The Science Behind Enrichment

In chapter one, we introduced the important concept of two-way changes in our brains. Our genes can affect us, but most of the changes we experience are either a gene-environment interplay or just flat-out environmental effects. The expression "changing brains" would have been laughable one or two generations ago. Today, we think of not "if" the brain can be changed, but "how much" it can be changed.

Much of what we've learned about the brain's plasticity and potential for enhancement has been derived from laboratory-based enrichment studies. The qualities that drive enrichment are relevant to educators who are looking at ways of improving the quality or quantity of learning not only for special populations but for all learners. This chapter will take a closer look at these studies, how the brain benefits, the factors that contribute to enrichment, and what this might mean for the educational realm.

First, a reminder of our definition of enrichment, as mentioned in the Preface:

Enrichment is a positive biological response to a contrasting environment, in which measurable, synergistic, and global changes have occurred.

In other words, enrichment is the response from a measure of difference. You can measure enrichment or track it only in comparison with something else. In a laboratory setting, the experimental condition is superior only when contrasted to lesser (control) conditions.¹ Even laboratory enrichment, with all the bells and whistles, may still be far inferior to what the experimental subjects would experience in a different environment. That is, when assessing the impact of various conditions on the brains of the subjects, it's the difference that counts. Nothing matters more in the field of enrichment research except the law of contrast. Without it, you have nothing. Keep this in mind when considering both the animal and human studies described in this chapter because it's more than important—it is everything. Without a measurable difference from a baseline, no enrichment response occurs. This critical definition implies the following:

The purpose is to maximize the individual's potential.

The actions that are taken are to enhance the environment.

The result (when done properly) is the "enrichment response."

The enrichment response is universally positive and can modify the brain at any age. Whenever the word enrichment is being used, it is describing something that affects the subject differently, and is more encompassing, more effective, and longer lasting than basic, everyday learning.² However, because of the brain's structural and safety limitations, it cannot "take in" an unlimited amount of new learning per day; to do so would create massive cognitive instability by overloading networks, meaning that the new learning would overwhelm the old. In addition, it would likely be very stressful. Remember that trauma is an example of overwhelming input. As a rule, the older the brain, the more it protects past knowledge—it's a survival function. But over time, our brains can take in a massive amount of new learning.

All of this takes time. But since most of us are so far short of that limit, there's plenty of room for enrichment! There is some evidence that suggests that the enrichment response may be closer to the "top end" of learning, in terms of how much can be learned in a given period, but we don't know for sure.³

Much of what I present in this chapter will be research from animal models (for ethical reasons). The rat (or mouse) models are used for several reasons. First, rats are cheap, easy to work with, and reproduce fast. They rarely live longer than thirty months and won't eat you out of your lab. In addition, the rat brain has many similarities to a human brain, although it is smaller, less folded, and less variable from individual to individual compared with human brains.

Obviously, there are limits to animal research. Two researchers who have studied the dilemma of animal versus human models have found that we can at times generalize, advising that in many cases, the procedures of some selected animal testing can be applied to children.⁴ Examples of safe and appropriate testing might include simple behavioral tasks, learning, memory, or studies on nutrition. These work well in both human and animal models. What doesn't work, of course, would be tasks involving language, complex learning, or specific latency-dependent studies.

No one is suggesting that everything shown in animal studies has a one-to-one correlation with human studies. There are simply some methodologically transferable models. These include doing an experiment and measuring new learning, spatial memory, and other brain changes. Having said that, no one knows exactly how much we can interpret from animal data. Nonetheless, it is reasonable to review the work and speculate on its implications for human growth and development. We'll begin with the first pioneer in enrichment studies.