Efficiency of Vocabulary Study Materials on Retention and TestingJORDAN SVIENMA TESOL DISSERTATION SYNOPSISUNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM

Background Paired List Vocabulary Materials Development What lexical elements are best to focus when studying vocabulary lists?

Laufer (1988)’s definition of “knowing” a word◦ Knowledge of word form◦ Structure◦ Meaning◦ Syntactic patterns◦ Word associations◦ Common collocations

Literature Word Association (see Aitchison 1987; Carter 1998, Zavera 2007, Verspoor 2008)◦ L1 and L2 vocabulary mapping◦ Syntagmatic, Paradigmatic, Phonological Associations

Vocabulary Retention Studies (see Hulstijn 1992, Laufer 1998, Laufer and Hultsijn 2001, Mondria 2003, Mondria and Wiersma 2004, Folse 2006)◦ Control for Incidental and Taught Methods◦ Control for Reading Exercise Types◦ Control for Controlled and Free Production◦ Control for Receptive and Productive Retention

Study Context and Terms Context for Study: Eiken Pre-1 Achievement + Spontaneous written communication

Resolution of gap between CEFR A2 level and Eiken Pre-1 (B2) Study◦ Students not able to retain level Pre-1 vocabulary, plus struggling to

spontaneously produce Level 2 vocabulary.

Population: 23 private junior high school grade 8 students, approximately CEFR A2 level

Methods Observed Translation-Based Methods

◦ Receptive Translation (English to Japanese) ◦ Productive Translation (Japanese to English)

Contextual Based Methods◦ Paradigmatic Associations (Synonyms and Antonyms)◦ Syntagmatic Associations and Structures (Example Sentences)

Students may access all of the above to further their lexical understanding of each word.◦ -Provide all aspects but focus on one at a time!

Hypotheses A) Increased access to word data allows for more thorough comprehension of vocabulary (Laufer 1988).◦ Leads to higher Eiken achievement and usage

B) Stronger students will see more benefit from contextual based methods than translation methods due to a higher ability to process lexical patterns.

C) Lower level students will benefit more from translation based methods due to reduced cognitive processing.

D) Productive translation methods will outpace receptive translation.

Method 1Selection of Vocabulary from past Eiken Pre-1 Exams104 total words (26 questions)

Catalogue source questions

Catalogue corresponding answer choices to each question.

Source: The Society for Testing English Proficiency (STEP) Inc. (2015) Level Pre-1 Test in Practical English Proficiency 2013-3 and 2014-1 Test Booklets. Online at: eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/downloads.

Method 2 Intake Survey + Diagnostic TestSeparation into 4 groups of English ability (based on quiz responses and teacher intuition)

3-7 students per group

Method 3Mini-Dictionaries of Eiken Pre-1 VocabularyAll lexical elements present but emphases differentiated

Students encouraged to study all parts but informed in advance which element they will be tested on

Method 4Next-Day Retention Quizzes Differentiated by EmphasisEach group received a different emphasis each time

Repeated four times with group emphasis rotating each time

Method 5Delayed Eiken Exam Unannounced 2 weeks after final initial set test

Original Eiken Pre-1 questions as catalogued in step 1.

Source: The Society for Testing English Proficiency (STEP) Inc. (2015) Level Pre-1 Test in Practical English Proficiency 2013-3 and 2014-1 Test Booklets. Online at: eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/downloads.

Method 6Sentence Writing TestIntent of word meaning basis for correct answer rather than grammatical accuracy

Diagnostic Quiz Percentages

Data and Results

Initial Quiz Retention Percentages

Data and Results

Delayed Eiken Exam Retention Percentages

Data and Results

Delayed Sentence Writing Test Percentages

Data and Results

Data and Results Aggregate of 50% or higher scores on each testing stage

Total students = 23

Delayed Test vs. Initial Test Rates

Discussion Implications

◦ Trends – Productive Translation the champion method (but not by a lot).

◦ Hypotheses A and B rejected◦ Wider berth of materials did not significantly raise scores◦ Context based methods were mixed but not stronger than productive translation

◦ Hypothesis C accepted for productive test but rejected for Eiken test.◦ Hypothesis D accepted

◦ Receptive translation was much weaker than productive translation and showed no correlation with delayed success.

◦ Contextual based methods show value as indicators of delayed success despite not being the strongest retention method in this study

Discussion Implications + Limitations

◦ Preexisting bias with familiarity of JE method may be skewing results

◦ Pre-1 lexis level too high for real acquisition outside rote memorization for this population

◦ Volume of words posts difficulties in study material creation without team collaboration

References• Aitchison, J. (1987). Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd• Cambridge University Press. (2015) Cambridge Dictionaries Online American English and Learner’s Dictionaries. Online at: dictionary.cambridge.org. Accessed March 18,

2015.• Carter, R. (1998) Vocabulary: Applied Linguistic Perspectives. London: Routledge• Folse, K. (2006) The Effect of Type of Written Exercise on L2 Vocabulary Retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40/2, 273-294.• Hulstijn, J. (1992) Retention of Inferred and Given Word Meanings: Experiments in Incidental Learning. In Arnaud, P J L and Bejoint, H. Vocabulary and Applied Linguistics.

Basingstoke: Macmillan Academic and Professional. 113-125.• Laufer, B. (1988) Ease and Difficulty in Vocabulary Learning: Some Teaching Implications. Annual Meeting of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign

Language. April 1988, Edinburgh, 1-21.• Laufer, B. (1998) The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language: Same or Different? Applied Linguistics, 19/2, 255-271•Mondria, J A. (2003) The Effects of Inferring, Verifying, and Memorizing on the Retention of L2 Word Meanings: An Experimental Comparison of the “Meaning-Inferred

Method” and the “Meaning-Given Method.” SSLA, 25, 473-499.•Mondria, J A and Wiersma, B. (2004) Receptive, Productive, and Receptive + Productive L2 Vocabulary Learning: What Difference Does It Make? In Bogaards, P and Laufer, B

(Eds). Vocabulary in a Second Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 79-100•Murakami, Y (Ed.) (2012) Derujun PassTan. Tokyo: Obunsha Co. Ltd.• The Society for Testing English Proficiency (STEP) Inc. (2015) Level Pre-1 Test in Practical English Proficiency 2013-3 and 2014-1 Test Booklets. Online at:

eiken.or.jp/eiken/en/downloads. Accessed January 10, 2015.• Verspoor, M. (2008) What Bilingual Word Associations Can Tell Us. In Boers, F and Lindstromberg, S (Eds.) (2008) Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Teaching Vocabulary

and Phraseology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.• Zavera, A. (2007) Structure of the Second Language Mental Lexicon: How Does it Compare to Native Speakers’ Lexical Organization? Second Language Research. 23/2, 123-

153.

Thank you!