In accordance with James E. Zull, in his book The Art of changing the brain, learning
originates in concrete experience, which leads
us to the term “experimental
learning”. But it is just the beginning, because learning also
requires reflection, the development of abstractions and active testing of
those abstractions.
According to the author, the learning cycle is
divided into four steps: a) concrete
experience: one receives direct physical information from the world
(vision, hearing, touch, position, smell, taste); b) reflective observation: remembering relevant information,
daydreaming and free association, analyzing experiences (it integrates sensory
information to create images and meaning); c)
abstract hypothesis: generation of abstractions, which requires
manipulation of images and language to create new mental arrangements,
developing plans for future action, comparing and choosing options, creating
symbolic representations and using short-term memory (problem solving and
making judgments, organizing actions) and d)
active testing: it´s necessary for the learning cycle to be completed. It´s
the conversion of ideas into physical action. It includes intellectual
activities such as writing, creating relationships, doing experiments and
talking in a conversation (Zull).
In our brains, we have the front cortex and the
back cortex. So, concrete experiences happen in the sensory cortex (back),
reflection involves the back integrative cortex, abstraction, the frontal
integrative cortex and active testing, the motor cortex (frontal).
The author states that the four stages of the
learning cycle are important. To have the four of them completed is our goal as
teachers. I personally identified with the part in which he asks, "Can we
teach without anyone learning?". And then he says that we might have had the
experience of having tried our best teaching someone, and at the end, we
discovered that it didn´t work. Or did it? Just because the learner didn´t get
it the way we expected him/her to get it, does it mean that it didn´t work at
all? Did he/she learn nothing? We can say that the person learned something,
because anything can produce learning.
I´ve been having this experience this semester,
with a student who has a severe grade of learning disability, she has ADD (Attention
Deficit Disorder) and APD (Auditory Processing Disorder), all at the same time.
She´s a listener student, which means that she can´t be assessed the same way
the other students are, even her test is different from the others. What I´ve
noticed is that, when I´m able to produce an atmosphere that is conducive to
learning, she is able to produce something. Then she answers my questions
correctly and participates. She may not respond on the same speed the others
do, but she responds in her own way and time. So the student is always able to
learn something. As teachers,
we should always try to optimize the learning cycle, designing activities that
stimulate the senses, reflection, abstraction and action.
Another part of the brain plays a very important
role in learning and it´s called the amygdala. According to the author, it
makes us recognize a dangerous situation and feel negative emotions, as anxiety
and fear. When survival, some kind of reward and pleasure are threatened, the amygdala
gets activated (Zull). But how does it relate to the classroom? As a teacher, I
must be aware that my learners will be automatically monitoring a given
situation in the classroom through their amygdalas, and it´s up to me creating
a negative or a positive environment for them. I want my students to learn, but
I have to say that not always I´m able to provide an adequate atmosphere to
them. Even when I think of activities to do in the classroom, with the best of
the intentions, sometimes they don´t turn out the way I wanted them to, and maybe
the learning process isn´t completed. I try to, but it´s difficult. But now that
I´m aware that this atmosphere has to be created, I try to plan my lesson in a
way that they feel more open to learning. I have to teach them in a way they
don´t realize that they´re actually learning! This way, things get a little
lighter.
According to the author, the front cortex is
responsible for solving problems, creating ideas, and transforming those ideas
into the symbolic form called language. It is also responsible for what he
calls “working
memory (short-tem memory)”, that happens when we have to remember a
few things for a short period of time, in order to develop ideas or solving
problems. He also explains that it is different from “long tem-memory” (Zull).
But how can the brain attain information? We have to receive information and
immediately create an association with other things, so we can remember that
information later on. The brain needs to create a story, because it gets easier
to make connections and then, remember something important. The brain likes
stories.
As teachers, it´s important that we don´t
overload working memory. Teachers have a large number of facts that have been
already processed in their brains, but students are only starting in this field;
they´re still getting only isolated facts. If we want them to process what we
are trying to teach them, we have to limit the number of information they get.
We have to "break" the information in to smaller parts. The author
says that the conscious rearranging and manipulation of items in working memory
is very close to what we call thinking and that´s why the front cortex
is usually called the brain´s executive part (Zull).
It is important that the teacher
focuses separately on the attending part and the task management part of
working memory: attending is just separating the relevant from the irrelevant.
Task management is more personal, it depends on the student´s past experiences
on his existing neuronal network. That´s why sometimes we have to stand back
and give the learner freedom. And that´s the moment when our explanations are
often ineffective, because who is learning has to try their own ideas (Zull).
In conclusion, now that I´ve had the opportunity
to understand better how the brain works when it comes to learning, my lesson
plans have changed for the best. Since the brain attains information through
concrete experiences, I try to include activities that provide that to the
students, so they can remember that in the future and then make their own connections.
Now I know that I have to “fire and wire” my students’ brains, which means that
I have to create “sparkles” and make neuronal connections happen inside their
heads.
Source: James E. Zull – The Art of Changing the
Brain.
