教學後單字練習題對臺灣國小學童英語字彙習得的影響:階層式單字練習題與抄寫練習題之比較 - 政大學術集成

全文

(1)國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士在職專班碩士論文. 指導教授：葉潔宇博士 Advisor：Dr. Chieh-yue Yeh. 教學後單字練習題對臺灣國小學童英語字彙習得的影響：. 政治大. 階層式單字練習題與抄寫練習題之比較. 立. The Effects of After-Instruction Vocabulary Exercises. ‧ 國. 學. on Taiwanese Young Learners’ Vocabulary Acquisition:. ‧. Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises vs. Copying Exercises. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. 研究生：甘秀琪撰 Name: Hsiu-chi Kan 中華民國一百年五月 May, 2011. v.

(2) The Effects of After-Instruction Vocabulary Exercises on Taiwanese Young Learners’ Vocabulary Acquisition: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises vs. Copying Exercises. A Master Thesis Presented to 政治大立Department of English,. ‧ 國. 學. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. National Chengchi University. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts. by Hsiu-chi Kan May, 2011.

(3) To My Beloved Parents 獻給我摯愛的父母. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. iii. i n U. v.

(4) Acknowledgements This thesis would not have been completed without the support and encouragement from many people. First of all, I owe my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Chieh-yue Yeh, for providing me with the opportunity to explore the world of academic research and guiding my steps throughout the journey of my thesis writing. Her wisdom, patience, kindness, and insightful suggestions are always unforgettable. My sincere appreciation is also extended to the committee members, Dr. Chen-kuan Chen and Dr. Yow-yu Lin, for their careful review of my thesis and their constructive. 治政大 suggestions during the oral defense. 立 ‧ 國. 學. Moreover, I am indebted to my friends and colleagues at my school for their support and encouragement. Special thanks also go to my classmates in the Master of. ‧. Arts in English Teaching program at National Chengchi University for their generosity. y. Nat. io. sit. of sharing their valuable teaching experience with me.. n. al. er. Finally, and most certainly I would like to extend my deepest thanks to my beloved. Ch. i n U. v. parents, my brother, and my sister for their unconditional love and unwavering support.. engchi. It is their love that supports me all the way to reach my dream. To them, I dedicate the thesis.. iv.

(5) TABLE OF CONTENTS. Acknowledgements...........................................................................................................iv Chinese Abstract ...............................................................................................................xi English Abstract..............................................................................................................xiii Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................1 Background and Motivation ......................................................................................1 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................2. 政治大. Research Questions ....................................................................................................2. 立. Significance of the Study ...........................................................................................3. ‧ 國. 學. Definition of Terms ....................................................................................................3. ‧. Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises ........................................................................3. sit. y. Nat. Copying Exercises .............................................................................................4. n. al. er. io. Chapter Two: Literature Review ...................................................................................5. i n U. v. Vocabulary Acquisition through Reading ..................................................................5. Ch. engchi. Word Learning through Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises .........................................6 Gass’s Five-Stage Framework for the L2 Input Processing...............................7 Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises ........................................................................7 Research on Word Gains through Reading plus Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises ....9 Chapter Three: Methodology .......................................................................................12 Participants...............................................................................................................12 Instruments...............................................................................................................14 Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET): Starters ..........................15. v.

(6) A Pre-test and Two Post-tests...........................................................................16 Selections of Reading Materials: An English Textbook ..................................19 Selections of Target Words ..............................................................................20 Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises ......................................................................22 Copying Exercises ...........................................................................................24 Procedures................................................................................................................25 Pilot Study........................................................................................................26 Main Study.......................................................................................................27. 治政大 Data Analysis ...........................................................................................................29 立 ‧ 國. 學. Chapter Four: Results ...................................................................................................31 Comparisons of Word Gains between the Two Groups ...........................................31. ‧. Comparisons of Word Retention between the Two Groups.....................................32. y. Nat. io. sit. Effects of Vocabulary Exercises on Students with Different Proficiency Levels ....33. n. al. er. The Statistic Results of the CYLET Scores for High and Low English. Ch. i n U. v. Achievers .........................................................................................................34. engchi. Comparisons of Word Gains and Retention for Students with Different Proficiency within Each Group and between the Two Groups ........................37 Summary ..................................................................................................................44 Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion ...................................................................46 Answers to the Research Questions .........................................................................46 Discussion of the Comparison between the Present Study and the Previous Studies ..................................................................................................................................49 Consistent Findings with the Previous Research .............................................49 vi.

(7) New Findings ...................................................................................................55 Pedagogical Implications of the Study.....................................................................56 Limitations of the Study...........................................................................................58 Recommendations for Further Research..................................................................60 Students’ Feedback after the Project ........................................................................61 Conclusion ...............................................................................................................62 References........................................................................................................................64 Appendix A: Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET): Starters ...................71. 治政大 Scale ................................76 Appendix B: A Chinese Version of Vocabulary Knowledge 立 ‧ 國. 學. Appendix C: A Chinese Version of VKS Pre- and Post-tests of the Study.....................77 Appendix D: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part I of Lesson 1..................................80. ‧. Appendix E: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part II of Lesson 1.................................81. y. Nat. io. sit. Appendix F: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part III of Lesson 1................................82. n. al. er. Appendix G: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part I of Lesson 2..................................83. Ch. i n U. v. Appendix H: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part II of Lesson 2................................84. engchi. Appendix I: Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises: Part III of Lesson 2.................................85. vii.

(8) LIST OF TABLES. Table 3.1 Statistics of Participants’ CYLET Scores.........................................................13 Table 3.2 Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ English Proficiency Test ............13 Table 3.3 The Instruments Used in this Study .................................................................15 Table 3.4 Target Words in the Textbook ..........................................................................22 Table 3.5 The Similarities and Differences in Treatments between the Two Groups......28 Table 4.1 Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ Pre-test and Post-test 1 ..............32. 政治大. Table 4.2 Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ Post-test 2 ..................................33. 立. Table 4.3 Statistics of the CYLET Scores for High and Low Achievers within Each. ‧ 國. 學. Group ...............................................................................................................34. ‧. Table 4.4 Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET. sit. y. Nat. Scores within the Experimental Group ............................................................35. n. al. er. io. Table 4.5 Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET. i n U. v. Scores within the Control Group .....................................................................36. Ch. engchi. Table 4.6 Independent-Samples t-test on High English Achievers’ CYLET Scores between Groups ...............................................................................................37 Table 4.7 Independent-Samples t-test on Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores between Groups ...............................................................................................37 Table 4.8 Paired-Samples t-test for Progress in the Experimental Group .......................39 Table 4.9 Paired-Samples t-test for Progress in the Control Group.................................41 Table 4.10 Independent-Samples t-test on High Achievers’ Pre-test, Post-Test 1, and Post-Test 2......................................................................................................43. viii.

(9) Table 4.11 Independent-Samples t-test on Low Achievers’ Pre-test, Post-Test 1, and Post-Test 2......................................................................................................44. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. ix. i n U. v.

(10) LIST OF FIGURES. Figure 3.1 The Design and Scoring of the VKS ..............................................................17 Figure 3.2 The Procedure of the Study ............................................................................26. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. x. i n U. v.

(11) 國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士在職專班碩士論文提要. 論文名稱：教學後單字練習題對臺灣國小學童英語字彙習得的影響：階層式單字練習題與抄寫練習題之比較. 指導教授：葉潔宇博士. 研究生：甘秀琪. 立. 論文提要內容：. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 單字練習題常作為英語教師提升第二外語學習者單字學習成效的方式之一，然而針對不同單字練習題的實際成效，其相關研究仍顯不足。因此，本研究採用. （word gains）與記憶保留（retention）的影響。. ‧. 量化研究方法，以探究階層式單字練習題與抄寫練習題對國小學童英語字彙習得. Nat. sit. y. 研究對象為臺灣北部一所公立國小四年級兩個班的五十五位學生，此均質的. er. io. 兩個班級被隨機指定為實驗組與控制組，實驗組於一般教學後施予階層式單字練習. al. v i n Ch 六週的單字練習題，一共練習二十四個主要單字。之後，兩組受試者隨即接受包含 engchi U n. 題，而控制組則於一般教學後施予抄寫練習題。兩組受試者皆接受每週一次、歷時. 所有主要單字的單字知識等級表（VKS）測驗，以得知兩組受試者的單字習得情形。一個月後，兩組受試者再次接受相同的單字測驗，以進一步得知單字的記憶保留情形。本研究主要發現如下：(1)在單字習得成效方面，接受階層式單字練習題的實驗組學生顯著優於接受抄寫練習題的控制組學生；(2)在單字保留成效方面，接受階層式單字練習題的實驗組學生亦顯著優於接受抄寫練習題的控制組學生；(3) 階層式單字練習題對於高、低英語學習成就者而言，在單字習得與記憶保留上皆有正面影響；(4)對於高、低英語學習成就者而言，抄寫練習題亦皆有助於提升其單字習得與保留成效；(5)對於高英語學習成就者之單字習得而言，階層式單字練習題與抄寫練習題的成效相同；然而，對於單字記憶保留而言，階層式單字練習題的成效優於抄寫練習題；(6)對於低英語學習成就者之單字習得與保留而言，階層. xi.

(12) 式單字練習題的成效皆優於抄寫練習題。最後，研究者針對階層式單字練習題及抄寫練習題在實際教學上之應用提供建議，以作為教育學者們參考。. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. xii. i n U. v.

(13) ABSTRACT. Vocabulary exercises are regarded as one of the ways English teachers frequently utilize to enhance English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ vocabulary learning efficiency. Yet, studies focusing on the comparisons of the effects of different vocabulary exercises on learners’ vocabulary acquisition and retention seem comparatively few. Thus, the present study adopted a quantitative research method to investigate the effects of two types of vocabulary exercises, i.e., hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying. 政治大. exercises, on learners’ word gains and retention.. 立. Participants of the study were two classes of 55 fourth-grade students in a public. ‧ 國. 學. elementary school in northern Taiwan. With the homogeneity of English proficiency on. ‧. Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET), the two classes were randomly. sit. y. Nat. assigned to the experimental and control groups. During the instructional experiment,. n. al. er. io. the experimental and control groups received hierarchy vocabulary exercises and. i n U. v. copying exercises respectively once a week, with a total of six times, to practice a total. Ch. engchi. of 24 target words selected in this study. After receiving the last vocabulary exercises, both groups received post-test 1, based on a Chinese version of Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS), to measure their word gains of all the target words. One month after receiving the last vocabulary exercises, both groups also received post-test 2, which was the same as post-test 1, to assess their word retention. The major findings are summarized as follows. (1) In terms of word gains, learners receiving hierarchy vocabulary exercises significantly outperformed those receiving copying exercises. (2) In terms of word retention, hierarchy vocabulary exercises possessed greater facilitative. xiii.

(14) effects than copying exercises. (3) Hierarchy vocabulary exercises exerted a significant effect on both high and low English achievers’ word gains and retention. (4) Not only high English achievers but also low English achiever reaped benefits from copying exercises on word gains and retention. (5) Hierarchy vocabulary exercises demonstrated superior effectiveness than copying exercises on high English achievers’ word retention, but not on their word gains. (6) Hierarchy vocabulary exercises led to both more word gains and retention than copying exercises for low English achievers. At the end of the thesis, pedagogical implications and recommendations for further research were provided.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. xiv. i n U. v.

(15) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background and Motivation Vocabulary learning is fundamental for all language learners. It has been suggested that for learners in English as a Second Language (ESL) contexts, around 2,000 words will be needed to maintain conversations, 3,000 word families to comprehend authentic texts, and 10,000 words to read difficult academic texts (Schmitt, 2000). To enhance learners’ word knowledge, teachers frequently draw on a. 治政 variety of reading sources in order to provide contexts 大 for students to learn vocabulary. 立 ‧ 國. 學. Research has shown that reading indeed leads to substantial gains in word acquisition (Krashen, 1989; Nagy, Herman, & Anderson, 1985; Nagy & Scott, 2000; Shu,. ‧. Anderson, & Zhang, 1995). Yet, some other Second Language (L2) vocabulary. y. Nat. io. sit. research, while recognizing the importance of vocabulary development through. n. al. er. reading, has also highlighted its limitations, and thus proposed other alternatives.. Ch. i n U. v. Indeed, learners’ vocabulary acquisition can also be facilitated in terms of. engchi. learners, teachers, vocabulary itself, and vocabulary exercises. Numerous studies have investigated different vocabulary learning strategies to help learners acquire words efficiently (Gu & Johnson, 1996; Prince, 1995; Sanaoui, 1995; Schmitt, 2000). Research on vocabulary teaching methods has also been carried out in past decades, e.g., keyword method (Hulstijn, 1997; Jones, 1995; Rodríguez & Sadoski, 2000), phonics instruction (Ehri, Nunes, Stahl, & Willows, 2001; Lai, 2004; Stuart, 1999). Moreover, a number of studies have been conducted on vocabulary itself, including the quantity and quality of words that L2 learners need to acquire (Coxhead, 2000; 1.

(16) Nation, 2001). However, little research has been done on vocabulary acquisition through written vocabulary exercises after teachers’ instruction. In fact, written vocabulary exercises can benefit learners in that they make target words salient so as to attract learners’ attention to notice the words (Folse, 2006). Paribakht and Wesche (1997) also claimed that different levels of vocabulary knowledge can be acquired and practiced through written vocabulary exercises. Thus, the present study attempts to fill this gap by comparing the effects of two types of written vocabulary exercises, i.e., hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises, on learners’ vocabulary acquisition.. 學. ‧ 國. 立. 政治大. Purpose of the Study. ‧. The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of different. y. Nat. io. sit. after-instruction written vocabulary exercises on the vocabulary acquisition and. n. al. er. retention of Taiwanese young learners. By implementing hierarchy vocabulary. Ch. i n U. v. exercises and copying exercises, the researcher compared these two types of written. engchi. vocabulary exercises to find out which one was more effective on learners’ word gains and retention, and how different exercises affected the word gains and retention of participants with high and low English proficiency.. Research Questions Based on the purpose of the study, there were three research questions addressed as follows. (1) Is there any difference in word gains between learners who receive hierarchy 2.

(17) vocabulary exercises and those who receive copying exercises? (2) Is there any difference in word retention between learners who receive hierarchy vocabulary exercises and those who receive copying exercises? (3) What is the effect of hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises on word gains and retention of high and low English achievers?. Significance of the Study This research may have pedagogical contributions in two ways. First, an. 治政 alternative approach to written vocabulary exercises is 大 advocated not only for English 立 ‧ 國. 學. teachers but also for textbook and curriculum designers to provide an efficient way to facilitate learners’ acquisition and retention of vocabulary, especially when the. ‧. learners aim to achieve specific vocabulary learning outcomes within a short period of. y. Nat. io. sit. time. Second, the results of the study may provide one of the solutions for individual. n. al. er. learning differences in that written vocabulary exercises involving diversity are. Ch. i n U. v. provided to cater to different needs of learners with different English proficiency. engchi. levels so as to help them acquire better word gains and retention. In sum, it is hoped that the study may shed light on young learners’ word acquisition in terms of written vocabulary exercises.. Definition of Terms Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises In this study, hierarchy vocabulary exercises referred to different levels of vocabulary exercises designed to foster learners’ different mental processing required 3.

(18) in vocabulary acquisition, ranging from the level of “selective attention” to a higher level, such as “recognition,” “interpretation,” and “production.”. Copying Exercises In the present study, copying exercises were defined as the vocabulary exercises that require learners to copy words and sentence patterns repeatedly and mechanically.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 4. i n U. v.

(19) CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW In this chapter, three major sections are presented to review literature on vocabulary acquisition. The first section elaborates on vocabulary acquisition through reading. The second section describes word learning through hierarchy vocabulary exercises. The last section discusses the research on word gains through reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises.. 治政 Vocabulary Acquisition through大 Reading 立 ‧ 國. 學. Numerous studies have proved that reading leads to incidental First Language (L1) and L2 vocabulary acquisition (Krashen, 1989; Nagy, Herman, & Anderson,. ‧. 1985; Nagy & Scott, 2000; Shu, Anderson, & Zhang, 1995). That is, words are. y. Nat. io. sit. incidentally picked up during the reading sessions while readers mainly focus on the. n. al. er. comprehension of the text, not on vocabulary acquisition (Hulstijn, Hollander, &. Ch. i n U. v. Greidanus, 1996). Nagy, Herman, and Anderson (1985), for instance, claimed that a. engchi. small but statistically significant increase of word knowledge occurs when the L1 eighth graders read such natural texts as an expository or narrative text. Similarly, Shu, Anderson, and Zhang (1995) examined Chinese and American children’s vocabulary acquisition and observed that both groups naturally and incidentally acquired word meanings through reading. Consequently, L1 and L2 word gains occur incidentally while learners are engaged in reading. Reading indeed can contribute to incidental vocabulary acquisition; however, some limitations have also been identified (Bensoussan & Laufer, 1984; Carnine, 5.

(20) Kameenui, & Coyle, 1984; Haynes, 1990; Huckin & Coady, 1999; Hulstijn, Hollander, & Greidanus, 1996; Peter, 2003; Shu, Anderson, & Zhang, 1995; Wesche & Paribakht, 2000). In terms of reading, the limitations include lacking learners’ attention and task demands (Huckin & Coady, 1999), ignoring the precise meanings of unknown words (Hulstijn, Hollander, & Greidanus, 1996), obtaining unclear and inadequate clues to infer meanings (Shu, Anderson, & Zhang, 1995), making erroneous inferences of the meanings of unknown words (Bensoussan & Laufer, 1984; Carnine, Kameenui, & Coyle, 1984), having insufficient encounters with the unknown words (Hulstijn,. 治政 Hollander, & Greidanus, 1996), etc. In terms of ESL or大 EFL contexts, L2 learners 立 ‧ 國. 學. may not easily acquire incidental vocabulary because of the inadequacy of authentic communicative input of a target language, insufficient cultural background knowledge. ‧. (Cheng, 2008), limited reading proficiency (Peter, 2003), different language systems. y. Nat. io. sit. (Haynes, 1990), etc. Consequently, although reading is conducive to incidental. n. al. er. vocabulary learning, learners may need other instructional interventions to help them. Ch. i n U. v. acquire vocabulary more efficiently, especially for ESL or EFL learners.. engchi. Word Learning through Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises Since incidental vocabulary learning through reading has its limitations, a number of studies thus have been conducted to seek for other alternatives to enhance ESL or EFL learners’ word gains, e.g., vocabulary learning strategies, methodology of vocabulary teaching, vocabulary itself (Coxhead, 2000; Gu & Johnson, 1996; Hulstijn, 1997; Lai, 2004; Liu, 2003; Nassaji, 2003; Nation, 2001; Parry, 1993; Rodríguez & Sadoski, 2000; Sanaoui, 1995; Stuart, 1999). Among them, however, few studies have 6.

(21) been done on written vocabulary exercises after instruction. Given that hierarchy vocabulary exercises enable learners to elaborate on different aspects of word knowledge so as to learn words more efficiently (Amiryousefi & Kassaian, 2010; Cheng, 2008; Gass, 1988; Hsu, 2005; Min, 2008; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997), the hierarchy vocabulary exercises were employed in this study. More details on hierarchy vocabulary exercises are discussed as follows.. Gass’s Five-Stage Framework for the L2 Input Processing. 治政大framework of Paribakht and Gass’s (1988) five-stage framework, regarded as the 立 ‧ 國. 學. Wesche’s hierarchy vocabulary exercises, presents the multistage process of how learners transform L2 input to output. The five stages encompass (1) apperceived. ‧. input, i.e., noticing novel language input and relating it to learners’ prior knowledge,. y. Nat. io. sit. (2) comprehended input, i.e., assigning meanings to the novel language input, (3). n. al. er. intake, i.e., assimilating the novel language input into learners’ existing knowledge, (4). Ch. i n U. v. integration, i.e., adjusting the learners’ internalized L2 systems so as to assimilate the. engchi. language input, and (5) output, i.e., producing language. Through this dynamic and repetitive process, the acquisition of L2 knowledge can be achieved.. Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises Based on Gass’s (1988) five-stage framework for language input processing, Paribakht and Wesche (1996) designed a five-level classification scheme for vocabulary exercise types in ESL textbooks to represent a hypothesized hierarchy of the degree and type of mental processing required by various kinds of vocabulary 7.

(22) exercises. This five-level classification scheme includes (1) selective attention, (2) recognition, (3) manipulation, (4) interpretation, and (5) production. Each level of vocabulary exercises is discussed as follows. First, selective attention refers to the exercises which aim to attract learners’ attention to target words by using some techniques, corresponding to the level of apperceived input in Gass’s (1988) framework. For instance, target words may be boldfaced, italicized, circled, colored, or highlighted by other visual signals in an article so that learners can notice the words. In addition, teachers may ask learners to. 治政 read a list of target words in the beginning of an article大 and then require them to 立 ‧ 國. 學. notice where the words appear in the article.. Second, recognition exercises focus on the association of the written form of. ‧. target words with their meanings, which corresponds to the level of comprehended. y. Nat. io. sit. input and possibly corresponds to the level of intake in Gass’s framework. Example. n. al. er. exercises include choosing correct pictures or writing L1 equivalents after seeing or. Ch. i n U. v. hearing target words, matching target words with their definitions or synonyms,. engchi. recognizing the meanings of target words from a multiple choice of meanings, etc. Third, manipulation exercises enable learners to use their knowledge of morphology and grammatical categories to rearrange and organize given elements to make words or phrases. According to Gass’s framework, more precise comprehension of target words will be needed in manipulation exercises. For instance, learners may need to change the grammatical category of target words, such as from verb to noun. Moreover, learners may be asked to use affixes and stems to construct words. Fourth, interpretation exercises require learners to interpret word meanings in 8.

(23) relation to other words or discourse functions, corresponding to the levels of intake and integration in Gass’s framework. Example exercises consist of guessing the meaning of target words in contexts, finding the odd word in a series of collocationally related words, etc. In addition, multiple choice cloze exercises are also regarded as interpretation exercises. Last, production exercises prompt learners to produce the target words in appropriate contexts, corresponding to the level of output in Gass’s framework. Example exercises include writing target words after seeing or hearing the L1. 治政大questions, labelling pictures, equivalents of target words, using target words to answer 立 ‧ 國. 學. etc. In sum, according to Paribakht and Wesche’s (1996) study, hierarchy vocabulary exercises, composed of five different vocabulary exercise types based on this. ‧. classification scheme, could facilitate learners to acquire word knowledge from. y. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. perception to production.. Ch. i n U. v. Research on Word Gains through Reading plus Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises. engchi. A number of studies have revealed that hierarchy vocabulary exercises could contribute to positive vocabulary acquisition (Amiryousefi & Kassaian, 2010; Cheng, 2008; Hsu, 2005; Lai, 2009; Min, 2008; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997). Paribakht and Wesche (1997), for instance, indicated that reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises led to quantitatively and qualitatively superior word gains than the reading-only treatment. Also, in Hsu’s (2005) study, the combination of reading activities and hierarchy vocabulary exercises (Reading Plus Treatment) exerted a significant effect on learners’ word gains and retention than the reading activities 9.

(24) alone (Reading Only Treatment). Moreover, regarding the effects of Reading Plus Treatment on learners’ English proficiency, the Reading Plus Treatment facilitated low English achievers to acquire vocabulary knowledge for a short period of time, while it benefited high English achievers to retain vocabulary for long-term memory. In addition, in response to some limitations in Paribakht and Wesche’s (1997) study, Min (2008) carried out a study and finally confirmed that reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises prompted learners to acquire more receptive and productive word gains as well as retention than the narrow reading treatment.. 治政大avoid some limitations in Likewise, Lai (2009) conducted research with attempt to 立 ‧ 國. 學. Paribakht and Wesche’s (1997) and Min’s (2008) studies. The result showed that both EFL senior high school higher- and lower-proficiency groups acquired more word. ‧. gains and retention in reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises than in the. y. Nat. io. sit. reading-only instruction.. n. al. er. Moreover, Chen (2008) pointed out that the group with hierarchy vocabulary. Ch. i n U. v. exercises significantly outscored the group with worksheets after reading storybooks. engchi. and that high English achievers significantly gained more benefits from hierarchy vocabulary exercises than copying exercises, whereas the effect of hierarchy vocabulary exercises and that of worksheet exercises on low English achievers’ word gains were the same. Last, in Amiryousefi and Kassaian’s (2010) study, the group with reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises significantly demonstrated more word gains and production than the reading-only group. Thus, reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises possesses superior effectiveness than reading-only treatment in learners’ vocabulary acquisition. 10.

(25) A review of literature has focused on the comparison between reading plus hierarchy vocabulary exercises and a reading-only treatment (Amiryousefi & Kassaian, 2010; Hsu, 2005; Lai, 2009; Min, 2008; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997); yet, no research has compared hierarchy vocabulary exercises with copying exercises. In fact, Taiwan and other EFL young learners regard copying exercises as a regular way of doing vocabulary exercises (Atay & Kurt, 2006). Thus, it might possibly be illuminating to compare these two vocabulary exercises on learners’ word gains. In addition, much previous research only probed into short-term vocabulary. 治政大 & Wesche, 1997), and gains (Amiryousefi & Kassaian, 2010; Cheng, 2008; Paribakht 立 ‧ 國. 學. little information is available on the relationship between long-term vocabulary retention and different types of vocabulary exercises. Since vocabulary retention. ‧. serves as a major issue in vocabulary acquisition (Thornbury, 2002), it is worthwhile. y. Nat. io. sit. exploring the effects of different vocabulary exercises on learners’ word retention.. n. al. er. Furthermore, while some research has been devoted to one level of English. Ch. i n U. v. proficiency (Amiryousefi & Kassaian, 2010; Min, 2008; Paribakht & Wesche, 1997),. engchi. few studies have reported on the effects of hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises on high and low English achievers. Given that high English achievers apply more vocabulary learning strategies to word acquisition than lower English achievers (Sung, 2006), teachers should provide appropriate vocabulary exercises for low English achievers to compensate their lack of using vocabulary learning strategies. Consequently, there is a need to explore the effects of hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises on the vocabulary acquisition and retention of Taiwanese young learners with different English proficiency. 11.

(26) CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY. This is an empirical study, aiming to investigate the effects of different after-instruction vocabulary exercises i.e., hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises, on word gains and retention of Taiwanese young learners. The details on the participants, instruments, procedures, and data analysis are elaborated in the following sections.. 立. 政治大 Participants. ‧ 國. 學. The participants in this study were 55 fourth graders from two intact classes in a. ‧. public elementary school in northern Taiwan. They were selected because they could. sit. y. Nat. be considered homogeneous for the following reasons. First, they had similar English. n. al. er. io. proficiency in reading and writing, based on a standardized English proficiency test,. i n U. v. Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET): Starters, conducted before this. Ch. engchi. study. The CYLET mean scores between the two classes were compared through an independent-samples t-test. As indicated in Table 3.1, the CYLET mean score of Class A was 10.57 (n = 28) with a standard deviation of 6.05, and that of Class B was 11 (n = 27) with a standard deviation of 6.34. Based on the statistics in Table 3.2, these two classes passed the Levene’s test (F = .312, p = .579 > .05), indicating that the two classes were homogeneous. The t-test for equality of means also revealed that no statistically significant difference existed in the CYLET mean scores between the two classes (t(53) = -.257, p = .799 > .05). Second, they were all native speakers of. 12.

(27) Mandarin-Chinese with an average age of 10 and had taken two 40-minute formal English classes per week in school settings for three years prior to this classroom-based experiment. Third, each class contained about 27 participants and the ratio of boys to girls in these two classes was approximately 1:1 respectively (see Table 3.1).. Table 3.1 Statistics of Participants’ CYLET Scores Test. 治 Female 政 Male 大13 28 15. Group Class A. CYLET. 立. 27. 15. Note. Total scores are out of 25.. SD. 10.57. 6.05. 11. 6.34. 12. ‧. Table 3.2. Mean. 學. ‧ 國. Class B. N. y. Nat. n. al. Class A-. Equal variances. Class B. assumed. Equality of Variances. C hF. e n g cSig. hi. .312. .579. Equal variances. t-test for Equality of Means. er. io. Levene’s Test for. sit. Independent-Samples t-test on Participants’ English Proficiency Test. iv n U t. df. p. -.257. 53. .799. -.256. 52.620. .799. not assumed. In addition to the homogeneity, they were selected for the reason that since the participants, who have already learned English for at least 3 years, should have enough basic concepts and knowledge of vocabulary and sentences according to the Curriculum Guidelines of Elementary English Language Teaching and Learning. 13.

(28) (Department of Education, Taipei City Government, 2010), they would be able to accomplish hierarchy vocabulary exercises implemented in this study, e.g., unscrambling the sentences. Moreover, given that these two classes were the researcher’s own classes, the experimental research was able to be conveniently conducted in practice. Afterwards, the two classes were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups and received hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises during class respectively. Furthermore, to investigate the effects of after-instruction vocabulary exercises. 治政大participants in each group on high and low English achievers’ word acquisition, the 立 ‧ 國. 學. were stratified into two levels, i.e., high and low English proficiency, based on their CYLET scores. The cut-off point was the mean of the CYLET scores in each group. ‧. (see Table 3.1). As for the experimental group, the participants (n = 28) whose. y. Nat. io. sit. CYLET scores were above the mean of the experimental group’s CYLET scores. n. al. er. (m = 10.57) were designated as high English achievers (n = 12), while those with the. Ch. i n U. v. scores below the mean were designated as low English achievers (n = 16). As for the. engchi. control group, the participants (n = 27) whose CYLET scores were above the mean of the control group’s CYLET scores (m = 11) were regarded as high English achievers (n = 13), while those with the scores below the mean were regarded as low English achievers (n = 14).. Instruments Two types of research instruments were employed in this study: (1) Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET): Starters and (2) a Chinese version of 14.

(29) Vocabulary Knowledge Scale as pre- and post-tests. Each type of instruments is elucidated in detail in the following sections. Table 3.3 summarizes the instruments used in this study.. Table 3.3 The Instruments Used in this Study Instruments. Functions. 1. CYLET: Starters. To assess participants’ initial English reading and writing proficiency so as to ascertain that they had similar English. 政治大 A pre-test: To explore participants’ initial knowledge of. proficiency.. 立. 2. A Chinese version of. Scale. Two post-tests: To track participants’ word gains and. ‧ 國. target words.. ‧. retention.. 學. Vocabulary Knowledge. y. Nat. io. sit. Cambridge Young Learners English Test (CYLET): Starters. er. The CYLET, a standardized English proficiency test developed by University of. al. n. v i n Cambridge English for SpeakersCof Other Languages Examinations (Cambridge hengchi U. ESOL), as mentioned above, aims to assess the English level of learners aged 7 to 12 (see Appendix A). It consists of three levels of assessment: Starters (Level 1), Movers (Level 2), and Flyers (Level 3). Each level is composed of three sections: Reading/Writing, Listening, and Speaking. Given that the reading/writing section of Starters is designed for beginning and elementary English learners, it was used to assess elementary school participants’ English reading and writing proficiency so as to ascertain that the two classes had the similar initial English reading and writing. 15.

(30) proficiency prior to the instructional experiment. The reading/writing section of Starters was also used to identify high and low English achievers of each group. The validity and reliability of Starters have been ensured by Cambridge ESOL through extensive research and evaluation. As for the scoring of Starters, the scoring criteria provided by Cambridge ESOL were applied to this study.. A Pre-test and Two Post-tests To pre- and post-test participants’ knowledge of target words, the researcher. 治政大on Vocabulary Knowledge administered three identical tests (see Appendix C), based 立 ‧ 國. 學. Scale (VKS), to the experimental and control groups: (1) a pre-test prior to the textbook instruction to measure participants’ initial knowledge of target words, (2). ‧. post-test 1 right after the participants received the last vocabulary exercises to track. y. Nat. io. sit. their word gains, and (3) post-test 2 one month after the participants received the last. n. al. er. vocabulary exercises to assess their word retention. According to the theory of the. Ch. i n U. v. curve of forgetting (Ebbinghaus, 1964), people will only retain about 21.1% of what. engchi. they learned one month after they learned the information. Thus, one-month interval between post-test 1 and 2 would be appropriate in this study. In addition, Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) was utilized because it can assess the specific word gains at the early stage of vocabulary development in an instructional or experimental situation (Wesche & Paribakht, 1996). The present study drew on a Chinese version of VKS (see Appendix B), translated by the researcher, to lower the EFL participants’ difficulty in understanding the test. A back-translation technique was applied to ensure the validity in translation between languages. 16.

(31) The Design and Scoring of the VKS The VKS, designed by Paribakht and Wesche (1993), is composed of two scales: an elicitation scale, which is composed of five self-report categories used to elicit responses from participants, and a five-point scoring scale used by raters to score the responses (Read, 2000). Both scales are illustrated in Figure 3.1.. The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) Scale 1: an elicitation scale Self-report Meaning of categories categories I don’t remember having seen Ⅰ this word before.. 政治大. Ⅳ. I know this word. It means ____. (translation). n. er. io. Ⅴ. al. Ch. 3. y. I have seen this word before, and I think it means ____. (translation). sit. Ⅲ. 2. engchi U. I can use this word in a sentence: ___________. (Write a sentence.) (If you do this section, please also do Section Ⅳ.). The word is familiar but its meaning is not known.. ‧. I have seen this word before, but I don’t know what it means.. Nat. Ⅱ. 學. ‧ 國. 立. Scale 2: a scoring scale Possible Meaning of scores scores 1 The word is not familiar at all.. A correct synonym or translation is given.. v ni. 4. The word is used with semantic appropriateness in a sentence.. 5. The word is used with semantic appropriateness and a grammatical accuracy in a sentence.. Figure 3.1 The Design and Scoring of the VKS. As illustrated in Figure 3.1, while participants take a Chinese version of VKS pre- and post-tests (see Appendix C), those who choose Category I (I don’t remember. 17.

(32) having seen this word before) will receive one point, meaning that the form of a target word cannot be recognized. Next, those who choose Category II (I have seen this word before, but I don’t know what it means) will obtain two points, indicating that the form of a target word is recognized but its meaning is unknown. In these first two categories, because the participants only need to show their self-perceived knowledge rather than their demonstrated knowledge, the researcher needed to ask them to report honestly in a Chinese version of VKS pre- and post-tests. Then, those who choose Category III (I have seen this word before, and I think it means ___) or Category IV (I. 治政大 (a wrong L1 translation) know this word. It means ___) will receive either two points 立 ‧ 國. 學. or three points (a correct L1 translation). In these two categories, the perceived knowledge of a target word is demonstrated; yet, those who choose Category IV have. ‧. much more confidence and certainty to their answers than those who choose Category. y. Nat. io. sit. III. Last, those who choose Category V (I can use this word in a sentence) may. n. al. er. receive four possible scores: two points (if the L1 translation of a target word is. Ch. i n U. v. inaccurate), three points (if a correct L1 translation of a target word is given, whereas. engchi. the target word is used with semantic and grammatical inappropriateness in a sentence), four points (if target words can be used semantically but not grammatically in a sentence), or five points (if target words can be used in a sentence semantically as well as grammatically). At Category V, not only the perceptive knowledge but also the productive knowledge of a target word is acquired. All the five self-report categories with a list of 24 target words (see Appendix C) were given to the participants in the three identical tests in the main study to help them determine how well they know each word. With regard to the inter-rater 18.

(33) reliability of this study, two raters, i.e., the researcher and a public elementary school English teacher in Taipei City, took charge of the scoring of the VKS in pre- and post-tests. The two raters independently scored each target word based on the scoring scale provided by Paribakht and Wesche (1993). Since the inter-rater reliability was .99 for pre-test, 1.00 for post-test 1, and 1.00 for post-test 2 in this study, it can be concluded that the scoring between the two raters was consistent.. The Reliability and Validity of the VKS. 治政大validity of the VKS was To ensure the quality of this study, the reliability and 立 ‧ 國. 學. considered. In terms of the reliability of the VKS, Wesche and Paribakht (1996) had proved it through administering the VKS with a word list (n = 32) to 93 students at 6. ‧. different proficiency levels twice within two weeks in the 1992 ESL summer school. y. Nat. io. sit. program. The results indicated that the VKS was reliable in that Pearson correlation. n. al. er. was 0.89 and 0.82 for the scores on 24 content words and 8 discourse connectives. Ch. i n U. v. respectively. Regarding of the validity of the VKS, it is difficult to set up because of. engchi. the lack of any comprehensive theory of second language vocabulary acquisition and of no appropriate instruments for comparing VKS results (Wesche & Paribakht, 1996). Nevertheless, Pariakht and Wesche (1997) manifested that the VKS could still sensitively reflect instruction-related gains and provided some indication of its validity for vocabulary achievement testing.. Selections of Reading Materials: An English Textbook The reading materials used in this study were selected from the first two lessons 19.

(34) in participants’ textbook, Hello, Darbie! Book 5, Kang-Hsuan Edition, based on the following six criteria. First, the textbook was designed based on the Nine-Year Integrated English Curriculum Guidelines of Elementary and Junior High Schools (Ministry of Education, Republic of China, 2004) and was approved by Taiwan Ministry of Education (MOE) for elementary school children. Second, the texts were familiar to the participants in that they were adapted from famous stories like “Pinocchio.” According to Bygate (1996), the familiarity of contents could positively affect learners’ lexis and syntax. Third, the texts could interest learners. Paribakht and. 治政大a significant criterion for Wesche (1999) claimed that interests of topics should be 立 ‧ 國. 學. selecting texts. Fourth, the texts’ difficulty level should be suitable for the participants because the words used in the textbook were high-frequency words from the 1200. ‧. fundamental English word list set by MOE for elementary and junior high school. y. Nat. io. sit. students (MOE, Republic of China, 2004). Next, the text type used in the textbook. n. al. er. was the dialogue which may be easier for the participants to process and understand. Ch. i n U. v. due to its simple sentence structures. Last, the length of each text contained about 50. engchi. words which allowed the researcher to complete textbook instruction and written vocabulary exercises within 40 minutes. Thus, the implementation of the texts in this study should be feasible.. Selections of Target Words The target words selected in this study (see Table 3.4) were required to meet the following criteria. Firstly, the target words were high-frequency words from the MOE’s 1200 fundamental English word list for elementary and junior high school 20.

(35) students (MOE, Republic of China, 2004) which are also in accordance with the words recorded as the most frequently used ones in Collins Cobuild English Dictionary (John et al, 1995). Haycraft (1978) indicated that choosing words that are commonly used is important in that any unusual word teachers teach will take the place of a useful one in students’ minds. Schmitt (2000) maintained that the most frequent words in a language make excellent targets for explicit attention. Secondly, all the target words used in this study were content words, such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives, in that content words serve as the major word classes that account for a. 治政 high percentage of the total number of words (Fromkin,大 Rodman, & Hyams, 2003). 立 ‧ 國. 學. Last, the words that could help students delineate their life experiences were served as the target words. Beck, McKeown, and Kucan (2002), for instance, pointed out that. ‧. better target words refer to the words that can be used in other texts and also be used. y. Nat. io. sit. to describe students’ own experiences. In light of this, such words as “brave, naughty,. n. al. er. and amazing” from Lesson 1 were included in this study even though they were not. Ch. i n U. v. from the MOE’s 1200 fundamental English word list (MOE, Republic of China, 2004).. engchi. Yet, to avoid the extraneous variable that some target words may be known for some participants, the target words were pilot-tested and those target words that were known for the participants were excluded, e.g., read, name. Thus, given the previous rationales, a total of 24 target words were included in this study.. 21.

(36) Table 3.4 Target Words in the Textbook Lessons. Target Words. Lesson 1: He is smart.. smart, shy, brave, naughty, honest, lazy, good, bad, amazing,. (12 words). done, move, worry. Lesson 2: I feel sad.. angry, happy, sad, excited, great, terrible, lonely, tired, help,. (12 words). long, sorry, welcome. Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises. 政治大 vocabulary exercises (see Appendix D-I). The hierarchy vocabulary exercise types 立 To foster vocabulary gains, the experimental group received hierarchy. ‧ 國. 學. 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. y. Nat. category of vocabulary exercises are addressed as follows.. al. er. io. sit. exercises were designed by the researcher. The purposes and the examples of each. n. v i n C h attention aim toUdraw learners’ attention to Firstly, the exercises of selective engchi. “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.. 22.

(37) 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. 治政 target words into such lexical networks as collocation, 大 synonyms, or antonyms. The 立 ‧ 國. 學. 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. y. Nat. io. sit. syntactic and semantic word knowledge but also in the functional knowledge of target. n. al. er. words. Specially, learners need to use a given target word to make a semantically and. Ch. i n U. v. grammatically appropriate sentence. The examples in this study included writing. engchi. 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 23.

(38) 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. 治政大Curriculum Guidelines of elementary English learners in Taiwan. According to the 立 ‧ 國. 學. 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. y. Nat. io. sit. and to copy the sentences learned in class. Thus, many English teachers ask their. n. al. er. students to copy target words and sentence patterns in textbooks to foster their basic. Ch. i n U. v. writing abilities. In addition, about 90% of Taiwanese English teachers assign copying. engchi. 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 24.

(39) 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. 治政大 exercises and two types of vocabulary exercises, namely hierarchy vocabulary 立 ‧. ‧ 國. 學. copying exercises, and finally two post-tests, i.e., post-test 1 and post-test 2.. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 25. i n U. v.

(40) A pilot study Participant selection: An English proficiency test (CYLET) Main study A pre-test in word knowledge. Textbook instruction: 1. Reading activities 2. Oral practice activities. 治 After-instruction exercises: 政 The experimental group 大The control group Hierarchy Vocabulary立 Exercises Copying Exercises 學. ‧ 國. After-instruction exercises:. Post-test 1.. ‧. One month later. y. Data analysis. n. al. er. io. sit. Nat. Post-test 2.. Figure 3.2. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 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.. 26.

(41) 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. 治政大week from the 2 the school’s timetable. As for the first class period of each 立. nd. to 7th. ‧ 國. 學. 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. y. Nat. io. sit. the class, while after the instruction, the experimental and control groups were. n. al. er. engaged in hierarchy vocabulary exercises and copying exercises respectively in the. Ch. i n U. v. last 15 minutes of the class. That is, the experimental and control groups received. engchi. 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.. 27.

(42) Table 3.5 The Similarities and Differences in Treatments between the Two Groups Week. Lessons. 1. Class. The Experimental Group. Period. The Control Group. 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 2. nd. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary. ˙Copying Exercises (15 min.). Exercises (15 min.) 1st 3. L1. ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.). 政治大 ˙Copying Exercises Exercises 立 ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities. 2nd. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary. (15 min.). (15 min.). 2nd. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary Exercises (15 min.). ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities. Nat. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary. er. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary. ˙Copying Exercises (15 min.). al. v i n ˙Textbook C hinstruction: readingUand oral practice activities e n g c reading h i and oral practice activities (25 min.) ˙Textbook instruction: Exercises (15 min.). 1 L2. st. 2nd. ˙Copying Exercises (15 min.). n. io. 2nd. sit. ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.). 5. 6. ˙Copying Exercises (15 min.). ‧. 1st. ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.). y. 4. 學. ‧ 國. 1st. Exercises (15 min.) 1 7. st. ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities ˙Textbook instruction: reading and oral practice activities (25 min.). 2nd. ˙Hierarchy Vocabulary 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.. 28. ˙Copying Exercises (15 min.).

(43) 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. 治政大 so as to investigate the were given to the experimental and control groups respectively 立 ‧ 國. 學. 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.. y. Nat. n. al. Ch. engchi. er. io. exercises to the participants in the next meeting.. sit. Then, the researcher reclaimed their exercises for correction and then returned the. i n U. v. 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 29.

(44) 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.. 立. 政治大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 30. i n U. v.

(45) 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. 治政大the results for Research receive copying exercises? The third section demonstrates 立 ‧ 國. 學. 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.. io. sit. y. Nat. n. al. er. Comparisons of Word Gains between the Two Groups. Ch. i n U. v. To answer the first research question, which addressed the comparisons of the. engchi. 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 31.

(46) 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. 立. 28. 52.07. 22.159. Control. 27. 45.81. 21.374. Experimental. 28. 98.29. 19.264. Control. 27. 85.56. 26.486. ‧ 國. p. 1.065. .292. 2.032. .048*. Nat. n. al. er. io. sit. y. ‧. Note. 1. Total scores are out of 120. 2. * p < .05. t. 學. Experimental Pre-test. Post-test 1. 治 SD 政 Mean 大. N. Ch. i n U. v. Comparisons of Word Retention between the Two Groups. engchi. 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 32.

(47) 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. Experimental Post-test 2 Control. 立. Mean. SD. 100.93 治 18.676 政 27 81.96 25.038 大. t. p. 3.175. .003**. 28. Note. 1. Total scores are out of 120.. ‧ 國. 學. 2. * p < .05, ** p < .01. ‧. Effects of Vocabulary Exercises on Students with Different Proficiency Levels. y. Nat. er. io. sit. 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. al. n. v i n proficiency groups, namely highCand achievers, in the experimental and h low e nEnglish gchi U 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.. 33.

(48) 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. 治政大 achievers, whereas the consisted of 12 high English achievers and 16 low English 立 ‧ sit. y. Nat. Table 4.3. ‧ 國. achievers.. 學. control group was composed of 13 high English achievers and 14 low English. io. al. Proficiency. N. Mean. SD. iv n16.42. 4.231. 16. 6.19. 2.198. High. 13. 16.69. 3.794. Low. 14. 5.71. 2.164. n. Group. er. Statistics of the CYLET Scores for High and Low Achievers within Each Group. High Experimental. Ch. Low. 12 engchi U. Control 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 34.

(49) 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. 治政大group (t(18) = 9.142, between the high and low English achievers in the control 立 ‧ 國. 學. 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.. n. al. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Table 4.4. i n U. v. Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores within the Experimental Group. Ch. engchi. Levene’s Test for. t-test for Equality of Means. Equality of Variances. High-. Equal variances. Low. assumed. F. Sig.. t. df. p. 9.134. .006. 8.322. 26. .000***. 7.638. 15. .000***. Equal variances not assumed *** p < .001. 35.

(50) Table 4.5 Independent-Samples t-test on High and Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores within the Control Group Levene’s Test for. t-test for Equality of Means. Equality of Variances. High-. Equal variances. Low. assumed. F. Sig.. t. df. p. 4.317. .048. 9.324. 25. .000***. 9.142. 18. .000***. Equal variances not assumed *** p < .001. 立. 政治大. ‧ 國. 學. 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. y. Nat. er. io. sit. 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. al. n. v i n the high English achievers in theCexperimental U groups were homogeneous. h e n g cand h icontrol 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. 36.

(51) 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 t-test for Equality of Means. Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances. 立. Experimental- Equal variances assumed. ‧ 國. Equal variances. df. p. -.172. 23. .865. 22. .866. -.171. ‧. not assumed. sit. y. Nat. Table 4.7. t. 學. Control. 政 F 治 Sig.大 .369 .549. n. al. vt-test for Equality of Means i n. C hEquality of Variances engchi U. Experimental- Equal variances Control. Levene’s Test for. er. io. Independent-Samples t-test on Low English Achievers’ CYLET Scores between Groups. F. Sig.. t. df. p. .117. .735. .593. 28. .558. .593. 27. .558. assumed Equal variances not assumed. 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. 37.

(52) 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. 治政大 each group, a achievers among pre-test, post-test 1, and post-test 2 within 立 ‧. ‧ 國. respectively.. 學. paired-samples t-test was employed in the experimental group and the control group. y. Nat. io. sit. The progress in the experimental group.. n. al. er. Table 4.8 reveals the results of the experimental group. Considering the high. Ch. i n U. v. English achievers in the experimental group, the mean difference between pre-test and. engchi. 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 target words one month after receiving the last hierarchy vocabulary exercises than they did before the instructional experiment. Furthermore, no significant difference existed in the mean difference between post-test 1 and 2 (MD = 2.917, t(11) = 1.040, 38.