As gymnastics coaches we are educators first. What we teach is the science of movement. How we teach is an art. Knowing this I tend to read many science bases educational journals (to improve my art).  I recently did a little follow up reading on research in neuroscience.

It is important to cut through the neuroscience buzz and extract real information that can improve any learning program. Paul Howard-Jones, a researcher at the Centre for Mind and Brain in Educational and Social Contexts at Bristol University in the United Kingdom, cautions that neuromyths, or the “misconception generated by a misunderstanding, a misreading, or a misquoting of facts scientifically established by brain research to make a case for use of brain research in education or other contexts” are more pervasive in the educational field than we might think—and that these neuromyths may, ultimately, work against educational achievement.

In a survey of educators across the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Turkey, Greece, and China, Howard-Jones found that teachers were quite susceptible to neuromyths, including the idea that humans only use 10 percent of their brains and that children are less attentive after consuming sugary snacks. The results were published in a Perspectives piece in Nature Review Neuroscience in October of 2014. And while Howard-Jones’ survey did not include American educators, he believes he would find similar results in the United States, as these ideas have become quite commonplace across the globe.

To help out with the process, Ann Herrmann-Nehdi, CEO of thinking research and learning organization Herrmann International, said there are a few neuroscience myths that learning leaders should recognize right away as false:

Myth: We only use 10 percent of our brains, and it’s slowing us down.
Fact: As much as Hollywood would like us to believe through movies like “Lucy” and “Limitless” that we could all be superhuman if we unlocked 90 percent of our brain capacity, Ann Herrmann-Nehdi, CEO of thinking research and learning organization Herrmann International, said that’s simply not true. We have full use of our brain but only so much of it needs to be working at a time for us to fully function.

Marcus Raichle, a neuroscientist at Washington University in St. Louis and a member of the Dana Alliance for Brain Initiatives (DABI), was one of the first scientists to suggest that, even at rest, the brain is working at full capacity. Since then, most neuroscientists have accepted that the brain has a so-called “default mode,” a sophisticated network of brain areas that remain active even when the brain is resting.

“When I’m asked what the brain’s job is, if I can sum it up in one sentence or so, I always say the brain is in the prediction business. We’ve learned that it’s always on—and most of its energy is devoted to trying to predict what’s going to happen to you next,” says Raichle. “And I don’t see how the brain could be in the prediction business if it was working at only 10 percent capacity.”

Myth: We can multitask.
Fact: A simple examination of how many car accidents happen because of people eating, texting, talking or otherwise not devoting all their attention to the road can discredit this theory. We feel like we can do many things at the same time, but really we’re just switching between the different parts of the brain handling each task. Herrmann-Nehdi, said “The brain is not a parallel processer, There’s at least a 50 percent increase in error rate and it takes you 50 percent longer to do something while multitasking.”
Myth: The right puzzles and classical music can boost intelligence.
Fact: Although there are short-term benefits of using mind-strengthening games and listening to classical music, there’s no long-term efficacy, Herrmann-Nehdi said. But hey, if you like Beethoven, it can’t hurt to listen to the fifth symphony every so often. Personally, I’m more of a Gershwin fan — “Rhapsody in Blue” is my jam.

Myth:Eating sugary snacks results in hyperactivity and reduced focus and attention.
Where It Comes From:As researchers study the effect of diet on cognition, one thing is becoming abundantly clear: diet matters. Understanding how, where, and why, however, remains a bit elusive. In the 1970’s, many researchers believed that sugary foods and food additives were linked to cognitive deficits—particularly in school-aged children. Several correlational studies showed a link between sugar intake and hyperactive behavior. These results were only fueled by parental and teacher anecdotes. They consistently reported that children are less attentive (and more active) after consuming sugar. Even today, if you offer elementary schoolers a cookie near bedtime, you’ll likely get an earful from a parent about how that sugary snack will only rile them up.

FACT:This particular neuromyth has been around for quite some time—and Harris Lieberman, a researcher who studies diet and cognition at the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, says that, despite several studies debunking it, it still remains a popular belief among both parents and educators. It’s a case where anecdote seems to have a stronger pull than sound scientific experimentation.

“For some reason, nutrition and behavior generates a lot of mythology. But in the controlled studies that investigated whether sugar versus placebo made children more hyperactive and interfered with their ability to concentrate, it’s clear that sugar was not linked to hyperactivity in kids,” he says. “But it’s very difficult to convince people once they think they are observing a relationship that it doesn’t exist, regardless of how many scientists say so and how many studies have been done.”

Myth:Hemispheric dominance (whether you are “left-brained” or “right-brained”) determines how you learn.

Where It Comes From: In the 1960’s, Roger Sperry, Joseph Bogen, and Michael Gazzaniga undertook what are now known as the “split-brain” studies. The group studied patients, usually epileptics, who had undergone a surgical procedure that severed the corpus callosum, or the white matter neural fibers that link the two hemispheres of the brain. The group discovered that this procedure resulted in some striking hemispheric differences on cognition. Gazzaniga, in an essay written for Nature Reviews Neuroscience about his split-brain research, says, “Nothing can possibly replace a singular memory of mine: that of the moment when I discovered that case W.J. could no longer verbally describe (from his left hemisphere) stimuli presented to his freshly disconnected right hemisphere.” The group went on to demonstrate that severing the corpus callosum in its entirety blocks interhemispheric communication—influencing a patient’s ability to perceive and describe information, depending on which side of the brain it was presented to.

More than four decades later, the split-brain work has undergone a metamorphosis in popular culture. It has been co-opted to describe visual and verbal learning styles, as well as different personality types. Books and popular periodicals argue that “hemispheric dominance,” or which side of the brain is more active, tells us about who we are as people. That “left-brainers” are your more analytical types—while “right-brainers” are more creative and expressive. And today, you’ll find all manner of educational books instructing teachers on how to harness the two different hemispheres to encourage optimal learning in the classroom.

Fact: Gazzaniga, now director of the Sage Center for the Study of Mind at University of California Santa Barbara (as well as a DABI member), says he couldn’t have predicted that his split-brain work could have become such a part of popular culture when he started the work more than 40 years ago.
“It took off and really had its own life,” he chuckled. “And it makes sense if you think about it in terms of a very easy way to explain what you knew about brain mechanisms and cognitive abilities. But it’s overly simplified and overstated.”

Gazzaniga says that the split-brain work has become “mixed up” with sound psychological and educational work that demonstrates that children use a variety of cognitive strategies to solve problems. “There are some kids who visualize problems and other kids who verbalize them. And some educators use those terms, visualizers and verbalizers,” he says. “That reality has been mapped on the right brain/left brain anatomy as an explanation. But that’s where it falls down. Because the actual neural mechanisms for how these cognitive strategies work are much more complex than that. Cognition, in general, is much more complex than that. That’s what we’ve learned over the years and continue to learn as we study hemispheric differences. It’s all just a lot more complicated than we ever thought.”

Myth: After a certain point, the brain is permanently wired and cannot change.
Fact: Herrmann-Nehdi said this is her favorite myth to debunk. Originally scientists believed the brain stopped growing at a certain age, but in the last 15 years researchers have found that it changes throughout life. “Learning can produce new connections, but it takes energy to do that,” she said. “That’s an important implication for corporate learning because it means all dogs can learn new tricks.”

————————————————————————————————————-
Howard-Jones PA. Neuroscience and education: myths and messages. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2014. 15(12): 817-824.

James W. The Powers Of Men: The Keys Which Unlock Hidden Energies, and Stir Men to Achieve—Such Keys as Love, Anger, War, Duty, the Temperance ‘Pledge,’ Despair, Crowd-Contagion, Christian Science, Conversion, Prayer, Resistance of Temptation and Other Excitements, Ideas and Efforts. The American Magazine, 1907. 65: 57-65.

Penfield WP. The Mystery of Mind. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1975.

Lashley KS. In search of the engram. Physiological mechanisms in animal behavior. 1950, Society for Experimental Biology, 454-482.

Raichle ME. The restless brain. Brain Connect, 2011. 1(1): 3-12.

Raichle ME, MacLeod AM, Snyder AZ, Powers WJ, Gusnard DA and

Shulman GL. A default mode of brain function. Proc Natl Acad Sci, 2001. 98(2): 676-682.

Langseth L and Dowd J. Glucose tolerance and hyperkinesis: A Meta-Analysis. Fed J Cosmetic Toxicol, 1978. 16: 120-133.

Wolraich ML, Wilson DB and White JW. The Effect of Sugar on Behavior or Cognition in Children. JAMA, November 22/29, 1995. 274 (20): 1617-1621.

Gordon HW, Bogen JE and Sperry RW. Absence of deconnexion syndrome in two patients with partial section of the neocommissures. Brain, 1971. 94: 327-336.

Gazzaniga MS. Forty-five years of split-brain research and still going strong. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, August 2005. 6: 653-659.