In 2018, Dr. Tracey Tokuhama-Espinosa published Neuromyths: Debunking False Ideas About The Brain, a book that interrogates roughly sixty myths about learning and teaching. She frames each myth by explaining the myth, discussing the origin of the myth, and what we now know. Each chapter concludes with a section – Why This is Good News for Teaching – where she aggregates all the science to inform how we can leverage this knowledge in our teaching.
Below are a few of the neuromyths from the first five chapters of the book.
MOST PEOPLE USE ABOUT 10% OF THEIR BRAINS
While early neuroimaging indicated small pockets of brain activity, modern brain imaging shows that most tasks demand substantial networks throughout the brain. There is evidence of broad network activity – even when sleeping. Neuroimaging aside, there are indicators that the 10% myth is a fallacy (synaptic pruning would be evident during autopsies and brain damage has been documented in every part of the brain). We use much more than 10% of our brain (p. 24).
THE LEFT AND RIGHT HEMISPHERES OF THE BRAIN ARE SEPARATE SYSTEMS FOR LEARNING
Also not true! The common interpretation of this myth is that “right-brained” people are more creative and emotionally intelligent while “left-brained” people are highly structured and hyperorganized. There are dozens of publications disputing this but the myth persists – probably because it is a convenient way of boxing instructional theory. There have been documented cases where people with only half a brain can develop most skills (p. 31).
INDIVIDUALS LEARN BETTER WHEN THEY RECEIVE INFORMATION IN THEIR PREFERRED LEARNING STYLES
This myth is a meaty one – there is a lot to unpack here. Tokuhama-Espinosa says,
“there is little or no data that can support the investment and use of learning styles”
and
“there is not a single study to prove learning style categorization actually works.”
She goes on to say there is a danger in perpetuating this myth – “both teachers and students believe that their academic achievement is tied to a style that is not really in their control, but rather is innate.”
This is worsened by a study in 2012 that revealed more than 2,500 textbooks that promoted learning styles – “Whole educational institutions, governments, and even academic societies have bought, literally, into the myth.” Perhaps one of the reasons this myth persists is because (as Hal Pashler contends), “if a person or a person’s child is not succeeding or excelling in school, it may be more comfortable for the person to think that the educational system, not the person or the child himself or herself, is responsible.”
Given the absence of convincing evidence for learning styles, Pashler concludes, “there is no adequate evidence base to justify incorporating learning styles assessments into general educational practice. Thus, limited education resources would better be devoted to adopting other educational practices that have a strong evidence base, of which there are an increasing number.” And for what it is worth, we also know “there is no correlation between cognitive preferences (learning styles) and domain area aptitudes. That is, one would think certain styles could be better equipped for certain types of learning, but there is no evidence for this” (p. 53).
BRAIN DEVELOPMENT IS COMPLETE BY THE TIME A PERSON REACHES SECONDARY SCHOOL
Dr. Tokuhama-Espinosa speculates that this myth may be informed by the false presumption that when physical growth ends, so does brain growth. The reality is that there are plenty of longitudinal studies on brain development (childhood to adolescents), research about brain structure (ages 5 to 32), and major meta-analyses that consider numerous longitudinal studies (ages 4 to 87) that show brain developmental changes across the lifespan. The brain is not done developing when you get your high school degree (p. 84).
SELF-PERCEPTION IS LESS IMPORTANT THAN IQ IN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
Consider Tokuhama-Espinosa’s claim:
“there is ample empirical evidence that self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs are each related with and influence academic achievement meaning that what a person thinks of his own ability to learn actually influences his learning. It seems that self-discipline, self-efficacy, and self-regulation all impact academic achievement…clear that motivation and behavior are mutually and reciprocally influential. Self-perception is important, and in many cases, even more important than IQ.”
Also consider this:
“It seems that if a person thinks he can learn, he probably will, but if he doubts his ability (has low self-confidence), he will probably not even try, and this downward spiral can turn into a self-fulfilling negative prophecy. Failure begets failure; thinking you will fail leads to a higher probability of failure. And success begets success; believing you can succeed leads to a higher probability of success. Neural plasticity shows us that people are not trapped or limited by the brain they are born with, but rather can maximize their genetic potential through both strong environmental experiences and confidence in their own abilities.”
There are a number of measures educators can take to increase student success – this one is costs nothing and yields huge results (p. 110).
If you are intrigued by these five myths, you should definitely read her book. Not only does she explore many more myths about learning but Dr. Tokuhama-Espinosa talks about how to leverage our current understanding in our teaching.
One thought on “Neuromyths – Part I”
Comments are closed.