본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

Effects of Massed vs. Distributed Implicit FonF on Receptive Acquisition of L2 Vocabulary Items

Ahmad Moinzadeh|Mohammad Nowbakht|Azizollah Dabaghi
아시아테플 (AsiaTEFL (The Asian Association of Teachers of English As a Foreign Language))|2015.09|Journal of Asia TEFL|제12권 제3호|pp. 115-147

1

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

Massed implicit focus on formdistributed implicit focus on formreceptive vocabulary acquisitionsalient

초록

The present study investigated the comparative effects of massed vs. distributed implicit focus on form (FonF) on the students’ short-term and long-term receptive L2 vocabulary acquisition. The participants (n = 45) were selected out of a population of 153 according to the result of the placement test and were randomly assigned to three groups of massed FonF, distributed FonF, and control group. The massed group was taught three short passages in which 28 target words were made typographically salient. Subsequently, they answered the comprehension questions presented after each passage during one session. The distributed group received instruction during three consecutive days. During each session they answered only one third of the comprehension questions. The control group received the same passages in which no words were made salient. The results of the immediate and delayed post-tests revealed the following: (a) both massed and distributed groups outperformed the control group in the post-tests; (b) there was no difference between the massed and distributed group in short-term vocabulary acquisition; and (c) the distributed group outperformed the massed group in the delayed post-test. These findings provide empirical evidence that Implicit FonF is beneficial to vocabulary learning; however, distributed FonF is more successful in long-term acquisition than massed FonF.

Abstract

The present study investigated the comparative effects of massed vs. distributed implicit focus on form (FonF) on the students’ short-term and long-term receptive L2 vocabulary acquisition. The participants (n = 45) were selected out of a population of 153 according to the result of the placement test and were randomly assigned to three groups of massed FonF, distributed FonF, and control group. The massed group was taught three short passages in which 28 target words were made typographically salient. Subsequently, they answered the comprehension questions presented after each passage during one session. The distributed group received instruction during three consecutive days. During each session they answered only one third of the comprehension questions. The control group received the same passages in which no words were made salient. The results of the immediate and delayed post-tests revealed the following: (a) both massed and distributed groups outperformed the control group in the post-tests; (b) there was no difference between the massed and distributed group in short-term vocabulary acquisition; and (c) the distributed group outperformed the massed group in the delayed post-test. These findings provide empirical evidence that Implicit FonF is beneficial to vocabulary learning; however, distributed FonF is more successful in long-term acquisition than massed FonF.

참고문헌 (42)

  1. Alanen, R., "Attention and awareness in foreign language learning", pp.259~302 (1995), University of Hawaii Press
  2. Brown, H. D., "Principles of language learning and teaching" (2007), Pearson Education
  3. Burdick, K. J., "Effects of massed and distributed practice on the learning and retention of a novel gross motor skill", master's, pp.1977
  4. Carroll, S., "Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition" (2001), Benjamins
  5. de la Fuente, M., "Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition : Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction", Language Teaching Research, 10(3), pp.263~295 (2006)
  6. Doughty, C., "Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition", pp.197~261 (1998), Cambridge University Press
  7. Ellis, R., "Introduction : Investigating form-focused instruction", Language Learning, 51, pp.1~46 (2001)
  8. Ellis, R., "Current issues in the teaching of grammar : An SLA perspective", TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), pp.83~107 (2006)
  9. Ellis, R., "Preemptive focus on form in the ESL classroom", TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), pp.407~432 (2001)
  10. Izumi, S., "Output, input enhancement and the noticing hypothesis : An experimental study on ESL relativization", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, pp.541~577 (2002)
  11. Krashen, S., "Principles and practice in second language acquisition" (1982), Pergamon Press
  12. Lee, S., "Effects of textual enhancement and topic familiarity on Korean EFL students' reading comprehension and learning of passive form", Language Learning, 57, pp.87~118 (2007)
  13. Leow, R., "The role of attention in second", foreign language classroom research: Methodological issues, 1990, 60~70[DOI]
  14. Leow, R., "The effects of input enhancement and text length on adult L2 readers’ comprehension and intake in second language acquisition", Applied Language Learning, 8, pp.151~182 (1997)
  15. Leow, R., "Explicit language learning", pp.61~72 (2011), Georgetown University Press
  16. Long, M., "Foreign language research in cross-cultural perspective", pp.39~52 (1991), John Benjamins
  17. Long, M., "Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition", pp.15~41 (1998), Cambridge University Press
  18. Meara, P., "Performance and competence in second language acquisition", pp.35~53 (1996), Cambridge University Press
  19. McLaughlin, B., "Second language learning: An information processing perspective", Language Learning, 33, pp.135~158 (1983)
  20. Nassaji, H., "Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form focused instruction in communicative context" (2011), Taylor and Francis
  21. Nation, P., "Teaching and learning vocabulary" (1990), Newbury House
  22. Pearson Longman ELT., "Total English Placement Test", Pearson Longman ELT, ~ (2006)
  23. Richards, J. C., "Longman dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics" (2002), Pearson Education
  24. Robinson, P., "Attention, memory, and the "noticing" hypothesis", Language Learning, 45, pp.283~331 (1995)
  25. Robinson, P., "Generalizability and automaticity of second language learning under implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19, pp.223~247 (1997)
  26. Rosa, E., "Awareness, different learning conditions, and second language development", Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, pp.269~299 (2004)
  27. Russel, V., "A closer look at the output hypothesis: The effect of pushed output on noticing and inductive learning of the future tense", Foreign Language Annals, 47, pp.25~47 (2014)
  28. Sachs, R., "Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies", pp.197~227 (2007), Oxford University Press
  29. Schmidt, R., "The role of consciousness in second language learning", Applied Linguistics, 11(2), pp.129~158 (1990)
  30. Schmidt, R., "Motor learning and performance: From principles to practice" (1991), Human Kinetics Books
  31. Schmidt, R., "Cognition and second language instruction", pp.3~32 (2001), Cambridge University Press
  32. Selinker, L., "Linguistic structure with processing in second language research: Is a "Unified Theory" possible?", Second Language Research, 20, pp.77~94 (2004)
  33. Sharwood Smith, M., "Speaking to many minds: On the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner", Second Language Research, 72, pp.118~132 (1991)
  34. Sharwood Smith, M., "Input enhancement in instructed SLA : Theoretical bases", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, pp.165~179 (1993)
  35. Shook, D., "FL", L2 reading, grammatical information, and the input-to-intake phenomenon, 1994, pp.5, 57~93
  36. Swain, M., "Input in second language acquisition", pp.235~253 (1985), Newbury House
  37. Tajeddin, Z., "Visual intelligence and lexical enhancement tasks : Their impacts on EFL learners' receptive and productive vocabulary", Asia TEFL, 8(3), pp.109~134 (2011)
  38. Tomlin, R., "Attention in cognitive science and second language acquisition", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 16, pp.183~203 (1994)
  39. White, J., "Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition", pp.85~113 (1998), Cambridge University Press
  40. Widdowson, H., "Aspects of language teaching" (1990), Oxford University Press
  41. Williams, J., "Memory, attention, and inductive learning", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, pp.1~48 (1999)
  42. Winke, P., "The effects of input enhancement on grammar learning and comprehension", Studies in Second Language Acuisition, 35, pp.323~356 (2013)

관련 논문AI추천

The Relative Effectiveness of Incidental and Intentional Learning of L2 Vocabulary박효정, 윤현숙팬코리아영어교육학회 · 영어교육연구2010 · 제22권 제1호A Study of Form-focused Instruction on L2 Academic Vocabulary Learning강동호한국영어교과교육학회 · 영어교과교육2024 · 제23권 제4호The Effects of Task-induced Involvement and Word Exposure Frequency on L2 College Students’ Vocabulary Acquisition마지현, 조영아대한영어영문학회 · 영어영문학연구2013 · 제39권 제1호Efficacy of Task Type and Involvement Load on EFL Learners’ Vocabulary KnowledgeBei-Bei Xu현대영어교육학회 · 현대영어교육2019 · 제20권 제2호The repetition effects on learning formulaic language in form-focused instruction윤현숙, 최정윤현대영어교육학회 · 현대영어교육2018 · 제19권 제1호Timing of form-focused instruction and development of implicit vs. explicit knowledge김정은한국영어교육학회 · 영어교육2014 · 제69권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (4건)

Teachers’ and Students’ Attitudes Toward Error Correction in L2 WritingKarim Sadeghi, Maghsoud Alizadeh Saltehpp. 1-31Writing Teacher Views on Teacher Feedback: A Shift from Grammar Corrector to Motivator조수경pp. 33-59College EFL Learners’ Metaphorical Perceptions of English LearningSU Fangpp. 61-79Roles of L1 and L2 Derivational Morphological Awareness in L2 Reading Through the Mediation of L2 Vocabulary Knowledge최연희pp. 81-114
원문 보기