Investigating distribution of practice effects for the learning of foreign language verb morphology in the young learner classroom

Within limited-input language classrooms, understanding the effect of distribution of practice (spacing between practice) on learning is critical, yet evidence is conflicting and of limited relevance for young learners. For second language (L2) grammar learning, some studies reveal advantages for spacing of 7 days or more (Bird, 2010; Rogers, 2015), but others for shorter spacing (Suzuki, 2017). Further, little is known about the role of cognitive individual differences (e.g., language analytic ability) in mediating practice distribution effects for L2 grammatical knowledge development and retention (Suzuki & DeKeyser, 2017). To address this gap, this classroom-based study investigated whether distribution of practice and language analytic ability moderated the effectiveness of explicit, input-based grammar instruction for young first language (L1) English learners of French (aged 8 to 11). The study revealed minimal differences between longer (7-day) versus shorter (3.5-day) spacing of practice for learning an L2 French verb inflection subsystem, at either post- or delayed post-test. Minimal group-level gains and substantial within-group variation in performance at post-tests was observed. Accuracy of practice during training and language analytic ability were significantly associated with post-test performance under both practice schedules. These findings indicated that within an ecologically valid classroom context, differences in distribution of practice had limited impact on learner performance on our tests; rather, individual learner differences were more critical in moderating learning. This highlights the importance of considering individual learner differences in the development of resources and the potential of digital tools for dynamically adapting instruction to suit individuals

Fatty acids and sleep in UK children: subjective and pilot objective sleep results from the DOLAB study - a randomized controlled trial

Sleep problems in children are associated with poor health, behavioural and cognitive problems, as are deficiencies of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids such as docosahexaenoic acid. Theory and some evidence support a role for these fatty acids in sleep regulation, but this issue has received little formal investigation. We examined associations between blood fatty acid concentrations (from fingerstick blood samples) and subjective sleep (using an age-standardized parent questionnaire) in a large epidemiological sample of healthy children aged 7–9 years (n = 395) from mainstream UK schools. In a randomized controlled trial, we then explored whether 16-week supplementation (600 mg day?1) with algal docosahexaenoic acid versus placebo might improve sleep in a subset of those children (n = 362) who were underperforming in reading. In a randomly selected subsample (n = 43), sleep was also assessed objectively via actigraphy. In 40% of the epidemiological sample, Child Sleep Habits Questionnaire scores indicated clinical-level sleep problems. Furthermore, poorer total sleep disturbance scores were associated weakly but significantly with lower blood docosahexaenoic acid (std coeff. ?0.105*) and a lower docosahexaenoic acid : arachidonic acid ratio (std coeff. ?0.119**). The treatment trial showed no significant effects on subjective sleep measures. However, in the small actigraphy subsample, docosahexaenoic acid supplementation led on average to seven fewer wake episodes and 58 min more sleep per night. Cautiously, we conclude that higher blood levels of docosahexaenoic acid may relate to better child sleep, as rated by parents. Exploratory pilot objective evidence from actigraphy suggests that docosahexaenoic acid supplementation may improve children's sleep, but further investigations are needed

Rethinking learning? Challenging and accommodating neoliberal educational agenda in the integration of Forest School into mainstream educational settings

A nation’s education system plays a key role in future economic competitiveness. Political attention to education has fuelled geographical interest in the role of formal education and informal learning environments in the cultivation of future citizen-workers. To date, formal and informal learning have largely been considered separately, but this paper responds by critically evaluating the intersections between the two spheres. This agenda is pursued through in-depth analysis of two state-funded, mainstream primary schools in the Midlands, UK, which adopt a Forest School programme. Qualitative in nature, the research involved 37 semi-structured interviews with teachers and children in the Foundation class and Year 4 (ages 4-5 and 8-9 respectively). The findings demonstrate that children understand classroom learning to contribute to their future pathways in a credentialised labour market, yet some struggle to frame Forest School activities as educational. Although presented as an antidote to the regimen of the school day, Forest School can thus be justified by some participants in relation to curriculum alignment and the future efficacy of the skills and knowledge acquired. In conclusion, this paper contributes to debates on the intersections of formal and informal education to examine how alternative education can function to counteract the institutionalisation of mainstream settings, whilst paradoxically developing skills in children that are valued by neoliberal states. More broadly, this furthers debates in Geographies of Education about what constitutes valuable learning in the primary school setting, and draws attention to the ways innovations might further exclude children currently disadvantaged in the education system