000080669 DIFFRENCES IN PERCEIVED APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH VOCABULARY IN VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA ΝΟΙ (NHỮNG KHÁC BIỆT TRONG CÁC PHƯƠNG PHÁP NHẬN THỨC VỀ VIỆC HỌC VÀ DẠY TỪ VỰNG TIẾNG ANH TẠI ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA VIỆT NAM, HA NΟΙ)

000080669 DIFFRENCES IN PERCEIVED APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH VOCABULARY IN VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA ΝΟΙ (NHỮNG KHÁC BIỆT TRONG CÁC PHƯƠNG PHÁP NHẬN THỨC VỀ VIỆC HỌC VÀ DẠY TỪ VỰNG TIẾNG ANH TẠI ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA VIỆT NAM, HA NΟΙ)

MEMISTRY OF ENUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI UNIVERSITY

DIFFRENCES IN PERCEIVED APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH VOCABULARY IN

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY » HANOI

SUBMITTED EN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE

OL MASTER IN TESOL

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI UNIVERSITY

VU THI BINH

LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH VOCABULARY IN

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF REQUIREMENT OF THE DEGREE

OF MASTER IN TESOL

SUPERVISOR: NGUYEN VAN TRAO, PhD

80669

i THƯ VIỆN ĐẠI HỌC HÀ NỘI

DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the thesis entitled:

DIFFRENCES IN PERCEIVED APPROACHES TO LEARNING AND TEACHING ENGLISH VOCABULARY IN VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI

is the result of my own research for the Degree of Master of Education at Hanoi University I confirm that this thesis has not been submitted for any other degrees

Student’s signature

Vii Thi Binh

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In completion of this thesis, I would particularly like to express deepest gratitude to my supervisor, PhD Nguyen Van Trao who has been a wonderful help to me with his profound knowledge, experienced guidance, valuable suggestions and advice throughout my work

I am thankful to all the staff at the post-graduate department for giving me assistance, the teachers who conducted the Master's course for providing me with valuable knowledge

A further acknowledgement goes to my dear friends from the master's course and

colleagues for their useful ideas, materials and encouragement

I am grateful to the students and teachers of University of Science, VNU who spent their valuable time to answer the questionnaires

The final credit must go to my family, especially my husband, who supported me with love and gentle pushing Without all this support, I could not have finished this thesis

Va Thi Binh

December, 2013

ii

ABSTRACT

"Without grammar, very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed” (Wilkins, 1972, p.111) Acquiring a basic vocabulary is, hence, a significant accomplishment for ESL or EFL learners (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006) There has so far been much research on perceived approaches to vocabulary learning and teaching to make the best use of different approaches Also, this study is aimed at investigating differences in perceived approaches to EFL vocabulary learning and teaching in terms

of perceived approach use frequency among students and teachers after identifying students’ perceptions and teachers’ perceptions towards vocabulary and their difficulties

in vocabulary learning and teaching

150 non-English major students in two average-level classes and in two high-level classes were surveyed through student questionnaire (Vietnamese version) 20 EFL teachers assigned by University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS) - VNU also took part in questionnaire answering Besides, interviews were conducted at random afterwards among some of students and teachers

The results of the questionnaires and interviews support the conclusion that both students and teachers had positive perceptions of vocabulary but frequently met plenty

of difficulties in learning and teaching English vocabulary Additionally, a fairly big differences in perceived approaches to learning English vocabulary between two kinds

of student subjects were represented Students in high-level classes tended to endorsed a bunch of different perceived approaches to English vocabulary learning instead of a central focus on the traditional grammar-translation approach like students in average- level classes There also exsisted considerable differences in perceived approaches to teaching English vocabulary among teacher subjects However, a common tendency was shown that teachers were more conscious of using variant perceived approaches to their English vocabulary teaching as compared to their students Reading approach was most often used rather than grammar-translation approach like in the past From the findings of this study, some suggestions were given to help teachers and students in teaching and learning English vocabulary

1, 1 Statement of the Problem

Scope of the Study

Aims of the Study

Research Questions

Significance of the Study

Organization of the Thesis

CHAPTER II - LITERATURE REVIEW

Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

What is meant by “Approach”?

Composite Approach of Motive and Congruent Learning Strategy

Description of Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

Surface Approach

Deep Approach

Achieving Approach

Surface Approach as opposed to Deep Approach

Nature of Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

Teachers’ Perceived Approaches to Teaching

Role of Teachers over Students’ Academic Outcomes

ITTF Approach vs CCSF Approach

Deciding Effects on Teaching Approaches

Approaches to Teaching and Conceptions of Teaching

Approaches to Teaching and Contextual Factors

Perceived Approaches to Learning and Teaching English

Vocabulary

Vocabulary Learning (VL) and Vocabulary Teaching (VT) in

SLA

Mastery of vocabulary knowledge

Incremental Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition

Role of Memory in Vocabulary Learning and Acquisition

Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning and Teaching

English Vocabulary

Grammar-translation Approach vs Communicative Approach

Direct Approach vs Reading Approach

Pages

ii

iii vii viii

b2 G2 in be

k9 wo 5.4

2.3.6

Decontextualized Approach vs Contextualized Approach

Incidental Learning vs Explicit Instruction and Independent

Rationale behind the Use of Survey Questionnaires

Description of Survey Questionnaires

Answer to Research Question 1

Students’ Perceptions and Difficulties in Learning English

Vocabulary

Teacher Respondents’ Perceptions of and Difficulties in

Teaching English Vocabulary

Answer to Research Question 2

Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning English

Vocabulary

Overall Vocabulary Learning Approach Use

Applying Surface Approach to Learning English Vocabulary

Applying Deep/Strategy Training Approach to Learning English

Vocabulary

Applying Achieving Approach to Learning English Vocabulary

Applying Grammar-translation Approach to Learning English

Applying Direct Approach to Learning English Vocabulary

Applying Reading Approach to Learning English Vocabulary

Applying Incidental Learning Approach to Learning English

44

Applying ITTF Approach vs CCSF Approach

Applying Grammar-translation Approach vs Communicative

Approach

Applying Direct Approach vs Reading Approach

Applying Explicit Instruction Approach & Strategy Training

Approach vs Incidental Learning Approach

Findings from the Interviews

Answer to Research Question 1: Students’ perceptions &

teachers’ of vocabulary

Answer to Research Question 2: : Differences in students’

perceived approaches to learning English vocabulary and

teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching English vocabulary

Summary of Major Findings

Limitations and Suggestions for Further Research

Recommendations

References

Appendices

Appendix 1: Student Questionnaire (English version)

Appendix 2: Student Questionnaire (Vietnamese version)

Appendix 3: Teacher Questionnaire

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary ofthe Differences in Motivation and Study Process of

Surface, Deep, and Achieving Approaches to Study

Table 2: Motive and Strategy in Approaches to Learning and Studying

Table 3.3.1: Vocabulary Learning Approaches

Table 3.3.2: Vocabulary Teaching Approaches

Table 4.1: Students’ Perceptions and Difficulties in Learning English

Vocabulary in Average-level Classes & in High-level Classes

Table 4.2: Teacher Respondents’ Perceptions of and Difficulties in Teaching

English Vocabulary

Table 4.3: Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning English

Vocabulary Students in Average-level Classes

Table 4.4: Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning English

Vocabulary Students in High-level Classes

Table 4.5: Differences in Perceived Approaches to Teaching English

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1: The Importance of Vocabulary

Figure 4.2: Time Spent on Learning Vocabulary outside Classroom

Figure 4.3: Aspect of a Word under the Greatest Consideration in

Vocabulary Learning

Figure 4.4: Evaluation of Difficulty in Learning New Words

Figure 4.5: Difficulty in Communicating or Learning 4 Skills due to

Inadequate Knowledge of Words

Figure 4.6: The Importance of Vocabulary

Figure 4.7: Stages to Organize Language Activities

Figure 4.8: Most Important Element in a New Word Explanation

Figure 4.9: Feeling of Vocabulary Teaching

Figure 4.10: Often - met Difficluties in Vocabulary Teaching

Figure 4.11: Comparison of Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning

English Vocabulary between Students’ in Average-level Classes and

Students’ in High-level Classes

Figure 4.12: Students’ Use of SA Approach in EFL Vocabulary Learning

Figure 4.13: Students’ Use of Deep/Strategy Training Approach in EFL

Figure 4.18: Students’ Use of Direct Approach in EFL Vocabulary Learning

Figure 4.19: Students’ Use of Reading Approach in EFL Vocabulary

Figure 4.21: Students’ Use of Composite Approaches in EFL Vocabulary

Figure 4.24: Teachers’ Use of Grammar-translation vs Communicative

Approaches in EFL Vocabulary Teaching

Figure 4.25: Teachers’ Use of Direct vs Reading Approaches in EFL

Vocabulary Teaching

Figure 4.26: Teachers’ Use of Explicit Instruction & Strategy Training vs

Incidental Learning Approaches in EFL Vocabulary Teaching

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Statement of the Problem

Vocabulary is an important language element that links four language skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing together and makes communication flow smoothly Wilkins, a famous British applied linguist, emphasizes the importance of

vocabulary with his saying "Without grammar, very little can be conveyed, without

vocabulary nothing can be conveyed" (1972, p.111) Pyles and Algeo (1970) also suggest that "when we first think about language, we think about words It is words that

we arrange together to make sentences, conversation and discourse of all kinds" (p.96)

In other words, without words that are considered as the building blocks of a language,

a speaker cannot convey the intended meaning Carter (1988, p.166) says: "Learning the most frequent 2,000 - 3,000 words in a language provides a firm basis of about 80 percent of the words likely to be encountered” Hence, in order to make progress in foreign language learning, learners need to be able to understand what they are encountered with the verbal communication That is, they need to acquire a certain

amount of words

In the very first part of his book on vocabulary, McCarthy (2000) writes it is the experience of most language teachers that the single, biggest component of any language course is vocabulary No matter how well the student learn grammar, no

matter how successfully sounds of L2 are mastered, without words to express the wide

range of meaning, communication in an L2 just cannot happen in any meaningful way This claim might be an overestimate of the role of vocabulary, and many language teachers can argue that an appropriate way of communication is far more important than words However, one’s communication ability in general depends a lot on his/her vocabulary size, because words are the tools to express ideas and feelings, and to learn

about the world (Johnson and Johnson, 2004), to communicate about something very

concrete to something very abstract

Acquiring a basic vocabulary is, hence, a significant accomplishment for ESL or EFL learners (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006) Inadequate vocabulary could lead to learners’ difficulties in language reception and production Reality shows that many students have fairly good knowledge of grammar but are hardly able to express themselves properly because of their vocabulary deficiency

However, vocabulary learning (VL) and vocabulary teaching (VT) are

characterized as neglected aspect of learning language (Meara, 1980) Researchers in the 1970s and early 1980s were drawn to syntax and morphology because of the way error patterns and developmental sequences of these features might reveal something about universals in languages and language acquisition Until the mid 1980s, VL and

VT have drawn growing attention from ESL or EFL researchers and have become central to language acquisition Specialists now emphasize the need of systematic and principled approach to vocabulary by both teachers and learners (Decarrico, 2001; Nation, 1990) One of the concerns in vocabulary is how to approach the teaching of English by teachers and the learning of English by students in the most suitably productive ways

Many Vietnamese students experience considerable difficulty acquiring a large enough vocabulary for successful communication in a variety of settings Long lists of words noted down from reading texts, listening passages, vocabulary, or grammar sections in the coursebooks are of limited assistance to them if they do not know how to

learn, remember and use these words Students’ difficulty in communication, both in the

oral and written forms is attributed to the fact that most words which have been learnt are forgotten soon and then become dead

From my premier interviews, some of my students negatively reflect on learning and teaching vocabulary Below are some examples:

“The teacher asked us to memorize prefixes, suffixes I do not remember exactly”

“We used to have classes to learn vocabulary alone”

“We memorize a lot of words without utilizing sufficiently their acquired lexical

knowledge”

Ete

To ensure an efficient process of vocabulary acquisition, ESL or EFL teachers are required to suitably adopt or adapt different approaches to the teaching of English, involving surface approach, deep approach, and achieving approach; grammar-

translation approach, communicative approach and so forth Concurrently, on the part of

students, they must be aware of different perceived approaches to the learning of English; then know to make the best use of each approach in different contexts Nevertheless, the approach traits, even the notion of approaches are still much further than teachers’ and students’ assumptions in thought They both get acquainted with a for-a-long-while one: in view of vocabulary teaching and learning, teachers and students

tend to focus simply on the purpose of word memorization and dictionary meaning Whereas the task of vocabulary learning and teaching is much further (i.e., it is to equip students with multiple forms, meanings, collocations and usage of a word in order to develop their receptive and productive vocabulary skills (Nation, 1990, 2001; see Read,

2004 for a recent view on vocabulary teaching)

From my close observation as a learner as well as a teacher of English at Vietnam National University (VNU), I find that students seem to get confused with the task of learning vocabulary They sound to lack effective strategies for vocabulary mastery Based on students’ and teachers’ difficulty in English vocabulary training task, the present research set out to investigate the differences in perceived approaches to learning and teaching English vocabulary It is believed that more research on difficulties in leaming and teaching English vocabulary as well as on diversity of different perceived approaches to this mission is not only necessary but carry theoretical and pedagogical significance in VNU and other universities

1⁄22 Scope of the Study

There is a wide range of arising issues involving perceived approaches to learning and teaching English vocabulary However, in the current study, I set the limit of investigating differences in perceived approaches to learning and teaching English vocabulary in general view by calculating descriptive statistics (i.e., frequency counts and percentages), namely SPSS It is supposed to be infeasible to conduct a research study on a larger scale, concerning a full view of intrinsic effects and extrinsic ones on employing different perceived approaches; or conceming perceived approaches endorsement on the basis

of the symbolic traits of the subjects such as sex (i-e., male or female), age (i.e., kids, teenagers

or adults) on the part of leamers, along with personal background, personal characteristics, qualifications, teaching experience, etc on the part of teachers and so forth which can produce very convincing results

Participants in this study were EFL teachers and non-English major second and third year students of VNU University of Science who were of Intermediate level of English language proficiency This study was implemented amongst four classes with

150 students altogether and 20 EFL teachers assigned by ULIS - VNU

13 Aims of the Study

Given the role of different perceived approaches to English vocabulary learning and teaching in helping EFL students become competent at the foreign language, the present study set out these aims: (1) to identify students’ perceptions and teachers’

3

perceptions towards vocabulary and their difficulties in vocabulary learning and teaching and (2) to define the diversity of perceived approaches to English vocabulary learning and teaching Or to put it differently, the author does this research for the purpose of improving the current English vocabulary training situation at VNU by coming to the final conclusion of the compatibility between students’ perceived approaches to learning English vocabulary and teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching English vocabulary

1.4 Research Questions

This study intends to find answers to the following research questions:

1 What are students’ perceptions and teachers’ perceptions of vocabulary and their difficulties in vocabulary learning and teaching?

2 What are differences in perceived approaches to learning and teaching English

vocabulary?

1.5 Significance of the Study

This study sheds more light on the differences in perceived approaches to learning and teaching English vocabulary currently applied at VNU The writer carried out this study in the hope that major common difficulties in teaching and learning the foreign language vocabulary shall be outspoken Teachers then take more notice of the current EFL vocabulary training situation so as to make proper changes to their pedagogical approaches At the same time, students become more aware of their own difficulties and more welcome to teachers’ assistance in the process of learning target vocabulary

After clarifying major common difficulties, the study is expected to achieve its primary purpose of getting both teachers and students more conscious of employing a variety of perceived approaches to teaching and learning English vocabulary, instead of their favorite usage of a traditional grammar-translation approach Differences in perceived approaches to teaching and learning English vocabulary shall be shown in detail

After the research completion, teachers and students are thought to become better

at choosing the suitable perceived approaches to teaching and learning EFL vocabulary

It is hoped that they take more advantages of each perceived approach and lessen its limitations at the same time so as to gain the ultimate purpose of EFL vocabulary training That is, teachers come up with constructive ideas for enhancing efficiency in

pedagogical approach use towards their teaching of vocabulary Concurrently, students

are able to achieve long retention of vocabulary and know how to utilize their lexical

knowledge of vocabulary in an attempt to acquire a high competence of English proficiency through teachers’ orientation

1.6 Organization of the Thesis

This thesis is comprised of five chapters, organised as follows:

Chapter I gives the introduction including statement of the problems; aims of the study; research questions; significance of the study

Chapter II presents a review of related literature to students’ perceived approaches to learning and teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching in general The second part of this review provides theoretical framework of differences in perceived approaches to learning and teaching English vocabulary as a main viewpoint of the thesis

Chapter III covers the information about methodology including the research method, data collection instruments and the information about the participants in the study, together with the steps to conduct the study

Chapter I'V presents the analysis and discussion of the data collected for the study Chapter V concludes the study, sets light on the limitations of the study, and suggests

some recommendations for further research.

CHAPTER IT LITERATURE REVIEW

Vocabulary learning (VL) has been a topic of interest to quite a large number of linguists as well as researchers for decades now An increasing number of studies have been conducted to investigate specific aspects of vocabulary in general and perceived approaches to vocabulary learning and teaching in particular

21 Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

2.11 What is meant by “Approach”?

According to Anthony (1963), approach refers to theories about the nature of

language and language learning that serves as a source of practices and principles in language learning and teaching Savignon (1983) also gives such a similar idea that

“approach is a set of assumptions about the nature of language and the nature of language teaching and learning” (p.301) Therefore teachers and learners are correspondingly in need of employing specific approaches suitable for their particular settings

2.1.2 Composite Approach of Motive and Congruent Learning Strategy

As indicated by Biggs (1979), Marton & Saljo (1976) and others, there exists congruence between types of motivation and learning strategies This priority has led to

a body of research pertaining to three main types of learning styles — deep, surface, and achieving (Biggs, 1979) Other researchers (e.g., Entwistle, Hanley & Hounsell, 1979; Marton & Séljé, 1976) have been proposing similar conceptualizations Accordingly, the surface approach measures for both participants’ intention to pass with minimum effort (surface motive) and their use of strategies to reproduce materials just enough to meet the minimum requirement (surface strategy) The deep approach gauges the extent

to which participants want to understand the subject (deep motive) and to relate it to meaningful contexts and to what they already know (deep strategy)

Importantly, however, Biggs’ (1987) theoretical conception of study approaches differs from other theorists in its two components: how students approach a task (strategy); and why they want to approach it in the first place (motive) Each of Biggs’ three approaches comprises a motive for learning and an associated strategy as described in the following table:

TABLE 2.I Composition of SPQ Scales and Subscales

Adopted from Biggs (1987, p.29)

Students adopt those strategies that are compatible with their motives: if they are curious (deep motive), they will want to find out and understand all that they can go about (deep strategy); if they want to achieve top marks (achieving motive), they will organize their approach accordingly; study according to a schedule, hand in assignments

on time, etc (achieving strategy)

2.1.3 Description of Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

2.1.3.1 Surface Approach

Ramsden (1992) suggests the surface approach describes an intention to avoid failure with corresponding strategies that facilitate the memorization of facts without meaning and organization Sharing the same idea, Laurillard (1979, p.399) descriptively clarifies that surface level processing refers to those occasions when the students

"focus only on the elements of the content", "see the task primarily as a memory task", “approach the task unthinkingly", as illustrated by the following quotes (p.399):

I condense it, getting the key ideas down

I looked up the formulae and made calculations from those

I make a précis so it’s like lecture notes, for revision

The more times I write it out, the better I remember it

I don't need to look at the system, I don't have to interpret it.

I can't really go wrong, it's all done on the diagrams for me I can go through without thinking about it at all

2.1.3.2 Deep Approach

By contrast, the deep approach involves an intention to gain personal understanding, with corresponding strategies to gain meaning from the learning task Laurillard (1979) illustratively defines that deep level processing refers to those occasions when the students "focus attention on the content as a whole", "try to

see the connection between different parts", "think about the logical connections

involved", "think about the structure as a whole" (p.399) The typical examples of this approach are also recorded in his study as conclusive evidence:

I check what the main point is

I started reading at the end to get an overall picture of what he is saying

I're told so much you need to find some kind of relationship

Looking at the system I was thinking out what is actually happening, relating numbers to features

I try to work through logically; putting in diagrams helps you think clearly and follow it through step by step

I worked out how each line could be converted into the next I worked through the steps in between Then I saw where it came from

I break down the structure of the problem into small bits

I have to make a basic assumption to work through, then you work backwards to check your input, then forward again

2.1.3.3 Achieving Approach

Extending the theoretical framework of student approaches to learning, Biggs (1987) further adds an ‘achieving’ component to the surface and deep study approaches The achieving approach, according to Biggs, is based on achieving motivation and involves those strategies which students believe will lead to high marks For instance, study skills techniques (e.g., good organization, speed reading, effective note-taking) and cue-conscious strategies that depend on the learning environment and the teacher involved (Akande, 1998)

Biggs (1991) further explains that achieving approach is characterized by its strong competitiveness and examination stress, together with a huge concern with

students’ academic achievement (Gow, Balla, Kember & Hau, 1996) Similarly, the

achieving approach is based on enhancing one’s ego through succeeding academically

(Biggs, 1979) The achieving approach ¡s therefore context dependent while the surface and deep approaches relate to rehearsal and the general cognitive processes of coding, respectively (Akande, 1998) The achieving approach may, nevertheless, be removed since its items are found to have heavily cross-loaded with the surface and deep approaches (Biggs, Kember and Leung 2001; Kember, Biggs and Leung 2004)

It is referred that students’ motives for learning affect their strategies for learning

in theoretical and practical sense To demonstrate, Biggs (1987) indicates that students who are intrinsically motivated tend to extract most meaning from their learning; they read widely, relating new content to what they already know (deep approach) Students who are motivated to achieve highest grades are likely to organize their work (achieving approach) Students who are learning in order to get by with minimal trouble, or simply

to pass their subjects without aiming high, are likely to focus on the bare essentials and rote learn them (surface approach)

2.1.4 Surface Approach as opposed to Deep Approach

Students are reported to be more likely to endorse a surface approach to learning

if they perceive that there is an excessive amount of material to be learnt, a lack of choice over content and methods of study and that the assessment system requires the reiteration of information Meanwhile, a deep approach is more likely to develop if

students are given time for contemplation and discussion with other learners, and if their

examinations probe for the understanding of principles rather than the reproduction of facts and procedures (Biggs, 1987) To explain more, Biggs (1979) also pinpoints that students adopting surface approach tend to focus on rote-learning the concrete and literal aspects of the learning materials, rather than on understanding the meaning On the other hand, students adopting deep approach are inclined to search for the underlying meaning, rather than concentrate on the literal aspects of the learning task

Perry (1981) adds learning is viewed as an accumulation of individual pieces of knowledge, most effectively accomplished by surface strategies such as rote learning which aims at reproducing the facts In other words, for the surface approach, the motivation is extrinsic as opposed to intrinsic interest in the subject matter for the deep approach

In addition, in 2001, Dr Jennifer Campbell and his colleagues carried out a study

on students’ perceptions of teaching and learning Nearly 500 secondary students in 24 classes were surveyed and four students in each class were interviewed concerning their approaches to learning and perceptions of their classroom environment The findings

9

propose that students with deep approaches to learning generally demonstrate a more sophisticated understanding of the learning opportunities offered to them than students with surface approaches Marton (1976) argues that students who adopt a deep approach

take an active role and see learning as something that they themselves do, whereas those

who adopt a surface approach take a passive role and see learning as something that just happens to them (see Tables 1 and 2 for detail)

Table 1 Summary of the Differences in Motivation and Study Process of Surface,

Deep, and Achieving Approaches to Study

Approach Motivation Process (strategy)

Surface Desire to complete their : *

Little real interest in content Interest in the subject Relate ideas to evidence Deep Vocational relevance Integration of material across courses

Personal understanding Identifying general principles

Achieving | Competing with others 8 8

To be successful Level of understanding patchy and

variable Biggs (1987) also gives a more detailed description of motive and strategy in

approaches to learning and studying in such a table as:

Table 2 Motive and Strategy in Approaches to Learning and Studying

Approach Motivation Process (strategy)

minimally;

A balancing act between failing and working more than is necessary

Deep motive (DM) is intrinsic interest in what is being learned;

To develop competence in particular academic subjects

Achieving motive (AM) to enhance ego and self-esteem through competition;

To obtain highest grades, whether or not material is

To follow up all suggested readings,

schedule time, behave as “model

student”

21.5 Nature of Students’ Perceived Approaches to Learning

It is confirmed that the three approaches lead to different kinds of learning outcome according to such research findings as Biggs (1987) and Marton (1976) The surface approach leads to retention of factual details at the expense of the structural relationships

inherent in the data to be learned, while emotional or affective outcomes are feelings of

dissatisfaction, boredom, or outright dislike The deep approach leads to an understanding

of the structural complexity of the task and to positive feelings about it The achieving approach, particularly in combination with deep, leads to good performance in examinations, a good academic self-concept, and to feelings of satisfaction

Undoubtedly, different students employ different approaches to learning Pursuant

to Biggs (1987), different approaches suit different people; some approaches are likely

to be harmful for some but beneficial for others It is therefore possible for students to combine an achieving approach with either a surface, or a deep approach In particular,

a student may see the way to obtain top marks as consisting of selectively rote learning

in an organized and systematic way (called surface-achieving); or more usually, of reading widely and seeking meaning in an organized and systematic way (called deep- achieving) The latter composite approach is quite powerful and is characteristic of many successful students The generalization emerging is that learning approaches,

especially deep and achieving, are most effective when students are consciously aware

of their own learning processes and try deliberately to control them, Biggs (1987) adds

What factors place an effect on what approaches to be adopted by different students? According to Biggs (1987) and Gow & Kember (1990), the approach adopted

by students depends not just on their own attitudes, habits, abilities and personality but

also on the demands made by the learning environment Course syllabi, teaching and assessment all place constraints on the students and affect their approaches to learning, depending on how they view the demands of the course More clearly, the approach to learning adopted by a student reflects the interaction between individual characteristics

of a student and the context and content of the task involved

Furthermore, various questionnaires were developed including the Approaches to Studying Inventory (Entwistle & Ramsden, 1983) and the Study Process Questionnaire (Biggs, 1987) to confirm that the same students may adopt different approaches, depending upon the demands of different course units (Eley, 1992), the quality of the

ll

teaching (Vermetten, Lodewijks, & Vermunt, 1999), and the nature of the assessment

(Scouller, 1998) More specifically, the choice of one approach to studying rather than another appears to depend upon the content, the context, and the demands of particular tasks

(Laurillard, 1979; Marton, 1976; Ramsden, 1979; for a review, see Richardson, 2000)

Sharing the same idea, Richardson (2005) proposes that the same student could exhibit different perceived approaches to studying in different situations In some cases, students are advised to combine different perceived approaches to make the best use of diverse approaches It is possible for students to combine an achieving approach with either

a surface or a deep approach To demonstrate, Biggs (1969) confirms that the achieving approach, particularly in combination with the deep approach, leads to good performance in examinations, a good academic self-concept, and to feelings of satisfaction In a nutshell, student approaches to learning are believed to play a decisive role in their academic success within the process of learning to the maximum possible extent

2.2 Teachers’ Perceived Approaches to Teaching

2.2.1 Role of Teachers over Students’ Academic Outcomes

The development of the research on teacher approaches to teaching follows closely the development of the research on student approaches to learning (Barley Mak

& Pakey Chik, 2011) As stated by Saeed (2003), teachers’ performance is associated with students’ performance and is one of the key determinants of quality assurance in the classroom teaching and learning discourse

Regarding teachers’ role, Bowden (1990) also assumes that the characteristics and

behaviors of teachers, in both the current and past experience of students, have

significant effects on how students of any age learn The success of the approaches endorsed by the teachers possibly lead to students’ academic performance achievements

Trigwell, Prosser and Waterhouse (1999) conclude that whether conceptual change or information transmission approach adopted by the teachers possibly determine what approaches to learning are prone to be applied by different students Specifically, students whose teachers adopted a student-focused approach are more likely to adopt a deep approach to learning and less likely to adopt a surface approach to learning as compared with students whose teachers adopted a teacher-focused approach Changing teaching practices to improve learning quality is hence both desirable and

feasible (Bowden, 1990) in the process of knowledge acquisition In order for students

to employ the deep approach to learning as active and creative learners, teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching are in need of being adjusted correspondently (Prosser and Trigwell, 1993)

In general, there exists a closely mutual connection between teaching and learning because of the fact that the quality of learning outcome is conversely a measure of quality of teaching (Mohanan, 2005) An increasing interest in doing research into student approaches to learning, by nature, results in an increasing interest in doing research into teacher approaches to teaching with respect to teachers’ importance in teaching and learning process

2.2.2 ITTF Approach vs CCSF Approach

Following the work of Marton and Saljé (1976) identifying the qualitative differences in teacher approaches to teaching, Trigwell and colleagues (Trigwell and Prosser 1993; Trigwell, Prosser and Taylor 1994) interviewed 24 university staff teaching first-year courses in chemistry and physics to discover how they perceived their approaches to teaching the subjects The findings show variant approaches characterized in terms of the teachers’ motives/intentions and strategies in conjunction with the studies on student approaches to learning, namely a single-focused information transmission/teacher-focused (ITTF) approach and a multi-focused conceptual change/student-focused (CCSF) approach

Also, based on their qualitative data, Trigwell and colleagues clarified the differences between these approaches in terms of teachers’ teaching acts and knowledge structure Teachers using an ITTF approach tend to focus on their own teaching acts and knowledge structure in delivering the content of a syllabus or textbooks They see their role as mainly transmitting information based upon that knowledge to their students What students may bring to or experience in learning is rarely a concern in their teaching Teachers tend to concentrate on forward planning, classroom management, and techniques that can facilitate their transmission of knowledge or information to the students

On the contrary, teachers endorsing a CCSF approach see information transmission as necessary but not sufficient Specifically, they aim at changing students’ ways of thinking or experiencing the subject matter and often make use of student- focused strategies, such as questioning (i.e., How to encourage questions from students

13

and respond in a way that facilitates their learning?), student group discussion and presentation (i.e., How to prompt students to behave actively and intrinsically towards

their studying) (Herdsa, 1992)

With the same research perspective, Trigwell Prosser and Taylor (1994) conducted the research with university teachers; qualitatively different approaches to science teaching were described In adopting a CCSF approach, teachers focus their attention on the students and monitor their perceptions, activity and understanding They assume students construct their own knowledge Accordingly, the key task of the teachers is to challenge current ideas through questions, problems, discussion and presentation At the same time, students are required to perform actively and intrinsically as a center of every learning activity

Much of the other research (e.g., Samuelowicz & Bain, 1992, 2001; Trigwell &

Prosser, 1996; Biggs, 1999; Vermunt & Verloop, 1999; Kember & Kwan, 2002) also

clarifies teacher approaches into a teacher- or content-centred approach and a student- centred approach to teaching These studies suggest that teachers following the teacher-

or content-centred approach see teaching mainly as the transmission of knowledge; and concentrate on the content of teaching and on what they do in teaching They place an emphasis on how to organise, structure and present the course content in a way that is easier for the students to understand On the other hand, teachers following the student- centred approach see teaching as facilitating student learning or students’ knowledge- construction processes or as supporting students’ conceptual change They focus on what students do in relation to their efforts to activate students’ existing conceptions, and on encouraging them to construct their own knowledge and understandings

In short, each perceived approach to teaching is of its different prominent traits

To determine which one is more sophisticated or complete, Prosser et al (1994) and Trigwell et al (1994) conducted studies with university teachers of science Pursuant to their research perspective, transmission elements of the ITTF approach are included in the CCSF approach, but the student-focused element of a CCSF approach is not a part

of the ITTF approach Because of this inclusion, a CCSF approach is considered to be a

more sophisticated or complete approach than the more limiting ITTF Teachers, therefore, need to raise awareness of the variation in qualitatively different ways of approaches to teaching so as to decide which appropriate approach should be employed

in their particular teaching context Nevertheless, teachers who adopt both conceptual change and information transmission strategies have a more complete approach to teaching than teachers using information transmission alone, Bowden (1988) says

2.2.3 Deciding Effects on Teaching Approaches

2.2.3.1 Approaches to Teaching and Conceptions of Teaching

Some researchers (e.g., Pratt, 1992) argue that different approaches to teaching reflect different underlying conceptions of teaching which can be seen as lenses through which people perceive and interpret the world Conceptions of teaching and learning can be placed on a continuum between a teacher-centered/content-oriented pole and a student-centered/learning-oriented pole (Kember, 1997) Conceptions on the latter side

of the continuum are most compatible with educational innovations based on constructivism and ideas behind powerful learning environments Indeed, Kember (1997) reviews interview-based investigations and suggests five different conceptions:

1 Teaching as imparting information

2 Teaching as transmitting structured knowledge

3 Teaching as an interaction between the teacher and the student

4 Teaching as facilitating understanding on the part of the student

5 Teaching as bringing about conceptual change and intellectual development in

the student

Teachers differ in their conceptions of teaching and learning which underlie the purpose and the strategies in teaching Accordingly, different teachers tend to approach their teaching in different ways Some recent studies on conceptions of teaching and teaching approaches show that conceptions of teaching have some influence on approaches to teaching (e.g., Trigwell, Prosser, & Waterhouse, 1999) In particular, teachers, who conceive of teaching as transmitting information to students, approach

their teaching in terms of teacher-focused strategies On the other hand, teachers, who

conceive of teaching in terms of helping students to develop and change their conceptions, approach their teaching in a student-focused way (Kember & Kwan, 2000; Trigwell & Prosser, 1996) This implies that conceptions may influence the way

15

teachers implement an educational design through their approaches to teaching, which can be seen as an operationalisation of their conceptions

2.2.3.2 Approaches to Teaching and Contextual Factors

In 2006, Lam and Kember conducted further research, basing on their early attempt to categorise the conceptions of teaching art among 18 secondary art teachers in the Hong Kong context In their study, some contextual factors, such as the impact of the external examination syllabus and the teachers’ educational background, also indicated noticeable influence on the teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching the subject Similar contextual influences have also been noted in earlier studies conducted

in the West (e.g., Gibbs 1992)

By devising the Perceptions of the Teaching Environment Inventory to measure

various aspects of the perceived teaching context, Prosser & Trigwell came up with some findings in more detail in 1997 They found a close relationship between teachers’ perceptions of their teaching context and their approaches to teaching according to their

scores on the ATI- the Approaches to Teaching Inventory In particular, teachers who

adopted a student-focused approach were more likely than teachers who adopted a teacher- focused approach to report that their departments valued teaching, that their class sizes were not too large, and that they had control over what was taught and how it was taught

To summarise, teachers’ intentions represent a compromise between their conceptions of teaching and their academic and social context (Stark 2000; Trigwell et

al 1999) Besides, the teachers constitute an important part of the learning context for the students, and the students in turn constitute an important part of the teaching environment for the teachers We need to develop our understanding of learning and teaching in particular contexts to have a right decision on the employment of teaching and learning approaches, instead of simply giving a brief training course with a hope of achieving changes in teachers’ conception of teaching

2.3 Perceived Approaches to Learning and Teaching English Vocabulary

2.3.1 Vocabulary Learning (VL) and Vocabulary Teaching (VT) in SLA

Vocabulary learning (VL) and vocabulary teaching (VT) are of utmost importance

to English proficiency acquisition Some specialists in methodology believe that the meaning of words cannot be adequately taught, so it is better not to try to teach them Others in methodology fear that students would make mistakes in sentence construction

if too many words are learned before the basic grammar has been mastered Actually, vocabulary learning is not simply a matter of learning that a certain word in one language means the same in all contexts It is widely accepted that vocabulary is more important than grammar in SLA Firstly, words still can be used to communicate successfully without the grammatical correction For example, as in baby’s utterance

“Mummy, water”, one can easily get his intention that he asks his mother for water, although his utterance which lacks a subject and a predicate is grammatically wrong Secondly, knowledge of grammar is limited but that of words are not Thus, learning vocabulary should last as long as the language is being in use

Vocabulary breadth in learning a foreign language is viewed as a primordial factor

in successful communication and, to a great extent, in high-level reading ability and comprehension It is thus necessary for ESL or EFL learners to get a full mastery of vocabulary knowledge

2.3.2 Mastery of Vocabulary Knowledge

Nation (1990, p 31) proposes the following list of the different kinds of knowledge that a person must master in order to know a word

= The meaning(s) of the word

* The written form of the word

= The spoken form of the word

= The grammatical behavior of the word

* The collocations of the word

= The register of the word

= The associations of the word

« The frequency of the word

Nation (1990) and Oxford & Scarcella (1994) also give quite a similar list of word knowledge aspects Following their ideas, the complexity of knowing an L2 word involves not just the ability to recognize its form (pronunciation, spelling, derivations), or knowing its dictionary meaning; it also entails knowledge of its specific grammatical properties, and collocations, functions (frequency and appropriateness), and the ability to use the word appropriately for actual interaction (Nation, 1990; Oxford & Scarcella, 1994)

17

It is correspondingly inferred that English vocabulary learning and teaching is not limited to memorization of a long list of words, together with their dictionary meanings Actually, it is a challenging task for both ESL or EFL teachers and learners if they do not have proper perceived approaches A lot of research has been conducted to point out differences in perceived approaches to English vocabulary learning and teaching in order to help students have long-term retention in learning new words as clarified below

2.3.3 Incremental Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition

Knowledge of a lexical item is not an “all or nothing” proposition; it is rather to be

conceived of as a continuum of knowledge at whose ends, according to some theoreticians,

receptive (or passive) knowledge and productive (or active knowledge) is placed (Visnja, 2008) The initial degree is elementary knowledge (e.g., the visual recognition of a lexical item in a context) that still does not enable a learner to produce it Meanwhile, with higher degrees of knowledge, close to productive knowledge (e.g., knowledge of multiple meanings of a polysemous lexical item), a learner is capable of producing a word including

the aid of an adequate stimulus (e.g., a context) (Melka, 1997)

With the further respect, some researchers (e.g., Meara, 1997; Laufer and

Paribakht, 1998; Waring, 1997) clarify that vocabulary knowledge includes two degrees: receptive (or passive) knowledge and productive (or active knowledge) The first one is being able to understand a word and is normally connected with listening and reading The left is being able to produce a word of one’s own accord when speaking or writing

On purpose of exploring the relationship between receptive (or passive) knowledge and productive (or active knowledge), Waring, in 1997, carried out a research on the relative vocabulary size of some Japanese learners of English and came

to a conclusion that if a high frequency word was known receptively, there was a good chance (64%) that it would be known productively By contrast, if a low frequency word was known receptively there was little chance (15%) it would be known productively It is inferred that far many more words are known receptively than

productively There is, however, no linear relationship between the amounts of words

known receptively and productively

To shed more light on the relationship between receptive (or passive) knowledge and productive (or active knowledge), Melka (1997) has concluded from the review of

numerous studies that there are two directions in understanding the dichotomy between receptive and productive vocabulary On the one hand, reception is thought to precede production and the distance between the two asymmetric notions is fairly large Furthermore, reception and production are two different processes dependent on different mental process On the other hand, the gap between the two notions is not significant and

it varies and shifts although reception may precede production These two contrasting views of reception and production have led to different estimates of receptive and productive vocabulary One group of researchers estimates the receptive vocabulary to be double the size of productive vocabulary; another that the distance between reception and

production diminishes with the development of knowledge in spite of being constantly

present; and a third group does not find the gap significant one at all, reviews Melka (1997) Generally, there are different stages in the process of getting familiar with a lexical item, bringing us closer to the border of reception and production and to the point where reception finishes and production starts, if only partially

2.3.4 Role of Memory in Vocabulary Learning and Acquisition

According to Schmitt (2000), lexical knowledge is more prone to attrition than other linguistic aspects A proper understanding of the role memory plays in vocabulary acquisition has an immediate practical value: on purpose of remembering a lexical item, the learning and teaching of vocabulary needs to be planned under such specific principles compiled by Thornbury (2002) on the basis of available research results as:

multiple encounters with a lexical item; retrieval and use of lexical items; use of

conscious attention and so forth

In the process of vocabulary acquisition, forgetting takes place in a way that when obtaining new information, most of it is forgotten immediately, after which the process

of forgetting slows down (Visnja, 2008) Students, in fact, meet difficulty in transferring

the learning material into the long-term memory whereas an important part of learning

is the storage of what has been learned in the long-tem memory Pursuant to Peet (2003,

p 3), the human mind effectively has three kinds of memory: sensory memory, short- term memory (or working memory), and long-term memory

Sensory memory has the capacity to hold a limited number of items for a period of only a few seconds, for immediate tasks that require little or no processing (e.g., remembering a phone number long enough to dial it, or a word long enough to repeat it Our short-term memory, in contrast, retains items for up to twenty seconds and is used

19

in circumstances where information needs to be manipulated or processed at a deeper level Actually, short-term memory is a controlled processing procedure at which the learner can retrieve their newly knowledge with effort Whereas long-term memory has the ability to store items away indefinitely In other words, this is an automatic processing procedure that ensures retrieval without effort

Learning new items, thereby, involves storing them first in short-term memory, and afterwards in long-term memory After a word is presented to students, it should be met again and again in different discourse contexts, whether visually or orally, so that it can gradually be picked up into the learners’ mind In the foreign language training context under limited natural language exposures in Vietnam, classroom activities (e.g., repetition, pair work and group work, peer testing, sentence making or presentation contests) and autonomous learning (e.g., self-reading, self-testing, and stick-notes using) are of effective employment These activities and materials should, nevertheless, be constructed in a systematic procedure to present a selection of connected words for easy storage “Human memory works most efficiently when it deals with structured information rather than a series of facts and information” as stated by Katamba (1994, p 229)

2.3.5 Differences in Perceived Approaches to Learning and Teaching English Vocabulary

2.3.5.1 Grammar-translation Approach vs Communicative Approach

Grammar-translation Approach

Grammar-translation is no doubt the most widely applied approach in the schools

of the world Following grammar-translation approach, students are presented with vocabulary lists, often accompanied by translation equivalents and grammar rules The original purpose of this approach is to help students read literature rather than to develop fluency in the spoken language (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006)

Hubbard, Jone & Thorton (1983) define grammar-translation approach as “the traditional deduction approach of language teaching, based on classical studies of dead languages, which consists of giving rules, paradigms and vocabulary and getting the students to apply this new knowledge to translation and to grammatical analysis” (p.329)

Rivers (1981, p.29) adds this approach "aims at inculcating an understanding of the grammar of the language and training the students to write the new language accurately by regular practice in translating from the native language" Here vocabulary is only taught in the form of bilingual lists and the intricacies of grammar are provided by long elaborate

explanations to give the rules for putting words together With respect to the teaching of vocabulary, this approach may be easy, cheap and useful but its relevance is restricted

because its focus is on form and not meaning (Krashen, 1984, p.128)

To clarify the effect of Grammar-translation approach on second language or foreign language acquisition, in 2004, Jiang conducted a research to show concerns about the involvement of the first language semantic structures in target language processing Whether translation learning affects VL positively or not stays controversial Prince’s experimental study (1996) reveals that translation learning is superior in quantity, but weaker learners are relatively unable to transfer their knowledge into L2 contexts Grace (2000) notes that L1 translation seems to have a positive effect on both short-term and long-term retention of words No conclusion has yet been drawn regarding using L1 for semantization

Hubbard et al (1983) suggests:

Communicative approach takes as its starting point the use or communicative purpose

of language This approach therefore strongly advocates careful attention to use rather than merely form/meaning It would also favor functional-notional organization of teaching materials It might tend to support a “deep end” approach to presentation of new language, in which students are first to cope with the communicative tasks as best as possible before being given the new, necessary form (p.326)

Accordingly, the communicative approach places its focus on task-based learning Students build and use English vocabulary through vocabulary processing in particular The vocabulary is introduced in several contexts and the students are given multiple opportunities to use the words in their every interaction both in and out of school (Jordan & Herrel, 2002) In implementing vocabulary processing, they suggest the following steps:

* Choose vocabulary to explore

Chart and categorize the words

= Add context to the words

= Find ways to use the words

= Encourage additions to the words collections

= Build vocabulary journals

In brief, communicative language teaching is an approach that helps learners become more active in real life situation through means of individual, pair and group work activities It encourages learners to practice the language they learn in meaningful ways as it requires them to take part in a number of activities with different tasks This helps to improve learners' communicative competence Newton (2001) refers to this approach as a way that can enable learners to manage their vocabulary meaning and develop their communicative skills at the same time

2.3.5.2 Direct Approach vs Reading Approach

Direct Approach

This approach stresses the ability to use rather than analyze a language as the goal

of language instruction or, in other words, the main goal is to train students to communicate in the target language and to have an acceptable pronunciation The idea behind the Direct Approach is that we learn languages by hearing them spoken and engaging in conversation (Hubbard, Jone & Thornton 1983) In this approach, learners are expected to imitate and practise the target language until they become fluent and

accurate speakers and, as there is no translation, it is assumed that they will learn to

think in the target language

It is supposed that vocabulary can be acquired naturally through interactions during the lesson; therefore, vocabulary is presented in context and is graded from simple to complex In this approach, vocabulary is emphasized over grammar (Larsen- Freeman, 2000) Concrete words are taught through objects, pictures, physical

demonstration, and abstract words are taught by grouping words according to a topic or through association of ideas (Zimmerman, 1997)

Reading Approach

This approach began to function as an alternative to the Direct Approach and was

chosen for practical reasons, limited class hours, the qualification of the teachers, and

the need of learners It is claimed in this approach that reading knowledge could be achieved through the gradual introduction of words and grammatical structures in

simple reading texts (Ketabi & Shahraki, 2011)

The vocabulary used in the reading passages is controlled at beginning levels and

is chosen according to their frequency and usefulness The acquisition of vocabulary is considered to be more important than grammatical skills and is expanded as fast as possible through intensive and extensive reading The translation of vocabulary items and sentences are permitted

2.3.5.3 Decontextualized Approach vs Contextualized Approach

Exposure to Linguistic Input through Contexts

Context is perceived by Beheydt (1987) to be of utmost importance to vocabulary learning - a process of semantization, i.e., a continuing process of getting acquainted with verbal forms in their polysemous diversity within varying contexts In this way, students can achieve long-term retention - one of the greatest challenges in learning new words

Clearly, the role of the context in initial stages of vocabulary learning is relatively

negligible But its significance grows as the learners’ knowledge expands (Visnja, 2008) With respect to the importance of contexts, Carter (1992) states that the primary source of vocabulary for native speakers is a wide range of contexts that enable them to experiment and to confirm, expand or narrow down the lexical nets L2 vocabulary can also be acquired through exposure to various contexts (Sternberg, 1987) For learning an L2, the factors that directly affect the efficiency of the vocabulary learning process should be taken into consideration, however Nagy (1997) specifically points out the success of contextual inferencing will depend on learners’ proficiency levels; i.e., on the various categories of knowledge (linguistic knowledge, world knowledge and strategic knowledge) that learners need to apply

Approach Specifications

Pursuant to Oxford and Scarcella (1994), vocabulary learning activities are

categorized within three approaches: decontextualized (e.g., word lists, flashcards, and

23

dictionary-lookup), partally contextualized (eg, word grouping word association/elaboration, physical response) and fully contextualized (i.e., practicing the four language skills in authentic communication activities), which provides a more systematic and research-based approach to vocabulary instruction

Beheydt (1987) further points out that the semantization process in vocabulary

learning is based on a provision of a number of concrete representative usages of each word, the meanings of which are more easily semantized if they are embedded in a meaningful context and stimulated by repetitive mental practice The more extensive the context, the greater the cognitive support for the semantization to take place Undoubtedly, the more varied the processing is, the better learners can remember

In fact, a lot of students find it difficult to memorize new words without specific contexts These students are inclined to memorize English words by copying a word five or six times or putting intensive effort into memorizing vocabulary and grammatical items in preparation for high-stakes examinations This trend is said to be familiar in Vietnamese language learning and teaching contexts Both teachers and learners are, in reality, under high pressure of getting good marks at examinations Students, as a nature of fact, tend to memorize vocabulary intensively without utilizing

sufficiently their lexical knowledge as the researcher’s close observation at small-scale

classes and large-scale classes as well at VNU Maybe learners must have critical strategic knowledge that will enable them to turn the incidental learning into an explicit learning process in order to accelerate the vocabulary learning process (Visnja, 2008) 2.3.5.4 Incidental Learning vs Explicit Instruction and Independent Strategy

According to Hunt and Beglar (2001), three approaches toward vocabulary

teaching and learning are discussed: incidental learning, explicit instruction and

independent strategy development

Incidental Learning

Hunt and Beglar (2001) confirm that incidental learning is learning vocabulary as

a by-product of doing other things or through other communicative skills such as listening, reading, speaking or writing A major source of incidental learning is extensive reading which they recommend as a regular out-of-class activity, through which most words are probably learned incidentally (Chun and Plass 1996; Omura 1991) With the similar idea, Woodinsky and Nation (1988) emphasize that the incidental learning of vocabulary through extensive reading can benefit language

curricular and learners at all levels Although most research concentrates on reading,

extensive listening can also increase vocabulary learning, stated by Elley (1989) Teachers are thereby required to provide opportunities for both extensive reading and listening according to the incidental learning of vocabulary

However, it has been apparent that vocabulary acquisition cannot rely on implicit incidental learning only but needs to be controlled Sokmen (1997) further confirms that implicit incidental learning seems to be a slow and inefficient process which does not necessarily imply long-term retention Thus the advocates of this view have begun to insist on more intensive, explicit vocabulary teaching from the very beginning of any language learning programme (Judd, 1978)

Explicit Instruction

Explicit instruction depends on identifying specific vocabulary acquisition targets for learners It also involves diagnosing the words learners need to know Explicit instruction requires that teachers provide opportunities for intentional learning of vocabulary; opportunities for elaborating word knowledge and opportunities for developing fluency with known vocabulary To put it more clearly, explicit instruction involves diagnosing the words learners need to know, presenting words for the first time, elaborating word knowledge, and developing fluency with known words Hunt and

Beglar (2001) confirm that fluency - building activities play an important role during

the process of vocabulary acquisition as they recycle already known words in familiar grammatical and organizational patterns Students can, in this way, focus on recognizing

or using a word without hesitation

Visnja (2008) says that explicit vocabulary teaching would ensure that lexical development in the target language follows a systematic and logical path, thus avoiding uncontrolled accumulation of sporadic lexical items With the same perspective, Nation (2002) also argues for a systematic rather than an incidental approach to the teaching of vocabulary and asserts that such a focus is an essential part of a language course

Nevertheless, in the eye of some other researchers, the contribution and effect of

explicit vocabulary teaching on vocabulary acquisition is still under dispute The fact that learners do not learn everything teachers teach accounts for this trend of idea Lewis (2000) describes teaching as being linear and systematic, but it is wrong to conceive of learning as being the same

According to Nation (1990), Paribakht & Wesche (1996), and Zimnerman

(1997), intentional learning through instruction also significantly contributes to vocabulary development And here the researchers agree that translation has a necessary and useful role in vocabulary learning Translation makes vocabulary learning faster (Nation 1982, 1990)

Moreover, Prince (1996) states that simply knowing translation for words does not

"guarantee that they will be successfully assessed for use in an L2 context” (p 488) because knowing a word means knowing more than just its translated meaning or its L2 synonyms Consequently, to present a new word, teacher should also create opportunities to meet recently learned words in new contexts that provide new

collocations and associations (Nation, 1994)

All in all, developing fluency overlaps most of all with the developing skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing (Nation, 1994) As a result, teachers are advised

to give learners as many opportunities as possible to practice these skills in light of explicit instruction approach

Independent Strategy

In vocabulary teaching, teachers are capable of applying a host of strategies which refer to everything teachers do or should do in order to help their learners learn (Hatch and Brown, 2000) A distinction is made between planned and unplanned vocabulary teaching strategies (Seal, 1991) Under Seal’s perspective, unplanned teaching strategies relate to teachers’ spontaneous reaction with the aim to help learners when the need arises Whereas planned vocabulary teaching refers to deliberate, explicit, clearly defined and directed vocabulary teaching in light with the use of teaching strategies (i.e., ways in which teachers introduce and present the meaning and form of new lexical items; and ways in which teachers encourage learners to review and practice (i.e., recycle what is known and monitor and evaluate the level of acquisition of various components of lexical knowledge) A certain amount of time is needed to explore the different aspects of lexical knowledge as well as to induce learners to actively process

lexical items (Nation, 2001) A review of the literature (Hatch & Brown, 2000; Nation, 2001; Sokmen, 1997; Thornbury, 2002) has drawn a comprehensive list of teaching

strategies that fall into two major categories:

(1) presentation of meaning and form of new lexical items

(2) review and practise presented lexical items

In accordance with teachers’ vocabulary teaching strategies, learners are trained to know the abundance of vocabulary learning strategies Pursuant to the classification of Oxford (1990), six strategies groups are defined, including memory strategies, cognitive strategies, compensation strategies, metacognitive strategies, affective strategies, social strategies (see appendix for details) With the aid of learning strategies instruction from teachers, EFL learners “become better learners In addition, skill in using learning strategies assists students in becoming independent, confident learners” during the process of L2 vocabulary learning (Chamot, 1999, p.1)

More specifically, Hunt and Beglar (2002) define that independent strategy involves practicing inferring words from contexts and training learners to use dictionaries

Practicing inferring words from contexts:

To guess successfully from contexts, learners need to know about 19 out of 20 words (95%) of a text which requires knowing 3,000 most common words” (Liu &

Nation, 1985; Nation, 1990) If students acquire more known words, they can understand the text and learn more new words Folse (1999) says that learners use known words to learn more words from contexts, not to use context to learn unknown

words If students’ vocabulary is, in contrast, poor, they are hardly able to guess words

in a text containing too many unknown words

Maybe the learners sometimes feel difficult to sort out which words are important

in a context and need to be inferred Teachers can assist them by marking words which they should try to infer or by providing glosses (Hulstijn, Hopllander & Greidanus, 1996) Once learners decide that a word is worth guessing, they might follow a five-step procedure (Nation and Coady, 1988):

1 Determine the part of speech of unknown word

iN) Look at the immediate context

Look at the wider context

Guess the meaning of unknown word

aE

Check that the guess is correct

Although guessing words from context often may not result in gaining a full understanding of a word, this strategy is still believed to have a considerable contribution to vocabulary learning

27

Using dictionary:

In vocabulary learning process, foreign language learners should use dictionaries for vocabulary development In Nation’s (2001) opinion, dictionary use helps learning comprehension and particularly useful for learners who do not cope well with guessing from context Although dictionaries are important tool, learners should know how and when to use them to their advantages Day and Luppescu (1995), when talking about the use of dictionary in vocabulary acquisition, show that students who used a dictionary scored significantly better on vocabulary test than students who did not However, in some cases, using the dictionary can inhibit vocabulary learning which was attributed to the effect of a large number of entries in the dictionary, and this sometimes makes the students confused Rhoder and Huerster (2002) provide useful suggestions for the

efficient utilization of dictionaries: that is, for learning the meaning of words, dictionaries

can be effective if used in combination with context and word elaboration activities

of adequate knowledge of vocabulary

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

As presented in Chapter I, the research mainly aims at defining differences in perceived approaches to English vocabulary learning and teaching after finding out students’ perceptions and teachers’ towards vocabulary and their difficulties in vocabulary learning and teaching The research also attempts to shed light on the compatibility between students’ perceived approaches to learning English vocabulary and teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching English vocabulary at VNU University

of Science It is thereby hoped that the current situation of vocabulary training here is improved for much better outcomes

In this chapter, the research methods used for the study are described, including the description of the research design, the participants, the data collection instruments and the description of procedure for data collection and analysis

3.1 Research Design

The study employs survey questionnaires to collect data about three issues: (1) the students’ perceptions and teachers’ perceptions towards vocabulary and their difficulties

in vocabulary learning and teaching; (2) the diversity of perceived approaches to

learning and teaching English vocabulary; (3) the compatibility between students’

perceived approaches to learning English vocabulary and teachers’ perceived approaches to teaching English vocabulary

3.2 Participants

3.2.1 Students

The participants for this study was 75 non-English major students in two average-

level classes, in which there are 25 males and 50 females, together with 75 ones in two

high-level classes, in which there are 30 males and 45 females They are studying at

Environmental Science Department of University of Science, VNU

The students in the two average-level classes learn English as a normal subject They are considered at Al level of English pursuant to Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) for the beginning level; and working with General English course book “New English File” by Clive Oxenden and Christina Latham-Koenig However, it is compulsory for these students to finish 14 credits of English through 3 terms; and meet the demand of achieving B1 level of CEFR before University graduation