Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Stippie Chee Wei How)

MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR KAMPAR
STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN OCT. 2011
MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR KAMPAR
A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN OCT. 2011
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT In completion of this thesis, there are several parties that I would like to express my gratitude to. First and foremost, to my Final Year Project supervisor, Ms. Tan Swee Mee of the Department of Languages and Linguistics, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) for her support and guidance academically and mentally, as well as her encouragement in the course of conducting this thesis. Her professional knowledge and experience are the main factor contributing to this thesis completion. Mr. Lee Soo Chee of the Institute of Chinese Studies also played a significant role in helping to conduct this research by assisting in gathering participants from the Chinese Studies (CH) course. It is impossible to conduct this research without participants from the aforementioned course. Participants from both courses of Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) are also given my sincerest gratitude. As the identified participants for this research, they have sacrificed precious time and effort in answering the questionnaires distributed to them. It would be impossible to get this research completed without their selfless contributions. Lastly, I do value and appreciate my parents and classmates for their assistance in helping to complete this thesis. To all people whom I have failed to mention above, I thank you for contributing to the completion of this thesis and may all of you be blessed.
APPROVAL FORM This research paper attached hereto, entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR Kampar prepared and submitted by Stippie Chee Wei How in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Arts (Hons) English Language is hereby accepted.
_____________________ Supervisor Ms. Tan Swee Mee
Date: _____________
i ABSTRACT In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students inability to use words precisely when there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are mastered and use correctly and accurately. It is becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with researches of Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS). This research studies and compares the MVLS, applied by UTAR students in both Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) courses to rehearse their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the words in the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS effectiveness. Learning new words is a complex and multi-processing effort. Many retention strategies are needed to transfer these new words from short-term to long-term storage. This research serves as a platform to enhance vocabulary building through understanding the conceptual frameworks of MVLS. Educators may refer to this study as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using sets of MVLS. Lastly, this research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the correct strategies to guarantee higher success rate of information storing and recalling in rehearsing new words.
ii DECLARATION I declare that the material contained in this paper is the end result of my own work and that due acknowledgement has been given in the bibliography and references to ALL sources be they printed, electronic or personal.
Name
: STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
Student ID: 09AAB01075
Signed Date
: ____________________ : 20th October 2011
iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 2 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 PAGE
1.0 Introduction 1.1 Research Background 1.2 Statement of Problem 1.3 Purpose of the Study 1.4 Research Questions 1.5 Scope of Study 1.6 Methodology 1.7 Significance of the Study 1.8 Definition of keywords/terms
Chapter 2:
Literature review 11 11 12 13 14 15 17 17 18
2.0 Introduction 2.1 Conceptual background 2.2 Mnemonic History 2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning 2.3.1 2.3.2 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) Nations Taxonomy (2001)
2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition 2.4.1 2.4.2 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002) Mason (2004)
v 2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004) 19 20 21 22 23
2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies 2.5.1 2.5.2 Yek, S.M (2006) Allen (1995)
2.6 Conclusion
Chapter 3:
Methodology 25 26 26 26 27 28 29 29 30 31 32 32 33 34 36 37 38
3.0 Introduction 3.1 Theoretical Framework 3.1.1 Model of memory (1968) 3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory 3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM) 3.1.1.3 Rehearsal 3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM) 3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972) 3.1.2.1 Levels of Processing (1972) 3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) 3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics 3.1.3.2 Spatial mnemonics 3.1.3.3 Visual mnemonics 3.1.3.4 Physical mnemonics 3.2 Restating purpose and research questions 3.3 Participants and sampling 3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process
v 3.5 Research design and stages 3.6 Presents study questionnaire 3.7 Conclusion 39 41 42
Chapter 4:
Data analysis and discussion 43 44 45 46 47 48 50 51 53 55 55 57 59 60 65 68
4.0 Introduction 4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results 4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1 4.3 Answering RQ 1 4.3.1 4.3.2 English language proficiency level and test results Scorers of Excellent in EL participants
4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2 4.4.1 4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH) Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL)
4.5 Answering RQ 2 4.5.1 4.5.2 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention Effectiveness of Keyword method
4.6 Findings pertaining to rehearsal preferences or approaches in RQ 3 4.6.1 4.6.2 Mnemonic styles and number of participants: CH and EL Answering RQ 3
4.7 Conclusion
vi Chapter 5: Conclusion 69 69 70 71 72 73 75 76
5.0 Introduction 5.1 Answering research questions 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 RQ1 RQ2 RQ3
5.2 Applications of MVLS in teaching training programmes 5.3 Limitations 5.4 Conclusion
REFERENCES Appendix A Sample of Questionnaire Appendix B Sample of Completed Questionnaire Appendix C Sample of Questionnaire (Appendix) Appendix D Sample of Words Rehearsal
77
79 83 86 87
vii LIST OF TABLES
Tables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants Sample of Words Rehearsal Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (CH participants) Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (EL participants)
Page 15 32 33 34 35 51 53 57 62 64
viii LIST OF GRAPHS
Graphs 1 2 Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants) Distribution of mnemonic styles (CH and EL participants)
Page 45 60
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MVLS Mnemonic vocabulary learning strategies CH Chinese Studies EL English Language STM Short-term memory LTM Long-term memory RQ Research Question FAS Faculty of Arts and Social Science ICS Institute of Chinese Studies ESL English as a second language L2 Second language GEPT - General English Proficiency Test
Page 1 1 1 2 2 6 7 7 8 17 21
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction This study is entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) Comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR Kampar. With these two variables involved in this research, the study aims to compare differences and similarities in terms of revising and rehearsing English vocabulary among participants from courses featuring Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL). There are nine sections in this chapter. Section 1.1 generally presents the background information regarding this research. It is followed by statement of problem which triggers this study in section 1.2. Section 1.3 states the purpose of this research, while research questions to be answered in the final chapter are posted on Section 1.4. Section 1.5 informs the scope of this research, while section 1.6 briefly discusses conceptual framework and methodology that are employed in conducting this research. Subsequently, a discussion regarding significance of this study is shown in Section 1.7. Finally, Section 1.8 provides some keywords and their definitions that are crucial to guide the reading.
1.1 Research Background Students amount of time spent in the classrooms does not promise equal amount of skills and knowledge learnt. In fact, students learning has drawn attention from teachers and parents, claiming that their learning progress does not meet expectations. There are two explanations to this matter: either the students listen to their teachers inattentively, which could be due to their interests and preferences of the lesson being taught; or they simply could not remember things taught to them clearly in the past and knowledge were not successfully stored in their memory. While the first scenario discusses about students motivation and factors that raise their attentions in class, the second scenario questions students memory rehearsals and shows that insufficient practise of information is the leading cause of unsuccessful transferring of information from Short-term Memory (STM) to Longterm Memory (LTM) (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968). The same applies to vocabulary learning, successful retention of newly taught words relies greatly on constant practises and rehearsals of these lexical items.
Having learnt basic grammatical rules does not contribute to excellence in knowledge of vocabulary. In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students inability to use words precisely when there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are mastered and used correctly and accurately (as cited in Malaysian Education Ministry English Teaching Syllabus, 2009). Statistics revealed that knowing the meanings of
words does not guarantee fluidity in using them in written and spoken communication. Learning words in a language is being regarded as the main component in effective communication; no information can be conveyed without using the appropriate words, regardless of knowing the rules and knowledge of grammar (Nemati, 2009).
According to Brown and Payne (1994), there are five steps in the process of vocabulary learning:
1. Having sources for encountering new words.
2. Getting clear images of the forms of the new words.
3. Learning the meaning of the words. 4. Making strong memory connection between the words forms and the meanings.
5. Applying the words in written or spoken form.
(Fan, 2003, p. 223, as cited in Hamzah et al., 2009, p. 42)
Knowing more words does help a person in getting intentions transferred to another party while lowering possibilities of communication failure. To consider one knows a word, Schmitt (1997) asserted that the following knowledge are necessary:
1. Lexical form: This refers to either spoken or written form of words, which are pronunciation or spelling of words.
2. Word structure: The knowledge of words basic morphemes, and the derivations of the words and its inflections.
3. Syntactic pattern: Knowing the exact location or placement of words in phrases or sentences so that the phrases or sentences are valid. 4. Meanings of words: There are three types of words meanings which are referential, affective, and pragmatics. Referential means metaphorical extensions of words meaning; affective refers to connotations of words and pragmatics refers to appropriate use of words based on the contexts given.
5. Lexical relations of words: This refers to similar or opposite meaning of words, such as synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, etc.
(Schmitt, 1997, p. 207, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34)
Revising and rehearsing are crucial to get words stored in STM to be well remembered and transferred into LTM. Unless new items are rehearsed regularly, they would be eventually forgotten no matter how hard they are processed in the first encounter due to human memorys fragile nature (Ellis, 1995; Hulstijn, 2001; Nation, 2001)
Communication failure has raised the need to improve on memory retention of words. It is becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with researches of Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) (Anderson, 1991,
as cited in Amir and Mohd Noor, n.d. p. 314), which can be defined as sets of techniques or learning behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques are effective in helping language learners to discover the meanings and to retain the knowledge of newly-learnt words. When words are understood better, appropriate usage of words in written and spoken communication is also achieved (Oxford, 1990).
This research compares and studies on the MVLS practised by Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) students in two courses consist of Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) in rehearsing and expanding their English vocabulary. Students in CH course are considered as non EL majors, while students in EL course are EL majors. Using the deep processing MVLS highlighted by Craik and Lockhart (1972) in Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34) as the theoretical framework, questionnaires designed accordingly were used in gathering and recording of research data.
1.2 Statement of Problem There are several factors that influence students preferences and choices of MVLS such as learning styles, motivations, language competency, etc (Oxford, 1990). The question of whether students in two different courses which contrast in terms of mediums of instruction in their lessons possess distinguishable abilities to rehearse their vocabulary remains unknown to linguists and researchers. Lectures in
CH are conducted using Chinese language while lecturers speak English to conduct their teachings in EL. Noticing such obvious difference in these two courses, this research sees frequency of exposure to English Language between students from CH and EL as one of the leading factors that influence students in storing, retaining, and recalling of new English words. Therefore, methods of rehearsing their newly learnt words adopted by students from these two courses are very worth researching.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research is to study and compare the MVLS, in other words, strategies applied by UTAR students in both CH and EL courses to rehearse their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the words in the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS effectiveness (Erten and Williams, 2008, p. 57). At the end of this research, conclusion is made and it is hoped that research questions set are answered.
1.4 Research Questions (RQ)
The questionnaires designed and later completed by participants are crucial in answering these three research questions:
RQ 1:
What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each other?
RQ 2:
What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words between students from these two courses?
RQ 3:
How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in rehearsing new English words?
1.5 Scope of Study
This research focuses on MVLS and vocabulary rehearsing of participants from both CH and EL courses from the Faculty of Arts and Social Science (FAS) and Institute of Chinese Studies (ICS). 40 students from each course were selected regardless of their year of studies. In selecting of participants, students frequency of exposure to English Language is the main aspect of this research. In other words, students from these two groups are selected due to the difference in their tendencies of being exposed to English language.
1.6 Methodology
There are two sections in this questionnaire. In Section A, students were required to fill in answers by referring to the appendix attached before they attempted to answer the questions. Section B consists of 15 questions accompanied by a likert scale. The completed questionnaires were analysed to obtain required data.
1.7 Significance of the Study
This research serves as a platform to enhance vocabulary building through understanding the conceptual frameworks of MVLS. Educators may refer to this study as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using sets of MVLS.
It is hoped that the results obtained would be able to answer questions regarding students methods in information processing and how effective these methods in promoting higher succession rate information storing and recalling. ESL learners would also understand better about the importance of continuous rehearsals and practises in enhancing storing and retaining of information.
ESL learners might also benefit from learning about factors which are crucial in getting information retained perfectly, such as motivation, learning styles, and language competency. Students frequency of getting themselves exposed to a certain target language might also affect the styles and pattern of MVLS which can be
utilised to their advantages in rehearsing and memorising of newly encountered words in the target language. In other words, this research attempts to explain the exposure to different mediums of instruction during lectures and its influences on styles in rehearsing and practising newly encountered words.
ESL learners are also encouraged to self-reflect on themselves by assigning themselves into either group of participants (EL majors or non-EL majors). Attempting the survey in the questionnaire provides an ideal opportunity to identify their methods of words rehearsal even they are not aware of it consciously. This research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the correct strategies of rehearsing words or whether a change is what they need to guarantee higher success rate of information storing and recalling.
1.8 Definition of keywords/terms
Memory: The main idea of this research, it refers to the system where processes of encoding, retrieval and storage of information are interrelated (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968). The Model of Memory (1968) which was introduced by Richard Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin is one of the theoretical frameworks which focuses on human memory structure.
Short-term memory: Another term of Short-term memory is the Working memory. It refers to information stored in memory only lasts for a brief moment; knowledge and
information which interest a person will move from sensory memory to short-term memory and they are either forgotten or lost without proper revising and rehearsing. (Henson and Heller, 1999).
Long-term memory: Facts and knowledge stored in the long-term memory are considered well-remembered or mastered that they tend to stay in this section for a longer period of time. Constant revision and rehearsal of items stored are to prevent them from being erased from the long-term memory.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS): Sets of techniques or learning behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques are effective in helping language learners to discover the meaning and to retain the knowledge of newly learnt words (Oxford, 1990).
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
In this chapter, previous researches of vocabulary learning are discussed, apart from that, related past studies are also brought into discussion. In Section 2.1, a noticeable phenomenon that triggers past researches about vocabulary learning strategies is highlighted, followed by a brief introduction of MVLS in Section 2.2. An introduction of two research taxonomies is featured in Section 2.3, which introduces Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) in Section 2.3.1 and Nations Taxonomy in Section 2.3.2. Section 2.4 brings forward three recent studies of vocabulary acquisition; they are research by Yoshi and Flaitz (2006) in Section 2.4.1, a study conducted by Mason (2004) in Section 2.4.2, and a research by Sahbazian (2004) in Section 2.4.3. An introduction of two mnemonic case studies is featured in Section 2.5, which are case studies of Siew M.Y in Section 2.5.1 and Allen (1995) in Section 2.5.2.
2.1 Conceptual background
Remembering new words in language learning appears to be the main setback for most language learners. To ensure effective retaining and recalling of new
vocabulary, constant revision is the key to avoid newly learnt words from being forgotten.
Unlike non-verbal communication, where messages can be transferred using signs and symbols, languages have both spoken and written form to get messages conveyed to another party. Intentions in a conversation can be figured out with correct words being used regardless of grammatical structure errors, but without learning the words beforehand, no idea can be conveyed at all.
With vocabulary learning regarded as the most crucial part in language learning, there are urgencies in publishing literature works about memory strategies, also known as Mnemonics vocabulary learning strategies (MVLS), which are sets of learning behaviours or strategies being practiced widely to assist in rehearsing newly encountered words to ensure them to be well- remembered (Schmitt, 1997: 207, cited in Xhaferi, 2008: 35).
2.2 Mnemonic History
The idea of mnemonic devices was introduced by Stanislaus Mink von Wennsshein and later many variations were developed over the years (Ebbinghaus, 1885). It was originally a list of strategies which were intended to assist people in remembering reminders written on their to-do lists, such as things to buy in the grocery stores, remembering names, numbers, etc. The earliest version of mnemonic
strategies were simple and direct, for example, assigning things to remember with specific codes that are easy to recall when needed, such as numbers, alphabets, etc. Although straightforward, researchers have confirmed that some of the strategies are still practiced widely nowadays.
It was in year 1730 when the first variation of mnemonic strategies was developed based on the earliest system. Dr. Richard Grey suggested using consonants and alphabets to represent digits that are supposed to be remembered. In year 1808, Gregor von Feinaigle developed another variation of mnemonic strategies based on Dr. Richard Greys version, instead of writing out the digits replacements, the consonants and vowels were pronounced as sound units.
In modern days, mnemonic strategies are also used in learning vocabulary and to minimise the chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, due to human memorys fragile nature (as cited in Yek, 2006, p. 11). The introduction of mnemonic strategies into teaching vocabulary to students has benefited not only the students but educators as well.
2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning
In researching vocabulary learning strategies, several taxonomies about vocabulary teaching and learning have been proposed by researchers of vocabulary. Although the taxonomies all differ in terms of methods and approaches they
categorise, they all provide strategies which are considered widely applicable in the course of foreign language learning.
2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996)
Peter Yongqi Gu and Robert Keith Johnson (as cited in Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Language Learning Outcomes, 2006) conducted a research in China with a purpose to reveal the vocabulary learning strategies employed by 850 Chinese university students who learnt English as their second languages. Their aims were to investigate the relationship between strategies deployed and outcomes which were likely to occur. There are four types of strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996, cited from Ghazal, n.d., p. 85) which reflect 850 sophomore non-EL majors choices in their vocabulary learning strategies while attempting questionnaires in the research. The mostly used strategies are metacognitive strategies which included selective attention and self-initiation strategies. In selective attention, respondents
acknowledged words that are important to learn and are essential in comprehension of a passage. Foreign and second language learners who preferred self-initiation strategies used plenty of ways to get a words meaning clear to them. Cognitive strategies employed by respondents in this study included strategy of guessing, which participants relied on their background knowledge, passage context, or other lexical
items to guess the meaning of a word. Other methods in cognitive strategies feature also note-taking and dictionary using.
Memory strategies are divided into rehearsal and encoding strategies. In rehearsal, using word lists and repetition of words are usually choices of rehearsing. Encoding strategies include association of words with imagery, visual, auditory, and semantic. Last but not least, the activation strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) refers to using newly learned words in written sentences or verbally. In short, the four major strategies to summarise Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) are as follow: Strategies Metacognitive 1.Selective attention: Identifying words which are crucial to learn. 2.Self initiation: Applying a variety of methods to get meanings of words clear Cognitive Memory 1. Guessing: The 1. Rehearsal: Word use of lists and background repetition of knowledge or words other contextual clues to guess the meaning of 2. Encoding: words. Association of words with 2. Note taking imagery, visual, auditory, and 3. Dictionary using semantic. Activation Using newly learnt words in written sentences or verbally.
Table 2.1: Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (Ghazal, N.D, p. 85)
2.3.2 Nations Taxonomy (2001) Nations Taxonomy was proposed by Paul Nation (2001, as cited in Ghazal, n.d., p. 86) in studying vocabulary learning strategies among foreign language learners. It is one of the most famous research materials which provides many approaches in vocabulary learning. Oxford (1990) describes vocabulary learning strategies as actions taken to improve second and foreign language learners ability to store vocabulary in their minds.
The strategies in this taxonomy are divided into three general classes of planning, source, and processes, with each has its own subset of key strategies. The first category, planning involves determining how much attention to be spent in certain lexical item. In short, the degree of importance of words is figured out before learning takes place (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86). Strategies in this category are choosing words to be studied, selecting aspects of word knowledge and choosing studying approaches as well as rehearsal planning. In the second category, source refers to gathering information about the words. Information may include a words form itself, the context which the word is in used, or simply information from learning aids such as bilingual dictionaries or glossaries. In other words, this category empasises on understanding the words better before they are spoken or written (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86).
Lastly, the processes category includes establishing word knowledge through noticing, retrieving, and generating strategies. Noticing in this category involves learners ability to spot words to be learned, strategies in noticing are adding words into notebooks, checklists and rehearsing the words. Retrieval describes the ability to recall the words when needed. Nation (2001) explains that how a word is stored will determine how it is retrieved in the future. Finally, generating strategies include attaching new aspects of knowledge to a persons pre-existing vocabulary storage system through visualising examples of words, words analysis, semantic mapping and using learning aids such as word scales or grids. (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86)
2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition
Researches and studies had been carried out in the past to investigate methods and approaches of students in attempting to boost their vocabulary learning. These studies also proved useful as teachers guidance and references in teaching of vocabulary.
2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002)
The main idea of this study was to examine the effectiveness of annotation on incidental vocabulary learning among a group of adult ESL students in a second
language (L2) reading programme. The term incidental can be defined as acquisition of words definitions in tasks such as reading comprehension and texts listening (Flaitz, 2002, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 43).
Three types of annotation were designed for this study: texts only, pictures only, and a combination of texts and pictures. The research subjects were 151 adult ESL learners at beginning and intermediate levels of language proficiency. Subjects were given texts for reading comprehension purposes. Three types of instruments were used as vocabulary retention assessment: word recognition, picture recognition, and definition supply tests.
Results obtained in this study showed that combination group (texts and pictures) performed better than the other two groups. Findings in this research revealed that there was no significant relationship between students language proficiency levels and performance of their vocabulary acquisition.
2.4.2 Mason (2004)
The researcher wanted to find out if listening to texts would contribute to students vocabulary and language development, and its effectiveness compared to giving direct instruction to students. 60 participants that were first year English majors in a private college in Osaka were chosen for conducting this study.
Participants were divided into two groups of texts listening group and direct instructing group.
Participants in the texts listening group showed vocabulary language development, as suggested by the comprehension hypothesis, where vocabulary development is the result of comprehension of messages. Students listened to stories line by line, sentence by sentence; and improved their understanding of the stories. They even made new sentences using new words they learned.
However, participants in the direct instructing group did not gain language development, despite their vocabulary did improve. This is due to the groups focus on form rather than language. In this group, students knew that they would be tested on their vocabulary, thus their attentions were focused on learning new words only, rather than understanding the stories (Mason, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 42).
2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004)
This study was conducted with a group of Turkish university students. The purpose of the research was to obtain a clearer image of the vocabulary learning strategies and steps taken by this group of respondents to assist themselves in learning new English words.
The methodology of this research was basically a survey with data gathering required the respondents to fill up a 35-items survey questionnaire in order to find out the percentages of each vocabulary learning strategies being used by the respondents.
Results of this research show that overall Turkish university respondents were not aware of using vocabulary learning strategies to revise newly learned English words, as frequency of effective rehearsing of new English words appeared to be low. Strategies such as the key word method and semantic mapping were not among the strategies which were used most by the respondents. However, memory strategies, especially the simple and direct ones, were reported having higher percentages of practitioners compared to other strategies.
In concluding the results, the researcher asserted that the most significant way of mastering new English words among the respondents was using straightforward cognitive based memory strategies (Sahbazian, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 41). This is mainly due to traditional teaching in Turkish education system which encouraged rote learning method in not only foreign language learning but also in most of the subjects.
2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies
This section features and discusses two case studies of teaching vocabulary to students in a classroom setting. Unlike the past studies mentioned in the previous
section, where the researchers were either linguists or language researchers, experiments in these two cases were conducted in a classroom setting by teachers of English Language.
2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006)
A 14 year-old boy diagnosed with Tourette syndrome and was observed with being absent minded and a lack of concentration in class. Yek (2006) gave him a rudimentary vocabulary test and found out that he had only second grade English vocabulary competency although he had been studying English language since kindergarten.
Yek (2006) started to teach him using mnemonics in learning English vocabulary. For complex and long words such as comprehension, he was taught to syllabicate them. The back drill method was also taught to him, an example is the word organise, where he was taught to pronounce it in ise, nise, anise, ganise and finally organise. In understanding the definitions of the words, translations were sometimes made in using the boys mother tongue, which is Chinese language. (Yek, 2006)
In year 2005, the boy sat for the General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) and managed to pass the test. On the same year, he took the GEPT oral test and successfully passed the test. The effectiveness of the mnemonics proved to be a
success as he was motivated in preparing for his GEPT intermediate level test. Among other reasons, the boys retention of English vocabulary may have been his motivation in his studies.
However, a discovery in this case study suggests a problem in teaching mnemonics to improve vocabulary learning lies in the instruction of abstract words. Often, mnemonics and other VLS cannot be applied in teaching such words.
2.5.2 Allen (1995)
Janet Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) proposed that she was teaching vocabulary just like how she was taught. Her vocabulary learning experiences include assigning words in a list to be learnt, looking up words in the dictionary, and making sentences using the assigned words. The dictionary method was her schools main approach in teaching vocabulary to students but she was concerned when using the same approach, her students had failed in locating the most logical definition, recognising its part of speech, and using them correctly in the sentences.
Her thoughts were that even students scored well in a vocabulary test; they still faced difficulties in retaining the knowledge of the words unless long term reinforcements were provided (Allen, 1995, cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009).
Inspired by a book entitled Vocabulary Cartoons (Burchers, Burchers, and Burchers, 1997), Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) started using cartoon illustrations and the keyword method to teach vocabulary to students. For each word to be learnt, students were provided with its definitions, the pronunciation, a keyword, a humorous cartoon with a caption, and examples of sentences with words used in context (Burchers, Burchers, and Burchers, 1997). To increase the students understanding of the words, Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) erased the definitions, and demanded students to figure out the definitions of the words based on the examples of sentences with words used in context. In testing the students knowledge of vocabulary, and the methods effectiveness, students were given reinforcement activities such as such as games and puzzles, other cartoon activities, graphic organizers, and analogy activities (Allen, as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009). The results turned out positively as the students were able to recall the words learnt, for the past nine years, the mnemonic vocabulary instructional method has been in used constantly to teach vocabulary to students.
2.6 Conclusion
It is important to acknowledge the development of MVLS from past to present before continuing to the next chapter. Chapter 2 attempts to reveal about the origins of
mnemonic strategies, which is also the main topic of this study. Getting sufficient knowledge of main subject would help in achieving better understanding of two important taxonomies of memory and vocabulary learning research, as well as other recent studies featured in this chapter. Past studies of memory and vocabulary learning have come up with several theories and approaches, which to a certain extent this study is related with.
The next chapter features the research design and explains the theories and approaches retrieved from the past studies mentioned above.
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction
The main discussions in this chapter are the research design and the theoretical framework. Section 3.1 briefly discusses the theoretical framework included in this research. Section 3.1.1 features the Model of Memory. Another theory is the Depth of Processing Theory, which is discussed in section 3.1.2. The following sections are explanations of MVLS grouped under four different categories retrieved from Schmitts Taxonomy (1997). The chapter continues in section 3.2 with an explanation on the participants selected to conduct this study. In section 3.3, the correct procedures and steps to get this research conducted charted out, as well as a detailed description on the research questionnaire. The next section discusses the instrumentation and processes involved in obtaining required research data. Section 3.5 presents the research design and stages in conducting this research, with the stages explained in the following sections. In Section 3.6, the research questionnaires layout and content are explained in detail. Last but not least, Section 3.7 concludes this chapter.
3.1 Theoretical Framework
It is necessary to acknowledge the theoretical framework used in this research, which consists of Model of Memory (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968) and Depth of Processing theory by Craig and Lockhart (1975). Finally, the construction of questionnaire is based on a list of mnemonic strategies retrieved from Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34).
3.1.1 Model of memory (1968)
The model of memory (1968) proposed by Richard Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin is regarded as one of the most established model in explaining how information processing occurs in human mind. This model includes three parts: sensory memory, short-term memory (STM), and long-term memory (LTM). Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) proposed that information is remembered only at a surface level at the stage of sensory memory and deep retention occurs only at the level of LTM.
3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory
How human minds interpret information depends on perceptions or thoughts. Perceptions can be defined as the process of assigning meanings to sensed stimuli (Klazy, 1984). There are three components that are important in sensing stimuli which
are sensory registers in visual, auditory, and tactual (Bower, 1999). In other words, these three components which process these stimuli are called sensory memory. According to Wolfe (2001), before any stimuli are retained and remembered, they must first processed by sensory memory. However, information is usually selfinitiated, where peoples perceptions decide how important a piece of information is. The selected stimuli will be transferred to short-term memory (STM). Therefore, information stored in sensory memory are quickly forgotten and short-lived (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968).
3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM)
Another term of STM given by Case (1984) is working memory. According to Henson and Heller (1999), STM is the memory in human consciousness, simply because peoples selective attentions are responsible in deciding the processing of stimuli in sensory memory and information that will to be stored in STM. To enable information stored in STM to be transferred into long-term memory (LTM), it is crucial to have deep processing with humans past experiences and background knowledge, which was further agreed by Wolfe (2001), claiming that integration of processed stimuli and background knowledge happens consciously. However, controversies were raised, as there were arguments by researchers (Banikowski, 1999; Carter & Hardy, 1999; and Wolfe, 1999) which indicated that capacity of STM can be
improved by applying sufficient rehearsals which would prolong the duration of information stored in our STM. As the term rehearsal plays a significant role in present research and it is also closely related to long-term memory (LTM), this term is discussed in the following section.
3.1.1.3 Rehearsal
Rehearsal can be defined as the ability to recite newly learned information by associating meanings from accumulated past experiences and background knowledge (Banikowski, 1999). There are two types of rehearsal which are maintenance rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal. Maintenance rehearsal refers to verbally repeating items to be remembered, and it is less likely that information rehearsed in such method can be transferred into long-term memory (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). While maintenance rehearsal is more like a parrot-based repetition of information, elaborative rehearsal is best described as a connection of past experiences and background knowledge with new information. Craik and Lockhart (1972) further discussed that elaborative rehearsal emphasises in creating extended images and utilising hints and clues in ensuring more efficient recalling of stored information. In 2003, a research conducted by Zimbardo, Weber, and Johnson (2003) proved that
rehearsing elaboratively helps to retain stored information better and transfer rehearsed information into long-term memory (LTM) in higher succession rate.
3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM)
Perkins (1989) suggested that LTM stores information that are rehearsed and mastered, even for many more years to come. Wolfe (2001) divided LTM into procedural memory and declarative memory. While declarative memory refers to an ability to tell and write out information that have successfully stored, procedural memory is more like an ability to practice actions that have been carried out constantly over the years. Chamberlain (1990) concluded that information stored in LTM is less likely to be forgotten and described them as permanent knowledge.
After understanding the structure of human memory, a theory about memory and information processing follows.
3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972)
The theory was proposed after a research conducted in collaboration of Fergus Ian Muirden Craik and Robert Lockhart (1975, as cited in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). The two researchers suggested that perceptions towards information influence meanings that will be defined upon
them. To put it simply, how stimuli are viewed will decide on informations definition in human minds. Both of the researchers also stressed that in order to enable first hand information to be well-remembered, rehearsals need to be performed in a series of stages (Crowder, 1976), hence the name Depth of Processing is used to name this theory.
3.1.2.1
Levels of Processing (1972)
Structural
Phonological
Semantic
Weak memory trace
Weak memory trace
Strong memory trace
(As cited in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294)
As the model of Depths of Processing (1972) displays above, there are 3 different levels in information processing, which are structural, phonological, and semantic
processing. While structural processing refers to appearances of stimuli, such as sizes, shapes, and patterns, phonological processing refers to auditory features and sound of stimuli, such as pronunciation of words (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). Last but not least, semantic processing refers to assigning meanings to stimuli, which is considered the level that will create strong memory trace (Craik and Lockhart, 1972).
In this experiment conducted by Craik and Lockhart (1972), classes were divided and were instructed to monitor and to process the words given. A recognition memory test was given right after the respondents had completed rehearsing the list of words depending on which group they were assigned into. Results showed that subjects who rehearsed the list of words for meanings remembered better than subjects who rehearsed structurally and phonologically.
3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS)
If the aim of teaching vocabulary is to master every word learnt and minimise chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, MVLS with deep memory processing must be proposed, rather than processed in a shallow, lower level processing (Craik and Lockhart, 1975). The following MVLS are retrieved from Schmitts Taxonony (1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34). Considering not all the strategies in the taxonomy are not applicable in modern vocabulary learning strategies study, Craik
and Lockhart (1975) stressed that only methods which promote deep memory processing are suitable in rehearsing and memorizing new vocabulary.
3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics
Strategies categorised under linguistic mnemonics focus on characteristics of words-to-learn, which includes pronunciation of words, spelling, pattern of words, etc.
Methods Peg method
Keyword method
Descriptions Links new words to an easily remembered rhyme to learn new words. Focuses on uses learners first language to aid in learning of words in foreign languages. Learns longer and more complex words easier by analysing the words syllables and letters. Learns words by using similar or opposite meaning of the words.
Examples Coat, boat, and float The German word Ei (egg in English) can be remembered easily by thinking of an English word Eye The word initiated can be broken up into four syllables: i-ni-tia-ted The word ferocious can be remembered better with the synonym fierce or the antonym tame.
Word break method
Word relation method
Table 3.1: Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics.
3.1.3.2
Spatial Mnemonics
Spatial mnemonics are strategies which are related with space. It requires learners to imagine or assign hints and clues which will help them to retain words in their memory.
Methods Spatial grouping
Descriptions Words are arranged to form patterns such as triangle, square, and columns.
Finger/number method
Loci method
Examples By arranging words to form a picture of a tree, learners will be able to recall all the words used to form the tree. Assigns each word to be A phrase with four words learnt with a finger or a can be remembered easier number with four numbers, such as 4785. Places words to be learnt Places the word cheese in different location and in the refrigerator, pencil recalls by approaching in the room, and flower these locations. in the garden.
Table 3.2: Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics.
3.1.3.3 Visual Mnemonics
Unlike spatial mnemonic strategies where imageries are mentally produced in learners mind, visual based mnemonic strategies emphasise on using physical imageries which can be felt and touched, such as flash cards and pictures.
Methods Visualisation
Descriptions Remembers the location of the word in that sentence.
Arranging
Word formation method
Examples Recalls the word by remembering the paragraph and lines it is located Groups the words Cabbage, bread, and according to their salmon are words under categories, such as colours, the food category. food, animals, etc. Visualises a words The word shape boxes pattern, such as word size, help remembering the shape, and pattern. word eel in terms of its shape:
e el
Flash cards method Pairs pictures with words that are going to be learnt Draws a picture of a smiling child to describe the word happy.
Table 3.3: Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics.
3.1.3.4 Physical Mnemonics Also called connection mnemonics or link mnemonics, learners ability to make good use of their pre-existing knowledge will be put into test under this mnemonic device. Physical mnemonics place great emphasise in connecting things already learned or known to aid in learning of new skills or knowledge.
Methods Associating
Descriptions Learns new words by recalling concepts already in memory Chains up strings of words by creating a story which features all the words to be learnt. Uses performance tests or examination to evaluate the results of vocabulary learning. Arranges words to be learnt into a diagram and relate other words which share similar idea with branches to create links.
Narrative chain
Reviewing/evaluating
Semantic mapping
Examples Links a newly learnt English word like billboard to a previously learnt word like board. To remember words such as boil, spicy, bake, roast, and wine, a story about a chefs daily routine can be created Most schools have spelling tests to evaluate students learning of English vocabulary. Figure 3.1 below shows an example of the Semantic mapping in vocabulary learning.
Table 3.4: Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics.
Figure 3.1: Semantic mapping in learning words related to transportation
Transportation Sailboat Airplane
Canoe
Water Land Submarine
Air
Helicopter
Truck
Van
Spaceship
(As cited in Language in India: Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow, Vol. 9, p. 124-125)
3.2 Restating purpose and research questions Long-term retention of words in a foreign language has become students main setback in learning a second language. Vocabulary learning is the first step in ensuring effective communication between both parties, as indicated in previous chapter; it is known that people cannot communicate without knowing the meanings of words and applying them in written and spoken communication (Zimbardo, Weber, and Johnson, 2003)
In understanding the frequency of exposure to English language which contrasts participants from two courses, this study aims to reveal the distinction in application of vocabulary learning strategies by respondents from both EL and CH courses. Apart from strategies of lexical memorising, effectiveness of vocabulary learning strategies will also be evaluated based on participants performances in the memory test.
Results obtained in data analysing will answer doubts and research questions posed at the beginning of the research: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each other?
RQ 1:
RQ 2:
What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words between students from these two courses?
RQ 3:
How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in rehearsing new English words?
3.3 Participants and sampling
The participants selected are students in Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. They are assembled in two groups based on their courses, which are English Language (EL) and Chinese Studies (CH). Students frequencies of exposure to the target language (English language) differ these two courses.
Lessons and lectures in EL are conducted mostly using English language; there are subjects where students are taught other languages, such as foreign language subjects and pendidikan moral. EL students are nurtured with the essential communicative skills and knowledge of the language to communicate fluently and competently. EL also encourages participation of students in international platforms such as conferences and forums as well as promoting the use of English language in different field of careers.
Being a total contrast to how EL operates, the mediums of instruction in CH are mostly Chinese language, while there are other languages used in conducting subjects similar to those mentioned before. Understanding the fact that the importance of Chinese language is currently widely recognised around the world, this course aims
to nurture students with high and excellent competency in Chinese language through the teaching of Chinese philosophies, history, and literatures.
40 participants from each course were required to participate in this research, regardless differences in their year of studies.
3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process Data are obtained through participants answering of questionnaires designed by applying a collaboration of Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34) and Craik and Tulvings Depth of Processing Theory (1975, as cited in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). A Questionnaire consists of two sections with section A appears in the form of a memory test which participants sit for and section B consists of 15 statements which participants pick a number in the likert scale to indicate how far they would agree with the statements given.
The procedures of answering the questionnaire are as follow:
1. Participants were given an appendix which contains words for them to memorise in order to sit for the memory test in Section A.
2. Participants were required to spend only twenty minutes to memorise the words listed in the appendix. The researcher demanded that the appendix be returned
within the time limit to prevent respondents from referring to the appendix.
3. Participants would begin answering Section A of the questionnaire.
4. Section B was answered once Section A was completed. Participants results in section A and section B were recorded and analysed. Results are presented in chapter four.
3.5 Research design and stages
This present study is a comparative study intends to investigate the MVLS practised by participants from the courses of CH and EL. The participants are set apart by the difference in frequency of exposure towards English language. This research also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the words in the questionnaire (refer to questionnaire/appendix). At the end of this research, research questions set is hoped to be answered. A total of 80 research participants, with 40 participants from both CH and EL were required to participate in this research. Participants were selected based on their courses regardless of their year of studies. The research questionnaires consist of two sections designed to achieve the research purpose stated early. Participants were required to answer the questionnaires subjectively and objectively.
Research questionnaires were distributed to the research participants, followed by a briefing of the instructions on answering the questionnaires. Participants thoughts and questions were answered before attempting to complete the questionnaires to reduce survey errors. Completed questionnaires were collected and separated based on experiment group, followed by analysis to obtain required data as shown below:
a) MVLS applied by participants in Section A b) MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A
c) Number of participants in each mnemonic style
In presenting the required data stated above, statistical measurements such as bar graphs were used to record and present data in both a) and c) in percentages. While MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A were recorded and presented using tables. Implications and reasoning were made based on the obtained results in the collected data. In discussing the results, research questions stated beforehand were also hoped to be answered in the final stage. The final stage aims to conclude this study by answering the research questions. Apart from that, it also suggests possible applications of MVLS in teaching training programs. Finally, limitations encountered in conducting this research are also stated.
Last but not least, the procedures from beginning of this present study to completion are presented in stages as listed below.
Stage 1: Defining of research purpose
Stage 2: Identifying of research participants
Stage 3: Designing research questionnaire in meeting the research purpose
Stage 4: Distributing of research questionnaires
Stage 5: Collecting of completed questionnaires
Stage 6: Analysing Research questionnaires
Stage 7: Presenting and explaining experiment data
Stage 8: Discussion
Stage 9: Conclusion
3.6 Presents study questionnaire
The questionnaire begins with an introductory page which introduces participants with basic understanding about present research as well as information regarding the researcher. Definition of the key phrase mnemonic strategies will be given to aid participants in completing this questionnaire. While section A is a memory test section which requires participants to memorise words in the appendix given, section
B requires participants to rate their opinions in the statements with a modified likert scale which includes five different levels of agreement.
3.7 Conclusion
The research questions restated above are also the objective of this study. At the end of this research, the researcher attempts to answer and clear the doubts in the form of three research questions stated in Chapter One. To do so, the procedures of the research must be systematically followed and conducted according to the research design. The theoretical framework which serves as the backbone of this research, contains two theories from past studies mentioned in the previous chapter, must be fully acknowledged to understand this study as a whole. Last but not least, there are also examples MVLS, which the researcher referred to design the questionnaire of this study.
The next chapter features statistics derived from analysed results based on the participants performances in answering the questionnaires.
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.0 Introduction
This chapter focuses on data analysis based on the questionnaires completed by participants, as well as featuring findings and discussion for each topic. In Section 4.1, an explanation is given on understanding the graph charts featured in the following section. Section 4.2 features a finding that is crucial in answering Research Question (RQ) 1. A discussion follows at Section 4.3 featuring two topics featured in Section 4.3.1 and Section 4.3.2. Section 4.4 focuses on findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2. Both Section 4.4.1 and Section 4.4.2 cover the analysed data obtained from participants from both courses. The following section includes a discussion with two topics featured in Section 4.5.1 and Section 4.5.2. Section 4.6 covers another finding which is crucial in answering RQ3. Section 4.6.1 features statistics in graphs and tables on the four mnemonic styles and number of participants who practice them. Next, a topic discussion is featured in Section 4.6.2. Lastly, a conclusion in ending this chapter is featured in Section 4.7.
4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results Section A of this present studys questionnaire features a vocabulary memory test that requires participants from CH and EL to memorise the words listed on the questionnaires appendix in a given time limit of twenty minutes.
The next phase of this section requires participants to write down the memorised words regardless of the words sequence, and briefly describe the method they used in retaining the words.
In recording the test results, participants were grouped based on their performances in the test. The four groups of results which participants were assigned in are Fail, Below average, Average, and Excellent. The distributions of the results are as follow:
Fail
- 1 to 7 words written correctly
Below average
Average
Excellent
The graph charts in the following sections show the results of the test obtained by participants in both courses.
4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1
Figure 4.1: Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants)
Five out of forty CH participants have failed the test and they accumulated a total of 12.5% in the group of participants who obtained the same results. A total of 15% of EL participants have failed the test, this figure indicates that 6 participants from the whole population of 40 did not pass the test. There are 35% of CH participants categorised under Below average with their results in the test. 10 participants from the EL course who have added up to 25% are categorised under the same category.
10 CH participants performances are placed under the Average category, which equals to a total of 25% of the group percentage. Under the same placement, 22.5% of EL participants have been assigned under this group.
27.5% of the CH participants managed to excel in the test as 11 of them are employing effective MVLS to achieve this result. Last but not least, statistics have reported that 37.5% of the EL participants also did well in the test as 15 of these participants achieved Excellent in the test.
4.3 Answering RQ 1
From the statistics shown above, it is obvious that participants from the CH course, despite having limited exposure to English language due to the medium of instruction of the course being Chinese language, managed to achieve less test failures than participants from the EL course. It is known that EL students experience higher exposure to English language, a fact that does not help participants from that course to achieve less test failures than participants from the CH course.
Having achieved lower percentages in failing the test, and higher percentages in scoring the results of Below average and Average, participants from the CH course are more focused on passing the test, rather than achieving the Excellent result. Statistics also show that despite having more test failures in EL participants, there appear to be more scorers of grade Excellent.
4.3.1 English language proficiency level and test results
The retrieved completed questionnaires show that the passing rate is higher in CH despite most of the participants are having lower proficiency in the English language. Evidences can be traced from the questionnaires Section A, question 2 that requires participants to briefly describe their methods and approaches used in rehearsing and memorising the words listed on the appendix.
There were difficulties encountered by CH participants in using simple sentence structure in English language to explain their styles and patterns during the vocabulary rehearsing session. Majority of the participants were answering the question using their own mother tongue, which is Chinese language. The other finding refers to their limited storage of English vocabulary, which is countered by their use of English content words without grammatical markers to form grammatically correct sentences. In this case, CH participants focused on conveying thoughts, rather than the validity and quality of their written language. These are some examples which could describe CH participants English language proficiencies, evidences are retrieved from the completed questionnaires:
I)
First, remember words, then write down, group together, break words, repeat many times.
II)
Think pictures, remember it, write and think pictures, practise to write.
Analysis conducted on the completed questionnaires has revealed that most CH participants are practising selective attention. In Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996), this approach is describe as a method where students identify words that are crucial to learn, in order to pass a test, to use them in writing, etc. (Gu and Johnson, 1996, cited from Ghazal, N.D, p. 85). In terms of selection of important words to be memorised, selective attention also includes selection of strategies to assist vocabulary rehearsal (Lawson and Hogben, 1996, p. 103).
An observable system that helps CH participants in passing the test is most respondents who achieved Below average and Average have a set of words that are written correctly. These words are: buhl, gyle, fundus, jink, lar, quid, tatou, vatic, noils. An assumption of these words having high reliability of being written correctly is because of the words being shorter and having less letters compared to other long words, thus making information processing easier and less complex. As a result, writing these nine words correctly will ensure participants a place under the Below average level.
4.3.2 Scorers of Excellent in EL participants
As mentioned before in previous discussion, despite being at greater number in terms of test failures, participants in EL are more superior at securing higher percentage in Excellent test result. Analysis conducted on the completed
questionnaires has revealed that EL participants who wrote out most of the words correctly are channeling their background knowledge and understanding of the English language to aid vocabulary retention.
Understanding the English language in a broader sense has helped EL participants to find more effective alternatives to retain longer and more complex words. During the vocabulary rehearsing session, EL participants are believed to make full use of the words definitions to better understand the words. Incorporating pre-existing knowledge in information processing and organising has been researched by Frederic Bartlett in completing his study of human constructive memory and pre-existing knowledge. The Schema Theory (1932) suggests that how information is processed depends on humans schema, or their pre-existing knowledge (Bartlett, 1977 cited in Landry, 2002). In this case, Excellent scorers in EL combined the structures of those longer words with the explanations provided in the definitions, and relied on their schemata to create an effective way to process these words that require more complex processing effort. The importance of the context of the words in used has been recognised heavily, as it provides mental images or imaginary meanings of the words (Intaraprasert, n.d., p. 90). Some examples below show how complex words can be retained effectively using the Schema Theory (1932):
I)
To remember the word Maggotorium, the word is first broken into [Maggot + orium]. The word can be defined as place where maggots are bred for sale to fishers. The context of the definition is similar to what an emporium offers, where people gather and transactions are ongoing. In short, the word is remembered by recalling an emporium where maggots are on sale. Another example is the word Hypnomogia that has the same meaning as insomnia. In this case, the word is broken into two parts in [Hypno + mogia]. The former part is remembered through the word Hypnosis; the latter part does not bear any meaning as it is classified as a function word. However it does sound like insomnia. As a result the word Hypnomogia is processed in such way: Insomnia is a result of hypnosis. To conclude, EL participants ability in understanding English language in a
II)
broader sense has helped them to rehearse longer and complex words and put them in better positions in increasing the percentage of Excellent scorers in the vocabulary memory test
4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2
As mentioned in previous chapters, effectiveness of MVLS in vocabulary retention remains an important issue to be discussed in this study. This section will
analyse The MVLS preferred by participants who managed to achieve Excellent for their vocabulary memory test results.
4.4.1 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH) Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) [Keyword method + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Arranging] [Keyword method + Associating + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Word break method + Evaluating] [Flash cards method + Associating + Evaluating] [Peg method + Flash cards method + Associating + Semantic mapping + Evaluating] Number of Excellent CH participants using the strategy 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total %
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
45.5 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1
Total
11
100
Table 4.1: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants *MLVS combinations are marked using [ ] Five CH participants who scored Excellent in the vocabulary memory test incorporated [Keyword method + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary retention. A total of 45.5% of the participants are using this combination of strategies in rehearsing new English vocabulary. Only one respondent used [Keyword method + Arranging] in increasing rate of vocabulary storing, which equals to 9.1% of the CH participants.
Apart from participants who employed MVLS in pairs, there are also combinations of three different MVLS; one of the participants was using [Keyword method + Associating + Evaluating] during the test. Another participant is a user of [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating] in vocabulary retention. Similar combination of strategies is used by another participant, but with a slight difference with the Peg method being replaced with the Word break method in such combination: [Keyword method + Word break method + Evaluating].
Unlike majority of the participants, there are two participants that are tested of not using the keyword method in rehearsing the vocabulary. One of them incorporated [Flash cards method + Associating + Evaluating] for memorising. Last but not least, a CH participant relied on five MVLS to achieve Excellent result in the test, the strategies combined are: [Peg Method + Flash cards method + Associating + Semantic mapping + Evaluating].
The next section features table 4.2 which lists the MVLS employed EL participants who achieved Excellent in the vocabulary test. The list also previews the efficiency of the chosen MVLS based on the perspectives of the EL participants.
4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL) Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) [Associating + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Arranging] [Keyword method + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Peg method] [Keyword method + Associating] [Keyword method + Arranging + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Word break method + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Word break method + Associating + Evaluating] [Keyword method + Peg method + Associating + Evaluating] [Keyword method] Number of Excellent CH participants using the strategy 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 Total %
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
20.0 13.4 13.4 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7 6.7
10
6.7
11 Total
1 15
6.7 100
Table 4.2: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants
*MLVS combinations are marked using [ ] Three participants who scored Excellent in the mnemonic vocabulary memory test adopted the combination of [Associating + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary memorising. A total of 20.0% of the participants are using these two methods in rehearsing the new English vocabulary. The pairing of [Keyword method + Arranging] recorded 13.4% with two participants tested of using this combination.
The same goes for the pairing of [Keyword method + Evaluating], with exactly same percentages and number of participants who adopt these strategies.
Only one participant, with a total of 6.7% of the EL participants, used [Keyword method + Peg method] during the test. The rest of the recorded strategies share the same percentages and number of users, such as a participant who adopted [Keyword method + Associating] for strengthening vocabulary retention.
Besides MVLS that are paired, there are also several combinations three MVLS employed by EL participants in rehearsing the words. Three combinations of three MVLS that share similar percentage and number of users are [Keyword method + Arranging + Evaluating], [Keyword method + Word break method + Associating + Evaluating], and [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating]
Apart from MVLS in pairs and participants who employed combinations of three strategies, the recorded data also shows two participants who combined four strategies in increasing rate of vocabulary retention. The two combinations are [Keyword method + Word break method + Associating + Evaluating] and [Keyword method + Peg method + Associating + Evaluating].
Last but not least, there is also a participant who adopted a single strategy approach, which is the Keyword method to rehearse vocabulary.
4.5
Answering RQ 2
To investigate the effectiveness of approaches selected by participants from both courses, there is no better way than studying MVLS that were used by participants who scored Excellent during the vocabulary rehearsing stage. To do so, Scorers of Excellent in both courses must be separated out from scorers of other results. The next step consists of identifying the MVLS used based on participants answers in the questionnaires Section A, question 2. Conducting analysis on participants choices of preferred MVLS during the vocabulary rehearsing session is intended to identify worth-researching topics in MVLS usefulness and their abilities to increase information processing rate. Issues that raise the researchers attention are the importance of reinforcement act ivities in raising vocabulary retention and the Keyword methods effectiveness in rehearsing unique words.
4.5.1 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention The employment of the Evaluating strategy by participants who scored Excellent in the vocabulary memory test is noticeable by the researcher, 10 out of 11 participants in CH and nine out of 15 participants in EL were tested of employing this strategy during the vocabulary rehearsing session. The question raised from this phenomenon is whether this strategy can be considered effective in improving
vocabulary retention rate. To provide an explanation regarding this question, it is crucial to understand this strategy beforehand. Retrieved from Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34), the Evaluating strategy has been regarded as one of the MVLS that promotes deep memory processing, rather than processing at a lower, shallow level (Craig and Tulvig, 1975). This strategy relies on different reinforcement activities to boost and prolong information storage by rehearsing items to be remembered. The reinforcement theory has also been introduced in second language learning.
In vocabulary learning, reinforcement activities include various performance enhancing tests to improve long-term retention, such as reading out loud memorised words, sentence making exercises, and spelling tests. In this case, most participants from both courses were rehearsing the new words by remembering them using various MVLS and writing them out, the process was repeated numerous times for better performances in recalling the words.
In an example retrieved from one of the completed questionnaires, a participant was performing the Evaluating strategy, three attempts were made and the results appeared positive as more words were recalled in each attempt. Table 4.3 presents the recalled words in each attempt. The participants first attempts in rehearsing the words had 16 words written correctly, while in second attempt the number of words
correctly written is 22. Lastly, all the words were written correctly in the third attempt. First attempt Anthelion, buhl, [empty], dormition, [empty], fundus, gyle, [empty], [empty], jink, kummel, lar, [empty], noils, ormolu, [empty], quid, redshort, [empty], tatou, [empty], vatic, [empty], xyloid, [empty], zitella Second attempt Anthelion, buhl, cavatina, dormition, exodontia, fundus, gyle, [empty], isonephelic, jink, kummel, lar, [empty], noils, ormolu, panaesthesia, quid, redshort, [empty], tatou, undercroft, vatic, [empty], xyloid, yataghan, zitella Third attempt Anthelion, buhl, cavatina, dormition, exodontia, fundus, gyle, hypnomogia, isonephelic, jink, kummel, lar, maggotorium, noils, ormolu, panaesthesia, quid, redshort, Scaramouch, tatou, undercroft, vatic, whiskerine, xyloid, yataghan, zitella
Table 4.3: Sample of words rehearsal The Evaluating strategy improved the vocabulary rehearsing results by building on participants memorised words with the ones that have not been mastered and stored. As a result, the process of rehearsing the correctly written words in the first attempt was skipped, and merely focusing on those words that were failed to recall. As more attempts were made, it also increased the possibility of scoring the Excellent result in the test.
4.5.2 Effectiveness of Keyword method
There are five MVLS combinations out of seven used by participants in CH that contain the Keyword method. Similar case is noticeable among EL scorers of Excellent in the vocabulary memory test; the Keyword method appears 10 MVLS
combinations out of the possible 11. These two phenomena indicate that the Keyword method does play a crucial role in effective combinations of MVLS in achieving the Excellent result. The Keyword method, similar to what the Evaluating strategy offers, is one of the MVLS that promotes deep memory processing and creating strong memory trace, which is important in achieving long-term retention. In learning a foreign language, the Keyword method emphasises the importance of the language learners mother tongue, where a word in the target language can be remembered easier by assigning a keyword from the language learners mother tongue. For example, the German word Ei (egg in English) can be remembered easily by thinking of an English word Eye, since both words share similar pronunciation. To recall the word Ei, the language learner will begin to search for the assigned keyword in his/her mind, thus recalling the foreign word from the keyword assigned beforehand.
In this study, the words selected and listed on the questionnaire appendix are considered new and foreign words, as participants claimed that these words have not been encountered by them before. Therefore, it is acceptable to state that this reason has prompted the Keyword method to be used in combinations with other MVLS. Examples of participants answers are retrieved from several questionnaires: completed
III) Participant A: I link the words Im rehearsing with those I am familiar with, such as gyle with Kyle, lar with lah, noils with nails, and many other examples.
IV) Participant B: I try to remember some of the words by linking them with words with similar sounds (e.g noils-noise, tatou-chateau), some by similar spellings (e.g buhl-bull, fundus-fungus), and some by similar parts of the words (e.g exodontia-exodus, dormition-dormitory). In this case, despite having encountered English words that are foreign to them, participants from both courses unconsciously recalled some words learnt before to be assigned as keywords so that these new words can be remembered easily. In the case with the two participants mentioned above, the Keyword method proves that language learners mother tongue or first languages do play a deciding role in second language learning.
4.6 Findings pertaining to rehearsal preferences or approaches in RQ 3
This section aims to compare and contrast the preferences and approaches of participants from CH and EL courses. In marking the similarities and differences in terms of vocabulary retention and rehearsal approaches, analysed data from participants answers on their questionnaires will be presented in bar graphs and tables. The analysed data in bar graphs serves to report the number of participants and
their preferences towards MVLS type. Lastly, a table will follow to unveil patterns and combinations multiple MVLS styles adopted by the participants.
There are four major mnemonic styles in vocabulary rehearsing; they are linguistic, spatial, visual, and physical. Apart from being a user of a certain mnemonic style, the same participant can also appear as a user of other several mnemonic styles.
4.6.1 Mnemonic styles and number of participants: CH and EL
Figure 4.2 Distribution of mnemonic styles (CH and EL participants)
Linguistic mnemonic appear to be the most-used mnemonic style among participants from both courses. 95% of the participants from CH are practitioners of linguistic mnemonic. In participants from EL, the percentage drops slightly and recorded a total of 92.5%.
Unlike linguistic mnemonic, a drastic contrast can be found in the number of spatial mnemonic users. A 40% decrease, which equals to 55% of the participants appear to be spatial mnemonic users. In EL participants, only 40% of the population is users of this mnemonic style. In other words, spatial style MVLS recorded as the least-used vocabulary learning strategies among CH participants.
80% of 40 CH participants are practicing strategies of visual mnemonics in improving vocabulary retention rate. There are more practitioners of this mnemonic style in EL participants; the bar graph indicates that 93% of the population is users of visual type MVLS in increasing rate of vocabulary retention.
Lastly, physical mnemonic strategies recorded 85% of CH participants who are employing these strategies in rehearsing new vocabulary. In participants from EL, the percentage of physical mnemonic users is 90%.
Table 4.4 shows combinations of multiple mnemonic styles adopted by the participants from CH course. Ranking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total Combinations of Mnemonic Styles [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual + Physical] [Linguistic + Visual + Physical] [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual] [Linguistic + Spatial + Physical] [Linguistic + Physical] [Linguistic + Visual] [Spatial + Physical] Linguistic Number of participants using the combination 16 12 2 2 2 2 2 2 40 Total % 40.0 30.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 100
Table 4.4: Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (CH participants). * Combinations of mnemonic styles are marked using [ ]
There are eight different combinations of mnemonic styles practised individually by 40 participants from the CH course. 16 participants are tested of incorporated all four combinations of mnemonic styles in vocabulary rehearsing in the form of [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual + Physical]. These participants make up altogether 40% from the CH participants group.
The second highest combination is a three-strategy combination which takes up the form of [Linguistic + Visual + Physical]. There are 4 fewer participants in employing this combination than the previous most-used form. Users of this combination make up a total of 30% from the whole population.
Unlike the 3-strategy combination mentioned previously, the mixture of [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual] appears to be less famous than the aforementioned [Linguistic + Visual + Physical]. With only two users reported of being users of this combination, both of these participants recorded only 5% of the CH respondents. This percentage will not change for the rest of the mnemonic styles combinations.
Another 3-strategy combination in the appearance of [Linguistic + Spatial + Physical] has only two practitioners with similar percentage with the previous combination. What contrasts this pattern with the previous form is the visual mnemonic style has been replaced with physical mnemonic strategies
There are three combinations of two-strategy patterns, they appear in forms of [Linguistic + Physical], [Linguistic + Visual], and [Spatial + Physical]. Last but not least, there are also two participants from this course that are using linguistic-only approach in strengthening vocabulary retention rate.
Table 4.5 shows combinations of multiple MVLS styles adopted by the participants from EL course. Ranking 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total Combinations of Mnemonic Styles [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual + Physical] [Linguistic + Visual + Physical] [Linguistic + Physical] [Linguistic + Visual] Visual [Spatial + Visual + Physical] Number of participants using the combination 15 17 3 2 2 1 40 Total % 37.5 42.5 7.5 5.0 5.0 2.5 100
Table 4.5: Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (EL participants).
* Combinations of mnemonic styles are marked using [ ]
Unlike the analysis on participants from the CH course, there are only six combinations of mnemonic styles employed by EL participants. In this course, the form of [Linguistic + Spatial + Visual + Physical] is no longer the most used combination. With 15 participants being users of this combination, it is the second placed combination with 37.5% participants of the whole population.
The mnemonic style combination with the most practitioners in the EL course appears to be a 3-strategy combination in the form of [Linguistic + Visual + Physical], employed by 17 participants in boosting vocabulary rehearsal rate, this combination has the highest percentage among the other combinations of mnemonic styles with 42.5%.
In combinations made up with mixing two mnemonic styles, the form of [Linguistic + Physical] has accumulated 7.5% out of the group consists of EL participants, there are three participants practicing this combination in rehearsing English vocabulary.
Another combination of two mnemonic styles in the form of [Linguistic + Visual] has one less practitioner compared to the previously mentioned combination. With only two participants being users and a total of 5% of 40 participants of EL course, this 2-strategy combination shares the same percentage with the only singlestyle approach, which is the visual mnemonic style employed by two participants from this course.
Last but not least, the combination of [Spatial + Visual + Physical] marks the least-sought after combination of mnemonic style with only one user being practitioner of this combination marking a total of 2.5% among the participants in the EL course.
4.6.2 Answering RQ 3
After analysing the statistics on number of participants from both courses, this section discussed on the unsuitability of spatial mnemonic style in both courses participants, as well as their disliking towards spatial mnemonic styles.
Statistics suggest that participants from both courses have found linguistic, visual, and physical mnemonic styles fit and suit their styles in terms of rehearsing vocabulary. Unlike other mnemonic styles that have recorded a minimum percentage of 80% practitioners among participants from both courses, the figures have suggested otherwise in spatial mnemonic styles low number of users.
Respondents react straightforwardly towards MVLS that suit them, to answer the doubts surrounding then low percentage that spatial mnemonic style has accumulated, the first step is to understand MVLS that are categorised under this style.
Spatial mnemonic MVLS promotes deep memory processing and creates strong memory trace that helps in achieving long-term retention of information in human memory. Spatial-style mnemonics are focused on using space to enhance retention of information; it requires users to imagine or assign hints and clues which will help them to retain words in their memory.
Three MVLS that are considered spatial are spatial grouping, finger method, and loci method. In spatial grouping, words are arranged in shapes and patterns and are recalled by searching for the shapes and patterns which the words formed. Finger method enables learners to learn words and also phrases, by assigning words on fingers or numbers, a phrase consists of several new words can be recalled when these fingers or numbers are put together. Lastly, the ancient loci method requires learners to place words to be learnt in different imaginary spaces. For example, a foreign
English language learner might want to place the word cheese in the refrigerator, pencil in the room, and flower in the garden. An assumption that can be drawn in participants preferences towards linguistic, visual, and physical over spatial mnemonic style are very much due to the styles requirement of strategic imaginary and systematic assigning of words to be learnt with specific codes to enhance memory retention rate. It is fair to conclude that failing in the first step of tagging words to be learnt would mean disrupting the next phase, which is recalling of stored words.
There are also difficulties in selecting the most suitable code for each word to be assigned with. For example, to effectively remember the word hypnomogia, language learners are facing problems in assigning the word with either hypnosis or insomnia, since both codes fit into the characteristics of the word hypnomogia.
To conclude, low percentage reached by spatial mnemonic style in terms of number of users among participants from both courses, to a certain extent, is caused by the first phase of spatial mnemonic style. To begin using spatial-type MVLS, language learners must first overcome the difficulties proposed by the styles strategic imaginary and systematic assigning characteristics before increasing the strength of information retention.
4.7 Conclusion
The discussion in this chapter is based on comparison of data analysis from the collected data between the two courses. It is intended at showing audience a clear distinction of MVLS between courses of CH and EL. The next chapter concludes this study by answering the research questions proposed at the beginning of this study, as well as making a conclusion by reviewing the topic discussions in this chapter.
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
5.0 Introduction
In this final chapter, issues raised at the beginning in the form of research questions are answered based on the findings and discussions in the previous chapter. Section 5.1 restates three research questions that were raised at the beginning of this study. The research questions answered in the previous chapter are summarised in Section 5.1.1, Section 5.1.2, and Section 5.1.3. Section 5.2 discusses on implications of MVLS in teaching training programmes from the researchers point of view. In Section 5.3, limitations encountered in conducting this study are included. Finally, Section 5.4 concludes this research as an ending to this study.
5.1 Summary of findings pertaining to Research Question
At the beginning of this research, three research questions have been proposed as the objectives of this study. The goal of this study is to clarify the issues raised in question at the proposal of this research topic.
5.1.1 RQ 1: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each other?
A characteristic that contrasts participants in both courses of CH and EL is the perception towards vocabulary learning. In CH participants, the main priority is to avoid failure in the vocabulary memory test. In explaining this perception, there is an occurrence of words that appeared in a predictable manner in answers given by CH participants in the test. It generally shows that the importance of getting messages across in conversations matters more than the quality of the content in the messages.
Having higher exposure to the English language has shaped a different point of view in participants from the EL course. The quality of the content in the messages is regarded the main priority, therefore learning more words for long-term use matters more than just conveying their thoughts to another parties. In learning a greater number of new words, upgrading the quality of the messages can also be achieved as there are more alternatives in the choices of words in getting their thoughts delivered.
5.1.2 RQ 2: What are the similarities in terms of English words rehearsal between students from these two courses?
One shared interest between participants from CH and EL is their opinions towards the importance of enforcing reinforcement activities in vocabulary learning. In the course of language learning, reinforcements are crucial in changing a subjects learning behaviour by repeating of certain task until it is memorised and mastered. In testing whether a topic taught is fully learnt, a language teacher may conduct several kinds of performance checking activities to ensure whether further reinforcements are needed.
Activities that can be used to enhance performances in long-term vocabulary retention include reading out loud memorised words, sentence making exercises, and spelling tests. Table 4.3 in the previous chapter has shown that practising repeatedly gradually improves the result of vocabulary rehearsing, as all the words are written correctly at the 3rd attempt, compared to earlier attempts where some words were still missing due to human memorys fragile nature that insufficient practise of information is the leading cause of unsuccessful transferring of information from Short-term Memory (STM) to Long-term Memory (LTM) (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968).
5.1.3 RQ 3: How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in rehearsing new English words?
It is answered that being exposed to a different degree to English language in terms of mediums of instructions does affect participants perceptions towards vocabulary learning and word usage in conversing with another party. However, studying in different courses where lessons are conducted using two different languages does not prevent participants from employing a totally diverse system of MVLS in vocabulary learning, due to the selection of these words, which are new words that most participants have not encountered before.
One noticeable similarity shared by participants from both courses is the choice of Keyword method used during the vocabulary rehearsing session. In this method, the language learners mother tongue is emphasised, where a word in t he target language can be remembered easier by assigning a keyword from the language learners mother tongue. In the context of this study, these selected words are being treated as foreign words due to their uniqueness and their low appearances in daily conversation, thus making the Keyword method the most suitable strategy in rehearsing them, regardless of the difference in terms of degree of exposure to English language.
5.2 The implications of MVLS in teaching training programmes Teachers biggest concern is to teach as many word as possible to students, at least to the extent that it is sufficient for students to understand the content of the lessons taught by the teacher. It is agreed that learning words is a difficult process, as researchers assert that to learn a word means to study its pronunciation, meaning, and how to use it correctly in a sentence (Schmitt, 2000; Read, 2000; Liu and Shaw, 2001, cited in Yek, 2006). Learning to use MVLS can reduce these complications. Thus, teachers need to be trained professionally with the knowledge and skills to successfully apply these MVLS in a classroom setting.
Malaysia is one of the countries with an environment where English language is taught and learnt as a second language. In such environment, vocabulary is taught to students most probably in a decontextualised manner during English lessons. In other words, students have very little exposure to the contexts where the words is best used with. A large amount of time is spent on presenting, explaining, and defining the terms in dictionary definitions. Under such circumstances, students are expected to be independent in their course of vocabulary learning where they are told to learn English vocabulary on their own, with very limited effort and guidelines provided to them on how to learn vocabulary effectively and how to improve their vocabulary usage.
However, instructing students to learn vocabulary by merely providing them with a list of words does not result and ensure the words are learnt effectively. The growing awareness on vocabulary learning is the importance of enhancing the students communicative competence of the target language and the recognition that greater amount of words are needed to achieve this aim, as this present study insists, it is impossible to communicate without words. Therefore, the implications for teaching vocabulary to improve students competency in communication are that teachers should possess at least an above average command of the target language and the applications of MVLS. Upon saying this, it indicates that teachers should be trained with different methodological trainings and apply new teaching approaches that are able to support learning. Next, it is crucial for teachers to be aware of language learners interests and combine different MVLS to maximise vocabulary learning. Teachers should understand that learners learn best at their own pace and with a learning style that suits them. Teaching program designers should make considerations that students' cultural background and pre-existing knowledge also play a significant role in vocabulary learning.
5.3 Limitations
The number of CH and EL participants in this research does not generalise the bigger population of similar group of students in other universities. Due to the number of the sampling groups, which refer to the participants from EL and CH courses respectively, are limited. Thus, to generalise to the whole population will be difficult.
Students from both courses are not exposed fully to the medium of instruction which belongs to their courses respectively. What contradicts to the reality is that participants from both courses are sometimes attending lessons in Bahasa Melayu and other foreign languages, depending on their choices of subjects which they chose.
Lastly, there is no guarantee that participants did not violate the instructions and the rules of the vocabulary memory test. Although participants were asked to return the distributed appendix once the given time limit is over, dishonesty in the test could have happened.
5.4 Conclusion
The research presents in detail the vocabulary learning strategies used by participants from both courses of CH and EL. It generally provides an overall idea regarding the type of MVLS users in both courses. It is shown in previous chapters that learning new words is a complex and multi-processing effort. Many retention strategies are needed to transfer these new words from short-term to long-term storage. However, the matter that concerns students and teachers is the suitability of these MVLS in raising the longevity in terms of the period these words are able to stay remembered in our memory for many more years to come. Craik and Lockhart (1972) assert that only methods which promote deep memory processing are suitable in rehearsing and memorising new vocabulary.
REFERENCES Benge, C., & Robbins, M. E. (2009), Using keyword mnemonics to develop secondary students vocabularies: a teachers action research. Journal of Language and Literacy Education. 6(1), 93-104.
Burchers, S., Burchers, M., & Burchers, B. (1997) Vocabulary cartoons: Learn hundreds of new SAT words fast with easy memory techniques (2nd ed.). New Monic Books.
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 104(3), 268-294.
Erton, I. H., & Williams, M., (2008). A comparative look into how to measure the effectiveness of vocabulary learning strategies: Through using percentages or correlation coefficients. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies. 4(2), 5772.
Ghazal, L. (n.d.). Learning vocabulary in EFL context through vocabulary learning strategies. Novitas-ROYAL. 1(2), 84-91.
Gu, P. Y. (2003). Vocabulary learning in a second language: Person, task, context and strategies. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 7(2). Retrieved October 24, 2011, from http://www.teslej.org/wordpress/issues/volume7/ej26/ej26a4/
Intaraprasert, C. (n.d.). Strategies for learning vocabulary employed by scienceoriented students: A qualitative perspective. Arab World English Journal. 1(1), 80-116.
Lawson, M. J., & Hogben, D. (1996). The vocabulary-learning strategies of foreignlanguage students. Language Learning. 46(1), 101-135.
Nemati, A. (2009). A strategy-based scheme for promoting vocabulary retention among language learners. Language in India: Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow. 9(9), 119-137
Nemati, M. (2009). Memory vocabulary learning strategies and long-term retention. International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education. 1(2), 14-24.
Noorizah Noor., & Zaini Amir (n.d.). Exploring the Vocabulary Learning Strategies of EFL Learners. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from http://ukm.academia.edu/ZainiAmir/Papers/490282/Exploring_the_Vocabular y_Learning_Strategies_of_EFL_Learners
Sahandri Hamzah., Reza Kafipour., & Saifuddin Abdullah. (2009). Vocabulary learning strategies of Iranian undergraduate EFL students and its relation to their vocabulary size. European Journal of Social Sciences, 11(1), 39-50.
Xhaferi, B., & Xhaferi, G. (2008). Vocabulary learning strategies used by students at SEEU in terms of gender and teachers attitudes toward teaching vocabulary. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from http://www.seeu.edu.mk/files/research/Brikena_Vocabulary.pdf
Yek, S. (2006). Memory enhancing vocabulary learning strategies instruction. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from http://ethesys.lib.mcu.edu.tw/ETD-db/ETDsearch/getfile?URN=etd-0804106-215407&filename=etd-0804106215407.pdf
APPENDIX A
UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE KAMPAR CAMPUS
My name is Stippie Chee Wei How, a student of Bachelor of Arts (Hons) English Language from Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. I am conducting a survey for my subject Final Year Project (FYP) among students of English Language and Chinese Studies. This survey aims to study and compare on the mnemonics strategies deployed by students in the Chinese Studies and English Language courses in rehearsing English vocabulary.
This survey questionnaire consists of sections A and B. Section A requires participants to fill in answers with the spaces provided, please refer to the appendix attached before answering question in section A. Section B consists of 15 questions, do read the instructions carefully before answering them. Your participation is appreciated.
Thank you. Prepared by: Name: Student I.D: Course: Contact number: E-mail address: Stippie Chee Wei How 09AAB01075 Bachelor of Arts (Hons) English Language 012-3487848 stippie_1214@hotmail.com
Definition of key term Mnemonic strategies techniques or methods which aid in memory strengthening and enhancing items memorisation such as words, numbers, etc.
Section A (Please refer to the appendix attached before answering questions in this section) 1. Please rewrite the words which you can remember from the given appendix. (Order of words does not matter). __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
2. Please briefly describe the method(s) you used to memorise the words. __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
Section B Kindly circle the number for questions 1 - 15 according to the scale shown below. Rating scale of survey: 1 Strongly disagree 4 Agree No. Questions
2 Disagree 5 Strongly agree Strongly disagree Disagree
3 Neutral
Neutral
Agree
Strongly agree
1.
I link up new words to other words which sound alike to help me remember better. I assign a newly learnt word to a key word to make remembering easier. I break up a word into smaller parts and study its spelling. I connect a word to its synonyms and antonyms to help me in remembering it better. I arrange new words in shapes and patterns such as triangle, square, columns, etc. I associate each new word with a number, or simply a finger to remember the word better. I try to imagine putting words-tobe-learnt in places I know and I can approach those words by going near to those places. I can remember a new word better if I remember where is it located in a text/passage.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Section B (Continued)
9.
I group words according to their categories such as food, plants, colours, etc. I memorise a words form and its pattern, such as its size and its shape. I assign words with an image or a picture to help me in remembering them. I relate new vocabulary to concepts already in memory. Exp: the word billboard may be associated with the word board. I build my vocabulary by using words which I have just learnt in short sentences or grouping them together to form a storyline. I know how to use semantic maps or mind mapping techniques to memorise new words. I use various tests to practice my vocabulary to ensure they are well stored in my memory.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
---- End of Questionnaire --Thank you for your time and cooperation.
APPENDIX B
Definition of key term Mnemonic strategies techniques or methods which aid in memory strengthening and enhancing items memorisation such as words, numbers, etc.
Section A (Please refer to the appendix attached before answering questions in this section) 3. Please rewrite the words which you can remember from the given appendix. (Order of words does not matter). Anthelion, buhl, cavatina, dormition, exodontia, fundus, gyle, hypnomogia, isonephelic, jink, kummel, lar, maggotorium, noils, ormolu, panaesthesia, quid, redshort, Scaramouch, tatou, undercroft, vatic, whiskerin, xyloid, yataghan, zitella.
4. Please briefly describe the method(s) you used to memorise the words. The first method was to remember the initial letter of each word in alphabetical order, that is from A to Z. The second method was to memorise each word by breaking it into syllables.
Section B Kindly circle the number for questions 1 - 15 according to the scale shown below. Rating scale of survey: 1 Strongly disagree 4 Agree No. Questions
2 Disagree 5 Strongly agree Strongly disagree Disagree
3 Neutral
Neutral
Agree
Strongly agree
1.
I link up new words to other words which sound alike to help me remember better. I assign a newly learnt word to a key word to make remembering easier. I break up a word into smaller parts and study its spelling. I connect a word to its synonyms and antonyms to help me in remembering it better. I arrange new words in shapes and patterns such as triangle, square, columns, etc. I associate each new word with a number, or simply a finger to remember the word better. I try to imagine putting words-tobe-learnt in places I know and I can approach those words by going near to those places. I can remember a new word better if I remember where is it located in a text/passage.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Section B (Continued)
9.
I group words according to their categories such as food, plants, colours, etc. I memorise a words form and its pattern, such as its size and its shape. I assign words with an image or a picture to help me in remembering them. I relate new vocabulary to concepts already in memory. Exp: the word billboard may be associated with the word board. I build my vocabulary by using words which I have just learnt in short sentences or grouping them together to form a storyline. I know how to use semantic maps or mind mapping techniques to memorise new words. I use various tests to practice my vocabulary to ensure they are well stored in my memory.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
---- End of Questionnaire --Thank you for your time and cooperation.
APPENDIX C Appendix Please apply the best strategies which you know best to remember all the words below anthelion buhl cavatina dormition exodontia fundus gyle hypnomogia isonephelic jink kummel lar noils ormolu panaesthesia quid redshort scaramouch tatou undercroft vatic whiskerine xyloid yataghan zitella luminous ring seen on a cloud opposite the sun inlaying of precious material onto furniture short operatic air falling asleep; death extraction of teeth the bottom of anything fermenting vat for beer insomnia line connecting points of equal cloud cover to move quickly with sudden turns and shifts cumin-flavoured liqueur local god of a house short pieces of fibre separated from longer ones by combing something expensive looking; gold-plated metal totality of perception; general awareness a cut or wad or something chewable brittle at red-heat ruffian; scoundrel armadillo crypt or vault under a church prophetic; oracular; inspired beard-growing contest woody; ligneous long curved knife or sabre young girl; maiden
maggotorium place where maggots are bred for sale to fishers
APPENDIX D
Anthelion Buhl Cavet Dormition Exdon Fundus Gyle Hypmogia Isophel Jink Kummel Lar Magotrium Noils Ormolu Panasthe Quid Redshort Scamauch Tatou Undercot Vatic Whisrine Xyloid Yatahn Zitella
Anthelion Buhl cavatina dormition exodontia fundus gyle hypmonoga isonephelic jink kummel lar maggotrium noils ormolu panaesthesia quid redshort scaramaoch tatou undercroft vatic whiskrin xyloid yataghan zitella
Anthelion Buhl cavatina dormition exodontia fundus gyle hypnomogia isonephelic jink kummel lar maggotorium noils ormolu panaesthesia quid redshort scaramouch tatou undercroft vatic whiskerine xyloid yataghan zitella

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Stippie Chee Wei How)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Stippie Chee Wei How)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR KAMPAR

STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

_____________________ Supervisor Ms. Tan Swee Mee

: STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

Student ID: 09AAB01075

: ____________________ : 20th October 2011

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 2 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 PAGE

v 2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004) 19 20 21 22 23

Data analysis and discussion 43 44 45 46 47 48 50 51 53 55 55 57 59 60 65 68

vii LIST OF TABLES

viii LIST OF GRAPHS

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 1

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 2

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 3

1. Having sources for encountering new words.

2. Getting clear images of the forms of the new words.

5. Applying the words in written or spoken form.

(Fan, 2003, p. 223, as cited in Hamzah et al., 2009, p. 42)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 4

(Schmitt, 1997, p. 207, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 5

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 6

1.3 Purpose of the Study

1.4 Research Questions (RQ)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 7

1.5 Scope of Study

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 8

1.7 Significance of the Study

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 9

1.8 Definition of keywords/terms

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 10

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 11

2.1 Conceptual background

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 12

2.2 Mnemonic History

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 13

2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 14

2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 15

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 16

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 17

2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition

2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 18

2.4.2 Mason (2004)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 19

2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 20

2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 21

2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 22

2.5.2 Allen (1995)

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 23

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 24

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 25

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 26

3.1 Theoretical Framework

3.1.1 Model of memory (1968)

3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory

Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 27