The search for talent: the Holy Grail

There is a  common idea,  noticeable from psychologists and educational experts, about put  labels to learners and give them a place in an imaginary continuous line that cluster outstanding skills in the right side and educational needs at the left side.

If it's looked the continuum, everybody at the left or right requires special education or supports, and at this case, it must be admitted that not everyone learns the same way. But a second glance, suggests that all who are in the middle of the curve, have no problem.

Certainly there is no more pride for  parents that their child can be declared as gifted, while there is no greater grief than when someone tells them that their child will not be able to learn more than  few skills. The rest of the parents clean the sweat when their stems are declared as normal, not having this any other implication beyond what a psychologist says.

Going deep into this subject, there is much more that experts do not report.

The forward of the book La educación de niños con talento en Iberoamerica (Education of gifted children at Ibero-America) opens saying, "All people are entitled to receive an education that develops their full potential and allow them to build a life plan" (Benavides, Maz, Castro and White, 2004).

With  this idea, then it is clear that those who are at  the left side of the  curve would have the opportunity to develop skills while those who have the right side can not move beyond, since they know more than anybody else, they have reached the maximum their abilities based on scales of talent.

The text describes programs, ideas and notes about  how to work with  talented children in several countries, but if these children are the greatest intellectual achievement, is it possible to teach even more?.

The talent from psychology

In the purest psychometric eagerness has been measured the intelligence and the possible capabilities, searching to find those common features on the continuum of the curve of intelligence. For those who are at the left, it was assumed that lack the intellectual, emotional or social skills to relate with those who are at the center of the continuum (Winner, 1998; Artigas Pallares, 2003, Martos and Help 2004). While those who are at the right have a high intellectual capacities measured with psychometric instruments (Pendarvis, Howley & Howley, 1990; Lohman, 2000; Lohman, Korb and Lakin, 2008). But they lack the emotional skills to adapt to those who have left or center of the continuum (Genovard and Castello, 1990; Freeman, 2005; Freeman, 2008; Freeman, 2010).

But not everything that intelligence tests measure is useful to adapting to the environment: for example there are important aspects of the real-world intelligence that are not considerate. On the other hand there is a debate if that perspective is confusing intelligence with rationality, issues that do not necessarily go hand by hand (Stanovich, 2009). That's why even the smartest people can do things that are considered irrationals. At the same time, psychometric tests forget an important feature of the brain: emotions (Freeman, 2008). This aspect has been widely documented as the primary difficulty in children considered talented.

Stanovich (2009) shows that there are features such as divergent thinking or aspects of the  everyday life that have nothing to do with what psychological tests measure, moreover, when students have the opportunity  to reply  to problems, it may surprise to expertise researchers, for example, when gifted children can talk to  others about science and feel good by providing creative answers, beyond which we have assumed is the only one correct answer ( Freeman, 2003), or when a child, considered with limited capacity, achieved a task for which he or she has worked for several hours. And  those that are supposed are  the differences, actually are the result of the brain architecture, which is molded with repetition and experimenting with  the environment  (Manaut-Gil-Casares Vaquero, Quintero-Gallego, Pérez-Santamaría, Gomez-Gonzalez, 2004).

Thus, from the speech of educational experts that sounds so melodious, the obvious question is: IF "All persons are entitled to receive an education that develops their full potential and allow them to build their project of life", Why is segmented the continuum?, Why can we have only one position?, Why can't be together?, maybe to create an elite education?.

From the standpoint of Renzulli (1978) the differences between the continuum are not only concentrated in one area as many authors propose (Parra, Ferrando, Prieto and Sanchez, 2005; Rogers, 2006; Valadez Sierra, Betancourt Berbena Morejon and Zavala, 2006) they are determined from different skills set out in three areas: high intelligence, creativity and involvement in the task.

Can a child with Down syndrome or Asperger be creative?, If your reply at the speed of light that does not, then please do not continue reading this article,  you are not creative. Creativity involves providing innovative responses to common problems. And it's not a mystery that daily work requires creativity and divergent thinking abilities, however, this is not developed at educational institutions at basic or higher level (Solomon, 2007).

Considering its capacity, each new brain must be trained to grow from environmental stimulation; a process that needs decades and each person must discover for itself all skills needed to be employed on that journey called Life (Tubino, 2004). And it doesn't depend of any curricula or educative legislation.

Accepting that the human brain still evolving (Fox, 2011), depends on synaptic communication, the development of structures and protein exchanges neurotransmitters (Haier, 2009), makes learning a more complex issue than just locate someone on one side or the other of an imaginary line, and open a door to understand that learning is not something that can be X-rayed by a test applied at a specific time.

Neuroscience research suggests that human abilities depend on the neural network architecture, which is related to the space where the brain develops, as it is confined to the skull, shaping each structure in a particular way, some areas can be over-exposed to stimuli preventing the development of other areas, under two assumptions: the law of survival of the fittest and its use related with environmental responses (Roberts, Anderson, Husain, 2010). So that it’s not possible to talk about standardized education and less, support the idea that everyone learns the same way.

And it must be added the fact that there are other actors in education, research showing that success in the case of gifted children, has a big support of maternal scaffolding, that makes the difference between passing from a skill to another (Morrisey, 2011) and the same from mother of children with developmental disorders, since they are who promote socialization skills in their kids, if there is any doubt, it's only needed one question:  who did teach you how keep attention while reading?.

Talent does not equal intelligence

The talent or giftedness refers to that ability or skill set which has a particular facility (Prado Suarez, 2006), but the definition of any author, never says that it is restricted to the fine arts or science or sports. If so, where do entrepreneurial talent, or create or play video games fall?.

Intelligence is adaptation to the environment (Genovard and Castello, 1990; VanTassel-Baska, Xuemei Feng, Brown, Bracken, Stambaugh, French, McGowan, Worley, Quek and Bai, 2008), an action that requires talent. Though not necessarily arrive together, this worth mentioning, for example that as highlighted in the Savant, which is a developmental disorder that is part of the autistic spectrum. Main feature of this syndrome is that people can have a widely talent developed at the same time a profound intellectual difficulty (Winner, 1998).

Thus, it is argued that the provision of skills of each person, although it has a genetic aspect, at the same time depends on environmental stimulation (Willard-Holt, 2008).  Every one can have a special talent for playing the piano in an extraordinary way, but if you never had a piano in front, the talent can not be developed. That's why experience shapes capacities that will be most useful. However, genetic damage as those presented in the development disorders also shape brain structure.

Brain studies reveal that the patterns of gray and white matter and metabolic efficiency may delineate individual differences related to intelligence. That's why the smartest brains work differently (not better) in the strongest areas that has a better domain (Haier, 2009).

What structures will be more developed?, those that are  used more frequently, and that is because of the skills that create, cause more satisfaction in completing tasks. That feeling of: I can do it (Prado Suarez, 2006). However, under the law of the strongest, the strengthened  structures, will push and eventually block the development of the  other less useful  (Haier, 2009) which is why you can not be expert in everything, because the skills will be permeated by the use and management of them.

In the case of arithmetic, it’s found that the frontal lobe is more involved in this activity, and also opens the path to memory processes and analytical thinking (Serra-Grabulosa, Pérez-Pàmies, Lachica, Membrives, 2010), Even though, a good mathematician not necessarily is a good writer of poetry or have social skills. Einstein maybe is a good example.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it can be said that the differences in the continuum that psychologists have called intelligence, is simply due to the cytoarchitecture of the brain and that it results from interactions, and this determines the capabilities that each possesses. Starting from the extreme neuronal flexibility that, that which is not known today, can be learned from the appropriate teaching strategy, which may be different for each depending on experience.

Under the motto: “Everyone is entitled to receive an education that develops their full potential and allow them to build their project to life", there shouldn’t be distinction what side of that continuum is, left, right or in the middle, all people have the ability to build a life project, based on their own abilities and who is not able to tie your shoes, you may have the ability to paint pretty colorless pictures.

Academic skills are not the only ones that are valid in life; there are also artistic and sporting activities. There are sports stars, who have not reached higher education, but they have adapted to environmental needs and above all, they are happy.

Under this idea, the separation of the continuum although it may have educational benefits, it makes no sense neuro cognitively, and that all people have the right to find a place in life, a happy childhood and successful adulthood.

Alma Dzib Goodin

If you would like to know more about my writing you can visit my web site:
http://www.almadzib.com

References

Artigas Pallarés, J. (2003) Perfiles cognitivos de la inteligencia límite. Fronteras del retraso mental. Rev Neurol. 36 (supl 1) S161-S167.

Benavides, M., Maz, A., Castro, E. y Blanco, R. (2004) La educación del niños con talento en Iberoamérica. UNESCO/Trineo SA. Chile.

Fox, D. (2011) The limits of intelligence. Scientific American. 305 (1) 36- 43.

Freeman, J. (2010) Worldwide provision to develop gifts and talents: an international survey. CfBT Education Trust. UK.

Freeman, J. (2008) The emotional development of the gifted and talented. Gifted and talented provision. Optimus Educational. London.

Freeman, J. (2005) Counseling the gifted and talented. Journal Gifted Education International. 19. 245-252.

Freeman, J. (2003) Scientific thinking in gifted children. In P. Csermely & L. Lederman (Eds) Scientific Education: Talent recruitment and public understanding. IOS Press with NATO Scientific Affairs Division. Amsterdam.

Haier, RJ. (2009) What does a smart brain look like?. Scientific American Mind. 20 (6) 26-33.

Genovard, C. y Castelló, A. (1990) El límite superior. Aspectos psicopedagógicos de la excepcionalidad intelectual. Pirámide. Madrid.

Lohman, D. F. (2000) Complex information processing and intelligence. En R. J. Sternberg (Ed.) Handbook of intelligence. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK.

Lohman, DF.,  Korb, K.A. y  Lakin, JM. (2008) Identifying Academically Gifted English- Language Learners Using Nonverbal Tests A Comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Quarterly. 52  (4). 275-296.

Manaut-Gil, E. Vaquero-Casares, E. Quintero-Gallego, E. Pérez-Santamaría, J. Gómez-González, C.M (2004) Relación entre el déficit neurológico y el cociente de inteligencia en niños y adolescentes. Rev Neurol. 38 (1): 20-27.

Martos, J. y Ayuda, R. (2004) Desarrollo temprano: algunos datos procedentes del autismo y los trastornos del lenguaje. Rev Neurol. 38 (supl 1) S39-S46.

Morrisey, AM (2011) Maternal scaffolding of analogy and metacogtnition in the early pretence giften children. Exceptional children. 77 (3) 351-366.

Parra, J. Ferrando, M., Prieto, MD. y Sánchez, C. (2005) Características de la producción creativa en los niños con altas habilidades. Sobredotaçao, 6, 77-98.

Pendarvis, E., Howley, A., & Howley, C. (1990) The abilities of gifted children. Prentice Hall. USA.

Prado Suarez, RC. (2006) Creatividad y sobredotación: Diagnóstico e intervención psicopedagógica. Creatividad y Sociedad. 9. 110-120.

Renzulli, J. S. (1978) What makes giftedness? Re-examining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60, 180- 184.

Roberts, R.E., Anderson, E. J., Husain, M. (2010) Expert Cognitive Control and Individual Differences Associated with Frontal and Parietal White Matter Microstructure. The Journal of Neuroscience. 30(50): 17063-17067.

Rogers, C. (2006) Niños superdotados: una capacidad intelectual superior. La Estación: revista de la asociación española para superdotados y con talento. 9 (12) 12-23.

Serra-Grabulosa, JM., Pérez-Pàmies, AA.,  Lachica, J., Membrives, S. (2010) Bases neurales del procesamiento numérico y del cálculo. Rev Neurol 50 (1): 39-46.

Solomon, J. (2007) Metaphors at work: identify and meaning in professional life. Fetzer Institute. USA.

Stanovich, KE. (2009) Rational and Irrational thought: The thinking that IQ tests miss. Scientific American Mind. 20 (8) 34-39.

Tubino, M. (2004) Plasticidad y evolución: papel de la interacción cerebro-entorno. Revista de estudios lingüisticos y literarios. 2 (1) 43-59.

Valadez Sierra, MD., Betancourt Morejón, J. y Zavala Berbena, MA. (2006) Alumnos superdotados y talentosos: identificación, evaluación e intervención, una perspectiva para docentes. Manual Moderno. México.

VanTassel-Baska, J.,  Xuemei Feng, A., Brown, E., Bracken, B.,  Stambaugh, T.,  French, H., McGowan, S., Worley, B.,  Quek, C. and Bai. W. (2008) A Study of Differentiated Instructional Change Over 3 Years. Gifted Child Quarterly 52 (4) 297-312.

Willard-Holt, C. (2008) You Could Be Doing Brain Surgery: Gifted Girls Becoming Teachers. Gifted Child Quarterly.  52 (4) 313-325.

Winner, E. (1998) Uncommon Talents: Gifted Children, Prodigies and Savants. Scientific American Presents. 32-37.

Zehhausern, T. R. (1982) Education and the Left Hemisphere, en Student Learning Style and Brain Behavior: Programs, Instrumentation, Research. Reston, NASSP. Virginia.

Intelligence or adaptive responses to the environment?

It seems sometimes the universe conspires to make me fall into certain issues, because different persons have shared me different texts about intelligence during the past few weeks. I will not mention them, just in case this articlecan be  offensive to some persons, but I thank all of them for the inspiration. I read around 500 pages before this idea made sense.

It is not a secret that I don't like the concept of intelligence, I have said it at diverse conferences, when people ask me how this links with my ideas about learning, I reply so far, I have not needed it to explain how species evolutionarily have to adapt to the environment, and I still believe that learning is one process that allows them to create responses front the needs around the environment.

I've seen the concept of intelligence as a tautology: no one can prove that it is necessary for learning, because with the right teaching strategies children are able to learn, and when I say ALL,  I mean of children with disorders of neurodevelopmental, people with acquired brain damage, and other species. If the answer makes sense in the environment, the response can be developed under specific mechanisms.

At the same time, so far, after many years of testing and labeling  children, there is no agreement between psychologists about what intelligence is, even more, there is no agreement among the biological, neurocognitive and psychological models, it is not possible to find studies able to unify it from different points of view.

The following map allows me to argue my refusal to believe on the one hand, we can make someone more intelligent, as many schools say and secondly, accept that if someone is not intelligent, doesn’t have a chance to learn:

 

from Lynn and Vanhanen, (2012)

This map was created from hundreds of studies carried out by various associations and independent investigations around the world using standardized tests measuring intelligence and published by Lynn and Vanhanen. What I see on this mapt is the enormous cultural impact, which on average, intelligence is not increased by attending an expensive school, and that intelligence is not victorious before the environment test.

So far, what I can assure, there are only some constants over time, the language, the reading writing and arithmetic skills, all these processes survive among generations, but at the same time are dependent on the social environment, so culture has a great weight in which is called intelligence. 

If we look the map at detail, Finland, which is the country best placed in the PISA tests, is not among the most intelligent. There is not correlation between these tests and the average intelligence of the countries, probably the only thing clear is that greater cultural input, higher average in academic tests, but another view is the fact intelligence does not correlate with academic tests.

But this makes sense, since environmental needs direct the kind of responses expected, in the case of the United States, intelligence is located along East and West coasts, does the landscape have any relationship?.

Now, let’s take a breath for a moment, it is socially said that the most intelligent people are those who manage to highlight, for example a pair of icons in science: Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking, both with bad scores in initial education, but none is considered a genius by his score on intelligence tests, but by their ability to analyze problems that no one else would have been able to resolve.

We admire people who have the ability to join the points as no one else has done in any field, which implies the process of association of ideas and especially creativity, divergent, convergent thinking.

This ability to be flexible at the environment is what allows some to take mankind to a new level. Windows, the Ipad, artists and the most exciting theories in science, arise when someone is able to break the model and make something new, call it mental flexibility.

This applies to humans but also to other species. Studies with dogs have shown that more domestication, major adaptive social responses and when we are looking in species that have not had household contacts, as studies with squirrels or prairie dogs, even they, are able to learn and reply in a flexible way to adapt to the  environment. However, like the school learning, domestication makes dependent to the species.

Hence, a question arises: is intelligence inherited?, evidence shows the answer is not, nature won’t  convey skills that were functional for a generation but will not be for another. Many people who were born before generation X are bogged down with new technologies. New generations on the other hand, adapt to continuous changes, the exception is language, reading, writing and numbers.

This applies to brain and artificial neural networks, too-rigid algorithms are not successful, there must be room for adaptation.

That’s why intelligence arises my mental itching when all educational models decide that ALL persons must know the same, and intelligence tests determine the success of children. This simplistic classification of intelligent and non intelligent is absurd in the light of the evidence and how have shown different investigations, only increase the level of stress in children, since it is  found high correlations between low self esteem and depression among children labeled as gifted.

It was Jean Piaget who said the most important thing was not the response of the child, but the logic used by the child to reach it. If Steve Jobs had applied a test about how a computer works, not doubt his teacher would had crucified him, because he was able to see beyond his teachers were able to see.

So far, none expensive school that assure increase children's intelligence is a factory of geniuses. So far, regardless of the level of intelligence of our parents, nobody can sit back comfortably and see how birds fly. All of us must find our way, design it, create it and make it something worthwhile.

So in response to all my friends who ask me, share and comment on the subject of intelligence, here is my answer: no one has sucessfully demonstrate that it is a unique process and I can not convince them that we should exploit the creativity, thinking, convergent and divergent in schools, because no one knows how the future will be and so hold, I have not seen a case where learning depend on intelligence, nor in humans or other species.

References

Deary, I.J. (2012) Intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology. 63. 453-482.

Dzib Goodin, A. (2013) Animal models for the study of learning. Available at: http://talkingaboutneurocognitionandlearning.blogspot.com/2013/09/animal-models-for-study-of-learning.html

Eliasmith, C., Trujillo, O. (2014) The use and abuse of large-scale brain models. Current Opinion in Neurobiology. 25. 1-6.

Guignard, JH., Jacquet, AT., & Lubart, TI. (2012) Perfectionism and anxiety: A paradox in intellectual giftedness? Plos One. 7 (7) e1043. Available on line: http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0041043&representation=PDF

Kan, KJ., Wicherts, JM. Dolan, CV., and Van der Maas, HJL. (2013) On the nature and nurture of intelligence and specific cognitive abilities: The more heritable, the more culture dependent. Psychological Science. In press.

Kovas, Y., Voronin, I., Malykh, SB., Dale, PS., Plomin, R. (2013) Literacy and numeracy are more heritable than intelligence in primary school. Psychological Science. 24 (10) 2048-2056.

Lee, CS., & Therriault, DJ. (2013) The cognitive underpinnings of creative thought: A latent variable analysis exploring the roles of intelligence and working memory in three creative thinking process. Intelligence. 41 (5) 306-320.

Lynn, R.,  and Vanhanen, T. (2012) Intelligence: A unifying construct for the social science. Ulster Institrute for Social Research. London, UK.

Drawing the soul and intelligence of a child

Bill Waterson wrote and illustrated a comic daily from November 18, 1985 to December 31, 1995, which exposed a child’s mind 6 year old that together with his toy Tiger, staged all sorts of adventures that over-invested in the imagination of their creator and touched the hearts and minds of many.

Imagination and creativity are the main ingredients of the stories without a educational goal but helped to many to understand children mind, criticizing the society and above of all, exposing the role of education in childhood.

Once I gave a lecture and I began showing a book that most had taught me about child cognition and when I show Calvin and Hobbes, audience was ready to leave the Auditorium, but examples could not show in a better way how some children watch reality and the way that as adults we mold their minds.

Wikipedia says this famous couple received their name from a French theologian called John Calvino who lived in the 16th century, and Hobbes receives its name as a tribute to Thomas Hobbes, who was an English philosopher born in the 17TH century and no doubt the brilliance of both characters do honor to the pair's minds that gave their them names.

The stories go around a friendship impossible to break between Calvin, an American child and its Tiger toy named Hobbes, who likes to eat tuna, and together live all sorts of adventures using simple elements that are in their environment.

Calvin is the only one who can talk and see Hobbes beyond its figure of Tiger rag.  Calvin’s parents are constantly watching him doing crazy things but almost never intervene in its mental activities. Finally, it does not hurt anyone.

The stories always reflect the friendship and the discoveries that Calvin shares with his Tiger, which always has a phrase to his little friend and rarely seen interacting with parents, which appear in the stories only to substantiate the role of the family and adults in children's lives.

Of course Waterson took advantage of this space of expression to criticize various society sphere, from the incongruity of the parents to educate children, as is the case with this mini story where Calvin is showing signs that it has learned that does not like her mom that soiled the floor...

 

To education as a means of personal development, which also is even stronger as the child is who confronts to society with the firm idea of maybe education is not exactly the best thing for him. 

But from a cognitive level that impacts of the history is the ability of Calvin and Hobbes to understand the world, resolve dilemmas and course, adapt to their reality, hence it is not difficult to find examples that explain this child thought, for example the Piagetian notions, where the first instance draws the child's ability to observe the reality and try to explain it but it fails to understand the transformation of the object up to abstract and explain such complex issues as the first movement law of Newton and if you find it hilarious explanation, take into account that only Calvin is 6 years old and uses mental resources at its disposal to explain something that students only repeated or copied a text and that even for an average adult is a complex issue.

Of course later you will be able to apply the laws of physics not to bother, but as an example that the theories of physics are applied to reality. This reveals a child's capacity to understand and apply the same which are transformed into planning and execution of ideas that are not always well received by adults:

So it is possible to look at the cognitive ability of children beyond what classrooms give in a limited way, sometimes restricting even the inventive capabilities of children.

It is true that this is just a cartoon, but can all children understand the world?. 

Of course back then Deficit of attention was not so popular, otherwise Calvin would have ended up with a psychologist who would have undoubtedly applied thousands of tests to ensure that the child had brain damage.

On occasions Calvin shared his imagination with the adults, who do not appreciated it and maybe time has been so he decided to take refuge in Hobbes, with whom he had a Pact of respect and also became his best friend, this allowed him to get away from the world of adults, who harassed him with obligations and meals never enjoyed.

As a result, it was possible to enjoy their occurrences, creative wonders and compelling explanations that were always you sprinkle by the games between them, always together, without barriers of thought, without violence and when the same emerging, everything ended with a hug between the two.

This image is an example of how the author was able to understand the child mind. It is true that the author is an adult, but in only 4 drawings reminds us that objects have a thousand and one uses, same that we cannot in the adult world, where there is an endless list of No´s. 

Reflective thinking, use and management of information, Metacognition are just some topics explored in the mind of a child who looked at life beyond what adults are usually allowed with which makes us ask ourselves when did we stop seeing life so simple?.

So beyond school and all its obligations is always possible to have fun for children, and this is something that Calvin understands perfect, because he found out that most of tasks are not read by teachers, did you laugh? Let us reflect a little what we do every day in the classroom, where only inflate weak ideas, poor reasoning becomes dark and inhibits the clarity, and everything sounds so elegant!.

 I want to believe author reflected so much this child happiness that helps us to have inspiration every day and give us an example of the child genius that we ignore our rush to watch them grow as men and women of good by, without remembering that today they sometimes children, able to see the different life, and which gradually learning to be afraid of errors and to adult life

Perhaps that makes this story so sophisticated from the point of view of children's cognitive development, because when the adults look at them, we do it with our own perspectives and dogmatic theories that search to explain the functioning of all, without allowing us to simply listen.

Waterson captured it perfect in this cartoon, where he asks Calvin inspiration and Calvin responds: “Maybe I don’t feel inspired what’s it worth to you?”.

Faithful sample of adults expect a lot from children, but we don't hear them, just give them obligations.

I hope one day to be able to schools to remember that children are more than answers in an exam and the World Bank numbers which guarantee funds that continue to perpetuate an education that binds to a desk and kills creativity. Hopefully one day... we can have many Calvins talking to Hobbes on philosophy, physics or on how to enjoy summers to the fullest.

Note, if you want to see the images so that they can read, just click on either and all images will appear in actual size.

Creativity, when a + b is equal to innovation

 Creativity is related with art generally, so when schools says it has to be included as curricular ingredient, thought runs through activities such as painting, music or theatre. But in the world of business, creativity plays an important role, beyond of the knowledge required for a job, a creative person solves problems, and earns thousands of dollars to the company that hires that genius.

Thinking about business, innovation is the key, the difference between continue to grow in the enterprise vortex or close the door of a company regardless of few years has needed to make it grow up to certain level.

A search between Linkedin comments reveals that human resources departments have this ability as the most desirable among employees. I remember only one of the thousands of comments that I found with a search, and he was a person who was looking for a high-level position and he said that after two hours of interview, the CEO of the company asked him, in a disturbing manner and without nothing to do with the position description: how many are two plus two?, and fast this person replied: whatever you want it to be… and he got incredibly the job with that single answer.

There are various explanations of what creativity is, but basically is the ability to generate ideas or thoughts that arrive at original solutions, and can be applied to all areas of life.

Various concepts associated as wit, talent brainstorming ideas, inventiveness, originality, intuition, inspiration, imagination, serendipity, art, intelligence, flexible, divergent thinking, innovation, problem-solving, capacity for analysis and synthesis, inventive, original thought and ability to change the environment.

Neuroscientists studies point to front cortex as the head of creative ideas, however, most of the researches have been developed linking artistic activities, in a way such that has found that this area processed musical tasks, and visual and verbal creativity (Fuster, 2008; Runco, 2007).

However it should be noted that creativity, beyond art requires flexible thinking and adaptability to the requirements of the tasks, divergent thinking, and problem solving, which is why Damasio (cited in Runco, 2007) explains that the brain hierarchy with regard to this kind of task would be given by the relationship between the macro systems, neural networks and molecular processes, because creativity is the sum of many functional processes, since it must be dotted with motivation, expertise in the subject, knowledge of the field in which ideas, is being developed which involves a representation and diversification of ideas to find one among many that is appropriate, innovative and adequate to resolve the issue in which you wish to innovate.

People usually say that children are particularly creative, and this is the reason that many skills must begin to develop from very young, for example artistic activities and is thus in part because they are not afraid to do or say things or social criticism. Pablo Picasso said that "all children are artists, the problem is that they lose the genius when they grow up" how happens this?.

One explanation is that the pre frontal cortex, takes place during the first years of life, but eventually grows and expands in density and volume as part of the normal development of the adult brain, and has resulted in the adult cognitive quality of control of momentum and attention, but at the same time, inhibits the ability of isolated thoughts, and this does grow self-censorship and due to environmental molding, so the adult learn to stop due to critical social (Fuster, 2002; Lehrer, 2010).

And it is here where begins the social paradox which leads to many people, especially young people to the frustration and others to glory, because even if it’s socially requested, we applaud innovation and generating ideas, but on the other hand, inhibits this feature in schools. This is the reason why Europe,  has tried to integrate creativity as part of academic and cultural policies since some years (Robinson, 1999).

The problem is that culture change at an accelerated pace thanks to the technological revolution where every day there are new applications and ways of interacting and as mentioned by Robinson, (2011) change is never linear, and cannot be predicted that there is around the corner, while the traditional curricula, has not achieved the leap and stop thinking that all students should learn the same rhythm (Dzib Goodin 2011) by what the interaction between creativity and curricula must be if one of the two allows the other to find the squaring of the circle.

Allow flexible thinking implies that there is not only one right answer, but in any case, different approaches to the same problem, without falling into another error of education, which is put in competition for the best, which minimizes the largest part often tolerance to frustration and creates negative emotions (Akinol and Mendes, 2008). Recent research shows that there is a tendency on the part of most creative people to dishonesty, due to the pressure to be the best and find the best options to solve a problem (Gino and Ariely, 2011).

However, creativity must be developed for everyday life, not just art, science, or big business, flexible thinking can be the answer to many situations of daily life, combined with the creativity would allow using various tools (Ionescu, 2011) and not just the most popular ones, or use them more effectively.

And perhaps the question is: what is the best way to teach creativity?, if those words are searched in Google, the answer is at  4 million 600 thousand entries, and gives the impression that there is no doubt that it is possible to teach this gift so valuable for enterprises, however, even though it is not a skill that may only have some elected, it seems that the experts agree that there must be certain conditions as the stimulation of the environment, motivating to resolve challenges, knowledge of a topic, a certain level of knowledge in the area to develop, practice, motivation and let each learn to recognize the moments of illumination (DiChristina, 2008).

The experts also explained that this creative thinking stems, not necessarily listening muses, it arises from the reading, observation, interaction with the world, which causes a slow but deep incubation of ideas, and that when you are in the process, should be avoided in the best possible way the distractions, because they sometimes miss an idea, which can be difficult or sometimes impossible to recover. Been looking for the least amount of sophisticated ideas, to avoid frustration, and learn to listen to criticism, unless it is hit too to the ego, then this will be whoever is winning when arises the idea of one million dollars (Johnson, 2010). And it is worth mentioning that originality is not enough for creativity, because we must also consider the usefulness of the idea as a variable (Runco and Jaeger, 2012).

Is why Pablo Picasso once said that "inspiration exists, but has to find us working", so there is no an easy recipe that produces innovative ideas, moreover, must be considered environments, because while some need solitude and calm to create, others feel inspired listening a brainstorm  of ideas within work teams with multiple points of view and ways of thinking.

But you must consider that the modern world offers advantages of communication without precedent, for example, international work teams meeting virtual conference rooms or in video conferences, with the possibility of sharing of multi-cultural influences and knowledge, which is why the creative possibilities can be multiplied.

At school level, there are areas where creativity and innovation are basic, regardless of the field of education. That's why that school programs not may leave out, but while there is a curricular change, and leave aside the idea that everyone should learn the same, at the same rate and in the same way, creativity is not an input. And many lose the passion and probably the possibility of developing talent (Dzib Goodin, 2011).

Therefore, the invitation is to enable that innovation and creativity are an item and ability in daily life, in all areas of society, to find black square circled of colors  and allow that talent to flourish, because in the end the school work, should be helping the search for talent and younger you find it, it’s best.

 Alma Dzib Goodin

If you would like to know more about my writing you can visit my web site:
http://www.almadzib.com

References:

Akinola, M. and Mendes WB. (2008) The dark side  of creativity: Biological vulnerability and negative emotions lead to greater artistic creativity. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 34 (12) 1677-1686.

DiChristina, M. (2008) Let your creativity soar. Scientific American Mind. 19 (3) 24-31.

Dzib Goodin, A. (2011) The search for talent: the holy grail. Disponible en : http://talkingaboutneurocognitionandlearning.blogspot.com/2011/12/search-for-talent-holy-grail.html.

Fuster, JM. (2008) Prefrontal cortex. Elsevier. Oxford. UK.

Fuster, JM. (2002) Frontal lobe and cognitive development. Journal of Neurocytology. 31.(3-5) 373-385.

Gino, F. and Ariely, D. (2011) The dark side of creativity: Original thinkers can be more dishonest. Harvard Bussiness School. Working papers. Disponible en  red: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/6613.html.

Ionescu, T. (2011) Exploring the nature of cognitive flexibility. New Ideas in Psychology. 30 (2) 190-200.

Johnson, S. (2010) Where good ideas come from: The natural history of innovation.  Penguin publisher. USA.

Lehrer, J. (2010) Childish creativity.  Disponible en red: http://scienceblogs.com/cortex/2010/03/childish_creativity.php.

Robinson, K. (1999) Culture, creativity and the young: developing public policy. Council of Europe Publishing. Belgium.

Robinson, K. (2011) Out of our minds. Courier Westford. Westford, MA. USA.

Runco, M. (2007) Creativity theories and Themes: research, development and practice. Elsevier Academic Press. USA.

Runco, M. and Jaeger, GJ. (2012) The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal. 24 (1) 92-96.

Brain differences: the black hole of formal education

The brain processes, as reviewed at this blog, are delicate networks of information. If part of the process is stopped, may cause different effects, from the momentary forgetfulness of what is being said ... what  are we talking about? ... Oh!, yes of course ... to lack of understanding of the context while we are talking.

But brain development doesn't happen in one day, nor is achieved over the age. Psychologists interpreted so bad Jean Piaget's position about development, that they attributed to development a character of mandate almost divine once the child reaches a certain age. The same applies to other developmental studies such as Gessell's. This opened a door to many books that every new mom reads so anxious, expecting her baby can do exactly what book says, but if her child still not makes the move, gesture or behavior becomes a problem. Certainly development has a range of normal and abnormal, all studies about neurodevelopment point on that direction, but there is always a need for being respectful when one has to explain that babies can not read, and that they achieve their balance with the environment through the stimulation and their need to exercise a certain activity.

As the Russian Vygotsky noted, the higher processes require a mediator, born of necessity (Vygotsky, 1995). The example he used to support this idea was the relationship between thought and language. But nearly a century has passed and this simple statement is still spinning in neuroscience.

But there are other studies that seem to complement that statement; it’s obvious that biological evolution was accompanied by an increase in complexity, reaching the brain itself at both human and other species. After all, the struggle of the fittest allows the maintenance of a species on the face of the earth.

If allowed to take a second to think what's different about a gifted person of another human being?, Of course, the responses suggest that a gifted is able to do or perform tasks that not everyone can do. Some may say, very elegant, the analysis of a person's behavior depends on the number of functions executed in the course of a life (Sagan, 2002) and others will say that the difference is the side of everyone occupy on normal learning curve.

Taking the latter statement as a starting point, what does make different from a person who is on the left or right side of the normal curve?, is it possible to exchange the sides?.

Formal education clearly indicates that this is not possible, but also this question is not even necessary to education, because everyone should learn the same, at the same rate and under the same principles. That is why governments have recently spent thousands of dollars on the appropriateness of standardized tests, which seek to compare the performances not only between individuals but between countries (UNESCO, 2006).

But then, could a person be on one side of the curve for some activities and at other side to another?, what does make the difference?.

From the point of view of the most basic components of life and the adaptations that are made through them, the brain is reduced to the molecular structures represented in the DNA, 23 pairs of chromosomes that correspond to every person (except in case of a mutation), proteins, RNA, genotype (Velázquez Arellano, 2004; Mann, 2011) and of course it's not possible to forget, the dozens of neurotransmitters and hormones, among all, each element will look for balance and a specific function within the central  and peripheral nervous system (Stix, 2011).

If  structures are analyzed, it's possible to see the neo cortex as the executor of the most sophisticated and the whole network of neural networks that run the entire length and breadth of the brain, searching consolidate from their specific functions (Prescott, Gavrilescu, Cunnington, O'Boyle and Egan, 2010).

Structurally, all brains are similar structurally and serve the same functions, except those with injuries or altered by genetic responses (Dzib, Goodin, 2011). On average, the brain weighs at birth 1375 grams and is on average 12% higher in proportion to the rest of the body (Sagan, 2002).

Under this point of view, education has followed the right path. All brains are primarily structural and functionally similar.

And all the higher processes have the same functions, a sensation captures the information from the environment through specific receptors, the perception  integrates information and make the service either memory, attention, learning, thinking, or language, which will transform  sensations of new ideas. Finely spattered by the motivation and excitement, for without this component, the process is not specific, as demonstrated by studies of neuromarketing and decision making (Blanchette & Richards, 2010; Leder, 2011).

Even when analyzing gender differences, the differences are small, because it gives more weight to the interaction with the environment when examining the attitudes towards certain areas of knowledge as mathematics, or engineering (Halpern, Benbow, Geary, Gur , Shibley Hyde and Gernsbacher, 2007).

But if we are all similar and neuro surgeons do not have to learn how each one of the brains and only need to be clear how to applies  the function map to all of them, Why do criticize formal education?, So far it seems that is correct that there are no differences.

Well, there are differences that place to each individual in a different position compared to another talking about learning, some studies show that skills are created by brain processes, ranging from a lack of development of the neocortex, prioritizing areas of the limbic system, as in the case of profound mental retardation, until the development of a neocortex focused on clear objectives, but a deterioration in emotional or interpersonal skills. So the conclusion is that we are different, because brain develops in each person based on three important aspects: genes, environment and interaction with the learning, creating a unique and unrepeatable brain.

Basically the functions should be adapted to the environment, this is called intelligence, and this is achieved by the needs that each individual faces over life in their interaction with the environment (Dzib Goodin, 2011), and this is supplemented with needs as specie, since a lot of development is related to technological advances and intracranial capacity. There will come a point where the brain efficiency will be tested because there is no more space to expand into, the cranial cavity is not getting bigger, the space is reduced and with it, more pressure over functions (Fox, 2011).

On the other hand, studies have tended to think that the struggle for neuronal connections, under the law of the strongest, sacrificing performance on shaping brains, so the domination of the neocortex on the excitement is that the networks neurons are so strong that oppress those that are not used together and effectively, creating lesions that affect the neurological development, as can be observed in the case of developmental disorders (Hardan, Minshew, Keshavan Mallikarnjuhn and 2001; Heaton and Wallace, 2004; Herbert, 2005).

It is then that neurological studies show that not all brains work the same way and that an important feature is the white substance, which allows the speed of synaptic transmission and brain structure and metabolic efficiency can make a difference (Haier, 2009).

So, the position on one side or the other of the normal curve is due to the distribution of brain architecture and that each person uses combinations of weak versus the key areas and this produces unique combinations. In this sense, an apprenticeship program may be done to fit to depositary of the brain in response to the individual characteristics. However, this does not involve custom software development, but the analysis of how people use information.

That is why now criticizes psychological tests, because they forget important aspects of how intelligence works in the real world and it is possible that people who are considered extremely talented by teachers, fail in the resolution of standardized tests, while people who seems less intelligent, are able to recognize the requirements of every item. Thus, now researchers begin to ask whether intelligence tests measure the correct human faculties, although it has been a criticism made for many years (Stanovich, 2009).

Returning to the original question, is it possible that all children learn?, is it education by taking the right path to effective learning?, is it an economic issue?.

Well, based on what has been presented, yes, it is possible to have happy learners as children and productive adults, in the interest of economy of a country, if considered at the outset that there are learning styles, developed from the experiences created interaction with the environment (Torrance, 1977).

This interaction creates cytoarchitectural differences and this can make the change in the interpretation of the environment and making decisions based on cognitive control (Roberts, Anderson, and Husain, 2010). And this is sometimes possible to observe only with unconventional measuring cognitive abilities (Lohman, Korb and Lakin, 2008).

Is it necessary an overinvestment to learn?, from the view of neuroscience, no, not at all, countries only need a change of attitude at all levels. As human beings, we do not learn what is imposed; learn what we want with our own way and pace. It’s the cognitive vision corrected and improved. But the idea of learning to learn built from cognition schools more than 30 years ago remains hidden in the drawer of good intentions. Just to give an example, one program at a public university in Mexico, which teaches special needs education has been named since many years: scholar problems, with an arrogant attitude on the child is told he has a problem. The reality is that every human being learns differently.

Concepts such as integrative or inclusive education, have no reason to be, despite all the Spanish tradition, the idea should focus more on strategies of assimilation of the world. What it is black to someone another can see it white, but if you share and learn from it, does it matter the color difference?, After all what matters is the use and management that the brain makes of the information.

Finally, different brains learn better with socialization this is an intuitive need, what can a child with Down syndrome teach to a computer whiz?, You never know ...

Alma Dzib Goodin 

If you would like to know more about my writing you can visit my web site:
http://www.almadzib.com

References

Blanchette, I. and Richards, A. (2010) The influence of affect o higher level cognition: A review of research on interpretation, judgment, decision making and reasoning. Cognition & Emotion. 24 (4) 561-595.

Dzib Goodin, A. (2011) Introducción a los procesos neurocognitivos del aprendizaje: lenguaje, lectura, escritura y matemáticas. Servicios Editoriales Balám. En prensa.

Fox, D. (2011) The limits of intelligence. Scientific American. 305 (1) 36- 43.

Haier, R. (2009) What does a smart brain look like?. Scientific American Mind. 20 (6) 26-33.

Halpern, DF., Benbow, CP., Geary, DC., Gur, RC., Shibley Hyde, J. and Gernsbacher, MA. (2007) Sex, math and scientific achievement. Scientific American Mind. 18 (6) 44-51.

Hardan, AY., Minshew, NJ., Mallikarnjuhn, M. and Keshavan, M. (2001) Brain Volume in autism. J. Child. Neuron. 16. 421-424.

Heaton, P. y Wallace, GL. (2004) Annotation: the Savant Syndrome. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry. 45 (5) 899-911.

Herbert, M. (2005) Large brains in autism: the challenge or pervasive abnormality. The Neuroscientist. 11 (5) 417-440.

Leder, H. (2011) Thinking by design. Scientific American Mind. 22 (3) 43- 47.

Lohman, DF., Korb, K.A. and Lakin, JM. (2008) Identifying Academically Gifted English- Language Learners Using Nonverbal Tests A Comparison of the Raven, NNAT, and CogAT. Gifted Child Quarterly. 52  (4). 275-296.

Mann, E. (2011) La química como herramienta en biomedicina. SEBBM: Sociedad Española de Bioquímica y biología molecular. 169. Disponibe en red: http://www.sebbm.com/169.htm.

Prescott, J., Gavrilescu, M., Cunnington, R., O’Boyle, MW. and Egan, GF. (2010) Enhanced brain connectivity in math-gifted students. Cognitive Neuroscience. 1 (4) 277-288.

Roberts, R.E., Anderson, E. J., and Husain, M. (2010) Expert Cognitive Control and Individual Differences Associated with Frontal and Parietal White Matter Microstructure. The Journal of Neuroscience. 30 (50): 17063-17067.

Sagan, C. (2002) Los dragones del Edén: especulaciones sobre la evolución de la inteligencia humana. Crítica. Barcelona.

Stanovich, K. (2009) Rational and irrational thought: the thinking that IQ test miss. Scientific American Mind. 20 (6) 34-39.

Stix, G. (2011) The neuroscience of True Grit. Scientific American. 304 (3) 29-33.

Torrance, E. P. (1977) Your Style of Learning Thinking. Form A and B: Preliminary Norms Abbreviated Technical Notes, Scoring Keys, and Selected References. Gifted Child  Quarterly. 21 (4) 563-573.

UNESCO (2006) Clasificación Internacional Normalizada de la Educación. Organización de la Naciones Unidas para la Educación, Ciencia y Cultura.

Velázquez Arellano, A. (2004) Lo que somos y el genoma humano: des-velando nuestra identidad. UNAM-FCE. México.

Vygostky, L. (1995) Pensamiento y lenguaje. Paidos. España.

3D image: Juan Conde Tovany