Learnlets

Secondary

Clark Quinn’s Learnings about Learning

Brain science in design?

3 July 2010 by Clark 4 Comments

The Learning Circuits Blog Big Question of the Month is “Does the discussion of “how the brain learns” impact your eLearning design?”   My answer is in several parts.

The short answer is “yes”, of course, because my PhD is in Cognitive Psychology (really, applied cognitive science), and I’ve looked at cognitive learning, behavioral learning, social constructivist learning, connectionist learning, even machine learning, looking for guidance about how to design better learning experiences.   And there is good guidance.   However, most of it comes from research on learning, not from neuroscience.

The longer answer has some caveats.   Some of the so-called brain science ranges from misguided to outright misleading.   Some of the ‘learning styles’ materials claim to be based in brain structure, but the evidence is suspect at best.   Similarly, some of the inferences from neural structures are taken inappropriately.   There’s quite a bit of excitement, and fortunately some light amidst the heat and smoke.   In short, there’s a lot of misinformation out there.

At the end of the day, the best guidance is still the combination of empirical results from research on how we learn, a ‘design research’ approach with iterative testing, and some inspiration in lieu of what still needs to be tested (e.g. engagement).   I think that we know a lot about designing effective learning, that is based in how our brains work, but few implications from the physiology of the brain.   As others have said, the implications at one layer of ‘architecture’ don’t necessarily imply higher levels of phenomena.   We’ve lots to learn yet about our brains.

As with so many other ‘snake oil’ issues, like multigenerational differences, learning styles, digital natives, etc, brain-based learning appears to be trying to sell you a program rather than a solution. Look for good research, not good marketing.   Caveat emptor!

Comments

  1. Jennifer says

    4 July 2010 at 2:35 AM

    Why do you believe that ‘Learning Styles’ is a ‘snake oil issue’? What’s your definition of Learning Styles?

  2. Clark says

    4 July 2010 at 9:27 AM

    Jennifer, my previous posts on the topic provide some insight:

    My first tirade

    Pointing to Daniel Willingham’s views

    Looking for the upside

    A recent take (with a bit of whimsy at the end)

    Hope this helps!

  3. Brad says

    8 July 2010 at 1:44 PM

    Hi Clark
    I’ve enjoyed your comments and have gone back through the listing of your posts, and Professor Willingham’s video. Much of what you said echoes the results of Pashler’s recent research. (Glenn, 2010) You in fact mention his research in your May2, 2010 blog. So how do we apply Pashler’s conclusion, that for any given lesson one instructional technique seems to be optimal for all types of students (A7), to the Learning Circuit Blog’s question about tailoring eLearning to suit brain learning? Most especially how do teachers who don’t have any great depth of understanding in cognitive psychology adapt? We’ve been flooded with articles about learning styles and multiple intelligences which Pashler, you, Willingham and others seem to dispute. If that is in question how are we to dive into Cognitive Information Processing Theory, Brain Development, Differentiation and Synaptic Pruning, etc.?

    Perhaps the answer lies, and please forgive a novice in Cognitive Psychology for, perhaps, butchering an understanding of this term, in this idea of metacognition: thinking about thinking. In our eLearning adventures is it better to try and teach to the content, teach in a way that corresponds to a particular understanding of brain activity, or rather, teach the student to think about how they learn? Do we “better the odds” by taking some time to make students aware of their own ability to assay their progress, or lack of it, and make adjustments, either pro- or retroactively?

    Glenn, D. (2010). Customized teaching fails a test: Instruction can’t be matched to learning style, study finds. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 56(17), A1, A17-A18.

  4. Clark says

    8 July 2010 at 3:07 PM

    Brad, I think the short answer is “use the best pedagogy and the right tool for the job”. That is, not adapting to the individual, but creating the best learning experience we can overall. We can adapt instruction based upon what people demonstrate about what they know, but the instruments to assess how people differ as learner are suspect, and similarly there’s no currently valid body of evidence that adapting based upon learner characteristics works. There are valid results (e.g. the learner’s epistemology), but they tend to be around individual aspects, and it’d be more useful if we could compare them, focus on the high leverage ones, etc.

    I actually think that we will be able to adapt instruction to the learner, but we need independently validated instruments, and then a serious body of research. For instance, I think it’s plausible that we’ll accommodate a learner’s style while they’re anxious and then challenge (at least, for any malleable factor) with support to develop learner ability. Among other things. Unfortunately, it takes a fairly large effort to attempt this. I was leading a project doing this a decade ago, which ended prematurely. We’ll see if anyone will pick up the opportunity, with the systems capability we now possess. If it’s not malleable, we might provide scaffolding or support. But at this point it’s largely (informed) speculation.

    And I’m a big fan of helping the learner know their own characteristics (with the caveat about instruments, above). I recommend making ‘learn to learn’ explicit, assess it, and develop it (I reckon it’s the best investment an organization can make for long term viability), but do not see enough of this. Fingers crossed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Clark Quinn

The Company

Search

Feedblitz (email) signup

Never miss a post
Your email address:*
Please wait...
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

Pages

  • About Learnlets and Quinnovation

The Serious eLearning Manifesto

Manifesto badge

Categories

  • design
  • games
  • meta-learning
  • mindmap
  • mobile
  • social
  • strategy
  • technology
  • Uncategorized
  • virtual worlds

Blogroll

  • Charles Jennings
  • Christy Tucker
  • Connie Malamed
  • Dave's Whiteboard
  • Donald Clark's Plan B
  • Donald Taylor
  • Harold Jarche
  • Julie Dirksen
  • Kevin Thorn
  • Mark Britz
  • Mirjam Neelen & Paul Kirschner
  • Stephen Downes' Half an Hour

License

Previous Posts

  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006

Amazon Affiliate

Required to announce that, as an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Mostly book links. Full disclosure.