Response Paper to Subject of Neuroscience of Computer and Cognition

Response Paper to Subject of Neuroscience of Computer and Cognition

Introduction

Kellog's “Cognitive Neuroscience”, John Geake's and Paul Cooper's “Cognitive Neuroscience: Implications for Education?”and Daniel L. Schwartz's, Kristen Blair's, and Jessica Tsang's “How to Build Educational Neuroscience: Two Approaches with Concrete Instances” discuss cognitive neuroscience and the complexities of the brain and mind along with their mutual relationship. Cognitive neuroscience is studied with an educational perspective by Geake, Cooper and Schwartz et al.

Response

Kellogg begins by discussing the basics related cognitive neuroscience and the relationship between cognitive neuroscience and cognitive psychology. He discusses many philosophical theories like Materialism and Dualism (Kellogg). He elaborates the signification of functional neuroanatomy and parallel processing in human brains. In a very interesting discussion, he compares and contrasts the human brain with digital computers. He introduces neurological methods with great detail and examines psychiatric patients with lesions and elaborates double dissociation and electrophysiology. In his “basics of neural networks” he has discussed the components of neural networks and models of the brain. The models consist of one or more nodes that mimic neurons. In a connectionist model, parallel computations of the brain are mimicked by neural networks. The distribution of knowledge is spread over many neurons. The three layers of the connectionist model are explained well by Kellogg. He minutely discusses the dynamics of neural networks. Logical rules including AND and OR rule and an algorithm called back-propagation of error meant to teach a neural network. By means of many examples, Kellogg explains how the different layers of neural networks can be made to learn different things.

Geake at al. relates the functions of the human brain with education and highlights the value of the former for the latter. He has pointed out at the compatibility of individual brain differences with phylogenic neurological similarity. He is of the view that cognitive neurosciecne can aid all educationists. Through examples, he has discussed Hebbian synaptic plasticity(Kellogg). He advocates the use of cognitive neuroscience in education. He very rightly considers that the role of education is that of a guiding light. It should begin by understanding “what” and “where” related to people. It should also on which path people may tread, or like to tread. I strongly agree with the writers. Education should act as a guidebook in explaining the profile of people based on their interests. This subject has begun to be explored by research. Cognitive neuroscience definitely has pedagogical implications.

Schwartz et al.'s in their paper have put forward two approaches and has also presented concrete examples in relation with those approaches. The first approach for the application of neuroscience in education is related to behavioral scientists. The second is related to educational researchers. Schwartz et al.'s manner of elaborations helps to make the approaches quite explicit. The behavioral neuroscientist focuses on individuals with clinical problems or unique capabilities. The educational researchers focus on learners with the aim of enhancing their intellectual capacities and caliber and reduce the achievement ...