Arch

ive of

SID

Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, Islamic Azad University, North Tehran Branch, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

Using Tasks in a Content-Based Program: Does It

Enhance Vocabulary Learning?

Hamid Marashi Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Iran

Ghazal Hatam Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Iran

ABSTRACT: This study was an attempt to investigate the effect of using tasks in a task/content-based instruction on EFL learners vocabulary achievement. To fulfill the purpose of this study, 60 female students attending the first grade of junior high in a school in Mashad, Iran, were selected from a total number of 90 based on their performance on the Cambridge Flyers Test of English and randomly put into two experimental and control groups. Both groups were taught the same content throughout the 12-session treatment; the only difference was that the experimental group was taught through using tasks in a content-based (task/content-based) approach while the students in the control group underwent a regular content-based approach. A vocabulary achievement test within the content area was given to students in both groups at the end of the instruction and the mean scores of both groups on this posttest were compared though an independent samples t-test which led to the rejection of the null hypothesis thus concluding that a task/content-based program was more effective on students vocabulary achievement compared to the content-based approach. A motivational questionnaire was also designed and given to both groups towards the end. The responses demonstrated a higher level of motivation among the participants in the experimental group compared to that of the control group. Keywords: task/content-based program, task-based instruction, content-based instruction, motivation, vocabulary achievement Psychologists, linguists, and language teachers have been interested in vocabulary learning strategies for a long time. To this end, numerous studies have been conducted comparing the retention effects of different vocabulary presentation strategies throughout the last half-century or so (Arnaud & Savignon, 1997; Andrade & Makaafi, 2001; Atkinson, 1972; Channell, 1998; Lado, Baldwin, & Lobo, 1967; Sansome, 2000).

Indubitably, one of the most important features in defining language knowledge is the knowledge of words. Vocabulary learning is a central issue in learning a new language which hand-in-hand with other skills and

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

74

subskills can help a person to use a language. Hatch (1983) argues in favor of the centrality of the lexicon to both acquisition and use by stating that it is the lexical level that adult L2 learners regard as most important (p. 74). If the prime goal is communication when there is little of the new language in command, she maintains, basic communication is engendered through words.

Real-life learning of the vocabulary of a foreign language cannot be regarded as a track to be trodden with ease (Goulden, Nation, & Read, 1990; Hatch & Brown, 1995). Furthermore, as Nation (1982) and Meara (1996) rightfully observe, vocabulary learning is an ongoing process.

Yet another aspect of vocabulary learning which most, if not all, language teaching programs are conscious of (though they may not necessarily succeed in addressing efficiently) is the distinction between knowing a word and using it. In other words, the purpose of vocabulary learning should include both remembering words and the ability to use them automatically in a wide range of language contexts when the need arises (McCarthy, 1984).

The contemporary history of language teaching is of course very much oriented towards finding cost-effective solutions for the issues discussed above, which are evidently only a handful of the challenges teachers face when it comes to teaching the language. There have thus been different methods designed for teaching a language as well as its vocabulary to EFL learners; one such way is content-based language teaching (CBLT) which may have deficiencies in teaching grammar or communicative skills but has been reported to be helpful in teaching the vocabulary of other subject matters to students. While arguing in favor of this advantage, Brinton, Snow, and Wesche (1989, p. 2) define CBLT as the integration of a particular content (e.g., math, science, social studies) with second language aims. It refers to the concurrent teaching of academic subject matter and second language skills.

Historically, the convergence of content and language instruction stems from the theoretical position that communicative competence (Hymes, 1971) in a second language is facilitated by using the language as a medium for learning content rather than by studying it as a separate and distinct subject area. Being propelled by that paradigm alongside other both theoretical notions and practical conclusions, CBLT has entered its fourth decade and by many accounts is flourishing in both foreign language and second language instructional settings (Crandall, 1987; Krashen, 1982; Mohan, 1986; Mohan, Leung, & Davison, 2001; Snow, 2005; Stoller, 2004).

Another relatively modern approach that is recently being integrated with other approaches and endeavors to maximize the language intake of learners (their vocabulary included of course) is task-based language

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

75

teaching (TBLT). Richards, Platt, and Webber (1985) define TBLT as a teaching approach based on the use of communicative interactive tasks as the central units of planning and delivery of instruction. Such tasks, though there is much controversy in the literature concerning their definition and typology (Ellis, 2003), are said to provide an effective basis for language teaching since they involve meaningful communication and interaction and enable the learners to acquire the grammar as a result of engaging in authentic language use. TBLT is an extension of the principles of communicative language teaching and an attempt by its proponents to apply the principle doctrines of second language teaching to learning (Richards, Platt, & Webber, 1985).

TBLT establishes tasks at the center of the methodological focus and grants a more communicative essence to the method with which it is integrated. Nunan (2004) argues about the disparateness of the outcomes of pure CBLT and CBLT integrated with TBLT and summarizes the benefits of CBLT as including an organic, analytical approach to language development and a framework within which learners can have sustained engagement on both content mastery and second language acquisition (p. 132). He further notes how these benefits work toward increasing motivation and engaging the learner more actively in the learning process, and clearly states that CBLT is very much in line with the principles of TBLT.

In this combination (CBLT and TBLT), the importance of focusing on content or language will of course vary in different contexts and highly depends on the objectives of the course. Recently, some schools in Iran have begun exploring teaching methods using English to teach subjects like math, science, and computer for students of the 11-14 age groups (junior high school). In this system, students learn English through other subjects. It should be added here that in the books being taught in this system, the main focus is on vocabulary, and other language subskills are not highlighted.

Accordingly, the researchers in this study became interested to find out whether the pure CBLT approach to teaching the vocabulary content of science subject matters or an integrated CBLT and TBLT approach, namely, task/content-based instruction, would generate more promising results in terms of the learners vocabulary achievement. Hence, a null hypothesis was raised in line with the objective of this study:

H0: Task/content-based programs do not have any significant effect

on EFL learners vocabulary achievement. In addition, a research question concerning the motivation of the learners following the instruction was raised:

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

76

How does a task/content-based program impact EFL learners motivation?

Method This part describes in detail the participants, instrumentation, materials, and procedure adopted in this study and ends with a brief overview of the statistical analyses employed, saving the full data analysis to the next and penultimate section of this paper. Participants To accomplish the objectives of this study, 90 female students aged 11-12 who were studying at the first grade of junior high in a school in Mashad, Iran, were given a language proficiency test and 60 of them whose scores fell within one standard deviation below and above the mean score were chosen. Subsequently, a test of vocabulary based on the material they were going to study in their textbook was also administered to make sure that the 60 subjects were homogeneous in terms of their vocabulary knowledge prior to the treatment and also to assure the researchers that the participants did not have any knowledge on the content which they were going to be exposed to; the results of this test confirmed that assumption.

Prior to the actual administration, both the proficiency test and the vocabulary tests were piloted among 30 students with almost the same language proficiency level of the 90 subjects who took the test later.

Instrumentation Three tests were used by the researchers in this study: a language proficiency test for homogenizing the students general English, a test of vocabulary to make sure that the participants level of vocabulary knowledge was the same prior to the treatment, and a posttest measuring and comparing the vocabulary achievements of the two groups. For comparing the two groups motivation after the treatment, a teacher-made questionnaire was used.

All the above are described in detail below in the chronological order employed in the study: 1. A Cambridge Flyers test was used for homogenizing the participants.

Only the reading and writing sections of this test were administered since the focus of this study was an evaluation of the participants vocabulary achievement in written form. According to the handbook of Cambridge Young Learners English Tests, this test is appropriate for candidates within the age group of 9 to 12. To make sure about the reliability of the test, the researchers piloted it among a group of 30 learners with characteristics almost identical with those of the target

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

77

group thereby calculating its reliability. Furthermore, the researchers ran item analysis on the test which proved none of the items needed to be replaced or revised.

2. The researchers designed a 20-item multiple-choice vocabulary test based on the Ministry of Education English textbook of the first grade of junior high (to divide the subjects into the control and experimental groups). Naturally, the researchers piloted this test too running the item analysis required to revise any inappropriate items and calculated the reliability of the test, as well.

3. A teacher-made vocabulary test based on the content of the instruction and consisting of 30 multiple-choice items testing the students vocabulary achievement within the content area was used as the posttest. It should be added that although the students were at the first grade of junior high school, they were familiar with multiple choice-tests and thus the format of the test did not disturb its face validity. A table of specification was designed by the researchers as the first step and the test was revised several times in order to suit the participants level of proficiency. Again to make sure the test was appropriate, the researchers piloted it prior to the actual administration among a group as identical as possible with the target group thus conducting a thorough item analysis and revising faulty items and checking its reliability.

4. A motivation questionnaire in close-ended form consisting of 15 questions was prepared by the researchers and used to investigate the level of motivation in both groups after the teaching period.

Materials The following materials were used at different stages of the study: 1. A series of tasks including individual and group work type was used

as a part of the treatment in the experimental group (described in the next section).

2. The SAMA English Science Book for the first grade of junior high was used as the course book which is designed and published by SAMA schools and includes science subject matters in English. Its main focus is on language teaching through science content.

3. The Oxford Picture Dictionary was used in the experimental group for doing certain tasks. Only those contents in this dictionary consistent with the content of the course book were used during the treatment. This dictionary thanks to its colorful pictures was very appropriate to the students language proficiency and age level.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

78

Procedure Following the process of selecting the control and experimental groups, the actual treatment commenced. It is worth noting that, in order to control the teacher variable, both groups were taught by one teacher (one of the researchers).

In the control group, the students were taught vocabulary through definitions, synonyms, and pictures. The students were not required to do any kind of tasks with the vocabulary they were learning; they only answered the questions presented in their course book.

In the experimental group, however, a task/content-based framework was employed. The content was taught through a content-based approach and the treatment was integrated with tasks, hence a task/content-based approach.

The lessons taught in both groups were under these headings: Animals, Plants, Objects and Matters, Five Senses, Teeth, and the Periodic Table. While in the control group, these lessons were taught in a usual content-based fashion and only the exercises in the books were employed, in the experimental group each of these lessons were taught through one or several tasks and vocabulary was taught through them. Each task had four main phases: warm-up (pre-task), main task, follow-up (post-task), and homework. A brief summary of each lesson is presented hereunder with the complete lesson plan for each chapter appearing in Appendix B.

For teaching the chapter of Animals, the students were taken to the zoo where they were taught the vocabulary content of their books regarding different animals. On their way to the zoo, the teacher showed them pictures of some animals and asked them to make the sound of those animals and this was regarded as the warm-up for this lesson. The whole trip to the zoo was in English and students were aware that this was a field trip with educational purposes for them. The next session, they worked on the reading passage of their books regarding animals and for homework, they were asked to draw their favorite animals and write at least three sentences for it. They read it for their classmates and showed their pictures.

For the Plants chapter, the teacher entered the class with a flower and the students were asked to touch and smell it; this act was regarded as the warm-up for this activity. The students were given planting tools and were taken to a garden. Different plant parts were introduced to them and subsequently, they planted some bean seeds themselves. For 10 days, they took care of their beans and as they started to grow, they were asked to introduce the different plant parts to their classmates. The session after the planting activity, they worked on the reading passage in class and for homework, they were asked to look at their picture dictionaries and find some new plant parts, draw at least one of them, and bring it to the class the following week.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

79

The lesson on Objects and Matters focused on magnets and thus the teacher took a box of magnets to the class and introduced the vocabulary content to the students by using magnets and showing their attraction power on different objects. Then the students were divided into groups of three and were given a magnet. Next, each two groups merged and they experienced the power of the magnet poles on each other with the teacher introducing the new vocabulary to them. As homework, they were asked to find some magnets around and write their names (the students had already learned about this naming in their textbooks) and draw a picture of one of them. The session after this, they showed their homework to their classmates and worked on the related reading passage in their book.

Next came the chapter of the Five Senses; a song was used for this lesson in the class. While the song introduced each body part, the teacher showed that part to them. Then they were asked to point to those body parts with the teacher and subsequently, the vocabulary was presented using a doll. Then again they started to sing the song with the tape. For homework, they were asked to draw one body part on a big sheet of paper and bring it to the class and talk about it in at least two sentences. The reading was done during the next session with the song activity and clapping and showing body parts.

The chapter on Teeth required the students to bring a toothbrush with them to the class. The teacher entered the class with a toothbrush in hand and started showing how teeth are brushed; this served as the warm-up for this activity. The vocabulary content was presented to them by showing the toothbrush. Additionally, they practiced correct tooth brushing with their toothbrushes while working in pairs using the vocabulary. For the next session, they were asked to look at their picture dictionaries and find at least three other words related to oral health and draw one of them to be presented in the class in the second session after working on the reading passage.

For the last chapter, that is the Periodic Table, a periodic table in English was taken to the class. They were given different substances such as salt, sugar, and water. The teacher explained to them that matters and substances are like a box and things inside them are different from how they are seen on the outside (this explanation was mostly done in their L1 of course since at this stage of language proficiency, the learners would fail to understand such explanations in English). For this purpose, they were divided into groups of five and were given a box with some small balls which represented atoms. They repeated the word atom and started to work in groups and showed each other the atoms. This was followed by some questions and answers. Some common atom names were presented to them, and then they looked in their boxes to find those atoms. For the next session as homework, they chose one atom and drew a picture of it on a big

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

80

sheet of paper and presented its characteristics; they used the single first person pronoun as they were supposed to be the atom themselves.

The whole treatment lasted for 12 sessions with the administration of the posttest (already described in detail in the instrumentation section) to both groups ending the treatment. The means of the scores achieved by both groups in the posttest were compared through running a t-test.

The motivational questionnaire was also administered to both groups alongside the posttest to see how each of the two groups responded to questions on their degree of motivation at the end of the program. Statistical Analysis The data analysis conducted in this study comprised both descriptive and inferential statistics: the former for calculating the means, standard deviations, and reliabilities of each test, and the latter (a t-test) to respond to the main research question and verify the null hypothesis. Results This section details the data analysis conducted in this study again in a chronological order reporting the subject selection process, dividing the participants into two groups, the posttest, and the hypothesis testing. Ultimately, the responses to the motivational questionnaire are presented.

Participant Selection Process As noted earlier, the Cambridge Flyers test used as a means for homogenizing the participants was first given to 30 students with almost the same level of proficiency for the piloting phase. Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics for this piloting.

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of the Proficiency Test Piloting

N Min Max Mean SD Total 30 9.00 41.00 27.67 9.81

Item analysis was run on this test and the results showed that none of the items needed to be revised or changed. Hence, the reliability was calculated. Table 2 reports the reliability estimate of the piloting (an acceptable Cronbachs Alpha Index of .89).

Table 2. Reliability Index of the Piloting Cronbach's Alpha K

.89 50

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

81

The researchers thus felt safe in employing the above piloted test for the subject selection process.

Following the piloting, the Cambridge Flyers test was administered to 90 students with the aim of selecting 60 of them for the study. The descriptive statistics of this process are presented below in Table 3.

Table 3. Descriptive Statistics of the Proficiency Test

N Min Max Mean SD Total 90 10 49 29.09 9.47

Dividing the Participants into the Two Groups Among the 90 students who took the test, 60 whose scores fell between one standard deviation above and below the mean were chosen as the participants of this study to be placed in the experimental and control groups.

Accordingly, 30 were put in one group and 30 in the other. The descriptive statistics of the two newly formed groups appear in Table 4 below.

Table 4. Group Statistics of the Two Groups Prior to the Treatment

Code N Mean SD Std. Error Mean

Skewness

Statistic Std. error Exp 30 27.80 3.53 0.64 0.36 0.43 Cont 30 28.10 4.37 0.79 0.17 0.43

To ensure further homogeneity between the two groups, an independent

samples t-test was run between the mean scores of both groups on the proficiency test. Prior to this, however, the normality of the two groups distribution of scores had to be checked.

Going back to Table 4 and by dividing the statistic of skewness by the standard error of each of the two groups, the results were 0.08 (0.36 / 0.43) and 0.40 (0.172 / 0.43) in the experimental and control groups, respectively. Both values fell within the range of -1.96 and +1.96, thus guaranteeing the normality of distribution within each group. Table 5 below includes the results of the t-test run between the mean scores of the two groups on the proficiency test.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

82

Table 5. Independent Samples t-Test of the Two Groups Mean Scores on the Proficiency Test

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-Test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t Sig. (2-tailed) df Mean Difference

Equal variances assumed

2.72 .10 -0.29 .77 58 -0.30

As Table 5 indicates, with F (1, 58) = 2.72, p =.10 (two-tailed), it was

concluded that the variances between the two groups were not significantly different. Therefore, the results of the t-test with the assumption of homogeneity of the variances are reported here.

Examining the mean difference of -0.30 with t(58) = -0.29, p = .77 (two-tailed) revealed that the difference between the two groups was not significant at the outset. Hence, the researchers could rest assured that the two experimental and control groups manifested no significant difference in their language proficiency prior to the treatment which means that any probable difference between the two groups at the end of the instruction period could be attributed to the difference in the programs. Posttest The posttest was designed by the researchers and consisted of 30 multiple-choice items resembling the content which was taught during the treatment. A series of statistical analyses was conducted before and after the administration which are described below.

Prior to the actual administration of the posttest, it was first piloted among a group of 30 students with almost the same language proficiency level as the target group. Table 6 provides the group statistics for this piloting.

Table 6. Descriptive Statistics of the Posttest Piloting N Mean SD Variance

Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Statistic

Total 30 17.63 .63 3.47 12.03

Subsequently, the reliability of the piloting was calculated to see

whether the designed posttest proved worthy of final administration. Furthermore, item analysis was run on this test and the improper items

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

83

were replaced by new ones. Table 7 contains the reliability index of the posttest in the piloting stage.

Table 7. Reliability Index of the Posttest Piloting Cronbach's Alpha K

.70 30 With the reliability index being at .70, the researchers felt confident in administering the test as the actual posttest to verify the hypothesis of this study.

Once ready for final administration, the posttest was given to the two groups. Table 8 contains the group statistics for this administration after the treatment period.

Table 8. Descriptive Statistics of the Posttest

Code N Mean SD Std. Error Mean

Skewness

Statistic Std Error Cont 30 15.30 6.71 1.23 0.50 0.43 Exp 30 23.53 3.82 0.70 0.41 0.43

As Table 8 reveals, the mean of the experimental group (M = 23.53, SD = 3.82) is perhaps exponentially higher than that of the control group (M = 15.30, SD = 6.71). However, further statistical analysis was required to see whether this difference was significant. Testing the Hypothesis To verify the null hypothesis of this study, an independent samples t-test was run between the means of the two groups scores during the posttest. Just as was explained earlier during the participation selection section, the normality of the two groups had to be checked first.

Going back to Table 8 and by dividing the statistic of skewness over the standard error of each of the two groups, the results were 1.17 (0.50 / 0.43) and 0.09 (0.41 / 0.43) in the control and experimental groups, respectively. Both values fell within the range of -1.96 and +1.96, thus guaranteeing the normality of distribution within each group. Table 9 shows the results of running the t-test.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

84

Table 9. Independent Samples t-Test for the Means of the Two Groups at the Posttest

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-Test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t Sig. (2-tailed) df Mean Difference

Equal variances not assumed

6.95* .01 -5.83** .00 58 -8.23

** p < .01, * p < .05

As is evident in the table, F (1, 58) = 6.95, p = .01 (two-tailed) disconfirms the equality of variances; nevertheless, t(58) = -5.83, p = .00 (two-tailed) lead to the conclusion that there was a significant difference between the mean scores of the two groups at the posttest.

It can thus be concluded that the presupposed null hypothesis was rejected meaning that the difference observed between sample means was large enough to be attributed to the differences between the population means and therefore not due to sampling errors. In other words, task/content-based instruction does have a significant impact on EFL learners vocabulary achievement.

Following the rejection of the null hypothesis, the researchers were interested to determine the strength of the findings of the research, that is, to evaluate the stability of the research findings across samples; hence, the effect size was estimated. While Cohens d stood at 2.42, the effect size was 0.78. According to Mackey and Gass (2005), this is considered a large effect size. Therefore, the findings of the study could be considered strong enough for the purpose of generalization. Motivational Questionnaire To compare the two groups motivation, a motivational questionnaire (see Appendix A) was designed by the researchers and given to all the participants after the treatment. The 15-item Likert-type questionnaire was designed in a way that the lower the score, the higher the motivation; that is to say that the highest degree of motivation in each of the 15 items was represented by a point 1 while the lowest by a point 4. Consequently, the lower the mean of the scores of a group, the higher their motivation.

The mean score in the experimental group was 16.66 (very close to the highest possible degree of motivation which is represented by 15 on this questionnaire), while in the control group it was 30. Therefore, it was concluded that the task/content-based program was more influential on students motivation in comparison with the content-based program.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

85

Discussion Through this research, it became evident that the group of EFL learners undergoing task/content-based instruction outperformed the group receiving content-based instruction with a very clear difference. As it was concluded from the statistical results conducted on the participants scores on the posttest in the two groups which led to the safe rejection of the null hypothesis of this study, there was a significant difference between the effect of task/content-based and content-based instruction on learners vocabulary achievement.

Furthermore, the motivational questionnaire given to the members of both groups following the completion of the instruction period clearly revealed that the task/content-based program was more influential on students motivation in comparison with the content-based program.

The findings of this study indicate that English teachers can benefit more effectively from a task/content-based approach in order to teach vocabulary, which is a fundamental part of language learning. When undergoing the task/content-based approach, students enjoy their learning as was expressed by the learners on the motivation questionnaire. This is true since the way they learn is categorically different from their previous experiences; learning happens in a joyful manner under this approach and gives them the experience that they are playing a game or that their English class is not a part of their regular school program bearing in mind that as young learners, going to school and class in many cases seems to be an obligation for them.

In addition, this modality of learning was most probably a major factor at work in the significant achievement of the learners undergoing the task/content-based program. Rather than the usual modality of teaching/learning in which students are mainly engaged in mere abstraction in the class, these young learners experienced, for the first time, a far more concrete presentation of new materials and were thus involved much more actively in a dynamic learning.

Conclusion Alongside providing teachers with plausible guidelines to employ in their classrooms, the findings of this research can help syllabus designers and textbook writers to design more effective textbooks for young learners; this is specifically true in the context of Iran where it can be really helpful to revise the materials presented to adolescent students at school. Furthermore, it is recommended to design a teachers guide with the focus on task/content-based instruction for content-based books being used in different systems clearly because not having a guide can lead to controversial issues faced by different teachers.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

86

Task/content-based language teaching may also be considered as an economical initiative in enhancing EFL learners vocabulary intake and use. Without having to undertake the abominably high expenses of textbook production, both public and private sector schools can incorporate and mainstream this procedure of language teaching in order to achieve more promising results.

The Authors Hamid Marashi is Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, and Executive Manager of the Journal of English Language Studies (JELS). He currently teaches the graduate courses of seminar in TEFL issues, discourse analysis, and teaching language skills and his main areas of research interest include cooperative learning, critical thinking, and TBLT. He has published in national academic journals and presented in international conferences. Gahzal Hatam holds an MA degree in TEFL from Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch. She has been teaching English since 2003 in several different language schools in Mashad and is currently teaching pre-advanced courses for adults in Safir Language School. Her main areas of research interest include TBLT and language testing. References Andrade, M. S., & Makaafi, J. H. (2001). Guidelines for establishing

adjunct courses at the university level. TESOL, 10(2/3), 33-39. Arnaud, P. J. L., & Savignon, S. J. (1997). Rare words, complex lexical

units and the advanced learner. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 157-173). England: Cambridge University Press.

Atkinson, R. C. (1972). Optimizing the learning of a second-language vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96, 124-129.

Brinton, D., Snow, M., & Wesche, M. (1989). Content-based second language instruction. NY: Newbury House.

Channell, J. (1988). Psycholinguistic considerations in the study of L2 vocabulary acquisition. In R. Carter & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp. 83-96). London: Longman.

Crandall, J. A. (1987). ESL through content-area instruction: Mathematics, science, and social studies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, & Washington, DC: Prentice Hall and Center for Applied Linguistics.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. England: Oxford University Press.

Goulden, R., Nation, P., & Read, J. (1990). How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics, 11(4), 341-363.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

87

Hatch, E. (1983). Psycholinguistics: A second language perspective. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Hatch, E., & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E. Ingram (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 3-28). London: Academic Press.

Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practices of second language acquisition. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press.

Lado, R., Baldwin, B., & Lobo, F. (1967). Massive vocabulary expansion in a foreign language beyond the basic course: The effects of stimuli, timing and order of presentation. Washington, DC: US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Project No. 5-1095.

McCarthy, M. J. (1984). A new look at vocabulary in EFL. Applied Linguistics, 5, 12-22.

Meara, P. (1980). Vocabulary acquisition: A neglected aspect of language learning. Language Teaching and Linguistics Abstracts, 13, 221-246.

Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Mohan, B., Leung, C., & Davison, C. (2001). English as a second language

in the mainstream: Teaching learning and identity. NY: Longman. Nation, I. S. P. (1982). Beginning to learn foreign vocabulary: A review of

the research. RELC Journal, 13, 14-36. Nunan. D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. England: Cambridge

University Press. Richards, J., Platt, J., & Weber, H. (1985). Longman dictionary of applied

linguistics. London: Longman. Sansome, R. (2000). Applying lexical research to the teaching of phrasal

verbs. IRAL, 38, 59-69. Snow, M. A. (2005). A model of academic literacy for integrated language

and content instruction. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language learning (pp. 693-712). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stoller, F. L. (2004). Content-based instruction: Perspectives on curriculum planning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 261-283.

Wesche, M., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative teaching, content-based instruction, and task-based learning. In R. Kaplan (Ed.), Handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207-228). England: Oxford University Press.

www.SID.ir

rAhc

evi fo

DIS

mataH dna ihsaraM

88

sexidneppA A xidneppA eriannoitseuQ lanoitavitoM

1= 2=

3= 4=

4 3 2 1 . 1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6 . 7 . 8 . 9 . 01 . 11 . 21 . 31 . 41 . 51

B xidneppA snalP nosseL slaminA ot slamina fo sdnik tnereffid fo noitcudortni eht no sretnec nossel sihT sepyt tnereffid thguat eb ot redro ni ooz eht ot nekat era stnedutS .stneduts .slamina fo

ri.DIS.www

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

89

Pre-task stage (warm up): On the way to the zoo, the teacher/researchers shows students the picture of some animals and asks them to make the sound of the animal. This process makes the students involved in the process of learning and they also enjoy doing this activity. Students figure out that this is a field trip with the purpose of education. Task: At the zoo, students move with the teacher/researchers from cage to cage and the teacher/researcher tells them the name of those animals and asks them to repeat the names. They have pictures of some animals and when they are told the name of each animal, they make a note below the picture and write the name. The whole process is conducted in English. Post-task and homework: The next session, students study the whole chapter in their books and for homework, they are asked to draw the picture of their favorite animal and write three sentences for it and bring it to the class. They can make use of their picture dictionaries to find the name of some animals they do not know. Plants Pre-task (warm up): The teacher/researchers enters the class with a flower in her hand. Students are asked to smell and touch the flower. They wait to see what happens next. Task: Students are given gardening equipment and go to the garden. Different plants are shown to them and they plant some bean seeds themselves. They are asked to follow the bean seed growth for ten days. The teacher/researcher has a plant in her hand and introduces different parts of it to the students. Post-task and homework: The following session, students study the chapter of plants in their books, they use their picture dictionaries in order to find the name of some new plants, and they draw some of the new ones for the next session to show to their classmates. After ten days, they go again to the garden and show different parts of their bean plant to their classmates. Objects and Matters Pre-task (warm up): The teacher/researchers enters the class with a box of magnets. One magnet is taken out of the box and put close to one of the metal objects in the class; students see how the magnet attracts the metal object. Then the process is practiced with a non-metal object and students differentiate how the effect is different. Task: The teacher/researcher introduces the vocabulary content by showing pictures and using magnets. Students repeat. Post-task and homework: Students are divided into groups of three and each group is given a magnet to practice the new vocabulary. Then the two groups are merged and they use the magnets; they have to understand the

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

Marashi and Hatam

90

effect of different poles on each other. For homework, they require a magnet to use among real world objects, draw their picture, and bring them to the class the coming session. They also work on the reading passage in the class. Five Senses Pre-task (warm up): The teacher/researchers enters the class singing a song which points to different parts of body and she shows that part while singing the song. Task: This time the students are required to show the pointed body part in the song. The vocabulary content is introduced by using a doll. After that the teacher plays the same song on the tape and wants them to repeat. Post-task and homework: For the next session, they are asked to draw different parts of the body on a big paper sheet and write at least two sentences about them. They bring their homework to the class and show it to their classmates. They also work on the reading passage. Teeth Pre-task (warm up): The session before teaching this content, the teacher/ researchers asks the students to bring a toothbrush to the class for the next session. She enters the class with her toothbrush in her hand and starts brushing her teeth. Task: The vocabulary content is presented to them by showing the toothbrush; they are also taught how to brush their teeth correctly and this is done in English. Post-task and homework: Students work in pairs practicing brushing their teeth correctly meanwhile using the vocabulary content. For the next session, they are required to find three words related to health in their picture dictionaries, draw them, and present in the class. The next session, they work on their reading passages. Periodic Table Pre-task (warm up): The teacher/researchers enters the class with a box in her hand. She has put some small balls inside it. The box is shown to the students and after some seconds, they are required to guess the content of the box. The teacher opens the box and the students understand how a box can be different inside. Task: They are given some objects such as salt, sugar, and water and are told that these objects are like a box having some small balls inside; atom is taught in this way. They are divided into groups and given boxes with a name of one substance written on each and there are small balls inside. They work together and practice the vocabulary content.

www.SID.ir

Arch

ive of

SID

TEFLL, IAUNTB, 1(4), 73-91, Fall 2009

91

Post-task and homework: They are given another box with different balls inside representing different atoms. The names of the different atoms are spoken and they should find the atom in their boxes. For homework, they choose one atom and draw a picture of it on a big sheet of paper and present its characteristics; they use the first singular personal pronoun as they are supposed to be the atom themselves.

Email: ahmuya@yahoo.com Email: ghhatam@live.com

www.SID.ir