Andrew Watson – Page 55 – Education & Teacher Conferences Skip to main content

Andrew Watson About Andrew Watson

Andrew began his classroom life as a high-school English teacher in 1988, and has been working in or near schools ever since. In 2008, Andrew began exploring the practical application of psychology and neuroscience in his classroom. In 2011, he earned his M. Ed. from the “Mind, Brain, Education” program at Harvard University. As President of “Translate the Brain,” Andrew now works with teachers, students, administrators, and parents to make learning easier and teaching more effective. He has presented at schools and workshops across the country; he also serves as an adviser to several organizations, including “The People’s Science.” Andrew is the author of "Learning Begins: The Science of Working Memory and Attention for the Classroom Teacher."

Investigating Mindfulness: How Do We Know Its Benefits?
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

investigating mindfulness

Does mindfulness truly benefit people?

On the one hand, the obvious answer is “yes.” We’ve all heard that meditation reduces stress, improve concentration, deepens sleep, and whitens teeth. (I think I made that last one up.)

Some of you reading this post may have embraced mindfulness, and perhaps tell your neighbors and friends about its healing powers.

This sort of evidence–coming from personal experience–can be powerfully persuasive.

Other Ways of Knowing

On the other hand, if we want to know about mindfulness in a scientific way, we’d like some research. Please.

Research on topics like these typically follows a predictable pattern. In the early days of Mindset theory, for example, Dweck worked with a few dozen people for an hour or so.

When these studies showed promise, she then followed larger groups of people for longer periods of time. In one study, for example, she and Lisa Blackwell followed hundreds of 7th graders for over 4 years.

One recent analysis I saw looked at Mindset data for 125,000 grade-school students. Yup: 125,000.

This trajectory–from small test studies to large and rigorous trials–makes sense. We can’t fund huge investigations of every idea that comes along, so we need to test for the good ideas before we examine them in depth.

But, once an idea–like, say, mindfulness–shows promise in early trials, we’d like to see larger and more rigorous trials as the years go by.

So: is that happening? Are we seeing better studies into mindfulness?

Investigating Mindfulness

Sadly, not so much. That’s the conclusion of a recent study, which compared early mindfulness research to more recent examples.

We would like to see studies with larger sample sizes, active control conditions, longer-term evaluation of results and so forth. This study finds some positive trends, but overall isn’t impressed with the research progress over the last 13 years.

Of course, their conclusion doesn’t mean that mindfulness doesn’t help.

It does mean, however, that our evidence isn’t as strong as it might seem to be, because we haven’t yet “taken it to the next level.”

___________________

By the way: you’ll have the chance to learn more about mindfulness, and about the ways that researchers investigate it, at the upcoming Learning and the Brain conference in New York.


Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transition: A longitudinal study and an intervention. Child development78(1), 246-263.

Goldberg, S. B., Tucker, R. P., Greene, P. A., Simpson, T. L., Kearney, D. J., & Davidson, R. J. (2017). Is mindfulness research methodology improving over time? A systematic review. PloS one12(10), e0187298.

Sleeplessness Harms Women’s Thinking More Than Men’s?
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

You can understand why this study lit up my twitter feed recently. It makes a remarkable claim: women — but not men — experience working memory declines after a sleepless night.

Why We Care

We have at least two powerful reasons to care about this study.

First, it makes strong claims about gender differences. According to lead author Rangtell (and 8 colleagues), women’s performance on a working memory task gets worse after a sleepless night.

On the other hand, men’s working memory performance remains just as good as when they had a cozy 8-hour sleep.

(I’ve written about gender differences before. You may recall that I’m often skeptical of specific claims, but do think that there are some important differences at the population level.)

So, this study plays an important role in the ongoing debate.

Second, Rangtell’s study focuses on working memory. And, working memory is really important in school.

What is working memory?

When a student works on a word problem in math, she first has to select the key information from the sentences. Then she holds that information in mind. Third, she reorganizes all that information into the correct formula. And finally she combines pieces of that formula appropriately: for example, she combines “7x+8x” into “15x.”

Whenever students select, hold, reorganize, and combine information, they’re using working memory.

And, our students do that all the time. They use working memory to conjugate a new Spanish verb. And, when they apply new terminology (“protagonist”) to a specific book (“Sethe is the protagonist of Beloved.”) And, when they balance chemical equations.

Basically, schools are shrines we build to honor successful working memory functioning.

If there truly is a gender difference in working memory function, that’s a really big deal.

Sleeplessness Harms Women More Than Men?

This study is, conceptually, very straigtforward.

Ask some people to do a working memory task after a full night’s sleep. Then, ask them to do the same task after they’ve been up all night. Is there a difference in their working memory performance?

sleeplessness harms women

Rangtell and her colleagues say: for men, “no”; for women, “yes.”

However, this study includes a very serious problem. The task that they use to measure working memory DOESN’T MEASURE WORKING MEMORY.

(You read that right.)

The researchers asked these people to listen to a list of numbers, and then type those numbers into the computer in the same order.

That’s simply not a test of working memory. After all, the participants didn’t have to reorganize or combine anything.

Instead, that’s a test of short-term memory.

Now, short-term memory is related to working memory. But, “related to” isn’t good enough.

Imagine, for instance, I claimed that sleeplessness makes people shorter. The way I determine your height is by measuring the length of your arm.

Of course: arm length and height are related. But, they’re not the same thing. Tall people can have short-ish arms. I can’t measure one thing and then make a claim about a related but different thing.

So too, Rangtell can’t measure short-term memory and then make claims about working memory. She didn’t measure working memory.

Does sleeplessness harm women’s working memory more than men’s? We just don’t know.

(By the way: I’ve reached out to the lead researcher to inquire about the working memory/short-term memory discrepancy. I’ll update this post if I hear back.)

Neuroplasticity and Myelin: Fascinating Brain Mysteries
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

If you attend the more hard-core neuroscience talks at Learning and the Brain conferences, you’re familiar with words like “myelin,” “neuroplasticity,” and perhaps even “oligodendrocytes.”

How do all these terms fit together? Here’s the scoop…

Step 1: Neuroplasticity

For much of the 20th century, neuroscientists believed that brains developed during early childhood. However, relatively quickly, they arrived at their final, unchanging form.

With newer technologies, however, we now know that brains keep changing throughout our lives. We’ve even got a word for a brain’s ability to change: “neuroplasticity.” (“neuro” = brain; “plastic” = change.)

Because this finding contradicts so many decades of neuroscientific belief, researchers have been REALLY excited about it. When you hear them at a talk, you can see their eyes grow wide with wonder.

Brains change throughout our lives.

Step 2: Myelin

Like babies, neurons are born naked.

Of course, neurons carry electrical signals, and exposed wires don’t do that very effectively. Over time, therefore, your brain needs to insulate those naked neurons.

It does so with “myelin sheathing”; a phrase that neuroscientists use so they don’t have to say “little white hot-dog buns made of fat.” But: that’s what myelin sheathing is — fat.

Myelination benefits all sorts of human activities. neuroplasticity and myelinWhen neurons myelinate, they carry their signals up to 100 times faster, and so perform the same job considerably more efficiently.

For example: babies learn to walk when the motor neurons responsible for that part of the body myelinate. (If you’re particularly interesting in myelination, check out this video.)

How does the brain myelinate those neurons? Highly specialized brain cells — with the poetic name “oligodendrocytes” — work like tiny bricklayers to create this essential coating.

Step 3: Neuroplasticity and Myelin

In a recent article over at Searching for the Mind, Dr. Jon Lieff explores the complexities of these essential processes. In particular, as he describes it, he sees myelination as essential for “whole brain neuroplasticity.”

It’s an article for those of you who really want to know more about highly complex brain mechanics. If you don’t have time for graduate school work in neuroscience, here’s a fascinating place to start.

Motivation vs. IQ: Which Is More Important?
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

motivation vs. IQ

Do students benefit more from a high IQ or from high levels of intrinsic motivation?

Over at Quartz, Rebecca Haggerty argues for the importance of motivation. To make this argument, she draws on the research of Adele and Allen Gottfried. By gathering data on a group of children for decades, they conclude:

Kids who scored higher on measures of academic intrinsic motivation at a young age—meaning that they enjoyed learning for its own sake—performed better in school, took more challenging courses, and earned more advanced degrees than their peers. They were more likely to be leaders and more self-confident about schoolwork. Teachers saw them as learning more and working harder. As young adults, they continued to seek out challenges and leadership opportunities.

Even more than a high IQ, intrinsic motivation points students toward a fulfilling life.

Parenting to Promote Motivation

According to the Gottfrieds, how can parents encourage this trait?

Unsurprisingly, parental behavior can influence child development. Inquisitive parents foster inquisitiveness. Parents who read to their children promote a love of reading.

No matter how many parenting books say it’s okay, paying children for grades squashes a love of learning for its own sake.

In any case, the examples we set early on endure. In one of the Gottfrieds’ findings, children encouraged to be curious when they were eight took more science classes years later in high school. That’s parenting for the long haul.

(For some thoughts on teaching strategies to promote intrinsic motivation, click here.)

Motivation vs. IQ: A Caveat and Two Puzzles

A caveat:

Whenever thinking about the “motivation vs. IQ” question, we should pause to remember its complexity. It might be tempting to discount IQ completely. And yet, we know that something like intelligence exists, and that it’s good to have.

Richard Nisbett explores these questions here.

Two points in Haggerty’s article strike me as puzzling.

First, the Gottfrieds speak of children being “motivationally gifted.” However, we know from Dweck’s research that such praise demotivates students.

We should stop praising children for who they are (“gifted, talented, a natural”) and focus on praising them for what they do (“detailed and imaginative work”).

Second, a detail. Haggerty writes that 19% of the Gottfrieds’ subjects have an IQ of higher than 130. That’s an astonishingly high number.

In a typical population, just over 2% of people have an IQ in that range.

In raw numbers: 25 of their subjects have “genius-level” IQ, and we would expect than number to be about 3.

If Haggerty got that number right, then we should be hesitant to extrapolate to the general population from this remarkable sample.

Surprise! The Unexpected Outdoor Class Advantage
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

outdoor learning advantage

“Can we have class outside today?”

If you’re like me, you get this question often. Especially on a beautiful spring day…

But do your students have a point? Might there be good reasons to move class outside every now and then?

Outdoor Class Advantage: What We Know

We’ve already got research suggesting that your students might be on to something.

Some researchers suggest that classes outside help restore student attention.

Other studies (here and here) indicated that they might enhance student motivation as well.

We’ve even got reason to think that exposure to green landscape helps students learn. For example: this study in Michigan suggests that natural views improve graduation rate and standardized test scores.

None of the evidence is completely persuasive, but each additional piece makes the argument even stronger.

Outdoor Class Advantage: Today’s News

If I’m a skeptic about outdoor class, I might make the following argument. Outdoor classes might be good for that particular class. However, they might be bad for subsequent classes.

That is: students might be so amped up by their time outside that they can’t focus when they get back indoors.

To explore this concern, Ming Kuo and colleagues put together an impressive study.

Over ten weeks, two teachers taught several pairs of lessons. Half of the time, the first lesson was taught outside. For the other half, the first lesson was taught inside.

Researchers then measured students’ attentiveness during the second lesson in these pairs.

The results?

The Results!

Students were more attentive — A LOT more attentive — after outdoor classes than indoor classes.

In almost 50% of the lessons, attention was a full standard deviation higher after outdoor classes. In 20% of the lessons, it was two standard deviations higher.

Technically speaking, that difference is HUGE.

(By the way: the researchers came up with several different ways to measure attention. Outdoor classes led to improved attention in four of the five measures.)

The Implications

This research suggests that teachers needn’t worry about outdoor classes leading to distraction in subsequent classes.

That finding doesn’t necessarily mean that outdoor classes benefit learning, but it does mean we have fewer potential causes for concern.

Getting the Best Advice about Learning
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

Occasionally I try to persuade people that neuroscience is fantastically complicated. In other words: we shouldn’t beat ourselves up if we don’t master it all.

Today I spotted a headline that makes my point for me:

 

Hippocampus-driven feed-forward inhibition of the prefrontal cortex mediates relapse of extinguished fear

Got that?

What’s the Bigger Point?

Neuroscience is simply fascinating. As teachers, we really want to know how neurons work. And synapses. And brain regions — like the hippocampus and the prefrontal cortex.

However, specific teaching advice almost always comes from psychology. How do teachers help students connect neurons to create memories? Psychology. What classroom strategies support executive function in the prefrontal cortex? Psychology.

At a LatB Conference, you’ll enjoy the neuroscience talks because they show you what’s going on underneath the hood. At the psychology talks, you’ll get specific classroom suggestions.

The best conference experience, in my opinion, combines both.

You Are Not a Nile Grass Rat…
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

read research skeptically

I’ve seen the same headline three times in my newsfeed today: “Dim Light Might Make You Dumber.”

One summary includes this teaser:

“Spending too much time in dimly lit rooms and offices may actually change the brain’s structure and hurt one’s ability to remember and learn.”

That’s a fascinating — and potentially alarming — research finding. At a minimum, it seems to have important implications for classroom design.

Here’s a key detail to remember: this study was done on Nile grass rats.

No, really. Rats. (I assume rats that live in Nile grass.)

Teachers Should Read Research Skeptically

Rat research is essential for neuroscientists. A great deal of our neuro-knowledge comes from animal studies.

So, too, in psychology. Watching primate behavior (and even pigeon behavior) helps us understand human behavior.

But, here’s the key point to remember: your students are not rats. (Depending on the grade you teach, they might occasionally remind you of rats. But, they’re really not.)

Teachers should pay close attention to neuroscience and psychology research done on people. However, you should NEVER change your teaching practice based on research into non-human animals.

Once More, with Feeling…

I want to go back to the quotation I cited above:

“Spending too much time in dimly lit rooms and offices may actually change the brain’s structure and hurt one’s ability to remember and learn.”

In your experience, how much time do rats spend in their offices?

According to Wikipedia, the natural habitats of the African rat are “dry savanna, moist savanna, subtropical or tropical moist shrubland, arable land, pastureland, rural gardens, urban areas, irrigated land, and seasonally flooded agricultural land.”

There’s no indication that rats ever go to the office.

Clearly, someone has already extrapolated the conclusions of this research to assume it applies to people. Until it has, in fact, been tested on people, you should not make the same mistake.

Do Musicians Really Have Better Memories?
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

musician memory

Here’s a provocative claim for you: “musicians have better memories than non-musicians.”

But, do we have research to support that claim?

According to a meta-analysis published back in October of 2017, the answer is: “mostly yes.”

What do we know about musician memory?

Reseachers in Padua, Italy examined 29 different memory studies, sorting them into categories of long-term, short-term, and working memory.

In all three categories, musician memory averaged higher on various tests than non-musician memory. (They defined “musician” as someone who had enrolled in a conservatory or music school, and “non-musician” as someone who had little musical training.)

The effect size was “small” for long-term memory, and “moderate” for short-term and working memory.

(For the stats pros in the house, Hedges’s g was 0.29 for LTM, 0.57 for STM, and 0.56 for WM.)

The Plot Thickens

Of course, the story gets more complex. After all, we have different ways of testing these memory skills.

So, for example, we might test people on their ability to remember musical tones. In that case, it’s not at all surprising that musicians have better memory.

But when we test their verbal ability, or their visuo-spatial ability, what do we find?

In long-term memory, it’s all the same. Musicians consistently have (slightly) higher scores than non-musicians.

For short-term memory and working memory, these tests matter. In verbal tests, musicians’ STM and WM still average higher, but not as much as overall. In visuo-spatial tests, the differences basically vanishes.

How to explain these differences?

It’s not surprising that music training might help with verbal capacities. Our ability to process and read language does depend significantly on our ability to process tone and rhythm.

However, music isn’t so directly related to processing of spatial information, and so might not provide enough training to make a difference.

How do we interpret these differences?

Before we conclude that music training causes better memory, we should consider an alternative explanation. Perhaps music requires better memory, and so only those with very good memory skills ever enroll in a conservatory.

If that explanation isn’t true, then we arrive at a surprising conclusion: just maybe it IS possible to train working memory.

Regular readers of this blog know that there’s a lot of skepticism about WM training programs. They’re often expensive and time consuming, and don’t consistently produce results outside of the psychology lab.

It would be thrilling to know that music lessons not only help people make music, but also boost this essential cognitive capacity.

At the same time, we should keep two cautions in mind.

First: it takes A LOT of music training to get into conservatory. People with WM difficulties just might not have that much extra time.

Second: this study doesn’t show that music training leads to greater learning of, say, math and reading. When we worry about students’ working memory, we typically want them to make greater progress in disciplines such as these.

Last Notes

These cautions aside, this study seems like wonderful news. Creating music is good for the soul. And, studying music just might be good for our memory systems as well.

Motivating Retrieval Practice: Money Doesn’t Help
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

Brain Chalkboard_CreditGiven all the benefits that come from retrieval practice, we should surely encourage our students to use this technique as much as possible. How can we best motivate them to do so?

Three researchers in Europe offer this answer: subtly.

More specifically, their research finds that offering students extrinsic rewards for their retrieval practice reduced its effectiveness.

Students offered rewards made more mistakes when they first tried to recall information, and–even taking those initial errors into account–remembered less than their fellow students who had received no enticement to practice.

In this study, the extrinsic rewards were cash payments: students received a euro for every correct answer. In schools, we rarely pay students money to get correct answers. However, we quite often pay them with grades.

This study suggests that retrieval practice should–as much as possible–come in the form of very-low-stakes or no-stakes retrieval.

Top Neuroscience Stories of 2017, Wisely Annotated
Andrew Watson
Andrew Watson

AdobeStock_137247812_Credit

NeuroscienceNews.com has published its “Top 20 Neuroscience Stories of 2017,” and the list provides helpful — and sometimes surprising — insight into current brain research.

Taken together, these stories add up to 5 important headlines.

Headline 1: Neuroscience can tell us such cool stuff!

Gosh darnit: people who swear more are more likely to be honest, and less likely to be deceptive. Dad gummity.

If music literally gives you chills, you might have unusual levels of connectivity between your auditory cortex and emotional processing centers.

People with very high IQs (above 130) are more prone to anxiety than others.

A double hand transplant (!) leads to remarkable levels of brain rewiring (!).

Forests can help your amygdala develop, especially if you live near them.

When you look a baby in the eyes, your brain waves just might be synchronizing.

Headline 2: Your gut is your “second brain”

Amazingly, fully one quarter of the 20 top stories focus on the connection between the brain and the digestive system. For example:

  • Traumatic Brain Injury Causes Intestinal Damage
  • Research Suggests Connection between Gut Bacteria and Emotion
  • New Light on Link between Gut Bacteria and Anxiety
  • Your Mood Depends on the Food You Eat
  • Gut Microbes May Talk to the Brain through Cortisol

This “aha” moment — our guts and our brains are deeply interconnected! — happens over and over, and yet hasn’t fully been taken on board in the teaching and understanding of neuroscience.

Teachers should watch this research pool. It will, over the years, undoubtedly be increasingly helpful in our work.

Headline 3: Neuroscience and psychology disagree about definitions of ADHD

A psychologist diagnoses ADHD by looking at behavior and using the DSM V.

If a student shows a particular set of behaviors over time, and if they interfere with her life, then that psychologist gives a diagnosis.

However, a 2017 study suggests that these ADHD behaviors might be very different in their underlying neural causes.

Think of it this way. I might have chest pains because of costochondritis — inflammation of cartilage around the sternum. Or I might have chest paints because I’m having a heart attack.

It’s really important to understand the underlying causes so we get the treatment right.

The same just might be true for ADHD. If the surface symptoms are the same, but the underlying neural causes are different, we might need differing treatments for students with similar behavior.

By the way, the same point is true for anxiety and depression.

Headline 4: Each year we learn more about brain disorders

Alzheimer’s might result, in part, from bacteria in the brain. Buildup of urea might result in dementia. Impaired production of myelin might lead to schizophrenia. Oxidative stress might result in migraines.

Remarkably, an immune system disorder might be mistaken for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. (Happily, that immune system problem can be treated.)

Headline 5: For teachers, neuroscience is fascinating; psychology is useful

If you’re like me, you first got into Learning and the Brain conferences because the brain — the physical object — is utterly fascinating.

You want to know about neurons and synapses and the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex and the ventral tegmental area. (Ok, maybe not so much with the ventral tegmental area.)

Over all these years, I’ve remained fascinated by neuroscience. At the same time, I’ve come to understand that it rarely offers teachers concrete advice.

Notice: of the twenty headlines summarized above, only one of them really promises anything specific to teachers. If that ADHD study pans out, we might get all sorts of new ideas about diagnosing and treating students who struggle with attention in school.

The other 19 stories? They really don’t offer us much that’s practical.

The world of psychology, however, has all sorts of specific classroom suggestions for teachers. How to manage working memory overload? To foster attention? To promote motivation?

Psychology has concrete answers to all these questions.

And so, I encourage you to look over these articles because they broaden our understanding of brains and of neuroscience. For specific teaching advice, keep your eyes peeled for “the top 20 psychology stories of 2017.”