Listado de Síntomas Breve (LSB – 50):

In her paper, Schaverien et al. (2000, 2002), ―A biological basis for generative learning47_{‖ discussed what the literature presented and how it supported the argument}

that learning is a generative act. In addition, neuroscience (Edelman 1993) further supported the concept of a biological basis for generative learning in technology and science. This model is relevant for this study as the concept could be applied to interpret the results from the three case studies in this thesis. In particular, the next section introduces the Generative Learning Model that has been applied in teaching and learning.

47

4.4.8.1 The Generative Learning Model (GLM)

The GLM model was proposed by Osborne & Wittrock (1983) and has four steps that relate to learning and teaching:

1. In the preliminary step, before beginning any formalized instruction, teachers

assess students' ideas and conceptual explanations.

2. In the focus step, the instructor provides experiences related to the particular concept that motivates the students to explore their level of conceptual understanding.

3. Next, the teacher helps students exchange points of view and challenges students to compare and contrast their ideas and support their viewpoints with evidence (the challenge stage); and

4. In the application stage, students use their newly refined conceptual

understandings in familiar contexts.

This model can be applied to LD students to assess their skill level and to diagnose learning difficulties. The ensuing sections provide discussion on brain structure, gender differences and cognitive function, and the seven stages of biological basis for thinking and learning. These are relevant to this study and are within its scope. The GML model is illustrated in Figure 4-7 below.

This model can be applied to LD students to assess their skill level and diagnose any learning difficulties. The ensuing sections provide discussion on brain structure, gender differences and cognitive function, and the seven stages of biological basis of thinking and learning by Lowery (1998). These concepts are relevant for this study and are within its scope.

4.4.8.2 Experience & Brain Structure

The literature revealed studies that brain structure can be modified with experience. Questions like ―What is needed within the brain to retain new information that is

learnt?‖ became very significant. As mentioned earlier, the brain is able to undergo

many forms of plastic change. There is growth or change in existing structure, particularly synapse number and structure, which predominately underlies learning. Recovering from damage may depend on similar changes. According to Ivanco and Greenough (2000) a process called neurogenesis is involved in both learning and damage. Hebb‘s (1949) postulate of firing neurons dependency to maintain synaptic efficacy occurs during learning. Factors mediating plastic change are discussed in Ivanco et al. (2000). The application of Hebbian rules to recovery from damage is a morphological change. The learning brain and the recovering brain may utilise common mechanisms, whereas experience can influence plasticity (Kolb 1995).

4.4.8.3 Cognitive function & Gender difference

The thesis also found studies that relate to gender difference in the cognitive function. There are studies that show close relation between brain size and function (Geschwind & Levitsky 1968, Kimura 1987). Further, studies have also demonstrated a link with structure size, function and intelligence and size of grey matter cerebral structures (Andreasen 1993). A correlation between size and intelligence was found by Willerman et al. (1992) and McGlone (1980).

Figure 4-8: Neuron structure model

(Source: www.scq.ubc.ca/.../uploads/2007/05/synapse.jpg ,image at: www.scq.ubc.ca/.../)

Figure 4-9: Brain model (Source: www.akri.org/cognition/images/brstruc.gif)

Other research studies by Maturana (1980), Lowery (1998), and Aujla et al. (2001) also provided arguments that link the nervous system to learning. In fact, Lowery (1998) provided the seven stage model of biological stages of thinking and learning which was presented in Figure 4-6 above, and this view was linked to non-connectionist models. It was argued that experiential learning induces neurons to act in a logical pattern (Stergiou et al. 1996). Therefore, we may think of memory storage as a collection of electrical patterns produced from a range of neurons. The reverse process is thinking – this involves the release of electrical patterns from memory storage (Lowery 2000). In

Lowery‘s view, the neural images are decomposed into components and can be stored in different memory areas which are then reassembled during memory recall.

―The nature of thinking capabilities and the sequence in which they appear have been well established on two research fronts. The biological basis underlying their appearance is established by periodic increases in brain size, brain weight, cellular growth within the brain, electrical functioning with the brain and head circumference. The psychological basis is established through evidence of the individual's increasing capacity to deal with independent ideas and to exhibit the same kinds of behaviours as other individuals within two- to – three - year ranges and with growth, the individual's ability to replace naive with more sophisticated

views‖ (Lowery 2000).

According to Lowery (2000), ―When Stage 7 appears at about age 16, students are able

to classify and reclassify objects or ideas into hierarchies of increasingly related or

inclusive classes‖ (Lowery 2000).

It is now that the individual can develop taxonomy based on a logical rationale concerning the relationships among the objects or ideas comprising the taxonomy while also realizing that the arrangement she has made is tentative and can be changed based on fresh insights. A content expertise is necessary. This cognitive stage exemplifies the highest order of flexible thinking. (See Figure 4-10 below)

According to Maturana (1980) the three processes: - thinking, learning and memory - can all be regarded as electrical stages existing across neurons carrying specific messages (independent of any given cell). The neuron firing theory can be seen as the carrier or transformation of a sequence of messages from chemical to electrical across the synapsis.

Another important question is ―Does a student‘s learning environment and their

behaviour affect the thinking process? There are several studies that have investigated

this question. For example, Huitt (2000), Schunck (2001) and Boyle (2000) (constructivist principles). Particular importance, for example, was given to the infrastructure and the classroom environment in the case studies in this thesis.