Applying The Four Strands Into Improving Adult Learners'' English Vocabulary At A Language Center In Ho Chi Minh City Ma .Pdf

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE APPLYING THE FOUR STRANDS INTO IMPROVING ADULT LEARNERS’ ENGLISH V[.]

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

APPLYING THE FOUR STRANDS INTO IMPROVING ADULT LEARNERS’ ENGLISH VOCABULARY AT A

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature

in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL

By

PHAM HOANG HUY

Supervised by

Assoc Prof Dr NGUYEN THANH TUNG

HO CHI MINH CITY, APRIL 2021

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

APPLYING THE FOUR STRANDS INTO IMPROVING ADULT LEARNERS’ ENGLISH VOCABULARY AT A

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature

in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL

By

PHAM HOANG HUY

Supervised by

Assoc Prof Dr NGUYEN THANH TUNG

HO CHI MINH CITY, APRIL 2021

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my profound gratitude toward those who have offered

me wholehearted support and assistance so that I could complete this thesis

First and foremost, I am deeply indebted to my supervisor, Assoc Prof Dr Nguyen Thanh Tung, for his enlightenment, comprehensive instruction, immense enthusiasm, and great empathy If it had not been for his guidance and encouragement,

I would not have been able to finalize the thesis No single word could describe how grateful I have always been to him

I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Ms Nguyen Thi Anh Dao – the Training Quality Manager at Nguyen Thi Minh Khai campus of the Vietnam USA Society Language Centers (VUS) – for authorizing me to conduct my research, and

Mr Phung Duy Hoang and Ms Ngo Nguyen Bao Han – the Teacher Care staff – for actively making arrangements for the intact classes

This study would not have been possible without generous support from my beloved colleagues at VUS, especially Ms Thai Thi A Chau, Ms Le Hong Ngoc Anh, and Mr Le Tuan Anh

I am greatly indebted to the Student Affairs Assistants of the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, especially Ms Nguyen Thi Hang, for her kind support throughout the program

Also, I am truly grateful to all of the teachers and classmates that I have had golden opportunities to work with in this program They have been incredibly inspirational, supportive and resourceful

Last but not least, my special thanks go to my family members, who have always taken tender care of me, strengthened my motivation and provided me with great encouragement

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY

I certify that this thesis, entitled “Applying the four strands into improving adult learners’ English vocabulary at a language center in Ho Chi Minh City,” is my original work It is based on my own research to meet the requirements for a thesis in the Master’s program in TESOL at the Ho Chi Minh City University of Social Sciences and Humanities issued by the Higher Degree Committee

All sources used for this thesis have been documented No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement

This thesis has not previously been submitted for the award of any award of any degree or diploma in any other situation

Ho Chi Minh City, April 2021

Pham Hoang Huy

RETENTION OF USE

I hereby state that I, Pham Hoang Huy, being the candidate for the degree of Master in TESOL, accept the requirements 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 original of my thesis deposited in the Library should be accessible for the purpose of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the library for the care, loan or reproduction

of the thesis

Ho Chi Minh City, April 2021

Pham Hoang Huy

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS i

STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ii

RETENTION OF USE iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ix

LIST OF TABLES xi

LIST OF FIGURES xiii

ABSTRACT xiv

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background to the study 1

1.2 Statement of the problem 3

1.3 Aim of the study and research questions 4

1.4 Significance of the study 4

1.5 Scope of the study 5

1.6 Organization of the thesis chapters 5

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 7

2.1 The four strands 7

2.1.1 Definition 7

2.1.1.1 Meaning-focused input 7

2.1.1.2 Language-focused learning 8

2.1.1.3 Meaning-focused output 9

2.1.1.4 Fluency development 9

2.1.2 Justification 10

2.1.2.1 Commonsense approaches to justification 10

2.1.2.2 Particular contributions 11

2.2 Benefits of the four strands in teaching English vocabulary 17

2.2.1 Vocabulary learning 17

2.2.1.1 Vocabulary knowledge 17

2.2.1.2 Vocabulary learning within the four strands 19

2.2.2 Learners’ attitudes toward learning vocabulary with the four strands 22

2.3 The application of the four strands into teaching English vocabulary 23

2.3.1 Procedures for applying the four strands 24

2.3.2 Task-based language teaching and the four strands 26

2.3.2.1 Task-based language teaching 26

2.3.2.2 Tasks 28

2.3.2.3 Task procedure 31

2.4 Related empirical research 33

2.4 Conceptual framework 37

2.6 Chapter summary 38

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY 39

3.1 Research site 39

3.3 Research methodology 43

3.3.1 Research approach 43

3.3.2 Research designs 43

3.3.3 Research instruments 45

3.3.3.1 Tests 45

3.3.3.2 Questionnaire 49

3.3.4 Research procedure 51

3.4 Analytical framework 55

3.4.1 Test scores 55

3.4.2 Questionnaire responses 56

3.5 Issues of validity and reliability 57

3.5.1 Tests 57

3.5.2 Questionnaire 59

3.6 Chapter summary 59

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 61

4.1 Data analysis 61

4.1.1 Test results 61

4.1.1.1 Pre-test 61

4.1.1.2 Post-test 67

4.1.1.3 Summary of test results 77

4.1.2 Questionnaire responses 77

4.1.2.1 Instrument reliability 78

4.1.2.2 Learners’ attitudes toward the application of the four strands 78

4.1.2.3 Summary of questionnaire responses 84

4.2 Discussion of findings 85

4.2.1 The effects of the four strands on adult learners’ vocabulary mastery 85

4.2.2 Learners’ attitudes toward the application of the four strands 89

4.3 Chapter summary 90

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 92

5.1 Conclusions 92

5.2 Evaluation of the methodology 94

5.2.1 Strengths 94

5.2.2 Weaknesses 95

5.3 Recommendations 96

5.3.1 For teachers 96

5.3.2 For learners 99

5.4 Suggestions for future research 99

5.5 Chapter summary 100

REFERENCES 101

APPENDICES 110

Appendix A – Pre-test 110

Appendix B – Pre-test answer key 112

Appendix C – Post-test 114

Appendix E – Sample analysis of students’ responses (Spoken section) 119

Appendix F – Questionnaire 121

Appendix G – Aspect of vocabulary knowledge for testing 124

Appendix H – Control group’s pre-test raw scores 125

Appendix I – Experimental group’s pre-test raw scores 126

Appendix J – Control group’s post-test raw scores (Written section) 127

Appendix K – Experimental group’s post-test raw scores (Written section) 128

Appendix L – Control group’s post-test raw scores (Spoken section) 129

Appendix M – Experimental group’s post-test raw scores (Spoken section) 130

Appendix N – Cronbach’s alpha of questionnaire items 131

Appendix O – Textbook extracts 132

Appendix P – Lesson plans for experimental group 135

Appendix Q – Lesson plans for control group 159

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AMTB Attitude/Motivation test battery

CLT Communicative language teaching

CS Student in the control group

ES Student in the experimental group

ELT English language teaching

IELTS International English language testing system

Sig The significance value

SLA Second language acquisition

SPSS The statistical package for social sciences

t The sample value of the t test statistic

TBLT Task-based language teaching

VUS Vietnam USA Society Language Centers

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Aspects of vocabulary knowledge 18

Table 2.2 Vocabulary knowledge aspects and learning approaches 20

Table 2.3 Principles for applying the four strands 25

Table 2.4 Criteria for defining a task-as-workplan 29

Table 2.5 The alignment between tasks and the four strands 32

Table 3.1 Description of the study participants 40

Table 3.2 Interactive English (IE) program: courses, levels, and textbooks 42

Table 3.3 The pre-test and post-test items in relation to vocabulary knowledge 47

Table 3.4 The questionnaire items and their focuses 50

Table 3.5 Timeline of the current study 52

Table 3.6 Summary of the vocabulary sessions in the EG 53

Table 3.7 Mean interpretation for Likert-scale items 56

Table 3.8 Aspects of word knowledge for testing 124

Table 4.1 Descriptive analysis of the pre-test scores 63

Table 4.2 Results of the independent samples t test for the pre-test scores 63

Table 4.3 Descriptive analysis of the pre-test scores regarding each vocabulary knowledge aspect 66

Table 4.4 Results of the independent samples t test for the pre-test scores regarding each vocabulary knowledge aspect 67

Table 4.5 Descriptive analysis of the post-test written section scores 68

Table 4.6 Results of the independent samples t test for the post-test written section scores 70

Table 4.7 Descriptive analysis of the post-test written section scores regarding each vocabulary knowledge aspect 72

Table 4.8 Results of the independent samples t test for the post-test written section scores regarding each vocabulary knowledge aspect 73

Table 4.9 Descriptive analysis of the post-test spoken section scores 76

Table 4.10 Results of the independent samples t test for the post-test spoken section scores 76

Table 4.11 Reliability statistics on items related to the students’ attitudes toward the

application of the four strands 78

Table 4.12 Responses to the items of the cognitive component 79

Table 4.13 Responses to the items of the affective component 82

Table 4.14 Responses to the items of the behavioral component 83

Table 4.15 Control group’s pre-test raw scores 125

Table 4.16 Experimental group’s pre-test raw scores 126

Table 4.17 Control group’s post-test written section raw scores 127

Table 4.18 Experimental group’s post-test written section raw scores 128

Table 4.19 Control group’s post-test spoken section raw scores 129

Table 4.20 Experimental group’s post-test spoken section raw scores 130

Table 4.21 Item-total statistics 131

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Distribution of the four strands within the classroom 24

Figure 2.2 Task procedure 31

Figure 2.3 The conceptual framework of the study 37

Figure 4.1 Summary of the pre-test scores 61

Figure 4.2 Distribution of the pre-test scores 62

Figure 4.3 Summary of the pre-test scores regarding form 64

Figure 4.4 Summary of the pre-test scores regarding meaning 65

Figure 4.5 Summary of the pre-test scores regarding use 65

Figure 4.6 Summary of the post-test written section scores 68

Figure 4.7 Distribution of the post-test written section scores 69

Figure 4.8 Summary of the post-test written section scores regarding form 70

Figure 4.9 Summary of the post-test written section scores regarding meaning 71

Figure 4.10 Summary of the post-test written section scores regarding use 72

Figure 4.11 Summary of the post-test spoken section scores 74

Figure 4.12 Distribution of the post-test spoken section scores 75

ABSTRACT

This study aims to examine the effects of the four strands, namely

meaning-focused input, language-meaning-focused learning, meaning-meaning-focused output and fluency development, proposed by Nation (2007, 2013a, 2013b), on adult learners’ English

vocabulary acquisition in terms of form, meaning and use and their attitudes toward their application Informed by the potential benefits that the four strands can offer to learners and supported by a rich agenda of SLA theories, the study adopts a quantitative research paradigm with the quasi-experimental and survey designs, with the participation of 29 adult learners at one campus of the Vietnam USA Society Language Centers (VUS) Within three weeks, the students in the experimental group (EG) learned the lexical items through tasks designed in accordance with the principles for integrating the four strands while their counterparts in the control group (CG) were instructed through the conventional sequence of presentation, practice and production

After their comparability had been indicated in the pre-test results prior to the introduction of the treatment, the analysis of the post-test scores revealed that the EG outperform the CG in both the written and the spoken section of the post-test Specifically, it was the scores regarding the aspects of form and use that witnessed a statistically significant difference between the groups when their component scores were separately evaluated Meanwhile, the data collected from the questionnaire highlighted the positive attitudes that the learners expressed toward the incorporation

of the four strands Those results confirmed that the four strands were able to enhance the learners’ grasp of vocabulary knowledge and engage them in vocabulary learning

Key words: the four strands, vocabulary learning, TBLT, adult learners

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter provides the introduction of the study by stating the background to the study, statement of the problem, aim of the study, research questions, significance

of the study, scope of the study, and the overall structure of the study

1.1 Background to the study

English, recently, has become such a popular language of communication that

it is widely considered as a lingua franca in many parts of the world It is the common language not only in formal settings such as international meetings and conferences but also in casual daily life where people socialize and entertain As a result, the language itself has been regarded as one of the requisite factors which contribute to one’s success in seeking employment and making progress in the career path Acknowledging the reality, millions of learners have devoted their time and effort to English courses both at school and at language centers so as to have good command of the language

Vocabulary – which, together with pronunciation and grammar, forms the

“what”’ of knowing a language (Ur, 1991, p 46) – possibly holds the most significant role in acquiring the language as learners have to broaden their knowledge on lexical items to build up their proficiency It is generally believed that the greater the quantity and the quality of one’s vocabulary are, the better the individual can develop the language skills It is worth noting that this belief does not entail the idea that mastering the areas of pronunciation and grammar is less crucial Nevertheless, being intelligible in communicative contexts no longer requires English learners to closely imitate the pronunciation of native speakers (Deterding & Lewis, 2019), and the focus

of teaching pronunciation should be more on core items like consonant deletion in initial clusters or vowel length distinctions, rather than every segmental and supra-segmental feature in this linguistic area (Cogo, 2015) In addition, Thornbury (2002) stated that “without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed” (p 13) Therefore, it is undeniable that vocabulary learning has an essential part to play in learners’ ability to become competent in English

Developed and promoted by Nation (2007, 2013a, 2013b), the four strands present an elaborate framework based on which teaching activities can be examined in terms of objectives and conditions According to Nation (2007), the framework can be applied not only to the whole language course but also to the process of teaching and learning vocabulary In fact, it has been considered as one of the most effective models that can facilitate English learners’ vocabulary acquisition (Funk, 2012;

Nation, 2017; Quentin, 2015) As suggested, the strands, namely meaning-focused

input, language-focused learning, meaning-focused output, and fluency development,

should be given equal time and attention during a lesson to provide learners with different types of learning chances With careful consideration while designing lessons and activities in accordance with the principles that Nation (2007) articulated, teachers can effectively facilitate their students’ vocabulary acquisition regarding form, meaning and use (O’Hogain, 2012) Also, such progress could help contribute to the enhancement in the learners’ attitudes toward learning English vocabulary

In the Vietnamese context, the issue of English vocabulary learning has been given great attention due to its significance According to the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training (2018), English language teaching (ELT) at a general educational level aims to equip students with the ability to use English as a tool for communication through the four skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing, and raise their awareness of intercultural differences Both aims rely heavily upon their vocabulary mastery to be fully achieved as they are obliged to use their vocabulary knowledge to interact with English speakers and gain input into cultural and social diversity Despite such ambitious aims, the practices of ELT in Vietnam seem to be inadequate for realizing them since many learners have been reported neither to be able to communicate nor to be capable of reading general news in English (Nguyen, 2017) This situation is likely to result from the use of unproductive teaching and learning techniques, particularly for vocabulary, such as learning by heart, choral drilling and repetition, which offer few opportunities for students to incorporate the newly learned items in meaningful contexts As a consequence, a great degree of anxiety is provoked in learners (Nguyen, 2017)

Informed by such a situation, several local empirical studies have been conducted with the aim to enhance the teaching and learning of English vocabulary, such as those by La (2017), Pham (2016), Nguyen (2014), and Tran (2012) These studies emphasized the need for certain pedagogical techniques to be used in the process of teaching lexical items so that learners’ acquisition can be assisted For instance, La (2017) examined the effects of employing mind-mapping in the teaching

of phrasal verbs while Nguyen (2014) focused on the use of clarifying routine as a strategy of vocabulary instruction Tran (2012) was concerned about the application of pictures as a means of teaching new items The results and implications drawn from these studies were surely remarkable to the field of ELT in Vietnam However, more work needs to be done as nearly all of the previous research placed an emphasis on merely one teaching technique without applying a framework that can cover the entire procedure of teaching and learning vocabulary knowledge (i.e form, meaning and use), which may lead to an inevitably unequal focus among these three aspects In fact, the techniques of concern in those studies, when placed within the four strands,

are typical of the language-focused learning strand since they encouraged intentional

learning

With these beneficial features, the four strands seem to be a potential framework for improving vocabulary mastery of English learners in Vietnam The present study, therefore, wished to fill the gap in the literature by applying the four strands into teaching English vocabulary

1.2 Statement of the problem

Being conscious that vocabulary learning plays a crucial role in English learners’ language ability, local researchers have been making an effort to investigate teaching techniques that are considered useful and effective However, the practices of English vocabulary teaching and learning in the Vietnamese context has still remained inadequate for fulfilling the national educational aims, i.e providing learners with a tool for intercultural communication and exploration Additionally, it was separate teaching activities that most of the previous empirical studies concentrated on rather

Therefore, there was a need for a study to cover such a framework, specifically the four strands, for practical implications

1.3 Aim of the study and research questions

Informed of the aforementioned problem, the current study aimed to scrutinize the effects of the four strands on adult learners’ English vocabulary learning Particularly, the study was to examine whether the four strands could improve adult learners’ English vocabulary mastery in terms of form, meaning and use Moreover, the learners’ attitudes toward the application of the four strands were taken into consideration In line with these research objectives, the study was conducted to answer the two research questions below

(1) How do the four strands affect adult learners’ English vocabulary mastery

1.4 Significance of the study

Upon the fulfillment of the research aim by answering the two research questions, the study gained significance in the following aspects

First and foremost, the study, to some extent, had theoretical values The study provided a thorough review of literature on theoretical issues and pedagogical justification of the four strands Also, the research investigated and confirmed the effects of the strands on adult learners’ English vocabulary mastery in regard to form, meaning, and use Moreover, the study revealed the learners’ attitudes toward the practices of learning vocabulary with classroom activities characterizing the four strands

Furthermore, the study would make certain contributions to the way English vocabulary has been instructed The research results, specifically, presented practical recommendations for both the teaching and learning of English vocabulary, which help teachers enhance their teaching methodology so that their students can acquire lexical items more effectively

1.5 Scope of the study

The study was confined to examine the effects of the four strands on adult learners’ English vocabulary mastery at a language center in Ho Chi Minh City The sampling strategy, the research designs as well as the specific research site led to its weak generalizability Hence, generalizations and practical recommendations that were drawn from the results of the study were made to the practices of teaching and learning vocabulary in courses within the selected English program and those in other related ones at the center However, the results of the present study would be seen as informative to familiar educational situations and provide theoretical and practical background, and tentative suggestions for future research

1.6 Organization of the thesis chapters

The study report comprises five consecutive chapters Chapter 1 provides the introduction with background information of the study Chapter 2 presents a review of the four strands, related theoretical issues and previous empirical studies in English vocabulary teaching and learning Besides, the chapter also introduces the conceptual framework that was established to provide justification for the selection of research designs, and the procedures for data collection and analysis Chapter 3 describes the methodology used in the study and discusses the sampling technique, the research instruments as well as the way through which the data were gathered and analyzed Chapter 4 reports on the analysis and discussion of the collected data, based on which the effects of the four strands on adult learners’ mastery of English vocabulary was informed This chapter also reveals how these learners perceived the application of the strands Finally, Chapter 5 reaches the conclusions and offers relevant pedagogical

implications regarding the practices of teaching and learning of vocabulary, together with certain recommendations for future research

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews the four strands in terms of definitions and justification, characteristics, benefits in teaching English vocabulary, and their application into the teaching practices Relevant theoretical issues as well as previous empirical studies on English vocabulary teaching and learning are also included

2.1 The four strands

The four strands emerge as an elaborate framework for English vocabulary teaching and learning, which can be revealed through what they are defined as, why they are advantageous and how they can be realized in the physical classroom

2.1.1 Definition

With the aim to develop a useful framework for examining a language course

in terms of its ability to offer “an appropriate balance of opportunities for learning”, Nation (2007) defined the four strands as “long continuous sets of learning conditions that run through the whole language course” (p.1) Therefore, all activities employed

within the duration of any course belong to one of the strands, namely

meaning-focused input, language-meaning-focused learning, meaning-meaning-focused output, and fluency development Each strand, according to Nation (2007), is highly distinctive regarding

its characteristics, applying conditions and typical activities

2.1.1.1 Meaning-focused input

The meaning-focused input strand involves learning through listening and

reading – using language receptively (Nation, 2007; Quentin, 2015) This strand is identified as being meaning-focused as its key objective is to encourage learners’ comprehension, together with knowledge obtainment or pleasure, from the aural or written input Activities such as share reading, extensive reading, listening to stories, watching TV or films, and being a listener in a conversation are typical of this strand

In order for this first strand to take place in the classroom, five conditions which were clearly stated by Nation (2007, 2015) need establishing First of all, the

majority of the language in the listening and reading passages, as well as their topics, extends within the learners’ prior knowledge Secondly, the given input is perceived

as interesting and motivating so that it can generate a high level of their involvement

in conducting the skills In line with the first condition, the third requires that the number of unfamiliar language items or structures accounts for only a small percentage of the input In regard to vocabulary, the proportion of previously learned lexical items should be from 95% to 98% (Hu & Nation, 2000) Fourthly, the input provides contextual clues for the learners to work out the meaning of the target items based on their background knowledge Meanwhile, the last condition emphasizes the use of a sizeable amount of input

2.1.1.2 Language-focused learning

Language-focused learning – also known as deliberate teaching and learning,

deliberate study, focus on form or form-focused instruction – concerns the intentional learning of language features, e.g pronunciation, spelling, vocabulary, grammar, and discourse (Nation, 2007; Quentin, 2015) As Nation (2007) argued, only when the explanations of the form of the target language features, which are either given by the teacher or consulted by the learners in their autonomous learning, are fully understood does deliberate study achieve its learning objective Such practice actually resembles the acts of conveying and receiving meaning rather than merely dealing with form; therefore, this strand is named language-focused instead of form-focused Suggested activities are dictation, pronunciation practice, using substitution tables and drills, learning vocabulary from word cards, guessing meaning from context or dictionary, intensive reading, dictation, and getting feedback about writing performance

A set of conditions needs setting up for this strand to function properly as well The first condition requires the learners to pay conscious attention to the language features Secondly, those features should be processed deeply and thoughtfully by them Thirdly, they should be given chances to revisit and review the same features to increase language exposure The fourth condition highlights the target language features’ simplicity and independence of the gap in the learners’ prior knowledge Last but not least, those features should be frequently encountered in the other strands

2.1.1.3 Meaning-focused output

This strand of meaning-focused output covers activities in which learners

acquire the language through speaking and writing (Nation, 2007; Quentin, 2015) In other words, the learners are offered opportunities to use language productively by talking in conversations, giving a speech, writing a letter, writing a note to someone, telling a story, or giving instructions These activities, when mechanically analyzed,

involve a combination of meaning-focused input and meaning-focused output as the

productive use of language that one learner carries out can act as the input of another

Like the meaning-focused input one, this strand also requires the same number

of conditions to come into existence within the classroom context Firstly, the topics

of speaking and writing are, to a great extent, relevant to learners Secondly, the learners are given purposes to exchange a meaningful message to their peers or the whole class In terms of language, unfamiliar items only take up a small proportion of what they call for in their production Simultaneously, when knowledge gaps occur, they can apply “communication strategies, dictionaries, or previous input” to compensate for them and complete their message (Nation, 2007, p 3) Last but not least, the learners are offered a great number of opportunities to use language both in oral and written manner

2.1.1.4 Fluency development

The fluency development strand provides learners with opportunities to apply

their newly learned knowledge at its best to receive messages in listening and reading, and to convey messages in speaking and writing Therefore, the fourth strand is also

meaning-focused (Nation, 2007) In order to encourage fluency development, teachers

can employ a variety of activities such as 4/3/2, repeated telling, repeated reading, speeding reading, skimming and scanning, ten-minute writing, and listening to easy stories The first three activities involve “repetitive reception or production of the same material” while the others do not (Nation, 2007, p 7)

According to Nation (2007, 2014), this strand also demands the presence of

features of the input and the output present no unfamiliarity to the learners due to the nature of fluency, i.e no involvement of new language items and no focus on

language features (Nation, 2007; Quentin, 2015) Secondly, fluency development

activities, as being meaning-focused, aim to boost their ability to receive and convey meaning The third condition puts an accent on the “pressure or encouragement to perform at a faster than usual speed” directed to the learners (Nation, 2007, p 6), which is deduced from another feature of fluency activities, i.e “if there is no push to

go faster, it is not a fluency activity” (ibid.) The final condition places an emphasis on the large quantities of input and output

2.1.2 Justification

Nation (2007) presented his argument for the necessity of such a framework, being informed by two commonsense approaches to justification: the time-on-task principle and the distinction of the learning process of each language skill

2.1.2.1 Commonsense approaches to justification

The time-on-task principle suggests that the greater amount of time learners invest in directly practicing a skill, the more probable they are to improve and master

it (Nation, 2007) However, the tasks that are being exercised to generate improvement should be of adequate quality since this feature also makes substantial contribution toward the progress of language learning Meanwhile, the other underlying theory of the four strands lays an emphasis on the differences of the language skills (i.e listening, reading, speaking, and writing) and requires equal attention to be paid to each of them during the process of teaching and learning In fact, every individual skill consists of other smaller segments with their distinctive characteristics, such as styles, genres, purposes, and relevant cognitive processes Therefore, according to the time-on-task principle, the learners should be offered with ample learning opportunities to practice each skill so that they can enhance their performance of it Additionally, the notions of accuracy and fluency coexist within every skill and both of them should be equally addressed to ensure their development

2.1.2.2 Particular contributions

Apart from the aforementioned commonsense justification, each strand also supports a number of theories in the field of second language acquisition (SLA), which help explain its potential for facilitating vocabulary learning

Meaning-focused input

Aiming at providing learners with opportunities to pick up the target language

items through reading and listening, the meaning-focused input strand promotes

incidental learning and Krashen’s (1985) input hypothesis

Incidental learning, as opposed to intentional learning, which characterizes the

strand of language-focused learning, has long been considered as one of the two main

approaches to vocabulary learning This type of learning, also known as implicit learning, highlights the importance of the exposure to lexical items in various contexts presented in the spoken or written input (Schmitt, 2000) Though this exposure is arguably not accompanied by the learners’ “awareness of what is being learned” (DeKeyser, 2003, p 314), it significantly contributes to their ability to grasp the items’ vocabulary knowledge, especially the meaning aspect, by generating guesses from the given contextual clues (Sokmen, 1997) Also, additional exposure to the newly learned items can help the learners reinforce them, which aids vocabulary retention (Schmitt, 2000)

However, this type of learning is said to be prone to certain shortcomings According to Sokmen (1997), learning vocabulary through guessing meaning from context is a time-consuming process with high risk of making errors, particularly for low-level proficiency learners Also, without extra encounters with the target items, guessing meaning from context does not certainly ensure long-term retention (Schmitt, 2000) These issues are in line with how Nation (2002) elaborated on the fragility of learning through reading In addition, both Nation (2002) and Sokmen (1997) agreed that incidental learning somehow depends on the learners themselves The former emphasized that the similarity between the reading contents and the

while the latter pointed out that techniques such as making guesses or consulting dictionaries may not be preferred by all learners

Though the aforementioned problems are undeniable, they can be decently addressed providing the conditions for learning through listening and reading are met

In order to reduce the potential guessing errors resulting from the learners’ insufficient lexical resource, Nation (2007, 2015) recommended the given input contain only a small number of unfamiliar features As stated in Krashen’s (1985) input hypothesis, learners actually learn “by understanding messages, or by receiving comprehensible input” (p 2) With less than 5% of the input presenting new language features, great potential for its comprehensibility can be yielded since such a condition is favorable for Vygotsky’s (1978) zone of proximal development, where the language is “a bit beyond [learners’] current level of competence” (Krashen, 1985, p 2) Another condition requires the input to be interesting and appealing to the learners, which takes their background knowledge into account This condition aligns with the affective filter hypothesis, which stresses on the learners’ openness to the input and their involvement in the message conveyed by it In terms of offering ample exposure to the target items for working out their meaning and later reinforcement, this can be ensured

by the use of large-sized input (Nation, 2007, 2015) Finally, “providing incidental encounters with words is only one method to facilitate vocabulary acquisition” (Sokmen, 1997, p 152); therefore, the learners can experience various activities in the other strands which may correspond better with their learning styles

Briefly, learners can experience incidental learning through the activities in this

strand of meaning-focused input Moreover, the potential benefits of this type of

learning, together with Krashen’s (1985) input hypothesis, can be fully accomplished

if relevant conditions are satisfied

Language-focused learning

This strand of language-focused learning, in characteristics, is comparable to

explicit teaching (Sokmen, 1997), explicit approaches (Schmitt, 2000), intentional learning (Hulstijn, 2003), explicit learning (Nation, 2001; DeKeyser, 2003), and form-

focused instruction or focus on form (Hummel, 2014) as these terms all refer to the learning process where learners’ attention is drawn to the target language features As claimed by Schmidt (1995) that “attention is required for all learning” (p 45), this particular strand is believed to offer the learners valuable opportunities to develop their vocabulary knowledge According to Nation (2007), if all the conditions for this

strand to be realized are met, language-focused learning can lead to the following four

effects:

It can add directly to implicit knowledge

It can focus on systematic aspects of the language

It can be used to develop strategies

It can raise consciousness to help later learning (p 6)

Sequenced in the course of a vocabulary lesson, this strand is preceded by the

meaning-focused input strand After either being exposed to the target items in the

input and guessing their meaning from the provided contexts, the learners may have already gained a few knowledge elements of the words, such as their written or spoken forms, form and meaning, collocations, or grammatical functions When it

comes to language-focused learning, this implicit knowledge can be confirmed and

transformed into explicit one This is because, through explicit teaching and learning, this strand can help the learners expand their vocabulary size expeditiously (Sokmen, 1997; Nation, 2007) and provide them with other components of lexical knowledge (Schmitt, 2000)

Assisted by this type of learning, learners can concentrate on features like words’ derivations, sense relations, or the differences between the first language (L1) and the target language (L2) (Schmitt, 2000) They can organize lexical knowledge in

a systematic way since language-focused learning encourages them to process target

lexical items deeply and thoughtfully (Sokmen, 1997; Nation, 2007) Sokmen (1997) also suggested that explicit teaching should be implemented in a way that can help the learners not only connect the newly learned items with the previously learned ones but also associate them with certain images or personal experiences for better retrieval

The third effect can be achieved due to the fact that intentional learning usually involves a wide range of activities (Sokmen, 1997; Schmitt, 2000; Hulstijn, 2003) Learners can participate in techniques such as dictation, dictionary work, word unit analysis or substituting drills These activities give them various occasions to meet the items and to pay spaced repeated attention to them, which is beneficial for long-term retention (Sokmen, 1997; Nation, 2007) Also, learners can employ the techniques that are used in the classroom as self-learning strategies or come up with their own ways to tackle and master vocabulary knowledge

Last but not least, as the learners are expected to be attentive to take full advantage of the learning opportunities established in this strand, it is highly likely that they can apply the same procedure into later learning The teacher can help direct their attention to what needs to be learned by utilizing input enhancement or input flooding The former makes the target items salient by having them capitalized or boldfaced (Smith, 1993), while the latter gets learners exposed to a substantial number

of instances of the items in the input (Hummel, 2014) These techniques play a crucially important role in turning part of the input into intake for learning – what the learners notice in the input – which is line with Schmidt’s (1995) noticing hypothesis After being aware of the marked items, they can recall how form-focused instruction

is given or decide among the acquired strategies to employ in independent learning

Being able to generate the aforementioned effects, language-focused learning

can offer learners opportunities to perform intentional learning, which can efficiently foster their grasp of vocabulary knowledge

2.1.2.2.3 Meaning-focused output

Like the meaning-focused input one, the strand of meaning-focused output is

also based on several SLA theories, most importantly Swain’s (1985) comprehensible output

As stated in one of the establishing conditions, learners are given plentiful chances to speak and write, specifically producing comprehensible output (Nation, 2007), which, according to Swain (1985), “is a necessary mechanism of acquisition

independent of the role of comprehensible input” (p 252) This is because such output

is to serve three remarkable functions for language learning: the noticing function, the hypothesis testing function, and the metalinguistic function (Swain, 1995) The first function occurs when the learners are aware of the knowledge gaps preventing them from producing the target language and delivering meaningful messages As a result, they are urged to fill these gaps by revisiting available input for necessary language items, making trials and errors, intentionally consulting dictionaries, or seeking assistance from their teacher and peers However, this function may not take a full effect unless the learners respond to the gaps that they have noticed (Nation, 2007) Secondly, the hypothesis testing function takes place when learners try utilizing the target items in speaking and writing, and make modifications in accordance with the feedback they receive This process shares similarity with the act of negotiation for meaning, in which the learners interact with their peers and adjust their interlanguage

so that a meaningful message can be expressed (Long, 1996) Through interaction, the learners can obtain constructive feedback or recasts, i.e “rephrasing an L2 learner’s incorrect utterance correctly (Hummel, 2014, p 78), to evaluate their trials Upon succeeding in conveying the message, they have achieved the main goal of the strand Finally, the third function, the metalinguistic function, is likely to happen when there are collaborations among learners to complete productive tasks In activities like strip stories or group writing, the learners are encouraged to conduct discussions about what language to use, during which they are able to present their vocabulary knowledge to each other (Nation, 2002, 2007) As a result, they can contribute to others’ progress in language learning, particularly helping their peers drift toward a more advanced stage, which is typical of peer-to-peer scaffolding (Hummel, 2014) In addition, in order to make sure that learners can use the target items productively and carry out scaffolding, the topics of the communicative tasks as well as a large amount

of necessary language should not exceed their background knowledge (Nation, 2007)

In short, meaning-focused output activities are advantageous to learners since

they offer them various opportunities to produce comprehensible output, whose

functions are to encourage them to respond to their knowledge gaps, perform negotiation for meaning and conduct scaffolding

Fluency development

There have been a few ways to define the notion of fluency is SLA According

to Lennon (1990), fluency, as a narrow sense, highlights “native-like rapidity” (p 390), while Ellis (2003) described fluency as “the extent to which the language produced in performing a task manifests pausing, hesitation, or reformulation” (p 342) It is linked to an individual’s language proficiency in terms of “ease, eloquence and smoothness of speech or writing” (Housen & Kuiken, 2009) These views are in line with Nation’s (2014) definition, when he dedicated an article particularly to this strand, that fluency refers to “the ability to process language receptively and productively at a reasonable speed” (p 11) Fluency also involves the act of receiving and conveying meaningful messages; therefore, it is meaning-oriented (Nation, 2007)

Fluency development is closely related to automatic processing which occurs

when learners practice a skill and are able to perform it with a relatively high speed

(Hummel, 2014) This explains why one of the conditions for fluency development

encourages the learners or even puts them under pressure to complete the assigned activities more quickly in comparison with the other three strands Moreover, this type

of processing requires little intentional effort from the learners and is not affected by their short-term memory constraints (ibid.) For this reason, when the focus is placed

on fluency, there must be no presentation of unfamiliar topics or features, or else the learners are forced to undertake controlled processing which is a time-consuming and effortful process of learning new things and prone to short-term memory limitations (ibid.) The relation between fluency and automatic processing is also mentioned when Housen and Kuiken (2009) discussed the interdependence among complexity, accuracy and fluency

Embracing such SLA theories, the strands place language learners at the center

of the learning process as they urge them to perform various cognitive processes like

incidental leaning in the meaning-focused input strand, explicit learning in

language-focused learning, hypothesis forming and testing in the strand of meaning-language-focused output, and automatic processing in fluency development

2.2 Benefits of the four strands in teaching English vocabulary

Being informed by the aforementioned SLA theories, the strands are considered

to be advantageous to the practices of teaching and learning English vocabulary since they can help improve learners’ vocabulary mastery and enhance their attitudes

a word with “the learning burden of a word” (p 44) There have been a few frameworks describing and analyzing a set of features that constitute vocabulary knowledge Even though the ways these features are organized and labeled are hardly the same, they all refer to certain aspects of lexical knowledge, which correspond to Nation’s (2001, 2013a) classification of form, meaning and use (see Table 2.1)

In Nation’s (2001, 2013a) framework, the first and tangible aspect of vocabulary knowledge, form, includes how a word is pronounced (i.e spoken form) and spelled (i.e written form), which comprise its formal properties as Barcroft, Sunderman, and Schmitt (2011) proposed This aspect also involves the structure of the word (i.e word parts), which is equivalent to Schmitt’s (2000) morphology or Thornbury’s (2002) and Barcroft et al.’s (2011) derivations

In terms of meaning, this aspect involves not only the connection between its form and meaning but the various physical referents or abstract concepts that the word represents, particularly in cases of homonyms (i.e words that have the same written

(2000)

Thornbury (2002)

Barcroft et al (2011) Form

Spoken

Written

Word parts

Spoken formaWritten forma

Morphologya

Spoken form Written form

Derivations

Formal properties Formal properties Orthographic neighborsbDerivationsb

Grammatical characteristics Collocations Register/style Frequency Connotations

Formulaic language Regional variation

Note aIn Schmitt’s (2000) framework, word form includes spoken form and written from, word meaning involves semantic features and sense relations while grammatical knowledge consists of morphology and word class

b

In Barcroft et al.’s (2011) framework, lexical characteristics include orthographic neighbors and derivations while sense relations are covered in semantic properties and spoken form but completely unrelated meanings), homographs (i.e words that have the same written form but different spoken forms), and homophones (i.e words that have the same spoken form with different written forms) (Nation, 2001, 2013a)

Also, it is of note that Nation’s (2001, 2013a) associations, in regard to meaning, deals with the word’s sense relations with others like its synonyms, antonyms, or hyponyms In contrast, word associations in Schmitt’s (2000) framework focus on the co-occurrence of the word with others as habitual lexical combinations, which actually characterizes Nation’s (2001, 2013a) collocations in the aspect of use

Besides collocations, the third aspect also concerns how the word is used precisely regarding its grammatical functions, or its word class in Schmitt’s (2000) framework and grammatical characteristics in Thornbury’s (2002) Furthermore, the appropriate use of the word relies on its constraints on use, e.g that it is used as an old-fashioned or contemporary word, in which country, by which social class, in what social relationship, for what topic or genre, and in written discourse or oral discourse

It is apparent that grasping all three aspects of vocabulary knowledge is a burden to all learners since knowing a word entails paying full attention to all the aforementioned elements Moreover, “in reality the different kinds of word knowledge are almost certainly interrelated” (Schmitt, 2000, p 6), making the task even more challenging However, the four strands can facilitate the practices of teaching and learning English vocabulary through the learning opportunities they offer

2.2.1.2 Vocabulary learning within the four strands

The beneficial effects of the four strands have been acknowledged since it was first introduced by Nation (2007) In essence, it is the three-to-one balance between

the meaning-focused strands and the language-focused learning strands that has been

strongly advocated

According to Nation and Yamato (2012), in order to assure the learning of lexical items, a language course and students’ autonomous learning should not merely concentrate on intentional learning Specifically, research conducted regarding the involvement load hypothesis (Hulstijn & Laufer, 2001; Folse, 2006; Keating, 2008; as cited in Nation & Yamato, 2012) revealed that learners could not retain more than half

of the items that had been instructed explicitly Therefore, activities that promote

Table 2.2

Vocabulary knowledge aspects and learning approaches

Form & meaning

Concepts & referents

Note Adapted from Nation (2001, p 34, 98, 2013a, pp 60, 132)

Indeed, with implicit learning and explicit learning as the two main approaches

to mastering vocabulary knowledge, according to Nation (2001, 2013a), each knowledge aspect is learned most effectively when either occurs with certain activities (see Table 2.2) Firstly, Nation (2001, 2013a) argued that form is best learned implicitly when learners encounter the target items several times Likewise, Schmitt (2000) claimed that the spoken form, especially connected speech features, should be presented in a larger context while the written from is closely linked to the skill of reading In addition, common and simple affixes can easily be tackled by this learning approach as long as their repetition is assured On the other hand, Nation (2001, 2013a), Schmitt (2000), and Thornbury (2002) agreed that the learners’ mastery of form can also occur when explicit learning is operated in the classroom Therefore, the

strands of meaning-focused input and language-focused learning adequately cater for

the grasp of this aspect while extra exposure to the target items can also be generated

in the other two strands since the learners have to utilize them both receptively and productively to receive and convey meaningful messages

Regarding meaning, the language-focused learning strand can serve to provide

learners with the most fruitful learning conditions It is recommended that the teacher facilitate the learners’ grasp of this aspect of vocabulary knowledge by giving them adequate understanding, comparing positive and negative examples, and emphasizing the items’ meaning limitations (Schmitt, 2000) As the connection between form and meaning, referents and concepts, and associations all require the learners to conduct deep processing to reach the optimal learning capacity, explicit learning allows them

to create association networks not only between the newly learned and previously learned ones but also between the L2 and L1 (Sokmen, 1997; Schmitt, 2000) Also, it

is necessary for the learners to personalize the new items, i.e “using the new word in

a context that is real for the learner personally” (Thornbury, 2002, p 88) Therefore,

the meaning-focused output strand can also aid meaning mastery

In terms of use, grammatical functions and collocations are covered more thoroughly with implicit learning experience while constraints on use should be learned explicitly (Nation, 2001, 2013a) Thornbury (2002) also commended that grammatical behavior of the target items should be displayed in a great number of examples to offer the learners ample exposure However, it is worth directing their attention to features such as word class and how a single word functions within certain patterns, especially when it is less frequently encountered (Thornbury, 2002; Schmitt, 2000) Likewise, “looking at numerous concordance instances” can help the learners deduce the items’ behavior of collocations (Schmitt, 2000, p 85) while classroom activities need to ensure their repetition so that the learners become familiar with those multiword units (Thornbury, 2002) Similar to form, the aspect of use can also

be learned effectively in the strands of meaning-focused input and language-focused

learning while the other two allow further repetitions of the target lexical items

With the ability to encompass both intentional and incidental learning, the four strands have been employed in the stages of planning and designing for vocabulary

need to be acquired through different means, which can provide learners with sizeable amount of exposure Likewise, Truxal (2018) embraced the principles of the strands and elaborated in a self-designed course to help students learn the academic word list They both emphasized the importance of the meaning-focused strands, especially the

strand of meaning-focused input Particularly, graded readers, newspapers, news

programs and stories are valuable sources where the target items can be introduced

with nearly all of their knowledge features Moreover, the strands on meaning-focused

output and fluency development can help to achieve the 20 meetings required for a

word to be learned (Quentin, 2015)

In brief, through the four strands, elements of the three vocabulary knowledge aspects can be covered effectively since they cater for both implicit and explicit learning In addition, learners are given opportunities to get exposed to the target lexical items on a regular basis since they are present in each strand

2.2.2 Learners’ attitudes toward learning vocabulary with the four strands

When the discussion is on the factors contributing to how successfully a pedagogical approach is employed or how much progress learners can attain, it is their attitudes that cannot be ignored According to Hummel (2014), attitudes play a vital role in the learners’ motivations, which partly shape their overall orientation, i.e their

“overall aim, purpose, direction, and/or goal of language learning” (p 201) In the field of psychology, attitude has been defined and structured in several ways; however, as for SLA, it has been approached in a less intricate manner

According to Gardner (1985), a person’s attitude refers to “an evaluative reaction to some referent or attitude object, inferred on the basis of the individual’s beliefs or opinions about the referent” (p 9) This definition is in line with the one phrased by Hummel (2014) that “attitude can be defined as a predisposition or tendency to respond in an evaluative manner toward someone or something” (p 201) Supposed L2 learning is the object, as Hummel (2014) exemplified, the learners may cultivate attitudes toward a number of aspects ranging from the native speakers and their community to the learning process itself More specifically, when taking the

learning practices into consideration, the learners may develop certain attitudes toward the teacher, the teaching method, and the course content It is reported that positive attitudes, together with high language aptitude, can increase the extent to which intake

is generated from the input (Gardner, Lalonde, & Moorcroft, 1985; Brown, 2007) Concerning its structure, attitude is divided into three components, namely affective, cognitive and behavioral (Zimbardo, Ebbesen, & Maslach, 1977) The first one highlights how an individual evaluate and respond to an object based on his or her emotions, likes, and dislikes The cognitive component involves what the person thinks about or knows about the attitude referent In other words, it represents the individual’s “beliefs about or factual knowledge of the object or person” (ibid.) The third one is illustrated by the overt actions that are taken in response to the referent or object This tripartite theory has also been advocated for a long period of time such as

by Fabrigar, MacDonald, and Wegener (2005) Nonetheless, Bordens and Horowitz (2008) slightly adjusted the structure by partitioning the behavioral component into behavioral intentions and behaviors, which extended the list of components

So as to measure learners’ attitude toward language learning, in particular a teaching practice, one of the most efficacious tools is the Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) developed by Gardner (2004) Though based on the original questionnaire which was designed to investigate what attitudes English-speaking Canadians held toward learning French, it has proved its own reliability through the fact that the test has been widely used and adapted for research purposes in the field of SLA (Hummel, 2014) This study, which aimed to examine how the four strands facilitated adult learners’ English vocabulary mastery, also wished to explore their attitudes toward the application of the framework Therefore, the AMTB emerged as a trustworthy work of reference in the stage of designing and developing the research tools that helped collect valid and reliable data so that such an aim could be fulfilled

2.3 The application of the four strands into teaching English vocabulary

According to Nation (2007), the four strands can be integrated in many courses from a skill-based classroom to a content-based one With careful consideration given

to the objectives of the course, the learners’ expectations and the constraints in schedules, each strand occupies a certain amount of time so that they receive equal weights, ideally a quarter of the course length (see Figure 2.1) To ensure a good balance among the strands, the teacher can categorize the activities into one or more strands and calculate their running time In addition, it is advisable for the teacher to consult ten principles and suggested activities that Nation (2007) offers

ADEQUATE DISTRIBUTION OF CLASSROOM ACTIVITIES

instruction

Figure 2.1 Distribution of the four strands within the classroom Adapted from Funk

(2012, p 303)

2.3.1 Procedures for applying the four strands

Table 2.3 presents the principles which outline the application of the four strands into a specific classroom Through these principles, it can be seen that all the four skills are decently covered during the process of teaching and learning Particularly, learners are provided with sizable comprehensible input through listening and reading passages and, afterward, encouraged to speak and write in the L2 On top

of that, an adequate amount of time should be devoted to enhancing their fluency in both receptive and productive skills Skill-focused principles may result from the aforementioned commonsense approaches to justification, namely the time-on-task principle and the distinction of each language skill

Another noticeable key feature highlighted in the principles is that meaning outweighs form, or as worded by Nation (2007, p 8) that there should be a “three-to-one balance” between meaning and form within the strands Receiving and conveying