Brain Trust : Youngsters Evaluate How Well Scientists’ Exhibits Explain Neurology in Lay Terms
The nerve of it all. The work of some of Southern California’s brainiest neuroscientists was on the line Tuesday--being judged by hundreds of wiggly, giggly schoolchildren.
In a twist on the traditional school science fair where experts evaluate the work of youngsters, fourth- and fifth-graders assessed exhibits built by neurological researchers, professors and graduate students.
The goal was to help scientists think up ways to explain their work with neurons and axons in lay terms, according to the sponsoring UCLA Brain Research Institute.
The results: Brains made of Jell-O beat out those depicted by computer bytes. And scholars who think it’s OK to lock themselves in ivory towers have another think coming.
That means that some of the 30 experts who spent three hours trying to explain the operation of the human nervous system to the 230 children could end up re-evaluating their own career goals, predicted Mark Lipschutz, chief administrative officer at the institute.
The scientists were as nervous as schoolkids themselves as they stood in front of their displays waiting to be judged. Each pint-size evaluator was equipped with a clipboard and a rating form loaded with potentially embarrassing questions.
Like “Did you learn something new?” “Was the exhibit interesting?” “Could you understand what the presenter was trying to tell you? “ “Was the presenter friendly?”
Eleven-year-old Ashley George listened intently as neuroscience graduate student David Rector, who researches epileptic seizures, explained patellar reflex, brain excitation and flexor inhibition. His display was titled “Neuron Math.”
Flashing Christmas tree lights poking through the back of the cardboard exhibit traced the “electrical signal” that Rector explained goes from the brain to the muscle. “Do you kids know what dendrites are?” Rector asked.
Ashley, a fifth-grader at Topeka Drive Elementary School in Northridge, penciled in a low score for the “Could you understand?”
Rector plunged on. “It’s like lots of wires going from your brain to the rest of your body. You have thousands of muscles and each one is connected to a brain cell,” he continued. Satisfied with that explanation, Ashley pulled out an eraser and raised his score.
The judges munched pizza as the scores were tallied by science fair organizer Deborah Colbern, a researcher into the effect of alcohol on memory for UCLA’s Center for the Health Sciences.
The simplest displays turned out to be the biggest hits. And the winners, who received certificates, were mostly researchers and scholars not too far removed from school science fairs themselves.
The only high-tech winners were Department of Veterans Affairs psychologist David Kaiser and graduate student Gina Poe. They used their own computer program to trace kids’ brain waves on a video screen.
UCLA neuroscience undergraduates Paras Barnajian and Radhika Nayar won with an exhibit that involved a paper cutout of a hand, a candle and a rope borrowed from the manager of the apartment house where Nayar lives.
Neuromuscular researcher Brad Smith and undergraduate Amir Kashani were winners with a demonstration involving dry ice, vials of colored water and popping balloons. Graduate psychology student Michelle Pilati and researcher Wendy Sternberg won by breaking five dozen eggs to show how the skull protects the brain.
Undergraduates Jonathan Lifshitz and Carrie Walters won with wobbly, life-size replicas of brains formed from Jell-O in a leftover Halloween-party mold. After showing the consistency of the brain, they let the judges eat the brains.
Graduate students John Klopp and Gregg Wong dodged Nerf darts fired by youngsters whose brains were struggling to correct visual signals distorted by pairs of prisms taped to the front of goggles.
“I thought I was through with science fairs when I came here,” laughed another winner, neuroscience undergraduate Bobbie Ugalat--who cooked up a pot of oatmeal to demonstrate the texture of the brain.
The competition was more of a learning experience for some of the experts than for the children. Neuropsychology professor Dahlia Zaidel acknowledged that her exhibit on the role of the brain in controlling the face was a flop.
“I learned today that children have a different way of communicating than adults,” said Zaidel, a 13-year teaching veteran.
The brain institute’s Lipschutz said Tuesday’s experience could help some neuroscientists sharpen their grant-writing and meeting presentation skills. And it might cause some younger ones to rethink their long-range goals.
A number are likely to decide they want to become teachers instead of doctors or researchers, he said.
And others, he said with a grin, are likely to decide just the opposite.
