Measures of Dispersion and Variability: Range, QD, AD and SD
Case study about IEC reading classes
1. CASE STUDY Group Project
Teaching English Methodology
Ehsan Ataei MP101459
Saeid Farid MP 101394
Semester II, 2011
Dr. Hanita Hassan,
Language Academy,UTM
2. Note:learners are new post graduate students with 5-5.5 Score in IELTS exam.
Students have problem in learning vocabulary
It is very important because vocabulary knowledge will affect EAP (English for
academic purposes) activities very much activities such as paraphrasing reading
comprehension and summarizing
Title:
Vocabulary-oriented teaching in IEC (Intensive English courses) reading classes
in UTM University
Statement of problem:
Students do not learn enough and basic vocabulary to meet their needs for
academic purposes e.g. paraphrasing, summarizing, reading comprehension.
Hypothesis:
It is assumed that problems in reading comprehension, Summarizing and
paraphrasing and general progress in IEC reading classes are due to the lack of
vocabulary-oriented teaching and extensive reading
I. Introduction
Vocabulary learning is fundamental in language acquisition regardless of the
type of language which is taught (first, second or foreign language).For many
years vocabulary learning was underestimated due to the power of structural
approaches in which the emphasis was on grammatical and phonological
structures. An important reason for the low status of vocabulary teaching and
learning throughout 1940s, 1950s and 1960s was because of language teaching
approaches based on American linguistic theories. Most influential was the
Charles fries‟s Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language (1945),
he believed that grammar should be the fundamental pillar of language learning
and also adopts a view of behaviorist psychology in which habit formation was
introduced as an essential part in learning process. Because the emphasis was on
teaching grammatical and phonological structures, the vocabulary needed to be
relatively simple, with new words introduced only as they were needed to make
the drills possible (Larsen Freeman 2000b; Zimmerman 1997).Assumption was
that once students learned the structural frames, lexical items to fill the
grammatical slots in the frames could be learned later, as needed.
3. This approach of learning vocabulary is then rejected by Chomsky who
believed that there is a rationalist framework in which the central assumption is
being that language is represented as a speakers‟ mental grammar, a set of
abstract rules for generating grammatical sentences. Language learning
approaches based on this theory viewed learning as rule acquisition, not habit
formation, and emphasized grammatical rules. Vocabulary was offered
somewhat more importance, but the focus on rules of grammar still served to
reinforce the idea that lexis was somewhat secondary.
Then, Hymes (1972), while not rejecting Chomsky‟s model, extended it and
gave greater emphasis to the sociolinguistic and pragmatic factors governing
effective use of language. The teaching approach that evolve from these
notions, referred to as communicative language teaching, promoted fluency
over accuracy and consequently shifted the focus from sentence-level forms to
discourse-level functions.
This picture has changed dramatically within the last three decades. The
challenge to the status began in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and by the late
1980s and early 1990s, vocabulary studies were developing exponentially and
vocabulary teaching was coming into its own.
II. Literature Review
The Importance of Vocabulary to Reading Comprehension
Of the many compelling reasons for providing students with instruction to build
vocabulary, none is more important than the contribution of vocabulary
knowledge to reading comprehension. Indeed, one of the most enduring
findings in reading research is the extent to which students‟ vocabulary
knowledge relates to their reading comprehension (e.g., Anderson &Freebody,
1981; Baumann, Kame„enui, & Ash, 2003; Becker, 1977; Davis, 1942;
Whipple, 1925).
One of the most persistent findings in reading research is that the extent of
students‟ vocabulary knowledge relates strongly to their reading comprehension
and overall academic success (see Baumann, Kame„enui, & Ash, 2003; Becker,
1977; Davis, 1942; Whipple, 1925). This relationship seems logical; to get
meaning from what they read, students need both a great many words in their
vocabularies and the ability to use various strategies to establish the meanings
4. of new words when they encounter them. Young students who don‟t have large
vocabularies or effective word-learning strategies often struggle to achieve
comprehension. Their bad experiences with reading set in motion a cycle of
frustration and failure that continues throughout their schooling (Hart &Risley,
2003; Snow, Barnes, Chandler, Goodman, & Hemphill, 2000; White, Graves, &
Slater, 1990). Because these students don‟t have sufficient word knowledge to
understand what they read, they typically avoid reading. Because they don‟t
read very much, they don‟t have the opportunity to see and learn very many
new words. This sets in motion the well known “Matthew Effects,” Stanovich‟s
(1986) application of Matthew, 25:29–“the rich get richer and the poor get
poorer.” In terms of vocabulary development, good readers read more, become
better readers, and learn more words; poor readers read less, become poorer
readers, and learn fewer words.
Finally, knowing a word means being able to appreciate its connotations and
subtleties. When we know a word at this level, we can use and recognize it in
idioms, jokes, slang, and puns (Johnson, Johnson, &Schlicting, 2004).
The Kinds of Reading Necessary to Produce Vocabulary Growth
Some researchers suggest that almost any reading will produce vocabulary
growth (Krashen, 1993). Others contend that, if students consistently select
texts below their current reading levels, even wide reading won‟t result in
measurable vocabulary growth (Carver, 1994). Nor is reading text that is full of
unfamiliar words likely to produce large gains in word knowledge (Shefelbine,
1990). For students to get the most out of wide reading, the conclusion of most
researchers is that they should read for various purposes and read texts at
various levels of difficulty. Students should read some text simply for
enjoyment and some text that challenges them (see National Reading Panel,
2000).
Researchers who have observed students reading independently in classrooms
also suggest that teacher guidance to students in selecting books can make
independent reading periods productive. Teachers can direct students to books
at appropriate reading levels and point out books that might be of interest to
individual students (Anderson, 1996). In addition, setting aside time for students
5. to talk with each other about what they read can contribute to the effectiveness
of independent reading time (Anderson, 1996).
As is true for any method of promoting vocabulary growth, wide reading has
some limitations. One limitation is that, although wide reading may be effective
in producing general vocabulary growth, it may not be an effective method for
teaching the specific words that students need to comprehend a particular
literature selection or a particular content area textbook. Another limitation is
that wide reading alone cannot ensure that students develop the kind of word-
learning strategies they need to become independent word learners. For these
kinds of word learning, many students require intentional, explicit instruction.
Instruction for Vocabulary Development
Over the past three decades, research has revealed a great deal about the kind of
vocabulary instruction that is most effective for helping students comprehend
what they read (e.g., Baumann, Kame„enui et al., 2003; Beck &McKeown,
1991; Blachowicz& Fisher, 2000; Nagy & Scott, 2000). Based on its analysis of
this research, the National Reading Panel (2000) concluded that no one single
instructional method is sufficient for optimal vocabulary learning; therefore,
effective instruction must use a variety of methods to help students acquire new
words and increase the depth of their word knowledge over time. Effective
instruction includes opportunities for both incidental word learning and
intentional word teaching.
What the National Reading Panel Says About the Role of Vocabulary in
Reading Instruction
(Reprinted from National Reading Panel, 2000, p. 4-4)
1. There is a need for direct instruction of vocabulary items required for a
specific text.
2. Repetition and multiple exposures to vocabulary items are important.
Students should be given items that will be likely to appear in many
contexts.
3. Learning in rich contexts is valuable for vocabulary learning. Vocabulary
words should be those that the learner will find useful in many contexts.
When vocabulary items are derived from content learning materials, the
6. learner will be better equipped to deal with specific reading matter in
content areas.
4. Vocabulary tasks should be restructured as necessary. It is important to be
certain that students fully understand what is asked of them in the context
of reading, rather than focusing only on the words to be learned.
Restructuring seems to be most effective for low achieving or at-risk
students
5. Vocabulary learning is effective when it entails active engagement in
learning tasks.
6. Computer technology can be used effectively to help teach vocabulary.
7. Vocabulary can be acquired through incidental learning. Much of a
student‟s vocabulary will have to be learned in the course of doing things
other than explicit vocabulary learning. Repetition, richness of context,
and motivation may also add to the efficacy of incidental learning of
vocabulary.
8. Dependence on a single vocabulary instruction method will not result in
optimal learning. A variety of methods was used effectively with
emphasis on multimedia aspects of learning, richness of context in which
words are to be learned, and the number of exposures to words that
learners receive.
7. III. Methodology
Attitude is an important concept that is often used to understand and predict
people's reaction to an object or change and how behavior can be influenced
(Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975) in order to evaluate this reaction this survey try to
open a horizon toward further case studies on teaching 4 skills in IEC classes to
the public dissatisfaction.
In this case study we survey on the existence of a problem in teaching reading
regarding to shortage in teaching vocabulary.
In order to test this matter a questionnaire was designed in 20 questions based
on the role of vocabulary in reading (reading comprehension, summarizing,
paraphrasing) which are the common activities in EAP English for academic
purposes also it was planned As Triandis (1971) mentioned based on
component of likert type questionnaire learner's feelings learner`s beliefs or
knowledge and learners preferences about teaching vocabulary in reading
classes.
Face book inquiry (poll):
Then, for being surer about this problem we add 104 students of IEC in one
group in face book and gave them this question: “Are you satisfied with the way
of teaching vocabulary in your reading classes?”
To answer this question, students just need to tick appropriate box:
1-stongly agree 2- agree 3-not sure 4-disagree 5-strongly disagree
The points are 4, 3, 2, 1, 0 respectively; the result of the question is as follow:
Strongly agree=4 person
Agree= 19 person
Not sure= 18 person
Disagree= 30 person
Strongly disagree=33 person
8. Base on the poll (appendix I ) we had 104 participants more than 60% of them
were dis satisfy with their classes So 5 likert type questionnaire was designed
on line and also in paper form and was distributed between IEC reading
students the result from 50 questionnaire on line (Appendix III and in paper
form Appendix II ) was as following.
Main Themes based on questionnaire
The results of this study can be divided into seven themes:
1-Extensive reading
2-Academic vocabulary
3-Vocabulary-oriented teaching
4-Using Authentic materials in teaching vocabulary
5-Learners` s general idea about teaching
6-Explicit vocabulary teaching
7-Teaching skills for Reading fluently
Setting
Intermediate English students with score band 5-5.5 in IELTS (international
English language testing system)
Participants: IEC English Reading postgraduate Students on line and in paper
from
Validity
All questions were designed base on major role of teaching vocabulary in
Reading classes so although we could had some observations and interviews (
we had some interviews but because of the time we could not organize them )
for the validity of the questionnaire but questionnaire was enough to answer our
research questions
More research and case studies in this field also in relation between reading and
writing will be needed.
9. IV. Findings, analysis and discussion and conclusion
Gathering and analyzing of data when evaluating the attitude scales, positive
attitudes have been graded from 5 to 1, and negative attitudes have been graded
from 1 to 5.
With the help Excel software calculations have been used and findings have
been analyzed.
Attitude plays a role in the process of learning a second language. Learners'
attitude
Towards vocabulary-orientation teaching is assured to influence how
Successful they will be in summarizing paraphrasing and reading
comprehension as three major aspects of EAP (English for academic purposes
39 IEC learners fill up the questionnaire form and the analysis is as follows:
(Learners` s general idea about teaching) learners` attitude toward their reading
class About 44% of students conveyed that they did not have any progress and
13% of them were not sure about their progress.(Appendix IV)
(Vocabulary-oriented teaching) more than 60% of students in the poll were
dissatisfied about shortage in vocabulary-oriented teaching in IEC classes.
(appendix I) and in the questionnaire also about 70% of learners enounced
which confirm our hypothesis about teaching vocabulary-orientation that is not
in the process of Reading teachers and classes in IEC. (AppendixV)
About 62% of learners insist on this fact that there is no relationship between
their reading activities and writing, Using vocabulary in writing and the
relationship between skills is very important.(Appendix VI)
(Teaching skills for Reading fluently)74% of learners have low speed in their
reading which affect fluent reading and the main cause is related to lack of
vocabulary teaching in reading classes. (Appendix VII)
(Academic vocabulary) about teaching academic vocabulary more than 50% of
students agree that they did not learn it very much. (AppendixVIII)
About extensive reading more than 65% of students likes to have extensive
readings,(in our informal interviews students talk about one project as an
extensive reading which was their favorite. (Appendix IX)
10. more than 60% of students are agreed that teacher implementation in
vocabulary-oriented teaching was not found or weak ( in informal interviews
students say they want their teachers to focus vocabulary and after that teach
them some reading skills and also let them find their own text ( extensive
reading ) and write some paragraphs based on the vocabulary that they have
taught ( in some classes the teacher ask students to write in their classes but
because there was no certain words in reading classes writing became none
sense and not meaningful for the students. (AppendixX)
In general among 39 IEC 3% strongly disagree 13% were not sure and 19%
disagree and 11% strongly agree and learners 54% agree about the problem in
teaching vocabulary-oriented .(Appendix XI) they emphasis that it is necessary
for them to know some certain words ( in academic context based on Liu Na
and Nation (1985) also Nation &Waring (1997: l l) remark we need a
vocabulary of about 3000 words which provides coverage of at least 95% of a
text before we can efficiently learn from context with unsimplified text.)
if IEC students learn this vocabulary ( for sure they have learnt so many of them
) they can pass reading comprehension, summarizing,paraphrasing better more
over adding extensive reading helps them to get more familiar with the new
word in their major as well as academic words.
V. Suggestions for further studies
We have several suggestions for further study. A longer qualitative case study
should be conducted over the course of an entire semester in order to gain a
complete picture of what is happening in IEC classroom. it is recommended to
run a case study about vocabulary-oriented teaching in among all reading
students and have pretest ( it can be IELTS reading test or some standard test in
vocabulary proficiency ) and at the end of the semester have a kind of post test
so with comparing this two test it will reveal that students have any progress in
their vocabulary or not. also another survey can be about the relationship of
reading and writing class in EAP
it is clear that most of the students are not satisfied with most of IEC classes
it can be a problem about syllabus or teaching implementation which need more
time observations interviews and case studies.
11. Implications
The purpose of this case study was to examine how lack of teaching vocabulary
affects the comprehension of meaning summarizing and paraphrasing.
Additionally, the implications of this research are for IEC reading teachers.
Several important points emerge from this study and give suggestions for how
vocabulary should be taught in IEC reading classes.
The first implication is the vital requirement for teachers to find new and
innovative ways to teach vocabulary. Extensive reading is a good way for EAP
students in IEC classes, because they have different majors so they can search
and find their favorite texts and enrich their vocabulary through extensive
reading and teacher can give the students some projects aboutit.
Appendix I
12. Appendix II
Questionnaire
Teaching vocabulary in IEC reading classes
Dear Students
Kindly answer following questions, your cooperation is highly appreciated.
Statements:
1. I think I did not have any progress about vocabulary knowledge in my reading class.
2. After a semester I feel, I cannot summarize or paraphrase very well.
3. There is no relationship between vocabulary that i learn and my writing class so i think i will
forget them.
4. I love to find vocabulary in other sources as well as my text book.
5. I cannot answer reading comprehension questions very well.
6. There is no plan for learning vocabulary in our class.
7. I am weak in reading comprehension.
8. I have a lot of unknown words in my reading book.
9. I feel I need more basic vocabulary to handle my reading.
10. My speed in reading is too low.
11. I have not learnt so many academic vocabularies in my reading class.
12. My teacher doesn‟t ask us to make sentence with new words.
13. I almost always use dictionary for paraphrasing.
14. My teacher doesn‟t use collocations in our reading class.
15. There aren‟t various kinds of texts for our reading in class (texts from magazines, articles, internet etc.)
16. We don‟t have Reading for fun in our class.
17. We don‟t have reading tests frequently in our reading class.
18. We don‟t practice on new words every session.
19. We don‟t learn new vocabulary of our readings before we read them.
20. We don‟t have so many class projects on learning new vocabulary.
13. Statements Strongly Agree Agree Not Sure Disagree Strongly disagree
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Hope to have better English classes
Appendix III
14. Appendix IV
2% 13%
44%
28%
srongly disagree
disagree
13% not sure
agree
strongly agree
15. Appendix V
1%
11%
19%
srongly disagree
10%
disagree
not sure
agree
59%
strongly agree
Appendix VIII
0%
10%
34%
srongly disagree
disagree
46% not sure
10% agree
strongly agree
16. Appendix VII
0%
3%
13% 10%
srongly disagree
disagree
not sure
agree
74% strongly agree
Appendix IX
15% 4%
13%
srongly disagree
17%
disagree
not sure
51% agree
strongly agree
17. Appendix X
11% 3%
23%
srongly disagree
disagree
not sure
agree
12% strongly agree
51%
Appendix XI
11% 3%
19%
srongly disagree
13% disagree
not sure
54% agree
strongly agree
18. REFERENCE
Anderson, R. C. (1996). Research foundations to support wide reading.In V.
Greaney (Ed.), Promoting reading in developing countries (pp. 55-77).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Anderson, R. C., &Freebody, P. (1981).Vocabulary knowledge. In J. Guthrie
(Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77-117).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Baumann, J. F., Kame„enui, E. J., & Ash, G. E. (2003). Research on vocabulary
instruction: Voltaire redux. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. R. Squire, & J. M.
Jensen (Eds.), Handbook on research on teaching the English language
arts (2nd ed., pp. 752-785). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Beck, I. L., &McKeown, M. G. (1991).Conditions of vocabulary acquisition.
In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of
reading research, (Vol. 2, pp. 789-814). New York: Longman.
Beck, I. L., &McKeown, M. G. (2001). Text talk: Capturing the benefits of
Read aloud experiences for young children. The Reading Teacher
19. Becker, W. C. (1977). Teaching reading and language to the disadvantaged –
What we have learned from field research. Harvard Educational Review
Blachowicz, C., & Fisher, P. (2000).Vocabulary instruction.In M. Kamil, P.
Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of Reading
Research (Vol. 3, pp. 503-523). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Davis, F. B. (1942). Two new measures of reading ability. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 33, 365-372.
Eli Hinkel 2005 Handbook of research in second language teaching and
learning; Lawrence Erlbaum Association Inc. Publishers
Fishbein, M., &Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research. Reading
Hart, B., &Risley, T. R. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word
gap by age 3. American Educator, 22, 4-9.
H. Douglas Brown 2001 Teaching by Principles, Second Edition Pearson ESL
Jack C. Richards, Theodore Stephen Rodgers 2001, Approaches and
methods in language teaching; Cambridge University press
Krashen, S. (1993).The case for free, voluntary reading. Canadian Modern
Language Review, 50(1), 72-82.
20. Marianne Celce-Murcia 2001 Teaching English as a Second or Foreign
Language, 3rd Edition Heinle ELT; 3 edition
Nagy, W. E., & Scott, J. A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. In M. L. Kamil, P.
Nagy, W.E. and Anderson, R.C. (1984). How many words are there in
printed English? Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 304-330.
Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.
3, pp. 269-284). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nation &Waring (1997: l l) Vocabulary Size, Text Coverage and Word Lists
By Paul Nation and Robert Waring, 1997
National Reading Panel. (2000). teaching children to read: An evidencebased
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its
implications for reading instruction. Washington DC: National Institute
of Child Health and Human Development.
Norbert Schmitt, Michael McCarthy 1997 Vocabulary: description, acquisition
and pedagogy
Norbert Schmitt, Michael McCarthy Harry C. Triandis ,Attitude and attitude
change1971. Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy 232 p.
21. Snow, C., Barnes, W. S., Chandler, J., Goodman, I. F., & Hemphill, L. (2000).
Unfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of
individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research
Quarterly, 21, 360-407.
Theodore V. Higgs, Teaching for proficiency: the organizing principle
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages 1987
Theodore V. Higgs, American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
1987 Teaching for proficiency: the organizing principle
Whipple, G. (Ed.). (1925). The twenty-fourth yearbook of the National Society
for the Study of Education: Report of the National Committee on
Reading. Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing.
WesleyLiu Na and Nation (1985)LIU Na. & Nation, P. 1985. Factors
affecting guessing vocabulary incontext. RELC Journal, 16, 35-42.
White, T. G., Graves, M. F., & Slater, W. H. (1990). Growth of reading
Vocabulary in diverse elementary schools: Decoding and word meaning.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 281-290.