When Science Merges with Education
Just by looking at a combination of these symbols, we can rapidly, with lightning fast reflexes, access tens of thousands of ideas. |
Neuroscience and LiteracyThe development of the writing system thousands of years ago was the first virtual reality game humans interacted with. The ability to 'read' and understand these new writing systems was from a rewiring of the human brain to place meaning into symbolic representations.
Through our interaction with these symbols, we become immersed in these ideas, which can be "just as invigorating and exciting as being in a real world context of face-to-face interaction" from words on a page in a book (McCandliss, B. 2015). |
Brain Development in Literacy
Every culture has their language, and it is through that language that children learn to communicate their thoughts, feelings and ideas with community members. The origins of language are known around the world in their oral representations, of stories passed down, songs and dances, and even art. The development of a writing and reading system as a means of communication, however, is not innate in the wiring of our brains. As children grow and learn, they receive stimuli from their senses that allow them to interact with their environment (Von Glaserfeld, 2008), to communicate their ideas through movements and burbled sounds, but as their understanding of the world grows, so does the complexity with which they must communicate their thoughts and ideas with others. To learn to read and write has become an expectation in society, however, one with which the child brain is not yet equipped.
In order to become literate, children's brains must be rewired to distinguish shapes as letters, and groups of letters as graphemes that make up particular words, with specific meanings (Kuhl, P, 2011; McCandliss, 2015). Using fMRI's, neuroscientists are beginning to be able to map the human mind during the learning process and they are discovering a vast array of individuality in the brain's cognitive mapping that suggests as each child learns to read and write, each child changes the neural circuitry in their brain uniquely. These findings point to an important aspect of learning the written language that scientists are only now discovering to be crucial in understanding how children rewire their brains to become literate. Not every child learns the same, but similarly, how children access letter formation recall and symbolic representation of words is diverse (Kuhl, 2011 ; McCandliss, 2015).
The brain biodiversity that exists lends a hand to education as much as it inhibits a one-size-fits-all approach that many educators would love to have at their fingertips. Through the use of the variety of cognitive scientific tools available today, such as fMRIs, EEGs and MEGs, neuroscientists and educators can uncover the secrets behind difficulties in learning to read and write across languages and cultures.
In order to become literate, children's brains must be rewired to distinguish shapes as letters, and groups of letters as graphemes that make up particular words, with specific meanings (Kuhl, P, 2011; McCandliss, 2015). Using fMRI's, neuroscientists are beginning to be able to map the human mind during the learning process and they are discovering a vast array of individuality in the brain's cognitive mapping that suggests as each child learns to read and write, each child changes the neural circuitry in their brain uniquely. These findings point to an important aspect of learning the written language that scientists are only now discovering to be crucial in understanding how children rewire their brains to become literate. Not every child learns the same, but similarly, how children access letter formation recall and symbolic representation of words is diverse (Kuhl, 2011 ; McCandliss, 2015).
The brain biodiversity that exists lends a hand to education as much as it inhibits a one-size-fits-all approach that many educators would love to have at their fingertips. Through the use of the variety of cognitive scientific tools available today, such as fMRIs, EEGs and MEGs, neuroscientists and educators can uncover the secrets behind difficulties in learning to read and write across languages and cultures.
Does the Brain Read Chinese the Same Way as English or Spanish?
In an article by Frontiers for Young Minds, an online Science Journal for kids, Nicole Conrad (2016) proposes the question of whether children learn language orthography (the written representation for letters in a language) the same way in the brain across cultures?
The article explores alphabetic and non-alphabetic orthographies and the differences in their morphological or symbolic structure. Since some languages, such as French and Spanish have consistent sound-letter representation, versus English or Danish languages that have inconsistent or multiple-sound-letter representations, studies show children may have greater difficulty accurately programming their brains to read the complex letter symbols. As the difference between sound and symbol differs, children have a harder time encoding the information in their brains. However, fMRIs have shown that even across all multiple cultures, both with alphabetic and non-alphabetic symbols, there is a visual word form area (VWFA) of the brain devoted exclusively to reading. It encompasses both Broca's area and Wernicke's area, two regions of the brain involved in the conceptualization of written and spoken speech (Conrad, 2016).
For more information, read the full article here.
The article explores alphabetic and non-alphabetic orthographies and the differences in their morphological or symbolic structure. Since some languages, such as French and Spanish have consistent sound-letter representation, versus English or Danish languages that have inconsistent or multiple-sound-letter representations, studies show children may have greater difficulty accurately programming their brains to read the complex letter symbols. As the difference between sound and symbol differs, children have a harder time encoding the information in their brains. However, fMRIs have shown that even across all multiple cultures, both with alphabetic and non-alphabetic symbols, there is a visual word form area (VWFA) of the brain devoted exclusively to reading. It encompasses both Broca's area and Wernicke's area, two regions of the brain involved in the conceptualization of written and spoken speech (Conrad, 2016).
For more information, read the full article here.
Early Literacy and Handwriting
With today's technology, children's early processing of language can be documented through neural signatures at a very young age (Kuhl, 2011). The psycho neurological mechanisms involved in learning to handwrite letters differ quite drastically from those neural connections made if a child learns to type or trace letters (Alonso, M.P.A., 2014). This has implications for cognitive learning and neural mapping that can affect a child's development in their early years as well as into higher education.
Handwriting in particular is important for the rewiring of certain neural circuitries to allow for greater ease of navigating the complexities of the written language. Karin H James and Laura Engelhardt (2012) conducted a study of preliterate children who learned handwriting skills versus typing or tracing skills, and were then tested on their "reading circuitry", or success in reading. The study found key circuits of the brain were enhanced when exposed to handwriting at an early, preliterate stage, facilitating their reading acquisition compared to children who practiced typing on a keyboard or tracing letters in words.
A similar study had been done by Alonso (2014) that uncovered similar findings in regards to the importance of developing handwriting skills to assist with reading abilities and memory. Alonso describes the effectiveness of the handwriting process to help reading abilities as 'embodied cognition', the ability for our brains to rewire circuitry for memory through the use of our hands, a slower, more deliberate manipulation of movements to make letters on a page. As children write, they embody the graphomotorically formed letters through the nerves in their hands. Typewriting does not offer the same benefits (Alonso, 2014).
Furthermore, evidence suggests that neuroscientists can see the differences between these two mediums of written communication in the mapping of the brain, which may also help to identify issues where children struggle in making important neural connections and may be unable to spell words in the correct letter order, such as letter reversal or vowel omission in children with Dyslexia.
Handwriting in particular is important for the rewiring of certain neural circuitries to allow for greater ease of navigating the complexities of the written language. Karin H James and Laura Engelhardt (2012) conducted a study of preliterate children who learned handwriting skills versus typing or tracing skills, and were then tested on their "reading circuitry", or success in reading. The study found key circuits of the brain were enhanced when exposed to handwriting at an early, preliterate stage, facilitating their reading acquisition compared to children who practiced typing on a keyboard or tracing letters in words.
A similar study had been done by Alonso (2014) that uncovered similar findings in regards to the importance of developing handwriting skills to assist with reading abilities and memory. Alonso describes the effectiveness of the handwriting process to help reading abilities as 'embodied cognition', the ability for our brains to rewire circuitry for memory through the use of our hands, a slower, more deliberate manipulation of movements to make letters on a page. As children write, they embody the graphomotorically formed letters through the nerves in their hands. Typewriting does not offer the same benefits (Alonso, 2014).
Furthermore, evidence suggests that neuroscientists can see the differences between these two mediums of written communication in the mapping of the brain, which may also help to identify issues where children struggle in making important neural connections and may be unable to spell words in the correct letter order, such as letter reversal or vowel omission in children with Dyslexia.
Neuroscience Impact on Educational Practices
Literacy: There is evidence that suggests we may be able to detect disabilities, such as dyslexia, from a very young age due to abnormal functioning of certain regions of the brain. Such early detection could be pivotal in creating early interventions and successful remediation (Goswami, 2008).
Physics: Brain research has shown that information that clashes with established concepts is inhibited from making changes in the brain, therefore retaining held concepts. The implication is that students come to physic class with preconceptions, often erroneous, and though they may learn to answer correctly on a test, have not made conceptual changes in their brains (Pititto & Dunbar, 2004). These and other findings could be justification for earlier introductions to fundamental physics.
Math: Number sense is generally located in the inter parietal regions of the brain but certain, oft-repeated, math facts are stored in linguistic regions. Furthermore, more complex computations involves visuo-spacial areas of the brain. This suggests that multi-modal math teaching could yield effective results (Goswami, 2004).
Second Language Learning: Areas of the brain develop at different rates over the course of a child's life. Brain imaging in concert with traditional language acquisition research are revealing optimal times, developmentally, for second language exposure. This new evidence can affect districts that have a "hold-back" policy on second language instruction (Petitto & Dunbar, 2004).
A Bridge too Far?This section provided an overview of various research, much of it from Mind, Brain, and Education advocates that believe the fields of cognitive neuroscience and education can be integrated. Certain adherents to this stance believe that the gap between the two can be bridged through "neuroscience-enriched" educators and "pedagogically-enriched" neuroscientists (Goswami, 2009). Do you think there is a need to bridge these two areas of research and practice? Do you think it is possible?
|
Answer in the comments below.