Neuroscience and New Technologies Dr Paul Howard-Jones NeuroEducational Research Network (NEnet) Graduate School of Education University of Bristol www.neuroeducational.net 1. Thinking about the brain and technology 2. Games and the brain 3. Technology, neuroscience and learning games
Neuroscience and New Technologies. 1. Thinking about the brain and technology 2. Games and the brain 3. Technology, neuroscience and learning games. Dr Paul Howard-Jones NeuroEducational Research Network ( NE net) Graduate School of Education University of Bristol www.neuroeducational.net. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Neuroscience and New Technologies
Dr Paul Howard-Jones
NeuroEducational Research Network (NEnet)Graduate School of EducationUniversity of Bristol www.neuroeducational.net
1. Thinking about the brain and technology2. Games and the brain3. Technology, neuroscience and learning games
•Basic neuroscience•Bridging studies•Developing classroom practice
•Public communication
•Consultation with teachers
Facebook is “infantilizing” our brains Wintour, P. in Guardian (London, 2009).
Google is “degrading our intelligence”Carr, N. in The Atlantic (2008).
‘Technology could be turning into a 21st-century addiction’ Roberts, D. in The Telegraph (2010).
Can Google rewire the brain?
a) Naive users b) Experienced users
Activity for internet searching, relative to reading:
Small, et al. (2009)
Activity after adults practise difficult multiplication:
a) Decreases b) Increases
The brain is plastic: Learning involves changes in
* neural connectivity* shifts in regional activity
Delazer et al. (2003)
Working memory bottleneck
automaticity
Is Google rewiring our brains?
•Experienced users using more search strategies•Additional activity: decisions making, reasoning
Activity for internet searching, relative to reading:
a) Naive users b) Experienced users
Some brains are more plastic than others… Will Facebook “infantilise” them?
90’s : * internet use -> reduced social-
connectedness, poorer well-being NOW:
* 49% of UK children 8-17 profile on social network sites (SNS) (OfCom, 2008)
* SNS’s -> stimulate teenage social connectedness and psychosocial well-being
But it is about how the technology is used: Benefits if supporting existing friendships
Games and Education
Gove (UK Education Minister, 2011): When children need to solve equations in order to get more ammo to shoot the aliens, it is amazing how quickly they can learn.
Mary Matthews(Blitz Games Studios, 2011): "Great ….but… exploration, experimentation, team building, problem-solving and independent, personalised, differentiated experiences…?”
Zimmerman & Fortugno (game designers, 2005): ‘‘only consensus in this whirlwind of activity seems to be that educational games are something of a failure’’
Games: a special influence on the brain1.5% to 8.2% of general population have problematic internet use – what are they doing?
• We do most enjoy 50:50 chances in games but not in school, where one study has shown children prefer risks of ~87% (Clifford et al., ‘88)
• Academic failure has more serious implications for esteem• The predictability of academic comfort zones (87% certainty) may
reduce reward response
This suggests:
• a “learning games approach” to teaching, with chance increasing uncertainty while protecting esteem
What about uncertainty in school?
More neuroscience needed:e.g. How does the brain respond to a competitor?
“Reward learning” theory => mirror their rewards as our own
Our results show we mirror a competitor’s actions as our own
but our reward system responds positively to their failure:
Reward response appears linked to learning inhibition not action
Do children prefer chance-based uncertainty in learning?
Task: Ask your maths question from * Mr Certain (Correct -> 1 point) * Mr Uncertain (Correct -> coin toss, 2 or 0 pts
30
40
50
60
70
80
1 6 11 16 21 26
Question number
Per
cen
tag
e o
f q
ues
tio
ns
req
ues
ted
fr
om
Mr
Un
cert
ain
As the session progressed, Mr Uncertain was increasingly more popular than Mr Certain – especially amongst boys
Bridging studies: neuroscience-> education
What happens to the learning discourse? Issues of fairness?Chance-based uncertainty encourages motivational “sport-talk” around learning, i.e. failure is bad luck, success is pure achievement. Chance not seen as unfair.
Is it just a superficial “sugar-coating”?No - Chance-based uncertainty enhances the emotional response to learning
How strong is this theory?Estimation of brain’s reward response (not the stakes) predicts learning during a learning game
Bridging studies: neuroscience-> education
Not recalled Recalled Estim
ated
bra
in re
spon
se
Plan
Evaluate
Intervene
Reflect
Practice-based research: What is good practice in teaching with immersive gaming (twigging)?
Prototype software was developed with the help of
Dyffryn School (Newport):
Chepstow School
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Question
Option 2
Option 1
Option 3
Option 4
Prestatyn High School, Penmorfa Primary School
Teaching With Immersive Gaming (twigging) – the science:
• Close intermingling of learning and gaming (effects of dopamine are brief)
• Use uncertain reward to generate dopamine ramps• Rising stakes through the game (effects of dopamine
are context specific, influenced by expectations)• Reward response when observing competitors is
driven by their losses – ensure high risk and high stakes when individual teams selected for special challenges
Teaching With Immersive Gaming (twigging) – the practice:
• Close intermingling of learning and gaming• Design of questions - test all learning levels• When presenting the questions, support and scaffold
students (e.g. remind of principles involved, q and a) • When revealing the correct answer, explain why
other answer options are incorrect before (usually) explaining the correct one
• referring to options by content not colour• Be ready for your teacher persona to transform...
Example of final interventions:
•Year 8 (28 students)
•Heat Energy Transfer – 3 lessons:ConductionConvection
Radiation
•Students learn•All consider these lessons are more fun than normal lessons•most would prefer always to learn in this way
B: Regions of activity, males > females
C: Regions of functional connectivity with warm colours for males > females
Although small samples prevent statistical gender analysis, mean learning scores consistently favoured boys………….why?
Young adults playing computer games (Hoeft et al., 2008):