Comparing concordancing of patterns and words for learners

Presented by Bill Zhi QUAN

Supervisors:

Lynn Grant, Darryl Hocking, Andy Conner

DDL (data-driven learning) may probably be the most influential and inspiring model of using corpus data directly in language teaching and learning.

Features:

concordancing – KWIC (key words in context)

great language exposure – enriched and enhanced input

active learner engagement – hands-on discovery learning

Proposal rather than practice

Grammar patterns are structured word combinations

phraseological in nature; both lexical and grammatical

PIC (patterns in context) retrieves patterns，or ‘to-the-point’ instances of a specific structure

expected to extend the basic unit of concordancing from individual words to multi-word patterns

Mobile PIC: searching patterns in your palm

Keep focused on one

Research question:

Does the PIC approach offer any advantage over the KWIC approach to ESL (English as a second language) students for their academic writing?

Engagement

by query numbers

Efficiency

by time spend

Perceived effectiveness

by feedback

2 cycles, each for 4 weeks

2 apps in 9 tablets (5 vs. 4)

18 intermediate-level learners from International House

9-million words over 9 disciplines, 52 academic core words

3 methods: passively captured logging data, exit questionnaire and semi-structured interview

Less engaged

Distinctive queries:

3 vs. 6

Queries per session:

2.0 vs 3.25

More efficient

Time:

1.56 min . vs 1.90 min.

Demand for sort-out

1 AKWIC member suggested to provide “collocations and phrases” of the target word;

APIC users “definitely” enjoyed the sort-out in advance

Benefits in grammar

AKWIC: mostly helpful for vocabulary enlargement

APIC: enhancement of “more grammar-based” knowledge or general language proficiency

A mixed picture:

PIC seems to be more efficient, while less attractive;

It can provide more benefits for learners, but the potential advantage is not significant.