Vocabulary learning

ANALYSIS OF EFL TEXTBOOKS AND VOCABULALRY LEARNING AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS 1

Analysis of EFL textbooks and vocabulary learning among Japanese

high school students

Hideki Momiyama

Akita International University


Abstract

This study is composed of three experiments. The first one aims

to analyze the word frequency and the recycling rate of target

vocabulary in Japanese EFL textbooks. To do this, three different

level textbooks were analyzed by an instrument called Lextutor,

which shows quantitative data about vocabulary in a text. The

findings indicated that most content words were less frequent and

recycled than function words; the word frequency and the

recycling rate tend to be increased in textbook which has more

word tokens. The aims of the second and third experiment are to

find trends in vocabulary learning strategies (VLSs) among the

participants for different purposes: regular vocabulary learning

and vocabulary test. One hundred and seventy one freshmen in a

high school participated in these experiments. In the second

experiment, the researcher provided them the questionnaire to

explore their VLS use for regular vocabulary learning. The


results revealed that majority of the participants depended on

the ‘written repetition’ strategy; also, motivated students

tended to use meta cognitive strategies more than less motivated

students. Moreover, the third experiment revealed that the

participants used various types of ‘written repetition’ strategy

for short term retention.

Key words: word frequency, recycling rate, vocabulary learning

strategy (VLS)

Introduction

English as a foreign language (EFL) leaners need to learn

large numbers of vocabulary in order to read, write, speak, or

listen to English. Given that their vocabulary is limited, they


face a lot of difficulties in English communication. Although

other linguistic aspects involving phonetics, phonology, or

syntax are essential as well, nothing may be more important than

learning English words to establish successful communication. So,

it is not surprising that “this area of language learning has

received significant attention” (Oxford, 2011, p. 254) and

“specialists now emphasize the need for a systematic and

principled approach to vocabulary by both the teacher and the

learner” (Decarrico, 2006, p. 285). As many researchers insist,

success in second language (L2) learning depends on acquiring as

many English words as possible.

However, when it comes to an EFL setting like Japan, most

learners receive less exposure to English outside classroom,

compared to learners learning English as a second language (ESL).

That is, ESL learners have to learn English to survive in the

society where English has some kind of special status (Crystal,

2002), while Japanese EFL learners do not need to use English in

their monolingual society, Japan. Furthermore, it is not unusual

that less motivated students do not open their English textbooks

at home without being forced to do so; even motivated students


would not be able to make up for the lack of input by their own

efforts. In such a challenging environment for English learning,

“the principal and sometimes the only source of foreign language

vocabulary will be from the language they are exposed to in the

classroom; the textbooks and teacher’s language” (Milton, 2006,

p.193). In sum, English teachers are highly responsible for

students’ vocabulary learning, so they need to explore more

effective teaching methods for vocabulary acquisition.

As the first step towards effective vocabulary teaching, it

is necessary for teachers to analyze the textbook that they use.

More specifically, they should explore what kinds of word are

frequently used and whether the target words are appropriately

recycled throughout the textbook since these factors are crucial

for vocabulary acquisition. According to the new course of study

(2009) published by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports,

Science, and Technology (MEXT), the number of target vocabulary

items, which students learn for six years from junior high

through senior high school, will be increased; the maximum number

will be the 3,000 most frequent word families. This revision

should be welcome because students will be exposed to more words


than what they are now. However, it is still uncertain about

whether the target words are sufficiently recycled throughout the

textbook or not; some words which are treated as the target words

in a chapter may appear only a few times, and in the worst case,

they may never come out in the other chapters.

Besides, teachers need to know what kind of strategy

students usually use to learn English vocabulary. In fact, each

student may employ different vocabulary learning strategies

(VLSs) in various situations; some students may consult a

dictionary to check a meaning or a syntactic feature of the

target word, while others may just jot down or utter the word

over and over again. Although it is basically better to respect

the strategies that each student employs (Nyikos & Fan, 2006),

teachers have to lead them in the right direction if they use an

ineffective VLS. Indeed, some students may adopt unreasonable

VLSs which do not suit their learning purposes. For instance,

Kadota and Ikemura (2006) pointed out that less advanced students

tended to highly depend on the ‘written repetition strategy’ to

memorize English vocabulary, without exploring more effective

VLSs; they may just employ the same strategies as what they do to


memorize Japanese ‘kanji’. Autonomy is a key factor to make

language learning successful, but their efforts would be

meaningless if they are not suitable for the learning purpose.

From these perspectives, the current study addresses the

following research questions:

1. What kinds of word are frequently used in the Japanese EFL

textbooks?

2. Is there enough recycling in the Japanese EFL textbooks to

support incremental learning?

3. What kind of VLS do Japanese high school students adopt for

regular vocabulary learning and vocabulary test?

Literature review

Vocabulary in textbooks

In general, it has been said that EFL learners need to

acquire the most frequent 2,000 words in English based on A

General Service List of English Words (West, 1953), which enable them to

recognize about 80 percent of any normal text (Milton, 2006;

Nation, 2001; Schmitt, 2000). Furthermore, Nation (2006)

calculated that between 2000 word and 3000 word families covered


about 95 percent coverage, and Schmitt (2010) insisted that

learners needed to know between 6,000 and 7,000 words to gain 98

percent comprehension in an authentic text. Taking account of the

actual situations, acquiring between the frequent 2,000 and 3,000

word families would be a realistic goal for Japanese high school

students.

Of course, it is essential for them to make numerous efforts

in order to acquire 2,000 -3,000 word families. In particular, as

Schmitt (2010) pointed out, “both learning and forgetting would

occur until the word is mastered and fixed in memory” (p.23),

they need to overcome possible ‘forgetting’ during the course of

learning. In fact, Nagy (1997) revealed that the chances of

learning and retaining a word from one exposure when reading were

only about 5 percent to 14 percent. In order to overcome such a

difficulty and reinforce long-term retention of learning words,

nobody would doubt that ‘recycling’ is a powerful way. Thus,

teachers should keep sufficient opportunities for students to

recycle the words with regular intervals (Schmitt, 2000), and

hopefully, textbooks offer sufficient recycling opportunities so

that students can be exposed to the target words repeatedly.


Indeed, Milton (2006) insisted that an effective textbook was

probably going to introduce large quantities of vocabulary at

regular intervals. Certainly, such textbooks would enable the

learners to learn the target words effectively. However, it may

be difficult to organize such an ideal textbook for vocabulary

learning. As Schmitt (2010) argued, general textbooks or adult

authentic texts seem to have less repetition, compared with

children’s reading books or Graded readers; also, Nation (1993)

claimed that it would be impossible to recycle every item

systematically in a course book.

Although there are pros and cons, such analysis may not be

applied to textbooks for Japanese EFL learners since these claims

are generally based on ESL textbooks published in the UK and the

US. In terms of text analysis, some Japanese researchers have

conducted the studies from the various angles, such as word

tokens and word frequency (Nakajo et. al, 2007), genre and text-

type (Sakai & Wada, 2012), or relationship between vocabulary of

textbook and entrance examination (Matsuo, 2000), but they did

not deal with the recycling rate of the target words in Japanese

EFL textbooks. Therefore, it is worth exploring this issue in


order to draw a clearer picture of an effective textbook for

vocabulary learning in Japanese setting.

Language learning strategies

Language learning strategies are defined as “specific

actions, behaviors, steps, or techniques used by students to

enhance their own learning” (Scarcella & Oxford, 1992, p. 63).

Besides, Oxford (2006) claimed, “when the learner consciously

chooses strategies that fit his or her learning style and the L2

task at hand, these strategies become a useful toolkit for

active, conscious, and purposeful self-regulation of learning”

(p. 359). Since students are generally required to manage their

own learning outside the classroom, it is better for them to be

familiar with various strategies which are suitable for the

learning needs. Indeed, as Cohen and Macaro (2007) introduced in

Language Learner Strategies, researchers around the world have studied

and presented varieties of strategies in reading, writing,

speaking, listening, or grammar, as well as vocabulary learning

strategies (VLS).


For English teachers in Japan, the most informative VLS

studies would be the one conducted by Schmitt (1997). In order to

find general VLS use among Japanese EFL learners, he carried out

surveys of a broad cross-section of Japanese learners: Junior

high school students, high school students, university students,

and adult learners. The results indicated that Japanese EFL

learners, especially young learners, tended to depend highly on

the ‘written repetition’ and ‘verbal repetition’ strategies to

consolidate words although “the patterns of strategy use can

change over time as a learner either matures or become more

proficient in the target language” (p. 223). This result, he

pointed out, “can, at least partially, be attributed to the study

style encouraged by the Japanese school system; students are

required to memorize English grammar and vocabulary, usually

through repetition” (p.220). In addition, in Japanese education,

students are generally instructed to write Kanji over and over

again to be familiar with its script. That is, young learners may

just follow this habit to memorize English words without

exploring other strategies.


In order to ‘acquire’ vocabulary, learners must learn

various factors including multiple word meanings, connotations,

derived forms, spellings, pronunciations, proper grammatical

uses, or collocation and so on (Nation, 1990). That is, they need

to employ suitable VLSs, depending on learning purposes. However,

it is no wonder that some learners, especially novice learners,

may adopt unreasonable VLS without any suggestions. So, it is

important for teachers to realize what kind of VLS students use

for various purposes such as regular vocabulary learning or

vocabulary test. Although Schmitt (1997)’s study revealed

informative findings about VLS use among Japanese learners, it

did not refer to VLS use for a specific purpose like vocabulary

test. Thus, it is meaningful to explore the topic as well as that

of regular vocabulary learning.

Experiment 1: Text analysis

For most Japanese high school students, the textbook is

their main tool of vocabulary learning. In other words, their

success of English learning depends on whether they can

appropriately acquire the words in textbook or not. However, it


is supposed that many students may not be able to learn

vocabulary effectively without any instructions. So, it is

important for teachers to analyze the textbook they use in order

to make effective teaching plans and provide useful instructions

with students; specifically, the word frequency and the recycling

rate of the target words, which are essential factors to

vocabulary acquisition, should be explored. This experiment was

designed from these perspectives.

Instruments

Three textbooks, which are published in Japan for the

beginning level (All Aboard), the intermediate level (Power on), and

the advanced level (Provision) first grade senior high school

students, were analyzed by an instrument called Compleat Lexical

Tutr / Lextutor V6.2 (http://www.lextutor.ca/freq/eng/). As Schmitt

(2010, p. 341) said, “Lextutor is the most essential tool in the

vocabulary researcher’s toolbox”, this tool shows a lot of useful

data about vocabulary such as the word frequency, the recycling

index, or word tokens in a text; furthermore, it calculates the

percentage of the high frequency 2,000 word families, Academic

http://www.lextutor.ca/freq/eng/


Word List (AWL), and off-list words in a text. This high-frequency

2,000 word families list is based on A General Service List of English

Words (West, 1953) and “the resulting of AWL contains 570 word

families which covers 10% of the academic corpus” (Schmitt,

p.79).

Procedure

In order to explore the word frequency in the textbooks, the

researcher used the Web Frequency Indexer V1.3, which caliculates the

word freguency from user texts and downloads influential

frequency lists. First, all the chapeters in each textbook were

scanned and pasted into the tool box (see Figure 1.1). Then,

Frequency Indexer calculated the word frequency in the textbook and

provided the frequency list (see Figure 1.2). Following this

procedure, the researcher gained the frequency lists of All

aboard, Power on, and Provision.


Figure 1.1. The screen shot from Word Frequency Indexer v 1.3

Figure 1.2. The list of the word frequency in a textbook

Lextutor has another useful function called Vocab Profile, which

generates data about the percentage of the high frequency 2,000

word families, Academic Word List (AWL), off-list words, and the

number of word tokens in a textbook. In order to gain a

vocabulary profile, the researcher scanned all chapters in a

text, and pasted them into the tool box (see Figure 1.3).

Following these steps, the researcher collected the data from all

textbooks (see Figure 1.4).


Figure 1.3. The screen shot from Vocab Profile

Figure 1.4. The results of the vocabulary profile in a textbook

In order to explore the recycling index of a textbook, all

chapters were divided into two sections, chapter 1-5 and chapter

6-11. Then, the researcher scanned each section and pasted them


into the tool boxes respectively (see Figure 1.5). Text Lex Compare

indicated the word families which were ‘unique’ to one section

and ‘shared’ in two sections (see Figure 1.5). That is, if a word

is shown in the ‘shared’ box, it means that the word is recycled

in two sections; on the other hand, a word in the ‘unique to

first / second’ box appears in only one section. Following this

procedure, the researcher explored words which were recycled in

two sections.

Figure 1.5. The screen shot from Text Lex Compare and recycling index

In each procedure, proper nouns like names of specific people or

place were excluded from the results.

Results 1


Word frequency

Table 1.1 shows the ten most frequent words in Provision,

Power on, and All aboard, and indicates that ‘function words’

dominate in the top frequency of all textbooks. This may be a

matter of course because “it is probably impossible to avoid

repeating much functional vocabulary, which is essential to well-

constructed language” (Milton, 2006, p.209). According to Schmitt

(2010), the first 50 words in the list of the 2,000 most frequent

words are made up entirely of function word.

Table 1.1

The ten most frequent words from Provision, Power on, All aboard, and Cambridge

Corpus

Provision

Power on All aboard

Rank Word Freq

Word Freq Word Freq

1

2

3

4

the (433)

the (168) the (95)

to (244)

a (93) a (43)


5

6

7

8

9

10

a (182)

and (77) in (35)

of (172)

in (76) is (35)

and (167)

to (76) to (34)

in (160)

he (67) of (33)

I (139)

of (64) and (31)

was (97)

is (58) I (30)

that (85)

you (48) on (30)

for (68)

was (44) was (27)

By contrast, it seems that frequent content words are likely

to be different depending on textbooks (see Table 1.2) although

the high-frequency words, like ‘people’ and ‘number’ frequently


appear in all the texts. Another finding is that most content

words in the list are involved in A General Service List of English Words

(West, 1953). Since the high-frequency 2,000 words cover more

than 80 percent of running words in English text (Nation, 2001),

it may be not surprising that these basic words frequently appear

in the textbooks.

Table 1.2

The top ten frequent content words from Provision, Power on, and All aboard

Provision

Power on All aboard

Word (Rank / Freq) Word

(Rank / Freq) Word (Rank / Freq)

people (13 /

62)

number (16 / 53)

have (23 /

43)

world (34 /

34)

life (42 /

people (18 / 26)

number (13 / 22)

number (27 / 19)

toad (14 / 21)

have (31 / 17)

frog (16 / 19)

world (31 / 17)


26)

go (47 /

23)

son (50 /

22)

war

(53 / 21)

father (55 /

20)

night (55 /

20)

people (17 / 17)

like (46 / 12)

have (21 / 13)

hippos (56 /10)

like (26 / 12)

countries (63 / 9)

life (30 / 11)

dance (63 / 9)

say (36 / 10)

day (63/ 9)

robots (39 / 9 )

substance (63 / 9)

look (39 / 9)

Note. Proper nouns are not involved in the list.

Indeed, the high-frequency 2,000 words are appropriately

distributed in all the textbooks; the percentage of 2,000 most

frequent words in Provision is 91.5 %, Power on is 88.56 %, and All

aboard is 88.38 % (see Table 1.3). Incidentally, Schmitt (2010,

pp.70-71) showed that the percentage of the 2,000 high-frequency

words in the beginning level Graded reader was 87.68 %.


Additionally, the result indicates that the number of the word

tokens is highly correlated to the ratio of the 2,000 high-

frequency word families in a textbook (r = .97). In sum, the more

words are involved in a text, the more often students encounter

high-frequency words.

Table 1.3

The ratio of the 2,000 most frequent words in Provision, Power on, All aboard

K1 Words K2

Words K1+K2 Tokens

(1 -1,000)

(1,001-2,000) (1-2,000)

Textbook %

% % n

Provision

86.18

Power on

83.21

All aboard

82.77

Graded reader

5.32

91.50 7,558

5.35 88.56 3,626

5.61 88.38 1,889

3.56 87.68 1,996


84.12

Note. Graded reader (Schmitt, 2010, p.71).

When it comes to the number of exposures which is necessary

to promote incidental learning from reading, the previous

researches revealed some concrete results. For instance, Pigada

and Schmitt (2006) found that there was a discernible rise in the

learning rate by about 10 exposures; Horst et al. (1998) also

revealed that it was likely for learners to learn words appearing

8 or more times throughout the text. Of course, these numbers

would depend on the proficiency level of the learners, but as a

benchmark of incidental learning, Schmitt (2010) insisted, “8-10

reading exposure may give learners a reasonable chance of

acquiring an initial receptive knowledge of words” (p.31).

Following his claim, the researcher counted the number of the

content words appearing more than 8 times in a text book (see

Table 1.4). The result indicates that there is a strong

correlation between the number of content words which appear more

than 8 times and word tokens in a textbook (r = .98). Again,

learners are more likely to encounter the high-frequency words in

a textbook which has more word tokens.


Table 1.4

The number of the content words which appear more than 8 times in the textbooks

Content words appearing more than 8 times Word tokensTextbook n

n

Provision

74

Power on

20

All aboard

13

7,558

3,626

1,889

Results 2

Word recycling

Besides the word frequency, it is necessary to explore

whether the target words are used in only one section or recycled

in more than one section because recycling is crucial to avoid

possible forgetting. Indeed, Schmitt (2010, p.23) pointed out,

“forgetting can occur even if vocabulary is relatively well


known, such as when one does not use a second language for a long

time, or one stops a course of language study”.

Table 2.1 shows that high-frequency content words such as

‘people’, ‘number’, ‘like’, or ‘go’ are sufficiently recycled and

most content words recycled in the textbooks are ranked in the

2,000 high-frequency word list. On the other hands, low-frequency

words like ‘toad’ and ‘frog’ seem to be intensively used only in

one chapter and they do not appear at all in other chapters.

Perhaps, this may be because a frog is the main character of the

chapter in which the words ‘toad’ and ‘frog’ frequently appear;

likewise, the words ‘hippos’ and ‘substance’ are repeatedly used

in the chapter, Hippos’ secret substance, in order to describe the

unique features that hippos have. That is, law frequency words

may be more likely to be influenced by a thematic content,

compared with high-frequency words.

Table 2.1

The top five recycling content words of Provision, Power on, and All aboard

Unique to first section Recycled Unique to second section (lesson 1-5) (lesson 6-11)


Textbook Word (Freq) Word (Freq) Word (Freq)Provision anime (12)

have (65) doctor (21)

culture (8)

people (37) night (14)

message (8)

number (32) paint (13)

television (8)

go (35) bird (12)

animators (7)

son (25) auction (11)

Power on draw (7)

have (38) hippos (10)

food (7)

people (26) dance (9)

greet (6)

number (19) substance (9)

dog (5)

world (17) law (9)


cartoon (4)

like (12) play (9)

All Aboard bomb (4)

have (16) toad (21)

love (4)

number (22) frog (19)

clothe (3)

people (17) robot (9)

dome (3)

like (12) say (9)

journey (3)

life (11) country (9)

Note. The words in the Unique to first / second section do not appear

in the other section.

Although some high-frequency words involving function words

seem to be sufficiently recycled throughout a textbook, it cannot

be said that overall recycling rate is enough in all the

textbooks. Indeed, the recycling rate in each text book is less

than 50 percent (see Table 2.2). This rate absolutely decreases

if the function words are not counted. Table 2.3 shows that the


number of the content words is about one-thirds of all in the top

fifty repeated word families list. That is, most content words

are not recycled in all the textbooks.

Table 2.2

Recycling index of word families in Provision, Power on, and All aboard

Unique word families

Repeated word families Recycling rate

Text book n

n %

Provision 857

346 40.37

Power on 585

237 40.51

All aboard 376

116 31.38

Table 2.3

The number of content words in the top fifty repeated word families

Content words in the top fifty Function words in the top fifty repeated word families


list repeated word families list Textbook n

n

Provision 15

35

Power on 14

36

All aboard 16

34

Discussion of experiment 1

The results of the experiment indicated that function words

were frequently used in the textbooks compared with content

words. Considering the components of English sentences, this

result is not surprising because function words are essential for

organizing a sentence in almost all cases. Indeed, some studies

exploring the word frequency revealed that the function words

dominated the frequency list (MacCathy & Carter, 1997; Leech,

Rayson, & Wilson, 2001). Also, the researcher found that less


frequent words which did not rank in the list of 2,000 word

family were likely to be affected by a thematic topic. Although

the frequent 2,000 word family was distributed in the textbook

sufficiently, when it comes to the recycling rate of target words

in the textbooks, most content words were less recycled in the

textbooks, except for some high-frequency words such as ‘people’,

‘world’, ‘life’ or ‘go’. It is assumed that the ratio of

recycling would vary depending on texts, but the finding supports

the claims that general textbooks or adult authentic texts have

less repetition unlike children’s reading books or Graded readers

(Schmitt, 2010) and that it would be impossible to recycle every

item systematically in a course book (Nation, 1993). Thus, it is

necessary to consider what to overcome the difficulty.

Furthermore, as Milton (2006) claimed that “the more

vocabulary that is presented in a course book, the more

vocabulary learners seems to acquire” (p.207), the results of the

experiment show that textbooks which have more word tokens are

likely to increase the word frequency and the recycling rate of

the target words, which are essential factors for vocabulary

acquisition (see Table 1.3 & Table 1.4). Although it is necessary


to provide additional trainings in order to develop ‘productive

knowledge’, when it comes to developing ‘receptive knowledge’

through reading a textbook, 8-10 reading exposures would be a

benchmark to promote incidental learning (of course, this would

be different depending on proficiency levels or the difficulty of

words). So, if a textbook does not provide sufficient

repetitions, teachers have to make up for the deficiency by using

the target words repeatedly in teacher talk, organizing tasks in

which students are unconsciously exposed to the target words, or

providing regular vocabulary tests and so on.

The good news is that all the text books adequately contain

the 2,000 high frequency word families (see Table 1.3). Although

Milton (2006, p.204) hypothesized, “an effective textbook is

probably going to introduce frequent and infrequent vocabulary in

roughly equal amounts”, it is more effective to address high

frequency words at the beginning and intermediate level. In

short, novice learners should focus on acquiring the 2,000

frequent word families which enable them to achieve basic

communication in English; as they mature, they should begin

exploring beyond the 3,000 word families level. Since textbooks


seem to offer sufficient high-frequency words, it is important

for teachers and students to use the resources appropriately.

Experiment 2: Learning strategy for vocabulary learning

In general, most teachers expect students to memorize the

target words before sitting in the class and to exert individual

effort to retain these words outside the classroom. Indeed, the

four skills, listening, speaking, writing, and reading, are

preferentially addressed in the lesson, so it is difficult to

secure enough time for vocabulary instruction within limited

time. Thus, in many cases, students are required to manage their

own vocabulary learning by themselves. So, it is important for

them to know effective vocabulary learning strategies (VLSs)

which facilitate vocabulary learning. If they adopt an

ineffective strategy which does not apply to a learning purpose,

teachers have to lead them in the right direction. Thus, it is

crucial to know how students learn vocabulary. From this

perspective, the following experiment was designed to explore the

tendencies of VLS use among Japanese high school students.

Participants


The participants involved in the experiment were 171

freshmen in a senior high school in Akita prefecture, Japan.

Since this high school offers a variety of majors, such as

special advanced learning courses, general courses, agricultural

courses, and environmental courses, students’ proficiency levels

are diverse. So, 30 students who belong to the special advanced

course and 141 students in the general courses were asked to

participate in the study.

Furthermore, for English lessons, students in the general course

which consisted of four homerooms were divided into three levels

depending on the result of their entrance examinations; 56

students were in the two advanced classes (29 students and 27

students), 53 students were in the two intermediate classes (25

students and 28 students), and 32 students were in the two

beginning classes (16 students and 16 students).

Taking account of these situations, in this experiment, 86

students (30 students in the special advanced learning course and

56 students in the advanced classes) were categorized as the

‘advanced group’, while 85 participants (53 students in the

intermediate classes and 32 students in the beginning level


classes) were the ‘less advanced group’. Then, the researcher

compared the trends of VLS use of the two groups.

Instruments

In order to ascertain the participants’ learning habit, a

questionnaire composed of 27 questions was administered in

Japanese (see Appendix 1); it was based upon the questionnaire

made by Schmidt et al (1996) and was modified to suit the purpose

of the study. The first 10 items concerned learning motivation;

the next 6 items concerned learning anxiety; and the final 11

items concerned VLS. Each statement had a four-point scale

(Likert scale) ranging from ‘1’ indicating ‘I totally disagree’,

to ‘4’ ‘I totally agree’.

In terms of the VLS section, the participants who marked ‘3’

or ‘4’ were counted as the ‘users’ of the strategy, while those

who answered ‘1’ or ‘2’ were counted as the ‘non users’; then,

the percentage of the ‘users’ was calculated. Also, each VLS was

divided into three categories, ‘cognitive strategy’, ‘meta

cognitive strategy’, and ‘social strategy’ in order to clarify

the participants’ VLS use depending on different purposes; in


terms of the concepts of these strategies, the researcher

referred to Language learning strategies (Oxford, 1990). In order to

get a clearer picture of VLS use among Japanese senior high

school students, the results of the cognitive strategy and the

social strategy section were compared with those of Schmitt

(1997) which examined VLS use of Japanese high school students.

Unfortunately, in terms of meta cognitive strategy, the

researcher could not find the relevant data in Schmitt’s study,

so comparison was not conducted.

Procedure

The survey was carried out soon after the participants were

enrolled in the school. Since they were divided into some classes

as referred in the previous paragraph, each teacher who took

charge of a class conducted the questionnaire in the same day. In

order to avoid a bias for the experiment, the teachers informed

the participants that the information would be used for only the

research aim and it would not affect their grade. The

participants were required to write students ID number on the


questionnaire sheet and respond to the questions in a span of ten

minutes.

Results

1. Meta cognitive strategies

Figure 2.1 The diagram of the meta cognitive strategies (Oxford, 1990, p.

137)

Oxford (1990) insisted, “meta cognitive strategies provide a

way for learners to coordinate their own learning process”

(p.136) so it is necessary for learners to be familiar with the

strategies since teachers cannot support students outside the

classroom. Then, she defined ‘centering your learning’,


‘arranging and planning your learning’, and ‘evaluating your

learning’ as the core concepts of meta cognitive strategy (see

Figure 2.1).

Table 3.1

The percentage of meta cognitive strategies users in the questionnaire

Advanced group Less advanced group

Strategies

% %

1. (Meta / Dis) Preview words before a class

83 53

2. (Meta / Con) Review words repeatedly

71 56.9

3. (Meta / Con) Self-made vocabulary test

46 47

Note. Dis: Discovery Con: Consolidation Meta: Meta cognitive strategy.

Table 3.1 displays the percentage of meta cognitive

strategies users in the questionnaire. The result reveals that

many participants in the advanced group seem to emphasize both


previewing (83%) and reviewing (71%) to acquire the target words,

compared with the students in the less advanced group (preview:

53%, review: 56.9%). This result can be expected to some extent

from the result of the questionnaire indicating that the mean of

learning motivation in the advanced group is higher than that of

the less advanced group (see Table 3.2).

Table 3.2

The result of the questionnaire in the motivation section

Advanced group Less Advanced group

Questions

Mean Mean

1. I like English

2.93 2.51

2. I make efforts to develop English proficiecy

2.93 2.54

3. I think it important to learn English

3.52 3.19


4. I focus more on English than the other subjects 3.03

2.46

5. I want to realize western movie or songs

3.06 2.77

6. I want my parents to praise my efforts

2.46 2.23

7. I want to communicate with foreiners in English 2.9

2.59

8. I want to work at the international stage

2.56 2.53

9. I want to be enrolled in a prestatge university

2.67 2.35

10.I want to get a good score in a term exam

3.37 3.25

As many experts have emphasized the relationship between

motivation and strategy use (Cohen & Macaro, 2007; Nation, 2001;

Oxford, 1990, 2011; Schmidt et. al, 1996), it would be assumed

that the more motivated learner is, the more likely to use ‘meta


cognitive strategy’ to regulate themselves. That is, many

motivated learners may positively manage their own learning

outside the classroom, while many less motivated learners may

give up making further efforts. Such attitudes would affect their

developments of language learning.

2. Cognitive strategies

Figure 2.2 The diagram of the cognitive strategies (Oxford, 1990, p. 69)

Figure 2.2 illustrates the diagram of cognitive strategies;

they are divided into four sets including ‘practicing’,

‘receiving and sending messages’, ‘analyzing and reasoning’, and

‘creating structure for input and output’. As Oxford (1990)


claimed, cognitive strategies, which range from repeating to

analyzing expressions to summarizing, would be essential in

learning a new language. Indeed, cognitive maturity is a key to

success in second language (L2) learning, especially for learners

who start learning L2 after acquiring their mother tongue

(Lightbown & Spada, 2006). That is, since most L2 learners need

to make conscious efforts to acquire L2, they should be familiar

with cognitive strategy.

Table 3.3

The percentage of cognitive strategies users in the questionnaire

Advanced group Less advanced group Schmitt

Strategies

% % %

1. (Cog / Con) Verval repetition 67

60 -

2. (Cog / Con) Written repetition 90

82 89

3. (Cog / Con) Learn words in textual contexts 60

35.7 69


4. (Cog / Con) Flash cards 21.8

11.7 29

5. (Cog / Dis) Consult a bilingual dictionary 97

80 73

Note. Cog: cognitive strategy, Scmitt: the result of the survey

conducted by Schmitt (1997).

The results of ‘cognitive strategies’ users (see Table 3.3)

are interesting enough to consider the relationship between

strategy use and proficiency levels. As for this point, Schmitt

(1997) claimed that many of the ‘deeper processing strategies’

were perceived as being more helpful as learners mature,

paralleling their increased use. For example, sufficient

grammatical knowledge and reading proficiency would be needed to

learn words in a textual context; it is necessary for learners to

understand various factors, such as knowledge of morphology,

syntax, or discourse, in order to discover the meaning of the

words in a sentence. That is, additional abilities besides

memorizing skills are required to adopt a deeper processing

strategy like the ‘learn words in textual contexts’ strategy.

Therefore, it is no wonder that the percentage of the users of


this strategy among the less advanced group (35.7%) is lower than

that of the advanced group (60 %).

Whereas, the percentage of the ‘written repetition’ users is

definitely high in both the advanced group (90%) and the less

advanced group (82%). This result is almost the same as that of

Schmitt’s study, which indicated that 89 percent of high school

students supported this strategy. On the other hand, the

proportion of the ‘flash card’ strategy users is low in both the

advanced group (21.8 %) and the less advanced group (11.7%);

interestingly, Schmitt (1997, p.223) showed that the ratio of

this strategy users decreased as learners matured (high school:

29%, university: 12%, adult: 10%).

Unsurprisingly, the most popular cognitive strategy among the

participants is ‘consulting a bilingual dictionary’ (the

advanced: 97%, the less advanced: 80%); compared with Schmitt’s

result (73%), the ratio of the strategy users is high. Although

the result indicates that majority of the participants use a

dictionary to discover the meanings of a word, it cannot be said

that all of them can use it appropriately. As Miller and Glidea

(1985) pointed out, dictionary use is a complex work, so it is


necessary to instruct how to use it, especially for young

learners.

3. Social strategies

Figure 2.3 The diagram of the cognitive strategies (Oxford, 1990, p. 145)

Figure 2.3 indicates the diagram of social strategies. In

terms of this strategy, Oxford (1990) claimed that cooperation

with other people was essential in language learning because

language in all its aspects was a social act. This cooperation

requires the learner to interact well with both peers and more

proficient language users.

Table 3.4

The percentage of social strategies users in the questionnaire

Advanced group Less advanced group Schmitt


Strategies

% %

%

1. (Soc / Con) Consolidate words with classmates 14.2

29.1 -

2. (Soc / Dis) Ask teachers for meaning

38.8 40.9 37

3. (Soc / Dis) Ask classmates for meaning 71

78 73

Note. Soc: Social strategy.

As for the ‘social strategies’, many participants of both

groups seem to ask the meaning of target words to classmates (the

advanced group: 71%, the less advanced group: 78%) rather than

teacher (the advanced: 40.9%, the less advanced: 38.1%). This

result is also close to Schmitt’s study which showed that 37

percent of the high school students depended on teacher, while 73

percent relied on classmates to discover the meaning of words.

However, according to Schmitt (1997), the percentage of the

learners who ask teachers for the meaning increases as they

mature. That is, there is a possibility that young learners may


just hesitate to ask teacher and depend on classmates, which is

easier and less strained. However, when it comes to effective

vocabulary learning, it is no wonder that learners should depend

on proficient learners or teachers who have deeper and wider

knowledge. In order to make such learning environment, it would

be important to establish a good rapport between the teacher and

students.


The results of the experiment indicated that the

participants’ proficiency levels affected their VLS use to some

extent, especially in terms of the strategies which require ‘deep

processing’. Also, not surprisingly, motivated students tended to

make more efforts outside the classroom compared with the less

motivated students. As for these points, many researchers

reported that the use of learning strategies seems to be

demonstrably related to student’s learning motivation and

proficiency (Ahmed, 1989; Fan, 2003; Gu & Johnson, 1996;

Hosenfeld, 1977; Sanaoui, 1995). If they have successful


experiences and gain a sense of achievement during the course of

learning, it is no wonder that their self-efficacy and learning

motivation are generated; then, they would be positive to explore

more effective learning strategies to gain further success. It is

assumed that success of learning may depend on whether the

learner can establish such positive cycles or not. As many

researchers claimed, it is definitely important to generate

learning motivation.

Moreover, the experiment revealed that many participants

were the users of ‘simple repetition’ strategies like ‘written

repetition’ and ‘verbal repetition’. As referred to in the

previous study (Schmitt, 1997), the study style encouraged by

Japanese schools may have affected the result. In fact, Japanese

EFL students are encouraged to learn the script of ‘Kanji’s,

jotting down them over and over again; also, they are required to

memorize English grammar and vocabulary, usually through

repetition. Actually, these simple repetition strategies may be

easier for Japanese learners to adopt, compared with complex

strategies like ‘image word meanings’ strategy or ‘analyze word

parts’ strategy. In addition, they may not be positive to make


‘flash cards’ or ‘word lists’ because making cards or word lists

are time-consuming works. Although the strategy use are likely to

change as learners mature (Schmitt, 1997), it seems that the

participants depended on the user-friendly strategy, ‘simple

repetition’.

However, as Oxford (1990) suggested in her book, Language

learning strategies, learners may have used various kinds of

strategies in order to discover or consolidate the target words.

From this point of view, the VLSs referred in the experiment may

have been insufficient to make strong claims about the general

VLS use among Japanese high school students. In addition, if the

researcher had required the participants to report the process of

memorizing words or conducted an interview with them, it would

have been possible to draw the clearer picture of their strategy

use. But, during the process of making the questionnaire, the

researcher focused on the VLSs that seemed to be standard among

Japanese high school students, rather than involving complicated

strategy such as the ‘keyword method’ or the ‘image word’s

meaning strategy’. Also, the result of the experiment was almost

similar to that of Schmitt (1997), which is known as the most


informative study for VLS use among Japanese EFL learners.

Although the experiment may be sill insufficient, the results

revealed useful data for vocabulary instruction.

Experiment 3: Learning strategies for vocabulary test

In many Japanese high schools, vocabulary tests are

regularly conducted as a mile stone of vocabulary learning for

students. For most students, success on such a test would be an

important factor in generating their learning motivation. Indeed,

many participants answered in the questionnaire (see Table 3.2),

“I want to get a good score in a term exam” (mean of the advanced

group: 3.37, the less advanced group: 3.25). That is, even the

results of a weekly vocabulary test may affect their learning

motivation. If so, it is important for them to employ better

lerning strategies to gain good result in vocabulary test.

Although it is no wonder that regular vocabulary learning is

crucial (this theme was explored in the Experiment 2), it is also

important for teachers to know how strudents learn words to

prepare for vocabulary test which could be a powerful motivator


for language learning. From this perspective, the experiement was

designed.

Participants

One hundred and seventy one students who joined in the

experiment 2 participated in this experiment. They were divided

into the same two groups in the previous experiment (see p.20);

85 students were in the advanced group, while 86 students were in

the less advanced group.

Instrument

Vocabulary tests (see Appendix 2.1 & 2.2) examined spelling,

meaning, and syntactic features of the target words; the first

test was carried out three weeks after lesson 1 completed, while

the second test was administered just after lesson 2 was over.

Eight target words, which are ranked in the 2,000 most frequent

words of English, were picked up from each lesson. The researcher

made the tests. Additionally, blank sheets were distributed to

the participants so that they could practice the target words

before the test; the written records revealed their VLS use to

retain words in a short term.


Procedures

The vocabulary tests were conducted in each class. As it was

done in experiment 2, the teacher who was in charge of each class

administered the tests. Before each test, the teachers informed

the participants that the result of the test did not affect their

grades. Then, the target words were announced and they were

required to memorize these words, using the blank sheet which was

distributed by the teacher; the ‘practice time’ was for ten

minutes. After that, the sheets were collected, and the first

question sheets examining ‘spelling’ of the target words were

distributed to them (see Appendix 2.1). Three minutes later, the

sheets were collected and the second question sheets which asked

‘meaning’ and ‘syntactic feature’ of the target words were

distributed (see Appendix 2.2). The participants were required to

write their student ID number on both the blank sheet and the

question sheets. The testing time was seven minutes.

Results


Figure 3.1 ABCABC type and AABBCC type


Figure 3.2 AABBCC ABC type and Sentence type

Over 90 percent of the participants used the ‘written

repetition’ strategy to retain the words in a short span although

various styles could be seen. For instance, some participants

jotted down the target words just in order repeatedly (see Figure

3.1); this strategy was named as ABCABC type. About half

participants repeated a word several times until they firmly

memorized it, then moved to another word (see Figure 3.1); this

was named as AABBCC type. Another type of written repetition was

the one which mixed AABBCC type with ABCABC type; this was named as

AABBCC, ABC type (see Figure 3.2). Only a few participants tried to


make sentences using the target words, which was named Sentence

type (see Figure 3.2).

The most popular style among both groups seemed to be AABBCC

type although the percentage of the users varied in each test

(see Table 4); interestingly, some users repeated each word

equally, while others seemed to selectively pay attentions on

less memorable words. However, when it comes to the concept of

‘deep processing’ and ‘spaced repetition’, which were recommended

by many scholars as a reasonable way to memorize words (Craik &

Lockhart, 1972; Nation, 2001; Schmitt, 2000), AABBCC, ABC type

would be a good strategy because it has two ways with a spaced

interval rather than a monotonous way. But actually, the

percentage of the users of this strategy was lower than AABBCC

type. Also, it is assumed that the Sentence type strategy would be

the best way from ‘deep processing’ perspective. However, in

order to adopt this strategy, learners need to be sufficiently

proficient to make original sentences, using the target words. In

fact, few participants adopted this strategy in the condition

that they were not allowed to use other sources like a text book


or a dictionary. Given that they had been allowed to use them,

the number of the users may have increased.

Table 4

Strategy use for two vocabulary quizzes

Less

advanced group Advance group

Strategies 1st

(%) 2nd (%) 1st (%) 2nd (%)

ABC ABC type 15

6.5 5.8 11

AA BB CC type 61

45 49 48

AA BB CC ABC type 15 45

33 30

Sentence 0

0 7 2.4

Others 9.8

3.5 5.8 9.5



Since the aim of this experiment was to realize how the

participants learned vocabulary in a short term, the researchers

did not explore the correlation between the strategy use and the

scores of the tests (this will be the further question). Besides,

within the limited sources, it was hard to draw a clear picture

of their strategy use. Although majority of the participants used

the written repetition strategy, they may have adopted another

strategy if they were given a different kind of test. Also, they

may have used, in the experiment, another strategy like verbal

repetition with written repetition strategy. In order to picture

their strategy use more clearly, additional instruments like an

interview or self-report should have been conducted besides the

instrument.

However, it was meaningful to realize that the participants

used different kinds of written repetition strategies for a short

term memorization. This finding indicates that the participants’

learning style may affect the type of repetition. For instance,

some learners used AABBCC ABC type which requires multiple


processing; after completing repetition, they checked all words

again. On the other hand, others adopted monotonous way like

ABCABC type or AABBCC type; they just wrote down words over and

over again until memorizing them. When it comes to the concept of

‘deep processing’, which is said to be a powerful way to memorize

words, multiple processing like AABBCC ABC type may be

reasonable. But it would be safe to respect each student’s style

rather than forcing them to change their ways since learning

style “characterizes a general or dominant pattern” (Brown, 2007,

p.119), However, it is necessary to suggest alternative ways if

students cannot gain a good result.

Additionally, motivation for the tests may have been related

to their strategy use. Even though the same strategy was

employed, the number of repetition was different depending on the

participants. Indeed, some participants repeated the words only a

few times, while others did it more than ten times. Also, it is

no wonder that participants’ emotional state would be different

depending on each test; some participants who tried hard to

memorize words in one test showed the different performance in

the other test. Otherwise, their performance may have been


related to their personality or the outer factors such as the

time of day may have affected their attitude toward vocabulary

tests. So, it may be effective to check their emotional states

before each experiment in order to realize more precise analysis

of their VLS use (this will a further question). Since various

emotional aspects are likely to affect learning, it is important

for teachers to be sensitive to students’ performance and

encourage them if they seem to be less energetic toward learning.

General discussion

Figure 4. Typical pattern of forgetting and expanded interval

(Schmitt, 2000, p.130)

Judging from the recycling rate and word frequency of the

textbooks, it is obvious that teachers should consider the

appropriate ways to avoid forgetting vocabulary since this

generally occurs on all learners; then, the concept of ‘expanding


rehearsal’ (Schmitt, 2000, p. 130) would be the key to this

matter (see Figure 4). As one of the practical ways, it would be

reasonable to provide a mini vocabulary quiz regularly. Then,

each quiz should focus on a specific feature, such as phonetics,

syntax, semantic, or spelling of the target words; Japanese-English

Parallel Corpus (http://www.manythings.org/corpus/) is useful to

make various questions, using the same words. The point is to

have students repeatedly learn the same words from various

angles. Since “a large number of lexical characteristics affect

the way vocabulary is acquired and used” (Schmitt, 2010, p.47),

such various measures should be provided. Also, it is effective

for teachers to use the target words in teacher talk consciously.

Through such a meaningful interaction between teacher and

students, they may be able to facilitate their vocabulary

retention.

In terms of VLS use among the participants, the result of

the current experiments indicated that the majority of the

participants used the ‘written repetition’ strategy for both

vocabulary learning and the vocabulary tests. As Schmitt (1997)

pointed out, they may just depend on repetition, which is

http://www.manythings.org/corpus/


generally used among Japanese learners. Another possible reason

may be that ‘written repetition’ does not call for technical

skills unlike other strategies; learners just jot down the words

to memorize them and they are not required to be proficient to

adopt this strategy. That is, the ‘written repetition’ strategy

may be the most user-friendly and all-round VLS, especially for

young learners. Indeed, some researchers reported that beginners

starting to a new FL spontaneously and overwhelmingly use of

silent or written repetition of the target words and its meaning,

but make relatively little use of mnemonic VLS unless trained to

do so (Gu & Johnson, 1996; Lawson & Hogben, 1996).

Actually, it seems that the ‘written repetition strategy’

has some advantages. For example, as Hill (1969) suggested,

repeated copying letters of the alphabet is an effective method

to recognize the letter shapes. Since Japanese has a different

writing system from English, it is definitely important for

Japanese EFL learners to recognize the English letter shapes;

‘written repetition’ would be effective to reinforce this

ability. Furthermore, many researchers claimed the importance of

the link between spellings and phonetic awareness. Papagno (1991)


revealed that the participants in his study were unable to learn

foreign language words under articulatory suppression, an

interference treatment that selectively affected phonological

short-term memory, while in Ellis and Sinclair’s experiment

(1996), participants who repeated the language aloud scored

significantly higher on vocabulary. From these results, Martin

and Ellis (2012) claimed that working memory and phonological

short-term memory had significant role in vocabulary learning.

In sum, mixing ‘written repetition’ with ‘verbal repetition’

would be a powerful way in order to facilitate effective

vocabulary learning.

However, it is not wise to just depend on the simple

repetition strategies; learners should be familiar with other

strategies gradually so that they can effectively learn words for

various purposes. Although the ‘written repetition’ strategy

seems to have some advantages as referred to in the previous

paragraph, it also has some disadvantages. Indeed, learners are

likely to rely upon a one-to-one correspondence. In addition, in

order to master vocabulary, learners must learn various factors

including multiple word meanings and connotations, derived forms,


spellings, pronunciations, proper grammatical uses, or

collocations and so on (Nation, 1990). That is, learners must be

familiar with the depth of word knowledge. Although simple

repetition may enable learners to expand vocabulary, it would be

definitely hard to acquire the depth of word knowledge through

one-to-one correspondence. Indeed, as Brown (2007) pointed out,

“rote pattern drills often evoke surface imitation”, shallow

processing like the ‘written repetition’ strategy may not help

learners facilitate deeper vocabulary learning; “a deeper level

of imitation is far more important in the process of language

acquisition” (p.43). That is, better learning would take place

when a deeper level of processing with elaboration is achieved.

In conclusion, it is obvious that they need to adopt appropriate

strategies besides ‘written repetition’ depending on learning

purposes.

Conclusion

Brown (2007) said that teachers would determine the

philosophy of education, teaching style, approach, methods, and

classroom techniques by understanding how the learner learns.


Indeed, students would not be able to improve their performances

if they do not know what to change and how to change their ways

of learning and they would be lost on the course of learning

without effective supports. The current study revealed that most

content words in the textbooks were not recycled enough, and

majority of young students depended on the ‘written repetition’

strategy for both vocabulary learning and vocabulary test. Taking

account of these situations, language teachers should consider a

teaching plan for vocabulary instruction. Then, it is necessary

for them to provide various types of exercises to facilitate

vocabulary acquisition. Of course, it may be hard to secure

sufficient time for vocabulary instruction in the actual setting;

it is no wonder that four skills are preferentially focused.

However, it is definitely important to organize reasonable

learning systems in which sufficient repetitions are offered with

regular intervals; in addition, additional trainings which would

cover the lack of input in a textbook should be regularly

offered. Moreover, teachers should always encourage students to

make individual efforts, giving reasonable feedback or suggesting

suitable VLSs depending on learning purposes. To achieve this, it


goes without saying that it is important to understand each

student’s personality and learning situation. Hopefully, such

rational and supportive learning environment enables Japanese EFL

learners to acquire adequate English vocabulary.

Appendix 1 英英英英英英英英英英英英英英

Question 全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全

全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１


全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

全全全全全全、1 全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。、。、、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、体。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１


全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全全、。

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

４３２１

Appendix 2.1

Lesson 1 We Have Hopes and Dreams –JUST LIKE YOU! Mini Test

英英英英

Class ( ) No. ( )

Ⅰ 英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英、。

① 英英英英英英英英英英英 ② ③ (v ) (s ) (t )

英英英英英英英④ ⑤ ⑥


( s ) ( c ) (s )

⑦ 英英英英英英英英⑧ ( r ) (i )

Appendix 2.2

英英英英②Class ( ) No. ( )

Ⅱ 英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英英、。、英英英英英英英英英英英英英英。

1. The nurse ( ) my father. *nurse: 英英英


(a) culture (b) treated (c) realized (d) situation 英英英英英（）

2. We were surprised to see the ( ).

(a) scene (b) someday (c) realized (d) treat 英英英英英（）

3. I want to be a ( ) in the future.

(a) culture (b) impressed (c) treated (d) vet 英英英英英（）

4. I do not know ( ) stories.

(a) such (b) impress (c) realize (d) scene 英英英英英（）

5. His words ( ) me.

(a) such (b) impressed (c) information (d) treated 英英英英英（）

6. I’d like to go to America ( ). * ‘d like to- ：英英英～

(a) someday (b) such (c) culture (d) treat 英英英英英（）

7. She is interested in American ( ).

(a ) culture (b) someday (c) impressed (d) realized 英英英英英（）

8. I want to ( ) my dream.

(a) such (b) treat (c) realize (d) scene 英英英英英（）


References

Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. NY:

Pearson Longman.

Chamot, A, U, Barnhardt, S, El-Dinary, P, B, & Robbins, J.

(1999). The learning strategies handbook. NY: Longman.

Chujo, K., Yoshimori, T., Hasegawa, S., Nishigaki, C., &

Yamazaki, A. (2007). Koutou gakkou

eigo kyoukasyo no goi[Vocabulary in course book of high

school English].Unpublished manuscript.

Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition. NY:

Cambridge

University Press.

Cohen, D., & Macaro, E. (2007). Language learner strategies. NY:

Oxford.

Committee of university English education. (2006). Eigo kyousi no

tameno gakusyu strategy

handbook[Learning strategy handbook for English teacher](in

Japanese). Tokyo: Taishyukan.

Crystal, D. (2002). The english language (2nd ed.). London: Penguin

books.


Decarrio, J.S. (2001). Vocabulary learning and teaching. In

Murcia, C (Eds.), Teaching

English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.)(pp. 285-299). MA:

Heinle cengage

DiCamilla, F., & M, Anton. (1997). The function of repetition in

the collaborative discourse of

L2 learners. The Canadian Modern Language Review 53: 609-633.

Dӧrney, Z. (1996). Moving language learning motivation to a

larger platform for theory and practice. In Oxford, R.

(Eds.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new

century, 71-80. Honolulu, Hawai`i: University of Hawai`i

press.

Dӧrnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2

self. UK:

Multilingual Matters.

Earten, I., & Williams, M. (2008). A comparative look into how to

measure the effectiveness of

vocabulary learning strategies: thorough using percentages

or correlation coefficients.

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 4(2), 56-72.


Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition(2nd ed.). NY:

Oxford.

Gebhard, J. G. (2006). Teaching English as a foreign or second language.

US: The University of Michigan Press.

Grabe, W. (2009). Reading in a second language: moving from theory to

practice. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Hasegawa, S., Chujo, K., & Nishigaki, Y. (2008). Examining the

utility of junior and senior high

school English textbook vocabulary. Unpublished manuscript.

Hashimoto, K. (2009). Cultivating “Japanese who can use English”:

problems and contradictions in government policy. Asian Studies

Review, 33, 21-42.

Kadota, S., & Ikemura, D. (2006). Eigo goi sidou

handbook[Vocabulary teaching

handbook](in Japanese). Tokyo: Taishyukan.

Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implication. London:

Longuman.

Lawson, M, J, & Hogben, D. (1996). The vocabulary learning

strategies of foreign- language students. Language Learning,

46(1), 101-135.


Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (2011). How languages are learned (3rd

ed.). NY:Oxford.

Martin K.I. & Ellis, N.C. (2012). The roles of phonological shot-

term memory and working memory in L2 grammar and vocabulary

learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34, 379-413.

Masamura, H. (2002). Eigo gogi image ziten [Dictionary of English

word images](in Japanese).

Tokyo: Taishyukan.

Matsuo, H. (2000). An analysis of Japanese high school English

textbooks and university

entrance examinations: A comparison of vocabulary. Annual

review of English language

education in Japan 11. 141-150.

Milton, J.(2009). Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. UK:

Multilingual

Matters.

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology

(MEXT), Japan. (2009, January). The course of study for high

school. Retrieved from


http://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/micro_detail/__i

csFiles/afieldf ile/2010/01/29/1282000_9.pdf

Mochizuki, M., Aizawa, K., & Tono, Y. (2003). Eigo goi shido no

manual. Tokyo: Taishyukan.

Muranoi, H. (2006). Daini gengo syutoku kenkyu kara mita

koukateki na eigo gakusyu hou sidou

hou[SLA research and second language learning and teaching]

(in Japanese). Tokyo: Taishyukan.

Nagy, W. (1997). On the role of context in first- and second –

language vocabulary learning. In Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M

(Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy (pp.64-83).

Cambridge University Press.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. UK:

Cambridge

University Press.

Nation, I.S.P. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL reading and writing. NY:

Routledge.

Nation, I. S. P & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary.

MA: Heinle Cengage

learning.


Naveh, M. H., Kafipour, R., & Soltani, R. (2011). The

relationship among extraversion tendency, vocabulary learning

strategies, and reading comprehension of EFL undergraduate

in Kerman province. Studies in Literature and Language, 3(2), 104- 110.

Nyikos, M. & Fan, M. (2006). A review of vocabulary learning

strategies: Focus on language proficiency and learner voice.

In Cohen, A. D. & Macaro, E. (Eds.). Language learning strategies.

NY. Oxford.

O’ Grady, W., & Guzman, V. (2005). Morphology: The analysis of

word structure. In O’ Grady,

W., Archibald, J., Arnoff, M., & Rees-Miller, J (Eds.),

Contemporary Linguistics (5th ed.)(pp. 111- 149). NY: Bendford

St. Martin’s.

Okada, M., Oxford, R., & Abo, S. (1996). Not all alike:

motivation and learning strategies among students of

Japanese and Spanish in an exploratory study. In Oxford, R.

(Eds.),

Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century, 105-119.

Honolulu,


Hawaiì: University of Hawaiì press.

O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second

Language

acquisition. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ortega, L. (2009). Second language acquisition. UK: Hodder education.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: MA: Heinle & Heinle

Publishers.

Oxford, R. (2006). Language learning styles and strategies. In

Murcia, C (Eds.), Teaching

English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.)(pp. 359-366). MA:

Heinle cengage

language.

Oxford, R. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. UK:

Pearson

Education Limited.

Oxford, R., & Shearin, J. (1996). Language learning motivation in

a new key. In Oxford, R.

(Eds.), Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century, 121-

144. Honolulu,

Hawaiì: University of Hawaiì press.


Rohelen, T., & Letendre, G. (1998). Teaching and learning in Japan.

Cambridge: Cambridge

university press.

Saito, H., & Ebsworth, M. E. (2004). Seeing English language

teaching and learning through eyes of Japanese EFL and ESL

students. Foreign Language Annals, 37(1), 111-124.

Sakai, H., & Wada, J. (2012). A genre/text-type analysis of

junior high school English textbooks.

JALT Journal, Vol. 34, No.2, November 2012.

Scarcella, R. C., & Oxford, R. (1992). The tapestry of language learning:

The individual in the communicative classroom. MA: Heinle / Thomson

Learning.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. US: Cambridge

university press.

Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary; a vocabulary research manual.

NY: Palgrave

macmillan.

Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary; description, acquisition and

pedagogy. NY:

Cambridge University Press.


Shizuka, T. (2002). Eigo test sakusei no tatsuzin manual [Manual

for making English test](in

Japanese). Tokyo:Taishyukan.

Shmidt, R., Boraie, D., & Kassabgy, O. (1996). Foreign language

motivation: Internal structure and external connections. In

Oxford, R. (Eds.), Language learning motivation:

Pathways to the new century, 9-70. Honolulu, Hawai`i: University

of Hawai`i press.

Takac, V, P. (2008). Vocabulary learning strategies and foreign language

acquisition. UK:

Multilingual Matters.

Tseng, W., Dӧrnyei, Z, & Schmitt, N. (2006). A new approach to

assessing strategic learning: the case of self regulation in

vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 27/1, 78-102.

Zhou, Y. (2010). English language learning strategy use by

Chinese senior high school students. English Language Teaching,

3(4), 152-158.

Vocabulary learning

Documents

Transcript of Vocabulary learning