Learning Models

Thinking takes place when beliefs are formed, in solving problems and when decisions are made. Theorists have been working for decades to identify a way in which 'good thinking' could be taught.

In the past, if one wished to acquire a new skill or learn a trade, one simply found someone who knew how and learnt from them. The Industrial Revolution introduced the notion that people could be brought together and taught using a standardized curriculum. This factory style of learning still exists in our schools today, combining elements of sociology, business, and religion with civic skills such as obedience, orderliness, and respect for authority.

In the 1950s and 1960s psychologists studying behaviorist theory attempted to explain why humans behaved the way they do. They proposed that studients were not developing the appropriate attitude and mind-set to be receptive to learning in the reward-punishment culture of schools as it failed to enable the student to reach the level of self-awareness needed to instill a genuine desire to learn for the sake of learning.

Brain Models

The brain has been historically described in terms of a hydraulic system, a switchboard and a three-part evolutionary schema. Methodologies around 'super learning' and 'accelerated learning' became popular as the Information Age emerged.

In spite of new technologies allowing closer inspection of brain structure and function, and research on cognitive processes, researchers have yet to conclusively define the ‘learning process’ in spite of many so called educational gurus espousing their latest theories for exceptional learning.

In 1986 Perkins proposed that intelligence could be improved by improving thinking skills.
He defined intelligence as a combination of power [natural ability], tactics [thinking
strategy] and content. These three factors supposedly combining to create an 'enlightened person'. He further proposed that since the education system was not supporting this form of intelligence, thinking skills must be specifically taught. Perkins introduced the idea of using thinking frames, now known as ‘Thinking Maps ‘.

In spite of the development of this learning tool, it still did not define clearly how the mind actually received, processed, or produced information.

Multiple Intelligences

Another notable contribution was that of Howard Gardner [1983] and his work with multiple intelligences. Gardner proposed that the brain possesses at least eight and possibly nine different types of intelligence, including: mathematical, musical, kinesthetic, linguistic, spatial, interpersonal, intra personal, naturalist, and possibly existentialist intelligence.

In applying multiple intelligences, learning experiences could be designed to help develop particular intelligences those individual may lack.

Brain-Compatible Learning

The recent technological revolution has enabled scientists to study the cerebral cortex in a manner and depth never before imagined. Researchers are locating areas of the brain that perform specific functions and speculation is that learning how these areas actually work .
Some researchers claim that anything you learned two years ago is already old information.

Triarchic Brain Theory of Intelligence

Sternberg’s [1996] work centered on three elements, creative intelligence, analytic intelligence, and practical intelligence. He proposed that we are most effective when our brains balance all three of its creative, analytical, and practical aspects.

Emotional Intelligence or EQ

Goleman [1995] identified the way the brain controlled our emotions, claiming that emotions are harboured in an almond sized structure called the amygdala, which controls the emission of the chemicals that regulate how we react to certain stimuli. Goleman believes that one’s emotional intelligence may be more of a measure of success than one’s IQ.

Unified Brain Theory

Sylwester [1997] added to the EQ theory by claiming that without an emotional connection, no learning can take place. He claims that our brains function as a whole system, with all the parts working in unison, to produce intelligence and that brain-compatible learning must be dynamic to keep pace with the rate of information change. With the current rate of information growth and complexity, it is clear that the brain is now lagging in its ability to process and assimilate information. It is like an old model computer trying to process modern programs.

Thinking Maps

When the brain encounters new information it either fits the new information into existing patterns of thinking or modifies its existing structures in order to make sense of the new information. Thinking maps is one attempt to replicate a framework for learning, that more closely aligns with the way the brain organizes information.

Todays version of Thinking Maps was developed by David Hyerle the 1980s, aiming to provide a more performance-effective alternative than traditional text layout.

Using maps configured on gestalt organizational principles, Herle claims these frames are more congruent with to accessing specific brain-thought processing functions.

There have been numerous studies of educational groups using these structures, with mixed success. Whilst proving effective in in untangling complex relations from the linear structure of text, they do little to improve long-term memory or recall.

The world continues to attempt to define ways in which we can use our natural brain function to assimilate large, complex volumes of data. Personally, I think this is the wrong approach. The human brain will likely never keep pace witht the information required and available today to make daily business decisions. Computers running business intelligence programs are much more adept at completing this task.

Our focus is better spent on our right brain capabilities to define the questions we should be entering into the computer - and developing our creative skills to identify the insight that information modeling can provide us. Wasting time on left brain prinicples is like being determined to get a bicylce to go fast enough to compete with a ferrari. If we use our right brain to break out from the boundaries of needing wheels to traverse from one point to another faster, our outcomes are more likely to prove effective. Unfortunately, this is where the Socratic style of evolutionary learning is holding us back. We need to break from the pack and adopt the fluid lateral thinking processes as describe by Edward de Bono and look outside predetermined boundaries and follow multiple paths of exploration to determine many possible outcomes, none of which need to utilise previously held concepts.

©Gail La Grouw. To learn more about how your business can use technology to enhance your brain modeling capabilities, get a copy of The Logical Organization here.

Back To Top