[ELTWeekly Volume 8, Issue 4 | January 27, 2016 | ISSN 0975-3036]
Using CALL for Creating Washback for Enhancing Vocabulary among the Suburban Undergraduate (UG) Level Students
Monal Desai, Research Scholar, Department of English, C U Shah University, Wadhwan. Dr.Surendrasinh Gohil, Asst. Professor in English, Department of English, NMCA, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, Gujarat
Abstract
The vital role of lexis in second language acquisition has long been acknowledged by researchers. Vocabulary is generally considered as the basic communication tool, and often labelled as one of the most difficult area by the language learners. Learners find it difficult to use appropriate words while writing or speaking. In order to acquire vocabulary, the second language learners use different techniques. This paper investigated whether use of CALL materials as a tool help second language learners at the UG level in a suburban college of Gujarat in learning vocabulary. The study explored if CALL can create washback and enhance vocabulary. The investigation was carried out using pre-test – treatment – post-test experimental design. The result of the experimental group was compared with that of the control group. The results of the study revealed that the students who receiving treatment in the experimental group outperformed those in the control group significantly.
Keywords: CALL (Computer Assisted Language Learning), ESL (English as a Second Language). Washback : Impact of assessment practices or tests.
Background
It was observed in the past that there was very little research being conducted in the field of ESL vocabulary ( Folse, 2004; Walters, 2004; Hunt & Beglar, 2005). However, the scenario has changed in the recent past. Folse (2004) asserts that since the mid- 1990s there has been a mini-explosion of research on second language vocabulary issues such as student needs, teaching techniques, learner strategies, and incidental learning. Knowledge of vocabulary is supposed as the backbone of learners’ competency which facilitates learning of any language tasks. Decarrico (2001, as cited in Celce-Murcia, 2001) states “vocabulary learning is central to first and second language acquisition and specialists now emphasize the need for a systematic and principled approach to vocabulary by both teachers and learners”( p. 285). Therefore, learning vocabulary is often perceived to be “of critical importance to the typical language learner” (Zimmerman, 2001, p. 5).
Learners feel that inadequacy in vocabulary resulted in their difficulties in both receptive and productive language use (Nation I.S.P, 1990). This is even worse if learners come from background in which English is not their primary language. Especially in context of technical institutions in Gujarat many learners originates from rural or suburban background. Medium of communication among peers and teachers is in vernacular language with English words thrown here and there. Thus, they are less able to comprehend text at grade level (Calderon M, August D, Slavin R, Duran D, Madden N, Cheung A, 2005).
Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension
The crucial role of vocabulary in comprehending language is quite evident. Research on reading points out that vocabulary and reading comprehension are very closely related to each other (Stahl, 1990). Chall (1987) claims that vocabulary knowledge can help reading, and reading can contribute to vocabulary growth. Laufer (1997) states that no text comprehension is possible, either in one’s native language or in a foreign language, without understanding the text’s keywords. Literacy experts share the belief that vocabulary knowledge and the ability to inextricably linked, the breadth and depth of student’s vocabulary is a key predictor of his or her ability to understand a wide range of texts (Anderson & Freebody 1981.) This is applicable for both native speakers of English and second language learners (Coady, 1993). Many researchers found that when the percentage of unknown vocabulary in a given text increases, the possibility of comprehending the text decreases (Hirsh & Nation, 1992; Hu & Nation, 2000; Laufer, 1989, 1992, 1997). Laufer (1989) was more specific when she revealed the importance of having sufficient vocabulary for reading comprehension, claiming that a reader whose vocabulary is insufficient to cover at least 95% of the words in a passage will not be guaranteed comprehension. Readers themselves consider vocabulary knowledge to be the main obstacle to second language reading comprehension. Yorio (1971) surveyed second language students, who reported that vocabulary was their main problem in reading comprehension.
Vocabulary Learning and Reading Comprehension through CALL
The use of Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL) in teaching languages has increased dramatically worldwide over the past decade. Teaching vocabulary through Web-Based Language Learning (WBLL) activities has been popularly used in English as a foreign/second language learning (EFL/ESL) contexts (Son, 2008).Chang and Hsu (2011) concedes that CALL has potential to enhance vocabulary of EFL college learners. In addition, Graney and Mokhtari (1993) state that CALL caters vocabulary learning as computer provides rich graphic, supports different learning styles and can provide immediate feedback. Therefore, use of CALL in enhancing vocabulary and developing reading skills may be explored with the language learners in the suburban areas where computers are accessible to the students.
Participants
The study was carried out involving 40 learners as the intact group sample from first semester of the engineering discipline. The sample consisted of the students who have been studying English as a Second Language for average Eight years, and their mean age was 18 at the time of the study. To facilitate the experiment, the participants were divided into two groups: control and experimental of 20 students in each.
Procedures
The treatment including the Pre and the Post Test lasted for four weeks. The treatment comprised of reading texts. Both the groups read the text and solved comprehension tasks that aimed at enhancing vocabulary. The control group was given printed reading texts together with the reading tasks, while the experimental group used hot potatoes software to read the text and complete the reading tasks online. Both the groups worked on the same texts and the tasks. However, the control group discussed answers with teacher whilst experimental group got immediate feedback from the computer once they completed the reading tasks. The teacher’s role in the experimental group was more to supervising while in control group learners depend on teacher for the feedback. The post- test was administered in the fourth week after the treatment. The scores of the Pre and the Post- tests were compared.
Classroom Observation by other teachers using journal entry was used as additional method of data collection. The data was collected based on common behavior demonstrated by the learners.
Data Analysis and Discussion
Table 1: Improvement in the post-test results of control and experimental groups.
| Control Group | Experimental Group
|
|
| Sample Size
N |
Difference in the mean score between the pre and the
post-test (%) |
Difference in the mean score between the pre and the
post-test (%) |
| 40 | 11.20 | 21.10 |
The table indicates that there is significant improvement in the means scores of the post tests from the pre-tests among both the groups. However, the experimental group has scored almost 10% more than the control group. It was observed that in control group, score increased between 2 to 16 per cent while the score of the experimental group increased between 10 to 32 per cent. The data depicts that the control group which used the printed material had an effect on the learners. Learners were able to comprehend meanings of vocabulary introduced to them. While, as compare to the experimental group, there was a higher increase of marks and this can be summarized by the learners’ better understanding of new vocabulary through the use of CALL materials. Due to engagement with layout of software and dictionary, the learners got more interest in learning new vocabulary compared to the printed materials. It was observed that the experimental group got immediate feedback after completion of the tasks. The positive reinforcement motivates learners to acquire new vocabulary. If error analysis is done with regenerative feedback then that knowledge results in learning new vocabulary.
Fig. 1. Immediate feedback obtained by the learners
Thus, the findings can determine that the score of Experimental group was significantly higher compared to Control group was not due to chance but due to the treatment, that is, use of computer in tasks.
Teacher Reflections
The reflection comprises observation based on classroom task and task with computers. In experimental group it was observed that they were quiet as compared to control group because they were busy with interactive CALL tasks and resources supported by it. It was observed that the learners took help of digital dictionary or internet and displayed taking responsibility for their learning. The interaction patterns were than in the control group. On the other hand, in the control group, two types of interaction patterns were observed: 1) teacher-learners 2) learners-learners as the sessions started with teacher’s instructions to the learners followed by reading task by learners and discussion of the answers. It was also noticed that Learner-learner interaction took place frequently in comparison to asking difficulties to the teacher. They felt comfortable to ask each other.
- Conclusion and Implications
It can be concluded that immediate feedback that the learners get while completing the reading activities fosters learning vocabulary. As Zahorik (1987) suggests if learners are given immediate feedback on their answers, it helps them to gratify their learning style which then leads to improved achievement. Furthermore, according to Zahorik (1987), immediacy of feedback is important because it provides students with information about how well they are doing. If the behavior is incorrect, the immediate feedback allows the learners to make corrective modifications and prevents continued practice of the incorrect behavior. On the other hand, if the behavior is correct, immediate feedback can motivate students to continue. In addition, feedback gives learners information about the progress they make towards their goals (Borich &Tombari, 1997; Eggen & Kauchak, 2004). The study helps in concluding that the immediate feedback that the learners get while conducting reading comprehension tasks with focus on vocabulary using CALL materials results in to positive backwash and proves to be constructive help in enhancing vocabulary through reading.
Works cited Anderson R.C, Freebody P. (1981).Vocabulary knowledge. In: Guthries JT, editor. Comprehension and Teaching: Research Perspectives. Newark, DE: International Reading Association; p.71-117.
Borich, G. D., &Tombari, M. L. (1997). Educational psychology: A contemporary approach (2nd ed). New York: Addison-Wisely Educational Publishers.
Calderón, M., August, D., Slavin, R., Duran, D., Madden, N., & Cheung, A. (2005). Bringing words to life in classrooms with English-language learners.Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice, 115-136.
Chang, C.-K., & Hsu, C.-K. (2011). A mobile-assisted synchronously collaborative translation-annotation system for English as a foreign language (EFL) reading comprehension. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(2), 155e180.
Coady J. (1993). Reaserch on ESL/EFL vocabulary Acquisition: Putting in context. In: Huckin T, Haynes M, Coady J, editors. Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Norwood: Ablex Publishing; p3-23.
Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2004). Educational Psychology: Windows on classroom. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Folse.K.S. (2004).Vocabulary Myths. AnnArbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Graney J, Mokhtari K. (1993) High frequency vocabulary and reading proficiency in ESL readers. In: Huckin T, Haynes M, & Coady J.editors. Second Language Reading and Vocabulary Learning. Norwood: Ablex Publishing.
Hirsh, D. & P. Nation. (1992) What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language 8 (2), 689-696.
Hu, M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Vocabulary Density and Reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13(1), 403–430.
Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2005). A Framework for Developing EFL Reading Vocabulary. Reading in a Foreign language, 17(1), 23-59.
Nation I.S.P.(1990) Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Boston, Mass: Heinle&Heinle Publishers.
Laufer, B. (1989). What percentage of text lexis is essential for comprehension? In Ch. Lauren and M. Nordman (Eds), In Special Language: From Humans Thinking To Thinking Machine . Multilingual Matters. (p. 316-323)
Stahl, S.A.(1990). Beyond the Instrumental Hypothesis: Some Relationships Between Word Meanings and Comprehension.Technical report no.505 of the Center for the Study of Reading. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Son, J. B. (2008). Using web-based language learning activities in the ESL classroom. International Journal of Pedagogies and learning, 4(4), 34-43.
Walters,J.(October 2004).Teaching the use of context to infer meaning: A longitudinal survey of L1 and L2 vocabulary research.Language Teaching,37(4),243-252.
Zahorik, J. A. (1987). Reacting. In M. J. Dunkin (Ed.), International encyclopaedia of teaching and teacher education .Oxford: Pergamon Press,pp. 416-423.