My Back Pages: Early Applications of Brain-Based Research

Over the last 15 years, ASCD has produced a rich assortment of resources on brain-based learning. In this installment of My Back Pages, we take a look at an article from the first issue of Educational Leadership to tackle the subject. Entitled "Understanding a Brain-Based Approach to Learning and Teaching," this article from October 1990 explores how early advances in brain research were used to inform the teaching process.

Read the article: Understanding a Brain-Based Approach to Learning and Teaching (PDF)

For authors Renate Nummela Caine and Geoffrey Caine, brain science has the potential to shed light on instructional design, administration, evaluation, the role of the school in the community, and professional development. Reviewing everything from conscious and unconscious learning processes to types of memory, the authors lay out 12 "brain principles" and examine the implications of each for educators. They offer ways to reconceptualize traditional notions of learning by considering how the brain functions and urge educators to use this information in their practice.

"Acknowledging how the brain learns from experiences will help us to understand meaningful learning more fully," the authors note. This look back at early efforts to apply brain research will be a fascinating read for educators interested in brain-based education.

In "My Back Pages," we look at important issues through the historical lens of the Educational Leadership archives. ASCD members have access to EL issues from 1943 to the present in the myASCD Online Library.

Comments

[Carolyn Pool]

Readers may be interested in a more recent article by the Caines in Educational Leadership, “The Way We Learn,” by Renate Nummela Caine and Geoffrey Caine. This article appeared in Sept. 2006, Vol. 64, No. 1. Read the abstract at the Educational Leadership archived issue for September 2006, or if you are an ASCD member, you will find the full-text article online, at www.ascd.org/el.

[Byron Allgood]

This is a very interesting article! I love how the authors pointed out the twelve brain principles. I am a firm believer that the educators who understand how the brain functions are the same people who get the most out of thier students. Are there anymore articles that support the Brain based approach?

[Beth Libby]

The twelve principles discussed in the article upon which the brain works were fascinating. The one I focussed on the most was the Principle Twelve which stated that all brains are unique and that teaching should include the multifaceted approach. While, as teachers, we all know this to be true, I sometimes think the NCLB parameters focus more on an approach using memorization (Principle Nine) where learning is rote. Principle Twelve supports and asserts that schools should move away from memorization to meaningful learning. My question is, how does this mesh with the types of questions used in testing that supports NCLB?

[ldean]

This was a very interesting article. I particularly liked the term "relaxed alertness". It is very important for teachers to challenge their students while at the same time encouraging, not intimidating them to reach their goals. It is as important for teachers to understand how their students learn, as it is what content they are learning.

[Jackie Caldwell]

Beth, I too liked the term "relaxed alertness". When students are stressed out and trying to learn material, they cannot fully comprehend it because they are not in the right mindset. Instead, they may be trying to memorize the material, which does not work well according to principle nine.
I also found principle three interesting when it stated that all the innovative methods for gifted students should be used for all students. Gifted and struggling learners alike need to be highly engaged in order to get the most out of a lesson. Some teachers come up with great activities for their upper level classes; however they resort to boring worksheets for their lower level students. In addition, I believe the high expectations need be in place for all types of learners.

[Jackie Caldwell]

I meant to say I agreed with ldean, in the previous post. I apologize for my error.

[Beth Libby]

Jackie, I agree with both you and ldean that the term "relaxed alertness" is an essential for learning. Students are not able to learn when under undue pressure to perform. This is not to say goals should not be established but instead an atmosphere of caring and support should be in place for students to succeed.

[Robyn]

I agree with all of the comments of the above bloggers. I found this article to be very enlightening and applicable to my everyday teaching strategies both now and in the future.

I was particulary taken by Principle #2 that states "gauging ahcievement on the basis of chronological age is inappropritate." I think that this is a statement that needs to be considered and is unfortunately overseen by the government. They are too consumed with numbers and percentages. This is not the root to improving our society's academic standing.

I also was taken by Principle #3 that mentioned comparing the methods used for teaching gifted students and how that should be mirrored for all students. I agree that high expectations should be set for all students in order for them to reach their maximun academic success.

Next, Principle #5 mentioned how emotions and cognition cannot be separated. I see the importance and creating a supportive climate is crucial. At the district I teach, the most support most of our studnets get is at school. It is imparative that as teachers, we creat an environment that they can feel safe and secure in.

At an in-house school seminar, the presenter mentioned that all learning experiences must first go through an emotion section of the brain. They went on to state that if the memory is negative, that the actual message will not be stored in the brain and that a message/memory with a positive connection will be stored. What is your take on this statement? Do you find it to be true?

Lastly, I was wondering what groups where used to verify this article as well as ages as far as research. I know that much of today's research done is only applicable to the study research which many times fails to be identified.

[Beth Libby]

Interesting questions, Robyn. It certainly makes sense that a student's memory would be impaired with negative stimuli around. The idea that the brain does not store messages when memory is negative has been seen many times when victims of trauma do not remember surrounding events. While that is an extreme example, I think it might apply. Conversely, moments of extreme pleasure can be remembered in great detail.

[Angela]

I enjoyed the article and found it to be a good review. I appreciated the organization and format (12 principles with educational implications for each). But I have to ask, what about this article is new to education? The authors' "implications to education" have been in practice for many years. Were these changes made as a result of brain research? or were the changes made and someone recognized that they corresponded with the current research about what we know about how the brain learns?
Another thought: Does it really matter? (rhetorical question, as a teacher we all know that of course it matters) I just mean if we understand how students learn and improve our instruction to maximize student learning, what good does it do if our assessments aren't aligned with the "12 principes"? I'm sure I'm 'preaching to the choir', I know it's not realistic to have portfolios, discussions, projects, and journals for standardized testing.
I think we've been using brain-based learning theories for a long time (they just haven't been labeled that). What's the next step? How can we use neuroscience to balance or even merge our political expectations with giving our students the best learning experience possible?

[Lisa]

I found this information to be intriguing and personally stimulating as an educator. I became familiar with brain based learning as an undergraduate student. Though these principles are not new per say, it was valuable to be reminded of ways to practically apply this ever changing research to my practice.

My personal conclusion after reading the article is that learning is indeed a "lifestyle." I believe that success for my students can be fostered best as I encourage a holistic style of learning. By this, I mean that I want them to develop a personal curiosity for learning that extends beyond the classroom. We can have a powerful impact on them as we refer to their prior knowledge and guide them in making connections with new material.

I echo Byron's previous question about how to effectively break away from the rote memory that so often characterizes our classroom instruction, especially in areas such as math (students struggle most when they don't know their basic facts). While the approaches used in a classroom ought to be diverse and stimulating for students, I finid it difficult to break away from the curriculum and and still maximize the time. I don't want to sacrifice coherency and a certain measure of structure. Does this ring true with others?

[Tina]

This article was enlightening. I was pleasantly surprised to see the date of the article as 1990. I believe that this type of learning is beneficial to all. In regards to Angela's comment on finding it difficult to break away from curriculum and still maximize the time, I find it exciting to encourage the students to search for answers. I follow the curriculum guidelines but incorporate other activities and allow the students to adventure into their learning. I do, however, find it difficult to have the students learn their math facts without the rote memorization. Does anyone have ideas regarding this?

[Patrick Groff]

As soon as the authors endorsed the "Whole Language" approach to the teaching of reading I realized that they had not thoroughly examined the relevant empirical evidence on this kind of instruction. These data consistently indicate that the WL methodology is not the most time- and cost-effective manner in which to develop children's reading ability. In short, WL pedagogy is not direct, intensive, systematic, early, and comprehensive instruction of a prearranged hierarchy of discrete reading skills and knowledge.

[soctriage@comcast.net]

Automatically thought of you (smile). Hope you're enjoying your son during this downtime.
Martin

[Kim Knotts`]

I agree with Tina that Whole Language was not the answer to all children's learning needs, however, there is validity to many of the ideas that are shown in brain based research. For instance, the role that emotion plays in a child's learning is critical. In an article written by Dr. Pat Wolfe, Phd. called Brain Research and Education: Fad or Foundation? (retrieved from www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/forum/fall03/brain.html on July 15, 2008) she notes that "Emotional responses have the ability to either impede or enhance learning." Most of us would agree that a safe, positive classroom environment results in student success. She goes on to argue that we need to be critical of research and analyze findings to be sure that we are using information that is valid and related to the classroom.

I also agree that much of what the brain research is showing only serves to offer concrete evidence that strategies we intuitively use are valid and useful in serving children. I also wonder how we can integrate what we intuitively know about children and what the research is confirming with the conflicting way we teach in order to be sure that students meet the rigorous standards.

[Kim Knotts`]

To those of you who are questioning rote memorization in the classroom, there is an article that discusses the fact that our brain remembers different information in different ways. Elaborate rehearsal is needed for declarative memory, or everyday memory.On the other hand, rote memorization works best for procedural memory, habits that you engage in without conscious recall
(Wolfe, 2003). Therefor, it seems best to me that we approach teaching using brain based methods much the same way we now approach reading instruction: Use a balanced approach. Do you have any ideas or comments on how we can achieve this balance?

References: Wolfe, P. (2003, Fall). Brain-compatible learning: Fad or foundation? Maricopa Center for Learning and Instruction. Retrieved July 14, 2008. from http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/forum/fall03/brain.html

[Nancy Plummer]

Brain research has come a long way since the Caine's article, published in 1990. Current research can validate or refute practices that teachers do intuitively. Current research is becoming so refined that it can provide very clear examples of how to instruct children in reading, and mathematics. The scientifically based reading research has identified that there are five essential components that need to be taught explicitly and systematically when teaching young children to read. The five components are: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary development, reading fluency, and reading comprehension. The Caines did not address the five necessary components in their “implications for education”. I did not read the updated article that the Caines wrote, but I am looking forward to seeing if they are in line with the current research that shows whole language in and of itself is not sufficient for young children to become proficient readers.

[Nancy Plummer]

We often get balance confused with equal. Balanced will look different for each student according to their needs. The needs have to be identified through assessment. There was a research by, Foorman & Schaltschneider (2003), which identifies the allocation of time for different components of reading in first and second grade. Consider this study when you are thinking about what balanced looks like.

Word Work(Phonics)
First grade-42% of instructional time. Second grade-20% of instructional time.

Reading Comprehension with Guided reading text for reading meaning
First Grade-8% of instructional time
Second Grade-20% of instructional time

Since reading comprehension is the goal, we always stress comprehension strategies as children read. In first grade the reading text level is not rich enough for developing the strong vocabulary and reading comprehension strategies. First grade text focuses more on the foundational skills of decoding and sight words. We build the rich vocabulary, and listening comprehension in first grade through oral language, and read alouds. As students become more proficient at reading, the balance shifts to less time on word work (phonics), and more time on reading comprehension. This shift in allotted instructional time continues up through the grades. The problem is that when we have students in second, third…grade that are not reading proficiently at grade level, they will need the instructional time in each component that matches the level of the grade they are reading at. So if you have a third grade student who is reading at a first grade level, 42% of that student’s instructional time would be at the word work level.

Check out the Florida Center of Reading Research at, http://www.fcrr.org for a resource in research based reading instructional ideas and support.

[Carolyn Pool]

In your search for reading resources, watch for a new book by Judy Willis, a classroom teacher and neurologist, *Teaching the Brain to Read: Strategies for Improving Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension.* Visit www.ascd.org/books for more info and for other resources on literacy and on the brain and learning.

[Elizabeth Gregurich]

Commenting on two of the posts, I would like to start with the concern that the article by Caine and Caine was written in 1990,questioning its validity with today's research. As I read the article I too was concerned about the lack of recent research as I read about whole language, a true "buzz word" of the 90's. I was surprised to see, as I looked for more articles on brain-based research that the work of Caine and Caine is often referenced in a multitude of other recent works. The article, "Beyond Learning Styles:
Brain-Based Research and English
Language Learners," by
Judy Lombardi, PhD, is an associate professor of secondary education at California State University Northridge, written in May/June of 2008, references the twelve principles of brain-based research, as does an article on "The Teacher Tap," http://eduscapes.com, along with an article on "The Brain Connection," http://www.brainconnection.com. Point being, the Caine and Caine research and theory must still be highly respected to be cited to this day.

In reference to Nancy's post, I appreciate the statistics you shared. It brings me back to a question that has been looming in my mind for the past couple of years as I came to the realization that many learners/readers are slipping through the cracks. How do I go back to the first, second, and third grade phonetic instructional time needed to hopefully raise a student's reading level up to grade level and keep up with the grade level curriculum?

[Nancy Lavender]

The article was very informative and the data was more understandable as each scientific finding was correlated to the educational setting. Within each principle, I could see how classrooms are operating in ways that are not efficient according to how the brain learns. Principle ten referred to learning through "real life" activity. These are some of the most time-consuming methods and I see them used less and less as teachers are pressed to assess more and comply with stringent standards of learning.

Principle Four addressed the search for meaning that occurs through patterning. I have seen this principle applied for phonics instruction with a technique called Word Study. I have used this for several years and it produced spellers who actually applied their skills to their written work. It observed learning taking place just as the research indicated. If you would like more information about this approach, the book is by Bear D., Ivernizzi, M., Templeton, S., and Johnson, F. (2004). Words Their Way: Word Study for Phonics, Spelling and Vocabulary Instruction. Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

[Beth Libby]

No mistake, Nancy. Your name is under the light gray dotted line after your blog.

I agree with you that teachers use authentic experiences for students less and less when standardize testing pressures are upon them. In actuality, students learn better when able to integrate classroom lessons with real life experiences. It's too bad these testing pressures are making real changes in the classroom which are not necessarily for the better.

[Keira Eisenbeil]

Learning about how the brain works is very interesting and becoming more influential in classroom teaching methods. As a new teacher, I had learned how important hands-on experiences were for learning in much of my undergrad work, but now I have a new respect for its importance. It is amazing how the brain is able/unable to create a unique mold all its own. I relate the brain to a photo album; if we looked inside, we could see a persons life experience and knowledge from when they were born.

One point made in the article was about reflection. When talking about hands-on experiences, it is thought of as some sort of active way to learn material rather than lecture or worksheets. Reflection can be made active for students and is a key element of repetition. Students are able to fuse their emotions about what they learned with the events of the experience.

Positive emotion is important in learning also. Students that are not able to feel comfortable in the environment are not likely to learn. This reminds me of students who don't raise their hand in class because they are afraid of being wrong or students that don't have a good relationship with their teacher. It is the job of the teacher to correct both situations. If there is not a "safe" learning environment, then the teacher ineffectively teaching and needs to reexamine his/her practices. If there is not a good teacher/student relationship, then the teacher needs to make the effort to create a better relationship. This will effect another area of the brain that was not discussed - personality. The teacher needs to connect with all students' personalities to have a good rapport with them. This will allow for students to have more positive experiences and thus, learning will happen.

In the article, Addressing literacy through neuroscience by Miller, S., & Tallal, P. A., there is a direct correlation between brain-based research and literacy. It goes into detail about how the brain learns phonemes, graphemes, phonemic awareness, morphology, semantics, syntax and grammar (2006). There are many new technological programs being developed based upon brain-based research. The article lists the program Fast ForWard Language as one that works. It was used in a study done with dyslexic students. At the end of the trial period, the students had made improvements in key areas of literacy. There is a lot more great information in the article. Read it at: http://www.aasa.org/publications/saarticledetail.cfm?ItemNumber=7812

[Tim Nelson]

This was a wonderful article. I have been interested in this subject for over a decade and have just now started to research it again.
I really liked how the article was structured. Listing the twelve principles for brain-based learning with an explanation was great but what was even more helpful were the implication for education sections.
This will take a little while to absorb and even longer to apply but it gives me somewhere to start. Thankyou.

[Deana Bell]

I found this article extremely interesting. I am a firm believer in the power of peripheral influence on students. The most important thing about peripheral influence I believe is that it remain positive. Many professionals believe you need to take down all posters and bright colors while others believe you should fill the walls. I think the main thing is to just keep a positive vibe for learning to take place.