The effects of applying the clarifying routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction in a reading class m a 60 14 10

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE THE EFFECTS OF APPLYING THE CLARIFYING ROUTINE AS A STRATEGY OF VOCABULARY INSTRUCTION IN A READING CLASS A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL By NGUYEN HANH MINH Supervised by PHO PHUONG DUNG, Ph.D HO CHI MINH CITY, JULY 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am deeply grateful to a number of people for assisting me in completing this M.A thesis First and foremost, I would like to express my sincere thanks to Dr Pho Phuong Dung, my supervisor I would not have been able to write the thesis to the end without the expert guidance and wholehearted support that I received from her throughout my thesis writing process My deep gratitude goes to my course coordinator, Le Ba Khanh Toan, M.A who has made great contribution to the process of conducting the experiment and collecting data Very special thanks are also due to my colleagues and friends, especially Khuong Thi Hong Cam, Vu Thieu Duong, Phan Thi Tra Khuc, who assisted me with access to the materials, gave me constant encouragement as well as kindly helped me very much in a number of ways I am truly indebted and thankful to the participants in the pilot study, pilot testing and the main study who contributed data to this study Last but by no means least, I owe my heartfelt gratitude to my devoted parents Nguyen Thi Nhan and Nguyen Ngoc Van, my supportive husband Nguyen Minh Tuan and beloved children for their unfailing love, understanding, encouragement and support over time Without them, I could not have overcome my ups and downs in life and concentrated on my studies i STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled “The effects of applying the Clarifying Routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction in a reading class” in terms of the statement of requirements for theses in Master’s Program at the University of Social Sciences and Humanities of Ho Chi Minh City, issued by the Higher Degree Committee No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of the thesis This thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution Ho Chi Minh City, May 28th, 2014 NGUYEN HANH MINH ii RETENTION AND USE OF THE THESIS I hereby state that I, NGUYEN HANH MINH, being the candidate for the degree of Master of TESOL, accept the requirement of the University relating to the retention and use of Master’s Theses deposited in the Library In terms of these conditions, I agree that the originality of my thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the Library for the care, loan or reproduction of theses Ho Chi Minh City, May 28th, 2014 NGUYEN HANH MINH iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements i Statement of originality ii Retention and use of the thesis iii Table of contents iv List of abbreviations xi List of tables xii List of figures xiv Abstract xvi CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the study 1.2 Aim of the study 1.3 Research questions 1.4 Significance of the study 1.5 Outline of the thesis CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Vocabulary 2.1.1 Definition of vocabulary 2.1.2 Aspects of word knowledge 10 2.1.3 Learnability of words 13 2.2 Vocabulary learning 13 2.2.1 Process of acquiring a word 13 2.2.2 The receptive-productive distinction 14 iv 2.2.3 Vocabulary learning strategies 14 2.3 Vocabulary instruction in a reading process 16 2.3.1 Purposes of learning/ teaching vocabulary in a reading process 16 2.3.2 Tendency of learning vocabulary in a reading process 17 2.3.3 Vocabulary instruction in a reading class 18 2.3.3.1 Quality of effective vocabulary instruction 18 2.3.3.2 Procedure of vocabulary instruction 19 2.3.3.3 Activities for vocabulary instruction 20 2.4 Related studies in vocabulary learning and teaching 21 2.5 The Clarifying Routine: A conceptual framework 24 2.5.1 Defining the Clarifying Routine 24 2.5.2 Instructional tool and procedure 24 2.5.3 Ways of applying the Clarifying Routine strategy 28 2.5.4 The effects of the Clarifying Routine 29 2.5.4.1 Facilitating vocabulary learning 29 2.5.4.2 Enhancing other learning objectives 30 2.5.5 Some concluding thoughts about the conceptual framework 31 2.6 Summary 31 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 32 3.1 Research design 32 3.2 Study setting 33 3.3 Research procedure 33 3.3.1 Pilot teaching 34 v 3.3.2 Main study 34 3.4 Participants 35 3.5 Research instruments 36 3.5.1 Preparation for tests 36 3.5.1.1 Selection of words 36 3.5.1.2 The pilot test 37 3.5.1.3 Revision 39 3.5.1.4 Re-testing 40 3.5.2 The pre-test and post-test 40 3.5.2.1 The pre-test 41 3.5.2.2 The post-test 41 3.5.2.3 Administration of the pre- and post-tests 42 3.5.3 Experiment 43 3.5.3.1 Preparation for lessons 43 3.5.3.2 Experimental teaching 44 3.5.4 Questionnaire 47 3.6 Data analysis procedure 49 3.7 Summary 49 CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 50 4.1 Results from the pre-test 50 4.2 Results from the post-test 52 4.2.1 Results from the M40-post-test 52 4.2.2 The students’ progress from the M40-pre-test to M40-posttest 55 vi 4.2.3 The results from the G20-post-test 57 4.2.4 Summary 59 4.3 The results from the questionnaire 59 4.3.1 The participants’ perceptions about learning vocabulary in a reading process 59 4.3.1.1 The need to learn vocabulary in a reading process 60 4.3.1.2 The purpose of vocabulary learning in a reading process 61 4.3.1.3 The choice between intentional learning and incidental learning of vocabulary 62 4.3.1.4 Summary 63 4.3.2 The participants’ reflection on the application of the Clarifying Routine strategy 63 4.3.2.1 The participants’ opinions about the learnability of vocabulary 64 4.3.2.2 The participants’ general impression on the Clarifying Routine strategy 64 4.3.2.3 The effects of the application of the Clarifying Routine strategy in the classroom 65 4.3.2.4 The restraints of the Clarifying Routine strategy in the classroom 72 4.3.2.5 The students’ intention to apply the Clarifying Routine as their self-learning strategy of vocabulary 74 4.3.3 Summary 75 4.4 Discussion 75 4.4.1 The participants’ lexical performance 75 4.4.2 The participants’ reflection on the effects of the C.R 79 vii 4.4.3 The difficulties of the application of the Clarifying Routine strategy 82 4.4.4 Summary 82 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 83 5.1 Major conclusions 83 5.2 Limitations of the study 85 5.3 Suggestions for further research 87 5.4 Recommendations for English language practitioners 87 5.4.1 For teachers 87 5.4.2 For students 90 5.5 Summary 90 References 91 Appendices 102 Appendix 1: Taxonomy of vocabulary learning strategies (Schmitt, 1997, pp 207-208) 102 Appendix 2: Course syllabus in Advanced-reading 104 Appendix 3: Pilot testing 108 Appendix 3A: Pilot vocabulary test (N= 87 test items) 108 Appendix 3B: Item Facility analysis of the pilot test 115 Appendix 3C: Cronbach Alpha of the pilot test (N= 70 chosen test items) 118 Appendix 3D: Results of Item Discrimination and Distractor Efficiency analysis of the 70 chosen items in the pilot test 119 viii Appendix 3E: Revised version of the pilot test (also used as the W70-pre-test & the M40-pre-test) 121 Appendix 3F: Cronbach Alpha for the revised version of the pilot test 127 Appendix 4: Lists of words .128 Appendix 4A: List of 70 chosen terms 128 Appendix 4B: Lists of target terms for use in the pre- and post-tests 129 Appendix 5: Vocabulary post-test 130 Appendix 6: Sample lesson plans for vocabulary instruction 134 Appendix 6A: Sample lesson plan for the Experimental Group 134 Appendix 6B: Sample lesson plan for the Experimental Group 142 Appendix 6C: Sample lesson plan for the Experimental Group 154 Appendix 6D: Sample lesson plan for the Control Group 158 Appendix 7: Questionnaire 161 Appendix 7A: Questionnaire in Vietnamese 161 Appendix 7B: Questionnaire in English .165 Appendix 8: Item facility analysis of the W70-pre-test 169 Appendix 9: Results of score frequency in pre- and post- tests 172 Appendix 9A: Score frequency of the M40-pre-test for the Control Group 172 Appendix 9B: Score frequency of the M40-pre-test for the Experimental Group 172 Appendix 9C: Score frequency of the M40-post-test for the Control Group .173 ix APPENDIX 7B: QUESTIONNAIRE IN ENGLISH FULL VERSION (SECTIONS 1, & 3) IS FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP SHORTENED VERSION (SECTIONS & 2) IS FOR THE CONTROL GROUP QUESTIONNAIRE This questionnaire aims to collect necessary information for the TESOL M.A thesis entitled “The effects of applying the Clarifying Routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction in a reading class” Please spend some little time giving response to the following questions Your participation contributes a lot to the success of this thesis We promise the data gathered will be used for the research purposes only Please find totally FOUR (4) pages of the questionnaire delivered to you For most of the questions, you just answer by ticking () in the boxes you choose SECTION 1: PERSONAL INFORMATION Name: ……………………………………………… Class: ………… Gender:  Male  Female Year of birth: …………… How much average hours per day you spend on self-studying English at home? ………… hours Apart from going to school in the University of Social Sciences and Humanities, have you been attending any English courses at other places from September, 2013 up to now?  Yes  No SECTION 2: ABOUT THE TEACHING AND LEARNING OF VOCABULARY WHILE READING Question 1: In your opinion, is it necessary to teach and learn vocabulary in a reading session?  Not necessary  Relatively necessary  Very necessary 165 Question 2: Which of the following statement would you agree most about learning vocabulary in reading?  While reading a text, we should only focus on comprehending the text and ignore unknown words or deal with them by guessing from the context  While reading a text, we focus on unknown words, and choose to learn some necessary terms  While reading a text, we need to learn all unknown words appearing in the text Question 3: In your opinion, what is the purpose of learning vocabulary in reading?  To comprehend the reading text  To recognize words in future encounters while reading or listening to something  To use words in future speaking and writing  All the above purposes Question 4: In your opinion, which of the following tendencies of vocabulary learning is more effective?  Incidental learning of vocabulary (Vocabulary will be gradually absorbed through extensive reading.)  Intentional learning of vocabulary (Attention is paid on targeted words while reading texts and various strategies are applied to record the words in mind.) SECTION 3: ABOUT THE LEARNING OF VOCABULARY THROUGH THE CLARIFYING ROUTINE STRATEGY Question 5: Which of the following types of vocabulary cause you problems in learning it? (You can choose multiple boxes below)  Long words  Abstract words  Multiple-meaning words  Complex words (words having multiple uses or aspects of knowledge)  Hard-to-articulate words 166 Question 6: What is your overall feeling about the application of the Clarifying Routine strategy with the use of the Clarifying Table instrument during the course?  I like it very much  I rather like it  I cannot decide  I don’t like it much  I dislike it Question 7: What is your opinion about the following specific characteristics of the Clarifying Routine? 7.1 EFFECTS 7.1.1 Arousing learners’ interest in learning vocabulary 7.1.2 Creating an exciting atmosphere in the classroom 7.1.3 Full of varied activities 7.1.4 Building learners’ thinking skills (i.e skills of analyzing, summarizing, associating, contrasting and synthesizing) 7.1.5 Promoting learners’ activeness 7.1.6 Building learners’ spirit of self-reliance (without dependence on the teacher) 7.1.7 Enhancing skills of collaborative working, thanks to group/ pair discussion 7.1.8 Letting students help and learn from each other 7.1.9 Suitable for learning problematic terms (abstract words, multiple-meaning words, and complex words 167 Strongly disagree Disagree Uncertain Characteristics Agree Strongly agree (Please put a tick  on the cell that best fits your viewpoint.) with numerous clarifiers) 7.1.10 Assisting students to understand words more clearly and thoroughly 7.1.11 Helping students connect the new word with personal experience practically 7.1.12 Letting students know how to use the word appropriately 7.1.13 Facilitating favorable memorization of words 7.1.14 Making it easy for learners to review the learnt words for tests and for future reference (thanks to Clarifying Table) 7.2 RESTRAINTS 7.2.1 The Clarifying Routine was so new, thus causing some embarrassment at the beginning 7.2.2 The use of the Clarifying Routine was timeconsuming 7.2.3 Sometimes few sections in the Clarifying Table seemed confusing 7.2.4 Sometimes it was hard to come up with an idea in limited time Question 8: Which of the following sections in the Clarifying Table troubles you most during the application of the Clarifying Routine strategy? (You can choose at most boxes.)  Section 2- Clarifiers  Section 3- Core idea  Section 4- Personal connection  Section 5- Use it to describe  Section 6- Don’t confuse it with  Section 7- Sentences Question 9: Do you wish to apply this strategy to independently learn vocabulary in the future?  Yes, always  Yes, frequently  Yes, occasionally  No, never - The end - Thank you for your contribution! 168 APPENDIX 8: ITEM FACILITY ANALYSIS OF THE W70-PRE-TEST Classes: 01 & 03 Test item Number of test-takers: 52 Number of test items: 70 Term Number of correct answers IF Chosen - Not Chosen Accentuate 19 0.37 Chosen Allegation 19 0.37 Chosen Apprehension 10 0.19 Chosen Arcane 12 0.23 Chosen Assuage 0.17 Chosen Atrocity 13 0.25 Chosen Breach 13 0.25 Chosen Canny 11 0.21 Chosen Commission 16 0.31 Chosen 10 Complacent 21 0.4 Chosen 11 Concede 0.15 Chosen 12 Conceivable 18 0.35 Chosen 13 Conducive 0.17 Chosen 14 Confine 23 0.44 Chosen 15 Consolation 0.06 Chosen 16 Contemptuous 14 0.27 Chosen 17 Contravene 19 0.37 Chosen 18 Deprive 10 0.19 Chosen 19 Derisive 17 0.33 Chosen 20 Disarming 15 0.29 Chosen 21 Disrupt 12 0.23 Chosen 22 Embellishment 13 0.25 Chosen 23 Escalate 20 0.38 Chosen 24 Euphoria 0.17 Chosen 25 Exhilarating 11 0.21 Chosen 26 Exorcise 10 0.19 Chosen No 169 27 Ferocious 0.1 Chosen 28 Fortuitous 23 0.44 Chosen 29 Gregarious 12 0.23 Chosen 30 Grievance 0.1 Chosen 31 Grudging 16 0.31 Chosen 32 Idyllic 10 0.19 Chosen 33 Impeccable 12 0.23 Chosen 34 Improvisation 14 0.27 Chosen 35 Impulse 0.12 Chosen 36 Indefatigable 14 0.27 Chosen 37 Ingenious 0.17 Chosen 38 Inherent 19 0.37 Chosen 39 Insouciance 10 0.19 Chosen 40 Intrepid 22 0.42 Chosen 41 Intriguing 0.12 Chosen 42 Introspective 16 0.31 Chosen 43 Jurisdiction 15 0.29 Chosen 44 Latent 0.12 Chosen 45 Libel 13 0.25 Chosen 46 Mitigate 10 0.19 Chosen 47 Perpetual 14 0.27 Chosen 48 Perverse 13 0.25 Chosen 49 Pilgrimage 19 0.37 Chosen 50 Precarious 13 0.25 Chosen 51 Prevail 18 0.35 Chosen 52 Provocation 12 0.23 Chosen 53 Radical 13 0.25 Chosen 54 Recoil 22 0.42 Chosen 55 Reconcile 19 0.37 Chosen 56 Resentment 14 0.27 Chosen 57 Savage 19 0.37 Chosen 170 58 Seductive 17 0.33 Chosen 59 Skeptical 21 0.4 Chosen 60 Spurious 10 0.19 Chosen 61 Staggering 0.15 Chosen 62 Summon 14 0.27 Chosen 63 Unwittingly 13 0.25 Chosen 64 Upheaval 13 0.25 Chosen 65 Veteran 15 0.29 Chosen 66 Vie 15 0.29 Chosen 67 Virulent 16 0.31 Chosen 68 Watershed 13 0.25 Chosen 69 Waver 23 0.44 Chosen 70 Zeal 11 0.21 Chosen Total of items TOTAL OF CHOSEN ITEMS 70 70 171 APPENDIX 9: RESULTS OF SCORE FREQUENCY IN PRE- AND POSTTESTS APPENDIX 9A: SCORE FREQUENCY OF THE M40-PRE-TEST FOR THE CONTROL GROUP Score Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 7.4 7.4 7.4 3.7 3.7 11.1 14.8 14.8 25.9 7.4 7.4 33.3 14.8 14.8 48.1 10 3.7 3.7 51.9 11 11.1 11.1 63.0 12 7.4 7.4 70.4 13 3.7 3.7 74.1 14 14.8 14.8 88.9 15 3.7 3.7 92.6 24 3.7 3.7 96.3 26 3.7 3.7 100.0 Total 27 100.0 100.0 APPENDIX 9B: SCORE FREQUENCY OF THE M40-PRE-TEST FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 4.0 4.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 24.0 16.0 16.0 40.0 8.0 8.0 48.0 10 12.0 12.0 60.0 11 8.0 8.0 68.0 12 8.0 8.0 76.0 14 4.0 4.0 80.0 15 4.0 4.0 84.0 17 4.0 4.0 88.0 18 4.0 4.0 92.0 20 4.0 4.0 96.0 22 4.0 4.0 100.0 Total 25 100.0 100.0 172 APPENDIX 9C: SCORE FREQUENCY OF THE M40-POST-TEST FOR THE CONTROL GROUP Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 7.4 7.4 7.4 10 3.7 3.7 11.1 12 3.7 3.7 14.8 13 3.7 3.7 18.5 14 3.7 3.7 22.2 15 3.7 3.7 25.9 16 3.7 3.7 29.6 18 3.7 3.7 33.3 20 7.4 7.4 40.7 21 3.7 3.7 44.4 23 3.7 3.7 48.1 26 11.1 11.1 59.3 27 7.4 7.4 66.7 29 3.7 3.7 70.4 30 3.7 3.7 74.1 31 3.7 3.7 77.8 32 3.7 3.7 81.5 33 3.7 3.7 85.2 34 3.7 3.7 88.9 37 3.7 3.7 92.6 38 3.7 3.7 96.3 39 3.7 3.7 100.0 Total 27 100.0 100.0 173 APPENDIX 9D: SCORE FREQUENCY OF THE M40-POST-TEST FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent Valid 19 4.0 4.0 4.0 20 8.0 8.0 12.0 21 4.0 4.0 16.0 22 4.0 4.0 20.0 23 4.0 4.0 24.0 24 4.0 4.0 28.0 28 8.0 8.0 36.0 29 8.0 8.0 44.0 31 8.0 8.0 52.0 32 4.0 4.0 56.0 33 8.0 8.0 64.0 34 4.0 4.0 68.0 35 4.0 4.0 72.0 36 4.0 4.0 76.0 37 4.0 4.0 80.0 38 4.0 4.0 84.0 39 12.0 12.0 96.0 40 4.0 4.0 100.0 Total 25 100.0 100.0 174 APPENDIX 10: TESTS OF NORMAL DISTRIBUTION OF DATA APPENDIX 10A: RESULT OF ONE-SAMPLE KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST OF THE DATA IN THE M40-PRE-TEST FOR EACH GROUP M40-pretest Group Experimental group N 25 Normal Parametersa Most Extreme Differences Control group Mean 10.48 Std Deviation 4.984 Absolute 140 Positive 140 Negative -.083 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 701 Asymp Sig (2-tailed) 710 N 27 Normal Parametersa Most Extreme Differences Mean 10.85 Std Deviation 5.201 Absolute 161 Positive 161 Negative -.118 Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 839 Asymp Sig (2-tailed) 483 a Test distribution is Normal b Calculated from data 175 APPENDIX 10B: RESULT OF ONE-SAMPLE KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST OF THE DATA IN THE M40-POST-TEST FOR EACH GROUP Group Experimental group Control group N Normal Parameters(a,b) Most Extreme Differences Mean Std Deviation Absolute Positive Negative Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) N Normal Parameters(a,b) Most Extreme Differences Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) a Test distribution is Normal b Calculated from data 176 Mean Std Deviation Absolute Positive Negative M40-posttest 25 30.40 6.813 106 106 -.095 531 940 27 23.52 9.204 125 089 -.125 648 794 APPENDIX 10C: RESULT OF ONE-SAMPLE KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST OF THE DATA OF GAIN SCORES FROM THE M40-PRE-TEST TO THE M40-POST-TEST FOR EACH GROUP Group Experimental group Control group N Normal Parameters(a,b) Most Extreme Differences Mean Std Deviation Absolute Positive Negative Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) N Normal Parameters(a,b) Most Extreme Differences Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) a Test distribution is Normal b Calculated from data 177 Mean Std Deviation Absolute Positive Negative Gain score from M40pre to M40-posttest 25 19.92 5.722 090 090 -.089 448 988 27 12.67 8.053 122 101 -.122 632 819 APPENDIX 10D: RESULT OF ONE-SAMPLE KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST OF THE DATA IN THE G20-POST-TEST FOR EACH GROUP Group EG N Normal Parameters(a,b) Most Extreme Differences Mean Std Deviation Absolute Positive Negative Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) CG N Normal Mean Parameters(a,b) Std Deviation Most Extreme Absolute Differences Positive Negative Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z Asymp Sig (2-tailed) a Test distribution is Normal b Calculated from data 178 G20-post-test 25 14.0200 11.33255 147 147 -.108 735 653 27 7.2593 9.40680 257 257 -.220 1.335 057 APPENDIX 11: PARTICIPANTS’ RESPONSES TO THEIR LANGUAGE LEARNING BACKGROUND APPENDIX 11A: PARTICIPANTS’ RESPONSES TO ENGLISH SELF-STUDY HOURS AT HOME Group Valid number Average hours of self-study Control Group 26 (*) 3.515 Experimental Group 25 3.500 (*)1 person left all questions in the questionnaire unanswered APPENDIX 11B: PARTICIPANTS’ RESPONSES TO WHETHER THEY ATTEND EXTRA ENGLISH COURSES OUTSIDE THE UNIVERSITY DURING THE TIME OF THE EXPERIMENT Group Yes (=attend extra No (=Not attend Total courses) extra courses) Control Group 23 26 (*) Experimental Group 22 25 Total 45 51 (*)1 person left all questions in the questionnaire unanswered 179 ... vocabulary teaching and learning in Vietnam The curiosity about the practical effects of applying the Clarifying Routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction in a subject-matter class in the. .. authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled ? ?The effects of applying the Clarifying Routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction in a reading class? ?? in terms of the statement of requirements... address that gap It was conducted in the form of a quasi-experiment to investigate the effects of this strategy when it is applied in vocabulary instruction in a reading class Data from the pre- and