PhD Program in Educational Neuroscience (PEN)
PEN 701 Educational Neuroscience Proseminar
Fall 2013 & Spring 2014
Note: This is a one credit course, but PEN students must take this course
twice in the same year for the total of two credits)
Professor: TBA
Office Hours: TBA
VP/Phone: TBA
Email: TBA
Office Location: TBA
Class Time: TBA
Syllabus prepared by Laura Ann Petitto
Course Overview
This course (PEN 701) serves as an introduction to
foundational issues in this discipline of Educational
Neuroscience. Students are required to take this course
twice (fall and spring). It is organized around three to four
public lectures each semester, delivered by invited
speakers on themes drawn from prevailing questions and
challenges in education today. Each lecture is preceded by
a preparation seminar, during which students will discuss
readings relevant to the lecture topic. After each lecture,
students will join the invited speaker for a special
discussion session, during which they will have the
valuable opportunity to interact directly with researchers
pursuing innovative projects in the field of Educational
Neuroscience. Students can expect to gain general knowledge of topics such as language learning, reading,
child development, educational assessment, educational intervention, and school, policy, and family
processes associated with young children, especially young deaf visual learners. Students will also learn
how contemporary brain and behavioral research may be applied in principled ways to address prevailing
problems in education. All seminars and lectures will be conducted bilingually, in ASL and English.
Program Description in Depth
In Educational Neuroscience Seminar, readings and presenters will cohere around the following specific
knowledge theme in contemporary Educational Neuroscience research: Students will explore the
importance of timing and the existence of “sensitive periods” in human language and reading
development, and students will also attempt to crack-the-code regarding the development of the brain
tissue and its related functions that, as a consequence of vital interactions with the environment, mediate
the remarkable human language and reading capacity across the life span.
The overall structure of this Educational Neuroscience Seminar is itself built on fundamental principles
about how humans learn most optimally—principles that have been advanced by scientists within
NSF/Gallaudet’s “Science of Learning Center,” Visual Language and Visual Learning, VL2, and
elsewhere. To promote life-long learning, students in this Seminar will (i) read about a particular idea or
set of ideas, (ii) “see” or “hear” the ideas expressed before them, (iii) mentally manipulate the ideas (e.g.,
through analyses and questioning), and (iv) expand upon the ideas to ultimately “own” the ideas for life
(e.g., through distributed reasoning that follows from group meetings and discussions).
The specific Seminar structure has 3 parts. Students are expected to participate in all three parts for full
course credit. In Part (1), students and faculty attend an intensive Educational Neuroscience Seminar
meeting. This meeting, in turn, has been intentionally yoked to Part (2) of this Seminar, that is, the Ed
Neuroscience Presentation Series, whereupon students will attend a colloquium given by the very author
of the previous week’s assigned reading. Following this colloquium presentation, students will then attend
the third required part of this Seminar, which is, Part (3), the Post-Ed Neuroscience Meeting, held with the
actual presenter. Here, students will have the opportunity to converse directly with, and question, the
actual researcher whose paper the student has read during Parts 1 and 2 of the Seminar.
Both the course content and delivery of this course fully supports diversity. As is true of the discipline of
Educational Neuroscience, both presenters and participants will be invited from a broad interdisciplinary
base, spanning diverse deaf and hearing scholars who are scientists, educators, teachers, clinicians, as well
as deaf and hearing students from these diverse disciplines. The Seminar respectfully embraces bilingual
teaching and learning principles, with all Seminars being conducted in ASL and English.
Foundational Papers
Please read the following papers for the first meeting.
The papers below introduce the new interdisciplinary discipline of Educational Neuroscience, its
combined behavioral and brain research foundations, and the explicit ways in which the discipline
is committed to marry core scientific discoveries with its principled application to prevailing
contemporary educational problems.
The first meeting will introduce these topics and the year’s Seminar themes.
In addition, a brief overview will be provided about Gallaudet’s “Visual Language and Visual
Learning, VL2” – one of the National Science Foundation’s six Science of Learning Centers in
the United States.
Foundational Papers
Mason, L. (2009). Bridging neuroscience and education: A two-way path is possible. Cortex, 45,
548-549.
McCandliss, B. D. (2010). Educational neuroscience: the early years. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 107(18), 8049-4050.
Petitto, L. A. (2009). New discoveries from the bilingual brain and mind across the lifespan:
Implications for Education. International journal Mind, Brain, and Education, 3 (4), pp.
185-197.
Szucs, D., & Goswami, U. (2007). Educational Neuroscience: Defining a new discipline for the
study of mental representations. International Mind, Brain, and Education Society, 1, 114127.
Woolf, S. H. (2008). The meaning of translation research and why it matters. Journal of the
American Medical Association, 299, 211-213.
Recommended Readings
The following papers are foundational to Educational Neuroscience. They also lay bare this year’s
Seminar themes concerning the role of timing and “sensitive periods” in early human
development. Further, they represent key research expertise within the NSF/Gallaudet
University’s “Visual Language and Visual Learning, VL2.”
Recommended Readings
Bavelier, D., Dye, M. W. G., & Hauser, P. C. (2006). Do deaf individuals see better? Trends in
Cognitive Science, 10, 512-518.
Bélanger, N., Slattery, T. J., Mayberry, R. I., & Rayner, K. (2012). Skilled deaf readers have an
enhanced perceptual span in reading. doi: 10.1177/0956797611435139.
Corina, D., & Singleton, J. (2009). Developmental Social Cognitive Neuroscience: Insights from
deafness. Child Development, 80, 952-967.
Emmorey, K., Petrich, J., & Gollan, T.H. (2012). Bilingual processing of ASL-English codeblends: The consequences of accessing two lexical representations simultaneously.
Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 199-210.
Emmorey, K., & Petrich, J. (2012). Processing orthographic structure: Associations between print
and fingerspelling. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 17(2), 194-204.
Mayberry, R. I. (2007). When timing is everything: Age of first-language effects on secondlanguage learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 537-549.
Mayberry, R. I., Chen, J., Witcher, P., & Klein, D. (2011) Age of acquisition effects on the
functional organization of language in the adult brain. Brain and Language, 119, 16-29.
Mayberry, R. I., del Giudice, A., & Lieberman, A. (2011). Reading achievement in relation to
phonological coding and awareness in deaf readers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Deaf
Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 164-188.
Morford, J. P., Wilkinson, E., Villwock, A., Piñar, P., & Kroll, J. F. (2011). When deaf signers
read English: Do written words activate their sign translations? Cognition, 118, 286-292.
Petitto, L. A., & Dunbar, K. (2004). New findings from Educational Neuroscience on Bilingual
Brains, Scientific Brains, and the Educated Mind.
http://petitto.gallaudet.edu/%7Edunbarlab/pubpdfs/pettitodunbarIP.pdf
Petitto, L. A., & Kovelman, I. (2003). The bilingual paradox: How signing-speaking bilingual
children help us to resolve it and teach us about the brain’s mechanisms underlying all
language acquisition. Learning Languages, 8(3), 5-18.
Petitto, L. A., & Zatorre, R.J., Gauna, K., Nikelski, E.J., Dostie, D., Evans, A.C. (2000). Speechlike activity in Speech-like cerebral activity in profoundly deaf people processing signed
languages: Implications for the neural basis of human language. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 97(25), 13961-13966.
Required Readings
Additional required readings will be assigned and will be based on each year’s specific
Themes. These readings will involve topics specifically related to the Seminar’s
presenters. Seminar presenters are engaged in cutting edge research in Educational
Neuroscience, broadly defined — leading to their invitation to come to Gallaudet and
share their expertise with us. Therefore, after reading the Foundational Papers, and after
reviewing the Recommended Readings, additional required readings will be selected from
the body of work of a given invited presenter.
This year, two papers will be chosen for each of the six presenters invited. The Seminar
leader will select one paper, and the other paper will be selected by the presenter
himself/herself. These papers will reflect both the theoretical frameworks used by each
presenter and the topic of their presentation while at Gallaudet. See class assignments
below for details on the structure of the Seminar and the requirements for each meeting.
Course Policy
1—Attendance constitutes 40% of the grade)—Students are expected to attend at least two
of the three on-line videoconferences for each seminar. Additionally, students will be
expected to attend the Educational Neuroscience Presentation component of this Seminar,
either on the Gallaudet campus or by streaming it live at your location. This Seminar is
synchronous, and all members are to meet together even if they are off-campus.
2—Class Activities (see assignments for grade breakdown of class activities)—There will
be a total of 18-class meetings; 6 each for the Ed Neuroscience Seminar, the Educational
Neuroscience Presentation component, and the Post-Ed Neuroscience Meeting. These
classes will be distributed throughout the academic year, around the three Seminar lectures
in the fall and three Seminar lectures in the spring. Class meeting times will rotate
between Wednesday or Thursday afternoons EST.
3—Classroom Assignments constitutes 60% of the grade (see breakdowns below)—
Students will be expected to read the two papers assigned for each Ed Neuroscience
Seminar, Part 1 (the one chosen by the Seminar Leader and the one chosen by the Ed
Neuroscience Presenter). Crucially, prior to the Ed Neuroscience Seminar, you will be
required to have read both papers. In addition, you will also be expected to have posted
your responses to the Guiding Questions (included below in the section on Requirements)
on the Discussion Board in Blackboard (BB). Again, both of these activities are to be
completed prior to the Ed Neuroscience Seminar. This provides you the opportunity to
discuss issues that interest you and/or those that you do not understand. These postings on
BB will help frame the discussion for the “in-class” session through both peer teaching as
well as to allow the instructor to provide supplemental resources, as needed, to help
students fill in gaps in their interdisciplinary knowledge.
Response Paper to the Ed Neuroscience Presentation component of this course (Part 2)—
posted to the Discussion Board on BB. After having watched the Presenter’s public
presentation (during the Ed Neuroscience Presentation component of this course), a
Response Paper is due no later than 2 days after the presentation.
Post Summary is your summation of the information that you have learned based on the
three-part Seminar structure (and discussions) that surround each presenter and will
typical occur with the presenter’s having met with our seminar group (Part 3). It is due no
later than 2 days after this discussion.
Assessment—responses to Guiding Questions on Blackboard for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1) (20%), Response Paper to the Ed Neuroscience Presentation Series (Part
2) (20%) —posted to the Discussion Board on BB and contributions to the responses of
others, and Post Summary after the Post-Ed Neuroscience Session with the presenter (Part
3) (20%).
Due Dates—Assignments are due two days prior to the Ed Neuroscience Seminar, and
two days after the Presentation and Post-Cog-Ed Neuroscience Session.
Gallaudet University Academic Integrity Policy
It is the student’s responsibility to familiarize themselves and comply with the Gallaudet
University’s Graduate Academic Integrity Policy, which can be found on the Gallaudet University
website at:
http://clerccenter.gallaudet.edu/Catalog/Registration_and_Policies/Graduate_Policies/Academic_I
ntegrity.html.
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 this link on the
Gallaudet University’s website for more information.
http://oswd.gallaudet.edu/Student_Affairs/Student_Support_Services/Office_for_Students_with_
Disabilities/General_Information/Academic_Accommodations_Policy.html
Student Learning Outcomes
Please see below
PhD Program in Educational Neuroscience
Rubric for Class Discussion Evaluation
910
7-8
5-6
3-4
0-2
Score
High
Participation:
(18-20%
range)
Description
Contributions reflect exceptional preparation and offers relevant information
from course materials and fieldwork experience to the class discussion. Is ontopic, appropriately initiates and models content and process discussion among
peers; consistently demonstrates listening for understanding, turn-taking,
respectful communication and language; can lead but does not dominate the
dialogue/interaction; engages actively in reflection (as distinguished from
reporting only); embraces and creates opportunities to explore difficult
dialogues/issues.
Moderate
Contributions reflect good preparation and offers relevant information from
Participation
course materials to class discussion. Mostly on-topic, initiates dialogue, takes
(16-18%
part in content/process discussion among peers, and usually demonstrates
range)
listening for understanding, turn-taking, respectful communication and
language. Takes part in the dialogue/interaction but does not dominate it;
engages frequently in reflection (as distinguished from reporting only); willing
to take risks to explore difficult dialogues/issues.
Low
Contributions reflect satisfactory preparation and occasionally offer relevant
Participation
information from class materials to class discussion. Sometimes on-topic,
(14-16%
participates in discussion when others initiate it, engages in mostly content
range)
rather than process related discussion; largely “reporting” rather than
reflection; occasionally demonstrates listening for understanding; makes effort
to be respectful in communication and language. Tends toward “passive”
engagement, and usually does not lead OR may dominate in interaction.
NonContributions reflect less than satisfactory preparation. Once in a while offers
participant:
relevant information from class materials to class discussion. Sometimes on(12-14%)
topic but rarely initiates comments or dialogue with peers. Occasionally
demonstrates off-task behavior (i.e. side conversations with peers,
on pager, writing notes) and needs to be redirected by the teacher. Rarely
takes part in content/process discussions with limited demonstration of
reflection and may withdraw from the discussion, dominate it, or may distract
other students from engagement. Limited intentionality in listening for
understanding, respectful communication and language.
Unsatisfactory Contributions reflect poor preparation. Rarely offers relevant information from
Participation
class materials to class discussion. Does not often participate in class
(<10% range) discussion, even if it's initiated by others and often demonstrates off-topic
behavior (i.e. side conversations with peers, on pager, writing notes). Rarely
takes part in content/process discussions with limited demonstration of
reflection; often withdraws from discussion, dominates it, or distracts other
students from their work. Does not demonstrate ability to listen for
understanding nor engage in respectful communication and language
exchanges. Unwilling to take risks to explore questions/issues.
Course Grade
Letter grade
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
Sequence of Course Activities
Based on the Educational Neuroscience Presentation Series Dates: TBA
Readings will be posted in BB prior to the start of the Seminar after Presenters
are selected
Ed Neuroscience Seminars—one week prior to the Educational Neuroscience Presentation
Guiding Questions responses posted in BB – 2 days prior
Discussion with peers and VL2 researchers—day of meeting
Educational Neuroscience Presentation Series
Response Paper to the VL2 Presentation Series—2 days after
Post-Educational Neuroscience Seminars—the day after the VL2 Presentation
Virtual Discussion with Experts to discuss potential research ideas
Post Summary after the Post-Educational Neuroscience Session with the
Presenter
Guiding Questions
Guiding Questions
1. What is the overarching question that this study addresses?
2. Why is this an important question? How would the answer to this question contribute to a
better understanding of the human capacity for language?
3. What are the conceptual and methodological novel aspects of this study? How do they
contribute to the testing of the ideas in the paper?
4. Building Strength in Stats: What statistical analyses have been used and presented in the
paper? Are the statistical analyses appropriate for answering the research questions and
advancing the study’s hypotheses?
5. What are the main findings and how are they interpreted? Do the findings address the
article’s overarching question? Do they help adjudicate among current theories of early
language development? If so, how?
6. Does this study add new insights to the current bulk of findings on the bilingual
advantage, our understanding of cognitive science, or theories about reading?
7. Can the results of this study have a far-reaching impact on society?
8. How has the paper impacted you? How has it changed or reinforced your own theoretical
views?
9. What are some of the unanswered questions that this study raises?
10. How has the paper impacted you? How has it changed or enriched your views?
11. What are some of the unanswered questions that this study raises?
Gallaudet University Ph.D. Program in Educational Neuroscience
Rubric for Grading for Reading Discussions and Presentations
Adapted from Department of Interpretation
Program Learning
Outcomes
Learning Outcomes Linked to Student Learning Opportunities
Course Name: PEN 701 Educational Neuroscience Proseminar
Course student Learning
Outcomes
1. Knowledge of contemporary
brain and behavioral research
and its principled application to
prevailing problems in
education, spanning the field of
Educational Neuroscience and
the contemporary disciplines
that comprise its
interdisciplinary foundational
base.
2. Knowledge and analysis of
overarching issues in language
learning, reading, child
development, educational
assessment, educational
intervention, and school, policy,
and family processes associated
with young children, especially
young deaf visual learners.
Student Learning
Opportunities
(Write major learning
opportunities)
Responses to Guiding Questions
on BB for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1), Response
Paper to the Ed Neuroscience
Presentation Series (Part 2) —
posted to the Discussion Board
on BB and contributions to the
responses of others, and Post
Summary after the Post-Ed
Neuroscience Session with the
presenter (Part 3).
Responses to Guiding Questions
on BB for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1), Response
Paper to the Ed Neuroscience
Presentation Series (Part 2) —
posted to the Discussion Board
on BB and contributions to the
responses of others, and Post
Summary after the Post-Ed
Neuroscience Session with the
presenter (Part 3).
Assessment Method
(Indicate at least 2 multiple &
varied assessment methods)
Proof of attendance at seminars and
posts on discussion board. Discussion
is assessed with a rubric in syllabus.
Proof of attendance at seminars and
posts on discussion board. Discussion
is assessed with a rubric in syllabus.
1
2
3
x
x
x
x
4
5
6
x
x
x
x
x
x
3. Knowledge of critical
analysis, and critical analytical
thinking, when reading and
comprehending research
articles.
4. Increased familiarity of the
scientific method of inquiry
5. Experience with active, studentcentered learning
Responses to Guiding Questions
on BB for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1), Response
Paper to the Ed Neuroscience
Presentation Series (Part 2) —
posted to the Discussion Board
on BB and contributions to the
responses of others, and Post
Summary after the Post-Ed
Neuroscience Session with the
presenter (Part 3).
Responses to Guiding Questions
on BB for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1), Response
Paper to the Ed Neuroscience
Presentation Series (Part 2) —
posted to the Discussion Board
on BB and contributions to the
responses of others, and Post
Summary after the Post-Ed
Neuroscience Session with the
presenter (Part 3).
Responses to Guiding Questions
on BB for the Ed Neuroscience
Seminar (Part 1), Response Paper
to the Ed Neuroscience
Presentation Series (Part 2) —
posted to the Discussion Board on
BB and contributions to the
responses of others, and Post
Summary after the Post-Ed
Proof of attendance at seminars and
posts on discussion board. Discussion
is assessed with a rubric in syllabus.
Proof of attendance at seminars and
posts on discussion board. Discussion
is assessed with a rubric in syllabus.
Proof of attendance at seminars and posts
on discussion board. Discussion is
assessed with a rubric in syllabus.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Neuroscience Session with the
presenter (Part 3).