Neurosciences have made great contributions to education in recent times, with findings and tools seriously involved in learning, cognitive development and pedagogy. They have tried to form an interdisciplinary biopsychosocial framework and not return to a biodeterministic view. This science offers tools for the early detection of children with special educational needs, the opportunity to compare different teaching modalities and provide a greater understanding of individual differences in learning processes (Manes).
One of the objectives of this discipline is to reveal the mysteries of the brain and its functioning in the educational field, providing pedagogy with fundamental knowledge about learning, memory and emotions; These functions are stimulated and strengthened in the classroom. The intention is to reduce the fissure and increase the effectiveness of teaching techniques and pedagogical practice.
Through neurological research, structural modifications have been observed in the brain as a consequence of the social links of the educational process.
Detailing specific contributions of this body of knowledge, one is the understanding of phonological processing that is important in the treatment of children with dyslexia. It has also provided information on the difference in the brain organization of literate and illiterate adults, demonstrating the importance of an experience close to reading and writing in childhood. Another important finding is neuroplasticity (the creation of new neural networks), which helps organize specific teaching strategies and memory consolidation through sleep. On the other hand, neurosciences have highlighted the importance of the educational environment; it is impossible to achieve effective learning in a highly stressful environment. Occasional stress can manifest as extra motivation or attention for a task; On the contrary, chronic stress hinders the educational process, affecting physiological and cognitive functioning. An environment of physical and emotional well-being is closely linked to effective learning (Manes).
Through neurological research, structural modifications have been observed in the brain as a consequence of the social links of the educational process. The human brain has evolved to understand and face environmental challenges. We can think of our cognitive abilities as an adaptive trait that was modified by the environment, increasing biological efficiency, favoring the survival and reproduction of individuals. We must give pride of place to the adaptation of our mind to social problems and this will result in cognitive skills for problem solving, knowledge of social norms and the type of intelligence we call “emotional intelligence.” While teaching, the brain transforms, both of those who teach and of those who learn, expanding their capabilities and functionality. (Campos, 2010; Diéguez, 2003).
We call teaching the action of resolving a knowledge gap through intentional behavior, which implies certain cognitive requirements such as (Sigman, 2015):
If you value articles like this, consider supporting us by becoming a Pro subscriber. Subscribers enjoy access to members-only articles, materials, and webinars.
- A metacognition, being an internalized set of mechanisms which allow obtaining, producing and evaluating information (Gonzales, 1996). It is recognizing the knowledge we have about something.
- A well-established theory of mind to recognize the knowledge that the other person has about something.
- Understand the differences and disparity between these two pieces of knowledge.
- Be motivated to solve that knowledge gap.
- Have a communication device developed to solve it.
Among the contributions that neuroscience has made to education, in this article we are concerned with the difference between the ability to learn and the ability to teach. The first is more generalized, all animals learn; On the other hand, the second, as we defined it before, is exclusive to the human being; It is something distinctive and particular. Thanks to the teaching of the various symbolic systems, our brain incorporates experiences and knowledge, making education and the transmission of culture possible. The ability to teach is a way of relating that defines us, builds us. It is the seed of all culture. (García; Pérez & Muñoz-Ruata; Sigman, 2015).
Mariano Sigman in his book “The Secret Life of the Mind” presents a hypothesis in which sharing knowledge, teaching, is an innate impulse. He explains that human beings have a teaching instinct; that our brain is predisposed to spread and share knowledge. This hypothesis is supported under the following premises:
Protomasters:
We are aware that children communicate before speaking; But can they communicate useful information to another? The answer is yes. Boys can actively intervene by warning another that they are going to make a mistake, they have the ability to foresee the other’s actions and respond accordingly before even starting to speak.
Thanks to the teaching of the various symbolic systems, our brain incorporates experiences and knowledge, making education and the transmission of culture possible.
We can cite a study carried out by Ulf Liszkowski and Michael Tomasello who developed an ingenious game with a one-year-old child and an actor. In view of a child, the actor dropped an object from a table in such a way that the child saw where he fell but the actor did not. When the actor tried to look for the object without success, the child used his index finger to point and thus inform the actor of its location. This was repeated with different children and revealed an important finding: in cases where it was clear that the actor knew where the object had fallen, the child no longer pointed (Sigman, 2015).
Boys are naturally effective teachers.
If the teaching instinct really exists, we should teach naturally and effectively from childhood. At this point, to evaluate effectiveness, prosody, the ostensive key, the ability to gesture the speech, a key shared by both people in the conversation, are important. This ostensive channel is effective from the day we are born. When a message is communicated through the ostensive channel, the receiver thinks that what he was taught is complete. In conclusion, to know if the children are effective and good teachers, we have to ask ourselves if they are ostensive so that the recipient thinks if the information is complete and reliable. Ostensive gestures are very natural, the most basic one we know is looking into the eyes and physically addressing the other person. Other ostensive cues are changing the tone of voice, raising your eyebrows, and pointing out relevant objects, among others.
Answering our initial question then, Why do we teach? Because teaching is a way of taking care of ourselves, sharing knowledge is a utilitarian means of those who communicate. In ancient times it was taught to protect oneself from predatory animals and thus, by teaching another, the person protected himself. Sharing knowledge is a trait that makes us unite in groups. Teaching is the center of culture and where it is born. Putting together groups, tribes or collectives makes each individual function better than they would alone. Teaching is not only a way of knowing things and causes; It is also knowing others and ourselves. Teaching helps consolidate the knowledge of those who teach. “Teaching is learning twice” (Sigman,2015).
Bibliography
- Campos, AL (2010). Neuroeducation: uniting neuroscience and education in the pursuit of human development. The education. Digital Magazine, 143.
- Dieguez, A. (2003). What is evolutionary epistemology. Journal of thought and culture, 1(3).
- García, EG, Pérez, LM, & Muñoz-Ruata, J. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: BRAIN, MIND AND CULTURE. Educational and training changes for human and sustainable development, 1.
- González, F. (1996). About metacognition. Paradigm, 14(1-2).
- Manes, F. What can neuroscience research contribute to education? Neurosciences and education.
- Sigman, Mariano (2015). The secret life of the mind. 1st edition. Buenos Aires
- Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., & Liszkowski, U. (2007). A new look at infant pointing. Child development, 78(3), 705-722.