Download pdf
English Language Learning Students’ Second Language Acquisition: Cognitive Factors and Supporting Strategies
- 1 Ontario Institute For Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West Toronto, Ontario, Canada
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Second language acquisition is learning a second language after a first language is already established. Cognitive load means the amount of information that working memory can hold at one time. As working memory has limit capacity and could be influenced by various factors, instructional teaching should avoid overloading it. This paper analyzed three cognitive factors which significantly influence English language learning (ELL) students in the process of their Second language acquisition (SLA). Second language acquisition a highly influenced by negative language transfer between Chinese and English. Redundancy of unnecessary learning information and transiency of spoken information adding additional learning process in working memory that don't positive contribute to learning. Due to the three main factors, several strategies have been developed to support English language learner’s second language acquisition. Teachers could create an English-learning friendly classroom by encouraging positive learning attitude and increasing the English language input. Provide a multimedia learning environment, reduce the unnecessary information, use dual-channel learning theory and choose appropriate approach based on individual needs are some other strategies that teachers could use to encourage student’s second language acquisition in classroom setting. Therefore, this paper explained the cognitive learning process of second language acquisition and provide several suggestions of teaching strategies to encourage ELL students’ language learning.
Keywords
supporting strategy, Second language acquisition, cognitive load capacity
[1]. Emmorey, K., Giezen, M. R., Petrich, J. A., Spurgeon, E., & Farnady, L. O. G. (2017). The relation between working memory and language comprehension in signers and speakers. Acta psychologica, 177, 69-77.
[2]. Sakai, K. L. (2005). Language acquisition and brain development.Science, 310(5749), 815-819.
[3]. Ma W. J., Husain M., Bays P. M. (2014). Changing concepts of working memory. 17 347–356. 10.1038/nn.3655
[4]. Rudner M. (2018). Working Memory for Linguistic and Non-linguistic Manual Gestures: Evidence, Theory, and Application. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 679.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00679
[5]. Vijayalakshmi, V., & Patchainayagi, S. (2020). Role of Memory in Language Learning-A Review. International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education, 12(2).
[6]. Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
[7]. Anthony M. I., Daniel M. M., Philomena N. M., Amos M. N., Njagi I. K., An Overview of Major Biological and Contextual Factors in Language Acquisition, American Journal of Linguistics, Vol. 1 No. 3, 2012, pp. 33-39. doi: 10.5923/j.linguistics.20120103.03.
[8]. Penfield W., Roberts L., (1959) Speech and brain mechanisms. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
[9]. Birdsong D. (2006) Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview. Language Learning. 56:9–49.
[10]. Wen, Z., Biedroń, A., & Skehan, P. (2017). Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. Language Teaching, 50(1), 1-31.doi:10.1017/S0261444816000276
[11]. Li, S. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 801-842.
[12]. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285.
[13]. Cowan N. (2010). The Magical Mystery Four: How is Working Memory Capacity Limited, and Why? Current directions in psychological science, 19(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277
[14]. Jackson, D. O. (2020). Working memory and second language development: A complex, dynamic future? Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 89-109. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2020.10.1.5
[15]. Nawal A. F (2018) Cognitive load theory in the context of second language academic writing, Higher Education Pedagogies, 3:1,385402, DOI: 10.1080/23752696.2018.1513812
[16]. Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 27–45.
[17]. Bhela, B. (1999). Native language interference in learning a second language: Exploratory case studies of native language interference with target language usage. International Education Journal, 1(1), 22-31.
[18]. Derakhshan, A., & Karimi, E. (2015). The Interference of First Language and Second Language Acquisition. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5, 2112-2117.
[19]. Nemati, M., & Taghizade, M. (2006). Exploring similarities and differences between L1 and L2. IRJABS, 4(9), 2477-2483.
[20]. Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
[21]. Baddeley, A. (1986). Working memory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
[22]. Jiang, D., & Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J., (2018). The Curious Case of Improving Foreign Language Listening Skills by Reading Rather than Listening: an Expertise Reversal Effect. Educational Psychology Review. 30. 1-27. 10.1007/s10648-017-9427-1.
[23]. Liu, M. &Toprac, P. & Yuen, T. (2009). What Factors Make a Multimedia Learning Environment Engaging: A Case Study. 10.4018/978-1-60566-158-2.ch010.
[24]. Ellis, R. （1997）, Second Language Acquisition, Oxford University Press, Oxford
[25]. Miller, GA. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 63: 81–97.
[26]. Ipek, H. (2009). Comparing and Contrasting First and Second Language Acquisition: Implications for Language Teachers. English Language Teaching. 2. 10.5539/elt.v2n2p155.
[27]. Yang, M., Cooc, N. & Sheng, L. (2017) An investigation of cross-linguistic transfer between Chinese and English: a meta-analysis. Asian. J. Second. Foreign. Lang. Educ. 2, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-017-0036-9
[28]. Wu, Ying. (2010). Er Yu Xi De Zhong Mu Yu Fu Qian Yi Xian Xiang Ji Dui Ce Yan Jiu (A Study of L1 Transfer in Second Language Learning and the Strategies). Journal of Chongqing University of Science and Technology (Social Sciences Edition), (2), 188-189
[29]. Zhai, H. (2009). On the Influence of Native Language Transfer in Second Language Acquisition. Journal of Chaohu College, 11(5), 99-102.
[30]. Wu, Mingjun. (2004). Negative Transfer in Vocabulary. Journal of Jiangsu Teachers University of Technology, 10(1), 61-66
[31]. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Multimedia learning. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 41, pp. 85-139). Academic Press.
[32]. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental Representations. New York: Oxford University Press.
[33]. Chang, C., & Tseng, K., & Tseng, J. (2011). Is single or dual channel with different English proficiencies better for English listening comprehension, cognitive load and attitude in ubiquitous learning environment? Computers & Education. 57. 2313-2321. 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.006.
[34]. Bagui, S. (1998). Reasons for increased learning using multimedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(1), 3–18
[35]. Taylor, G. (2005). Perceived processing strategies of students watching captioned video. Foreign Language Annals, 38(3), 422–427.
[36]. Winke, P., Gass, S., & Sydorenko, T. (2010). The effects of captioning videos used for foreign language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology, 14(1), 65–86
[37]. Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-232.
[38]. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 185–233
[39]. Plass, J., & Chun, D., & Mayer, R. & Leutner, D. (2003). Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities. Computers in Human Behavior. 19. 221-243. 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00015-8.
[40]. Diao, Y., Sweller, J. & Chandler, P. A. (2007). The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language. American Journal of Psychology, 120 (3), 237-261.
[41]. Leahy, W., & Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory, modality of presentation and the transient information effect. Applied Cognitive Psychology,25, 943–951
[42]. Furnham, A. (2001). Remembering stories as a function of the medium of presentation. Psychological Reports, 89, 483-486.
[43]. Yow, W. Q., & Li, X. (2015). Balanced bilingualism and early age of second language acquisition as the underlying mechanisms of a bilingual executive control advantage: why variations in bilingual experiences matter. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 164. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00164
[44]. Zhao, Y. (2019) Negative Transfer of Mother Tongue in English. Creative Education, 10, 940-946. doi: 10.4236/ce.2019.105070.
[45]. Paivio, A. (2006). Mind and its evolution; A dual coding theoretical interpretation, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
Cite this article
Meng,L. (2023). English Language Learning Students’ Second Language Acquisition: Cognitive Factors and Supporting Strategies. Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media,3,817-827.
Data availability
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
Disclaimer/Publisher's Note
The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s). EWA Publishing and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
About volume
Volume title: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Innovation and Philosophical Inquiries (ICEIPI 2022), Part II
© 2024 by the author(s). Licensee EWA Publishing, Oxford, UK. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license. Authors who
publish this series agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the series right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this
series.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the series's published
version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial
publication in this series.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and
during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See
Open access policy for details).