I am totally fascinated by the workings of neuroscience. From Phineas Gage and his terrible railroad accident in the middle of the nineteenth century, (improbably surviving an accident that left him with an iron rod through his head), understanding of the brain has come a really long way. (And also has a really long way to go!) I recently read Dr Sarah-Jayne Blakemore’s Inventing Ourselves: The Secret Life of the Teenage Brain – it is magnificent! It provides invaluable understanding of adolescence to anyone who has contact with young people between the ages of about 12 to 25. Once read, you will certainly look at this age group, (and likely your own teenage years), differently.
Blakemore reminds us that although the teenage years are joked of as a time to dread and endure, (often depicted by Harry Enfield’s conversion to Kevin the teenager), they are also a fundamental and formative period of life. We can learn to embrace this time when pathways are malleable and creativity runs high; yet, this positivity is hampered by an increased fear of judgement from peers at a time when acceptance is craved. Studies that involve computer games, show that adolescents are hypersensitive to social exclusion. Clearly, this helps to explain disruptive behaviour when adolescents are gathered together in schools – a time that can feel intensely painful to many who experience peer critique or ridicule. Something that many choose to avoid by joining/forming a clique in what appears to be safety in “pack behaviour”. I can only imagine how much more awful this must be with invasive social media 24-7, and its impact on dopamine… Research on male rats shows that social isolation in adolescence can have far-reaching consequences on the brain structure, hormones and behaviour in adulthood; Blakemore, therefore, suggests that behaviours that promote peer acceptance could actually be considered as adaptive. There is a clear discrepancy between evolutionary drives and beneficial learning environments.
This becomes particularly potent when considered alongside Mischel’s experiments into self-control and “hot” contexts. (Previously blogged about here). Adolescents are more likely to make risky decisions to impress friends, (resulting in many rules being tested/broken), but will also be risk averse in other, seemingly safe, contexts, such as not answering questions in front of peers in class. All of which can feel incredibly frustrating in school environments. Blakemore’s book is wonderful, though, in the way that she tries to navigate a positive path. She outlines a 2016 study at Yale and Princeton universities: groups of between 20-32 students took part in anti-conflict workshop about bullying. They were then encouraged to lead anti-bullying campaigns. Their photos and names were included next to posters that they’d designed and displayed. This was intended to create an association between the anti-bullying slogan and the identity of the student who had designed it. The initial students were also encouraged to give out orange wristbands to students who were seen engaging in friendly behaviours. The researchers then compared levels of student conflict with control schools. They found that the “research schools” had reduced student conflict by 30%. Furthermore, they discovered that the most popular students have greater influence than others on social norms/behaviour. We know that peer conformity is a natural and potent drive, so it seems that schools could try to work with this rather than against it. I think this could be worth considering in any area where we are trying to turn the balance on certain behaviour, whether this be conflict, engagement in lessons or reading for pleasure.
Another area Blakemore highlights that could help us to work with adolescent brain development is regarding pruning and myelination. (Both of which I have previously blogged about here). She shows that early interventions into cognitive skills are important. Yet, this nurturing must continue throughout childhood and adolescence; it is not too late to provide intervention during adolescence to help with the myelination process. Knoll et al even suggest that certain types of cognitive skill (like non-verbal reasoning) will be developed more efficiently in late adolescence. This contrasts previously held beliefs that non-verbal reasoning is fixed and possibly innate – we now know that it can be trained and improved through experience-expectant plasticity. The brain expects to meet and develop from many stimuli during different stages of development, meaning we need to be careful what we are assessing, and when. The ability for plasticity continues throughout life, and doesn’t end with adolescence. Adults can continually change to meet our environments and learn new skills, reinforcing the idea that education does not have to be a “one shot” opportunity during our teenage years. Studies into London cab drivers prove that our brain changes dependent on use. We need to encourage our life-long learners at every stage, especially with the way that our society is changing so rapidly. Successful futures are going to be dependent on our ability to keep learning, reflecting and making use of our brain’s ability for plasticity.
The statement that behaviour management is all about relationships is one commonly heard. We can easily become blase to it. Blakemore provides the science behind this clearly, and I strongly recommend reading her book for the full nuance. Humans are intensely social! Neuroscience shows us that a large proportion of our brains are dedicated to understanding other people and social interactions – to try to work against this would be incredibly counterproductive. As teachers, we need to find a way to harness this power effectively. Typically, developing children, (other than those on the autism spectrum), acquire an understanding of the social world very quickly! Research into still face experiments with babies is incredibly powerful and emotive in illustrating this. Yet, Iroise Dumontheil shows that there is a development dip in “face processing non-verbal tasks that occurs alongside the onset of puberty. This could be linked to the process of social pruning, which is yet to occur, in order to boost final efficiency. Importantly, though, this may indicate that educational dips between primary and secondary transition could be linked to changes in the brain and, as such, could be a natural part of development.
This development dip also links to the way in which adolescents perceive non-verbal gestures in the world around them. Monk et al did research with young people aged 9-17, and adults aged 25-36 on viewing fearful and neutral faces. The findings suggest the adolescent brain is tracking emotional and arousing stimuli in the environment, even when asked to focus on non-emotional stimuli. This may mean that adolescents find it challenging to focus on the task set when in the presence of distracting stimuli; Blakemore links this to driving a car with a friend in the passenger seat, but surely this could equally be linked to the low level and silly peer-to-peer disruptions that can plague lesson, even once important learning tasks have been set? Interestingly, this is further compounded by simultaneous brain changes. In the 2000s, Steinberg proposed a theory as to why risk-taking may peak in adolescence. The limbic system generates the reward feeling that is elicited by taking risks. In young adolescents, the limbic system is already mature and particularly sensitive to that rewarding (feel-good) feeling. However, the prefrontal cortex, which stops us acting on impulse and inhibits risk-taking, is not yet mature. This leads to a difficult developmental mismatch between the maturity and functioning of these two systems. It seems almost a perfect storm, all during a time at which students are under pressure to perform academically. This development of the two systems can, however, vary across individual development. This perhaps helps to make sense of why we have students at opposite ends of the risk-taking spectrum in one class, and perhaps why some find it easier to regulate focus than others. A more mature PFC, (as typically seen in adults), better regulates behaviour. Viewing certain conversations about behaviour and learning through this lens has helped me to shed understanding on situations that otherwise appear bewildering and frustraing, (neither great emotions for problem-solving). Whilst boundaries and rules must still be enforced, it can help us to carry out consequences with warmth, vital for maintaining a feeling of belonging. Perhaps, this can even help us to devise the most appropriate consequences too.
Blakemore even shows why punishments do not always seem to work as deterrents. She refers the reader to Palminteri’s (2016) study. They found that adolescents (12-17) and young adults (18-32) were equally good at learning to choose symbols associated with rewards but, interestingly, adolescents were worse at avoiding symbols associated with punishment. (Mischel’s marshmallow research also shows adolescents are more tempted by immediate rewards and find it difficult to maintain self-control for longer-term rewards). She details a study from 2000 that compared the impact of different messages in anti-smoking campaigns that are aimed at teenagers and then one which looked at junk food. I found these fascinating! For a quick outline: the most effective adverts focus on values that are important to young people such as feeling like a socially conscious, autonomous person. They cared most about the effects on others, (especially family members/children) and being deceived (such as coercive/underhand messages). It seems that in order to reduce risk-taking behaviour, we need to focus on immediate (hot), social consequences of actions/decisions and how they link to immediate identities. Long term consequences can be considered but they don’t have the needed impact on their own. This really makes me think about the language used when dealing with negative behaviour or choices in school. Talking about how this will affect their future is too “cold” of a consequence and needs to be paired with something much more immediate.This will obviously differ depending on circumstances. I want to think about this alongside Mischel’s “fly on the wall strategy” strategy, to encourage the use of the PFC; I still have the intention of creating target-setting/revision strategy sheets designed around this perspective, for my exam classes to use after Easter in the run-up to their final exams. I am hoping that knowing more about this research will help me to support their executive function more effectively.
Okay, neuroscience is not a magic wand, but, to me, it is magical. Understanding is key to empathy and Blakemore does a superb job of allowing us access to this alien territory. Through the perspective that she and Daniel Siegel, (see this previous blog), have helped to provide me, I genuinely feel better equipped to understand, empathise and hopefully help guide these “brains under development”. Wherever possible, I want to work with this stage of development and not against it; in truth, it is hard to fight against evolutionary drives. In learning to focus that energy, the future is an exciting place for our students but in the meantime they will need support, connection and boundaries from the whole village.