What is attended is learned. Thornbury defines teaching as ‘the management of attention for pedagogical purposes’: drawing attention to what matters and screening out distraction.
Claim
Attention gates acquisition. “Continuous partial attention” (Linda Stone) caused by devices undermines classroom learning. So teaching = directing attention to the lesson’s targets and away from noise.
Mechanism / theory
- Ellis & Robinson (2008, p. 3): “What is attended is learned, and so attention controls the acquisition of language itself.”
- Schmidt’s Noticing Hypothesis (1990; 2001): attention is needed for input → intake.
- Form–function mapping (Saville-Troike 2006); Nation (1990) on incidental vocabulary needing repeated exposures; VanPatten (1994).
- The evidence in the post itself is journalistic (NYT, Hamlet’s Blackberry), not experimental.
Classroom moves
- All heads up before moving to the next stage; make objectives explicit.
- Use voice, gesture, eye contact to make key items salient.
- Drill for salience, not for accuracy.
- Books closed / devices off in teacher-fronted stages; negotiate when dictionaries/laptops are allowed.
- Reduce stimulus overload: decorative slides, background music during silent reading.
Limits & critique
- Krashen (first comment): attention “can’t possibly be necessary” for acquisition of form (citing Truscott 1998); comprehensible input suffices. Thornbury: implicit learning is possible but inefficient.
- Edtech supporters (Lyon-Jones, Stanley): tech helps attention when tasks are relevant.
Apply in my context (Claude)
- Decorated slides compete with targets for attention. This connects directly to your existing video thesis (walls/slides killing focus). Cite Ellis & Robinson + cognitive-load arguments rather than anecdote.
- On smartboards: one target per slide at the noticing stage. Leave animation for build-ins that reveal the form.