Why I went to the CHAZ.

I live about an hour away from Seattle.  Like most people in the area, and many around the country, I have been trying to understand exactly what is going on there.  I have heard reports of the Capitol Hill area being vacated by the police and taken over by protesters.  I have seen videos posted by friends and colleagues showing what looks more like a block party than a riot.  I have also watched video commentary by news outlets crying out about the lack of law and order and extortion, militant actions, and violence.  I wanted to know what it actually was. 

As a teacher, it has been difficult to figure out how to appropriately interact with students amidst the school closures from COVID-19, the fallout from George Floyd's death at the hands of police officers, the protests, violence, and calls for defunding the police.  Unable to have these conversations in-person with my students has made it even more difficult to engage in helpful dialogue around these issues, but it has been further compounded by the lack of reliable information.  

So I went to Capitol Hill.  I visited the CHAZ (Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone).  I went because I had to see for myself because I can no longer trust what I watch on the news, read in the paper, listen to on the radio or see on social media. In the classroom, I often tell my students that the skills they need today are different from the skills I needed as a teenager.  We are no longer teaching students where to find information, we are teaching them how to discern if it is true.  It's becoming increasingly difficult every day.    

Last night, The Seattle Times ran an article about Fox News using digitally altered pictures of what is happening on Capitol Hill and using pictures from Minneapolis riots implying that it was Seattle. Fox has since removed these pictures. Similarly, I have scrolled through angry posts and comments by friends and families who are citing articles that are outdated, misleading, or misconstrued.  Their anger is real, but the material may not be.

One post was titled 6 Officers have died in the last 10 days, the media has barely said a word which was shared by several of my friends over the last two weeks. It was often accompanied by comments condemning violent protests and the lack of regard by the media for the safety of police officers. The article was originally published almost six months ago.  In the article, it listed the cause of death of six of the officers.  One was killed during a high speed pursuit, another during a traffic stop.  One died of brain cancer, another of a heart attack, and one from complications from the flu.  One cause of death was unknown at the time, and the final four officers were not even mentioned in the article about how the media is not paying attention to the death of officers.  

These types of click bait posts can be juxtaposed against posts that are misleading or overly critical of police officers or any other group someone chooses to target as well. The content of a message is no longer as important as the response by the consumer. Attacks against groups, policies, programs, or individuals are measured less by their validity and more by their effect.  Bias through statistics and crowd counts, selection or omission, or loaded language are becoming the acceptable norm not only by those providing content, but also by those who are consuming it.  

The idea that news outlets are now having to "fact check" materials that are posted by other news outlets demonstrate that the integrity and motives of those who are providing information is compromised at best, and at worst, a competition not for speed of the story, but for control of the narrative and perception of their viewers.  The online source Snopes.com touts itself as the "go-to source for discerning what is true and what is total nonsense.  Its entire existence is dependent on the acceptance that reality is no longer a requirement for reporting the news, that our society cannot decipher what is true and what is not, even when we see it with our own eyes. 

And it's becoming harder all the time.  Photos can be manipulated, information can be slanted or misconstrued, quotes can be taken out of context, videos can be edited or created using deepfake technology which makes it increasingly difficult to even know what is true or even what is real.  Conversations are less about what is correct or true, but what is believed.  

While I believe that skepticism is healthy, functional dialogue requires a tether to what is factual and true.  There are very few things that are more dangerous than an opinion that is rooted in a false sense of reality.  There is an obligation of news sources and providers of content to be thorough in their vetting process, honest in their representation, and factual in their foundation.  Failure in that obligation is not only reckless, but maliciously unethical. 

As a teacher, I want to be able to teach my students.  I want to be able to talk to them, and have conversations that are meaningful and lead to somewhere other than a stalemate or dead end.  I want to teach them how to support and defend their ideas with factual material, evidence-based critical thinking, and information that is accurate and credible.  I want to be able to do the same.

So I went to see it for myself.  I went because I want my students to be able to trust me.  I went because I want to be able to trust myself.  And I feel like that has been taken away from me.  

Neuropossibility

The human brain is an incredibly complex and diverse organ.  The most recent estimate is that the brain contains 86 billion neurons, and each neuron has the potential to make tens of thousands of synaptic connections with other neurons.  This means that there are well over 100 trillion possible synaptic connection that can be made in the brain, and countless neural pathways.  

With the sheer number of potential connections, it is easy to understand that no two brains are the same.  Despite this diversity, there are inevitable similarities as well.  And where there are similarities, there are statistical norms and averages. Prominent patterns have emerged over time creating a definition for what is normal, for what is the expected outcome based on averages.  This does not mean that average is 'good' or 'better.' Average is nothing more than a mathematical probability.

Even with all of the complexity and diversity of the human brain, prominent patterns have emerged over time. The neurotypical brain is a brain that has forms, structures and processes that fall within the statistical norm in certain categories.  When they fall outside the statistical norm, they can be referred to as non-neurotypical, neuroatypical, neurodivergent, or more colloquially; strange, odd, different or weird.

The term 'normal' is often used synonymously with words like average, typical, standard or appropriate.  In this case, 'abnormal' would be better or worse than average, atypical, unusual, special, or inappropriate.  But this is a false definition, because any two things are going to be different from each other.  These differences offer a variety of challenges as well as opportunities and are more often subjective based on perspective.

Beyond what is considered neurotypical, patterns will emerge. Methods of processing information, behaviors, or observable actions may manifest outwardly, making them more readily identifiable and divisible. More observable differences create more perceived separation, and new patterns emerge which are used to further assign individuals into categories creating generalized classifications and labels according to associated traits.

Someone who is introverted, is autistic, or has ADD, or someone who experiences hyperthymesia or dyspraxia might have common traits which are similar to others of that subgroup. Or they may not.  They may have traits similar to others outside of the subgroup.  Or they may not.  Imagine a Venn diagram of nearly eight billion circles of varying shapes and sizes, one for each human being on the planet, laid out on a single image.  It be would full of overlap and outliers.  A mosaic of human potential in which each person shares some traits with one group and some traits with others.  

Imagine a box of clear marbles.  They may vary in size or have other unique characteristics, but they all share the common trait of clarity.  If you add another clear marble, it easily falls into conformity with the rest.  But, add a red marble and it becomes easily identifiable.  Even if it has a similar shape or density to other marbles in the box, because it does not conform to the most common identifiable characteristic of the rest, it will inevitably be set apart from the rest. The clear marbles may have other characteristics that make them different but they all share an easily identifiable trait. The red one is more different, a judgement based on a feature that has been determined as most relevant.    

Our species has a penchant for patterns and order.  Class systems, cliques, hierarchies are all social constructs used to place people into groups that can be identified, organized and labeled.  We name the groups, then we come up with terms for what is outside those groups. The term "on the spectrum" denotes something separate from the majority, when in reality, every single human being on the planet is on the spectrum of neuropossibility.  In light of this, the range of human potential goes beyond our ability to calculate.  Within this range of opportunity, patterns will inevitably emerge, but patterns are not rules.  Nor are they standards of what is acceptable and what is not.

The spectrum of human neural development is not a linear spectrum. It is a multidirectional patchwork of trillions of potential outcomes and possibilities ranging from how the brain is physically formed, to how neurotransmitters are produced.  From how it functions and processes information to how it changes and adapts as a response to outside stimuli.  The potential outcomes are incalculable.

While we cannot ignore differences, we can be aware of which differences we are more likely to accept and which we are not.  While we may weigh out some unifying factors as more important or more valuable, the only single unifying factor that we all share is that we are all different. 

Students Learning Online Need Social Interaction

Students Learning Online Need Social Interaction

If we eliminate the social factor from the child, we are only left with an abstraction.

                                                                 -John Dewey, My Pedagogic Creed 1897

Human beings have always had a need for social interaction.  One of the foundational prerequisites of human growth and survival  is safety, and one of the primary evolutionary conditions for safety has been strong social connections and community.  Throughout our history, we have always been safer in groups.  Whether it be from physical threats such as our ancestors faced from wild animals and the environment, or modern threats against personal well-being and economic stability, our species has always been more successful when we are part of a group, tribe, team, family or community.

In fact, collaboration and social interaction goes beyond helping immediate or pressing dangers, but plays a major role in response to perceived threats or dangers.  It is a near universal desire to "talk" to someone after a disruptive or traumatic event.  It is social interaction that helps facilitate the return to homeostatic functioning, or biological balance and stability.

When faced with a threat, the autonomic nervous system leans heavily on the sympathetic nervous system creating a physical stress response (fight, flight, or freeze).  Regular body functions such as breathing, heart rate and regulation of hormones are kicked into overdrive and the primary goal becomes to survive.  The parasympathetic nervous system, which helps regulate normal bodily functions (feed and breed), is more or less put on hold until the danger is assessed and the situation or circumstance is deemed "safe."  Individuals under duress, whether it is large or small, experience varying degrees of neurological response which can impede memory and negatively impact motivation and cognitive function.

Not only do human beings need social structures to manage crisis or instability, we also need social interaction and collaboration to help us return to a state of normalcy and safety.  Without social interaction, human beings cannot function at optimal levels physically, mentally, or emotionally. Prison inmates, when left in solitary confinement, experienced decreases in the size of their hippocampus, an area of the brain that aids in learning, memory and spatial awareness; and an increase in the size of the amygdala, which regulates anxiety and fear. While this is an extreme case, it is clear that consistent social interaction has a positive impact on the capacity to learn and develop. Suddenly deprived of their primary mode of personal social interaction, it isn't surprising that students should experience a dramatic drop in motivation and engagement.

As children develop into adolescents and young adults, the need and importance of peer relationships changes.  For elementary age students, students work best within large group settings, while adolescent age students in middle school begin to break into smaller groups, primarily focusing on same-sex friends and confidants.  By high school, it begins to branch out to romantic interest and complex social structures stretching into multiple groups based on shared values or interests.  As this development occurs, the impact on learning and motivation increases.

Younger students may be more easily motivated away from their peers, as their social support structure is built on relationships with adult figures such as teachers and parents, but teens especially are more likely to be motivated when surrounded by positive peer influence and a need for social approval.  During the teen years, the influence of peer pressure increases dramatically. MRI scans have shown increased activity in the reward processing centers of the brains of teenagers in response to social cues of facial expression. This implies that teens are more likely to feel better or worse when considering the reactions of those around them. During late adolescence, teens are primarily trying to build their own personal identity while simultaneously seeking the approval of their peers.  This happens while they are also required to work towards establishing competency and purpose as individuals.

Social interaction both motivates and facilitates the learning process

Social interaction is one of the primary motivating factors for middle school and high school students for several reasons.  In the classroom, students are more likely to participate in an environment of engaged peers than in isolation.  Because of the increased feelings of rewards connected to peer approval, students engage when surrounded by peer engagement.  B.F. Skinner's operant conditioning model suggests that it is the desire of rewards or avoidance of punishments is the primary driver for learning.  For teens, rewards and punishments are linked with this social approval.  While it can also lead to disruption in the classroom as student focus shifts, it is more likely that peer influences help keep students in check and motivated about a task, especially a group task.  But it is not the only reason students are likely to perform better in social settings.

Psychologist Albert Bandura's Social Learning Theory is based on the idea that learning is a complex process that is the result of both active participation and practice, but it also takes place vicariously through observation and modeling. Students who are not directly participating in an activity or discussion are observing, listening, and gleaning information and skills from within a group setting. When working alone, students are left without this opportunity. 

Social interaction also increases the quality of learning in a variety of ways.  Students who have the opportunity to communicate directly with their peers practice organizing their thoughts and reflecting on their overall understanding.  It can provide opportunities to find gaps within their reasoning as they discuss, share information, or even listen to others.  In a study of the impact of social interaction on student learning from Missouri State University, participants reported that they were more engaged, felt more comfortable in the classroom environment, had better comprehension and were more likely to attend class.  Social interaction not only creates a safer and more enjoyable environment for students to learn, it facilitates learning and provides neurological advantages for improved learning.

Oxytocin, a hormone produced in the hypothalamus which regulates our "tend and defend" response, is the neurotransmitter released during moments of intimacy and positive social interaction.  It is what creates that "warm and fuzzy" feeling when we hug, it is what helps mothers emotionally bond to their children, and it drives our need for partnership and connection with other human beings.  Feelings like empathy, concern or generosity are all increased with the introduction of oxytocin.  Increased levels of oxytocin have been connected with improved performance in the classroom as it reduces stress and counteracts the effects of the stress hormone cortisol.  It helps create an attitude conducive with learning and promotes positive social interaction. When provided with opportunities to connect with their peers, students are gaining this neurological advantage.  

We need to meet students where they are

Psychologist Lev Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory is based on the premise that cognitive development in children is advanced through social interaction with others and that a learner cannot reach their full potential without social influence and interaction.  His concept of the Zone of Proximal Development is based on the need for scaffolding of instruction and  guided practice to bridge the gap between what a child can do on their own and what they have not yet mastered.

Much of the instruction and practice both in and out of classrooms today is built on this process.  When learning to ride a bicycle, a child first relies on training wheels or a parent to steady the bike until they master the skill of maintaining balance.  Without that intermediate help, the task of riding a bike is out of reach for the child alone. Students are given guided instruction as they work to understand new material.  It is only through gradual progression and meeting students at the bridge between what they can do and what they cannot do, that they are able to successfully develop and master new skills.

Meeting students where they are has become a primarily digital practice as schools work to become online institutions.  If we want to increase engagement, if we want to help facilitate student learning, we need to increase the social interaction they have with their peers, and we have to meet them at the bridge between their own mastery and where we would like them to be.  For many students, they feel most comfortable and confident with the use of social media platforms. Where we need to help them get to is using those platforms to connect with intentional purpose.  The experience of losing a major portion of their school year, of adapting to a new educational landscape is incredibly difficult.  Students are confused, frustrated and anxious.  Building effective programs is definitely a priority, but so is helping students feel safe by returning to some sense of normalcy.  Communicating and processing with their peers is also a major piece to that puzzle.

In order to increase engagement, we must increase that which will have the largest impact on student motivation.  Peer interaction is the primary driving force for action for most adolescents and teens. The normal environment for many of our students has been completely altered, leaving students with an inability to connect.  While schools have been able to leverage extrinsic motivators such as grades or graduation requirements to spur students forward, we have drastically underestimated the motivational factors of the physical and social immediacy of the classroom.  Instead of working within a community of learners, most students are now isolated from one of their largest motivating factors.

As educators, we may have hesitations about stepping into the digital world that many of our students utilize.  In 1908, George Palmer, a philosophy professor at Harvard for 40 years wrote in his book The Ideal Teacher, "instead of lamenting the imperviousness of our pupils, we had better ask ourselves more frequently whether we have neatly adjusted our teachings to the conditions of their mind."

Are we using tools and strategies that will best facilitate their method of learning, or are we using tools and strategies that will best facilitate our preferred method of teaching? Perhaps it is because those platforms are outside of our own area of expertise.  If so, what better way to bridge that gap than working with the group who is already there? 

Social interaction increases motivation, effectiveness, and opportunity and is an integral component of education and learning.  Intentionally increasing social interactions with their peers has to be a priority if we want to best help our students. Human beings need each other.  We have been programmed over generations to work as a part of a community.  It keeps us safe, it keeps us healthy, and it gives us the greatest advantage and opportunity to be successful. 

What are we really teaching students during the Covid-19 pandemic?

What are we really teaching students during the Covid-19 pandemic?

As of April 19th, there have been over 50 million students who have faced school closures in the United States.  At least 35 million students will not be returning to school this academic year, and nearly every student in the United States has faced some change to their daily routine or schedule.

For both teachers and students, the last few months have been a challenge to create and work within a new framework, which comes with both unique problems and new opportunities.  Teachers have had to create new methods of communicating, teaching, and evaluating learning.  Administrations have had to examine and restructure expectations to meet with new guidelines from governing bodies.  Students have had to learn new platforms and adapt to increases in personal responsibility and time management.

One of the primary areas of concern has been how students will access material, be held accountable, or meet the standards of their classroom.  The ability to be resilient, self-motivated and manage their time might be the most important lesson they take away from this experience.  It is difficult, frustrating, and might pay of dividends in the future if approached appropriately. 

We are now faced with greater disparity between degrees of student opportunity.  Those who have readily access to the internet or resources and those who do not is only part of the story.  The gap between the varying factors of privilege, of wealth inequality and other discrepancies are moving towards the forefront of educational policies.  Now, more than ever, we are also grading a student's ability to self-regulate.  But are we teaching it?

The modern American education system is built on a foundation of co-regulation principles.  We do not expect students to take full responsibility of regulating their time, actions, or behaviors.  We use bells, schedules, units of instructions, even dress codes to help students manage how they learn and behave in the school setting.  The school building itself is designed to help students construct a physical environment to improve learning.  

This creates less of a demand on executive function, which is still developing during the school age years.  Students do not need to decide how to manage their time, the bell does.  They do not need to decide when to eat, they are assigned a lunch. Students do not need to decide what content area they will focus on, they are provided standards.  Students have been trained to rely on this co-regulation as they are part of a system that uses this scaffolding to supplement their developing executive function.

Recently, that scaffolding was removed.  The training wheels were suddenly taken off and a new level of personal responsibility was placed on their shoulders.  It should not be shocking to any educator that those students who required constant reminders, often forgot their homework, or struggled to stay on task were more likely to fall behind.  Students who have limited support structures outside of the classroom are now in a place of larger cognitive requirement as they must figure out not only what to do, but also how, where, and when to do it.  

Shifting Curriculum Focus

We often forget that content is often a vehicle to teach more important skills that are required beyond the classroom.  The Covid-19 pandemic has increased the attention on issues of education that have been lurking in the shadows for decades, and one of those issues is the division between hard skills (content) and soft skills (behaviors).  Bruce Tulgan, who specializes in management training, remarked that "people get hired because of their hard skills, but get fired because of their soft skills."  In a three year study conducted by Leadership IQ, a global leadership training and research company, 20,000 new hires were tracked after being hired in public, private businesses and healthcare organizations.  Nearly 50% of these new hires were let go with eighteen months of being hired, but only 11% were because they lacked the technical skills required.  89% were let go because of a lack of various soft skills such as lack of motivation, coachability, and social emotional skills.

Organizations like Forbes, Rasmussen College, and Monster.com list similar skills that employers are looking for in the digital age.  The include problem solving, communication, flexibility, time management, resiliency and initiative; which are the same skills we can focus and hone with the recent changes to most schools across the country.  The question is whether we are looking at this as roadblock to traditional education, or an opportunity?  Are we helping our students to practice these skills in a real-world situation? 

In order to help students get the best possible outcome from this situation, it requires thoughtful and intentional practice, and also a willingness to change our focus. 

Skills such as controlling emotions, time management, impulse control, and self-regulation are all attributes of executive function and are vital to roles of individual responsibility.  These skills extend beyond the workplace and play a role in how we interact with friends, family and community.

We can help students practice improving their attention and focus without their normal structures and routines in place.  A study conducted at the Mind, Brain and Behavior Research Center has shown that students improved their ability to focus and maintain attention when provided with guided practice followed by personal reflection.  Students experienced greater growth when the child understood the training process.  While executive function is largely connected with brain development, it can also be trained and developed with intentional scaffolding and the use of co-regulation.

The truth is that schools and teachers have always played a role in the development of executive function and its correlated soft skills such as time management, focus, inhibition control and planning. The natural progression from co-regulation to self-regulation is the unspoken backbone of human cognitive development.  As students struggle with lack of the routine structures that helped facilitate their learning it provides schools with a unique opportunity to shift their attention and focus on how to improve skill sets and practices that are only going to become more opportune in a digital world. Focusing on building these skills should be our priority, even before our content. Make it very clear to students that part of what they are learning and what we want them to practice is how to manage their time or adapt to new scenarios. Now, without the added support of our physical structures, we need to increase our role as co-regulators of their executive function. 

As many businesses and organization move towards increased online or work-from-home scenarios, students are being provided a trial-by-fire tutorial in potential changes to the global workforce.  Schools are now being afforded the opportunity to facilitate learning that is directly applicable and has been pushed to the forefront of a changing landscape.  The Covid-19 pandemic will become one of the defining moments of this generation and schools should be sending a message to our students about what they can do instead of what they cannot.  It should be seen as an opportunity to develop resiliency and problem solving, to practice time management and personal responsibility.  How we handle this event will have lasting impacts on our students, but it won't necessarily be about content.  

Why can't you just focus?

Why can't you just focus? 

Structures of the neurodiverse (ADD/ADHD) brain 

What is often frustrating for parents, teachers, and even individuals with ADD/ADHD is how they can focus intensely in some instances but struggle to sit still and work in others.  How can someone choose to work for extended periods of time on one thing only to insist that it is impossible for them on another?  Instead of being able to motivate themselves internally, there seems to be the need for an external motivator, a parent or teacher, standing over their shoulder to keep them on task.

In this case, it is important to remember that internal motivation is often a product of self-regulation, and self-regulation can be much more challenging for the neurodiverse brain.  Understanding the difference between self-regulated focus and concentration, and interest-based focus and concentration is key to understanding the external behaviors of individuals with ADD/ADHD.  It is important to keep in  mind this neurological difference and how it manifests in behavior.  Distinguishing these differences can help bridge the gap between attention and focus.

You've probably had this experience.  You're watching TV, reading a book, working on homework or some other task and you are interrupted by someone asking you an unrelated question.

"What time is your appointment tomorrow?"

"Huh?  What did you say?" And then, before they can repeat their question, you answer it. "It's at noon." 

The  momentary delay is the result of the brain switching from one context to another. This is the primary difference between attention and focus or concentration.  Attention is a function of the brain to ensure that you are aware of your surroundings. It is hearing the question; it is the sensing of stimuli.  Focus is the conscious investment into a specific task or stimuli; it is thinking of the answer and then vocalizing it. 

Sustained focus can be achieved without conscious choices or deliberate actions.  Getting caught up in a conversation with a friend or becoming hyper-focused on a competitive game or activity are often achieved with little conscious effort.  Hyper-focus can be unintentional, and is usually based on personal value, entertainment or pleasure, or pressing need. Each of these can help someone get lost in what they are doing, or what has come to be known as "flow state."

Achieving this intense focus can be difficult at times and may require conscious choice or deliberate actions.  This is where the Prefrontal Cortex plays a vital role.  It falls under the domain of executive function to force ourselves into this flow state.  This might involve finding a quiet place to work, setting a timer to help manage time and attention, or simply telling ourselves "I have to get this done."  Turning off the tablet or cellphone, going to the library or setting specific parameters for how long you will work on something are all conscious choices to limit distractions and limit our attentive spectrum. One of the major differences between a neurodiverse ADD/ADHD brain and a neurotypical brain is determining what it should focus on from a wide variety of attention grabbing stimuli. Differences in brain structures and functions can drastically affect the transition from attention to focus.

Major areas of the brain that help to regulate focus and attention are the Prefrontal Cortex; the Reticular Activating System (RAS); the Limbic System, which helps regulate emotions; and the Basal Ganglia, which is primarily associated with executive movements, but also plays a role in attention by working with the cerebral cortex to control desired actions. Each of these regions of the brain play a role in attention and focus, and each of these regions of the brain can be affected in someone who has ADD/ADHD. In this case, it might lead to an inability to focus or lack of motivation.  It can also make it difficult to avoid distraction or control emotions.  These are all examples of self-regulation that are more readily facilitated by a neurotypical brain.

The term "attention deficit" is somewhat misleading in that the ADD/ADHD brain may be highly attentive, but struggles to narrow focus to a single stimuli or action.  One of the functions of the Basal Ganglia is to transition between the involunary and the voluntary.  It acts as the brakes of a car that allows the driver to more easily control where it is going.  Similarly, the limbic system helps to control and regulate emotions while the RAS determines what stimuli should merit our conscious attention and what can be ignored. The Prefrontal Cortex is in charge of executive function, or the ability to self-regulate which plays a major role in transitioning from attention to focus.

When these areas of the brain are affected, it can be challenging, if not impossible to maintain focus on a task.  Additionally, it is difficult to even reason WHY a task should merit focus and attention. The ability to consciously focus, to limit distractions, or to assign meaningful ancillary value are all facets of self-regulation and can be hindered in the ADD/ADHD brain. For example, jumping through a hoop has no immediate value in and of itself, but may be a part of a larger process.  The neurotypical brain can rationalize the importance of the hoop as a step towards a large goal, the neurodiverse brain struggles with the lack of immediate value or relevancy; it may even rebel against it.

Yet, the neurodiverse brain is absolutely capable of sustained focus and attention, if not hyper-focus. It just often requires it to be interest-based.  If a stimuli or activity is novel, urgent, or high interest, there is often no noticeable hindrance in thinking or activity by an individual with ADD/ADHD. Flow state is achieved if and when there is immediate and inherent interest. 

While the neurotypical brain will also focus on something that is interest-based, it has an easier time assigning secondary value to a task which is not perceived as engaging or interesting. This might be rationalizing that is important to someone else, or that it is needed to achieve a desired grade our outcome.  It also makes it easier to perform the task if there is an associated reward or punishment.  This is why pleading or bribery may not work on a child or student with ADD/ADHD, as they may find it more difficult to assign secondary value to a primary activity.  Differences in these neurological forms and functions affect the ease and ability of making the choice of when and how to focus.

Understanding these differences in how the brain weighs out sensory information and stimuli may help some of the confusion and frustration that can accompany ADD/ADHD.  Due to the incredibly complex and interconnected nature of the human brain, it is impossible to make a judgment as to exactly what is the ideal form and function, but recognizing these structures and functions can give insight into the incredibly diverse spectrum of human thinking and cognition.  Internal values and motivators are the combination of a myriad of biological and learned factors unique to each person and they are the keys to promoting active engagement.