A
U
S
T
R
A
L
I
A
N
U
N
I
V
E
R
S
I
T
I
E
S
’
R
E
V
I
E
W
REVIEWS
Brain, brain, go away; come again another day Why the Brain Matters. A teacher explores neuroscience by John Tibke ISBN 978-1-4739-9291-7 (pbk), Corwin, 204 pp., 2019. Reviewed by Andrys Onsman
I have no idea whether Jon Tibke has finished his doctoral studies yet but judging by the conceptual clarity of his writing in Why the Brain Matters I’d say he’s got it in the bag. He has produced a short, excellent and timely book, and although it is aimed at secondary school teachers, its readership should be far wider than that because in my opinion it is one of the best books on introductory neuro-cognition on the market. Its strength includes the author’s willingness to say what is known, what remains unknown and what our best guess is (so far) on the bits in between. Given that he is talking from his (often stated) perspective as a teacher, it is an excellent snap shot of where we are at in neuroscience now, and how both what we know and what we don’t know might be used to improve learning and teaching in secondary schools (and elsewhere). There is a pleasing logic to the sequence of the chapters, based on answering four simple questions: Why should teachers be interested in neuroscience? What should we know and what can we ignore? How can we use it in our practice? What does the future hold? His answers are clear, coherent and grounded in actual research, and are also kernels of ideas that serve as solid bases for further reading and consideration. The first chapter outlines the reasons why teachers ought to keep an eye on developments in the field. His consideration of the term ‘brain-based learning’, based on asking ‘what learning does not involve the brain?’ won me over immediately. His advice is to not accept the reductionist jargon without examination because a lot of it is wankery (my term, not his). I agree that the promulgation of vague, incomplete ideas tarted up with glib terminology that carelessly assume universality has done too much damage in the past. A reasonable understanding of what happens in the brain of a learner helps teachers realise that idiosyncracy is the norm and treating students equally isn’t the same as treating them equitably. Foregoing a general description of the brain and its elemental functions, Tibke outlines what he believes teachers and students should know and points to a few sites
66
and books for further detail. All the examples and references are secondary school-related but they also exemplify the broader context. There were a few sites that I was not familiar with, mainly the English ones, but they seemed to be helpful and well researched when I looked at them. I’m sure there are sites of the same quality in Australia, Europe and even the USA if you look judiciously enough. Both the first two chapters include a synthesis of the ideas presented: Tibke is very good at putting his analytical comments into a useful context. Unlike other books on the subject, his is a ‘big picture’ approach that doesn’t get bogged down in detail but also doesn’t skimp on evidence. The chapter dispelling the neuromyths should be compulsory reading for every parent and teacher as a barricade against the host of pseudoscience charlatans scamming the gullible public. Smart drugs, AI interfaces, sleep, brain scans and more are discussed and placed in one of 3 baskets: true, not true or possible-but-we-need-to-know-more. Tibke picks a few of the more currently controversial ones to exemplify his strategy of assessing whether they are true, and it seems to me to be a relatively easy way to do your own fact-checking. The chapter on schools being involved in research is the most problematic: not conceptually, the idea is fine but in practice. Tibke uses the BrainCanDo project at Queen Anne School in England as the basis for his argument that getting real research into schools is beneficial to students. I know a bit about the cited study on music and I’m not entirely convinced that the outcomes are as readily generally interpretable as Müllensiefen implies. Tibke does acknowledge that although there are correlational links between learning music and general learning, there is no causal relationship. The Queen Anne study is ongoing and results won’t be in for a few years, but my money is on more correlation and exactly the same causality. Nonetheless, Müllensiefen’s work is definitely worth reading if you are interested in music (but bear in mind his output is prodigious).
Brain, brain, go away; come again another day Reviewed by Andrys Onsman
vol. 62, no. 1, 2020
