Here’s a sentence that I stumbled across in my neuroanatomy textbook:
Question 3: Normally, the subthalamic nucleus projects glutaminergic (excitatory) fibers to the two exit nuclei of the basal ganglia, the medial segment of the globus pallus, and the migrant pars reticulata, which in turn send inhibitory projections to the thalamus. Thalamocortical fibers that are excitatory project into the motor cortex.
I picked up the neuroanatomy textbook in my office and began reading Chapter 13 in my sincere effort to better understand the brain. I was convinced that I can compensate for my lack of understanding of the subject by using my comprehension techniques. After all, I am a reading specialist. I know of visualization, prediction, connection and summary. I also know how to apply those techniques.
After reading for about 30 seconds, I wanted to throw the book against the wall, because it was making me feel incredibly stupid. I felt like the book was taking away my intelligence. I said to myself: “I can’t predict, I can’t visualize, I can’t synthesize, I can’t summarize or connect! I read it, but I don’t understand it.” I had no other comprehension strategy at my disposal.
I turned this ordeal into a learning moment. I found that I lacked prior knowledge that influenced my vocabulary and ultimately affected my understanding of the text. He did not know what was subthalamic. I had a hard time visualizing the basal ganglia and globe pallidus. “Substantia nigra pars reticulata” seems Latin from 500 BC. C.
Most of the words in that paragraph were “foreign” to my brain and I couldn’t really rely on word deconstruction (my reference strategy with difficult words) like identifying the prefix, suffix, root, etc.
The prior knowledge strategy is twofold. You have to choose what you want to learn and then remember what you already know, and this is called “prior knowledge activation.”
Before I can go ahead and activate my prior knowledge of the kernel, I first need to develop my knowledge. There is no magic about it!
How to generate prior knowledge?
The development of prior knowledge can occur in two ways: directly and indirectly.
You are directly coming into contact with experiences. In my case visiting museums and laboratories, talking to scientists and researchers. It takes time, commitment and money. But I always see it as an investment rather than a liability. I expand my knowledge about things so that I can learn more things.
Indirectly is by reading research papers or articles online that are written in easier language and with less depth. I use YouTube videos a lot to familiarize myself with unfamiliar terms and concepts. While watching a video, I try to pay close attention to the words that are being said and also to the images provided. I’m always looking for short, high-quality snippets from science labs. These videos are usually created for or by medical students.
How long does it take?
I ended up looking for 4 things: basal ganglia, globe pallus, thalamus, and glutaminergic. It took me about 15 minutes to get a clear idea of what those things were. I saw a YouTube video on Thalamus and did a Wiki search on other topics. Then I closed my notes and tried to explain out loud what those things were.
I know that if I can explain a concept to someone, I know it myself. If you think it takes too long, think about how long it takes to read and reread the same text over and over again. Add to that the frustration of reading and not understanding it. Also, think about the opportunity cost of misunderstanding it.
Why does it work?
I found that I learn most effectively when I already know something about the subject. When I have vivid foreknowledge, the learning process is even more effective. Knowing something is not enough. You have to activate the knowledge and bring it to the surface. I’ll cover that in my next article.
