• 沒有找到結果。

網絡圖教學對高中生英文字彙習得之效益研究:以The Frayer Model為基礎 - 政大學術集成

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "網絡圖教學對高中生英文字彙習得之效益研究:以The Frayer Model為基礎 - 政大學術集成"

Copied!
108
0
0

加載中.... (立即查看全文)

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. 網絡圖教學對高中生英文字彙習得之效益研究:. 治 政 以 The Frayer Model大 為基礎 立. ‧ 國. 學. The Effects of Graphic Organizer Instruction on. English Vocabulary Acquisition of Senior High School Students:. ‧. Take the Frayer Model as the Basis. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. 研究生:吳依婷撰 Name: Yi-ting Wu 中華民國一百零一年六月 June, 2012.

(2) The Effects of Graphic Organizer Instruction on English Vocabulary Acquisition of Senior High School Students: Take the Frayer Model as the Basis. A Master Thesis. 立. 治 to 政Presented 大. Department of English,. ‧ 國. 學 National Chengchi University. ‧. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. i n U. v. In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts. by Yi-ting Wu June 21.

(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. I owe my deepest gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Chieh-yue Yeh, for her patient guidance and inspiring encouragement throughout the journey of my thesis writing. Without her support and help, I could not complete this thesis successfully. I also greatly appreciate the committee members, Dr. Chen-kuan Chen and Dr. Yow-yu Lin, who not only carefully reviewed my thesis but also provided constructive suggestions during the oral defense.. 政 治 大 unfailing support, assistance and encouragement, including Huai-chien Hung, Jinzo 立. My sincere appreciation is also extended to my friends and colleagues for their. Chen, and Shu-chuan Lin. I would like to thank my classmates in the Master of Arts. ‧ 國. 學. in English Teaching Program at National Chengchi University, who offered me useful. ‧. advice on my thesis based on their teaching experiences.. sit. y. Nat. Finally, and most certainly I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to my. io. er. beloved parents, my brother, my sister, and my fiance, for always being there with me. Their love, support and encouragement lead me throughout the hardships of thesis. n. al. Ch. writing. It is to them that this thesis is dedicated.. engchi. iv. i n U. v.

(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 Significance of the Study ....................................................................................... 3 立 Research Questions ................................................................................................ 3. Definition of Terms ................................................................................................ 4. ‧ 國. 學. Graphic Organizer Instruction ....................................................................... 4. ‧. Traditional Vocabulary Instruction ................................................................ 4. sit. y. Nat. Chapter Two: Literature Review ................................................................................ 5. io. er. Graphic Organizers ................................................................................................ 5 Definition of graphic organizers .................................................................... 5. al. n. v i n Corganizers Theories of graphic 6 U h e n g....................................................................... i h c Applications of graphic organizers ................................................................ 7 Variations of graphic organizers in vocabulary instruction ........................... 9 Vocabulary Instruction and Collocation ............................................................... 11 Definition of collocation .............................................................................. 12 Classification of collocation ........................................................................ 12 Importance and necessity of explicit collocation instruction ....................... 13 Related Studies on the Frayer Model ................................................................... 14 The Frayer Model and English Vocabulary Teaching .......................................... 15 Chapter Three: Methodology.................................................................................... 17 v.

(6) Participants........................................................................................................... 17 Instruments........................................................................................................... 19 General English Proficiency Test (GEPT): Elementary Level Tests 4 & 5 . 20 A Pre-test and Two Post-tests....................................................................... 21 Teaching materials and worksheets ............................................................. 22 Selection of Target Words ............................................................................ 23 Graphic Organizer Instruction: the Adapted Frayer Model ......................... 25 Traditional Vocabulary Instruction .............................................................. 30. 政 治 大 Pilot Study .................................................................................................... 32 立. Procedure ............................................................................................................. 30. Main Study ................................................................................................... 34. ‧ 國. 學. Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 37. ‧. Chapter Four: Results ............................................................................................... 39. sit. y. Nat. Results of the Overall Performance of the Experimental Group ......................... 39. io. er. Results of the Overall Performance of the Control Group .................................. 41 Results of the Participants’ Performances on the Pre-test, Post-test I, and. al. n. v i n Ch Post-test II ............................................................................................................ 42 engchi U Results of the Effects of Different Vocabulary Instructions on High and Low. Proficiency Learners ............................................................................................ 44 The Statistical Results of the GEPT Scores of High and Low Proficiency Learners........................................................................................................ 45 The Statistical Results of High and Low Proficiency Learners’ Performances within Each Group and between the Two Groups ................ 49 Summary .............................................................................................................. 56 Chapter Five: Discussion and Conclusion ............................................................... 59 Answers to the Research Questions ..................................................................... 59 vi.

(7) A Comparison between the Present Study and the Previous Studies ................... 64 Pedagogical Implications of the Study ................................................................ 68 Limitations of the Study....................................................................................... 69 Recommendations for Further Research .............................................................. 70 Students’ Feedback after the Project .................................................................... 71 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 72 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 74 Appendix A: General English Proficiency Test (GEPT): Elementary Level Tests 4 &. 政 治 大 Appendix B: The Pre-test ........................................................................................... 82 立 5.................................................................................................................................. 80. Appendix C: The Immediate Post-test and the Delayed Post-test .............................. 84. ‧ 國. 學. Appendix D: Traditional Worksheets of Lesson 5 in English Reader for Senior High. ‧. Schools Book 1 for Both Experimental and Control Groups ..................................... 86. sit. y. Nat. Appendix E: The Adapted Frayer Model Worksheets of Lesson 5 in English Reader. io. er. for Senior High Schools Book 1 for the Experimental Group ..................................... 89 Appendix F: Traditional Worksheets of Lesson 5 in English Reader for Senior High. al. n. v i n C hGroup ......................................................................... Schools Book 1 for the Control 93 engchi U. vii.

(8) LIST OF TABLES. Table 3.1 Statistics of Participants’ GEPT Scores ....................................................... 18 Table 3.2 Independent t-test on Participants’ English Proficiency Test (GEPT) ......... 18 Table 3.3 The Instruments Used in this Study ............................................................. 20 Table 3.4 Instructions and Teaching Materials for CG and EG ................................... 23 Table 3.5 Target Words in the Textbook ...................................................................... 25 Table 3.6 The Similarities and Differences in Treatments between the Two Groups .. 36. 政 治 大 Table 4.2 Paired-Sampled t-test for Progress in the Control Group ............................ 42 立 Table 4.1 Paired-Sampled t-test for Progress in the Experimental Group ................... 41. Table 4.3 Independent t-test on Participants’ Pre-test, Immediate post-test and. ‧ 國. 學. Delayed post-test.......................................................................................................... 44. ‧. Table 4.4 Statistics of the GEPT Scores for High and Low Proficiency Learners within. sit. y. Nat. Each Group .................................................................................................................. 46. io. er. Table 4.5 Independent t-test on High and Low Proficiency Learners’ GEPT Scores within the Experimental Group .................................................................................... 47. al. n. v i n Table 4.6 Independent t-testC on High and Low Proficiency h e n g c h i U Learners’ GEPT Scores. within the Control Group ............................................................................................. 47. Table 4.7 Independent t-test on High Proficiency Learners’ GEPT Scores between Groups .......................................................................................................................... 49 Table 4.8 Independent t-test on Low Proficiency Learners’ GEPT Scores between Groups .......................................................................................................................... 49 Table 4.9 Paired-Sampled t-test for Progress in High and Low Proficiency Learners of the Experimental Group ............................................................................................... 51 Table 4.10 Paired-Sampled t-test for Progress in High and Low Proficiency Learners of the Control Group .................................................................................................... 53 viii.

(9) Table 4.11 Independent t-test on High Proficiency Learners’ Pre-test, Immediate post-test, and Delayed post-test ................................................................................... 55 Table 4.12 Independent t-test on Low Proficiency Learners’ Pre-test, Immediate post-test, and Delayed post-test ................................................................................... 56. 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 2.1 The Frayer Model .................................................................................... 11 Figure 3.1 A Modified Frayer Model ........................................................................ 27 Figure 3.2 Word Map 1 ............................................................................................. 28 Figure 3.3 Word Map 2 ............................................................................................. 28 Figure 3.4 The Adapted Frayer Model ...................................................................... 29 Figure 3.5 The Procedure of the Study ..................................................................... 32. 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:網絡圖教學對高中生英文字彙習得之效益研究: 以 The Frayer Model 為基礎. 指導教授:葉潔宇博士. 研究生:吳依婷. 立. 論文提要內容:. 政 治 大. ‧ 國. 學. 本研究旨在探討網絡圖教學對高中生英文字彙習得的影響。網絡圖已廣泛運. ‧. 用於閱讀教學,且 the Frayer model 之前的研究都專注在學科領域的單字與閱讀. y. Nat. 教學。然而在以英語為第二外語的環境中,針對使用 the Frayer model 於網絡圖. er. io. sit. 教學是否能增進學習者字彙習得(vocabulary acquisition)與記憶保留(word retention),其相關研究仍顯不足。因此,本研究採用量化研究方法,以探究「網. al. n. v i n 絡圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」對高中生英文字彙習得與記憶保留 Ch engchi U 的影響。. 研究對象為台灣北部一所公立高中一年級兩個班的六十九位學生,具有相同 英文能力的這兩個班級被隨機指定為實驗組與控制組。在歷時六週的實驗教學 中,實驗組與控制組分別接受「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」 來學習三十二個主要單字。之後,兩組受試者隨即接受包含所有主要單字的研究 者自編測驗,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)整體而言,接受「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」的實驗組學生習得大多數的主要 單字,但單字保留成效不佳;(2)總括來說,接受「純傳統單字教法」的控制組 xi.

(12) 學生習得並保留大多數的主要單字;(3)在單字習得與記憶保留成效方面,接受 「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」的實驗組學生顯著優於接受「純傳統單字教法」的控 制組學生;(4)「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」對於高英語學 習成就者的單字習得與記憶保留皆有正面影響,但只對低英語學習成就者的單字 習得有正面影響;(5)對於高英語學習成就者之單字習得而言, 「網絡圖暨傳統單 字教法」的成效優於「純傳統單字教法」 :然而,對於單字記憶保留而言, 「網絡 圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」的成效相同。對於低英語學習成就者 之單字習得與記憶保留而言,「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」. 治 政 大 在實際教學上的應用提供建議,以作為教育學者們的參考。 立. 的成效相同。最後,研究者針對「網絡圖暨傳統單字教法」與「純傳統單字教法」. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. xii. i n U. v.

(13) ABSTRACT. This study intends to explore the effects of graphic organizer instruction on vocabulary acquisition of senior high school students. Though graphic organizers have been widely employed in reading instruction and previous studies on the Frayer model focus on vocabulary and reading in content areas, little research has been conducted on whether graphic organizer instruction utilizing the adapted Frayer model will facilitate learners’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention in an EFL. 政 治 大 investigate the effectiveness of two different vocabulary instructions, i.e., “graphic 立 context. Therefore, this present study adopted a quantitative research method to. organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary. ‧ 國. 學. instruction only” on senior high school students’ vocabulary acquisition and word. ‧. retention.. sit. y. Nat. Participants of this study were two classes of 69 first year students in a public. io. er. senior high school in northern Taiwan. With similar English proficiency on General English Proficiency Test (GEPT), the two classes were randomly assigned as the. al. n. v i n C h During the six-week experimental and control groups. instructional experiment, the engchi U experimental and control groups received “graphic organizer plus traditional. vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only” respectively to learn 32 target words selected in this study. After receiving the last vocabulary instructions, both groups took the immediate post-test, a researcher self-designed test, to assess their acquisition of all the target words. One month after the immediate post-test, both groups received the delayed post-test, which was the same as the immediate post-test, to track their word retention. The major findings are summarized as follows. (1) As a whole, learners receiving “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” acquired most of the target words but did not retain them one xiii.

(14) month after. (2) Overall, learners receiving “traditional vocabulary instruction only” not only acquired the target words but also retained them in a month. (3) In terms of vocabulary acquisition and word retention, learners receiving “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” significantly performed better than those receiving “traditional vocabulary instruction only”. (4) Both “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only” promoted high proficiency learners’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention, but were only effective in low proficiency learners’ vocabulary acquisition. (5) High proficiency. 政 治 大 significantly acquired much more target words than those receiving “traditional 立 learners receiving “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction”. vocabulary instruction only”, but similarly retained target words as those receiving. ‧ 國. 學. “traditional vocabulary instruction only”. Low proficiency learners receiving “graphic. ‧. organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary. sit. y. Nat. instruction only” acquired target words as well as retained the words to a similar. io. er. extent. Pedagogical implications and recommendations for further research were provided at the end of the thesis.. n. al. Ch. engchi. xiv. i n U. v.

(15) CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background and Motivation The importance of vocabulary cannot be overemphasized in language learning. Vocabulary is a vital component of language learning, for it is the indispensable element of language listening, speaking, reading and writing skills. Mastering vocabulary is particularly essential for EFL students. If they do not build good foundations in vocabulary, they will have difficulty comprehending reading texts and. 政 治 大 little can be conveyed. Without vocabulary, nothing can be conveyed” (p. 111). The 立. communicating with foreigners. As Wilkins (1972) claimed, “Without grammar, very. importance of vocabulary learning is obviously stated.. ‧ 國. 學. One of the assumptions of knowing a word put forth by Richards (1976) is that. ‧. “knowing a word entails knowledge of the network of associations between that word. sit. y. Nat. and other words in language” (p. 81). He mentioned associating links between words. io. er. by subordinate, coordinate, and superordinate classification, which echoes some components of the Frayer model. Hatch and Brown (1995) suggested five steps in the. al. n. v i n C h(1) encountering new process of learning vocabulary: words, (2) creating a mental engchi U picture of word form, either visual or auditory or both, (3) learning the words’ meaning, (4) creating a strong linkage between word form and meaning in the memory, and (5) using words (cited in Wang, 2010).. In order to facilitate vocabulary learning, various vocabulary teaching strategies and techniques have been applied to assisting learners in acquiring vocabulary efficiently (Chang, 2004; Holden, 1999; Jones & Thomas, 2006; Lai, 2003; Pressley & Harris, 1990; Richards, 1976; Smith, C. B., 2002). Jones and Thomas (2006) stated that “true vocabulary acquisition requires development of meaning to go with the words” (p. 59). They suggested some graphical vocabulary strategies, such as concept 1.

(16) of definition maps or word maps, be applied to helping learners acquire vocabulary in content areas like language arts and social studies. Holden (1999) also presented 15 memory and mnemonic strategies to help learners develop the range and breadth of their vocabulary, e.g. association method and keyword method. Since there are so many strategies and techniques concerning vocabulary learning in the literature, teachers should try to employ, besides traditional translation-based vocabulary instruction, other novel or peculiar methods to arouse students’ interest in learning vocabulary.. 政 治 大 language learning, especially in reading (Dunston, 1992; Egan, 1999; Jiang & Grabe, 立 In the language classroom, graphic organizers have been widely utilized in. 2007; Lo, 2010; Moore & Readence, 1984), writing (Chang, Sung & Chen, 2002;. ‧ 國. 學. Reutzel, 1986; Smith, 2000), listening (Ruhe, 1996; Schmidt-Rinehart, 1994; Teng,. sit. y. Nat. J. J., 2002).. ‧. 1994), and vocabulary (Hung, 2006; Irvin, 1990; Kaelin, 1991; Monroe, 1997; Smith,. io. er. The Frayer model, which was designed based on the concept of graphic organizers, has been frequently used for teaching mathematical vocabulary (Monroe,. al. n. v i n 1997; Monroe & Pendergrass, 1997;CWilder, 2010). However, h e n g c h i U little research has. incorporated the Frayer model into English vocabulary teaching in an EFL context. Thus, the present study attempts to fill the gap by designing an experimental research to investigate the effect of graphic organizer instruction using the adapted Frayer model on the vocabulary acquisition of senior high school students.. Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of graphic organizer instruction on the vocabulary acquisition and word retention of EFL senior high school students. By conducting two different instructions, i.e., “graphic organizer plus 2.

(17) traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only,” the researcher hoped to find out if “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” was more effective in promoting learners’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention than “traditional vocabulary instruction only,” and further to probe into how these two instructions affected high and low proficiency learners respectively.. Research Questions In order to achieve the purpose of the study, five research questions were. 政 治 大 (1) How much progress do learners who receive “graphic organizer plus 立. addressed as follows.. traditional vocabulary instruction” make?. ‧ 國. 學. (2) How much progress do learners who receive “traditional vocabulary. ‧. instruction only” make?. y. Nat. (3) Do learners who receive “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary. instruction only” on vocabulary acquisition?. al. er. io. sit. instruction” perform better than those who receive “traditional vocabulary. n. v i n C h “graphic organizer (4) Do learners who receive plus traditional vocabulary engchi U. instruction” perform better than those who receive “traditional vocabulary instruction only” on word retention?. (5) Are both “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only” equally effective for high and low proficiency learners respectively?. Significance of the Study The significance of this present study can be described in two ways. First, graphic organizer instruction may work as a novel alternative teaching method in EFL 3.

(18) vocabulary instruction to enhance learners’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention. Graphic organizers not only connect learners’ prior knowledge to new information but also motivate learners to associate and explore vocabulary, creating a pleasant and interactive learning atmosphere. Second, graphic organizer instruction was verified to be effective for high proficiency learners to acquire and retain vocabulary, and only effective for low proficiency learners to acquire vocabulary. It appears that graphic organizer instruction may meet the needs of learners with different proficiency levels, only if low proficiency learners were strongly motivated and longer exposed to. 政 治 大 light on senior high school students’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention 立. graphic organizer instruction. Overall, it is hoped that this present study may shed. 學 Definition of Terms. sit. y. Nat. Graphic Organizer Instruction. ‧. ‧ 國. through different vocabulary instructions.. io. er. In this present study, graphic organizer instruction was defined as an original vocabulary teaching method which requires students to utilize the adapted Frayer. al. n. v i n C h their definitions model to learn vocabulary words, including or synonyms, engchi U collocations, sentence making and associations.. Traditional Vocabulary Instruction In this study, traditional vocabulary instruction referred to the translation-based teaching method which focuses on explanations and translations of vocabulary and example sentences, coupled with morphological forms and collocations if necessary.. 4.

(19) CHAPTER 2 LITERARURE REVIEW In this chapter, the literature on the instruction of graphic organizers was reviewed in four sections. The first section elaborates on the definition, theories, applications, and variations of graphic organizers. The second section further probes into the relationship between vocabulary instruction and collocation. The third section discusses the related studies on the Frayer model. The last section describes the connection between the Frayer model and English vocabulary teaching.. 立. 政 治 大 Graphic Organizers. Graphic organizers can be used as vocabulary development activities and are. ‧ 國. 學. thought of as an effective way to introduce new vocabulary before reading (Irvin,. er. io. sit. y. Nat. organizers are discussed below in the following parts.. ‧. 1990). The details on the definition, theories, applications, and variations of graphic. n. a l Definition of graphic organizers v i n Coffered Numerous studies have synonyms for graphic organizers, such U h e nvarious i h gc. as concept mapping, semantic webbing, graphic overview, and so on (Lo, 2010). Egan (1999) defined a graphic organizer as “a visual representation of knowledge, a way of structuring information, and of arranging essential aspects of an idea or topic into a pattern” (p. 641). That is, through the representation of graphic organizers, full command of text structure and higher level of thinking might be achieved. According to DiCecco and Gleason (2002), graphic organizers show the holistic relationship of all the contents and concepts by integrating them within a format of spatial arrangement. The format of a graphic organizer is made up of geometric shapes, lines, and arrows to demonstrate the interrelationships among major ideas (Darch et al., 5.

(20) 1986). Allen (1999) pointed out that “constructing graphic organizers aids and assists students as they discover meaning through intriguing pathways, separate from the traditional method” (cited in Smith, J. J., 2002, p. 4). For example, graphic organizers help students to grasp the essence of content material as well as promote positive involvement and discussion among students (Kaelin, 1991).. Theories of graphic organizers Three theories related to graphic organizers are Ausubel’s meaningful learning. 政 治 大 organizers have their origins in Ausubel’s advance organizers, whose function is to 立 theory, schema theory, and cognitive information processing theory. Graphic. “provide ideational scaffolding for the stable incorporation and retention of the more. ‧ 國. 學. detailed and differentiated material that follows” (Richard, 1979, p. 372). In other. ‧. words, graphic organizers help to bridge the gap between what learners have already. sit. y. Nat. known and what they are going to learn by assimilating new information into their. io. er. cognitive structures (Ivie, 1998). In one of Ausubel’s studies, he indicated that learners’ background knowledge had a significant effect on helping learners. al. n. v i n understand and retain new conceptsC (Ausubel & Youssef, U h e n g c h i 1963). That is, meaningful. learning occurs when learners’ prior knowledge is activated and the new information is connected to the known information. Schema theory is similar to meaningful learning theory to some extent. A schema, containing slots for specific information, is an organization of concepts and knowledge stored in memory (Dunston, 1992). The slots within a schema are just like the subsumers within our cognitive structure. If new information a learner takes fits into his or her existing schema, proper meanings will be constructed and comprehension will be improved. For instance, “teaching new vocabulary by linking the new word or label to a previously learned concept should result in greater learning 6.

(21) and longer retention than more conventional methods” (Eeds & Cockrum, 1985, p. 493). As Dunston (1992) stated: Although the connection between schema theory and graphic organizers is not explicitly stated in the existing research, the implication is that key vocabulary terms or concepts from a learning task that are graphically displayed can activate prior knowledge more instantaneously and completely than abstract prose. (p. 59). Teng (1994) also argued that visual cues provided before listening served as advance. 政 治 大 facilitated listening comprehension. 立. organizers, which activated relevant information in existing schema and as a result. Another theory with relation to graphic organizers is cognitive information. ‧ 國. 學. processing theory. According to Atkinson & Shriffin (1968), cognitive information. ‧. processing theory refers to the role that sensory, short-term, and long-term memory. sit. y. Nat. play in receiving information and then transferring it to store and then recall in. io. er. memory. If new information moving from sensory memory to short-term memory is actively used and integrated with existing knowledge, this information is more likely. al. n. v i n Cmemory. to store in learners’ long-term organizers, visual presentation used U h e n gGraphic i h c for organizing information, help this process to occur (Dye, 2000). Moreover,. cognitive information processing theory emphasizes the use of graphic diagrams, which helps learners connect new information with prior knowledge (Driscoll, 2002). Rekrut (1996) also exemplified such effective vocabulary instructions as semantic mapping, the modified Frayer model and the keyword method, which assist learners to build connections between previous conceptual knowledge and new words.. Applications of graphic organizers Graphic organizers have been widely applied in language learning, especially in 7.

(22) reading (Dunston, 1992; Egan, 1999; Jiang & Grabe, 2007; Lo, 2010; Moore & Readence, 1984), writing (Chang, Sung & Chen, 2002; Reutzel, 1986; Smith, 2000), listening (Ruhe, 1996; Schmidt-Rinehart, 1994; Teng, 1994), and vocabulary (Hung, 2006; Irvin, 1990; Kaelin, 1991; Monroe, 1997; Smith, J. J., 2002). As for the applications of graphic organizers in reading, Jiang & Grabe (2007) compared the studies in the effect of graphic organizers that do and do not reflect text structures and concluded that the former facilitated learners’ comprehension and retention of content area reading material. In Egan’s (1999) research, she shared how she made use of. 政 治 大 for teachers to consider. Lo (2010) found that graphic organizer instruction helps 立. graphic organizers to teach reading and provided practical instructional suggestions. enhance reading comprehension of Taiwanese senior high school students and that. ‧ 國. 學. they hold a positive attitude towards the use of graphic organizers. With regard to the. ‧. applications of graphic organizers in writing and listening, Smith (2000) presented a. sit. y. Nat. unit of 10-day lesson plans on teaching descriptive writing, providing information. io. er. about students’ grade, ability level, prior knowledge, and key concepts and skills to develop. At the end of the unit, all of each student’s writings would be compiled in a. al. n. v i n C lesson handbook. The title of the second-day was “Modeling a Good Descriptive U h e nplan i h gc. Text,” in which a graphic organizer was used to develop students’ ability to add. descriptors and details to supporting sentences. Chang, Sung & Chen (2002) intended to explore the learning effects of concept-mapping strategies on students’ text comprehension and summarization abilities. They discovered that both map-correction and scaffold-fading strategies helped enhance students’ text summarization ability; students were thus able to grasp and organize the main ideas instead of trivial messages of an article. On the other hand, Teng (1994) maintained that visual cues allowed listeners to pay attention to specific information and to make predictions more accurately. Therefore, learners provided with visual cues performed 8.

(23) significantly better in listening comprehension than those without visual cues. Further, learners seeing visual cues before listening to the passage particularly produced greater performance than those seeing visual cues during or after listening. Schmidt-Rinehart (1994) suggested that instructors should employ advance organizers as a means of connecting learners’ background knowledge with new information so as to enhance learners’ topic familiarity and contribute to their listening comprehension. Additionally, the applications of graphic organizers in vocabulary are illustrated as follows. In addition to emphasizing the importance of vocabulary knowledge, Irvin. 政 治 大 learning strategies for effective vocabulary instruction. For instance, graphic 立. (1990) analyzed reasons for vocabulary acquisition and offered guidelines as well as. organizers presented as a tree diagram are a good way of showing word relationships.. ‧ 國. 學. Monroe (1997) not only summarized studies related to using graphic organizers in. ‧. vocabulary instruction but also recommended that further research elaborate on. sit. y. Nat. teaching mathematics vocabulary through graphic organizers. Smith, J. J. (2002). io. er. conducted an instructional experiment on special education students but no significant differences existed among the four treatments of graphic organizer versus traditional. al. n. v i n Cpointing instructions and assessments, that theU use of graphic organizers does not h e n out i h gc. necessarily fit for all situations. As the present study focuses on vocabulary teaching, the researcher further extends to explore the variations of graphic organizers in vocabulary instruction.. Variations of graphic organizers in vocabulary instruction When it comes to vocabulary instruction, graphic organizers used as teaching techniques or strategies come in various formats, such as concept of definition maps, i.e., word maps, semantic feature analysis, word webs, sentence plus definition method, word analogies, the Frayer model, semantic mapping, concept wheels, and 9.

(24) the verbal-visual word association strategy (Chang, 2004; Greenwood, 2002; Hopkins & Bean, 1998; Monroe, 1997; Monroe & Pendergrass, 1997; Myers & Chang, 2009; Rosenbaum, 2001; Schwartz, 1988). As pointed out by Myers & Chang (2009), “visuals are powerful retention aids to promote students’ vocabulary understanding and acquisition” (p. 200). Among all the graphic organizers, concept of definition maps and the Frayer model are comparatively suitable for vocabulary teaching in senior high. These two graphic organizers are totally different from each other in format and in content. A concept of definition map, i.e., a word map, is a graphic. 政 治 大 illustrations. Three questions like “What is it?” “What is it like?” and “What are some 立 representation of the definition of a word in terms of categories, properties, and. examples?” help learners define a word more clearly. Schwartz (1988) exemplified in. ‧ 國. 學. detail how he taught key vocabulary terms by means of concept of definition maps.. ‧. He pointed out the limitations and problems he encountered during instruction and. sit. y. Nat. suggested feasible solutions to those problems. For example, students were puzzled. io. er. about what to fill regarding the three questions, so he provided complete context passages for students to identify information to answer the three questions. The. al. n. v i n C h needs to be usedUflexibly and modified to limitation of the map is that “the structure engchi fit particular concepts” (p. 111). Furthermore, the components of the Frayer model include relevant and irrelevant attributes, examples and non-examples, and superordinate, subordinate, and coordinate terms (Greenwood, 2002). The Frayer model uses four boxes to define examples, non-examples, characteristics, and non-characteristics of a concept or a word (see Figure 2.1). The Frayer model helps learners develop relationships and categories that are associated with the concept or the word. Learners have to define the target concept or word and apply the information to generate examples and non-examples. Wilder (2010) claimed that if students could write examples and develop non-examples of a concept on their own, 10.

(25) they would fully comprehend the concept. The Frayer model helped develop students’ reasoning skills because vocabulary was presented as a concept related to other concepts rather than as a string of words put together. He made some modifications of the Frayer model to fit into what he wanted students to know about geometry and was amazed at the level of understanding his students achieved.. Essential Characteristics. Non-essential Characteristics. 政 治 大 Non-examples. Examples. 立. ‧ 國. 學. Figure 2.1 The Frayer Model. ‧ y. sit. Nat. Vocabulary Instruction and Collocation. n. al. er. io. Since collocation is one of the essential parts comprising the adapted Frayer. i n U. v. model of the present study (see Figure 3.4), the relationship between collocation and. Ch. engchi. vocabulary instruction is explored as follows. Probing into vocabulary instruction, collocation is found to play an important role in lexical competence, but has long been undervalued (Wei, 1999; Bonk, 2000). Furthermore, Zimmerman (1993) pointed out that the concept of collocation is often neglected by language instructors and students thus fail to take notice of collocation despite its presence in classroom teaching materials (cited in Bonk, 2000). Therefore, collocation should be taught in such an explicit way in class that learners will get a clear picture of what words go with certain other words.. 11.

(26) Definition of collocation Benson et al. (1997) defined collocations, or recurrent, fixed combinations, as “fixed, identifiable, non-idiomatic phrases and constructions” (p. xv). According to Wei (1999), collocation is defined as the way words are typically combined or used together. Bonk (2000) claimed that collocations, or formulaic speech, refer to repeated and frequent combinations of lexical elements. Nation (1990) stated that collocation is the company that a word keeps and a type of word knowledge involving what words precede or follow a word. Palmer (1933) gave the definition of collocation as. 政 治 大 independent entity, rather than by the process of piecing together their component 立 “successions of words that must or should be learnt… as an integral whole or. parts” (cited in Durrant & Schmitt, 2010, p. 164). That is, words of collocation should. ‧ 國. 學. not be learned as isolated words but acquired as meaningful chunks. Further, Durrant. ‧. & Schmitt (2010) pointed out that collocations are word combinations that language. y. sit. io. er. linguistic knowledge.. Nat. learners encounter again and again so that these combinations are retained as their. n. al. C h of collocationU n i Classification engchi. v. Collocations are usually categorized into two major groups: grammatical collocations and lexical collocations, based on Benson et al.’s classification of collocations (Benson et al., 1997; Liao, 2009; Myers & Chang, 2009; Wang & Good, 2007). Grammatical collocations are made up of a dominant word and a preposition or grammatical structure, whereas lexical collocations consist of nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs. There are eight types of grammatical collocations in Benson et al.’s (1997) categorization: (1) noun + preposition, (2) noun + to + infinitive, (3) noun + that-clause, (4) preposition + noun, (5) adjective + preposition, (6) adjective + to + infinitive, (7) adjective + that-clause, and (8) nineteen English verb patterns. As for 12.

(27) lexical collocations, seven types are illustrated as follows: (1) verb (creation/activation) + noun/pronoun, (2) verb (eradication/ nullification) + noun, (3) adjective + noun, (4) noun + verb, (5) noun (unit) + of + noun, (6) adverb + adjective, and (7) verb + adverb. Benson et al.’s (1997) classification of collocations has laid a solid foundation for the study of collocation henceforward.. Importance and necessity of explicit collocation instruction The nature of collocation is so pervasive, inconspicuous and unpredictable that. 政 治 大 Chang, 2009; Wei, 1999). Learners’ acquisition of collocation depends on explicit 立. learners need a guide to make explicit acquisition (Durrant & Schmitt, 2010; Myers &. attention to target collocation terms. Insufficient exposure to target collocation terms. ‧ 國. 學. will contribute to defects in learners’ collocation knowledge (Durrant & Schmitt,. ‧. 2010). Myers & Chang (2009) claimed that collocation knowledge plays a crucial role. sit. y. Nat. in learners’ communicative competence and language proficiency. That is, collocation. io. er. knowledge enables learners to communicate in a more efficient and native-like way. Wei (1999) argued that instructors should provide learners with clear and explicit. al. n. v i n C h of collocation, U guidance to arouse their awareness which helps promote learners’ engchi. language development. Additionally, Liao (2009) maintained that learning. collocations not only equips learners with accurate speaking and writing abilities but also enhances their language skills such as the usage of vocabulary. Chan & Liou (2005) indicated that collocation instruction is necessary and beneficial for EFL learners’ collocation knowledge and confirmed the value of collocation instruction. Hsu (2002) concluded that “direct collocation instruction helps EFL learners acquire new collocations in written and spoken discourses that in turn enhance their proficiency in the four skills” (cited in Myers & Chang, 2009, p. 182). In other words, a strong correlation exists between learners’ collocation competence and their general 13.

(28) proficiency in English (Bonk, 2000; Myers & Chang, 2009). Bonk (2000) contended that collocation knowledge greatly influences learners’ comprehension and usage of language. For lack of repetition of collocations in textbooks, Wang & Good (2007) suggested that EFL instructors should provide explicit collocation instruction for learners to expose to collocations. After reviewing the importance of collocation in vocabulary instruction, let’s investigate more studies pertinent to the Frayer model.. Related Studies on the Frayer Model. 政 治 大 content areas. As for the application of the Frayer model to reading, Peters (1974) 立. Most of the studies on the Frayer model focus on vocabulary and reading in. pointed out that students using materials organized based on the Frayer model did. ‧ 國. 學. significantly better in comprehending concepts than those employing materials. ‧. organized based on the textbook approach. The result further showed a better. sit. y. Nat. performance for both high and low learners utilizing the Frayer model. Additionally,. io. er. among these studies, the Frayer model has been frequently used for teaching mathematical vocabulary (Monroe, 1997; Monroe & Pendergrass, 1997; Wilder,. al. n. v i n C hresearch proved that 2010). Monroe and Pendergrass’ (1997) students using the engchi U. concept of definition map integrated with the Frayer model performed better than those using the definition-only model on the use of mathematical vocabulary in their journal writing. In other words, the integrated CD-Frayer model was effective in teaching mathematical vocabulary. Rekrut (1996) stated that the Frayer model was suitable for teaching complicated concepts and suggested it should be applied in such subjects as physics and art to clarify words like “mass” or “impressionism”. Graves (1985) put forth a modified Frayer model with more explanations, examples, and exercises, which was easier for students to grasp the concept (cited in Rekrut, 1996). Flanigan & Greenwood (2007) divided all words into four levels from level 1 to level 14.

(29) 4. Level 1 words refer to the words students need to have a deep understanding before they learn the reading passage. The Frayer model was recommended to teach level 1 words, for it enabled students to thoroughly understand a concept and to compare and contrast the concept with similar concepts.. The Frayer Model and English Vocabulary Teaching As mentioned earlier, previous studies on the Frayer model were mostly used to teach mathematical vocabulary. However, there is a lack of empirical research to. 政 治 大 teaching in an EFL context. Therefore, the present study attempts to fill this gap by 立 verify the effectiveness of incorporating the Frayer model into English vocabulary. designing an experimental research to investigate the effect of the instruction using. ‧ 國. 學. the adapted Frayer model on the vocabulary acquisition and retention of senior high. ‧. school students.. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 15. i n U. v.

(30) 立. 政 治 大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 16. i n U. v.

(31) CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY The present study is an empirical study aiming to explore the effects of different vocabulary instructions, i.e., “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only”, on vocabulary acquisition and word retention of senior high school students. There are four sections in this chapter. The first section provides information about the participants. The second section describes the instruments of the study, including an English proficiency test. 政 治 大 section presents the whole procedures throughout the study. The last section focuses 立 (GEPT), a pre-test and two post-tests (researcher self-designed tests). The third. on the data analysis.. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 Participants. sit. y. Nat. The participants in the study were 69 first year students from two classes in a. io. er. public senior high school in northern Taiwan. These two classes were selected because they were the researcher’s own classes so that the experimental research was. al. n. v i n C h in practice. PriorUto the instructional experiment, able to be conveniently conducted engchi the participants took a standardized English proficiency test, GEPT, whose purpose. was to distinguish high proficiency learners from low proficiency learners in the two classes. The scores of the two classes on the GEPT were analyzed through an independent t-test. The statistical results were illustrated in Table 3.1. The GEPT mean score of Class A (n = 36) was 67 with a standard deviation of 15.781, while that of Class B (n = 33) was 65.21 with a standard deviation of 16.294. Further, as shown in Table 3.2, these two classes passed the Levene’s test (F = .153, p > .05), indicating that the two classes were homogeneous. The t-test for equality of means revealed that there was no significant difference in the GEPT mean scores between the two classes 17.

(32) (t(67) = .463, p > .05), indicating that the two classes were of similar English proficiency.. Table 3.1 Statistics of Participants’ GEPT Scores Test. Group. N. Mean. SD. Class A. 36. 67. 15.781. Class B. 33. 65.21. 16.294. GEPT. Note. Total score is 100.. 立. ‧ 國. 學. Table 3.2. 政 治 大. Independent t-test on Participants’ English Proficiency Test (GEPT). Equality of Variances. Means. Sig.. Ch. .697. n. Class A-. assumed. Class B. Equal variances. sit. F. y. t-test for Equality of. t. df. p. 67. .645. 66.045. .645. er. io. Equal variances. ‧. Nat. al. Levene’s Test for. .153. engchi. iv .463 n U .462. not assumed. As the two groups were of similar English proficiency, one of the classes was then randomly assigned as the experimental group and the other as the control group. The former received “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction,” while the latter received “traditional vocabulary instruction only.” In addition, the participants aged 16 on average were all native speakers of Mandarin-Chinese and 18.

(33) attended four 50-minute formal English classes and one 80-minute after-school English class per week as the experiment was implemented. To investigate the effects of different vocabulary instructions on vocabulary acquisition and word retention of high and low proficiency learners, the participants in each group were stratified into two levels, namely high and low English proficiency, based on their GEPT scores. The mean of the GEPT scores in each group was the cut-off point to distinguish high proficiency learners from low proficiency learners. As displayed in Table 3.1, in the experimental group, the participants (n = 36) with. 政 治 大 whereas those with scores below 67 were classified as low proficiency learners (n = 立 GEPT scores of 67 and above were classified as high proficiency learners (n = 19),. 17). In the control group, the participants (n = 33) with GEPT scores of 65.21 and. ‧ 國. 學. above were classified as high proficiency learners (n = 18), whereas those with scores. ‧. below 65.21 were classified as low proficiency learners (n = 15).. er. io. sit. y. Nat. Instruments. The instruments employed in this study included (1) General English. al. n. v i n C h Level Tests U Proficiency Test (GEPT): Elementary 4 & 5 (See Appendix A) and (2) engchi. researcher self-designed tests used as a pre-test and two post-tests (See Appendixes B & C). These two instruments, whose functions were summarized in Table 3.3, were elaborated in the following sections.. 19.

(34) Table 3.3 The Instruments Used in this Study Instruments. Functions To ensure that the participants had the same level of English. 1. GEPT: Elementary proficiency and to distinguish high proficiency learners from Level Tests 4 & 5 low proficiency ones A pre-test: To ascertain that both groups had similar initial vocabulary proficiency. 2. Researcher. 政 治 大 acquisition and word retention 立. Two post-tests: To assess the participants’ vocabulary. 學. ‧ 國. Self-designed Tests. General English Proficiency Test (GEPT): Elementary Level Tests 4 & 5. ‧. The GEPT, a standardized English proficiency test developed by the Language. sit. y. Nat. Training and Testing Center (LTTC), targets English learners at all levels in Taiwan. It. io. er. consists of five levels: Elementary, Intermediate, High-intermediate, Advanced, and. al. v i n Cand ongoing research of test development The Reading sections of the h eadministration. ngchi U n. Superior. The validity and reliability of the GEPT have been confirmed due to. elementary level tests 4 & 5 were chosen as the instrument of this study for three reasons. First, the participants might not have taken the elementary level tests 4 & 5 because they were the latest practice test past papers. Second, the ability of an examinee that passed the Elementary level was roughly equivalent to that of a junior high school graduate. This conformed to the participants of the present study, the first year students in senior high. Third, since the focus of this study was on the effects of graphic organizer instruction on vocabulary acquisition, only the first part of the Reading section, Sentence Completion, could most directly measure the participants’ 20.

(35) vocabulary proficiency. Therefore, Cloze and Reading Comprehension of the Reading section as well as the other sections of the GEPT, including Listening, Writing, and Speaking, were eliminated. Those questions in Sentence Completion that were related to sentence structure or grammar instead of vocabulary were also deleted. The first part of the Reading section, Sentence Completion, of the elementary level tests 4 & 5 as well as the sample tests downloaded from the GEPT official website (https://www.gept.org.tw/Exam_Intro/down01.asp) was administered to identify high and low proficiency learners of each group. There were 25 multiple choice questions. 政 治 大 100. The mean of all the participants’ GEPT scores in each group was the cut-off 立. in total. The participants could get 4 points for each correct answer. The full score was. point to distinguish high proficiency learners from low proficiency ones.. ‧. ‧ 國. 學 A Pre-test and Two Post-tests. sit. y. Nat. The purpose of the pre-test was to examine if the experimental and control. io. er. groups had similar vocabulary proficiency prior to the instructional experiment. The pre-test tested the vocabulary from lesson 2 to lesson 5 of the participants’ textbook,. al. n. v i n Cthe which had not been taught by To ensure that all the participants h eteacher-researcher. ngchi U did not know the target words before the experiment, those who had known the target words in the pre-test would be excluded from the experiment. The researcher administered the immediate post-test to both groups right after the participants received their respective six-week vocabulary instructions to assess their vocabulary acquisition and the delayed post-test one month later to track their word retention. The one month interval difference was designed according to Ebbinghaus’ (1964) theory of the curve of forgetting research. People will only retain about 21.1% of what they learned one month after they learned the information (cited in Kan, 2011). Therefore, one-month interval between the immediate post-test and the delayed post-test would 21.

(36) be appropriate in this study. In addition, all the pre- and post-tests were the same test designed by the researcher as an achievement test to evaluate if “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” had a greater effect on the participants’ vocabulary acquisition and word retention than “traditional vocabulary instruction only.” As the content of an achievement test was based directly on the objectives of the course, the researcher chose to design an achievement test rather than adopt the GEPT as the pre- and post-tests. The objective of the vocabulary instructions of both groups was not to measure the participants’ general English proficiency but to test if. 政 治 大. the participants could understand and memorize the new words taught by the teacher-researcher.. 立. The pre- and post-tests were composed of two parts: 14 multiple choice. ‧ 國. 學. questions and 14 gap filling questions by providing the initial and final letters, which. ‧. were the most common question types of vocabulary tests in senior high and thus. sit. y. Nat. were quite familiar to the participants. The participants could get 3.5 points when they. io. er. answered a question correctly. The full score was 98. The Cronbach’s alpha level of the pre- and post-tests was .8, meaning that there was high reliability among all the. al. n. v i n C h of the tests, the tests question items. As for the expert validity were reviewed by the engchi U researcher’s instructor and another instructor who specializes in testing. Moreover, three senior high school English teachers with over twenty years of teaching experiences were also invited to review the test. Based on their suggestions, some revisions were made, such as grammatical clues, possible answers and wording.. Teaching materials and worksheets The teaching materials used for both the experimental group and the control group in this study were selected from lessen 2 to lesson 5 in the participants’ textbook, English Reader for Senior High Schools Book 1, Far East Edition. In 22.

(37) addition to the textbook, the teacher-researcher taught the experimental group with the worksheets of the adapted Frayer model developed by the researcher, and the control group with the traditional worksheets containing information, such as morphology and collocation, extracted from the teachers’ manual. Lesson 1 was used as the warm-up training for the experimental group to make them familiar with the adapted Frayer model. The instructions and teaching materials for both groups are presented in Table 3.4. With the same textbook and identical treatment in the first class period for both groups, it was in the second class period of each lesson that both groups were. 政 治 大. taught with different instructions and worksheets.. 立. 學. ‧ 國. Table 3.4. Instructions and Teaching Materials for CG and EG. The Experimental. (CG). Group (EG). al. n. 2nd period: traditional vocabulary instruction + traditional worksheets nd. Ch. . . . er. io. 1st period: traditional vocabulary instruction + traditional worksheets. . y. Nat. Textbook. sit. Instructions and Materials. The Control Group. ‧. Groups. engchi. 2 period: graphic organizer instruction + the adapted Frayer model worksheets. i n U. v. . Note. Shaded areas are the different treatments.. Selection of Target Words Owing to the limited time of the tight schedule in the school timetable and the time-consuming property of graphic organizer instruction, among all the vocabulary covered in the participants’ textbook from lesson 2 to lesson 5, only eight words in each lesson would be selected as the target words for graphic organizer instruction. As 23.

(38) experimented in the pilot study, eight words were taught exactly within one class period. The eight words in each lesson for this study (see Table 3.5) were selected based on the following criteria. First, all the target words chosen for this study were content words, such as adjectives, adverbs, nouns, and verbs. Content words account for the majority of word classes and are much easier for learners to give definitions or make associations than function words. Second, the target words were critical to the key concepts of the Reading passage in each lesson. Third, the target words were more concrete in terms of meaning. The words that could be taught through the. 政 治 大 abstract for learners to describe their images, e.g. instead, following, were excluded 立. adapted Frayer model would be chosen as the target words. Some words that were too. from graphic organizer instruction. Fourth, the words with collocation usages in the. ‧ 國. 學. teachers’ manual were also included in the list of the target words. As for the rest of. ‧. the new words in each lesson, they were taught through traditional vocabulary. sit. y. Nat. instruction with traditional worksheets in both groups so that the instructional time of. io. er. the experimental group could be in accordance with that of the control group. In other words, for the experimental group, the eight target words were taught through graphic. al. n. v i n C Frayer organizer instruction with the adapted worksheets and the rest of the U h e nmodel i h gc words were taught through traditional vocabulary instruction with traditional. worksheets. For the control group, all the words were taught through traditional vocabulary instruction with traditional worksheets.. 24.

(39) Table 3.5 Target Words in the Textbook Lessons. Target Words. Lesson 2: Country Music (8 words). cattle, desert, calm, instrument, add, enemy,. Lesson 3: Table Talk (8 words). service, area, fried, certainly, gentleman,. Lesson 4: The Little Shepherd Boy (8 words). shepherd, clever, single, flow, dizzy, eternity,. Lesson 5: Skin Care (8 words). understanding, gather. gesture, website, lottery. 立. wisdom, scholar. 治protect, damage, vitamin, essential, 政 organ, squeeze, rub,大 proper 32 words. ‧ 國. 學. Total. ‧. Graphic Organizer Instruction: the Adapted Frayer Model. sit. y. Nat. As mentioned in the literature review, the Frayer model can be developed to. io. er. analyze and test concept attainment by presenting concepts in a relational manner.. al. (Greenwood, 2002) The Frayer model, using four boxes to define examples,. n. v i n C and non-examples, characteristics, of a concept or a word, helps h enon-characteristics ngchi U learners form concepts and learn vocabulary. The Frayer model may improve learners’. understanding of a concept or a word, but it ignores other aspects of vocabulary learning, such as synonyms, collocations, and sentence making. Later, three diagrams of a modified Frayer model (See Figure 3.1) and two word maps (See Figure 3.2 and 3.3) were found in Reading Rockets (http://www.readingrockets.org/strategies/word_maps/), a website funded by a major grant from the U.S. Department of Education with a variety of teaching information and resources about reading. The researcher thus thought the three diagrams were 25.

(40) more suitable for vocabulary teaching in senior high than the original Frayer model in educational settings of Taiwan. After checking these diagrams with five other in-service senior or vocational high school English teachers with an average of six-year teaching experiences, the researcher finally decided to eliminate the two word maps because they were either too complicated or too flexible. As shown in Figure 3.2, there were so many boxes for learners to fill in that there seemed to be no time to teach eight words in one class period. On the other hand, it was difficult to confine the possible answers to the boxes in the word map in Figure 3.3. It appeared. 政 治 大 answer made sense. However, the modified Frayer model, consisting of “definition in 立 that there were no standard criteria or range for learners to follow as long as any. your own words,” “synonyms,” “use it meaningfully in a sentence,” and “draw a. ‧ 國. 學. picture of it,” was thereby considered more suitable for teaching vocabulary in senior. ‧. high, for it clearly contained the knowledge and usage of a word. According to. sit. y. Nat. George, knowing a word can be interpreted from four classification criteria: form,. io. er. position, function and meaning (cited in Nation, 1990), among which written form, collocations, concept, and associations respond to some of the boxes in the modified. al. n. v i n Frayer model. For example, writtenC form of target words is h e n g c h i Urevealed in the central box “vocabulary word,” while concept and associations are related to “definition” and. “synonyms” of target words. In addition, collocations also play a vital role in knowing a word. As Nation (1990) claimed, “Knowing a word involves having some expectation of the words that it will collocate with” (p. 32). The researcher accordingly made a slight change to the modified version on the website to suit the needs of her vocabulary instruction. That is, “definition in your own words/ synonyms,” “collocations,” “your very own sentence,” and “your association/ sketch” comprised the adapted Frayer model of the present study (see Figure 3.4). The researcher combined definition and synonyms in one box and added collocations in 26.

(41) another and changed “draw a picture of it” to “your association/ sketch” in the last box. Based on Hatch and Brown’s (1995) five steps of vocabulary learning: (1) encountering new words, (2) creating a mental picture of word form, either visual or auditory or both, (3) learning the words’ meaning, (4) creating a strong linkage between word form and meaning in the memory, and (5) using words (cited in Wang, 2010), the last four steps responded to the adapted Frayer model of the present study. Learning the words’ meaning involves knowing their definitions and synonyms. Creating a mental picture of word form and a strong linkage between word form and. 政 治 大 are ways of knowing how to use words. The first item of the adapted Frayer model 立. meaning is related to association of the word, and collocations and making sentences. was meant to develop students’ ability to define a new word in their own words;. ‧ 國. 學. occasionally they could just use synonyms to define it if any. The aim of the second. ‧. item was to familiarize students with usages of a target word. Students had to know. sit. y. Nat. what types of words to use with it. The third item was intended to help students learn. io. er. how to use a target word by making a sentence on their own. For the last item, students could write something like how they memorized and associated the new. al. n. v i n C reminding word or simply drew a picture of the word. U h e n g them i h c Definition in Your Own Words. Synonyms. Vocabulary word. Using It Meaningfully in a Sentence. Draw a Picture of It. Figure 3.1 A Modified Frayer Model 27.

(42) (antonym or “nonexample”). (synonym). (the matching. (Vocabulary Word). (other forms of. dictionary definition). Page Number. the word). _____. 政 治 大. (sentence or phrase from the text). (my very own sentence). aCategory iv l C n What is h it? e n g c h i U Properties. n Comparisons. sit er. io. Word Map 1. y. ‧. Nat. (my association, example, or sketch). Figure 3.2. 學. ‧ 國. 立. What is it like?. Illustrations What are some examples?. Figure 3.3. Word Map 2 28.

(43) Collocations. Definition in your own words / synonym(s). Vocabulary word. Your very own sentence. Figure 3.4. 立. Your association/ sketch. 政 治 大. The Adapted Frayer Model. ‧ 國. 學. To make the experimental group familiar with the adapted Frayer model, the. ‧. teacher-researcher taught the new words in lesson 1 (lesson 2 to lesson 5 were the. y. Nat. sit. content to be covered in the main study) in the following way as a warm-up training. n. al. er. io. for one class period prior to the main study. Regarding the teaching procedure of the. i n U. v. experimental group receiving graphic organizer instruction of eight target words, the. Ch. engchi. researcher, i.e. the teacher, introduced a new word by giving a definition in such a plain way that students could understand the meaning of the new word and then listed several words from which students had to choose the synonym of the new word. The teacher-researcher went on to supplement some collocations of the new word. After that, the teacher led students to make a sentence with the new word. Finally, she shared how she associated or memorized the meaning of the new word and drew a picture reminding her of the new word. Students needed to fill in the handout box by box and got the picture of what the adapted Frayer model was like. When the main study was conducted, students in the experimental group were required to give 29.

(44) definitions, synonyms, collocations as well as make sentences and associations on their own. The teacher elicited and encouraged more responses from students and discussed their responses with the whole class. Students were able to use dictionaries in class so that they could check whether the words they came up with were correct or not, but they were not allowed to copy the definitions and the example sentences in the dictionaries. After the instruction of each class, the adapted Frayer model worksheets were examined by the teacher to ensure that no box was left blank by students. As for the first class period of each lesson, the experimental group received. 政 治 大 receiving traditional vocabulary instruction. 立 Traditional Vocabulary Instruction. 學. ‧ 國. the same instruction and used the same textbook and worksheets as the control group. ‧. On the other hand, the control group, using the textbook as the teaching. sit. y. Nat. material, received the traditional translation-based vocabulary instruction, whose main. io. er. focus was on the explicit explanation of vocabulary and translation of example sentences. That is, the teacher-researcher introduced a new word by guiding students. al. n. v i n C hand explained the meaning to look at its definition in the textbook of the new word in engchi U Chinese. The teacher then moved on to translate the meanings of the example. sentences provided in the textbook or asked students to read the sentences and translate them into Chinese. Through example sentences, the teacher also explained the usages of the new word. The morphological forms and collocations of the new word were supplemented in the traditional worksheets.. Procedure This research procedure of this study comprises two stages: a pilot study and the main study. After the pilot study, the participants took an English proficiency test 30.

(45) (GEPT) and the experimental group received a warm-up training of graphic organizer instruction so that they would be familiar with its teaching procedure prior to the main study. The main study includes: (1) a pre-test in word knowledge; (2) two types of vocabulary instructions, namely “graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction” and “traditional vocabulary instruction only”; (3) the immediate post-test and the delayed post-test with an interval of one month (see Figure 3.5).. 立. 政 治 大. ‧. ‧ 國. 學. n. er. io. sit. y. Nat. al. Ch. engchi. 31. i n U. v.

(46) A pilot study. An English proficiency test (GEPT). A warm-up training for EG. Main study A pre-test in word knowledge. 立. ‧. ‧ 國. Graphic organizer plus traditional vocabulary instruction (the experimental group). 學. Traditional vocabulary instruction (the control group). 政 治 大. n. Ch. engchi. Delayed post-test. er. io. al. One month later. sit. y. Nat. Immediate post-test. i n U. v. Data analysis. Figure 3.5 The Procedure of the Study. Pilot Study To verify the feasibility of this study, a pilot study was conducted prior to the 32.

(47) main study, and some modifications were made based on the pilot study. The purposes of the pilot study were to find out whether there were some problems with the teaching procedure of graphic organizer instruction and to delete the questions of the researcher self-designed test whose reliability was below .3. The pilot study as well as the researcher self-designed test was administered to a senior one class that did not join the main study from the same school. The researcher went through the teaching procedure of graphic organizer instruction. The participants were taught eight new words of lesson 1 in a class period. At the beginning of the instruction, the. 政 治 大 vocabulary in this way, which was thought of as novel and interesting after they got a 立 participants looked surprised, for in school settings they had never learned English. picture of the teacher-researcher’s teaching pattern. They especially took interest in. ‧ 國. 學. the picture drawn in the box of “association” by the teacher-researcher. However, the. ‧. participants seldom made responses when asked to make sentences for the new words.. sit. y. Nat. The results of the pilot study are as follows: (1) As experimented in the pilot. io. er. study, eight words were taught exactly in one class period; therefore, the researcher ensured the precise number of the words to be taught in one class period in the main. al. n. v i n C h above, the participants study—8 words. (2) As mentioned kept silent most of the time engchi U when they were asked to offer answers. Consequently, the researcher needed to. provide the participants with hints and guidance to elicit more responses from them. (3) Most of the participants did not know the target words in the researcher self-designed test with the mean score of 18.87, confirming that the target words were unknown words for the participants. (4) The Cronbach’s alpha level of the researcher self-designed test was .8, meaning that there was high reliability among all the question items, so no revision was made and the researcher self-designed test was thus taken as the pre- and post-tests.. 33.

數據

Table 4.11 Independent t-test on High Proficiency Learners’ Pre-test, Immediate  post-test, and Delayed post-test ..................................................................................
Graphic Organizers
Figure 2.1    The Frayer Model
Graphic Organizer Instruction: the Adapted Frayer Model
+3

參考文獻

相關文件

Although there was not much significant difference in the performance of students in relation to their durations of computer usage per day in the secondary

Robinson Crusoe is an Englishman from the 1) t_______ of York in the seventeenth century, the youngest son of a merchant of German origin. This trip is financially successful,

fostering independent application of reading strategies Strategy 7: Provide opportunities for students to track, reflect on, and share their learning progress (destination). •

Strategy 3: Offer descriptive feedback during the learning process (enabling strategy). Where the

O.K., let’s study chiral phase transition. Quark

專案執 行團隊

There are existing learning resources that cater for different learning abilities, styles and interests. Teachers can easily create differentiated learning resources/tasks for CLD and

Microphone and 600 ohm line conduits shall be mechanically and electrically connected to receptacle boxes and electrically grounded to the audio system ground point.. Lines in