mnemonic vocabulary learning strategies (stippie chee wei how)

Upload: stippie-chee

Post on 17-Oct-2015

47 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

A study about vocabulary learning strategies of research participants from the English Language course and the Chinese Studies course.

TRANSCRIPT

  • MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON

    BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR

    KAMPAR

    STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

    A RESEARCH PROJECT

    SUBMITTED IN

    PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

    THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE

    FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

    UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN

    OCT. 2011

  • MNEMONIC VOCABULARY LEARNING STRATEGIES (MVLS) COMPARISON

    BETWEEN STUDENTS OF CHINESE STUDIES AND ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN UTAR

    KAMPAR

    STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

    A RESEARCH PROJECT

    SUBMITTED IN

    PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR

    THE BACHELOR OF ARTS (HONS) ENGLISH LANGUAGE

    FACULTY OF ARTS AND SOCIAL SCIENCE

    UNIVERSITI TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN

    OCT. 2011

  • ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

    In completion of this thesis, there are several parties that I would like to express my

    gratitude to. First and foremost, to my Final Year Project supervisor, Ms. Tan Swee Mee of the

    Department of Languages and Linguistics, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) for her

    support and guidance academically and mentally, as well as her encouragement in the course of

    conducting this thesis. Her professional knowledge and experience are the main factor

    contributing to this thesis completion.

    Mr. Lee Soo Chee of the Institute of Chinese Studies also played a significant role in

    helping to conduct this research by assisting in gathering participants from the Chinese Studies

    (CH) course. It is impossible to conduct this research without participants from the

    aforementioned course.

    Participants from both courses of Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) are

    also given my sincerest gratitude. As the identified participants for this research, they have

    sacrificed precious time and effort in answering the questionnaires distributed to them. It would

    be impossible to get this research completed without their selfless contributions.

    Lastly, I do value and appreciate my parents and classmates for their assistance in

    helping to complete this thesis. To all people whom I have failed to mention above, I thank you

    for contributing to the completion of this thesis and may all of you be blessed.

    STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

  • APPROVAL FORM

    This research paper attached hereto, entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies

    (MVLS) comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR

    Kampar prepared and submitted by Stippie Chee Wei How in partial fulfillment of the

    requirements for the Bachelor of Arts (Hons) English Language is hereby accepted.

    _____________________ Date: _____________

    Supervisor

    Ms. Tan Swee Mee

  • i

    ABSTRACT

    In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students inability to use words precisely when

    there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are mastered and use correctly and accurately. It is

    becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with researches of Mnemonic

    Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS). This research studies and compares the MVLS,

    applied by UTAR students in both Chinese Studies (CH) and English Language (EL) courses to

    rehearse their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research

    also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the words in

    the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS effectiveness.

    Learning new words is a complex and multi-processing effort. Many retention strategies are

    needed to transfer these new words from short-term to long-term storage. This research serves as

    a platform to enhance vocabulary building through understanding the conceptual frameworks of

    MVLS. Educators may refer to this study as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using

    sets of MVLS. Lastly, this research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the

    correct strategies to guarantee higher success rate of information storing and recalling in

    rehearsing new words.

  • ii

    DECLARATION

    I declare that the material contained in this paper is the end result of my own work and that due

    acknowledgement has been given in the bibliography and references to ALL sources be they

    printed, electronic or personal.

    Name : STIPPIE CHEE WEI HOW

    Student ID: 09AAB01075

    Signed : ____________________

    Date : 20th

    October 2011

  • iii

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    CONTENTS PAGE

    Chapter 1: Introduction

    1.0 Introduction 1

    1.1 Research Background 2

    1.2 Statement of Problem 5

    1.3 Purpose of the Study 6

    1.4 Research Questions 6

    1.5 Scope of Study 7

    1.6 Methodology 8

    1.7 Significance of the Study 8

    1.8 Definition of keywords/terms 9

    Chapter 2: Literature review

    2.0 Introduction 11

    2.1 Conceptual background 11

    2.2 Mnemonic History 12

    2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning 13

    2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) 14

    2.3.2 Nations Taxonomy (2001) 15

    2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition 17

    2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002) 17

    2.4.2 Mason (2004) 18

  • v

    2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004) 19

    2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies 20

    2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006) 21

    2.5.2 Allen (1995) 22

    2.6 Conclusion 23

    Chapter 3: Methodology

    3.0 Introduction 25

    3.1 Theoretical Framework 26

    3.1.1 Model of memory (1968) 26

    3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory 26

    3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM) 27

    3.1.1.3 Rehearsal 28

    3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM) 29

    3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972) 29

    3.1.2.1 Levels of Processing (1972) 30

    3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) 31

    3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics 32

    3.1.3.2 Spatial mnemonics 32

    3.1.3.3 Visual mnemonics 33

    3.1.3.4 Physical mnemonics 34

    3.2 Restating purpose and research questions 36

    3.3 Participants and sampling 37

    3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process 38

  • v

    3.5 Research design and stages 39

    3.6 Presents study questionnaire 41

    3.7 Conclusion 42

    Chapter 4: Data analysis and discussion

    4.0 Introduction 43

    4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results 44

    4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1 45

    4.3 Answering RQ 1 46

    4.3.1 English language proficiency level and test results 47

    4.3.2 Scorers of Excellent in EL participants 48

    4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2 50

    4.4.1 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH) 51

    4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL) 53

    4.5 Answering RQ 2 55

    4.5.1 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention 55

    4.5.2 Effectiveness of Keyword method 57

    4.6 Findings pertaining to rehearsal preferences or approaches in RQ 3 59

    4.6.1 Mnemonic styles and number of participants: CH and EL 60

    4.6.2 Answering RQ 3 65

    4.7 Conclusion 68

  • vi

    Chapter 5: Conclusion

    5.0 Introduction 69

    5.1 Answering research questions 69

    5.1.1 RQ1 70

    5.1.2 RQ2 71

    5.1.3 RQ3 72

    5.2 Applications of MVLS in teaching training programmes 73

    5.3 Limitations 75

    5.4 Conclusion 76

    REFERENCES 77

    Appendix A Sample of Questionnaire 79

    Appendix B Sample of Completed Questionnaire 83

    Appendix C Sample of Questionnaire (Appendix) 86

    Appendix D Sample of Words Rehearsal 87

  • vii

    LIST OF TABLES

    Tables Page

    1 Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy 15

    2 Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics 32

    3 Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics 33

    4 Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics 34

    5 Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics 35

    6 Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants 51

    7 Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants 53

    8 Sample of Words Rehearsal 57

    9 Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (CH participants) 62

    10 Combinations of multiple mnemonic styles (EL participants) 64

  • viii

    LIST OF GRAPHS

    Graphs Page

    1 Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants) 45

    2 Distribution of mnemonic styles (CH and EL participants) 60

  • ix

    LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

    Abbreviations Page

    1 MVLS Mnemonic vocabulary learning strategies 1

    2 CH Chinese Studies 1

    3 EL English Language 1

    4 STM Short-term memory 2

    5 LTM Long-term memory 2

    6 RQ Research Question 6

    7 FAS Faculty of Arts and Social Science 7

    8 ICS Institute of Chinese Studies 7

    9 ESL English as a second language 8

    10 L2 Second language 17

    11 GEPT - General English Proficiency Test 21

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 1

    CHAPTER 1

    INTRODUCTION

    1.0 Introduction

    This study is entitled Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS)

    Comparison between students of Chinese Studies and English Language in UTAR

    Kampar. With these two variables involved in this research, the study aims to

    compare differences and similarities in terms of revising and rehearsing English

    vocabulary among participants from courses featuring Chinese Studies (CH) and

    English Language (EL). There are nine sections in this chapter. Section 1.1 generally

    presents the background information regarding this research. It is followed by

    statement of problem which triggers this study in section 1.2. Section 1.3 states the

    purpose of this research, while research questions to be answered in the final chapter

    are posted on Section 1.4. Section 1.5 informs the scope of this research, while section

    1.6 briefly discusses conceptual framework and methodology that are employed in

    conducting this research. Subsequently, a discussion regarding significance of this

    study is shown in Section 1.7. Finally, Section 1.8 provides some keywords and their

    definitions that are crucial to guide the reading.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 2

    1.1 Research Background

    Students amount of time spent in the classrooms does not promise equal amount

    of skills and knowledge learnt. In fact, students learning has drawn attention from

    teachers and parents, claiming that their learning progress does not meet expectations.

    There are two explanations to this matter: either the students listen to their teachers

    inattentively, which could be due to their interests and preferences of the lesson being

    taught; or they simply could not remember things taught to them clearly in the past

    and knowledge were not successfully stored in their memory.

    While the first scenario discusses about students motivation and factors that raise

    their attentions in class, the second scenario questions students memory rehearsals

    and shows that insufficient practise of information is the leading cause of

    unsuccessful transferring of information from Short-term Memory (STM) to Long-

    term Memory (LTM) (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968). The same applies to vocabulary

    learning, successful retention of newly taught words relies greatly on constant

    practises and rehearsals of these lexical items.

    Having learnt basic grammatical rules does not contribute to excellence in

    knowledge of vocabulary. In Malaysia, questions have been raised about students

    inability to use words precisely when there are only 1200 out of 1800 words learnt are

    mastered and used correctly and accurately (as cited in Malaysian Education Ministry

    English Teaching Syllabus, 2009). Statistics revealed that knowing the meanings of

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 3

    words does not guarantee fluidity in using them in written and spoken

    communication. Learning words in a language is being regarded as the main

    component in effective communication; no information can be conveyed without

    using the appropriate words, regardless of knowing the rules and knowledge of

    grammar (Nemati, 2009).

    According to Brown and Payne (1994), there are five steps in the process of

    vocabulary learning:

    1. Having sources for encountering new words.

    2. Getting clear images of the forms of the new words.

    3. Learning the meaning of the words.

    4. Making strong memory connection between the words forms and the meanings.

    5. Applying the words in written or spoken form.

    (Fan, 2003, p. 223, as cited in Hamzah et al., 2009, p. 42)

    Knowing more words does help a person in getting intentions transferred to

    another party while lowering possibilities of communication failure. To consider one

    knows a word, Schmitt (1997) asserted that the following knowledge are necessary:

    1. Lexical form: This refers to either spoken or written form of words, which are

    pronunciation or spelling of words.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 4

    2. Word structure: The knowledge of words basic morphemes, and the derivations

    of the words and its inflections.

    3. Syntactic pattern: Knowing the exact location or placement of words in phrases

    or sentences so that the phrases or sentences are valid.

    4. Meanings of words: There are three types of words meanings which are

    referential, affective, and pragmatics. Referential means metaphorical extensions

    of words meaning; affective refers to connotations of words and pragmatics

    refers to appropriate use of words based on the contexts given.

    5. Lexical relations of words: This refers to similar or opposite meaning of words,

    such as synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy, etc.

    (Schmitt, 1997, p. 207, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34)

    Revising and rehearsing are crucial to get words stored in STM to be well

    remembered and transferred into LTM. Unless new items are rehearsed regularly,

    they would be eventually forgotten no matter how hard they are processed in the first

    encounter due to human memorys fragile nature (Ellis, 1995; Hulstijn, 2001; Nation,

    2001)

    Communication failure has raised the need to improve on memory retention of

    words. It is becoming increasingly urgent to attract the communities attention with

    researches of Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS) (Anderson, 1991,

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 5

    as cited in Amir and Mohd Noor, n.d. p. 314), which can be defined as sets of

    techniques or learning behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques

    are effective in helping language learners to discover the meanings and to retain the

    knowledge of newly-learnt words. When words are understood better, appropriate

    usage of words in written and spoken communication is also achieved (Oxford, 1990).

    This research compares and studies on the MVLS practised by Universiti Tunku

    Abdul Rahman (UTAR) students in two courses consist of Chinese Studies (CH) and

    English Language (EL) in rehearsing and expanding their English vocabulary.

    Students in CH course are considered as non EL majors, while students in EL course

    are EL majors. Using the deep processing MVLS highlighted by Craik and Lockhart

    (1972) in Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34) as the

    theoretical framework, questionnaires designed accordingly were used in gathering

    and recording of research data.

    1.2 Statement of Problem

    There are several factors that influence students preferences and choices of

    MVLS such as learning styles, motivations, language competency, etc (Oxford,

    1990). The question of whether students in two different courses which contrast in

    terms of mediums of instruction in their lessons possess distinguishable abilities to

    rehearse their vocabulary remains unknown to linguists and researchers. Lectures in

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 6

    CH are conducted using Chinese language while lecturers speak English to conduct

    their teachings in EL. Noticing such obvious difference in these two courses, this

    research sees frequency of exposure to English Language between students from CH

    and EL as one of the leading factors that influence students in storing, retaining, and

    recalling of new English words. Therefore, methods of rehearsing their newly learnt

    words adopted by students from these two courses are very worth researching.

    1.3 Purpose of the Study

    The purpose of this research is to study and compare the MVLS, in other

    words, strategies applied by UTAR students in both CH and EL courses to rehearse

    their newly encountered English words. Apart from styles of rehearsing, this research

    also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to memorise the

    words in the questionnaire, as there are seriously lacking sources in terms of MVLS

    effectiveness (Erten and Williams, 2008, p. 57). At the end of this research,

    conclusion is made and it is hoped that research questions set are answered.

    1.4 Research Questions (RQ)

    The questionnaires designed and later completed by participants are crucial in

    answering these three research questions:

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 7

    RQ 1: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when

    students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each

    other?

    RQ 2: What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words

    between students from these two courses?

    RQ 3: How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in

    students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in

    rehearsing new English words?

    1.5 Scope of Study

    This research focuses on MVLS and vocabulary rehearsing of participants

    from both CH and EL courses from the Faculty of Arts and Social Science (FAS) and

    Institute of Chinese Studies (ICS). 40 students from each course were selected

    regardless of their year of studies. In selecting of participants, students frequency of

    exposure to English Language is the main aspect of this research. In other words,

    students from these two groups are selected due to the difference in their tendencies of

    being exposed to English language.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 8

    1.6 Methodology

    There are two sections in this questionnaire. In Section A, students were required

    to fill in answers by referring to the appendix attached before they attempted to

    answer the questions. Section B consists of 15 questions accompanied by a likert

    scale. The completed questionnaires were analysed to obtain required data.

    1.7 Significance of the Study

    This research serves as a platform to enhance vocabulary building through

    understanding the conceptual frameworks of MVLS. Educators may refer to this study

    as a guidance to promote learning of vocabulary using sets of MVLS.

    It is hoped that the results obtained would be able to answer questions regarding

    students methods in information processing and how effective these methods in

    promoting higher succession rate information storing and recalling. ESL learners

    would also understand better about the importance of continuous rehearsals and

    practises in enhancing storing and retaining of information.

    ESL learners might also benefit from learning about factors which are crucial in

    getting information retained perfectly, such as motivation, learning styles, and

    language competency. Students frequency of getting themselves exposed to a certain

    target language might also affect the styles and pattern of MVLS which can be

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 9

    utilised to their advantages in rehearsing and memorising of newly encountered words

    in the target language. In other words, this research attempts to explain the exposure

    to different mediums of instruction during lectures and its influences on styles in

    rehearsing and practising newly encountered words.

    ESL learners are also encouraged to self-reflect on themselves by assigning

    themselves into either group of participants (EL majors or non-EL majors).

    Attempting the survey in the questionnaire provides an ideal opportunity to identify

    their methods of words rehearsal even they are not aware of it consciously. This

    research also serves as a platform to analyse if they are adopting the correct strategies

    of rehearsing words or whether a change is what they need to guarantee higher

    success rate of information storing and recalling.

    1.8 Definition of keywords/terms

    Memory: The main idea of this research, it refers to the system where processes of

    encoding, retrieval and storage of information are interrelated (Atkinson and Shiffrin,

    1968). The Model of Memory (1968) which was introduced by Richard Atkinson and

    Richard Shiffrin is one of the theoretical frameworks which focuses on human

    memory structure.

    Short-term memory: Another term of Short-term memory is the Working memory. It

    refers to information stored in memory only lasts for a brief moment; knowledge and

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 10

    information which interest a person will move from sensory memory to short-term

    memory and they are either forgotten or lost without proper revising and rehearsing.

    (Henson and Heller, 1999).

    Long-term memory: Facts and knowledge stored in the long-term memory are

    considered well-remembered or mastered that they tend to stay in this section for

    a longer period of time. Constant revision and rehearsal of items stored are to prevent

    them from being erased from the long-term memory.

    Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS): Sets of techniques or learning

    behaviours to promote vocabulary learning. These techniques are effective in helping

    language learners to discover the meaning and to retain the knowledge of newly learnt

    words (Oxford, 1990).

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 11

    CHAPTER 2

    LITERATURE REVIEW

    2.0 Introduction

    In this chapter, previous researches of vocabulary learning are discussed, apart

    from that, related past studies are also brought into discussion. In Section 2.1, a

    noticeable phenomenon that triggers past researches about vocabulary learning

    strategies is highlighted, followed by a brief introduction of MVLS in Section 2.2. An

    introduction of two research taxonomies is featured in Section 2.3, which introduces

    Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996) in Section 2.3.1 and Nations Taxonomy in

    Section 2.3.2. Section 2.4 brings forward three recent studies of vocabulary

    acquisition; they are research by Yoshi and Flaitz (2006) in Section 2.4.1, a study

    conducted by Mason (2004) in Section 2.4.2, and a research by Sahbazian (2004) in

    Section 2.4.3. An introduction of two mnemonic case studies is featured in Section

    2.5, which are case studies of Siew M.Y in Section 2.5.1 and Allen (1995) in Section

    2.5.2.

    2.1 Conceptual background

    Remembering new words in language learning appears to be the main setback for

    most language learners. To ensure effective retaining and recalling of new

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 12

    vocabulary, constant revision is the key to avoid newly learnt words from being

    forgotten.

    Unlike non-verbal communication, where messages can be transferred using

    signs and symbols, languages have both spoken and written form to get messages

    conveyed to another party. Intentions in a conversation can be figured out with correct

    words being used regardless of grammatical structure errors, but without learning the

    words beforehand, no idea can be conveyed at all.

    With vocabulary learning regarded as the most crucial part in language learning,

    there are urgencies in publishing literature works about memory strategies, also

    known as Mnemonics vocabulary learning strategies (MVLS), which are sets of

    learning behaviours or strategies being practiced widely to assist in rehearsing newly

    encountered words to ensure them to be well- remembered (Schmitt, 1997: 207, cited

    in Xhaferi, 2008: 35).

    2.2 Mnemonic History

    The idea of mnemonic devices was introduced by Stanislaus Mink von

    Wennsshein and later many variations were developed over the years (Ebbinghaus,

    1885). It was originally a list of strategies which were intended to assist people in

    remembering reminders written on their to-do lists, such as things to buy in the

    grocery stores, remembering names, numbers, etc. The earliest version of mnemonic

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 13

    strategies were simple and direct, for example, assigning things to remember with

    specific codes that are easy to recall when needed, such as numbers, alphabets, etc.

    Although straightforward, researchers have confirmed that some of the strategies are

    still practiced widely nowadays.

    It was in year 1730 when the first variation of mnemonic strategies was

    developed based on the earliest system. Dr. Richard Grey suggested using consonants

    and alphabets to represent digits that are supposed to be remembered. In year 1808,

    Gregor von Feinaigle developed another variation of mnemonic strategies based on

    Dr. Richard Greys version, instead of writing out the digits replacements, the

    consonants and vowels were pronounced as sound units.

    In modern days, mnemonic strategies are also used in learning vocabulary and

    to minimise the chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, due to human

    memorys fragile nature (as cited in Yek, 2006, p. 11). The introduction of mnemonic

    strategies into teaching vocabulary to students has benefited not only the students but

    educators as well.

    2.3 Taxonomies of Vocabulary Learning

    In researching vocabulary learning strategies, several taxonomies about

    vocabulary teaching and learning have been proposed by researchers of vocabulary.

    Although the taxonomies all differ in terms of methods and approaches they

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 14

    categorise, they all provide strategies which are considered widely applicable in the

    course of foreign language learning.

    2.3.1 Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996)

    Peter Yongqi Gu and Robert Keith Johnson (as cited in Vocabulary Learning

    Strategies and Language Learning Outcomes, 2006) conducted a research in China

    with a purpose to reveal the vocabulary learning strategies employed by 850 Chinese

    university students who learnt English as their second languages. Their aims were to

    investigate the relationship between strategies deployed and outcomes which were

    likely to occur.

    There are four types of strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996, cited

    from Ghazal, n.d., p. 85) which reflect 850 sophomore non-EL majors choices in

    their vocabulary learning strategies while attempting questionnaires in the research.

    The mostly used strategies are metacognitive strategies which included selective

    attention and self-initiation strategies. In selective attention, respondents

    acknowledged words that are important to learn and are essential in comprehension of

    a passage. Foreign and second language learners who preferred self-initiation

    strategies used plenty of ways to get a words meaning clear to them. Cognitive

    strategies employed by respondents in this study included strategy of guessing, which

    participants relied on their background knowledge, passage context, or other lexical

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 15

    items to guess the meaning of a word. Other methods in cognitive strategies feature

    also note-taking and dictionary using.

    Memory strategies are divided into rehearsal and encoding strategies. In

    rehearsal, using word lists and repetition of words are usually choices of rehearsing.

    Encoding strategies include association of words with imagery, visual, auditory, and

    semantic. Last but not least, the activation strategies in Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy

    (1996) refers to using newly learned words in written sentences or verbally.

    In short, the four major strategies to summarise Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy

    (1996) are as follow:

    Strategies

    Metacognitive Cognitive Memory Activation

    1.Selective attention:

    Identifying words

    which are crucial to

    learn.

    2.Self initiation: Applying a variety

    of methods to get

    meanings of words

    clear

    1. Guessing: The use of

    background

    knowledge or

    other contextual

    clues to guess the

    meaning of

    words.

    2. Note taking

    3. Dictionary using

    1. Rehearsal: Word lists and

    repetition of

    words

    2. Encoding: Association of

    words with

    imagery, visual,

    auditory, and

    semantic.

    Using newly learnt

    words in written

    sentences or verbally.

    Table 2.1: Four Major MVLS Styles - Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (Ghazal, N.D, p. 85)

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 16

    2.3.2 Nations Taxonomy (2001)

    Nations Taxonomy was proposed by Paul Nation (2001, as cited in Ghazal, n.d.,

    p. 86) in studying vocabulary learning strategies among foreign language learners. It

    is one of the most famous research materials which provides many approaches in

    vocabulary learning. Oxford (1990) describes vocabulary learning strategies as

    actions taken to improve second and foreign language learners ability to store

    vocabulary in their minds.

    The strategies in this taxonomy are divided into three general classes of

    planning, source, and processes, with each has its own subset of key strategies.

    The first category, planning involves determining how much attention to be spent in

    certain lexical item. In short, the degree of importance of words is figured out before

    learning takes place (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86). Strategies in this category are

    choosing words to be studied, selecting aspects of word knowledge and choosing

    studying approaches as well as rehearsal planning.

    In the second category, source refers to gathering information about the words.

    Information may include a words form itself, the context which the word is in used,

    or simply information from learning aids such as bilingual dictionaries or glossaries.

    In other words, this category empasises on understanding the words better before they

    are spoken or written (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86).

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 17

    Lastly, the processes category includes establishing word knowledge through

    noticing, retrieving, and generating strategies. Noticing in this category involves

    learners ability to spot words to be learned, strategies in noticing are adding words

    into notebooks, checklists and rehearsing the words. Retrieval describes the ability to

    recall the words when needed. Nation (2001) explains that how a word is stored will

    determine how it is retrieved in the future. Finally, generating strategies include

    attaching new aspects of knowledge to a persons pre-existing vocabulary storage

    system through visualising examples of words, words analysis, semantic mapping and

    using learning aids such as word scales or grids. (as cited in Ghazal, N.D, p. 86)

    2.4 Recent Studies on Vocabulary Acquisition

    Researches and studies had been carried out in the past to investigate methods

    and approaches of students in attempting to boost their vocabulary learning. These

    studies also proved useful as teachers guidance and references in teaching of

    vocabulary.

    2.4.1 Yoshi and Flaitz (2002)

    The main idea of this study was to examine the effectiveness of annotation on

    incidental vocabulary learning among a group of adult ESL students in a second

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 18

    language (L2) reading programme. The term incidental can be defined as acquisition

    of words definitions in tasks such as reading comprehension and texts listening

    (Flaitz, 2002, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 43).

    Three types of annotation were designed for this study: texts only, pictures

    only, and a combination of texts and pictures. The research subjects were 151 adult

    ESL learners at beginning and intermediate levels of language proficiency. Subjects

    were given texts for reading comprehension purposes. Three types of instruments

    were used as vocabulary retention assessment: word recognition, picture recognition,

    and definition supply tests.

    Results obtained in this study showed that combination group (texts and

    pictures) performed better than the other two groups. Findings in this research

    revealed that there was no significant relationship between students language

    proficiency levels and performance of their vocabulary acquisition.

    2.4.2 Mason (2004)

    The researcher wanted to find out if listening to texts would contribute to

    students vocabulary and language development, and its effectiveness compared to

    giving direct instruction to students. 60 participants that were first year English

    majors in a private college in Osaka were chosen for conducting this study.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 19

    Participants were divided into two groups of texts listening group and direct

    instructing group.

    Participants in the texts listening group showed vocabulary language

    development, as suggested by the comprehension hypothesis, where vocabulary

    development is the result of comprehension of messages. Students listened to stories

    line by line, sentence by sentence; and improved their understanding of the stories.

    They even made new sentences using new words they learned.

    However, participants in the direct instructing group did not gain language

    development, despite their vocabulary did improve. This is due to the groups focus

    on form rather than language. In this group, students knew that they would be tested

    on their vocabulary, thus their attentions were focused on learning new words only,

    rather than understanding the stories (Mason, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 42).

    2.4.3 Sahbazian (2004)

    This study was conducted with a group of Turkish university students. The

    purpose of the research was to obtain a clearer image of the vocabulary learning

    strategies and steps taken by this group of respondents to assist themselves in learning

    new English words.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 20

    The methodology of this research was basically a survey with data gathering

    required the respondents to fill up a 35-items survey questionnaire in order to find out

    the percentages of each vocabulary learning strategies being used by the respondents.

    Results of this research show that overall Turkish university respondents were not

    aware of using vocabulary learning strategies to revise newly learned English words,

    as frequency of effective rehearsing of new English words appeared to be low.

    Strategies such as the key word method and semantic mapping were not among the

    strategies which were used most by the respondents. However, memory strategies,

    especially the simple and direct ones, were reported having higher percentages of

    practitioners compared to other strategies.

    In concluding the results, the researcher asserted that the most significant way of

    mastering new English words among the respondents was using straightforward

    cognitive based memory strategies (Sahbazian, 2004, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 41).

    This is mainly due to traditional teaching in Turkish education system which

    encouraged rote learning method in not only foreign language learning but also in

    most of the subjects.

    2.5 Mnemonics in vocabulary teaching case studies

    This section features and discusses two case studies of teaching vocabulary to

    students in a classroom setting. Unlike the past studies mentioned in the previous

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 21

    section, where the researchers were either linguists or language researchers,

    experiments in these two cases were conducted in a classroom setting by teachers of

    English Language.

    2.5.1 Yek, S.M (2006)

    A 14 year-old boy diagnosed with Tourette syndrome and was observed with

    being absent minded and a lack of concentration in class. Yek (2006) gave him a

    rudimentary vocabulary test and found out that he had only second grade English

    vocabulary competency although he had been studying English language since

    kindergarten.

    Yek (2006) started to teach him using mnemonics in learning English vocabulary.

    For complex and long words such as comprehension, he was taught to syllabicate

    them. The back drill method was also taught to him, an example is the word

    organise, where he was taught to pronounce it in ise, nise, anise, ganise

    and finally organise. In understanding the definitions of the words, translations

    were sometimes made in using the boys mother tongue, which is Chinese language.

    (Yek, 2006)

    In year 2005, the boy sat for the General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) and

    managed to pass the test. On the same year, he took the GEPT oral test and

    successfully passed the test. The effectiveness of the mnemonics proved to be a

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 22

    success as he was motivated in preparing for his GEPT intermediate level test. Among

    other reasons, the boys retention of English vocabulary may have been his

    motivation in his studies.

    However, a discovery in this case study suggests a problem in teaching

    mnemonics to improve vocabulary learning lies in the instruction of abstract words.

    Often, mnemonics and other VLS cannot be applied in teaching such words.

    2.5.2 Allen (1995)

    Janet Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) proposed that she was teaching

    vocabulary just like how she was taught. Her vocabulary learning experiences include

    assigning words in a list to be learnt, looking up words in the dictionary, and making

    sentences using the assigned words. The dictionary method was her schools main

    approach in teaching vocabulary to students but she was concerned when using the

    same approach, her students had failed in locating the most logical definition,

    recognising its part of speech, and using them correctly in the sentences.

    Her thoughts were that even students scored well in a vocabulary test; they still

    faced difficulties in retaining the knowledge of the words unless long term

    reinforcements were provided (Allen, 1995, cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009).

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 23

    Inspired by a book entitled Vocabulary Cartoons (Burchers, Burchers, and

    Burchers, 1997), Allen (as cited in Benge and Robbins, 2009) started using cartoon

    illustrations and the keyword method to teach vocabulary to students. For each word

    to be learnt, students were provided with its definitions, the pronunciation, a keyword,

    a humorous cartoon with a caption, and examples of sentences with words used in

    context (Burchers, Burchers, and Burchers, 1997).

    To increase the students understanding of the words, Allen (as cited in Benge

    and Robbins, 2009) erased the definitions, and demanded students to figure out the

    definitions of the words based on the examples of sentences with words used in

    context.

    In testing the students knowledge of vocabulary, and the methods effectiveness,

    students were given reinforcement activities such as such as games and puzzles, other

    cartoon activities, graphic organizers, and analogy activities (Allen, as cited in Benge

    and Robbins, 2009). The results turned out positively as the students were able to

    recall the words learnt, for the past nine years, the mnemonic vocabulary instructional

    method has been in used constantly to teach vocabulary to students.

    2.6 Conclusion

    It is important to acknowledge the development of MVLS from past to present

    before continuing to the next chapter. Chapter 2 attempts to reveal about the origins of

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 24

    mnemonic strategies, which is also the main topic of this study. Getting sufficient

    knowledge of main subject would help in achieving better understanding of two

    important taxonomies of memory and vocabulary learning research, as well as other

    recent studies featured in this chapter. Past studies of memory and vocabulary

    learning have come up with several theories and approaches, which to a certain extent

    this study is related with.

    The next chapter features the research design and explains the theories and

    approaches retrieved from the past studies mentioned above.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 25

    CHAPTER 3

    METHODOLOGY

    3.0 Introduction

    The main discussions in this chapter are the research design and the theoretical

    framework. Section 3.1 briefly discusses the theoretical framework included in this

    research. Section 3.1.1 features the Model of Memory. Another theory is the Depth of

    Processing Theory, which is discussed in section 3.1.2. The following sections are

    explanations of MVLS grouped under four different categories retrieved from

    Schmitts Taxonomy (1997). The chapter continues in section 3.2 with an explanation

    on the participants selected to conduct this study. In section 3.3, the correct

    procedures and steps to get this research conducted charted out, as well as a detailed

    description on the research questionnaire. The next section discusses the

    instrumentation and processes involved in obtaining required research data. Section

    3.5 presents the research design and stages in conducting this research, with the stages

    explained in the following sections. In Section 3.6, the research questionnaires layout

    and content are explained in detail. Last but not least, Section 3.7 concludes this

    chapter.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 26

    3.1 Theoretical Framework

    It is necessary to acknowledge the theoretical framework used in this research,

    which consists of Model of Memory (Atkinson and Shiffrin, 1968) and Depth of

    Processing theory by Craig and Lockhart (1975). Finally, the construction of

    questionnaire is based on a list of mnemonic strategies retrieved from Schmitts

    Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34).

    3.1.1 Model of memory (1968)

    The model of memory (1968) proposed by Richard Atkinson and Richard Shiffrin

    is regarded as one of the most established model in explaining how information

    processing occurs in human mind. This model includes three parts: sensory memory,

    short-term memory (STM), and long-term memory (LTM). Atkinson and Shiffrin

    (1968) proposed that information is remembered only at a surface level at the stage of

    sensory memory and deep retention occurs only at the level of LTM.

    3.1.1.1 Sensory Memory

    How human minds interpret information depends on perceptions or thoughts.

    Perceptions can be defined as the process of assigning meanings to sensed stimuli

    (Klazy, 1984). There are three components that are important in sensing stimuli which

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 27

    are sensory registers in visual, auditory, and tactual (Bower, 1999). In other words,

    these three components which process these stimuli are called sensory memory.

    According to Wolfe (2001), before any stimuli are retained and remembered, they

    must first processed by sensory memory. However, information is usually self-

    initiated, where peoples perceptions decide how important a piece of information is.

    The selected stimuli will be transferred to short-term memory (STM). Therefore,

    information stored in sensory memory are quickly forgotten and short-lived (Atkinson

    and Shiffrin, 1968).

    3.1.1.2 Short-term Memory (STM)

    Another term of STM given by Case (1984) is working memory. According to

    Henson and Heller (1999), STM is the memory in human consciousness, simply

    because peoples selective attentions are responsible in deciding the processing of

    stimuli in sensory memory and information that will to be stored in STM. To enable

    information stored in STM to be transferred into long-term memory (LTM), it is

    crucial to have deep processing with humans past experiences and background

    knowledge, which was further agreed by Wolfe (2001), claiming that integration of

    processed stimuli and background knowledge happens consciously. However,

    controversies were raised, as there were arguments by researchers (Banikowski, 1999;

    Carter & Hardy, 1999; and Wolfe, 1999) which indicated that capacity of STM can be

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 28

    improved by applying sufficient rehearsals which would prolong the duration of

    information stored in our STM.

    As the term rehearsal plays a significant role in present research and it is also

    closely related to long-term memory (LTM), this term is discussed in the following

    section.

    3.1.1.3 Rehearsal

    Rehearsal can be defined as the ability to recite newly learned information by

    associating meanings from accumulated past experiences and background knowledge

    (Banikowski, 1999). There are two types of rehearsal which are maintenance

    rehearsal and elaborative rehearsal. Maintenance rehearsal refers to verbally repeating

    items to be remembered, and it is less likely that information rehearsed in such

    method can be transferred into long-term memory (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). While

    maintenance rehearsal is more like a parrot-based repetition of information,

    elaborative rehearsal is best described as a connection of past experiences and

    background knowledge with new information. Craik and Lockhart (1972) further

    discussed that elaborative rehearsal emphasises in creating extended images and

    utilising hints and clues in ensuring more efficient recalling of stored information. In

    2003, a research conducted by Zimbardo, Weber, and Johnson (2003) proved that

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 29

    rehearsing elaboratively helps to retain stored information better and transfer

    rehearsed information into long-term memory (LTM) in higher succession rate.

    3.1.1.4 Long-term Memory (LTM)

    Perkins (1989) suggested that LTM stores information that are rehearsed and

    mastered, even for many more years to come. Wolfe (2001) divided LTM into

    procedural memory and declarative memory. While declarative memory refers to an

    ability to tell and write out information that have successfully stored, procedural

    memory is more like an ability to practice actions that have been carried out

    constantly over the years. Chamberlain (1990) concluded that information stored in

    LTM is less likely to be forgotten and described them as permanent knowledge.

    After understanding the structure of human memory, a theory about memory and

    information processing follows.

    3.1.2 Depth of Processing Theory (1972)

    The theory was proposed after a research conducted in collaboration of Fergus

    Ian Muirden Craik and Robert Lockhart (1975, as cited in Journal of Experimental

    Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). The two researchers suggested

    that perceptions towards information influence meanings that will be defined upon

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 30

    them. To put it simply, how stimuli are viewed will decide on informations definition

    in human minds. Both of the researchers also stressed that in order to enable first hand

    information to be well-remembered, rehearsals need to be performed in a series of

    stages (Crowder, 1976), hence the name Depth of Processing is used to name this

    theory.

    3.1.2.1 Levels of Processing (1972)

    As the model of Depths of Processing (1972) displays above, there are 3 different

    levels in information processing, which are structural, phonological, and semantic

    Structural Phonological Semantic

    Weak memory trace Weak memory trace Strong memory trace

    (As cited in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294)

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 31

    processing. While structural processing refers to appearances of stimuli, such as sizes,

    shapes, and patterns, phonological processing refers to auditory features and sound of

    stimuli, such as pronunciation of words (Craik and Lockhart, 1972). Last but not least,

    semantic processing refers to assigning meanings to stimuli, which is considered the

    level that will create strong memory trace (Craik and Lockhart, 1972).

    In this experiment conducted by Craik and Lockhart (1972), classes were

    divided and were instructed to monitor and to process the words given. A recognition

    memory test was given right after the respondents had completed rehearsing the list of

    words depending on which group they were assigned into. Results showed that

    subjects who rehearsed the list of words for meanings remembered better than

    subjects who rehearsed structurally and phonologically.

    3.1.3 Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning Strategies (MVLS)

    If the aim of teaching vocabulary is to master every word learnt and minimise

    chances of newly learnt words being forgotten, MVLS with deep memory processing

    must be proposed, rather than processed in a shallow, lower level processing (Craik

    and Lockhart, 1975). The following MVLS are retrieved from Schmitts Taxonony

    (1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34). Considering not all the strategies in the

    taxonomy are not applicable in modern vocabulary learning strategies study, Craik

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 32

    and Lockhart (1975) stressed that only methods which promote deep memory

    processing are suitable in rehearsing and memorizing new vocabulary.

    3.1.3.1 Linguistic Mnemonics

    Strategies categorised under linguistic mnemonics focus on characteristics of

    words-to-learn, which includes pronunciation of words, spelling, pattern of words,

    etc.

    Methods Descriptions Examples

    Peg method Links new words to an

    easily remembered rhyme

    to learn new words.

    Coat, boat, and float

    Keyword method Focuses on uses learners first language to aid in

    learning of words in

    foreign languages.

    The German word Ei (egg in English) can be

    remembered easily by

    thinking of an English

    word Eye

    Word break method Learns longer and more

    complex words easier by

    analysing the words syllables and letters.

    The word initiated can be broken up into four

    syllables: i-ni-tia-ted

    Word relation method Learns words by using

    similar or opposite

    meaning of the words.

    The word ferocious can be remembered better with

    the synonym fierce or the antonym tame.

    Table 3.1: Listing of MVLS categorised under Linguistic Mnemonics.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 33

    3.1.3.2 Spatial Mnemonics

    Spatial mnemonics are strategies which are related with space. It requires learners

    to imagine or assign hints and clues which will help them to retain words in their

    memory.

    Methods Descriptions Examples

    Spatial grouping Words are arranged to

    form patterns such as

    triangle, square, and

    columns.

    By arranging words to

    form a picture of a tree,

    learners will be able to

    recall all the words used to

    form the tree.

    Finger/number method Assigns each word to be

    learnt with a finger or a

    number

    A phrase with four words

    can be remembered easier

    with four numbers, such as

    4785.

    Loci method Places words to be learnt in different location and

    recalls by approaching these locations.

    Places the word cheese in the refrigerator, pencil in the room, and flower in the garden.

    Table 3.2: Listing of MVLS categorised under Spatial Mnemonics.

    3.1.3.3 Visual Mnemonics

    Unlike spatial mnemonic strategies where imageries are mentally produced in

    learners mind, visual based mnemonic strategies emphasise on using physical

    imageries which can be felt and touched, such as flash cards and pictures.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 34

    Methods Descriptions Examples

    Visualisation Remembers the location of

    the word in that sentence.

    Recalls the word by

    remembering the

    paragraph and lines it is

    located

    Arranging Groups the words

    according to their

    categories, such as colours,

    food, animals, etc.

    Cabbage, bread, and salmon are words under the food category.

    Word formation method Visualises a words pattern, such as word size,

    shape, and pattern.

    The word shape boxes

    help remembering the

    word eel in terms of its shape:

    e e l

    Flash cards method Pairs pictures with words

    that are going to be learnt

    Draws a picture of a

    smiling child to describe

    the word happy.

    Table 3.3: Listing of MVLS categorised under Visual Mnemonics.

    3.1.3.4 Physical Mnemonics

    Also called connection mnemonics or link mnemonics, learners ability to make

    good use of their pre-existing knowledge will be put into test under this mnemonic

    device. Physical mnemonics place great emphasise in connecting things already

    learned or known to aid in learning of new skills or knowledge.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 35

    Methods Descriptions Examples

    Associating Learns new words by

    recalling concepts already

    in memory

    Links a newly learnt

    English word like

    billboard to a previously learnt word like board.

    Narrative chain Chains up strings of words

    by creating a story which

    features all the words to be

    learnt.

    To remember words such

    as boil, spicy, bake, roast, and wine, a story about a chefs daily routine can be created

    Reviewing/evaluating Uses performance tests or

    examination to evaluate

    the results of vocabulary

    learning.

    Most schools have spelling

    tests to evaluate students learning of English

    vocabulary.

    Semantic mapping Arranges words to be

    learnt into a diagram and

    relate other words which

    share similar idea with

    branches to create links.

    Figure 3.1 below shows an

    example of the Semantic

    mapping in vocabulary

    learning.

    Table 3.4: Listing of MVLS categorised under Physical Mnemonics.

    Figure 3.1: Semantic mapping in learning words related to transportation

    Transportation

    Water

    Land

    Air

    Submarine

    Canoe

    Sailboat

    Truck Van

    Helicopter

    Airplane

    Spaceship

    (As cited in Language in India: Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow, Vol. 9, p. 124-125)

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 36

    3.2 Restating purpose and research questions

    Long-term retention of words in a foreign language has become students main

    setback in learning a second language. Vocabulary learning is the first step in

    ensuring effective communication between both parties, as indicated in previous

    chapter; it is known that people cannot communicate without knowing the meanings

    of words and applying them in written and spoken communication (Zimbardo, Weber,

    and Johnson, 2003)

    In understanding the frequency of exposure to English language which

    contrasts participants from two courses, this study aims to reveal the distinction in

    application of vocabulary learning strategies by respondents from both EL and CH

    courses. Apart from strategies of lexical memorising, effectiveness of vocabulary

    learning strategies will also be evaluated based on participants performances in the

    memory test.

    Results obtained in data analysing will answer doubts and research questions

    posed at the beginning of the research:

    RQ 1: What are the differences in students word rehearsal approaches when

    students mediums of instructions in their courses contrast against each

    other?

    RQ 2: What are the similarities in ways of remembering English words

    between students from these two courses?

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 37

    RQ 3: How does being different in terms of mediums of instructions in

    students courses is going to affect preferences or styles of students in

    rehearsing new English words?

    3.3 Participants and sampling

    The participants selected are students in Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman.

    They are assembled in two groups based on their courses, which are English

    Language (EL) and Chinese Studies (CH). Students frequencies of exposure to the

    target language (English language) differ these two courses.

    Lessons and lectures in EL are conducted mostly using English language;

    there are subjects where students are taught other languages, such as foreign language

    subjects and pendidikan moral. EL students are nurtured with the essential

    communicative skills and knowledge of the language to communicate fluently and

    competently. EL also encourages participation of students in international platforms

    such as conferences and forums as well as promoting the use of English language in

    different field of careers.

    Being a total contrast to how EL operates, the mediums of instruction in CH

    are mostly Chinese language, while there are other languages used in conducting

    subjects similar to those mentioned before. Understanding the fact that the importance

    of Chinese language is currently widely recognised around the world, this course aims

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 38

    to nurture students with high and excellent competency in Chinese language through

    the teaching of Chinese philosophies, history, and literatures.

    40 participants from each course were required to participate in this research,

    regardless differences in their year of studies.

    3.4 Detailed description of instrumentation and process

    Data are obtained through participants answering of questionnaires designed by

    applying a collaboration of Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, as cited in Xhaferi, 2008, p.

    34) and Craik and Tulvings Depth of Processing Theory (1975, as cited in Journal of

    Experimental Psychology: General, Vol. 104, No. 3, p. 268-294). A Questionnaire

    consists of two sections with section A appears in the form of a memory test which

    participants sit for and section B consists of 15 statements which participants pick a

    number in the likert scale to indicate how far they would agree with the statements

    given.

    The procedures of answering the questionnaire are as follow:

    1. Participants were given an appendix which contains words for them to memorise

    in order to sit for the memory test in Section A.

    2. Participants were required to spend only twenty minutes to memorise the words

    listed in the appendix. The researcher demanded that the appendix be returned

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 39

    within the time limit to prevent respondents from referring to the appendix.

    3. Participants would begin answering Section A of the questionnaire.

    4. Section B was answered once Section A was completed.

    Participants results in section A and section B were recorded and analysed.

    Results are presented in chapter four.

    3.5 Research design and stages

    This present study is a comparative study intends to investigate the MVLS

    practised by participants from the courses of CH and EL. The participants are set

    apart by the difference in frequency of exposure towards English language. This

    research also evaluates the effectiveness of each strategy used by respondents to

    memorise the words in the questionnaire (refer to questionnaire/appendix). At the end

    of this research, research questions set is hoped to be answered. A total of 80 research

    participants, with 40 participants from both CH and EL were required to participate in

    this research. Participants were selected based on their courses regardless of their year

    of studies. The research questionnaires consist of two sections designed to achieve the

    research purpose stated early. Participants were required to answer the questionnaires

    subjectively and objectively.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 40

    Research questionnaires were distributed to the research participants, followed by

    a briefing of the instructions on answering the questionnaires. Participants thoughts

    and questions were answered before attempting to complete the questionnaires to

    reduce survey errors. Completed questionnaires were collected and separated based

    on experiment group, followed by analysis to obtain required data as shown below:

    a) MVLS applied by participants in Section A

    b) MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A

    c) Number of participants in each mnemonic style

    In presenting the required data stated above, statistical measurements such as bar

    graphs were used to record and present data in both a) and c) in percentages. While

    MVLS applied by participants who scored Excellent in Section A were recorded

    and presented using tables. Implications and reasoning were made based on the

    obtained results in the collected data. In discussing the results, research questions

    stated beforehand were also hoped to be answered in the final stage. The final stage

    aims to conclude this study by answering the research questions. Apart from that, it

    also suggests possible applications of MVLS in teaching training programs. Finally,

    limitations encountered in conducting this research are also stated.

    Last but not least, the procedures from beginning of this present study to

    completion are presented in stages as listed below.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 41

    Stage 1: Defining of research purpose

    Stage 2: Identifying of research participants

    Stage 3: Designing research questionnaire in meeting the research purpose

    Stage 4: Distributing of research questionnaires

    Stage 5: Collecting of completed questionnaires

    Stage 6: Analysing Research questionnaires

    Stage 7: Presenting and explaining experiment data

    Stage 8: Discussion

    Stage 9: Conclusion

    3.6 Presents study questionnaire

    The questionnaire begins with an introductory page which introduces participants

    with basic understanding about present research as well as information regarding the

    researcher. Definition of the key phrase mnemonic strategies will be given to aid

    participants in completing this questionnaire. While section A is a memory test

    section which requires participants to memorise words in the appendix given, section

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 42

    B requires participants to rate their opinions in the statements with a modified likert

    scale which includes five different levels of agreement.

    3.7 Conclusion

    The research questions restated above are also the objective of this study. At the

    end of this research, the researcher attempts to answer and clear the doubts in the form

    of three research questions stated in Chapter One. To do so, the procedures of the

    research must be systematically followed and conducted according to the research

    design. The theoretical framework which serves as the backbone of this research,

    contains two theories from past studies mentioned in the previous chapter, must be

    fully acknowledged to understand this study as a whole. Last but not least, there are

    also examples MVLS, which the researcher referred to design the questionnaire of

    this study.

    The next chapter features statistics derived from analysed results based on the

    participants performances in answering the questionnaires.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 43

    CHAPTER 4

    FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

    4.0 Introduction

    This chapter focuses on data analysis based on the questionnaires completed by

    participants, as well as featuring findings and discussion for each topic. In Section

    4.1, an explanation is given on understanding the graph charts featured in the

    following section. Section 4.2 features a finding that is crucial in answering Research

    Question (RQ) 1. A discussion follows at Section 4.3 featuring two topics featured in

    Section 4.3.1 and Section 4.3.2. Section 4.4 focuses on findings pertaining to the

    similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2. Both Section 4.4.1 and Section 4.4.2

    cover the analysed data obtained from participants from both courses. The following

    section includes a discussion with two topics featured in Section 4.5.1 and Section

    4.5.2. Section 4.6 covers another finding which is crucial in answering RQ3. Section

    4.6.1 features statistics in graphs and tables on the four mnemonic styles and number

    of participants who practice them. Next, a topic discussion is featured in Section

    4.6.2. Lastly, a conclusion in ending this chapter is featured in Section 4.7.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 44

    4.1 Distribution of vocabulary memory test results

    Section A of this present studys questionnaire features a vocabulary memory test

    that requires participants from CH and EL to memorise the words listed on the

    questionnaires appendix in a given time limit of twenty minutes.

    The next phase of this section requires participants to write down the memorised

    words regardless of the words sequence, and briefly describe the method they used in

    retaining the words.

    In recording the test results, participants were grouped based on their

    performances in the test. The four groups of results which participants were assigned

    in are Fail, Below average, Average, and Excellent. The distributions of the

    results are as follow:

    Fail - 1 to 7 words written correctly

    Below average - 8 to 14 words written correctly

    Average - 15 to 21 words written correctly

    Excellent - 22 to 26 words written correctly

    The graph charts in the following sections show the results of the test obtained by

    participants in both courses.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 45

    4.2 Findings pertaining to the differences of MVLS in RQ 1

    Figure 4.1: Compared vocabulary memory test results (CH and EL participants)

    Five out of forty CH participants have failed the test and they accumulated a total

    of 12.5% in the group of participants who obtained the same results. A total of 15% of

    EL participants have failed the test, this figure indicates that 6 participants from the

    whole population of 40 did not pass the test.

    There are 35% of CH participants categorised under Below average with their

    results in the test. 10 participants from the EL course who have added up to 25% are

    categorised under the same category.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 46

    10 CH participants performances are placed under the Average category, which

    equals to a total of 25% of the group percentage. Under the same placement, 22.5% of

    EL participants have been assigned under this group.

    27.5% of the CH participants managed to excel in the test as 11 of them are

    employing effective MVLS to achieve this result. Last but not least, statistics have

    reported that 37.5% of the EL participants also did well in the test as 15 of these

    participants achieved Excellent in the test.

    4.3 Answering RQ 1

    From the statistics shown above, it is obvious that participants from the CH

    course, despite having limited exposure to English language due to the medium of

    instruction of the course being Chinese language, managed to achieve less test failures

    than participants from the EL course. It is known that EL students experience higher

    exposure to English language, a fact that does not help participants from that course to

    achieve less test failures than participants from the CH course.

    Having achieved lower percentages in failing the test, and higher percentages in

    scoring the results of Below average and Average, participants from the CH course

    are more focused on passing the test, rather than achieving the Excellent result.

    Statistics also show that despite having more test failures in EL participants, there

    appear to be more scorers of grade Excellent.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 47

    4.3.1 English language proficiency level and test results

    The retrieved completed questionnaires show that the passing rate is higher in CH

    despite most of the participants are having lower proficiency in the English language.

    Evidences can be traced from the questionnaires Section A, question 2 that requires

    participants to briefly describe their methods and approaches used in rehearsing and

    memorising the words listed on the appendix.

    There were difficulties encountered by CH participants in using simple sentence

    structure in English language to explain their styles and patterns during the

    vocabulary rehearsing session. Majority of the participants were answering the

    question using their own mother tongue, which is Chinese language. The other finding

    refers to their limited storage of English vocabulary, which is countered by their use

    of English content words without grammatical markers to form grammatically correct

    sentences. In this case, CH participants focused on conveying thoughts, rather than

    the validity and quality of their written language. These are some examples which

    could describe CH participants English language proficiencies, evidences are

    retrieved from the completed questionnaires:

    I) First, remember words, then write down, group together, break words, repeat

    many times.

    II) Think pictures, remember it, write and think pictures, practise to write.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 48

    Analysis conducted on the completed questionnaires has revealed that most CH

    participants are practising selective attention. In Gu and Johnsons Taxonomy (1996),

    this approach is describe as a method where students identify words that are crucial to

    learn, in order to pass a test, to use them in writing, etc. (Gu and Johnson, 1996, cited

    from Ghazal, N.D, p. 85). In terms of selection of important words to be memorised,

    selective attention also includes selection of strategies to assist vocabulary rehearsal

    (Lawson and Hogben, 1996, p. 103).

    An observable system that helps CH participants in passing the test is most

    respondents who achieved Below average and Average have a set of words that

    are written correctly. These words are: buhl, gyle, fundus, jink, lar, quid, tatou, vatic,

    noils. An assumption of these words having high reliability of being written correctly

    is because of the words being shorter and having less letters compared to other long

    words, thus making information processing easier and less complex. As a result,

    writing these nine words correctly will ensure participants a place under the Below

    average level.

    4.3.2 Scorers of Excellent in EL participants

    As mentioned before in previous discussion, despite being at greater number in

    terms of test failures, participants in EL are more superior at securing higher

    percentage in Excellent test result. Analysis conducted on the completed

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 49

    questionnaires has revealed that EL participants who wrote out most of the words

    correctly are channeling their background knowledge and understanding of the

    English language to aid vocabulary retention.

    Understanding the English language in a broader sense has helped EL participants

    to find more effective alternatives to retain longer and more complex words. During

    the vocabulary rehearsing session, EL participants are believed to make full use of the

    words definitions to better understand the words. Incorporating pre-existing

    knowledge in information processing and organising has been researched by Frederic

    Bartlett in completing his study of human constructive memory and pre-existing

    knowledge. The Schema Theory (1932) suggests that how information is processed

    depends on humans schema, or their pre-existing knowledge (Bartlett, 1977 cited in

    Landry, 2002).

    In this case, Excellent scorers in EL combined the structures of those longer

    words with the explanations provided in the definitions, and relied on their schemata

    to create an effective way to process these words that require more complex

    processing effort. The importance of the context of the words in used has been

    recognised heavily, as it provides mental images or imaginary meanings of the words

    (Intaraprasert, n.d., p. 90). Some examples below show how complex words can be

    retained effectively using the Schema Theory (1932):

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 50

    I) To remember the word Maggotorium, the word is first broken into [Maggot +

    orium]. The word can be defined as place where maggots are bred for sale to

    fishers. The context of the definition is similar to what an emporium offers,

    where people gather and transactions are ongoing. In short, the word is

    remembered by recalling an emporium where maggots are on sale.

    II) Another example is the word Hypnomogia that has the same meaning as

    insomnia. In this case, the word is broken into two parts in [Hypno + mogia].

    The former part is remembered through the word Hypnosis; the latter part does

    not bear any meaning as it is classified as a function word. However it does

    sound like insomnia. As a result the word Hypnomogia is processed in such

    way: Insomnia is a result of hypnosis.

    To conclude, EL participants ability in understanding English language in a

    broader sense has helped them to rehearse longer and complex words and put them in

    better positions in increasing the percentage of Excellent scorers in the vocabulary

    memory test

    4.4 Findings pertaining to the similarities in English words rehearsal in RQ 2

    As mentioned in previous chapters, effectiveness of MVLS in vocabulary

    retention remains an important issue to be discussed in this study. This section will

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 51

    analyse The MVLS preferred by participants who managed to achieve Excellent for

    their vocabulary memory test results.

    4.4.1 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (CH)

    Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary

    Learning Strategies (MVLS)

    Number of Excellent CH participants using the

    strategy

    Total %

    1 [Keyword method +

    Evaluating]

    5 45.5

    2 [Keyword method +

    Arranging]

    1 9.1

    3 [Keyword method +

    Associating + Evaluating]

    1 9.1

    4 [Keyword method + Peg

    method + Evaluating]

    1 9.1

    5 [Keyword method + Word

    break method + Evaluating]

    1 9.1

    6 [Flash cards method +

    Associating + Evaluating]

    1 9.1

    7 [Peg method + Flash cards

    method + Associating +

    Semantic mapping +

    Evaluating]

    1 9.1

    Total 11 100

    Table 4.1: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in CH participants

    *MLVS combinations are marked using [ ]

    Five CH participants who scored Excellent in the vocabulary memory test

    incorporated [Keyword method + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary retention. A

    total of 45.5% of the participants are using this combination of strategies in rehearsing

    new English vocabulary. Only one respondent used [Keyword method + Arranging]

    in increasing rate of vocabulary storing, which equals to 9.1% of the CH participants.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 52

    Apart from participants who employed MVLS in pairs, there are also

    combinations of three different MVLS; one of the participants was using [Keyword

    method + Associating + Evaluating] during the test. Another participant is a user of

    [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating] in vocabulary retention. Similar

    combination of strategies is used by another participant, but with a slight difference

    with the Peg method being replaced with the Word break method in such

    combination: [Keyword method + Word break method + Evaluating].

    Unlike majority of the participants, there are two participants that are tested of

    not using the keyword method in rehearsing the vocabulary. One of them incorporated

    [Flash cards method + Associating + Evaluating] for memorising. Last but not least, a

    CH participant relied on five MVLS to achieve Excellent result in the test, the

    strategies combined are: [Peg Method + Flash cards method + Associating + Semantic

    mapping + Evaluating].

    The next section features table 4.2 which lists the MVLS employed EL

    participants who achieved Excellent in the vocabulary test. The list also previews

    the efficiency of the chosen MVLS based on the perspectives of the EL participants.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 53

    4.4.2 Scorers of Excellent and their MVLS (EL)

    Ranking Mnemonic Vocabulary

    Learning Strategies (MVLS)

    Number of Excellent CH participants using the

    strategy

    Total %

    1 [Associating + Evaluating] 3 20.0

    2 [Keyword method +

    Arranging]

    2 13.4

    3 [Keyword method +

    Evaluating]

    2 13.4

    4 [Keyword method + Peg

    method]

    1 6.7

    5 [Keyword method +

    Associating]

    1 6.7

    6 [Keyword method +

    Arranging + Evaluating]

    1 6.7

    7 [Keyword method + Word

    break method + Evaluating]

    1 6.7

    8 [Keyword method + Peg

    method + Evaluating]

    1 6.7

    9 [Keyword method + Word

    break method + Associating

    + Evaluating]

    1 6.7

    10 [Keyword method + Peg

    method + Associating +

    Evaluating]

    1 6.7

    11 [Keyword method] 1 6.7

    Total 15 100

    Table 4.2: Listing of MVLS - scorers of Excellent in EL participants

    *MLVS combinations are marked using [ ]

    Three participants who scored Excellent in the mnemonic vocabulary memory

    test adopted the combination of [Associating + Evaluating] to enhance vocabulary

    memorising. A total of 20.0% of the participants are using these two methods in

    rehearsing the new English vocabulary. The pairing of [Keyword method +

    Arranging] recorded 13.4% with two participants tested of using this combination.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 54

    The same goes for the pairing of [Keyword method + Evaluating], with exactly same

    percentages and number of participants who adopt these strategies.

    Only one participant, with a total of 6.7% of the EL participants, used [Keyword

    method + Peg method] during the test. The rest of the recorded strategies share the

    same percentages and number of users, such as a participant who adopted [Keyword

    method + Associating] for strengthening vocabulary retention.

    Besides MVLS that are paired, there are also several combinations three MVLS

    employed by EL participants in rehearsing the words. Three combinations of three

    MVLS that share similar percentage and number of users are [Keyword method +

    Arranging + Evaluating], [Keyword method + Word break method + Associating +

    Evaluating], and [Keyword method + Peg method + Evaluating]

    Apart from MVLS in pairs and participants who employed combinations of three

    strategies, the recorded data also shows two participants who combined four strategies

    in increasing rate of vocabulary retention. The two combinations are [Keyword

    method + Word break method + Associating + Evaluating] and [Keyword method +

    Peg method + Associating + Evaluating].

    Last but not least, there is also a participant who adopted a single strategy

    approach, which is the Keyword method to rehearse vocabulary.

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 55

    4.5 Answering RQ 2

    To investigate the effectiveness of approaches selected by participants from both

    courses, there is no better way than studying MVLS that were used by participants

    who scored Excellent during the vocabulary rehearsing stage. To do so, Scorers of

    Excellent in both courses must be separated out from scorers of other results. The

    next step consists of identifying the MVLS used based on participants answers in the

    questionnaires Section A, question 2.

    Conducting analysis on participants choices of preferred MVLS during the

    vocabulary rehearsing session is intended to identify worth-researching topics in

    MVLS usefulness and their abilities to increase information processing rate. Issues

    that raise the researchers attention are the importance of reinforcement activities in

    raising vocabulary retention and the Keyword methods effectiveness in rehearsing

    unique words.

    4.5.1 Reinforcement activities in vocabulary retention

    The employment of the Evaluating strategy by participants who scored

    Excellent in the vocabulary memory test is noticeable by the researcher, 10 out of 11

    participants in CH and nine out of 15 participants in EL were tested of employing this

    strategy during the vocabulary rehearsing session. The question raised from this

    phenomenon is whether this strategy can be considered effective in improving

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 56

    vocabulary retention rate. To provide an explanation regarding this question, it is

    crucial to understand this strategy beforehand.

    Retrieved from Schmitts Taxonomy (1997, cited from Xhaferi, 2008, p. 34), the

    Evaluating strategy has been regarded as one of the MVLS that promotes deep

    memory processing, rather than processing at a lower, shallow level (Craig and

    Tulvig, 1975). This strategy relies on different reinforcement activities to boost and

    prolong information storage by rehearsing items to be remembered. The

    reinforcement theory has also been introduced in second language learning.

    In vocabulary learning, reinforcement activities include various performance

    enhancing tests to improve long-term retention, such as reading out loud memorised

    words, sentence making exercises, and spelling tests. In this case, most participants

    from both courses were rehearsing the new words by remembering them using various

    MVLS and writing them out, the process was repeated numerous times for better

    performances in recalling the words.

    In an example retrieved from one of the completed questionnaires, a participant

    was performing the Evaluating strategy, three attempts were made and the results

    appeared positive as more words were recalled in each attempt. Table 4.3 presents the

    recalled words in each attempt. The participants first attempts in rehearsing the

    words had 16 words written correctly, while in second attempt the number of words

  • Mnemonic Vocabulary Learning 57

    correctly written is 22. Lastly, all the words were written correctly in the third

    attempt.

    First attempt Second attempt Third attempt

    Anthelion, buhl, [empty],

    dormition, [empty],

    fundus, gyle, [empty],

    [empty], jink, kummel, lar,

    [empty], noils, ormolu,

    [empty], quid, redshort,

    [empty], tatou, [empty],

    vatic, [empty], xyloid,

    [empty], zitella

    Anthelion, buhl, cavatina,

    dormition, exodontia,

    fundus, gyle, [empty],

    isonephelic, jink, kummel,

    lar, [empty], noils, ormolu,

    panaesthesia, quid,

    redshort, [empty], tatou,

    undercroft, vatic, [empty],

    xyloid, yataghan, zitella

    Anthelion, buhl, cavatina,

    dormition, exodontia,

    fundus, gyle, hypnomogia,

    isonephelic, jink, kummel,

    lar, maggotorium, noils,

    ormolu, panaesthesia,

    quid, redshort,

    Scaramouch, tatou,

    undercroft, vatic,

    whiskerine, xyloid,

    yataghan, zitella

    Table 4.3: Sample of words rehearsal

    The Evaluating strategy improved the vocabulary rehearsing results by

    building on participants memorised words wit