How Verbal Thinking Elevates Learning

student working on mathThe notion of talking to oneself, often dismissed as a mere quirky habit or a sign of preoccupation, is, in fact, a powerful, evidence-based cognitive tool essential for learning, problem-solving, and achieving self-regulation. For educators, understanding and deliberately integrating this "verbal thinking"—known in psychological literature as private speech, self-talk, or self-explanation—into pedagogical practice can unlock deeper comprehension and foster truly independent learners. 

The psychological roots of verbal thinking's benefit trace back most prominently to the work of Soviet psychologist Lev Vygotsky. His socio-cultural theory identifies a critical stage in a child's cognitive development where social communication turns inward to become a robust tool for thinking. Vygotsky outlined a three-stage developmental framework for language: beginning with Social Speech in young children, where language is purely external and used for communicating with others; progressing to Private Speech during the preschool years (ages 3-7), where the child begins to speak aloud to themselves, often in a whisper or mumble, utilizing this overt language as a self-guiding tool for planning, regulating, and controlling their own behavior and problem-solving attempts.

For example, a child engaged in a puzzle might audibly walk themselves through the steps: "First, put the red block here, then the blue block goes on top." This transitional phase ultimately leads to Inner Speech (age 7+), which is the fully internalized, silent verbal thought that most adults use for abstract reasoning, reflection, and sophisticated problem-solving. For educators, the key takeaway from Vygotsky’s work is that overt verbal thinking, or private speech, represents the crucial bridge from externally guided learning—where an adult or peer provides the instruction—to true self-regulation and independent, complex thought. By encouraging students to verbalize their process, teachers are helping them build the necessary internal scaffolding for later, silent, and more sophisticated thinking.

Crucially, verbal thinking doesn't just manage behavior; it fundamentally alters how information is encoded and understood by the brain, supporting both memory and comprehension. Research in memory retrieval highlights a phenomenon known as the Production Effect, which demonstrates that reading or generating information aloud significantly improves its memory retention compared to reading it silently. This memory boost occurs because speaking information aloud engages a greater number of sensory channels simultaneously. The learner uses visual input (seeing the text), verbal/motor input (the physical articulation of the words), and auditory input (hearing the words being spoken). This richer, multi-modal encoding creates a more distinctive and robust memory trace in the brain, making the information much easier to recall later. This distinctiveness is vital: when a learner produces a word aloud, it stands out against the background of other silently read words, making the item unique in memory. Therefore, simply having students read key definitions, summaries, or steps aloud in a low-stakes environment is a simple, yet highly effective, way for educators to leverage this proven physiological mechanism to strengthen long-term memory.

Perhaps the most powerful cognitive benefit, particularly for complex material, is the deep processing that occurs through self-explanation. This process is not mere repetition; it is the active, conscious act of trying to explain new information by relating it to what one already knows, making necessary inferences, and proactively clarifying any ambiguities. The first benefit here is powerful metacognitive monitoring: when a learner verbalizes a concept, the very act of articulation immediately exposes areas of confusion or "knowledge gaps." If a student struggles to explain a step in a math proof or a scientific concept, the flaw in their understanding is instantly revealed, prompting them to go back and refine their knowledge. This is a critical act of metacognition—the vital process of thinking about one's own thinking. Secondly, self-explanation drives coherence building. Verbalizing forces the student to translate disparate, often fragmented, pieces of information into a coherent, logical structure. They are not just recalling isolated facts but actively constructing a unified mental model of how the concepts interact. This principle is famously embodied by the Feynman Technique—explaining a concept simply as if teaching it to a novice—which serves as a form of high-level, deliberate verbal thinking that ruthlessly exposes the limits of a learner's comprehension.

The idea that talking to yourself out loud is not only "okay" but also an excellent learning technique is satisfying, but as I dug into this research, I recognized things from my college and grad school education courses. Other than the idea that it's not abnormal behavior to talk to yourself, this research is not completely new. I used several of these pedagogies in my teaching.

The challenge for educators, then, is to move verbal thinking from an accidental occurrence to a deliberate, scaffolded learning strategy within the classroom environment. One highly effective technique is the Think-Aloud Strategy, which focuses on teacher modeling. This strategy is used to make the invisible thought process of an expert visible and accessible to students, thereby explicitly teaching them how to engage in effective self-talk. To implement this, the teacher must first explicitly state the goal: "I’m going to show you how a skilled reader or problem-solver thinks by saying my thoughts out loud." Then, as the teacher reads a complex passage, works through a mathematical equation, or analyzes a primary source, they must stop frequently to verbalize their internal dialogue. This might involve using strategic planning language like, "I'm thinking I should use the quadratic formula here because the equation is set to zero," or demonstrating monitoring and correction by saying, "That word, 'ephemeral,' sounds like it means brief, so I’m going to pause and look that up to make sure I understand the context," or making connections: "The author just described the main character as restless. That connects to the idea I read earlier about his lack of a stable job. I wonder if this will lead to him leaving town." Once modeled, the teacher must transition students to practicing the strategy, perhaps through paired activities known as Reciprocal Think-Alouds, before expecting independent use.

A second practical technique is the Self-Explanation Prompt. This method strategically inserts verbalization breaks into a learning task to force metacognitive reflection and is particularly useful in technical subjects. Implementation begins by identifying key moments in a text, problem set, or lab procedure where a deeper understanding is absolutely necessary before the student can proceed. At these pause points, the teacher provides students with specific open-ended questions they must answer aloud to themselves or in a brief reflection journal. Prompts should be targeted to specific cognitive functions, such as focusing on rationale ("Why did I choose this variable to isolate?"), demanding synthesis ("What is the main idea of this section in my own words?"), or explicitly asking for a connection ("How does this new concept relate to what we learned last week?"). For maximum impact, teachers should then encourage a "Think-Pair-Share" approach where students must first explain their logic to a partner, which solidifies the idea and provides practice in articulation before the whole class moves on.

Finally, the "Teach It Back" Method is a form of high-stakes verbal thinking rooted in the pedagogical principle that to teach a concept is to truly master it. In this strategy, a student is assigned the role of briefly "teaching" a key concept, a section of the reading, or a part of the homework to a small group, to the class, or even to an imaginary audience. The critical instruction given to the student is to explain the topic as simply as possible, perhaps using an analogy, metaphor, or non-technical language if appropriate. The student must translate complex, academic language into straightforward, accessible terms, which serves as the ultimate test of their own comprehension. The teacher should provide specific feedback not only on the accuracy of the content but also on the clarity and logical structure of the explanation, reinforcing the importance of effective verbal articulation as a measure of understanding. By integrating these verbal thinking strategies—modeling, prompting, and teaching back—educators are not just improving a single study skill; they are building the core components of the resilient and self-regulated learner, equipping students with the tools for lifelong, independent cognitive growth.

SOURCES
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. (This source is foundational for the concepts of Private Speech and its role in Self-Regulation.)

MacLeod, C. M. (2011). The production effect: Better memory as a consequence of saying aloud during study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(2), 195–204. (This research provides the physiological basis for the Production Effect and memory benefits.)

Chi, M. T. H. (2013). Self-explanation: The effects of talking aloud or writing on learning. Topics in Cognitive Science, 5(1), 1–4. (This source details the mechanism and benefits of Self-Explanation for deep comprehension.)

Berk, L. E. (1992). The role of private speech in the development of mental processes. Psychological Review, 99(4), 779–795. (This provides contemporary developmental research supporting and elaborating on Vygotsky’s observations of private speech.)

Classroom Cellphone Bans: Pros and Cons

students depositing phones in a box

Schools are instituting bans on cell phones in classrooms. These bans aim to create a more focused, interactive, and supportive learning environment for students. But they are certainly controversial. Some large school districts like Los Angeles Unified School District and New York City Public Schools are looking to or have already implemented district-wide cellphone bans. Though this is more common in K-12 classroom, in higher education there are examples of individual faculty, certain courses or departments that have initiated bans.

The reasons generally given for these bans include:

Reducing Distractions: Cell phones can be a significant source of distraction for students, leading to decreased focus and engagement in class

Improving Academic Performance: Studies suggest that limiting cell phone use in classrooms can lead to better academic outcomes, as students are more likely to pay attention and participate in lessons

Enhancing Social Interaction: Banning cell phones encourages face-to-face communication and interaction among students, which is crucial for developing social skills.

Preventing Cyberbullying: Cell phones can be used to facilitate cyberbullying of students, faculty and administration, and removing them from the classroom can help create a safer environment

Promoting Mental Health: Excessive screen time and social media use have been linked to mental health issues in young people. Reducing cell phone use in schools can help mitigate these effects

When cell phones first became more prevalent with students (starting with college students and working down to high school and now younger students) there were individual teachers who instituted bans on using them in class. There were also teachers who promoted the wise use of them in their courses. The cons side of this also has good reason against banning cell phones from classrooms

As Educational Tools: Cell phones can be powerful educational tools, providing access to learning apps, online resources, and educational videos that can enhance the learning experience.

For Emergency Communication: Cell phones allow students to quickly contact parents or emergency services in case of an emergency, providing an added layer of safety.

Developing Digital Literacy: In today's digital age, students need to learn how to use technology responsibly. Allowing controlled use of cell phones in the classroom can help develop these skills.

Access to Information: Cell phones enable students to instantly look up information, conduct research, and verify facts during lessons, promoting active learning.

Inclusivity: For students with special needs, cell phones can provide necessary accommodations, such as text-to-speech applications and other assistive technologies.

Organizational Tools: Many students use their phones to keep track of assignments, deadlines, and schedules through calendar apps and reminders.

Parental Contact: Parents can directly communicate with their children, which is reassuring for both parties, especially in cases of schedule changes or family emergencies.

A web search will turn up lots of articles on the pros and cons of cell phone use and bans on their use in classrooms.
https://congressionaldigest.com/pros-and-cons-of-banning-cellphones-in-schools/
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/03/experts-see-pros-and-cons-to-allowing-cellphones-in-class/

 

So You Want To Be An AI Prompt Engineer

AI prompt engineerWhen I was teaching in a high school, I used to tell students (and faculty) that we were not preparing them for jobs. I was sure many of our students would end up in jobs with titles that did not exist then. There is a song by The Byrds from the 1960s titled "So You Wanna Be a Rock 'n' Roll Star." In 2024, it could be "So You Want To Be An AI Prompt Engineer."

The role of AI prompt engineer attracted attention for its high-six-figure salaries when it emerged in early 2023. What does this job entail? The principal aim is to help a company integrate AI into its operations. Some people describe the job as more prompter than engineer.

There are already tools that work with apps like OpenAI’s ChatGPT platform that can automate the writing process using sets of built-in prompts. Does that mean that AI will replace AI prompt engineers already? For now, the prompter works to ensure that users get the desired results. They might also be the instructors for other employees on how to use generative AI tools. They become the AI support team. AI can automate "trivial" tasks and make more time for work that requires creative thinking.

What kind of training leads to getting this job? You might think a background in computer science, but probably a strong language and writing ability is more important. People who write in the corporate world might justifiably fear AI will take their jobs away. Being a prompter might be an alternative.

Still, I suspect that there is a good possibility that a prompter/engineer's job might be vulnerable as software becomes better at understanding users’ prompts.

If you are interested in being an AI prompt engineer, I posted last week about some free online courses offered by universities and tech companies that included three courses that relate to creating prompts for AI.

AI Applications and Prompt Engineering is an edX introductory course on prompt engineering that starts with the basics and ends with creating your applications.

Prompt Engineering for ChatGPT is a specific 6-module course from Vanderbilt University (through Coursera) that offers beginners a starting point for writing better prompts.

Another course on ChatGPT Prompt Engineering for Developers is offered by OpenAI in collab with DeepLearning and it is taught by Isa Fulford and Andrew Ng.  It covers best practices and includes hands-on practice. 

Can Bloom's Taxonomy Teach Us Anything About AI?

spiral model
Image gettingsmart.com

 

When I was studying to be a secondary school teacher, Bloom’s Taxonomy often came up in my classes as a way to do lesson planning and a way to assess learners. Recently, there have been several revisions to its pyramid stack. An article on www.gettingsmart.com suggests a spiral might be better, particularly if you want to use it as a lens to view AI.

The author, Vriti Saraf, opines that the most important potential of AI isn’t to enhance human productivity, it’s to enhance and support human thinking, and that looking at AI’s capabilities through the lens of Bloom’s Taxonomy showcases the possible interplay of humans and machines.

It is an interesting idea. Take a look.