131 English Teaching, Vo l. 65 , No. 2, Summer 20 \0 Good Timing: The Spacing E fI ect and Grammar Acquisition Scott Miles (Daegu Haany University) Miles, Scott. (2010). Good timing: The spacing effect and grammar acquisition. Englisll Teaclling, 65(2) , 131-150. This study aims to investigate the effect of spaced distribution versus massed distribution leaming on grammar acquisition. Memory research has shown that presenting information in increasing time intervals (spaced repetition) results in better learning and retention than presenting the information in one lengthy and uninterrupted session (massed repetition). This phenomenon is called the spacing effect. Though research in second language vocabulary has been well developed in regards to spacing effect methodology, very little has been done on the possible application to second language grammar acquisition. Using a quasi-experimental pre-test post-test design, a study was performed to trial an investigation on the impact of spaced repetition instruction on grammar acquisition versus the more traditional massed repetition (block) instruction. The re sults of the post tests showed the spaced instruction group outperformed the massed instruction group. 1. INTRODUCTION Memory research has shown that people generally retain information better when instruction and review sessions are spaced in increasing time intervals, as opposed to learning the infonnation in one lengthy but uninterrupted session (Baddeley , 1990). If a learner spends a total of 30 minutes studying a list of words , for example, it will be more effective to divide that 30 minutes into three ten-minute lessons spread out over a period of several days or weeks, rather than just have the learner spend an uninterrupted 30 minutes of study on the word list. This phenomenon is known as the spacing effect, and is considered one of the most consistent and robust findings in memory research (Dempster,
Transcript
131
English Teaching, Vol. 65, No. 2, Summer 20 \0
Good Timing: The Spacing EfIect and Grammar Acquisition
Scott Miles
(Daegu Haany University)
Miles, Scott. (2010). Good timing: The spacing effect and grammar acquisition.
Englisll Teaclling, 65(2), 131-150.
This study aims to investigate the effect of spaced distribution versus massed
distribution leaming on grammar acquisition. Memory research has shown that
presenting information in increasing time intervals (spaced repetition) results in better
learning and retention than presenting the information in one lengthy and uninterrupted
session (massed repetition). This phenomenon is called the spacing effect. Though
research in second language vocabulary has been well developed in regards to spacing
effect methodology, very little has been done on the possible application to second
language grammar acquisition. Using a quasi-experimental pre-test post-test design, a
study was performed to trial an investigation on the impact of spaced repetition
instruction on grammar acquisition versus the more traditional massed repetition (block)
instruction. The results of the post tests showed the spaced instruction group
outperformed the massed instruction group.
1. INTRODUCTION
Memory research has shown that people generally retain information better when
instruction and review sessions are spaced in increasing time intervals, as opposed to
learning the infonnation in one lengthy but uninterrupted session (Baddeley, 1990). If a
learner spends a total of 30 minutes studying a list of words, for example, it will be more
effective to divide that 30 minutes into three ten-minute lessons spread out over a period of
several days or weeks, rather than just have the learner spend an uninterrupted 30 minutes
of study on the word list. This phenomenon is known as the spacing effect, and is
considered one of the most consistent and robust findings in memory research (Dempster,
132 ScottMiles
1996; Baddeley, 1990).
The question this study seeks to answer is what impact this type of instruction method
might have on second language gramrnar learning. Issues of language item recycling have
long been discussed and accepted in the language teaching literature, but there has been
little research exploring spaced distribution methodology on grammar learning and
retention. Research in second language vocabulary acquisition is fairly well developed in
this area (B하lrÌck et al., 1993; Bloom & Shuell, 1981; Dempster, 1987; Miles & Kwon, 2008), generally showing learning and retention rates under spacing effect methodology at
2-3 times that of block leaming (massed repetition). However, research on the possible
application of these principles to second language grammar acquisition is largely
unexplored.
If the spacing effect is as relevant to grammar acquisition as it is to other areas of
learning, this could have a significant effect on pedagogical grammar practices. To date, the bulk of studies investigating the effects of explicit grammar instruction show modest
and somewhat fragile results, especially considering the amount of deterioration of gains
on delayed post tests (Krashen, 2003). As research on the spacing effect shows a strong
effect on long-term retention, the implementation of this methodology may prove essential
for explicit grammar instruction.
11. LlTERA TURE REVIEW
1. Spacing Effect in the Experimental Psychological Literature
The spacing effect, first discussed in 1885 by Ebbinghaus (Ebbinghaus, 1998/1 913), is described as ’one of the most robust and dependable phenomena yet documented by
behavioral scientists' (Dempster, 1996, p. 318). The phenomenon was researched
extensively in the early part ofthe 20th century and was recommended to educators ofthe
time, though to no substantial effect. After a period of dormancy, interest in the spacing
effect in the experimental psychology field was revived in the 1960s and continues today.
The spacing effect has been verified in nearly allleaming domains. Enhanced leaming
under the conditions of the spacing effect has been found in the leaming of mathematics
(Gay, 1973; Good & Grouws, 1979; Rea & Modigliani, 1985), foreign language
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 133
The spacing effect has a lso been found effective in skill mastery. 8addeley and
Longman (1978) found distributed practice was superior to massed practice in participants
leaming touch-type. A group leaming the skill for 1 hour of ηping per day reached 80
wpm in less than 60 hours of practice. Two other groups practicing for 2 hours a day took
nearly 80 hours to reach that goal, and a fourth group practicing for 4 hours a day only
reached 70 WPM after 80 hours.
Not only is the spacing effect well established in studies, the size of effect dwarfs most
other findings in the psychology literature (Dempster, 1996). Whereas most studies
showing significant effects of various teaching practices have small to moderate effect
sizes, studies in the spacing effect generally show gains of twice those from massed
presentation practices. For example, Bahrick and Phelps (1 987) showed impressive
retention rates of foreign language vocabulary leamed in a spacing effect condition over a
period of eight years, with recall being 2.5 times that of leamers in non-interval leaming
conditions. Rea and Modigliani ( 1985) found that participants remembering multiplication
facts and spelling through expanding intervals of retrieval retained twice the gains of
students leaming through massed repetition. Considering these results, many scholars and
researchers have argued strongly for the implementation of distributed leaming in all
subjects (Bjork, 1987; Dempster, 1996; Rea & Modigliani, 1987b).
2. Vocabulary Learning and the Spacing Effect
1n the field of second language acquisition, research on the spacing effect has mostly
been limited to vocabulary learning. Educators and scholars in vocabulary acquisition have
written much about the robust findings of the spacing effect and its possible applications
for second language leaming (Nation, 2001; Takac, 2008). Thombury (2002) suggested a
list of factors crucial for transferring vocabulary knowledge to long-term memory, inc1uding multiple encounters with the word at spaced intervals. Schmidt (2000) argues for
the role of expanding rehearsal in vocabulary leaming, as acquired lexical items are more
prone to forgetting than other linguistic forms . This follows Pimsleur’s (1967) point that as
most forgetting occurs early on, most review sessions should take place within a week of
leaming new content, with later repetitions coming at increasingly longer spaced intervals.
A I없ge number of studies have confinned that the spacing effect methodology has a
strong effect on second language vocabulary acquisition (Atkinson, 1972; Bh따ick， 1979;
Landauer & Bjork, 1978; Miles & Kwon, 2008; Siegel & Misselt, 1984). Gains in
vocabulary for groups fo l1owing distributed interval leaming were typically twice those of
students in massed repetition methodology (Baddeley, 1990), particularly in studies which
had delayed post tests as words leamed through spaced distribution are typical1y more
134 Scott Miles
resistant to forgetting than words learned through massed repetition. In the Miles and
Kwon (2008) study, for example, gains maintained in delayed post tests in receptive and
productive use of vocabulary in the spaced disπibution groups were 2-3 times that of
students in the massed repetition groups.
The spacing effect can be a crucial factor for long term retention even over the space of
many years. Bahrick and Phelps (1987) conducted an 8-year longitudinal study on
retention ofvocabulary originally leamed in secondary school as a follow up to an earlier
study (Bahrick, 1979) on repetition schemes. ln the 1979 study, 8ahrick had students leam
50 English-Spanish word pairs in three conditions: 0 interval reviews (massed repetition), l-day interval reviews, and 30-day interval reviews. Bahrick was able to locate and test
75% of the students from the 1979 study (excluding those who had continued to study
Spanish or who resided in a Spanish speaking country) eight years after the initial study.
The study found that the În itial leaming scheme of 30-day intervals resulted În 2.5 times
the retention of the zero interval group on retrieval tests. Even though eight years had
passed, a moderate number of words were retained by the 30-day interval group, while
participants in the 1 day or 0 intervals had forgotten nearly all the words.
3 . Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition
Although the spacing effect has been well tested for L2 vocabulary acquisition, as ofyet
little research has been conducted to investigate its possible application for gr없nmar
instruction and acquisition
A few studies have found evidence of the effectiveness of the spacing effect on Ll
grammar acquisition. Cromer (1987) had success giving exposure to ten sentεnces with
easy/eager to please constructions once every three months to teach children the
grammatical differences. Cromer was not purposely exploiting the spacing effect, but the
conditions of the experiment did make use of it and may have contributed to the success of
the study. In another study with Ll children, Ambridge, Theakston, Lieven, E &
Tomasello (2006) presented study participants with a particular construction [lt was the
OBJECT that the SUBJECT VERBed: lE: lt was the ball the boy wanted.] in three
different leaming schedule treatments.
1) massed group: 10 training sessions presented in 1 day
2) distributed-pairs group: 2 training sessions per day for 5 days
3) distributed group: 1 training session per day for 10 days
The participants were measured on an elicited production task. Both distributed groups
outperformed the massed group.
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 135
Year (2009) has conducted the only study thus far which has specifically examined the
potential role for the spacing effect in L2 grammar acquisition. Three groups were given
exposure to ditransitive verb consπuctions according to massed or distributed schedules, with a massed distribution group receiving the input over a 4-day period and two spaced
distribution groups following a 4-week or 8-week schedule. The spaced distribution
groups outperformed the massed distribution group on measures of elicited production 뻐d
acceptability judgment.
The results of the Year study were modest, but quite encouraging considering that
participants were not given explicit instruction on the grammar forms. What remains to be
explored is the potential effect ofthe spacing effect on explicit grammar instruction.
The study reported here was designed to research the impact of spacing effect
methodology on explicit grammar instruction. The central hypothesis is thus as follows :
Students who learn grammar following spaced inteπal instruction wiU improve in
grammar use and knowledge and retain gains better than students who are not exposed to
cyclical teaching, yet receive the same total instruction time within an intensive period.
川. METHOD
1. Participants
Study participants consisted of Korean university freshman students enrolled in two
general English courses at S. University in Seoul, Korea. The general levels of the
paπicipants can be classified as high-beginning to low-intermediate on ACTFL (American
Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages) scales in regards to productive language
use. These students were registered for compulsory general English courses. Ages ranged
from 19-22, with the majority aged 19. 까le class (English 2) is a four skills class with a
slight emphasis on speaking and writing. A textbook for developing writing skills at the
intermediate level was used. Though the textbook and other course materials did cover
some grammar points, the target gramrnar of the pilot study was not included in these
materials.
Each class was designated as a different group for the study (see Table 1). The Massed
Practice group was composed ofbusiness majors (13 business management students) and
humanities majors (six sociology students, and one student from each of the fc이lowing
m갱ors: English literature, English culture, international culture, philosophy, history, German, Korean, history, and religion). The Spaced Distribution group was composed
solely of science majors (26 engineering students, one chemistry student, and one natural
science student).
136 ScottMi1es
TABLE 1 Study Participants
Females Males Humanities Business Science Major Major Major
Massed Distribution Group (27) 9 18 14 13 0 Spaced Distribution Gro뽀깊엉 12 16 0 0 28
A potential flaw in the study is that the groups vary significantly in m매ors. 깐le pretests
of both groups, however, showed that the levels of ability of students were equivalent (see
Section IV: Tables 3 and 4) in regards to the target grammar.
2. Instruction
1) Gramrnar Selection
The grammar selected for this experiment is the proper use of almost as an adverb and
quantifier, and most as a quantifier, as these are, in the researcher’s observations, typically
problematic structures for Korean leamers at the beginning-intermediate levels.
(1) Use of almost as an Adverb
In the English language, like most adverbs, almost follows the BE verb, but precedes
other verbs (Ceice-Murcia, & Larsen-Freeman, 1999).
She was almost late.
We almost lost the game.
As the Korean word order is SOV, the verb always comes last and thus the Korean word
for almost (keowui) always precedes the verb. 까le Korean language also allows far more
flexibility in how distant the adverb can be placed before the verb, being able to occur
prior or after the subject.
(2) Use of almost as a Quantifier
Korean students often neglect to use quantifiers such as ‘ all ’, ‘no ', ‘eveη ’ etc. when
almost is used as a quantifier in a noun phrase. Common mistakes students make are as
follows:
Almost Korean males love soccer. [Correct: Almost all Korean males love soccer.]
Almost students didn 't come. [Correct: Almost no students came.]
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 137
Although this p따ticular grammar error has not been specifically examined in previous
research, an analysis of the pretest data in this study shows that the majority of Korean
students failed to identity errors with almost as a q뻐ntifier， and also failed to properly use
almost as a quantifier in the elicited translation test. The meaning of almost is generally
clear to Korean students of English, corresponding lexically with the Korean translation,
keowu i. This word serves the same functions as almost in English, but has more
grammatical f1exibility in the Korean language in word order and the optional use of a
quantifier ifthe context makes the meaning clear.
(3) Proper Use of most as a Quantifier.
Usage of most was included in the study as it is related semantically to almost, and is
also commonly misused by Korean leamers of English. Mistakes with most usage center
on misuse of the preposition of and the article the. Common mistakes with most include
the following:
Mostofgμys don ilike it.
Most the people didn Í' go there
Grammatical usage of most as a quantifier requires that it is followed by a prepositional
phrase and article (ofthe) when identifying a specified noUll, or the complete omission of
the preposition phrase when referring to a non-specified noun. In either case, the noun is in
plural fonn if it is a count noUll.
A10st Korean~ eat rice for brea뼈st
Most of the Koreans that I know don i eat brea뼈st.
2) Lesson Schedule
Students in all groups (spaced distribution and massed distribution) followed identical
lesson plans with the lone exception ofhow the time given for instruction and practice was
distributed. See Table 2.
Wéek During the Semester Week 2 Wéek 3 (Tuesday) Wéek 3 (Thursday) Week4 Week7 Week 13
TABLE2 Instruction Schedu1e
Spaced Distribution Group Massed Distribution Group Pretest Pretest Session 1 (30 minutes) Session 2 (1 0 minutes) Session 3 (1 0 minutes) Session 4 (10 minutes) Sessions 1-4 (60 minutes) Delayed posttest Delayed posttest
138 Scott Miles
The Massed Disσibution group had one intensive 60-minute lesson on almost/most
grarnmar. The Spaced Distribution group had four short lessons on almosνmost grarnmar.
The first session was for 30 minutes, the second session, occurring two days after the
initial session, was for 10 minutes. The third session was also 10 minutes in length, and
was given one week after the initial session, and the fourth and final session (also for 10
minutes) was given approximately 28 days after the initial session (see Table 2 below).
As can be seen from Table 2, the posttest was delayed 6 weeks after the last instruction
session for both groups. This enabled the researcher to measure retention of grarnmar
knowledge.
(1) Rationale for Instruction Schedule
Research on the spacing effect has employed a wide variety of spacing schedules, ranging from a matter of seconds to as many as 60 days between study sessions. Though
there is no consensus on an ideal repetition schedule, several researchers have put forth
proposals for efficient spacing schedules.
Landauer and 히ork (1978) found that the longer the intervals between reviews were, the better the content was retained if the intervals were not long enough for students to
forget the words completely. They propose the following considerations:
1. Generally, retrieval spacings should be far apart
2. Rehearsals are only effective if retrieval is successful (thus, not spaced too far
apaπ).
3. Successful retrieval strengthens knowledge, allowing for further successful
retrieval at increasingly lengthy intervals.
Landauer and Bjork’s experiments favored an expanding retrieval schedule and their
findings were confinned by Rea and Modigliani (1 985; 1987) 띠 a c\assroom setting.
Pimsleur (1967) proposed an expanding schedule of 5 seconds, 25 seconds, 2 minutes, 10
minutes, 1 hour, 5 hours, 1 day, 5 days, 25 days and 4 months. This schedule is impractical
for the c\assroom, and thus a modified form was used: 48 hours, 1 week, and fmally 3
weeks (see Table 2).
3) Lesson Plans
The lessons were designed to provide a balance of instruction and practice. Each session
introduced new exercises in order to maintain student interest and provide a wide range of
example sentences. The total time of instruction for both groups was 60 minutes.
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 139
There were three main p앙ts ofthe lesson:
1) Explanation stage
2) Quizzes
3) Communicative activities
The explanation portion began with an inductive exercise, followed by the instructor’s
explanation ofthe grammar points.
Most qui강es in the instruction were error identification 때d coπection. Students were
presented with sentences containing one or more errors on the target grammar, and then
were required to identi fY and correct the errors. The quizzes were used as a way for
students to check their knowledge and provide more opportunities for grammar instruction
and review.
The communicative activities were selected to give students the opportunity to use the
grammar in a communicative way and to break up the instruction and quiz components of
the lesson plan to increase attention and engagement in the lesson plans. In the Massed
Distribution group, few students would have the mental stamina to focus on instruction
and quizzes on one grammar point for 60 minutes. The communicative activities gave
some needed variety in the activity types while keeping the grammar point in focus . Again, the sεquence of activities was identical for both groups.
A mix of pair work and individual activities was used to provide variety to the activity
types. In the pair work, students were able to get support from their peers and check their
answers. ln the individual activities, students were forced to test their knowledge of the
concepts without help from others.
3. Test Administration
Identical tests were used for the pre and post tests. The time between the pre and post
tests was slightly over 3 months; thus, it is highly unlikely that students would recall the
content from the pretest. Two test types were used for the study (see Appendix). The
delayed posttests were unannounced.
1) Editing Test
까le editing test consisted of 15 sentences, each having a number of grammatical errors
(See Appendix 1-1). There were 12 mistakes with almost/most grammar for students to
identify and correct, in addition to non-target grammar errors (third-person singular, tense,
artic1 es, count and non-count noun errors, etc.). Students were instructed to find and
140 Scott Miles
correct as many errors as they could, with no specific mention ofthe target grammar errors.
Types of target gr없nmar errors were evenly distributed among the three types covered in
lllstructlOn:
Most: 4 mistakes
Almosl as an adverb (word order): 4
Almost as a qu뻐tifier (missing determiner): 4
2) 티icited Translation Test
까le second test was an elicited translation task (Swain, Naiman & Dumas, 1974).
Students were presented with 15 sentences in the Korean language, 10 of which were
designed to necessitate the use of the target grammar when translated into English. A
1 O-minute time limit was given for the test.
This type oftest has an advantage over the editing test in that students must produce the
language, enabling the researcher to get a clearer idea of how well the students can apply
their grammar knowledge. The 10-minute time limit presented a challenge for most
students in the experiment, and thus can be considered a properly speeded test. A speeded
test was used for this task in order to get a better view of the students’ proceduralized
knowledge of the grammar, as the demands of a speeded test allow less time for students
to draw upon declarative grammar knowledge (티lis & Barkhuizen, 2005).
One flaw in the e\icited translation test design that was overlooked was an unequal
distribution oftarget grammar types in this portion ofthe test.
ι1ost: 2
Almost as an adverb (word order): 2
Almost as a quantifier (missing determiner): 6
IV. STUDY RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A paired samples T-test was conducted to compare the pretest and posttest scores within
groups on both test types. All statistical analyses were conducted on SPSS version. 17.0.
1. Editing Test Results
The editing test was a 12 point test. The following chart shows the results ofthe pre and
post tests.
Good Timing‘ The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 141
TABLE3
Pretest Massed Distribution Group 2.6 Spaced Distribution Group 2
Editing Test ResuIts Fosttest Gain 7.0 +4 .4*
8.5 +6.5*
D -8 2
F3Tl
「‘ι
앞-% ”m
df 25 21
*p < .01
80th groups made statistically significant gains on the post test, with the Massed
Distribution group gaining 4.4 points on the posttest (a 36% increase), and the Spaced
Distribution group gaining 6.5 points (a 54% increase). To deterrnine if the difference in
gains made in the Spaced Distribution group was statistically significant, an independent
T-test was perforrned. The gains of the Spaced Distribution group over the Massed
Disσibution group were significant (p < .05). A Cohen s d effect size was calculated at .58, showing a moderately strong effect.
2. Translation Test Results
The elicited translation test was a 10-point test. The following chart shows the results of
the pre and post tests.
TABLE4 Translation Test Results
Pretest Massed Distribution Group 3.4 Spaced Distribution Group 3.1
Posttest Gain 5.0 + 1.6* 6.2 +3.1*
m-g
이”
앞-m 처
df 22 25
*p < .01
A paired T-test analysis within groups showed that gains in both groups were
statistically significant. The Massed Distribution group made a s\ight gain of 1.6 (a 16%
increase), while the Spaced Disσibution group made a 3.1 p이nt gain (a 31 % increase). To
determine ifthe difference in gains between the Spaced Distribution group and the Massed
Distribution group on the elicited translation test were statistic때Iy significant, an
independent T test was performed. The gains of the Spaced Distribution group over the
Massed Distribution group were significant (p < .05). A Cohens d effect size was
calculated at .54, showing a moderately strong effect.
The Spaced Distribution group outperformed the Massed Repetition group on both test
types. Gains in the editing test were more dramatic than in the e \icited translation test. The
elicited translation task is arguably more di댐cu\t than the editing test, as students are
required to recall not only grammar, but also vocabulary, whereas in the editing task
students can direct all their attention to grammar. ln the editing task, students may have
142 Scott Miles
had more time to recall what was learned from the grammar lessons. The spacing effect
methodology may have given the Spaced Distribution group a strong advantage in
recalling what was presented in the study sessions.
The overall gains from both tests are modest in comparison to other studies comparing
spaced and massed distribution instruction on vocabulary leaming and retention. This may
be due to the higher level of complexity of grarnmar leaming and usage in comparison to
recalling individual vocabulary items. Another issue to keep in mind is that research in the
spacing effect consistent1y shows that the gains made through spaced interval instruction
are more resistant to decay in comparison to gains made through massed instruction
(Bah디 k， 1984; B하πik et. a1., 1993; Bahrik, 2000). Had this researcher been able to
conduct a second delayed post test, it is possible that the gap between the spaced interval
group and the massed distribution group would continue to widen. Further research is
needed to confirrn this
v. CONCLUSION
As the hypothesis of this study is confirrned, a tentative argument can be made for the
implementation of distributed leaming into the ESLfEFL grammar curriculurn. This can be
practically implemented by distributing the amount of time set aside for a p따ticular
grammar point over the semester, with systematic short review sessions delivered in c1ass
or as homework assi밍unents . Teachers using a grammar course book might reconsider
how they approach a particular uni t. Rather than spend one or two consecutive weeks
going through all the lessons in a given unit, for example, the teacher could cover half of a
unit in one week, and then continue with the unit in later c1ass periods spread throughout
the semester following a spaced distribution schedule such as that used in this study.
Furthermore, the positive effect of spaced distribution leaming on long terrn retention of
learned items can add rnore support for the role of explicit grammar instruction in
language acquisition. A remaining criticisrn of explicit instruction is that the results are
often tempor없y and weaken, if not disappear, when delayed post tests are administered
(Krashen, 2003). Wh ite (1991), for exarnple, found that providing both positive and
negative evidence in adverb placement led to superior gains in comparison with a group
which did not have explicit feedback. However, these gains disappeared on a delayed
posttest. This issue may not be a problem with explicit instruction itself, but due, at least in
part, to the natural limits of memory and its inevitable decay without rehearsal
maintenance. Explicit grammar instruction through spaced distribution may be an answer
to this problem.
Finally, this study provides further evidence that second language leaming can be
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 143
viewed in terms of general skill acquisition 뻐d cognitive psychology, justifying the
adaptation and implementation of findings from this rich field to second language theory
and pedagogy.
There are several limitations to this study that should be addressed in future research.
One f1aw in this study was the lack of balance between the paπicipants in the two
experimental groups. Despite the relatively equal levels of proficiency at the beginning of
the semester, the differences in majors may have had an effect on performance in the
course. Secondly, an immediate posttest following instruction would provide a better view
of initial leaming in both spaced and massed distribution instruction, and thus allow
researchers to measure initial gains and the rate of decline in knowledge for both groups
more precisely. Additionally, a second delayed posttest given several months after the
instruction period would give a better idea of the long term effects of spaced distribution
methods. It is not easy to track study participants over long time periods, but the research
that has taken pains to do this (i .e. 8ahrick & Phelps, 1987; Bahrick et al., 1993) has
shown impressive results. Another limitation ofthe study was in the test types themselves.
An editing test is mostly a measure of declarative knowledge, and is not necessarily
representative ofhow the study p따ticipants would use the grammar in spontaneous speech
or writing. The elicited translation test attempted to get a glimpse ofthe study p때cipants ’
productive ability, but this still 싫lls short of a true test of how students would be able to
produce the grammar outside of the classroom. Finally, the scope of grammar covered in
this study was rather limited. Not all grammar is of the same complexity and πansparency
(DeKeyeser, 2005), and thus other forms of grammar should be researched to see if spaced
distribution methodology is consistently effective.
REFERENCES
Ambridge, 8., Theakston, A. , Lieven, E.Y.M., & Tomasello, M. (2006). The distributed
leaming effect for children ’s acquisition of an abstract grammatical construction.
CognitiveDevelopment, 21, 174-193.
Atkinson, R. (1972). Optimizing the leaming of a second language vocabulary. Journal 01 Experimental Psychology, 96, 124-129.
8addeley, A.D., & Longman, D.J.A. (1 978). The inf1uence of length and frequency on
training sessions on the rate ofleaming to type. Ergonomics, 21 , 627-35.
8addeley, A. (1990). Human memory: Theory and practice (pp. 103-124). Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
8ahrick, H. P. (1979). Maintenance of knowledge: Questions about memory we forgot to
144 Scott Miles
ask. Journal of Experimental Psycholo，양 . General, 108, 296-308.
Bahrick, H. P. (1 984). Semantic memory content in pennastore: Fifty years of memory for
Spanish leamed in school. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 1-29.
Krug, D., Davis, T. B., & Glover, J. (1990). Massed versus distributed repeated reading: A
case offorgetting helping recall? Journal ofEducational Psychology, 82, 366-371.
Landauer, T. K., & Bjork, R . A. ( 1978). Optimum rehe앙sal pattems and name leaming. ln
M. M. Gruneberg, P. E. Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical aspects ofmemory
(pp. 625-632). New York: Academic Press
Mi les, S., & Kwon, C .J. (2008). Benefits of using CALL vocabulary programs to provide
systematic word recycJ ing. English Teaching, 63( 1), 199-216.
Nation, I.S.P. (200 1). Learning vocabulary in another language (pp. 60-113). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Pimsleur, P. (1 967). A memory schedule. Modern Laη'guage Journal, 51 (2), 73-75.
Postman, L., & Knecht, K. (1983). Encoding variability in retention. Journalof Verbal
Learningand Verbal Behavior, 22, 133-152.
Rea, C. P., & Modigliani, V. (1985). The eff농ct of expanded versus massed practice on the
retention ofmu!tiplication facts and spelling lists. Human Learning, 4, 11 -18.
Rea, C. P., & Modigliani, V. (1 987). 까le spacing effect in 4- to 9-year-old children.
Memory& Co，앙lition， 15, 436-443 .
Rea, c.P. & Modigliani, V . (1987b). Educational implications ofthe spacing effect. In M.
M. Gruneberg, P. E . Morris, & R. N. Sykes (Eds.), Practical Aspects oj Memory:
Current Research and Issues (pp. 396-406). New York: Academic Press.
Reith, H., Axelrod, S., Anderson, R., Hathaway, F., Wood, K., & Fitzgerald, C. (1 974).
Re
Influence of distributed practice and daily testing on week1y spelling tests. The
Journal ojEducational Research, 62, 73-77
146 Scott Miles
Seabrook, R., Brown, G.D.A., & Solity, J.E. (2005). Distributed and massed practice: from
laboratory to classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 107-122.
Siegel, M .A., & Misselt, A.L. (1984). Adaptive feedback and review paradigm for
computer-based drills. Journal of Educational Psycholo.양'， 7ι 310-317.
Swain, M. , Naiman, N. , & Dtunas, G. (1 974). Alternatives to spontaneous speech: elicited
translation and imitation as indicators of second language competence. Working
Papers on Bilingualism, 3: 68-79.
Takac, V. P. (2008). Vocabulary learning strategies andforeign language acquisμion (pp
4-25). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters Limited.
Thombury, S. (2002). How 10 teach vocabulary (pp. 13-31). Harlow: Longman.
White, L. (1 991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: some effects of
positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second Language Research, 7, 133-16 1.
Ye앙，1. (2009). Korean speakers' acquisition ofthe English ditr뻐sitive construction: The
role of input frequency and distribution. Unpublished dissertation. Teacher’s
College, Colurnbia University.
A[
뼈 願Editing Quiz Name: Student #
Each ofthe following sentences has 1-3 grammar mistakes
• Underline the mistakes you find
• Write the correct grammar below the mistake
was .. lt
Example: When 1 am in high school , I hated English, but now Ilike them.
When I l!.띠 in high school, 1 hated English, but now 1 like 띠ξ미·
1. Everyone almost want to get A grade, but most student don ’ t study enough for that.
2. Professor? Is it OK ifl missing our next class? 1 have to going to the hospital
3. It hard to wake up early every day, so 1 am late to almost my 9 0 ’c\ock classes.
4. It costs so many money to buy all my book this semester.
5. It is OK to play computer game, but most your time should be spent to study
6. Would you mind close window? Because it’s cold in here.
7. Min-so! Almost I didn’t recognize you. Are you changing your hairstyles?
8. 1 know 1 should not to throw garbage on the street, but almost people does it.
Good Timing: The Spacing E없ct and Grammar Acquisition
9. Most of American men doesn’t like soccer, but almost Korean men do.
10. 1 wake up late this moming and missed almost the bus
11 . Most of people likes sports, but my boyfriend don’t very much.
12. When 1 was young, students almost don’t have cellular phone.
13 . My life as college student is hard, but it was easier than my high school life
14. It almost is time to finish c1ass, so everyone should getting ready to go.
15. So much childrens these days do not listen their parents.
APPENDIXB Elicited Translation Test
Translation Quiz Name: Student #
147
아래의 문장들을 적절한 영 어문장으로 번역하세요. 문장 옆의 target English 단어를 반 드시 사용해야만 합니다. 때로는 주어진 문장에 적절하도록 영어 단어의 형식 을 바꿔
야 할 필요도 있을 것입 니다.
1. 그녀는 우리 문제의 거의 모두에 책임 이 있다 [책 임 =responsible]
2. 대부분의 사람들은 정치에 대해 부정 적으로 생각한다. [부정 = negative]
3. 거 의 매 일 책을 읽는 것은 단어 학습의 과정을 빠르게 한다. [과정 =process]
4. 그녀는 요즘 그녀의 스케율에 있어 매우 유연하다. [유연한=flexible]
5. 한국 전쟁 이 끝났을 때 ， UN은 판문점 에 북한과 남한 사이의 경계를 만들었
다. [경 계=boundary]
6. 당신은 이 반의 반 정도의 학생들조차 컨닝을 하지 않을 것이라고 확신시킬
수 있습니까? [확신시키다=ensure]
7. 거 의 모든 나라에서 흑독한 날씨가 증가하였다. [혹독한=severe]
8. 꽤 몇 명 의 사람들은 그들 건강의 위 험을 감수한다. [위 험 =risk]
148 Scott Miles
9. 나의 친구들은 왜 자주 나의 공부를 방해한다. [방해하다= interrupt]
10. 그는 대부분의 유령 이야기들에 논리적인 설명이 존재한다고 믿는다. [논리
=Iogic]
11. 그녀가 작년에 한 예측들 중 실제로 일어난 것은 거의 없다. [예측하다
=predict]
12. 우리는 우랴의 성적에 대해서 교수와 거의 논쟁을 할 뻔했다. [논쟁=conflict]
13. 영어 능력은 요즘 거의 모든 직업과 상관있다. [상관있다 =relevant]
14. 우리는 그 정책을 버릴 뻔했지만， 그냥 유지하기로 결정했다. [버리다
=abandon]
15. 그 반의 학생 수는 거 의 50% 감소했다. [감소하다=reduce]
APPENDIX C Elicited Translation Test with Translations
Translate the following sentences into proper English. Make sure in the translation you use the target English word noted after the sentence. At times you might need to change the forrn of the English word to fit into the sentence.
아래의 문장들을 적절한 영어문장으로 번역하세요. 문장 옆의 target English 단어를 반 드시 사용해야만 합니다， 때로는 주어진 문장에 적절하도록 영어 단어의 형식을 바꿔 야 할 필요도 있을 것입니다.
1. She is responsible for almost all of our problems.
그녀는 우리 문제의 거의 모두에 책엄이 있다. 책임 =responsible
2. Most people think negatively about politics.
대부분의 사람들은 정치에 대해 부정적으로 생각한다 부정 = negative
3. Reading almost every day can really speed up the process of vocabulary leaming.
거의 매일 책을 읽는 것은 단어 학습의 과정을 빠르게 한다. 과정 =process
4.
5.
6
7.
8.
9.
10
11.
12
13
Good Timing: The Spacing Effect and Grammar Acquisition 149
She is very tlex ible w ith her schedule these days.
그녀는 요즘 그녀의 스케줄에 있어 매우 유연하다 유연 한=tlexible
At the end of the Korean War, the UN put a boundary between North and South Korea
at Panmunjum.
한국 전쟁이 끝났을 때， UN은 판문점에 북한과 남한 사이의 경 계를 만들었다.
경 계=boundary
Can you ensure that even half ofthe students in this class will not cheat?
당신은 A 끼-
이 반의 반 정도의 학생들조차 컨닝을 하지
있습니 까? 확신시 키 q.=ensure
Severe weather has increased in almost every country.
않을 것이라고 확신시 킬
거의 모든 나라에서 혹독한 날씨가 증가하였다 흑독한=severe
Quite a few people take risks with their health.
꽤 몇 명의 사람들은 그들 건강의 위험을 감수한다. 위험 =risk
My friends inteπupt my study quite often.
나의 친구들은 꽤 자주 나의 공부를 방해한다. 방해하다= interrupt
He believes that there is a logical explanation for most ghost stories.
그는 대부분의 유령 이야기들에 논리 적 인 설명이 존재한다고 믿는다 논리 적
=Iogical
Almost no predictions she made last year actually happened .
그녀가 작년에 한 예측들 중 실제로 일어난 것은 거의 없다 예측=prediction
We almost had a conflict with the professor about our grades
우리는 우리의 성적에 대해서 교수와 거의 논쟁을 할 뻔했다. 논쟁=conflict
English ski lls a re relevant to almost every profession these days
영어 능력은 요즘 거의 모든 직업과 상관있다. 상관있다=relevant
150 Scott Miles
14. We almost abandoned that p이icy， but we decided to keep it.
우리는 그 정책을 버릴 뻔했지만， 그냥 유지하기로 결정 했다. 버리t:J-=abandon
15 . The number of students in that c\ass was reduced by almost 50%
Scott Miles Daegu Haany University Department of Foreign Languages 290, Yugok-dong Kyeongbuk, Kyeongsan, Korea Tel. (053) 819-1388 H.P. : 010-2016-6846 Fax: (053) 819-1039 Email: scott@dh뼈c.k
Received in March, 2010 Reviewed in April, 2010 Revised version received in May, 2010
