Upload
stippie-chee
View
43
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A study about vocabulary learning strategies of research participants from the English Language course and the Chinese Studies course.
Citation preview
MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON
BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR
KAMPAR
STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
A RESEARCH PROJECT
SUBMITTED IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE
FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN
OCT. 2011
MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON
BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR
KAMPAR
STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
A RESEARCH PROJECT
SUBMITTED IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE
FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE
UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN
OCT. 2011
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
In completion of this thesis, there are several parties that I would like to express my
gratitude to. First and foremost, to my Final Year Project supervisor, Ms. Tan Swee Mee of the
Department of Languages and Linguistics, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) for her
support and guidance academically and mentally, as well as her encouragement in the course of
conducting this thesis. Her professional knowledge and experience are the main factor
contributing to this thesis completion.
Mr. Lee Soo Chee of the Institute of Chinese Studies also played a significant role in
helping to conduct this research by assisting in gathering participants from the Chinese Studies
(CH) course. It is impossible to conduct this research without participants from the
aforementioned course.
Participants from both courses of Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) are
also given my sincerest gratitude. As the identified participants for this research, they have
sacrificed precious time and effort in answering the questionnaires distributed to them. It would
be impossible to get this research completed without their selfless contributions.
Lastly, I do value and appreciate my parents and classmates for their assistance in
helping to complete this thesis. To all people whom I have failed to mention above, I thank you
for contributing to the completion of this thesis and may all of you be blessed.
STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
APPROVAL FORM
This research paper attached hereto, entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies
(MVLS) comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR
Kampar prepared and submitted by Stippie Chee Wei How in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Bachelor of Arts (Hons) English Language is hereby accepted.
_____________________ Date: _____________
Supervisor
Ms. Tan Swee Mee
i
ABSTRACT
In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students inability to use words precisely when
there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are mastered and use correctly and accurately. It is
becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with researches of Mnemonic
Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS). This research studies and compares the MVLS,
applied by UTAR students in both Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) courses to
rehearse their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research
also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the words in
the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS effectiveness.
Learning new words is a complex and multi-processing effort. Many retention strategies are
needed to transfer these new words from short-term to long-term storage. This research serves as
a platform to enhance vocabulary building through understanding the conceptual frameworks of
MVLS. Educators may refer to this study as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using
sets of MVLS. Lastly, this research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the
correct strategies to guarantee higher success rate of information storing and recalling in
rehearsing new words.
ii
DECLARATION
I declare that the material contained in this paper is the end result of my own work and that due
acknowledgement has been given in the bibliography and references to ALL sources be they
printed, electronic or personal.
Name : STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW
Student ID: 09AAB01075
Signed : ____________________
Date : 20th
October 2011
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENTS PAGE
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.0 Introduction 1
1.1 Research Background 2
1.2 Statement of Problem 5
1.3 Purpose of the Study 6
1.4 Research Questions 6
1.5 Scope of Study 7
1.6 Methodology 8
1.7 Significance of the Study 8
1.8 Definition of keywords/terms 9
Chapter 2: Literature review
2.0 Introduction 11
2.1 Conceptual background 11
2.2 Mnemonic History 12
2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning 13
2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) 14
2.3.2 Nations Taxonomy (2001) 15
2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition 17
2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002) 17
2.4.2 Mason (2004) 18
v
2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004) 19
2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies 20
2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006) 21
2.5.2 Allen (1995) 22
2.6 Conclusion 23
Chapter 3: Methodology
3.0 Introduction 25
3.1 Theoretical Framework 26
3.1.1 Model of memory (1968) 26
3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory 26
3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM) 27
3.1.1.3 Rehearsal 28
3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM) 29
3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972) 29
3.1.2.1 Levels of Processing (1972) 30
3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) 31
3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics 32
3.1.3.2 Spatial mnemonics 32
3.1.3.3 Visual mnemonics 33
3.1.3.4 Physical mnemonics 34
3.2 Restating purpose and research questions 36
3.3 Participants and sampling 37
3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process 38
v
3.5 Research design and stages 39
3.6 Presents study questionnaire 41
3.7 Conclusion 42
Chapter 4: Data analysis and discussion
4.0 Introduction 43
4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results 44
4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1 45
4.3 Answering RQ 1 46
4.3.1 English language proficiency level and test results 47
4.3.2 Scorers of Excellent in EL participants 48
4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2 50
4.4.1 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH) 51
4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL) 53
4.5 Answering RQ 2 55
4.5.1 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention 55
4.5.2 Effectiveness of Keyword method 57
4.6 Findings pertaining to rehearsal preferences or approaches in RQ 3 59
4.6.1 Mnemonic styles and number of participants: CH and EL 60
4.6.2 Answering RQ 3 65
4.7 Conclusion 68
vi
Chapter 5: Conclusion
5.0 Introduction 69
5.1 Answering research questions 69
5.1.1 RQ1 70
5.1.2 RQ2 71
5.1.3 RQ3 72
5.2 Applications of MVLS in teaching training programmes 73
5.3 Limitations 75
5.4 Conclusion 76
REFERENCES 77
Appendix A Sample of Questionnaire 79
Appendix B Sample of Completed Questionnaire 83
Appendix C Sample of Questionnaire (Appendix) 86
Appendix D Sample of Words Rehearsal 87
vii
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
1 Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy 15
2 Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics 32
3 Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics 33
4 Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics 34
5 Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics 35
6 Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants 51
7 Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants 53
8 Sample of Words Rehearsal 57
9 Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (CH participants) 62
10 Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (EL participants) 64
viii
LIST OF GRAPHS
Graphs Page
1 Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants) 45
2 Distribution of mnemonic styles (CH and EL participants) 60
ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations Page
1 MVLS Mnemonic vocabulary learning strategies 1
2 CH Chinese Studies 1
3 EL English Language 1
4 STM Short-term memory 2
5 LTM Long-term memory 2
6 RQ Research Question 6
7 FAS Faculty of Arts and Social Science 7
8 ICS Institute of Chinese Studies 7
9 ESL English as a second language 8
10 L2 Second language 17
11 GEPT - General English Proficiency Test 21
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
This study is entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS)
Comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR
Kampar. With these two variables involved in this research, the study aims to
compare differences and similarities in terms of revising and rehearsing English
vocabulary among participants from courses featuring Chinese Studies (CH) and
English Language (EL). There are nine sections in this chapter. Section 1.1 generally
presents the background information regarding this research. It is followed by
statement of problem which triggers this study in section 1.2. Section 1.3 states the
purpose of this research, while research questions to be answered in the final chapter
are posted on Section 1.4. Section 1.5 informs the scope of this research, while section
1.6 briefly discusses conceptual framework and methodology that are employed in
conducting this research. Subsequently, a discussion regarding significance of this
study is shown in Section 1.7. Finally, Section 1.8 provides some keywords and their
definitions that are crucial to guide the reading.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 2
1.1 Research Background
Students amount of time spent in the classrooms does not promise equal amount
of skills and knowledge learnt. In fact, students learning has drawn attention from
teachers and parents, claiming that their learning progress does not meet expectations.
There are two explanations to this matter: either the students listen to their teachers
inattentively, which could be due to their interests and preferences of the lesson being
taught; or they simply could not remember things taught to them clearly in the past
and knowledge were not successfully stored in their memory.
While the first scenario discusses about students motivation and factors that raise
their attentions in class, the second scenario questions students memory rehearsals
and shows that insufficient practise of information is the leading cause of
unsuccessful transferring of information from Short-term Memory (STM) to Long-
term Memory (LTM) (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968). The same applies to vocabulary
learning, successful retention of newly taught words relies greatly on constant
practises and rehearsals of these lexical items.
Having learnt basic grammatical rules does not contribute to excellence in
knowledge of vocabulary. In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students
inability to use words precisely when there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are
mastered and used correctly and accurately (as cited in Malaysian Education Ministry
English Teaching Syllabus, 2009). Statistics revealed that knowing the meanings of
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 3
words does not guarantee fluidity in using them in written and spoken
communication. Learning words in a language is being regarded as the main
component in effective communication; no information can be conveyed without
using the appropriate words, regardless of knowing the rules and knowledge of
grammar (Nemati, 2009).
According to Brown and Payne (1994), there are five steps in the process of
vocabulary learning:
1. Having sources for encountering new words.
2. Getting clear images of the forms of the new words.
3. Learning the meaning of the words.
4. Making strong memory connection between the words forms and the meanings.
5. Applying the words in written or spoken form.
(Fan, 2003, p. 223, as cited in Hamzah et al., 2009, p. 42)
Knowing more words does help a person in getting intentions transferred to
another party while lowering possibilities of communication failure. To consider one
knows a word, Schmitt (1997) asserted that the following knowledge are necessary:
1. Lexical form: This refers to either spoken or written form of words, which are
pronunciation or spelling of words.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 4
2. Word structure: The knowledge of words basic morphemes, and the derivations
of the words and its inflections.
3. Syntactic pattern: Knowing the exact location or placement of words in phrases
or sentences so that the phrases or sentences are valid.
4. Meanings of words: There are three types of words meanings which are
referential, affective, and pragmatics. Referential means metaphorical extensions
of words meaning; affective refers to connotations of words and pragmatics
refers to appropriate use of words based on the contexts given.
5. Lexical relations of words: This refers to similar or opposite meaning of words,
such as synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, etc.
(Schmitt, 1997, p. 207, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34)
Revising and rehearsing are crucial to get words stored in STM to be well
remembered and transferred into LTM. Unless new items are rehearsed regularly,
they would be eventually forgotten no matter how hard they are processed in the first
encounter due to human memorys fragile nature (Ellis, 1995; Hulstijn, 2001; Nation,
2001)
Communication failure has raised the need to improve on memory retention of
words. It is becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with
researches of Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) (Anderson, 1991,
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 5
as cited in Amir and Mohd Noor, n.d. p. 314), which can be defined as sets of
techniques or learning behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques
are effective in helping language learners to discover the meanings and to retain the
knowledge of newly-learnt words. When words are understood better, appropriate
usage of words in written and spoken communication is also achieved (Oxford, 1990).
This research compares and studies on the MVLS practised by Universiti Tunku
Abdul Rahman (UTAR) students in two courses consist of Chinese Studies (CH) and
English Language (EL) in rehearsing and expanding their English vocabulary.
Students in CH course are considered as non EL majors, while students in EL course
are EL majors. Using the deep processing MVLS highlighted by Craik and Lockhart
(1972) in Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34) as the
theoretical framework, questionnaires designed accordingly were used in gathering
and recording of research data.
1.2 Statement of Problem
There are several factors that influence students preferences and choices of
MVLS such as learning styles, motivations, language competency, etc (Oxford,
1990). The question of whether students in two different courses which contrast in
terms of mediums of instruction in their lessons possess distinguishable abilities to
rehearse their vocabulary remains unknown to linguists and researchers. Lectures in
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 6
CH are conducted using Chinese language while lecturers speak English to conduct
their teachings in EL. Noticing such obvious difference in these two courses, this
research sees frequency of exposure to English Language between students from CH
and EL as one of the leading factors that influence students in storing, retaining, and
recalling of new English words. Therefore, methods of rehearsing their newly learnt
words adopted by students from these two courses are very worth researching.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this research is to study and compare the MVLS, in other
words, strategies applied by UTAR students in both CH and EL courses to rehearse
their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research
also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the
words in the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS
effectiveness (Erten and Williams, 2008, p. 57). At the end of this research,
conclusion is made and it is hoped that research questions set are answered.
1.4 Research Questions (RQ)
The questionnaires designed and later completed by participants are crucial in
answering these three research questions:
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 7
RQ 1: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when
students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each
other?
RQ 2: What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words
between students from these two courses?
RQ 3: How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in
students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in
rehearsing new English words?
1.5 Scope of Study
This research focuses on MVLS and vocabulary rehearsing of participants
from both CH and EL courses from the Faculty of Arts and Social Science (FAS) and
Institute of Chinese Studies (ICS). 40 students from each course were selected
regardless of their year of studies. In selecting of participants, students frequency of
exposure to English Language is the main aspect of this research. In other words,
students from these two groups are selected due to the difference in their tendencies of
being exposed to English language.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 8
1.6 Methodology
There are two sections in this questionnaire. In Section A, students were required
to fill in answers by referring to the appendix attached before they attempted to
answer the questions. Section B consists of 15 questions accompanied by a likert
scale. The completed questionnaires were analysed to obtain required data.
1.7 Significance of the Study
This research serves as a platform to enhance vocabulary building through
understanding the conceptual frameworks of MVLS. Educators may refer to this study
as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using sets of MVLS.
It is hoped that the results obtained would be able to answer questions regarding
students methods in information processing and how effective these methods in
promoting higher succession rate information storing and recalling. ESL learners
would also understand better about the importance of continuous rehearsals and
practises in enhancing storing and retaining of information.
ESL learners might also benefit from learning about factors which are crucial in
getting information retained perfectly, such as motivation, learning styles, and
language competency. Students frequency of getting themselves exposed to a certain
target language might also affect the styles and pattern of MVLS which can be
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 9
utilised to their advantages in rehearsing and memorising of newly encountered words
in the target language. In other words, this research attempts to explain the exposure
to different mediums of instruction during lectures and its influences on styles in
rehearsing and practising newly encountered words.
ESL learners are also encouraged to self-reflect on themselves by assigning
themselves into either group of participants (EL majors or non-EL majors).
Attempting the survey in the questionnaire provides an ideal opportunity to identify
their methods of words rehearsal even they are not aware of it consciously. This
research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the correct strategies
of rehearsing words or whether a change is what they need to guarantee higher
success rate of information storing and recalling.
1.8 Definition of keywords/terms
Memory: The main idea of this research, it refers to the system where processes of
encoding, retrieval and storage of information are interrelated (Atkinson and Shiffrin,
1968). The Model of Memory (1968) which was introduced by Richard Atkinson and
Richard Shiffrin is one of the theoretical frameworks which focuses on human
memory structure.
Short-term memory: Another term of Short-term memory is the Working memory. It
refers to information stored in memory only lasts for a brief moment; knowledge and
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 10
information which interest a person will move from sensory memory to short-term
memory and they are either forgotten or lost without proper revising and rehearsing.
(Henson and Heller, 1999).
Long-term memory: Facts and knowledge stored in the long-term memory are
considered well-remembered or mastered that they tend to stay in this section for
a longer period of time. Constant revision and rehearsal of items stored are to prevent
them from being erased from the long-term memory.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS): Sets of techniques or learning
behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques are effective in helping
language learners to discover the meaning and to retain the knowledge of newly learnt
words (Oxford, 1990).
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 11
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
In this chapter, previous researches of vocabulary learning are discussed, apart
from that, related past studies are also brought into discussion. In Section 2.1, a
noticeable phenomenon that triggers past researches about vocabulary learning
strategies is highlighted, followed by a brief introduction of MVLS in Section 2.2. An
introduction of two research taxonomies is featured in Section 2.3, which introduces
Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) in Section 2.3.1 and Nations Taxonomy in
Section 2.3.2. Section 2.4 brings forward three recent studies of vocabulary
acquisition; they are research by Yoshi and Flaitz (2006) in Section 2.4.1, a study
conducted by Mason (2004) in Section 2.4.2, and a research by Sahbazian (2004) in
Section 2.4.3. An introduction of two mnemonic case studies is featured in Section
2.5, which are case studies of Siew M.Y in Section 2.5.1 and Allen (1995) in Section
2.5.2.
2.1 Conceptual background
Remembering new words in language learning appears to be the main setback for
most language learners. To ensure effective retaining and recalling of new
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 12
vocabulary, constant revision is the key to avoid newly learnt words from being
forgotten.
Unlike non-verbal communication, where messages can be transferred using
signs and symbols, languages have both spoken and written form to get messages
conveyed to another party. Intentions in a conversation can be figured out with correct
words being used regardless of grammatical structure errors, but without learning the
words beforehand, no idea can be conveyed at all.
With vocabulary learning regarded as the most crucial part in language learning,
there are urgencies in publishing literature works about memory strategies, also
known as Mnemonics vocabulary learning strategies (MVLS), which are sets of
learning behaviours or strategies being practiced widely to assist in rehearsing newly
encountered words to ensure them to be well- remembered (Schmitt, 1997: 207, cited
in Xhaferi, 2008: 35).
2.2 Mnemonic History
The idea of mnemonic devices was introduced by Stanislaus Mink von
Wennsshein and later many variations were developed over the years (Ebbinghaus,
1885). It was originally a list of strategies which were intended to assist people in
remembering reminders written on their to-do lists, such as things to buy in the
grocery stores, remembering names, numbers, etc. The earliest version of mnemonic
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 13
strategies were simple and direct, for example, assigning things to remember with
specific codes that are easy to recall when needed, such as numbers, alphabets, etc.
Although straightforward, researchers have confirmed that some of the strategies are
still practiced widely nowadays.
It was in year 1730 when the first variation of mnemonic strategies was
developed based on the earliest system. Dr. Richard Grey suggested using consonants
and alphabets to represent digits that are supposed to be remembered. In year 1808,
Gregor von Feinaigle developed another variation of mnemonic strategies based on
Dr. Richard Greys version, instead of writing out the digits replacements, the
consonants and vowels were pronounced as sound units.
In modern days, mnemonic strategies are also used in learning vocabulary and
to minimise the chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, due to human
memorys fragile nature (as cited in Yek, 2006, p. 11). The introduction of mnemonic
strategies into teaching vocabulary to students has benefited not only the students but
educators as well.
2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning
In researching vocabulary learning strategies, several taxonomies about
vocabulary teaching and learning have been proposed by researchers of vocabulary.
Although the taxonomies all differ in terms of methods and approaches they
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 14
categorise, they all provide strategies which are considered widely applicable in the
course of foreign language learning.
2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996)
Peter Yongqi Gu and Robert Keith Johnson (as cited in Vocabulary Learning
Strategies and Language Learning Outcomes, 2006) conducted a research in China
with a purpose to reveal the vocabulary learning strategies employed by 850 Chinese
university students who learnt English as their second languages. Their aims were to
investigate the relationship between strategies deployed and outcomes which were
likely to occur.
There are four types of strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996, cited
from Ghazal, n.d., p. 85) which reflect 850 sophomore non-EL majors choices in
their vocabulary learning strategies while attempting questionnaires in the research.
The mostly used strategies are metacognitive strategies which included selective
attention and self-initiation strategies. In selective attention, respondents
acknowledged words that are important to learn and are essential in comprehension of
a passage. Foreign and second language learners who preferred self-initiation
strategies used plenty of ways to get a words meaning clear to them. Cognitive
strategies employed by respondents in this study included strategy of guessing, which
participants relied on their background knowledge, passage context, or other lexical
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 15
items to guess the meaning of a word. Other methods in cognitive strategies feature
also note-taking and dictionary using.
Memory strategies are divided into rehearsal and encoding strategies. In
rehearsal, using word lists and repetition of words are usually choices of rehearsing.
Encoding strategies include association of words with imagery, visual, auditory, and
semantic. Last but not least, the activation strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy
(1996) refers to using newly learned words in written sentences or verbally.
In short, the four major strategies to summarise Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy
(1996) are as follow:
Strategies
Metacognitive Cognitive Memory Activation
1.Selective attention:
Identifying words
which are crucial to
learn.
2.Self initiation: Applying a variety
of methods to get
meanings of words
clear
1. Guessing: The use of
background
knowledge or
other contextual
clues to guess the
meaning of
words.
2. Note taking
3. Dictionary using
1. Rehearsal: Word lists and
repetition of
words
2. Encoding: Association of
words with
imagery, visual,
auditory, and
semantic.
Using newly learnt
words in written
sentences or verbally.
Table 2.1: Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (Ghazal, N.D, p. 85)
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 16
2.3.2 Nations Taxonomy (2001)
Nations Taxonomy was proposed by Paul Nation (2001, as cited in Ghazal, n.d.,
p. 86) in studying vocabulary learning strategies among foreign language learners. It
is one of the most famous research materials which provides many approaches in
vocabulary learning. Oxford (1990) describes vocabulary learning strategies as
actions taken to improve second and foreign language learners ability to store
vocabulary in their minds.
The strategies in this taxonomy are divided into three general classes of
planning, source, and processes, with each has its own subset of key strategies.
The first category, planning involves determining how much attention to be spent in
certain lexical item. In short, the degree of importance of words is figured out before
learning takes place (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86). Strategies in this category are
choosing words to be studied, selecting aspects of word knowledge and choosing
studying approaches as well as rehearsal planning.
In the second category, source refers to gathering information about the words.
Information may include a words form itself, the context which the word is in used,
or simply information from learning aids such as bilingual dictionaries or glossaries.
In other words, this category empasises on understanding the words better before they
are spoken or written (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86).
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 17
Lastly, the processes category includes establishing word knowledge through
noticing, retrieving, and generating strategies. Noticing in this category involves
learners ability to spot words to be learned, strategies in noticing are adding words
into notebooks, checklists and rehearsing the words. Retrieval describes the ability to
recall the words when needed. Nation (2001) explains that how a word is stored will
determine how it is retrieved in the future. Finally, generating strategies include
attaching new aspects of knowledge to a persons pre-existing vocabulary storage
system through visualising examples of words, words analysis, semantic mapping and
using learning aids such as word scales or grids. (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86)
2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition
Researches and studies had been carried out in the past to investigate methods
and approaches of students in attempting to boost their vocabulary learning. These
studies also proved useful as teachers guidance and references in teaching of
vocabulary.
2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002)
The main idea of this study was to examine the effectiveness of annotation on
incidental vocabulary learning among a group of adult ESL students in a second
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 18
language (L2) reading programme. The term incidental can be defined as acquisition
of words definitions in tasks such as reading comprehension and texts listening
(Flaitz, 2002, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 43).
Three types of annotation were designed for this study: texts only, pictures
only, and a combination of texts and pictures. The research subjects were 151 adult
ESL learners at beginning and intermediate levels of language proficiency. Subjects
were given texts for reading comprehension purposes. Three types of instruments
were used as vocabulary retention assessment: word recognition, picture recognition,
and definition supply tests.
Results obtained in this study showed that combination group (texts and
pictures) performed better than the other two groups. Findings in this research
revealed that there was no significant relationship between students language
proficiency levels and performance of their vocabulary acquisition.
2.4.2 Mason (2004)
The researcher wanted to find out if listening to texts would contribute to
students vocabulary and language development, and its effectiveness compared to
giving direct instruction to students. 60 participants that were first year English
majors in a private college in Osaka were chosen for conducting this study.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 19
Participants were divided into two groups of texts listening group and direct
instructing group.
Participants in the texts listening group showed vocabulary language
development, as suggested by the comprehension hypothesis, where vocabulary
development is the result of comprehension of messages. Students listened to stories
line by line, sentence by sentence; and improved their understanding of the stories.
They even made new sentences using new words they learned.
However, participants in the direct instructing group did not gain language
development, despite their vocabulary did improve. This is due to the groups focus
on form rather than language. In this group, students knew that they would be tested
on their vocabulary, thus their attentions were focused on learning new words only,
rather than understanding the stories (Mason, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 42).
2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004)
This study was conducted with a group of Turkish university students. The
purpose of the research was to obtain a clearer image of the vocabulary learning
strategies and steps taken by this group of respondents to assist themselves in learning
new English words.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 20
The methodology of this research was basically a survey with data gathering
required the respondents to fill up a 35-items survey questionnaire in order to find out
the percentages of each vocabulary learning strategies being used by the respondents.
Results of this research show that overall Turkish university respondents were not
aware of using vocabulary learning strategies to revise newly learned English words,
as frequency of effective rehearsing of new English words appeared to be low.
Strategies such as the key word method and semantic mapping were not among the
strategies which were used most by the respondents. However, memory strategies,
especially the simple and direct ones, were reported having higher percentages of
practitioners compared to other strategies.
In concluding the results, the researcher asserted that the most significant way of
mastering new English words among the respondents was using straightforward
cognitive based memory strategies (Sahbazian, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 41).
This is mainly due to traditional teaching in Turkish education system which
encouraged rote learning method in not only foreign language learning but also in
most of the subjects.
2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies
This section features and discusses two case studies of teaching vocabulary to
students in a classroom setting. Unlike the past studies mentioned in the previous
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 21
section, where the researchers were either linguists or language researchers,
experiments in these two cases were conducted in a classroom setting by teachers of
English Language.
2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006)
A 14 year-old boy diagnosed with Tourette syndrome and was observed with
being absent minded and a lack of concentration in class. Yek (2006) gave him a
rudimentary vocabulary test and found out that he had only second grade English
vocabulary competency although he had been studying English language since
kindergarten.
Yek (2006) started to teach him using mnemonics in learning English vocabulary.
For complex and long words such as comprehension, he was taught to syllabicate
them. The back drill method was also taught to him, an example is the word
organise, where he was taught to pronounce it in ise, nise, anise, ganise
and finally organise. In understanding the definitions of the words, translations
were sometimes made in using the boys mother tongue, which is Chinese language.
(Yek, 2006)
In year 2005, the boy sat for the General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) and
managed to pass the test. On the same year, he took the GEPT oral test and
successfully passed the test. The effectiveness of the mnemonics proved to be a
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 22
success as he was motivated in preparing for his GEPT intermediate level test. Among
other reasons, the boys retention of English vocabulary may have been his
motivation in his studies.
However, a discovery in this case study suggests a problem in teaching
mnemonics to improve vocabulary learning lies in the instruction of abstract words.
Often, mnemonics and other VLS cannot be applied in teaching such words.
2.5.2 Allen (1995)
Janet Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) proposed that she was teaching
vocabulary just like how she was taught. Her vocabulary learning experiences include
assigning words in a list to be learnt, looking up words in the dictionary, and making
sentences using the assigned words. The dictionary method was her schools main
approach in teaching vocabulary to students but she was concerned when using the
same approach, her students had failed in locating the most logical definition,
recognising its part of speech, and using them correctly in the sentences.
Her thoughts were that even students scored well in a vocabulary test; they still
faced difficulties in retaining the knowledge of the words unless long term
reinforcements were provided (Allen, 1995, cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009).
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 23
Inspired by a book entitled Vocabulary Cartoons (Burchers, Burchers, and
Burchers, 1997), Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) started using cartoon
illustrations and the keyword method to teach vocabulary to students. For each word
to be learnt, students were provided with its definitions, the pronunciation, a keyword,
a humorous cartoon with a caption, and examples of sentences with words used in
context (Burchers, Burchers, and Burchers, 1997).
To increase the students understanding of the words, Allen (as cited in Benge
and Robbins, 2009) erased the definitions, and demanded students to figure out the
definitions of the words based on the examples of sentences with words used in
context.
In testing the students knowledge of vocabulary, and the methods effectiveness,
students were given reinforcement activities such as such as games and puzzles, other
cartoon activities, graphic organizers, and analogy activities (Allen, as cited in Benge
and Robbins, 2009). The results turned out positively as the students were able to
recall the words learnt, for the past nine years, the mnemonic vocabulary instructional
method has been in used constantly to teach vocabulary to students.
2.6 Conclusion
It is important to acknowledge the development of MVLS from past to present
before continuing to the next chapter. Chapter 2 attempts to reveal about the origins of
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 24
mnemonic strategies, which is also the main topic of this study. Getting sufficient
knowledge of main subject would help in achieving better understanding of two
important taxonomies of memory and vocabulary learning research, as well as other
recent studies featured in this chapter. Past studies of memory and vocabulary
learning have come up with several theories and approaches, which to a certain extent
this study is related with.
The next chapter features the research design and explains the theories and
approaches retrieved from the past studies mentioned above.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 25
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction
The main discussions in this chapter are the research design and the theoretical
framework. Section 3.1 briefly discusses the theoretical framework included in this
research. Section 3.1.1 features the Model of Memory. Another theory is the Depth of
Processing Theory, which is discussed in section 3.1.2. The following sections are
explanations of MVLS grouped under four different categories retrieved from
Schmitts Taxonomy (1997). The chapter continues in section 3.2 with an explanation
on the participants selected to conduct this study. In section 3.3, the correct
procedures and steps to get this research conducted charted out, as well as a detailed
description on the research questionnaire. The next section discusses the
instrumentation and processes involved in obtaining required research data. Section
3.5 presents the research design and stages in conducting this research, with the stages
explained in the following sections. In Section 3.6, the research questionnaires layout
and content are explained in detail. Last but not least, Section 3.7 concludes this
chapter.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 26
3.1 Theoretical Framework
It is necessary to acknowledge the theoretical framework used in this research,
which consists of Model of Memory (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968) and Depth of
Processing theory by Craig and Lockhart (1975). Finally, the construction of
questionnaire is based on a list of mnemonic strategies retrieved from Schmitts
Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34).
3.1.1 Model of memory (1968)
The model of memory (1968) proposed by Richard Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin
is regarded as one of the most established model in explaining how information
processing occurs in human mind. This model includes three parts: sensory memory,
short-term memory (STM), and long-term memory (LTM). Atkinson and Shiffrin
(1968) proposed that information is remembered only at a surface level at the stage of
sensory memory and deep retention occurs only at the level of LTM.
3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory
How human minds interpret information depends on perceptions or thoughts.
Perceptions can be defined as the process of assigning meanings to sensed stimuli
(Klazy, 1984). There are three components that are important in sensing stimuli which
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 27
are sensory registers in visual, auditory, and tactual (Bower, 1999). In other words,
these three components which process these stimuli are called sensory memory.
According to Wolfe (2001), before any stimuli are retained and remembered, they
must first processed by sensory memory. However, information is usually self-
initiated, where peoples perceptions decide how important a piece of information is.
The selected stimuli will be transferred to short-term memory (STM). Therefore,
information stored in sensory memory are quickly forgotten and short-lived (Atkinson
and Shiffrin, 1968).
3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM)
Another term of STM given by Case (1984) is working memory. According to
Henson and Heller (1999), STM is the memory in human consciousness, simply
because peoples selective attentions are responsible in deciding the processing of
stimuli in sensory memory and information that will to be stored in STM. To enable
information stored in STM to be transferred into long-term memory (LTM), it is
crucial to have deep processing with humans past experiences and background
knowledge, which was further agreed by Wolfe (2001), claiming that integration of
processed stimuli and background knowledge happens consciously. However,
controversies were raised, as there were arguments by researchers (Banikowski, 1999;
Carter & Hardy, 1999; and Wolfe, 1999) which indicated that capacity of STM can be
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 28
improved by applying sufficient rehearsals which would prolong the duration of
information stored in our STM.
As the term rehearsal plays a significant role in present research and it is also
closely related to long-term memory (LTM), this term is discussed in the following
section.
3.1.1.3 Rehearsal
Rehearsal can be defined as the ability to recite newly learned information by
associating meanings from accumulated past experiences and background knowledge
(Banikowski, 1999). There are two types of rehearsal which are maintenance
rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal. Maintenance rehearsal refers to verbally repeating
items to be remembered, and it is less likely that information rehearsed in such
method can be transferred into long-term memory (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). While
maintenance rehearsal is more like a parrot-based repetition of information,
elaborative rehearsal is best described as a connection of past experiences and
background knowledge with new information. Craik and Lockhart (1972) further
discussed that elaborative rehearsal emphasises in creating extended images and
utilising hints and clues in ensuring more efficient recalling of stored information. In
2003, a research conducted by Zimbardo, Weber, and Johnson (2003) proved that
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 29
rehearsing elaboratively helps to retain stored information better and transfer
rehearsed information into long-term memory (LTM) in higher succession rate.
3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM)
Perkins (1989) suggested that LTM stores information that are rehearsed and
mastered, even for many more years to come. Wolfe (2001) divided LTM into
procedural memory and declarative memory. While declarative memory refers to an
ability to tell and write out information that have successfully stored, procedural
memory is more like an ability to practice actions that have been carried out
constantly over the years. Chamberlain (1990) concluded that information stored in
LTM is less likely to be forgotten and described them as permanent knowledge.
After understanding the structure of human memory, a theory about memory and
information processing follows.
3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972)
The theory was proposed after a research conducted in collaboration of Fergus
Ian Muirden Craik and Robert Lockhart (1975, as cited in Journal of Experimental
Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). The two researchers suggested
that perceptions towards information influence meanings that will be defined upon
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 30
them. To put it simply, how stimuli are viewed will decide on informations definition
in human minds. Both of the researchers also stressed that in order to enable first hand
information to be well-remembered, rehearsals need to be performed in a series of
stages (Crowder, 1976), hence the name Depth of Processing is used to name this
theory.
3.1.2.1 Levels of Processing (1972)
As the model of Depths of Processing (1972) displays above, there are 3 different
levels in information processing, which are structural, phonological, and semantic
Structural Phonological Semantic
Weak memory trace Weak memory trace Strong memory trace
(As cited in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294)
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 31
processing. While structural processing refers to appearances of stimuli, such as sizes,
shapes, and patterns, phonological processing refers to auditory features and sound of
stimuli, such as pronunciation of words (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). Last but not least,
semantic processing refers to assigning meanings to stimuli, which is considered the
level that will create strong memory trace (Craik and Lockhart, 1972).
In this experiment conducted by Craik and Lockhart (1972), classes were
divided and were instructed to monitor and to process the words given. A recognition
memory test was given right after the respondents had completed rehearsing the list of
words depending on which group they were assigned into. Results showed that
subjects who rehearsed the list of words for meanings remembered better than
subjects who rehearsed structurally and phonologically.
3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS)
If the aim of teaching vocabulary is to master every word learnt and minimise
chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, MVLS with deep memory processing
must be proposed, rather than processed in a shallow, lower level processing (Craik
and Lockhart, 1975). The following MVLS are retrieved from Schmitts Taxonony
(1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34). Considering not all the strategies in the
taxonomy are not applicable in modern vocabulary learning strategies study, Craik
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 32
and Lockhart (1975) stressed that only methods which promote deep memory
processing are suitable in rehearsing and memorizing new vocabulary.
3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics
Strategies categorised under linguistic mnemonics focus on characteristics of
words-to-learn, which includes pronunciation of words, spelling, pattern of words,
etc.
Methods Descriptions Examples
Peg method Links new words to an
easily remembered rhyme
to learn new words.
Coat, boat, and float
Keyword method Focuses on uses learners first language to aid in
learning of words in
foreign languages.
The German word Ei (egg in English) can be
remembered easily by
thinking of an English
word Eye
Word break method Learns longer and more
complex words easier by
analysing the words syllables and letters.
The word initiated can be broken up into four
syllables: i-ni-tia-ted
Word relation method Learns words by using
similar or opposite
meaning of the words.
The word ferocious can be remembered better with
the synonym fierce or the antonym tame.
Table 3.1: Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 33
3.1.3.2 Spatial Mnemonics
Spatial mnemonics are strategies which are related with space. It requires learners
to imagine or assign hints and clues which will help them to retain words in their
memory.
Methods Descriptions Examples
Spatial grouping Words are arranged to
form patterns such as
triangle, square, and
columns.
By arranging words to
form a picture of a tree,
learners will be able to
recall all the words used to
form the tree.
Finger/number method Assigns each word to be
learnt with a finger or a
number
A phrase with four words
can be remembered easier
with four numbers, such as
4785.
Loci method Places words to be learnt in different location and
recalls by approaching these locations.
Places the word cheese in the refrigerator, pencil in the room, and flower in the garden.
Table 3.2: Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics.
3.1.3.3 Visual Mnemonics
Unlike spatial mnemonic strategies where imageries are mentally produced in
learners mind, visual based mnemonic strategies emphasise on using physical
imageries which can be felt and touched, such as flash cards and pictures.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 34
Methods Descriptions Examples
Visualisation Remembers the location of
the word in that sentence.
Recalls the word by
remembering the
paragraph and lines it is
located
Arranging Groups the words
according to their
categories, such as colours,
food, animals, etc.
Cabbage, bread, and salmon are words under the food category.
Word formation method Visualises a words pattern, such as word size,
shape, and pattern.
The word shape boxes
help remembering the
word eel in terms of its shape:
e e l
Flash cards method Pairs pictures with words
that are going to be learnt
Draws a picture of a
smiling child to describe
the word happy.
Table 3.3: Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics.
3.1.3.4 Physical Mnemonics
Also called connection mnemonics or link mnemonics, learners ability to make
good use of their pre-existing knowledge will be put into test under this mnemonic
device. Physical mnemonics place great emphasise in connecting things already
learned or known to aid in learning of new skills or knowledge.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 35
Methods Descriptions Examples
Associating Learns new words by
recalling concepts already
in memory
Links a newly learnt
English word like
billboard to a previously learnt word like board.
Narrative chain Chains up strings of words
by creating a story which
features all the words to be
learnt.
To remember words such
as boil, spicy, bake, roast, and wine, a story about a chefs daily routine can be created
Reviewing/evaluating Uses performance tests or
examination to evaluate
the results of vocabulary
learning.
Most schools have spelling
tests to evaluate students learning of English
vocabulary.
Semantic mapping Arranges words to be
learnt into a diagram and
relate other words which
share similar idea with
branches to create links.
Figure 3.1 below shows an
example of the Semantic
mapping in vocabulary
learning.
Table 3.4: Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics.
Figure 3.1: Semantic mapping in learning words related to transportation
Transportation
Water
Land
Air
Submarine
Canoe
Sailboat
Truck Van
Helicopter
Airplane
Spaceship
(As cited in Language in India: Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow, Vol. 9, p. 124-125)
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 36
3.2 Restating purpose and research questions
Long-term retention of words in a foreign language has become students main
setback in learning a second language. Vocabulary learning is the first step in
ensuring effective communication between both parties, as indicated in previous
chapter; it is known that people cannot communicate without knowing the meanings
of words and applying them in written and spoken communication (Zimbardo, Weber,
and Johnson, 2003)
In understanding the frequency of exposure to English language which
contrasts participants from two courses, this study aims to reveal the distinction in
application of vocabulary learning strategies by respondents from both EL and CH
courses. Apart from strategies of lexical memorising, effectiveness of vocabulary
learning strategies will also be evaluated based on participants performances in the
memory test.
Results obtained in data analysing will answer doubts and research questions
posed at the beginning of the research:
RQ 1: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when
students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each
other?
RQ 2: What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words
between students from these two courses?
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 37
RQ 3: How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in
students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in
rehearsing new English words?
3.3 Participants and sampling
The participants selected are students in Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman.
They are assembled in two groups based on their courses, which are English
Language (EL) and Chinese Studies (CH). Students frequencies of exposure to the
target language (English language) differ these two courses.
Lessons and lectures in EL are conducted mostly using English language;
there are subjects where students are taught other languages, such as foreign language
subjects and pendidikan moral. EL students are nurtured with the essential
communicative skills and knowledge of the language to communicate fluently and
competently. EL also encourages participation of students in international platforms
such as conferences and forums as well as promoting the use of English language in
different field of careers.
Being a total contrast to how EL operates, the mediums of instruction in CH
are mostly Chinese language, while there are other languages used in conducting
subjects similar to those mentioned before. Understanding the fact that the importance
of Chinese language is currently widely recognised around the world, this course aims
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 38
to nurture students with high and excellent competency in Chinese language through
the teaching of Chinese philosophies, history, and literatures.
40 participants from each course were required to participate in this research,
regardless differences in their year of studies.
3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process
Data are obtained through participants answering of questionnaires designed by
applying a collaboration of Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p.
34) and Craik and Tulvings Depth of Processing Theory (1975, as cited in Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). A Questionnaire
consists of two sections with section A appears in the form of a memory test which
participants sit for and section B consists of 15 statements which participants pick a
number in the likert scale to indicate how far they would agree with the statements
given.
The procedures of answering the questionnaire are as follow:
1. Participants were given an appendix which contains words for them to memorise
in order to sit for the memory test in Section A.
2. Participants were required to spend only twenty minutes to memorise the words
listed in the appendix. The researcher demanded that the appendix be returned
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 39
within the time limit to prevent respondents from referring to the appendix.
3. Participants would begin answering Section A of the questionnaire.
4. Section B was answered once Section A was completed.
Participants results in section A and section B were recorded and analysed.
Results are presented in chapter four.
3.5 Research design and stages
This present study is a comparative study intends to investigate the MVLS
practised by participants from the courses of CH and EL. The participants are set
apart by the difference in frequency of exposure towards English language. This
research also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to
memorise the words in the questionnaire (refer to questionnaire/appendix). At the end
of this research, research questions set is hoped to be answered. A total of 80 research
participants, with 40 participants from both CH and EL were required to participate in
this research. Participants were selected based on their courses regardless of their year
of studies. The research questionnaires consist of two sections designed to achieve the
research purpose stated early. Participants were required to answer the questionnaires
subjectively and objectively.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 40
Research questionnaires were distributed to the research participants, followed by
a briefing of the instructions on answering the questionnaires. Participants thoughts
and questions were answered before attempting to complete the questionnaires to
reduce survey errors. Completed questionnaires were collected and separated based
on experiment group, followed by analysis to obtain required data as shown below:
a) MVLS applied by participants in Section A
b) MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A
c) Number of participants in each mnemonic style
In presenting the required data stated above, statistical measurements such as bar
graphs were used to record and present data in both a) and c) in percentages. While
MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A were recorded
and presented using tables. Implications and reasoning were made based on the
obtained results in the collected data. In discussing the results, research questions
stated beforehand were also hoped to be answered in the final stage. The final stage
aims to conclude this study by answering the research questions. Apart from that, it
also suggests possible applications of MVLS in teaching training programs. Finally,
limitations encountered in conducting this research are also stated.
Last but not least, the procedures from beginning of this present study to
completion are presented in stages as listed below.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 41
Stage 1: Defining of research purpose
Stage 2: Identifying of research participants
Stage 3: Designing research questionnaire in meeting the research purpose
Stage 4: Distributing of research questionnaires
Stage 5: Collecting of completed questionnaires
Stage 6: Analysing Research questionnaires
Stage 7: Presenting and explaining experiment data
Stage 8: Discussion
Stage 9: Conclusion
3.6 Presents study questionnaire
The questionnaire begins with an introductory page which introduces participants
with basic understanding about present research as well as information regarding the
researcher. Definition of the key phrase mnemonic strategies will be given to aid
participants in completing this questionnaire. While section A is a memory test
section which requires participants to memorise words in the appendix given, section
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 42
B requires participants to rate their opinions in the statements with a modified likert
scale which includes five different levels of agreement.
3.7 Conclusion
The research questions restated above are also the objective of this study. At the
end of this research, the researcher attempts to answer and clear the doubts in the form
of three research questions stated in Chapter One. To do so, the procedures of the
research must be systematically followed and conducted according to the research
design. The theoretical framework which serves as the backbone of this research,
contains two theories from past studies mentioned in the previous chapter, must be
fully acknowledged to understand this study as a whole. Last but not least, there are
also examples MVLS, which the researcher referred to design the questionnaire of
this study.
The next chapter features statistics derived from analysed results based on the
participants performances in answering the questionnaires.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 43
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.0 Introduction
This chapter focuses on data analysis based on the questionnaires completed by
participants, as well as featuring findings and discussion for each topic. In Section
4.1, an explanation is given on understanding the graph charts featured in the
following section. Section 4.2 features a finding that is crucial in answering Research
Question (RQ) 1. A discussion follows at Section 4.3 featuring two topics featured in
Section 4.3.1 and Section 4.3.2. Section 4.4 focuses on findings pertaining to the
similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2. Both Section 4.4.1 and Section 4.4.2
cover the analysed data obtained from participants from both courses. The following
section includes a discussion with two topics featured in Section 4.5.1 and Section
4.5.2. Section 4.6 covers another finding which is crucial in answering RQ3. Section
4.6.1 features statistics in graphs and tables on the four mnemonic styles and number
of participants who practice them. Next, a topic discussion is featured in Section
4.6.2. Lastly, a conclusion in ending this chapter is featured in Section 4.7.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 44
4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results
Section A of this present studys questionnaire features a vocabulary memory test
that requires participants from CH and EL to memorise the words listed on the
questionnaires appendix in a given time limit of twenty minutes.
The next phase of this section requires participants to write down the memorised
words regardless of the words sequence, and briefly describe the method they used in
retaining the words.
In recording the test results, participants were grouped based on their
performances in the test. The four groups of results which participants were assigned
in are Fail, Below average, Average, and Excellent. The distributions of the
results are as follow:
Fail - 1 to 7 words written correctly
Below average - 8 to 14 words written correctly
Average - 15 to 21 words written correctly
Excellent - 22 to 26 words written correctly
The graph charts in the following sections show the results of the test obtained by
participants in both courses.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 45
4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1
Figure 4.1: Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants)
Five out of forty CH participants have failed the test and they accumulated a total
of 12.5% in the group of participants who obtained the same results. A total of 15% of
EL participants have failed the test, this figure indicates that 6 participants from the
whole population of 40 did not pass the test.
There are 35% of CH participants categorised under Below average with their
results in the test. 10 participants from the EL course who have added up to 25% are
categorised under the same category.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 46
10 CH participants performances are placed under the Average category, which
equals to a total of 25% of the group percentage. Under the same placement, 22.5% of
EL participants have been assigned under this group.
27.5% of the CH participants managed to excel in the test as 11 of them are
employing effective MVLS to achieve this result. Last but not least, statistics have
reported that 37.5% of the EL participants also did well in the test as 15 of these
participants achieved Excellent in the test.
4.3 Answering RQ 1
From the statistics shown above, it is obvious that participants from the CH
course, despite having limited exposure to English language due to the medium of
instruction of the course being Chinese language, managed to achieve less test failures
than participants from the EL course. It is known that EL students experience higher
exposure to English language, a fact that does not help participants from that course to
achieve less test failures than participants from the CH course.
Having achieved lower percentages in failing the test, and higher percentages in
scoring the results of Below average and Average, participants from the CH course
are more focused on passing the test, rather than achieving the Excellent result.
Statistics also show that despite having more test failures in EL participants, there
appear to be more scorers of grade Excellent.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 47
4.3.1 English language proficiency level and test results
The retrieved completed questionnaires show that the passing rate is higher in CH
despite most of the participants are having lower proficiency in the English language.
Evidences can be traced from the questionnaires Section A, question 2 that requires
participants to briefly describe their methods and approaches used in rehearsing and
memorising the words listed on the appendix.
There were difficulties encountered by CH participants in using simple sentence
structure in English language to explain their styles and patterns during the
vocabulary rehearsing session. Majority of the participants were answering the
question using their own mother tongue, which is Chinese language. The other finding
refers to their limited storage of English vocabulary, which is countered by their use
of English content words without grammatical markers to form grammatically correct
sentences. In this case, CH participants focused on conveying thoughts, rather than
the validity and quality of their written language. These are some examples which
could describe CH participants English language proficiencies, evidences are
retrieved from the completed questionnaires:
I) First, remember words, then write down, group together, break words, repeat
many times.
II) Think pictures, remember it, write and think pictures, practise to write.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 48
Analysis conducted on the completed questionnaires has revealed that most CH
participants are practising selective attention. In Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996),
this approach is describe as a method where students identify words that are crucial to
learn, in order to pass a test, to use them in writing, etc. (Gu and Johnson, 1996, cited
from Ghazal, N.D, p. 85). In terms of selection of important words to be memorised,
selective attention also includes selection of strategies to assist vocabulary rehearsal
(Lawson and Hogben, 1996, p. 103).
An observable system that helps CH participants in passing the test is most
respondents who achieved Below average and Average have a set of words that
are written correctly. These words are: buhl, gyle, fundus, jink, lar, quid, tatou, vatic,
noils. An assumption of these words having high reliability of being written correctly
is because of the words being shorter and having less letters compared to other long
words, thus making information processing easier and less complex. As a result,
writing these nine words correctly will ensure participants a place under the Below
average level.
4.3.2 Scorers of Excellent in EL participants
As mentioned before in previous discussion, despite being at greater number in
terms of test failures, participants in EL are more superior at securing higher
percentage in Excellent test result. Analysis conducted on the completed
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 49
questionnaires has revealed that EL participants who wrote out most of the words
correctly are channeling their background knowledge and understanding of the
English language to aid vocabulary retention.
Understanding the English language in a broader sense has helped EL participants
to find more effective alternatives to retain longer and more complex words. During
the vocabulary rehearsing session, EL participants are believed to make full use of the
words definitions to better understand the words. Incorporating pre-existing
knowledge in information processing and organising has been researched by Frederic
Bartlett in completing his study of human constructive memory and pre-existing
knowledge. The Schema Theory (1932) suggests that how information is processed
depends on humans schema, or their pre-existing knowledge (Bartlett, 1977 cited in
Landry, 2002).
In this case, Excellent scorers in EL combined the structures of those longer
words with the explanations provided in the definitions, and relied on their schemata
to create an effective way to process these words that require more complex
processing effort. The importance of the context of the words in used has been
recognised heavily, as it provides mental images or imaginary meanings of the words
(Intaraprasert, n.d., p. 90). Some examples below show how complex words can be
retained effectively using the Schema Theory (1932):
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 50
I) To remember the word Maggotorium, the word is first broken into [Maggot +
orium]. The word can be defined as place where maggots are bred for sale to
fishers. The context of the definition is similar to what an emporium offers,
where people gather and transactions are ongoing. In short, the word is
remembered by recalling an emporium where maggots are on sale.
II) Another example is the word Hypnomogia that has the same meaning as
insomnia. In this case, the word is broken into two parts in [Hypno + mogia].
The former part is remembered through the word Hypnosis; the latter part does
not bear any meaning as it is classified as a function word. However it does
sound like insomnia. As a result the word Hypnomogia is processed in such
way: Insomnia is a result of hypnosis.
To conclude, EL participants ability in understanding English language in a
broader sense has helped them to rehearse longer and complex words and put them in
better positions in increasing the percentage of Excellent scorers in the vocabulary
memory test
4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2
As mentioned in previous chapters, effectiveness of MVLS in vocabulary
retention remains an important issue to be discussed in this study. This section will
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 51
analyse The MVLS preferred by participants who managed to achieve Excellent for
their vocabulary memory test results.
4.4.1 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH)
Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary
Learning Strategies (MVLS)
Number of Excellent CH participants using the
strategy
Total %
1 [Keyword method +
Evaluating]
5 45.5
2 [Keyword method +
Arranging]
1 9.1
3 [Keyword method +
Associating + Evaluating]
1 9.1
4 [Keyword method + Peg
method + Evaluating]
1 9.1
5 [Keyword method + Word
break method + Evaluating]
1 9.1
6 [Flash cards method +
Associating + Evaluating]
1 9.1
7 [Peg method + Flash cards
method + Associating +
Semantic mapping +
Evaluating]
1 9.1
Total 11 100
Table 4.1: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants
*MLVS combinations are marked using [ ]
Five CH participants who scored Excellent in the vocabulary memory test
incorporated [Keyword method + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary retention. A
total of 45.5% of the participants are using this combination of strategies in rehearsing
new English vocabulary. Only one respondent used [Keyword method + Arranging]
in increasing rate of vocabulary storing, which equals to 9.1% of the CH participants.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 52
Apart from participants who employed MVLS in pairs, there are also
combinations of three different MVLS; one of the participants was using [Keyword
method + Associating + Evaluating] during the test. Another participant is a user of
[Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating] in vocabulary retention. Similar
combination of strategies is used by another participant, but with a slight difference
with the Peg method being replaced with the Word break method in such
combination: [Keyword method + Word break method + Evaluating].
Unlike majority of the participants, there are two participants that are tested of
not using the keyword method in rehearsing the vocabulary. One of them incorporated
[Flash cards method + Associating + Evaluating] for memorising. Last but not least, a
CH participant relied on five MVLS to achieve Excellent result in the test, the
strategies combined are: [Peg Method + Flash cards method + Associating + Semantic
mapping + Evaluating].
The next section features table 4.2 which lists the MVLS employed EL
participants who achieved Excellent in the vocabulary test. The list also previews
the efficiency of the chosen MVLS based on the perspectives of the EL participants.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 53
4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL)
Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary
Learning Strategies (MVLS)
Number of Excellent CH participants using the
strategy
Total %
1 [Associating + Evaluating] 3 20.0
2 [Keyword method +
Arranging]
2 13.4
3 [Keyword method +
Evaluating]
2 13.4
4 [Keyword method + Peg
method]
1 6.7
5 [Keyword method +
Associating]
1 6.7
6 [Keyword method +
Arranging + Evaluating]
1 6.7
7 [Keyword method + Word
break method + Evaluating]
1 6.7
8 [Keyword method + Peg
method + Evaluating]
1 6.7
9 [Keyword method + Word
break method + Associating
+ Evaluating]
1 6.7
10 [Keyword method + Peg
method + Associating +
Evaluating]
1 6.7
11 [Keyword method] 1 6.7
Total 15 100
Table 4.2: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants
*MLVS combinations are marked using [ ]
Three participants who scored Excellent in the mnemonic vocabulary memory
test adopted the combination of [Associating + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary
memorising. A total of 20.0% of the participants are using these two methods in
rehearsing the new English vocabulary. The pairing of [Keyword method +
Arranging] recorded 13.4% with two participants tested of using this combination.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 54
The same goes for the pairing of [Keyword method + Evaluating], with exactly same
percentages and number of participants who adopt these strategies.
Only one participant, with a total of 6.7% of the EL participants, used [Keyword
method + Peg method] during the test. The rest of the recorded strategies share the
same percentages and number of users, such as a participant who adopted [Keyword
method + Associating] for strengthening vocabulary retention.
Besides MVLS that are paired, there are also several combinations three MVLS
employed by EL participants in rehearsing the words. Three combinations of three
MVLS that share similar percentage and number of users are [Keyword method +
Arranging + Evaluating], [Keyword method + Word break method + Associating +
Evaluating], and [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating]
Apart from MVLS in pairs and participants who employed combinations of three
strategies, the recorded data also shows two participants who combined four strategies
in increasing rate of vocabulary retention. The two combinations are [Keyword
method + Word break method + Associating + Evaluating] and [Keyword method +
Peg method + Associating + Evaluating].
Last but not least, there is also a participant who adopted a single strategy
approach, which is the Keyword method to rehearse vocabulary.
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 55
4.5 Answering RQ 2
To investigate the effectiveness of approaches selected by participants from both
courses, there is no better way than studying MVLS that were used by participants
who scored Excellent during the vocabulary rehearsing stage. To do so, Scorers of
Excellent in both courses must be separated out from scorers of other results. The
next step consists of identifying the MVLS used based on participants answers in the
questionnaires Section A, question 2.
Conducting analysis on participants choices of preferred MVLS during the
vocabulary rehearsing session is intended to identify worth-researching topics in
MVLS usefulness and their abilities to increase information processing rate. Issues
that raise the researchers attention are the importance of reinforcement activities in
raising vocabulary retention and the Keyword methods effectiveness in rehearsing
unique words.
4.5.1 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention
The employment of the Evaluating strategy by participants who scored
Excellent in the vocabulary memory test is noticeable by the researcher, 10 out of 11
participants in CH and nine out of 15 participants in EL were tested of employing this
strategy during the vocabulary rehearsing session. The question raised from this
phenomenon is whether this strategy can be considered effective in improving
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 56
vocabulary retention rate. To provide an explanation regarding this question, it is
crucial to understand this strategy beforehand.
Retrieved from Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34), the
Evaluating strategy has been regarded as one of the MVLS that promotes deep
memory processing, rather than processing at a lower, shallow level (Craig and
Tulvig, 1975). This strategy relies on different reinforcement activities to boost and
prolong information storage by rehearsing items to be remembered. The
reinforcement theory has also been introduced in second language learning.
In vocabulary learning, reinforcement activities include various performance
enhancing tests to improve long-term retention, such as reading out loud memorised
words, sentence making exercises, and spelling tests. In this case, most participants
from both courses were rehearsing the new words by remembering them using various
MVLS and writing them out, the process was repeated numerous times for better
performances in recalling the words.
In an example retrieved from one of the completed questionnaires, a participant
was performing the Evaluating strategy, three attempts were made and the results
appeared positive as more words were recalled in each attempt. Table 4.3 presents the
recalled words in each attempt. The participants first attempts in rehearsing the
words had 16 words written correctly, while in second attempt the number of words
Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 57
correctly written is 22. Lastly, all the words were written correctly in the third
attempt.
First attempt Second attempt Third attempt
Anthelion, buhl, [empty],
dormition, [empty],
fundus, gyle, [empty],
[empty], jink, kummel, lar,
[empty], noils, ormolu,
[empty], quid, redshort,
[empty], tatou, [empty],
vatic, [empty], xyloid,
[empty], zitella
Anthelion, buhl, cavatina,
dormition, exodontia,
fundus, gyle, [empty],
isonephelic, jink, kummel,
lar, [empty], noils, ormolu,
panaesthesia, quid,
redshort, [empty], tatou,
undercroft, vatic, [empty],
xyloid, yataghan, zitella
Anthelion, buhl, cavatina,
dormition, exodontia,
fundus, gyle, hypnomogia,
isonephelic, jink, kummel,
lar, maggotorium, noils,
ormolu, panaesthesia,
quid, redshort,
Scaramouch, tatou,
undercroft, vatic,
whiskerine, xyloid,
yataghan, zitella
Table 4.3: Sample of words rehearsal
The Evaluating strategy improved the vocabulary rehearsing results by
building on participants memorised words wit