Criticisms and applications

While emerging findings in brain research introduce compelling opportunities for adult learners and educators, influential researchers argue that these discoveries have not translated into practical applications supported by research (Fischer & Immardino-Yang, 2008 [in press]; Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007; Bruer, 1997). Some educators have developed brain-based learning programs that attempt to identify and apply theories derived from knowledge about how the brain works. However, just as adult education practice has introduced disruptive processes and philosophies that threaten traditional education, emerging models from brain research seem to be challenging the way people think about learning while providing fodder for opportunists to promote questionable programs cloaked in scientific terminology.

Still learning

From a traditional education perspective, Bruer (1997) declares that “we do not know enough about brain development and neural functions to link that understanding… to educational practice” (p. 4). Likewise, Fischer and Immordino-Yang (Fischer & Immardino-Yang, 2008 [in press]) have written extensively about the potential their emerging brain research provides for learning practice but assert that “most of what is called ‘brain-based education’ today have no grounding at all in the brain or cognitive science” but is mere “beliefs about learning and schooling restated in the language of brain science” (para. 8).

Merriam et al. seem to concur, limiting their discussion on brain-based education to examples of programs that incorrectly interpret the available research. For example, one program purports to help adults maximize the functioning of the left and right hemispheres. At the same time, it promotes the debunked myth that reason and emotion reside in separate hemispheres.

Understanding the brain essential for learning

Resistance and hucksters aside, even the most skeptical educator might agree with neuroscientist Jeanette Norden (2007) when she says, “everything we see, hear, feel, and think, and all that we do, is the result of underlying brain processes.” Given the brain's vital role in learning, it seems educators should be able to justify classroom strategies with available research.

For example, one teacher may adhere to the Piagetian philosophy that the child learns best when he or she is left to explore as a lone scientist (Piaget & Inhelder, 2000), while another may adhere to Vygotsky’s philosophy that a child learns best when he or she collaborates with adults (Watson, 2002). Both of these instructors may benefit by reviewing Fischer’s (2007) integration of neurology with dynamic skills theory to show that children can develop steadily alone as their brains develop new capacities but that their learning can accelerate if they actively engage with knowledgeable adults when their brains develop new neural networks--and that the connections in those neural networks can fade if they are not developed.