1 of 13

�The Impact of Working Memory Training on Bahasa Melayu Spelling(Ejaan) in 5 and 6-Year-Old Learners

Student Name : Koo Chee Yan

Student ID : 2022.9.EDU02.0006

Oral Presentation for Project Proposal Chapter 1,2 3

Date : 17 Dec 2023 (Sunday)

Chapter 4: Research Result
Chapter 5 Discusssion/Conclusion

2 of 13

4.0 Research Result

4.1 Introduction

The research result shows significant improvement in the 2 experimental group –age 5 & 6
Key area improvement : Accuracy in Ejaan output

The findings of the result analysis show that working memory training has impacted

the spelling accuracy throughout the duration of 4 weeks training ( based on 3 times training a week).

However, the measurement of ejaan is done such a way to cover a small scope of the Sukukata range that has been taught and ready for testing. It does not covers full range.

3 of 13

4.1 Introduction

A working memory training module is developed using an existing resources using digital multimedia sukukata software. The module is adapted using the “Dual Coding Thoery” and “Cognitive Load Theory”
The module is presented in a structural and systematic manner

Scope of training covers for 5 years old is full range of :

ba,be,bi,bo,bu,be ; ca,ce,ci,co,cu,ce ; da,de,di,do,du,de

Fa,fe,fi,fo,fu,fe ; ga,ge,gi,go,gu,ge ; ha,he,hi,ho,hu,he

Scope of training covers for 6 years old is larger in coverage :

bam,bem,bim,bom,bum,bem ; ca,ce,ci,co,cu,ce ; da,de,di,do,du,de

Fa,fe,fi,fo,fu,fe ; gar,ger,gir,gor,gur,ger ; ha,he,hi,ho,hu,he

4 of 13

5 yr olds Pretest T-Test

5 of 13

5 yr olds Posttest T-Test

6 of 13

6 yr olds Pretest T-Test

7 of 13

6 yr olds Posttest T-Test

8 of 13

4.2 Quantitative Method

The percentile of accuracy in ejaan is used to measure the impact on the students after receiving working memory training

Assumptions:

Sample is Randomly selected from a classroom of 5 year olds and 6 years old .
The sample consists of 10 students from 5 year olds and 14 students from 5

The Dependent Variable is at the interval Scale
Pupulation Variances (between 2 groups) are the same.

9 of 13

5.0 Discussion

5 year-old group A has significantly improve from19% to 84% after 4 weeks training while Group B (Control) drops 25 from 14% to 12%. The drop could due lack of practice, drilling(repeating) and rehearsal vis a vis group A has better rehearsal from WM training.

10 of 13

5.0 Discussion

5 year-old Group A shows good improvement reflects better memory retention, beating forgetting curveHowever, long term memory is more robust..

11 of 13

5.0 Discussion

6 year-old group A (Experiment) has improved from51% to 67% after 4 weeks training while Group B (Control) rose by 1%, from 29% to 30%. The increase in percentile in group A could be the effect of working memory training but not significant may due to increase demand on working memory as the scope and larger amount of sukukata has to be practice within a month.

12 of 13

5.0 Discussion

6 year-old group B (Experiment) has rose only 1% from 29% to 30% could be due to lack of Working Memory training and forgetting curve. Increased demand on longer spelling words further increased the load of working memory of individuals.

13 of 13

5.1 Conclusion

We could conclude from the research that :

Group A outperform Group B in terms of spelling after receiving 4 weeks working memory training
From observation, during training, rehearsal and repetition is essential for retaining long term memory of the sukukata taught
Group A in 5 Year olds increased faster than 6 years old could be due to chunking effect is demanding the older students. 6 years old have to remember 3 types of pattern namely : KVKV, KVKVK and KVKVKV compared to only KVKV for 5 year olds.
The longer the strings of character, the more loading it has on working memory

5. Both groups comply to the Cogitive Load Theory and Dual Coding Theory.