He will be discussing the “7 Discoveries From Brain Research That Could Revolutionize Education” and how these discoveries have “real world implication” for all educators. Join the session to learn how you can apply this research to succeed with your students in the classroom. This webinar will take place on Tuesday, September 28th at 10am Pacific/1pm Eastern time.

Please click HERE to register ASAP as space is limited. If you have any questions, please email webinars@scilearn.com.



You might be like many who organize professional development. You are experienced, thoughtful and very, very busy.

So what is the “Rule of Thirds?”It’s the biggest little secret in education. There are three BIG thirds in professional development (PD).

The first third of the three comes from the circumstances of the actual professional development day. I am shocked at how often someone asks me to fly 5,000 miles to his or her school and yet there’s a terrible microphone, poor seating and abominable lighting. Some “providers” ensure there are plenty of donuts, as if that would optimize staff learning. Others give me a screen 6′ x 6′ for 500 people. That’s like watching a movie in your living room on an iPod. Instead get a 10 x 10′ screen!

Over the years, I have been asked to speak in a movie theater, a bar, a library, a lunchroom and, even a racetrack. A cheap or free venue is NOT a bargain if the staff has a bad day. Now you should know that I am good at working miracles with whatever someone gives me, but why take risks if you don’t have to?

The first third of the three parts is: optimize learning conditions!

The second third of the value in professional development comes from having a relevant, high quality, and very engaging presenter. That’s right: 33% of the value from any professional development that comes from the caliber of presenter. By the way, those who hire me say that I consistently get “rave” reviews. I will always do my best to be the best you can get.

The third of three thirds comes from the follow up. Every teacher needs to have weekly or monthly “check-ins” that jump-start the changes. Teachers are busy and sometimes stressed. In fact, they are so busy, that you practically have to “get in their face” to get them to do something out of the ordinary. Without adequate follow up, you are getting only one third of the potential value.

Follow up should be 1) book study 2) professional learning communities 3) weekly emails 4) teachers blogging about the strategies they use 5) short weekly staff meetings with quick sharing and celebrations.

Without those three BIG qualities, you have little chance. But now that you know better, see what you can do to make it happen.

photo credit: Wesley Fryer

Many students who are having difficulty in school may have listening and/or hearing problems; and these problems may be impacting their behavior, reading abilities, and attentional patterns. Schools ought to test for both hearing and listening skills.

Generally making music is better than listening to it. But don’t let the lack of a trained music teacher keep your learners from music exposure. Do what you can do in the circumstances you have. Everything from humming, to singing, using primitive to popular instruments, or CD players can add music to the day.

Let your students know why you use what you do. Help them understand the differences among music which calms, energizes or inspires. Students of all ages should learn why you use music. and be able to suggest selections.

Always be the last word in music selections. If you think that the suggestions of others are not your style, that’s no problem–still use it. But if what students suggest has hurtful lyrics or create an inappropriate mood, say no. That’s your responsibility as a professional.

Get students involved in the process of managing the music after you have introduced it. Many are happy to play “disk jockey” for the class, but you’ll want to have clear rules on what’s done and when.

Get a CD player. Keep your CDs in a safe, clean binder and keep them and the CD player well-secured.

Do active research with music. Work with another grade-level teacher. Both of you can split your class and trade student halves. You might try one type of music for 10-15 minutes (if it’s a math class, you might use Sonata for Two Pianos in D Major) and the other teacher might try a series of rhythms or even heavy metal. Then switch the two groups and do a ten-minute exam or survey activity that measures spatial reasoning, logic or problem-solving. Tally up the scores and share them with students.

Remember the studies that suggest that students learn and recall better when physiological states are matched. If students learn material with a particular music in the background, they’ll also do better with it during the test. This suggests that you might want to use music for learning only when you can match it at test time.

Approximately 15-25% of your may be highly sensitive to sounds. They may be highly auditory learners. If these students complain about your use of music, you might want to turn it down a bit, listen to their suggestions and remind them you use music only part of the time, not all the time. At least a quarter of your students dislike teamwork; would you throw that out, too? Be respectful, but stand your ground.

Background music does affect your students. The consensus is: 1) select it carefully 2) make sure it’s predictably repetitive and 3) play music in a major key 4) use instrumentals, not vocals for the background.

Some students will complain about music because of another issue: control. If the room’s too cold, and students can access the thermostat, they complain less. If music is not their taste, and they can have input on what’s played or the volume, you’ll get fewer complaints. When a student complains, you can be empathic; either turn down the music a bit or allow the student to sit further from the speakers.

Remember the power of authority figures and the value of your credibility with music. If you act positive when using music, and show that you believe it actually will enhance learning and memory, it will have a stronger effect. The group that was told music inhibits learning did perform worse on a music-enhanced word list and vocabulary quiz than the controls.

Silence is golden. Anything can become saturated. Use music selectively and purposely. In most classes, it might be used from 10-30% of the total learning time

Two exceptions:
1) if music is the whole focus of a class, more may be fine
2) you may use environmental noise/music like waterfalls, rain forests or oceans
for longer than other selections.

It’s best to optimize music training with intervals of rest. The practice sessions for playing music ought to be for a minimum of 30 minutes, up to a maximum of 90 minutes, with a focus on one skill at a time. Longer sessions can work, for one to two hours, if you’re alternating short concentrated bursts of music training of fifteen minutes at a time, with an activity like dance, drawing, theater, recess, or walks. This should be done a minimum of two or more times weekly. To get lasting benefits, the playing is best if over at least a year. Schools which have a once weekly “token” music program for 30 minutes or less are missing the significant benefits, though some meager musical and cultural exposure is better than nothing.

Based on the evidence gathered so far, it’s both reasonable and prudent that music should be a significant part of every child’s education. It is the ethical, scientific and cultural imperative that all children get exposure to music as an equal with every other discipline. There is also support for the policy of starting children early in their music education as the effects are greater in the early years. Positive impact increases with each additional year.

The message with music education is, start early, make it mandatory, provide instruction, add choices and support it throughout a student’s education. That’s what leads to dependable results. It can be, literally, an education with music in mind.

photo credit: bonnie-brown

Today, as a result of years of work by brain-based educators, educators are a far more informed profession. They are more professional, they look more at research, and they are increasingly more capable of understanding and incorporating new cognitive neuroscience discoveries than they were 10 years ago.

More schools of education are incorporating knowledge from the brain sciences than would have done so if we had followed the critics’ advice and crawled into an intellectual cave for 25 years. Many forward thinkers have stayed tuned to such sources as Bob Sylwester’s monthly column in Brain Connection, Scientific Learning’s Internet journal that’s regularly read by thousands of educators and parents. Sylwester, formerly a professor at the University of Oregon and a widely published authority on brain-based education, has been “connecting the dots” for educators for a decade.

10 years after the mudslinging criticism of brain-based education, it’s appropriate to say, “We were right.”

In fact, because of the efforts of the brain-based community to inform educators, thousands are currently using this knowledge appropriately to enhance education policy and practice. There are degree programs in it, scientific journals, and conferences; and peer-reviewed brain-related research now supports the discipline.

There are countless neuroscientists who support the movement, and they demonstrate their support by writing and speaking at educational conferences.

As an author in the brain-based movement, I have reminded educators that they should never say, “Brain research proves . . .” because it does not prove anything.

It may, however, suggest or strengthen the value of a particular pathway.

What educators should say is, “These studies suggest that XYZ may be true about the brain. Given that insight, it probably makes sense for us, under these conditions, to use the following strategies in schools.” This approach, which is a cautionary one, sticks with the truth. When one is careful about making causal claims, the connections are there for those with an open mind.

The science may come from a wide range of disciplines. Brain-based education is not a panacea or magic bullet to solve all of education’s problems. Anyone who claims that is misleading people. It is not yet a program, a model, or a package for schools to follow.

The discussion of how to improve student learning must widen from axons and dendrites to the bigger picture. That bigger picture is that our brain is involved with everything we do at school. The brain is the most relevant feature to explore, because it affects every strategy, action, behavior, and policy at your school.

New journals explore such essential topics as social conditions, exercise, neurogenesis, arts, stress, and nutrition. A school cannot remove arts, career education, and physical education and at the same time claim to be doing what’s best for the brains of its students. These are the issues we must be exploring, not whether someone can prove whether a teacher’s strategy was used before or after a neuroscience study provided peer-reviewed support for that strategy.

Today, there is still criticism, but the voices are no longer a chorus; they’re a diminishing whine. For the critic, it’s still “my way or the highway.”

That’s an old, tired theme among critics; the tactic of dismissing another’s research by narrowing the discussion to irrelevant issues, such as whether the research is cognitive science, neurobiology, or psychology. They’re all about the mind and brain.

The real issues that we should be talking about are what environmental, instructional, and social conditions can help us enrich students’ lives. To answer that, it’s obvious that everything that our brain does is relevant and that’s what should now be on the table for discussion.

Yes, we are in the infancy of brain research — there’s so much more to learn. But dismissing it is not only shortsighted, it’s also dead wrong. At this early stage, that would be like calling the Wright Brothers’ first flight at Kitty Hawk a failure because it only went a few hundred yards.

And let’s remember, the Wright Brothers had no credibility either; they were actually bicycle mechanics, not aviators. The future belongs not to the turf protectors, but to those with vision who can grasp interdisciplinary trends as well as the big picture. Nothing is more relevant to educators than the brains of their students, parents, or staff.

Brain-based education is here to stay.

Excerpted from Eric Jensen’s article in Kappan Magazine…. You can read the full text here.

4N6K3G7VQE6D photo credit: Ryan Somma

Matthew’s April 1st class:

Matthew’s Halloween class:

If you’d like to learn how Matthew Weathers did this, you can find out more here.

So many who work in the arts have asked me if the arts are good for learning and the brain. It is common knowledge that arts can arouse passions.

The brain-based approach is to check out how it interfaces with the brain. Some believe that arts should be in school simply because many students thoroughly enjoy them. Others advocate a higher curriculum standing for arts on equal footing with math, science and language arts.

There’s real science behind why arts should be in every kid’s school experience, every day. There is now substantial evidence that arts are a stand-alone discipline. I would argue that arts support the neurobiological development of the brain in ways that enhance the social and academic performance of our students.

You’ll see that arts alter the neurobiological trajectory of the brain in ways that strengthen the academic and social skills unlike any other intervention. Arts change the brain like no other discipline. When schools reject arts, kids lose out. For students to do well in school, their brain must function in ways that are academically and socially useful.

What do the arts bring to the table?

The teachers are constantly trying new classroom strategies learned from books, trainings and conferences. The administrators are constantly inspiring, motivating and coaching their staff in endless ways to sharpen their collective saw. Unfortunately, this approach of trying to get better performance from students and staff can become overwhelming.

There seems to be no limit to the quantity of available strategies, so it becomes very much of a hit or miss approach. This results in a dizzying and endless stream of programs, themes, missions, projects and, ultimately, burnout among many educators.

But what if there was another way to go about this process. What if you could do less and get more? What is actually different in the brain that matters in the school context? The brain-based approach is to find out what works in the brain that runs academic achievement.

I suggest the existence of multiple operating systems in the human brain, each of which actually determine success in school. These operating systems (e.g. academic, social, athletic, survival) contribute towards your student success. But ultimately, since schools are all expected to reach performance goals, the academic operating system is of most relevance. Understanding this system is critical to a school’s success.

Collectively, we could dream up a list of the mind/brain attributes and the specific skills that students need to have to make it in school. But the list might get a bit cumbersome and, ultimately overwhelming for staff. The operating system model attempts to simplify this understanding. We can do that for a good reason.

Our brain does not need to be perfect for a student to succeed in school. Academic success does not require perfection and that’s good. School success requires good enough and that concept fits better with our brain. The aggregate of these factors is called our academic operating system.

Among the parts, we might include:

1. Effort: long-term motivation and the ability to defer gratification
2. Processing skills: auditory, visual and tactile
3. Attentional skills: engage, focus and disengage as needed
4. Memory capacity: short term and working memory
5. Sequencing skills: knowing the order of a process
6. Growth mindset: I can change and be better! confidence

One does not need to be superior in all of these to get good grades. But one does need enough of each and any compensatory strategies to succeed.

We all have a fault-tolerant brain, which is good at compensating and doing workarounds so that one can succeed at a task even if it has to find an unconventional approach to get it done. Avoid dismissing this as simply another way to label study skills. While I am a strong supporter of learn to learn skills, this operating system approach describes the deeper neuropsychological underpinnings of academic success patterns.

After years of working with students teaching study skills, special education programs and mind/brain processes, what has emerged is a model featuring the fewest moving parts needed for school success. The attraction of this model is that it is simple enough for educators to understand, use and modify as needed.

The brain-based approach is to connect the evidence from within the brain to results out in the real world. More importantly, it is based on a very powerful discovery in recent neuroscience: our brains have significant plasticity.

One of the most astonishing developments in cognitive science of the last hundred years is the debunking of the fixed brain myth. We now know that brain changes daily.

The concept of brain plasticity reminds us that students are not stuck the way they are. While their success is dependent on their operating systems, those systems can be upgraded. There are many things that effective schools do well. Whatever you’ve done in the past that worked for students, in some way, it has successfully changed the brain in ways that can be measured on achievement tests. Indirectly, we change the student’s brains at school.

When we teach students how to play an instrument, it changes brain mass. Many arts can improve attentional and cognitive skills. Playing chess can increase reading and math, and the pathways that increase attention, motivation, processing and sequencing skills. A good arts program physically changes the brain. Good schooling has upgraded the student’s operating system. In fact, every successful school intervention features a variation on the theme of rebuild the operating system.

This system works on the principle of fewest processes that matter most to the learning process. But if you simply try to cram more content into the same brain, without upgrading the operating system, students will get bored, frustrated, and fail. This is where the arts come in.

Five universities were funded as part of the Dana Foundation efforts to discover the effects of art on the human brain. Preliminary data after five years shows that arts positively impacts cognition. Learning to play music is the best studied of the arts. New evidence suggests that music enhances cognition. There is evidence from top neuroscientists in peer-reviewed journals such as The Journal of Neuroscience. The title, Musical training shapes structural brain development – gives you a sense of the straightforward evidence.

Here’s the significance of a quality academic operating system: it has the capacity to override the adverse risk factors of injuries, toxins, divorce, poverty or a substandard childhood! When this operating system is off or simply not up to the constraints and demands of school, students struggle. These are not simple study skills; these are the capacity to focus, capture and discriminate information, process it, remember and represent it in a meaningful way.

This bundled set of skills can be more than a great equalizer; it can be a critical piece of your school strategy for academic success with low-income students. When you address academic problems, it will always come back to strengthening the student’s academic operating system. The brain-based approach says arts build stronger operating systems, which means better academic performance.

In short, arts change the brain for the better and students are the big winners.

If you want better academics, arts deliver. If you just want a better person for the real world, arts deliver.

It’s time to get off the fence. It’s time to quit waffling and wondering if arts are worth it your school. They’re worth it.

The real question is, Are you going to stand up for is good for kids, or fall short by drinking the kool-aid of the scared educators who think kids just need more drill and kill?

I’m interested in seeing your comments.

photo credit: torbakhopper

Can Relevant Research Help Your Students Score Higher on Your Upcoming BIG Tests?

Let’s focus on something I ordinarily NEVER focus on: testing. As much as I dislike the types, timing, policies, content and uses of existing state and national tests (is there anything I left out?), the reality is, we’d rather our students get higher than lower scores.

I’ll focus on three things that can help your students improve their chances to score up to their potential.

By the way, kids never score above their potential; they’re just not going to randomly make enough lucky right answers time after time after time. (In statistics, it’s called regression to the mean.) But, they often underperform for a host of reasons, even when they should perform much better.

While we could focus on dozens of variables that influence standardized testing, we’ll focus on 1) brain chemistry 2) priming and 3) episodic memory triggers.

Brain Chemistry and Testing
There are three chemicals to focus on for optimal testing results: 1) dopamine (It generally facilitates informational transfer within limbic and cortical networks to promote working memory and reward-seeking behavior, says Luciana, et al. 1998), 2) noradrenaline (It generally promotes a more narrowed focus, sharper attention and improved memory. This system plays a specific role in the regulation of cognitive functions, including sustained attention, working memory, impulse control, and the planning of voluntary behavior.), and 3) glucose (It provides short term energy and, in low to moderate doses, promotes enhanced memory. (Krebs DL, Parent MB., 2005.)

The Power of Priming and Positive Suggestion
Can you influence testing outcomes by “prepping” their brain for success? It has long been proposed that motivational responses that were subtle could serve as priming to affect academic performance. A recent study showed that yes, priming can help students do better. You can prep the brain several ways. One is by showing and asking the students to write them the letter “A” in advance in a certain way. We’ll tell you “how” in a moment. The other one of our two “prepping” strategies is to give peppermints to all kids for your final review, then use peppermints again at the time of the big test (Barker, et al. 2003.) This raises attentional levels and provides glucose for learning and memory.

Location of the Test Itself
We feel stressed when we are in a novel location. Not surprisingly, stress impaired memory when kids were assessed in an unfamiliar surrounding, but not when assessed in the original learning location. (Schwabe L., and Wolf OT., 2009.) In short, if your students can’t be in the test-givers room to learn the material, at least bring them into the testing room and do a review in that room days before the event.

In the paragraphs above, we’ve offered three “angles” for improving the testing outcome. First, the science is solid when you consider each strategy separately. But combined, these strategies may help you get to the next level. The chef, Emeril, would say they could give you “BAM!”… Power.

Let’s “flesh out” each of the studies from above. The first category is about enhancing brain chemicals.

This is fairly easy to do.

Dopamine can be strengthened by: 1) voluntary gross motor repetitive movements, like marching, relays, playing a game, 2) enhanced by strong positive feelings like reunions and celebrations, and 3) enhanced by looking forward to something very good.

Norepinephrine is enhanced by: 1) risk, like a student speaking in front of his/her peers, 2) urgency, like serious deadlines for compelling task, and 3) excitement, like theater, competition, comedy, the arts.

Glucose is enhanced by: 1) food sources, complex carbos are best, but almost any source can do in a pinch, 2) physical activity (glucose is stored in the liver, in the form of glycogen, and released in the form of glucose), and 3) any time we are experiencing emotions.

Here’s how to use the power of suggestion. You can influence testing outcomes by “prepping” their brain for success with a positive suggestion. Sound like Star Trek “Vulcan” Mind Control? Or, is it more of the “Obi Wan Kenobe” effect? It’s neither. It has long been proposed that motivational responses that were subtle could serve as priming to effect academic performance.

The research study I mentioned was conducted at a large research university in the USA.

Here is what they started with:

23 undergraduates in Group 1 (were conducted in classroom settings)
32 graduate students in Group 2 (were conducted in classroom settings)
76 undergraduates in Group 3 (were conducted in laboratory setting)

The “mind games” manipulation came in the form of a phony answer key identification code. This study used a “Test – Bank ID code” (completely phony) on the front cover of a test. The ID Code was needed because participants were prompted to view and write it on each page of their test. The letters used were “A” (the positive priming for group 1) “F” (the negative priming for group 2) and “J” (the neutral, control group 3). Students who got and used the “A” on their ID Code outperformed BOTH the “F” on the code and the “J” control group. Students are vulnerable to evaluative letters presented before a task, these results support years of research highlighting the significant role that our nonconscious processes play in achievement settings.

The next study I mentioned with priming and positive suggestion used peppermint odor during simple skill practice, performance, memorization, and alphabetization. Participants completed the protocol twice–once with peppermint odor present and once without. Analysis indicated significant differences in the gross speed, net speed, and accuracy on the task, with odor associated with improved performance. The study results suggest peppermint odor may promote a general arousal of attention, so participants stay focused on their task and increase performance.

Next, use location of the test itself as an advantage.

As we said earlier, changes in rooms can induce stress. Undue stress before “the big” test impairs memory, whereas memory performance is enhanced when the learning context (location) is reinstated at retrieval (testing) time. As a general rule, low to moderate stress is best for encoding and retrieving. It is best to match the encoding (original learning) and retrieval (test situation) stress level.

I have always advocated that we ensure that students taking a test take it in the room in which they studied for it. That’s the power of episodic or context memory. But there’s more to it. Stress is an issue, too. The study examined whether the negative impact of stress before memory retrieval can be attenuated when memory is tested in the same environmental context as that in which the learning took place. These results suggest that the detrimental effects of stress on memory retrieval can be abolished when a distinct learning context is reinstated at test time.

Stress impaired the student’s memory when assessed in the unfamiliar context, but not when assessed in the learning context (Schwabe L., and Wolf OT., 2009.) In short, if your students can’t be in the official test-taking room for the big test to learn the material, at least bring them into the testing room prior and do a review in that room a few days before the event.

Remember, you can also combine all three of the strategies above for Positive Synergy.

And now, a BONUS! Here’s what to do after the interim tests (but before the big “Standards Tests”). We know that reflection and meta thinking can be powerful. Debbie Barber, a sixth grade teacher at Ackerman Middle School in Canby, Oregon says, “My kids have a chance to improve their scores by doing a test autopsy. They correct their mistakes and then write a half page reflection on why they did so poorly and what they should have done differently. They earn a half point for each corrected answer. Not only do the parents love it, the test scores have improved and the students are really taking ownership of their work!”

CITATIONS:

Barker S, Grayhem P, Koon J, Perkins J, Whalen A, Raudenbush B. Improved performance on clerical tasks associated with administration of peppermint odor. Percept Mot Skills. 2003 Dec;97(3 Pt 1):1007-10.
Arnsten AF. Through the looking glass: differential noradrenergic modulation of prefrontal cortical function. Neural Plast. 2000;7:133–46. [PubMed]
Ciani KD, Sheldon KM. (2010) A versus F: the effects of implicit letter priming on cognitive performance. Br J Educ Psychol. Mar;80(Pt 1):99-119.
Fulkerson, F. E.; and G. Martin. 1981. Effects of exam frequency on student performance, evaluations of instructor, and test anxiety. Teaching of Psychology; April, 8(2): 90-93.
Krebs DL, Parent MB. (2005) The enhancing effects of hippocampal infusions of glucose are not restricted to spatial working memory. Neurobiol Learn Mem. Mar;83(2):168-72.
Luciana, M., Collins, PF and RA Depue (1998) Opposing roles for dopamine and serotonin in the modulation of human spatial working memory function Cerebral Cortex Volume 8, Number 3, Pp. 218-226.
Schwabe L, Wolf OT.(2009) The context counts: congruent learning and testing environments prevent memory retrieval impairment following stress. Cogn AffectBehav Neurosci. Sep;9(3):229-36.

photo credit: Nate Kay

You May Be Surprised at What the Research Says

Hardly a day goes by that I don’t hear an educator grumble about “the evils of testing.” You know what I mean: the evil empire of state and national tests that drive staff and kids into stressful zombies who learn only test-taking skills and to dislike school.

Along with, “How’s the weather?” the testing complaints have become the single common denominator in conversations about kids and learning. But what if everything you believed about testing was wrong? What if the actual science behind it was different than what you thought?

Is your school a Title 1 or Title II school? Are you struggling with raising achievement in kids who grow up in poverty?

One solution is the new ASCD book, Teaching with Poverty in Mind just released. But several, brand-new discoveries in neuroscience are now spring-boarding a revolution in how we can change the student and the school for low-income students. I’ve just had to completely reinvent my already cutting-edge workshop on poverty.

You can get it two ways: 1) Attend our 4-day event this summer for details) or, 2) bring me to your school. Yes, I am now offering this breakthrough event to individual schools (like yours). My available dates are scarce, but the kids at your school deserve to achieve. I’ll show your staff exactly how to do it. If you want to start seeing dramatic results at your school, contact my wife Diane at diane@jlcbrain.com

Here’s what the genuine “real deal” research says about our brain, testing and learning.

First of all, let’s be clear about it: there are many, many types of testing. We don’t need to list them all here, but there are as many types of testing as there are types of learning.

The list might include:

1) objective and subjective
2) abstract and concrete
3) deductive and inductive
4) classroom or “on-site” real world
5) recall or constructive knowledge
6) priming quality or in-depth knowledge and
7) etc.

In short, one must be very, very careful about generalizing the results of one type of testing to ALL types of testing.

So, given these variables, what does the research say?

Here are 3 powerful “take-home” messages on one type of learning: text learning.

SURPRISE #1: Repeated testing enhances learning more than repeated studying. This study used 177 college students and asked them (1) to list strategies they used when studying (an open-ended free report question) and (2) to choose whether they would reread or practice recall after studying a textbook chapter (a forced report question). The results of both questions point to the same conclusion: many students experience illusions of competence while studying and that these illusions have significant consequences for the strategies students select when they monitor and regulate their own learning (Karpicke, et al. 2009).

SURPRISE #2: We’ve just learned that MORE testing is BETTER than more studying. But what happens when students simply don’t know the test question? Do unsuccessful retrieval attempts help or impede future learning? A recent study suggests that unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhanced learning. One might suggest that the process of taking challenging tests (instead of avoiding errors) will support learning (Richland, et al. 2009).

SURPRISE #3: So far, we’ve learned that testing is better than studying. We saw that unsuccessful testing is a good thing for learning. In this third study, the authors examined the effect of unsuccessful retrieval attempts on learning in 5 different studying and testing conditions. Students were given an essay and then were asked questions (pretesting) vs. given key concepts (priming knowledge) about embedded concepts BOTH before and after reading the passage. Results showed that post-test performance was better after the pre-test condition than in the extended study condition in all experiments. This result confirmed and expanded on the other two studies (Kornell, et al. 2009).

This sounds brutal. The science says that MORE, not less, testing is better.

One way to interpret these studies is to throw your arms up and say, “I can’t do it!” Another way to interpret these is to say, “Of course! I’ve always thought that getting and giving feedback was valuable. Now, I’ll just need to remember to include my students more often in this process so it’s not more work for me.”

For the moment, I won’t go on a big diatribe about the national and state testing (I’ve said elsewhere that it does not reflect what students have learned in other, more important areas, or what they really need to learn for their developmental stage, the real world or their brain).

Ready for your answer to, “What do I do on Monday?”

Here’s what this research suggests for you. First, pre-testing is a good idea. Starting about fourth grade, kids can pretest other kids with little work on your part. They can use partners with texts, watch DVDs, create Qs or you can use Qs from the “end of the unit exams” that you have already made up.

Second, do not “gloss over” the mistakes. Do not pretend they are minor or didn’t happen. Let students know that the information will be on later tests and it is important to know.

When a student does poorly on a question, it’s completely okay to show disappointment (or sadness) in your voice or body language. Just 3-5 seconds of the emotion will tell the student’s brain that they let you down and that doing poorly is not a good thing. But, do not dwell on this! After a few seconds (just enough to “lock in” the emotion in their brain), move on. Change your tone, your body language and get positive. Say, “Well, we know what to work on and you’ve shown you can put in the effort, so I’m looking forward to good things. Let’s get going!”

Finally, get students involved much more in the feedback/testing process. By the time they are ten years old, they are ready to give quality feedback. Make it task specific (about the answer, not the person), make it content specific (“Capitalize these words but NOT those types”) and always acknowledge effort, not so called-talent. Do NOT say, “I know you can do better. You’re a smart kid. You’ve got the brains to do well.” Say, “I love how much you worked on that. Your good effort will pay off. Keep at it.”

Why? Effort is a much stronger determiner of success than the supposed “natural talent.” Want to know why? Read, Talent is Overrated by Geoff Colvin.

Let’s cut to the chase: everything you do in your classroom is likely to have SOME effect on the brain.

Brain-based education says, “Be purposeful about it.” Now, go have some fun!

REFERENCES
Karpicke, JD, Butler AC, Roediger, HL 3rd. Metacognitive strategies in student learning: do students practice retrieval when they study on their own? Memory. 2009 May;17(4):471-9

Richland LE, Kornell N, Kao LS. The pretesting effect: do unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance learning? J Exp Psychol Appl. 2009 Sep;15(3):243-57

Kornell, N, Hays MJ, Bjork, RA. Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Jul;35(4):989-98

photo credit: Nate Kay

“Could you remind me, what did you just say?

Part 1: Research

Have you ever been in one room of the house and started walking towards another room with a goal in mind… Usually, you’re thinking of a task such as, “Ive got to get that file or book from the bedroom.” Halfway to the other room, you forget what you were going to get! Then you have to go back to the original room to remind yourself!

All teachers have heard of our working memory or short-term memory. By the way, even researchers act confused when I ask for the difference. The best I can get is this: working memory refers to the “cognitive load” (or the amount of “stuff”) that your brain is holding in your brain while you do a task. But short-term memory refers to the time element of that cognitive load. Usually, short-term memory is from 5-20″. If we do not process that content, it often vaporizes. But, does it necessarily have to disappear? The answer is no.

Among the many amazing things about our brain is its plasticity. This refers to the capacity to change through neural reorganization. Memory (working OR short-term) can be enhanced through several strategies. Why would you care? There are many reasons: kids follow directions better they solve problems better, make better decisions and score higher on achievement tests. But generally, class is more fun to teach. Besides, you can enhance working memory for very little effort. I’ll bet you’d like to know how…

The OLD school of thinking, based on George Miller’s classic 1956 study suggested we can hold 7 _/+ 2 items in our head. That’s out of date and you want to be up to date, right? The new research suggests 2-4 (at the most) for chunks in our working memory (Cowan, et al.). If you are not currently strengthening the working memory of your students, don’t complain about it. No one else is going to do this, so it’s your choice: improve it, or you lose the right to complain about kids not having it.

Working memory can be enhanced two ways. Strengthening neural networks (through practice) and strengthening the efficacy of the “real-time” holding capacity with chemicals are your only two choices. The neural networks get strengthened through practice. That means the use of games and activities that build this skill. As an example, if you want to get good at playing cards, a strong working memory is a must. But, how about if we set aside gambling for a moment? There are better choices we’ll get to later.

Some chemicals, like nicotine, actually enhance working memory (Lecacheux, et al., 2009). We also know that moderate glucose uptake can support memory, too (Gibbs et al., 2008). But let’s not suggest that kids light up and eat candy bars before a big test. Instead, we’ll stick with easy to boost neurotransmitters that help working memory like dopamine (Brennan AR, Arnsten AF, 2008).

Part 2: Applications

Actually, it’s easy. Brain training games and activities with a good research base behind them are not just the future of the brain, but the present. The best website for working memory is http://www.cogmed.com. They have some excellent programs that can support brain changes. If you or a loved one (hint: son, daughter, niece, nephew, parent or spouse) does not have a good working memory, get some help. Life is tough unless the brain is working well.

Another pathway is the chemical one. Dopamine is the neurotransmitter most associated with feeling good. It’s the chemical linked with pleasure, as well as the anticipation of pleasure. Aside from using drugs like cocaine (not a good teaching tool), how can we bump up dopamine levels? I thought you were going to ask that!

Dopamine is released under many conditions. Use a variety of these in your work:

1. Make a prediction to a student, out loud, of something good about to happen (the students have to believe it and want it, of course)

2. Brisk walking, marching, brief games with spontaneous movement

3. Celebrations of joy (they must be genuine and last for at least 20-30 seconds to release any dopamine.) Get everyone involved, play upbeat music with a celebration activity

In short, good feelings release dopamine. That’s the potential of targeted teaching. But you have to commit to the process and ensure that it gets done. Don’t let anyone say, “I’ve heard of all that!” Get your staff on board and start making miracles.

Is this awesome or not?

Let’s cut to the chase: everything you do in your classroom is likely to have SOME effect on the brain. Brain-based education says, “Be purposeful about it.” Now, go have some fun and make another miracle happen!

CITATIONS:
Brennan AR, Arnsten AF. Neuronal mechanisms underlying attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: the influence of arousal on prefrontal cortical function. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1129:236-45
Cools R, Gibbs SE, Miyakawa A, Jagust W, D’Esposito, M. (2008) Working memory capacity predicts dopamine synthesis capacity in the human striatum. J Neurosci. Jan 30; 28(5): 1208-12
Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1):87-114.
Gibbs ME, Summers RJ. Effects of glucose and 2-deoxyglucose on memory formation in the chick: interaction with beta(3) – adrenoceptor agonists. Neuroscience. 2002;114(1):69-79
Jaeggi SM, Buschkuehl M, Jonides J, Perrig WJ. (2008) Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. May 13;105(19):6829-33.
Jaeggi SM, Berman MG, Jonides J. (2009) Training attentional processes. Trends Cogn. Sci. May;13(5):191-2;
Lecacheux M, Karila L, Aubin HJ, Dupont P, Benyamina A, Maman J, Lebert A, Reynaud M. [Cognitive modifications associated with tobacco smoking]. Presse Med. 2009 Sep;38(9):1241-52
Zigmond MJ, Cameron JL, Leak RK, Mirnics K, Russell VA, Smeyne RJ, Smith AD. Triggering endogenous neuroprotective processes through exercise in models of dopamine deficiency. Parkinsonism Relat Disord. 2009 Dec;15 Suppl 3:S42-5

photo credit: hidden shine

We recently finished the “Teaching with the Brain in Mind” program. Wow! What an amazing event.

Some came to it concerned about the challenges of brain-based learning. Others wanted brain-based strategies. Only a few were brain-skeptics. Most just wanted to deepen or widen their skill set and knowledge base. Suffice it to say, all left the program excited and ready to make changes.

“This is the best professional development experience I’ve had in 27 years of teaching. I will use so much of what I learned here and I am eager to return to my students and work with them in a more enlightened approach.” Patricia Gefert, Ohio.

Student learned the most critical brain principles. By the way, these are NOT the principles you’ll find in any book. These are the most updated, cutting edge principles anywhere. Every principle is illustrated, unpacked, debriefed and role-modeled. On top of that, there are the demonstrations, interactions and, yes, even a “field trip.”

One of the highlights was the visit to Dr. Daniel Amen’s Brain Clinic, where participants got to see inside the actual patient clinic that has been grabbing headlines for years. Amen has been “ahead of the crowd”, just as Eric Jensen has been.

Spect scans of the author's brain taken at Amen Clinic in Newport Beach, California. In the four surface views on the left, the less active regions of the brain show up as holes or dents. The scans on the right show the most active 15 percent of the brain in red and white. Photo: Daniel Amen

At the end, when asked for suggestions to others, who might be considering the program, one participant said, “Do it! It will change your teaching forever.” Kelly Small, Alberta, CA

Another highlight was the appearance, in person, of Dr. Larry Cahill, a pioneer in memory, emotions and gender. His lab has made not one, but three breakthroughs in neuroscience. Everyone was riveted to his talk on how emotions and gender influence our memory. Everyone was spellbound!

“Every single concept, activity and interaction was of great value to me.” Lois Cameron. Shaker Heights, OH.

The “Teaching with the Brain in Mind” program gives you the scientific background, the strategies that can transform the classroom and once again, the actual demonstration of the strategy. This way, you can see it, hear and feel how it works. This makes it the most practical, and yet, research-based program on the brain anywhere.

The next “Teaching with the Brain in Mind” program happens in San Antonio, Texas. The content will be awesome, the guest speaker is riveting and the field trip is over the top good.

If you have not yet taken the “Teaching with the Brain in Mind” program, this is your only chance. Find out how to meet the challenges of brain-based learning and teaching. Meet other like-minded participants. And, most of get inspired and rocket-propelled to teach smarter, with less stress.

See you in San Antonio!

Click here for details.