The Global Aspects of

28 Brain-Based Learning

by J. Diane Connell
Howard Gardner’s seminal book Frames of Mind: The Theory
of Multiple Intelligences (1983) taught educators around the globe
to understand the actual connections that the brain has with learn-
ing. Beginning in the late 1980s and the early 1990s, thousands of
American teachers became intensely interested in learning about
the brain-based multiple intelligences and finding multiple ways to
reach their increasing numbers of diverse learners.
The special significance of Howard Gardner’s theory of multiple
intelligences is his claim that all seven of his original intelligences, as
well as his eighth, have physiological locations in the brain (Gardner
1983). Drawing upon research in neuropsychology, Gardner
described how different functions of the brain can be related to par-
ticular brain-injury locations and stated: “The consequences of such
brain injury may well constitute the single most instructive line of
evidence regarding those distinctive abilities or computations that lie
at the core of a human intelligence” (p. 63). He noted that some intel-
ligences are “relatively independent of one another” and that “they
can be fashioned and combined in a multiplicity of adaptive ways
by individuals and cultures” (pp. 8–9). Gardner added that although
intelligences “typically work in harmony,” when “the appropriate
observational lenses are donned, the peculiar nature of each intel-
ligence emerges with sufficient (and often surprising) clarity” (p. 9).
The enormous interest in the brain-based multiple intelligences
helped to bring about the new field of Brain-Based Learning (BBL).
Current research in the field of BBL is gleaned from the combined
work of neurologists, biologists, psychologists, educators, and phy-
sicians. Professionals strive to extrapolate the most current research
data on the brain and apply this information to teaching and
learning in pre-K–16+ schools. Results gleaned from BBL provide
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

a theoretical foundation for helping students learn and for helping

teachers reach diverse learners in America and around the world.

Defining Brain-Based Learning

Brain-Based Learning can be viewed as techniques gleaned from
research in neurology and cognitive science used to enhance teacher
instruction. These strategies can also be used to enhance students’
ability to learn using ways in which they feel most comfortable, neu- 29
rologically speaking. Jensen (1995/2000) defines BBL as “learning in
accordance with the way the brain is naturally designed to learn” (p.
6). Perhaps the most important aspect of BBL is that it encompasses
and combines specific types of research-based academic interven-
tions as well as applied aspects of emotional learning.
A basic component of brain-based learning is that our emo-
tions influence our ability to learn. Our brains are constantly striv-
ing to make connections between intellect and emotions. Jensen
(1995/2000) explains that the “brain attaches emotion to each event
and thought, forming patterns of meaning . . .” (p. 9). Generally
speaking, teachers have paid little attention to the emotional con-
tent of lessons. Chapman and King (2003) quote Robert Sylwester
as explaining in an interview with Marcia D’Arcangelo: “[O]ur emo-
tional system drives our attentional system, which drives learning
and memory and everything else that we do. It is biologically impos-
sible to learn and remember anything to which we don’t pay atten-
tion” (p. 141). The emotional system tells us whether something
is important—whether we ought to put energy or effort into it. In
other words, teachers are most likely to gain, and keep, the atten-
tion of students when they engage students’ brain-based emotional
systems in a challenging yet non-intrusive manner.

Twelve Principles of BBL

Since the 1990s, educators and psychologists such as Armstrong
(2009); Caine, Caine, and Crowell (1999) and Caine et al. (2009);
Goleman (1994); Jensen (1995/2000, 2005); and Sousa (2006) have
been forerunners in the BBL movement. These authors have helped
with disseminating neurological research into research-based aca-
demic best practices.
For the past fifteen years, many regular education and spe-
cial education teachers in the United States have embraced BBL
techniques to reach an increasingly diverse school population.
Interestingly, other countries around the globe, including Turkey,
Chile, England, and Thailand, are also using BBL techniques in
their schools. The sidebar provides a brief synopsis of Geoffrey and
 educational HORIZONS  Fall 2009

Principles of Brain-Based Learning

1. The brain is a parallel processor: The brain performs many tasks
simultaneously, including thinking and feeling.
2. Learning engages the entire physiology: The brain and the body are
engaged in learning.
3. The search for meaning is innate: “[T]he brain’s/mind’s search for
30 meaning is very personal. The greater the extent to which what we learn
is tied to personal, meaningful experiences, the greater and deeper our
learning will be” (Caine and Caine 1994, 96).
4. The search for meaning occurs through patterning: “The brain
is designed to perceive and generate patterns, and it resists having
meaningless patterns imposed on it” (Caine and Caine 1994, 88).
5. Emotions are critical to patterning: Our emotions are brain based; they
play an important role in making decisions. In the groundbreaking The
Emotional Brain, Joseph LeDoux (1996) clearly explains how the emotional
neural passageways (which originate in our amygdala) influence the neural
passageways needed for academic and scholarly work.
6. The brain processes parts and wholes simultaneously: The left and
the right hemisphere have different functions, but they are designed to
work together.
7. Learning involves both focused attention and peripheral perception:
People hold general perceptions of the environment and pay selective
attention to various parts of it.
8. Learning always involves conscious and unconscious processes:
There is interplay between our conscious and our unconscious. “One
primary task of educators is to help students take charge of their conscious
and unconscious processing” (Caine and Caine 1994, 157).
9. We have at least two different types of memory: spatial
(autobiographical) and rote learning (taxon memory). The taxon or
rote memory systems consist of “facts and skills that are stored by practice
and rehearsal” (Caine and Caine 1994, 169). Spatial, or autobiographical,
memory “builds relationships among facts, events, and experiences”
(Caine and Caine 1994, 170).
10. Learning is developmental: Children, and their brains, benefit from
enriched home and school environments.
11. Learning is enhanced by challenge and inhibited by threat: Students
optimally benefit when their assignments are challenging and the
classroom environment feels safe and supportive. Daniel Goleman (1994)
expands upon the importance of eliminating threat from the classroom in
the influential Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ.
Each brain is uniquely organized. When teaching, we need to consider
how each student learns most effectively; each student has his or her own
unique set of brain strengths and weaknesses.
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

Renate Caine’s (1994; Caine, Caine, and Crowell 1999; Caine et al.
2009) principles of brain-based learning.
Clearly these principles can be used in pre-kindergarten through
secondary classrooms and in college courses as well. They enable
and encourage teachers to teach successfully to the diversity of
learners found in American classrooms.

Application of Brain-Based Learning in the United 31

States: Serving Diverse Learners
The multitude of diverse learners in today’s American public
school classrooms has created formidable challenges for teach-
ers and administrators. Analysis of recent census trends indicates
that K–12 school populations will become yet more diverse in
the foreseeable future. In addition to regular education students,
most American classrooms include gifted students and an influx of
English Language Learners and refugees, as well as students with
a variety of specific special needs (e.g., high- and low-functioning
autism, Aspergers, ADHD, emotional and behavioral disorders, spe-
cific learning disabilities).
Brain-Based Learning research affirms that although all students
can learn, each brain is unique and each student has his or her
own preferred learning style (Armstrong 2009; Connell 2005; Jensen
1995/2000, 2005). BBL also establishes that learning is greatly
enhanced when students are taught using research-based learning
strategies. Researchers have demonstrated the effectiveness of using
BBL in an inclusion classroom to teach regular education students as
well as ELL students and students with special needs (Green 1999;
Lombardi 2008; Marzano 2003). This research confirms that inclu-
sion teachers can reach students by incorporating aspects of BBL,
such as multiple intelligences, learning styles, and emotional intel-
ligences, into their classroom and homework assignments.

Now Is the Time: Let’s Put BBL into the Teacher

Education Curriculum
Sadly, approximately twenty years after the “birth” of BBL, few
undergraduate and graduate teacher education programs in the
United States offer a specific course on BBL (Gunzelmann 2009).
Especially regrettable is that most regular education teachers are
responsible for teaching diverse learners as well as students with
special needs. The biological basis of BBL is clearly applicable to
all regular education and special needs students. BBL has a dual
focus: (1) it encourages teachers to modify their teaching methods
 educational HORIZONS  Fall 2009

to reach all students, and (2) it seeks to create a safe yet challenging
emotional climate in the classroom.
Although a growing number of colleges do include BBL classes in
their curricula, that focus needs to expand to all graduate and under-
graduate programs that train teachers. Such a class would combine
neuroscience research with research-based learning and teaching strat-
egies. Examples of applicable course titles include: (1) “The Biology of
BBL: Applications for Inclusion Classrooms” or (2) “Teaching Methods
32 for Elementary or Secondary Education with a Focus on BBL.” It is
interesting to note that Pickering and Howard-Jones (2007) of the
University of Bristol, England, also recommend including neurosci-
ence and psychology in initial teacher-training courses in England.
A number of books on BBL best practices could be used as sup-
plemental textbooks. Brain-Based Strategies to Reach Every Learner
(Connell 2005), used as a supplemental textbook in the author’s grad-
uate and undergraduate teacher-training classes, provides examples of
BBL strategies that work with both regular and special education stu-
dents, as well as with culturally diverse learners. Other recommended
books include Teaching with the Brain in Mind (Jensen 1995/2005)
and Becoming a “Wiz” at Brain-Based Teaching (Sprenger 2003).

Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

Interest in brain-based learning strategies and educational
strategies is beginning to spread around the globe (Dwyer 2002).
Pickering and Howard-Jones (2007) find that “responses from the
educators based in the United Kingdom and other locations around
the world have indicated enthusiasm for a role of neuroscience in
education” (p. 111).
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

Since Brain-Based Strategies to Reach Every Learner (Connell

2005) was printed, the author has received e-mails and telephone
calls from educators in countries worldwide, including Chile,
Thailand, Canada, England, and Russia. The South China Morning
Post published a comprehensive article (Sharma 2007) regarding
neuroscience and current BBL activities in Germany, Holland, and
Finland.
In 2008, Caine and Caine’s Making Connections was translated
33
into Turkish. In addition, Muhammet Ozden and Mehmet Gultekin
(2008), faculty members at Anadolu University in Eskisele, Turkey,
published “The Effects of Brain-Based Learning on Academic
Achievement and Retention of Knowledge in Science Courses.” They
write, “The learning and teaching process in science courses should
be based on exploration and inquiry” (p. 4). Two other recent publi-
cations from Turkey focus on making connections between BBL and
the constructivist learning model: Gulpinar (2005) and Kahveci and
Selahatdin (2008).
In September 2007, the University of Chile in Santiago hosted an
international conference titled “Early Education and Human Brain
Development.” In attendance were scientists from Chile, France,
Germany, Holland, Spain, the U.K., and the U.S. (Hirsh-Pasek and
Bruer 2007). The author has had the privilege of presenting several
two-day workshops in Chile: in Santiago (January 2008) and in Vina
del Mar (January 2009). Audiences in both cities consisted of pre-
K–16 teachers eager to apply BBL techniques in Chilean schools and
colleges. They were receptive to both the academic interventions
and the focus on the emotional climate of a classroom.
Many teachers and researchers in the U.K. are investing time
and interest in BBL. Howard-Jones (2008) writes, “In a recent survey
of teachers, almost 90 percent thought that knowledge of the brain
was important, or very important, in the design of educational pro-
grammes” (p. 6). Pickering and Howard-Jones (2007) discuss how
many educators already use education initiatives linked to the brain.
Those include teaching and learning approaches, learning styles,
emotion and learning, educational kinesiology, and ideas based on
research in cognition and neuroscience.
Clearly, the door is now open: educators and neuroscientists
from around the world need to continue working together to bring
education the findings from neuroscience that are most relevant and
applicable to teachers.
The remainder of this article explains the idea of building a
“Learning and the Brain Community.” This type of “community” is
based upon two principles: (1) creating a learning atmosphere that
 educational HORIZONS  Fall 2009

intentionally welcomes and accepts all learners and (2) using effec-
tive, research-based academic BBL strategies to enhance student
learning. Teachers and principals around the globe could implement
such a learning community.

Building a “Learning and the Brain Community”

The big idea is to strive intentionally toward creating a cohesive
34 “community of learners.” In either a classroom or a school of that
nature, everyone must be convinced of the importance of “buying
into” the learning community. In such a place, all students and all
adults are respected and cultural differences are valued (Berger
2003; Dwyer 2002). Goals and expected outcomes should focus on
both the academic and the emotional aspects of learning. Wolfe and
Brandt (1998) have stated that for academic learning to take place,
students need to feel safe and challenged in a classroom with an
emotional climate based upon respect. This notion is supported in
the neurological research: Goleman (1994, 2006); LeDoux (1996,
2002); and Zull (2002) explain the neurological phenomena that take
place inside students’ brains when they feel unsafe in a classroom
(like someone in the wilderness). If the amygdala, located inside our
limbic system, perceives the learning environment as “unsafe,” it will
essentially shift the blood and oxygen in the brain into a “flight or
fight” mode, making it impossible for a student to learn content.
Ideally, all members of a school community, including admin-
istrators, teachers, specialists, paraprofessionals, bus drivers, lunch
aides, and custodians, participate in a learning community. Building
a Learning and the Brain Community is a year-long commitment.
During the academic year, a continual focus should be kept on the
goals and objectives created together by the community members.
Monthly or bimonthly meetings are needed to build and maintain
this type of learning community (Berger 2003).
Agenda items for the first few meetings could include (1) shar-
ing a vision of the learning community and (2) reading and dis-
cussing books such as An Ethic of Excellence (Berger 2003); Spirit
Whisperers (Moorman 2001); and Teaching with the Brain in Mind
(Jensen 1995/2005). Professional participants will also benefit from
taking workshops or university classes that focus on the application
of research-based BBL strategies.
Once adults understand the big BBL community concepts, they
can begin to design and implement specific BBL strategies. The
remaining monthly learning community meetings can be devoted
to teachers sharing the results of their academic and emotional
work in their classrooms. Teachers need scheduled time to plan and
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

develop their new BBL lessons. I recommend that teachers share

BBL lessons with one another. In an ideal Learning and the Brain
Community, teachers strive to support each other’s efforts and pro-
vide constructive feedback on each other’s BBL lesson plans: col-
laboration is the key to schoolwide success (Berger 2003). Students
who witness cooperation and support between the teachers in
their building are more likely to imitate such behaviors with their
classmates.
35
Once the adults are ready, students become the real focus of their
work. Students need to understand that their roles as members are
essential to the success of the learning community. Students must be
shown how to invest emotionally in becoming a part of a pluralistic
environment free of sarcasm, ridicule, and prejudice. Students need
to be taught to be proud and supportive of others’ accomplishments.
Moorman (2001) explains that classrooms must be places where
students with diverse backgrounds and interests can be proud of
others’ talents and accomplishments.
Students are expected to produce their best work. Students’
self-esteem increases when they can see their accomplishments and
understand the value of producing their highest-quality work. Caine
and Caine (1994) emphasize that the brain’s search for meaning is
deep and personal: human brains are constantly seeking depth and
meaning. In a learning community, Berger (2003) describes an atmo-
sphere in which everyone is expected to value genuine effort and
quality work. Student work is always on display, both at the school
and in the community at large.
Students are taught to respect their teachers and one another.
Moorman (2001) points out the importance of teaching students
responsibility for their own actions. In his chapter the “Principle of
Personal Responsibility,” he discusses ways to help students think
through their actions and choices. Students are held accountable for
their role in the learning process regarding behavior and academic
work; they are led to become successful thinkers and learners.
In essence, students learn to become members of a society that
expects hard work and collaboration and that values the opinions of
every member. An entire school that embraces these concepts will
be able to help make the world a better place. Students who receive
the same messages year after year will internalize them. When those
students transition from school, they will take their values with them
into the world at large.
The next section provides a research-based BBL strategy that
teachers around the world can implement with diverse learners in
pre-K–16 settings.
 educational HORIZONS  Fall 2009

Use of Multiple Intelligences in Designing Lessons

and Delivering Content for Pre-K–16 Students
The theory of multiple intelligences provides a framework
that teachers can use to create lessons that will reach all learn-
ers. The eight MI’s include verbal-linguistic (word smart); logical-
mathematical (math smart); spatial (picture smart); bodily-kinesthetic
(body smart); musical (music smart); naturalistic (nature smart);
36 interpersonal (people smart); and intrapersonal (self smart). There
is a likelihood of an existential intelligence as well (Gardner 1998).
Gardner contends that although all people have each MI in their
brains (they are, after all, brain based), each person’s compilation
of MI strengths is different. Most people have a range of strong,
moderate, and less-developed multiple intelligences. (Readers unfa-
miliar with the multiple intelligences are referred to a recent book
by Thomas Armstrong [2009].)
Surveys and observations have found that most teachers typi-
cally utilize only some of the nine MI’s in their classrooms—and
the ones that they use the most often usually constitute their stron-
gest multiple intelligences (Connell 2005). Such teachers are most
likely to connect with students whose learning styles resemble their
teaching styles, but not with those whose learning styles vary greatly
from theirs. For example, teachers with strong visual, spatial, and
bodily-kinesthetic brain-based MI’s are likely to provide students
with wonderful hands-on activities; however, they most likely do
not provide students enough verbal explanations to meet the needs
of students whose strength is verbal-linguistic. Accordingly, teachers
who include all the MI’s in their lessons during the day will be able
to connect with the diversity of learners found today in classrooms
around the world.
Simply put, teachers can begin to use brain-based learning tech-
niques by making sure that they use all nine multiple intelligences
during their instruction and assignments each day. Gardner (1983)
notes that it is not necessary to use all nine MI’s in each lesson; how-
ever, a good global goal for teachers is to plan to use all MI’s during
the course of the day.
Connecting MI’s with our Learning and the Brain Communities,
teachers will benefit greatly during the monthly meetings by sharing
ideas and findings from their use of the various multiple intelligences.
Other research-based BBL strategies that can be implemented in the
global communities include: differentiated instruction (Tomlinson
1999); multisensory approaches to reading, writing, and math (Fast
ForWord; Orton-Gillingham; Wilson Reading System); learning style
approaches (Connell 2005; Frender 1994); and left brain, right brain
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

strategies (Connell 2005; Gunzelmann and Connell 2006; Springer and

Deutsch 2001). Interested readers are encouraged to read those books
to facilitate their understanding of more-effective BBL strategies.

Conclusion
During the past twenty years the field of brain-based learning has
grown tremendously. It is reasonable to expect that its research and
applications to teaching and learning will continue to expand in the 37
United States and in many countries around the world. The newest MI
brain research has threefold advantages: first, it provides educators
access to brain research to make academic brain-based connections to
teaching and learning. Second, it allows educators to design classroom
and school environments that accommodate a growing diverse group
of student learners. Finally, it is becoming clear that BBL research and
strategies provide a solid foundation for educators around the world
to create successful Learning and the Brain Communities.

References
Armstrong, T. 2009. Multiple Intelligences in the Classroom. 3rd ed. Alexandria,
Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Berger, R. 2003. An Ethic of Excellence: Building a Culture of Craftsmanship
with Students. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Caine, R., and G. Caine. 1994. Making Connections: Teaching and the Human
Brain. Rev. ed. Menlo Park, Calif.: Addison-Wesley.
Caine, R., G. Caine, and S. Crowell. 1999. Mindshifts: A Brain-Compatible
Process for Professional Development and the Renewal of Education.
Tucson, Ariz.: Zephyr Press.
Caine, R., G. Caine, C. McClintic, and K. Klimek. 2009. 12 Brain/Mind Learning
Principles in Action: Developing Executive Functions of the Human Brain.
Thousands Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Chapman, C., and R. King. 2003. Differentiated Instructional Strategies for
Reading in the Content Areas. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Connell, D. 2005. Brain-Based Strategies to Reach Every Learner. New York:
Scholastic.
D’Arcangelo, M. 1998. “The Brains behind the Brain.” Educational Leadership
56 (3): 20–25. Retrieved June 6, 2002, from <http://www.ascd.org/
readingroom/edlead/9811/darcangelo.html>.
Dwyer, B. 2002. “Training Strategies for the Twenty-first Century: Using Recent
Research on Learning to Enhance Training.” In Innovations in Education
and Teaching International. London: Routledge
Fast ForWord. Fast ForWord Reading Series and Educational Software.
Oakland, Calif.: Scientific Learning Corp.
Frender, G. 1994. Teaching for Learning Success. Nashville, Tenn.: Incentive
Publications.
Gardner, H. 1983. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New
York, N.Y.: Basic Books.
 educational HORIZONS  Fall 2009

———. 1998. Keynote presentation, Fourth International Teaching for

Intelligence Conference: New York, April 23.
Goleman, D. 1994. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ.
New York: Bantam Books.
———. 2006. Social Intelligence: The New Science of Human Relationships.
New York: Bantam Books.
Green, F. R. 1999. “Brain and Learning Research: Implications for Meeting the
Needs of Diverse Learners.” Education 119 (4) (Summer): 682–688.
Gulpinar, M. 2005. “The Principles of BBL and Constructivist Models in
38 Education.” Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 5 (2) (November):
299–306.
Gunzelmann, B. 2009. “New Administration/New Possibilities: Research-based
Education for Equality and Excellence.” Educational Horizons (Fall).
Gunzelmann, B., and D. Connell. 2006. “The New Gender Gap: Psychological,
Neurobiological, and Educational Perspectives.” Educational Horizons 84
(2) (Winter).
Hirsh-Pasek, J., and J. Bruer. 2007. “Brain/Education Barrier.” Science 317
(September 7).
Howard-Jones, P. 2008. Teaching and Learning Research Programme Seminar
Series: Collaborative Frameworks in Neuroscience and Education. London,
U.K.
Jensen, E. 1995/2000 (revised). Brain-based Learning: The New Science of
Teaching and Training. Rev. ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
———. 2005. Teaching with the Brain in Mind. 2nd ed. Alexandria, Va.:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Kahveci, A., and A. Selahatdin. 2008. “Different Approaches—Common
Implications: Brain-Based and Constructivist Learning from a Paradigms
and Integral Model Perspective.” Journal of Turkish Science Education 5
(3) (December): 124–129.
LeDoux, J. 1996. The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of
Emotional Life. New York: Touchtone.
———. 2002. Synaptic Self: How Our Brain Becomes Who We Are. Toronto,
Canada: Viking Press.
Lombardi, J. 2008. “Beyond Learning Styles: Brain-based Research and English
Language Learners.” The Clearing House (May/June).
Marzano, R. 2003. What Works in Schools: Translating Research into Action.
Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Moorman, C. 2001. Spirit Whisperers: Teachers Who Nourish a Child’s Spirit.
Merrill, Mich.: Personal Power Press.
Orton-Gillingham. Institute for Multi-sensory Education. Birmingham, Mich.
Ozden, M., and M. Gultekin. 2008. “The Effects of Brain-based Learning on
Academic Achievement and Retention of Knowledge in Science Courses.”
Electronic Journal of Science Education 12 (1).
Pickering, S. J., and P. Howard-Jones. 2007. “Educators’ Views on the Role of
Neuroscience in Education: Findings from a Study of UK and International
Perspectives.” International Mind, Brain, and Education Society 1 (3):
109–113.
Sharma, Yojana. 2007. “Mental Exercise: The Appliance of Neuroscience
Theory in Education Is Taking Off.” South China Morning Post
(December 15): 5.
 Global Aspects of Brain-Based Learning

Sousa, D. 2006. How the Brain Learns. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin
Press.
Sprenger, M. B. 2003. Becoming a “Wiz” at Brain-Based Teaching. Thousand
Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.
Springer, S., and G. Deutsch. 2001. Left Brain, Right Brain: Perspectives from
Cognitive Neuroscience. 5th ed. New York: W. H. Freeman and Co.
Tomlinson, C. 1999. The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of
All Learners. Alexandria, Va.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Wilson Reading System. Wilson Language Training. Oxford, Mass. 39
Wolfe, P., and R. Brandt. 1998. “What Do We Know about Brain Research?”
Educational Leadership 56 (3): 8–13.
Zull, J. 2002. The Art of Changing the Brain. Sterling, Va.: Stylus Publishing.

J. Diane Connell, Ed.D., is Professor of Education and Director

of Graduate Programs in Learning Disabilities at Rivier College,
Nashua, New Hampshire.