Neural Network Principles |
||
| Because of
a recent string of educational fads which sought authority by claiming (often
without much justification) to be derived from neuroscience, many educators
now react badly to what they call 'neuro-babble', and have convinced themselves
that neuroscience has nothing to tell us, yet, about how we learn, and therefore
has nothing to contribute to the design of more effective approaches to
education. |
||
|
It is true that cognitive neuroscientists don't say much about education, but it's not because they have nothing to contribute, it's because they are focused on a different set of problems and are working at a different level of detail. They are necessarily bogged down in the highly intricate scientific (experimental, statistical and ethical) problems that arise when they try to unravel such complexities as; why the speed at which we can read and distinguish between past and future tense verbs is effected by whether the words are presented in the left or right visual field? |
||
| Their tools
and methods are designed to work at that small scale, the microcosm, and
are not suitable for exploring the general principles, the macrocosm, of
human learning. They know a lot about how our brains learn to perceive the
world, but they don't talk about it. |
||
| So it falls to others
who, like myself, are less constrained by professional/academic group-think,
to bridge the gaps between the different academic disciplines, to extract
principles and axioms from one domain and try them out in others. We will
probably be ignored and then attacked by many prestigious and well established
tribes, but hey, someone has to do it. |
||
| Designers of artificial
intelligence software and smart robot-builders spend a lot of time copying
ideas and discoveries from neuroscience and working out how they can be
applied to real world problem-solving. From their perspective, neuroscience
has already discovered many new and fundamental principles of neural network
learning which have profound implications for the the design of human education
systems. Here are a few particularly important ones. |
||
|
In evolutionary terms, high quality sensory information is an expensive commodity. As a consequence, our sensory capability is surprisingly limited, much more limited than we normally realise. We feel as if we can see everything there is to see, and hear everything there is to hear, but actually we can only detect a tiny proportion of the vast amount of information that is bouncing around the universe and we are blind to the rest of it. |
||
| But evolution
is an awesome problem-solver and came up with a very smart solution. The
limitations of our sensory capacity are compensated for by the amazing experience-trapping
ability of our neural networks. The brain uses this trapped experience to
pre-consciously enhance our limited real-time sensory information. Our understanding
of how the world appeared to work in the past, is used to help make sense
of the limited, vague, ambiguous and noisy information we receive from our
senses. |
||
|
It
is important to understand how neural networks trap and use past experience.
|
||
| Our accumulated maps and
models about the world are not stored as facts or data in a lookup table,
they are encoded in the current wiring of the network which continuously
evolves in response to the sensory experiences that flow through it. New
real-time sensory information passes through (is processed by, observed
by) networks which have been shaped by past experience, networks which have
been 'taught' by experience to be sensitive to particular patterns of associations
and distinctions, and insensitive to others. |
||
| This is how we interpret
our environment, how we recognize familiar objects, people, places, movements,
smells, situations, threats and opportunities, from within the stream of
information that flows through our senses. This is how past experience is
pre-consciously employed to help make sense of limited, noisy, current information.
|
||
|
Our perceptions, judgments and reactions, feel much more solid than they really are. They are actually composed of a small measure of sensory information and a large measure of assumptions about how to world 'is' now, which are based on our experience of how the world appeared to us in the past. The quality of our current perception, our understanding and our behavioral choices is highly dependent on the quality of our accumulated maps and models about reality - and the quality of our maps and models changes significantly with time and experience. |
||
|
Neural
network learning curves.
|
||
| We are so confident in
the truth of our current model of the world that we are not normally aware
of the profile of our own learning curve. Adults forget - to use one of
Piaget's examples - that there was a time in our childhood when we didn't
know that 'number is conserved'. Then, one day we discovered, to our astonishment
(amusement, delight), that counting a row of ten pebbles from left to right
produces the same result as counting them from right to left. Adults forget
that we had to learn how to see and experience the world, and we forget
that the experience of learning, finding new ways to make sense of our world,
is very good fun. |
||
| We are also blissfully
unaware of all the things that we are not yet aware of. Gradually, step
by step, we become aware of, learn to distinguish between, more and more
different aspects of the world. Once we start paying attention to something
new, we learn fast, but as our maps and models improve, our attention reduces.
We have the feeling that we know all about that now, and we only pay attention
if something unexpected/unexplained happens. And then, too often, learning
grinds to a complete halt and we enter the rigid believe phase, where our
curious learning attention is no longer activated by that topic. |
||
| Not even the arrival of
some new experience that (to an independent observer) highlights glaring
inconsistencies in our maps and models, is enough to shake our believe and
trigger a review and update of our understanding. This is not because we
are stupid, illogical or irrational, it is because our neural networks have
settled into such a stable state that they can no longer detect, respond
to, or learn from, these new inconsistencies. |
||
| And so it goes - we stumble
across our own individual cognitive landscape, from the blissful ignorance
of inexperience, to the self-assured ignorance of too much experience, via
a trail of temporary errors. But this neural learning mechanism works very
well, most of the time. Well enough to have enabled an unbroken chain of
our ancestors to cope with a huge variety of very challenging situations.
Their struggles ensured that we, their offspring, inherited a neural platform
that was very well adapted to working out how to cope with the types of
problems that arise for a human being on the surface of planet earth. We
are naturally very good at learning from experience and applying that experience
to the business of staying alive. What we need is a rich supply of the
right types of experiences to learn from, and a healthy cultural framework
to tell us how to make sense of the experiences. |
||
|
Structurally encoded experience-trapping is the crucial concept here. |
||
| In order to understand
how this experience-trapping is possible, you first need to understand both
the concept and the mechanisms of neural plasticity. This will be
a new and unfamiliar concept for most people because most of the machines
and systems we encounter in everyday life do not work in this way. |
||
| We naturally assume that
the electrical wiring in our radios, DVD players, toasters, and washing
machines, will remain the same from one day to the next, and that these
pieces of equipment will behave in exactly the same way tomorrow as they
did today. We do not expect that the wiring will rearrange itself every
time it is used, and that its behavior will evolve
as a result. But that is what happens in our neural networks. The wiring
in a neural network subtly rewires itself every time it is used, adapting
and fine tuning its performance, growing new connections to speed up the
reaction times of busy circuits, connecting subsystems that repeatedly get
used at the same time, adjusting switches and sensors to make them more
or less sensitive, cutting away and recycling redundant wiring that hasn't
been used for a long time. |
||
|
There are some everyday examples of plasticity (things changing their structure as a result of experience) that may help in developing an understanding of these experience-trapping processes at work in our neural networks. |
||
| For an example
of a sequence of events causing structural changes in a system, which then
influence the future behavior of the system, think of rain falling on a
hillside. The water flows downhill and collects at the lowest point to form
a little lake. The level in the lake rises until the water overflows its
retaining barrier and forms a powerful stream which washes away the land
surface to cut a passage across the landscape to the next lowest level lake.
Every time it rains the the whole system evolves a little bit, and the flowing
water cuts a slightly different and more direct path to the sea. Once a
river system is well established, it is very difficult for a new river system
to get started in that area, because the rain naturally flows into the existing
system. Similarly, patterns of connections form in our neural networks,
as a result of the sequence of experiences that have flowed through that
area of the brain. The current state of these patterns determines how we
will respond (interpret, perceive, react) to the next experience, and that
new experience will play its part in further fine tuning the overall neural
pattern. |
||
| Like a well established
river system, a well established neural pattern comes to dominate its landscape.
Whilst it may still be able to adjust itself in response to trivial and
fluffy new experiences at the edge of its territory, its core structures
may become so well established that they become very insensitive to important
new evidence (the belief stage). An important new experience might be able
to start a new furrow in an unploughed region of the network but it probably
won't have any effect on the core structures in an established pattern. |
||
|
For an example of a more
dynamic network plasticity, think about the evolution of a group of friends
on a social networking website. Suppose one member of an existing group
develops a new interest and tells his/her group friends about it. Some
of them are interested in this new topic, others are not. The ones who
are interested get excited about the new subject, and start telling other
people, some of whom are not part of the original group. Some of these
outsiders then join the original group, bringing new ideas and associations
with them. This changes the nature and balance of the original group.
As a result, the original group starts to split into two different groups
with slightly different characteristics; one centered around the members
who were interested in the new idea, and the other centered around the
ones who were not. Because the two groups now have slightly different
characteristics, they may react quite differently to the next new idea
that comes along. This is quite a good model for neural network plasticity:
a dynamic structure whose reactions to external events change over time,
because its internal structure is constantly being reshaped by the flow
of resonant experiences. |
||
|
So
what can these neural network principles tell us about human learning
and teaching.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
Be
aware of the weaknesses in the neural network mechanism.
|
||
| Our neural networks are
very good at detecting local 'cause and effect' relationships. They can
detect and store associations between things which happen close together
in both space and time. We are very bad at detecting remote associations
where the cause and effect are separated by either time or space. To ease
our anxiety and reduce uncertainty, we invent reasons to explain remote
causation. We have a long history of invented reasons to explain why droughts,
floods, earthquakes, plagues, etc., occur. |
||
| Because our neural network
understanding is based on experience, we are very bad at assessing the probability
of things we have not yet experienced. We do not expect the unexpected.
We are not good at detecting random chaos, so we tidy-up and simplify the
past, which causes us to underestimate the amount of sudden change there
is in our environment. We assume the world is more stable than it is. We
assume it has always been the way it is now. We get anxious if it looks
like changing. We don't understand that it is and has always been changing.
|
||
| We think / feel that our
perception of reality is true. We don't realise that we invented our current
interpretation of reality and that our perception is very limited. We have
to learn by experience that the world looks very different from other people's
points of view, and from within other cultural or ideological frameworks. |
||
| We often
distort our own experience-based perception and models of reality, in order
to fit in with the orthodox views of significant social groups. Particularly
if there are rewards and punishments involved. So watch out for the influence
of fashion and group-think. Many of our attention mechanisms operate pre-consciously
in the vast submerged iceberg of the mind. Advertisers, and persuaders of
all types, will try to hijack these attention mechanisms to get you to buy
their products or lend support to their causes. Be aware. |
||
| And finally - our neural networks evolved to grow up in a more natural setting than the modern urban landscape most of us now inhabit. It remains to be seen how well they will function in this new setting. | ||