This chapter concludes the current study by summarizing the major findings, providing pedagogical implications, pointing out the limitations of research, and suggesting future research directions.
Major Findings
To understand how well the senior high school English textbooks in Taiwan have prepared students for reading English-medium textbooks in college, this study has explored the sizes and distributions of academic words from the AWL in the five senior high school English textbook series. To assist students’ academic vocabulary development, the academic words from the AWL that are not included in each textbook series are also identified and compiled into complementary word lists to serve as supplementary learning materials for students with diverse learning needs.
The new words in the five textbook series were also analyzed with the GSL K1, K2 and the AWL frequency scheme to reveal the vocabulary profiles of new words of each textbook series. The information of vocabulary profile of new words in
textbooks could potentially help teachers in choosing suitable learning materials for their students. The words on the 1,200-word List were also combined with the data of new words of each textbook series for frequency scheme analysis so as to shed light on the optimal vocabulary sizes that students could develop through the K-12 curriculum with the use of different textbook series.
Academic Vocabulary Size
About 42% to 55% of the academic words on the AWL were found to be included in the current five textbook series. Significant differences were reported in
terms of the sizes of academic words from the AWL in the textbook series. Three textbook series contains more than 50% of the academic words from the AWL in the new word section: textbook series C includes the most of them with 315 word families across six volumes, followed by textbook series E with 306 word families and textbook series D with 289 word families. The other two textbook series,
textbook series B and A, were found to include less than 50% of the academic words from the AWL in their new word section: textbook series B and A contain 256 word families and 240 word families of academic words on the AWL respectively,
accounting for about 45% and 42% of the 570-word-family AWL. Statistical testing results reveal that textbook series A selects a significantly smaller amount of academic words in its new word section when compared with textbook series C, E and D while the textbook series C and E include significantly larger amount of academic words when compared with textbook series B and A.
Academic Vocabulary Distribution
In terms of the distribution of academic words across ten sublists of the AWL, no significant differences were identified in the amounts of academic words from Sublist1 and the first three sublists among the five textbook series. The academic words selected from Sublist 1 of the AWL in the five textbook series range from 41 word families to 47 word families. The academic words selected from the first three sublists also show a slight variation with textbook series E including the maximum amount of 124 word families while textbook series B including the minimum amount of 105 word families. Despite no significant differences shown in the amounts of academic vocabulary selected in Sublist 1 and the first three sublists, significant differences do exist in the amounts of academic words selected from Sublist 4 to Sublist 10 among five textbook series. That is, the five textbook series examined in
current study shared similar strength in the academic vocabulary selection of the first three sublists, which provides a high percentage of academic text coverage. Yet, the five textbook series vary in terms of the amount of academic vocabulary selected from the remaining seven sublists with textbook series C and E including far more academic words from these sublists than textbook series B and A.
As for the academic words distribution across the six volumes of each
textbook series, four textbook series present the largest amount of academic words in the fourth volume except that textbook series E introduced the largest amount of academic words in the third volume, which allows students to expose to more academic words one semester early than the other textbook series. Textbook series A presented noticeable smaller amount of academic words in its first volume when compared with the rest of the four textbook series and increased the amount of academic words gradually in its first four volumes. Dramatic increase or decline patterns for the amounts of academic words presented in advanced volumes were spotted in textbook series C and B. Textbook series D also shows a slight decline in the amount of academic words when it progressed from the first volume to the second volume.
Complementary Word Lists
As each textbook series contains about 42% to 55% of academic words on the AWL, the remaining academic words on the AWL were also identified for each textbook series in this study. Five complementary word lists were compiled to facilitate students’ academic vocabulary learning. Teachers could utilize these word lists to create supplementary learning materials while textbook writers could consider adding some of the academic words on the complementary lists to their future new versions of textbooks if adding the academic words is feasible without lower too
much of the readability of the reading texts in the textbooks. Students could learn from the lists or use the lists to set up their academic vocabulary learning goals.
Frequency Scheme Analysis of New Words in Textbooks
As the high-frequency words on the GSL and the academic words on the AWL could provide about 92% coverage of academic texts, the new word in the textbook series were also analyzed with the frequency scheme of the GSL and the AWL.
Significant differences do exist in the total amounts of words selected from the GSL and the AWL among the five textbook series. Textbook series B and D were found to include significantly larger amount of words from the GSL and the AWL than
textbook series A and E. Textbook series C does contain far more words from the GSL and the AWL when compared with textbook series E yet no significant difference were reported when compared with the rest of textbook series.
Textbook series B was found to have the largest amount of words selected from the GSL and the AWL with a stronger focus on the high-frequency words of the GSL, the first 1,000 words in particular. Textbook series E was found to contain the smallest amount of words selected from the GSL and the AWL with a noticeable smaller amount of words selected from the first 1,000 words in GSL though it contains relatively higher amount of the academic words. Textbook series D was found to have a similar amount of words selected from the GSL and the AWL to textbook series B. Textbook series D contains 40 more word families from the second 1,000 word on the GSL yet 30 more word families from the AWL than textbook series B. Textbook series C has a moderate amount of words selected from the GSL and the AWL with more focus on the academic words and including moderate amount of high-frequency GSL words. Textbook series C contains about 100 less word families from the GSL than textbook series B yet include about 60 more word families from
the AWL than textbook series B. When compared with textbook series C, textbook series A selects a similar amount of high-frequency words from the GSL yet includes 75 less word families from the AWL.
Frequency Scheme Analysis of New Words Introduced through the Curriculum
The frequency scheme analysis of new words introduced through the curriculum shows that students could reach a vocabulary size of about 75% of the GSL and 45% to 55% of the AWL after mastering the 1,200-word List and new words from any of the textbook series through the K-12 curriculum in Taiwan. No
significant differences were reported in the optimal vocabulary sizes students could develop on the GSL and the AWL frequency scheme with the use of different textbook series through the K-12 curriculum. Distinct features of re-introducing the lexical items from the 1,200-word List of textbook series were identified to explain the different results when compared with the textbook-only analysis. Textbook series A, B and D shared more new words with the 1,200-word List than textbook series C and E.
Pedagogical Implications
Based on the research findings of this study and literature review, some pedagogical implications are proposed to facilitate students’ development of the ability to read academic texts.
This study has found that the five senior high school textbook series include significantly different amounts of academic words from the AWL and high-frequency words from the GSL. The distributions of the academic words in the textbook series also differ from each other. The disparity of the amounts of new words selected from the AWL and the GSL and the different distribution patterns of these new words would create different difficulty level of the textbook series, which would provide
many different choices for students with diverse language proficiencies and learning needs. Cunningworth (1995) pointed out the importance of selecting the appropriate textbooks that fits students’ proficiency level and learning abilities to optimize students’ learning. To facilitate students’ optimal vocabulary development, teachers could first find out students’ current vocabulary level and choose a textbook series that meets their learning needs. Students could be tested to see if they have gained good control of the words on the1,200-word List or the high-frequency words to decide which textbook series might better suit them. Nation (2008) argued that it’s important for the teachers to find out whether the learners need to be focusing on high-frequency vocabulary, academic vocabulary, technical vocabulary or
low-frequency vocabulary when planning the vocabulary component of a language course. Senior high school teachers and instructors in university could also use The Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation, 1990; Schmitt, et al, 2001) to identify the learning needs of their students and set appropriate academic vocabulary learning goals for the students.
In terms of the academic vocabulary selection of the five textbook series, this study also reveals that only 42% to 55% of the academic words from the AWL are included in the current five textbook series. When considering the academic words that students are likely to learn in the K-12 curriculum, the percentage rises to 43% to 56%. This implies that if students would like to comprehend English-medium
textbooks at university, they would still have to learn the remaining 44% to 57% of academic words from the AWL. Textbook writers could consider including more academic words from the AWL into their future textbook series if they decide to emphasize the learning of academic words. Weir (2009) pointed out that the academic vocabulary on the AWL was adopted as an indicator for lexical difficulty in the
analysis of Cambridge Main Suite Reading examinations. As adding more academic words in the reading texts is likely to increase the text difficulty for learners, textbook writers should evaluate the increase of text difficulty when adding more academic words into the reading texts. More academic words from the first three sublists from the AWL could be included first as these academic words provide a much larger
coverage for academic texts and are recommended to be learned first (Coxhead, 2000).
Pilot studies with regards to the text difficulty or readability level shifts could be conducted to identify the optimal amount of academic words that could be integrated into the reading texts of new textbook series. Textbook writers should also try to avoid dramatic increase or sharp decline of academic words when the volumes progress to more advanced levels. The reason is that dramatic increase or sharp decline of academic words would pose more challenges for students’ vocabulary development.
Furthermore, to enhance students’ vocabulary knowledge development, textbook writers could consider labeling the register of words, such as indicating the academic vocabulary with abbreviation of “AWL” or illustrating high-frequency words with a symbol of a key or abbreviation of “GSL.” The information provided with the label would correspond to what Nation (2001) proposed as providing the information on constraints of use in the form-meaning-use framework of knowing a word. As the senior high school English curriculum in Taiwan is more oriented to English for General Purpose (EGP), adding the register information of words, such as words for academic uses, could raise learners’ awareness of the particular use of words in certain domains so that they develop the knowledge of word register. Since words of high-frequency vocabulary, academic vocabulary and less-frequent vocabulary were all introduced in the new words section in the senior high school textbooks, the labels of word register information could also help students to decide which words to focus first and to set up their own vocabulary learning goals.
As the selection of textbooks often involves many factors and teachers in Taiwan very often would have mixed-level classes, it is very likely students of
different vocabulary sizes end up using the same textbook series in class. In this case, differentiated instructions could be implemented to optimize students’ learning. For senior high school students who have a larger vocabulary size and good control of high-frequency words, teachers could utilize the complementary lists as compiled from this study to create supplementary learning materials to assist students’ academic vocabulary development. Learning from the lists and developing word part analysis skills could also be encouraged for learning academic vocabulary as suggested by Nation (2001). Senior high school students with a smaller vocabulary size should first focus on develop good mastery of the high-frequency words and then gradually progress to the learning of academic words, especially the ones falling on the first three sublists with the highest learning value. Instructors at college level could check whether the students at college level need to work on the academic words on the AWL through the Vocabulary Levels Test as it contains a section built upon the AWL.
Nation (2001) suggested that students are required to reach at least a score of 25 out of 30 in order to do academic studies in English. Students who score less than 25 could study the items on the AWL to develop their academic vocabulary knowledge.
Instructors could also utilize the complementary lists compiled in this study to help students identify the academic words that they need to work on. It is very likely that college students in freshman year might not be familiar with the academic words that were not introduced in the senior high school textbook series. The complementary lists for each textbook series could be of potential use for college students who need to work on the learning of academic words.
Limitations of Research
This study aims at examining the sizes and distribution of academic words among the five current senior high school English textbook series and identifying the academic words on the AWL that are not selected in the textbook series to form complementary lists to serve as supplementary materials for students’ learning. It should be noted that the findings of the research are limited to the learning materials examined in this study. That is, only the new words included in the basic learning materials of the textbook series are investigated in this research for fair quantitative comparison. The new words in the advanced learning materials of the textbook series were not included. Therefore, the described vocabulary selection features of textbook series are only limited to the basic learning materials of each textbook series.
In addition, the features of vocabulary selection of textbook series were identified through the frequency framework of the GSL and the AWL to reveal to what extent each textbook series might have prepared students for reading English-medium college textbooks. The vocabulary selection features of textbook series identified are limited to this scope as the new words in the textbooks falling into the off-list (less-frequent word) category were not able to be classified into word families through Web VocaProfile classic v.4 for systematic discussion. The new words in the off-list category in the textbook series were examined with the counting unit of lemma to provide some extra information with regards to the vocabulary selection with this particular type of words in this five textbook series.
Moreover, the finding of this study is also limited to the current corpus linguistic tools available. As highly accurate computer programs for tagging lexemes (word forms and their distinct meanings) are still to be developed (Gardner & Davies, 2014), the findings of this study are simply the results of word form comparison rather than word form plus word meaning comparison. Sixty AWL word families
containing homographs were identified by Wang and Nation (2004), yet the meaning distinctions could not be examined with the instrument available in this study. It is likely that students might not have fully mastered the academic words that appear in the high school textbooks, especially the one with polysemy features. Teachers should raise students’ awareness in differentiating the usages of these polysemous academic words when students’ academic vocabulary learning progress to a more advanced level. The most frequent meanings of the polysemous academic words should be introduced and followed by the less frequent meanings.
Last but not the least, the findings of this research on the academic vocabulary selection in textbooks is also limited to the academic word list adopted. The AWL was built on the assumption that the frequency of academic words would come after that of the GSL words. Researchers pointed out that the AWL does not contain words of academic nature which at the same time falls into the high-frequency GSL word category (Nagy & Townsend, 2012; Neufeld, et al, 2011). Some GSL words, such as interest, account, and rate, were not identified as academic words on the AWL despite the fact that they do have academic meanings and appear frequently in academic texts.
Many attempts of making new academic word lists have been made recently (Browne, et al., 2013; Gardner & Davies, 2014). This research still utilize the AWL for analysis of academic words as many other researchers have proven that the AWL could provide text coverage of about 10% of academic texts in various disciplines while there haven’t been as many established results about the text coverage of academic texts provided by these two relatively new academic word lists .
Suggestions for Future Research
This study analyzed the academic vocabulary introduced at the new word section in textbooks as Cobb (1995) and Schmitt and Schmitt (2012) did for wordlists
comparison aiming at examining words for intentional vocabulary learning. To reveal the vocabulary input in the textbooks, future research could include the reading texts for examination of vocabulary recycling from the perspective of incidental vocabulary learning.
As Browne, Culligan and Phillips (2013) recently develop the New General Service List (NGSL) and New Academic Word List (NAWL), which claims to provide higher text coverage than the original GSL and the AWL, future research
As Browne, Culligan and Phillips (2013) recently develop the New General Service List (NGSL) and New Academic Word List (NAWL), which claims to provide higher text coverage than the original GSL and the AWL, future research