One who hesitates is NOT lost (when repeating new words to remember them better by)

                                                   

(Credit: Clker.com)

Actually, the study (Summarized by Neurosciencenews.com) Repeating New Words Out Loud Isn’t Always the Best Way to Learn Them, by Kapnoula et al. Basque Center on Cognition, Brain and Language (BCBL) is, more or less, a neuroscientific validation of a principle established decades (and decades ago) by experienced language teachers: sometimes pausing for a instant before you repeat the new word (or piles of words) is the better way to learn and remember it. 

The research does, however, point indirectly to an important development in the field in the last few decades: learning new words out of context, even if the meaning is provided in some form, is a very delicate and complex process, best case. Simply put, subjects in one condition either (a) repeated a new  English-looking, nonsense word (e.g., penivasher) immediately or (b) paused slightly and then repeated the word out loud. With a 4-second pause, their memory for the latter words the next day was significantly better than the former. From the study:

“When a person repeats a word immediately after hearing it, cognitive resources are dedicated to preparing the production of the word and, as a result, these resources cannot be used to deeply encode that word. In contrast, if production is delayed for a few seconds, this overlap is avoided, allowing deeper learning and encoding to take place.”

Ok. That makes sense. But then we have this: 

“Understanding these cognitive mechanisms can teach us how to use repetition more efficiently in educational contexts. For example, teachers can encourage students to repeat a new word the first time they hear it, but after this first exposure, the learning processes should focus more on listening rather than on production,” 

What? Why do I suspect that the researchers have never taught or been taught language--or if they have, poorly, at that?

 " . . . repeat it (once) but after this first exposure, the learning process should focus on listening rather than production . . .?" 

Imagine in just what teaching system/context would that apply. Granted, if all you are working with are new words IN ISOLATION (without associated meaning), where the goal is just reading or listening comprehension for some reason--maybe passing an L2 reading test, not speaking, that figures. But if the new words are actual L2 words, encountered in a rich, memorable context and high frequency collocation--the general M.O. of contemporary language methodology--then radically switching away from productive, out loud repetition/use of words in learning is  . . . well . . . arcane, to put it mildly. 

This may be a case where researchers take what is actually a very nice study and pretty much fanta-(or over)-size its potential application, or don't spend enough time on the concluding paragraph. (I'd pause a bit before assuming it is but the latter . . . )

Now if you do want to experience full-body, memorable engagement/repetition of new words--without hesitation--go to: www.actonhaptic/kinetik 

Keep in touch.

Bill

Source: Wait long and prosper! Delaying production alleviates its detrimental effect on word learning. Kapnoula, C. & Sameul, A. 2023 Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2022.2144917

Managing distraction in (haptic pronunciation) teaching: to block or to hype . . . or both!

New study by Udakis et al:  Interneuron-specific plasticity at parvalbumin and somatostatin inhibitory
synapses onto CA1 pyramidal neurons shapes hippocampal output, characterized by Science Daily as a  . . . a breakthrough in understanding how memories can be so distinct and long-lasting without getting muddled up." Normally, I wouldn't take a shot at connecting research in basic neuroscience to haptic pronunciation teaching, but this one, describing the basic mechanisms by which some memories get stored so that they are recalled vividly later, points to a couple of principles that should underlie all instruction, not just haptic pronunciation teaching. 

In essence what were identified are two key "circuits," in effect, one that basically intensified the event and another that served to block out distraction, or put another way functions to inhibit other "learning" that might cover over or undermine an experience. One interesting implication of that model is that the brain, in some sense, is "intentionally" managing distraction. Now the conditions that have to be in play for an experience to be "protected" are, of course, myriad, but the concept that highly systematic attention to distraction, not just increasing excitement or emotional engagement in a "teachable moment" is critical is worth considering. 

Clker.com

In the comment on the earlier post on distraction, the observation was made that, at least in one program, distraction was not seen as having any relevance in instruction, whatsoever. My guess is that that is the case in many systems as well. In our haptic pronunciation teaching workshops one of the questions we must explore is how teachers explicitly and intentionally deal with in class distractions, of all kinds, but especially extraneous kinetic (movement in the room), visual (elements in the visual field of learners), auditory (any noise coming in from outside or being generated in the room), olfactor (odors), airborne (pollution, etc.), temperature fluctuations and furniture comfort and distribution. 

Any one of those can seriously undermine instruction, of course. In haptic work which is based on systematic control of movement and gesture and utilization of the visual field, you can see how any distraction, in addition to just naturally "wandering students minds" can undermine the process. Consequently, we attend to ALL of them in our initial assessment of the classroom setting that learners are about to enter. 

Just the use of gesture and movement synchronized with speaking will capture the attention of learners at least temporarily mediating the surrounding potentially distractions, but the idea is that in addition to learners being "captivated" by the lesson content, activities and instructor delivery, attention to or control of select environmental features may be extraordinarily important. Assuming you can not control everything at once, I'd suggest you use our basic heuristic: adjust . . . at least just one or two intentionally . . . each class--without letting learners know what you are up to.  Then maybe do some kind of warm up, maybe not like this one of mine, but you get the idea!

Source: 

University of Bristol. (2020, September 8). Research unravels what makes memories so detailed and enduring. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 1, 2020 from www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/09/200908131139.htm

Great memory for words? They're probably out of their heads!

Perhaps the greatest achievement of neuroscience to date has been to repeatedly (and empirically) confirm common sense. That is certainly the case with teaching or training. Here's a nice one.

For a number of reasons, the potential benefit of speaking a word or words out loud and in public

Clipart: Clker.com

when you are trying to memorize or encode it--rather than just repeating it "in your head"--is not well understood in language teaching. For many instructors and theorists, the possible negative effects on the learner of speaking in front of others and getting "unsettling" feedback far outweigh the risks. (There is, of course, a great deal of research--and centuries of practice--supporting the practice of repeating words out loud in private practice.)

In what appears to be a relatively elegant and revealing (and also common-sense-confirming) study, Lafleur and Boucher of Montreal University, as summarized by ScienceDaily (full citation below) explored under which conditions subsequent memory for words is better: (a) saying it to yourself "in your head", (b) saying it to yourself in your head and moving your lips when you do, (c) saying it to yourself as you speak it out loud, and (d) saying the word out loud in the presence of another person. The last condition was substantially the best; (a) was the weakest.

The researchers do speculate as to why that should be the case. (ScienceDaily.com quoting the original study):

"The production of one or more sensory aspects allows for more efficient recall of the verbal element. But the added effect of talking to someone shows that in addition to the sensorimotor aspects related to verbal expression, the brain refers to the multisensory information associated with the communication episode," Boucher explained. "The result is that the information is better retained in memory."

The potential contribution of interpersonal communication as context information to memory for words or experiences is not surprising. How to use that effectively and "safely" in teaching is the question. One way, of course, is to ensure that the classroom setting is both as supportive and nonthreatening as possible. Add to that a social experience with others that also helps to anchor the memory better.

Haptic pronunciation teaching is based on the idea that instructor-student, and student-student communication about pronunciation must be both engaging and efficient--and resonately and richly spoken out loud. (Using systematic gesture does a great deal to make that work. See v4.0 later this month for more on that.)

I look forward to hearing how that happens in your class or your personal language development. If that thread gets going, I'll create a separate page for it. 

Keep in touch!

Citation:
University of Montreal. "Repeating aloud to another person boosts recall." ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 6 October 2015. .

Intrusive and proactive pronunciation instruction (IPPI!)

Clip art: Clker

Love that acronym! Over the life of the blog there have been several posts that relate to exercise persistence. What comes out of that research, from several disciplines, is the idea that advising and helping students managing their time is a very good idea. In this Science Digest summary of MA thesis research by Kansas State student, Tennant, the effect of intrusive and proactive advising and engagement with freshman college students is striking. (US universities are rediscovering the importance of student retention in these difficult economic times, apparently.)  Although Tennant's work focuses primarily on at-risk students, the implications for our work are clear: resources and energy spent on assisting students in mangage life and study outside of class pay off.

What do you know about how your students study and practice of pronunciation on their own? (For that matter, what do you know about their life outside of class?) The ambivalence that we all deal with between learner autonomy and empowerment on one hand-and motivating (or cajoling) them to do their homework that you have assigned for their own good on the other . . . reflects where the field is today. The position that there could possibly be one basic pronunciation program that "fits all"--and that it could be integrated into general speaking and listening instruction--seems very much a throw back to earlier structuralist language teaching.

We have learned a great deal since the 50s about method design and what constitutes the range of strategies and technologies that can be applied to the process. The AH-EPS approach is to (A) use the basic phonological structures of the language as a standard point of departure for enhancing and integrating learners' ability to learn new sounds and vocabulary, and (B) to carefully prescribe a framework for what should go on between formal classes (or working with a haptic video independently.) That framework involves both fixed warm ups and pedagogical-movement routines associated with L2 sound features, and, most importantly, staged extension to learners' individual needs and current program of study.

In a classroom setting that means training both instructors and learners to use a set of techniques for presenting, correcting, remembering and recalling what should be integrated into spontaneous speaking, listening, reading and writing. IPPI! (or perhaps, H-IPPI!)