The results were intriguing – for more check out their new paper in Frontiers !
This week Professor Michael Thomas discussed the famous marshmallow experiment and its recent fall from grace. A new replication study by Watts and colleagues controlling for various social factors such as home environment and socio-economic status has put into doubt the original claims about the importance of impulse control.. But what does this really mean?
Professor Thomas explored the real consequences of controlling for correlated variables in statistical analysis and how this can lead to simplistic conclusions about causality. For more on this read Payne and Sheeran‘s interesting article!
The DE-ENIGMA project is a large European project on robotics and autism, funded by Horizon 2020. The project consists of many teams, including UCL, working together to develop activities to teach autistic children about emotions, using a humanoid robot, Zeno pictured below.
The project was based on the premise that many people with autism have difficulty using and understanding verbal and non-verbal language. This may make it more difficult to understand others and interact with them. On the other hand, robots may be easier to comprehend as they are more predictable systems. Previous research suggests that children with autism may perceive a humanoid robot as being less complicated, less threatening, and therefore be more comfortable to communicate with than humans.
Over the past year, the UCL team have conducted studies with children to test the suitability of their learning activities. Yesterday’s talk outlined the numerous studies they have engaged in and discussed the activity design issues that they encountered. During the summer, the DE-ENIGMA team conducted design critique interviews with teachers and presented the key insights and feedback from teachers on suggested ways they could adapt their activity designs to meet the needs of autistic children in the research.
Find out more at the DE-ENIGMA website!
Professor Michael Thomas and the CEN team have produced a new free resource which aims to give an overview of the workings of the brain. No small feat in just a few thousand words. The resource is in the form of the website which you can peruse right here.
Prof Thomas gives you a little taster of what’s in store below
This week we enjoyed a highly thought-provoking seminar from Julia Harrington, Head of Queen Anne’s school in Caversham and founder of BrainCanDo. BrainCanDo is committed to the application of psychology and neuroscience research to improve educational and emotional outcomes for children. You can see a short summary video of Julia’s talk here:
In yesterday’s seminar, Dr Natasha Kirkham presented her recent research on multimodal learning in primary school children. She writes:
“It is a well-received idea throughout the world of primary and secondary education that the more information contained in a learning situation, the easier the learning. For example, instead of using rote repetition learning of the times tables, modern teaching can include songs, videos and even dances that support the maths content. This has been referred to as “multimodal learning,” and it has been used as the basis for educational programs in literacy and numeracy, dealing with both typically and atypically developing children. Multimodal learning covers a lot of ground, from specific teaching technologies (smart boards) to general teaching philosophies (teaching content using different modalities at the same time). However, as intuitive as this idea seems, there has been very little research into whether multimodal learning is of any real benefit in education. In fact, our findings suggest that children’s age and the type of modalities being used (visual, auditory, touch) must be taken into consideration. Evidence for the usefulness of multimodal cues on learning is strongest in young children (e.g. 5 to 6 years), and during incidental learning contexts. Other contexts suggest that as you get older, multiple cues are not only less useful, but can be detrimental.”
You can also follow Natasha on Twitter @NatashaKirkham
For a fun play-along video which shows what our brains do when information from different senses conflict, have a look here at the McGurk effect and for a remarkable example of innovation in the face of an absent sense, enjoy this Blind baseball
This week we are very pleased to welcome two researchers – Camilla Gilmore from Loughborough and Lucy Cragg from Nottingham University to talk about their research and what it might mean for educators.
The focus of our research is understanding which general thinking skills are involved in different aspects of learning and doing maths. Our first project (SUM) had three main aims: The first was to discover how executive function skills (e.g. manipulating information in memory, flexible thinking, ignoring distractions) are involved in knowing maths facts, applying maths procedures and understanding maths concepts. The second was to distinguish between the skills needed for learning new mathematical material and those needed for performing already‐learned mathematical operations. Finally, we explored how the role of executive function skills might change as children grow older and become more proficient in maths.
What led you to this area of research?
We shared an office while doing our PhDs on mathematical cognition (Camilla) and executive function development (Lucy). At the time, people doing research on the role of executive function skills in mathematics were either experts in mathematical cognition or executive function, but not both. We decided it would be a good idea to join forces and combine our expertise to better understand the complex interactions between these two sets of skills.
Could you summarise your findings?
Some of the main findings from our work are:
1. Different combinations of executive function skills are important for different components of maths. For example, holding and manipulating information in mind (working memory) and ignoring distractions are more important for learning maths facts and procedures than they are for conceptual understanding.
2. While children’s understanding of mathematics develops dramatically through primary and secondary school, they are drawing on the same set of underlying executive function skills from KS2 right through to young adulthood.
3. In children who have just started school, mathematical and executive function skills interact.
4. Children with good procedural skills have better overall mathematics achievement if they also have good conceptual understanding and working memory.
5. Young children with similar levels of overall mathematical achievement can show very different patterns of strengths and weaknesses across the component skills.
What do you think this means for teachers in the classroom?
If a child is having difficulties with maths, it makes sense to look at their strengths and weaknesses in learning maths facts, carrying out procedures and understanding concepts, rather than focusing on their overall performance. It might also be helpful to consider the underlying skills, such as how good they are at storing and manipulating information in mind, ignoring distractions and thinking flexibly. Maths is a complex subject and there are many reasons why children might struggle; sometimes it’s related to general thinking skills, rather than maths-specific skills.
If you could give one tip to teachers based on your work, what would it be?
You might want to consider how the activities you use in the classroom challenge children’s executive function skills, such as the amount of information they need to hold in mind. Sometimes this might be a good thing, but at other times you might want to reduce these demands, by using concrete manipulatives such as hundred squares or number lines for example, so that children have the cognitive resources to focus on a new idea that is being introduced.
In this week’s seminar, Dr Anna Remington talked about her research showing that autistic children and adults can take in more information than their non-autistic counterparts. This can confer distinct advantages in certain processing tasks, but there is also the risk of overload.
You can read more about Anna’s work – and test your own perceptual abilities – in a piece she wrote in The Conversation and in a paper about Deutsche Bank’s internship programme for autistic graduates. If you’re a Twitter user, you can follow Anna @annaremington and CRAE (the Centre for Research into Autism and Education) @CRAE_IoE
In this week’s seminar, Leonardo Bevilacqua shares his fascinating research into children with conduct problems. Using a large dataset (ALSPAC), he has looked at the likelihood of these children being ‘Not in Education, Employment or Training’ (NEET) by the age of 20, and the positive effects that school connectiveness and school enjoyment have on this association.
To read more about Leo’s research, click on the links below:
A bit more about Leo: He is completing his PhD at UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, under the supervision of Professor Russell Viner, Professor Bianca De Stavola and Edward D. Barker at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience. He is currently working on:
1) a randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of a whole-school intervention to reduce bullying in 40 schools in London (INCLUSIVE Trial)
2) Predictors and outcomes of adolescent mental health with particular attention to conduct problems and antisocial behaviour.
He is also a senior teaching fellow at UCL Institute of Education and works as an assistant Psychologist at Helen Bamber Foundation. He will soon start a post-Doc with Professor Essi Viding looking at social reward processing in young people with conduct problems and callous-unemotional traits.
We are delighted to introduce Shafina Iqbal Vohra, who has very kindly shared her thoughts with us about research in education.
Shafina, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions. Firstly, how do you keep up-to-date with the latest education research?
Reading. I follow various researchers, journals, articles, magazines, speakers, setups, education providers, government, and NGO bodies (WEF, UN, OECD, LEGO Foundation). I also attend seminars and conferences where possible (given the limitations of a teaching timetable) and network by meeting key individuals in education research. Recently, I have also been invited to various public events whether it is volunteering at charitable education-led events (usually related to STEM i.e. Science, Technology, Engineering, Maths), or whether I am a speaker on a panel for education and creativity. These have included the Bett Show, EdTech Podcast (coming up), TEDxTalk (The hand that rocks the mind: Learning through hands-on processes), or events such as Mayor of London RECODE, Mayor of Newham festival, and Institute of Imagination with the London Brain Project which I really enjoy! Whenever there is opportunity to learn more about the kinds of research that is being undertaken or possibilities for future research, I try to make it!
Is it important to you whether the research uses particular methods (e.g. neuroscience, classroom-based)?
I am equally interested in pure neuroscience/lab-based methodology and classroom/field-based methodology. I strongly see the benefit that the two bring together as they are an excellent way of unwrapping the relationships between the neural correlates of particular functions and the consequential or preceding behaviours we see in classrooms. Of course, there is always the debate about whether it is too simplistic to relate learning to regions of the brain directly, as functionality is all connected to a large degree. But to understand for example specific behaviours or specific challenges, neuroscience is of huge value as it equips us with direct evidence, and then allows educators to apply such understanding to their classrooms. This has huge positive impact. Similarly, classroom-based methodology provides researchers with the direct observable behaviours that also offer huge insights into learning such as how giving tools (in my case, LEGO) can enhance learning, creativity, problem solving and collaboration for the learner which may not always be simple to assess neuroscientifically.
Could you tell us how research has influenced your teaching?
As I teach Psychology and am a researcher myself, I have applied research directly to my teaching and vice versa. Understanding the teenage brain and circadian rhythms for example, has led to my rearranging what when & how I teach, which has resulted in positive learning experiences for my students. Knowing that the Basic Rest Activity cycle exists throughout the day at 90 minute intervals enables my teaching to be planned accordingly. For example, in a lesson after lunch students may feel sleepy, so I ensure that heavy thinking and listening does not continue for too long, knowing that they may lose attention. I have therefore developed hands-on methods that are engaging, less strenuous, and yet still productive.
Research has also shed light on understanding multi-sensory input and how this leads to much more activity in the brain across various regions. This has also informed my teaching practice as I ensure my lessons are a good mix of visual, tactile & auditory stimuli to enhance learning. This improves consolidation as the learners experience the learning through various forms hence repeating the content, leading to better memory and retrieval as they can attach a context to it too.
What do you think researchers should focus on next (i.e. what are the gaps in our understanding, from a teacher’s perspective)?
Research from the LEGO Foundation (here and here) has recently verified that play-based learning (early years) is key to motivated learning, independence & resilience – these are key factors that leaners need throughout education. More research in this area (as I am doing) is needed for secondary education. The amount of research on the teenage brain is increasing, but understanding how to engage demotivated teenagers who are experts in some things (gaming, social media, tv) but still maturing in others (prioritising work, taking responsibility for not doing things or accepting constructive criticism) is needed for improving teaching rather than teaching purely for assessments. I feel that research into hands-on learning and innovative thinking in the classroom is needed more than ever to improve the quality and quantity of skills-ready individuals.
Do you have any suggestions of how communication and collaboration could be improved between teachers and education researchers?
It should be easier for researchers to work in schools as this is where 6-7 hours of a child’s learning in the day takes place. I also feel that teachers should be heavily involved in research as they are at the forefront of understanding what works and what does not on a daily basis, whilst some researchers may not have extensive classroom experience. An improved dialogue between teachers and researchers would lead to stronger evidence-based research in real settings (classrooms) where natural behaviours are permitted. The collective effort of both teachers and researchers would allow for more fluidity in research, addressing issues at both the behavioural and neuroscience level together that could then have an impact on policy and curriculum. For example, my research question is based on what I have directly experienced in my teaching; a sizeable, observable impact on learners’ motivation and progress when using LEGO. This has led me to examine evidence for hands-on learning which could then be embedded across many subjects to enhance progress and learning.
Please could you describe a research-informed idea that you feel has had a positive impact in your classroom, so that others could try it as well if they feel it’s relevant. (e.g. Why did you introduce the idea? What did you do? What impact has it had?)
My approach in teaching & learning is to bring real life to the classroom. There are many ways of doing this effectively, using tried & tested activities. However, for me as an adult if someone says “let’s play…” I am instantly excited. It is human nature to play and have fun and the positive implications this has on the brain has been demonstrated through much research in early years (PEDAL, Cambridge).
Through my own experience of teaching science to KS3, I have found that children love to play even at secondary level. They want to enjoy school, they want to make things, and they want to use something in the learning that grabs them, that excites them. There is a lot of content to cover in our new curriculum. So, for me to enjoy teaching and my learners to enjoy learning, I introduced some very simple methods of learning and revising using LEGO (as per research on play), alongside more typical activities such as film, documentary, field experiments, plus the usual essays and tests they have to do.
I adapted the LEGO Foundation 6-bricks concept, for A-level Psychology using a regular 2×4 LEGO System brick. I use it in various ways whether it is to teach localisation of function (Broca’s Area, Motor Cortex, Somatosensory Cortex, Frontal Lobe, etc.) by colour coding LEGO bricks to coloured regions on the brain (from the web). An idea from the London Brain Project (Beading the brain) inspired me to create lessons using LEGO for tasks that allow students to engage with the difficult names of regions and also to use their hands, learn, laugh and remember. Added to this, I developed the 6 brick concept for research methods where students have to use 6 bricks to create things about research methods and these are usually fantastically creative, very innovative and simple and clear – it engages them with the concepts that are sometimes difficult to grasp or imagine. I also use LEGO Education’s research work on play and STEM learning by using their “Build To Express” kits to allow students to create key studies in Psychology using the LEGO which acts as a self–differentiated activity. For me it is about my learners valuing their learning and actively thinking.
The impact to my lessons has been tremendous as it means learners have different tools at hand to choose from, they become independent, they collaborate and facilitate within their own groups and it gives them a tangible memory trigger to aid their revision and exam success.
Thank you Shafina!