Using portfolios to understand learners' responses to vocabulary learning strategy instruction and use: A case study.

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	唐達之 Alastair Dunbar
論文名稱：	Using portfolios to understand learners' responses to vocabulary learning strategy instruction and use: A case study. Using portfolios to understand learners' responses to vocabulary learning strategy instruction and use: A case study.
指導教授：	吳又熙 Yu-hsi Wu
口試委員:
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	人文社會學院 - 外國語文學系 Foreign Languages and Literature
論文出版年：	2004
畢業學年度：	93
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	166
中文關鍵詞：	Vocabulary learning strategies 、Young learners 、Mnemonics 、Portfolios 、Metacognitive strategies
外文關鍵詞：	Vocabulary learning strategies, Young learners, Mnemonics, Portfolios, Metacognitive strategies
相關次數：	點閱：3 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

ABSTRACT
This study investigated young Taiwanese learners’ responses to vocabulary learning strategy instruction and use. For theses purposes a case study was conducted over a period of 12 weeks, in a private language school in Hsinchu, Taiwan. The participants were 6 young learners of English as a foreign language, aged between 9 and 13. The learners attended the language school daily, for a period of 1.5 hours. It was during this time that the case study was conducted.
The students were instructed in mnemonic and metacognitive learning strategies that could be applied in their vocabulary learning. In order to gauge the effects of the learning strategies on the students’ vocabulary learning, data were collected from multiple sources; namely the students’ portfolios, teacher student interviews, and parent student discussions. The data collected were then analyzed by following Patton’s (1990) guidelines for the analysis of qualitative data.
The results of the study suggested that learning strategy instruction and use affected learners’ vocabulary learning in the following ways: (i) that learners began to plan more productive tasks to aid their vocabulary learning, (ii) that the use of metacognitive strategies improved learners’ performances in vocabulary tests, (iii) that learners seemed to become more self- directed in their learning, and (iv) that whilst static vocabulary tests are a useful indicator of the vocabulary that students have learned at a given point in time, more dynamic methods of assessment are required to discover whether or not they are able to use what they have learned. Based on the findings of this study a syllabus for the implementation of vocabulary learning strategies was designed, and is included in Chapter 5 of this thesis.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   i
TABLE OF CONTENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   ii
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  vii

CHAPTER
    1. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    1
1.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    1
1.2 Motivations for this study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    1
1.3 Perceptions of language. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    2
1.4 Approaches to assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    3
1.5 The aims of this study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    6
1.6 Research questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     7

2.    LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
2.1    Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    8
2.2 Learning strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    9
        2.2.1 A definition of the kinds of learning strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    9
        2.2.2 The teachability of learning strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    12
        2.2.3 Mnemonic strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    14
        2.2.4 Metacognitive strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.3 How is language ability developed?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
2.4 Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    21
    2.4.1 Traditional and alternative methods of assessment. . . . . . . . . . . .    22
        2.4.2 The nature and origins of portfolio assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    25
2.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    30

3.    METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  32
3.1 Rationale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     32
3.2 Participants, context, and materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    34
3.3 Instruments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    36
        3.3.1 Vocabulary lists and vocabulary tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    37
        3.3.2 Student portfolios. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     38
        3.3.2.1 Reflective journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    39
        3.3.2.2 Students’ independent work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     .    41
    3.3.3 Interviews and discussions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    41
    3.3.4 Teacher’s reflective journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    43
3.4 Procedures    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    45
        3.4.1 Learning strategy instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    45
        3.4.2 Presentation and clarification of vocabulary items. . . . . . . . . . . . .    47
        3.4.3 The vocabulary tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    48
        3.4.4 The reflective journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    48
        3.4.5 Interviews and discussions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    49
        3.4.5.1 Teacher-student interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     49
        3.4.5.2 Parent-student discussions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    50
    3.4.6 Students’ independent work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    51
3.5 Data analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     52

4.    RESULTS AND DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    57
        4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    57
        4.2 A note on the typologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    59
        4.3 How, if at all, does instruction in learning strategies
               affect students’ abilities to learn vocabulary items? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    60
            4.3.1 Students’ beliefs about approaches to vocabulary
                   learning prior to strategy instruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    61
            4.3.2 Changes in learners’ planned vocabulary review activities
                    as a result of strategy instruction and strategy use. . . . . . . . . . . . .    62
            4.3.3 Learners’ actual vocabulary learning activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    65
            4.3.4 Learners’ independent vocabulary learning in weeks 10 – 12 . . . .    68
            4.3.5 The amount of time learners spent reviewing the vocabulary. . . . .69
            4.3.6 How the learning strategies helped learners remember
                   (i) how to say or spell a word, and (ii) remember its meaning. . . .    71
      4.4 How, if it all, do learning strategies help students use those vocabulary
     items in vocabulary tests, and in their independent work? . . . . . . . . . . .74

            4.4.1 The students’ performances in the vocabulary tests . . . . . . . . . . .     74
            4.4.2 Students’ use of the vocabulary items in their
                   independent work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    79
        4.5 How does the triangulation of learners’ responses to learning
            strategy instruction enhance understanding of these responses?. . . . . . .    85
            4.5.1 Students’ responses to vocabulary learning strategies in
                   the different response contexts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    85
        4.6 Limitations of the study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    92

5.    SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . .     95
        5.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    95
        5.2 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    95
        5.3 Pedagogical implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    101
        5.4 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    102
            5.4.1 A suggested syllabus for strategy instruction
                   and associated practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    102
            5.4.2 Socialization . . . . .  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    104
            5.4.3 Implementing portfolios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    105
            5.4.4 Implementing reflective journals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    106
            5.4.5 Strategy training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    110
                5.4.5.1 The keyword method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .    112
                5.4.5.2 The loci method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     113
                5.4.5.3 The peg method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    115
                5.4.5.4 Metacognitive strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    117
            5.4.6 Strategy use and vocabulary tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     118

REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     121
APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    126
        Appendix A: Vocabulary tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     .     127
        Appendix B: Students’ independent work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     136
        Appendix C: Vocabulary lists. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    143
        Appendix D: Metacognitive wallcharts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    150
        Appendix E: Parent – student questionnaires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    145
        Appendix F: Sample consent form. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     154
        Appendix G: Reflective journal questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     162
        Appendix H: Students’ vocabulary learning plans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .     168

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure                                            Page
1.    “Interrelationships between direct and indirect strategies among
 the six strategy groups” (source: Oxford 1990). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

2.    A flow chart to illustrate the interrelation of data
 within the present study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

    3.   Research Schedule. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    44

    4.   Students’ performances in the vocabulary tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    76

5.    How the learners responded to learning strategy instruction
during the case study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    84



Table
    1.   Participants’ data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    35
    2.   Learners planned vocabulary learning activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    63
3.    The distribution of the learners’ planned vocabulary
learning activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    64

    4.   Learners’ actual vocabulary learning activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    66

    5.   Learners actual vocabulary learning activities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    67

    6.   Students’ review times across the different strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    70

7.    The amount of time that students spent reviewing
outside of class time. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    71

    8.   Students’ vocabulary test scores expressed as percentages. . . . . . . . . . . . . .    79

9.    The number of times learners used the vocabulary items in
        each project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .    81
      10. A proposed schedule for implementing vocabulary learning strategies . . . . 103

                                

REFERENCES

Bachman, L.F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L.F. & Cohen, A.D. (1998). Interfaces between second language acquisition and language testing research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bachman, L.F. & Palmer, A.S. (1996) Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, J.D. & Hudson, T. (1998). The alternatives in language assessment. TESOL Quarterly, volume 32, pp. 653 – 675.
Campione, J.C. (1996). Assisted learning: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky
(pp. 219 – 250). London: Routledge.
Carlson, L. (2003). Boss of the plains. In Houghton Mifflin Reading Traditions 4 (pp. 219 – 241). USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Chamot, A.U. & O’Malley, J.M. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen, A.D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Longman.
Cohen, A.D. (1987). The use of verbal and imagery mnemonics in second language vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, volume 9, pp. 43 – 62.
Cullen, R. (1998). Teacher talk and the classroom context. ELT Journal, volume 52, pp. 179 – 187.
Dixon-Krauss (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom: Mediated literacy instruction and assessment. New York: Longman.
Donato, R. & McCormick, D. (1994). A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. The Modern Language Journal, volume 78, pp. 453 – 464.
Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the Teachability of Communication Strategies. TESOL Quarterly; volume 29, pp55-85.
Engeström, Y. (1996). Non scolae sed vitae discimus: Toward overcoming the encapsulation of school learning. In H. Daniels (Ed.), An introduction to Vygotsky
(pp. 151 – 170). London: Routledge.
Gall, M.D., Borg, W.R. & Gall, J.P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction. New York: Longman.
Genesee, F. & Upshur, J.A. (1996). Classroom-based evaluation in second language education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gil, G. (2002). Two complementary modes of foreign language classroom interaction. ELT Journal, volume 56, pp. 273 – 279.
Giles, H. & Coupland, N. (1991). Language: Contexts and consequences. Pacific Grove, California: Open University Press.
Gottlieb, M. (1995). Nurturing student learning through portfolios. TESOL Journal, volume 5, pp. 12 – 14.
Huerta-Macías, A. (1995). Alternative assessment: Responses to commonly asked questions. TESOL journal, volume 5, pp. 8 – 11.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McNamara, T.F. (1996). Measuring second language performance.
New York: Longman.
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, M.A. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Mora, P. (2003). Tomas and the library lady. In Houghton Mifflin Reading Traditions 4 (pp. 159 - 177). USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Murphey, T. & Arao, H. (2001). Reported belief changes through near peer role modeling. TESL – EJ volume 5, number 3. Retrieved August 8th, 2004, from
http://www-writing.berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej19/a1.html.
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York: Newbury House Publishers.
Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. California: Sage Publications.
Pennycock, A. (1997). Cultural alternatives and autonomy. In Benson, P. and Voller, P. (Eds.), Autonomy and Independence in Language Learning (pp. 33-53). London: Longman.
Porter, C. & Cleland, J. (1995). The portfolio as a learning strategy. Portsmouth, N.H.: Heinemann.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2004). GCSE English literature: Review of standards 1980 – 2000. Retrieved August 5th, 2004, from
http://www.qca.org.uk/ages14-19/downloads/gcse_english_literature.pdf.
Read, J. (1997). Vocabulary and testing. In N. Schmitt and M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Robbins, D. (2001). Vygotsky's psychology-philosophy A metaphor for language theory and learning. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history, and typology. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. New York: Prentice Hall International.
Seedhouse, P. (1996). Classroom interaction: Possibilities and impossibilities. ELT Journal volume 50, pp. 16 – 25.
Shohamy, E. (1996). The role of language tests in the construction and validation of SLA theories. In Tarone, E., Gass, S.M. & Cohen, A.D. (Eds.), Research methodology in second language acquisition. Northvale, N.J: L. Erlbaum.
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt and M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wagner, L.R. & Brock, D. (1996). Using portfolios to mediate literacy instruction and assessment. In Dixon – Kraus, L. (Ed.), Vygotsky in the classroom: Mediated Literacy instruction and assessment (pp. 161 – 174). NY: Longman.

全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校內網路)
全文公開日期本全文未授權公開 (校外網路)

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文