ABSTRACT This study aimed at attesting the effect size of consciousness raising tasks CR tasks in boosting EFL learners’ acquisition of lexical chunks or multi-word units.. Among the wid
INTRODUCTION
Background and significance of the research
The framework within which this research project came into shape entails the following key urgencies
1.1.1 The rising role of chunks in modern academia and pedagogy
Recent vocabulary research highlights the importance of chunks, or formulaic language, in enhancing fluency and facilitating the transition from intermediate to advanced language proficiency (Schmitt, 1996; Lewis, 2002) Despite years of studying vocabulary and grammar, many language learners struggle to achieve native-like speech and writing This challenge arises because, as Swan notes, formulaic language is particularly difficult for learners to master.
Lexical chunks have become integral to language teaching, as noted by American linguist Ben Zimmer, editor-in-chief of the Visual Thesaurus Dictionary This trend is evident in the ongoing emphasis that curriculum developers and textbook writers place on these chunks Widely-used textbook series, such as New, reflect this growing importance of lexical chunks in language education.
Modern language learning resources like Cutting Edge, Speak Out, New English File, Interactions, and Mosaic increasingly present vocabulary in sets rather than in isolation While a systematic approach to incorporating these language chunks is still developing, it is crucial to highlight the importance of this issue in current studies.
1.1.2 The intolerable situation of learners’ chunk knowledge sized up from the current study setting
The study was conducted at a school that offers intensive IELTS preparation courses, where the researcher has worked as an IELTS instructor for nearly five years Observations indicate that many IELTS trainers focus primarily on enhancing learners' skills and test-taking strategies, often neglecting the importance of vocabulary and chunk teaching in their curriculum Consequently, vocabulary instruction is reduced to merely recommending a few recognized vocabulary books, with the assumption that students will learn independently.
The pursuit of higher IELTS band scores presents significant challenges for learners, particularly in their productive skills For example, improving a Writing test score from band 5 to band 6 often requires reducing grammatical and spelling errors, while advancing from band 7 to band 8 demands a stronger lexical resource, highlighting the impact of limited chunk knowledge Additionally, students' motivation tends to wane due to the prevalent teacher-centered instruction, making the learning process even more burdensome, especially for those who recognize the critical importance of chunk learning.
It was two afore-stated problems that urged for immediate rectification for this uncomfortable situation
1.1.3 The lumbering progress of chunk-oriented research and the need to triangulate conflicting research findings
The widespread recognition of the importance of chunks prompts a renewed inquiry into the most effective instructional methods for maximizing acquisition and ensuring long-lasting retention.
Various chunk teaching and learning methods have been proposed by both ELT theorists and practitioners, ranging from traditional rote rehearsal to innovative approaches within the communicative curriculum These methods can generally be classified into two main categories: incidental (or implicit) methods and intentional (or explicit) methods Incidental methods emphasize self-chunk learning through extensive reading, while intentional methods address the low rate of chunks learned incidentally by providing a more direct and effective approach.
Explicit chunk instruction is divided into two sub-groups: direct explicit instruction and indirect explicit teaching Direct explicit instruction involves teachers providing clear presentations and explanations of new chunks, while indirect explicit teaching focuses on chunk concepts as lesson aims but allows for greater student self-exploration This approach forms the theoretical basis for consciousness raising (CR) tasks, which are central to the chunk instruction discussed in this thesis.
Conflicting findings from previous studies make it challenging to determine the most effective instruction for CR tasks as a chunk instruction Therefore, it is crucial to obtain more empirical evidence to resolve this inconclusive research situation, particularly in the context of English Language Teaching (ELT) in Vietnam.
Research aim
The aim of this study is two-fold:
(1) To find out the effectiveness of consciousness-raising tasks on lexical chunks acquisition at two levels: (a) size and (b) depth
(2) To investigate students’ perception on the use of CR tasks in lexical chunks instruction
Research questions and research hypothesis
The research aims stated above are addressed via two main research questions which are as follows
1 What is the difference between the group treated with CR tasks instruction and the one treated with teacher-fronted instruction in terms of their lexical chunk acquisition? a To what extent does the experimental group outperform the comparison one in terms of size of chunk acquisition after the treatment? b To what extent does the experimental group outperform the comparison one in terms of depth of chunk acquisition after the treatment?
2 What are the students’ views on CR tasks as a chunk instruction mode?
This study investigates the impact of collaborative reading (CR) tasks on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students' acquisition of lexical chunks It is based on the premise that CR tasks can effectively introduce various aspects of lexical chunks to learners Additionally, the research examines students' perceptions of CR tasks as a method for chunk instruction, utilizing an attitudinal scale to gather and analyze data that supports the quantitative findings The hypothesis posits a positive correlation between CR tasks and the enhancement of lexical chunk acquisition among EFL students.
1 The experimental group will significantly outperform the comparison group in terms of their gains in (a) chunk size and (b) chunk depth
2 Students will have positive views towards the use of CR tasks
Organization of the thesis
This thesis consists of six chapters, beginning with an overview of the study's background, significance, research aim, hypothesis, and questions Chapter 2 offers a critical analysis of existing theories related to the topic, establishing a solid theoretical foundation for the conceptual framework The methodology is detailed in Chapter 3, covering research design, setting, subjects, tools, procedures, and statistical analysis of the data Chapter 4 presents the results, including T-test analyses of the pre- and post-Collocational Competence Test, delayed Writing Posttest scores, and descriptive statistics from the attitudinal questionnaire An in-depth discussion of these findings is provided in Chapter 5, while Chapter 6 concludes the thesis and discusses implications, considering the study's limitations.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Overview of lexical chunks
Lexical chunks encompass a wide range of terminologies, including multi-word units, formulaic speech, and collocations, which can lead to confusion among researchers As Michael Lewis (1993) noted, while lexical chunks can be sub-categorized, such classifications often involve overlapping categories and marginal cases Thus, a comprehensive overview of lexical chunks should begin with a broad definition that captures the entire spectrum of these linguistic phenomena.
A linguistic perspective emphasizes the predictability of word co-occurrences to differentiate between chunks and non-chunks According to Lewis (1997), a lexical chunk is defined as a phenomenon where certain words appear together in natural text more frequently than by chance This implies that when one word in a chunk is present, it often evokes its lexical partner Injeeli (2013) illustrated this concept with an example, noting that while predicting a co-occurring word from a given word is not always certain, the likelihood is significantly higher compared to non-collocates or non-chunks.
An applied linguistic perspective, on the other hand, defines chunks in relation to a language user’s mental lexicon Alison Wray, a renowned researcher in the field of formulaic language, commented:
A lexical chunk refers to a sequence of words or elements that is prefabricated, meaning it is stored and retrieved from memory as a whole during use, rather than being generated or analyzed through language grammar.
As such, a lexical chunk, in its broadest sense, may be defined as any cluster of words whose combination is of greater than randomness and constitute just a single memory unit
2.1.2 A historical review of lexical chunks
Lexical chunks have a rich history in linguistics and related fields
In 1956, psychologist George Miller introduced the concept of "chunking" as part of his Cognitive Load Theory, which suggests that the capacity of human short-term memory is limited.
Long-term memory tends to organize previously stored information into sets as a compensation strategy, allowing for the retention of 5 to 9 units of information (Miller, 1956) This influential theory has inspired extensive follow-up research and derivative theories from both psychologists and psycholinguists In 1966, Michael Halliday further emphasized Miller's findings by illustrating the commonness of the phrase "strong tea" compared to less appropriate expressions.
“powerful tea” (which should have been an absolutely perfect word combination from a pure grammarian’s view) Widdowson, a pioneer in Communicative
Language teaching emphasizes that communicative competence goes beyond merely knowing grammatical rules; it involves understanding a collection of partially pre-assembled patterns or formulaic frameworks (Widdowson, 1989, p 135) This viewpoint challenges the Chomskyan linguistic school, prompting experts to shift their focus from Chomsky's prevailing idea of creativity to innovative concepts like chunks and the cognitive processes involved in managing them.
In 1991, the conflict with Chomskyan followers escalated due to a stronger theoretical and empirical foundation, particularly through the COBUILD project, which created a comprehensive corpus of contemporary English text This innovation enabled John Sinclair, the project's director, to advocate for the open-choice and idiom principles as fundamental mechanisms of language use, ultimately asserting the superiority of the idiom principle (Sinclair, 1991, p 110) To implement this principle, several linguists sought a more practical chunk-based pedagogy, leading to Michael Lewis's influential 1993 book, “The Lexical Approach,” which presented 20 key assumptions that inspired many of Lewis's predecessors.
The concept that "language consists of grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalized grammar" (Lewis, 1993, p 34) marks a significant shift in Applied Linguistics According to vocabulary researcher Scott Thornbury, this "lexical turn" has led to a renewed focus on vocabulary instruction, overshadowing traditional grammar instruction in existing English Language Teaching (ELT) syllabuses (Thornbury, 2006, p 55).
The Lexical Approach, also known as the Chunking Approach, emphasizes the importance of lexis in facilitating second language (L2) acquisition Teachers are encouraged to teach vocabulary in chunks rather than isolated words, as this method enhances learning Additionally, mastering grammar involves the ability to understand the patterns found within these lexical chunks.
Moon (1997) identified two perspectives on vocabulary: the isolationist view, which sees vocabulary as a collection of individual words, and the collocationist view, which recognizes the importance of the relationships and patterns between words He emphasized that collocationists understand the strong clustering tendencies of words Consequently, proponents of the Lexical Approach are true collocationists who advocate for prioritizing vocabulary instruction, especially in teaching word chunks.
The Lexical Approach has garnered mixed reactions from linguists and educators, with notable proponents like Prof Norbert Schmitt and Ben Zimmer, while skeptics such as Michael Swan and Brett Reynolds express concerns Harwood (2002) highlighted that the term "Lexical Approach" is often used but poorly understood, indicating a significant gap in comprehension within the literature He acknowledged that substantial efforts are still needed for this approach to be effectively incorporated into mainstream English Language Teaching (ELT) textbooks.
Chunks have proven their significance over time, thanks to the efforts of Lexical Approach advocates The necessity of positioning them at the core of the syllabus is now supported by robust theories and substantial empirical evidence Consequently, any skepticism regarding their increasing importance as a fleeting trend can be alleviated The full integration mentioned by Harwood suggests that this "new toy" is in need of a more structured pedagogical framework, highlighting an empirical research gap that requires attention.
2.1.3 The nature of lexical chunks
Lexical chunks play a crucial role in language learning, highlighting the ongoing need for a standardized approach to chunk pedagogy, despite years of dedicated research efforts.
2.1.3.1 The saliency and arbitrariness of lexical chunks
The recognition of the saliency of lexical chunks began with intuition and personal language use However, the development of large corpora with millions of words has enabled scientific validation of the prevalence of formulaic language.
In 2010, it was argued that native English speakers possess tens or even hundreds of thousands of formulaic expressions, with estimates varying widely Additionally, research from the COBUILD project revealed that lexical chunks make up 40 percent of running texts, highlighting the significant role these expressions play in language use These findings suggest that the strength of lexical chunks is a fundamental aspect of language proficiency.
Lexical chunks as operationalized for this research
This section aims to define the range of lexical chunks targeted in the current research, emphasizing a semantics-based model for selection Referential meanings served as the primary criterion, while pragmatic and grammatical features were intentionally excluded from consideration.
Lewis (1997) identifies two types of chunks with pragmatic meanings: conventional speech routines, including sentence frames (e.g., "Would you mind if "), social formulae (e.g., "see you later"), and discourse markers (e.g., "frankly speaking") In contrast, referential meanings involve collocations (e.g., "widely travel"), phrasal verbs (e.g., "get up"), and idioms (e.g., "get cold feet") This study will focus on collocations, phrasal verbs, and idioms, intentionally excluding sentence frames, social formulae, and discourse markers, as well as grammatical collocations that require specific prepositions or verb forms.
Paul Meara (1997) noted that many empirical studies in chunk acquisition rely on a limited number of chunks, leading to a lack of generalizability in their findings A common issue is the random selection of target chunks, which corpus-based studies could address by utilizing lemmatized frequency data (Durrant and Schmitt, 2010) However, empirical studies focused on instructional effectiveness may find that compiling chunks based solely on frequency results in chaotic and artificial lesson plans To mitigate this, the current study employed a thematic selection policy, choosing chunks based on specific topics that carry referential meaning While lemmatized frequency remains a consideration in chunk selection, the emphasis on topic-based chunks aims to simplify material development for the instructional treatment The diagram below illustrates the selection process for the target chunks in this study.
THE POOL OF TARGET CHUNKS
Figure 2.3: Chunk operationalization for the current study
Aspects of lexical chunk acquisition
The human mental lexicon is often referred to as a "black box" due to its complex psychological nature Recent advancements in vocabulary research have sparked increased interest in understanding this intricate system and its operational mechanisms According to Read (2000), there have been many attempts to define the components of vocabulary knowledge and identify key variables; however, a comprehensive model for vocabulary acquisition and a clear dimension of lexical knowledge remain elusive.
Lexical chunk acquisition refers to how our brain processes multi-word units, and psycholinguists generally agree that these chunks function more like individual words than as constructed sequences Therefore, it is essential to approach chunks from a lexical perspective rather than a purely grammatical one This suggests that vocabulary acquisition and knowledge may significantly influence the process of acquiring lexical chunks.
Chunk acquisition, similar to vocabulary acquisition, involves the storage, processing, and retrieval of lexis, resulting in varying qualities of knowledge from recognition to mastery (Ellis, 1993) For research and convenience, chunk knowledge is often quantified in terms of size and depth, categorizing the formulaic lexicon into two main domains, each encompassing several aspects.
According to Schmitt (2010), vocabulary knowledge encompasses both the size and depth of a learner's lexical items Size refers to the number of words known, while depth indicates the level of mastery of those words Importantly, size and depth are not mutually exclusive; a certain level of mastery is always associated with the number of words known Researchers approach this complexity with caution and flexibility, adapting their conceptual frameworks accordingly.
The acquisition continuum ranges from no knowledge to full mastery, with a person's formulaic inventory representing the initial level of acquisition This inventory includes all chunks that create mental linkages to the individual's lexicon, contributing to their overall language development.
In psycholinguistics, "chunk size" refers to the distinction between explicit or declarative knowledge Specifically, learners may be aware of certain language chunks but may not know how to effectively use them in real-life situations.
In chunk testing research, the size of chunk knowledge refers to receptive aspects, which encompass the ability to identify the form and meaning of target chunks These aspects can be assessed through straightforward test items like multiple-choice questions or matching exercises According to Schmitt (2010), this specific sub-construct of chunk size is termed receptive size.
Chunk size can reflect a higher level of knowledge, as evidenced by testees' ability to remember the form-meaning connections of chunks Schmitt (op cit.) referred to this aspect as recall (or semi-productive) size measures, suggesting that cloze test items can effectively assess this ability.
The size of chunk knowledge, whether receptive or semi-productive, pertains only to the initial stages of developing a formulaic lexicon This construct does not address whether students have internalized these chunks for spontaneous use in productive tasks, as this aspect will be explored only when considering the depth of chunk knowledge.
Schmitt (op cit., p 42) argues that depth is one of the most ambiguous and least measurable constructs in cognitive science He suggests that the best way to define depth is by relating it to quality rather than quantity, emphasizing the importance of how well a learner understands a lexical item.
Researchers have differing opinions on the relationship between size and depth of knowledge and fluency Daller, Milton, and Treffers-Daller (2007) argue that these aspects should be considered as distinct dimensions.
Many linguists contend that fluency should be understood as depth rather than mere knowledge (Read, 2000; Thornbury, 2006; Schmitt, 2010) This depth is not solely about knowledge acquisition; it also encompasses the employability of skills, which is reflected in the automaticity demonstrated by students.
In the context of chunk-oriented learning, depth of knowledge refers to the integration of target chunks into learners' lexicon for immediate access (Lewis, 1997) This depth can be understood as the automaticity in producing chunks, where learners feel confident using them in essays or fluent conversations Read (2000) highlights that a key aspect of this depth is the ability to produce fluent speech or writing without apparent planning or effort Thus, depth represents a significant level of mastery in the continuum of chunk acquisition.
In chunk testing, the depth of knowledge is typically assessed through productive tests like writing or oral examinations This depth reflects a well-organized mental lexicon and procedural knowledge Additionally, depth signifies the presence of durable memory traces (Nation, 2001).
The writing or oral test is typically administered after a certain period to allow for the detection of more complex and enduring traces For further details, refer to Chapter 3 (3.3).
Proposals for chunk instruction
2.4.1 Brief of second language vocabulary instruction
Extensive reviews on vocabulary pedagogy by researchers such as Meara (1996), Schmitt (1997), and Thornbury (2002) highlight two primary trends in vocabulary instruction: implicit and explicit methods Implicit instruction, often referred to as "guessing from context" or "incidental vocabulary learning," promotes vocabulary acquisition through repeated exposure to reading materials In contrast, explicit instruction emphasizes intentional vocabulary teaching, providing clear explanations for a carefully chosen list of vocabulary items.
In English Language Teaching (ELT), the selection and grading of materials are crucial for effective implicit vocabulary instruction, as teachers must invest time in choosing appropriate input to enhance students' vocabulary acquisition through immersion Explicit vocabulary instruction, on the other hand, focuses on developing various teaching techniques that prioritize teacher-student interaction This interaction can be either one-way and teacher-dominated, often relying on mechanical drilling or rote memorization, or it can be more innovative and dynamic within a task-based teaching framework In this approach, teachers emulate first language caretakers, minimizing traditional activities like drilling and error correction, and treating vocabulary as a tool to achieve communicative goals.
The two primary trends in vocabulary teaching, each offering unique advantages, serve as essential reference points for theorists in the pursuit of effective chunk instruction.
Chunks are considered a unique lexical phenomenon, as noted by Nattinger and De Carrico (1992), who describe a lexical chunk as a lexical-grammatical unit that lies between the lexicon and syntax These multi-word units function similarly to single words while retaining conventional syntactic characteristics, making their teaching particularly challenging.
In the realm of implicit teaching, English Language Teaching (ELT) practitioners have compelling reasons to advocate for implicit chunk learning through extensive exposure to language input, both in and out of the classroom Thornbury emphasizes that to effectively teach lexical chunks, educators should provide learners with numerous correct examples.
(2002, p 107) asserts this tradition Given the sheer amount of chunks and their complicatedness, those arguments justify the unteachability of almost all chunks
Advocates of explicit teaching question the belief that students can naturally acquire chunks through reading, favoring activities focused on chunk development However, there is significant disagreement among them regarding the most effective methods for teaching these chunks Consequently, no cohesive approach has emerged, with only tentative proposals and isolated techniques available.
A widely used method for chunk instruction in contemporary textbooks is the rule-based approach, as noted by Thornbury (2002) This method involves identifying and emphasizing patterns or regularities within a set of chunks Multi-word items are categorized and presented based on their formation or shared meanings Examples of this rule-based approach can be found in extracts from two course books.
Read the following sentences carefully
Last night I tried to do my homework However, I kept making mistakes because the man upstairs was doing his exercises and making a noise
Make usually means to create, bring into existence, or produce a result
Do usually means to perform an action However, there are exceptions to this ‘rule’, as you will see in Exercise 3
(extracted from Bell J and Gower R., Intermediate Matters, Longman)
Down is an adverb and a preposition The basic meaning of down is to do with movement from a higher position or level to a lower one
Down phrasal verbs can be categorized based on their meanings For movement and position, they indicate a change in location Completeness, ending, and change refer to actions that signify a conclusion Decreasing, lowering, and reducing describe actions that diminish something Eating and drinking pertain to consuming food and beverages Fastening and fixing involve securing or repairing items Writing and recording relate to documenting information Lastly, collapsing and attacking denote actions that involve falling or striking.
I drank down my double Scotch eagerly
The lid of the box was nailed down
The water floods their homes or breaks down the walls
Go and lie down on your bed
If the firms failed to make enough money, they would close down
They ask me the date and flight number: I always write it down so I will remember
It’s a bit hot in here- turn it down
(extracted from Radley P and Millerchip C., Workout Upper Intermediate,
An enthusiastic champion of this approach is Frank Boers, a cognitive linguist from Victoria University of Wellington He commented:
While the collocational process is not entirely predictable, studies indicate that it is largely motivated Modern English Language Teaching (ELT) coursebooks include grammatical exercises that help learners infer underlying rules Similarly, there is no reason why most exercises focusing on language chunks cannot be structured in this manner (Boers, 2010, p 293).
The rule-based approach in language learning faces challenges due to the unclear scope of rules (Thornbury, 2002, p 108) Additionally, a specific rule may generate a list of language chunks with varying meanings, leading to potential overgeneralization This highlights the difficulty in establishing rigid rules at the intersection of grammar and vocabulary, given the inherent arbitrariness of language.
Item-based chunk teaching is proposed as a more effective instructional method, offering significant benefits worth considering This approach can save students considerable time that would otherwise be spent grappling with complex linguistic phenomena Additionally, the design, implementation, and evaluation of item-based chunk teaching procedures are anticipated to be simpler These advantages provide strong justification for adopting this teaching practice.
An explicit approach to teaching chunk formation can be implemented in two ways: through direct instruction or indirect exploration Teachers may clearly articulate rules of chunk formation, emphasizing that these are regulative rather than generative rules, or they may provide students with lists of chunks to illustrate form-meaning connections This direct explicit instruction has fluctuated in popularity within English Language Teaching (ELT) and vocabulary instruction Alternatively, indirect explicit instruction allows students to discover how words combine to form chunks and their meanings through discovery tasks While these tasks, known as consciousness raising tasks, aim to promote intentional chunk teaching, they do so in a less overt manner, addressing the limitations of other teaching methods The theoretical foundations of consciousness raising tasks will be discussed further.
2.4.3 Theoretical grounds behind consciousness raising tasks
Consciousness raising (CR) tasks were originally developed to teach grammar, growing out of a keen contemporary interest in task-based teaching A
CR task in such frame could be defined as follow:
A pedagogic activity involves learners engaging with L2 data in various forms, requiring them to perform operations that lead to a clear understanding of specific linguistic properties of the target language (Ellis, 1997, p 160).
Ellis emphasizes that the primary objective of consciousness-raising (CR) tasks is to foster explicit knowledge of grammatical structures, which includes metalinguistic awareness These tasks are designed to create opportunities for learners to engage in the target language while exploring its rules through a discovery-based approach.
CR tasks focus on creating a conscious representation of target features, with production of these features being limited and incidental Unlike traditional task-based syllabuses, which are production-oriented, CR tasks are data-driven and input-based They represent an evolution in task-based learning, as their primary goal is not to elicit learner production This approach diverges from the conventional task-based method, which assumes that skills can be naturally acquired through immersion However, CR tasks do not revert to a traditional lecture model; instead, they encourage learners to take active responsibility for their learning, promoting acquisition while minimizing the risk of overwhelming them before they grasp essential skills.
Consciousness raising tasks are, in fact, built upon three assumptions
Prior studies
Recent research has increasingly focused on lexical chunks, highlighting three main areas: chunk assessment instruments, the relationship between chunk knowledge and the four language skills, and methods of chunk instruction Various studies have compared receptive and productive elicitation techniques (Fan, 1991; Zhang, 1993; Granger, 1998; Schmitt, 1998; Howarth, 1998; Lorenz, 1999; Gitsaki, 1999; Kaszubski, 2000; Bonk, 2000) Additionally, the significance of chunks in enhancing L2 learners' writing and speaking skills has been well-documented (Liu, 1999; Meara, 2002; Hsu, 2005) However, there is a notable lack of research on effective chunk teaching methods, and existing findings in this area have been inconsistent.
Research on chunk instruction highlights a divide among scholars regarding teaching methods Some emphasize the significance of implicit chunk teaching (Ellis, 1997; Nagy, 1997; Nation, 2001), while others advocate for explicit instruction through consciousness-raising activities Additionally, there are skeptics who prefer traditional methods like rote learning or teacher-led pedagogy This article will provide a comprehensive report on empirical studies related to consciousness-raising tasks and their effectiveness as a chunk teaching methodology compared to other proposed methods.
2.5.1 Studies into the role of CR tasks in L2 teaching in general
The critical importance of noticing in learning has led to a consensus that conscious attention is essential for effective second language acquisition Numerous empirical studies, from early research by Sharwood Smith (1981) and Fotos and Ellis (1991) to more recent investigations by Norris and Ortega (2000) and Doughty (2003), have consistently supported the benefits of consciousness-raising (CR) tasks in grammar acquisition These studies primarily focused on grammatical elements such as form, meaning, and use, highlighting the positive effects of CR tasks However, research on the role of CR tasks in chunk acquisition remains limited compared to grammar-focused studies, with most investigations emerging later in the field of English Language Teaching (ELT).
2.5.2 Studies into the role of CR tasks in teaching lexical chunks
The potential of CR tasks in teaching lexical chunks was first systematically reported by Willis and Willis (1996), who provided a comprehensive overview of theoretical aspects and illustrative task types Subsequent studies by Schmidt & McCarthy (1997), Nesselhauf (2003), Ying and Hendricks (2004), Hunt and Beglar (2005), Thornbury (2006), Seesink (2007), and Stoitchkov (2008) have highlighted the evolution of chunk instruction and its promising prospects However, many of these claims lack clarity and require further empirical investigation As noted by Coxhead (2008, p 159), despite the advancement of theoretical positions, there has been limited research on learners' actual practices in developing L2 collocational competence.
Recent empirical research on the controversial issue of CR tasks in English Language Teaching (ELT) has emerged, primarily documented in key papers, institutional Ph.D theses, and a limited number of articles in current ELT journals This article will critically review these studies, categorizing them into two groups: those that support the positive impact of CR tasks and those that present opposing empirical evidence.
2.5.2.1 Empirical evidences for CR tasks in chunk teaching
The very first study whose findings lent support to CR tasks in chunk teaching was probably that of Yang and O’Neill (2004), which came under the title
“Collocation Learning through an “AWARE” Approach: Learner Perspectives and Learning Process” Over a five-month period of an intensive English course,
The study utilized collaborative retrieval (CR) tasks to enhance chunk learning among adult EFL learners, aiming to improve their collocational awareness and proficiency This qualitative longitudinal research involved interviews and analysis of participants' reflective journals and essays, providing insights into learner practices in chunk learning Despite its contributions, the study left some quantitative questions unanswered, such as specific chunk gain ratios and the statistical significance of the experimental group's performance compared to the control group To address these gaps, additional studies were conducted to quantitatively evaluate the effectiveness of CR tasks against other chunk teaching methods.
Reza et al (2011) conducted a comprehensive study comparing the effectiveness of form-focused corrective (CR) tasks with meaning-focused communicative activities and a no-treatment condition, finding that form-focused CR tasks significantly enhanced the phrasal lexicon of Iranian Intermediate EFL learners, as indicated by statistically significant ANOVA p-values Similarly, Soleimani et al (2013) reported positive outcomes from CR tasks in a study involving 65 Iranian Intermediate students, aligning with findings from Jiang and Shu (2011), who examined CR tasks focused on prefabricated verb chunks and patterns Their 18-week experiment with 120 Chinese students revealed that the Experimental Group, which engaged in CR tasks, demonstrated significantly higher frequency and accuracy in verb patterns compared to the Control Group, which received traditional teacher-fronted instruction.
Recent studies suggest that CR tasks could serve as an effective chunk instruction mode, yet concerns about their validity persist A significant issue identified in Jiang and Shu (2011) is the absence of a pre-test to ensure homogeneity in chunk knowledge between groups, casting doubt on the Independent Sample T-Test results Additionally, two Iranian studies highlighted a tendency to prioritize research design while neglecting the construction of reliable research tools, leading to potentially ungrounded findings due to questionable instruments and poorly defined targets Furthermore, none of the studies conducted follow-up testing to assess the longevity of the positive effects of CR tasks This topic is particularly intriguing, as other studies have reported contrasting findings, which will be discussed in the subsequent review.
2.5.2.2 Empirical evidences against CR tasks in chunk teaching
A study by Jones and Haywood (2004) examined the acquisition of language chunks in a 10-week English for Academic Purposes (EAP) pre-sessional course The experimental group (EG) participated in various chunk recognition (CR) activities, including highlighting chunks in texts, analyzing word patterns using concordance lines, and discussing the relevance of these chunks for EAP writing In contrast, the control group (CG) did not receive any treatment Ultimately, the study could not determine the effectiveness of the CR activities on chunk acquisition.
EG students took part in led to their retention of chunks since their final essays did not contain a higher proportion of formulaic sequences than those produced by the
Peters (2006) replicated John and Haywood’s study using a mixed qualitative and quantitative approach to examine the effects of CR tasks on advanced EFL learners' recall of individual words and chunks His results revealed no significant quantitative differences between the two groups Similarly, Stengers (2010) found consistent outcomes However, it is important to note that the CR tasks employed by these researchers primarily focused on peripheral aspects of noticing, leading participants to engage in passive rather than active awareness of the target chunks Consequently, during the treatment phase, their consciousness was limited to mere perception of the input, lacking intentional and deeper cognitive engagement.
In 2008, Boers and Lindstromberg conducted a study with advanced Dutch-speaking language majors to assess the impact of brief teacher-led consciousness-raising sessions on students' recall of alliterating phrases Over three months, 15 participants in the experimental group (EG) engaged in these tasks, while 14 in the control group (CG) did not Although the EG outperformed the CG in a posttest, the results lacked statistical significance The researchers concluded that drawing attention to alliterative phrases did not significantly aid learners They noted that the CG had higher proficiency prior to the treatment, and the 10-second intervention may have been too brief to yield noticeable effects Additionally, the small sample size raised concerns about the reliability of the findings.
Golebiewska (2013) conducted research in a UK university that revealed CR tasks, defined as an Observe-Hypothesize-Experiment Cycle, did not significantly enhance learners' pragmatic chunk repertoire Unlike previous studies, her approach involved a teacher-fronted treatment for the control group, leading to the conclusion that CR tasks were no more effective than traditional chunk instruction Despite earlier warnings about limitations such as small sample sizes and brief interventions, Golebiewska's research design did not adequately address these concerns.
Conflicting findings from various exploratory studies and articles have contributed to ongoing confusion regarding the effectiveness of CR tasks as a medium for chunk instruction As a result, the question remains unresolved, fueling continued debates that inform the conceptual framework of the current study.
Conceptual framework
This section identifies the existing gaps in the literature regarding the use of collaborative reading (CR) tasks as a chunk teaching method, while also emphasizing the reasons for selecting this topic.
The evolution of CR tasks in chunk teaching has transitioned from being described as “a journey without maps” (Thornbury, 1998) to a more structured and principled methodology, driven by the collaborative efforts of researchers, theorists, and English Language Teaching (ELT) practitioners.
The credibility of CR tasks is no longer a tedious endeavor, yet it is not merely a repetitive exercise, as there are only a limited number of studies available on the topic The existing literature presents conflicting findings and poorly supported conclusions, highlighting the need for thorough research and a careful reevaluation of the issue.
A comprehensive examination of relevant theoretical frameworks and empirical studies has identified three significant shortcomings that warrant further exploration Firstly, the current state of research is predominantly descriptive and unique, as noted by Schmitt (2008).
Research on chunk-oriented studies has often presented CR tasks as theoretical proposals or implemented them inconsistently, leading to conflicting findings regarding their effectiveness Key issues include poorly defined research objectives and tools, as well as inadequately designed studies with inappropriate sample sizes and mismatched pretest-posttest measures Furthermore, the impact of CR tasks on learners' long-term retention of target chunks has been overlooked These shortcomings significantly undermine the reliability and generalizability of current research conclusions.
This study aims to re-evaluate the effectiveness of CR tasks on EFL students' chunk acquisition, addressing flaws identified in previous research It seeks to validate existing findings or provide new insights into this contentious topic Key priorities include the careful operationalization of research variables, a well-structured research design, appropriate research instruments, further exploration of existing gaps, and cautious interpretation of the collected data.
Chapter summary
Chapter 2 has reviewed several theoretical concepts and empirical studies related to the present study The chapter starts with an overview of lexical chunks and CR tasks before narrowing down and specifying the operationalization accommodated for this research In the subsequent section, a number of studies into 1he same topic have been critically reviewed This review has demonstrated that there exists an urgent need to testify the effectiveness of CR tasks in chunk teaching, which helps validate that the topic explored in 1his MA thesis is a well chosen one In chapter 3, the methodology employed to carry out the research is to be found.