Recognizing Emotions After Brain Injury: Re-Learning a Critical Social Skill

• October 4, 2011 by Bill Jenkins, Ph.D.

For most of us, interpreting and expressing emotion is something deeply instinctive. But what happens when that ability to express ourselves or read another’s emotions goes awry? Imagine what can happen to a student’s classroom experience if they can’t make sense of something as simple as their teacher’s facial expression. In the past, these kinds of students have been seen as having behavior problems. So how can we help them succeed?

Research has shown that people with traumatic brain injuries often experience this same inability to interpret and respond to emotions, a condition called "affect recognition."

Barry Willer, professor of psychiatry and specialist in TBI (traumatic brain injury) of the University of Buffalo, tells the story of a man and his wife who came into his office with a problem. The woman had experienced a mild traumatic brain injury. While her husband was supporting her recovery as best he could, she consistently described his attitude as “indifferent. “ He was frustrated, to say the least.

“His wife didn’t know she wasn’t recognizing his emotions,” said Willer, recounting the story in a 2009 interview with Insciences Journal , “and he had no idea what was going on.”

This couple is by no means alone. Nearly fifty percent of all traumatic brain injuries result in problems interpreting and expressing emotion.

As educators, being able to connect with our students at an emotional level is essential to classroom success. Without that connection, the learning process can quite easily come to a halt. Thankfully, Willer has demonstrated that there is hope for this population, and that the human brain is quite capable of re-learning how to understand facial expressions and use that information to interpret emotion.

Willer and his team have developed two specific interventions that have shown positive results:

• Facial Affect Recognition (FAR): Individuals view faces on a computer screen that directs them to concentrate on specific elements of each face. "Look at the eyes. What are the eyes doing? What is the mouth doing?" and asks them to name the emotion.
• Stories of Emotional Inference (SEI): Participants are asked to read stories that describe events, along with character’s beliefs, wants and behaviors. From this information, participants are asked to infer the character’s emotions.

"What was so exciting about our preliminary study," says Willer, "is that someone may lose the ability to recognize emotions, but even 10 years later, they can re–learn the skill if given the right assistance."

As it turns out, the only emotion that traumatic brain injuries do not erase is "happy," which is very hard–wired and has an extensive amount of "redundant circuitry." Says Willer, "I don’t know how that happened, but we all can be glad it did."

For further reading:  Milders, M., Fuchs, S., & Crawford, J. R. Neuropsychological impairments and changes in emotional and social behaviour following severe traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 25, 2003. 157-172.

Related Reading:

Lifelong Learning and the Plastic Brain

5 Paths to Brain Health: Tips From Dr. Paul Nussbaum

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Brain Fitness, Brain Research, Reading & Learning

Tags: adaptivity, behavior, brain plasticity, brain training, cognitive skills, effort, memory, processing

How Learning and Literacy Enhance Our Brains

• June 30, 2011 by Bill Jenkins, Ph.D.

Reading is a recent cultural invention. It is not a skill we are naturally programmed to develop like walking or vocalizing. It is a relatively recent development in human history estimated to be only about 6000 years old. The development of oral language in humans is believed to be nearly 300,000 years old.  Oral language is thought to have co-developed with the use of tools as both require complex motor control.

To quote from the recent book Reading in the Brain (Dehaene, 2009): "At this very moment, your brain is accomplishing an amazing feat­—reading. Four or five times per second, your gaze stops just long enough to recognize one or two words.  You are, of course, unaware of this jerky intake of information.  Only the sounds and meanings of the words reach your conscious mind.  But how can a few black marks projected onto your retina evoke an entire universe?"^[i]  

In 2010, Stanislas Dehaene, et al. published a study which evaluated whether learning to read improves brain function, and also whether there are tradeoffs for such learning.^[ii] In other words, does learning to read “occupy” a space in the brain that could or would be used for something else in our evolutionary past?

Dehaene and his research team have used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure how the brain responded to various stimuli, including spoken and written language, visual faces, houses, tools, and checkers in a group of literate and illiterate adults. Ten were illiterate, 22 learned to read as adults, and 31 learned to read as children.

In the end, their studies generated a number of fascinating conclusions. Literacy—no matter at what point in life the skill is acquired, in youth or as an adult—enhances brain response in three ways:

1. It boosts the organization of the visual cortex. Located toward the back of the brain, this is the area that processes visual information.
2. It allows the area of the brain responsible for spoken language—the planum temprale—to be activated by written sentences.
3. It refines how the brain processes spoken language.

Granted, there is much more detail to understand behind these conclusions, and I certainly invite you to read the entire article. Still, for us as educators, these conclusions hold useful insights.

In being aware of how literacy is related to these other skills, such as speaking and visual processing, we can use this information as yet another tool to help us better understand what we can expect from our students, no matter their ages. If they come into our classroom able to read, we know that we can expect them to have greater capacity for speech. If they come in with fewer or no reading skills, we might want to be aware that they might have challenges in processing visual input. 

Given these conclusions, the more we can continue to develop technology solutions that can teach while detecting deficiencies and adapt to student needs “on the fly,” the better we will be able to individualize instruction, fill in gaps in learning and strengthen essential skills.

As these scientists continue their investigations and the research sheds more light on how reading affects brain processing, we as educators will continue to increase our abilities to make better targeted instructional decisions that will help every individual student achieve optimal success.

[i] Dehaene, Stanislas. Reading in the Brain. Penguin Viking Publishing. November, 2009.

[ii] Dehaene, Stanislas et. al.How Learning to Read Changes the Cortical Networks for Vision and Language. 2010.

Related Reading:

How Learning to Read Improves Brain Function

The Essential Nature of Developing Oral Reading Fluency

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Trends, Reading & Learning

Tags: adaptivity, auditory processing, brain development, child reading development, cognitive skills, early learning, elementary school learning, improving reading skills, Innate abilities, learning to read, literacy, processing, reading comprehension, visual processing

Tapping the Source: Finding and Using the Innate Student Passion for Learning

• June 16, 2011 by Sherrelle Walker, M.A.

In a previous post, I began an exploration of methods for increasing student motivation. We delved into Daniel Pink’s model of motivation that he describes in his book, Drive, and how motivation arises most effectively when a project or task addresses three internal emotional variables at the same time: autonomy, mastery and purpose.

Along with Pink, another great contemporary thinker, writer and speaker in the world of education is Mark Prensky, who coined the idea of “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” (now well-known across the education technology community) to characterize how technology advances have completely changed the way students learn in a single generation. Like Pink, Prensky is a student of the mind who has dedicated his career to exploring and developing ideas to help educators help their students learn as effectively and purposefully as possible.

In a recent piece, Blame Our Young? Or Use Their Passion!, Prensky briefly references how we try to motivate the next generation to succeed through hitting them hard with the message that the future is in their hands. Prensky cites President Obama, Colin Powell and Newt Gingrich for all using this technique of heaping responsibility upon our youth. An excellent example of this style can be seen in President Obama’s 2009 speech given at Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. It was a wonderful talk, to be sure, and it was historic in that it was one of those rare moments when a president has directed an entire speech to our nation’s young people. In that address, Obama talked about how our youth had the opportunity to make choices to help build their own futures, as well as to contribute to helping make our nation become great.

Still, let’s face it: as wonderful as those sentiments might sound to adults, to a young person, that is a daunting amount of responsibility. According to Prensky’s thinking, this kind of discipline-based, “the weight of the future is in your hands” approach to motivation does not come from within, and for this reason, is bound to generally fail. If you think about it, middle schoolers have a hard enough time worrying about next week, much less what might be coming in five or ten years.

“What if,” he ponders, “instead, we asked the kids what their passion is, and invited them to follow and use that passion as a gateway to all kinds of learning—learning that will help our country and the world.” (Prensky, p. 2)

What if we were to really take the time to ask what our students were passionate about and then used that as jumping off points for greater learning? If a student loves music, fantastic! We can use that to talk about history, mathematics and acoustics. If a student is interested in boats, excellent! Now we have a great place to launch into conversations about history, technology, geography and ecology. What? Janie loves dogs? Wonderful, let’s talk about all those wonderful breeds and the genetics (and by extension, mathematics) behind all their beautiful differences.

Considering that due to our different neurological wirings each of us perceives the world differently, the conclusion that a true, long-lasting passion for learning must come from within seems obvious. How can we expect every student—each with his or her own completely unique perspective on the universe—to learn in the same way?

This is why it is so essential for educators to help students find and pursue their passions. We can teach math or science or geography in the classroom until we’re blue in the face. Some students may absorb the lessons, some may not. If, on the other hand, we can help our students find the links between their passions and these same lessons, then we create a direct connection between the essential content and something they truly and deeply care about, helping motivate the student to not only continue learning, but strive for individual excellence.

According to Prensky, “Wherever this (passion-based learning) has been tried—in scattered public, private and charter schools, and even MIT—it has been a resounding success. Kids flock to be part of something that allows them to follow their own interests.” (Prensky, p. 2) In case you hadn’t noticed, we have come full circle back to Pink’s elements of motivation—autonomy, mastery and purpose—and using that innate passion to help encourage students to take ownership of and responsibility for their learning.

In today’s age of technology-based classrooms, with our ability to have self-directed discovery and learning so integrated into the learning experience, we have the opportunity for educators to assume more of the role of coach and less of the role of lecturer. In so doing, we can help our students identify and tap into the very core of the topics that genuinely interest them and give them the learning tools to pursue those topics. At that point, once we uncover those passions, we then have an immediate in-road into the mind of each student and a pathway we can travel with each individual as they explore the world around them and begin to figure out how to make it better.

Further reading:

Prensky, Marc. Blame Our Young! Or Use Their Passion? We can do better than just laying the responsibility for solving our nation’s problems on the backs of our kids. 2010.

Prensky, Marc.  What I Learned Recently In New York City Classrooms: How to keep all kids busily engaged at all times. 2010.

Related Reading:

Individualizing Instruction Through Understanding Different Types of Learners

Teaching Creativity in the Classroom

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Education Trends, Reading & Learning

Tags: adaptivity, digital natives, emotions in learning, how children learn, Innate abilities, motivating students, school leader effectiveness, teacher effectiveness, teacher impact

Brain Research, Learning & Literacy: Webinar with Dr. Bill Jenkins

• May 28, 2010 by Norene Wiesen

In this pre-recorded webinar, "Addressing Literacy Through Neuroscience," Dr. Bill Jenkins discusses brain development and plasticity, takes us on a tour of the parts of the brain involved in language processing, and reviews some recent research findings on language impairment. 

You will learn about the strong correlation between auditory processing and language development, the importance of timing in our perception of speech, and more.

Be sure to take advantage of this unusual opportunity to learn from an expert about what happens in the brain when we learn language, how oral language skills influence learning, and what we can do to help children learn better.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Brain Research, Fast ForWord, Scientific Learning Research

Tags: adaptivity, attention, brain plasticity, brain training, cognitive skills, crosstraining, early learning, frequency, how children learn, innovation, intensity, intervention, language learning, learning environment, literacy, memory, motivating students, processing, processing rate, reading intervention, sequencing, technology in education

Brain Fitness Is Not A Game

• April 30, 2010 by Terri Zezula

A recent study on brain video games is causing discussions worldwide on the benefits of brain training and programs developed to improve brain functioning. The study, published in Nature and summarized on Nature News, titled “No Gain From Brain Training,” was conducted with adults, average age 39, who practiced a series of online tasks for a minimum of ten minutes a day, three times a week, for six weeks.

These tasks, focused on reasoning, planning and problem-solving abilities, were tests and not exercises intended to improve cognitive skills. While the outcome of the study brings the concept of brain training to the forefront of online discussion sites, it’s important to note that the clarification of brain video games, brain training programs and brain fitness programs and the origins of the research behind the development of these products are critical to the discussions. 

What differentiates the Scientific Learning products from those advertised as “brain video games” or “brain training programs” is the science: decades of research into how students learn preceded the development of our products. For more than 30 years, neuroscientists at Scientific Learning have studied the way the brain learns.

The expertise and collaboration of Drs. Michael Merzenich, William Jenkins, Paula Tallal, and Steven Miller, the founders of Scientific Learning, along with several other cognitive neuroscientists, resulted in the development of a research-based series of products. The Fast ForWord® software is based on the science of how the brain learns and retains information. It utilizes the principles of neuroscience and learning to exercise and develop the brain's processing efficiency, essential for academic learning and reading success.

Brain plasticity research demonstrates that completing learning tasks in a frequent, intense timeframe accelerates learning. Just as exercise promotes physical fitness, exercising our brain improves brain fitness in four critical areas: memory, attention, processing and sequencing.

In addition, the research is recognized and supported by other scientists in peer reviews from Stanford University, Cornell University, UCSF Medical Center & Rutgers University, and many other top Universities, including a recent study by Dr. Nadine Gaab of Children’s Hospital Boston ((Gaab, N., Gabrieli, J.D.E., Deutsch, G.K., Tallal, P., & Temple, E. (2007). Neural correlates of rapid auditory processing are disrupted in children with developmental dyslexia and ameliorated with training: An fMRI study. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 25, 295-310.)).

Finding the right product to improve cognitive skills can be overwhelming for the consumer. Numerous articles and research studies can be found online that address the interest and concern in this popular field of learning and brain development. In fact, a Google search on “brain video games” resulted in more than 32million hits! Members of the education community, parents and teachers alike, who are looking for programs for their students, should be cognizant of the importance of scientific research.

If a product is touted as “research-based,” what are the origins, extent and validity of that research? Are the products intended to test or improve cognitive skills? According to Dr. William Jenkins, Scientific Learning's Chief Scientific Officer, “a program that is designed to improve cognitive, reading or language skills and build brain fitness is adaptive to the student’s abilities; critical tasks are practiced at an appropriate frequency and intensity; multiple skills are cross-trained at the same time for lasting improvement; and rewards are built into the program for maximum motivation as the student progresses.”

In the study referenced above, “No Gain From Brain Training,” researchers believe that none of the groups who participated in the study boosted their performance on tests measuring general cognitive abilities such as memory, reasoning and learning. Participants in the study were volunteers who were viewers of a popular BBC game show, “Bang Goes the Theory.” The study required the participants to complete tasks for only 10 minutes a day, 3 times a week.

While the study concluded that there is no evidence of “any generalized improvements in cognitive function following brain training in a large sample of healthy adults,” it is a study that leads to more questions than answers. Were the tasks measures of current cognitive skills or were they designed to build upon these skills? The study leads the reader to conclude that these were tests of cognitive ability, not exercises to improve skills. So the conclusion that the programs did not improve cognitive function is baffling. Were the tasks adaptive, motivating, and practiced with intensity and frequency? Was there cross-training on multiple tasks to build cognitive skills? How comprehensive is a study conducted on participants who complete tasks for only a few minutes a week?

Based on the intensive studies done on proven brain training or brain fitness products already on the market that follow the basic principles of clinical trial studies (i.e Posit Science, a brain fitness program for adults), this study is not a strong indicator of the results that can be realized with a true research-based program. Whether programs are defined as brain training or brain video games or tasks designed to test cognitive skills, they don’t necessarily have the intensive scientific research that is the foundation of a proven brain fitness program.

Subscribe to this blog to get new blog posts right in your inbox and stay up to date on the science of learning!

Attend one of our popular webinars with thought leaders in learning. Live and pre-recorded webinars are available. Register today!

Categories: Brain Fitness, Brain Research, Fast ForWord, Scientific Learning Research

Tags: academic success, accelerate learning, adaptivity, attention, brain plasticity, brain training, cognitive skills, crosstraining, frequency, how adults learn, intensity, learning through play, memory, motivating students, processing, processing rate, sequencing, technology in education