Paul.Howard-Jones (2008)
Philosophical Challenges for Researchers at the Interface between Neuroscience and Education.
Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42, 3-4, 361-380
KRO Notes
Comparing with GC hotseat article
No reference to learning theories even in section on Education’s approach to learning
Phj advises asking each other ( when each other are from different disciplines) questions.
The problem is similar for phj ‘ working at the interface means that straddling different philosophies’ KRO and a lot of other things like method, vocab.
Phrasing
‘neuroscientific insight of how we learn’
‘compelling evidence as opposed to firm proof’
p371 ‘practical benefits of avoiding dualism’
p373 ‘ resist being seduced by explanations exclusively privileging factors of one type , be it biological, psychological or social.’
P375 ‘ when biological and cognitive concepts resonate, one can feel more confident about the validity of both’
P376 free will & the individual ‘ some scientists suggest, therefore, that our sense of free will is a trick, just the mind’s way of estimating its own apparent authorship by drawing causal inferences about relationships between thoughts and actions’ also ‘ since discussions about the existence of free will are very bound up with those about consciousness , they are unlikely to be resolved in the future’
Definitions & descriptions
‘Philosophy investigates the bounds of sense, that is what can be coherently thought and said’ Bennett & Hacker 2003, p399’
What is Learning?
View from neuroscience
Is it memory?. Cognitive psychologists have conceptualised different types
Declarative & non declarative ie facts & skills – reports evidence for location in medial temporal lobe ( eg hippocampus) and diencephalons that facilitates memory and accepts that other brain areas are involved depending on more specific aspects of the memory task.
Declarative & non declarative memory as process
‘changes in the patterns of connectivity between neurons ie synaptic plasticity. “ two key ways in which this can occur know as long-term potentiation(LTP) and long term depression (LTD)’
‘LTP refers to an enduring increase ( upwards of one hour) of the efficiency by which a neuron relays electrical information, as a result of temporal pairing (coincidence in time) between the incoming and ongoing signal’ “LTP refers to the ability of a neuron to adjust its connectivity, in response to signals related in time’ i.e. Hebbian learning
LTD ‘ refers to an enduring decrease in synaptic efficiency. This is a mechanism thought to explain , for example, how neurons in the perehinal cortex decrease their output as a stimulus is repeatedly presented, underlying our ability to recognise familiarity’ KRO – how does this relate to inhibition?
Also makes claims for an increase in size of structures with practice and decrease according to reduced practice. practice.
Working memory – relevant to the type of memory promoted by Education. Locates to dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC).
Working memory as process p364-365 ‘ rather than being supported by mechanisms of synaptoc plasticity and the production of new connectivity, it would appear that the DLPFC supports working memory by controlling a temporary increase in acivity within pre-existing networks’
Note also the shift of brain activity ( indicating a locality for cognitive process?) as expertise of the individual increases. ( cf Larry & learning to sing).
View from Education
KRO what do we mean when we say the view from Education, the term embraces so much, so much broader than neuroscience, where are the boundaries?
P365 ‘ Educational ideas about learning are diverse and eclectic in their origins. The product of a variety of forces and products.’
‘culturally transmitted ideas from within and beyond the teaching profession’
‘generally teachers have an atheoretical approach but there is an overall tendency to favour constructivism rather than explicit instruction (? now looking from the point of view of learning theory)
Figure 1 Levels of educational change as proposed in a recent commentary by the
Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP, 2006). Adapted from
Blakemore and Frith (2000) with permission of the authors. Demonstrates this as a series of circles of increasing radius containing the following
- Classroom processes
- Teachers’ roles, values, knowledge and skills
- Teachers’ professional development
- School structures and cultures
- Local and national policy e.g. reference on page 366 to the 10 Principles into Practice TLRP, 2007, with 1-6 expanding on what can be achieved beyond factual recall. E.g’.the significance of informal learning such as that occurring out of school
Concerns about the incompatibility of neuroscientific and educational perspectives on learning
P367 ‘ some of the concerns in the new discourse between neuroscience and education revolve around some quite old arguments. One of these is an extreme form of dualism; in which the mind and brain are considered as separate and distinct. The opposite point of view, that they are one and the same is described here as monism’
Explicit reference to either monism or dualism is rare but the implication is common.
Monism: does brain = mind?
Davis and category error ‘ Davis may be correct in suggesting that neuroscience should not presently be used to provide any additional support for promoting concepts of meaning making that are essentially psychological. Neither might such support be needed, since these psychological concepts are well supported by behavioural studies, even if the neuroscientific search is still on for the biological structures’ ( KRO do behavioural studies suffice?).
‘The belief of some that the mind can be fully described by states of the brain may be a significant factor in some interdisciplinary tensions’
Use of metaphor p369 ‘ unrelenting efforts to use metaphors ( eg map, symbol) in describing representations in the brain when they, as commonly understood, cannot exist there’ (KRO isn’t this one of the problems with the collective drive to anatomically locate an area under study also compounded by an absence of a common vocabulary or acceptance of different approach).
Dualism: Are brain and mind distinct concepts? ( KRO how about if we phrased this as different entities? One being abstract and the other concrete)
With this view can make statements about mind-behaviour and brain- behaviour relationships but not about brain-mind relationships.
However one approach used by neuroscientists is to construct the brain as a biological tool for the mind or that brain activity reflects meaning making processes of the mind. To an extent the monism / dualism philosophical approach is reflected in
Causal and contingent relationships between mind and brain
Phj questions relationship as mere contingency… p370 ‘ However, brain processes are clearly more than just a reflection of our mind’s attempt to assign and contemplate meaning, since the suppression of brain processes ( through trama or experimental techniques such as TMS) can reduce such mental abilities ( KRO – but how does this statement fit with text based lesions argues for taking as many perspectives as possible). Also phj re cites evidence for changing size of some brain structures depending on expertise or use.
Phh concludes that ‘ biological processes in the brain appear to be intimately bound up with our cognitive ( KRO only cognitive?) abilities even if they cannot be considered the same thing’
Example of a causal approach : ADHD due to brain malfunction leads to education professionals shifting responsibility to medicine. But since there are things that schools, parents and society can do p371 there are ‘practical benefits of avoiding dualism’
Implications of dualism for education would be that teachers do not need to know about the brain and how it might affect behaviour particularly in problematic areas whereas such knowledge could contribute to the approach to intervention e.g. ADHD.
Therefore dangers from adopting both a monism or a dualism approach
Mind and Brain together: Cognitve Neurosceince.
Cognitive neuroscience – understanding the interrelationship between brain and mind ( KRO then where does social neuroscience some in?)
So far
Blakemore & Frith, 2000 the mind and brain must be explained together
Bruer, 1997 : education & neuroscience; a bridge too far
Morton & Frith model, 1995 to combine environmental, biological, cognitive & behavioural levels of description. (KRO make connection the table of perception-process-outcome from the Joinson book) . Facts ? the observable represented at the Brain & the behavior level ( KRO has the the ability to observe at the brain level distorted our thinking?)
phJ p372 ‘ in this brain-mind-behaviour model, the term ‘envionment’ must be considered in terms of the level being described.’ (KRO ? is text based a restriction or does it operate at the level of the brain?), ‘The (solid) arrows indicate the directions in which causal connections are most often sought’ PHJ suggests that the arrows could be drawn bidirectional ( see dashed lines). For example, environmental influences ( such as being able to access a new stimulus) can influence our behaviour that also, in turn, influences our mental processes. If these processes produce learning, this learning can be assumed to have some neural correlate at a biological level.’ (KRO – link to Joinson, Chapter 5) but also thinking in terms of the new stimulus being additive in terms of having a mental correlate’ ( KRO another thought , do solid lines indicate the influence of the individual and the dotted the influence of Education, including the educator?)
Note emphasis on the individual
Leaving behind biologically privileged learning – a ‘levels of action’ model for neuroscience and education. Bringing in the social
We some how need to link biology, psychology and/or mind to Education.
Social & cultural factors ( papers by Davis & Schumacher which I need to get.
Davis, A.J. The Credentials of Brain-Based Learning. Journal of Philsophy of Education, 38,1, 21-36.
Schumacher, R. (2007) The Brain is not enough: Potential and Limits in Integrating Neuroscience & Pedagogy, Analyse & Kritik, 29.1, pp38-46.)
Have a role at an educational level therefore the following figure which represents learning when two individuals interact compared to the previous figure which focuses on the individual ‘ becomes more suggestive of the complexity that can arise when considering brain-mind-behaviour relationships within educational contexts’
Figure 3 To interrelate the most valuable insights from cognitive neuroscience and
the social science perspectives of education (represented by arrows), the brain-4
mind-4behaviour model may need to be socially extended. Even two individuals
interacting, as represented here, is suggestive of the complexity that can arise when
behaviour becomes socially mediated. Such complexity remains chiefly the realm
of social scientists, who often interpret the meaning of such communication in
order to understand the underlying behaviour. Cognitive neuroscience has
established its importance in understanding behaviour at an individual level but is
only just beginning to contemplate the types of complex social domains studied by
educational researchers reproduced from Howard-Jones (2007) with permission of
the TLRP.
P375 ‘the recent flourishing of journals focusing on social cognitive neuroscience demonstrate the beginning of efforts in this area, but interpretation of social complexity remains chiefly the realm of social scientists’
get
Alexander, H.A. (2006) A View from somewhere: Explaining the paradigms of Educational Research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40,2, 205-221.
Also relevant to the discussion in this section is the academic approach that focuses on the relationship between learning & development eg Piaget, Vgotsky, Bruner ( KRO therefore in my opening chapter need to emphasise that I will not be doing so)
Phj p376 suggests benefits of the above model as ‘ boundaries with bi-directional permeability emphasise the role of the educational social environment’.
