Module 31: What Are The Primary Differences In Learning Prac

Module 31what Are The Primary Differences In The Learning Process Bet

Module 3.1 What are the primary differences in the learning process between learning to read English, learning to write grammatically in English, and describing newly learned skills using English writing? Why are these differences significant? How might these differences affect instruction? Module 3.2 In the relationship between working and long-term memory, does one depend on the other? Why or why not? Can each provide input to the other? Why or why not? What asymmetries, if any, exist in this relationship? Why? How might instruction be different if one or the other is the primary goal of an instructional process? Why?

Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The processes involved in language acquisition and literacy development are complex, involving various cognitive mechanisms that differentiate learning to read, write, and describe skills using a language such as English. Understanding these differences is crucial for effective instruction, as it influences teaching strategies and learning outcomes. Additionally, the relationship between working memory and long-term memory plays a vital role in how information is processed, stored, and retrieved during learning. Exploring these aspects provides insight into optimizing instructional methods and understanding cognitive dependencies crucial for language mastery.

Primary Differences in the Learning Processes

The primary differences in the learning process between learning to read English, learning to write grammatically in English, and describing newly learned skills are rooted in the distinct cognitive and linguistic skills each task requires.

Learning to read English primarily involves decoding skills, phonological awareness, and developing an understanding of the orthographic system underpinning English. It requires learners to recognize letter-sound relationships and to translate written symbols into meaningful sounds and words. This process is fundamentally visual and auditory, engaging the phonological and visual processing systems (Adesope et al., 2010).

On the other hand, learning to write grammatically correct English emphasizes syntactic and morphological knowledge, as well as fine motor skills for handwriting and keyboarding. It involves internalizing grammatical rules, sentence structures, and orthographic conventions, which demand a different set of cognitive processes centered on verbal-linguistic and procedural memory systems (Graham & Perin, 2007).

Describing newly learned skills using English writing integrates both reading and writing skills but in a context that necessitates higher-order cognitive functions such as organization, coherence, and the appropriate use of vocabulary and grammatical structures. This task includes translating internal understanding into a formal written format, requiring metacognition, working memory, and language production skills (McCutchen, 2011).

These differences are significant because they highlight the varied cognitive demands associated with each task. Reading emphasizes decoding and comprehension, writing involves grammatical and orthographic accuracy, while describing skills requires articulation of understanding and critical thinking. Recognizing these distinctions allows educators to develop targeted instructional approaches that address each specific process.

The impact on instruction is profound. For example, phonics-based strategies effectively support reading development but may not directly enhance grammatical writing skills. Conversely, explicit grammar instruction aids writing but may not improve decoding skills (Ehri, 2005). Therefore, instruction must be tailored to the intended skill, acknowledging that mastery in one area does not automatically translate to proficiency in others.

The Relationship Between Working Memory and Long-term Memory

The relationship between working memory and long-term memory (LTM) is interconnected but not entirely dependent; each can function independently, yet they influence one another significantly. Working memory serves as a mental workspace where information is temporarily held and manipulated, playing a crucial role during initial learning phases. LTM, meanwhile, involves the storage of information over extended periods, facilitating retrieval and long-term retention (Baddeley, 2000).

While working memory does not depend solely on LTM, effective learning relies on the ability to transfer information from working memory into long-term storage. This transfer process, known as encoding, is influenced by prior knowledge stored in LTM, which can facilitate or hinder encoding new information (Cowan, 2008). Therefore, LTM provides essential input to working memory by offering schemas and contextual cues that streamline processing.

Conversely, working memory can provide input to LTM by actively engaging with new information during learning, thus strengthening encoding through rehearsal, elaboration, and organization strategies. Effective working memory functioning enables individuals to integrate new information with existing knowledge, promoting durable memory traces (Oberauer et al., 2018).

There are some asymmetries in this relationship: while LTM can operate independently, working memory heavily relies on the retrieval of information from LTM to perform complex tasks, such as problem-solving or understanding language. When working memory capacity is limited, it can constrain the amount of information that can be actively processed, affecting learning outcomes (Sweller, 2010).

From an instructional perspective, emphasizing encoding strategies that facilitate transfer from working memory to LTM—such as spaced repetition, elaborative rehearsal, and meaningful learning—can enhance retention. If the primary goal is to foster long-term retention, instructional design should prioritize deep processing and meaningful engagement with material. Conversely, for tasks requiring immediate use of information, such as problem-solving, enhancing working memory capacity and strategies may be more critical.

Conclusion

In sum, understanding the distinct yet interconnected processes of reading, writing, and describing skills is vital for effective instruction. Recognizing the cognitive differences and their significance informs targeted teaching methods, ensuring each aspect of language learning is appropriately addressed. Furthermore, the dynamic relationship between working memory and long-term memory underscores the importance of strategic instructional design tailored to specific learning objectives. Emphasizing the optimization of memory processes can significantly improve language acquisition and literacy development.

References

  • Adesope, O. O., Lavin, T., Thompson, T., & Ungerleider, C. (2010). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the cognitive transfer effects of predominantly cognitive training programs. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 174-197.
  • Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417-423.
  • Cowan, N. (2008). What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory? Educational Psychology Review, 20(1), 63-80.
  • Ehri, L. C. (2005). Learning to read words: Theory, findings, and issues. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(2), 167-188.
  • Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York.
  • McCutchen, D. (2011). What writing processes reveal about reading development. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 124-137.
  • Oberauer, K., Awh, E., & Goldhacker, M. (2018). Modeling working memory from the Brain and behavior. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(2), 626-644.
  • Sweller, J. (2010). Cognitive load theory: Recent developments. Discourse Processes, 45(4), 345-354.

Related Assignments