An investigation into the effects of semantic mapping on vocabulary memorizing for the first year english non major students at namdinh teachers traning college submitted

M IN IS T R Y O F E D U C A T IO N A N D T R A IN IN G H A N O I U N IV E R S IT Y T R A N TH I T H U H IE N AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE EFFECTS OF SEMANTIC MAPPING ON VOCABULARY MEMORIZING FOR THE FIRST-YEAR ENGLISH NON-MAJOR STUDENTS AT NAMDINH TEACHER’S TRANING COLLEGE SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEGREE OF MASTER IN TESOL SUPERVISOR: MA PHAM HONG THUY TRUNG TAM THÖNG TIN THlf VStN is H anoi M ay, 0 f t m ACKNOW LEDGEM ENT i A B STR A C T ii LIST OF A BBR EV IA TIO N S iv LIST OF FIGURES AND TA BLES v CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the study .1 1.1.1 The College I 1.1.2 The Teachers 1.1.3 The students 1.1.4 The Program 1.1.5 The statement o f the problem 1.2 The aims o f the study 1.2.1 The aims o f the study 1.2.2 The research questions 1.3 The scopes of the study 1.4 The organization o f the study CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Vocabulary acquisition 2.1.1 What is vocabulary? 2.1.2 The importance o f vocabulary 10 2.1.3 Types o f vocabulary 11 2.1.4 Incidental and intentional vocabulary learning 11 2.2 Vocabulary teaching 12 2.2.1 Traditional vocabulary teaching techniques 13 2.2.2 Current trends in teaching vocabulary 14 2.3 Memorizing word meanings : 18 2.3.1 Short-term and long-term memory 18 2.3.2 Major factors affecting word memorization 18 2.4 Semantic mapping for vocabulary learning 20 2.5 The previous related studies 23 2.6 Summary 26 CHAPTER III: THE METHODOLOGY 28 3.1 The research design 28 3.2 The research questions 29 3.3 Description of variables 29 3.3.1 Independent variables .29 3.3.2 Dependent variable 30 3.4 The subjects 31 3.5 Data collection 32 3.5.1 Data collection instruments 32 3.5.1.1 T ests 32 3.5.1.1.1 Justications for tests 32 3.5.1.1.2 Descriptions of tests 33 3.5.1.2 Questionnaire 35 A 3.5.1.2.1 Justifications for the questionnaire 35 3.5.1.2.2 Descriptions of the questionnaire .35 3.5.2 Data collection procedure 36 3.6 Data analysis techniques 37 3.6.1 Descriptive analysis 38 3.6.2 T-test 38 3.6.3 Thematic analysis for questionnaire results 39 3.7 Summary 39 CHAPTER IV: DATA ANALYSIS AND D ISCUSSION .41 4.1 Descriptive analysis 41 4.1.1 Descriptive analysis for vocabulary tests 41 4.1.1.1 Results from pretests 41 4.1.1.2 Results from the posttest 44 4.1.1.3 Results from progress tests 48 4.1.2 Results from the experimental questionnaire 50 4.1.2.1 Results for students’ attitudes towards the technique 50 4.1.2.2 Results for the effectiveness o f the technique 51 4.1.2.3 Results for the use o f the technique 53 4.2 Major findings 56 4.3 Discussion 57 4.4 The limitations o f the study 59 4.5 Summary 60 CHAPTER V: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION .61 5.1 Implications and recommendations 61 5.1.1 The implications which arise from the present study 61 5.1.1.1 The role o f teacher in vocabulary learning process 61 5.1.1.2 The role o f discussion in semantic mapping application 62 5.1.2 Recommendations for future research 63 5.2 Conclusion 64 REFERENCES 66 APPENDIXES 71 APPENDIX 1: T ests 71 APPENDIX 2: Test Results 80 APPENDIX 3: Questionnaire 83 APPENDIX 4: Results from The Questionnaire 88 APPENDIX 5: Lesson P lans 91 ACKNOW LEDGEMENT I wish to express m y gratitude to my supervisor, M A Pham H ong Thuy, for her encouragem ent, guidance, and advice throughout the research W ithout her w ell-designed plan, and m eticulous review o f the draft, this research w ould have been im possible w ould also like to acknow ledge and express m y appreciation to thank MA N guyen T hai Ha, V ice Dean o f Post G raduate D epartm ent, for offering m e the chance to undertake this problem and for providing me sustained guidance and advice I am also indebted to Dr Tran H ong H anh for her statistical assistance and advice I also w ish to th an k my colleagues, my friends, my students, and my fam ily for th eir understanding and support ABSTRACT At Namdinh Teachers’ Training College (NTTC), English non-major students have studied English as a compulsory subject When learning English, they laced with many difficulties not only in specific language skills but also in vocabulary acquisition Because of their learning habits and their learning strategies, they failed to memorize words for long time and to recall words when necessary Many efforts were made to help the students learn words better but the results did not satisfy both the teacher and the students Based on literature review, it is found that semantic mapping has had good effects on vocabulary learning; especially it improves the retention and retrieval o f word meanings (Schmitt, 2000; Grains & Redman, 1986; Sokmen, 1997; Decarrico, 2001; Nation, 2001) That is the reason why the researcher wanted to conduct the present study This study set out to investigate the effects o f semantic mapping on word meaning retention and retrieval o f the first-year English non-major students at NTTC The focus o f this study is to find whether students could remember and recall the words they learnt better with the help o f semantic mapping than other traditional techniques which were represented in this study as the wordlist technique The experiment was commended in 15 weeks in two classes (Computer Science and Mathematics) as the two classes had almost the same background The two classes were randomly assigned as experimental group and control group For the experimental group, semantic mapping was used to teach vocabulary whereas for control group, the teaching was through wordlists Participants took English vocabulary proficiency tests at the beginning and at the end o f the study, called pretest and posttest respectively During the experiment, participants were delivered progress tests on vocabulary For experimental group, a questionnaire was completed at the end o f the study to find out experimental students’ attitudes towards the semantic mapping technique The data for this study was obtained through two instruments: English vocabulary tests and a questionnaire on semantic mapping for experimental group The subjects were 80 first-year English non-major students from two classes namely Computer Science and Mathematics in NTTC The data were collected through vocabulary tests and a questionnaire Then, these data were analyzed using descriptive analysis, T-test and thematic analysis with the assistance o f SPSS version 13.0 The findings o f the study showed that the experimental students outperformed the control students in terms o f vocabulary retention and retrieve and that the experimental students have positive responses to semantic mapping technique The findings o f the study also indicated that semantic mapping can be used for future vocabulary learning Some implications also rose from the present study such as the teacher’s role and the role o f discussions in vocabulary learning CM: Control M athematics HCS: Experimental Computer Science EFL: English as a foreign language ESL: English as a second language FL: Foreign language Cj E: General English GET: General English training LI: First language L2: Second language NTTC: Namdinh Teachers’Training College fable 4.1 : Descriptive Statistics o f pretest fable 4.2: Independent Sample T-test for pretest l able 4.3: Descriptive Statistics of gender difference for pretest Fable 4.4: Descriptive Statistics o f posttest Table 4.5: Independent Sample T-test for posttest Table 4.6: Descriptive Statistics of gender difference for posttest Table 4.7: Paired Sample T-test results Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics o f progress tests Feature 2.1 Semantic feature analysis for means o f transport Feature 2.2 Semantic mapping for human life cycle Feature 2.3 Semantic mapping for items in bedroom Feature 2.4 Semantic mapping for word “unfaithfulness” Feature 2.5 Semantic mapping for word “sumo” Feature 4.1 : Pretest scores Feature 4.2: Posttest scores Feature 4.3: Pretest and posttest scores Feature 4.4: Progress test scores Feature 4.5: Responses to the attitudes towards the semantic mapping Feature 4.6: Responses to the effectiveness o f the semantic mapping Feature 4.7: Responses to the uses o f semantic mapping C H A P T E R I: IN T R O D U C T IO N 1.1 Background to the study / / / The College Namdinh Teachers' Training College (NTTC) is known as a good educational unit under the Ministry o f Education and Training Since it was established in 1978 the College has trained thousands o f students to be teachers for secondary schools in the province 1.1.2 The Teachers The English Department at NTTC has total ten teachers Among them, four teach General English (GE) for English non-major students and the rest teach English major students All o f the teachers had formal tertiary training at the long-established institutions of language in Vietnam such as Hanoi University, College o f Foreign Languages under Vietnam National University Most of them are qualified teachers with good teaching experience o f more than four years and abilities to select and adapt teaching materials One of them has MA in TESOL and one has MA degree in Education Management They are enthusiastic with teaching, creative in applying new materials in their teaching and willing to help students learn better 1.1.3 The students 375 first-year English non-major students found the population for the study They enroll in the College to become teachers at secondary schools They come from different districts in the province Their age ranges from 18 to 22 There may be no big problem among students in terms o f age and this is one of advantages for teachers to choose the appropriate teaching method First-year English non-major students are divided into classes according to their professionals namely Mathematics, Computer Science, Physics, Biology Art, English, Literature, and Geography The average number o f students in each class is 40 to 45 This means that the class size is too big for a language class A P P E N D IX 4: R E S U L T S FR O M Q U E S T IO N N A IR E The results from the questionnaire were coded in number ranging from to = no response (for both close-ended and open ended questions) Negative symbol (-) stands before the coded number to present negative responses The code for close-ended items as follows - Part 1: - Part II: -P art III: = never fe lt = rarely fe lt = often fe lt = always felt — never used - rarely used - often used = always used = sometimes fe lt = sometimes used = absolutely disagree = disagree =- agree = absolutely agree = no opinion The code for open-en ded items: For statement 11 “You use semantic mapping to learn words in not only vocabulary section but also i n section” = listening = speaking = reading = writing For statement 13 “Give your reasons for the future use of the semantic mapping” 1= semantic mapping helps organizing words systematically = semantic mapping assists long-term memory = semantic mapping helps students visualize and contextualize the words when they want to recall = semantic mapping motivate students in learning vocabulary = other reasons For the statement on the suggestion for better use o f the technique “Give your suggestions for the better use o f the technique” in statement 13 = use semantic mapping as a pre-activity in speaking or writing lessons = use semantic mapping to check the students’ understanding = use semantic mapping with other techniques = other suggestions ^ rn CO Results from Questionnaire for Experimental Group '-f■ - 10' ^ — ■—1 O •" » — (N (N mC 'lZr I ts CN r - — T f ^ » ỗ C3 H OiJ ỗ < ■ * — * t/5 c/ỵ u ►J ■p C/5 WD s "ÕỈ H T3 u* O •♦P — » J2 13 J-H ■J2 C/2 bio c 12 ỗ3 ệ (/5 o G Ă3 J5 C3 0p c « DJj X) "euS < 1-u C« tn + * C3 c -*-> c J ■o c/l c/5 C/3 C ca CJ X ♦— > CJ C /5 ■ *— * C /5 -o s~ —1 o s: c /3 C J cj CJ £ IE cn -*C — C C 0) £ C/3 _a> x ca ~a £ o ~0 ■*— * 03 X — oLh O C ea ■d o a, £ •a — c C / X X o c / C / (U ■o *3 i- o o I-i G, £ c ca O O'! X u* -*% O C/5 ca ■s Õ *ụ c £ ãi > C/Ỵ J■ e» * — ẵ ÇT -C o -C "P VỊ I— 03 o> Ü (/5 le TD iằ V ầ ) -> ão aj JS y >o* _ OJ O u -ẫ a O -O cữ £ J2 •a "S c/5 c J s : o o C /2 c aj < u "O x ■ « — * C /2 C /2 < > ► > u o '5 * — * £ Unit 5: COMPARISONS (U cd c/2 u - O 'o c •a c yn -a _aj CJ c d < D tc d >> u ) Ui c » S 4) • o C / » X t/j D T3 ^ t » S s* P ^ w X o O La < U | < -1 ° c o > * c o o ) X •*-» T3 C c d t> ■a c e e < D E < u E t / / _ a > • o < D C / C / c d X o < D u C / E < u & Xi C3 O O > u > < D X E E < D 01 C / C / 2 C / 00 c ■ c d u ii- '5 o C / c d • C / c d & > U ( o s C / •*-* o o C m V BX W DX « -J c o C / C / c d C / c d aj V - o c d a • * > C / E G O C / 'C c d a, ID * < u u TJ a > u o u C L ¿0 f -a c h i 4) £ « a x w • • Im a > x < D u « s o c o C < u a > I j a c d < u -I s: o a o o o "O aj < u -o u o < u C / c < D -a >, X c aj x C / -a c C/3 C / c d "T3 C c d -a i— c d O X -lii o • » aj C / o x O » C / c d c O a a < u E C / D ■ rs o ■4—* 'C o a C / x+ > o o a, 4) _o X u > o Q s: ■sS a 00 C / JD _o 'C u c T c d < L > u c 0* ~o 0 as o < -a *3 is T3 C/2 •• (5 £ o c/2 '3 * — » XI c d x aj X oo c 'g o o C / "O L _ o t / -p u "T? ỗ C3 to X (L) tn i¡¿ (U Ị> 4ca —t t/ j c ü u c ãa c t/ợ ỗ c ' tu V TD c D G Q to s: I ỗa c / C j ă Co -O „2 ■ o ex £ a i VỊ / j 03 i♦-* c y C /3 c "S ?! 03 l_ O T3 ”a c J2 ầ L > ằ ỗd E o o '5b t / w T ca c 5b 9- D- t/2 >> 03 £ Q J O H Dû C y aj? O J *— ■ & u ü U l O O O % ỮÍ