Target Words in the Textbook
Lessons Target Words
Lesson 1: He is smart.
(12 words)
smart, shy, brave, naughty, honest, lazy, good, bad, amazing, done, move, worry
Lesson 2: I feel sad.
(12 words)
angry, happy, sad, excited, great, terrible, lonely, tired, help, long, sorry, welcome
Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises
To foster vocabulary gains, the experimental group received hierarchy
vocabulary exercises (see Appendix D-I). The hierarchy vocabulary exercise types used in this study were based on Paribakht and Wesche’s (1996) five-level
classification scheme for vocabulary exercise types, i.e., selective attention,
recognition, manipulation, interpretation, and production, while the contents of the exercises were designed by the researcher. The purposes and the examples of each category of vocabulary exercises are addressed as follows.
Firstly, the exercises of selective attention aim to draw learners’ attention to
“notice” or “apperceive” the target words. In this study, for instance, participants were engaged in “Read and Circle” exercises; that is, they needed to circle out the target words from a short reading passage designed by the researcher.
Secondly, the aim of recognition exercises is to foster the learners’ ability to recognize both the form and the meaning of target words. The examples in this study included matching the target words with the correct pictures, i.e., Look and Match, and writing down the L1 equivalents for the target words, i.e., Read and Write.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Thirdly, manipulation exercises aim at enhancing learners’ syntactic knowledge of morphology and grammar in order to rearrange or organize the target words correctly in a sentence. In other words, learners can manipulate the target words by giving derivations or using stems and affixes to construct words. However, due to the difficulties of applying manipulation exercises to all target words, this exercise type was not be used in the study.
Fourthly, the purpose of interpretation exercises is to develop learners’ semantic knowledge to interpret the meaning of target words in a context and to integrate the target words into such lexical networks as collocation, synonyms, or antonyms. The example in this study included choosing the best answer to complete sentences, i.e., Read and Choose.
Finally, production exercises aim to increase learners’ gains not only in the syntactic and semantic word knowledge but also in the functional knowledge of target words. Specially, learners need to use a given target word to make a semantically and grammatically appropriate sentence. The examples in this study included writing down the target word after seeing its L1 equivalent, i.e., Let’s Write, and
unscrambling words to make sentences, i.e., Unscramble the Sentences.
In the present study, the experimental group encountered each target word in five different exercise types with a total of five times so that students could acquire
enough practice to know each word at different levels. According to Rott’s (1999) study, two encounters with target words is the minimum number to activate small but measurable word gains, whereas six encounters with target words can contribute to remarkably larger word gains. The time of doing vocabulary exercise spent in the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
experimental group was the same as that spent in the control group, i.e., 15 minutes.
Before the instructional experiment, the expert validity of hierarchy vocabulary exercises was examined by 11 in-service English teachers attending a Master of Arts in English Teaching (ETMA) program in August, 2010 so that the appropriateness of the hierarchy vocabulary exercises in this study could be ensured.
Copying Exercises
Copying exercises were given to the control group in that it is widely used for elementary English learners in Taiwan. According to the Curriculum Guidelines of Elementary English Language Teaching and Learning (Department of Education, Taipei City Government, 2010), one of the English learning objectives of writing skills for the third and fourth graders is that learners will be able to spell target words and to copy the sentences learned in class. Thus, many English teachers ask their students to copy target words and sentence patterns in textbooks to foster their basic writing abilities. In addition, about 90% of Taiwanese English teachers assign copying exercises to elementary school learners, based on the researcher’s informal survey conducted with 11 elementary school English teachers attending a Master of Arts in English Teaching (ETMA) program in August, 2010. Those teachers taught in different elementary schools from northern to southern Taiwan, six of them from urban cities and five of them from rural cities. In light of this, copying exercises were given to the control group after textbook instruction. The control group, like the experimental group, encountered each of the target words with a total of five times.
That is, the control group needed to copy a target word three times, copy a sentence
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
embedded the target word one time, and copy the Chinese equivalent of the sentence one time from the blackboard presented by the teacher into their exercise books. Thus, the control group had the same exposure frequency of target words as the
experimental group.
Procedures
This study was conducted through two stages (see Figure 3.2): a pilot study first, then the main study, which included a pre-test, followed by textbook instruction and two types of vocabulary exercises, namely hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises, and finally two post-tests, i.e., post-test 1 and post-test 2.
‧
An English proficiency test (CYLET) Main study
A pre-test in word knowledge.
Textbook instruction:
1. Reading activities 2. Oral practice activities
After-instruction exercises:
The Procedure of the Study
Pilot Study
The purposes of the pilot study were to field-test the instruments and procedures, to discover whether there existed some potential problems in the design of the main study, and to make some adjustments. The pilot study was carried out with 60 students aged 11, who did not participate in the main study.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Main Study
The study took place in the first term of the 2010-2011 academic year. The researcher, i.e., the English teacher of the experimental and control groups, conducted the study for 3 months, approximately from September to November in 2010.
Specifically, prior to the textbook instruction, i.e., in the 1st week of the main study, both groups received a pre-test to assess their initial word knowledge of target words.
During the following 6 weeks, each group met twice a week and 40 minutes per meeting during normal English class time, and two lessons were instructed based on the school’s timetable. As for the first class period of each week from the 2nd to 7th week, both groups received textbook instruction, composed of reading and oral practice activities. Regarding the second class period of each week from the 2nd to 7th week, both groups first received textbook instruction in the beginning 25 minutes of the class, while after the instruction, the experimental and control groups were engaged in hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises respectively in the last 15 minutes of the class. That is, the experimental and control groups received hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises respectively once a week from the 2nd to 7th week. After receiving the last vocabulary exercises, i.e., in the 8th week, both groups received post-test 1 to track their word gains. One month after receiving the last vocabulary exercises, i.e., in the 12th week, both groups received post-test 2 to assess their word retention. All the three tests were the identical test, using a Chinese version of Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS). The procedure of the main study is presented in Table 3.5.
‧
The Similarities and Differences in Treatments between the Two Groups Week Lessons Class
Period The Experimental Group The Control Group 1 2nd ˙Administer a pre-test. (40 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
2
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
3
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
4
L1
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
5
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
6
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
1st ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities
˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.)
7
L2
2nd ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.)
˙Copying Exercises (15 min.)
8 1st ˙Administer post-test 1. (40 min.) 12 1st ˙Administer post-test 2. (40 min.)
Note. Shaded areas are the different treatments.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Textbook Instruction: Reading and Oral Practice Activities
Both groups received the same reading and oral practice activities to learn target words, sentence patterns, dialogues, etc. in each lesson. The activities included silent reading, choral and individual reading, answering reading comprehension questions, drills, etc.
Different Treatments: After-instruction Written Vocabulary Exercises
After textbook instruction, hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises were given to the experimental and control groups respectively so as to investigate the effects of different vocabulary exercises on participants’ word gains and retention. All the participants worked on the vocabulary exercises independently for 15 minutes once a week during class and met each of the target words with a total of five times.
Then, the researcher reclaimed their exercises for correction and then returned the exercises to the participants in the next meeting.
Data Analysis
In this research, the statistical package SPSS (12.0) was used to analyze the data collected from pre- and post-tests. To answer the first research question, an independent-samples t-test was applied for the mean scores of post-test 1 of the experimental and control groups. Similarly, to answer the second research question, an independent-samples t-test was implemented for the mean scores of post-test 2 of the experimental and control groups. Additionally, to answer the third research question, which focused on the effect of vocabulary exercises on word gains and
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
retention of high and low English achievers within each group and between the two groups, a paired-samples t-test and an independent-samples t-test were conducted respectively. The alpha level for all statistical analyses was set at .05 for tests of significance.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS
This chapter contains four sections to report the results of the quantitative analysis of the data collected. The first section presents the results for Research Question 1 — Is there any difference in word gains between learners who receive hierarchy vocabulary exercises and those who receive copying exercises? The second section reports the results for Research Question 2 — Is there any difference in word retention between learners who receive hierarchy vocabulary exercises and those who receive copying exercises? The third section demonstrates the results for Research Question 3 —What is the effect of hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises on word gains and retention of high and low English achievers? The final section summarizes all of the findings in the study.
Comparisons of Word Gains between the Two Groups
To answer the first research question, which addressed the comparisons of the word gains between the experimental and control groups, receiving hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises respectively, an independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the mean scores of the two groups’ pre-test and post-test 1. Post-test 1, which was conducted right after the participants received the last written vocabulary exercises, is regarded as the scores of the participants’ word gains. As disclosed in Table 4.1, at the beginning, the difference of pre-test between the experimental and control groups did not reach a significant level (t(53) = 1.065, p = .292 > .05). However, there was a statistically significant difference in the mean
‧
scores of post-test 1 between the two groups (t(47) = 2.032, p = .048 < .05). The mean score of post-test 1 for the experimental group (m = 98.29) was higher than that of the control group (m = 85.56), suggesting that the experimental group significantly outscored the control group on word gains. Put differently, hierarchy vocabulary exercises led to more word gains for the participants than copying exercises.
Table 4.1
Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ Pre-test and Post-test 1
Test Group N Mean SD t p
Experimental 28 52.07 22.159
Pre-test
Control 27 45.81 21.374
1.065 .292
Experimental 28 98.29 19.264
Post-test 1
Control 27 85.56 26.486
2.032 .048*
Note. 1. Total scores are out of 120.
2. * p < .05
Comparisons of Word Retention between the Two Groups To answer the second research question, which addressed the effect of the vocabulary exercises on the participants’ word retention, an independent-samples t-test on post-test 2 was administered to compare the mean scores of the two groups.
Post-test 2, administered one month after the participants received the last written vocabulary exercises, is regarded as the score of the participants’ word retention. As shown in Table 4.2, the mean difference of post-test 2 between the two groups was statistically significant (t(48) = 3.175, p = .003 < .05). The mean score of post-test 2 for the experimental group (m = 100.93) was much higher than that of the control
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
group (m = 81.96), demonstrating that the experimental group significantly outperformed the control group on word retention. It appears that hierarchy vocabulary exercises had a greater impact on the participants’ word retention than copying exercises.
Table 4.2
Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ Post-test 2
Test Group N Mean SD t p
Experimental 28 100.93 18.676 Post-test 2
Control 27 81.96 25.038
3.175 .003**
Note. 1. Total scores are out of 120.
2. * p < .05, ** p < .01
Effects of Vocabulary Exercises on Students with Different Proficiency Levels In this section, the results of the pre-test and those of the two post-tests for the participants with different English proficiency are discussed as follows. First, the two proficiency groups, namely high and low English achievers, in the experimental and control groups were examined to ensure their heterogeneity within each group and their homogeneity between the two groups prior to the instructional experiment.
Second, for the third research question, which addressed the effect of vocabulary exercises on word gains and retention of learners with different English levels within each group and between the two groups, a paired-samples t-test and an
independent-samples t-test were applied respectively.
‧
The Statistic Results of the CYLET Scores for High and Low English Achievers Table 4.3 displays the statistic results of Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET) scores for the high and low English achievers in the experimental and control groups. As mentioned in Chapter 3, the participants in each group were divided into two levels, including high and low English proficiency, based on their scores on a standardized proficiency test, CYLET. The cut-off point was the mean of the CYLET scores in each group, i.e., 10.57 and 11 for the experimental group and the control group respectively. Thus, as shown in Table 4.3, the experimental group consisted of 12 high English achievers and 16 low English achievers, whereas the control group was composed of 13 high English achievers and 14 low English achievers.
Table 4.3
Statistics of the CYLET Scores for High and Low Achievers within Each Group
Group Proficiency N Mean SD
Note. Total scores are out of 25.
To ensure that in each group, the high and low English achievers’ English proficiency existed a statistically significant difference prior to the instructional experiment, an independent-samples t-test was conducted. As displayed in Table 4.4, the high and low English achievers in the experimental group did not pass the
‧
Levene’s test (F = 9.134, p = .006 < .05), indicating that the two proficiency groups in the experimental group were heterogeneous. The t-test for equality of means also showed that there was a statistically significant difference between the high and low English achievers in the experimental group (t(15) = 7.638, p = .000 < .05). In a similar vein, as shown in Table 4.5, the high and low English achievers in the control group also did not pass the Levene’s test (F = 4.317, p = .048 < .05), indicating that the two proficiency groups in the control group were heterogeneous. The t-test for equality of means also showed that a statistically significant difference existed between the high and low English achievers in the control group (t(18) = 9.142, p = .000 < .05). Thus, the findings verified that the high English achievers in each group indeed possessed higher English proficiency than the low English achievers in each group.
Table 4.4
Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores within the Experimental Group
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df p
‧
Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores within the Control Group
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df p
Moreover, to ensure that the high English achievers in the experimental and control groups had the similar English proficiency prior to the instructional
experiment, and so did the low English achievers, an independent-samples t-test was conducted. As illustrated in Table 4.6, the high English achievers in the experimental and control groups passed the Levene’s test (F = .369, p = .549 > .05), indicating that the high English achievers in the experimental and control groups were homogeneous.
The t-test for equality of means indicated that there was no significant difference between the high achievers in the experimental and control groups (t(23) = -.172, p = .865 > .05). Similarly, as presented in Table 4.7, the low English achievers in the experimental and control groups also passed the Levene’s test (F = .117, p = .735
> .05), indicating that the low English achievers in the experimental and control groups were also homogeneous. The t-test for equality of means also showed that no significant difference existed between the low achievers in the experimental and
‧
control groups (t(28) = .593, p = .558 > .05). It appears that the high achievers’
English proficiency in the experimental and control groups was at the same level prior to the instructional experiment, and so was the low achievers’ English proficiency.
Table 4.6
Independent-Samples t-test on High English Achievers’ CYLET Scores between Groups
Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df p
Independent-Samples t-test on Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores between Groups Levene’s Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df p
Comparisons of Word Gains and Retention for Students with Different Proficiency within Each Group and between the Two Groups
To answer the third research question, which focused on the comparative effects
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
of word gains and retention on participants with different proficiency levels, the results of pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2 were discussed from two aspects. First, the word gains and retention of high and low achievers within each group were compared. Second, the word gains and retention of high and low achievers between the two groups were analyzed.
Comparisons within Each Group
To probe into the effect of vocabulary exercises on the progress of high and low achievers among pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2 within each group, a
paired-samples t-test was employed in the experimental group and the control group respectively.
The progress in the experimental group.
Table 4.8 reveals the results of the experimental group. Considering the high English achievers in the experimental group, the mean difference between pre-test and post-test 1 (MD = 42.333) reached a significant level (t(11) = 6.196, p = .000 < .05), indicating that they made significant progress on word gains after engaging
themselves in hierarchy vocabulary exercises. In addition, there was also a significant difference in the mean difference between pre-test and post-test 2 (MD = 45.250, t(11) = 6.673, p = .000 < .05), demonstrating that they retained significantly more
themselves in hierarchy vocabulary exercises. In addition, there was also a significant difference in the mean difference between pre-test and post-test 2 (MD = 45.250, t(11) = 6.673, p = .000 < .05), demonstrating that they retained significantly more