The theory behind encyclopedic knowledge

[msocorro]

I would only have to add, that if you don´t belie in EK, then don´t do it! why wais your time trying to change everybody minded?I don´t know for sure if it is good or bad, but what I do know is that they are going to have to learn the same stuff at school, where they are not going to be loved just by the fact of spending time with them, they are just going to have to learn it to spit it  on a price of paper. how many teenagers do you know understand half of what they are made to memorize a long their school years?I was thought bunch of facts non related in my school days, some have since, some have nosiness at all. but no one question the schooling, no one askers, why does my kid have to be 8 hours a day in an institution?but we do question anything any one says to differ.
 
as I said before, live and let live!

[msocorro]

I would only have to add, that if you don´t belie in EK, then don´t do it! why wais your time trying to change everybody minded?I don´t know for sure if it is good or bad, but what I do know is that they are going to have to learn the same stuff at school, where they are not going to be loved just by the fact of spending time with them, they are just going to have to learn it to spit it  on a price of paper. how many teenagers do you know understand half of what they are made to memorize a long their school years?I was thought bunch of facts non related in my school days, some have since, some have nosiness at all. but no one question the schooling, no one askers, why does my kid have to be 8 hours a day in an institution?but we do question anything any one says to differ.
 
as I said before, live and let live!

[DadDude]

It is possible to disagree with something--or with one approach to something--and also "live and let live."  Criticizing a thing, or merely analyzing it critically as we're doing here, does not mean being intolerant of it.  Maybe more to the point, if one criticizes a practice or belief, that does not necessarily imply that one would have a moral criticism of a person who does it or believes it.  So if you will let us debate things intellectually without complaint, we'll be only too happy not to criticize you morally.

[melodym37]

Nicely put Daddude!!

[ShenLi]

My oh my, how ever did I miss this thread? Like Denise, this is a topic close to my heart, too! This is what I've gotten out of it since studying the subject...

According to TweedleWink, the purpose of early EK training is to populate the right brain with knowledge - kind of like filling a library with books. If done correctly (I'll explain more about this later), when the children are older, the information will come back to them in a manner something akin to de javu - they may not remember how they know it or when they learned it only that they know it. I guess a good example would be like the one I read from Brain Rules for Baby by John Medina:

“It just jumped out at me!” Brott exclaimed to his mother. Brott had been at the podium of a symphony orchestra, conducting a piece of music for the first time, when the cellist began to play. He instantly knew he’d heard this piece before. This was no casual reminder of some similar but forgotten work: Brott could predict exactly what musical phrase was coming next. He could anticipate the flow of the entire work during the course of the rehearsal; he knew
how to conduct it even when he lost his place in the score.

Freaking out, he called his mother, a professional cellist. She asked for the name of the piece of music, then burst out laughing. It was the piece she had been rehearsing when she was pregnant with him. The cello was up against her late-pregnancy mid-abdomen, a structure filled with soundconducting fluids, fully capable of relaying musical information to her unborn son. His developing brain was sensitive enough to record the musical memories. “All the scores I knew by sight were the ones she had played while she was pregnant with me”, Brott later said in an interview. Incredible stuff for an organ not even zero years old.

I kind of get what he meant because when I was in Grade 5 on piano, my teacher made me learn a piece for an exam. The way my teacher used to teach me was to get me to sight read once through first. Ordinarily, my sight reading is crappy at best, but with this one particular piece, I played better than usual and it was a hard piece for me because the fingering was tricky. My teacher immediately asked me, "Have you played this before?" I had never played the piece before and I didn't even remember ever having heard it before but something about it felt "familiar". Did I listen to it when I was a child? I don't know.

Another instance was a song I learned when I was very young. I read the lyrics again in a book when I was a teenager and I could hum the music for it even though the song was "new" to me. I only discovered that I'd learned the song as a child because my cousin later told me I used to sing it when I was little.

Even if a child cannot remember the information as clearly, learning it for the second time will very likely be easier than if they were hearing the information for the first time. For instance, I had to memorise the first 36 elements of the Periodic Table for Chemistry in Year 12. Even though I cannot recite them all now, I still remember the first ten and it will definitely be easier for me to memorise the other 26 elements if I had to learn it again now.

In this respect, I agree with Dr Paddy. If you are going to do EK, it makes more sense to cover material that will be relevant and useful to the child rather than obscure information they are unlikely to ever need.

However, based on information from Professor Makoto Shichida, EK is less about the information and more about stimulating the brain. Or perhaps he wasn't really talking about EK, but he refers to the activity of rapidly flashing vast quantities of image flashcards to young children in order to stimulate their right brains and bring out its unique ability such as its photographic memory. In fact, someone on the forum (so sorry, I forget whom) posted a link to an article about some training involving rapid flashing in a darkened room being done with fighter pilots to help them learn to quickly distinguish between friendly and enemy planes. As a result of the training, some of them developed photographic memories. The article is here:

http://www.datasync.com/~rsf1/fun/phot-mem.htm

This information seems to be in concordance with Shichida's speed flash card activity.

Going back to EK and developing encyclopedic knowledge... How do you ensure that the child retains the information and not forget it once they are older? This is the part I have not been quite clear on. I've read that you only have to flash the cards once and the child will remember (but for how long?), some say, at least four times, others say, not too many times or you will be stimulating the left brain which is not what you want. Based on what I understand about the child's brain, I think TweedleWink's method might be the way to go. In fact, this is what they do in Heguru as well. They recommend going through the flash cards with a child a few times, then putting them away for a while, say six months or a year, depending on the child, then bringing them out and flashing them again. The first exposure opens the child's mind to the subject and the terminology. When the child receives the second exposure (6 months or 1 year later) he/she will have had more life experiences, greater knowledge and a better understanding of the world and new connections to the information will be formed. I guess this is pretty much what Tracy and Drummerboy are saying.

However, I feel it is important to have the repeat exposures to the flashcards at set intervals - 6 months, 1 year (exactly how frequently, I don't know but as long as it is repeated over a period of time) - to avoid synaptic pruning. I first read about this in the Science of Parenting by Margot Sunderland but since then many others say the same thing - at birth, we have more brain cells than we will ever have in our lives, but there are very few connections between them. As that baby grows, numerous connections between the brain cells will be made forming a complex network. Once the child is about two years, synaptic pruning will begin - this is when the brain cuts off connections that are deemed redundant because of disuse. My take out from this is that if you don't do repeat exposures to the information, synaptic pruning takes place and that's why the children cannot remember the information they learned as infants and toddlers. How much of it gets erased depends on whether you are still covering related information. For instance, if you flashed famous artists for your child but never covered any other flash cards related to art, I think it's a safe bet that your child will most likely have no memeory of those famous artists. If, however, you went on to flash famous works of those artists and other flash cards related to art, you can expect better retention of the information. I hope that makes sense.

So does EK make sense to me? Yes, I think so. But I think parents need to be very clear on what they are trying to achieve with it - brain exercise? Knowledge retention? Because I believe that it is done will affect the future results seen in the child.

[Paddy Jim Baggot MD]

i love the neurobiology.  But i would not necessarily fear synaptic pruning, it is part of natural development.
God, were he to write a patent for a computer, would need to specify each wire of every circuit.
Some computer patents have had thousands of claims and immense complexity.
Yet, He is far smarter than that.
He could say, make far more neurons than one needs, and simply prune those unused.
then make far more glial cells (each neuron has one or more secretaries) than one needs, then prune.
and dendrites-receptive areas of each neuron, make excess and prune again.
This solution takes much less space in the genome.  The genome already contains more info than library of congress.
imagine there were a huge excess of phone lines connecting everywhere to everywhere else
those phone lines connecting people to people would likely be used, and therefore retained.
Phones lines connecting a cow pasture to a horse's stable would likely not be used, and therefore lost
But they could be.  if stable boys used them, they could be retained
If we had an extra 5% neurons, 5% glial cells, extra 5% dendrites, etc
Imagine how we could augment brain power.  I think it happens to children of these moms.
   

[Paddy Jim Baggot MD]

Less about the information and more about stimulating the brain.
I wholeheartedly agree!!
I will have my children learn Tagalog.  And anything else i can teach them, or anyone else can teach them.
Because most important is the computing power which results from microarchitecture of brain.
In the future, we have no idea what we will need to know or learn.  But if we can learn anything well, we will be adaptible.
I'm only suggesting practical information will stimulate brain more, and more frequently. 

[msocorro]

It is possible to disagree with something--or with one approach to something--and also "live and let live."  Criticizing a thing, or merely analyzing it critically as we're doing here, does not mean being intolerant of it.  Maybe more to the point, if one criticizes a practice or belief, that does not necessarily imply that one would have a moral criticism of a person who does it or believes it.  So if you will let us debate things intellectually without complaint, we'll be only too happy not to criticize you morally.

sorry, just go me on a bad day.
you are very right, and I do belive that is what this forum is all about.

[Paddy Jim Baggot MD]

imagine a child walks down the street.  Sees an unfamiliar man. they both pretty much ignore each other.
a month later she does it again.  Now she recognizes mr so-and-so.  They are happy to see each other, and talk happily about whatever they have in common. 
In the second instance the brain recieved more stimulation.  Which was because know she knows who mr so and so is.  Imagine brain cells talking to each other in real time.  Those with more knowledge have more to talk about.  Not only the people but also the brain cells. 
Thus practical knowledge about the environment makes the environmernt more stimulatory, also more fun.   
Or she met the dog who frightened her before.
Now the dog is more stimulatory  than before it frightened her.  Environment more stimulatory.

[DadDude]

Off topic alert!

In the future, we have no idea what we will need to know or learn.  But if we can learn anything well, we will be adaptible.
I'm only suggesting practical information will stimulate brain more, and more frequently. 

I think you're right on the latter point.  But as to your point about the future, I say: nonsense.  No offense, but this is so commonly repeated that it has become a pet peeve of mine.

Imagine someone saying to a child 75 years ago, quite accurately, that in your lifetime the world will change radically, and much new knowledge will be discovered and things that are relevant in 75 years are today unknown or unemphasized.  Would it follow, 75 years ago, that we had no idea what we needed to know or learn?  Of course not.  There is no need to throw the curriculum out the window simply because the world is changing.  Consider the elementary school subjects (or what should be such subjects) and ask yourself how many of them have changed much in the last 75 years, despite the fact that the most revolutionary technological changes in all of human history happened in this period: reading; penmanship; arithmetic; world history since ancient times; national histories; geography; science; art; music; and various others to taste.

What new subjects have become important for elementary students to know?  Typing and computers...and that's pretty much it.  The only things that have become even possibly outdated are cursive handwriting and Latin (though Latin was already mostly out, 75 years ago).  National history has had 75 more years' worth of facts, but a similar observation could be made 75 and 150 years ago, and that wasn't a reason not to learn history.  Same is true of geography--we don't not learn geography because borders will change in our lifetimes.

What gives this meme (actually, I hate the concept of "memes" but it fits in this case) some teeth is that science and technology changes and develops so fast.  But the vast bulk of these changes are relevant to students at higher levels, in high school and college.  And even then, we should not tell students, "You don't have to learn brain science because the field will look totally different in 20 years."  We should say, "You really ought to learn brain science because it's such a hot field with fascinating discoveries being made all the time."

Just had to get that off my chest. 

[TmS]

Totally agree with you DadDude.

While things look completely different it is mostly in the way of advancements and new understanding.

Knowing the historical evolution that discoveries etc have taken has multiple benefits both in moving forward and in sometimes going backwards to move forward again (imagine if we had stuck to the electric car, I dare say the battery industry would look quite different had we taken that course and had the necessity to develop the technology down such a path).

The more knowledge one has, even if said knowledge is "outdated", the better equipped we are for our trek down the path of the future.

[Gindy]

((Forgive me, I am new to his forum and some of the early learning concepts and have none of the hard facts you asked for in the original post.  Also I’m all opinion and no credentials.)

Firstly I am doing EK mainly for the supposed cognitive benefits of stimulation and “brain building”, which I have just assumed is the real purpose in doing it. 
Two main questions in this thread have stood out to me:

1.  Do they remember what they learn?

2.  Is it beneficial considering they can't possible fully grasp what they are "memorizing"? 
I have had (and do have) some of the same questions however I have decided to do the EK.  Here’s the way I look at it;

 As for question 2, When we talk to a newborn, we talk to them about all kinds of things that they can’t understand at all but clearly that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t talk to them.   We are also told to read read read to our babies.  Surely most of what we read (at least initially) is way over their heads as well, but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t read, even when they are in the womb!  I approach EK with similar reasoning and expectations. 

I also think it’s similar to learning words.  My baby learned to say the word "time" at about 10 months old.  It was cute and exiting but I really wondered if she had any understanding of the concept behind that word.   However I still repeated the word over and over for her to learn, trusting that at some point she will have a basic understanding of "time" and that later she will gain an even more expanded and abstract understanding of it.  First we learn what something is, then we learn about that thing, and only then can we understand it.  When broken down like that an image of something and a word to call it seem like the logical place to start.  Bits cards and POI (in my view) are stages 1 and 2.  Where else would you start?

I do try to make my cards as relevant to my baby’s life as I can.  I also try to picture her as a teenager or young adult and think of what kinds of “bits” she would enjoy sharing so I have chosen some topics like “drinks from around the world”- information that might be cool to share someday. 

But do they remember the info?  I believe Doman says it is not a memorization program.  I don’t expect my baby to remember any of it without some reminders, and I thought that was the whole purpose of retiring the cards and then bringing them back with more info each time and then eventually making books out of them so your children could bring them to a doctors’ appointment and sit quietly reading them while the other children are giving their parent’s headaches. 

Obviously the human mind is dynamic, that's what makes it so much more flexible than a computer- and we can't expect that we just file this info in with no refreshers and it is downloaded forever.  My dad was from Austria and spoke German every day of life for twenty some years, but after living in the states for a few decades he started to forget some of the language.  If you don’t use it you lose (or at least misplace it) but that doesn’t necessarily mean it has been of no benefit to you.

I’m not doing it expecting literal encyclopedic knowledge but after all the effort I do plan on reviewing the info from time to time as she grows up.  Then, once the knowledge becomes a part of a person’s understanding it doesn’t really have to be remembered, it becomes part of a whole picture and a world view.   

Perhaps a third question is- is it worth the time effort and expense.  Considering  the enormous effort it takes to do the cards and the time that might be spent with the child they come at a high price indeed. 

[Gindy]

Since I started my reply- left it to take care of a teething infant, returned to it and posted it the thread has really changed.  Sorry if I've been redundant. 

[PokerDad]

I realize this thread was inadvertently bumped the other day, and I read through it as a result.

OMG... the link that ShenLi posted above was quite profound.

The article discusses Tachistoscope training done in WWII fighter pilots and how some of those that went through the training developed a keen "photographic memory".

Now, I should pause a moment here to define how they used this term. As used in the article, photographic memory meant that a person could see an image for a split second and then begin describing it in detail as though they were still looking at the image. In the article, it mentions that some pilots could view a page in a book for a micro second and THEN read the page as if they were still viewing the page itself.

Okay, so one of my favorite classes in college was Cognitive Psychology, taught by one of the most well known and well respected memory experts in psychology (#58 Most Eminent psychologists, #20 Most frequently cited in introductory psychology text books). In this class, one of the areas that the professor had researched (and that we studied in class as a result) was the iconic memory.

Iconic memory is basically like a shadow image that lasts for a few moments after the stimulus is removed. This is what the Tachistoscope training was all about. I've never heard of training to extend iconic memory or using it to read pages off a book only glanced at for a micro second.

I think I'm going to have to email my professor and ask about this. If I get a decent response, I'll post. I haven't emailed that prof in about 2 years (my class was a decade ago!)

[Dr Miles R Jones]

Encyclopedic Knowledge in children is possible but you mustn't fall into the trap of putting the cart before the horse.  You can teach a child their basic skills of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by starting with an algebra book.  At least I could do that but I am a specialist in teaching and curriculum design.  I would not do it because it puts so much material in the child's head that they are not ready to comprehend yet while marginalizing the priority information that they are ready for.

The problem with Doman's approach is that so much of the material he advocates is not primary information, not even secondary information, it is also presented out of context as DadDude emphasized.  Visual stimulation via pictures is critical to learning and increases a child's brain capacity.  But why not use pictures to teach the keys to the universe, letters and their sounds and numbers and their quantities.  Once reading and doing math the key has been put in the door and it has been opened and all encyclopedic knowledge is there for them.

Start with a reading primer not an encylopedia.  I am all for Encyclopedic Knowledge but doing it in a scattershot disorganized way will yield little.  Priority skils first and furious.  Once the door to reading and math has been opened then all things are possible.  Build on their knowledge in a consistent fashion focusing on things they find motivating.  We have been discussing memory systems.  Natural memory does not hold a candle to Trained Memory as far as how easy it is to remember and recall info.  Trained Memory uses visual mnemonics since 80% of the input cortex of the brain is devoted to the visual.  Those Trained Memory skills should be woven into the early learning so they become second nature.

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214772
• Latest: addisonjones

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 449
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 236
• Total: 236