The effect of noticing, retrieval, and generation on vocabulary learning and retention among high School students

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Department of English Language, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran

10.22098/jsp.2020.910

Abstract

The present study is an attempt to examine the psychological processes of noticing, retrieval, and generation and their possible contribution to the process of vocabulary learning and retention among intermediate students. The research method was experimental. Ninety intermediate students were randomly assigned to three groups, namely Noticing through Input enhancement (n=30), Input Enhancement plus Input-Based Reviewing (n=30), and Input Enhancement plus Output-Based Reviewing (n=30). The target Academic Words were contextualized in Focus on Vocabulary 2: Mastering the Academic Word List (Schmitt, Schmitt, & Mann, 2011). A pretest composed of the VKS items was administered to the participants. The first group encountered the target words that have been already highlighted to absorb their attention. Encountering the already highlighted words, the second group reviewed the words through researcher-made word cards. The third group, besides encountering the already highlighted words, reviewed the words through paraphrasing the sentences including the target words. One week after the last treatment session, an immediate posttest, and after two weeks, a delayed posttest were administered. Based on the results of Friedman’s ANOVAs, subsequent Wilcoxon Signed Rank Tests, and Kruskal Wallis Tests, it was revealed that noticing without any intervention has no significant effect on vocabulary learning and retention. It was also found that both types of input-based and output-based reviewing have positive effect on vocabulary learning and retention and their effects are not significantly different.

Keywords

References

Adams, R. (2003). L2 output, reformulation and noticing: Implications for IL development. Language Teaching Research, 7, 347–376.
Alanen, R. (1995). Input enhancement and rule presentation in second language acquisition. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Attention and awareness in foreign language learning (pp. 259–302). Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i.
Bachman, L. F. (2011). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bahrick, H.P. & Phelps, E. (1987). Retention of Spanish vocabulary over 8 years. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 13, 344–349.
Beaton, A. Gruneberg, M. & Ellis, N. (1995). Retention of foreign vocabulary using the keyword method: a ten-year follow-up. Second Language Research, 11, 112–120.
Benati, A. (2005). The effects of PI, TI and MOI in the acquisition of English simple past tense. Language Teaching Research, 9, 67–113.
Bisson, M.J. van Heuven, W.J.B. Conklin, K. & Tunney, R.J. (2014). The role of repeated exposure to multimodal input in incidental acquisition of foreign language vocabulary. Language Learning, 64, 855–877.
Chen,C. & Truscott, J. (2010). The effects of repetition and L1 lexicalization on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31, 693–713.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213–238.
Daloglu, A. Baturay, M. & Yildirim, S. (2009). Designing a Constructivist Vocabulary Learning Material. In: R. Marriot & P. Torres (Eds.) Handbook of Research on ELearning Methodologies for Language Acquisition. London, United Kingdom: IGI Global.
DeKeyser, R. (1997). Beyond explicit rule learning: Automatizing second language morphosyntax. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(2), 195–221.
Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 273–293.
Gary, J.O. & Gary, N. (1981). Comprehension-based language instruction: Theory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379, 332–342.
Gass, S, M. & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, Interaction and Output in Second Language Acquisition. In B. vanPatten & J. Williams (Eds.). Theories in Second Language Acquisition – An Introduction. (pp.180-206). New York: Routledge.
Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, interaction and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Arnold.
Hashemi, S. & Kassaian, Z. (2011). Effects of learner interaction, receptive and productive learning tasks on vocabulary acquisition: An Iranian case. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2165–2171.
Hatch, E. & Brown, C. (1995). Vocabulary, semantics, and language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hirsh, D. (2012). Current perspectives in second language vocabulary research. Bern: Peter Lang AG, InternationalAcademic Publishers.
Horibe, S. (2003). The output hypothesis and cognitive processes: An examination via acquisition of Japanese temporal subordinate conjunctions (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Purdue University, Lafayette.
Izumi, S. & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239–278.
Izumi, S. (2002). Output, input enhancement, and the noticing hypothesis: An experimental study of ESL relativization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 541–577.
Izumi, S. & Bigelow, M. (2000). Does output promote noticing and second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 239–278.
Izumi, S. Bigelow, M. Fujiwara, M. & Fearnow, S. (1999). Testing the Output Hypothesis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3), 421–452.
Jalilifar, A.R. & Amin, F. (2008). Classroom vocabulary learning: Investigating the role of task types on Iranian high school learners of English as a foreign language. Teaching English Language and Literature Society of Iran, 2(8), 111–141.
Khabiri, M & Pakzad, M. (2012). The effect of teaching critical reading strategies on EFL learners’ vocabulary retention. The Journal of Teaching Language Skill, 4(1), 73–106.
Kim, Y. (2008). The Role of Task-Induced Involvement and Learner Proficiency in L2 Vocabulary Acquisition. Language Learning, 61, 100-140.
Komachali, M. & Khodareza, M. (2012). The Effect of Using Vocabulary Flash Card on Iranian Pre-University Students' Vocabulary Knowledge. International Education Studies, 5(3), 134–147.
Kornell, N. (2009). Optimising learning using flashcards: Spacing is more effective than cramming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(9), 1297–1317.
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications, New York: Longman.
Kwon, S. H. (2007). The Roles of Output on L2 Vocabulary Acquisition: Noticing, Retrieval and Retention. English Education, 62(4), 279–310.
Laufer, B. & Rozovski-Roitblat, B. (2014). Retention of new words: Quantity of encounters, quality of task, and degree of knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 687–711.
Lee, J. F. & Benati, A. G. (2009). Research and perspectives on processing instruction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Leow, R. P. (2001). Do learners notice enhanced forms while interacting with the L2? An online and offline study of the role of written input enhancement in L2 reading. Hispania, 84, 496–509.
Leow, R. P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: a student-centered approach. New York: Routledge.
Leow, R. Egi, T. Nuevo, A. & Tsai, Y. (2003). The roles of textual enhancement and type of linguistic item in adult L2 learners’ comprehension and intake. Applied Language Learning, 13, 1–16.
Li, X. (1988). Effects of Contextual Cues on Inferring and Remembering Meanings of New Words. Applied Linguistics, 9(4), 402–413.
Long, M.H. (1983). Native speaker/non-native speaker conversation and the negotiation of comprehensible input. Applied Linguistics, 4, 126–41.
Long, M.H. Inagaki S, & Ortega, L. (1998). The role of implicit negative feedback in SLA: Models and recasts in Japanese and Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 357–371.
Mackey, A. (2012). Input, interaction, and corrective feedback in L2 learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mitchell, R. Myles, F. & Marsden, E. (2013). Second Language Learning Theories.Abingdon: Routledge.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. B. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In J. Coady &T. N. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Rassaei, E. (2012). The effects of input-based and output-based instruction on L2 development. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 16(3), 1–25.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary knowledge and use. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Robinson, P. (2013). The Routledge Encyclopedia of Second Language Acquisition. Abingdon: Routledge.
Russell, V. (2014). A Closer Look at the Output Hypothesis: The Effect of Pushed Output on Noticing and Inductive Learning of the Spanish Future Tense. Foreign Language Annals, 47(1), 25–47.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3–32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schmitt, D. Schmitt, N. & Mann, D. (2011). Focus on vocabulary 2: Mastering the Academic Word List. White Plains, NY: Pearson Education.
Scovel, T. (1998). Psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 165-179.
Sharwood-Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118–132.
Shintani, N. (2012). Input-based tasks and the acquisition of vocabulary and grammar: A process-product study. Language Teaching Research, 16(2), 253–279.
Shintani, N. (2011). A comparative study of the effects of input-based and production-based instruction on vocabulary acquisition by young EFL learners. Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 137–158.
Shintani, N. Li, S. & Ellis, R. (2013). Comprehension-based versus production-based grammar instruction: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. Language Learning, 63(2), 296-329.
Soleimani, H. Ketabi, S. & Talebinejad, M.R. (2008). The effect of output fronted activities to enhance noticing and acquisition of rhetorical structure of contrast paragraphs. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 141–166.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input and second language acquisition (235–253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis; Theory and research. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 471–483). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Takač, V. P. (2008). Vocabulary learning strategies and foreign language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Thorndike, E. L. (1908). Memory for paired associates. Psychological Review, 15(2), 122 138.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
VanPatten, B. (1996). Input Processing and Grammar Instruction in Second LanguageAcquisition. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Waring, R. & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15, 130–163.
Wesche, M. & Paribakht, T. S. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary knowledge: Depth vs. breadth. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 13–39.
Journal of School Psychology
Volume 9, Issue 1
April 2020
Pages 189-207

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics