Improving students dictionary skills an action research study at the university of transport and communications m a

Using a first-person narrative style, it reports a two-cycle qualitative action research study which I conducted to improve my students’ dictionary skills.. In the first cycle, I investi

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY

UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES

FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ DICTIONARY SKILLS:

AN ACTION RESEARCH STUDY AT THE UNIVERSITY

OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS

A thesis submitted to the Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature

in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL

Table of contents

Table of contents i

Abstract v

Statement of candidate vi

Acknowledgements vii

List of tables viii

List of figures ix

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background to the study 2

1.2 Aims of the study 5

1.3 Research questions 5

1.4 Significance of the study 6

1.5 Organization of the study 6

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 8

2.1 The dictionary 9

2.1.1 Definitions and classifications 9

2.1.2 Structure 9

2.1.3 Contents 10

2.1.4 Research 11

2.2 Dictionary use 13

2.2.1 The dictionary user 13

2.2.2 Dictionary use situations and purposes 13

2.2.3 Dictionary consultation process 15

2.3 Dictionary skills 18

2.3.1 Definitions 18

2.3.2 Specifications 18

2.3.2.1 Dictionary structures 18

2.3.2.2 Stages of the consultation process 19

2.3.2.3 Dictionary typology 21

2.3.2.4 Users’ language proficiency 24

2.3.3 Assessment 25

2.3.3.1 Dictionary skills testing 25

2.3.3.2 Student’s self-assessment of dictionary skills 30

2.3.3.3 Issues in dictionary skills assessment 30

2.4 Why need to improve students’ dictionary skills? 32

2.4.1 Dictionaries play a central role in language learning 32

2.4.2 Using a dictionary is not easy 32

2.4.3 Students indeed lack dictionary skills 33

2.5 How to improve students’ dictionary skills? 34

2.5.1 The lexicographical triangle: The role of the teacher 34

2.5.2 Recommendations from the literature 35

2.5.2.1 Teach students dictionary skills 35

2.5.2.2 Improve dictionary culture 40

2.5.3 Previous research on improving students’ dictionary skills 41

2.6 Research gap 44

2.7 Summary 45

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 46

3.1 Methodology 47

3.1.1 The interpretivist paradigm and qualitative inquiry 47

3.1.2 Practitioner research 48

3.1.3 Action research 50

3.1.3.1 Definitions 51

3.1.3.2 Underlying assumptions 52

3.1.3.3 Action research ‘cycles’ and ‘models’ 54

3.1.3.4 Quality criteria 57

3.2 Research design 59

3.2.1 My action research 59

3.2.2 Cycle 1: Getting to know the situation 61

3.2.2.1 Area of focus 61

3.2.2.2 Data collection 62

3.2.2.3 Data analysis and interpretation 66

3.2.2.4 Action plan 1 68

3.2.2.5 Cycle 1 model 69

3.2.3 Cycle 2: Evaluating the intervention 69

3.2.3.1 Area of focus 69

3.2.3.2 Data collection 70

3.2.3.3 Data analysis and interpretation 73

3.2.3.4 Action plan 2 74

3.2.3.5 Cycle 2 model 74

3.3 Research site 74

3.4 Participants 75

3.5 Ethical considerations 76

3.6 Summary 80

CHAPTER 4: THE FIRST CYCLE AND INTERVENTION 81

4.1 Findings 82

4.1.1 Students’ perceptions of dictionary use 82

4.1.2 Students’ practices of dictionary use 87

4.2 Discussion 93

4.3 Action plan of Cycle 1 96

4.4 Intervention 97

4.4.1 Teaching dictionary skills to the students 98

4.4.2 Integrating dictionary use into class activities 101

4.4.3 Modifications of the intervention plan and other decisions along the way 103

4.5 Summary 104

CHAPTER 5: THE SECOND CYCLE 105

5.1 Findings 106

5.1.1 Effectiveness of materials and activities used in the intervention 106

5.1.2 The teaching of the 10 skills in the intervention 108

5.1.3 Changes in students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use 111

5.1.3.1 Changes in students’ perceptions of dictionary use 112

5.1.3.2 Changes in students’ practices of dictionary use 114

5.1.4 Students’ suggestions about the intervention 120

5.2 Discussion 120

5.3 Action plan of Cycle 2 123

5.4 Summary 125

CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION 126

6.1 Summary of the study 127

6.1.1 Findings of the two cycles 127

6.1.2 Contributions of the study 127

6.1.3 How I have changed through this research 128

6.2 Limitations of the study 129

6.3 Recommendations and suggestions for further research 130

6.4 Updates 130

REFERENCES 132

APPENDICES 141

CYCLE 1 APPENDIX 1: Preliminary Test of dictionary skills 142

APPENDIX 2: Preliminary Questionnaire 145

APPENDIX 3: Preliminary Interview 149

APPENDIX 4: Sample entries in my Research Journal 150

APPENDIX 5: Complete data from Part 4 of Preliminary Questionnaire 151

INTERVENTION APPENDIX 6: Eighteen dictionary skills omitted from the action plan of Cycle 1 152

APPENDIX 7: Sample dictionary skill lesson 154

APPENDIX 8: A post on the class Facebook group related to dictionary skills 157

APPENDIX 9: Some dictionary-related questions in the end-of-course games 158

APPENDIX 10: Dictionaries and other language learning materials available in the library 159 CYCLE 2 APPENDIX 11: Evaluative Test of dictionary skills 160

APPENDIX 12: Evaluative Questionnaire 163

APPENDIX 13: Evaluative Interview 166

APPENDIX 14: Student feedback form 168

Abstract

This thesis recounts my journey as a teacher undertaking practitioner research Using a first-person narrative style, it reports a two-cycle qualitative action research study which I conducted to improve

my students’ dictionary skills

In the first cycle, I investigated my students’ perceptions and practices regarding their dictionary use, using data from the Preliminary Test of dictionary skills, Questionnaire, Interview, and my Research Journal I found that my students were using a variety of dictionaries, among which the most popular and frequently used were phone-based and online products They generally appreciated the roles of dictionaries in their learning but had not had proper instructions on how to use them By analyzing the problems that they were having, I determined 10 dictionary skills that the students needed to learn most based on Nesi’s (1999) specification and taught these skills in an intervention afterward

In the second cycle, I evaluated this intervention in terms of the effectiveness of the materials and activities I used, the teaching of the 10 dictionary skills, the changes in my students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use after the intervention, and their suggestions and comments about the intervention With data from the Evaluative Test of dictionary skills, Questionnaire, Interview and

my Research Journal, I found that my students benefited most from learning Stage-2 skills in Nesi’s (1999) specification, and that they appreciated the materials and activities I used, particularly the explanations, slides and handouts The students also made positive changes in their perceptions and practices of dictionary use after the intervention and offered valuable suggestions to improve my teaching practices

Keywords: dictionary skills, dictionary use, ESP, students’ perceptions and practices

Statement of candidate

I hereby certify that the work in this thesis entitled ‘Improving students’ dictionary skills: An action research study at the University of Transport and Communications’ has not been previously accepted

for the award of any other degree to any other university or educational institution

I also certify that this thesis presents my original research and has been written solely by me Any assistance and support that I have received towards the completion of this thesis has been duly acknowledged

Finally, I certify that all the material used in the thesis is clearly indicated

………

Nguyễn Kim Vũ Bảo (166014011106)

April 2020

Acknowledgements

The completion of this thesis could not have been possible without the assistance and encouragement

of so many people I was fortunate to meet Their invaluable contributions are sincerely appreciated and gratefully acknowledged

First and foremost, I wish to sincerely thank my supervisor, Dr Nguyễn Nhã Trân, for her generous and insightful guidance Without her timely encouragement, I would not even have chosen the thesis track, which turned out to bring me on this wonderful journey Besides being a supervisor, she has always been a close friend of mine through the ups and downs of my life I always feel blessed to be one of her students

I would like to thank the Department of English of the University of Transport and Communications (UTC), especially Ms Hà Thị Thanh and Ms Trần Thị Thanh Loan, for the support they have given

me during this MA course My heartfelt appreciation also goes to the UTC Library staff for letting

me hold the library orientation session, to the Registrar’s Office for rescheduling my courses so that

I could conduct this research I also thank my beloved students, whose curiosity and enthusiasm have always motivated me to be a better teacher

Thank you my friends of the class MA 2016A and ‘Team Thesis’, especially ‘Má Châu’, ‘Chị Huyền’, Duyên, Phúc, Diễm and Anne You all have made my life so fun and meaningful in ways I could never have expected Thank you my old friend Điềm for helping me organize my data

My final thoughts are to my Mom and Dad, to whom I am indebted for everything I have achieved in

my life

List of tables

Table 2.1 Learning activities generally associated with dictionary use 14

Table 2.2 Purposes for dictionary use in language learning 14

Table 2.3 Nesi’s (1999) specification of dictionary reference skills in higher education 20

Table 2.4 Engelberg and Lemnitzer’s (2009) search techniques in electronic dictionaries 22

Table 2.5 Pastor and Alcina’s (2010) search options in electronic dictionaries 23

Table 2.6 Lew’s (2013b) specification of dictionary skills 23

Table 2.7 Dictionary skills rubric for level B1 (CEFR) 24

Table 2.8 Dictionary skills tested in the Okayama project (1985) 26

Table 2.9 Specifications of the Dictionary Research Test (Atkins & Varantola, 1998) 27

Table 2.10 Dictionary skills tested in Lew and Galas (2008) 29

Table 3.1 Goals of action research and quality criteria 58

Table 3.2 Cycle 1: Research questions aligned with data collection tools 62

Table 3.3 Brief descriptions of data collection tools of Cycle 1 63

Table 3.4 Cycle 2: Research questions aligned with data collection tools 70

Table 3.5 Brief descriptions of data collection tools of Cycle 2 71

Table 4.1 Cycle 1: Ten dictionary skills with highest means in Questionnaire Part 4 85

Table 4.2 Cycle 1: Mean values of Stage-2 skills in Questionnaire Part 4 86

Table 4.3 Cycle 1: Students’ problems when using dictionaries in the Preliminary Test 91

Table 4.4 Ten dictionary skills students needed to learn most 95

Table 4.5 Action plan of Cycle 1 96

Table 4.6 Intervention: Dictionary skills teaching contents integrated into course syllabus 99

Table 4.7 Intervention: Activities and procedures of the dictionary skills lessons 100

Table 5.1 Cycle 2: Usefulness of the materials and activities used in the intervention 106

Table 5.2 Cycle 2: Usefulness of the skills taught in the intervention 109

Table 5.3 Cycle 1 vs Cycle 2: Number of dictionaries in total vs used most frequently 115

Table 5.4 Cycle 1 vs Cycle 2: Number and results of dictionary consultations 117

Table 5.5 Cycle 1 vs Cycle 2: Students’ problems when using dictionaries 118

List of figures

Figure 2.1 An entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th edition) 11

Figure 2.2 Practical and theoretical directions of lexicography 11

Figure 2.3 The decision-making process in dictionary consultation for comprehension 17

Figure 2.4 Factors in dictionary skills assessment 31

Figure 2.5 The lexicographical triangle: Stakeholders in improving dictionary skills 35

Figure 3.1 The Dialectic Action Research Spiral 55

Figure 3.2 Research outline 60

Figure 3.3 Specific themes of Cycle 1 research questions 61

Figure 3.4 A student’s notes of dictionary use showing three types of consultation results 67

Figure 3.5 Cycle 1 model 69

Figure 3.6 Specific themes of Cycle 2 research question 70

Figure 3.7 Cycle 2 model 74

Figure 4.1 Cycle 1: Type and number of dictionaries reported in total vs most frequently used 87

Figure 4.2 Cycle 1: Types of dictionary consultations 89

Figure 4.3 Intervention: Course timeline showing research and teaching progress 97

Figure 5.1 Cycle 2: Type and number of dictionaries reported in total vs most frequently used 114

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step (Lao Tzi)

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step But in many cases, we did not know in

the first place what journey that single first step would take us on, nor did (or will) we know where our journey would bring us Sometimes we did not even know which step it was, first or last A single step might, therefore, end up beginning a journey of a thousand miles

The research that I am about to recount in this thesis is one example My interest in improving students’ dictionary skills is in the spotlight of this work, but it has been here in me for a while, since a time I now frankly cannot remember And it will certainly be there, for who knows how long Taken this way, this work is just a polished, convenient extract of a much longer and messy story of how I have been trying to help my students improve their dictionary skills, told from my perspective as a language learner, a dictionary user, a teacher, and a researcher

As I will explain more clearly in Chapter 3, choosing the action research design for a master’s

thesis seemed an ambitious and risky decision for me, given the fact that this research would be

among the first of its kind at the Faculty Perhaps even more so was the first-person narrative style

that I decided to use to write up this thesis (see Elliott, 2005, for the use of narrative in research) These important decisions, as well as many others, were methodologically strategic To a certain extent, they also reflected my eagerness to try something new After all, once one has determined

to embark on an adventure, why not choose a less trodden path?

1.1 Background to the study

Me and my dictionaries

I was seven when my family moved from Khánh Hòa to Đồng Nai in 1996 We settled in a remote area in Xuân Lộc, where I lived until I went to college in 2007 The first dictionaries that I knew were the ones I found in a wooden cupboard in the living room There were five of them, I remember, all thick, old, and often dusty My favorite one was a Sino-Vietnamese dictionary, which had beautiful pictures and strange-looking characters in it1

Like other kids at that time, I started learning English in my sixth grade Around that year, my mother bought me a dictionary2 I was not particularly interested in the book then I cannot even recall the moment my mother gave it to me Yet that first dictionary was to be so important to me,

at least for the next six years Looking back, I think it was that ‘single step’ that began my journey

of learning English And I am grateful to my mother for that

English became one of my favorite subjects at secondary school I began to use my dictionary more and more over the years, so much that my mother once had to use duct tape to toughen the spine of the book for fear that too much use would tear it apart It became my second teacher, always there by my side, 24/7 Interestingly, I felt that I was being more independent and proactive

in my learning Above all, I knew that I was making great progress, and that I was having a lot of joy

I bought myself a new dictionary in my first year at college It was the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (7th edition), the dream of many students at that time I was not disappointed In fact, I cannot imagine going through those four years without it I learned so much from it! And not just

me, many friends of mine also had their dictionaries with them all the time So did some of our teachers One teacher I met in my second year proudly told us that she had had her dictionary for years, and that it was still useful Another I met in a course on translation said that: “If you don’t understand a word, look it up in a dictionary If you still don’t understand, look it up in another dictionary And yet another, if necessary.” As I recalled such memories to write this passage, I suddenly realized that, as successful language learners, we teachers are all deeply indebted to those early dictionaries3

1 The others were English, French, Latin and Vietnamese dictionaries These had been my father’s dictionaries when

he studied languages at college Regrettably, they were all destroyed by termites a few years later

2 It was an English-English-Vietnamese dictionary by Trần Hồng Phúc (2000) The book has been republished many times since then but keeps its distinctive red cover, which brings back pleasant memories whenever I see it in

a bookstore

3 I believe many of us share these memories Nguyen, H C (2017), for example, narrated passionately how a monolingual dictionary transformed his learning

As a student of language, I loved dictionaries I loved the scent and touch of the paper, I was amazed at the hidden wisdom, and I admired the meticulous work of the compilers Dictionaries enabled learning beyond classroom walls They made me feel confident, autonomous, responsible and happy in my learning

Expectations meet reality

I became a teacher in late 2011 and have been teaching English at a small university since then

As a teacher, I began to take up new roles and responsibilities, but my beliefs about the position

of dictionaries in language learning did not changed much In some way, my personal experience with dictionaries led me to expect that my students would use a dictionary like I used to And I assumed that they already knew how to use their dictionary “It’s not rocket science,” I thought

However, my observations gradually revealed a different story When I asked students to bring their dictionaries to class, I was disappointed to know that most of them did not have any dictionary

at all Those few who did have one appeared to be struggling with every word they looked up, as

if it was the first time they opened it Most of them did not get what they wanted from their dictionaries They were wasting a wonderful learning resource

In recent years, more students have a dictionary on their cell phone4 There are also online dictionaries, which can be accessed easily from their personal devices These handheld electronic resources allow students to locate a word in seconds But wait, most of my students still cannot get the right thing from their dictionary! I am sure there is something not right But I do not know what it is What do they need? Better dictionaries? More grammar and vocabulary? Dictionary skills? What is going on? What can I do? Such questions have crossed my mind more than once, but they were quickly forgotten amid the everyday realities of the classroom

Theoretical confirmation

In 2016, I decided to enroll in a master’s program in TESOL at the University of Social Sciences

& Humanities, Vietnam National University – Ho Chi Minh City (USSH, VNU-HCM) The courses of the program provided me with valuable insights about the current issues of my profession Above all, I began to understand what it meant to ‘do research’, and I wanted to give

it a go About a year later, it was time to choose a topic for my thesis proposal I was quite sure then that I would do some research into the use of music in the classroom5 But when the writing began, I got stuck It seemed that I was not ready for it I was not comfortable and confident in it

4 Or rather, they have a cell phone that happens to have a dictionary on it?

5 Besides language, I am really into music I can play piano and guitar quite well At that time, I was planning to study the effects of background music on students’ performance in speaking activities

I was looking for a new research idea when I noticed how much I had been using dictionaries to help me write up the proposal At that moment, I thought about my students, about all those unanswered questions that had always been there in the back of my mind I began to read more research on students’ dictionary use

As I expected, dictionaries are widely believed to play a central role in learning a language (e.g Cubillo, 2002; East, 2008; Kirkness, 2004) Yet it is not easy to use them The process of looking

up a word turned out to be much more complicated than I had thought In fact, many studies showed that students did not have the skills and knowledge to use their dictionaries effectively6(e.g Carduner, 2003; Chi, 2013; Lew & Galas, 2008; Nesi, 1999, 2013; Nesi & Haill, 2002; Tono, 2001) The more I read, the more I appreciated the position of dictionaries in language learning, the difficulties my students could have, and the well-grounded need to improve their dictionary skills I felt compelled to do something

A quick review of the literature later suggested that I explicitly teach my students the skills they needed to use their dictionaries better (Nesi, 1999; Tono, 2001; Wingate, 2004) Additionally, I could nurture a dictionary-friendly classroom environment, which would not only benefit my dictionary skills teaching but also help develop the dictionary culture at my institution in the long run (Gouws and Prinsloo, 2012; Lew & Galas, 2008) But what exactly would I have to do? What skills would I teach my students? And how?

To answer these questions, I went on to search the literature for reports of previous projects to improve students’ dictionary skills so that I could learn from them Unfortunately, although researchers had long called for teaching dictionary skills (e.g Bishop, 2000, 2001; Cubillo, 2015; Nesi, 1999; Tono, 2001; Wingate, 2002, 2004), there had been few such projects ever recorded In the Vietnamese context, it seemed that no previous studies had been conducted to improve language students’ dictionary skills Furthermore, very little was known about how Vietnamese students were using their dictionaries, which made it even more difficult for teachers like me to decide what to do to help our students Therefore, I knew that I had to understand more about my students’ dictionary use before I could improve their dictionary skills I had the first ideas of an action research study

And that was how my research began As narrated above, the rationale for this study is threefold:

my personal values about dictionaries and learning, my first-hand observations and experiences as

a teacher, and theoretical support from the literature I think there are numerous ways a research project begins But for me, it started with “a gap between the real world of [my] daily teaching

6 Somehow I managed to teach myself to use dictionaries, but research shows that many students are not that lucky

practices and [my] vision of an ideal one” (Mills, 2011, p xii) I wanted to understand my students’ dictionary use so that I could do something in my capacity to improve their dictionary skills This action-oriented approach was the main reason I chose an action-research design

1.2 Aims of the study

The overall aim of action research is to generate contextual knowledge that prompts action to improve the immediate situation (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006; Mills, 2011) In this way, my research generally aims to create local knowledge that can be directly translated into action to improve my students’ dictionary skills

This overall aim has two specific objectives First, I need to understand the current situation by investigating my students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use The knowledge I obtain will guide an intervention program to improve their dictionary skills Second, I need to evaluate

my intervention This evaluation will show what is working and what is not so that I can further enhance my students’ dictionary skills in the future These two objectives are the backbones of the two cycles of my research

1.3 Research questions

Like all action researchers, I start with a general question: How do I improve my practice? (McNiff

& Whitehead, 2006) In my case, this question is translated into: How do I improve my students’ dictionary use in learning English? But before taking action, I have to know how my students are doing with their dictionaries, particularly their perceptions and practices regarding their dictionary use These two areas prompt the focus of the two research questions (RQ) for the first cycle:

RQ 1.1 What are my students’ perceptions of dictionary use in learning English?

RQ 1.2 What are my students’ practices of dictionary use in learning English?

In answering these questions, I can understand the current situation, particularly the problems my students are having in using dictionaries These problems become the focus of an intervention I implement to improve their dictionary skills Once I carry out the intervention, it is useful for me

to evaluate the impacts of my effort I want to know if it ‘works’ or not, and what else I can do This leads me to the research question of the second cycle:

RQ 2 How did the intervention go?

It should be noted that these research questions were not carved in stone from the beginning Rather, they were distilled over time as the focus of my study became clearer and more defined, a distinctive feature of the action research design

Cycle 1:

Cycle 2:

1.4 Significance of the study

My study is significant in a number of dimensions On the practical level, it is an on-going driven effort to reformulate my personal knowledge of the problem This informed understanding, being highly relevant, specific and reflective, is then directly translated into solutions to improve

data-my practices Metaphorically speaking, it is another step forward in data-my professional development

as a reflective practitioner (Schön, 1983)

This study is equally significant to my participants, who are also my students, in that they have had an opportunity to further develop their dictionary skills Although their actual improvement might be, as shown in a following chapter, rather humble and preliminary, it clearly shows how

my learning and improved practice can positively influence their learning (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006)

The power of action research is not in its generalizability but rather, in “the relevance of the findings to the researcher or the audience of the research” (Mills, 2011, p 114) In this way, the reader of this thesis will benefit not only from the insights and solutions, but also from the frustration and challenges that I recounted as long as they can identify with my setting This transferability, among other attributes, constitutes the “trustworthiness” of an action research study (Mills, 2011, p 104) and is achieved through detailed descriptions of the contexts, activities and events (Stringer, 2007)

On the theoretical level, action research is in contrast with applied research in that it looks for “a

theory for practice rather than a theory of practice” (Burns, 2010, p 14, original emphasis) From

this epistemological standpoint, my study contributes to the knowledge of the field, firstly, through the personal theories I have developed for my own teaching and learning Secondly, it adds to the literature a richly descriptive case, with an in-depth understanding characterizing its interpretivist paradigm Finally, the action research design combined with a first-person narrative style of writing offers a relatively new perspective in the landscape of ELT research in Vietnam To my knowledge, this is one of the first of its kind to be conducted for a master’s degree in TESOL at the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, USSH, VNU-HCM

1.5 Organization of the study

Although my thesis has all the required components of a typical master’s thesis, it does not strictly follow the standard five-chapter structure recommended by the Faculty More specifically, I will present the findings of my research in, not one, but two separate chapters to accentuate the two action research cycles This is a risky decision, but it allows me to organize my ideas more clearly,

as well as to be more faithful to the course of action I took when doing this research

Chapter 1 is an introduction, setting the background for my study Here I also present the aims and

significance of the study, the research questions, and the structure of my thesis

In Chapter 2, I will review the existing literature about dictionary use in language teaching and

learning, with the aim of exploring ways to improve my students’ dictionary skills

Chapter 3 will focus on the methodology employed in the study I will describe in detail the

research design and research questions, the participants, the instruments for collecting data, and

the procedures for collecting and analyzing these data

In Chapter 4, I will report the findings of the first cycle These findings are the foundation of an

intervention to improve my students’ dictionary skills Chapter 5 will follow with the findings of

the second cycle, which attempts to evaluate the intervention

Finally, Chapter 6 will summarize the findings and contributions of the study, followed by my last

reflections on how I have grown in my profession through this study Then I will discuss the

limitations of my study before offering some practical recommendations and suggestions for

further research

As you reach these lines, you might have noticed that I am writing my thesis in a much more

personal and expressive tone than what is usually expected in a master’s thesis at the Faculty This

chapter, for example, started with an intimate first-person narrative of how my research took shape

Except in Chapter 2, where I tend to sound more distant in my writing, all the following chapters

will keep this tone to different degrees This is an important methodological decision, which I will

explain fully in Chapter 3 In one way, it has turned my writing into an enjoyable experience,

which makes me believe that reading this work will also be an enjoyable experience to you

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

Wherever languages are used and wherever languages are taught and learned, especially

in educational settings, dictionaries play a central role (Kirkness, 2004, p 65)

The dictionary has a long and fascinating history Since thousands of years ago, dictionaries have been made and used in all corners of the globe, making them arguably the most common type of reference works When it comes to language teaching and learning, the role of dictionaries is simply beyond dispute Perhaps because of their prevalence, however, their use is often taken for granted by both teachers and learners

In this chapter, I am taking a step backwards to appreciate one of the most important resources in language teaching and learning I want to understand what dictionaries are and how they are used

by language learners, with the aim of exploring ways to improve my students’ dictionary skills

2.1 The dictionary

2.1.1 Definitions and classifications

A dictionary is a resource that “allows humans to store and retrieve information relatively easily and rapidly” (Hartmann & James, 1998, p 117) In layman’s terms, they are basically books or electronic resources that list the words of a language (often alphabetically) and give their meanings and/or their equivalents in another language In the context of this thesis, unless otherwise

indicated, the term dictionary refers to dictionaries of the English language, in their full range of

variations, which can be used by learners of English

People have long been interested in making dictionaries, with the oldest known ones dating back

to 2300 B.C.E However, it was not until the 17th century that the first English dictionaries were printed (Osselton, 2009) Nowadays, there are so many kinds of dictionaries that their classifications are becoming extremely complicated Common criteria to distinguish dictionary

types are size (e.g unabridged, gem), coverage (e.g general, specialized), medium (e.g print, electronic), language (e.g monolingual, bilingual, multilingual) and user type (e.g scholarly,

learner’s, translator’s) (Hartmann & James, 1998, p 147) Some researchers suggested describing dictionaries with a “set of properties” rather than trying to put them into distinct classes (Atkins & Rundell, 2008, p 26)

Such typological complexity can pose challenges for dictionary users, especially language learners With the sheer abundance of dictionaries available, they might be confused as to which

to choose for their purpose On the other hand, they might not be aware that there are dictionaries which could better cater for their needs

2.1.2 Structure

The dictionary structure refers to the component parts of a dictionary in terms of its overall design

(macrostructure) and contents of the entry (microstructure) The macrostructure is the overall “list

structure”, which allows the user to locate information in a dictionary (Hartmann & James, 1998,

p 91) One of the most basic macrostructural conventions in English dictionaries, for example, is the alphabetical ordering of headwords7 The microstructure is the internal structure of an entry

It is how a dictionary selects and displays the contents of a headword (usually its spelling, pronunciation and meanings) Dictionaries vary considerably not only in the amount of information they provide for an entry, but also in how this information is presented (Hartmann & James, 1998)

7 Yet even for this basic principle, further strategic decisions are frequently to be made, especially in the case of compounds, idioms and derivatives Alternatively, entries can be listed thematically, phonologically, or by

frequency

Although less frequently, lexicographers are also interested in the megastructure and mediostructure of a dictionary The former refers to the totality of the component parts of a

reference work, including the macrostructure and the ‘outside matter’, i.e the front matter and appendices The latter, also known as the cross-reference structure, refers to the network of cross-references which allows users to locate information that spreads over different parts of a dictionary (Hartmann & James, 1998)

Efficient dictionary use requires adequate understanding of these structures Arguably, knowledge

of the microstructure is critical since it is at this level that users spend most of their time with and get the most from a dictionary (Tono, 2001) In addition, microstructural conventions are highly complicated and vary greatly across dictionary-makers, which could make it challenging for users

to cope with

Although not as important, knowledge of the mediostructure is also necessary because references are extensively used in most dictionaries, whether paper or electronic (Hartmann & James, 1998) Understanding of the megastructure and macrostructure is less useful This is even more true in electronic dictionaries, where the burden of locating information, which typically demands megastructural and macrostructural knowledge, has been virtually removed thanks to the use of type-in search boxes and hyperlinks (Lew, 2013a, 2013b)

The body of a dictionary contains a systematic list of headwords Each headword is explained with some information, which, together with the headword, constitutes an entry8 These entries

“represent the particular selection of vocabulary and other items that the editors have decided merit inclusion, given the size and purpose of the dictionary” (Jackson, 2002, p 25) Most of the information a dictionary provides is organized under the microstructure of the entry The type and amount of this information will vary across dictionaries, but will usually include a word’s spelling,

8 Also called a ‘reference unit’

pronunciation, inflection, word class, definition, example, usage, and etymology (Jackson, 2002)

As an illustration, Figure 2.1 shows an entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th

edition) (Hornby et al., 2013)

Figure 2.1 An entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th edition)

It can be said that the body, specifically the contents of the entry, is what a dictionary is all about Although electronic and online dictionaries have made dramatic changes to the way dictionaries are made and used, the contents and structure of their entries have remained largely the same as those found in their traditional print fellows (Lew, 2013a, 2013b)

2.1.4 Research

The area of research that studies dictionaries as their primary focus is lexicography According to

Hartmann and James (1998), it is “the professional activity and academic field concerned with dictionaries and other reference works” (p 85) As the definition specifies, there are two basic

divisions: practical lexicography (dictionary making) and theoretical lexicography (dictionary

research) The former is concerned with the professional activity of compiling dictionaries and

was traditionally assumed to be the only focus of lexicography The latter, i.e dictionary research,

is a relatively young field This field takes a wide range of interests, which Hartmann (2003, p 2) summarizes in Figure 2.2:

Figure 2.2 Practical and theoretical directions of lexicography

Dictionary-making Dictionary research

Lexicography

Research on dictionary use, under dictionary research, is where my study belongs According to

Hartmann (2001, p 83), this line of research focuses on six aspects of dictionary use:

▪ Pedagogical lexicography

▪ Awareness of dictionary types and their use

▪ The dictionary user as a complex quantity

▪ Activity contexts for dictionary use (needs analysis)

▪ Strategies necessary for efficient dictionary consultation (skills analysis)

▪ Deliberate instruction of dictionary reference skills

Other researchers appear to have slightly different ideas Hulstijn and Atkins (1998), for example, proposed seven areas of focus for dictionary use research:

▪ The attitudes, needs, habits and preferences of dictionary users

▪ Text or word comprehension (decoding learning activities)

▪ Text or word production (encoding learning activities)

▪ Vocabulary learning

▪ Dictionary-related performance in testing

▪ Teaching dictionary skills (user education)

▪ Critical comparisons and reviews of dictionaries

Elaborating this framework, Tono (2001) suggested a “tentative list of research areas and topics” for dictionary use research (p 61) However, his list appears unnecessarily complicated (see his work for detailed descriptions of the list)

While researchers are yet to reach a definite framework for dictionary use research, these first sketches are well made As Nesi (2013) rightly concluded, the aim of all dictionary use research

is to discover ways to “increase the success of dictionary consultation” and involves “the identification of users’ needs and skills deficits, and the making of appropriate matches between types of dictionary, types of dictionary user and types of dictionary use” (pp 62-63)

Given my current interest in improving students’ dictionary skills, this study is perfectly nested under dictionary use research I am particularly interested in my students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use as well as the feasibility and effects of dictionary skills training in the classroom context

2.2.1 The dictionary user

According to Varantola (2002), dictionary users can be roughly categorized as either language learners, professional users or non-professional users Language learners are distinctive in that

they use dictionaries to learn a language, whether on their own or guided by a teacher Professional users, such as translators, use dictionaries “to perform a task that they get paid for” (p 32) The last category refers to people using dictionaries for non-professional purposes such as doing puzzles The dictionary user profile also includes a wide range of other attributes such as age, mother tongue, language proficiency and level of dictionary skills (Nesi, 2013)

Research on dictionary users plays a central role in lexicography Understanding dictionary users

is critical to dictionary makers who want to match their products with their target customers’ needs User attributes are also important variables in dictionary use research because they strongly correlate with dictionary use perception and behavior: what dictionaries to use, for what purposes, what strategies or skills are employed, etc (Hartmann, 2001)

In this study, the dictionary users I focus on are language learners, to be more specific, my

students Knowledge of the ‘learner-user’, in my case, serves as a foundation for the designing, implementation and evaluation of dictionary skills training programs

2.2.2 Dictionary use situations and purposes

Dictionaries are used in various situations and for multiple purposes Now that I have narrowed down this discussion to the use of dictionaries by language learners, this part will focus on the learning situations and purposes for which language students resort to their dictionary

Researchers widely agree that language learners generally use dictionaries for either receptive (decoding) or productive (encoding) purposes9, although dictionaries are also used for other tasks such as learning vocabulary or finding out about a language Nesi (2013) summarized these activities as follows (Table 2.1):

9 This distinction between ‘receptive’ and ‘productive’ dictionary use is rather problematic In reality, learning activities often involve both types On the contrary, students can use dictionaries for purposes that are neither receptive nor productive Therefore, when necessary, I will mention specific learning activities (e.g reading,

writing) instead of these loosely-defined terms

Table 2.1

Learning activities generally associated with dictionary use

Written medium Reading Translating from L2 to L1 Writing Translating from L1 to L2

Spoken medium Listening Interpreting from L2 to L1 Speaking Interpreting from L1 to L2

Gathering language information

Note From Nesi (2013, p 67)

Being more specific, Nation (2001) classified dictionary use in language learning as either for comprehension, production, or learning purposes (Table 2.2) Although the list he proposed

“covers most purposes for dictionary use” while learning a language (Nation, 2001, p 446), it is not intended to be exhaustive

Table 2.2

Purposes for dictionary use in language learning

Comprehension

(decoding)

▪ Look up unknown words met while listening, reading or translating

▪ Confirm the meanings of partly known words

▪ Confirm guesses from context

Production

(encoding)

▪ Look up unknown words needed to speak, write, or translate

▪ Look up the spelling, pronunciation, meaning, grammar, constraints on use, collocations, inflections and derived forms of partly known words needed to speak, write, or translate

▪ Confirm the spelling, etc of known words

▪ Check that a word exists

▪ Find a different word to use instead of a known one

▪ Correct an error

Learning ▪ ▪ Choose unknown words to learn (vocabulary learning) Enrich knowledge of partly known words, including etymology

Note From Nation (2001, pp 446-447)

As shown in Table 2.2, dictionary use benefits an extensive range of language learning contexts The specific learning activity as well as students’ L2 proficiency will largely determine the type and format of the dictionaries that students prefer to use and the kind of information they look for (Nesi, 2013; Tono, 2001) It is important to note that most dictionary use is for receptive (decoding) purposes such as reading and L2-L1 translation (Nesi, 2013) This is also the area of research that has been more thoroughly investigated, compared with other purposes of dictionary use Therefore, it is not a coincidence that much of my discussion so far and hereafter concerns dictionary use for receptive purposes

2.2.3 Dictionary consultation process

Some vocabulary item is impeding comprehension as the learner reads “If you can’t

work out what it means, just look it up in the dictionary”, says the teacher The

implication is clear: looking it up is a mechanical, last resort activity […] But how

true is this? Is it such a negative and straightforward activity to look up a vocabulary

item in a monolingual learners’ dictionary when reading? (Scholfield, 1982, p 185)

The imaginary situation above is something I believe most of us can easily relate to Many people, including teachers, take it for granted that using a dictionary is an easy, simple and mechanical last resort Unfortunately, as this author soberly wondered, it might not be what it looks like

Scholfield (1982) provided one of the first and most comprehensive descriptions of the process of consulting a dictionary, in this case, for reading comprehension This process involves seven steps, which are summarized below for brevity (Scholfield, 1982, pp 186-193):

Step 1 Locating the unknown word or phrase

Step 2 Finding the citation form of inflected forms

Step 3 Locating the unknown word in the alphabetic list

Step 4 If the targeted entry cannot be found, users have to (a) look up each main entry if the

unknown item is a compound or belongs to a phrase; (b) look for the stem if the unknown word seems to have a suffix; (c) scan nearby entries if the unknown item seems

to be an irregularly inflected form or spelling variant; (d) search the addendum

Step 5 Reducing the unsuitable senses in entries of polysemous words by elimination

Step 6 Understanding the definition and integrating it into the context with the unknown item Step 7 Inferring the appropriate sense from the senses listed in case none of these senses fit

Scholfield concluded that the consultation process is much more complex than commonly thought and requires quite an amount of knowledge and effort from the user’s part He did not discuss the

steps involved in productive dictionary use (e.g writing), which he believed are “distinct” and

“equally complicated” (Scholfield, 1982, p 194), nor did he discuss non-print dictionaries, perhaps because these were still rare at the time10 The key takeaway is clear, though: Dictionary use, whether receptive or productive, is not as easy as it looks

10 Although the roots of electronic lexicography date back to the early 1960s, electronic dictionaries had not been popularized until the 1990s (Granger, 2012)

By the late 1990s, new types of dictionaries were taking the stage Nesi (1999) wanted to respecify the skills to use a dictionary, and she had a slightly different idea about the look-up process Consulting a dictionary, according to Nesi (1999), involves five “stages”12:

Stage 1 Before study (e.g choose a dictionary)

Stage 2 Before dictionary consultation (e.g decide whether and what to look up)

Stage 3 Locate entry information

Stage 4 Interpret entry information

Stage 5 Record entry information (for future reference)

It should be noted that Nesi’s (1999) primary concern was about dictionary skills, not the consultation process Therefore, we can only infer the roles and contents of these stages from the skills she specified in each stage Nevertheless, it can be easily seen that the ‘core’ stages (2, 3 and 4) are basically a concise revision of Scholfield’s (1982) seven steps The most noticeable

difference is the inclusion of choosing dictionaries (Stage 1) and recording look-up results (Stage 5) in the consultation process It seems that all these five stages were intended to apply to both

receptive and productive dictionary use, although the author did not clarify this issue

All the ‘steps’ and ‘stages’ above have been very useful so far, yet they mistakenly suggest that looking up a word is a straightforward or linear process This could have been the reason why Tono (2001) took a more realistic perspective Instead of steps or stages, he visualized the consultation process (for L2/L1 translation) in a block diagram (Figure 2.3), starting with a

“conflict in text comprehension” (p 164):

12 There are, in fact, six “stages” in Nesi (1999) However, the author said that Stage 6, which concerns users’ understanding of lexicographical issues, is “independent of the consultation process” (p 370) As a result, this stage

is exempt from the current discussion

Figure 2.3 The decision-making process in dictionary consultation for comprehension

Thanks to Tono’s (2001) visualization, the full level of complexity of a look-up scenario is clearly demonstrated, with arrows representing the possible actions taken by users until they find the needed information (if they succeed!) Tono also recognized the crucial role of supplementary strategies during the consultation, which he called the “other potential strategies” (see the upper right corner of the diagram) However, he did not clarify the implicit tasks of locating a word and applying look-up results, nor did he even include choosing a suitable dictionary or recording consultation results as possible activities in the look-up process

The discussion so far shows that our current understanding of the dictionary consultation process

is rather simplistic and fragmentary For one thing, little is known about how a dictionary is used for a specific type of learning activities, except for the crude receptive-productive dichotomy For another, dictionary types (see Section 2.1.1) and users’ attributes (see Section 2.2.1) have been largely off the radar screen, even though these factors can determine how a dictionary is actually used (Nesi, 2013; Varantola, 2002)

That said, there is one thing that is obvious: Looking up a word in the dictionary is not as easy as

it may look It is, indeed, “a complex (psycho-) linguistic process” (Hartmann, 1989, p 102), and

it requires that “certain skills be applied in a systematic way” (Scholfield, 1982, p 185) So, what are these skills?

2.3 Dictionary skills

2.3.1 Definitions

Dictionary skills (also called “dictionary-using skills” or, more broadly, “reference skills”) are

defined as “the abilities required on the part of the dictionary user to find the information being sought” (Hartmann & James, 1998, p 117) Being more specific, Cowie (1983) said that they are

“the skills which the user is assumed to possess, or can be expected to acquire, in handling a dictionary and making effective use of the information it contains” (p 136)

For the purpose of this study, I find Cowie’s (1983) definition clearer and more empowering

because it emphasizes that students can learn dictionary skills, and that these skills are not only about ‘finding information’, but rather about the abilities to optimize the information a dictionary provides In this light, dictionary skills are hereafter conceptualized as the skills which the

language learner is supposed to have, or expected to learn, in handling a dictionary and making the best use of the information it contains for their learning purposes

Dictionary skills are a major theme in dictionary use research Due to its special relevance to my study, this area of research is reviewed separately in the following sections to allow more room for discussion Within the context of my study, I will first focus on how dictionary skills are specified and assessed in language teaching and learning

2.3.2 Specifications

It seems that not much is known about dictionary skills themselves Hartmann (1999) claimed that the set of skills required of (or possessed by) a dictionary user had not yet been established empirically This might still be true today, with most specifications of dictionary skills being based largely on assumptions and introspections (Lew, 2013a) My review of the relevant literature shows that these specifications are generally associated with either (1) dictionary structures, (2) the hypothetical stages of the consultation process, (3) dictionary typology, or (4) users’ language proficiency

2.3.2.1 Dictionary structures

Dictionary skills can be described by means of the type of dictionary structure for which they are assumed to be useful The idea is that each level of dictionary structure (see Section 2.1.2) should demand a unique set of skills and knowledge from the user to retrieve the information it contains

More specifically, macrostructure skills are the skills necessary for retrieving information from

the dictionary macrostructure, such as locating an entry or making effective use of signposts13

13 Also called ‘guide words’, these are words or short phrases that distinguish the senses of an entry or between homographic entries They act as a visual index to help users access the meaning they want more easily

(Tono, 2001) Macrostructure skills have been particularly useful in paper dictionaries, where users must understand how entries are selected and organized to ‘navigate’ in a dictionary In non-print dictionaries, however, these skills are of much less use since users now interact with the entry contents (microstructure) much more than with the overall word-list structure (if any) In fact, certain macrostructure skills (e.g knowledge of the alphabetical ordering) have now become virtually obsolete in online dictionaries (Lew, 2013a, 2013b)

Microstructure skills, on the other hand, involve the ability to retrieve information from the

contents of an entry, such as understanding display conventions, reading phonetic symbols and choosing meanings These skills are, due to the sophistication of the microstructure, more important and also more difficult to acquire than macrostructure skills (Tono, 2001)

Apart from the above microstructure-macrostructure distinction, little has been said about the skills

related to other dictionary structures, i.e mediostructure and megastructure skills This is probably

because of the limited roles of these structures in the dictionary-using process

There are a few issues about the use of dictionary structures to describe dictionary skills First, this specification is too broad to allow further discussion There have not been any comprehensive descriptions of the dictionary skills involved in each level of structure, which makes it challenging

to identify, assess or integrate dictionary skills in the classroom Furthermore, it is not always productive or even possible to pinpoint the type of structure where a skill ‘belongs’ Some skills (e.g choosing which dictionaries to use) do not fit into any dictionary structure Others are, on the contrary, useful across different structures Knowledge of the alphabetical ordering, for example, can be necessary for both macrostructural and microstructural dictionary use (Varantola, 2002)

The problems with this approach are largely rooted in the fact that it is based solely on the dictionary structure, while looking up a word clearly involves other elements (see Section 2.2.3) Put simply, it does not reflect the consultation process Therefore, this specification may offer a somewhat convenient way to describe dictionary skills, but it does not offer a practical framework for further examination

2.3.2.2 Stages of the consultation process

Using a dictionary is a highly complex process, involving multiple stages (see Section 2.2.3), and each stage requires a distinct range of skills from the user This idea is proposed by a few researchers, most notably Hillary Nesi (1999)

Targeting dictionary use by university students, Nesi classified dictionary skills into hypothetical stages of the dictionary consultation process Her work provides the first comprehensive specification of dictionary skills, and the most influential so far (Lew, 2013a) Although the list is remarkably long, it is quoted here in full length due to its special relevance to my study:

2.6 Identifying the word class of the look-up item

3.6 Finding derived forms 3.7 Finding multi-word units 3.8 Understanding the cross-referencing system in print dictionaries & hyperlinking in electronic dictionaries

4.6 Interpreting etymological information 4.7 Interpreting morphological and syntactic information 4.8 Interpreting the definition or translation

4.9 Interpreting information about collocations 4.10 Interpreting information about idiomatic and figurative use 4.11 Deriving information from examples

4.12 Interpreting restrictive labels 4.13 Referring to additional dictionary information (in front matter, appendices, hypertext links) 4.14 Verifying and applying look-up information

Stage 5:

Recording entry

information

5.1 Sifting entry information

5.2 Deciding how to record entry information

5.3 Compiling a vocabulary notebook or file of index cards

5.4 Using the notebook section of an electronic dictionary

Stage 6:

Understanding

lexicographical

issues

6.1 Knowing what people use dictionaries for

6.2 Knowing lexicographical terminology

6.3 Understanding principles and processes of dictionary compilation

6.4 Recognizing different defining and translating styles

6.5 Comparing entries

6.6 Dictionary criticism and evaluation

Note Adapted from Nesi (1999, pp 370-372)

It is interesting to examine these skills in terms of their roles in the look-up process Arguably, the skills in Stages 2, 3 and 4 are the ‘core’ of a dictionary consultation, covering all the strategies for planning a consultation, locating an entry and interpreting its information Stages 1 (Before study) and 5 (Recording entry information) are peripheral because they are either related to users’ prior knowledge or after the look-up results have been achieved Stage 6 skills (Understanding lexicographical issues) is in fact “independent of the consultation process” (Nesi, 1999, p 370)

Nesi’s list is undoubtedly exhaustive, to the extent that it happens to include skills that are too trivial or technical (e.g finding information about the spelling of words, understanding grapho-phonemic correspondence, choosing amongst homonyms), which have little applicability in practice Grouping dictionary skills into stages also creates the false impression that a skill is only useful in one particular stage, and that these skills are to be used in a linear or chronological manner This is not the case, considering the complex nature of the consultation process (see Section 2.2.3) In other words, this specification is not an accurate representation of the consultation process, although it is a close one Finally, while the list was intended to apply to both traditional and non-print dictionaries, the coverage of issues specific to electronic dictionaries could not have been broad enough by today’s standards (Lew, 2013a)

That said, Nesi’s specification is a critical development in dictionary skills research For the first time and in a thorough manner, the full range of dictionary skills has been specified, at least to a fair degree Despite its limitations, the list also reflects the dictionary consultation process as it is Nesi’s contribution has laid a strong foundation for the research of dictionary skills in language teaching and learning For the purpose of my study, this specification of dictionary skills is particularly useful because it is directly relevant to my participants – university students In fact,

as shown in the following chapters, it was one of the frameworks I used to build my research tools and intervention

2.3.2.3 Dictionary typology

Dictionary skills can be specified based on dictionary typology In other words, different types of dictionaries may demand different sets of skills from the user Although there are various types of dictionaries available (see Section 2.1.1), the distinction has been most visible between traditional paper dictionaries and their modern non-print fellows Since the skills for paper dictionaries have been substantially discussed in the previous parts, this section will zoom in on major contributions

to the specification of electronic dictionary skills

It should be noted that the term ‘electronic dictionaries’ hereafter refers to non-print dictionaries

in general, including online (web-based) dictionaries, except when it is necessary to make a distinction between different types of non-print dictionaries Also, many authors use ‘search techniques’ or ‘search options’ to refer to electronic dictionary skills

Engelberg and Lemnitzer (2009) assembled the “search techniques” that can help when using electronic dictionaries Their specification (pp 101-102) is summarized in Table 2.4 for brevity:

Table 2.4

Engelberg and Lemnitzer’s (2009) search techniques in electronic dictionaries

1 Incremental Using automated term completion features (also called ‘type-ahead search’ or ‘search-as-you-type’)

2 Wildcard Using wildcard and truncation symbols (e.g ‘*’, ‘?’, ‘+’) to replace a sequence of characters

3 Boolean Using logical operators (e.g ‘AND’, ‘OR’, ‘NOT’) in search terms

4 Filtered Using available filters to restrict search results

5 Sound Searching by phonological/phonetic representation or voice recognition

6 Fuzzy spelling Using suggestions for possibly misspelled queries (the ‘Did you mean’ feature)

7 Anagram Searching for anagrams (restricted to dictionary users engaged in word games)

8 Inflected form Searching for inflected forms, useful for heavily inflected languages

9 Index-based Locating a term in an index, usually in the form of a vertical list

10 External-text- based Using embedded lexicographical assistance, which usually displays callouts with a definition upon clicking a word in the electronic text

11 Picture-based Using available thematic/illustrative pictures to search for a vocabulary item

12 Scanner-based Using optical scanning devices (e.g reading pen) to convert print to electronic text

Note Adapted from Engelberg and Lemnitzer (2009, pp 101-102)

As the authors themselves acknowledged, these skills are exclusively of the ‘search’ stage, which

is but one of the many stages in the consultation process (see Section 2.2.3) It appears that other dictionary skills are assumed to be similar to the case of using paper dictionaries In terms of significance, most of these skills are either too petty and obvious (e.g 1, 4, 6, 7, 10), or too technical to the lay user (e.g 2, 3, 8) Others have very limited applicability (e.g 5, 11) Besides, these features are not always available

Pastor and Alcina (2010) added a few more “search options” to Engelberg and Lemnitzer’s (2009) specification Their descriptions of electronic dictionary skills are based on what they believed to

be the three “elements” of any “search event”: the query (search terms), the resource (search fields

or features), and the result (information found) Their ideas (p 320-332) are outlined in Table 2.5

below:

▪ A partial word (using wildcard symbols, such as ‘*’ and ‘?’)

▪ An approximate expression (e.g inflected forms, similarly pronounced or spelled words)

▪ An anagram or crossword

▪ A combination of two or more words (e.g exact phrase, presence of any search words)

▪ Filters (e.g parts of speech, themes)

Element 2:

The resource

(Using search fields/features)

▪ Search in the entry field (word list)

▪ Search in the content field (e.g definitions, examples, corpus)

▪ Search in the thematic field index (for thematically related items/areas)

▪ Search in the external links access field (links to resources external to the dictionary)

Element 3:

The result

(Understanding the types of

results found and how they are

presented)

▪ Complete (full) entries

▪ Incomplete entries (entry ‘snippets’)

▪ List of headwords

▪ “Did you mean” item list (suggestions)

Note Adapted from Pastor and Alcina (2010, pp 320-332)

Again, most of these skills are rather trivial, obvious or, on the contrary, too specialist They are also highly dictionary-specific because electronic dictionaries vary greatly in the features they provide and how these features are displayed and used

In an effort to ‘put it all together’, Lew (2013b) proposed an exhaustive list of skills for electronic dictionaries To make this list, he started by sifting through previous specifications (i.e Engelberg

& Lemnitzer, 2009; Nesi, 1999; Pastor & Alcina, 2010), picking out the skills most relevant to electronic dictionary use Then he added some general Internet skills because “skills for using online dictionaries should not be considered in isolation from skills of using the Internet more generally” (p 28) The list is summarized in Table 2.6:

Note Adapted from Lew (2013b)

Lew’s (2013b) paper is a critical and timely revision of the set of skills which dictionary users need in a new era However, it would be too early to say that a specification of ‘modern’ dictionary

skills has been firmly established For one thing, non-print dictionaries vary enormously in the way they interact with their users A word can now be looked up in a mobile application, a website,

a computer program, a translation machine, etc., whose interfaces and features can be remarkably diverse Besides, due to the fast pace of technological advances, dictionaries and their accompanying skills have been constantly evolving Therefore, it seems difficult, or even unfeasible, to establish a distinct set of skills for electronic dictionaries in general

All things considered, it is important to remind that many of the ‘new’ skills are in fact peripheral

to the consultation process They also tend to be either too trivial or technical for common dictionary use The most important skills, it appears, remain substantially the same for both traditional paper dictionaries and their modern electronic fellows (Lew, 2013a, 2013b) Arguably, these ‘core’ skills should be prioritized in dictionary skills training

2.3.2.4 Users’ language proficiency

The latest development in specifying dictionary skills is relating them to users’ language proficiency levels One such attempt is by Cubillo (2015), who specifies dictionary skills according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

Relying on Nesi’s (1999) and Lew’s (2013b) specifications, Cubillo (2015) described dictionary skills across the six CEFR levels (i.e A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2), attempting to develop a common rubric for dictionary skills assessment For each level, dictionary skills are characterized

by seven “criteria” (i.e Decide, Locate, Understand, Interpret, Evaluate, Record, and Implement),

which roughly correspond to the stages of the consultation process by Nesi (1999) The higher the level, the more advanced the skills As an example, Table 2.7 below is an extract of the resulting rubric of dictionary skills for level B1 (see her paper for the complete table):

Table 2.7

Dictionary skills rubric for level B1 (CEFR)

Note From Cubillo (2015, p 125)

Cubillo’s (2015) specification could have far-reaching implications for the integration of dictionary skills in language teaching and learning, especially for assessment purposes (see Section 2.3.3) On a theoretical level, it is “a starting point to discuss other possible ways to understand dictionary skills and assign specific levels to these skills” (p 138)

However, the author herself admitted that this specification is still in its infancy, partly because it has yet to catch up with an unprecedented expansion in dictionary typology and dictionary use in recent years On top of everything else, it is not easy to judge which dictionary skills correspond

to which proficiency levels, as well as to describe a dictionary skill systematically across these levels Unless there is a reliable framework, such prescriptions are prone to intuition and arbitrariness

2.3.3 Assessment

Now that I have had an idea of what dictionary skills are and how they have been specified, it is necessary to turn to another important discussion: How dictionary skills are assessed and the place

of dictionary skills assessment in language teaching and learning Sadly enough, this is apparently

a big gap in the literature (Tono, 2001)

This lack of research is, in fact, quite understandable Because assessment is intimately related to teaching, language assessment and its research have largely taken interests in central teaching areas, particularly language skills and knowledge (Llosa, 2017) As dictionary skills have never been in focus (see more in Sections 2.4 and 2.5), dictionary skills assessment has been of little appeal to researchers

However, the idea of assessing dictionary skills is not new In this section, I will review the development of dictionary skills assessment by looking at two dominant themes: dictionary skills testing and students’ self-assessment of dictionary skills I conclude this part with a discussion of some general issues of dictionary skills assessment

2.3.3.1 Dictionary skills testing

In 1985, the Okayama Prefecture Senior High School Circle of English Education released the final report of a research project concerning the assessment of dictionary skills, which included one of the first important dictionary skills tests in the literature The report was discussed in Tono (2001) without the name of the author or editor and is hereafter referred to as ‘The Okayama project’ (1985)

The project was aimed at seeing how effectively students could use a bilingual dictionary Japanese) for comprehension purposes The main research instrument, called the “Dictionary Using Skills Test”, assessed dictionary skills in the following domains (Table 2.8):

(English-Table 2.8

Dictionary skills tested in the Okayama project (1985)

(1) Reference ▪ ▪ Knowledge of an alphabetical order Reference speed

(2) Inference ▪ ▪ Disambiguation of parts of speech Inferring meanings

(3) Understanding of

dictionary

conventions

▪ Phonetic signs: (i) stress, (ii) sound

▪ Parts of speech labels

Note Adapted from the Okayama Project (1985, as summarized by Tono, 2001, pp 75-83)

Although the scope of the test was particularly narrow, there was no detail about why the researchers selected these areas, as well as how the test items were constructed and validated In the absence of a sound knowledge of the look-up process and a dependable dictionary skills specification at the time, the involved decisions might have been highly intuitive That said, the Okayama dictionary skills test deserves recognition as the first major contribution to dictionary skills assessment It is also among the very few empirical studies that assessed students’ dictionary skills in their natural classroom context (Tono, 2001)

Shortly after the Okayama report, Atkins and her colleagues (1987) presented the initial findings

of a large-scale research project on language learners’ dictionary use Three main instruments were used to collect the data, one of which, called the “Dictionary Research Test”, was aimed at assessing dictionary skills The test was described in detail and included in the appendices of the project’s final report (Atkins & Varantola, 1998) It consisted of 9 sections with 44 items, which aimed to “replicate as far as possible the natural use of the learner’s dictionary” and were “grouped according to the linguistic process or aspect of dictionary skills they were designed to test” (Atkins

& Varantola, 1998, p 23)

A total of 1140 students from 7 countries, speaking 4 languages, did the test They came from various educational establishments, including secondary schools, colleges, universities and adult education programs The participants were asked to use only one dictionary (monolingual or bilingual) throughout the course of doing the test They had to indicate this dictionary at the beginning of the test, as well as whether they used it to answer each question For several parts, however, they were required to answer without using their dictionary The test specifications are summarized in Table 2.9 (see their paper for the full English version):

Table 2.9

Specifications of the Dictionary Research Test (Atkins & Varantola, 1998)

1 NO Understanding of parts of speech and their English names

2 NO Understanding of the grammatical metalanguage used in learners’ dictionaries

3 YES Ability to select from a list the correct item to fill slots in elementary-level contexts

4 NO Expectations of where in the dictionary multiword expressions (compound noun, verbal idiom and prepositional phrasal verb) are likely to be located

5 YES Ability to select from a list the correct prepositional complement of various English words

6 YES Comprehension of a passage in English

7 YES Translation from students’ own-language into English

8 YES Ability to find a suitable item to fill slots in quite difficult contexts

9 YES Ability to select from a list the correct item to fill slots in quite difficult contexts

Note Adapted from Atkins & Varantola (1998)

Ambitious as the project itself, the test was long and sophisticated In addition, the participants had to answer a user profile questionnaire and take a placement test, which were no less tiring This could have reduced the reliability of the data because the students might have been put off by the complexity of the assessment tasks Another drawback of the test lies in its close-ended question items, which yielded little information of how the dictionary was actually used For example, while all the students were asked to say whether they had resorted to their dictionary

(“Did you use your dictionary to help you answer this question?”), a simple yes-no option would

not do justice to the consultation process: What words did the students look up? What were the results of their consultations? What decisions did they make? Etc Finally, like the Okayama project mentioned previously, there was no description of the selection of dictionary skills being tested This could be due to the lack of a dependable framework of dictionary skills, such as Nesi’s (1999), at the time Non-print dictionaries were also ignored, which is why these early dictionary skills tests can be rather outdated now

Nevertheless, this test is a remarkable development in dictionary skills testing and is, in fact, the most comprehensive ever conducted It is also among the few studies that allow students to choose their dictionary to use (although partly restricted), which, despite the difficulty in controlling students’ performance, approximates more closely to natural dictionary use

Since the Dictionary Research Test (Atkins & Varantola, 1998), there have been no other comprehensive large-scale dictionary skills assessments being made This is not necessarily a negative sign, however In fact, recent studies are often more selective and purposeful about their testing dictionary skills

Chi’s (2003) quasi-experimental study, for example, used a dictionary skills test to investigate the effectiveness of a dictionary training program for first-year university students Using a questionnaire, she first identified the areas of skills and knowledge where the students believed they needed more instruction on how to use a monolingual learners’ dictionary These areas then became the foci of the treatment and the dictionary skills pre- and post-test More specifically, she focused on the dictionary skills related to:

▪ Knowledge of the alphabetical ordering

▪ Knowledge of dictionary conventions for pronunciation and stress marks

▪ Understanding information about collocations and style labeling

▪ Knowledge of the English language and culture

These tests are markedly different from the previous ones in that their specifications are driven and purposefully relevant, which is an important development However, it should be risky

data-to base solely on the questionnaire data data-to decide the contents of the tests After all, students’ perceptions of what dictionary skills they need to learn depend largely on their very awareness of the range and difficulty of the skills involved in dictionary use Unfortunately, this awareness is usually low (Cubillo, 2015, see more in Section 2.3.3.2) Therefore, triangulating multiple sources

of evidence could have been a better option

In a somewhat similar design, Lew and Galas (2008) targeted younger learners of English seven final-year students (aged 12-13) of a primary school in Poland participated in this quasi-experimental study Dictionary skills teaching was integrated into the syllabus of the experiment group The progress was quantified and compared using the dictionary skills pre- and post-test The only dictionary allowed in the tests and prescribed throughout the treatment was a

Fifty-bilingualized Polish version of the Oxford Wordpower published in 2000, selected due to its

popularity in Polish schools The dictionary skills being tested are set out in Table 2.10:

Table 2.10

Dictionary skills tested in Lew and Galas (2008)

(1) Reference

▪ Knowledge of alphabetical ordering

▪ Using a dictionary for equivalents, definitions, spelling, pronunciation and obtaining grammatical information

▪ Locating words using initial letters

▪ Dictionary features and layout

▪ Understanding how dictionary display pronunciation, parts of speech, word formation, derivatives, past forms, countable/uncountable nouns, idiomatic expressions, phrasal verbs and pronouns

(4) Acquiring extra information ▪ Obtaining socio-cultural information

Note Adapted from Lew and Galas (2008, pp 1274-1275)

There was little explanation about the choice of dictionary skills to be taught and tested Even so,

it is obvious that the test specification is an elaborated version of the one used in the Okayama report (1985) I discussed above The key difference here is that this time, it is used for a different purpose: investigating the effectiveness of dictionary skills training The skills being tested seem rather ‘above the head’, considering the age of the participants This suggests the importance of

an adequate understanding of the context in dictionary skills teaching and assessment

There are a few other tests in the literature that are not aimed at but intimately related to dictionary skills assessment (e.g Chan, 2012; Ranalli, 2013; Tono, 2001) These tests are often used to investigate how dictionaries assist students in linguistic tasks (e.g reading, writing, translating),

or to evaluate the efficiency of dictionary features (e.g signpost, definition, example) In fact, many parts of these tests closely resemble those found in a ‘pure’ dictionary skills test Although skills assessment is not the primary purpose, they offer useful methodological solutions Tono (2001), for example, described tests that used specially-designed dictionaries with invented words

to control the variables Chan (2012) combined her test with self-reporting protocols to tap into

the many facets of the dictionary use process

The works I have reviewed above informed some very important decisions in my study For example, due to the lack of a common framework for dictionary skills testing, I realized that it was risky to single-handedly develop an exhaustive dictionary skills test Instead, I focused on identifying problems that came up when my students used dictionaries to do a specific task Also,

to get a fuller picture, I triangulated data from this dictionary-using task with questionnaire and interview data, and with my reflected experience as a teacher and dictionary user

2.3.3.2 Student’s self-assessment of dictionary skills

Students’ self-assessment of dictionary skills has been a neglected field in the literature, and it still seems a promising yet treacherous land for researchers Until now, the only major study that involves self-assessment of dictionary skills is Hartmann’s (2000) case study of dictionary use among university students at Exeter, UK One of the research tools he used, called the “Dictionary Test”, was aimed at eliciting students’ self-assessment and reflection of their dictionary skills (p 389) The test consists of three parts:

▪ PART 1: Self-assessment of dictionary skills

(“How well do you think you will do without dictionary consultation?”)

▪ PART 2: Dictionary skills while referring to a particular dictionary

(“Where did you look up X, and what did you find?”)

▪ PART 3: Reflection on the task

(“How well do you think you did?”)

The skills and knowledge being assessed (in Parts 1 and 2) were based on Nesi’s (1999) specification of dictionary skills, including those related to spelling, meaning, pronunciation, stress, morphology, usage labels, idioms, etymology, collocations and parts of speech

Cubillo (2015) raised doubts about the validity of such assessment According to her, assessment of dictionary skills often lacks validity because users might not be aware of the full range of dictionary skills and therefore “cannot evaluate their skills beyond their current use of dictionaries” (p 118) She concluded that:

self-[…] self-assessment of dictionary skills cannot be carried out properly unless users

are instructed on all the stages [of the dictionary consultation process] described

above [in her article], or unless they are reminded in a post-test or post-questionnaire

that includes some kind of description of the full range of dictionary skills (p 118)

Cubillo’s (2015) comment reveals but one of many pertinent issues concerning dictionary skills assessment, which I now turn to in the last part of this discussion

2.3.3.3 Issues in dictionary skills assessment

At its heart, assessment involves making evidence-based inferences about a person’s knowledge, skills or abilities In language teaching and learning, the general purpose of assessment is to certify students’ achievement and support learning (Green, 2014) In this sense, dictionary skills assessment involves obtaining evidence to inform inferences about students’ dictionary-related knowledge, skills or abilities, for the purpose of improving their dictionary use