The Application of Information Processing Theory to English Vocabulary Learning Strategies in a Chinese High School
1.0 Introduction
Learning of language among humans is a topic that has gained educators’ attention. This is because how individuals learn, involving acquiring, synthesizing, and retaining previous information, influences the choice of long-term objectives associated with an instruction. Vocabulary learning is a component of language learning, which improves learners’ understanding of acquiring the second language (Letchumanan et al. 2016; Moeller et al. 2009; Liu 2016). In its use in various senses, the definition of the term vocabulary is not limited to counts of words in a language. Still, it includes entire words associated with a particular chronological era (Bai 2018). Vocabulary is ambiently learned in an environment rich in oral and written communication: a learning context that provides direct teaching and incidental learning opportunities. Chen (2009) has echoed a similar concept by asserting that traditionally, teaching and learning techniques such as direct method, which has emphasized sole use of target language in class while communicating meaning directly by linking speech forms to objects, actions, gestures, situations, mime rather than concentrating on classroom’s practical realities is ineffective. Nightmares characterize this approach of teaching and learning; for instance, in Western China, high school students forget vocabularies as soon as they look at them from the dictionary and use the same vocabularies repeatedly (Chen, 2009). Some scholars have suggested that vocabulary learning grounded on theory becomes more useful for the learners (Skehan 1996). In this paper, we single-handedly choose to explore the application of information process theory to English vocabulary learning in Chinese high schools.
2.0 Teaching and Learning Experience Explored
Researchers have proposed various strategies for learning vocabulary. A study conducted by Letchumanan et al. (2016) has broadly classified vocabulary learning strategies into direct and indirect strategies. Such classification is also confirmed by Oxford (1990), as cited by Bai (2018). The direct class encapsulates cognitive, memory, and compensation strategies, whereas the indirect class embodies social, effective, and metacognitive strategies. After listing vocabulary learning strategies such as vocabulary learning beliefs, guessing strategies, activation strategies, dictionary strategies, guessing strategies, regulation, and more, Gu and Johnson (1996), as cited by Letchumanan et al. (2016), further adopted a broad classification of vocabulary learning strategies into metacognitive strategies (encompassing monitoring, planning, end evaluation strategies) and cognitive strategies (including rehearsal or practice, attention, and production). Tao (2006); Onnis (2016) classified vocabulary learning strategies as memory, cognitive, metacognitive, social, and affective strategies; more information about vocabulary learning strategies is provided in appendix A. Whether direct or indirect, both of these strategies promote rote learning instead of meaningful learning, especially when learners do not take center-stage in the teaching-learning process, which should be the basis of teaching and learning English vocabulary.
Theory plays a crucial role in developing an effective teaching and learning experience. This is why I adopted a vocabulary teaching and learning strategy tailored to information—processing model to improve the effectiveness of English language education among Chinese high school students. Teaching and learning supported by a theoretical framework are purported to be meaningful (Slate and Charlesworth 1988). As opposed to rote learning, meaningful learning is appreciated as a learning approach with unprecedented ability to encourage students to explore knowledge and foster students’ vocabulary competence besides integrating new knowledge with the old one (Pahriyono and Asmuni 2014). Moody et al. (2018) stated that meaningful learning also drives the creative and active mind of learners in contextual learning. Thus, the selection of teaching and learning strategy based on theory provide experiential learning to Chinese high schoolers.
3.0 Rationale for Selecting Teaching and Learning Experience Explored
There is a close link between information processing theory and undergraduate internship programs, more so for skilled-based teaching and learning perspectives, encompassing presentation, practice, and production alongside the input-processing-output model. This is the rationale why I selected information processing theory. Modern classes are characterized by the rapid proliferation of computers, which has encouraged computer-based learning models such as the information processing model (Kandarakis and Poulos 2008). Figured from a different lens, an information processing model has been developed adequately to provide alternative suggestions to improve the teaching-learning process (Slate and Charlesworth 1988). Therefore, the information processing model is seen as a tool used for improving the delivery of classroom instruction by the teacher.
4.0 Exploration of the Selected Theory and Experience
It is in the interest of educators to equip students with theoretical knowledge and understanding about such theories and learn about the application of the theoretical framework in practice.
Anecdotal accounts of practicing teachers’ failure to make the transition from theory to practice effectively and with confidence occur too often. To some extent, this is caused by the inability of practicing teachers to integrate both model and practice in teaching and learning English vocabulary among high school learners in China. The integration of theory and practice is associated with the practical value of learning theory-based concepts. This is a skill-based teaching-learning approach, which leverages declarative, procedural, and automatized knowledge to the learners (Lecture Notes 2020). A combination of theory and practice-based experience helps learners become competent and capable experts indebted to knowledge acquisition, self-awareness, and skill-building (Wrenn and Wrenn, 2009). Every educator’s pride is to see their students appreciate the vitality of field and classroom experiences and learn that nothing is as practical as a good theory. The best learning environment is created when two modalities of learning and integrated into a course instead of solely applying every modality across multiple courses in for high school vocabulary teaching-learning curriculum. Therefore, I applied both a combination of theoretical experience and internship experience.
4.0 Development of Information Processing Theory
Gagne first proposed teaching and learning the information processing model to explain teaching-learning activities from an information-processing perspective. Information processing refers to brain manipulation or coding o information stored in the memory (Lutz and Huitt 2003). In the information processing model, the learning process is perceived as a process by which learners acquire and utilize information. It is a complex process in which the interaction between the environment and learners yields a learning behavior, highlighting practical application characteristics to apply better research findings of the teaching-learning model in teaching practice. Gagne believes that information processing during learning and memorizing learned concepts constitutes a typical teaching and learning theory in his understanding of the model. In its entirety, the information processing model suggests that the external environment always induces the learning subject, transforming into the nerve information via the receptor (Guo, 2019). The information is eventually propagated to the sensory recorder. The senses then register part of this information in short-term memory through encoding and later on stored in long-term memory. When the body needs stored information, the body is configured to conduct searches and retrieve long-term memory information. After the retrieval of the primary information, the body transmits part of the information to the reaction generator. In contrast, the other bit of information is sent to the short-term memory. The information processing model is characterized by a direct teaching-learning strategy (control and anticipation). Control is classified as a cognitive strategy, while anticipation belongs to the motivation strategy class. Thus, Gagne separates the learning process into stages, including students’ stimulation by the external environment and internalization of the external environment. Teaching is classified as an external event and how it is designed will impact the internal learning process.
4.1 The Stage Model
The information processing model gave rise to memory-based learning grounded on computer analogy, stage model, during the late 1960s. The stage model was put forward by and Shiffrin in 1968, as cited by McLaughlin et al. (1983). Traditionally, the stage model was the most widely used theory of information processing, which assumes that information is sourced from the external environment, processed by sensory memory, and stored in short-term memory or working memory (Lutz and Huitt 2003; Kandarakis and Poulos 2008). Working memory is a system for holding information temporarily and allowing such information to be used in performing a series of cognitive tasks encompassing transferring information into and retrieving information from the long-term memory, as shown in figure 1.
Figure 1: Showing Interaction between Memory Systems (Lecture Notes 2020 Slide 14).
According to the stage model, the memory system comprises nodes shift from being inactive to active continually depending on task processing. Node passiveness and inactivity are part of the elements that characterize the long-term storage of information (McLaughlin et al. 1983). In the presence of an external stimulus, a small number of memory system nodes are activated, which translates long-term stored information into the short-term store information. These nodes are activated in two ways: attention and automaticity. As defined by Suthers (1996) and cited by Lutz and Huitt (2003 p.3), Attention refers to the limitation of perceptual processing and generation of responses. Attention enhances the flow of information. It is affected by factors such as the learner’s meaningfulness, the complexity of new information, the similarity between competing stimuli, and learners’ physical ability. The opposite of attention is known as automaticity, and it is defined as overlearning of tasks and habitualness of sources of information coupled with minimal attention (DeKeyser and Criado 2012). Automaticity permits the redirection of attention to other stimuli or information, allowing learners to multi-task without being distracted by the acquisition of new information. Thus, the attention and automation process complete sensory memory in the stage model, and the whole model is summarized in figure 2.
Figure 1: Showing Stage Model (Lutz and Huitt 2003 p.3).
From figure1, there is three-stage in the stage model: sensory memory, working memory or sensory memory, and long-term memory. Learners’ senses internalize information from the external environment; thus, teaching is considered an external event. The span of sensory memory varies depending on the stimuli’ depth; for instance, auditory stimuli last for 3 seconds, while visual stimuli last for ½ a second (Lutz and Huitt 2003). Sensory memory is promoted in learners by an understanding pattern by which information is represented, a process known to many as pattern recognition. Numerous models explain the recognition of the pattern. However, I wish to focus only on the prototype model. This model asserts that the storage unit of information is an abstracted or generalized form of knowledge unit, which can be recognized by comparing input and prototype. Whenever these two concepts are established to be matching, then new information is accepted just like the existing ones. Short-term memory lasts as long before the elapse of 15-30 seconds. Long-term memory is the last stage often reserved on memory knowledge and experiences, which occurred at some point in time and analogous computer storage device, a hard disc (Kandarakis and Poulos 2008). Long-term memory is further classified as declarative memory and procedural memory. A declarative memory, also known as conscious memory, encompasses the remembrance of names, facts, and objects. Procedural memory involves forming ties between stimulus and response (associative learning or classical conditioning).
4.2 The Depths of Processing Model
For the furtherance of information processing theory ideas, the model of Depths of Processing was suggested by Craik and Lockhart in 1972. This model’s proponents assert that memory retention is influenced by variation in processing mode and not the duration of repeating information. According to this model, everything that reaches a learner never becomes an object of attention; instead, innate scanning systems select a line of input stimulus that accesses the central cognitive system while filtering other lines of stimulus to remain at the periphery of attention. Thus, in this model, the central cognitive system is regarded as a control system, which organizes tasks and sets a functional goal (McLaughlin et al. 1983). The depths of the processing model elaborate more about information processing theory, and multiple stages couple it.
These multiple stages of the Depths of Processing model include sensory or physical stage, matching input stimuli against store abstraction, and pattern recognition. The preliminary stage focuses on analyzing sensory or physical features like angles, lines, pitch, brightness, and loudness. The second stage is concentrated on matching input information against an abstraction based on previous learning. Pattern recognition is the last stage of this model, and more information about it is jotted down under the stage model (paragraph 3). As used in this context, depth is a greater degree of cognitive and semantic analysis (Craik and Lockhart 1972 p.675). This implies that after recognizing stimulus, it undergoes advanced processing and elaboration or enrichment, which triggers images and associations based on the previous experience. The Depths of Processing model advocates for similar processing levels existing in perceptual analysis of smell, sound, touch, sight, among others (Ekuni et al. 2011). Therefore, the outcome of such processing is the memory trace, which is a function of depth analysis. The information processing model is a complex model whose development has given rise to many models; among the discussed models in this context include the Stage model, the Prototype model, and the Depths of processing model; I wish to explore how these models are applicable in teaching and learning of English vocabulary among Chinese high schoolers in the next section.
6.0 Analysis of Internship Experience
Teachers who teach high school English vocabulary in China are expected to implement high school English teaching requirements tailored to trial implementation. This approach seeks the integration of a blend of scientific theory and practical guidance approach (Slate and Charlesworth 1988). Based on this approach, I expect teachers to rethink the objectives of training high school English vocabulary teaching to develop learners’ comprehensive English vocabulary ability. But how should teachers impart different kinds of knowledge while they are teaching? This is a question that has attracted the attention of most educators. By concentrating on motivating learners, teachers can foster the acquisition of different kinds of knowledge (practical and theoretical knowledge) in a single session of instruction. It is possible to achieve such motivation through the presentation, which is closely associated with declarative knowledge among Chinese high school students (Shi 2017; Guo 2019; Lightbown and Spada 2013). Significant motivation among learners is promoted when declarative knowledge is sequentially followed by procedural knowledge, which in most cases, is leveraged by teachers through encouraging rehearsal by way of repeating English vocabularies (practice). The acquisition of procedural knowledge is a more sophisticated process. The teacher is encouraged not to rely on words only but to back up such words with correct demonstrations and explanations. Regular teaching and English vocabulary learning can only be effective when teachers promote mastery of necessary declarative knowledge followed by promulgating mastery of essential procedural knowledge (progressive learning) (Guo 2019). An example of such progressive learning characterizes teaching-learning of the grammatical rule in constructing progressive tense from a verb to produce a meaning (verb+ing); for instance, ‘cheat’ is a declarative vocabulary after applying the grammatical rule, we get ‘cheating’ which is a procedural vocabulary.
It is prudential that information processing theory enables teachers and students alike to identify different kinds of knowledge. But they cannot last once internalized by the learner lest they are stored. Based on the information processing model, particularly the Stage model, the information process fosters student interaction with the external environment then organizes and stores the processed information in their minds (Guo 2019). In general, propositions and propositions networks represent declarative knowledge. Propositions are the tiniest units comprising of relationships and topics. As used in this context, the topic typically denotes object and subject, whereas relationships connect subjects and objects. For example, a teacher can construct a phrase like ‘I hate you,’ which is a proposition. In this proposition, the main body is ‘I,’ the object is ‘you,’ and the connection is ‘hate;’ Such connection produces a propositional network which give rise to semantic knowledge. Production and production networks represent procedural knowledge. Production is a pattern of processing which culminates to storage of processed information either in short-term or working memory and long-term memory. Procedural knowledge is commonly referred to as a skill completion. Production is also enhanced by teachers when they engage learners in practical application of English vocabulary to transform procedural knowledge to automatized knowledge. Thus, memorization and classification of vocabularies involve interaction of learners’ short-term memory and long-term memory (Liu 2016). The representation of words in either short-term and long-term memory by learners enhances effectiveness of English vocabulary teaching.
A heightened debate surrounds the criteria by which student learn English vocabularies. The common denominator in English vocabulary learning is polysemy. Polysemy is the association of one word with more than one meaning. In classification of polysemous words into marginal and typical words to derive meaning, teachers apply the Prototype model, which recognizes pattern of words (Guo 2019). For example, from the Chinese Contemporary Dictionary, ‘university’ means ‘a higher learning institution with teaching and research facilities typically including a graduate school and professional schools that award master’s degrees and doctorates and an undergraduate division charged with award of bachelor’s degrees’. From this definition we can extent meaning to capture more vocabularies such as curriculum, lecturers and students, professors, research institution, and so on. Such meanings are guided by rules of extracting semantic knowledge, what is referred to by scholars like Chen (2009), as semasiology and internalization.
The information processing models allows teachers to apply scientific strategies of teaching and learning. These strategies arouse attention of high school learners (Dunlosky et al. 2013). For instance, teachers are expected to introduce an instruction in a manner that looks different and trigger conflicts, which turns out to be an effective means of attracting learners’ attention. As suggested by the Depths Processing model, perception is selective because learners select pieces of stimulus input to internalize while restricting the learning effect (Guo 2019). I therefore recommend teachers to embrace correct guidance to make learners lock psychological resources into vital information. The most common scientific learning strategies is retelling which is divided into refinement repetition and maintenance repetition. The former is vested on establishment of connection between new and old information, whereas the latter is grounded on promoting mechanical memorization of familiar vocabularies (Bai 2018). Thus, retelling is a strategy used by teachers to add value to the teaching and learning of vocabularies.
7.0 Conclusion
The English language is a second language in China and learning of English vocabulary is treated to be as important as learning English language. Such learning is promoted by combining theoretical and practical strategies of teaching and learning (skill-based strategy). To be specific, in this paper, information processing model as been discussed and its application in learning of English vocabulary. The core rationale of applying information processing model is to promote
short-term memory and foster the transformation of short-term memory into long-term memory, which is an effective way of processing information. Vocabulary learning strategies based on information processing can promote processing of vocabulary, extraction of information and usage of vocabularies.
The outcome of this experience can provide rich reference point and direction for language teaching in Chinese high schools. Teachers are advised to guide learners to pay attention to vocabulary learning, create emphasis on the application of vocabulary, and strengthen the process of learning English vocabularies by using robust teaching strategies like retelling.
Bibliography
McLaughlin, B., Rossman, T. and McLeod, B., 1983. Second language learning: An information‐processing perspective 1. Language learning, 33(2), pp.135-158.
Skehan, P., 1996. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied linguistics, 17(1), pp.38-62.
Guo, J., 2019, March. The Enlightenment of Information Processing Theory on College English Teaching. In 2018 8th International Conference on Education and Management (ICEM 2018). Atlantis Press.
Shi, H., 2017. Learning strategies and classification in education. Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1(1), pp.24-36.
Han, Y., 2014. Foreign language vocabulary learning strategies: Patterns of use among college students (Doctoral dissertation).
Liu, P.L., 2016. Mobile English vocabulary learning based on concept-mapping strategy. Language Learning & Technology, 20(3), pp.128-141.
Tao, Z., 2006. AN INVESTIGATION INTO VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES USED BY NON－ENGLISH MAJORS. CELEA Journal, 29 (2), pp. 26-33. http://www.celea.org.cn/teic/66/66-27.pdf
Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K.A., Marsh, E.J., Nathan, M.J. and Willingham, D.T., 2013. Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), pp.4-58.
Chen, Y., 2009. A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to Classroom English Vocabulary Instruction for EFL Learners in Mainland China. English Language Teaching, 2(1), pp.95-100.
Peng, S., 2009. English vocabulary learning strategies of senior high school students (Doctoral dissertation, School of English Institute of Social Technology Suranaree University of Technology).
Onnis, L., 2016. Second Language Acquistion. https://blogs.ntu.edu.sg/hss-second-language-acquisition/wiki/chapter-17/
Moeller, A.K., Ketsman, O. and Masmaliyeva, L., 2009. The essentials of vocabulary teaching: From theory to practice.
Oxford, R.L., 2003. Language learning styles and strategies: An overview. Learning Styles & Strategies/Oxford, GALA, 2003, pp.1-25.
Bai, Z., 2018. An analysis of English vocabulary learning strategies. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(4), pp.849-855.
Letchumanan, K., Muthusam, P., Govindasamy, P. and Farashaiyan, A., 2016. An overview of preferred vocabulary learning strategies by learners. Asian Social Science, 12(10), pp.174-179.
Lightbown, P.M. and Spada, N., 2013. How languages are learned 4th edition-Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers. Oxford university press.
Johnson, K., 1997. Language teaching and skill learning. Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Lutz, S. and Huitt, W., 2003. Information processing and memory: Theory and applications. Educational Psychology Interactive, pp.1-17.
Pahriyono, P. and Asmuni, A., 2014, October. Meaningful learning for fostering the students’ pragmatic competence.
Moody, S., Hu, X., Kuo, L.J., Jouhar, M., Xu, Z. and Lee, S., 2018. Vocabulary instruction: A critical analysis of theories, research, and practice. Education Sciences, 8(4), p.180.
Kandarakis, A.G. and Poulos, M.S., 2008. Teaching implications of information processing theory and evaluation approach of learning strategies using LVQ neural network. Advances in Engineering Education, 5(3), pp.111-119.
Slate, J.R. and Charlesworth Jr, J.R., 1988. Information Processing Theory: Classroom Applications.
Wrenn, J. and Wrenn, B., 2009. Enhancing learning by integrating theory and practice. International Journal of Teaching and learning in higher education, 21(2), pp.258-265.
Lecture Notes, 2020. Information Processing Theory and Language Education.
Craik, F.I. and Lockhart, R.S., 1972. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 11(6), pp.671-684.
Ekuni, R., Vaz, L.J. and Bueno, O.F.A., 2011. Levels of processing: The evolution of a framework. Psychology & Neuroscience, 4(3), pp.333-339.
DeKeyser, R. and Criado, R., 2012. Automatization, skill acquisition, and practice in second language acquisition. The encyclopedia of applied linguistics.
Appendix
Appendix A: Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Peng 2009).
]'[;ljh