But what I find relevant to teaching English as a foreign language is the suggestion that this extant knowledge is so efficient in guiding human behaviour because it is automatically“ tagged” by language. The implication of this is that, in learning a foreign language, working memory( attention) is guided by previous knowledge, which is inherently tagged by the native language. This idea is supported by research showing that we remember the gist of what we read in a second or foreign language in our first language. In other words, the idea of immersion language teaching, in which only the L2 is used, is completely impossible to achieve, as all student learning is immersed in their prior, linguistically-tagged knowledge. But the big question for me is: How much does this inevitable intrusion of the L1 interfere with L2 learning? More specifically, what does it add to the working memory load associated with performing tasks and exercises in the L2? When we allow time for planning output or responding to input, do we allow sufficient time for the working memory load of using the L1 as well as the L2 to integrate the L2 input into our previous( long-term) knowledge? Do we have any idea what sufficient time is, for learners with high or low working memory capacity?
Overall, I guess the key reminder for me from Peter’ s talk, and reflecting on working memory in the foreign language learning classroom, is that is highlights just how important it is that activities are engaging enough to keep distraction at bay as much as possible, yet also allow sufficient processing time so as not to overload learners. With such a delicate balancing act to achieve, and given it will vary according to individual differences between learners, maybe it shouldn’ t be so surprising when a lesson plan works perfectly in one class yet falls to pieces in another!
Further reading( freely available online):
Doolittle, P. E., & Altstaedter, L. L.( 2009). The effect of working memory capacity on multimedia learning: Does attentional control result in improved performance? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching, 2( 1), 7-25.
Lunqvist, M., Rose, J., Herman, P, Brincat, S. L, Buschman, T. J., & Miller, E. K.( 2016). Gamma and beta bursts underlie working memory. Neuron, 90, 152 – 164.
Ma, W. J., Husain, M., & Bays, P. M.( 2014). Changing concepts of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 17( 3), 347 – 356.
Unsworth, N., Engle, R. W.( 2007). The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: Active maintenance in primary memory and controlled search from secondary memory. Psychological Review, 114( 1), 104 – 132.
Caroline Handley is a Visiting Faculty Member at Asia University in Tokyo and a PhD candidate at Swansea University in Wales. Her main research interests are in vocabulary and the mental lexicon, and the interaction between linguistic and conceptual knowledge.
6