esbb presentation

ENHANCEMENT OF LEARNING ENGLISH

PHRASAL VERBS WITH THE HELP OF

TECHNOLOGY-ENHANCED MNEMONIC DEVICES

TAKESHI SATO @TOKYO UNIV. OF AGR. & TEC., JAPAN

TYLER BURDEN @MEISEI UNIV., JAPAN

Presentation for the 3rd ESBB Conference @ Providence University, Taiwan, on 20th of May, 2016.

• What is the better representation of target knowledge for our students?

• Is material with multimodal functions better than language-based representation?

Phrasal Verb Machine by Cambridge University Press

OUTLINE

1. Background

2. Research Questions

3. Research Procedures

4. Findings

5. Conclusion & Discussion

1. BACKGROUND

1. BACKGROUND

• Visual aids seem to be useful for L2 learners

Dual Coding Theory / Generative Multimedia Theory

Many studies (Lindstromberg& Boers 2008, Yoshii, Sato, Lai & Burden 2014, Yeh & Wang 2003)

• It seems ideal to develop materials with a multimodal environment

JAPOW! by COCONE Corporation

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

• Imagers are better at using visual aids than verbalizers (Boers & Lindstromberg 2008)

• Confirmed the advantage of imagers in the use of visual aids. (Sato, Lai & Burden 2014)

• What device should be developed for verbalizers?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZGf2FF01pQ

PHRASAL VERBS

• Multiword unit consisting of a verb and a preposition (adverb) such as “bring in”, “take on” or “go over”

• Appear frequently but difficult to use because of their nature of polysemy

• Japanese language has no prepositions

• Not only language teachers but also cognitive linguists interested in phrasal verbs

• Our concepts are rooted in our bodily experiences and then extended via conceptual metaphor (Lakoff 1987)

Schema

ExtensionPrototype

Langacker (1987)

APPLICATIONS FOR PHRASAL VERBS (1)

• Mobile-based applications developed by Quizlet

• Focused on 8 verbs & 3 prepositions

• Attached the prototypical sense of each word as a verbal gloss

• Hypothesize the learners could conceptualize the senses from the verbal mnemonic devices

APPLICATIONS FOR PHRASAL VERBS (2)

• Attached image schema (Lakoff 1987) of each word as a visual gloss

• Abstract patterns in experience and understanding (Johnson 1987)

• Hypothesize the learners could conceptualize the senses from the visual mnemonic devices

2. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1.Do visual mnemonic devices help Japanese EFL learners to acquire the phrasal verbs?

2.Do imagers acquire the phrasal verbs more effectively than verbalizers when they use visual mnemonic devices?

3.Do verbalizers acquire the phrasal verbs more effectively than imagers when they use verbal devices?

3. RESEARCH

PARTICIPANTS

• 50 Japanese EFL learners participated

• All freshmen from the department of economics

• Randomly divided into a control group (n=23) and an experimental group (n=27)

• Their English language proficiency (TOEIC) is not statistically different (p=0.254, >.05)

PROCEDURES (1)

1. Completed the Information Processing Styles Questionnaire (Childers et al, 1983)

2. Answered 18 fill-in-the-blank questions as a pre test

3. Registered Quizlet to learn the target phrasal verbs list (36=18 phrasal verbs *2 different sentences)

PROCEDURES (2)

4. Answered 28 questions as a post-test 1 week after the pre test. In other words, given 1 week to study with Quizlet

5. Answered 15 questions as a delayed test 1 week after the post-test

6. All the tests were conducted in a PC room where the participants answer all questions on their own PC screens

ANALYSIS

• T-test between the two groups in terms of the total scores and time to complete

• Multiple comparisons (Fisher LSD) among the 4 groups

imagers / verbalizers in the control group

imagers / verbalizers in the experimental group

4. FINDINGS

T-TEST BETWEEN THE GROUPS: PRE TEST

No significant difference

score (p=0.95 >.05)

time (p=0.48 >.05)

6.747.22

4.18 4.23

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

5.50

6.00

6.50

7.00

7.50

verbal image

score time

T-TEST BETWEEN THE GROUPS: POST-TEST


score (p=1.00)

Significant difference

time (p=2.58, <.05)

13.70

12.37

6.46 6.02

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

verbal image

score time

T-TEST BETWEEN THE GROUPS: DELAYED TEST


score (p=0.07)

Significant difference

time (p=3.71, <.05)

8.43 8.38

3.26

4.25

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

verbal image

score time

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: PRE TEST (SCORE)

No significant difference between any group

7.27 7.17 7.07

6.13

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

M+SD M M-SD

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: POST-TEST (SCORE)


12.8711.75

12.9315.13

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

21

23

M+SD M M-SD

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: DELAYED-TEST(SCORE)


8.718.00 8.07

9.13

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

M+SD M M-SD

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: POST-TEST (TIME)

Significant difference between

imager with visual glosses and verbalizers with verbal glosses

(p=0.03 < .05)

12:05:57 AM

12:06:09 AM

12:06:40 AM

12:06:58 AM

0.003

0.0035

0.004

0.0045

0.005

0.0055

M+SD M M-SD

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: DELAYED TEST (TIME)

Significant difference between

imagers*visual vs verbalizers*verbal

(p=0.000 <.05)

imagers*visual vs. imagers*verbal (p=0.023<.05)

verbalizers*visual vs. imagers*verbal

(p=0.019 <.05)

12:04:37 AM 12:04:1

1 AM

12:03:18 AM

12:03:39 AM

0.0018

0.0023

0.0028

0.0033

0.0038

M+SD M M-SD

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS: ACCURACY RATE BETWEEN PRE & POST-TEST

Significant difference between (% score improvement)

verbalizers with visual glosses and verbalizers with verbal glosses

(p=0.04 <.05)

5.582.15

6.93

19.99

-15

-5

5

15

25

35

M+SD M M-SD

CONCLUSION

ANSWERS TO OUR RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Do visual mnemonic devices help Japanese EFL learners to acquire phrasal verbs?

• NO in terms of the scores

• YES only in the post test in terms of processing time

2. Do imagers learn phrasal verbs more effectively than verbalizers withvisual mnemonic aids?

• YES only in the post test in terms of processing time

3. Do verbalizers acquire the phrasal verbs more effectively than imagers when they use the non-visual mnemonic devices?

• YES in the post test in terms of accuracy rate and in the delayed test in terms of processing time

IMPLICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

• Visual mnemonic devices might facilitate the processing in acquiring the phrasal verbs just after the treatment

• Verbal devices have a positive effect on learning phrasal verbs, especially for verbalizers

• The effects of mnemonic devices depend on learners’ information processing styles.

• Small samples and rather short-term research

• Further examination needed

THANK YOU FOR LISTENINGご清聴ありがとうございました

TAKESHI SATO [email protected]

TYLER BURDEN [email protected]

REFERENCES

• Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: a comparative study. Language Learning and Technology, 5(1), 202-232

• Boers, F., & Lindstromberg, S. (2008). How cognitive linguistics can foster effective vocabulary teaching. In F. Boers, & S. Lindstromberg (Eds.), Cognitive linguistic approaches to teaching vocabulary and phraseology (pp.1-64). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,

• Childers, T.L., Houston, M.J, & Heckler, S.E. (1985). Measurement of individual differences in visual versus verbal information processing, Journal of Consumer Research, 12, 125-134.

• Mayer, R. & Moreno, R. (2002). Aids to computer-based multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 12, 107-119.

• Lakoff, G.(1987) Woman, fire and dangerous thing. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

• Langacker, R, W.(1987) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume I, Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press.

• Sato, T., Lai, Y., & Burden, T. (2014). Examining the Impact of Individual Differences of Information Processing Styles in Technology-Enhanced Second Vocabulary Learning. Proceedings of CLaSIC 2014. p. 432-440.

• Yoshii,M., & Fraitz, J.(2002). Second Language Incidental Vocabulary Retention: The Effect of Text and Picture Annotation Types. CALICO Journal, 20(1), 33-58.

• Yeh, Y., & Wang, C. (2003). Effects of Multimedia Vocabulary Annotations and learning styles on vocabulary learning. CALICO Journal, 21(1). 131-144.

Education

esbb presentation