The Effects of L1 and L2 Summary Writing on L2 Vocabulary Retention
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This quasi-experimental study attempted to examine the relationships between summary writing of an L2 newspaper article in Korean (L1) and that of English (L2) on vocabulary retention, and the impact of explicit instruction on L2 summary writing. Participants (N=128) from three English courses were assigned to one of three conditions respectively: L1 summary writing (SW1), L2 summary writing (SW2), and L2 summary writing without instruction (SW3). Vocabulary retention was assessed using a multiple-choice test immediately after a reading and summary writing task, and again after two weeks. A mixed-design repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between Time and Group, indicating that the rate of vocabulary forgetting was similar across all groups. However, there were significant main effects of Time and Group. SW1 was associated with significantly better vocabulary retention than SW3, and SW2 was associated with significantly better retention than SW3 on the delayed posttest. Neither Pearson nor Spearman correlations found a significant relationship between the participants’ vocabulary size and either immediate or delayed posttest scores. These findings may suggest potential benefits of L1 use and pedagogical support for L2 vocabulary acquisition.
Abstract
This quasi-experimental study attempted to examine the relationships between summary writing of an L2 newspaper article in Korean (L1) and that of English (L2) on vocabulary retention, and the impact of explicit instruction on L2 summary writing. Participants (N=128) from three English courses were assigned to one of three conditions respectively: L1 summary writing (SW1), L2 summary writing (SW2), and L2 summary writing without instruction (SW3). Vocabulary retention was assessed using a multiple-choice test immediately after a reading and summary writing task, and again after two weeks. A mixed-design repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between Time and Group, indicating that the rate of vocabulary forgetting was similar across all groups. However, there were significant main effects of Time and Group. SW1 was associated with significantly better vocabulary retention than SW3, and SW2 was associated with significantly better retention than SW3 on the delayed posttest. Neither Pearson nor Spearman correlations found a significant relationship between the participants’ vocabulary size and either immediate or delayed posttest scores. These findings may suggest potential benefits of L1 use and pedagogical support for L2 vocabulary acquisition.