The effects of L1 and L2 e-glosses on incidental vocabulary learning of junior high English students

第一語言及第二語言註解對於國中生英文字彙附帶學習成效之研究

胡思敏(Si-Min Hu)

指導教授 ： 劉顯親

國立清華大學/人文社會學院/外國語文學系/碩士(2011年)

摘要

Researchers have examined the effectiveness of glosses on incidental L2 vocabulary learning from issues of whether or not glosses are useful (Chen, 2002; Hulstijn, Hollander & Greidanus, 1996; Jacobs, Dufon, & Hong, 1994; Ko, 2005; Miyasako, 2002; Watanabe, 1997a, 1997b) to which type (in L1 or L2) is more effective (Chen, 2002; Jacobs et al., 1994; Ko, 2005; Miyasako, 2002; Watanabe, 1997b; Yoshii, 2006). However, little research on gloss languages is conducted in a computer-enhanced environment though e-glossing has shown outperformance over its traditional paper format from several empirical studies (Abraham, 2008; Davis & Lyman- Hager, 1997; Lyman- Hager, Davis, Burnett & Chennault, 1993; Taylor, 2006; Taylor, 2009). Attempts to compare the effects of L1 and L2 glosses have brought mixed results: some indicating no difference between the two types (Chen, 2002; Jacobs et al., 1994), and others suggesting the advantage of one gloss type over the other type. Researchers such as Ko (2005) and Miyasako (2002) found that their participants with higher L2 level proficiency profited more from L2 glosses, whereas Watanabe (1997) and Yoshii (2006) advocated the advantage of L1 glosses, especially for the lower L2 proficiency level learners. Up to present, few studies have included high school students as participants that address this issue.
To fill the gap, this study examined the effectiveness of L1 and L2 glosses on incidental vocabulary learning in a computer-based environment. The study used Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll & Stewart, 1994) as a theoretical base. According to the model, learners can medi¬ate the L2 either through a L1 word translation or through concepts without L1 assistance. The former approach might be more effective than the latter in early stag¬es of L2 learning. As L2 proficiency increases, a direct link to concepts from L2 words can be possible. Through this model, one could expect that the L1 glosses would be more effective than L2 glosses on vocabulary learning for low-proficiency level learners, whereas higher-proficiency level learners would profit more from L2 glosses. Accordingly, this study considered the influence of learners’ proficiency level (low or high) on the effects of L1 and L2 glosses, and investigated how these factors affect incidental vocabulary learning.
Participants in this study were 78 junior high school students. With Chinese as their first language, the students were divided into four treatment groups based on their intra-school English test and the long-term observation from their teachers: High L1 --> L2 (n=19), High L2 --> L1 (n=19), Low L1 --> L2 (n=20), and Low L2 --> L1 (n=20). They were reading two online reading passages with either Chinese or English glosses, were assessed with a vocabulary definition-supply test and a cloze test, and received a questionnaire. The repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) were utilized to analyze the score data. Significant differences were found not only among the four groups but also between the two posttests. Because there was also a significant interaction between groups and posttests, one-way ANOVA was needed to further examine the interaction. Post-hoc analyses then disclosed the effectiveness of L2 glosses for high level learners in word retention but no difference between the performance of the two low groups in either immediate posttests or delayed posttests. On the other hand, the questionnaire data indicated that 95% participants enjoyed the reading experience with CALL-based glosses, confirming the acceptance of e-glosses for junior high school students. Besides, L1 glosses were preferred by more than half of the participants, no matter for high or for low level learners.
Two pedagogical implications can be derived from the finding. First, glosses are useful whether in Chinese or English for enhancing vocabulary learning, and we should continue to utilize glosses in reading materials. Second, the effects of Chinese and English glosses may depend on high school learners’ English proficiency level as well as the tests. In this study, English glosses seemed to be more effective for higher level learners in word retention, but the immediate effects have not yet confirmed. As to lower level learners, even though Chinese glosses seemed to be more preferable for them, glosses in Chinese have not yet been proven to be more effective than L2 glosses. To meet individual learner’s need, therefore, both L1 and L2 glosses should be offered for students to choose from in CALL environments.
This study concludes the usefulness of either Chinese or English e-glosses while high school students read English texts to acquire vocabulary. The effects of Chinese and English glosses would differ, depending on the proficiency of the learners as well as the type of the tests: English glosses are more suitable for higher level learners, especially in word retention; for low level learners, however, Chinese or English glosses did not seem to differ in their incidental vocabulary learning. Against common English teachers’ belief, Chinese glosses or even Chinese dictionary explanations may not always provide the direct and thus preferred help for all high school students while reading.

關鍵字

註解 ； 字彙學習 ； 電腦輔助語言教學

並列摘要

無資料

並列關鍵字

gloss ； vocabulary learning ； CALL

參考文獻

Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 183-198.

Abraham, Lee B. (2008). Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(3), 199-226.

Benton, S. L., Glover, J. A., & Brunning, R. H. (1983). Levels of processing: Effect of number of decisions on prose recall. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 382-390.

Chen, H. (2002). Investigating the effects of L1 and L2 glosses on foreign language reading comprehension and vocabulary retention. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Computer-Assisted Language Instruction Consortium, Davis, CA.

Chen, H. & Leung, Y.-S. (1989). Patterns of lexical processing in a nonnative language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 316-25.