Language Learning Strategies and their application in the preschool

Learning Strategies and Second Language Vocabulary Development of

Young English Language Learners

Learning Strategies and Second Language Vocabulary

Development of Young English Language Learners

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 TEACHING CONTEXT

This report is written with the intention to not only

review the literature in the field of vocabulary learning

strategies but to also identify implications of such

learners on the author's learners.

Presently, the author of this paper works with two

preschool classes. One preschool class consist of

sixteen, three year olds and who are engaging in foreign

language learning for the first time. The other class

consists of twenty learners with an average age of four,

all of whom are entering the second year of the preschool

program.

The program emphasises the teaching of spoken English in

the initial year and then develops the skills of reading

and writing in the second year and the third year

prepares them for working in the elementary program

across all four language skills.

1.2 BACKGROUND

Ellis (1997) highlights the dysfunctional relationship

between theory and practice in second language

D Mitchell (b2041738)1



acquisition and argues that for the relationship to

become more functional, both researchers and teachers

need to be more allied in their quest to understand each

other and each other's roles within the field. One area

that has been affected by this is second language

vocabulary teaching. Sokmen (1997) argues that second

language teachers have been guided away from the teaching

of vocabulary and instead been focused and trained on the

teaching of grammar, giving grammar the spotlight in

second language teaching. By giving grammar the central

focus in teaching materials, vocabulary instruction has

often been treated as inferior and has not gained the

same respect nor standing that grammar instruction has

achieved within the field.

However, vocabulary instruction and its importance in the

second language classroom has seen a resurgence in the

literature and the pedagogy associated with vocabulary

teaching has also changed dramatically within the same

time frame, putting vocabulary back in the spotlight as

an area that needs to be addressed with more vigour in

the classroom (Nation 1990, 2001 and O'Malley and Chamot

1990).

Beimiller & Slonim (2001) identify that first language

learners have acquired between five and seven thousand

words prior to being taught how to read and that second

language learners who are to begin reading in the second




language have no where near the same range of acquired

lexical items in the second language, putting them at a

disadvantage when learning to read in the second or

foreign language.

This conclusion, drawn by Umbel et al. (1992) has further

implications for the learners of the author of this

paper. The comparison drawn between first and second

language learners was based on the second language being

taught and learned in a naturalistic setting where the

learners were Hispanic learners learning English in the

US. In this setting learners are totally immersed in

English and have maximum exposure to it's use within and

out with the school day due to teaching, participation

and peer relationships with first language speakers which

drives the need to communicate in the L2 (Cameron 2001).

Such advantages and motivations are not readily available

to the author's learners as they are not learning English

as a second language but as a foreign language. The

distinction between both has been highlighted in the

literature but stems from an initial distinction offered

by Ellis (1985). Ellis identifies second language

learning as the process of acquiring a language through

immersion in settings which provide natural and informal

exposure of the target language, just like the learners

of the Umbel et al. (1992) study. Ellis then identifies

the learning of a foreign language as processes that take




place in formal learning contexts where learners are

aware of what is going on and are consciously involved in

the process of learning and where exposure is limited to

the classroom setting.

The latter description correlates with the author's

teaching context in Taiwan where he teaches a range of

young learner (YL herein) classes using a mixed

methodology. The curriculum design is based on a mix of

methods that strongly advocate the teaching of grammar in

a systemic way and does not actively promote vocabulary

development. This is one of the issues that Sokmen (1997)

highlights in his work whereby course design

methodologies assume that vocabulary will be learned

incidentally and does not provide learners with adequate

skills nor teaches them learning strategies in the area

of vocabulary development.

With regards to how a minimal breadth of vocabulary can

negatively impact literacy development in L2 learners,

this report identifies vocabulary learning strategies and

how their implementation can assist L2 learners in

developing their vocabulary range and in turn develop not

only the reading skills of his learners but also their

autonomy in developing their vocabulary range.

The report itself is guided by the following questions:

1. What is the role and importance of vocabulary within

SLA?




2. What vocabulary learning strategies exist within the

literature and which ones can be exploited most in

the author's teaching context?

3. How can such strategies inform the author's teaching

practice in the young learner classroom?

Having discussed these questions the author goes onto

identify how this report could be used a departure point

for future research in the field of second language

vocabulary learning strategies.

2 VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT

This chapter highlights the important role that

vocabulary plays in second language acquisition and

identifies some of the key issues that are common within

the literature with regards to how vocabulary is learned

and what should be taught.

2.1 THE ROLE OF VOCABULARY IN SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING

Whilst Aitchison (2010) argues phonics and phonology are

the corner stone of languages, Richards and Rogers (2001,

p132) disregard this notion and advocate that ''a lexical

approach in language teaching refers to one derived from the belief that the

building blocks of language learning and communication are not grammar,

functions, notions, or some other unit of planning and teaching but lexis, that

is, words and word combinations''.




For language learners to be successful in the second

language they need to be able to participate within it

and across the four skills of language. As Birdsong

(2005) points out that such participation allows success

to be measured and compared to the language abilities of

the native speaker. It can therefore be seen that second

language learners need to develop many different

linguistic skills that allow them to read, write, hear,

read and comprehend the meanings and discourse of the

second language (Cook 2008).

In developing such L2 linguistic devices that support L2

success, learners need to have a wide ranging vocabulary

base to help them operate in the L2 much like a native

speaker within a variety of settings and discourse.

Nation (2001) and Roberts (2008) both agree that

vocabulary plays an integral role in second language

acquisition and that it needs specific focus during

instruction to facilitate its development. Therefore

lending support to the above argument put forward by

Richards and Rodgers (2001) with regards to the

importance of developing the learners’ lexicon to enable

success in the L2.

In summary, if learners are to be successful in the

second language by means of comparing them to native

speakers, they need to have a wide ranging vocabulary




that allows them to operate within the four language

skills.

Having highlighted that vocabulary acquisition correlates

with L2 success, the next section looks at current issues

in the teaching and learning of vocabulary.

2.2 KNOWING A LEXICAL ITEM

One of the main issues that Vivian Cook (2008, 2009)

raises with regards to second language vocabulary, is

that it has proven to be an area within SLA that is hard

to research. She argues that it is possible to identify

which words people need to know in the second language to

be successful in the L2 and that the measurement of such

items can be undertaken and tested using a number of

norms. Yet, the literature is limited in addressing how

vocabulary is acquired. This is due to the complexities

related to lexical items, which are explored further

below.

2.3 WHAT DOES IT MEANS TO KNOW A WORD?

Singleton (1999), Cook (2008) and Nation (2001) all

address the question of what it means to understand a

lexical item and each author's answer to this question is

detailed below.

Singleton (1999) proposes that knowing a word involves

knowledge that goes beyond recognising the basic unit and




that the learner must also have knowledge of how a

lexical item can be used in isolation and within phrases.

Cook (2008) extends on Singleton's generalization and

provides us with a categorized list of what a learner

needs to know about a word to truly understand it. This

list is presented in table 1, below.

Forms of the word

Pronunciation

SpellingGrammatical Properties

Grammatical categories

Possible and impossible structures

Idiosyncratic grammatical information

Word buildingLexical Items

Collocations

AppropriatenessMeaning

General meanings

Specific meaningsTable 1.1. Knowing a word. Adapted from Cook (2008, p50-51).

This comprehensive list provides language teachers with a

signpost to the importance that vocabulary teaching

should play in their class and gives credence to the

argument given above by Richards and Rodgers (2001) that




vocabulary is the building block of language development

and as such needs to be taught with prominence.

In chapter two of Learning Vocabulary in Another Language,

Nation (2001) considers word knowledge from two other

perspectives, receptive and productive lexical

understanding. Below, I summarize Nation's descriptors

of each perspective.

For a learner to receptively understand a word, they must

be able to do the following:

recognise a lexical item when heard (spoken form)

recognise a lexical item in text (written form)

separate words into sub units to deduce meaning

understanding its use in different contexts

aware and able to use appropriate word

associations

understand deviations of use at the syntax level

understand and recognise collocation use

understand word frequency and items which have

high/low frequency status

(Adapted from Nation, 2001, p24-26)

There are different criteria applied to the understanding

of a lexical item at the productive level and these are

summarized below.




Learners must be able to produce the lexical items

with the correct spoken form, or in other words,

with the right pronunciation (spoken form)

Construct words in their morphological states so

that the correct meaning is implied and delivered to

the listener (spoken form)

Learners must be able to produce the written form of

the word using the correct spelling constructs

Learners must be able to use the words in different

contexts

Use the word with appropriate collocations.

Learners must be able to select words and use them

depending on the situation (formal/informal)

(Adapted from Nation, 2001, p24-26)

The above descriptors from all three authors highlight

the complexities of learning words to build a large

vocabulary base. Nation (2001) identifies this amount of

work as burdensome with regards to the amount of effort

required of the learner in learning a lexical item to its

fullest extent.

This leads the author to address the question of how

children come to acquire and grow their vocabulary base

and take on the challenge of acquiring vocabulary in a

second language; a task that requires so much of a

learner.




2.4 VOCABULARY DEVELOPMENT IN CHILDHOOD

One issue that is evident in the literature is in how we

understand first language development and what drives

vocabulary development (Ramirez et al. 2012). During the

initial stages of first language development, children go

through a period of exponential growth in language

development (Cameron 2001 and Saville-Troike 2012).

Saville-Troike (2012) discusses first language

development and presents a sequence of first language

development as presented in table 2.

Age Parameters Observed Language

Development0-6 months Children can discriminate

between sounds and in turn

discard those which are not

of use to them<>3 years old Children have mastered the

prominent sounds of their

first language>3 years old Children have developed an

understanding of how

conversation works with

reference to turn taking and

other discourse use.>4-5 years old Children gain mastery of the




grammatical system and

further develop it as they

progress through the school

years.Table 2.1: First Language Development. Adapted from Saville-Troike

(2012, p12-13).

Table 2, illustrates how children develop their first

language with reference to sound, discourse and grammar

but does not address how, when and the stages involved in

vocabulary development; lending support to the need to

investigate the questions stated above by Ramerez et al.

(2012). What the literature does highlight is an initial

pattern of vocabulary development which I have summarized

below.

Children first begin by employing nouns to label the

world around them and as they begin to communicate by

using such labels and receive more input from their

parents, care givers and others, their vocabulary base

grows (Cameron 2001). Cameron (2001) goes on to report

that children then begin to use two word noun structures

to express their demands, needs and wants and as children

become more cognitively mature and more involved in

discourse, they start to employ more complex lexical

items and in turn through usage and familiarity build not

only a strong vocabulary base but a grammatical one too

(Gillette et al. 1999).




If young children therefore start to communicate using

singular lexical items, then surely this is the same for

the young foreign language learner? If so, then it is

important to identify best practices for the teaching of

vocabulary and in turn provide learners with strategies

that will not only allow them to learn and expand their

vocabulary base in the second language but to also lead

learners to be autonomous in their learning too.

3. FROM TEACHER CENTRED TO LEARNER CENTRED INSTRUCTION

IN THE FOREIGN LANGUAGE CLASSROOM

This section of the report identifies changes in teaching

methodology and how the role of the learner has

transitioned from a passive to an active one.

Chapter 3.1 discusses how changes in methodology have

placed the learner at the centre of learning and how such

placement has led research to focus on the strategies

that learners employ to support and develop their own

learning is discussed in chapter 3.2. In chapter 3.3, the

report explores specific strategies that relate to the

learning of second language vocabulary.

3.1 CHANGING ROLES: FROM PASSIVE LEARNER TO ACTIVE

LEARNER.

Griffiths and Parr (2001) provides an overview of how

changes in language methodologies have resulted in the

foreign language classroom being learner centred as




opposed to teacher centred, as it was in the early days

of second language teaching and learning.

One of the initial teaching and learning strategies used

by teachers in the field of second language teaching and

learning was that of the grammar translation method.

Griffiths and Parr (2001) describe this method as one

that concentrates on the teaching of the productive

skills of reading and writing, one that did not have a

communicative aspect to it and one that was more

concerned with accuracy other than fluency. Cook (2008,

p238) gives two examples of how much emphasis is given to

grammar in the method and by looking at the discourse

transcription it is easy to see that learners taught

using this method are being taught to be highly

grammatically aware but that all communication is

conducted in the first language and the only time the

second language is used is to translate and explain

singular speech parts.

Cook (2008), Griffiths and Parr (2001) identify that the

grammar translation method leaves little room for

learners to take control over their own learning but Cook

(2008), goes on to identify that the method itself does

have a place in the modern classroom, and I concur in my

own experience.




The author has seen how the use of direct and immediate

translation can bring instant meaning to a student and

reported so in his classroom based research project

(Mitchell 2014) but would never use it as an extended

teaching method due to the fact that he teaches within a

communicative language setting and this would lead the

learner to know that by waiting for the translation they

would not need to create their own meaning in their L2

lexicon, as it would be given as a translated item later,

creating a redundancy in teaching and learning (Cameron

2001).

As the grammar translation method lost momentum, the

audio -lingual approached emerged. This approach differed

heavily from that of the grammar translation method as it

addressed the teaching of the four skills and emphasised

the productive skill of speaking, unlike its predecessor

Griffiths and Parr (2001) and Cook (2008).

When discussing the audio lingual method, Griffiths and

Parr (2001) state the behaviourist view of language

teaching as 'a system of habits which can be taught and

learnt on a stimulus/response/reinforcement basis (ibid

2001, p248) much like any other skill according to

Richards and Rodgers (2001).

The key teaching strategies employed within this method

are dialogue drills and controlled substitution practice.




The idea behind the method is that for second language

learning to be successful, the learner only needs to be

involved in an environment that only promotes habit

formation (Richards and Rodgers 2001).

Such an environment requires that learners be engaged

with the language by memorizing dialogues and performing

drills so that errors can be reduced through practice and

that correct responses to stimuli shall become automatic.

When correct responses are produced the learner is given

some form of reward that will inspire future growth and

development in the language (Richards and Rodgers 2001).

Such reinforcement and the continued need for it via this

method should result in the preferred habit (behaviour)

being assimilated into the learners language repertoire

and allow for automatic response when the stimulus is met

in a natural setting (ibid 2001).

The audio lingual method, just like the grammar

translation method does not give learners any control in

what they were learning and it does not offer them any

opportunity to participate or engage on their terms,

instead all learning is conducted with the teacher being

in control of what and how learning takes place in the

classroom (ibid 2001 and Griffiths and Parr 2001).

The role of the learner is to learn to react to stimuli

and respond accordingly and with the correct learned




response. They are to be passive and reactive to the

stimuli given and by engaging in this way they will

acquire a 'a new form of verbal behaviour' (Richards and

Rodgers 2001, p62).

The method itself has been criticised and lost its place

as a teaching strategy due to the following reasons given

by Richards and Rodgers (2001, p65) below:

the theory behind the method did not stand up to

empirical rigour

the skills taught were not useful in natural

communicative settings

learners were not engaged due to boredom and lack of

progress

In questioning the validity of the audio-lingual method,

researchers such as Corder (1976) found that the learner

was more than something than a willing passive

participant in a learning environment but instead was

capable and eager to be an active agent in the process of

second language acquisition.

As the learner became the focus of research in second

language acquisition, researchers wanted to understand

how a learner organises their linguistic knowledge,

access it and in turn wanted to know how successful




learners strategise their learning to be successful

(Griffiths and Parr 2001).

3.2 LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES

Previous discussion highlights with evidence that

learners must engage in much work to learn, memorize and

build their L2 lexicon. Chapter three of this report

identifies what strategies teachers can offer their

learners to help them within this area of second language

learning.

3.2.1 DEFINING 'STRATEGY'

Collins (2014) identifies the word as being derived from

the Greek, strategia, and identifies it as being

synonymous with the duties of a general. However, in its

modern use, Collins (2014) defines it as 'a long term plan for

success'.

These two meanings can be seen in an alternate way and

relate the role of general to that of the teacher,

leading his students to success by employing a number of

plans to enable such success.

However, this definition as proposed by myself does not

fit with current methodology. The main reason for this is

highlighted by O'Malley and Chamot (1990) and Oxford

(1990) whereby learners take control over the learning




strategies that they employ and which they utilise in

language acquisition.

Therefore it can be seen that the 'strategic general' is

now the learner and the teacher's role is more of the

general's advisor.

3.2.2 LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES, DEFINITIONS AND

TAXONOMIES

The above definition of strategy identifies the role of

the learner and the teacher. Here in this section, a

presentation of definitions, strategies, and the

categories of such are presented.

3.2.3 DEFINING LEARNING STRATEGIES

Rubin (1975, p43) defines learning strategies as ''the

techniques or devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge.''

Oxford (1990, p8) identifies strategies that language

learners use as ''specific actions taken by the learner to make learning

easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more

transferrable to new situations.'' Griffiths (2013, p36) provides

the most current definition, one born of her review of

learning strategy research and defines them as ''activities

consciously chosen by learners for the purpose of regulating their own

language learning''.




The first two definitions identify strategies as

something that have been given to the learner to utilised

at their discretions whilst the third given by Griffiths

makes the case that the learner is actively choosing and

engaging in methods of learning that apply solely to them

in their situation. However, all three definitions attend

to the notion that learners have to be trained in such

strategies so that they can consciously access and apply

them to their learning (Cameron 2001).

Research into language learning strategies stemmed from

the changes in second language methodology as previously

discussed and the main focus of research in this area was

to gain insight and understanding into what strategies

successful L2 learners used in mastering their chosen L2

(Wong 2005).

Rubin (1975) found through a series of data collection

instruments, concluded that good language learners are

learners who participate with ease and with good

linguistic judgement, are driven by the need to

communicate, have little anxiety when using the second

language, engage in all practice opportunities, focus on

the meaning of what is being said, heard and conveyed and

ones who diligently monitor their interlocutors.

Naimen et al. (1978) argued that knowing what constitutes

a good language learner needed more clarification. From




their research they found that an in-depth understanding

of how strategies were acquired, exploited and related to

current pedagogical methods was needed.

3.2.4 LEARNING STRATEGIES

O'Malley and Chamot (1990) undertook research based on

the above work by Naimen et al. (1978) and identified

that three main strategies were being employed by

learners in being successful in second language

acquisition. These strategies are:

metacognitive strategies

cognitive strategies

socio/affective strategies

O'Malley and Chamot (1990) and Ungureanu and Georgescu

(2012) explain metacognitive strategies as those used

more by experienced learners as they engage the learner

in a cycle of reflection and through participating in

this cycle, analyse their own learning process and seek

to use strategies that they have found work for them in

their former learning experiences. Ungureanu and

Georgescu (2012, p5001) listed seven metacognitive

strategies in their study as they pertain to language

learning. These are:

anticipating or planning

directed attention




selective attention

self-management

self-monitoring

problem identification

self-evaluation

Whilst the above strategies are used by those who have

the abilities and knowledge required to control and

direct their learning, Ungureanu and Georgescu (2012)

also identified strategies that learners who are being

taught use and termed these as cognitive strategies.

These strategies allow learners to learn an item by

relating it to the learner through an activity whereby

the learner can interact with it, modify it and use it to

complete the learning objective of the task.

Ungureanu and Georgescu (2012, p5001) define the

cognitive strategies as:

repetition

resourcing

grouping

note taking

deduction

induction/ deduction

substitution

elaboration

summarization

translation

transfer




inference

The last category is that of socio-affective strategies

and these can be seen as strategies that allow the

learner to work with others and use language in a way

that is both meaningful to the learner and in a way that

the learner can understand the learning point. Ungureanu

and Georgescu (2012, p5001) list four strategies under

socio-affective strategies, they are:

questioning for clarification

cooperation

self-talk

self-reinforcement.

3.2.5 TAXONOMY OF LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES

Table 3.1, taken from Oxford (1990, p9) provides taxonomy

of the features of language learning strategies as they

pertain to communicative competence of learners.

Features of Language Learning Strategies

Language Learner Strategies1. Contribute to the main goal, communicative

competence.

2. Allow learners to become more self-directed.

3. Expand the role of teachers.

4. Are problem-orientated.

5. Are specific actions taken by the learner.




6. Involve many aspects of the learner, not just the

cognitive.

7. Support learning both directly and indirectly.

8. Are not always observable.

9. Are often conscious.

10. Can be taught.

11. Are flexible.

12. Are influenced by a variety of factors. Table 3.1 Features of Language Learning Strategies,

Oxford (1990 p9).

There is an evident relationship between the taxonomies

of Oxford (1990) and O'Malley and Chamot (1990) in that

learners and teachers can employ different strategies

during learning and teaching that allow learners to focus

on their learning in the three strategy types.

However, Schmitt (1997) identifies issues within the

works of both Oxford (1990) and O'Malley and Chamot

(1990) with specific regards to vocabulary acquisition

strategies. He argues that whilst the taxonomy presented

by Oxford (1990) gives a broad overview of strategies it

fails to address the learning of lexical items by the

individual learner without consultation of another

person. Schmitt (1997) therefore added a fourth strategy

type; determination strategies, to address the gap in

Oxford's (1990) taxonomy.




Schmitt (1997) identified further complications in

Oxford's (1990) work stating that the categories given

overlapped in practice and that the classification of

strategies being used by learners could be hard to

classify during observation. However, Oxford had the

foresight of this argument occurring and stated in her

(1990) work that strategy research had not been explored

nor presented enough in detail in the literature and that

it was still in a state of fluidity and open to debate.

The author also agrees with Cameron (2001) in that the

work above does not address how such strategies could or

should be applied to YLs, especially those who cannot

operate nor control their own learning owing to age and

experience.

This section of the report has given definitions, insight

and a brief overview of the themes that are evident in

the literature that surrounds learning strategies and

demonstrates some of the issues that are in debate when

it comes to categorization and application of such to

vocabulary learning. In the next chapter, vocabulary

learning strategies are presented and discussed.

3.3 VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES

Research into vocabulary learning strategies has been

extensive but very little has been done to address the

use of strategies used by learners in the primary and in




the preschool ages (Cameron 2001). Such a gap presents

issues for the author's learners as it is within these

age ranges that his learners are acquiring English as a

second language.

Schmitt (1997) also identifies that when working with

YLs, it is advisable to employ a range of strategies

within the classroom so that learners can choose and

adopt learning strategies that match their learning

styles. However automatic choosing may not occur

naturally during this stage of learning development but,

as Cameron (2001) states, they may have a longer lasting

impact on learners strategy use as they continue to learn

the second language.

In this section of the report, an overview of discovery

and consolidation strategies are given and then a

discussion of how such strategies can be applied to the

author's teaching practice is discussed in chapter four.

3.3.1 TAXONOMY OF VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES

Schmitt (1997) presents his taxonomy of fifty eight

vocabulary learning strategies but states that this

number should not be considered as the final count of

strategies used in this area but that the sum gives a

working register of available vocabulary learning

strategies. These fifty eight items were then classified

and grouped under the following strategy labels: social,

memory, cognitive, metacognitive (Schmitt, 1997). These




items are discussed as general learning strategies by

Ungureanu and Georgescu (2012) but, Schmitt (1997)

categorized the fifty eight items that pertained

specifically to vocabulary learning strategies. These

strategies were then listed under two strategy types

suggested by Cook and Mayer (1983) and Nation (1990);

discovery and consolidation strategies, thereby

simplifying the categorisation system.

3.3.2 DISCOVERY STRATEGIES

Schmitt (1997) describes discovery strategies as the way

in which learners encounter new lexical items and that

such discovery is often related to social and

determination strategies as discussed above. During the

discovery process learners may discover more about the

lexical item with reference to context, guessing from L1

cognates, referring to a dictionary or simply by asking

their teacher, peer or other interlocutor.

Below, is an overview of some of the discovery strategies

that are available for learning second language

vocabulary.

3.3.2.1 DISCOVERING NEW WORDS IN CONTEXT

Guessing from context is one of the most fundamental

resources for learning and developing second language

vocabulary (Nation 2001). For correct guessing to occur

when discussing the contextual item, learners must




already be familiar with at least 95% of the content

being used (Liu and Nation 1985). This highlights an

issue for the YL teacher in that some YL learners do not

have any L2 vocabulary knowledge when they begin their L2

education, this is especially true in the author's

teaching context whereby learners start as young as two

and seldom have had any L2 input since birth. However,

with practice, guessing through context is taught by

using pictures and short videos.

Cameron (2001) suggests that this strategy should be

encouraged as it draws the learner to consider all of the

information available to them within the contextual item

and prepares them for making correct guesses as they

advance in their L2 knowledge.

When working with older learners though, the strategy

above allows learners to consider such contextual

information and guess with more accuracy. They are also

more able to guess using Liu and Nation's (1980, cited

Nation 2001) framework to support guesswork. This

framework allows learners to first, identify the unknown

lexical item, secondly, identify its working role within

the surrounding text both at the simple and complex

level. Having completed these steps the learner can then

guess and the guess can be checked by the learner by

several interventions. They can identify if the guess

belongs in the same speech part category, manipulate the




new lexical item to see if it works in relation to the

guess, use synonym and antonyms to establish meaning and

finally check in a dictionary to confirm that the guess

is correct (Nation and Coady 1988). This framework allows

learners to discover new words by employing three

distinct discovery strategies; guessing through context,

word analysis and dictionary use (Schofield 1982, Bauer

and Nation 1993, Nation 2001)

It can be highlighted here that learners need to be

trained in the latter skills but with determination

strategies, learners may be able to ascertain if their

guesses are correct by consulting their interlocutor

either by asking or even by checking their paralinguistic

response, a strategy that may be best exploited in the

young learner classroom, especially in the context of the

author where most of his learners are not yet able to

read let alone use a dictionary.

3.3.3 CONSOLIDATION STRATEGIES

After the discovery of a new lexical item occurs,

learners need to have strategies for retaining the

item(s) (Schmitt 1997). This section of the report will

look at the three consolidation strategies proposed by

Schmitt (1997) in his taxonomy of vocabulary learning

strategies. The three area strategies that will de

presented are that of memorization, cognitive and

metacognitive strategies.




3.3.3.1 MEMORIZATION STRATEGIES

For learners to successfully store new vocabulary items

then they must engage in deep mental processing

procedures (Schmitt 1997) such as that defined in the

Depth of Processing Hypothesis (Craik & Lockhart 1972 and

Craik & Tulving 1975). Such processing can occur by

engaging learners in strategies that allow them to

connect new lexical items to established ones in the L2

lexicon, through visual input and grouping (Schmitt 1997)

Therefore it can be deduced that such strategies are

highly important when it comes to developing L2

vocabulary.

Further evidence supporting the importance of

memorization strategies is in Schmitt's taxonomy where

memorization strategies account for more than fifty

percent of strategies for learning vocabulary (Schmitt

1997). Examples of Schmitt’s strategies are presented

below and pertain to the young learner classroom as per

the author's teaching context:

use visual images that contain explain the word by

form and in context

use stories that emphasise the use of the word

practice the spelling of the new word

associate a physical action to the word




Another strategy, the Keyword Method, presented by Nation

(1990) was designed for the teaching of low-frequency

lexical items and directs learners to make a connection

to the L2 item with reference to a similar one in the L1

and applying their own mental image, so that the word

could be consolidated in the mind of the learner. Whilst

Pressley, Levin and Miller (1982) found this to a

successful strategy for retention and recall of L2

vocabulary, this author feels that it is one that is best

suited to experienced learners who have a higher

knowledge of their L1 vocabulary because translation,

self-direction and attention are not strategies yet

acquired by his learners, especially those in the

preschool. He also sees that the typological distances

between Mandarin and English may present difficulties in

presenting this method to young learners.

3.3.3.2 COGNITIVE STRATEGIES

To facilitate vocabulary acquisition at the cognitive

level, Schmitt (1997) promotes repetition strategies,

much like those favoured by the behaviourist theories of

learning such as the audio-lingual method previously

discussed (Griffiths and Parr 2001) and argues against

the Depth of Processing Hypothesis with regards to these

strategies. This hypothesis dismisses the use of such

strategies for consolidation; however Schmitt (1997)

found that a large proportion of learners used written

and oral repetition strategies when it came to




consolidation of new lexical items in a study he

conducted on the topic. It can be seen here then that

their is still a role for the behaviourist methods in the

language classroom and one that is being adopted by

learners as opposed to imposed by teachers.

3.3.3.3 METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES

Metacognitive strategies allow learners to work at a

level of self-assessment and such strategies allow them

to engage in ways that allow them to control, organise

and assess their own learning and development (Schmitt

1997). In Schmitt's taxonomy he advises the use of spaced

word practice, develop lexical knowledge through focused

and continued study of lexical items and through self

assessment. By transferring these strategies to learners,

learning responsibility is also transferred and learning

effects may be more enhanced (Gu and Johnson 1996). Gu

and Johnson (1996) noted that learners employing such

strategies in their learning were likely to have a higher

proficiency level and larger vocabulary base. Therefore

this demonstrates that such strategies play an

influential role pertaining to successful outcomes in not

only vocabulary development but language development as a

whole.

4 APPLYING THEORY IN PRACTICE: TEACHING VOCABULARY

STRATEGIES IN THE YL CLASSROOM




This review has stated quite clearly that the learning of

new vocabulary is a task that is highly involved and

requires a lot of the learner (Nation 2001) and that for

second language vocabulary development to be successful

it needs specific instruction and focus in the classroom,

Nation (2001) and Roberts (2008). One issue that Schmitt

(1997) and Cameron (2001) highlight above is that

teachers must employ a range of teaching strategies when

teaching vocabulary to YLs and such strategies can then

be adopted as learning strategies by learners later on in

their language learning.

Below an example of a lesson plan is given to demonstrate

how this report has informed pedagogy to promote

vocabulary learning strategies in the YL context. The

class that will be subject to this teaching plan are the

author's youngest class of learners as detailed above.

4.1 APPLYING DISCOVERY STRATEGIES IN THE YL CLASSROOMWithin the teaching plan below it evident that the author

has seen that he can lead his learners to discover new

lexical items through differing methods of discovery. The

above plan shows that discovery can take the form of

being introduced to YLs in a variety of ways, such as

through song, storybooks but that the initial context for

teaching is in using real life materials so that new

items are relevant and real for the learners and are

encountered in fun and varied ways that are age

appropriate. It is also evident that the discovery of new




items is not an isolated event and the author realizes

that for acquisition to occur, learners must engage in

numerous encounters with the new items (Nation 2001).

Theme 1: My School Week 1: Sentence Pattern: What is this? This is my (noun)Vocabulary items: book bag, classroom, school, pencil box and teacherTeaching Section

Discovery strategies: learning through context

Teach new lexical items

Introduce students to the new lexical items by using flashcards and realia.

Take students on a tour of the school and have them look for and name preplaced realia and people

Return to class and discuss the new items again using theme poster and flashcards

Place realia in a bag, have one studentat a time come and feel items inside and guess which item they are going to pull out

Check guess and reward for both correctand incorrect guesses

Model pronunciation and have students repeat the lexical item

Musical Time

Review lexical items again using flashcards and realia

Teach song, word by word. Listen to the song Review lexical items again, show

students how to clap when they hear a new item when listening to the song




Learners listen and clap when they heara new lexical item

Reward correct and incorrect guesses Review new lexical items again

Story Time Use the teacher's reading book and havestudents look at cover page and identify any of the new lexical items.

Review all items again Discuss each page in detail and ask

many comprehension questions about the new lexical items

Have students come to the front and identify by touching the lexical items in pictorial form in the book

At then end of the story, review the lexical items once more using the book and other contextual materials.

Table 4.1 Discovery Strategies for vocabulary instructionin the YL classroom.

4.2 APPLYING CONSOLIDATION STRATEGIES IN THE YL CLASSROOM

Having encountered the new lexical items through

discovery strategies, like those above, the next step is

for the learner to retain them in their L2 lexicon. The

lesson plan below identifies consolidation strategies

below that can be used to help YLs retain new lexical

items.

Teaching Consolidation by memorization strategies




SectionTeach new lexical items

teach new lexical items following the discovery approach above with reference to pictorial aids and in context

with each new item taught apply a gesture having taught each item with a gesture

play games that allow learners to combinethe two together and establish a connection in the mind

employ the TPR method where appropriate to establish connections between word andactions

Musical Time

reinforce actions and lexical item connections by making them key actions inthe teaching and singing of songs and rhymes

Story Time draw attention to the new lexical item inpictorial and written form in the story book to make a connection in the learnersmind of its importance within the story

have learners use the gesture assigned tolexical items when they hear it during story time

Table 4.2: Consolidation by memory strategies

By using such techniques to aid in memorization, learners

engage in deep processing as outlined by Schmitt (1997)

and allows them to make connections in the brain and

store L2 lexis. This may lead to learners adopting the

Key Word Method later in learning if success is gained

using similar methods in the YL classroom.

4.3 APPLYING COGNITIVE AND METACOGNITIVE STRATEGIES IN

THE YL CLASSROOM

Teaching Section

Consolidation by cognitive strategies




Teach new lexical items

teach new lexical items following the discovery approach above with reference to pictorial aids and in context

with each new item taught apply a gesture drill new items in chant play simple pair games that allow

learners to engage with new items and encourage repetition. One such game is concentration whereby learners turn two cards, say the lexical item and keep cards only when they match.

Musical Time

reinforce actions and lexical item connections by making them key actions inthe teaching and singing of songs and rhymes

practice theme song and leave on repeat during class time so that new lexical items can be subconsciously acquired

Story Time draw attention to the new lexical item inpictorial and written form in the story book to make a connection in the learnersmind of its importance within the story

have learners use the gesture assigned tolexical items when they hear it during story time

when new lexical items are met, repeat drill and combine with action

Table 4.3. Consolidation by cognitive strategies

It can be seen from the previous three tables that

repetitive cognitive strategies run throughout the lesson

giving maximum exposure to new lexical items. By

combining memorization and cognitive strategies, it would

be evident that a teaching model could be made by

combining the latter two strategies and teach using a

formula based on visual input, gestures, repetition and

activities and harness a framework for exploiting maximum

exposure to new L2 lexis.




So, what about metacognitive strategies? To some extent

one area, proposed by Schmitt (1997) that the author has

detailed throughout all three strategy applications above

is that learners benefit from metacognitive strategies

through continued study of lexical items.

Within the teaching context of these learners, vocabulary

items are recycled and reused and therefore such

strategies can be applied by continually drawing

attention to items that have also been previously taught

and space for such recognition would need to be

incorporated into the strategic plan above as these

learners progress in the L2 program.

5 FUTURE RESEARCH IN VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES

This report has given an overview of learning strategies

and ones related to vocabulary learning however it does

not offer an in-depth review of a specific area of

research within vocabulary learning. The author of this

report would therefore like to use this report as a

departure point and go onto research more in depth the

role of cognitive strategies in second language

vocabulary development in the early years.

6 CONCLUSION

Vocabulary has been shown to be of high value within the

realms of second language learning and has been referred

to as the cornerstone of language itself by Richards and




Rogers (2001). With such defined importance, the author

presented and discussed the literature that surrounds

learning strategies as a whole and those which pertain to

vocabulary learning so that he could understand how such

strategies can inform his teaching . The author concludes

that by engaging in this report that he has been able to

actively apply what he has read and understood and

discovered useful insights into his own teaching practice

with young learners. He has also found that the

literature surrounding cognitive strategies in vocabulary

learning is limited and this has led him to consider this

field as an avenue for further study having compiled this

report.




BIBLIOGRAPHY

AITCHISON, J. (2010). Aitchison's Linguistics: Teach Yourself. 7th ed., London, Hodder Education.

BAUER, L. and NATION, P (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6, 253-279.

BIRDSONG, D. (2005). Interpreting age effects in second language acquisition. In: Kroll, J.F. and DeGroot, A.M.B. (eds.). Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectives. New York, Oxford University Press, pp109-127.

BEIMILLER, A. and SLONIM, N. (2001). Estimating root word vocabulary growth in normative and advantaged populations: Evidence from a common sequence of vocabulary acquisition. [online] Journalof Educational Psychology, 93, 498-520. Article from ProQuest last accessed 6 May 2014 at: http://search.proquest.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/docview/220224695?pq-origsite=summon

CAMERON, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

COOK, L. K. and MAYER, R. E.(1983). Reading strategies training for meaningful learning from prose. In: PRESSLEY, M. AND LEVIN, J. (eds). Cognitive Strategy Research: Educational Applications. New York, Springer-Verlag, 81-126.

CORDER, S. P. (1967). The significance of learners’ errors. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 5, 160-70.

COLLINSDICTIONARY.COM (2014). Strategy. [online]. Last accessed 23 August 2014 at: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/strategy?showCookiePolicy=true

COOK, V. (2008). Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. 4th ed., London, Hodder Education.




COOK, V. (2009). Multilingual Universal Grammar as the norm. In: Leung, I. (ed.) Third Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar,Bristol, Multilingual Matters, 55-70

CRAIK, F. and LOCKHART, R. (1972). Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior II, 671-684.

CRAIK, F.I.M AND TULVING, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal Of Experimental Psychology 104, 268-284.

ELLIS, R. (1997). SLA Research and Language Teaching. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

GILLETTE, J., GLEITMAN, H., GLEITMAN, L. AND LEDERER, A. (1999), Human simulations of vocabulary learning. [online].Cognition 73, 135–76. Article from ScienceDirect last accessed 1 June , 2014 at: http://www.sciencedirect.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/science/article/pii/S0010027799000360]

GRIFFITHS, C. (2013). The strategy factor in successful language learning. Bristol, UK, Multilingual Matters

GRIFFITHS, C. and PARR, J. M. (2001). Language-learning strategies: theory and perception. [online].ELT Journal, 55(3), 247-254. Article from oxford Journals last accessed 1 June, 2014 at: http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/content/55/3/247.full.pdf+html]

GU Y. and JOHNSON, R. K.(1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46(4), 333-340.

MITCHELL, D. (2014). Classroom Based Research Project. Facultyof Society and Development. Sheffield Hallam University. Unpublished.


http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/content/55/3/247.full.pdf+html

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/content/55/3/247.full.pdf+html



NAIMAN, N., FROEHLICH M., STERN H. AND TEDESCO A. (1978). The Good Language Learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education

NATION, P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Massachusetts, Heinle & Heinle.

NATION, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

NATION, P. and COADY, J. (1988). Vocabulary and reading. In: CARTER, R. and McCARTHY, M. (eds.). Vocabulary and Language Teaching. London, Longman, 97-110

O'MALLEY, J.M. AND CHAMOT, A.U. (1990). Learning Strategies in second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press..

OXFORD. R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. Boston, Heinle & Heinle.

PRESSLEY, M., LEVIN, J. R. AND MILLER, G.E.(1982). The keyword method compared to alternative vocabulary learning strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 50-60.

RAMAREZ, N.F., LIEBERMAN, A.M., MAYBERRY, R.I. (2012). The initial stages of first-language acquisition begun in adolescence: whenlate looks early. [online]. Journal of Child Language. 391-414. Article from ProQuest last accessed 6 May 2014 at:http://search.proquest.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/docview/1289839534/abstract?accountid=13827]

RICHARDS, J.C. AND RODGERS, T.S. (2001), Approaches and methods in language teaching.2nd Edition. New York, Cambridge University Press.

ROBERTS, T.A. (2008). Home storybook reading in primary or second language with preschool children: Evidence of equal effectiveness for second-language vocabulary acquisition. [online]. Reading Research Quarterly, 43 (2), 103-130. Article from ProQuest last accessed 2 June 2014 at:




http://search.proquest.com.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/docview/212134625?pq-origsite=summon

RUBIN, J. (1975). What the ‘Good Language Learner’ Can Teach Us.[online]. TESOL Quarterly, 9 (1), 41-51. Article from JSTOR last accessed 23 August 2014 at: http://www.jstor.org.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/stable/10.2307/3586011?origin=api

SAVILLE-TROIKE, M. (2012). Introducing Second Language Acquisition. 2nd Edition. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

SCHMITT, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In: SCHMITT, N. and McCARTHY, M. (eds.) Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 199-227.

SCHOFIELD, P. (1982). Using the English Dictionary for Comprehension.[online] TESOL Quarterly, 16(2), 185-194. Article from JSTOR last accessed 23 August 2014 at: http://www.jstor.org.lcproxy.shu.ac.uk/stable/10.2307/3586791?origin=api

SINGLETON, D. (1999), Exploring the second language mental lexicon. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

SNEDEKER, J. AND GLEITMAN, L. (2004). Why it is hard to label our concepts. In: HALL, D.G. and WAXMAN, S. (eds.). Weaving a lexicon. Cambridge MA, MIT Press. 257-94

SOKMEN, A.J. (1997), Current trends in teaching and second language vocabulary. In: SCHMITT, N. AND MCCARTHY, M. (eds.). Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. pp. 237-257

UMBEL, V.M., PEARSON, B.Z., FERNANDEZ, M.C. AND OLLER, D.K. (1992). Measuring bilingual children's receptive vocabularies. Child Development, 63(4), 1012-1020.




UNGUREANU, C., & GEORGESCU, C.A. (2012). Learners' Strategies in Language Learning.[online]. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences (46), 5000-5004. Article from ELSEVIER last accessed 11 June 2014 at: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S1877042812021118/1-s2.0-S1877042812021118-main.pdf?_tid=914d9ee2-2aa3-11e4-bb9a-00000aab0f26&acdnat=1408784453_1581ee38218bc31d821a5f195570ca55

WEBB, S.A. AND CHANG, A. C. (2012). Second Language Vocabulary Growth. [online].RELC Journal 43,113-126.Article from SAGE Publications last accessed 6 May 2014 at: http://rel.sagepub.com/content/43/1/113

WONG, M. (2005). Language Learning Strategies and Language Self-Efficacy: Investigating the Relationship in Malaysia.[online] RELC Journal 36 (3) 245-269. Article from SAGE Publications last accessed 12 June 2014 at: http://rel.sagepub.com/content/36/3/245

WORD COUNT 6572


Language Learning Strategies and their application in the preschool

Documents

Transcript of Language Learning Strategies and their application in the preschool