How Neuroscience Can Improve Language Teaching

Teaching and research:
What has neuroscience ever
done for us?
Carol Lethaby clethaby@clethaby.com
Website: http://clethaby.com
Twitter: @clethaby
Patricia Harries patti.harries@gmail.com

Monty Python, 1979
Carol Lethaby & Patricia Harries 2017

1 Uncovering neuromyths in ELT
2 Neuroscience and ELT practice
3 Conclusions

“we should not expect [research] to have
any necessary or close link with the
activity of teaching”
Maley (2016)

“I remain convinced that teaching is more
a live, personal, creative, intuitive, human
art than a measurable science.”
Scrivener (2016)

“our intuitions and beliefs about how we
learn are often wrong in serious ways”
Pashler et al, 2009:117

Neuroscience busts myths

Carol Lethaby and Patricia Harries, 2017

“misconception generated by a misunderstanding or
misreading or a misquoting of facts scientifically
established (by brain research) to make a case for the
use of brain research in education or other contexts”
OECD in Howard-Jones, 2014:817

An example of a neuromyth is that
learning is enhanced if people are
classified and taught according to
their preferred learning style.

Left – right brain
Another neuromyth is that learners
are left-brain or right-brain
dominant

Where do these ideas come from?

“This misconception is based on a valid research
finding, namely that visual, auditory, and kinesthetic
information is processed in different parts of the
brain.” (Dekker et al, 2012:2)

“Thus, it is incorrect to assume that only one sensory
modality is involved with information processing.”
(Dekker et al, 2012:2)

Problems with learning styles:
There is no evidence that
teaching to preferred learning
styles enhances learning.
(the meshing hypothesis)

• Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., and Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning
Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning. A Systematic and Critical
Review. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
• Krätzig, G.P. and Arbuthnott, K.D. (2006). Perceptual learning style
and learning proficiency: A test of the hypothesis. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98, 238-246.
• Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning
styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public
Interest, 9(3), 105-119.
• Riener, C., & Willingham, D. (2010). The myth of learning styles.
Change, Sept/Oct, 32-36.
• Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2015). Matching learning
style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 107(1), 64.

“In the current study, we failed to find
any statistically significant, empirical
support for tailoring instructional
methods to an individual’s learning style.”
Rogowsky et al, 2015: 77

Both hemispheres are used for processing
both logical and creative tasks.
There is no evidence that some people
have better connected or more dominant
left or right brain networks.

"The pop culture idea (creative vs. logical
traits) has no support in the neuroscience
community and flies in the face of
decades of research…” Anderson, 2017
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-35640368

Categorising learners as either left or right
brained, and focusing teaching on developing one
hemisphere over another are not considered to
be useful educational methods.
(Holmes, 2016:109)

“research is not genuinely valued when its
results run counter to popular folk-
knowledge”
Maley (2016)

Teachers’ beliefs
Our surveys (2015 - 2016) - 332 English language
teachers from the US, Canada, Mexico and Brazil
Nine statements about brain-based learning

Statements about brain-based learning
5. Differences in hemispheric dominance (left brain, right
brain) can help explain individual differences amongst
learners.
7. Individuals learn better when they receive information in
their preferred learning style (e.g. visual, auditory,
kinaesthetic).
8. Teaching to learning styles is more important in language
learning than in other types of learning.

30.12%
90.36%
60.24%
8. Learning styles in language learning
7. VAK
5. Left brain, right brain
Lethaby and Harries (2015-2016)
% English language teachers who agree with
neuromyths
n = 332

Neuroscience and research-based teaching
Why not focus on evidence-based ways that we
know are more helpful to learners?

•Let’s focus on interventions that do have a
research base.
http://nyphotographic.com/

Examples of aspects of teaching that do have
a research base:
•prior knowledge
•cognitive overload
•vocabulary learning
http://nyphotographic.com/

“the single most widely
demonstrated difference [in
learning outcomes] is prior
knowledge.”
Clark, 2014: 335

The effect of prior knowledge
• Brewer and Trayens, 1981
• 30 students taken into a room - told it was the room of a professor who
was conducting an experiment
• After 35 seconds the students were moved to another room and told to
write down everything they saw in the room:
• 29 remembered it had a desk / chair
• 8 remembered it had a skull / bulletin board
• 9 remembered there were books (there weren’t!)
• Prior knowledge influences what we perceive

Reading and prior knowledge
• “The most important factor in determining how much
readers will comprehend and how well writers will be
able to communicate about a given topic is their level
of knowledge about that topic”
• (interest in the topic is also important but often is
related to prior knowledge).”
• (Allington and Cunningham, 2010)

•“The importance of prior knowledge to
comprehension and communication is
included in virtually all modern theories
of reading” (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Pressley, Wood, &
Woloshyn, 1992; Spivey, 1996)
• (Allington and Cunningham, 2010)

•“.. what students already know about
the content is one of the strongest
indicators of how well they will learn
new information relative to the
content.”
• Marzano, 2004

Building on prior knowledge: How does the student brain learn?
• May 12, 2014 Marlieke van Kesteren
• http://www.neuwritewest.org/blog/2014/5/12/building-on-prior-
knowledge-how-does-the-student-brain-learn

Van Kesteren et al, 2014
• How does our brain remember new, study-related
information?
• Two groups of students – biology / education
• - ss given sentences with new information in the
primary field and in the non-primary field
• - brain activity measured using MRI scanner
• - next day ss tested on the information they learned

Findings
• Students better remembered information related to their own field of
study
• Remembering information related to the primary field of study was
associated with activity in a particular brain region: the medial prefrontal
cortex.
• This research suggests that this brain region acts to integrate new with old
information.
• When students learn new information related to their primary field of
study, that information will not be stored separately, but will be linked to
information that was already remembered before.
• In turn this leads to better performance on the memory test.

Medial prefrontal cortex

Medial prefrontal cortex
• “How actively they used this brain region during learning of our
study-related sentences was predictive for their later academic
performance.”
• “Can we then predict future academic success by placing students in
an MRI-scanner?”
• “The relationship between brain activity and academic performance
is merely a correlation.”
• Van Kesteren, 2014

Applications to education
“… once we understand more about how
our brain uses prior knowledge (the stuff
we already know) to learn new
information, we could tap into our prior
knowledge better and more selectively
before we learn new information.”.””
Van Kesteren, 2014

Building on prior knowledge: How does the
student brain learn?
May 12, 2014 Marlieke van Kesteren

How can we use what students know to help
them to learn more easily?
•Use pre-tasks
• activate background knowledge
• build background knowledge

What prior knowledge do L2 students have?
•Content
•L1
•L2

How can we use what students know to help
them to learn better?
•Re-cycle and build on what learners
know / use a spiral curriculum

•“It is very important in education that
courses build on each other as much as
possible, because knowledge builds from its
antecedents.”
• Van Kesteren, 2014

Know about learners’ interests
• We are most interested in / motivated by the things
we already know something about
• (“interest in the topic is also important but often is
related to prior knowledge.”)
• Therefore … we need to make connections between
what we do in class and students’ real lives.

And ….
•Constantly be aware of prior knowledge –
don’t assume that learners know something
– check it.
•“faulty background knowledge”
•Eg basic vocabulary, parts of speech, names
of tenses
•Find out what the learners know.Carol Lethaby and Patricia Harries, 2017

Summary
•Prior knowledge is essential in helping us to
learn new things
•We are finding out more about the brain and
where prior knowledge is connected with new
information

Cognitive Load

“Visual representations appear to be
most effective when they are designed to
support the cognitive processes
necessary for deep comprehension.”
Butcher, 2006

•If we present learners with too much
information – text and complex visuals that
don’t support comprehension of the text
this will be too hard for learners.
•Text and visuals need to support each other.

•Learning from Text with Diagrams:
Promoting Mental Model Development
and Inference Generation
•Butcher, Kirsten R.
•Journal of Educational Psychology, v98 n1
p182-197 Feb 2006

•Wouters, P., F. Paas, and J. J. G. van Merrienboer.
2008. ‘How to optimize learning from animated
models: a review of guidelines based on
cognitive load’. Review of Educational Research
78/3: 645–75.

Vocabulary learning
“Research consistently shows that more new words can
be learned using L1 translations than with L2-based
definitions (Laufer and Shmueli, 1997; Ramachandran
and Rahim, 2004).” In Schmitt, 2008
German.aiflc

Ramachandran, S.D. and Rahim, H.A. (2004). Meaning recall and
retention: The impact of the translation method on elementary level
learners’ vocabulary learning. RELC Journal 35, 2: 161-178.
• Subjects in two groups given 20 words to learn over a period of four
weeks.
• Group 1 – direct translation
• Group 2 – English only
• Group 1 outperformed group 2 significantly
“In addition, Corder (1990) notes that the reliance on the L1 knowledge is
basically relying on prior knowledge to facilitate new learning.” (2004: 174)
German.aiflc

Other papers that look at evidence for good
teaching
• Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K.A., Marsh, E.J., Nathan, M.J. & Willingham,
D.T. (2013). Improving students learning with effective learning
techniques promising directions from cognitive and educational
psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14/1, 4-58.
doi: 10.1177/1529100612453266
•Looks at TEN specific teaching techniques
and the research done to support the use of
them.

• Roediger, H. L., & Pyc, M. A. (2012). Inexpensive techniques to
improve education: Applying cognitive psychology to enhance
educational practice Journal of Applied Research in Memory and
Cognition, 1/4, 242-248. Doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2012.09.002
• Three general principles for improving learning based
on research evidence.
•Distribution of practice
•Retrieval practice
•Explanatory questioning

Recommendations
So, what has neuroscience
ever done for us?

1 Exposed the practices that don’t
hold up to scrutiny.

“Sometimes ideas are intuitively attractive
and easy to understand. But without
evidence, this should count for nothing.
Education is too important to be hijacked by
crazy ideas that gain currency only by
hearsay”
Della Sala & Anderson (2012:4)

2 Provided information and teaching
ideas that are both relevant and
have empirical basis

“the claims of neuroscience are important
simply because its discoveries about learning
are open to empirical test and
disconfirmation”
Goswami, 2012:48 in Della Sala & Anderson (Eds)

“The goals of education, like those of
other professions, are best served by
evidence-based practice.”
• Arbuthnott and Krätzig, 2014: 7

3 Used research findings to validate
current best practice

“some findings from educational
neuroscience may support long-standing
existing practice”
Geake in Patten & Campbell (Eds 2011:42)

Teachers ARE interested in brain research!
(Pickering and Howard-Jones, 2007, Decker,
2012)
We need better communication and
collaboration between researchers and
educational practitioners.

• Incorporate neuroscience courses into teacher
education
• Help teachers to read and understand research and
what it means for the classroom
• Teachers and researchers can work together to use
neuroscientific research to inform practice … and vice
versa
Ansari, Coch & De Smedt (2011) in Patten & Campbell (Eds)
Dekker et al (2012)

“the best way to generate and exploit
scientific research which is useful to
education is to involve educators from
start to finish”
Howard-Jones (2012:338) in Della Sala & Anderson (Eds)

What has neuroscience ever done for us?
“neuroscience offers an empirical foundation
for investigating theories and ideas already
present in pedagogy, and for disrupting
others”
Goswami (2012:55) in Della Sala & Anderson (Eds)

What have the Romans ever done for us?
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvPbj9NX0zc

So …..apart from …
… exposing neuromyths
…providing information that informs teaching
… helping us validate best practice
… what has neuroscience ever done for us???

• References
• Arbuthnott, K.d., & Krätzig, G.P (2014) Effective teaching: sensory learning styles versus general memory processes. Comprehensive Psychology, 4,2.
• Butcher, K.R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98, 182-197
• Clark, R.C (2015) Evidence-based Training Methods ASTD
• Coffield, F., Moseley, D., Hall, E., and Ecclestone, K. (2004). Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning. A Systematic and Critical Review.
London: Learning and Skills Research Centre.
• Dekker,S., Lee, N.C., Howard-Jones, P., and Jolles, J. (2012). Neuromyths in education: Prevalence and predictors of misconceptions among teachers.
Frontiers in Psychology 3/429 1 – 8
• Della Sala, S. & Anderson, M (eds) (2012) Neuroscience in Education OUP
• Holmes, J.D Great Myths of Education and Learning (2016) Wiley Blackwell
• Howard-Jones, P (2014) Neuroscience and education: myths and messages. Nature Reviews Neuroscience Volume 15 December 2014 817-824
• Kerr, P (2017) https://adaptivelearninginelt.wordpress.com/2017/02/13/learning-styles-the-emperor-with-no-clothes/
• Krätzig, G.P. and Arbuthnott, K.D. (2006). Perceptual learning style and learning proficiency: A test of the hypothesis. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 98, 238-246.
• Lethaby, C. and Harries, P (2016) Learning styles and teacher training: are we perpetuating neuromyths? ELTJ 70/1 (fJan 2016)
• Pashler, H., McDaniel, M., Rohrer, D., & Bjork, R. (2009). Learning styles: Concepts and evidence. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(3), 105-
119.
• Patten, K.E. and Campbell, S.R (eds) (2011) Educational Neuroscience Wiley Blackwell
• Pickering, S. J., and Howard-Jones, P. (2007). Educators’ views on the role of neuroscience in education: findings from a study of UK and international
perspectives. Mind Brain Educ. 1, 109–113.
• Riener, C., & Willingham, D. (2010). The myth of learning styles. Change, Sept/Oct, 32-36.
• Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2015). Matching learning style to instructional method: Effects on comprehension. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 107(1), 64.
• Wouters, P., Paas, F. & van Merrienboer, J.J.G. (2008). How to optimize learning from animated models: A review of guidelines based on cognitive
load. Review of Educational Research, 78, 645-675.

Teaching and research:
What has neuroscience ever
done for us?
Carol Lethaby clethaby@clethaby.com
Twitter: @clethaby
Website: http://clethaby.com
Patricia Harries patti.harries@gmail.com

How Neuroscience Can Improve Language Teaching

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to How Neuroscience Can Improve Language Teaching

Similar to How Neuroscience Can Improve Language Teaching (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

How Neuroscience Can Improve Language Teaching