CASE STUDY Group Project

Teaching English Methodology

Ehsan Ataei MP101459

Saeid Farid MP 101394

Semester II, 2011

Dr. Hanita Hassan,

Language Academy, UTM

Note: learners are new post graduate students with 5-5.5 Score in IELTS exam. Students have problem in learning vocabulary It is very important because vocabulary knowledge will affect EAP (English for academic purposes) activities very much activities such as paraphrasing reading comprehension and summarizing

Title:

Vocabulary-oriented teaching in IEC (Intensive English courses) reading classes in UTM University

Statement of problem:

Students do not learn enough and basic vocabulary to meet their needs for academic purposes e.g. paraphrasing, summarizing, reading comprehension.

Hypothesis:

It is assumed that problems in reading comprehension, Summarizing and paraphrasing and general progress in IEC reading classes are due to the lack of vocabulary-oriented teaching and extensive reading

I. Introduction

Vocabulary learning is fundamental in language acquisition regardless of the type of language which is taught (first, second or foreign language).For many years vocabulary learning was underestimated due to the power of structural approaches in which the emphasis was on grammatical and phonological structures. An important reason for the low status of vocabulary teaching and learning throughout 1940s, 1950s and 1960s was because of language teaching approaches based on American linguistic theories. Most influential was the Charles fries’s Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language (1945), he believed that grammar should be the fundamental pillar of language learning and also adopts a view of behaviorist psychology in which habit formation was introduced as an essential part in learning process. Because the emphasis was on teaching grammatical and phonological structures, the vocabulary needed to be relatively simple, with new words introduced only as they were needed to make the drills possible (Larsen Freeman 2000b; Zimmerman 1997).Assumption was that once students learned the structural frames, lexical items to fill the grammatical slots in the frames could be learned later, as needed.

This approach of learning vocabulary is then rejected by Chomsky who believed that there is a rationalist framework in which the central assumption is being that language is represented as a speakers’ mental grammar, a set of abstract rules for generating grammatical sentences. Language learning approaches based on this theory viewed learning as rule acquisition, not habit formation, and emphasized grammatical rules. Vocabulary was offered somewhat more importance, but the focus on rules of grammar still served to reinforce the idea that lexis was somewhat secondary.

Then, Hymes (1972), while not rejecting Chomsky’s model, extended it and gave greater emphasis to the sociolinguistic and pragmatic factors governing effective use of language. The teaching approach that evolve from these notions, referred to as communicative language teaching, promoted fluency over accuracy and consequently shifted the focus from sentence-level forms to discourse-level functions.

This picture has changed dramatically within the last three decades. The challenge to the status began in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and by the late 1980s and early 1990s, vocabulary studies were developing exponentially and vocabulary teaching was coming into its own.

II. Literature Review

The Importance of Vocabulary to Reading Comprehension

Of the many compelling reasons for providing students with instruction to build vocabulary, none is more important than the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to reading comprehension. Indeed, one of the most enduring findings in reading research is the extent to which students’ vocabulary knowledge relates to their reading comprehension (e.g., Anderson & Freebody, 1981; Baumann, Kame‘enui, & Ash, 2003; Becker, 1977; Davis, 1942; Whipple, 1925).

One of the most persistent findings in reading research is that the extent of students’ vocabulary knowledge relates strongly to their reading comprehension and overall academic success (see Baumann, Kame‘enui, & Ash, 2003; Becker, 1977; Davis, 1942; Whipple, 1925). This relationship seems logical; to get meaning from what they read, students need both a great many words in their vocabularies and the ability to use various strategies to establish the meanings

of new words when they encounter them. Young students who don’t have large vocabularies or effective word-learning strategies often struggle to achieve comprehension. Their bad experiences with reading set in motion a cycle of frustration and failure that continues throughout their schooling (Hart & Risley, 2003; Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman, & Hemphill, 2000; White, Graves, & Slater, 1990). Because these students don’t have sufficient word knowledge to understand what they read, they typically avoid reading. Because they don’t read very much, they don’t have the opportunity to see and learn very many new words. This sets in motion the well known “Matthew Effects,” Stanovich’s (1986) application of Matthew, 25:29–“the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.” In terms of vocabulary development, good readers read more, become better readers, and learn more words; poor readers read less, become poorer readers, and learn fewer words.

Finally, knowing a word means being able to appreciate its connotations and subtleties. When we know a word at this level, we can use and recognize it in idioms, jokes, slang, and puns (Johnson, Johnson, & Schlicting, 2004).

The Kinds of Reading Necessary to Produce Vocabulary Growth

Some researchers suggest that almost any reading will produce vocabulary growth (Krashen, 1993). Others contend that, if students consistently select texts below their current reading levels, even wide reading won’t result in measurable vocabulary growth (Carver, 1994). Nor is reading text that is full of unfamiliar words likely to produce large gains in word knowledge (Shefelbine, 1990). For students to get the most out of wide reading, the conclusion of most researchers is that they should read for various purposes and read texts at various levels of difficulty. Students should read some text simply for enjoyment and some text that challenges them (see National Reading Panel, 2000).

Researchers who have observed students reading independently in classrooms also suggest that teacher guidance to students in selecting books can make independent reading periods productive. Teachers can direct students to books at appropriate reading levels and point out books that might be of interest to individual students (Anderson, 1996). In addition, setting aside time for students

to talk with each other about what they read can contribute to the effectiveness of independent reading time (Anderson, 1996).

As is true for any method of promoting vocabulary growth, wide reading has some limitations. One limitation is that, although wide reading may be effective in producing general vocabulary growth, it may not be an effective method for teaching the specific words that students need to comprehend a particular literature selection or a particular content area textbook. Another limitation is that wide reading alone cannot ensure that students develop the kind of word-learning strategies they need to become independent word learners. For these kinds of word learning, many students require intentional, explicit instruction.

Instruction for Vocabulary Development

Over the past three decades, research has revealed a great deal about the kind of vocabulary instruction that is most effective for helping students comprehend what they read (e.g., Baumann, Kame‘enui et al., 2003; Beck & McKeown, 1991; Blachowicz & Fisher, 2000; Nagy & Scott, 2000). Based on its analysis of this research, the National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that no one single instructional method is sufficient for optimal vocabulary learning; therefore, effective instruction must use a variety of methods to help students acquire new words and increase the depth of their word knowledge over time. Effective instruction includes opportunities for both incidental word learning and intentional word teaching.

What the National Reading Panel Says About the Role of Vocabulary in

Reading Instruction

(Reprinted from National Reading Panel, 2000, p. 4-4)

1. There is a need for direct instruction of vocabulary items required for a

specific text.

2. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important.

Students should be given items that will be likely to appear in many

contexts.

3. Learning in rich contexts is valuable for vocabulary learning. Vocabulary

words should be those that the learner will find useful in many contexts.

When vocabulary items are derived from content learning materials, the

learner will be better equipped to deal with specific reading matter in

content areas.

4. Vocabulary tasks should be restructured as necessary. It is important to be

certain that students fully understand what is asked of them in the context

of reading, rather than focusing only on the words to be learned.

Restructuring seems to be most effective for low achieving or at-risk

students

5. Vocabulary learning is effective when it entails active engagement in

learning tasks.

6. Computer technology can be used effectively to help teach vocabulary.

7. Vocabulary can be acquired through incidental learning. Much of a

student’s vocabulary will have to be learned in the course of doing things

other than explicit vocabulary learning. Repetition, richness of context,

and motivation may also add to the efficacy of incidental learning of

vocabulary.

8. Dependence on a single vocabulary instruction method will not result in

optimal learning. A variety of methods was used effectively with

emphasis on multimedia aspects of learning, richness of context in which

words are to be learned, and the number of exposures to words that

learners receive.

III. Methodology

Attitude is an important concept that is often used to understand and predict people's reaction to an object or change and how behavior can be influenced (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) in order to evaluate this reaction this survey try to open a horizon toward further case studies on teaching 4 skills in IEC classes to the public dissatisfaction.

In this case study we survey on the existence of a problem in teaching reading regarding to shortage in teaching vocabulary.

In order to test this matter a questionnaire was designed in 20 questions based on the role of vocabulary in reading (reading comprehension, summarizing, paraphrasing) which are the common activities in EAP English for academic purposes also it was planned As Triandis (1971) mentioned based on component of likert type questionnaire learner's feelings learner`s beliefs or knowledge and learners preferences about teaching vocabulary in reading classes.

Face book inquiry (poll):

Then, for being surer about this problem we add 104 students of IEC in one group in face book and gave them this question: “Are you satisfied with the way of teaching vocabulary in your reading classes?”

To answer this question, students just need to tick appropriate box:

1-stongly agree 2- agree 3-not sure 4-disagree 5-strongly disagree

The points are 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 respectively; the result of the question is as follow:

Strongly agree=4 person

Agree= 19 person

Not sure= 18 person

Disagree= 30 person

Strongly disagree=33 person

Base on the poll (appendix I ) we had 104 participants more than 60% of them were dis satisfy with their classes So 5 likert type questionnaire was designed on line and also in paper form and was distributed between IEC reading students the result from 50 questionnaire on line (Appendix III and in paper form Appendix II ) was as following.

Main Themes based on questionnaire

The results of this study can be divided into seven themes:

1-Extensive reading

2-Academic vocabulary

3-Vocabulary-oriented teaching

4-Using Authentic materials in teaching vocabulary

5-Learners` s general idea about teaching

6-Explicit vocabulary teaching

7-Teaching skills for Reading fluently

Setting

Intermediate English students with score band 5-5.5 in IELTS (international English language testing system)

Participants: IEC English Reading postgraduate Students on line and in paper from

Validity

All questions were designed base on major role of teaching vocabulary in

Reading classes so although we could had some observations and interviews

( we had some interviews but because of the time we could not organize them )

for the validity of the questionnaire but questionnaire was enough to answer our

research questions

More research and case studies in this field also in relation between reading and

writing will be needed.

IV. Findings, analysis and discussion and conclusion

Gathering and analyzing of data when evaluating the attitude scales, positive attitudes have been graded from 5 to 1, and negative attitudes have been graded from 1 to 5.

With the help Excel software calculations have been used and findings have been analyzed.

Attitude plays a role in the process of learning a second language. Learners' attitude

Towards vocabulary-orientation teaching is assured to influence how

Successful they will be in summarizing paraphrasing and reading comprehension as three major aspects of EAP (English for academic purposes

39 IEC learners fill up the questionnaire form and the analysis is as follows:

(Learners` s general idea about teaching) learners` attitude toward their reading class About 44% of students conveyed that they did not have any progress and 13% of them were not sure about their progress.(Appendix IV)

(Vocabulary-oriented teaching) more than 60% of students in the poll were dissatisfied about shortage in vocabulary-oriented teaching in IEC classes. (appendix I) and in the questionnaire also about 70% of learners enounced which confirm our hypothesis about teaching vocabulary-orientation that is not in the process of Reading teachers and classes in IEC. (Appendix V)

About 62% of learners insist on this fact that there is no relationship between their reading activities and writing, Using vocabulary in writing and the relationship between skills is very important.(Appendix VI)

(Teaching skills for Reading fluently)74% of learners have low speed in their reading which affect fluent reading and the main cause is related to lack of vocabulary teaching in reading classes. (Appendix VII)

(Academic vocabulary) about teaching academic vocabulary more than 50% of students agree that they did not learn it very much. (Appendix VIII)

About extensive reading more than 65% of students likes to have extensive readings, (in our informal interviews students talk about one project as an extensive reading which was their favorite. (Appendix IX)

more than 60% of students are agreed that teacher implementation in vocabulary-oriented teaching was not found or weak ( in informal interviews students say they want their teachers to focus vocabulary and after that teach them some reading skills and also let them find their own text ( extensive reading ) and write some paragraphs based on the vocabulary that they have taught ( in some classes the teacher ask students to write in their classes but because there was no certain words in reading classes writing became none sense and not meaningful for the students. (Appendix X)

In general among 39 IEC 3% strongly disagree 13% were not sure and 19% disagree and 11% strongly agree and learners 54% agree about the problem in teaching vocabulary-oriented .(Appendix XI) they emphasis that it is necessary for them to know some certain words ( in academic context based on Liu Na and Nation (1985) also Nation & Waring (1997: l l) remark we need a vocabulary of about 3000 words which provides coverage of at least 95% of a text before we can efficiently learn from context with un simplified text.)

if IEC students learn this vocabulary ( for sure they have learnt so many of them ) they can pass reading comprehension, summarizing, paraphrasing better more over adding extensive reading helps them to get more familiar with the new word in their major as well as academic words.

V. Suggestions for further studies

We have several suggestions for further study. A longer qualitative case study should be conducted over the course of an entire semester in order to gain a complete picture of what is happening in IEC classroom. it is recommended to run a case study about vocabulary-oriented teaching in among all reading students and have pretest ( it can be IELTS reading test or some standard test in vocabulary proficiency ) and at the end of the semester have a kind of post test so with comparing this two test it will reveal that students have any progress in their vocabulary or not. also another survey can be about the relationship of reading and writing class in EAP

it is clear that most of the students are not satisfied with most of IEC classes

it can be a problem about syllabus or teaching implementation which need more time observations interviews and case studies.

Implications

The purpose of this case study was to examine how lack of teaching vocabulary affects the comprehension of meaning summarizing and paraphrasing.

Additionally, the implications of this research are for IEC reading teachers. Several important points emerge from this study and give suggestions for how vocabulary should be taught in IEC reading classes.

The first implication is the vital requirement for teachers to find new and innovative ways to teach vocabulary. Extensive reading is a good way for EAP students in IEC classes, because they have different majors so they can search and find their favorite texts and enrich their vocabulary through extensive reading and teacher can give the students some projects about it.

Appendix I

Appendix II

QuestionnaireTeaching vocabulary in IEC reading classes

Dear Students

Kindly answer following questions, your cooperation is highly appreciated.

Statements:

1. I think I did not have any progress about vocabulary knowledge in my reading class.

2. After a semester I feel, I cannot summarize or paraphrase very well.

3. There is no relationship between vocabulary that i learn and my writing class so i think i will

forget them.

4. I love to find vocabulary in other sources as well as my text book.

5. I cannot answer reading comprehension questions very well.

6. There is no plan for learning vocabulary in our class.

7. I am weak in reading comprehension.

8. I have a lot of unknown words in my reading book.

9. I feel I need more basic vocabulary to handle my reading.

10. My speed in reading is too low.

11. I have not learnt so many academic vocabularies in my reading class.

12. My teacher doesn’t ask us to make sentence with new words.

13. I almost always use dictionary for paraphrasing.

14. My teacher doesn’t use collocations in our reading class.

15. There aren’t various kinds of texts for our reading in class (texts from magazines, articles, internet

etc.)

16. We don’t have Reading for fun in our class.

17. We don’t have reading tests frequently in our reading class.

18. We don’t practice on new words every session.

19. We don’t learn new vocabulary of our readings before we read them.

20. We don’t have so many class projects on learning new vocabulary.

Statements Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly disagree

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

Hope to have better English classes

Appendix III

13%

28%

13%

44%

3%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix IV

1% 19%

10%

59%

11%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix V

33%

10%

46%

10%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix VIII

10% 3%

74%

13%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix VII

4% 13%

17%

52%

15%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix IX

3%

23%

12%50

%

11%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix X

3% 19%

13%

54%

11%

srongly disagreedisagreenot sureagreestrongly agree

Appendix XI

REFERENCE

Anderson, R. C. (1996). Research foundations to support wide reading. In V.

Greaney (Ed.), Promoting reading in developing countries (pp. 55-77).

Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. Guthrie

(Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77-117).

Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Baumann, J. F., Kame‘enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary

instruction: Voltaire redux. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M.

Jensen (Eds.), Handbook on research on teaching the English language

arts (2nd ed., pp. 752-785). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (1991). Conditions of vocabulary acquisition.

In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of

reading research, (Vol. 2, pp. 789-814). New York: Longman.

Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of

Read aloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher

Becker, W. C. (1977). Teaching reading and language to the disadvantaged –

What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review

Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. In M. Kamil, P.

Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading

Research (Vol. 3, pp. 503-523). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Davis, F. B. (1942). Two new measures of reading ability. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 33, 365-372.

Eli Hinkel 2005 Handbook of research in second language teaching and

learning; Lawrence Erlbaum Association Inc. Publishers

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An

introduction to theory and research. Reading

Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word

gap by age 3. American Educator, 22, 4-9.

H. Douglas Brown 2001 Teaching by Principles, Second Edition Pearson ESL

Jack C. Richards, Theodore Stephen Rodgers 2001, Approaches and

methods in language teaching; Cambridge University press

Krashen, S. (1993). The case for free, voluntary reading. Canadian Modern

Language Review, 50(1), 72-82.

Marianne Celce-Murcia 2001 Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language, 3rd Edition Heinle ELT; 3 edition

Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. L. Kamil, P.

Nagy, W.E. and Anderson, R.C. (1984). How many words are there in

printed English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330.

Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.

3, pp. 269-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Nation & Waring (1997: l l) Vocabulary Size, Text Coverage and Word Lists

By Paul Nation and Robert Waring, 1997

National Reading Panel. (2000). teaching children to read: An evidencebased

assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its

implications for reading instruction. Washington DC: National Institute

of Child Health and Human Development.

Norbert Schmitt, Michael McCarthy 1997 Vocabulary: description, acquisition

and pedagogy

Norbert Schmitt, Michael McCarthy Harry C. Triandis ,Attitude and attitude

change1971. Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy 232 p.

Snow, C., Barnes, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill, L. (2000).

Unfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of

individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research

Quarterly, 21, 360-407.

Theodore V. Higgs, Teaching for proficiency: the organizing principle

American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages 1987

Theodore V. Higgs, American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages

1987 Teaching for proficiency: the organizing principle

Whipple, G. (Ed.). (1925). The twenty-fourth yearbook of the National Society

for the Study of Education: Report of the National Committee on

Reading. Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing.

Wesley Liu Na and Nation (1985) LIU Na. & Nation, P. 1985. Factors

affecting guessing vocabulary in context. RELC Journal, 16, 35-42.

White, T. G., Graves, M. F., & Slater, W. H. (1990). Growth of reading

Vocabulary in diverse elementary schools: Decoding and word meaning.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 281-290.