Did you know . . .

The fusiform facial area is a special area within the brain that processes facial images. This is apart from the processing of other spatial objects. The neurons literally light up in a different pattern depending on whether we are looking at a human face or a non-human object. It is even indicated that the brain can distinguish from a face that is actually in your presence and a face that is presented graphically (as in a picture or on a computer screen).

Pop, pop, pop!

This leads to different rates of cognition in general and contextual processing specifically.

Boldly taking the initiative with this recent research, Australia is conducting a national experiment by redesigning their classrooms. Reading some of the tactics they are employing in the redesigned classrooms, it is interesting to note that nonverbal influence in the classroom is first addressed through clutter reduction. Turns out we really do have trouble with understanding others if our environment is cluttered.

Which leads me to wonder about workplace productivity.

Studies bat back and forth concerning cluttered versus non-cluttered workspaces. Too clean versus too cluttered, and just what constitutes cluttered (your sandwich from yesterday = definitely too cluttered). I prefer a clean work space, but several colleagues seem to prefer and even claim better performance by having clutter around them. The “I know where everything is” syndrome. I even have students who bring seemingly every worldly possession they own to class so they can clutter the limited desk space. Do you really need to charge your phone, iPod and laptop while you are in class? At 9p on a Tuesday night?

Does it matter? What do you think?

No related posts.

When you spend your time in Sales person mode, time is even more valuable. You may have  a set amount of time that the potential client is willing to spend with you. Or you have X number of appointments to make before the day is over. And if your business is predominantly face-to-face, you really have a limited set of hours.

So how can you move your prospects more quickly?

How about some movement.

When the environment around you becomes more active, your focus actually sharpens . . . if you are interested in the other side of the table. In other words, when you want to pay attention to someone, go to a busy restaurant with lots of movement. Because of the increased action around you, your field of vision will narrow which increases rapport with the person sitting across form you.

Your brain literally tosses out the extraneous stuff and increases focus on what is directly ahead. It’s like the difference between the way you drive on a sunny day and the way you drive in a snow storm. The snow storm provides the extraneous stimulation to focus your attention on every driving lesson you ever had (never mind the folks who must not have had any driving lessons…). Essentially your IQ pops up a few marks and you have access to parts of your brain that otherwise receive very little activity.

In a sales situation, use this to your advantage by placing the person being sold with his back to the restaurant looking at you with the wall behind you so long as that wall is not mirrored. This works best in a busy restaurant.

The motion around you will increase his awareness and focus and guess what, you’re the only thing on which to focus. Bonus!

If a busy restaurant is not practical, how about going for a walk with your client. Okay, this sounds completely fishy, but same principle applies. By getting your client moving, you cause him to detach from the details of his office: emails to return, phone calls to make, paperwork to shuffle, etc. Getting him (or her) to walk at a comfortable pace allows him enough mental energy to expend on you while releiveing him from those daily stressors which ultimately puts him in a better frame of mind for considering your proposal.

This isn’t jogging, this is light, but brisk walking. If your activity level increases too much he will go into exercise mode which puts you out of mind. So keep it brisk, but not heavy duty.

This alone will not bring you the sale, but it will help your client forget to resist you.

No related posts.

Talent is one of those things we talk about all the time, but very rarely define. How often do you refer to someone doing something incredible: Tiger Woods, Tom Brady, Michael Phelps, Dara Torres, Usain Bolt as a Natural Talent?

Since that often feels a bit like a cop-out, let’s dive in to the science of Talent.

What is Talent?

One word.

Myelin.

That white stuff that wraps your nerve fibers and keeps the electric impulses from slipping into the ether. The more myelin, the thicker the insulation around the nerve fiber, the stronger the impulse received. The more complete the training any given moment.

Firing on all cylinders
What produces talent is constant firing of the right neural pathways. Keep firing them and the myelin builds. The more you fire (the right paths!), the more myelin . . . the more myelin, the more signal reaches . . . starting to sound circular yet?

Sure. Basically it works like this:

A little bit of sporadic effort produces next to nothing as a result.

A lot of effort sporadically spent produces ocassional short-lived improvement.

A lot of effort expended regularly in any direction produces results in that direction.

A lot of effort expended regularly and in the direction of the goal gains exponential results.

In this case 1 + 1 = 5000

But what about these Natural Talents?
What about them? The talent is natural, but it isn’t in-born. That’s the good news. Here’s the sobering part, the natural talent requires significant work.

By the time you have expended 1000 hours or more on developing a particular skill, you are better than 95% of the population for that skill. AND every minute you spend practicing is worth 3 minutes of a less myelin-wrapped competitor.

Your insulation from the competition is literally in your head.

That’s why Einstein’s brain had all that “white stuff.” When Einstein passed away, his brain was studied thoroughly. But no one understood what all the white stuff was. Looks like it was myelin.

Stumbling to the Top ™

So how do you get talent? Start now!

Studies demonstrate that adults still produce myelin well into their 60s and it proves to be an excellent way to hold off disease, particularly those that affect the brain. It is never too late to start. Though you might not be racing Usain Bolt around the track as a 50 year old, there’s no reason to delay your interest in painting. You can develop a masters talent, but it won’t be overnight.

There’s nothing easy about Talent. It is all hard work. In short, you develop talent by stumbling and staggering in the direction of your goal.

No related posts.

Rewriting the No Child Left Behind Law is in process. If you have children in school this may be important to you. If you are childless, it may seem unimportant.

That couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Whether or not you have children, if you plan to be living in 20 years, how our children are educated today will influence your quality of life. In 20 years, the children just starting school will be having their mid-20s crisis (did anyone have one of these prior to the baby boomers?). The children now finishing school will be leading major companies and entering the upper rungs of politics . . .

These kids are our future, literally.

So how are they doing?

Oh, #@$*@!

From what I can tell, they have a lot of self esteem. They feel good about themselves. Really, really, good about themselves. But, they don’t have any proof of earning that self esteem, and deep down, each child knows it.

Let’s take a quick look at our rankings in international tests. This chart demonstrates performance in problem solving – Math.

The reality check is that United States students performed well on some tests, not as well as might be expected on others, and very poorly on some.

There is a “counter myth” that the United States generally performed at or close to the international average in math and science. This is true, as far as it goes. However, some of the nations tested were decidedly disadvantaged compared to the United States, and the international average included the scores of those less favored nations. To say that the United States is near the international average largely means that our students fared better than students in some severely deprived countries. Many other advanced nations scored far above the average.  See the article with stats from the international tests.

But, surely there are ways to counter this information, right? The standard excuses that we educate all of our population so a comparison of our students is broader than in other countries . . . not true. How about the idea that our best students outperform the best students in other countries – again, that our average is pulled down by the lower end of students . . . again, not true. US best students ranked second to last of the 20 advanced nations. How about . . . our students are more attuned to cretive thinking whereas these other countries are drilling facts and using rote memorization?

It is true the other countries lean on heavy drills, memorization and other (apparently) seeming barbaric learning mechanisms. Guess what?

American students were dead last of the advanced countries and well below average for all countries in ability to apply knowledge through creative problem solving.

Perhaps rote memorization serves a purpose….

As a nation, we’ve been punked. Our children are learning to feel good, but they aren’t learning to read, write, add/subtract/multiply and divide. How can you feel good as an adult if you can’t cover the basic functions and then apply them. We are creating a nation of zombies.

When you cannot contribute to the vibrant, productive fabric of this country you are more likely to have problems with substance abuse and depression. Those are expensive problems for society….

Are there any bright spots?

Our 4th graders have often done well, especially in reading. Our 8th graders have done exceptionally well in civics.

Well that’s something. At least until you read the conclusion. Emphasis is mine.

However, American students have not generally performed as well as our national advantages would lead one to expect. Between 1995 and 2003 our students made good strides in factual learning in science and some improvement in factual learning in mathematics. They deteriorated in application of knowledge in all subjects between 2000 and 2003. They did very poorly in tests of original, creative, logical thinking. Most of the excuses for low American performance fail the reality test. Quibbles about sample participation and the age of students tested are specious and cannot explain away the obvious defects in US students’ performance.

The harder a student works, the more he will struggle with concepts, the more he will own those concepts once he gets them. Upon mastery of a concept, the child will develop a security that he knows something. That’s the beauty of it, he will know something. This leads to self esteem.

Self-esteem can not be taught, it must be earned.

The Secretary of Education is coming to your state by the end of December, look here for his schedule – then go give your input!

Related posts:

1. Education Issues – Teacher Signaling
2. Education Issues: Quantity, Quality?
3. Education Stimulus Money Establishes Test Standards, Can’t Fix Test Problems

In the Education Leadership post a few days ago Rob commented that teaching attracts liberals. So let’s dissect. Is it true that teaching attracts liberals or is there something more going on?

There are a few ways to go through this. Let’s start with the premise that teaching attracts liberals. That premise is either true or not true. How do we decide, scientifically? We have to identify the population of teachers as liberal or not liberal versus the same in the overall population.

If it is true that teaching attracts liberals disproportionally, what is it about teaching or liberalness that brings the two together?

Could it be that Teacher Unions somehow block non-liberals? Or matriculation for conservative PhD students is somehow blocked by liberal faculty….

If it is false, how did the profession get the reputation? Better yet, has it always been this way?

So let’s tackle these one at a time (1999 data from the North American Academic Study Survey):

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week (April 2005). The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans….

“What’s most striking is how few conservatives there are in any field,” said Robert Lichter, a professor at George Mason University and a co-author of the study. “There was no field we studied in which there were more conservatives than liberals or more Republicans than Democrats. It’s a very homogenous environment, not just in the places you’d expect to be dominated by liberals.”

In contrast with the finding that nearly three-quarters of college faculty are liberal, a Harris Poll of the general public last year found that 33 percent describe themselves as conservative and 18 percent as liberal.

Hmmmm.

The evidence I have for liberal professors blocking the advancement of conservative students is painful and anecdotal, so give me a few days to dig for the science to support or deny this – look for that next week.

Has it always been this way?

In the last major survey of college faculty, by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1984, 39 percent identified themselves as liberal.

Well then.

What is perhaps more troubling is the ripple effect it is having throughout the education system. I have no beef with college professors who fly left of the spectrum. That’s your gig. And, yes, I will defend your right to have those opinions no matter how much I disagree with them.

But what about our primary and secondary education system? By the time a child reaches college he or she should be able to think critically and has been molded by mom and dad. When you are 5 years old, you take everything said to you at face value.

I have a very strong opposition to politics in the classroom for those who are not even the age of reason.

Give the lack of understanding for the basics (reading, writing, arithmetic) I see in adult graduate level students, there is no time for political shenanigans in the primary classroom. Get back to math, reading and writing. Science, critical thinking, scientific method – how to conduct an unbiased experiment and scientifically assess the results… those have a solid place in late elementary school and middle school. Being told smart cars are “better” in kindergarten, no place. No thank you.

So let’s leave this politicing aside and look at something perhaps more important, teacher qualifications. If teachers are qualified to teach our children how to think and to love learning, then perhaps the right/left (rather left/far left) leanings become less relevant . . ..

Oh dear.

According to the “Meeting Highly Qualified Teachers Challenge” report published in 2003, 28 of 29 states where the same standardized teaching tests are used, a teacher may be below the national overall (teaching and non-teaching populations) average in mathematics and still be a teacher. 29 of 29 for reading . . . and in some states you may perform in the bottom quarter (i.e. with more than 75% of the population performing better than you did) and still meet the requirements to become a teacher.

What?!

Yet, from my personal experience it is next to impossible to pursue the very low pay, grueling hours of teaching due to the certification process. Thanks, I’ll stick with private education.

As large donors to the Democratic party, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association have an agenda, but it doesn’t seem to be educating our young ones.

Want more? A site dedicated to information on teachers’ unions.

Related posts:

1. Cost of Education
2. Education Issues – Teacher Signaling
3. Education Issues: Quantity, Quality?

Rough draft of the first 20 minutes (26 minutes) of a presentation on nonverbal communication.

Forget to Resist Me: 21 non verbal cues you can use to influence your outcomes!

Also known as get your spouse to take out the garbage without griping.

(link removed)

The download link is for yousendit – the file is too large for me to post.

Related posts:

1. Contextual Cues Influence Learning

Try, try, try again and one day you’ll get it . . . heard that one before? Turns out that may not be so helpful after all. Save some time and get a better result by utilizing this short cut.

New research coming out of the clever folks at MIT’s Picower Institute for Learning and Memory including professor Earl Miller indicates that our ability to process information is actually enhanced by doing something successfully just before the new information is introduced. The research is introduced in an article in Neuron, the July 30th issue.

The abstract states, “Learning from experience requires knowing whether a past action resulted in a desired outcome. The prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia are thought to play key roles in such learning of arbitrary stimulus-response associations. Previous studies have found neural activity in these areas, similar to dopaminergic neurons’ signals, that transiently reflect whether a response is correct or incorrect. However, it is unclear how this transient activity, which fades in under a second, influences actions that occur much later. Here, we report that single neurons in both areas show sustained, persistent outcome-related responses. Moreover, single behavioral outcomes influence future neural activity and behavior: behavioral responses are more often correct and single neurons more accurately discriminate between the possible responses when the previous response was correct. These long-lasting signals about trial outcome provide a way to link one action to the next and may allow reward signals to be combined over time to implement successful learning.”

This absolutely jives with what I have seen in my ManhattanGMAT students. When student warms up with an easy problem she is more likely to get the next question of any level correct.

Tests were arranged using monkeys (is that what they call graduate students now??). The monkeys were rewarded if they responded correctly. Researchers found a lingering signal within certain brain cells when the monkey responded correctly.

What is perhaps more interesting is that they did not find a lingering signal after an incorrect answer. “But after an error there was no improvement. In other words, only after successes, not failures, did brain processing and the monkey’s [learning] behavior improve.”

This certainly gives me ideas of how to improve my private course materials and team facilitation exercises. If we are to maximize an individual’s performance, a series of building successes seems appropriate. But, is there a way to circumvent the process? I continue to dig ways to expedite the learning process and maximize cognition.

P.S. To find the article you’ll have to hunt down a copy of Neuron. Your best bet is to find a medical school library. Even very large, well funded public libraries do not carry it.

No related posts.

October 7-11, I will be in New York City to speak on Causing Cognition through Body Language at various private functions and helping Kevin Hogan at his Body Language Mastery Course also in New York, October 10-11.

Kevin has some stellar surprise guests planned. He is after all the man who wrote the book on Body Language and has trained the best in the business. It’s worth the trek. Come find me at   the back of the room doing the schleppy things. Kevin has offered to teach me the ropes of hosting professional speaking gigs so I’ll be on duty in the trenches during his course.  Who knows, you may even see me presenting for an hour or two . . .

October 7th is booked but the morning of October 8th, a few spots remain for consultations with executive teams. If you are interested in arranging a private meeting, please send a quick e-mail with a description of your company.

kate (at) katemckeon (dot) com

Related posts:

1. Contextual Cues Influence Learning