{"id":7484,"date":"2024-03-03T08:00:16","date_gmt":"2024-03-03T13:00:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/blog\/?p=7484"},"modified":"2024-03-10T07:52:04","modified_gmt":"2024-03-10T12:52:04","slug":"weather-forecasting-and-cognitive-science","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/weather-forecasting-and-cognitive-science\/","title":{"rendered":"Weather Forecasting and Cognitive Science"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>I live in Boston, and we just had an ENORMOUS snow storm. TWELVE INCHES of snow fell in just a few hours. It was, as we say, &#8220;a monstah.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Oh, wait a minute, <em>that didn&#8217;t happen<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/AdobeStock_128527268.jpeg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright size-medium wp-image-7494\" src=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/AdobeStock_128527268-300x169.jpeg\" alt=\"A winter scene: cars covered in a foot of swon, and two pedestrians walking away from the camera, shoulders hunched agains the cold snow\" width=\"300\" height=\"169\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/AdobeStock_128527268-300x169.jpeg 300w, https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/AdobeStock_128527268-1024x577.jpeg 1024w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>The FORECAST said we&#8217;d get a monstah.\u00a0In reality, by the end of the day, exactly 0.0 inches of snow had accumulated on my sidewalk. It was as close to &#8220;nothing&#8221; as was the Patriots&#8217; chance of winning the Super Bowl this year.<\/p>\n<p>You can imagine the public response:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Hah! All the &#8220;experts&#8221; with all their science-y equipment and equations and models and colorful images &#8230; they all got it wrong. AGAIN!<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">That&#8217;s it: I&#8217;m done with all this weather forecasting nonsense. I&#8217;ll rely on my trick knee to tell me when the weather is a-changing.<\/p>\n<p>While that response is predictable, I also think it&#8217;s unfair. In fact, believe it or not, it reminded me of the work we do at Learning and the Brain.<\/p>\n<p>In most ways, weather forecasting has almost nothing to do with cognitive science. But the few similarities might help explain what psychology and neuroscience research can (and can&#8217;t do) for teachers.<\/p>\n<p>I want to focus on three illustrative similarities.<\/p>\n<h2>Spot the Butterfly<\/h2>\n<p>First, both meteorologists and cognitive scientists focus on\u00a0<strong>fantastically complex systems<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>In the world of weather:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">As the butterfly theory reminds us, small changes over here (a butterfly flapping its wings in my backyard) could cause enormous changes over there (a typhoon in Eastern Samar).<\/p>\n<p>In the world of education:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Whether we&#8217;re looking at neurons or IEPs or local school budgets or working memory systems or mandated annual testing, we&#8217;ve got an almost infinite number of interconnected variables.<\/p>\n<p>Research might tell us to &#8220;do this thing!&#8221;, but the effect of that recommendation will necessarily depend on all those other variables.<\/p>\n<p>We should not be shocked, therefore, that a one-step intervention (e.g.: growth mindset training) doesn&#8217;t have exactly the effect we want it to. That one intervention interacts with all those other complex systems.<\/p>\n<p>The research-based suggestion <a href=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/a-beacon-in-the-mindset-wilderness\/\" target=\"_blank\">isn&#8217;t necessarily wrong<\/a>, but it also can&#8217;t briskly overcome all the other forces that influence learning.<\/p>\n<h2>Possibilities and Probabilities<\/h2>\n<p>Second: like weather forecasts, research-based suggestions focus on\u00a0<em>probabilities<\/em>.<\/p>\n<p>That is: the weather channel didn&#8217;t say &#8220;Boston is going to get 12 inches of snow!&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>If you looked past the simplified headline, it said:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8220;We&#8217;ve seen conditions more-or-less like this 100 times before.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">2 of those times, we got\u00a0less than 2 inches<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">8 times, we got 2-6 inches<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">25 times, 6-10 inches<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">45 times, 10-14 inches<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">15 times, 14-18 inches<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">5 times, more than\u00a018 inches.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Make plans accordingly.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>They <em>don&#8217;t know for sure<\/em>; they&#8217;re making <strong>predictions<\/strong> based on previous cases &#8212; and those\u00a0previous cases provide a range of possibilities.<\/p>\n<p>Notice, by the way, that the forecasters weren&#8217;t exactly wrong. New York and Philly got pounded; they got the &#8220;monstah&#8221; we were expecting.<\/p>\n<p>But &#8212; because a butterfly somewhere flapped its wings &#8212; the storm went slightly south and left us alone.<\/p>\n<p><strong>So, too, with psychology and neuroscience research aimed at the classroom.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Researchers can say: &#8220;this strategy helped students score 5% higher on the end-of-year exam &#8230; ON AVERAGE.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>That means the strategy (probably) helped more students than it hurt. But the effects were different student-by-student.<\/p>\n<p>Who knows: the strategy could have made learning\u00a0<em>harder<\/em> for some students.<\/p>\n<p>We&#8217;re looking at probabilities, not panaceas.<\/p>\n<h2>The Bigger the Claim&#8230;<\/h2>\n<p>Third: expert forecasters get their predictions right more often than they get them wrong. And &#8212; this is crucial &#8212; the &#8220;wrong&#8221; results come more often for <strong>big, outlier events.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><em>Sunny days in June? Glum rain in November?<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">Relatively <em>easy<\/em> to predict.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\"><em>A once-in-a-generation hurricane? A monstah snow storm?<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">MUCH harder to predict. We just have less data about unusual events because&#8230;<em>they&#8217;re unusual<\/em>!<\/p>\n<p>So too in the world of research-based teaching advice.<\/p>\n<p>I honestly think that researchers get their advice &#8220;right&#8221; much of the time &#8212; at least within the narrow confines of the context they describe.<\/p>\n<p>That is: a large collection of well-designed studies probably merits careful consideration.<\/p>\n<p>At the same time, if researchers loudly announce a <em>big, outlier conclusion<\/em>, we should be ready for that claim to collapse upon further investigation.<\/p>\n<p>Imagine that researchers claim&#8230;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; dancing a hornpipe helps students learn fractions, or<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; standing in a &#8220;power pose&#8221; does something worthwhile\/important, or<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; teachers don&#8217;t need to know anything about a topic to teach it well.<\/p>\n<p>In each of these cases, the extremity of the claim should prepare us for doubts.<\/p>\n<p>Equally true, let&#8217;s say &#8220;research shows&#8221; that a particular teaching strategy has a HUGE effect on learning.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s possible, but honestly kinda rare.<\/p>\n<p>For instance, as I <a href=\"https:\/\/braindevs.net\/blog\/\/the-jigsaw-advantage-should-students-puzzle-it-out\/\" target=\"_blank\">wrote recently<\/a>, I found a meta-analysis claiming that the &#8220;jigsaw&#8221; method has a cohen&#8217;s d value of 1.20. As stats people know, that&#8217;s simply ENORMOUS.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s possible&#8230;but I wasn&#8217;t at all surprised to find very little support for that claim. I honestly can&#8217;t think of <em>any<\/em> teaching intervention that makes that much of a difference on its own.<\/p>\n<h2>TL;DR<\/h2>\n<p>Like weather forecasters, psychology and neuroscience research&#8230;<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; looks at enormously complicated systems,<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; offers conclusions best understood as probabilities, and<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">&#8230; is likeliest to be right when it makes modest claims.<\/p>\n<p>In brief: this field can be fantastically useful to classroom teachers, as long as we understand its challenges and limitations.<\/p>\n<p>Our teacherly &#8220;trick knee&#8221; might be right from time to time. But wisely considered research will probably be better.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>I live in Boston, and we just had an ENORMOUS snow storm. TWELVE INCHES of snow fell in just a few hours. It was, as we say, &#8220;a monstah.&#8221; Oh, wait a minute, that didn&#8217;t happen. The FORECAST said we&#8217;d get a monstah.\u00a0In reality, by the end of the day, exactly 0.0 inches of snow [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":7494,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[171],"class_list":["post-7484","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lb-blog","tag-mbe"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7484","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7484"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7484\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7509,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7484\/revisions\/7509"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7494"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7484"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7484"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.braindevs.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7484"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}