Welche Bedeutung haben die Neurowissenschaften für die Fremdsprachendidaktik? : eine pro- und retrospektive Studie in Bezug auf Theorie und Praxis
Today, there is growing demand that education should be integrated with relevant neuroscientific findings to answer questions of upbringing and learning. This approach is considered both forward-looking and necessary internationally. For example, in 2004 the OECD organised conferences under the title “Brain and Learning” in several countries. For quite a time the discipline of foreign language teaching (FLT) is attempting to integrate findings of neuroscience with its own theories and recommended methods. In parallel a new discipline called neurodidactics (ND) has emerged from education. As a spin-off discipline ND wants to answer questions of learning by means of neuroscience. However, ND as well as similar approaches also raise serious doubts about their practicability. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this dissertation is to focus the dichotomy between approval and rejection of this new trend in education. With regard to FLT it is analysed to what extent authors refer to neuroscience to shed new light on the theory and practice of foreign language learning and teaching, i.e. to separate the theoretical and methodological wheat from the chaff. Another aim of this dissertation is to pave the way for the future effective cooperation between neuroscience and FLT. METHOD: The method is twofold. Firstly, scanning the FLT literature the integration of neuroscientific findings with FLT is analysed within a fifteen year time frame from 1990 to 2004. The data found is assessed qualitatively with special regard to 1) the representation of language in the brain, 2) the paradigm shift, where symbolism is replaced by connectionism, and 3) various aspects of learning and memory. Secondly, based on the analysis advice for the future cooperation of FLT and neuroscience is given. RESULTS: Bridging the gap between FLT and neuroscience often fails: As for instance, authors of FLT a) misinterpret models of neuroscience and cognitive psychology, b) draw conclusions from unsuitable and/or only a few neuroscientific publications reflecting work in progress, and c) misapply the terminology of neuroscience. For these and other reasons, the discipline of FLT does not succeed in legitimating theories, methods and techniques, neither are new ideas formulated which are influenced by neuroscience. CONCLUSIONS: The future relationship between FLT and neuroscience is discussed: The wider the scope of an FLT study is the more superficial the results are. This does not help addressing concrete issues and special problems of FLT. For example, knowing that changing one’s synapses’ weights is a crucial factor in learning does not improve vocabulary learning. Instead, studies should mainly concentrate on one single aspect of language acquisition or language processing. It is suggested that the discussion on the pros and cons of an early start in second language learning serves as a realistic example of a transdisciplinary research project: On the one hand further research on the representation of language in the brain in relation to age and proficiency will provide new insights into relating behaviour with neural activity. On the other hand these insights combined with what we already know about how the brain processes information will help providing the pupils with nearly optimal learning conditions.
info:eu-repo/classification/ddc/370, Neurologie, Fachdidaktik, Englischunterricht, Erziehung, Schul- und Bildungswesen, Fremdsprachenunterricht, Fachdidaktik Englisch, Neurowissenschaften, Neurodidaktik, Fremdsprachenforschung, Sprache, Gehirn, Konnektionismus
Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
Publikationsserver der RWTH Aachen University