chooses to follow. This is why the constant barrage of updates on Facebook draws our attention more than the monotone teacher in the front of the room. Another level of attention is when the brain is at rest or daydreaming. That in itself is another level of attention. She also says that different sensory systems trigger different circuits for attention. For example, our visual attention system has a different root in the brain than our auditory attention system, although they're both hubs for alerting, orienting, and executive attention aspects. So now what? Well, first educators need to know that there are three attention systems, alerting, orienting, and executive control. Alerting involves a state of arousal and activation of cognitive systems. It prepares the brain and the body for conscious attention by signaling when to be alert and vigilant. The system is activated when the brain perceives a visual or verbal cue that something important might be happening. So when a teacher uses a loud clap or a bright light on a board or a specific or verbal cue like class, listen up or hey class to quickly capture their attention. This brings students from relax state to an alert and ready to learn state activating the alerting attention system. Orienting involves directing attention for specific location. The orienting attention system allows the brain to focus on a sensory input by selecting a location or modality. There are two types. Covert, which occurs when a person shifts their attention due to environmental change without moving their body and overt, which occurs when a person consciously decides to shift their attention to a stimulus by moving their head or eyes. An example of this would be a teacher directing students to a particular area of the room or of the board by pointing and saying something like look here, which suggests students' visual focus to that location, essentially orienting their attention to the relevant information. All right, and the third is executive attention and this involves cognitive functions like conflict resolution and working memory. The executive attention system is a neural network in the brain that helps regulate thoughts, emotions and responses. It allows us to black out distractions and focus on a specific task, focus on activities that will help us achieve a goal, and it allows us to switch between multiple pieces of information. The executive attention system is located in the prefrontial cortex and is closely related to other executive functions like working memory. Executive attention develops during the preschool years. As children learn to pay attention to caregivers and establish routines through playing games, following rules and using their imaginations. An example of this in a school setting would be when a student is actively working on a complex math problem. Simultaneously, focusing on the numbers, relevant formulas, ignoring distractions, strategically planning out the steps to solve the equation and filtering irrelevant information while maintaining focus on the task at hand. Designing lessons that allow for students to activate a variety of attention systems in the brain is something that we do have some control over. Nautilety can be a highly activating aspect of attention. Involving our students in life, lessons which don't allow for them to succumb to boredom and losing focus requires that we understand different attention systems and which ones we're activating depending on how we are engaging our students. Takohama Espinoza suggests that we're now at a point where this information can and should be included in teacher preparation programs. So this is something we should consider as we examine what teaching in the 21st century looks like. And that was the last one. I know that was a ton of information and it was a much longer podcast that I've done in the past but I do hope that you heard something that sparked your curiosity or helped you think about your teaching in a different way. Again, the book is called "Nuromaths, debunking false ideas about the brain" and it is written by Tracy Takohama Espinoza published by WWE Norton & Company in 2018. It is a really fantastic book to have in your library of resources and I definitely highly recommend it. You don't have to read a cover to cover either the way she's organized it. You can bounce around and read parts of it that are of interest to you when you have some free time. So again, thanks for joining me today and I hope you enjoyed the podcast and we'll see you for episode 4. I'm Dr. Jean-Titouille and you have been listening to Brainwaves exploring the intersection of neuroscience and education. A podcast dedicated to bridging the gap between cognitive neuroscience and classroom applications, providing educators, policy makers and parents with a comprehensive understanding of how their brain learns and how this knowledge can be leveraged to improve educational practices. [Music]