If Im so Smart, Why do I Feel so

Dumb?
Implications of Neural Plasticity in the Classroom
Elizabeth Powers
University of North Texas

Abstract: The human brain is capable of creating new neural connections throughout ones
life. Research has demonstrated that when students are taught the concept of neural plasticity as
well as an incremental theory of intelligence, they are more inclined to persevere through
academic challenges and demonstrate resilience in challenges with peers. Previous generations
innately understood that intelligence was gained through experience. It is time to communicate
that understanding to a new generation of students.

Keywords: Neural plasticity, intelligence, fixed entity, incremental, mindset

If Im so Smart

Introduction
The human brain weighs around three pounds. Our brains are an amazing combination of
parts, which work together to allow us to think, feel, remember, move, and exist. The brain is
made up of the cerebrum, cerebellum, amygdala, and hippocampus. The cerebrum is the largest
part of the brain. It helps us to think and speak. The cerebellum is the small part at the base of the
skull. It controls our muscles and helps us to move. The prefrontal cortex, right behind the
forehead, helps us to think rationally and plan. The amygdala, a very small portion of the brain
deep in the center, controls emotions. Finally, the hippocampus, also in the center, enables us to
access stored memories. Throughout the brain there are cells called neurons that send small
electrical signals to other neurons through synapses, where they are eventually sent to the
muscles for a response. These neurons join together to form a neural network (Deak, 2010).
Neural plasticity is the ability of our brain to make new neural connections (Deak, 2010). It
has been determined that our brains can make these new neural connections for as long as we are
alive (Stiles, 2000). In Destin Sandlins (2015) video series, Smarter Every Day, he demonstrated
neural plasticity through a backwards bicycle. His engineers added a couple of gears to the
handle bars of an average bike. These gears changed the direction that the front wheel turned
when the handle bars were turned. When the handle bars were turned to the right, the front wheel
would turn to the left. Sandlin had ridden a bike for decades. When he first tried to ride this bike,
he couldnt go more than a few inches without falling off. He understood what he needed to do to
ride the backwards bike, however, his neural pathways were established and they said that when
you turn the handles of a bike to the right you go to the right. Furthermore, there is a lot of
information that your brain receives from your body about balance and movement to maintain an
upright position on a bike. These established neural pathways were all being challenged with this

If Im so Smart

simple alteration. He determined that he would force himself to learn how to ride the altered
bike. He worked on it every day for eight months. After eight months, he actually felt his brain
make the switch, and he was able to ride the bicycle competently. He had his six-year-old son
try it. His son had been riding a bike for three years, or half of his life. Initially, his son failed as
well. It took his son two weeks to learn how to ride the backward bicycle. This demonstrates that
neural plasticity is present in every brain at all ages. It also demonstrates that childrens brains
are especially plastic and open to creating new connections (Deak, 2010).
Examples of Neural Plasticity
Adults who struggle with dyslexia are often told that whatever gains they have made in
training their brains as children are all the gains that they are going to make in their lives. These
adults are told that while they may have done some intervention as children, the fluidity and ease
with which they read and decode is fixed now that they are adults. However, new research is
challenging this belief (Eden et al., 2004). In the 2004 study done by Eden and colleagues at
Georgetown University Medical Center, researchers worked with 19 dyslexic adults and 19
dyslexic control subjects. Researchers had seen that neurological changes could be made in
children with dyslexia who were treated with intervention strategies, but wanted to see if
corresponding changes in adult brains were possible. The researchers embarked on an 8 week,
phonologically-based intervention program. At the end of the 8-week program they found that
the dyslexic adults with training demonstrated not only improvements in phonological
processing and word reading, they also demonstrated significantly more activity in the left
hemisphere parietal cortex and numerous right hemisphere regions, which the researchers
postulated were activated to assist the left hemisphere in processing (Eden et al., 2004). The
author also has personal experience in this area through a family member. Her sister struggled

If Im so Smart

with undiagnosed dyslexia in school in the sixties and seventies, but compensated for it with an
incredible work ethic. After she became a mother, she taught herself to read more fluently
through the practice of reading childrens books to her young children. She is now a very
competent reader who will read for pleasure. This is a personal demonstration of the adult brains
ability to build new neural pathways, gaining competency in areas where there had been little.
Children demonstrate the greatest neural plasticity up to the age of 10 (Deak, 2010). A
demonstration of that neural plasticity is the study done by Sylvan Moreno and colleagues from
the Institut de Neurosciences Cognitives de la Mditerrane in Portugal in 2009. In this study
researchers had reviewed the research that indicated that students who studied music had richer
neural connections, but these were correlational studies. Moreno and his group of researchers
wanted to establish causality. Moreno and his team had average children with no musical
background or demonstrated aptitude participate in either music training or painting training for
a period of six months. Pitch discrimination is the ability to hear the differences in different
tones, or pitches. Each group was given pitch discrimination tests and reading tests prior to their
course of study. Each group then received training in their respective area of focus twice a week
for 24 weeks. Their research found that the relatively short periods of musical study of only six
months had strong consequences on the functional organization of the childrens brain.
(Moreno, 2009, p. 712) After the study was completed, students were better able to discriminate
vocal pitches. The researchers also noted improved language production, increased reading
scores, and an improved ability to focus their attention, thereby demonstrating the causality they
had sought to establish (Moreno et al., 2009).

Understanding Neural Plasticity Influences on Educational Outcomes

If Im so Smart

Carol Dweck has spent the last 20 years researching neural plasticity and how understanding
it impacts our approach to life. When she started researching, she was simply looking at how
people responded to frustration. She set up experiments where she gave individual children easy
puzzles to solve and then gave them very challenging puzzles to solve. When some of her
participants experienced frustration, they responded as she expected, with correlating behaviors
of frustration. But other participants responded with enthusiasm and excitement when presented
with the difficult puzzles, looking forward to the challenge with joy. This was not what she was
expecting. She asked herself why these children seemed to be excited about the opportunity to
fail (Dweck, 2006). She discovered that some people believe that traits like intelligence can be
developed incrementally, or are malleable, and some people think that traits like intelligence are
a fixed entity. These differing beliefs have profound, life-long consequences. When people have
a fixed entity view of intelligence, they believe that they are either smart or they are not. It is
permanent. It is established by their genes. When these people encounter a challenge and fail,
they have demonstrated that they are not smart in that area. People who believe this avoid failing
at all costs. They especially avoid letting others see them fail. Individuals with a fixed entity
view of intelligence, perceive having to make an effort in an area as an indication that one was
not and will not ever be intelligent or talented enough in that area. However, people who believe
that they can develop their intelligence or other personality traits incrementally, view failure as a
learning experience (Dweck, 2006). These people arent off-put by things that are challenging.
They view them as a part of the process. They realize that while they may not like failing, they
are getting closer to their goal of learning something newwhether it is how to play the piano,
do algebra, or cook a turkey that is moist. Each of these experiences is an opportunity to practice
and get better (Dweck, 2006).

If Im so Smart

In study after study, researchers have demonstrated that teaching an incremental approach to
intelligence improves student performance. A 2002 study by Aronson and colleagues taught one
group of incoming university students the incremental theory of intelligence and asked them to
visualize their brain making more neural connections while studying and learning in their college
courses. Another group was taught that intelligence is fixed, and they shouldnt worry too much
if they struggled in certain classes. The students taught the incremental theory of intelligence saw
their grade points rise by .23. The other students saw no gain in grade point (Aronson, Fried, &
Good, 2002).
Researchers wondered whether middle school students struggling with the adjustment to
middle school would see an increase in academic success if taught an incremental understanding
of intelligence. They devised a study wherein one group of middle schoolers received a weekly
email teaching them about the incremental model of intelligence and study skills, while another
group received the emails teaching them about study skills alone. Both groups saw an initial
downward trend in grades, but the students being taught about neural plasticity saw that trend
arrested and reversed. The other group continued to decline. Several months after the
interventions, the incremental group had a .30 increase in grade point over the control group
(Good et al., 2003, Blackwell et al., 2007)
Understanding Neural Plasticity Impacts Resilience
With this understanding, Yeager and Dweck (2012) set out to see if a mindset could make a
significant difference in outcomes of resilience. Resilience is the ability to bounce back from
challenges. Challenges are ubiquitous. Students frequently face challenging courses and
personal challenges with aggressive peers. Yeager and Dweck wanted to know if students who
had or were taught an incremental theory of intelligence and personality traits would be more

If Im so Smart

resilient in the face of academic challenges and peer victimization or exclusion, than those who
had a fixed entity view of intelligence or personality traits. Yeager and Dweck were concerned
with the population of students who attend community colleges and are enrolled in remedial
math, which is roughly 65% of that population (Center for Community College Student Success,
2011). Only a small percentage of these students eventually graduate. The intervention and
control groups of students were asked to read an article that either explained an incremental
theory of intelligence or an article about how the brain works. The article that discussed the
incremental theory of intelligence emphasized the malleability of adult brains, since the vast
majority of the students had indicated a fixed entity theory of intelligence as their mindset, and
focus groups had indicated their concern that as adults they could not change (Yeager & Dweck,
2012). The intervention article also emphasized that students needed to do more than just apply
effort, they also needed to try different strategies and ask for help. After reading their respective
articles, the students were to write a letter explaining their article to a fictional upcoming student.
While 20% of the control group dropped out of the class, only 9% of the intervention group
dropped out of the class. Additionally, the intervention group earned better grades in class. These
students had no additional supports in class or additional training. This indicates that a small
intervention can have a big return. It also indicated that students facing very large challenges,
with intervention, increased their resiliency significantly (Yeager & Dweck, 2012).
Yeager and Dweck also looked into resilience in the face of peer aggression or exclusion.
When students were taught that personality traits are not fixed, but can be changed, even though
that may be difficult, the students were less likely to respond to a snub or aggressive act with
equal or increased aggression. The researchers worked on this concept in various ways and then
tested it by taking it to an urban high school with significant levels of conflict. For this

If Im so Smart

intervention, the researchers felt a longer approach would be more helpful than some of the brief
interventions they, and other researchers, had had success with in the past. In this intervention,
they worked with the students for six weeks in three two-week segments. First they learned about
how the brain functions and its core elements. Next they studied the incremental theory of
personality: that people do not do things because of traits that are fixed, but because they have
thoughts, and thoughts can be changed. Finally, they internalized these concepts through
discussions, role playing, writing, and reading. The control group was taught social and
emotional skills commonly taught in interventions aimed at de-escalating violence. The
evaluation came a month after the interventions. The researchers used an online role-playing
scenario. The students who were taught the incremental understanding of personality were
significantly less aggressive toward their aggressive or snubbing digital friend than the control
group who received training on de-escalating violent behaviors (Yeager & Dweck, 2012).
Focus on Your Strengths?
Doing a quick online search for the topic, focus on your strengths returns over four
million webpage hits. Focusing on ones strengths has become a mantra for management through
books such as Strengths Finder by Tom Rath and First, Break All the Rules by Buckinham,
Marcus & Coffman, Curt. In the same way, it has become a mantra for teachers. Teachers
regularly try to comfort students when they fail at something by reminding them of something
else that they are great at. The intent is to build a child's self-esteem by focusing on the things
that they do well. This seems like a sound strategy. However, when researchers put this to the
test, they found that discounting their weaknesses and reinforcing their strengths indicated to the
students that the adults in their lives did not believe they were capable of doing better in the area
of weakness (Rattan, Good, & Dweck, 2011). The researchers postulated that when an instructor

If Im so Smart

holds a fixed entity theory of intelligence and comforts a child who fails with words such as,
"Don't worry about this. You rock at writing. We can't all be 'math people'." The child then
believes that they do not have the ability to learn the subject at hand, and they are less motivated
to try. To test this theory, researchers Rattan, Good, and Dweck formulated several studies. First
of all, they found that instructors with a fixed entity theory of intelligence were more likely to
conclude that a student wasnt "smart enough" in math based on an initial failing test grade in a
math course. Teachers with an incremental understanding of intelligence were offended that such
a conclusion could even be considered (Rattan, Good, & Dweck, 2011).
To determine how instructor feedback influenced student motivation to continue to work
through a challenge, the researchers created a study in which college students imagined
themselves receiving a low grade on the first calculus test of the year. They then received
feedback from their professor. The feedback would either be in one of three frameworks. First, it
might be positive in nature and highlight their strengths while making curriculum modifications
for their weakness, a typical comforting approach used by educators. Second, it might be
positive in nature and acknowledge both their strengths and their struggle and then suggest
strategies to help them gain the skills they needed to be successful in their area of weakness.
Finally, it would be positive in nature and neutral. The students felt that the professor who
offered the "comfort" strategy had low motivation to help them and low expectations about their
capabilities in the subject matter. The neutral feedback and the feedback that encouraged their
ability and provided some strategies to find success both left the students feeling as though their
professor was invested in their success. Those students were more motivated to try harder and
they thought their grade would be significantly higher by the end of the semester (Rattan, Good,
& Dweck, 2011). Those students were encouraged to keep trying.

If Im so Smart

This is a vitally important piece of information. Weve known for some time that students
rise to the level that educators expect (Jussim &Eccles 1992), but to have such power to
influence through the way an educator responds to student failure is significant. It demonstrates
that the bias of the educator toward a fixed entity of intelligence or an incremental understanding
of intelligence either opens the future up for a student or closes doors for them that they havent
even knocked on yet. Educators would never want to close doors for their students. It is out of
compassion and trying to ease the short term pain that comes with failing that these messages are
given. It is better to allow a student to feel the pain of failure than to communicate to a student
that they cannot succeed in an area.
Application to the Classroom
The applications to the classroom are significant. First of all, educators must work to
create their own growth mindset of intelligence and personality traits. It is out of convictions that
people act. This growth mindset will enable the educator to create positive outcomes out of the
challenges that will come their way. Challenges will happen. Being able to respond to them with
resilience will only benefit the educators own life. Then, while that lesson is being internalized
educators can begin to explicitly teach the principles of neuroplasticity to their students. When
students understand how their brains make connections they will be less threatened by the
experience of not understanding something initially. They can calmly tap their brain and say to
themselves, Im building a new neural connection. Ill get this soon. This will significantly
reduce the anxiety they are experiencing in the process of learning. When students learn that not
getting the answer right the first time is actually normal and to be expected, something magical
happens. They can allow themselves to stumble through the learning process, which will help
them to grow.

If Im so Smart

As educators understand and teach the principles of neuroplasticity, they will also begin
allowing their students to experience failure, because it means that they are growing. Educators
will also stop encouraging their students when they fail by focusing on their strengths alone,
because doing so inadvertently tells their students that they do not believe in the students ability
to learn something. Instead, educators will address that failure by talking to the students about
what different strategies they might be able to employ to master a new skill. When the students
start mastering things that were hard for them, their self-confidence will grow and they will
begin to take on larger challenges. They will build their own resiliency, tenacity and grit. That
grit will enable them to meet the challenges that will inevitably come their way.
Summary
The human brain is always ready to create new neural connections. This was
demonstrated through Dustin Sandlers backward bicycle, adult dyslexics learning new
phonological skills, and children learning music who made new neural connections which helped
in linguistic skills and reading. By teaching students explicitly about the brains ability to make
these new neural connections, we empower students in the challenges of the learning process as
well as build their resilience in challenges outside of learning. Furthermore, when mentors in a
students life focus on their strengths and modify the environment to the degree that they are not
challenged in an area of weakness, the student is robbed of the self-esteem building experience
of overcoming that was very difficult for them.
Future studies should be conducted which consider the influence of teaching an
incremental theory of intelligence to students with ADHD, dyslexia, and dysgraphia. These
students are often creative thinkers, very intelligent, and yet struggle in the learning process,
because they are often socially immature and struggle with impulsivity. Teaching them tenacity

If Im so Smart

and resilience through an understanding of neural plasticity and an incremental understanding of

intelligence should give great hope and build the confidence of these students, enabling them to
take on challenges that they are capable of solving with their out of the box thinking and high
intelligence.
Looking Back and Looking Forward
Tom Brokaw (1998), chronicled a generation of Americans in his book titled, The
Greatest Generation. These people were no smarter than the generations who are currently in
power or are growing up now. They certainly did not amass the wealth seen by current
technology wizards. They didnt have great political power. What did Brokaw see in them that
made them great? This generation of Americans was raised in The Great Depression. They
watched their families lose their homes, farms, and jobs, and came of age while fighting a war on
two fronts against the greatest forces we had ever seen in history. After that, they came home and
were responsible for the greatest economic boom in history. How did they do that? The author
proposes that they did that because they had no expectations that life would come easily. They
had seen the desperate days of the Depression and just as they were getting out of it, America
entered World War II. Their expectation in life was that they would take a low paying job in a
company, work very hard, learn a lot along the way and move up. They had hopes that they
would one day own their own home. It didnt need to be big or fancy, just theirs. Their goals
were modest, but they were willing to work at them, and they expected that they would have
setbacks. When those setbacks came, whether in the war or at home, they took them with natural
disappointment and started again. They lived the incremental theory of intelligence. They didnt
expect to know everything; they expected to learn. They knew that learning would come with
experience, and experience would come with pain.

If Im so Smart

We have lost the wisdom of The Greatest Generation, but hopefully, as we rediscover that
failure is a part of learning, and pain is a part of life, we will recapture the work ethic that they
gained through the challenges they faced. Educators have the greatest responsibility and
opportunity to influence a new generation. We will do that best if we personally adopt an
incremental theory of intelligence, build our own resilience and model tenacity in the challenges
that are an inevitable part of life. We will then be able to transfer that knowledge to our students.
A poet well known to The Greatest Generation was Edgar Albert Guest. This poem of his
exemplifies the way they lived:
It Couldnt Be Done
By Edgar Albert Guest
Somebody said that it couldnt be done
But he with a chuckle replied
That maybe it couldnt, but he would be one
Who wouldnt say so till hed tried.
So he buckled right in with the trace of a grin
On his face. If he worried he hid it.
He started to sing as he tackled the thing
That couldnt be done, and he did it!

Somebody scoffed: Oh, youll never do that;

At least no one ever has done it;
But he took off his coat and he took off his hat
And the first thing we knew hed begun it.
With a lift of his chin and a bit of a grin,
Without any doubting or quiddit,
He started to sing as he tackled the thing
That couldnt be done, and he did it.

If Im so Smart

There are thousands to tell you it cannot be done,

There are thousands to prophesy failure,
There are thousands to point out to you one by one,
The dangers that wait to assail you.
But just buckle in with a bit of a grin,
Just take off your coat and go to it;
Just start in to sing as you tackle the thing
That cannot be done, and youll do it.

Educators would do well to adopt this philosophy of life for themselves and to impart it to
the next generations, increasing their neural plasticity, intelligence, and resilience.

References
Arneson, J., Fried, C., & Good, C., (2002). Reducing the effects of stereotype threat on African
American college students by shaping theories of intelligence. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 38, 113-125.

If Im so Smart

Blackwell, L. A., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S., (2007). Theories of intelligence and
achievement across the junior high school transition: A longitudinal study and an
intervention. Child Development: 78, 246-263.
Brokaw, T., (1998). The greatest generation. New York, NY: Randomhouse Trade Paperbacks.
Center for Community College Student Success. (2011). Benchmarking & Benchmarks:
Effective Practice with Entering Students. Austin, TX:The University of Texas at Austin,
Community College Leadership Program.
Deak, J., (2010). Your fantastic, elastic, brain: Stretch it, shape it. San Fransisco, CA: Little
Pickle Press, Inc.
Dweck, C. (2006) Mindset. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.
Eden, G.F., Jones. K. M., Cappell, K., Gareau, L., Wood, F., Zeffiro, T., Flowers, D.L., (2004).
Neural changes following remediation in adult developmental dyslexia. Neuron, 44, 411422.
Good, C., Aronson, J., & Inzlicht, M., (2003) Improving adolescents standardized test
performance: An intervention to reduce the effects of stereotype threat. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology, 24, 645-662.
Guest, E., A (1919). The Path to home. Retrieved from: http://allpoetry.com/It-Couldnt-Be-Done
Jussim, L., Eccles, J., S. (1992). Teacher expectations: II Construction and reflection of student
achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 6.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.947
Moreno, S., Marques, C., Santos, A., Santos, M., Castro, S.L., Besson, M., (2009). Musical
training influences linguistic abilities in 8-year-old children: More evidence for brain
plasticity. Cerebral Cortex. 19. 712-723.

If Im so Smart

Rattan, A., Good, C., Dweck, C. S., (2011). It's ok- not everyone is good at math: Instructors
with an entity theory comfort (and demotivate) students. Journal of Experimental Social
Psychology. 48.731-737.
Sandler, Destin. (2015, April 24), The Backwards Brain Bicycle: Smarter Every Day 133 [Web
blog] Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFzDaBzBlL0
Stiles, J., (2000). Neural plasticity and cognitive development. Developmental Neuropsychology.
18.(2). 237-272.
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C.S., (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe
that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist. 47. (4). 302-314.