Weighing up the Effects of Working Memory and Cognitive Abilities in CLIL Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era of globalization, multilingualism is no longer the exception but the rule. To fully promote the commnicative and functional development of multilingual learners, different educational programs at school have been implemented in the past few years. The study presented here is a contribution in this direction, by investigating the linguistic development in a second foreign language (L3 English) of students who were exposed to asymmetric input exposure in this and another non-native language. This other language was the L2 (German), which the learners (n= 50, 11-13 years old) were studying in a CLIL context together with the native languages of the participants (Spanish and Catalan). Within such a context, the purpose of the study is two-fold. On the one hand, it attempts to investigate the linguistic attainment in the L3, measured in terms of various dimensions of writing performance in a composition task, namely, fluency, accuracy, structural complexity and lexical complexity. On the other hand, the study aimed at exploring the contribution of various components of working memory (short-term memory and attention switching) to performance in these linguistic dimensions. The results suggest that individual differences in storage capacity and in capability for attention and task switching had an effect on the accuracy of the learners’ performance, and to a lesser extent, also lexical complexity. Moreover, it was found that in general, attentional abilities had a greater impact than memory. These results are discussed in light of previous findings, while proposing directions for further investigation in the field.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".