CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY
The present study uses a quantitative method to investigate Taiwanese junior high school EFL learners’ use of vocabulary learning strategies, perceptual learning style preferences, and the relationships between them. One questionnaire composed of two sets of closed questions was administered to 207 students at one junior high school in Taipei County as the major data collection instrument. One set of questions comprises a vocabulary learning strategy questionnaire adapted from Schmitt’s (1997) vocabulary strategy questionnaire, which includes 58 statements.
The other set is perceptual learning style preference questionnaire adapted from Reid’s (1987) Perceptual Learning Style Preference questionnaire (PLSPQ), consisting of 30 items. In addition, participants’ final course grades were used as a measurement of their achievement level. The data collected through the questionnaire was analyzed by the SPSS (version 11.0). What follows are the detailed descriptions of the participants, instruments, data collection procedures, and data analysis procedures.
Participants
The present study recruited the second-graders in one public junior high school in
Taipei County as the participants of the study. The second-graders were selected as
the participants for two reasons. First, the first-graders may not be mature enough to
report their learning styles. Besides, though they all had received 3 years’ formal
English education at elementary school, the time they exposed to English was
generally very limited and the learning content was usually simple and easy. They,
thus, may not have enough to say about their strategies. Second, the third-graders
were preparing for the Basic Proficiency Test. Since the competition is keen,
students may not have interest in answering the questionnaire. The second-graders had learned English at least for four years, with one year at junior high school, where English learning is highly emphasized. Therefore, they may have had more chances to employ strategies. Besides, they should be cognitively mature enough to report their preferred learning styles while learning English.
The school is located at the margin of the Taipei County with a 38-year long history. Though it is an old school, the principal is devoted to the promotion of the new nine-year integrated curriculum and aims to develop students’ vitality and creativity. Like most other junior high schools, the school puts much emphasis on English teaching and learning. For example, textbook model dialogue recitation is held once a week in the morning study time; English language contests like dictionary looking-up, reading, and story-telling contests are held annually; and all the labels of the offices are bilingual. However, due to the geographically marginal location of the school and most parents’ low to middle social economic status, most of the students do not have much exposure to English except in English classes; nor do they achieve high English proficiency. In the past three years, the graduates’ average English score for the Basic Proficiency Test was always slightly below the average score of the whole nation.
The age of the participants ranged from 13 to 14. Based on the statistics reported by the school, they received formal English education since the fourth grade at elementary school, and about one fourth of the participants had attended a private language school. At the time of study, the participants had five English classes per week, each for 45 minutes.
Instruments
In the present study, one self-report questionnaire was employed to identify
Taiwanese junior high students’ vocabulary learning strategies and perceptual learning styles. Final course grades were used as a measurement of participants’ achievement level. The questionnaire developed by the researcher consists of three sections (see Appendix C). Section one consists of seven questions to get background information about the participants. Section two includes 58 statements on vocabulary learning strategies, called vocabulary learning strategy questionnaire. Section three contains 30 closed questions on learning styles, named perceptual learning style preferences questionnaire. Details about the two sets of questions on vocabulary learning strategy and learning style are given below.
Questionnaire
Vocabulary Learning Strategy Questionnaire
The researcher adapted Schmitt’s taxonomy of vocabulary learning strategies (see Appendix B), which identifies 58 strategies to learn vocabulary, to investigate the frequency of strategies participants use. Schmitt’s taxonomy was adopted for the following reasons. First, Schmitt’s taxonomy is the most recent and comprehensive one for classification of vocabulary learning strategies. The taxonomy is derived from a variety of sources, including the results of surveys with 600 junior high to adult learners, and Oxford’s (1990) and Cook and Mayer’s (1983) taxonomies of language learning strategies. Therefore, Catalán (2003) stated that Schmitt’s taxonomy “is rich and sensitive to the variety of learning strategies” (p. 60). Second, several researchers have employed it in their studies (e.g., Catalán, 2003; Chen, 1998;
Kudo, 1999) so the results of the present study can be compared to theirs.
Schmitt’s strategy taxonomy was interpreted and translated into Chinese, the
native language of the participants, by the present researcher. Though Schmitt’s
taxonomy “can be used with learners of different ages, educational backgrounds and
target languages” (Catalán, 2003, p. 60), some modifications were still necessary to prevent ambiguities and suit the cognitive ability of Taiwanese junior high students and the EFL learning environment in Taiwan. The major modifications made were as follows. First, two strategies about “cognates” were deleted. The participants’
first language is not an Indo-European language so cognates can not be a resource for guessing the meaning of new words. Second, based on my teaching experience, many Taiwanese students use “underlining the whole keywords” as a memory strategy so this strategy was added, in addition to the original item, “underlining initial letter of the word.” Third, most English textbooks in Taiwan have word list cards in the appendix so “using word list cards” was added as well. Fourth, due to the advances in technology, use of the electronic dictionary is quite popular among junior high students so “using an electronic dictionary” was added, in addition to “using a bilingual dictionary” and “using a monolingual dictionary.” Fifth, to clarify the meaning of each item, different from other researchers (e.g., Catalán, 2003; Chen, 1998; Kudo, 1999), all the strategies were written in complete sentences and specific examples were given. Sixth, to understand the frequency of using vocabulary learning strategies, the researcher changed Schmitt’s Yes/No response format to a 5-point Liker-scale, ranging from “1, never” to “5, almost always.” Finally, the original item “skip” or “pass” new word was deleted because it was not thought to enhance vocabulary learning. In sum, the 5-point Liker-scale questionnaire contained 58 statements. Detailed modifications for other strategies are presented in Appendix D.
The Chinese version questionnaire was examined and revised by one English and
one Chinese junior high school teachers before the pilot study to ensure the accuracy
and intelligibility of the translation. After the pilot study, the Chinese questionnaire
was revised for the second time according to the results of the pilot study and the
problems found in it.
Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire
The questionnaire used in this study to investigate learning styles was adapted from Reid’s (1987) Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire (see Appendix A), which includes 30 items and identifies four kinds of perceptual learning modalities (visual, auditory, kinesthetic, and tactile) and two kinds of social interaction factors (group and individual). There are several instruments for measuring learners’ learning styles in different aspects. The researcher used Reid’s framework for the following reasons. First, Reid’s study is one of the few studies that describe the perceptual learning style preferences of non-English speaking people.
It “seemed geared to cultural and/or linguistic differences” (Kroonenberg, 1990, p. 36).
Second, unlike other questionnaires for assessing general learning styles, it is designed specifically to assess one’s language learning style. The directions of the questionnaire ask respondents to “respond to the statements as they apply to your study of English” (Reid, 1984, p. iii). Therefore, it is suitable for the EFL environment in Taiwan. Third, it is more commonly used by researchers so the results of this study can be compared to other researchers’ findings (e.g., Reid, 1987;
Rossi-Le, 1995; Stebbins, 1995; Tsao, 2002).
However, Reid’s PLSPQ was specifically designed to identify adult ESL students’ perceptual-style preferences, which becomes the drawback in the present study. The participants of the present study were adolescents and English was studied as a foreign language in Taiwan, where English is not the primary vehicle for communication and English input is limited. To meet junior high school students’
cognitive abilities and the actual situation in Taiwan, based on the researchers’
experiences with junior high school students, some statements of the questionnaire
were modified while translated into Chinese by the present researcher (see Appendix E).
Before the pilot study, to ensure that students can comprehend all of the questions, one Chinese and one English teachers examined and revised the Chinese questionnaire. Based on the results of the pilot study, the Chinese questionnaire was revised again.
Final Course Grade
Final course grades were used as a measure of participants’ English achievement level in this research. The researcher asked for the administrators of the Academic Office for help to gain the grade of each participant.
Unlike proficiency tests that evaluate the global competence in a language, an achievement test is limited to classroom lessons and course materials (Brown, 2001).
The present researcher adopted achievement scores rather than proficiency scores
because standardized language proficiency test, like TOEFL and GEPT, is not
financially affordable for participants. Due to concern of practicality, the
achievement scores were adopted in the present research. The final course grades in
this research were determined by students’ performance on monthly exams, quizzes,
and assignments, which included listening comprehension, reading, grammar, and
sentence writing components as well as teacher’s evaluation of students’ participation
and performance in classroom activities. Generally speaking, the final course grades
could reflect students’ attainment in listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills at
the end of a semester.
Data Collection Procedure Pilot Study
A pilot study was conducted in September, 2005 to examine the feasibility of data collection procedures, detect problematic questionnaire items, and analyze the reliability of the questionnaires. According to the results and problems found, some modifications were made and improvement measures were taken.
Procedure
Seventy-two second-graders in two classes at one junior high school in Tao-yuan County were participants of the pilot study. One questionnaire with two sets of questions, vocabulary learning strategies and perceptual learning style preferences, was administered to the participants. To avoid emotional uneasiness in the participants, the surveys were conducted by the homeroom teachers, not the researcher.
The researcher wrote a note to appreciate the testers’ help and ask them to remind students of the following two points. First, the results of the questionnaire would be kept confidential and would not affect their course grades, so that they can answer each question honestly. Second, they had better answer all the questions. Besides, the researcher asked the homeroom teachers to measure the administration time.
It took about 15 minutes on average for participants to answer the questionnaire.
Of the 72 collected questionnaires, 12 were considered invalid due to too many missing answers or obviously careless responses (e.g., circling the same answer throughout). Totally, 60 valid cases were used for data analysis by SPSS, version 11.0.
Results
The internal-consistency reliability coefficients (alpha) for each category of the
vocabulary learning strategies were estimated as follows: Determination Strategy (.87), Discovery Social Strategy (.74), Consolidation Social Strategy (.59), Memory Strategy (.92), Cognitive Strategy (.85), Metacognitive Strategy (.78). As for the learning style preference, Cronbach’s alpha for each subscale was as follows: Visual Learning Style (.61), Auditory Learning Style (.77), Tactile Learning Style (.81), Kinesthetic Learning Style (.84), Group Learning Style (.89), Individual Learning Style (.83). Except for the Consolidation Social Strategy category in vocabulary learning strategy questionnaire and the Visual Learning subscale in perceptual learning style preference questionnaire, all the categories and subscales were considered reliable
4.
Problems Found and Modifications
According to the results of the pilot study, the reliability coefficients of consolidation social strategy category and the visual learning subscale were below .70.
In order to improve the reliability, the three consolidation social strategy items and the five visual learning items were subject to modifications. The researcher randomly chose four students from each class to interview. These eight students were asked to answer the eight problematic items again and explain the reasons for their choice in the interview. The process of the interview was tape-recorded for further analysis.
Regarding the three social strategies for vocabulary consolidation, the researcher found that item 15 did not need modification because when translated as “I would memorize new words by studying or practicing with classmates,” the item was clear to all the interviewers, who knew the emphasis was on “being together with classmates.” However, for item 16, originally translated as “Teacher or classmates check my flash cards or word lists for accuracy”, most interviewers said that they
4
A value of Cronbach’s Alpha of .70 or higher was considered evidence of reliability (Becker, 2000).
gave this item a low score because they did not have flash cards or word lists. It seemed that they did not get the point that this item focuses on the benefit of having interaction with others. Thus, the item was modified into “I would ask teachers or classmates to randomly check the words I learned.” For item 17, “Interact with native speakers,” some interviewers explained that they gave this item a low score because they had no chances to interact with native speakers. In the EFL environment, it is hard for a learner to find a native speaker of English to interact with.
Thus, due to the environment constraint, this item was modified into “I would practice using the newly learned words in conversations with teachers, classmates or native speakers.”
As far as the visual learning subscale is concerned, the present researcher found that for item 6, originally translated as “If the English teacher writes the content of his/her lecture on the board, I would learn better,” some interviewers explained that they gave this item a low score because the content of the teacher’s lecture was the same as the content in their textbooks, which made the approach meaningless. Still, some gave this item a high score because the content of the teacher’s lecture was usually the key points of the lecture. They thought it was helpful because they could copy it down on their notebooks. All in all, participants focused on the content that the teacher wrote on the board, rather than the modality they used for learning.
Hence, this item was modified into “When the teacher writes down the main points of his/her lectures on the blackboard, I learn better by ‘seeing’ the words on the board.”
As to item 10, “When I read instructions, I remember them better,” most interviewers
could get the focus on the written form of instructions, so this item was only slightly
modified into “When learning English, I remember the content better by reading
written instructions or explanations.” As to item 12, originally translated as “I
understand better by reading instructions myself than by listening to teacher’s
lecture,” most interviewers seemed to focus on the comparison between “individual reading” and “teacher’s lecture” rather than on the contrast between visual mode and auditory mode. This item was thus modified into “When learning English, I understand better by reading written instructions or explanations.” As to the original item 24, “To me, I learn better by reading printed materials, like textbooks and handouts than by listening to lectures,” the interviewers focused on the usefulness of materials and lectures rather than the mode materials were presented. Thus, this item was modified into “I learn better by reading printed materials than by listening to someone.” As to item 29, “I learn better by reading textbooks myself than by listening to teacher’s lecture,” the interviewers reflected that they could comprehend the content by reading the textbooks themselves if the material was easy; but if the text was complicated, they needed the teacher’s oral instructions. It seems that their answers were influenced by the difficulty level of texts. Therefore, this item was modified into “To me, while learning the same content, I learn better by reading instructions than by listening to teacher’s lectures”.
After the modifications, the eight modified questions were administered to other 3 junior high school students for further feedback. The final version of the Chinese questionnaire was decided based on the feedback they provided in the interview after completing the questionnaire (see Appendix C). There was only a minor modification of these statements. To transcend the language barrier, the present researcher also provided the equivalent English version of the two sets of questions (see Appendix F and G).
To reduce the number of invalid questionnaires in the formal study, the researcher
wrote a note to the teachers who agreed to administer the questionnaire in the formal
study, asking them to remind students of the following things before they started to
respond: (1) read the instructions; (2) answer questions written on both sides of the
paper; (3) circle the answers clearly, not using pencils.
Formal Study
The formal study took place at a junior high school in Taipei in early October, 2005 to survey students’ vocabulary learning strategy use and perceptual learning style preferences.
The researcher first contacted the administrators and homeroom teachers of the second grade at that school, asking for their approval for the study. With their approval, the researcher mailed the questionnaires to the homeroom teachers who helped administer the survey during the “homeroom teacher’s time.” The researcher wrote a note to the teachers. In the note, some points were emphasized. First, the students should be told that each individual’s responses would be kept confidential and their responses would not influence their course grades so they could answer each question honestly. Second, during the survey, no discussion was permitted. Third, participants should be encouraged to answer each statement without thinking too much. The homeroom teachers were asked to collect the questionnaires and give them to the researcher immediately after the survey.
Of the 207 collected questionnaires, 12 were invalid because of missing questions. In total, 195 valid questionnaires were adopted for data analysis. The reliability coefficients for the whole set of vocabulary learning strategy inventory was .96. The Cronbach alpha for Consolidation Social Strategy category and the Visual Learning subscale were .67 and .81 respectively. Compared with their reliability coefficients obtained at the pilot study (alpha = .59 and .61 respectively), the modifications done after the pilot study somewhat helped
5.
5
