PhD Program in Educational Neuroscience (PEN)
PEN 704 Foundations of Educational Neuroscience II
Spring 2014, 3 Credits
Professor: TBA
Office Hours: TBA
VP/Phone: TBA
Email: TBA
Office Location: TBA
Class Time: 3 hour meeting time, once per week, 14 weeks
Syllabus prepared by Laura Ann Petitto
COURSE OVERVIEW
New knowledge about how we learn, think, reason, acquire vast knowledge, and how we conceptualize
our social, emotional, and moral worlds, has led to revolutionary insights into the developing child and
the birth of an exciting multidisciplinary field called Educational Neuroscience. Beginning in the mid
2000s, a unique experiment in the history of science was launched in the nation. The National Science
Foundation created six Science of Learning Centers to advance scientific discoveries about learning that
have meaningful benefits for society and education. While the discipline of Educational Neuroscience
predated the creation of the NSF Centers, it was catapulted forward and afforded stunning momentum
and strength from them. The scientific vision, questions, methods, and commitment to two-way
translation of research discoveries are virtually identical to the activity that is sometimes called the
“Science of Learning” or “the learning sciences” – following from the name of the NSF Centers. They
are indeed essentially one and the same the same discipline. One clarification would be that Educational
Neuroscience focuses robustly on learning that is specifically at the heart of early schooling: language,
reading, math, science, social-emotional. In Part I of this course, we uncover the foundational knowledge
of this modern multidisciplinary field, and, in Part II, we consider new discoveries that advance our
understanding of human learning from studies of the “Visual Learner,” especially the young deaf visual
learner, and we do so from a new perspective: Gallaudet has one of the six coveted sites in the nation to
have an NSF Science of Learning Center, called Visual Language and Visual Learning, VL2.
Educational Neuroscience at Gallaudet University, therefore, provides a unique strength in, and
contribution to, pioneering advances in the education of young deaf children.
COURSE DESCRIPTION
The main objective of this two-part course, Foundations of Educational Neuroscience (fall, PEN 703 &
spring, PEN 704) is to understand how the rich multidisciplinary field of Educational Neuroscience can
inform science and education (and educational policy) in principled ways. In this second course PEN
704, we draw scientific advances from the field and from the National Science Foundation, Science of
Learning Center, Visual Language and Visual Learning, “VL2” at Gallaudet University. Topics span the
impact of early brain plasticity of the visual systems and visual processing on higher cognition, early
social visual engagement and literacy learning, the role of gestures in learning, early sign language
exposure and its facilitative impact on language learning, the bilingual brain, the surprising role of
“Visual Phonology” in early reading, and innovations in two-way educational translation uniting science
and research. One major objective is for students to learn how Educational Neuroscience can provide
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 1
specific advances in the education of all children, particularly young deaf children. Students in this
course will read research articles, participate in discussions, do a small research project, and present a
final paper.
COURSE STRUCTURE & REQUIREMENTS
New topics are introduced during the first part of the class in lecture, though interactive format (~1.5
hrs). After a brief break, an in-depth interactive discussion, and/or an in-class Mini Lab experience,
occurs during the second part of the class (~1.5hrs), which will consist of very active student
engagement with the material (and which will be both guided and promoted by the professor). Students
are required to attend classes and complete the thinking guides (see below), do all readings, write 2 short
essays and a final paper, and provide an in-class Presentation on time. The course structure is designed
using modern understanding of principles of how humans learn most optimally. Thus, if students do the
above, they are sure to have the most happy and productive time in the class and to learn and know the
material for life.
Grading Scale
A+
97-100
A
94-96
A90-93
B+
B
B-
87-89
84-86
80-83
C+
C
F
77-79
74-76
73 and below
GRADING
Class Participation: 15%
(Derived from a combination: Participation, Discussions, Thinking Guides;
see also Blackboard & Required Reading below)
2 Short Essays: 30%
(15% each; See description below)
Final Paper: 30%
(See description below)
Presentation of Final Paper: 25% (See description below)
WRITING & PRESENTATION REQUIREMENTS
What is a Thinking Guide?
Prior to each class, a “Thinking Guide,” which is a teaching innovation used to
promote active learning, will be handed out. Thinking Guides contain a few of
that class’ most crucial concepts and/or key questions. If you fill these in as you
attend in class, your participation in the class will be most rewarding; they are
provided as one “learning tool” to help you actively synthesize, learn, and
remember new material “on-line” (while physically seated in the class).
Thinking Guides will be collected after each class in lieu of taking attendance,
although they will not be graded, per se, because they are for you. In addition,
they are not graded because, as you will see, you may modify and enhance them
as a result of what we all discuss as a group. All Thinking Guides will be
returned to you to keep for future reference in preparation for your short essays
and/or final paper.
Short Essays:
Two essays are required that are closely related to the material discussed in
class, which must reflect critical analysis and synthesis of the topic at hand. You
may write on topics that are either (i) to be discussed in class (i.e., in the
syllabus) or (ii) derived from your own interest. If you choose (i), you must
show evidence of having read at least two articles above and beyond those
already assigned in the syllabus for the topic. If you choose (ii), it is
essential/required that you first discuss your chosen topic with the professor at
least one week prior to due date. Maximum length for the Short Essay is 5 pages
(each), double-spaced, 12-point font. There is no page limit for the References.
Final Paper:
A final paper will be due exactly one week prior to the last week of class (Week
13). This paper will also serve as the foundation of your in-class final
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 2
presentation during the last week of class. The topic must be directly related to
the goals and content of this course and must be selected by you in consultation
with the professor. The topic of your Final Paper must be submitted by Friday
of Week 7 of the course. Maximum length for the Final Paper is 10 pages of
actual content/text, double-spaced, 12-point font. There is no page limit for the
References.
Short Essays & Final Paper APA Format: The structure of the Short Essays and Final Paper will be in strict APA
journal article format and style regarding the overall presentation of the content.
That is, there will be (1) an Introduction containing an explicit statement of the
theoretical question/issues, as well as a (1a) Rationale/Significance section
containing a situation of the question relative the literature and/or educational
practice (why is your question significant?; what would we know if we had the
answer to this question?; how would an answer advance science and
education?), (2) Methods section containing a discussion and/or critique of the
methods/means by which the field has addressed the question/issues, (3) Results
section containing essential findings relative to the question, and a (4)
Discussion section discussion from which you draw conclusions and
implications, including your analysis/critique and synthesis of the issues at
hand, and ideas for further study on the topic.
Presentation of Final Paper:
You are required to give one 10-minute presentation of your Final Paper
(accompanied by a 10-minute discussion) during the last class of the term.
Practice. Time yourselves. This will be excellent preparation for conference
presentations. You are strongly encouraged to discuss your presentations with
the professor well in advance. For this presentation, you are expected to use
visual aids (e.g., PowerPoint). You are strongly encouraged to prepare handouts
for your classmates, summarizing the main points of your presentation. In
addition, please prepare 2-3 questions for presentation’s 10-min discussion
period, which you must distribute on Blackboard one week prior to the
presentation date. In this way, you will help each other to learn the topics.
Please note that once you have committed to a Final Paper/Presentation topic, it
can only be changed under exceptional circumstances.
BLACKBOARD & REQUIRED READINGS
The course will be supported by the blackboard website. Please note that the information on Blackboard
does not replace attending the classes. All readings for the course are on Blackboard. The specific
readings that are required for each individual class/topic are listed in below. You are expected to do all
the reading and there will be questions in class that will assess your knowledge of all the texts. In this
semester, you are asked to pay special attention to the “Building Connections” comments in the syllabus
associated with some of the classes when doing the readings for that week. This is another creative
“design feature” built into this course to ensure your learning and life-long ownership of the course
material. Here, you are encouraged to link the knowledge that you are learning in this Part II of the
course with the knowledge that you learned in Part 1of the course. When “Building Connections”
comments appear in this syllabus, students can be certain that they will be asked directly to elaborate on
these links and connections. Your answers will be assessed as a normal component of your “Class
Participation” evaluation/grade (see rubric attached).
ACADEMIC RESPONSIBILITY
It is the student’s responsibility to familiarize themselves and comply with the Gallaudet University
Graduate Academic Integrity Policy, which can be found in the Gallaudet University
Undergraduate/Graduate Catalog or on the Gallaudet University website at:
http://catalog.gallaudet.edu/Catalog/Registration_and_Policies/Graduate_Policies/Academic_Integrity.h
tml
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 3
OSWD ACADEMIC ACCOMMODATION POLICY
Students have the responsibility of formally requesting accommodation through the Office for Students
With Disabilities (OSWD) at the beginning of the semester. See,
http://oswd.gallaudet.edu/Student_Affairs/Student_Support_Services/Office_for_Students_with_Disabi
lities/General_Information/Academic_Accommodations_Policy.html
For information on your rights under the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act please see the
OSWD site.
CHANGES TO THE SYLLABUS
Should items on this syllabus change; all students will be informed in writing.
EVALUATION CRITERIA (SEE ALSO GRADING RUBRIC BELOW)
PEN 704: Foundations of Educational Neuroscience II
Course student Learning
Outcomes
1. Students will learn the core
questions, principles, goals,
knowledge domains, and
methods of the new
multidisciplinary field
Educational Neuroscience.
2. Students will know and
explain the principled and
meaningful links between
science and education through
problems explored in and out
of the class.
3. Students will demonstrate
the critical thinking, analysis
skills, and knowledge
necessary to conduct research
in Educational Neuroscience.
Student Learning
Opportunities
(Write major learning
opportunities)
Class
participation/discussion
informed from assigned
readings
Class
participation/discussion
informed from assigned
readings, Short Essays,
Final Paper, and
Presentation of Final
Paper
Class
participation/discussion
informed from assigned
readings, Short Essays,
Final Paper, and
Presentation of Final
Paper
Assessment Method
(Indicate at least 2 multiple &
varied assessment methods)
PLO
1 2 3 4 5 6
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed using a rubric
provided in the syllabus; paper and
presentation will be assessed using
the rubrics for written assignments
and presentations
x x x x x
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed using a rubric
provided in the syllabus; paper and
presentation will be assessed using
the rubrics for written assignments
and presentations
x x x x x
Participation in class discussion
will be assessed using a rubric
provided in the syllabus; paper and
presentation will be assessed using
the rubrics for written assignments
and presentations
x x x x x
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 4
COURSE SCHEDULE
WEEK 1. INTRODUCTION TO EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE, PART II
Beginning in the mid 2000s a unique experiment in the history of science was launched in the nation. The
National Science Foundation created six Science of Learning Centers to advance scientific discoveries about
learning that have meaningful benefits for society and education. While the discipline of Educational
Neuroscience predated the creation of the NSF Centers, it was catapulted forward and afforded stunning
momentum and strength from them. The scientific vision, questions, methods, and commitment to two-way
translation of research discoveries are virtually identical to the activity that is sometimes called the “Science
of Learning” or “the learning sciences” (following from the name of the NSF Centers). They are indeed
essentially one and the same the same discipline. One clarification would be that Educational Neuroscience
focuses robustly on learning that is specifically at the heart of early schooling: language, reading, math,
science, social-emotional. In this introductory class, we will discuss core strengths unique to Educational
Neuroscience at Gallaudet University. Gallaudet has one of the six coveted sites in the nation to have an NSF
Science of Learning Center, called Visual Language and Visual Learning, VL2. VL2’s research and
translational activities in Educational Neuroscience will be discussed, especially regarding pioneering
advances in the understanding of the “Visual Learner.” Definitions of core terms will be provided (e.g., who
is a visual learner?) Innovations in the understanding of human learning through the new lens of the visual
learner will also be laid bare through discussion of the course content. We will also discuss the assessments,
papers, and presentation that are required for this course.
WEEK 2. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER - NEW VIEW OF BRAIN
PLASTICITY AND HUMAN LEARNING
Part 1. Much scientific focus has examined the role of the ears and auditory processes in building
knowledge, especially involving language, reading, and literacy. What happens when the lion’s share of
knowledge is derived from vision (visual attention/processing, visual language, and visually-based, socialemotional interactions)? Here we analyze new discoveries about the neural plasticity of particular brain
structures and related brain functions made possible only through understanding the young deaf visual
learner. Core contemporary scientific concepts include the impact of brain plasticity (neural plasticity) in
higher cognitive functions, cross-modal plasticity, the significance of maturational milestones in biological
development, and the critical or “Sensitive Period Hypothesis.”
Part 2. A revolutionary new view has advanced from VL2 findings: Differences in early sensory experience
can change the brain and its functions in ways that can afford higher cognitive processing advantages to the
young deaf visual learner. It is imperative that you challenge yourself to understand deeply this revolution in
contemporary thought. Based on your readings, you will discuss and critically analyze the broad
ramifications that this new understanding could have on educational and medical practices and policy with
young visual learners, especially the young deaf visual learner.
Cohen, Lehericy, Chochon, Lemer, Rivaud, & Dehaene, S., 2002
Lomber, Meredith, & Kral, 2010
Kolb & Whishaw, 1998
Thomas, 2012
Jiaxiang & Kourtzi, 2010
WEEK 3. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER – VISUAL PROCESSING
Part 1. We explore the anatomical and functional changes of parietal lobe (dorsal) visual attention systems
and auditory and visual temporal (ventral) systems, as a result of different early sensory experience. During
specific visual attention tasks, VL2 researchers and others have shown functional reorganization in the
brain’s dorsal visual stream in deaf adults. For these tasks, it is suggested that sensory experience, rather
than visual sign language experience, brings about these visual attention/processing differences. Yet, in
other studies, visual linguistic experience (and not just sensory experience) impacts the functional
organization of visual processing. We will delve into both types of findings and their powerful scientific
implications.
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 5
Part 2. Two groups will be formed. Based on the readings, the first group will identify brain changes that
impact visual processing—brain changes that appear to result from different early life sensory experiences
(deaf, hearing). The second group will identify brain changes that impact visual processing that appear to
result from early exposure to a visual signed language. Together, the two groups will then discuss the
significance of such remarkable changes to brain structures and functions in the lifetime of an individual
(ontogeny), and then identify the translational significance of these findings for society, education, and
educational policy.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present brain changes to the Educational
Neuroscience studies of controlled and automatic learning processes studied in Week 5, Part I of this
course.
Bavelier, Dye, & Hauser, 2006
Bosworth & Dobkins, 2002a,b
Hauser et al., 2007
Dye Hauser & Bavelier, 2009
Dye & Bavelier, 2010
WEEK 4. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER - VISUAL ATTENTION AND
HIGHER COGNITION & LITERACY
Note: Short Essay #1 due today in class
Part 1. We explore how differences in early visual sensory experience can impact visual attention, and, in
turn, human learning. This is a new advance in the brain sciences, as some fundamental neural systems were
thought to be especially resilient in the face of experiential change. VL2 researchers and others have found
that early exposure to a visual signed language in young deaf visual learners changes their visual attention
processing, which, in turn, has an upstream positive impact on higher cognition. Infants exposed to a visual
signed language in early life attend less to the hands and more to the direction and trajectory of the adult’s
eye gaze, thereby facilitating language development. The capacity to track adult eye gaze aids the infant in
making connections between a given sign and its intended meaning. VL2 studies of older deaf toddlers
during book reading with their signing parents have found that the toddlers’ eye gaze tracking ability is
indeed vital to early vocabulary, language, and literacy mastery, both in American Sign Language as well as
in English.
Part 2. Following from the readings and class content, you will identify common beliefs about the early
exposure of signed languages to young children and its relation to the acquisition of reading. Critically
analyze the validity of such common beliefs in light of the experimental evidence thus far.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present brain changes to early visual attention (as
a result of early visual language experience) to Educational Neuroscience studies of Reading in Week 10,
Part I of this course.
Brooks & Meltzoff, 2008
Lieberman, 2012
WEEK 5. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER - SOCIAL VISUAL
ENGAGEMENT AND HIGHER COGNITION & LITERACY
Part 1. We explore how changes in early visual sensory experience can impact social visual engagement,
social self-regulation, and learning. VL2 researchers and others have found that early exposure to a signed
language in young deaf visual learners changes their social visual engagement (and eye-gaze tracking) skills
and social-emotional self-regulation that is vital to learning and remembering what we learn, positively
impacting language, reading, and literacy.
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 6
Part 2. MiniLab Experience: Through Fuze meeting technology, we will visit with the lead scientist who
conducts this research. New research on Gaze following/tracking behavior in deaf infants exposed to signed
language, as compared to deaf infants who are not, will be discussed and observed. Paying special attention
to the experimental paradigm, identify the behaviors that can be measured and the translational significance
that findings from these studies could potentially possess for future translational work, and, ultimately for
the young deaf visual learner.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present brain changes to early visual attention (as
a result of early visual language experience) to Educational Neuroscience studies of Reading in Week 10,
Social Cognition in Week 11, and Culture in Week 13, in Part I of this course.
Swisher, 2000
Posner & Rothbart, 2000
Mohay, 2000
WEEK 6. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER - ROLE OF GESTURES &
MATH LEARNING
Part 1. Studies of hearing children’s use of gestures have shown that there can be highly revealing
“mismatches” between their gestures and language productions at developmental junctures when they are
on the cusp of conceptual insight and change, for example, going from not understanding a math concept to
understanding it. In turn, these children’s knowledge acquisition can be facilitated if they receive
training/instruction within the developmental time period when the mismatches occur. VL2 researchers
have found that gesture is indeed a robust representational form during signed language development in the
young deaf child despite the fact that gesture and sign reside in the same modality. Moreover, deaf children
demonstrate gesture-signed language “mismatches” at similar times and at similar conceptual thresholds as
hearing children in math learning.
Part 2. While above you identified widely held common beliefs about early signed language exposure, here
you will identify common beliefs about the potentially interfering role of early gestures—for example,
whereupon gestures in young deaf children exposed to speech are often discouraged (e.g., deaf children
with Cochlear implants). Based on the assigned readings, identify the important role of children's gestures in
determining where they are in their mathematical development. Critically analyze how the findings may
serve as an aid in instructional practice used in the education of all young visual learners, especially the
young deaf visual learner, and especially as they relate to the training of science and scientific concepts.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present findings about gestures, to Educational
Neuroscience studies of Math and Numeracy in Week 6, in Part I of this course.
Goldin-Meadow, Shield, Lenzen, Herzig, Padden, 2012
WEEK 7. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND THE VISUAL LEARNER – NEW INSIGHTS INTO
LANGUAGE UNIVERSALS, LANGUAGE ADVANTAGES, & THE BILINGUAL BRAIN
Note: Topic for Final Paper due by Friday @ 5:00pm of this week
Part 1. The brain and behavioral studies of language development and bilingualism at VL2 finds
that early exposure to a signed language proceeds on the identical language maturational timetable
as spoken language. Early bilingual exposure to a signed language and a spoken language (bimodal
bilinguals) affords higher cognitive advantages. New discoveries in VL2’s affiliated laboratory, the
Brain and Language Laboratory, BL2, show that all bilingual children (sign+sign, sign+speech,
and speech+speech) deomonstrate remarkable language and reading advantages over age-matched
monolingual children. Moreover, early sign-exposed deaf children learning English primarily
through reading (sign-print bilinguals) possess linguistic processing strengths across both
languages. Indeed early access to a signed language improves these sign-print deaf bilingual
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 7
children’s performance in reading English rather than the reverse. Ingenious studies of these deaf
children reading English print reveal that they simultaneously access ASL during English reading,
showing the same classic dual language activation strengths observed in all bilinguals. This work
challenges science and society’s concept of “Bilingualism” to include children who are indeed bilingual, but
who have exclusive access to their other language through the printed word.
Part 2. MiniLab Experience: Through Fuze meeting technology, you will visit the lab where some of the
above discoveries have been made, and observe the experimental paradigms and stimuli used to make the
discoveries. Critically analyze the structure of each experiment, identify the dependent and independent
measures, and make a “Thinking Guide” flow chart of the specific logic/reasoning underlying each
experiment.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present findings about monolingual and bilingual
language acquisition to Educational Neuroscience studies of language learning, Weeks 6 & 7, in Part I of
this course.
Emmorey, Borinstein, Thompson & Gollan, 2008
Freel, Clark, Anderson, Gilbert, Musyoka, & Hauser, 2011
Hauser, Lukomski & Hillman, 2008
Petitto & Holowka, 2002
(Optional: Petitto & Marentette, 1991)
WEEK 8. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND A REVOLUTIONARY VIEW OF READING – VISUAL
PHONOLOGY, CHILDREN AND ADULTS
Note: Short Essay #2 due today in class
Part 1. There is now growing evidence that deaf visual learners also have – and use – a “visual phonology”
when accessing meaning from English printed words, which is built up from a complex combination of
early visual experience with the sign phonetic-syllabic rhythmic temporal properties key to sign
phonological organization, phonetic rhythmic temporal combinatorial parameters of fluid fingerspelling,
and sensitivity to visual orthographic patterning. Early visual language experience also impacts the visual
learner’s use of a larger "text processing" window when reading printed text (studied with eye-tracking and
neuroimaging technologies). As in the acquisition of reading in spoken languages (e.g., English), visual
phonology in the deaf visual learner appears to be especially crucial in early reading acquisition. While
somewhat later readers (specifically, the fluent ASL and English bilingual deaf child) also show the shift to
more sign semantic processing during reading.
Part 2. Two groups will be formed. The first group will critically assemble and evaluate the evidence for
the existence of a visual phonology drawing from the readings. The second group will identify the important
implications of the finding for education, teaching, and policy regarding the young visual learner to read.
Each will then inform and debate with the other. Crucially, both will then discuss why the discovery of a
“visual phonology” has been articulated by leading world scientists to be one of the most revolutionary
findings about the nature of human language in the history of language studies.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present behavioral and brain discoveries of visual
phonology and reading in visual learners to Educational Neuroscience studies of Reading in Week 10, in
Part I of this course.
Emmorey, Xu & Braun, A, 2012
Baker, Golinkoff, & Petitto, 2006
McQuarrie & Parrila, 2009
Morford, Wilkinson, Villwock, Pinar, & Kroll, 2011
Petitto, Zatorre, et al., 2000
Pinar, Dussias, & Morford, 2011
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 8
WEEK 9. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH
Part 1. Through synergistic VL2 Center collaborations, VL2 researchers have built upon VL2 findings
showing the advantageous impact of early visual language exposure and visual social engagement on later
language, reading, and literacy. In turn, they have designed and conducted translational research whereupon
they ask whether parental training in ASL can facilitate communication in the home so that language and
pre-literacy skills are in place for young deaf children prior to school entry. Here, they specifically train
parents of young deaf visual learners in the visual language of ASL as a direct tool to enhance their
children’s social visual engagement, vocabulary acquisition, and overall language, reading, and literacy
success.
Part 2: MiniLab Experience: First, from your readings, discuss and identify what is translation research?
What are the steps from translational research, to educational practice, and to educational policy change?
Direct? Second, through Fuze meeting technology, you will visit with this lab, view demonstrations of the
teacher/parent training procedures, and discuss with the researchers, first-hand, results thus far. Critically
evaluate the experimental paradigm used and the theoretical premises upon which the studies are based.
Discuss with the researchers their “next step” scientific questions, as well as their translational research
plans to be pursued.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the translational research described here to
Educational Neuroscience studies in this Part II of the course, especially Weeks 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8. In addition,
link the present translational research described here to Educational Neuroscience studies of Bilinguals in
Week 7, Reading in Week 10, Social Cognition in Week 11, and Culture in Week 13, in Part I of this
course.
Haptonstall-Nykaza & Schick, 2007
Padden, 2006
WEEK 10. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE INNOVATIONS IN TRANSLATION – EVALUATION & RISK
ASSESSMENT, ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF RESEARCH IN SPECIAL POPULATIONS
Part 1. VL2 is committed to the integration of research and education through the development of tools and
products that employ scientific principles of Center work, to disseminate information to teachers, parents,
and the community at large, as well as to train a future generation of students in interdisciplinary scientific
methods. Each will be identified, analyzed, and discussed in turn.
Part 2. Despite good intentions, formal mechanisms of evaluation and risk assessment must be put in place
regarding all translational “products.” Discuss and critically analyze why? Drawing from your readings,
identify and discus ethical considerations involved in all such research and product/information
dissemination. In addition, identify, discuss, and critically evaluate the crucial ethical considerations of all
such research, especially research involving special populations.
Borner et al., 2010
Urban & Trochim, 2009
Tochim, Kane, Grahman, Pincus, 2011
WEEK 11. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE INNOVATIONS IN TRANSLATION – NORMATIVE DATA,
VOLUNTEER PARTICIPANT POOLS, FIRST-TIME SHARED DATA BANKS
Part 1. VL2 research has given rise to activities and products that have value for the practitioners, for
example, the “VL2 Assessment Toolkit” (Adult and Child versions) to promote common measures and
definitions in the field. This facilitates cross-project comparisons, the collection of vital norms for the
development of sign language important for teachers, health care practitioners, and parents, and indeed
makes possible a greater potential for accumulating data needed for evidence-based practice and educational
reform. VL2 has also created a Shared Research Participant Pool (inclusive of infants, children and adults)
and a mechanism for sharing data amongst VL2 affiliated researchers (VL2 Data Sharing Bank). Here,
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 9
VL2 is developing the cyber-infrastructure, IRB protocols, and recruitment strategies for a national
participant pool of Deaf individuals who would like to be contacted for potential participation in future
VL2-affiliated research. This will be of great assistance for researchers needing to recruit participants from
this low-incidence population. There is also great interest in making available de-identified data sets (such
as EELS data) in a VL2 Shared Data Bank for VL2-affiliated researchers seeking to conduct secondary data
analyses and testing new research hypotheses.
Part 2. Two groups will be formed. Each will separately evaluate the pros and cons of these activities for all
stakeholders, especially members of the deaf community, by considering the multitude of complex factors
at hand. Arbitrarily, one group will be assigned as pro, one con. An open debate will ensue.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: Link the present normative data/ASL Assessment Toolkit
to Educational Neuroscience studies in this Part II of the course, especially Weeks 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8. In
addition, link the present normative data/ASL Assessment Toolkit to Educational Neuroscience studies of
Bilinguals in Week 7 and Reading in Week 10 in Part I of this course. Note this work is a result of “twoway,” bidirectional (especially, from the community to the lab) collaboration. Identify how/why?
Allen et al., 2009
Morere & Allen, In Press, Chapter 2
Enns & Herman, 2011
WEEK 12. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE INNOVATIONS IN TRANSLATION – BILINGUAL
READING APPS, DISSEMINATION, CLASSROOM & COMMUNITY IMPACT
NOTE: Final paper due today (no exceptions)
Blackboard: Upload your 2-3 Discussion questions for your next week’s presentation today.
Part 1. VL2 develops a wide range of educational and informational translational products in a
variety of media to facilitate the rapid and widespread distribution of Center findings, and the
learning of deaf children in their homes and in school. An important goal is to move from
translational research to translational impact by communicating the findings and Center activities
broadly and effectively using multiple methods appropriate for a wide variety of stakeholders.
Part 2. MiniLab Experience: You will participate in demonstrations of VL2’s groundbreaking ASL-English
Bilingual Reading Apps, Parent-Teacher Packages, web-based dissemination venues, products, tools, and
more. However, you will view the ASL-English Bilingual Reading Apps and specifically identify the chain
of reasoning/planning underlying its design, moving from the laboratory findings upon which it was based,
to the translational research that preceded its development, and then to the parameters along which it is
presently designed and tested.
Building Connections with Part I of the Course: The ASL-Bilingual Reading Apps have important and
meaningful links to discoveries from Educational Neuroscience discussed in Part I of this course, as well as
those specific discoveries discussed in this Part II of the course. As we approach Week 13 of this 2-Part
course, now it is your turn: Identify the specific research connections and foundations (spanning Part I and
Part II of this course) from which the ASL-Bilingual Reading Apps derived?
DeLana, Gentry, Andrews, 2007
Andrews & Rusher, 2010
WEEK 13. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE INNOVATIONS IN TRANSLATION – TRAINING THE NEXT
GENERATION
Part 1. VL2 trains scientists at the undergraduate, graduate, and post-doctoral levels in the multidisciplinary
study of visual language and visual learning. VL2 has also created a Science Mentorship Program to further
support the training of young students and to address the crucial issue of the retention of young students in
science, spanning undergraduates to young faculty (and includes one-on-one training and mentorship of
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 10
former VL2 students/faculty, as well as new students/faculty who wish to participate in the Center)—
activities also vital to Center sustainability.
Part 2. MiniLab Experience: Two groups will be formed arbitrarily. Based on the readings, and class
knowledge, you will discuss with the VL2 student representative who will visit this class the structure of the
VL2 Student Leadership Team, as well as the other student organs, and then prepare an organizational flow
chart, which you will then critically evaluate for strengths and perceived areas to strengthen. Further, at the
larger level involving contributions to society, you will offer a critical analysis of the motivation behind the
design of such student training activities. Stepping back, identify the fuller societal outcomes that could
potentially follow from such activities.
WEEK 14. EDUCATIONAL NEUROSCIENCE AND INTEGRATION OF SCIENCE & TRANSLATION –
BUILDING PARTNERSHIPS
Note: In-class Presentation of your Final Paper today
Part 1. We will identify VL2’s strong two-way partnerships with The Laurent Clerc National Deaf
Education Center as well as VL2’s School Partner Program (which contains over 90 schools). We will
identify and discuss the fuller societal outcomes that could potentially follow from such partnerships. We
will track the two-way, bi-directional mutual discovery that moves from the Schools/community to the
laboratory. We will also identify the steps from the laboratory, to translational research, and, ultimately, to
educational practice and policy innovations. Both directions are vital for discovery and change. You will
identify and know how this is so, and, crucially, you will know the steps that lead to revolutionary
educational innovation and society change for all children, especially the young visual learner!
Part II. In-class Presentations.
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 11
REFERENCES
Allen, T.E., Clark, D.M., del Giudice, A., Koo, D., Lieberman, A., Mayberry, R. I., & Miller, P. (2009).
Phonology and reading: A response to Wang, Trezek, Luckner, and Paul. American Annals of
the Deaf, 154, 338-345.
Andrews, J. F., & Melissa Rusher (2010). Codeswitching Techniques: Evidence-Based Instructional
Practices for the ASL/English Bilingual Classroom. American Annals of the Deaf. 155(4), 407424.
Baker, S.A., Golinkoff, R. M., & Petitto, L.A. (2006). New insights into old puzzles from infants’
categorical discrimination of soundless phonetic units. Language Learning and Development,
2(3), 147-162.
Bavelier, D., Dye, M.W.G. & Hauser, P.C. (2006). Do deaf individuals see better? Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 10 (11), 512-518.
Börner, K., Contractor, N., Falk-Krzesinski, H.J., Fiore, S.M., Hall, K.L., Keyton, J., Spring, B., Stokols,
D., Trochim, W., and Uzzi, B. (2010). A Multi-Level Systems Perspective for the Science of
Team Science. Science Translational Medicine 2, cm24.
Bosworth, R.G., & Dobkins,K. R. (2002a). The effects of spatial attention on motion processing in
deaf singers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners. Brain & Cognition, 49, 152-169.
Bosworth, R. G., & Dobkins, K. R. (2002b). Visual field asymmetries for motion processing in deaf
and hearing signers. Brain and Cognition, 49, 170–181.
Brooks, R. & Meltzoff, A. (2008). Infant gaze following and pointing predict accelerated vocabulary
growth through two years of age: a longitudinal, growth curve modeling study. Journal of Child
Language, 35 (1), 207-220.
Cohen, L., Lehericy, S., Chochon, F., Lemer, C., Rivaud, S., & Dehaene, S. (2002). Languagespecific tuning of visual cortex? Functional properties of the visual word form area. Brain: A
Journal of Neurology, 125(5), 1054-1069.
Crume, P. & Singleton, J.L. (2008). Teacher practices for promoting visual engagement of deaf
children in a bilingual preschool. Paper presented at the Association of College Educators of
the Deaf/Hard of Hearing. Monterey, CA.
Dehaene, S., Molko, N., Cohen, L., & Wilson, A. J. (2004). Arithmetic and the brain. Current Opinion
in Neurobiology, 14, 218-224.
DeLana, M., Gentry, M. A., Andrews, J.F. (2007). The efficacy of ASL/English Bilingual Education:
Considering Public Schools. American Annals of the Deaf. 152(1).
Dye, M.W.G. & Bavelier, D. (2010). Attentional enhancements and deficits in deaf populations: An
integrative review. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience. Special Issue on Development and
Plasticity of Multisensory Functions, 28 (2), 181-192.
Dye, M., Hauser, P., Bavelier, D. (2009). Is visual selective attention in deaf individuals enhanced or
deficient? PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5640.
Emmorey, K., Borinstein, H. B., Thompson, R. L., & Gollan, T. H. (2008). Bimodal bilingualism.
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(1), 43-61.
Emmorey, K., Xu, J., & Braun, A. (2012). Neural responses to meaningless pseudosigns: Evidence for
sign-based phonetic processing in superior temporal cortex. Brain and Language. 117(1). 34-38.
Enns, C.J. & Herman, R.C. (2011). Adapting the Assessing British Sign Language Development:
Receptive Skills Test Into American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf
Education. 16(3), 362-374.
Freel, B. L., Clark, M. D., Anderson, M. L., Gilbert, G. L., Musyoka, M. M., & Hauser, P. C. (2011).
Deaf individuals’ bilingual abilities: American Sign Language proficiency, reading skills, and
family characteristics. American Annals of the Deaf, 2(1) 18-23.
Goldin-Meadow, S., Shield, A., Lenzen, D., Herzig, H., Padden, C. (2012). The gestures of ASL signers
use tell us when they are ready to learn math. Cognition, (02)006.
Gratton, G., & Fabiani, M. (2003). The event related optical signal (EROS) in visual cortex:
Replicability, consistency, localization and resolution. Psychophysiology, 40(4), 561-571.
Haptonstall-Nykaza, T. S., & Schick, B. (2007). The transition from fingerspelling to English print:
Facilitating English decoding. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12 (2), 172-183.
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 12
Hauser, P., Lukomski, J. & Hillman, T. (2008). Development of deaf and hard-of-hearing students’
executive function In M. Marschark & P.C. Hauser (Eds.) Deaf cognition: Foundations and
outcomes. (pp. 250-263). NY: Oxford University Press.
Hauser, C.P., Dye, D. W.G., Boutla, M, Green, C.S., & Bavelier, D. (2007). Deafness and visual
enumeration: not all aspects of attention are modified by deafness. Brain Research, 1153, 178187.
Jiaxiang, Z. & Kourtzi, Z. (2010). Learning-dependent plasticity with and without training in the human
brain. PNAS, 107(30),13503-13508.
Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I.Q. (1998). Brain plasticity and behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 4364.
Kovelman, I., Baker, S.A., & Petitto, L. A. (2008). Age of first bilingual language exposure as a new
window into bilingual reading development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11(2), 203223.
Lieberman, A. (2012). Eye Gaze and Joint Attention: Fundamental skills for successful interactions in
Home and School Environments. Visual Language & Visual Learning Research Brief. Learning
From Research #5. Washington, D.C.
Lomber, S.G., Meredith, M.A., and Kral, A. (2010) Crossmodal plasticity in specific auditory cortices
underlies visual compensations in the deaf. Nature Neuroscience 13, 1421-1427.
McQuarrie, L. & Parrila, R. (2009). Phonological Representations in Deaf Children: Rethinking the
“Functional Equivalence” Hypothesis. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 14(2), 137154.
Mohay, H. (2000). Language in sight: Mothers’ strategies for making language visually accessible to
deaf children. In P.E. Spencer, C.J. Erting, & M. Marschark (Eds.), The deaf child in the family
and at school (pp. 151-166). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Morford, J., Wilkinson, E., Villwock, A., Pinar, P., & Kroll, J. (2011). When deaf signers read English,
do written words activate their sign translations? Cognition, 18 (2), 286-292.
Morere, D. and Allen, T. (In Press). Assessing Literacy in Deaf Individuals: Neurocognitive
Measurement and Predictors. New York: Springer.
Padden, C. (2006). Learning fingerspelling twice: Young signing children’s acquisition of fingerspelling.
In M. Marschark, B. Schick & P. Spencer (Eds.) Advances in Sign Language Development by
Deaf Children. New York: Oxford University Press.
Petitto, L.A., Holowka, S., Sergio, L., Levy, B., & Ostry, D. (2004). Baby hands that move to the rhythm
of language: Hearing babies acquiring sign languages babble silently on the hands. Cognition, 9,
43-73.
Petitto, L.A., & Holowka, S. (2002). Evaluating attributions of delay and confusion in young bilinguals:
Special insights from infants acquiring a signed and a spoken language. Sign Language Studies,
3(1), 4-33.
Petitto, L.A., & Marentette, P. (1991). Babbling in the manual mode: evidence for the ontogeny of
language. Science, 251, 1493–1496.
Petitto, L.A., Zatorre, R., Gauna, K., Nikelski, E.J., Dostie, D., & Evans, A. (2000). Speech-like cerebral
activity in profoundly deaf people processing signed languages: Implications for the neural basis
of human language. (PET brain imaging study.) Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, 97(25), 13961-13966.
Pinar, P., Dussias, P.E., Morford, J.P. (2011). Deaf Readers as Bilinguals: An Examination of Deaf
Readers’ Print Comprehension in Light of Current Advances in Bilingualism and Second
Language Processing. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(10), 691-704/
Posner, M.I., & Rothbart, M.K. (2000). Developing mechanisms of self-regulation. Development and
psychopathology, 12(3), 427-41.
Swisher, M. (2000). Learning to converse: How deaf mothers support the development of attention and
conversational skills in their young deaf children. In P.E. Spencer, C.J. Erting, & M. Marschark
(Eds.), The deaf child in the family and at school (pp.21-39). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates. 316-339.
Thomas, M.C. (2012). Brain plasticity and education. BJEP Monograph Series II, Number 8 Educational Neuroscience, Volume 1, 143-156(14)Tochim, W, Kane, C, Grahman, M, Pincus,
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 13
H. (2011). Evaluating Translational Research: A process Marker Model. Clinical and
Translational Science. 4(30), 153-162.
Trochim, W., Kane, C., Graham, M., and Pincus, H. (2011). Evaluating Translational Research: A
Process Marker Model. Clinical and Translational Sciences 4, 153-162.
Urban, J. B., & Trochim, W. (2009). The Role of Evaluation in Research-Practice Integration: Working
Toward the "Golden Spike". American Journal of Evaluation, 30(4), 538-553
Zhanga, J., and Kourtzia, Z (2010). Learning-dependent plasticity with and without training in the
human brain. PNAS, 107, 30, 13503–13508.
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 14
Gallaudet University Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience
Rubric for Grading for Reading Discussions and Presentations
Adapted from Department of Interpretation
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 15
Gallaudet University Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience
A Scored Rubric for Evaluating a Research Paper
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 16
Adapted from Department of Interpretation
Quoted from Linda Suskie’s (2004:146-147) Assessing Student Learning: A Common Sense Guide.
This quoted rubric was adapted with permission from a rubric developed by Sharon Glennen and Celia BassichZeren in the Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Towson University
Foundations of Educational Neuroscience, Part II, page 17