How do Babies Learn?

So which is it? Are babies mindless beings who only eat, sleep and cry? Or are they little geniuses, ready for academic pursuits? The truth is probably half way between the two. There is no doubt that the brain of a baby is like a sponge which eagerly soaks up information and that brain plasticity in young babies is at it's peak. What we must also realise however is that young babies need a secure, loving environment in order to utilise this inherent neuroplasticity.

In evolutionary terms, babies have not changed a great deal over the last 50,000 years. However, what we know about them has changed a great deal.

Astute observers of human development have always believed that the early years were critical to developing potential and this view is supported by evidence that children exposed to highly enriched environments develop bigger, superior brains, whilst children who are exposed to impoverished environments have smaller, less well developed brains. This is a view which began as early as the Greek philosopher Aristotle and was developed in the 11th century by the Persian philosopher, Ibn Sina (known as "Avicenna" in the West. He argued that the "human intellect at birth is rather like a tabula rasa, a pure potentiality that is actualised through education and experience of the world and consequently ' “comes to know" '

While this information is exciting and hopeful, especially to the parents of children whose development has been adversely affected by brain injury or some ather retarding factor, it also poses a danger, as some professionals and parents think it means we should apply intensive and exhaustive programmes of stimulation to teaching both brain injured and 'well' children in order to maximise their potential. Enter the billion-dollar baby industrial complex to sell us videos and flash cards to make our babies "smarter and the clinics offering eight to ten hour day – long programmes of developmental stimulation to children with developmental problems.

But a number of researchers have found clear evidence that some promotion of early learning tasks can actually interfere with later learning. Not only that, but that ensuring that the child has plenty of 'downtime' actually improves the learning process. This recent study by Ellenbogen et al demonstrates that relational memory -- the ability to make logical "big picture" inferences from disparate pieces of information, and an essential part of learning - is dependent on taking plenty of breaks and even more important, getting a good night's sleep. I believe that this is where other rehabilitation centres have it worng and where Snowdrop have it right in relation to the programmes of developmental stimulation we provide for brain injured children.

So here's the dilemma: We know we're supposed to be doing something to take advantage of the early years of brain development, but what? The answers to this query may be simpler than we think. They require only the simplest understanding of how babies operate.

First, babies are wired for relationships. To paraphrase the great Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky, everything children need to know comes to them through relationships which provide interaction with more skilled partners, relationships that mean something to them personally. From birth, they use their emerging skills to seek out those they can learn to trust. They flourish when they know they are secure. They fall apart and under-perform when they are stressed. Their behaviour is organised and meaningful. They communicate clearly when stressed if we will but pay attention to their cues. When their needs are met, they snuggle, coo and sleep. When they feel overwhelmed, they fuss, turn red and lose motor coordination.

So babies need to be cared for by their parents and grandparents and other caregivers in a way that "listens" to what they tell us with their behaviour. Responsive care-giving gives children evidence that their needs matter. It teaches them to respect themselves and others.

They need to be cared for by people who are emotionally available to them. They need to see a smile reflect their own and a look of concern in someone's face when they cry. When they make attempts at language, they need to be heard and responded to by someone who really wants to know what they have to say. They need opportunities to play with other children and figure out what works in human interaction. They need some freedom to choose their own play activities and interact with others in their own comfortable style.

When children are confident in their safety and acceptance, they can relax and learn. According to Bjorklund and other evolutionary psychologists, learning is inhibited by fear and anxiety but facilitated by security and the opportunity to choose. Children are born learning as a natural response to their interesting world. They only need our interest and support. We adults serve as guides to help them find their way.

Anyone wanting more information on Snowdrop's work should email info@snowdrop.cc, or go to our website at http://www.snowdrop.cc

Memories Are More Likely To Stick If Learning Includes Regular Periods Of Rest

More evidence to support the way in which we deliver the Snowdrop programme; - That it should not be an intensive, concentrated programme of developmental activities, but should be spaced out during the day and incorporated into a more general 'lifestyle pattern.'

With thanks to MNT for highlighting this research.
------------------------------------------------

Scientists and educators alike have long known that cramming is not an effective way to remember things. With their latest findings, researchers at the RIKEN Brain Science Institute in Japan, studying eye movement response in trained mice, have elucidated the neurological mechanism explaining why this is so. Published in the Journal of Neuroscience, their results suggest that protein synthesis in the cerebellum plays a key role in memory consolidation, shedding light on the fundamental neurological processes governing how we remember. 

The "spacing effect", first discovered over a century ago, describes the observation that humans and animals are able to remember things more effectively if learning is distributed over a long period of time rather than performed all at once. The effect is believed to be closely connected to the process of memory consolidation, whereby short-term memories are stabilized into long-term ones, yet the underlying neural mechanism involved has long remained unclear. 

To clarify this mechanism, the researchers developed a technique based around the phenomenon of horizontal optokinetic response (HOKR), a compensatory eye movement which can be used to quantify the effects of motor learning. Studying HOKR in mice, they found that the long-term effects of learning are strongly dependent on whether training is performed all at once ("massed training"), or in spaced intervals ("spaced training"): whereas gains incurred in massed training disappeared within 24 hours, those gained in spaced training were sustained longer. 

Earlier research suggested that this spacing effect is the product of the transfer of the memory trace from the flocculus, a cerebellar cortex region which connects to motor nuclei involved in eye movement, to another brain region known as the vestibular nuclei. To verify this idea, the team administered local anesthetic to the flocculus and studied its effect on learning. While learning gains in mice that had undergone one hour of massed training were eliminated, those in mice that had undergone the same amount of training spaced out over a four hour period were unaffected. 

Explaining this observation, the researchers found that the spacing effect was impaired when mice were infused with anisomycin and actinomycin D, antibioticswhich inhibit protein synthesis. This final discovery suggests that proteins produced during training play a key role in the formation of long-term memories, providing for the first time a neurological explanation for the well-known benefits of spaced learning - as well as a great excuse to take more breaks.