字幕表 動画を再生する
-
What I'm about to share with you are findings from a study
-
of the brains of more than 1,000 children and adolescents.
-
Now, these were children who were recruited
-
from diverse homes around the United States,
-
and this picture is an average of all of their brains.
-
The front of this average brain is on your left
-
and the back of this average brain is on your right.
-
Now, one of the things we were very interested in
-
was the surface area of the cerebral cortex,
-
or the thin, wrinkly layer on the outer surface of the brain
-
that does most of the cognitive heavy lifting.
-
And that's because past work by other scientists has suggested
-
that in many cases,
-
a larger cortical surface area
-
is often associated with higher intelligence.
-
Now, in this study, we found one factor
-
that was associated with the cortical surface area
-
across nearly the entire surface of the brain.
-
That factor was family income.
-
Now, here, every point you see in color is a point where higher family income
-
was associated with a larger cortical surface area in that spot.
-
And there were some regions, shown here in yellow,
-
where that association was particularly pronounced.
-
And those are regions that we know support a certain set of cognitive skills:
-
language skills like vocabulary and reading
-
as well as the ability to avoid distraction
-
and exert self-control.
-
And that's important,
-
because those are the very skills
-
that children living in poverty are most likely to struggle with.
-
In fact, a child living with poverty
-
is likely to perform worse on tests of language and impulse control
-
before they even turn two.
-
Now, there are a few points I'd like to highlight about this study.
-
Number one:
-
this link between family income and children's brain structure
-
was strongest at the lowest income levels.
-
So that means that dollar for dollar,
-
relatively small differences in family income
-
were associated with proportionately greater differences in brain structure
-
among the most disadvantaged families.
-
And intuitively, that makes sense, right?
-
An extra 20,000 dollars for a family earning, say, 150,000 dollars a year
-
would certainly be nice, but probably not game-changing,
-
whereas an extra 20,000 dollars
-
for a family only earning 20,000 dollars a year
-
would likely make a remarkable difference in their day-to-day lives.
-
Now, the second point I'd like to highlight
-
is that this link between family income and children's brain structure
-
didn't depend on the children's age,
-
it didn't depend on their sex
-
and it didn't depend on their race or ethnicity.
-
And the final point --
-
and this one's key --
-
there was tremendous variability from one child to the next,
-
by which I mean there were plenty of children from higher-income homes
-
with smaller brain surfaces
-
and plenty of children from lower-income homes
-
with larger brain surfaces.
-
Here's an analogy.
-
We all know that in childhood,
-
boys tend to be taller than girls,
-
but go into any elementary school classroom,
-
and you'll find some girls who are taller than some boys.
-
So while growing up in poverty is certainly a risk factor
-
for a smaller brain surface,
-
in no way can I know an individual child's family income
-
and know with any accuracy
-
what that particular child's brain would look like.
-
I want you to imagine, for a moment, two children.
-
One is a young child born into poverty in America;
-
the other is also an American child,
-
but one who was born into more fortunate circumstances.
-
Now, at birth, we find absolutely no differences
-
in how their brains work.
-
But by the time those two kids are ready to start kindergarten,
-
we know that the child living in poverty
-
is likely to have cognitive scores that are, on average, 60 percent lower
-
than those of the other child.
-
Later on, that child living in poverty
-
will be five times more likely to drop out of high school,
-
and if she does graduate high school,
-
she'll be less likely to earn a college degree.
-
By the time those two kids are 35 years old,
-
if the first child spent her entire childhood living in poverty,
-
she is up to 75 times more likely to be poor herself.
-
But it doesn't have to be that way.
-
As a neuroscientist, one of things I find most exciting about the human brain
-
is that our experiences change our brains.
-
Now, this concept, known as neuroplasticity,
-
means that these differences in children's brain structure
-
don't doom a child to a life of low achievement.
-
The brain is not destiny.
-
And if a child's brain can be changed,
-
then anything is possible.
-
As a society, we spend billions of dollars each year, educating our children.
-
So what can we tell schools, teachers and parents
-
who want to help support kids from disadvantaged backgrounds
-
to do their best in school and in life?
-
Well, emerging science suggests
-
that growing up in poverty is associated with a host of different experiences
-
and that these experiences in turn may work together
-
to help shape brain development and ultimately help kids learn.
-
And so if this is right,
-
it begs the question:
-
Where along this pathway can we step in and provide help?
-
So let's consider first intervening at the level of learning itself --
-
most commonly through school-based initiatives.
-
Now, should we be encouraging teachers to focus on the kinds of skills
-
that disadvantaged kids are most likely to struggle with?
-
Of course.
-
The importance of high-quality education based in scientific evidence
-
really can't be overstated.
-
And there are a number of examples of excellent interventions
-
targeting things like literacy or self-regulation
-
that do in fact improve kids' cognitive development and their test scores.
-
But as any intervention scientist doing this work would tell you,
-
this work is challenging.
-
It's hard to implement high-quality, evidence-based education.
-
And it can be labor-intensive,
-
it's sometimes costly.
-
And in many cases, these disparities in child development emerge early --
-
well before the start of formal schooling --
-
sometimes when kids are just toddlers.
-
And so I would argue:
-
school is very important,
-
but if we're focusing all of our policy efforts
-
on formal schooling,
-
we're probably starting too late.
-
So what about taking a step back
-
and focusing on trying to change children's experiences?
-
What particular experiences are associated with growing up in poverty
-
and might be able to be targeted to promote brain development
-
and learning outcomes for kids?
-
Of course, there are many, right?
-
Nutrition, access to health care,
-
exposure to second-hand smoke or lead,
-
experience of stress or discrimination,
-
to name a few.
-
In my laboratory,
-
we're particularly focused on a few types of experiences
-
that we believe may be able to be targeted
-
to promote children's brain development
-
and ultimately improve their learning outcomes.
-
As one example,
-
take something I'll call the home language environment,
-
by which I mean, we know that the number of words kids hear
-
and the number of conversations they're engaged in every day
-
can vary tremendously.
-
By some estimates,
-
kids from more advantaged backgrounds
-
hear an average of 30 million more spoken words
-
in the first few years of life
-
compared to kids from less advantaged backgrounds.
-
Now, in our work, we're finding
-
that kids who experience more back-and-forth,
-
responsive conversational turns
-
tend to have a larger brain surface in parts of the brain
-
that we know are responsible for language and reading skills.
-
And in fact, the number of conversations they hear
-
seems to matter a little bit more than the sheer number of words they hear.
-
So one tantalizing possibility
-
is that we should be teaching parents not just to talk a lot,
-
but to actually have more conversations with their children.
-
In this way, it's possible that we'll promote brain development
-
and perhaps their kids' language and reading skills.
-
And in fact, a number of scientists are testing
-
that exciting possibility right now.
-
But of course, we all know
-
that growing up in poverty is associated with lots of different experiences
-
beyond just how many conversations kids are having.
-
So how do we choose what else to focus on?
-
The list can be overwhelming.
-
There are a number of high-quality interventions
-
that do try to change children's experience,
-
many of which are quite effective.
-
But again, just like school-based initiatives,
-
this is hard work.
-
It can be challenging,
-
it can be labor-intensive,
-
sometimes costly ...
-
and on occasion,
-
it can be somewhat patronizing for scientists to swoop in
-
and tell a family what they need to change in order for their child to succeed.
-
So I want to share an idea with you.
-
What if we tried to help young children in poverty
-
by simply giving their families more money?
-
I'm privileged to be working with a team of economists,
-
social policy experts and neuroscientists
-
in leading Baby's First Years,
-
the first-ever randomized study
-
to test whether poverty reduction causes changes in children's brain development.
-
Now, the ambition of the study is large,
-
but the premise is actually quite simple.
-
In May of 2018,
-
we began recruiting 1,000 mothers living below the federal poverty line
-
shortly after they gave birth in a number of American hospitals.
-
Upon enrolling in our study,
-
all mothers receive an unconditional monthly cash gift
-
for the first 40 months of their children's lives,
-
and they're free to use this money however they like.
-
But importantly, mothers are being randomized,
-
so some mothers are randomized to receive a nominal monthly cash gift
-
and others are randomized to receive several hundred dollars each month,
-
an amount that we believe is large enough
-
to make a difference in their day-to-day lives,
-
in most cases increasing their monthly income by 20 to 25 percent.
-
So in this way,
-
we're hoping to finally move past questions
-
of how poverty is correlated with child development
-
and actually be able to test whether reducing poverty causes changes
-
in children's cognitive, emotional and brain development
-
in the first three years of life --
-
the very time when we believe
-
the developing brain may be most malleable to experience.
-
Now, we won't have definitive results from this study for several years,
-
and if nothing else,
-
1,000 newborns and their moms will have a bit more cash each month
-
that they tell us they very much need.
-
But what if it turns out that a cost-effective way
-
to help young children in poverty
-
is to simply give their moms more money?
-
If our hypotheses are borne out,
-
it's our hope that results from this work will inform debates about social services
-
that have the potential to effect millions of families with young children.
-
Because while income may not be the only or even the most important factor
-
in determining children's brain development,
-
it may be one that,
-
from a policy perspective,
-
can be easily addressed.
-
Put simply,
-
if we can show that reducing poverty changes how children's brains develop
-
and that leads to meaningful policy changes,
-
then a young child born into poverty today
-
may have a much better shot at a brighter future.
-
Thank you.
-
(Applause)