Phonological Loop and Mathematics

Many studies have investigated the relationship between the multi-components of working memory and learning mathematics. Researchers have found significant correlations between mental arithmetic in children and the phonologic loop (Adams & Hitch, 1997; Towse & Houston, 2001; Jarvis & Gathercole, 2003). The role of the phonological loop also has been explored in adult counting (Logie & Baddeley, 1987) and arithmetic (Ashcraft et al., 1992; Logie et al., 1994; Lemaire et al., 1996). Holmes and Adams (2006) indicated the phonological loop is thought to be important for the attainment of number facts in early childhood. Learned number facts form complete networks in long term memory between mental arithmetic s and the phonological loop. However, the association was no longer significant in an adolescent population (Reuhkala, 2001).

The teaching and learning processes take place through the medium of language. Mathematics is considered to be the language of science, and as Baroody and Standifer (1993) indicate, “For children, Mathematics is essentially a second or foreign language.” The translation of ordinary language in mathematics into the symbolic language creates a conflict of exactitude which leads to overload of the working memory. The usage of common vocabularies in mathematics causes another language problem, because their meanings in the mathematics context differ from the normal English usages. Gardner (1972) examined the accessibility of words to students at a number of levels in secondary school by testing commonly used words in science and the results showed:

• “Pupils lacked precision in their use of words as they moved from context to context.

• Students were easily confused by words (which) ‘sound alike’ or ‘look alike’.

• In a significant number of cases, students chose meaning exactly opposite to the accepted meaning.

• There was an improvement in performance with age.”

Durkin and Shire (1991) demonstrate that one of the feature in mathematics is that the meanings to convey them are often endowed with other meanings, which may be more familiar to children in every day language and the vocabulary of mathematics includes many words which have multiple meanings and there is evidence that students often fail to interpret the words as teachers intend them. Cassells and Johnstone (1983) have emphasised the great problems, which are caused when normal words are used with precise meanings. Macnab and Cummine (1986) specify words such root, solution, product, matrix, differentiate, integrate, function, coordinate, prime, factor, multiply, power, index, whose use in the mathematics context cause difficulties of the semantic confusion involved. Durkin and Shire (1991) also listed a table of individual common ambiguous words (multi-meaning), used in mathematics and they discuss the meaning of each word is likely to have for child before he or she encounters it in a mathematical context at school . In this case, the mathematical meaning of the words and holding information occupy the student’s working memory space. Therefore, there is no empty room or space for manipulating this information.