RE: [xmca] Educational neuroscience

[Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>]

OK if anyone wants the Andy Clark paper and can't get it via the link I sent earlier - email me!

Rod

-----Original Message-----
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole
Sent: 28 July 2013 22:19
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience

Whoever the moderators are, they are probably ambivalent, is mt guess.
What I do in such ashes is to ask people who are interested to write me directly.

The commentaries are interesting too.
Mike

On Sunday, July 28, 2013, Rod Parker-Rees wrote:

> I could, but should I? How do xMCA moderators feel about copyright?
>
> Sorry if this seems unhelpful, Nancy, but I don't want to cause any
> problems for this forum.
>
> Meanwhile, the link is
> http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&a
> id=8958097&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S0140525X12001495
>
> All the best,
>
> Rod
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> [mailto:
> xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>] On Behalf Of Mack, Nancy J.
> Sent: 28 July 2013 17:04
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: RE: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
>
> Rod,
> This sounds useful.
> Could you please attach a copy of the article for us to read?
>
>
> Nancy
>
>
> Dr. Nancy Mack
> Professor of English
>
> ________________________________________
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu <javascript:;> [
> xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu <javascript:;>] on behalf of Rod
> Parker-Rees [ R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk <javascript:;>]
> Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 11:01 AM
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: RE: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
>
> I am reading a fascinating article by Andy Clark - 'Whatever next?
> Predictive brains, situated agents, and the future of cognitive science'
> BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2013) 36, 181-253
> doi:10.1017/S0140525X12000477 - not specifically focused on education
> but offering a powerful set of arguments for understanding cognitive
> processes (including perception and action) as always involving both
> top-down and bottom-up components. We don't simply take in perceptual
> information and pass it through a series of processes to extract
> information from it, instead we actively anticipate what we are likely
> to experience and check our perceptions against these predictive
> models, paying attention only to aspects where there is a mismatch.
> This is grossly oversimplifying a complex argument but I think it does
> relate to questions about neuroscience and education because it
> clearly shows that what we already know (a product of our experience -
> always social and always cultural) directly informs the way our brains
> process new information. We have our (unique) genetic biology but we
> also have our (unique) history which makes our perezhivanie
> - what we understand from our experience - unique to us. Some aspects
> of neuroscience can help us to challenge the simplistic, 'mind as machine'
> models which neuroscience has tended to encourage (mainly among people
> who are not involved in it).
>
> All the best,
>
> Rod
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> On Behalf Of Martin John Packer
> Sent: 27 July 2013 23:28
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
>
> Yes, it seems to me that some of the best evidence against a simple
> preprogrammed maturational account of brain development has come from
> neuroscience itself. Equally, some of the most interesting theorizing
> and research exploring alternatives to the computational model of the
> brain and the representational model of mind is coming from neuroscientists.
>
> Martin
>
>
> On Jul 27, 2013, at 11:46 AM, "Hansen, Monica" <
> monica.hansen@vandals.uidaho.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Andy, and others. Interesting discussion. Some good sources. One
> consideration:
> >
> > Pharmaceutical implications are NOT the only result of understanding
> > the
> contribution of neuroscience in education! Although I have seen
> neuroscientists include this in their discussion (especially for
> dyslexia and adhd).
> >
> > One implication of neuroscience for teachers in the classroom with
> individual students is a greater understanding of normal, individual
> variation for complex functions like reading and writing. In working
> to understand neuroanatomy of meaningful language, one finds that
> current research supports more structures being involved rather than
> identifying one localized region for speech production.  Rather than
> considering development as predetermined, development is considered
> ongoing. The social and cultural influence in an individual's cortical organization is huge!
> Current neuroscience supports what Bella Kotik-Friedgut refers to from
> Luria as "extracortical" organization, the notion that the cortex is
> reorganized from without the individual. Development of the brain is
> not predetermined for our students just because of genetics. What we
> become and are is not reduced to chemicals, is not a function of
> time(maturity) in the mechanistic sense, but arises from the ability
> of our nervous systems as dynamic, growing and changing within larger systems.
> >
> > Monica Hansen
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu
> > [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu]
> > On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:00 AM
> > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > Subject: Re: [xmca] Educational neuroscience
> >
> > I would like to suggest a thought experiment.
> > Suppose that neuroscience had progressed to a point where every
> > psychological phenomenon has been traced to a specific formation in
> > the brain. (This is of course very far from the case. Even dramatic
> > psychological disorders are often invisible to neuroscience, but
> > just suppose. ....)
> >
> > What then?
> >
> > It could help faciitate new pharamceutical and surgical cures for
> psychological disorders.
> > So instead of better teaching, we could administer drugs to children
> > so
> they learn faster, or something??
> > It is only surgical and pharmceutical interventions that require
> > neuroscientific knowledge. Oherwise, stories about the brain just
> > function as rationalisations, for doing things which can be
> > explained and tested without reference to the brain,
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > Huw Lloyd wrote:
> >> On 24 July 2013 16:45, Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 24 July 2013 16:35, Wagner Luiz Schmit
> >>> <wagner.schmit@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Huw,
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for the indications. Any "recent" (10 years or so)
> >>>> research dealing with the data made available by the knew scan technologies?
> >>>>
> >>>> Best,
> >>>>
> >>>> Wagner
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Nothing that I've come across.  I haven't expected to find
> >>> anything though, so haven't looked with any diligence.
> >>>
> >

This email and any files with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the recipient to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient then copying, distribution or other use of the information contained is strictly prohibited and you should not rely on it. If you have received this email in error please let the sender know immediately and delete it from your system(s). Internet emails are not necessarily secure. While we take every care, Plymouth University accepts no responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan emails and their attachments. Plymouth University does not accept responsibility for any changes made after it was sent. Nothing in this email or its attachments constitutes an order for goods or services unless accompanied by an official order form.