The main objective of this study is to see whether the use of computer-presented brain training games on young students can harness the potential overall neuroplasticity of their brain and improve learning as a whole. The experiment was performed on a study sample of 372 second graders. The variables in the experiment were four brain training games presented by the computer and designed with the intent of increasing “executive function” in students. The reason the age range of second graders was chosen is because evidence shows that executive function skills when children are between the ages of five and seven, predict what their future academic success. The four brain training games presented by the computer start out simplest in the first game, with training the concepts of concentration and attention, and then, as subsequent games progress, new algorithms are used to train other aspects of brain functions. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay This experiment was designed with the intent of obtaining data on both the short- and long-term effects of computer-presented brain training on math and reading performance and learning. It seems to answer two questions: The first is, can a brain training game immediately before a math or reading game improve performance on cognitive priming? The second question is: Does brain training for several months increase performance on school-administered standardized math and reading tests beyond the improvement compared to comparison classes that did not undergo brain training? Variables within the experiment including the four different types of brain games, as well as the areas of mathematics and reading in which it was intended to improve children's learning, were defined conceptually and operationally. They did this by explaining the four games and explaining that the complexity of the game's objectives increased as the games continued, as well as stating that it is known that prior stimulation actually alters the brain's processing of information by creating an intensification response to the stimulus, as opposed to “task-related visual stimulus” that delays responses to the stimuli. After identifying this, it was hypothesized that brain training would improve neurocognitive function, and the more brain training per week, the better. The null hypothesis is that training will make no difference in academic performance. The reason for addressing this question is that it is critical to better understand how young children can process and absorb material over time, so that academic institutions are able to implement these tools to increase learning at all levels. The sample size used in this study The study involved three hundred and seventy-two second graders in thirteen classrooms in public schools in Fairfax County, Virginia. Classes within each school were randomly assigned to the CC Reading Content Brain Training Game (202 students) or the CC Math Content Plus Brain Training Game. Three other schools with ten second-grade classes served as controls and did not play any of the games. They avoided racial and socioeconomic bias by recruiting students from schools.