kang et al 2013 presentation

Don’t just repeat after me: !Retrieval practice is better than

imitation for foreign vocabulary learning

Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan & Harold Pashler (2013) APLI 624,13th November, 2014

Presented by Takashi Oba

Outline

• Introduction: L2 vocabulary learning!

• The present study!

- Theoretical background: two practice conditions!

- Method!

- Result & main findings!

- Theoretical accounts and pedagogical implications !

• Your turn! Discussion questions !

Before we start…

Today’s focus: L2 vocabulary learning

• How can we effectively learn L2 words?!

• How did you learn (memorize) L2 words for the test preparation?

Word list Flashcard

!

apple!!

!

!

!

!

apple !!

!

りんご!!

Cue Target

picture L2 word

L1 (translation) L2 word

Goal of this study

Compare the effects of retrieval practice with imitation and on learning L2 spoken vocabulary

Two practice conditions

• Imitation: repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker or a teacher

• Retrieval practice: produce (write / say aloud) L2 words from memory when cued by concept (picture / L1 presentation), followed by presentation of correct answer (Ex. flashcard-typed drills)

cue target

cue target

Imitation

Retrieval practice (testing effect)

Previous studies

Previous studies:!- Repeated imitation (saying aloud) > silent learning (i.e. Seibert, 1927; Ellis & Beaton, 1993)!

→tapping phonological loop function?

- Retrieval practice with cues (L1) > reading English (L1)-L2 pairs (i.e. Carrier & Pashler,1992; Kang, 2010)!

→ ◎ recall=write out the English translation; × “pronouncing” the words!

This study: First attempt to measure the effects of retrieval practice of learning of L2 phonological word forms

Let’s experience the two conditions!

Japanese nouns Image romaji Meaning in

English

いぬ（犬） inu dog

ねこ（猫） neko cat

うし（牛） ushi cow

ひつじ（羊） hitsuji sheep

Let’s learn Japanese nouns!

Imitation

Retrieval practice

Comprehension test

a b c

d e f

Production test

1 2

3 4

Ans. ひつじ (羊:hitsuji) Ans. いぬ (犬:inu)

Ans. ねこ (猫:neko) Ans. うし (牛:ushi)

Experiment 1 Experiment 2

Participants Native speakers(undergraduates)of English learning Hebrew how many? 41 59

Task & procedure

- Learn 40 Hebrew nouns: picture presentation & hearing the corresponding Hebrew word !

- 4 semantic categories (i.e. body, animals, food, households)!- imitation vs. retrieval practice

times of training 3 6

Assessment - comprehension (hear a Hebrew word and choose the corresponding picture) - production (see a picture cue and say aloud corresponding Hebrew words)!

when? immediately after two days later order of the

tests comprehension→production counterbalanced order

Method

Fig.1 Sequence of events in a training session in the two conditions

Result Significant!

Main findings

• Learners engaged in retrieval practice performed better in comprehension as well as production ability of the L2 words than imitation group’s performance!

• No significant difference in the pronunciation quality was found in both groups (Exp.1&2)

Theoretical accounts

• Why retrieval practice >>imitation?!

• Due to the influence of “Transfer appropriate processing (TAP)”? (but positive effects on comprehension!)!

• Neutral-network model of test-enhanced learning (Mozer et al, 2004): “error-correction mechanism”!

- “actual output” and make errors !

→ feedback & error-correction !

→ “desired output”!

• Role of “mediators”: cues - - - (retrieving process) - - - target

Swain’s output hypothesis

<Internal> <External>

Output

Formulating4Hypothesis

Noticing4a4hole

(Syntactic4processing)

Testing4Hypothesis

Confirmation Modification4orRejection

Modified4or4confirmed4output

Relevant4Input

Feedback(interlocutor/

teacher)Problem4solving

Selective4attention

Noticing4the4gap

!

“Actual output”

“Desired output”

Error correction

Pedagogical implications• Retrieval practice will yield long-lasting effects of

learning as “desirable difficulties” are entailed in the practice (Bjork, 1999)!

• Effects of imitation seems to be short-lived, but the effects of imitation (i.e. better pronunciation:Ellis & Beaton, 1993 ) must not be dismissed !

• Taking into account individual differences in L2 classrooms (proficiency level, learning style, language aptitude…), both types of training can be effectively incorporated into L2 classrooms !

Ex. imitation practice → retrieval practice

• Suppose you teach English vocabulary to 20-30 students at a L2 classroom. How can you incorporate “retrieval practice” in your classroom?!

• Do you think “imitation” is crucial for L2 vocabulary learning? If so, how can we effectively use this type of practice for individual learning or classroom-based learning? !

• Some instructors claim that “L2 vocabulary must be learned in more contextualized situation (dialogue or short passage). Flashcard and using world list are not effective.” Do you agree? Do you think flashcard or word list is still effective to use the vocabulary in meaningful settings (reading, writing or conversation)?

Discussion questions: What do you think?