Friday, May 28, 2010

Learning & the Brain Presentation: Michael Posner

One of my favorite conferences is the Learning and the Brain Conference held at various locations several times a year. The most recent conference was held in Washington, D.C. in early May. I tried to play the role of on-the-spot-reporter and posted on Twitter live from the conference.

To provide readers with a sense of the conference, I'm going to post my Twitter stream from each presentation. These are the actual "tweets" I posted from the conference. I've cleaned them up a little, but other than a few corrected typos, they represent the raw ideas presented at the conference.

As you read through these "tweets," keep in mind that I was posting the comments/ideas of the presenter. These do not necessarily represent my conclusions from the research.

Here are my posts from the first keynote presenter, Michael Posner:

  • First speaker is Michael Posner, topic: Brain’s Attention Networks. Will use initials (MP) to indicate speaker.
  • Posner is from the University of Oregon and was recently honored by the President for his work in cognitive neuroscience.
  • MP: Attention is a central topic for education. New tech giving us new insight into nature of attention.
  • MP: Attention is a set of neural networks—at least 3: alerting, orienting, & executive. Each set associated w/different brain area.
  • MP: At rest, two brain networks are active, “default state,” which alert brain to change.
  • MP: Alerting deficits in early childhood later negatively affect the executive network.
  • MP: There are both overt AND covert shifts in attention.
  • MP: A deficit in orienting attention network correlates with some autistic behaviors.
  • MP: Executive network is associated with conflicts in sensory data and self-regulation.
  • Post on importance of self-regulation:
  • MP: Effortful control of attention is one self-regulation element of the executive network.
  • MP: The anterior cingulate is related to self-regulation; size & activity can predict self-regulation capacity.
  • MP: Executive network deficiency is related to most cognitive disorders.
  • MP: Individual differences in executive network functioning are wide-ranging.
  • MP: For example, the speed in managing conflicts in sensory data correlate w/self-regulation capacity.
  • MP: Separate white matter pathways deal with the three attention networks.
  • MP: Recent study shows IBMT (form of meditation) actually influences those white matter pathways positively.
  • MP: IBMT meditation influences brain state, which positively influences executive functions.
  • MP: Differing neurotransmitters are also associated with each attention network. This can help guide gene research.
  • MP: When does executive network begin to self-regulate individual? Evidence shows around 7-10 months of age.
  • MP: Around 7 months, a child is aware of conflicts in sensory data—e.g., a scene different from expectation.
  • MP: Anticipatory looking at 4-7 months correlates w/some self-regulation abilities at 4 years of age.
  • MP: Connectivity of the executive network, however, develops slowly—present at age 9 but not fully connected.
  • MP: Showing novel objects may help produce connectivity within executive attention networks.
  • MP: Gene DRD4 present on a specific chromosone correlates with ADHD. (Genetic basis discovered?)
  • MP: If gene is present AND parenting is poor, MAJOR ADHD impulsivity develops.
  • MP: “True experts” have “highly elaborated semantic memory,” correlated w/activity in fusiform gyrus.
  • MP: High levels of experience influence brain activity for specific areas. Fusiform gyrus active in chess, bird, & dog experts.
  • Posner now taking questions from audience.
  • MP: Alerting attention deficiency associates w/aging & ADHD disorders.
  • MP: Orienting attention deficiency associates w/autism.
  • MP: Executive attention deficiency associates w/Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia, addiction, & others.
  • MP: Parents not to blame for ADHD children; research shows correlation in extreme impulsivity.
  • MP: With research subjects, parenting classes actually decreased children’s impulsivity.
  • (As you can imagine, some resistance to these ideas. Posner: “Just sharing what research shows.”)
  • MP: My research will be translated to classroom by educators, not me. I’m just a scientist. We need teachers to think this through.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Professional Development: A Defense

Teacher conversations about professional development often include the terms worthless and waste of time, and a general disdain for typical approaches is often evident. The back-and-forth can be a bruising arena for those who actually provide professional development, and I’ve been feeling a bit bruised recently. Don’t worry. The bruises have only been blows to my ego. (The only actual bruise I have came compliments of a concrete planter on the corner of New Jersey & M Streets in Washington, D.C., and that’s not a tale I care to retell.)

I must confess that my own experience supports such derogatory comments. I once spent an entire morning of “professional development” brainstorming alternate ways to earn a living. Though I’m sure the administration’s intent and the presenter’s goals were worthwhile, the session was so poorly designed that worthless and waste of time accurately described the result.

Why, then, do the current perspectives of professional development seem bruising? A few years ago I began an organization committed to “investing in teachers,” a “school’s most valuable asset.” And, yes, professional development is a significant component of what we do. So, allow me to provide a brief defense of professional development based on what it can do when it’s effectively designed.

Professional development can contribute to increased student learning. As we learn more about teaching and related topics, such as findings from neuro- and cognitive science, we discover principles that can improve our teaching. As our teaching becomes more effective, our students understand more. Our growth in teaching influences their depth of learning.

Many times, our growth in teaching relates to our instructional design—an element that directly influences student learning: “Many breakdowns in student learning may be a function of poor classroom curriculum design,” suggests Robert J. Marzano. “...the expert teacher has acquired a wide array of instructional strategies along with the knowledge of when these strategies might be the most useful.”1 Professional development can equip us with additional strategies for fostering learning.

Professional development can provide a common language for teachers to talk to teachers about teaching. This increases the possibility of collaboration, a practice known to improve practice:
Surgeon and author Dr. Atul Gawande details conclusions of a Harvard Business School study on the learning curve surgeons experience when learning new surgical techniques. Practice in itself proved an unreliable predictor of learning rate and success, but how surgeons practiced made a significant difference. A surgeon leading one of the quickest-learning teams picked “team members with whom he had worked well before” and kept “them together through the first fifteen cases before allowing any new members. He had the team go through a dry run the day before the first case, then deliberately scheduled six operations in the first week, so little would be forgotten in between. He convened the team before each case to discuss it in detail and afterward to debrief.” In contrast, a surgeon who had significantly more experience led one of the slowest-learning teams. He involved different personnel in each surgery, “which is to say that it was no team at all,” and led no pre- or post-operation discussions. Increased collaboration quickened learning rate and improved performance. Most important, patients benefitted from the surgeon’s collaborative approach.2
Educational research reaches a similar conclusion: collaboration improves teacher performance. Unfortunately our learning institutions often impede professional growth by inhibiting collaboration. As a result, we can actually hinder student learning by failing to sharpen one another through collaboration.3 Common professional development can provide a basis and means for such collaboration.

Professional development can provide new research that equips teachers to be more intentional. New research often illuminates why what we already know to be successful teaching is effective. This recognition helps us become more intentional in our use of various methods and approaches. When we understand why something works, we know better how to optimize its effectiveness. A consistently good teacher is an intentional teacher, and the more we understand about teaching and learning, the more intentional we can become. Professional development can do these things, which also means it can fail to do them, and this is a source of teacher frustration and justifiably bruising comments:
Unfortunately, schools provide little help. Most professional development programs for teachers, claims Richard Paul, are “episodic, intellectually unchallenging, and fragmented” with “very little discussion on or about serious educational issues, and when there is such discussion it is often simplistic.”4
Those leading professional development sessions have a critical responsibility. In the next post I’ll explore some principles that should be considered when designing and leading professional development. We need effective, high quality, meaningful professional development.

Otherwise we do a disservice to hard-working professionals and deserve the bruises their opinions inflict on our egos.

  1. Marzano, R.J., What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2003), 106, 78.

  2. Gawande, A., Better: A Surgeon’s Notes on Performance (New York: Henry Holt, 2007), 230.

  3. Sergiovanni, T.J., Moral Leadership: Getting to the Heart of School Improvement (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992), 88.

  4. Washburn, K.D., The Architecture of Learning: Designing Instruction for the Learning Brain (Pelham, AL: Clerestory Press, 2010), 191.

Image: 'Audience'