Running head: SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Using Science to Teach Science:
Applying the Scientific Method in Teaching Physiological Psychology
Sarah K. Johnson
Moravian College
Gretchen H. Gotthard
Muhlenberg College
1
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
2
Abstract
This chapter explores a two-pronged science-based approach to teaching physiological
psychology. First, the Kolb Learning Cycle is applied to the classroom by providing
opportunities for students to have concrete experiences, reflect on those experiences, form
subsequent hypotheses, and test those hypotheses. The roles of emotional significance, preexisting schemas, and repeated practice are discussed in the context of this cycle. Second,
several evidence-based practices for learning are explored (e.g., the testing effect, levels of
processing, and judgments of learning), with the encouragement that these are shared in an
explicit manner with students. The scientific method, as both the foundation for such evidence
and as a parallel to the Kolb cycle, is the underlying framework for teaching—confronting headon the resistance that many psychology students have for physiological psychology, rooted in a
fear of science. Numerous in-class activities, discussed throughout the chapter, tie this
theoretical framework to specific classroom practices.
Keywords: Kolb learning cycle; Experiential learning; Emotional significance; Testing
effect, Judgments of learning; Physiological Psychology
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
3
Using Science to Teach Science:
Applying the Scientific Method in Teaching Physiological Psychology
Psychology sometimes suffers from a public-image problem. This problem derives from
the fact that those practicing Psychology research see the field as a science, whereas those
outside of Psychology, including students newly exposed to the field, often do not see
Psychology as a science, or at the very least see it as a so-called “soft science.” Teaching in the
areas of Physiological Psychology/Biopsychology and Sensation and Perception are liable to
bring out the worst in this conflict of views, as students enter the classroom prepared for
material that they do deem to be scientific, while at the same time considering themselves as
Psychology students to be somewhat outside of science (Goedeke & Gibson, 2011; see Bartels,
Hinds, Glass, & Ryan, 2009, for evidence that the perception of Psychology as a science
increases as students take more courses in Psychology). To illustrate, here’s an anecdote about
a student who was at the very top of her statistics and research methods class. The student
asked her statistics professor (SKJ) what classes she (the professor) would be teaching in the
fall; the answer was: “Cognitive Neuroscience… you should definitely take it. It will really relate
to your interests in speech pathology.” The (email) reply from the student?
Hmm…Cog Neuro? *cringe* I know that I am NOT a neuroscience girl… any form of
‘science’ and ‘<student’s name>’ are NOT synonymous” [quoted with permission].
This kind of response appears in different forms, but is not uncommon from Psychology
students who simply don’t see themselves as being in a science, despite learning (through a
year-long course, in the case of the above student) the scientific method. Some have suggested
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
4
that this image problem is enough of a hindrance to our teaching that changing the name of our
discipline from Psychology to Psychological Science is a necessary step in combating the
misguided impressions students have when they enter our classrooms (Ewing et al., 2010).
The matter gets worse when the course is geared towards students who don’t identify
as Psychology students at all—perhaps ranging from those who do consider themselves
apprentice scientists (majoring in Biology, Chemistry, or Physics, for example) and those who
consider themselves nowhere close to scientists (e.g., those majoring in the Arts, Humanities,
or Business). In such cases, the students enter the classroom already resistant to the idea of
learning scientific material, already holding the expectation that they will not be able to learn it
well because they are not “that kind of person”—i.e., a science person. Students’ fears may not
be unfounded, as evidence suggests that Introductory Psychology students do in fact perform
more poorly on tests of biopsychology-related material than material from most other
disciplines within Psychology (Peck, Ali, Matchock, & Levine, 2006). Furthermore, it has been
shown that fear and anxiety surrounding learning can produce levels of stress hormones (e.g.,
glucocorticoids) that impede an individual’s ability to learn (e.g., Andreano & Cahill, 2006).
Creating a classroom environment that encourages low-stakes experimentation with the
material (often referred to as “relaxed alertness”; e.g., Caine & Caine, 1994) may be an
important way to diminish some of this anxiety.
Our answer for creating this low stakes, yet engaging environment? Make science not
only the topic, but also the method for learning, and the method for deciding how to promote
better learning. In this chapter we will discuss how to prepare for teaching a course in
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
5
Physiological Psychology, using the scientific method as the foundation for the techniques you
use.
Who is this chapter for? This chapter is for new instructors—those who are sitting down
to prepare the nuts and bolts of a class: getting a syllabus ready, choosing a textbook or other
readings, and planning assignments. Some of the ideas contained here may be familiar to those
who have been teaching for a while, especially in Cognitive Psychology (where there is a great
deal of research being done on teaching practices that can better promote learning), or other
sciences (e.g., Chemistry, where the Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning, or POGIL,
method is a well instantiated example of a scientific method based approach to learning;
Herreid, 2007). We will touch on some of these practices—but the more experienced
instructor may find in this chapter a sense of how these different ideas can come together to
form a holistic approach, centered around the scientific method.
What kind of course are you planning? In this chapter, we will refer to Physiological
Psychology as the general domain, but the principles contained here also apply to many other
similar courses, such as Sensation and Perception, Cognitive Psychology (see also Sternberg &
Sternberg, this volume), Experimental Psychology (Thorsheim, this volume), Conditioning and
Learning, and Neuroscience (Muir, this volume). The similarity in these topics in terms of the
focus on experimental methodology means the principles here would apply well to any of them
(and potentially to some others, to the extent that they are taught in a way that highlights
controlled scientific research). Nonetheless, the examples we will describe here focus on
Physiological Psychology concepts. We consider Physiological Psychology to be essentially a
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
6
synonym for Biological Psychology or Biopsychology—although there may be some slight
differences in emphasis in the way some approach these labels, the ideas presented here will
work equally well for courses with either classification.
Another key aspect of course preparation to consider is the level of the course and the
overall function it serves within the institution. The authors have varied experience, ranging
from a course that serves as a general education requirement and is open to any student at any
level within the college, to a high-level course that serves upper-class Psychology and
Neuroscience majors in particular. We will discuss ways to adapt your course plans to suit
varied needs. Going along with the course level, differences in the size and make-up of the
class are important to consider. Again, the authors have experiences ranging from very small
courses (~10 students) to somewhat larger courses (~40 students), and with students from
purely within Psychology and Neuroscience, to those coming from across the college at large.
We will address these differences as well.
Regardless of the level or make-up of your class, the ideas presented here will help you
to involve students actively in the process of learning the material. We start by outlining a key
conceptual framework for thinking about teaching—namely the Kolb Cycle (Kolb, 1984). In the
first part of the chapter, we will discuss how to implement this framework in teaching, creating
a cycle of learning that resembles the scientific method. We will highlight concrete activities
and ideas you can use in your classrooms. In the second part of the chapter, we will discuss
how the actual scientific method, in the form of psychological research on learning, can inform
the ways you teach. Here we will focus on ways that research has contributed to our
understanding of how students learn best; we promote active sharing of this information with
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
7
students, and again we will provide some examples of how you can incorporate these ideas and
findings into classroom activities. Finally, we will discuss a few concerns you may face as you
work these ideas into your own teaching, such as how to assess students’ understanding
(traditional versus non-traditional methods), and how to make room for hands-on activities
without sacrificing content (or whether, in fact, sacrificing content may be advisable).
THE FOUR COMPONENTS OF KOLB’S LEARNING CYCLE
Students may have their own preferences when it comes to learning new information
(e.g., via visual aids, hands-on demonstrations, reading, or lectures), but several factors are
consistently linked with the formation of solid long-term memories. Information can be better
encoded, stored, and retrieved if it is (1) emotionally significant to the learner (e.g., Sylwester,
2002; Caine, Caine, McClintic, & Klimek, 2009), (2) made meaningful by incorporation into preexisting schemas (e.g., deWinstanley & Bjork, 2002), and (3) practiced repeatedly in different
forms and/or contexts (e.g., Halpern & Hakel, 2003). These objectives can be easily attained
through the use of a scientific-method-based form of learning, referred to as Kolb’s learning
cycle (Kolb, 1984; Kolb, Boyatzis, & Mainemelis, 2000; see also Zull, 2011; Zull, 2002). Kolb
described four key components to his model: “concrete experience”, “reflective observation”,
“abstract hypotheses”, and “active testing”.
This section of the chapter will describe the basic components of each phase of Kolb’s
cycle, and then apply them to the three key components to learning (i.e., emotional significance
of information, incorporating information into pre-existing schemas, and repeated practice),
along with examples so readers can “Try It Out” in their own classes.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
8
Concrete Experience
In essence, any activity that turns a student from a passive witness into an active
participant can serve as a concrete experience for the classroom – for example, analyzing a
video clip of a patient with a neurological disorder, carefully examining news stories from the
internet for accuracy, and writing and performing a skit to demonstrate traditional symptoms
of a neurological disorder. Based on this model, physically (or virtually) manipulating a sheep
brain should produce better memory for neuroanatomy than simply listening to a lecture about
different parts of the brain (see Play-DohTM Brains). Observing first-hand the symptoms of a
patient with schizophrenia (e.g., viewing a video clip or interviewing a patient), rather than just
reading about the symptoms in a book or seeing them listed on a PowerPoint slide, should
result in better memory for the disorder. Class-designed and conducted replications of effects
should promote stronger learning compared to simply reading or hearing about experiments
that have been conducted.
TRY IT OUT: Play-DohTM brains
This exercise, discussed by Wilson and Marcus (1992), can be used in conjunction with a
standard sheep brain dissection lab, or in place of actual dissection, for example, when costs
prohibit ordering materials for a full class to do dissection, or when appropriate facilities aren’t
available for a wet lab. This an excellent opportunity to create an atmosphere of “relaxed
alertness” where students may feel more prepared to jump into the exercise and are less
concerned about making mistakes (Caine et al., 2009), than if they were dissecting real sheep
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
9
brains. In some institutions, a good proportion of Psychology students are also Early Childhood
Education students, and Play-DohTM makes brain anatomy concrete in a way that relates well to
their other academic interests. There is very little preparation involved in setting up this
activity, and there are a large variety of ways this lab can be carried out. The instructor may set
up a well-structured activity where students are given a clear model to copy, or perhaps the
instructor gives students a list of brain structures and allows them to explore on their own
(using their textbook or class notes to create and locate key structures). The activity could
emphasize the layers of the brain (moving from subcortical to cortical regions), could be done
more or less three-dimensionally, or could require individual students to focus on certain
regions and then coordinate with other members of the class afterwards to put the pieces
together correctly. Most importantly, students can exercise their own creativity in how to
approach it.
Reflective Observation
Exposing students to various phenomena via concrete experiences is only part of the
formula for learning. Providing them with the time to think about those experiences and make
sense of them in the context of their prior experiences is an essential second step in
understanding (Grossman, 2009; Zepke & Leach, 2010). Reflective observation can take many
forms, but will often involve writing at some level. Students may engage in “minute papers”
during a class session (e.g., jotting down their initial impressions on a new topic or noting
connections they see between new material and material discussed in previous classes; Angelo
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
10
& Cross, 1993; Stead, 2005), or produce longer works in an out-of-class assignment. They may
create informal sorts of reflection assignments (e.g., blog posts), or more formal reflections
(e.g., lengthy research papers). Importantly, terminology and definitions need not emerge until
after students have had this important time to reflect on their experiences. Students might
examine a figure from a research article and write down their impressions of what the figure is
showing. In a subsequent discussion, key terms and concepts will emerge and be tied in with
the student’s reflections on the figure. For example, when discussing the effects of stress on
the immune system, students might analyze a figure showing that high subjective ratings of
stress are correlated with increased incidence of developing a cold. After reflecting on the
figure, students will be introduced to concepts like Selye’s general adaptation syndrome (Selye,
1956) and the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis (Breedlove, Watson, & Rosenzweig,
2010). Having seen the data first hand will give the students a concrete experience on which to
“hang” these new concepts and definitions. Furthermore, writing may not even be a
component of a reflection opportunity. For example, students may create audio or video clips
where they describe their reflections about a particular concrete experience and keep an
electronic diary of their perceptions. Or they may create oil paintings, sketches or graphic
novels as a form of reflection. The varieties of potential reflection opportunities are vast.
Abstract Hypotheses
The process of generating abstract hypotheses goes hand-in-hand with reflective
observation. This phase of the cycle consists of creating new ideas that, in the student’s view,
have not yet been tested in the real world. As with all hypotheses, abstract hypotheses should
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
11
be stated in a way that is testable. Any reflection that goes beyond simple observation and
description likely involves abstract hypothesis generation. For example, after viewing a video
clip of a patient with schizophrenia, a student might reflect in a short paper that the patient
had a hard time keeping their train of thought (i.e., showed disorganized thought processes),
the patient reported hearing voices in their head (i.e., auditory hallucinations), and the patient
was worried that they were being watched by special government forces (i.e., paranoid
behavior). Taking this description a step farther, the student may recall from a previous class
session that drugs known to increase dopamine in the brain sometimes lead to hallucinations.
When the student wonders whether giving a dopamine antagonist (i.e., a drug that lowers
dopamine in the brain) might decrease auditory hallucinations, they have generated an abstract
hypothesis.
Active Testing
The last phase in Kolb’s cycle (1984) involves the active testing of abstract hypotheses.
In the traditional sense, one might conduct an empirical study to fully examine the question at
hand. However, in a classroom setting, especially one that does not have a lab component, it
may be impossible to conduct an experiment. Lack of laboratory equipment does not mean
that active testing cannot take place in the classroom. In fact, there are a variety of ways for
students to actively test their abstract hypotheses. For example, in the schizophrenia example
described in the Abstract Hypotheses section, after making the hypothesis that excess
dopamine produces hallucinations, the student could conduct a literature search to find an
empirical article that has experimentally addressed the question. Students may choose to
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
12
search reputable sources on the internet, refer to their textbook or notes from the course (or
from other courses they have taken), talk with an expert, or “brain storm” with a partner to
look for answers. Importantly, this step often leads to new concrete experiences, which brings
the learning cycle full circle. Reading an empirical article, or observing resources online, for
example, are new concrete experiences, which may lead to new reflective observations,
abstract hypotheses, and further active testing of those hypotheses. Along these lines, we
advocate incorporating primary sources into your class as much as possible (allowing for
appropriate reading/processing time depending on class level). Empirical sources can provide
the initial moment of reflective observation (as discussed in the example of Seyle’s general
adaptation syndrome), or act in the service of active testing.
APPLYING KOLB’S LEARNING CYCLE TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Emotionally Significant Information
Research into the neurobiology of memory has shown clearly that emotionally
significant memories are remembered better than ordinary mundane memories (e.g., Cahill &
McGaugh, 1991; McIntyre, McGaugh, & William, 2012). This enhancing effect is closely tied to
the release of epinephrine and norepinephrine (i.e., that “burst of adrenaline” one gets after an
important event has occurred), as well as other neurotransmitter systems (i.e., acetylcholine,
GABA and opioids; Breedlove et al., 2010). Epinephrine and norepinephrine release causes a
chain reaction during which the amygdala and hippocampal formation work together to form a
well-consolidated new memory (e.g., McIntyre et al., 2012). Involvement of the amygdala in
this process, rather than simply the hippocampal formation, puts a “stamp” of sorts on the
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
13
memory, tagging it as “important”. The trick is to mimic this effect in the classroom. How can
experiences be made significant in a classroom setting? Concrete experiences. These hands-on,
active-learning-driven experiences make learning “come alive”. They give students the thrill of
self-initiated discovery, i.e., an “Aha” moment, and make the experience feel more important
(e.g., Mystery Boxes).
TRY IT OUT: Mystery Boxes
There are a number of websites describing this basic activity. Here is our spin on it, with
several links provided at the end for those who want to see some other versions or ways of
framing the same activity.
At its simplest, this activity involves a set of opaque boxes each with a small object (or
objects) inside. However, the end “reveal” is a bit more fun if you take the time to put a little
extra work in at the beginning. Using cardboard boxes that are approximately 6” x 6” x 3”, build
obstacles inside, such as ramps, tunnels, pillars, and the similar, out of foam. Add a marble or
other small object to each box: something that rolls is ideal, but objects with some texture (e.g.,
a 20-sided die) create an interesting sound when the box is manipulated. Tape the box shut,
and cover it if necessary.
In class, students are charged with figuring out what is inside the box. Questions posed
to the class throughout this process include: What forms of evidence do you have for figuring
out what is inside the box? What are some limitations on your ability to find out what is inside?
What other forms of evidence would you like to have? Do all of the boxes contain the same
thing? How would you test whether this is true? Students are encouraged to report their
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
14
findings (using written descriptions, drawings, or both), and to update those findings as
necessary. This activity easily fills a single class period, and can extend across class periods,
which has the benefit of providing students with an incubation period during which they may
develop new hypotheses or shed their initial assumptions.
This activity is great for illustrating three larger points in relation to the general field of
physiological psychology:
1) The scientific method involves experimentation and hypothesis testing. This point
can be taken a step further to discuss the social nature of science, for example by highlighting
the role of communication between scientists. How do our ways of describing our findings
impact how others understand them?
2) Our techniques for understanding the brain and the nervous system, particularly in
relation to behavior, are indirect. We can’t “see inside the box”, so we have to find ways to
infer what is inside. One reason for making adaptations to the inside of the box (e.g., ramps)
instead of just including different objects is that most students will make the assumption that
the task is to decide what object is inside. Asking them what assumptions they are making
about the inside of the box can lead to the revelation that there are other factors affecting
what they hear and feel. This revelation parallels the theme that our study of physiology and
the brain involve many assumptions (e.g., the assumption that blood flow correlates strongly
with brain activity).
3) Once students have reflected on the kinds of evidence they are using, the concept of
“converging evidence” can be introduced. This concept can easily be incorporated repeatedly
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
15
throughout the semester, for example in discussing how animal and human literature, or
neuroimaging and patient literature, can be brought together.
Source: http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/mys.box.html (developed by Dr.
Jean Beard, Professor Emerita, San Jose State University, San Jose CA for the Evolution & the
Nature of Science Institutes website); http://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/Nature-ofScience/Teaching-and-Learning-Approaches/Student-activity-Mystery-boxes
One simple way to create concrete experiences that engage emotional responses in
students is through the act of “reproblematizing” the content itself. Reproblematizing can be
accomplished by removing key information from class materials (e.g., definitions and answers
to key questions), and then giving students the opportunity to “discover” the information for
themselves. When teaching within a “traditional”, lecture-based format, students might be
shown a PowerPoint slide with a variety of course content laid out in a neat outline with key
terms and corresponding definitions. In a reproblematized classroom, students are given
“clues” that help them arrive at the same terms and definitions on their own. Reproblematizing
course content is simple to do, yet can have a profound effect on learning (e.g., deWinstanley &
Bjork, 2002). Done in a sequential way, students are able to make the same “discoveries”
originally made by the researchers, while at the same time engaging in an emotionally
significant experience that will help them to more fully consolidate their new information.
Case study methods of teaching (e.g., POGIL) serve as excellent reproblematizers of
content (e.g., Herreid, 2007). For instance, it gives students the hands-on experience of
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
16
working through the case, allows for reflection, abstract hypothesis creation, and testing of
ideas, and gives students the opportunity to have an “aha” moment where they experience the
thrill of solving a problem. Not surprisingly, these discovery moments are positively reinforcing
for the student, and have been correlated with release of dopamine in the reward circuitry of
the brain (Ashby, Isen, & Turken, 1999). Additionally, significant emotional experiences engage
the amygdala and hippocampal formation and lead to the release of acetylcholine, which
contributes to the strengthening neural connections associated with the creation of memory
(Ashby et al., 1999).
TRY IT OUT: Reproblematizing Course Content
EXAMPLE 1: Several well-supported theories of amnesia exist in the literature (e.g.,
consolidation theory and reconsolidation theory). In the reproblematized classroom, students
might be given samples of data and then asked to analyze them. For example, students view a
figure showing a standard temporal gradient of retrograde amnesia (i.e., memory for events
that occur close in time to the amnesic event are disrupted, while memories farther in time
from the amnesic event are spared). Students reflect on this figure and then discuss their initial
interpretations with a partner. Most students will determine that “newer” memories are
vulnerable to amnesic agents, while “older” memories are not. This defines traditional
consolidation theory. Next, students view a figure from an empirical paper (e.g., Land, Bunsey,
Riccio, & 2000) in which “old”, but recently “reactivated” memories (i.e., those that undergo a
brief reminder prior to an amnesic event) are also disrupted, in addition to new memories.
After reflection on these additional data, students arrive at the conclusion that activity state of
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
17
a memory is more important than age (i.e., “active” memories, those that are currently being
processed, are vulnerable to amnesic agents). This finding provides a definition for
reconsolidation theory and a contrast to consolidation theory.
EXAMPLE 2: When discussing the localization of aphasias (i.e., language disorders) within the
brain, students might view a photograph or diagram of a damaged human brain (or better yet,
a real brain that could be closely examined), followed by the question: “What abnormalities do
you see in this brain?” This reflection could be accomplished with a quick written response or a
brief discussion with a partner nearby. Some students will quickly recall (perhaps from a
previous course) that damage to that part of the brain results in a specific type of aphasia, but
many will not. Students might then be given a hint: “This is Broca’s patient, whom he referred
to as Tan” (Breedlove et al., 2010). Students are given another minute to incorporate this hint
into their previous writing and/or small group discussions. The final step in this problem solving
scenario might involve viewing a short video clip of a patient with Broca’s aphasia (or giving
students written language samples), and applying their interpretations to concepts that came
out in their earlier writing or discussions.
Incorporating New Information into Pre-Existing Schemas
It can be difficult for students to learn new content that is entirely separate from their
pre-established schemas (e.g., deWinstanley & Bjork, 2002). And it may be challenging for
instructors to give students the opportunity to really struggle with new material, yet this period
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
18
of reflection contributes importantly to long-term retention of material (Grossman, 2009;
Zepke & Leach, 2010). For example, when introducing a new concept, students might be given
one minute to write down any connections they see between the new concept and past
information they have learned (in current or past classes). This “one minute paper” gives each
student a chance to form their own opinions and make their own, albeit preliminary,
associations before being provided with more detailed information (Angelo & Cross, 1993;
Stead, 2005). Taking this one minute reflection a step further, by giving students an additional
minute or two to discuss their initial thoughts with a partner (i.e., “think-pair-share”; King,
1993; Lyman, 1987), can further the connections being made (for details about effective
strategies for group work, see Davis, 1993).
Another means for enhancing connection-building is to be intentional in the way you
use examples within your course. For example, try using a recurrent case study throughout the
semester, and allow students to add to that case as new concepts are introduced.
TRY IT OUT: Recurrent Case Study
Provide students with a case study, like the one below (i.e., “Mr. Smith Goes to the
Neurologist”). The case could be used in several different ways. For example, you might ask
students to use the case as a supplement to their reading of a particular textbook chapter or
article, and then answer specific questions about the case prior to returning to class. Or
perhaps you might use the case as an in-class exercise during which students individually jot
down initial impressions of the case, and then confer with partners to further their
understanding of the case before a larger group discussion takes place. Conversely, you might
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
19
assign the case as a short paper assignment where students use material discussed in class
and/or reputable outside sources to “diagnose” the case at hand. In all scenarios, students
should be reviewing the case in detail and then attempting to make connections between the
case and material discussed in class.
MR. SMITH GOES TO THE NEUROLOGIST: Imagine you are a physician seeing a new patient. Mr.
Smith describes symptoms that have been worsening over the past several months. He states:
“Walking has become a major chore. Just trying to get up from a chair and walk across the
kitchen floor to get a glass of water can take several minutes and completely zaps my energy. I
also have a very hard time sleeping, because whenever I lie down my hands begin to tremble.”
Upon further examination, you notice that Mr. Smith is indeed able to walk, but does so at a
painfully slow rate and is quite unbalanced. Additionally, he is able to speak, but his fluency is
significantly impaired. And while he is able to produce speech at a slow rate, he shows almost
no facial expressions (e.g., anger or sadness) when discussing his current difficulties.
After becoming familiarized with the case, provide students with opportunities to make
connections between the case of Mr. Smith and material discussed in class over multiple
content areas and at multiple points during the semester. Some examples for use with the case
of Mr. Smith can be found in the Table 1 below.
Table 1: Recurrent Case Study
TOPIC
Neuroanatomy
TERMS/CONCEPTS
REFLECTION QUESTIONS
●
Substantia Nigra
1
Where are these structures located?
●
Basal Ganglia
2
What are their primary functions?
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Methods
●
Motor Cortex
●
Cerebellum
●
Deep Brain
1. How might this technique help Mr. Smith?
Stimulation
2. What evidence would suggest it is an effective
3
20
How might these concepts be related (or not) to the
case of Mr. Smith?
treatment?
Motors Systems
●
Parkinson’s Disease
●
Huntington’s
Smith’s case (if at all)? Define each and then analyze
Disease
each in the context of Mr. Smith’s case.
●
Pharmacology
Amyotrophic Lateral
1. How do these disorders/diseases relate to Mr.
2. Research current treatments for these
Sclerosis
disorders/diseases. As Mr. Smith’s physician, what
●
Apraxia
would you recommend? What is his prognosis?
●
Dopamine
●
Acetylcholine
●
L-Dopa
1. What are the primary functions associated with
these neurotransmitters/drugs?
2. What role might they play (if at all) in Mr. Smith’s
condition?
Drug Abuse
Ethics
●
Heroin
●
MPTP
●
MPP+
2. How was the knowledge about MPTP uncovered?
●
MAO
3. How can we relate these to the case of Mr. Smith?
●
Neuromelanin
●
Research with
1. What do we know about how these compounds
affect the brain?
1. Should non-human primates be used in research
animals, especially
(e.g., MPTP’s link to Parkinson-like behavior)? Are
non-human
there effective alternatives?
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
primates
●
Stem cell research
21
2. Should stem cells be studied as a possible treatment
for diseases? How about embryonic stem cells?
Repeated Practice
Students are usually quite familiar with traditional out-of-class study techniques (e.g.,
reading class notes and the textbook, creating and studying flashcards, and reviewing
PowerPoint slides presented in class). However, repeated practice with material can (and
should) take place in large part during class sessions as well. It can be difficult to ensure that
students read assigned chapters and articles prior to attending class, but when class sessions
revolve around this material and do so in a very hands-on way, students learn quickly that to
thrive in your class, they need to come prepared.
Inevitably, material from one section will spill into others as you and the students make
these important connections (see Recurrent Case Study for specific examples). Review of class
material can take other forms as well. Informal, non-graded quizzes at the beginning of most
class sessions can give students a quick way to review material from the previous class session
and the opportunity to correct any misconceptions they might have about the material. The
instructor may choose to go around the classroom from one student to the next throwing out
questions from the previous class’ material, or they may choose to use Clickers (or index cards
with number choices written on them) to quickly poll the entire class. The bottom line is that
the act of a quick review can have a big impact on learning. Research on the testing effect
shows clearly that the act of retrieving information (whether for a graded test or a quick, non-
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
22
graded quiz) significantly improves long-term recall. More about the testing effect will be
discussed in a later section.
TRY IT OUT: Quizzing
EXAMPLE 1: Ask students to jot down two or three questions on a separate sheet of paper or on
index cards when doing their reading prior to class. At the beginning of class, have students
exchange cards with the other members of a small group. No more than five minutes should be
needed to run through each group member’s questions. Ask each group to present their best
(or most confusing) question to the rest of the class. Any sources of confusion can then be
addressed with the class as a whole. Another alternative might be to collect questions from
students as they enter the classroom and then pose several of them to the class as a whole.
EXAMPLE 2: Online quizzing done outside of class can also help to enhance student learning.
Many textbooks come with elaborate online sites where students can take quizzes (often with
the results sent to the professor). It is also quite simple to create your own quizzes in the
course management system used by your institution (e.g., Blackboard). Many institutions will
offer tutorials on using such system—try contacting the Information Technology office to see
when such opportunities might be available. In addition to wording questions exactly as you
would prefer, creating your own quizzes gives you the freedom to make choices in what your
students can and cannot do. You might choose to set up the quiz in a way that allows students
to take the quiz multiple times until they get everything correct (or again as a review before an
exam). It might also be advantageous to set up the quiz so that students can only see which
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
23
questions they got wrong, but not what the correct answers were, so they can find the correct
answers by reviewing their notes or textbook. You might even assign small groups of students
to different chapters to be covered over the course of the semester and have them write quiz
questions (to be posted online) for their particular chapter (Zepke & Leach, 2010; see also Zhao
& Kuh, 2004, for a discussion of the benefits of group work).
KOLB LEARNING CYCLE: CONCLUSIONS
Many instructors will choose to approach the teaching of physiological psychology with
a traditional, lecture-based approach. Perhaps this occurs in part because they were taught in a
similar manner themselves, but it may also be the case that they worry incorporating more
hands-on, discussion-based methods will limit their ability to pass along important content to
their students. The active methods described in this chapter can be carried out with minimal
sacrifice to key content, but may in some cases require more of a time commitment and
potentially some sacrifice, especially for those new to the incorporation of experiential learning
activities in the classroom. We address the issue of time and content at the end of the chapter.
Students who are new to this type of active classroom are often resistant. Three
combined strategies can lessen this resistance and help students see the value in what the
instructor is trying to accomplish: (1) explain the learning cycle to students, (2) tell them why
you are using it, and (3) use it consistently from the first day of the class. In some courses (e.g.,
introductory-level courses), students might engage in a learning cycle activity where they apply
the cycle to a class activity on the first day of classes. Students in higher-level courses might be
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
24
required to incorporate the learning cycle into assignments when they are leading the class
discussion on a particular topic (e.g., engage the class in an activity that relates to an article on
which they are leading the discussion). Making students aware of how and why you are using
active learning techniques, and employing these techniques from the first day of the term,
often diminish resistance from students who are used to traditional lecture courses.
SCIENTIFIC METHOD: USING RESEARCH ON LEARNING TO INFORM TEACHING
The Kolb cycle (1984) is parallel to the scientific method, which brings us to another
aspect of how we can infuse our teaching with these concepts. Psychological research has
increasingly attempted to address ways we can enhance learning—ways that can be of direct
benefit to our students. This research can help us help students understand how to improve
their learning and how their common-sense beliefs about learning can lead them astray. In
addition, students can be shown the parallel between using experiential learning in the
classroom to promote learning of the course material and the way that researchers use an
experimental approach (i.e., scientific method) to better understand how people learn in
general. Within the context of teaching students concepts in Physiological Psychology via an
active experiential learning approach, we can also guide students in re-evaluating their choices
for studying using evidence-based techniques as the manner for supporting the claims.
Evidence supports the idea that when directly confronted with information about psychological
effects that relate to better learning, students will opt to change their approach to studying
(Bugg, DeLosh, & McDaniel, 2008).
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
25
Below we will discuss several effects that have direct bearing on the way students may
choose to study. These effects apply to a wide range of material that students need to study
for different classes; however, they may find these ideas particularly relevant for a Physiological
Psychology course in which there is, at least according to students’ perceptions, a great deal of
material to be rotely memorized (e.g., components of the nervous system, parts of neurons,
steps in the action potential, etc.).
The Testing Effect
There are a variety of effects that relate to the choices students make in studying and
evaluating their own learning, but none seem to have taken off in the literature as much as the
testing effect. This effect (also called test-enhanced learning) refers to the fact that testing
oneself on material leads to improved recall later compared to simply being re-exposed to the
material (i.e., rereading/restudying it). It has been found across dozens of studies (e.g.,
Carpenter & DeLosh, 2006; Carpenter, Pashler, & Cepeda, 2009; Chan & McDermott, 2007;
Congleton & Rajaram, 2012; Finn & Roediger, 2011; Halamish & Bjork, 2011; Karpicke &
Roediger, 2008; Roediger & Karpicke, 2006), has been found with a variety of different
materials (e.g., associative word pairs: Halamish & Bjork, 2011; fact learning: Carpenter,
Pashler, Wixted & Vul, 2008; map learning: Carpenter & Pashler, 2007; science-based passages:
Karpicke & Roediger, 2008; foreign language vocabulary: Karpicke, 2009; bilinear functions:
Kang, McDaniel, & Pashler, 2011), and has been shown to occur even with transfer to different
types of questions from initial to final testing (Rohrer, Taylor, & Sholar, 2010). However,
students typically do not invoke self-testing as a study technique. Re-reading is the most
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
26
common strategy for studying, with using flashcards, rewriting notes, and “memorizing” being
three other common approaches listed in the top six (Karpicke, Butler, & Roediger, 2009). Selftesting ranked 9th in a list of 11 self-generated study habits, with only 10.7% of the 177 students
surveyed listing this as a study option they used. Doing quizzing in class (see Try it Out:
Quizzing section) makes excellent use of the principle behind the testing effect, but it cannot
completely take the place of positive study habits. The active learning being promoted in class
may be forestalled somewhat by a very passive learning style students self-select outside of
class. Nonetheless, promoting active testing (i.e., quizzing) in class may lead some students to
continue these practices when studying on their own.
A key aspect about the testing effect to share with students is the role of test delay (i.e.,
how much time elapses between study and test). Testing oneself produces stronger recall
compared to restudying information when longer delays between study period and final test
are involved (e.g., 2 days or 1 week), but with short delays (e.g., 30 minutes), rereading leads to
superior results compared to self-testing (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006). Put another way, while
rereading information may boost initial memory, considerable forgetting occurs over a delay for
that information, whereas information that is tested experiences much less forgetting over
time (Congleton & Rajaram, 2012; Roediger & Karpicke, 2006; Wheeler, Ewers, & Buonanno,
2003). Thus, students need to consider their goals and study habits when deciding whether to
self-test, e.g., if studying right before an exam (i.e., cramming), then testing oneself may not
have the best outcome.
TRY IT OUT: Testing Effect and Arousal
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
27
Research by Finn and Roediger (2011) reveals an effect of arousal in mediating the
testing effect. Because the testing effect is very robust, and because it is a relatively easy
paradigm to instantiate in a classroom environment, it makes a good set of concepts for
experiential learning. After discussing arousal, students can brainstorm their own expectations
for how arousal will affect the testing effect. This relationship is easily relatable to their
personal experiences with studying and test anxiety. Here are some questions that can be
posed. Regarding arousal: Will arousal enhance the testing effect, reduce it, or have no effect?
How should we induce arousal? Are there other ways to induce arousal? What kind of arousal
is of most interest? Will all forms of arousal have the same effect? Regarding the general
experimental design: How should we set up the testing effect? What kind of materials? What
kind of testing procedures? How long of a delay between study and test? Of course, students
can be prompted to decide for themselves what factors are of interest. Follow-up questions
can help with reflection, inducing movement along the Kolb cycle: How do we know that
arousal occurred? Was a manipulation check in place? Was an appropriate comparison group
included? To what extent will this study of arousal and testing be similar to and different from
real-life experiences (e.g., studying and test anxiety)?
Levels of Processing
A second issue related to studying is the role of deep, elaborative encoding compared
with shallow encoding (aka the depth-of-processing effect; Craik & Lockhart, 1972; see also
Craik & Tulving, 1975; Ramponi, Richardson-Klavehn, & Gardiner, 2004; Rose, Myerson,
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
28
Roediger, & Hale, 2010). Processing information on a deeper, more meaningful level enhances
later memory over rote processing. Typically, in experimental work, this is illustrated by
increased memory performance for items that are encoded based on meaning, such as thinking
about the categorical relationships of an item (deep encoding) as opposed to those encoded
based on sound, such as thinking about whether a particular item rhymes with given word, or
visual features, such as thinking about whether a word is in uppercase or lowercase letters
(both considered more shallow encoding). In the studying of physiological psychology
concepts, deep encoding would likely involve thinking about how certain concepts relate to
others and thinking about how the concepts relate to our everyday lives. However, many
students are lacking at the outset a sense of how the concepts learned in this course will relate
to their lives more globally. A key way to invoke deep processing of information is to make that
information personally meaningful, including explicitly associating information with oneself,
referred to as the self-reference effect (Rogers, Kuiper, & Kirker, 1977). Immordino-Yang and
Faeth (2010), for example, describe a view of learning that involves incorporating emotional
connection to the material as part of way of fostering intuitions about that material. These
kinds of intuitions would be akin to the hypothesis generation that is part of the Kolb Cycle.
However, students may have trouble finding the meaningfulness of the concepts they are
learning in this class (emotional significance, as referred to previously in this chapter), and thus
may start out without the proper building blocks for the types of activities we have been
describing. They may not be ready to find those emotional ties without our help.
As an additional complication, the role that level of encoding can play may interact with
the degree or type of motivation students have toward learning the material. Individuals with
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
29
different types of motivation may show the depth-of-processing effect to different extents
(Graham & Golan, 1991; Barker, McInerney, & Dowson, 2002). Studies of motivation often
focus on three types of motivation: mastery-focused motivation, i.e., attempts to learn simply
to gain a better understanding of or competence with the material, regardless of the external
rewards; performance-approach motivation, when the learner is focused on learning as it
relates to external factors or outcomes, such as praise and good grades; and performanceavoidance motivation, which involves a lack of effort directed toward learning because of a fear
of incurring negative external outcomes. Another way that these three types of motivation can
be conceptualized is as seeking intrapersonal competence (mastery), seeking normative
competence (performance-approach) and avoiding normative incompetence (performanceavoidance). Task performance is generally enhanced with mastery and performance-approach
goals compared to performance-avoidance (e.g., Elliot, Shell, Henry, & Maier, 2005).
Interestingly, Barker et al. (2002) found that students with performance-avoidance
motivation showed a greater depth-of-processing effect than those with other types or with no
induced motivation. However, most work seems to support a positive relationship between
mastery-focused motivation and deep processing, either in showing that deep encoding leads
to greater benefits for those with mastery motivation compared to those with performance
motivation (referred to as task-focused and ego-focused motivation, respectively, in Graham &
Golan, 1991), that mastery motivation predicts use of deep-processing strategies (Liem, Lau, &
Nie, 2008), or that deep-processing opportunities can actually promote formation of masteryfocused motivation (Belenky & Nokes-Malach, 2012). Even if we aren’t fully certain about the
relationship between different types of motivation and level of encoding, these findings suggest
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
30
that we can’t ignore motivation in considering how to help our students promote deeper
learning.
While students in our courses are not without their own responsibility of making
meaning for themselves with the material, we can help them achieve this, and we can highlight
mastery as opposed to performance-based motivation (either performance-approach or
performance-avoidance forms, as discussed in Barker et al., 2002). Some of the active-learning
ideas discussed in the first part of this chapter can help achieve this focus and can reinforce
attention to the meaning of concepts rather than rote memorization. While an effective
lecture style is not necessarily going to prove worse than other forms of teaching, such as
providing demonstrations (e.g., Webster & Muir, 1995), it may be necessary to incorporate
specific, intentional moments in our teaching where emotional connections/personal relevance
can be highlighted. Whether the attention is on helping students make meaningful connections
across material (e.g., the Recurrent Case Study activity), highlighting meaningfulness and
relevance to their everyday lives (e.g., Neuroscience in the Public Eye), or simply making the
material more fun and engaging at the moment (e.g., the Play-DohTM lab presented earlier,
Human Action Potential Model), there are many ways that we can enhance meaningful
processing of the material.
TRY IT OUT: Neuroscience in the Public Eye
Promoting thought about how brain-related concepts are a part of our students’
everyday lives, this short paper involves finding information about the brain in a public format
(e.g., movie, TV show, news article, blog). We suggest including three parts to this paper: 1)
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
31
evaluation of the information for accuracy, 2) determination of the credibility of the source
itself, and 3) assessment of the general public’s ability to understand the information
appropriately. The second part of the paper is, in some ways, the most important one,
highlighting the kind of critical-thinking scholarship skills that we seek to promote in all of our
classes. Students are charged with investigating the credentials of those writing the
information (potentially with an example to work from). In the final part of the assignment,
they need to consider how much background knowledge would be needed to accurately
understand the information (e.g., does the information involve physiological or neuroscience
techniques that are difficult to understand without appropriate education). As a whole, the
assignment is aimed at having students consider the kind of brain-related information they are
confronted with every day, and to essentially role-play how they will critically evaluate that
information—something that can serve them throughout the entire lives.
TRY IT OUT: Action Potential – Human Model. This activity was adapted from an on-line
source (listed at the end).
The materials needed for this activity are two different colors of pom-poms (crumpled
colored post-it notes could be used in a pinch) and masking tape. Additional pom-poms could
be used to expand on the activity, as well as notecards with “+” and “-“ symbols to stand for
excitatory and inhibitory post-synaptic potentials.
Students are assigned roles as components of a neuron contributing to the flow of an
action potential. This includes sodium (Na+) and potassium (K+) ion channels and a sodiumpotassium pump. Tape is placed on the floor making a cell membrane—for large classes, two
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
32
membranes can be used with students sitting along both sides of the axon, but for small
classes, the model works just as well using only one side and allowing a wall of the classroom to
serve as the other side of the axon. Clearly label the inside and outside of the axon, and have
students decide how many of each type of ion (represented by different colors of pom-poms)
should be found on the inside and outside. Start with the pom-pom ions clustered down at one
end of the axon. Using concepts that the students have read and learned about in class (some
preparation for this activity is necessary), discuss what will happen to each type of ion—i.e., the
sodium-channel students will move the Na+ from the outside to the inside of the axon, while
the potassium-channel students will move the K+ from the inside to the outside. Finally the
Na+/K+ pump students will transport 3 Na+ ions out of the cell and 2 K+ ions into the cell. The
level of depth of the model can be tailored to the class needs (e.g., in higher-level classes, you
may want to discuss the ATP-requirement for the Na+/K+ pump to work, but in more
introductory classes you may want to leave that detail out).
The interactive part comes from having students decide what is needed in order for the
action potential to flow down the entire axon—e.g., adding a student to the model to represent
“saltatory conduction”—i.e., flow of Na+ ions inside the axon from one set of ion channels to
the next. Once the students have made some adjustments (and those playing certain roles
have become more confident in what they need to do), propose adding new components to the
model to create a more complete sense of the neural conduction process. For example,
students can take on roles of sodium channels and exocytosis at the end of the axon to initiate
chemical signal conduction (other pom-pom colors can reflect the sodium ions and the different
neurotransmitters being released—candies, like M&Ms, make good symbolic neurotransmitters
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
33
and a nice celebratory snack once the entire action potential model has worked successfully).
At the other end, students can enact the factors that start the action potential by initiating
EPSPs and IPSPs (using the “+” and “-“ notecards) and serving as a summation mechanism at
the axon hillock (the class can decide how the summation will work).
Students who have read the associated chapter and had some discussion in class will be
prepared enough to contribute ideas about how to tweak the situation so that the action
potential is flowing more smoothly and will have ideas about what needs to be added.
Additional roles that can be played by students involve tracking the electrical activity as it
travels down the axon or at one point along the axon. For example, a student tracking the
electrical potential at one point along the axon can raise a hand higher in the air as the
potential in that spot becomes more positive because Na+ ions are flowing into the cell, and
then lowering the hand as the K+ ions leave the cell. After seeing this electrical activity
represented kinesthetically (as a hand that is raised and lowered), the class can be asked to
figure out how the action potential should be graphed, with potential on the Y-axis and time on
the X-axis.
Positive aspects of this human model include the following: 1) repeated practice of the
basic form of the model (highlighting ion movement) several times as the model is tweaked and
new components are added will help improve retention; 2) the kinesthetic, down-on-the-floor
nature of the model is distinctive compared to other learning experiences in class and thus
sticks out in memory; students also find it humorous, therefore it becomes emotionally
distinctive as well; 3) the suggestions for how to improve flow of the action potential often
match realistic aspects of the neural signal conduction process (e.g., the fact that the Na+/K+
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
34
pump has difficulty keeping up with the ion channels and sometimes can’t operate because it
doesn’t have the right number of both types of ions; and the fact that Na+ ions have to flow
down the inside of the axon to be available for movement by the pump at the next point).
Source: Genetic Science Learning Center, University of Utah, http://learn.genetics.utah.edu;
http://teach.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/pompom.html. For another example of an
interactive demonstration of action potentials for up to 30 students, see Hamilton and Knox
(1985).
Judgments of Learning
Finally, one last issue to consider in relating psychological research about learning to our
classrooms, are judgments of learning (JOLs). These predictions of ones learning of information
compared to actual performance for that information on later tests are a key, if subtle, aspect
of how people approach their own learning. Assessing one’s own level of understanding is of
crucial importance when planning whether to continue studying or interacting with a certain
subset of the material or move on to other concepts. In research, JOLs are sometimes made on
an item-by-item basis, and sometimes made in more aggregate ways (e.g., predicting how many
out of N items will be correctly recalled). In both cases, the findings are similar—people’s
predictions tend to be not very good (e.g., Karpicke & Roediger, 2008). Students predict their
later memory for information especially poorly when they are simply re-exposed to
information, rather than trying to generate it themselves (e.g., Karpicke, 2009; Kornell & Son,
2008). Introducing students to this idea—that gauging how well they learned a concept simply
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
35
by looking at the information and judging its familiarity is not a strong way to predict how well
they can pull that information up from memory when being tested—can help them to approach
their studying and their assessment of the need to study further in a new way.
What makes the issue of JOLs especially interesting is how individuals’ predictions can
be mediated by their personal theories of learning capacity and how effort plays into learning.
Miele, Finn, and Molden (2011), for example, found that people differed in their judgments of
learning depending on whether they were classified as “entity intelligence theorists” (i.e.,
seeing intelligence as a fixed trait) or “incremental intelligence theorists” (i.e., seeing
intelligence as a malleable characteristic). Participants in the former category were more likely
to think that putting a high amount of effort into encoding an item was an indication that they
were not able to learn it well (i.e., they had reached their learning capacity), whereas
individuals in the latter category were more likely to consider a high amount of effort as
evidence of good progress toward learning. It is a small step from this finding to the idea that
students will differ in whether they think of themselves as “science-capable” or “scienceincapable”, and that this can translate into concrete differences in their judgments of learning,
and hence in their future study plans for this course. In essence, just when learning may be
kicking into full gear, students may give up due to their perception that the extra effort
required is evidence that they’ve reached their limit.
RESEARCH ON LEARNING: CONCLUSIONS
As instructors, we hope that our students will challenge themselves and keep learning
despite the difficulties they might experience in doing so. In fact, many of the robust findings of
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
36
psychological effects that have educational relevance—such as the testing effect, levels of
processing, and several others (e.g., the spacing effect: Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted, & Rohrer,
2006; interleaving: Kang & Pashler, 2012)—can be gathered under the umbrella of creating
desirable difficulties—a concept first introduced by Robert A. Bjork (1994). As Bjork and Bjork
(2011) outline in a recent review of the field, there are a variety of choices people can make
while studying that seem to initially create more difficult learning but ultimately result in better
learning over the long-term. The suggestions they outline include self-testing, varying the
location and form of practicing or studying, spacing out study sessions, and interleaving study
of different domains rather than amassing all of the studying for one topic. Worrell and
colleagues (2010) have identified the desirable difficulties approach as one of the most
“promising principles” for taking psychological findings and applying them to the classroom
(others on their top seven list include spacing and deep explanatory processing, i.e., levels of
processing). Given the tendency that students may have to interpret study difficulties as
evidence they have overtaxed their capacity for learning this material, it is all the more
important that we share these well-established findings with them and give them hope that
their difficulties can be a sign of progress rather than failure.
Assessing Student Understanding
Discussion of the testing effect and students’ ability to predict their own test
performance naturally leads to the question of assessment. Form of assessment is a question
for any instructor, and no less for the instructor attempting to emphasize a non-traditional
approach to learning. We also recognize that assessment can exacerbate feelings of failure and
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
37
emphasize performance-based forms of motivation (particularly performance-avoidance,
which, as discussed in the Levels of Processing section, is not associated with as strong learning
compared to other forms of motivation; Elliot et al., 2005), and we argue that fear of failure is
already a weighty concern for our students, making assessment a tricky area to navigate in our
Physiological Psychology courses. Nonetheless, we cannot ignore the need for assessment both
for the benefit of the student (i.e., knowing how he/she is doing in terms of learning the
material at the level expected), the instructor (recognizing that students’ understanding reflects
on our own pedagogical choices; also, especially for new instructors, fitting into what is, in most
cases, a department with traditional views about assessment), and the department at large (in
relation to self-assessment of how well the department is meeting their stated curricular goals).
Many instructors and departments may not recognize their daily grading as serving these larger
goals, but advocates for assessment, like Saville (2013), frame grading as an opportunity for
serving multiple purposes in this way.
The topic of grading in all its forms and uses would be of too large a scope to undertake
here (see Walvoord & Anderson, 2010, for an excellent resource in this capacity); however, the
one facet of grading we are compelled to address is the role of traditional grading in a nontraditional (experiential) learning environment. Although at first glance, these ideas may seem
in conflict, we argue that there is room for traditional forms of grading, in line with many of the
educationally relevant psychological effects described in the second half of this chapter.
Research supporting the role of testing and quizzing in promoting long-term learning is a rapidly
growing area of research on memory and suggests that we should see each assessment not
only as a moment of evaluation but as a moment of further consolidation of learning. As such,
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
38
moments of evaluation become part of the Kolb cycle in providing “concrete experiences” for
students to assess the level of their own knowledge, “reflective observation” on what factors
contributed to the particular outcome, or grade (i.e., in terms of their own study choices, their
ability to form connections with the material, and so on—explicitly exposing your students to
the importance of these components for their learning may put them in a better position to do
this reflection), and potentially make changes in anticipation of future assessments (i.e.,
“abstract hypotheses” and “active testing”).
In terms of exam construction, while there is not much evidence out there connecting
experiential learning with ideal forms of testing, we advocate providing questions that involve
more than just rote regurgitation of definitions or concepts. Asking students to provide
definitions doesn’t necessarily promote deeper processing of the concepts, whereas asking for
a novel example (one that was not used in the text or in class) requires application of those
concepts. A compare and contrast question (asking for key similarities and differences),
especially bringing together terms that may not have been explicitly compared in class or in the
text, requires critical thinking about the concepts and provides a chance to strengthen
associations between them. In other words, any testing or evaluation that would be
compatible with an experiential learning focus should go beyond definitional or fact-like
knowledge. Such questions could evoke suspicion in at least some students (i.e., as trick
questions). Gray (1993), in his reflection on Testing and Grading to Reward Thought, provides a
very helpful suggestion regarding how to deal with such students… namely, don’t apologize.
Instead, Gray suggests we prompt our students to approach the situation with the goal of
outsmarting the “trick question” by thinking deeply, rather than rotely, about the content. If
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
39
we, as instructors, don’t accept and promote that testing situations are fundamentally learning
moments, then our students certainly can’t be expected to accept this idea either.
Fitting It All In
As alluded to in the conclusions portion of the Kolb Learning Cycle (1984) section of this
chapter, there is sometimes concern that adding interactive activities in class will necessarily
require eliminating content. It is true that time can be at a premium when planning the
schedule of material for a class, and some of the activities described here are relatively time
consuming (e.g., Human Action Potential; Play-DohTM Lab, Reproblematizing: Temporal
Gradient of Retrograde Amnesia, Mystery Boxes). Others, however, can be instituted very
quickly (e.g., minute papers; quizzing) or can be assigned for outside of class (e.g., Neuroscience
in the Public Eye).
Here’s one way to view this dilemma: Making the commitment to create an experiential
learning environment will push you to identify that content which truly is key. This exercise is
of value to us as instructors, as well as our students, as it prompts us to evaluate the content of
our course as a whole in order to prioritize. Some sacrifice may be necessary—such as omitting
the process of outlining the whole chapter’s content explicitly in class—in order to engage
students at a level that significantly improves their ability to learn through deep, meaningful
manipulation and discussion of the material. On the other hand, using this model of learning,
students take responsibility for their own learning and, in that, should be capable of reading
and rehearsing basic definitions and key concepts before coming to class, rather than relying on
the instructor alone to provide this information. Class time becomes less of a venue for
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
40
providing outlines and definitions of the chapter, and more of a context for solving problems
and discussing the key concepts. However, if it does become necessary to drop some of the
content, we advocate seeing this as an opportunity for truly identifying what content you care
most about—this can help you feel refreshed about the material, as well. Ultimately, deeply
encoded, emotionally significant, self-driven learning experiences, which lead to better overall
learning, are worth the sacrifice.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
41
References
Andreano, J. M. & Cahill, L. (2006). Glucocorticoid release and memory consolidation in men
and women. Psychological Research, 17, 466-470.
Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques, 2nd ed., Jossey-Bass, San
Francisco, 1993, pp. 148-153.
Ashby, F., Isen, A. & Turken, U. (1999). A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its
influence on cognition. Psychological Review, 106, 529-550.
Barker, K. L., McInerney, D. M., & Dowson, M. (2002). Performance approach, performance
avoidance, and depth of information processing: A fresh look at relations between
students’ academic motivation and cognition. Educational Psychology, 22, 571-589.
Bartels, J. M., Hinds, R. M., Glass, L. A., & Ryan, J. J. (2009). Perceptions of psychology as a
science among university students: The influence of psychology courses and major of
study. Psychological Reports, 105, 383-388.
Belenky, D. M., & Nokes-Malach, T. J. (2012). Motivation and transfer: The role of masteryapproach goals in preparation for future learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21,
399-432.
Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings.
In J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp.
185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating
desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In M. A. Gernsbacher, R. W. Pew, L. M. Hough,
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
42
& J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Psychology and the real world: Essays illustrating fundamental
contributions to society (pp. 56-64). New York: Worth Publishers.
Breedlove, S. M., Watson, N. V. & Rosenzweig, M. R. (2010). Biological Psychology: An
introduction to behavioral, cognitive, and clinical neuroscience (6th ed.). Sinauer
Associates.
Bugg, J. M., DeLosh, E. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2008). Improving students’ study habits by
demonstrating the mnemonic benefits of semantic processing. Teaching of Psychology,
35, 96-98.
Cahill, L. & McGaugh, J. L. (1991). NMDA-induced lesions of the amygdaloid complex block the
retention enhancing effect of posttraining epinephrine. Psychobiology, 19, 206-210.
Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Menlo
Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Caine, R. N., Caine, G., McClintic, C. & Klimek, K. J. (2009). Twelve brain/mind learning principles
in action: Developing executive functions of the human brain (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Carpenter, S. K., & DeLosh, E. L. (2006). Impoverished cue support enhances subsequent
retention: Support for the elaborative retrieval explanation of the testing effect.
Memory & Cognition, 34, 268-276.
Carpenter, S. K., & Pashler, H. (2007). Testing beyond words: Using tests to enhance
visuospatial map learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 474-478.
Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., & Cepeda, N. J. (2009). Using tests to enhance 8 th grade students’
retention of U.S. History facts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 760-771.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
43
Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., Wixted, J. T., & Vul, E. (2008). The effects of tests on learning and
forgetting. Memory & Cognition, 36, 438-448.
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in
verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354380.
Chan, J. C. K., & McDermott, K. B. (2007). The testing effect in recognition memory: A dual
process account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,
33, 431-437.
Congleton, A., & Rajaram, S. (2012). The origin of the interaction between learning method and
delay in the testing effect: The roles of processing and conceptual retrieval organization.
Memory & Cognition, 40, 528-539.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic
memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294.
Davis, B. G. (1993). Collaborative learning: Group work and study teams. In Tools for teaching,
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
deWinstanley, P. A. & Bjork, R. A. (2002). Successful lecturing: Presenting information in ways
that engage effective processing. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 89, 19-31.
Elliot, A. J., Shell, M. M., Henry, K. B., & Maier, M. A. (2005). Achievement goals, performance
contingencies, and performance attainment: An experimental test. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 97, 630-640.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
44
Ewing, A.T., Andre, J., Blair-Broeker, C. T., Fineburg, A. C., Daniel, J. H., Higa, J. J., … Weaver, K.
A. (2010). When and where people learn psychological science: The sun never sets. In D.
F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for the future of
the discipline. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Finn, B., & Roediger, H. L. (2011). Enhancing retention through reconsolidation: Negative
emotional arousal following retrieval enhances later recall. Psychological Science, 22,
781-786.
Goedeke, S., & Gibson, K. (2011). What do new psychology students know about psychology?
Australian Psychologist, 46, 133-139.
Graham, S., & Golan, S. (1991). Task involvement, ego involvement, and depth of information
processing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 187-194.
Gray, P. (1993). Engaging students’ intellects: The immersion approach to critical thinking in
Psychology instruction. Teaching of Psychology, 20, 68-74.
Grossman, R. W. (2009). Structures for facilitating student reflection. College Teaching, 57, 1522.
Halamish, V., & Bjork, R. A. (2001). When does testing enhance retention? A distribution-based
interpretation of retrieval as a memory modifier. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 37, 801-812.
Halpern, D. F. & Hakel, M. D. (2003). Applying the science of learning to the university and
beyond: Teaching for long-term retention and transfer. Change, 35, 36-41.
Hamilton, S. B., & Knox, T. A. (1985). The colossal neuron: Acting out physiological psychology.
Teaching of Psychology, 12, 153-156.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
45
Herreid, C. F. (2007). Start with a story. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association
Press.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Faeth, M. (2010). The role of emotion and skilled intuition in
learning. (pp.66-81) In D. A. Sousa (Ed.), Mind, brain, and education. Bloomington, IN:
Solution Tree Press.
Kang, S. H. K., McDaniel, M. A., & Pashler, H. (2011). Effects of testing on learning of functions.
Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18, 998-1005.
Kang, S. H., & Pashler, H. (2012). Learning painting styles: Spacing is advantageous when it
promotes discriminative contrast. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 97-103.
Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice
retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 469-486.
Karpicke, J. D., Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2009). Metacognitive strategies in student
learning: Do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory, 17,
471-479.
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science,
319, 966-968.
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41, 30-35.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E. & Mainemelis, C. (2000). Experiential learning theory: Previous
research and new directions. In R. J. Sternberg & L. F. Zhang (Eds.), Perspectives on
cognitive, learning and thinking styles. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
46
Kornell, N., & Son, L. K. (2008). Learners’ choices and beliefs about self-testing. Memory, 17,
493-501.
Land, C., Bunsey, M. & Riccio, D.C.(2000). Anomalous properties of hippocampal lesion-induced
retrograde amnesia. Psychobiology, 28, 476-485.
Liem, A. D., Lau, S., & Nie, Y. (2008). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals
in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and
achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 486-512.
Lyman, F. (1987). Think-pair-share: An expanding teaching technique. MAA-CIE Cooperative
News, 1, 1-2.
McIntyre, C. K., McGaugh, J.L. & William, C. L. (2012). Interacting brain systems modulate
memory consolidation. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36, 1750-1762.
Miele, D. B., Finn, B., & Molden, D. C. (2011). Does easily learned mean easily remembered?: It
depends on your beliefs about intelligence. Psychological Science, 22, 320-324.
Peck, A. C., Ali, R. S., Matchock, R. L., & Levine, M. E. (2006). Introductory psychology topics and
student performance: Where’s the challenge? Teaching of Psychology, 33, 167-170.
Ramponi, C., Richardson-Klavehn, A., & Gardiner, J. M. (2004). Level of processing and age
affect involuntary conceptual priming of weak but not strong associates. Experimental
Psychology, 51, 159-164.
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and
implications for educational practice. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 1, 181-210.
Rogers, T. B., Kuiper, N. A. & Kirker, W. S. (1977). Self-reference and the encoding of personal
information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 677-688.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
47
Rohrer, D., Taylor, K., & Sholar, B. (2010). Tests enhance the transfer of learning. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 36, 233-239.
Rose, N. S., Myerson, J., Roediger, H. L., & Hale, S. (2010). Similarities and differences between
working memory and long-term memory: Evidence from the levels-of-processing span
task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 471483.
Saville, B. K. (2013). Grading as assessment of teaching and learning: Issues and opportunities.
In D. S. Dunn, C. M. Mehrotra, R. E. Landrum, & M. A. McCarthy (Eds.), Assessing
teaching and learning in psychology: Current and future perspectives. Belmont CA:
Wadsworth.
Selye, H. (1956). The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Stead, D. R. (2005). A review of the one-minute paper. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6,
118-131.
Sylwester, R. (2002). A biological brain in a cultural classroom (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Corwin Press.
Walvoord, B. E., & Anderson, V. J. (2010). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment
(2nd ed). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
Webster, D. G., & Muir, J. J. (1995). Presenting physiological measures: Effectiveness of
demonstration versus lecture. Teaching of Psychology, 22, 192-195.
Wheeler, M. A., Ewers, M., & Buonanno, J. F. (2003). Different rates of forgetting following
study versus test trials. Memory, 11, 571-580.
SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH TO TEACHING PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
48
Wilson, C., & Marcus, D. K. (1992). Teaching anatomy of the sheep brain: A laboratory exercise
with PlayDohTM. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 223-225.
Worrell, F. C., Casad, B. J., Daniel, D. B., McDaniel, M., Messer, W. S., Miller, H. L., … Zlokovich,
M. S. (2010). Promising principles for translating psychological science into teaching and
learning. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Undergraduate education in psychology: A blueprint for
the future of the discipline. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Zepke, N. & Leach, L. (2010). Improving student engagement: Ten proposals for action. Active
Learning in Higher Education, 11, 167-177.
Zhao, C. & Kuh, G. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and student engagement.
Research in Higher Education, 45, 115-138.
Zull, J. E. (2011). From brain to mind: Using neuroscience to guide change in education. Sterling,
VA: Stylus Publishing.
Zull, J. E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring
the biology of learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.