In this Middle School Journal article, Rebecca Shore, Jenna Ray, and Paula Goolkasian (University of North Carolina/Charlotte) report the results of an experiment on science vocabulary learning with three 7^th-grade teachers in a large urban school. The researchers worked with teachers to systematically compare three memory strategies for learning these words: pathogen, vaccine, antibody, immunity, antibiotic, immune system, and antigen:

-   The first group of students used the standard approach – copying seven new words and definitions from the textbook’s glossary;

-   The second group of students talked to a classmate about the meaning of the words;

-   The third group of students drew colorful pictures of the words.

Students were quizzed on their knowledge of the words immediately afterward and again two days later.

            The results? “As expected,” say Shore, Ray, and Goolkasian, “we learned that different learning strategies can make a difference in word retention, particularly with struggling readers.” The second and third groups did significantly better than the first.

But there was an unexpected finding. Looking over more than 800 quizzes, Shore, Ray, and Goolkasian noticed that the majority of students from all three groups of students didn’t correctly define antibody, antigen, and antibiotic – all beginning with the same prefix anti. The researchers thought the same prefix would have helped students remember the meanings and distinguish among them, but the opposite was true. Clearly students’ attempts to retrieve the meaning of these words was hampered by confusion caused by the prefix.

Looking back at the textbook chapter from which these words were taken, the authors noticed that students were also introduced to two other clusters of easily-confused words: stalagmite and stalactite, and meiosis and mitosis. This made them think that study techniques might not be the most important factor in student success. Instead, they conjecture that teachers should use a morphological approach, emphasizing the meaning of different word parts.

Shore, Ray, and Goolkasian note that “similarities in new learning can cause negative transfer in memory and actually interfere with learning. After new learning takes place, the brain usually needs about a day to consolidate that learning. So, if a student was to practice a second similar skill before a first skill is consolidated in memory, the second skill can interfere with mastery of the first skill, and the child may not be able to perform either skill very well.” This suggests that when introducing a new cognitive task (or motor skill), teachers should draw attention to the similarities and differences and space out their presentations.

“Too Close for (Brain) Comfort: Improving Science Vocabulary Learning in the Middle Grades” by Rebecca Shore, Jenna Ray, and Paula Goolkasian in Middle School Journal, May 2013 (Vol. 44, #5, p. 16-21), no e-link available; the authors can be reached at rshore6@uncc.edu, jray51@uncc.edu, and pagoolka@uncc.edu. 

From the Marshall Memo #489