A 2 (encoding sequence: traditional vs. adjusted) × 2 (nature of semantic encoding cue: word vs. picture) design was used, resulting in four experimental conditions. The four classes, which had similar proficiency distribution profiles, were randomly assigned to the four teaching conditions. The participants with different
- 37 -
encoding cues would see different PPT slides (see Fig. 1).
Keyword (L1 Semantic Encoding Cue) Keyword (Picture Encoding Cue) Figure 1. Samples of Microsoft PowerPoint slides showing pictures of the target word
(frugal, 節儉的) and its keyword (fermented soybean curd,豆腐乳 or 腐乳 in Chinese)
For the traditional sequence groups (Groups A and C), a target word was connected to its phonologically similar L1 keyword first. Before providing the keyword, the researcher read out loud the target word and the participants were then asked to repeat the target word. There were two reasons for reading and asking for repetition. First, by knowing the pronunciation of the target word, the participants could link the target word to the phonologically similar keyword more easily. Second, by reading out the target word, the participants would not mistake the pronunciation of the keyword for the pronunciation of the target word. This was to prevent the
- 38 -
participants from mispronouncing the target words afterwards.
In Group A, the participants first saw the PPT slide with only the target word (see Fig. 2). The researcher read the target word aloud to present the participants with the pronunciation of the word, and then told the participants what the keyword was.
Next, the researcher connected the target word to the phonologically similar keyword orally (e.g., Please connect the word “frugal” to its keyword 豆腐乳). The researcher instructed the participants to pay attention to the phonological similarity between the target word and the keyword (e.g., The pronunciation of “frugal” sounds like 豆腐乳) to encourage them to build the phonological encoding. The researcher also told the participants that the keywords worked as mnemonics. After building the phonological encoding, the semantic meaning of the target word was presented with the L1
translation. The L1 translation appeared next to the target word. The researcher then directed the participants to form a vivid mental image to connect the keyword to the L1 translation (e.g., 吃豆腐乳過日子的人很節儉, People who eat fermented soybean curd every day live a frugal life. “Frugal” means 節儉).
- 39 -
Connect the target word “frugal” to 豆腐乳 without the image of the keyword.
Connect 豆腐乳 to the L1 translation of “frugal.”
Group A
Figure 2. Samples of Group A (phonological encoding followed by L1 semantic
encoding cues)
In Group C, the picture of the keyword was presented prior to the picture of the target word. This was to avoid the participants building the semantic encoding prior to the phonological encoding by looking at the picture of the semantic meaning of the target word. The participants first saw the PPT slide with the target word and
- 40 -
the picture of the keyword (see Fig. 3). The researcher read out the target word, and then directed the target word to the phonologically similar keyword. The keyword was presented with a picture. The researcher instructed the participants to build the
phonological encoding by connecting the target word to the keyword (e.g., Look at the picture. This is 豆腐乳. The pronunciation of “frugal” sounds like 豆腐乳. 豆腐 乳 is a keyword to help you remember the semantic meaning of “frugal.” Notice the
phonological similarity). After that, the picture of the semantic meaning was
presented. The researcher asked the participants to link the keyword to the semantic meaning of the target word by directing to the picture of the semantic meaning (e.g., Look at the bigger picture. The money is tied tight. Hence, the money should be spent sparingly. Frugal means 節儉. 吃豆腐乳過日子的人很節儉. People who live a frugal life eat fermented soybean curd every day).
- 41 -
Connect the target word “frugal” to 豆腐乳 with the image of the keyword.
Connect 豆腐乳 to the semantic meaning of “frugal.”
Group C
Figure 3. Samples of Group C (phonological encoding followed by picture semantic
encoding cues)
- 42 -
As shown in Fig. 3, the picture of the semantic meaning is bigger than the picture of the keyword. Based on Lawson and Hogben (1998), the picture of the definition has to be bigger than the picture of the keyword. There are two reasons for making the sizes different. First, making the picture of the definition bigger
encourages semantic encoding. Second, it allows the participants to distinguish the picture of the semantic meaning from the picture of the keyword.
To examine whether avoidance of the negative phonological similarity effect may improve learning outcomes during later retrieval, the other two groups (Groups B and D) were instructed in the adjusted sequence (encouraging semantic encoding prior to phonological encoding).
Before providing the semantic meaning, the researcher read the target word aloud, and the participants were then asked to repeat the target word, after which the researcher immediately presented the semantic meaning. This was to encourage the semantic encoding of the target word. The reason the researcher asked for repetition was to make sure the participants grasped the correct pronunciation of the target word.
By reading the target word aloud, the participants would not mistake the
pronunciation of the keyword as the pronunciation of the target word. This was to prevent the participants from mispronouncing the target words afterwards.
In Group B, the participants saw a PPT slide with the target word and the
- 43 -
picture of the semantic meaning (see Fig. 4). The researcher read the target word to let the participants know the pronunciation, then the researcher directed the target word to the picture of the semantic meaning. The semantic meaning was explained by the
researcher (e.g., Look at the picture. The money is tied tightly. Hence, the money should be spent sparingly. In other words, “frugal” means 節儉). After knowing the
semantic meaning of the target word, the participants were instructed to link the semantic meaning to the keyword, which was presented with a picture after the explanation of the semantic meaning of the target word. The reason the two pictures did not appear simultaneously was to prevent the participants from building the phonological encoding prior to the semantic encoding. The keyword was presented both with a picture and orally by the researcher (e.g., Look at the smaller picture. This is 豆腐乳). Then the participants were instructed to form a vivid mental image to connect the semantic meaning to the keyword (e.g., Frugal means 節儉. 吃豆腐乳過 日子的人很節儉. People who live a frugal life eat fermented soybean curd every
day).
- 44 -
Connect the target word “frugal” to its semantic meaning with a picture.
Connect the semantic meaning of “frugal” to the keyword 豆腐乳 with the
picture of the keyword.
Group B
Figure 4. Samples of Group B (picture semantic encoding followed by phonological
encoding cues)
- 45 -
For Group D, the participants saw a target word and its L1 translation (see Fig.
5). After the participants received the definition of a target word, the keyword was orally provided. Then the participants were instructed to form a vivid mental image to connect the definition to the keyword (e.g., Frugal means 節儉. 吃豆腐乳過日子的 人很節儉. People who live a frugal life eat fermented soybean curd every day).
Connect the target word “frugal” to its L1 translation.
Connect the L1 translation 節儉的 to the keyword 豆腐乳 without the picture of the keyword.
Group D
Figure 5. Samples of Group D (L1 semantic encoding followed by phonological
encoding cues)
- 46 -
For the design of the PPT slides, there were two reasons the L1 translations were not shown in the slides for picture groups (Groups B and C). First, this study aims to examine if pictures may become hindrance during delayed retrieval.
According to Wang and Thomas (1992), pictures provided by the researcher may become a hindrance over time. They suggested the researcher should only provide the target word and its L1 translation. In other words, the participants should generate their own mental images without seeing any pictures. By comparing the performance between the picture groups and the word groups, the result may reveal whether provided pictures would become hindrance over time.
Second, there are already three elements (a target word, a keyword picture, and a picture of the semantic meaning of the target word) on one PPT slide.
Presenting L1 translations on PPT slides might result in information bombardment.
The participants in the picture groups already had one more element on the slide (a target word and two pictures) than the word groups did (a target word and its L1 translation). Adding one more element would give the picture groups twice as many elements as the word groups. In addition, the L1 translations would be presented orally by the researcher along with the description of how to form mental images. In other words, the participants would still be able to understand the meaning of the target word in their L1. Providing L1 translations on PPT slides of picture groups
- 47 -
might have been redundant and unnecessary.
Each week, only five target words were presented to the participants. Based on
Farley, Ramonda, and Liu (2012), under normal teaching conditions teachers should teach fewer target words each session and later evaluate learners’ later retrieval. They
suggested that the total amount of to-be-taught words should be less than twenty-four.
After teaching the five target words, cued recall was tested after a seven-day delay.
Because the students needed time to prepare for their final exam, the experiment lasted for only one month. That is, within one month, the participants were presented twenty target words total (five per week). Four delayed tests were implemented because of the number of the to-be-taught words. For each delayed test, only the five target words learned a week before were tested. After the four delayed tests, all target words were reviewed. Seven days later, the participants took the last delayed test, during which all target words were tested. There were five delayed tests in total.
During the tests, all target words were read loudly by the researcher. The participants needed to write down the L1 definitions of the target words to test if the participants remembered the form-meaning knowledge of the novel L2 words.
Materials
Twenty-five target words were selected from Image System for Memorizing English Words (Yao, 1992), Part 3 (英语单词形象记忆法, Part 3 谐音形象记忆法)
- 48 -
(see Appendix A). The target words had either two or three syllables. There are two reasons the target words were chosen from this book. First, as the vocabulary in the book was more difficult than that in the participants’ English textbooks, the
participants were less likely to have learned the target words previously. Second, the vocabulary in the book was presented with Chinese keywords. The description of how to connect the keyword to the definition was also provided. Hence, it would be easier to build the connection with the keywords provided. Each target word was read by the researcher aloud in class before the four learning sessions began. The participants could raise their hands if they thought they knew the word. Then the researcher would ask them to provide its definition individually (if there were more than one participant raising their hands). Once a word was correctly answered by any participant, the target word would be eliminated. This was to ensure none of the target words had been learned by the participants before the sessions. Finally, twenty words were chosen as the target words in this experiment.
All target words were presented with PPT slides. For the participants who received the word encoding cue, they saw the English target word and its L1 definition (see Fig. 6). For the participants who received the picture encoding cue, they saw the English target word and two pictures. One was related to the semantic meaning of the target word; the other to the keyword. The picture of the semantic
- 49 -
meaning was bigger (Lawson & Hogben, 1998; Wyra, Lawson, & Hungi, 2007) so that the participants could differentiate the two pictures more easily and to reduce the possibility of mistaking the keyword picture for the semantic one.
Keyword (L1 translation) Keyword (Picture)
Figure 6. Samples of Microsoft PowerPoint slides showing pictures of the target word
(frugal means 節儉的 in Chinese) and its keyword (fermented soybean curd, 豆腐 乳 or 腐乳 in Chinese)