6 Learning Myths Debunked by Neuroscience

6 Learning Myths Debunked by Neuroscience

Neuroscience isn’t rocket science. It’s harder, because it’s about the human brain. While the laws of physics are straightforward (if hard to grasp for most of us), the laws that govern how brain chemistry affects human behavior are much more subject to variation. With the advent of the fMRI machine in 2000, the study of the brain exploded—and with it, a lot of old myths about the brain were debunked.

Here are six such myths that are particularly relevant to learning professionals.

Myth 1: Some people are good at multitasking.

There is no such thing as multitasking. There is only the ability to toggle one’s attention back and forth very quickly, and that skill has its limits. This truth has strong implications for learning professionals who are designing experiences for virtual learning. People learning virtually have many more options to entertain themselves than they would in a live classroom, so keeping learners engaged and on their toes becomes even more important.

Myth 2: We can learn while sleeping.

Sleep is critical to learning—but, despite the hopes of students everywhere, it is not because we learn while sleeping. The reason we need to work to recall what we want to remember before sleeping is because short-term memories are encoded into long-term memory while we sleep. So the more times we recall and practice before sleeping, the more chance there is that we will remember when it matters.

Myth 3: We have preferred learning styles.

Despite the continued prevalence of the idea that if instructors match to preferred learning styles individuals will learn faster, there is zero scientific evidence to support it. It is true that individuals do appreciate different methods of instruction more than others. However, the effective way to tailor learning has more to do with learning aptitude and content knowledge. So modifying the speed at which individuals are expected to make sense of new material and modifying the difficulty of the practice problems are much better ways to adapt instruction to specific learners.

Myth 4: We learn best when the material is simple and straightforward.

Again, an attractive idea, but untrue. Instruction that includes novelty and layering is much more effective than the application of logic and reasoning.

Myth 5: We learn best when we feel safe.

People are much more apt to engage in learning if they are just a little uncomfortable. This is counter-intuitive, but research shows that both making errors and forgetting, which can cause frustration and self-doubt, are the most reliable ways to learn new information and encode it in a way that will be used in the future. The errors made with the highest degree of confidence tend to be the ones that are most memorable.

Myth 6: Knowing = Doing

Although we have all experienced the gap between knowing something and modifying our behavior based on that knowledge, it has not changed the hopeful wish that one standalone event will help anyone change their behavior. This, if anything, is an example of hope over reason—not unlike a student sleeping with their textbook under their pillow and crossing their fingers that the contents will magically seep into their brains.

Short, single, standalone events, like keynotes and webinars, are useful to draw attention to a topic or new skill that is desired (or required), to build awareness, and to generate interest and excitement.

Actual learning happens best with small portions of content that are recalled often over time and practiced, providing a foundation for the next concept. This is why the advent of virtual learning (which can easily be shortened and spaced out) with specific instruction for practice between learning sessions is so effective.

The human brain is an exceptionally complex organ. The more we learn about it, the more mysterious it seems to become. The temptation is to believe that our brains are like computers or even the newer AI models, but the comparison does not hold water. However, there are some things we do know for sure, and learning professionals need to know them so they can best make the business case for proper investment to support their mission.

?______________________________________________________________________________________________

Note: Ready to explore further? Consider attending this year’s Blanchard Leadership Summit. Neuroscience is just one of the topics that will be explored as a part of 24 best practice learning sessions for L&D leaders, instructional designers, and delivery experts.

Ayrolyn K.

Learning Program Design and Implementation, Instructional Design, Learning Management, Learning Experience Design

2 个月

Well... I'd put one caveat in there. I'd say that actual learning happens when small portions of content are recalled often over time and practiced. Then you're able to have feedback on your ability to perform the task, prove knowledge of the concepts, apply the theory, etc., in a way that doesn't put you into your threat zone or trigger your protection instincts. These are very real for large groups of people with varying experiences with "leadership" - teachers, caregivers, or managers in business organizations. My point is, Madeleine ?? , feedback loops are critical to learning and that safety is essential in these loops.

回复
Alex Kimi

Portfolio Analyst | Auckland Council

2 个月

I like your insight that There is no such thing as multitasking. There is only the ability to toggle one’s attention back and forth very quickly, and that skill has its limits. So true.

回复
Pamela Kaufman Wagoner

Leadership Coach, Learning Thought Leader

3 个月

Madeleine -this is an excellent article! I particularly love #5 :)

回复
April H.

She/Her | Director of Strategy and Transformation and DEI Practice Lead

3 个月

Madeleine, I love this! The "spacing effect"--that long-term memory is enhanced when learning events are spaced apart in time, rather than massed in immediate succession--is solid science and it goes alllll the way back to the late 1800s with Ebbinghaus. I saw a recent study that was sort of shocking to me, which suggest that as much as 90 percent of information is forgotten within 30 days, and 70 percent of that loss happens within one day! Whoa.

Carroll Carter, Jr.

4Ce-Mobility Advs.

3 个月

Very helpful!

回复

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了