1 / 28

Facilitating Vocabulary Memorization through mnemonic learning

Facilitating Vocabulary Memorization through mnemonic learning. Tzu- ning Rachel Kao (Graduate student ) g9841040@pu.edu.tw Wen -chi Vivian Wu (Associate professor ) wcwu@pu.edu.tw. The Department of English Providence University Taichung city, Taiwan. Background statement .

fleta
Télécharger la présentation

Facilitating Vocabulary Memorization through mnemonic learning

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Facilitating Vocabulary Memorization through mnemonic learning Tzu-ning Rachel Kao (Graduate student)g9841040@pu.edu.tw Wen-chi Vivian Wu (Associate professor) wcwu@pu.edu.tw The Department of English Providence University Taichung city, Taiwan

  2. Background statement

  3. Purpose • This study was an attempt to examine the effects of the use of mnemonic learning on increasing vocabulary memorization.

  4. Literature of Review • Wilkins argued (1972) that “Without grammar very little can be conveyed, without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed”. • Oxford (1990) pointed out that language learners typically have significant difficulty on remembering a large amount of vocabulary simultaneously .

  5. The finding reported by Wyra, Lawson and Hungi (2007) ,which examined the effects on students using mnemonic keyword method to learned Spanish words, revealed that the keyword method was a useful procedure for acquisition of vocabulary in FL learning. • Systematic over the past 20 years has documented the effectiveness of Atkinson’s (1975) mnemonic keyword method for facilitating acquisition of vocabulary word meanings (Levin, 1993).

  6. Definitions apple

  7. Example

  8. Research Question

  9. Method • A quasi-experimental design • Effects of the use of mnemonic learning (ML) Six segments:

  10. 1. Participants 5 6 6th-grade elementary school students 3 0 TI condition Control group 2 6 ML condition Experimental group

  11. 2. Material • Word selection:15 vocabulary words • Auxiliary pictures Ministry of Education 3. Training of ML teacher • Video • One-hour meeting 4. Procedure • Two classes were taught by the same teacher •  vocabulary  grammar

  12. 5. Testing procedure and data collection • Pretest: 1 week before the instruction • Posttest: end of the lesson • Testing session: 15 mins • Types of testing: matching, connecting, spelling 6. Scoring • Matching: 10 • Connecting: 10 • Spelling:10 Fish house ( ) ( ) thus search piano dcde imgne 尋找 a e i 決定 因此 鋼琴 想像

  13. Finding Results : Repeated measures analysis indicated that mnemonic learning did not have an effect on vocabulary memorization. Table 1 Mean and standard deviation (SD) scores of student’s vocabulary memorization and the ability of word spelling . Group Mean SD n . WS TI condition 6.45 2.15 30 ML condition 4.44 2.40 26 . VM TI condition 23.78 4.48 30 ML condition 18.33 6.56 26 . Note: WS= word spelling; VM= vocabulary memorization

  14. Table 2 Repeat measures analysis results of student’s ability of word spelling and the vocabulary memorization Repeat measures analysis . F p . pre-posttest effect .278 Interaction within group effect .001 . Figure 1 .600 .970

  15. At the onset of this study Group A X (ML) Group B (TI) WS: word spelling VM: vocabulary memorization WS VM WS VM WS VM WS VM

  16. At the onset of this study 26 ML condition Experimental group Word Spelling 30 TI condition Control group Students in the control group performed better than their counterparts in the ability of word spelling Table 3 Mean and standard deviation (SD) scores of student’s ability of word spelling Group Mean SD n . WS TI condition 6.45 2.15 30 ML condition 4.44 2.40 26 Table 4 T test results of student’s ability of word spelling Levene’s test for T test for equality of means quality of variance. F p t p mean difference WS equal variance assumed .046 .832 3.297 .609 .002

  17. At the onset of this study Group A X (ML) Group B (TI) WS: word spelling VM: vocabulary memorization WS VM WS VM WS VM WS VM

  18. At the onset of this study Vocabulary memorization 26 ML condition Experimental group 30 TI condition Control group Students in the control group outperformed their counterparts in the amount of vocabulary words memorized Table 3 Mean and standard deviation (SD) scores of student’s vocabulary memorization Group Mean SD n . VM TI condition 23.78 4.48 30 ML condition 18.33 6.56 26 . Table 4 T test results of student’s vocabulary memorization Levene’s test for T test for equality of means quality of variance . F p t p mean difference . VM equal variance assumed 1.227 .273 3.674 1.485 . .001

  19. At the onset of this study Group A X (ML) Group B (TI) WS: word spelling VM: vocabulary memorization WS VM WS VM WS VM WS VM

  20. Progress of word spelling, vocabulary memorization 30 TI condition Control group Table 5Mean and SD scores of the control group’s word spelling test . Mean SD n . Pretest 6.450 2.155 30 Posttest 6.467 2.173 30 . Table 6Paired T test results of students’ word spelling test of the pretest and posttest Paired variance difference Mean SD t p . Paired pretest-posttest -0.167 0.334 -.273 Table 7 Mean and SD scores of the control group’s vocabulary memorization test Mean SD n . Pretest 23.783 4.477 30 Posttest 23.933 4.511 30 Table 8 Paired T test results of students’ vocabulary memorization test Paired variance difference Mean SD t p . Paired pretest-posttest -.150 .511 -1.608 .787 .119

  21. At the onset of this study Group A X (ML) Group B (TI) WS: word spelling VM: vocabulary memorization WS VM WS VM WS VM WS VM

  22. 26ML condition Experimental group Progress of word spelling vocabularu memorization Table 9Mean and SD scores of the experimental group’s word spelling test . Mean SD n . Pretest 4.442 2.401 26 Posttest 4.462 2.404 26 . Table 10Paired T test results of students’ word spelling test of the pretest and posttest Paired variance difference Mean SD t p . Paired pretest-posttest -0.19 0.98 -1.000 Table 11 Mean and SD scores of the experimental group’s vocabulary memorization test Mean SD n . Pretest 18.327 6.565 26 Posttest 18.269 6.662 26 Table 12 Paired T test results of students’ vocabulary memorization test Paired variance difference Mean SD t p . Paired pretest-posttest 0.058 .294 1.000 .327 .327

  23. Word spelling Vocab. memorization

  24. Discussion

  25. Limitations Future Directions 1. The same level of English proficiency 2. A great amount of weekly lessons 3. Relevant knowledge 4. Investigating the effects of mnemonic learning in adults 1.Unequal level of English proficiency 2. Unfamiliar with the teaching method & teaching materials in one lesson 3. The memory strategy instruction

  26. Conclusion Mnemonic learning is one of complementary approaches which provides learners an option to learn vocabulary words. 嗯?? 遊行哦! 頗累的~ 來去遊行! 因為哇愛台灣啦!! 每日一字: Parade

  27. Thank you

More Related