International trends in the education of students with special educational needs

6.5 Brain Differences Between the Sexes

Elsewhere, the writer has reported on research showing sex differences at all levels of the nervous system, noting that it is becoming increasingly clear that sex matters in the development and functioning of the brain (Mitchell, in preparation). As one researcher puts it, ‘The picture of brain organization … is of two complex mosaics – one male and one female – that are similar in many respects but very different in others’ (Witelson, 1991). As expressed by one writer (Cahill, 2006), this is not surprising:

It seems incontrovertible that males and females evolved under some similar, and some very different pressures. We should therefore expect, a priori, that their brain organization will be both similar in some respects, and markedly different in others (p.4).

This is a complex, promising – and controversial – topic. As summarised by Mitchell (in preparation) some of the key research findings are as follows:

• 
  Total brain size is often reported to be 8-10% larger in males (Goldstein et al., 2001). However, at this stage of our knowledge, this difference should not be interpreted as implying any sort of functional advantage or disadvantage (Lenroot et al., 2007).
  
• 
  There is evidence that women have a larger corpus collosum – the area of the brain responsible for the transfer of information from one brain hemisphere to the other – relative to cranial capacity than do men. (Note that this and other studies of the relative sizes of regions of the brain adjust for total brain size)(Johnson et al., 1994).
  
• 
  Extensive evidence shows sex differences in the anatomical structure, neurochemical make-up and reactivity to stress of the hippocampus, a region of the brain associated with learning and memory. MRI studies show that the hippocampus is larger in women than in men. As well, there is evidence for sex differences in many of the neurotransmitter systems within the hippocampus (Cahill, 2006).
  
• 
  The amygdala – which plays a significant role in memory for emotional events – is significantly larger in men than women. The left amygdala seems to play the more important role in women and the right amygdala in men (Cahill, 2006).
  
• 
  A recent – controversial – study carried out at the University of Pennsylvania investigated connections in the brain among 949 8–22 year old individuals. The researchers found greater neural connectivity from front to back and within one hemisphere in males. To the researchers, this suggested that male brains are structured to facilitate connectivity between perception and coordinated action. In contrast, in females, the connectivity between the left and right hemispheres was stronger, suggesting that their brains facilitate emotional processing and the ability to infer others’ intentions in social interactions. These differences first became apparent at about the age of 13 years and became more pronounced in adolescence and young adults (Ingalhalikar et al., 2013). According to some writers, too much should not be made of this research. Some point out that although the differences are statistically significant, they are actually not substantive and that they portray average differences with a lot of overlap. Also, the Pennsylvania researchers did not in fact look at behavioural differences between the sexes – but only guessed at how any wiring differences might be related to behavioural differences between the sexes (http://www.wired.com/2013/12/getting-in-a-tangle-over-men-and-womens-brain-wiring/).
  
• 
  Using MRI, a team of researchers in the US and Canada have found robust male/female differences in the shapes of brain development trajectories, with total cerebral volume peaking at age 10.5 years in females and 14.5 years in males (Lenroot et al., 2007). A recent study carried out by these researchers at the US’s National Institutes of Health (NIH) concluded that the most profound difference between girls and boys is not in their brain structures, per se, but rather in the trajectories of development of the various brain regions (Lenroot et al., 2007). While the differences between the brains of adult women compared with adult men are small, this is not the case among children. In fact, differences between girls and boys, in terms of brain development, are much larger than differences between them in terms of height. Thus, the NIH study found that different regions of the brain develop in a different sequence, and at a different tempo, in girls compared with boys. When the “inflection point” (roughly the halfway point in brain development) is considered, girls reach it just before the age of 11 years, while boys do not reach it until just before age 15 years. Thus, in terms of brain development, a young woman reaches full maturity between 21 and 22 years of age. In contrast, a young man does not reach full maturity, until nearly 30 years of age.
  
• 
  A University of Iowa study shows just how complex the relationships between brain structure, behaviour, and sex/gender can be. These researchers compared the straight gyrus (SG) component of the ventral frontal cortex region of 30 adult males and 30 adult females matched for age and IQ. They found that the SGs were proportionately larger in the women than in the men. Since this region of the brain is known to be involved in social cognition and interpersonal judgment, which many studies have shown to be at higher levels in females than males, it was argued that there must be a connection between the SG and these social skills.
  
• 
  To investigate the relationship between the SG structure and social cognition in children, the Iowa researchers studied 37 boys and 37 girls aged 7 to 17, matched by age and IQ. In contrast to the findings in adults, the SG was slightly smaller in girls than boys. Further, in girls, but not boys, smaller SG volumes significantly correlated with better social perception and higher identification with feminine traits. In both studies, the researchers added another complication. Instead of dividing their subjects by biological sex, they also classified them in a test of psychological gender in a questionnaire by biological that assesses a person’s degree of masculinity vs femininity. They found that in both adults and children, this measure of gender identity also correlated with the SG size. Not surprisingly, the researchers concluded that there is a complex relationship between sex, femininity, social cognition and SG morphology (Wood et al., 2008).
  

Caution must be exercised in interpreting brain differences such as those just described. For example, is not yet possible to establish whether there is a direct link between gender differences in various cognitive domains and particular brain differences. It could be argued that the direction of the effect could be either way: brain differences cause the cognitive differences or greater participation in various activities cause the brain differences. Perhaps both explanations have merit and gender differences reflect the interaction between biology and psychosocial influences (Cassidy, 2007).

6.6 Summary

1. 
   The brain, with its 100 billion nerve cells, is the seat of our mental faculties, regulating our bodily functions, as well as performing such higher functions as language, reasoning, and memory.
   
2. 
   The brain has a complex architecture, with various regions being responsible for various functions.
   
3. 
   If for any reason any components of the brain are not functioning optimally, a person’s capacity to learn will be affected. These reasons could be genetic or environmental. Research is increasingly helping us to understand the underlying causes, suggesting ways of preventing or remediating them by targeting each learner’s strengths and weaknesses.
   
4. 
   Neuroscience is giving us fruitful leads to follow, a situation that will undoubtedly improve in the future.
   
5. 
   We know an increasing amount about two related principles of brain development, namely that ‘neurons that fire together, wire together’, and ‘use it or lose it’.
   
6. 
   There are sensitive periods when certain types are learning are optimal.
   
7. 
   The executive system plays a critical role in problem solving. It is goal-oriented and it consciously controls, edits, plans, directs, and monitors our behaviour.
   
8. 
   Recent advances in the neurosciences of emotions are highlighting the connections between cognition and emotion that have the potential to revolutionise our understanding of learning.
   
9. 
   Research is increasingly confirming that neurological factors contribute to a range of disabilities, as a result of either significant or minimal central nervous system dysfunction.
   
10. 
    It is becoming increasingly clear that sex matters in the development and functioning of the brain.
    
11. 
    It is possible that brain differences cause the cognitive differences or greater participation in various activities cause the brain differences.
    

 

CHAPTER SEVEN

RESPONSE TO INTERVENTION AND GRADUATED RESPONSE

An alternative to categorisations such as those outlined in the previous chapter is the Response to Intervention (RtI) model. In brief, this involves (a) tracking the rate of growth in core subjects for all students in the class; (b) identifying students whose levels and rates of performance are significantly below their peers; and (c) systematically assessing the impact of evidence–based teaching adaptations on their achievement (Shaddock et al., 2009). Above all, RtI is an approach focused on outcomes and on the evaluation of intervention; it thus integrates student assessment and instructional intervention. The RtI framework provides a system for delivering interventions of increasing intensity. Data based decision-making is the essence of good RtI practice.

RtI can be considered as being roughly equivalent to other approaches, known variously as ‘student progress monitoring’ and ‘data-based decision making within a problem-solving framework’ (NASDSE and CASE, 2006).

RtI is widely used in the US and Canada, but the writer was unable to find any significant reference to its use outside North America. However, RtI bears a close resemblance to the ‘Graduated Response’ model of intervention in England, as outlined in the 2001 Code of Practice. This will be summarised later in this chapter.

The material relating to RtI is synthesised from Ervin (2010), Gerber (2010), the National Association of State Directors of Special Education and the Council of Administrators of Special Education (2006), the National Center on Response to Intervention (2010), Wikipedia (2010), and Yell and Walker (2010).

7.1 Background

In the US, RtI has a statutory and regulatory foundation. Thus, the re-authorisation of IDEA in 2004 proscribed the identification of a child with a specific learning difficulty on the basis of a severe discrepancy between achievement and intellectual ability. Instead, it favoured a process in which the child ‘responds to scientific, research-based intervention’ [P.L. 108-446, 614(b)(6)(B)]. Further, subsequent regulations required that prior to being referred for classification as a child with a specific learning disability, he or she should have been provided with ‘appropriate high quality, research-based instruction in regular education settings’, and that ‘data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable intervals, reflecting formal assessment of student progress during instruction’ be provided. Only then, if the child has not made adequate progress after an appropriate period of time, could the child be referred for an evaluation to determine if special education should be provided.

RtI builds on two recommendations made by the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education (2002):

• 
  Consider children with disabilities as general education children first…In instruction, the systems must work together to provide effective teaching.
  
• 
  Embrace a model of prevention not a model of failure. The current model guiding special education focuses on waiting for a child to fail, not on early intervention to prevent failure. Reforms must move the system toward early identification and swift intervention, using scientifically based instruction and teaching methods (p.9).
  

The Commission also specifically recommended the use of an RtI model:

Implement models during the identification and assessment process that are based on response to intervention and progress monitoring. Use data from these processes to assess progress in children who receive special education services (p.21).

It would seem, too, that the development of RtI was provoked, at least in part, by concern that over 50% of IDEA funding was being spent in learning disability programmes, with around 70% of special education activities being related to learning disability cases (Batsche, 2006). However, it must be emphasised that RtI is not limited to students with learning disabilities, but is intended for all those who are at risk for school failure, as well as students with identified disabilities. It is increasingly being seen as an approach to adapting instruction to meet the needs of student who are having problems learning in the general curriculum. Thus, ‘the purpose of an RtI system, which combines evidence-based instruction, increasing intensity of academic and behavioral supports, and progress monitoring, is to increase the number of at risk students whose needs are addressed so that they may learn successfully in general education before their problems become so severe that they need special education services.’ (Yell et al. 2011, p.74)

Directory: Documents -> about
about -> Analysis of Law in the United Kingdom pertaining to Cross-Border Disaster Relief Prepared by: For the 30 June 2010 Foreword
about -> Optus pre-paid mobile broadband service
about -> Optus mobile broadband service
about -> Optus Pre-Paid Mobile Service Service Description
about -> About Ace Computers
about -> About atlanta
about -> Sir Francis Drake is a historic hotel near Moscone Convention Center, San Francisco
about -> Optus ip phone Express Service Service Description
about -> Autism Spectrum Disorders

Download 3.41 Mb.

Share with your friends: