Does the Method of Vocabulary Presentation Make a Difference? : Focus on Form in Second Language Vocabulary Learning
Lina Yuliani
Does
the Method of Vocabulary Presentation Make a Difference?
:
Focus on Form in Second Language Vocabulary Learning
1. Introduction
Vocabulary
is basically used as a minimal means to deliver the message in oral and written
language. Broadly defined, vocabulary is the knowledge of words and word
meaning in both oral and print usage and in productive and receptive forms. Thus
there is no doubt that vocabulary is one of several important components of
language skills. There has been a number of studies under both frames of first
language learning (L1) and second language learning (L2) showing evidence that
non is more important than the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to reading
comprehension. Reading is a very crucial tool for L2 learners to get input for
extending their vocabulary range. The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded
that comprehension development cannot be understood without a critical
examination of the role played by vocabulary knowledge in first language
learning. The extent of students' vocabulary knowledge relates strongly to
their reading comprehension and overall academic success (Baumann, Kame'enui,
& Ash, 2003; Becker, 1977; Davis, 1942; Whipple, 1925). It is clear that
the relationship between learners' vocabulary knowledge and their general
reading skills is positively correlated. Thus it could be said that a major
cause of comprehending difficulty is the students' lack of understanding of
unfamiliar English words.
2. Research
design
a.
Lesson
observation
The first stage of the data-collection process involved observing
and recording in the research in SMP islam padangratu, totaling three group.
b.
Questioner
The
questionnaire used in this research contained which three levels of class based on the result of
a placement test; all followed the same curriculum provided by SMP Islam Program. The three classes were randomly
assigned to the three different conditions: story-only (n=15), word-noticed (n=15), and L2-word-definition (n=10).
Word-noticed, L2-word-definition condition groups worked with the same language
instructor, and story-only group worked with another language instructor. three
levels of class based on the result of a placement test; all followed the same
curriculum provided by SMP Islam Program. The three classes were randomly assigned to the three different
conditions: story-only (n=15), word-noticed (n=15), and L2-word-definition (n=10). Word-noticed, L2-word-definition
condition groups worked with the same language instructor, and story-only group
worked with another language instructor.
3. Method
3.1. Participants
Learners
who participated in this study enrolled in SMP Islam melinting, during a
2016 vacation in communicative EFL classroom. They
were 40 eighth-grade junior high students between the ages of 13-15 are divided
into three classes. In most cases, they had been studying English
for more than 2 years.
participants was 40. At the beginning of the course they were placed into three levels of
class based on the result of a placement test; all followed the same curriculum
provided by SMP Islam Program.
The three classes were randomly assigned to the three different conditions:
story-only (n=15), word-noticed (n=15), and L2-word-definition (n=10).
Table 1 .
The
story of a group-only Word-L2-word look-definition
|
Story-only
|
Word-noticed
|
L2-word-definition
|
||||
|
|
Subjects
|
Group
|
Subjects
|
Group
|
Subjects
|
Group
|
|
1
|
lina (Lyan)
|
A
|
Dimas (Kaisar)
|
B
|
Fitri (bayu)
|
B
|
|
2
|
ryan (Kristin)
|
C
|
Darul ( layla)
|
C
|
Lulu (Tari)
|
B
|
|
3
|
septi (Annie)
|
B
|
Rahman (Ria)
|
B
|
Fadil (kanaya)
|
B
|
|
4
|
Ani (Richo)
|
B
|
muhammad (ana)
|
A
|
Melly (Harri)
|
A
|
|
5
|
Indah ( Mia )
|
B
|
Imma (Karno)
|
B
|
Mega (aries)
|
A
|
|
6
|
Lista (Jarot)
|
C
|
Reihan (Lizna)
|
A
|
Dennis (linda)
|
A
|
|
7
|
Nury (Marko)
|
A
|
Riska (Kevin)
|
B
|
Yongki (Rachel)
|
A
|
|
8
|
Adi (Tina)
|
C
|
Ayu (Martin)
|
A
|
Zahra ( ziddan)
|
C
|
|
9
|
Putri (Sally)
|
C
|
Farel (Layra)
|
C
|
Siska (Surya )
|
B
|
|
10
|
Rio (Rany)
|
C
|
Deny (Susi)
|
B
|
Erwin (Ryna)
|
A
|
|
11
|
Mitha (Daniel)
|
A
|
Riki (Winny)
|
B
|
|
|
|
12
|
Lusi ( bowo)
|
A
|
hendra (Kiki)
|
A
|
|
|
|
13
|
Fania (Bintang)
|
C
|
Okta (hendrik)
|
A
|
|
|
|
14
|
Dwi (Dian)
|
A
|
Alim (Nicky)
|
C
|
|
|
|
15
|
Maya (Tomi)
|
B
|
|
|
|
|
* Most students
attend the middle school.
3.2. Materials
·
Reading Text
All subjects read 4 extensive stories
approximately consisting of 2000 words each class of 40 minutes. Those texts
were two works of nonfiction and two of fiction selected from Ellie's Fun
Readers written by Eric Prochaska, entitled "Space Exploration and Our
Lives"(T1), "Video Game Championship"(T2), "Extreme
Animals"(T3) and "Carter the Kid Cyborg"(T4). The format of
texts was familiar in genre and difficulty level. About more than 90%
vocabulary were familiar and high frequent, so the safe threshold was formed
for text comprehension.
·
The target words
The target words consisted of 20 nouns, 6
verbs and 6 adjectives (32 words in total), which were unlikely to be familiar
to the subjects. This unfamiliarity was verified in a pilot test in which all
subjects who participated in the experiment were asked to see a vocabulary list
including targets words plus distracters and to check the words whose meaning
they know and they do not know. The 32 target words were the only words that
most of students marked they do not know. Those 32 target words are listed in table
2 according to the extracted reading texts. The frequency of each word appeared
in the reading was also indicated in order to examine the effect of word
frequency on in the retention of new words. However, unfortunately in this
study the result related to word frequency was eliminated due to lack of the
number of target words.
Table 2
|
Text
1
Space
Exploration and Our Lives
|
freq.
|
Text
2
Video
Game Championship
|
freq.
|
Text
3
Extreme
Animals
|
freq.
|
Text
4
Carter
the kid Cyborg
|
Freq
|
|
|
1
|
v.
benefit from
|
5
|
n.
arcade
|
12
|
n.
endurance
|
8
|
n.
malfunction
|
2
|
|
2
|
n.
exploration
|
5
|
n.
cluster
|
1
|
a.
ultimate
|
2
|
n.
scar
|
2
|
|
3
|
n.
microorganism
|
5
|
a.
smug
|
1
|
n.
tern
|
6
|
a.
mechanical
|
3
|
|
4
|
n.
radiation
|
3
|
n.
disgrace
|
1
|
n.
sperm whale
|
9
|
n.
limb
|
4
|
|
5
|
n.
purifier
|
2
|
v.
mock
|
1
|
n. sonar
|
3
|
v.
surround
|
2
|
|
6
|
n.
contribution to
|
2
|
v.
tease
|
2
|
n.
arctic
|
5
|
n.
hostage
|
1
|
|
7
|
v.
detect(or)
|
3
|
a.
gracious
|
1
|
v.
immigrate
|
3
|
|
|
|
8
|
n.
spectator
|
2
|
n.
tuition
|
1
|
a.
immense
|
2
|
|
|
|
9
|
a.
unique
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
n.
spin-off
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
·
Test
Pre- and post- tests were administrated
immediately before and after the treatment, they measured the retention of
target words' forms and the acquisition of the meaning (Appendix 1). The same
testing procedure was used for both tests in which students had to complete
fill-in-the-blank or multiple choice word tasks within 10 minutes. The
distracting questions doubled target words each text are presented and
different distracters are used on pre- and post- test. Each test took about
7-10 minutes to complete. Subjects were not allowed any test related questions
or dictionary searching while testing. Students scored one point for the
correct answer, even if the form was spelled somewhat incorrectly (for example,
detector instead of detecter) but there was good evidence of word acquisition.
However, imperfect answers (for example, immen instead of immense) received a
zero score.
3.3 Procedures
The
treatment was carried out during the first two weeks of a one month course. One
preliminary familiarity test was administered on the first day in order to
ascertain the degrees of familiarity to target words. The goal was to select a
group of target words unknown to all participants. All participants showed no
previous knowledge of the final 32 words (see Appendix 2).
All
learners in the three groups participated in a regular class session on the school program. As usual, they had four 40 minute
reading classes with 4 different story books every other day for 2 weeks.
Before reading the text book, students were asked to take a pre-test about the
target words. After that, they were asked to read through a text while
listening to a story script. Here, hearing stories has been able to result in
considerable incidental vocabulary development. They had several comprehension
questions for the teacher in the middle of reading. Especially, for story-only
group, students listened to a story containing target words without any
noticing of the words. Yet in the class of word-enhanced group, they listened
to a story containing the underlined and in bold target words. And in the class
of L2-word-definition group, they were presented with the target words as
discrete items with their word parts and meanings in L1 below each page. A
post-test was presented with the purpose of measuring students' immediate
retention of target words. The test tasks were composed of target words and
distracters. The reliability of the pretest and post tests were satisfactory
(.83 and .77). Some classes in the camp program were only 2 weeks in length, so
a delayed post test could not be administrated remaining for the further study
of measuring their usage of target words in way that could show results.
3.4 Analysis and Results
Mean
scores on the pre-test were nearly identical (Table 3). On the immediate
post-test the word-noticed group did only far better than the other groups of
story-only and word-noticed, and also significantly different F(2,115)=15.515, p<.05.
The L2 word-definition group performance was slightly higher than the
story-only group, but the difference was not statistically significant. The
word-noticed group mean was nearly double that of the story-only group.
Table 3 Mean Score and SD of Pre and Post
Test of Three Treatment Groups
|
Pre-test
|
Post-test
|
|||||||||
|
Text
|
Text
1
|
Text
2
|
Text
3
|
Text
4
|
Mean
|
Text
1
|
Text
2
|
Text
3
|
Text
4
|
Total
Mean
|
|
Story-only
|
1.57
(1.01)
|
2.14
(1.37)
|
3.12
(1.53)
|
1.69
(1.59)
|
2.13
(1.49)
|
2.85
(0.77)
|
3.57
(2.25)
|
3.75
(0.98)
|
3.30
(2.48)
|
3.37
(1.77)
|
|
Word-noticed
|
2.87
(1.45)
|
2.70
(1.23)
|
2.81
(1.10)
|
1.87
(1.15)
|
2.56
(1.25)
|
4.62
(2.55)
|
6.25
(2.47)
|
5.15
(2.70)
|
8.12
(2.50)
|
*
6.03 (2.79)
|
|
L2
word-definition
|
2.20
(1.47)
|
1.33
(1.72)
|
2.75
(1.53)
|
2.25
(1.74)
|
2.13
(1.64)
|
3.90
(1.44)
|
3.83
(2.22)
|
3.50
(2.48)
|
4.87
(2.59)
|
4.02
(2.20)
|
Mean (SD)
As
can be seen in Figure 1, as for all subjects of the treatment groups of
story-only, word-noticed, L2 word-definition they scored higher on the post
vocabulary retention test than the pre-test and yet the greatest improvement
came with the words in the word-noticed group. The students from L2-definition
group remembered somewhat better than the story-only group, but were not
significantly different. The results of this investigation demonstrate that the
only exposure to unknown or unfamiliar words through story-listening while
reading has a positive effect on their ability to remember and recognize the
target words. However, the word presentation based on form-focused method such
as word-noticed and L2 word-definition has a lot better effect on results in word
retention test, especially showing a significant score difference of pre- and
post-test in a word-noticed within the context than in L2 word-definition
presented below the context.
This result did not meet the
expectation that L2-word-definition presented below the context would give
clearer word knowledge so that students' performance will be better on word
retention test, which represents the word presentation out of the context do
not affect positively on the enhancement of word-notice. And even through
distracting the process of word-guessing, the way of L2-definition presentation
consequently can lead to reduce the skill of reading
comprehension.
Moreover, as can be seen in Table
3 there has been found a main effect on text variable F(3,115)=6.365, p<.05).
The reading texts used in the treatment are two works of fiction- "Video
Game Championship"(T2) and "Carter the Kid Cyborg"(T4), and two
works of non-fiction- "Space Exploration and Our Lives"(T1) and
"Extreme Animals"(T3). Students' performance was better on the words
from two works of nonfiction- "Video Game Championship"(T2) and
"Carter the Kid Cyborg"(T4) than the other fictions. This result
implicates that topic of the story could be one of the factors influencing
success of word-learning from context. For the further study the level of
intact group and the difference of individual instructor should be considered
more seriously.
4. Conclusion and Implications
The
investigation reported here provides empirical evidence for the claim that students can better learn target vocabulary
through reading with target word-noticed within the context than through
reading-only or L2-word-definition explicitly presented below the text. In
addition, regarding the topics of reading texts, reading in an easier genre and
more interesting topic would have to be provided for younger and lower
proficiency level of the learners. N.C. Ellis (1995) suggested that according
to the strong implicit vocabulary learning hypothesis new words are acquired
totally unconsciously. From this we could infer that the reading-only without
any noticing to words still help the students learn new words. However, in
accordance with a weak implicit vocabulary learning hypothesis Ellis (1995)
asserted it is at least necessary for learners to notice that a word is new to
them. The word presentation method of word-noticed used in this study which was
to induce the students to take notice of the target vocabulary is a teaching
strategy informed by the weak implicit hypothesis. This results could be said
that learning knowledge of words and word meaning is a conscious process that
requires noticing and attention.
Comments
Post a Comment