An Investigation Into Vocabulary Learning Strategies Employed By Secondary School Students At Nguyen Trai High School.pdf

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

PHAM THI THU HUONG

AN INVESTIGATION INTO VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES EMPLOYED BY SECONDARY SCHOOL

STUDENTS AT NGUYEN TRAI HIGH SCHOOL

MASTER THESIS

Thai Nguyen, June 2023

THAI NGUYEN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION

FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES

PHAM THI THU HUONG

AN INVESTIGATION INTO VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES EMPLOYED BY SECONDARY SCHOOL

STUDENTS AT NGUYEN TRAI HIGH SCHOOL

Major: ENGLISH TEACHING THEORIES AND METHODOLOGIES Code: 8140111

MASTER THESIS

Supervior : Cao Thuy Hong, PhD.

Thai Nguyen, June 2023

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma

No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgements in the thesis

This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in any other tertiary institution

Thai Nguyen, May 2023 Pham Thi Thu Huong

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to sincerely thank Mrs Cao Thuy Hong, Ph.D., my supervisor, for her valuable advice and assistance during my time carrying out the research Her superior knowledge and kind support enabled me to finish my study

In addition, I want to express my gratitude to Thai Nguyen University of Education's English faculty and staff for their support, advice, and encouragement

I also want to thank my family and friends for their love and support throughout this journey This voyage would not have been possible without them

Finally, I would like to acknowledge everyone who participated in my research for their time and willingness to share their experiences Without their contribution, this study would not have been completed

ABSTRACT

The research aimed to investigate the vocabulary learning strategies employed by students at Nguyen Trai High School, Thai Binh province A

quantitative survey research design was adopted to find out (i) vocabulary learning

strategies employed by students at Nguyen Trai High School (ii) relationship between gender and vocabulary learning strategies; as well as (iii) relationships between students’ achievement and vocabulary learning strategies Specifically, a

set of questionnaires were delivered to 200 participants (eleventh and twelfth graders at Nguyen Trai High School, Thai Binh province) The results of the study

showed that (i) student participants were average strategy users, with the mean scores ranging from 3.280 to 3.647, and determination strategies were most frequently used by students; (ii) there was no difference between male and female

students in terms of vocabulary learning strategies used; but (iii) there was a positive relationship between students’ achievements and their use of vocabulary learning strategies The study had important implications for teachers, students, and

other researchers

Keywords: vocabulary, strategies, vocabulary learning strategies

Chapter One: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY 1

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 2

1.2.1 Aims of the Study 2

1.2.2 Objectives 2

1.3 RESEACH QUESTIONS 2

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 2

1.5 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 3

1.6 THE STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY 3

Chapter Two: LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 CONTEXT OF THE STUDY 4

2.2 LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES 5

2.2.1 The concept of language learning strategies 5

2.2.2 Classification of language learning strategies 6

2.2.3 Factors affecting language learning strategies 11

2.3 VOCABULARY AND VOCABULARY LEARNING 19

2.3.1 Words versus Vocabulary 19

2.3.2 The importance of vocabulary 22

2.3.3 Aspects of L2 Vocabulary Knowledge 25

2.4 PREVIOUS STUDIES 34

Chapter Three: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 37

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN 37

3.2 RESEARCH POPULATION AND RESEARCH SAMPLE 37

3.3 DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT 37

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURE 39

3.5 DATA ANALYSIS 42

Chapter Four: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 43

4.1 Demographic information of the participants 43

4.2 Research question (rq) 1: what are the vocabulary learning strategies employed by students at nguyen trai high school? 44

4.3 RQ2 Are there any differences between male and female students' use of vocabulary learning strategies? 48

4.4 RQ3 Are there any relationships between students’ achievement and vocabulary learning strategies? 49

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 52

5.1 Summary of main findings 52

5.2 Implications 52

5.3 Limitations 56

REFERENCES 57

Appendix 70

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 2.1 The requirements for knowing a word receptively and productively

Nation (2001, p.27) 26

Table 3.1 Breakdowns of the questions in the questionnaire 37

Table 3.2 Interpretation of Cronbach’s alpha value (George & Mallery, 2003) 39

Table 3.3 The scale reliability 39

Table 4.1 The participants’ English-studying experience and GPA 42

Table 4.2 A comparison of students’ vocabulary learning strategies 43

Table 4.3 Item Statistics of Determination Strategies 44

Table 4.4 Item Statistics of Social Strategies 45

Table 4.5 Item Statistics of Metacognitive strategies 4 6

Table 4.6 Correlations between gender and students’ vocabulary learning strategies 47

Table 4.7 Correlations between GPA and students’ vocabulary learning strategies 49

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1: Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) 8 Figure 2.2 Difference between vocabulary and lexis (van Vlack, 2013) 21

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Abbreviations Meaning

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

One of the key language components which may help learners of English as a second language (ESL) or foreign language (EFL) to improve their language abilities (i.e., speaking, listening, reading, and writing) is vocabulary According to McCarthy (1990), regardless of how well the learners have learned grammar or how well they have mastered the sound system, communication in a second/ foreign language would be challenging without words In addition to grammar and pronunciation, Min (2013) asserted that non-native speakers need a solid lexical foundation to succeed as English users in any academic environment

In Vietnam, English was integrated into the primary education curriculum since 2003 and was taught from grade 3 with a duration of 70 hours per year It is considered a compulsory foreign language and one of the conditions for consideration and recognition of high school graduation (MOET, 2010) Despite efforts to teach and learn English in Vietnam, recent statistics shows that, after more than two decades of teaching English as a compulsory subject, Vietnam is still facing a crisis of quality After seven years of schooling and two years studying at university, students still struggle to communicate effectively in English, according to the former head of Vietnam's National Foreign Languages 2020 Project (MOET, 2008) Vietnam English Proficiency Index (EPI) website shows that Vietnam's ranking drops year by year, from #41(2019) to #52(2020) and #66(2021) (EPI, 2022) Improving Vietnamese learners’ overall language proficiency in general and vocabulary in particular is, therefore, an urgent mission

Of the different factors that may affect vocabulary acquisition (i.e., noticing, elaboration, motivation; Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001) vocabulary learning strategies have been considered influential tools for accelerating learners' vocabulary learning (Boonkongsaen, 2012) However, it seems like there are not enough studies on how

Vietnamese high school students can best approach learning new words in the classrooms, particularly studies that investigate the relationship between learners’

background and their learning strategies

1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES 1.2.1 Aims of the Study

This study was conducted with the aim of gaining insights into vocabulary learning strategies of high school students at the current school, as well as

discovering possible relationships between students’ background (i.e., gender,

proficiency level) and their vocabulary learning strategies use

1.2.2 Objectives

Specific objectives identified for the study are as follow:

- to determine the vocabulary learning strategies employed by students at Nguyen Trai High School

- to identify whether there were any differences in vocabulary learning strategies used by male and female students

- to find out if there are any relationships between students’ achievement and vocabulary learning strategies

1.3 RESEACH QUESTIONS

1 What are the vocabulary learning strategies employed by students at Nguyen Trai High School?

2 Are there any differences between strategies employed by male and female students?

3 Are there any relationships between students’ achievement and vocabulary learning strategies?

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study was conducted among 200 students in grades 11 and 12 from Nguyen Trai high school in Thai Binh, Vietnam 10th graders were not the respondents of this research as they were newcomers at the high school and need to

take time to adapt to the new environment The difference in students’ adaptability may affect their learning strategies; however, it was not the objective of the study Moreover, in this study, only the vocabulary learning strategies of the students were taken into consideration Strategies that learners used to learn other language components (i.e., grammar, pronunciation) or other language skills (i.e., listening,

speaking) were not examined

1.5 THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this research was to examine the vocabulary acquisition methods used by Nguyen Trai High School students It is expected that this research will benefit high school students who wish to improve their vocabulary learning strategies Educators who want to support students with vocabulary learning may also find useful information from this research Besides the practical benefits, the research would also be a valuable addition to the current body of literature on Vietnamese high school students' strategies for learning new vocabulary words

1.6 THE STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY

The research consists of five chapters as follows:

Chapter 1: Provides background and rationale for the study, clarifies the objectives of the research, specifies the research questions, scopes, and barriers of the study as well as highlights potential contributions of the study to research and practice

Chapter 2: Provides an overview of English language teaching and learning in Vietnam as well as the theoretical basis on vocabulary learning strategies

Chapter 3: Describes the research design, specifically the research approach, methods of data collection and analysis

Chapter 4: Presents the findings from the study

Chapter 5: Discusses the research findings and accordingly provide implications for research and practice

Finally, references and appendices are listed sufficiently at the end of the research

Chapter Two

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter provides the theoretical background to the study It clarifies the conception of language learning strategies, reviews different classification of language learning strategies before focusing on strategies in second/ foreign language learning and factors that may affect students’ linguistic strategies when learning vocabulary Studies that have investigated vocabulary learning strategies employed by high school students are also reviewed

2.1 CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

The linguistic history of Vietnam demonstrates a close relationship between language and politics Vietnam had been split in two before 1975, with the North supporting the communism of Russia and China and the South supporting the capitalism of the United States From 1975 to about 1989, the main foreign language was Russian; now it is English The Doi Moi, which opened the door for Vietnam to join the market economy, has created conditions for the explosive development of English Nevertheless, the primary focus of the English curriculum at that time in Vietnamese schools was on reading development It was common practice to utilize the grammar-translation method (Denham, 1992)

Over the past twenty years, the Government of Vietnam has enacted many policies on the teaching of English and devoted a greater proportion of its budget to its promotion than ever before (Hoang, 2020) While English education has undergone tremendous transformation in major cities, it is still only offered in a few places in rural and isolated locations (Khamkhien, 2010) Despite being a compulsory subject, it seems that English language teaching in Vietnam has not been fully effective, due to many reasons including a shortage of teachers, ineffective teaching, and high costs of external tutoring (Nguyen & Hoang, 2006) The results of language teaching and learning are still quite low compared to the effort and money spent Various factors can account for this; however, the core of these factors may be related to policymaking (Nguyen, 2012) Therefore, research

on issues of effective teaching and learning policy-making is much expected in the current context of Vietnam

In many Vietnamese classrooms, the English as a Foreign Language teacher would typically introduce new words to students by writing a list of them on the board Before giving Vietnamese translations, demonstrating how to pronounce the terms, and having the class repeat after the teacher numerous times, the list would be reviewed in the lesson Vu and Peters (2021) argue that the focus is often on a single word, which is often chosen using glossaries in textbooks and reference books Some students may be required by the teacher to show that they have retained the vocabulary from the prior lesson in the subsequent class But when it comes to learning new words, students are often left alone They are pushed to remember the meaning of new words, but are rarely given the opportunity to use these words in the classrooms Priorities are often given to reading and grammar It is important to note that Vietnamese EFL instructors rarely administer pre- and post-lesson vocabulary tests in order to gauge how much their students’ vocabularies have expanded A better command of grammar is typically what they go for instead (Vu & Peters, 2021) Vu and Peters (2021) argue that such an approach can dilute the impact of vocabulary instruction on students' development

2.2 LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES 2.2.1 The concept of language learning strategies

As defined by Oxford (1990), language learning strategies (LLS) are the aforementioned purposeful linguistic practices that facilitate the acquisition, processing, retention, and application of new knowledge Cohen (1998) explains that language learning techniques are the actions that students take on purpose to better acquire and use a foreign language These actions include encoding, retrieving, and storing linguistic information However, Ellis (1994) defined language learning methods as both mental and behavioral activities, which are relevant to a specific stage of language acquisition or language use Ellis (1994) argues that LLS can take the form of both physical (such as reciting a new word

aloud to memorize it) and mental strategies (such as using a dictionary or the surrounding context to figure out what a word means) It can be challenging to estimate the exact number of definitions for language learning systems that exist Finding one that is useful for all study goals is a considerably harder task Though there was some disagreement between the many theories of LLS, they all seemed to agree that employing the right methods improved students' ability to learn in a variety of contexts The following list of characteristics offered by Ellis (1999) provides a holistic summary of key characteristics of LLS

- The term "strategies" covers both broad ideas and particular acts or tactics used to acquire a second language

- Strategies are problem-focused; the learner uses a strategy to get around a specific learning challenge

- Students frequently know what strategies they use and can identify each component when asked to pay close attention to their actions or thoughts

- Strategies include both language (such as asking for an object's name) and non-linguistic (such as pointing at an object to ask for its name) behavior

- Both the L1 and the L2 can be used for linguistic strategy

- While some tactics are mental, others are behavioral As a result, although some tactics can be observed directly, others cannot

- Others may contribute directly (for instance, memorizing techniques targeted at certain lexical items or grammatical rules), while some tactics contribute indirectly by giving learners information about the L2 that they can then process

- Depending on the task the learner is working on and their personal preferences, strategies are used in a variety of ways

2.2.2 Classification of language learning strategies

Many academics have examined how well or successfully language learners attempt to learn in order to determine whether learning methods were effective for them, according to Ellis (1997) It is expected, as Rubin (1975) points out, that

successful learning strategies can be taught to less successful students and adopted by them to increase language acquisition Data is gathered through interviews, surveys, questionnaires, and journals as well as through direct observation and student self-reports Good L2 learners, in Rubin's opinion (1975), are accurate guessers, willing to practice and communicate, regularly unfettered, attentive to speech, and focused on the message Good language learners' strategies were examined by Stern (1975, p.309), and they included the following:

Stern's (1975) classification served as a foundation for subsequent research into language learning methods Stern's strategy classification and Rubin's research share certain commonalities, including an emphasis on practice and communication, a focus on meaning, and a commitment to self-monitoring However, the studies did not concentrate much on individual differences in strategy preferences

According to Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, and Todesco (1978), in order to create an effective learning model, it is important to conduct a thorough analysis of existing lists of learning strategies and procedures Oxford (1990) offered a probably more systematic and comprehensive way of looking at language learning strategies Oxford (1990) proposed classifying LLS into two broad categories: direct and indirect learning strategies Direct learning strategies, which include the learner's interaction with the target, can be further subdivided into:

(1) Memory strategies: techniques created to aid students in memorizing and recalling information, such as introducing new words and phrases in the context of existing ones and employing other sensory cues

(2) Compensatory strategies: the use of strategies to compensate for language barriers and facilitate communication, such as making educated guesses when reading or listening, or substituting synonyms or idioms in place of the original words

(3) Cognitive Strategies: necessitates the development of abilities that help pupils comprehend and generate language in a variety of contexts, such as taking notes, repeating, and summarizing literature

Strategies that enhance language learning indirectly through activities like focusing, planning, evaluating, looking for opportunities, managing fear, and fostering empathy and cooperation (Oxford, 1990, p 146) consist of three groups namely:

(1) Metacognitive strategies: Learning strategies that include things like self-evaluation and make connections to previously learned content to help with organization and evaluation

(2) Affective strategies: methods for controlling one's feelings and motivations, such as learning to relax through deep breathing exercises, listening to music, or watching films in one's target language to overcome language barriers, etc

(3) Social strategies: actions that improve students' ability to engage with others while studying a language, such as questioning, working with classmates, and empathizing with native speakers

Figure 2.1 below provides a visual representation of Oxford’s SILL:

Figure 2.1: Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)

Learning strategies can be broken down into three groups, according to O'Malley and Chamot (1990): cognitive (such as the rehearsal, organization,

inference, summarizing, reducing, imagery, transfer, and elaboration), social/affective (such as seeking clarification and self-talk), and metacognitive Vocabulary learning methods can be broken down into two groups: discovery methods and consolidation methods, as described by Schmitt (1997 ) Strategies for consolidation include social, memorization, cognitive, and metacognitive approaches, whereas those for discovery are focused and collaborative The taxonomy follows Oxford's (1990) categorization of linguistic acquisition strategies into the following six categories: social, memory, cognitive, metacognitive, emotional, and compensatory Schmitt (1997), however, noted that no category in Oxford's system successfully reflects the kinds of procedures a human undertakes when confronted with learning the meaning of a new term without the assistance of another person So, he formulated a fresh class for the methods utilized by students upon first encountering a word: determination tactics According to Schmitt (1997), cultural background is another factor that teachers take into account when selecting vocabulary words for their students According to him, students from differing cultural backgrounds can occasionally hold quite disparate views regarding the value of various vocabulary acquisition strategies The section below summarizes key strategies in Schmitt’s (1997) classification:

- Discovery strategies: the attempt that learners make (reference materials or ask other people) to determine the meaning of a new word

+ Determination Strategies: learners determine the meaning of a word without seeking assistance from others by adopting one or more of the following: word class, word components, cognates, contextual guessing, and dictionary use

+ Social Strategies: Students seek out those already versed in the meaning of the target term by inquiring about it (via activities such as asking for an L1 translation, a synonym, a paraphrased definition, and examples of use)

- Consolidation strategies: learners attempt to memorize the target word after encountering it for the first time

+ Social Strategies: learners engage in group work, ask their teachers to classify the word lists and communicate with native speakers to improve their vocabulary acquisition

+ Memory Strategies: learners deal with the link of the new word to be learned with preexisting knowledge utilizing imagery or grouping for improved retrieval of the phrase; also, physical motions can be employed to help in recalling the words Memory methods include imagery, word association, grouping, keyword, and collocation

+ Cognitive Strategies: although similar to the memory group's strategies, the emphasis here is not on influencing how the mind works Methods such as making lists of words to memorize, using flashcards, taking notes, and consulting textbook glossaries are common

+ Metacognitive Strategies: Learners can use these methods to self-monitor and assess their progress Learners can also assess their own progress with vocabulary tests, and they should understand when to skip or pass a word Although there are several language-learning resources available (e.g., books, magazines, newspapers, and films), learners should be exposed to L2 as often as possible and continue to acquire new vocabulary in order to become proficient in the target language

The Schmitt taxonomy provides several benefits over other approaches The most frequently mentioned benefits are its simple technology implementation, flexibility in accommodating students from a wide range of educational backgrounds and desired language proficiency levels, and depth of content and sensitivity to other relevant learning methodologies, which may allow for cross-study comparisons (Catalan, 2003) It can also be used to easily aggregate student feedback and standardize evaluative benchmarks Because of its usefulness, Schmitt's (1997) taxonomy was selected as the basis for the overarching classification of vocabulary learning strategies in this investigation "Discovery" methods are those that students employ to clarify meanings of unfamiliar terms

when they first encounter them, whereas "consolidation" strategies are those that students employ to clarify meanings of unfamiliar phrases when they come across them again (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990)

2.2.3 Factors affecting language learning strategies

2.2.3.1 Gender and language learning strategies

Students' linguistic strategies are influenced by a number of contextual elements The results may be advantageous or detrimental Gender is arguably the most studied element among the many that may influence language learners' strategy selection (e.g., age, degree of proficiency, gender) It's not easy to pin down exactly why men and women learn from each other in such distinct ways methodologically and strategically Women, according to Hong-Nam and Leavell (2006), make greater use of emotive and social coping mechanisms than men do, but the researchers were unable to determine why this was the case Women have been found to make greater use of tactics for learning a foreign language than men They argue that these kinds of findings are significant because they demonstrate that there can be some constant variations between how women and men in a group acquire a language Green and Oxford (1995) argue that if gender inequalities are shown in many studies across different cultures, it is likely due to biological and/or socialization-related causes and that they should be taken into account when designing language instruction programs

Although the gender factor has long been taken into account in SILL studies The results from studies so far are somewhat contradictory Green and Oxford (1995) found that gender is a determinant in how people learn a new language In other words, women are more likely than males to employ Memory and Metacognitive methods In contrast, Wharton (2000) in a survey involving 678 foreign language students, on gender differences, found that men used strategies significantly more often than women My-Van (1988) found that among adult Vietnamese refugees, men were more likely to report using multiple learning styles

than women In a study among 1200 undergraduate university learners of French, Spanish, German, Russian, and Italian, Oxford and Nyikos (1989) reported that females were more frequent strategy users than males when it comes to formal practice strategies (e.g comparing languages, formulating and revising rules, and analyzing words), general study strategies (e.g studying hard, ignoring distractions, being prepared), and conversational input elicitation strategies (e.g asking questions and eliciting responses)

Other studies indicate that males employed certain strategies more frequently than females Tran's (1988) study of forty- to ninety-two-year-old Vietnamese immigrants in the United States, for example, suggested that males used more strategies to learn and improve their English language skills than females Strategies that were used by these male students included taking classes, practicing with friends, and watching television or radio in English) In a second study among university-level beginning German learners, Nyikos (1990) found that when a visual-spatial stimulus of the color plus image was used in the vocabulary tests, male students performed better When color was the mediator, however, females remembered more Nyikos (1990) accordingly proposed that these strategies were the result of the socialization of males and females and that these differences should be taken into account when promoting the use of strategies in language acquisition

In short, there seems to be a relationship between gender and language learning strategies However, the direction of the relationship is unclear Therefore, more studies are needed to clarify this issue

2.2.3.2 Language proficiency and language learning strategies

Sukying (2021) examined the connection between language-learning practices and English competency with a sample of 1,523 first-year college students enrolled in a regular English course Using a taxonomy created by Oxford (1990) and data from the Ordinary National Educational Test, researchers created a 36-item questionnaire that found that teaching students about the steps involved in learning

led to better performance A survey of 65 college students' approaches to learning Spanish as a foreign language was conducted by Ranjan et al (2021) using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) questionnaire plus two free-form items The study found a moderate relationship between the proficiency of 15 high-achieving students and the strategies that they used to acquire the target language In a study of 1200 undergraduates learning a foreign language, Oxford and Nyikos (1989) discovered that the use of more strategies corresponded to the perception of greater proficiency and that those who had been studying the language for four or five years used more strategies than those with less experience Green and Oxford (1995) discovered in a study of university students in Puerto Rico that those with the highest proficiency level employed cognitive strategies more frequently than those with the lowest proficiency level Anderson and Vandergrift (1996) discovered, based on verbal reports from 36 school-aged French learners in Canada, that the prevalence of cognitive strategies decreased as the level of proficiency increased They also discovered that as proficiency levels increased, so did the use of metacognitive strategies

According to a study by Marrie and Nettan (1991), younger pupils adopt tactics similarly to older students They discovered that while both effective and bad communicators utilized a similar number of methods, the sorts of strategies varied The more successful students adopted the more efficient methods Corbeil (1990) reported similar results She mentioned that various people pick up languages at varying rates According to Corbeil (1990), a student's reaction to error correction may be a key element in how well they learn The findings showed that stronger students employed more complex procedures to more effectively incorporate error repair into prior knowledge The more accomplished students did a deeper, more thorough processing of the information Students that were not successful were just willing to process at a surface level It seems that instead of incorporating the correction into their prior knowledge, these students avoided and occasionally rejected the correction Students who did well put in more effort, took more interest

in their work, and responded positively to correction, in contrast to those who were doing poorly, who tended to gloss over it Using a variety of strategies, Rost and Ross (1991) were able to distinguish between students with higher and lower levels of proficiency They concluded that higher achievers were employing a distinct level of cognition from those who struggled MacIntyre (1994) underlined further that the application of strategies follows from and contributes to improved proficiency The factors that lead to and produce increased language competence are strategies More research into MacIntyre's conclusion was urged by Bremner (1999) The research conducted by Osanai (2000) on 147 overseas students studying in American universities revealed a strong correlation between self-rated ability and the use of language learning tactics In his study of SILL practices among university students in 2000, Wharton discovered that those students who regarded their language proficiency as "good" or "fair" were significantly more likely to use SILL strategies than those students who ranked their performance as "poor." He also said that the frequency with which various techniques are reported to be used is linearly related to one's level of expertise However, the effect of proficiency on strategy deployment works both ways

2.2.3.3 Other factors

a Students’ beliefs

Numerous studies (Vann & Abraham, 1990; Wenden, 1986; Kim, 2001; Yang, 1999; and Hong, 2006) have examined the relationship and influence of students' beliefs on their decisions and strategies (Vann & Abraham, 1990; Wenden, 1986; Kim, 2001; Yang, 1999; and Hong, 2006)

Vann and Abraham (1990) conducted a critical analysis of beliefs and strategies pertinent to language acquisition They utilized a quantitative methodology and discovered that a student's beliefs can influence his or her learning strategies and abilities Two undergraduates participating in the investigation held divergent views on language acquisition Both researchers deemed one respondent's logic for language learning to be limited because she had confidence in examining

formal structures for language learning, whereas the other participant's logic was deemed to be expansive because she had confidence in correspondence strategies At the conclusion of the course, the latter performed well on an oral exam, while the former had a superior TOEFL score Consequently, this investigation revealed that differences in perspectives or beliefs regarding language acquisition can result in the successful application of a variety of systems

Wenden (1986) investigated the relationship between students' beliefs and the technique they employed in an ESL setting She discovered that language learners have distinct beliefs regarding i) utilizing the language, ii) learning about the language itself, and iii) local factors The study supported her contention that strategies were associated with beliefs about the structure of the language, whereas correspondence strategies were associated with beliefs about utilizing the language through cooperative learning

Kim (2001) investigated the relationship between the beliefs of Korean undergraduates about language learning and their use of language learning strategies Sixty undergraduates and their beliefs were evaluated using the BALLI and SILL to gauge their strategies in this examination A factor analysis was conducted to identify the beliefs of Korean undergraduates and their choice of strategies Six conviction factors were included in such an investigation: belief in social cooperation, belief in training, formal language learning, self-proficiency beliefs, language fitness, and belief in inspiration The findings of the study indicated that the beliefs of Korean undergraduates regarding self-efficacy, inspiration, and training conviction enabled them to employ more persuasive strategies

Yang (1999) examined the relationship between the beliefs Chinese EFL students held about language acquisition and the learning strategies they employed Undergraduates from Taiwan who were being evaluated were discovered to be interested in this investigation The examination's findings indicate that students' self-sufficiency beliefs corresponded perfectly with effective training strategies The

study indirectly supported the existence of a strong relationship between students' beliefs and the methodology they employ

Hong (2006) examined the relationship between the beliefs of 428 monolingual Korean undergraduates and 420 bilingual Korean-Chinese undergraduates at the college level The beliefs and learning strategies of the understudies were independently surveyed via BALLI and SILL Undergraduates who were bilingual in Chinese and Korean utilized subjective strategies more frequently than those who were monolingual in Korean, who only occasionally employed remuneration strategies Two bilinguals and one monolingual had a great deal of instrumental motivation to acquire English The bilinguals were more optimistic than the monolinguals regarding the significance of formal English The study revealed that monolinguals and bilinguals held distinct beliefs regarding English language acquisition, and it contrasts the impact of these beliefs on the system used for the two groups

b Age

Due to the scarcity of longitudinal studies in the field of LLSs (Larsen-Freeman & Long, 1991), studies that investigate the relationship between age factor and the use of LLSs are restricted Research studies are often limited to homogeneous samples (e.g., young children, secondary school students, university students, or adults) A study of young infants’ use of LLS (Wong-Fillmore, 1979) demonstrated the significance of cognitive and social strategies Chesterfield and Chesterfield (1985) conducted research on bilingual learners and discovered that infants first developed receptive strategies (repetition and memorization) Then, they developed strategies that enabled them to initiate and maintain interactions (such as gaining attention and requesting clarification) Lastly, they devised techniques for the detection and monitoring of grammatical errors

Oxford and Nyikos (1989) investigated the factors that influenced university students' selection of language learning strategies The participants were 1,200 foreign language pupils from a single American university Their study suggested

that students who with more than five years’ experience learning the language tended to employ functional practice strategies or communicative strategies more frequently than less experienced students; those who had studied the language for more than four years used conversational input elicitation strategies more often than less experienced peers Oxford (1990) further reinforced that students of various ages and stages of second language acquisition employed somewhat distinct strategies; older or more advanced students employed certain strategies more frequently than younger or less advanced students Devlin (1996) contrasted the learning and study strategies employed by older (defined as 23 years or older) and younger (defined as 22 years or younger) university students, as measured by the Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI) The results revealed that older pupils reported employing metacognitive strategies more effectively than their younger counterparts Young learners, according to Lee and Oxford (2008), utilize social strategies such as discussing with and seeking assistance from others more frequently than other types of strategies Adult learners, on the other hand, make extensive use of metacognitive strategies such as planning, organizing, and evaluating their Second Language (L2) learning

c Cultural background

Despite the fact that students from various cultural backgrounds tend to use different types of strategies, it is difficult to assert that previous studies and research have exhaustively examined the effects of cultural background on strategy preferences The primary finding of Bedell's (1993) study cited by Oxford et al (1995) was that learners from diverse cultural contexts employ various types of strategies at varying frequencies According to Politzer and McGroarty (1985), Asian students favor rule-oriented and rote memorization strategies In their study, Politzer and McGroarty (1985) administered a questionnaire to 18 Asian learners (primarily Japanese) and 19 Hispanics (Latin American speakers of Spanish) enrolled in a preparatory course for graduate study in the United States to examine the correlation between the students' L1 background/ethnicity and their strategy use

On the scale of excellent language behaviors, Asian students scored lower than Hispanic students, according to the study The researchers concluded that Asian learners are less likely to partake in such social interactions than Hispanic learners According to Politzer and McGroarty (1985, p 113-114), classroom behaviors such as asking the teacher, correcting classmates, volunteering answers, and other social interaction behaviors such as requesting assistance and asking others to repeat are more prevalent in the Western repertoire than in the Asian repertoire

Lengkanawati (2004) gathered data from 56 students at two Australian universities learning Indonesian as a Foreign Language (IFL) and 114 students at an Indonesian university learning English as a Foreign Language and found that differences in LLS use between the two groups were due to differences in their learning cultures

Oxford (1994) discovered that Taiwanese students are more structured, analytical, memory-based, and metacognitively oriented than students from other groups O'Malley and Chamot (1990) discovered that Asian students favor their own established rote learning strategies Correspondingly, Huang and Van Naerrsen (1987) and Tyacke and Mendelsohn (1986) state that learners of Asian origin prefer rote memorization strategies and focus on the linguistic code According to O'Malley et al (1985), Asian students were less willing than Hispanic students to adopt novel learning strategies Politzer and Mc Groarty (1985) drew the conclusion that many accepted "good" language-learning strategies may be founded on ethnocentric, namely Western, assumptions about effective language learning due to the use of strategies that differ from those employed by other cultural groups MacIntyre (1994) also suggested that the effect of ethnicity as a determinant of strategy use can be better comprehended by examining the differences typically associated with the variable, as opposed to the variable itself

d Career choice

The selection of a particular occupation or area of specialization has been linked to strategy selection The above-mentioned study by Politzer and McGroarty

(1985) revealed that students majoring in engineering or other physical sciences scored lower than those majoring in social sciences and humanities Nonetheless, no definitive conclusion could be drawn from this study because the distinction between the two groups was quite similar and essentially overlapping

In a study of three groups of language learners (professional language trainers, native-speaker language teachers, and students), Ehrman and Oxford (1988) discovered that professional language trainers reported using a greater variety of strategies than the other two groups, while students reported using fewer strategies overall

e Motivation

According to a number of studies, the motivation of language learners influences the choice and application of strategy According to Politzer and McGroarty (1985), the objective of English language acquisition is a central topic in any discussion of language learning strategies Oxford (1989a) argued that learners acquire target languages for a variety of reasons and purposes, which may influence their selection of learning strategies Oxford and Nyikos (1989) asserted that motivation had a pervasive influence on the reported use of specific kinds of strategies , while Nyikos and Oxford (1993), reporting on a study of university language learners in the United States who were required to take a language course, reported that the students focusing on obtaining good grades focused on formal, rule-related processing strategies and academic study strategies, rather than on strategies which improve skills

2.3 VOCABULARY AND VOCABULARY LEARNING 2.3.1 Words versus Vocabulary

To put it simply, a vocabulary is a group of lexemes (words) that includes not just individual words but also phrases and idioms A word can also be a sound or combination of sounds that together make up a unit of grammar or vocabulary in

a language, and hence function as a "part of vocabulary." Therefore, vocabulary consists of more than just single words (Read 2000, p 20; Richards 2000, p xi), it also comprises meaningful linguistic units and complicated and compound terms in addition to fundamental words in all their forms The term "vocabulary" is commonly used to refer to the process of learning a language's whole bank of terms used in specific contexts Specifically, expanding one's vocabulary entails mastering several word categories and strategies for dealing with terms one may initially find difficult to pronounce or understand

The comparative study of words and vocabularies has been undertaken by only a select group of academics, notably Jackson and Amvela (2000) and Richards et al (1992) A word is a unitary structural component that can't be broken down into its component morphemes and is used to build phrases Morphemes, the smallest meaningful components of language, are the ultimate grammatical constituents On the other hand, a vocabulary, sometimes called lexis or a lexicon, is a set of words or a set of subsets of words that are used in specific contexts "word" is defined by Richards et al (1992) as the smallest linguistic unit that can exist on its own in speech or writing, in contrast to "vocabulary," which is defined as a group of lexemes that includes single words, compound words, and idioms (p 400)

First considered in this theoretical investigation is the concept of vocabulary or lexis Some online dictionaries, like Merriam-Webster (2015), define vocabulary as the set of words that make up a language, the set of words that a person is comfortable with and uses, and the set of terms that are associated with a certain topic Words used in a particular language or field of study, or that are familiar to or made use of by a particular person, is how Cambridge (2016) defines a person's lexicon In addition, Macmillan (2016) defines vocabularies as a person's complete collection of words in a given language

Those definitions are consistent with what several scholars in linguistics and applied linguistics have proposed One example is how Linse and Nunan (2005)

highlight the fact that a person's vocabulary is simply their word stock Vocabulary, as defined by Richards and Schmidt (2010), is a group of lexemes that may comprise simple words, compound words, and idiomatic expressions Vocabulary, according to Kamil and Hiebert (2005), is commonly seen as familiarity with word meanings The term lexis has only recently been coined, although it is already often used to mean vocabulary The term lexis, from the ancient Greek word for "word," refers to the entire lexicon of a language, or the language itself, as explained by Barcroft, Sunderman, and Schmitt (2011) According to Jackson and Amvela (2000), lexicon, lexis, and vocabulary are all synonyms In support of their thesis, Larsen-Freeman and Decarrico (2010) argue that the scope of vocabulary/lexis extends beyond syntax and morphology to include phonetics, phonology, semantics, and lexis (vocabulary) On the other hand, some people differentiate lexis from vocabulary Words and their definitions are often brought up when discussing vocabulary The scope of a lexicon, however, extends much beyond words themselves It extends to include deeper lexical meanings as well See van Vlack's (2013) image below for a visual representation of the gradual increase in complexity from word to lexis

Figure 2.2 Difference between vocabulary and lexis (van Vlack, 2013)

As could be seen from the figure, lexis is a system of words that relate to one another to create a network of meanings, which may include polysemy, collocation, ambiguity, synonymy, and frequency (Schmitt & Meara, 1997; Miller, 1999; Nation, 2001) Therefore, it is believed that the teaching of words in forms of isolated or decontextualized vocabulary lists, may hinder learners' lexical development (Shen, 2008)

2.3.2 The importance of vocabulary

Vocabulary development is highlighted as one of the most crucial aspects of learning English, as it is impossible to have meaningful conversations without it (see Section 2.1) Words and phrases are the foundation of any language education, say Bowen et al (1985) According to Nation (1990), this supports the idea that students of foreign languages consider vocabulary to be among the most crucial

aspects of language study Students often ascribe their language learning challenges on a lack of vocabulary knowledge Despite this, various researchers in the fields of vocabulary acquisition and instruction (Hedge, 2000; Long &Richards, 1997; Maley, 1986; Richards, 1985; Zimmerman, 1997) argue that vocabulary has been undervalued in the language classroom for quite some time

As a result, this section's primary goal is to research and assess the significance of vocabulary in language acquisition in order to scrutinize what we have known about English vocabulary and reflect on how this has been implemented in language teaching and learning Vocabulary helps students learn about and make sense of the world, as well as themselves and their feelings They are unable to communicate their innermost feelings because of the limitations of their language On the other hand, they have a wide range of words at their disposal, allowing them to express themselves effectively in every situation Kitajima (2001) argues that one cannot communicate one's thoughts without using words to name things, processes, and ideas

In practice, grammar is usually prioritized over vocabulary However, according to Allen (1983), it would be better for focus on vocabulary at the starting point (Flower, 2000) This view is congruent with Lewis's (1993) view that vocabulary should be the focus of language teaching and learning To put it another way, these scholars understand the importance of proper grammar This lends credence to what we already knew from firsthand experience: that it is feasible to understand others despite their grammatical and pronunciational mistakes, but that communication is extremely difficult without the medium of language It is widely agreed that vocabulary is more crucial than grammar when it comes to learning a new language Wilkins (1972) argues that without grammar, just a small fraction of what a person knows would be understood Since language learners cannot use structures correctly if they do not have enough vocabulary knowledge, Harmer (1991) argues that careful word choice can sometimes be more important than choosing grammatical structures

Experts have also shared the view that in order to become fluent in communication generally, it is essential to build a large vocabulary For instance, Lewis (1993) claims that having a large vocabulary is crucial for effective communication Without an understanding of the context in which they are being addressed, language learners who have mastered morphology and syntax will be unable to take part in a conversation Krashen and Terrell (2000) argue that in order for second language learners to effectively express themselves, ask questions, and convey information, they must first learn how to create lexical items Vocabulary, as emphasized by Richards in the introduction to Schmitt (2000), is also crucial to communicative competence and second language learning Similarly, Davies and Pearse (2000) are of the belief that the vocabulary of a person is often more important than their grammar skills in a conversation A lack of vocabulary can be discouraging for language students since it prevents them from making themselves understood McCarthy (1990) agrees with the importance of vocabulary, writing that it is impossible to communicate effectively in a second language without a large collection of words to express a variety of meanings, regardless of how well the student learns the grammar or how well they grasp the sounds of the L2 In other words, words are the tools that learners use to think, express ideas, and feel

To sum up, it is undeniable that vocabulary knowledge is important Students who have large and varied vocabulary do better academically, interact more comfortably with native speakers, and go further in their study of the language Learners in any language benefit greatly from building a vast and varied vocabulary, as it allows them to more accurately convey their ideas, feelings, and thoughts Vocabulary, as noted by the aforementioned academics, is essential not only to the learning and understanding of language but also to effective communication

2.3.3 Aspects of L2 Vocabulary Knowledge

Being aware of the difficulties involved in learning an L2 term is one of the key components of L2 vocabulary learning If the learner is aware of these needs, they may choose appropriate Vocabulary Learning Strategies (VLSs) Below are three lists outlining what it takes to know a term, as suggested by Richards (1976), Carter (1998), and Nation (2001)

Many presumptions on what the learner needs to understand about L2 terms to completely acquire them were made by Richards (1976; referenced in Read, 2000) The following are the presumptions:

1 Throughout their lifetimes, native speakers continue to increase their vocabulary

2 Understanding a word requires understanding the chances of running into it in written or spoken communications

3 Understanding a word includes understanding the limitations on its use resulting from variations in function and circumstance

4 Understanding a word requires understanding the syntactic activity related to it

5 Understanding a word requires understanding its base form

Carter (1998) adds the following qualities to the list of requirements for knowing a word:

1 It involves being able to recall it and apply it effectively; however, for certain purposes, just passive knowledge is required and some words are only ever known to certain users in this way

2 It entails understanding the possibility of running across the term in either spoken, written, or both circumstances

3 It entails being aware of the underlying forms and derivations that may be produced from the word, as well as the syntactic frames into which it can be inserted

4 It entails being aware of the connections that a word has to other terms in the language as well as to words that are similar in an L1

5 It entails recognizing the word's relative coreness as well as its more pronounced pragmatic and discoursal roles and its style levels

6 It entails being aware of the many connotations attached to it as well as the variety of its collocational patterns, which are frequently related

7 It implies having words in whole or partially fixed formulations simply stored in memory to repeat and modify as needed

In contrast to learning L2 vocabulary for production purposes, which relies on strategies that activate the lexical store to use items in context-appropriate ways, learning L2 vocabulary for receptive purposes requires using strategies that can aid students in comprehending lexical items and storing them in memory (Carter, ibid)

Nation (2001) differentiates between receptive and productive vocabulary usage in L2, where receptive vocabulary use is defined as the ability to perceive the form of a word while listening or reading and retrieve its meaning

Vocabulary development involves the active pursuit and invention of the most effective word forms for spoken and written communication

What is needed for receptive and productive knowledge of a term is summarized in Table 2.1 below, which is based on work by Nation (2001)

Table 2.1 The requirements for knowing a word receptively and productively (Nation 2001, p.27)

Form

Spoken

R What does the word sound like? P How is the word pronounced? Written R What does the word look like?

P How is the word written and spelled?

Word Parts

R What parts are recognisable in this word?

P What word parts are needed to express the meaning?

Meaning Form and R What meaning does this word signal?

meaning P What word form can be used to express this meaning?

Concept and referents

R What is included in the concept? P What items can the concept refer to?

Associations R What other words does this make us think of? P What other words could we use instead of this one?

Use

Grammatical functions

R In what patterns does the word occur? P In what patterns must we use this word?

Collocations R What words or types of words occur with this

R Where, when and how often would we expect to meet this word?

P Where, when and how often can we use this word?

(R = receptive knowledge, P = productive knowledge)

It is obvious that receptive knowledge has less stringent criteria According to Nation (2001), the following factors contribute to this assumption:

1 Amount of knowledge:

Receptive knowledge requires the ability to recognize the meaning in accordance with the spoken or written forms, whereas productive type necessitates acquiring additional spoken and written output patterns That is to say, in order to have productive knowledge, one must be aware of a word's meaning as well as its spoken and written forms This indicates that learning a word for speaking or writing requires more time and repetition than learning it for listening or reading

2 Practice:

Receptive knowledge is more frequently practiced than productive information by native speakers and L2 learners As a result of constant usage and practice, receptive knowledge becomes stronger in one's memory

3 Accessibility:

When L2 learners use L2 language receptively, they translate from L2 to their L1, and when they use L2 productively, they reverse this orientation Nation (2001) contends that because L2 learners are more proficient in their L1, receptive usage is consequently simpler

4 Motivation:

If a second language learner has no interest in using a particular expression or form of language (such as a taboo expression, slang word, expression from a different dialect, expression from a different sociocultural background, specialized language for a specific field, etc.), they may not be motivated to learn the expressions or forms necessary for productive use of the language

5 Nature of production:

After the requirement to articulate a concept, comes the necessity to use L2 effectively This concept might be used to clarify something, persuade someone, inquire about something, etc Here, many mental processes start to take place at once

6 Senses used:

The senses of hearing and/ or vision must be used when employing L2 for receptive purposes On the other hand, productive usage necessitates the employment of other senses Given these prerequisites, presumptions, and qualities of L2 word knowledge, it is reasonable to conclude that learning L2 vocabulary is more difficult than one may anticipate It is a protracted, hard process that calls for both careful planning and the creative application of both explicit and implicit VLSs

2.3.3.1 Implicit versus explicit vocabulary learning

Native speakers learn their L1 vocabulary mostly implicitly after they have a sufficient command of their native tongue, however, implicit learning may begin at an early level (Schmitt 2000) There are very few phrases that students could learn explicitly from others in their immediate environment (Carter, 1998) It is well acknowledged that the bulk of words are learned implicitly and that vocabulary growth picks up speed from early childhood through formal schooling before slowing down in adulthood (Read, 2000) Despite the fact that different studies have produced different estimates of the amount of the vocabulary of native English speakers dependent on people's age and level of education, this holds true It is estimated that by the time a child is five years old, he or she has learned the families of four thousand to five thousand words (Nation and Waring, 1997) Instruction in subconsciously learning the L2 lexicon is recommended for L2 learners if the findings from studies on L1 vocabulary acquisition are applicable to L2 vocabulary acquisition (Schmitt, 2000; Carter, 1998)

Implicit learning is essential for the development of L2 vocabulary, especially in the latter learning phases when learners are anticipated to come across low-frequency terms L2 learners start to run across a plethora of uncommon words whenever their vocabulary level surpasses that of graded material and they start dealing with texts that lack grammatical control Making a conscious effort to learn uncommon terms is not cost-effective (Parry, 1993) By acquiring new terms from their contexts with the aid of a dictionary, learners of a second language should actively work to expand their vocabularies beyond the 2,000 or so most often used words (ibid) Little-frequency words are frequently crucial for discourse comprehension, whereas explicit learning mostly concentrates on high-frequency words with little information content (Carter, 1998)

Implicit learning is more flexible and forward-thinking than its counterpart, explicit learning, which might be regarded as being faster and more principled According to Read (2000), studies on the vocabularies of infants reveal that only a

limited proportion of acquisition occurs by incidental means Two investigations on the word learning of novel terms encountered in a reading book at suitable levels by native English-speaking school kids were undertaken by Nagy, Herman, and Anderson (1985 and 1987; quoted in Read, 2000) The students were not informed that a vocabulary test would come after the reading assignment In the 1985 study, it was estimated that between 10% and 25% of their vocabulary acquisition would be unintentional Only 5% of the new phrases were kept, per the research from 1987 Read (2000) contends that the differences in results between the two trials can be attributed to the fact that the incidental vocabulary test was administered six days after the reading assignment in the second study, as opposed to immediately after the first experiment Read (2000) reports on empirical research showing that when L2 earners are given a test right after finishing the reading, they indicate some comprehension of a few previously unrecognized phrases in the book This relates to haphazard L2 vocabulary acquisition Furthermore, according to Read (2000), knowing a term does not always result from correctly inferring its meaning from a reading text After finishing the reading assignment, one might logically establish a word's meaning for the sake of immediate comprehension without having to recall the meaning or even the shape of the word Implicit learning that is well-staged is essential Even though a second-language learner is instructed to begin with implicit learning, they may run into multiple new terminology that render the strategy ineffective The student may experience or develop potentially hazardous psychological issues under these conditions From a psychological perspective, it is crucial for second language learners to realize that learning new words implicitly using guessing tactics is a lengthy, progressive process that takes a lot of time and effort Sternberg (1987) claims that picking up new words by seeing their usage in context is neither the quickest nor the most effective method According to Sternberg (1987), studies conducted previously by Levin et al (1982), Pressley et al (1982b), and others demonstrate that the keyword strategy is preferable to learning vocabulary from context