Home >Documents >This is YOUR RQ

This is YOUR RQ

Date post:23-Feb-2016
Category:
View:47 times
Download:0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
This is YOUR RQ. Jane Doe and John Smith RQ: To what extent does writing new words help high school ELLs learn vocabulary?. Barcroft, J. (2004). Effects of sentence writing in second language lexical acquisition. Second Language Research, 20 (4), 303-334. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript:
  • Jane Doe and John Smith RQ: To what extent does writing new words help high school ELLs learn vocabulary?Barcroft, J. (2004). Effects of sentence writing in second language lexical acquisition. Second Language Research, 20(4), 303-334. This is YOUR RQ.

  • What is the Issue?The effects on learning new second language (L2) words when comparing writing words in a sentence vs. repetition of words in a word-picture task.

    Beginning of Introduction and literature review

  • Potential factors affecting L2 lexical acquisition Semantic Elaboration: Focus on semantic (referential, meaning-related) properties of an item in the input Output = production: Writing known or new words in original sentences

  • Semantic Elaboration (SE)Positively affects memory for L1 known words (e.g. Tressalt & Mayzner 1960; Levin et al. 1982)Memory for known or new words depends on type of assessment (Pressley et al. 1982)Reliance on form vs. meaning

  • Theories of Human Memory for Processing InputLevels of processing (LOP): Depends on depth of cognitive processing (Craik & Lockhart 1972)More vs. less elaborate manipulationTransfer appropriate processing (TAP):Memory performance depends on processing: same on test as during learning? (Morris et al. 1977)

  • Theories of Human Memory for Processing InputType of processing-resource allocation (TOPRA): For high processing demands, semantic elaboration:increases learning semantic properties of wordsbut decreases learning strucural propertiesbecause processing resources are limited(Barcroft, 2000, 2002; McDaniel & Kearney, 1984)

  • Semantic Elaboration Research in L2 Word LearningNo positive effects on structural memory for new words = TOPRA (Brown & Perry, 1991; Prince, 1996)Positive effects on pseudoword learning (Coomber et al., 1986)But tasks may not have involved the expected amount of semantic elaboration

  • Mixed Effects of Outputon L2 Word LearningNo effects of translating new L2 words into L1 (Watanabe, 1997) Negative effects of copying L2 words (=structural) (Barcroft, 1999)Positive effects of modified output (Ellis & He 1999)

    Effect depends on type of learning task and test

  • The Present Study:Research QuestionsDoes writing new words in sentences affect L2 lexical acquisition (L2la)?If yes, does sentence writing decrease L2la? (b/c requires semantic processing)If yes, are effects (decrease in L2la) short and long term? The papers RQs

  • Experiment 1ParticipantsL2 Spanish, L1 English2nd semester college students (n=44)

    Materials24 concrete, unfamiliar words, no cognates with English

    Exposure time and repetitionsNo sentence writing: 24 sec.; 4 exposures per wordSentence writing: 48 sec.; 1 exposure per word(See experiment 2!)Beginning of method

  • Experiment 1Design and procedurePre-test: 24 new L2 wordsTreatment (everyone did both conditions): Condition 1: Write words in original sentences (= semantic elaboration)Condition 2: View word-picture repetitions (4 times) (=structural memory)Post-tests:After treatmentTwo days laterOne week later

  • Scoring and AnalysisDependent variables:number of syllables correctly producednumber of words correctly produced

    AnalysisRepeated-measures ANOVA

  • Experiment 1: ResultsSyllables: Significant effects for time and condition, no interactions. Similar effect for # of words.Beginning of results

  • DiscussionSentence writing has a negative, lasting effect on L2 word learningSupports TAP: Learning through sentence writing does not transfer to productive L2 vocabulary testSupports TOPRA: High processing demands of sentence writing decreases memory for structure of new words

  • Experiment 2ParticipantsL2 Spanish, L1 English2nd semester college students (n=10)

    Materials24 concrete, unfamiliar words, no cognates with English

    Exposure time and repetitionsNo sentence writing: 24 sec.; only 1 exposure per wordSentence writing: 48 sec.; 1 exposure per word

    Design and procedureSimilar to Experiment 1No third posttest

  • Experiment 2: ResultsSyllables: Significant effects for condition, not time; no interactions. No significant effects for # of words.

  • DiscussionConfirmation of results from Experiment 1Findings from Experiment 1 not due to differences in time of exposure or number of repetitions

  • Conclusionsand ImplicationsSentence writing = semantic elaboration and outputSentence writing can inhibit learning of structural properties of new words (not known words)Overload of processing resources required in sentence writing divide attention for new word learningFuture research: Study independent effects of semantic elaboration vs. output; test learners of different proficiency levels, L1s and L2s, on different tasksOverall discussion/ conclusions

  • Discussion QuestionDo you think that these findings have any pedagogical implications for TESOL? If so, what are they? If not, why? YOUR question to start class discussion

  • ReferencesBarcroft, J. (1999). Processing resources and L2 lexical acquisition in three writing tasks. Paper presented at the Second Language Research Forum, Minneapolis, MN.Barcroft, J. (2000). The effects of sentence writing as semantic elaboration on the allocation of processing resources and second language lexical acquisition. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL.Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52, 2. [note: page number are missing in reference list]Brown. T. & Perry, Jr. F. (1991). A comparison of three learning strategies for ESL vocabulary acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 655-670.Coomber, J. E., Ramstad, D. A. & Sheets, D. R. (1986). Elaboration in vocabulary learning: A comparison of three rehearsal methods. Research in the Teaching of English, 20, 289-93.Craik, R. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-84.Ellis, R. & He, X. (1999). The role of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 285-301.Levin, J. R., McCorminck, C.Bl, Miller, G. E, Berry, J. K. & Pressley, M. (1982). Mnemonic vs. nonmnemonic vocabulary-learning strategies for children. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 121-136.McDaniel, M. A. & Kearney, E. M. (1984). Optimal learning strategies and their spontaneous use: The importance of task-appropriate processing. Memory and Cognition, 12, 361-373.Morris, C.D, Bransford, J.D. & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing vs. transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-33.References (all and only those in ppt)

  • ReferencesPressley, M., Levin, J. R. & Miller, G. E. (1982). The keyword method compared to alternative vocabulary-learning strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 50-60.Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context vs. translations as a function of proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 478-93. Tressalt, M. E. & Mayzner, M. S. (1960). A study of incidental learning. Journal of Psychology, 50, 339-47.Wattanabe, Y. 1997. Input, intake and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, 287-307.

    About Pressley et al. (p. 306-307): one semantic elaboration condition (imagery) was effective when the posttest was definition recall only, a test that provides word forms and does not require learners to generate words based on their own knowledge. However, the same researchers found another semantic elaboration condition (synonym) to be inhibitory (compared to no strategy) when the posttest was a matching task. Therefore, performance on the matching task depended more on knowledge of word form than did the recall task, because the matching task required selecting among multiple word forms at once, and therefore the inhibitory effect of semantic elaboration was observed.Word measure may not be precise enough.Note how I selected only the most important conclusions

Popular Tags:

Click here to load reader

Reader Image
Embed Size (px)
Recommended