ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS. i

LIST OF TABLES. iii

LIST OF FIGURES. iv

 

C H A P T E R   I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE. 1

1.1 Introduction. 2

2.1 Statement of the Problem.. 5

3.1 Statement of the Research Question. 8

4.1 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 9

5.1 Definition of Key Terms. 9

6.1 Significance of the Study. 10

7.1 Limitations and Delimitation. 11

 

C H A P T E R   II : REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE. 12

2.1 Overview.. 13

2.2 Need for Writing. 13

2.3 Cooperative Writing: subcategory of Cooperative Learning. 15

2.4 Cooperative Writing Features. 17

2.4.1 Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability. 18

2.4.2. Processing Group Interaction. 18

2.4.3. Peer Feedback. 19

2.5. Cooperative writing in EFL classrooms. 19

2.6. Perspectives on cooperative writing. 21

2.7. Benefits of Cooperative Approach in EFL Writing Classroom.. 25

2.8. Preparing EFL Students for peer response in writing classrooms. 26

2.9. Guidelines for preparing EFL students for peer response. 27

2.10. Personality Factors and Teaching Writing. 30

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS. i

LIST OF TABLES. iii

LIST OF FIGURES. iv

 

C H A P T E R   I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE. 1

1.1 Introduction. 2

2.1 Statement of the Problem.. 5

3.1 Statement of the Research Question. 8

4.1 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 9

5.1 Definition of Key Terms. 9

6.1 Significance of the Study. 10

7.1 Limitations and Delimitation. 11

 

C H A P T E R   II : REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE. 12

2.1 Overview.. 13

2.2 Need for Writing. 13

2.3 Cooperative Writing: subcategory of Cooperative Learning. 15

2.4 Cooperative Writing Features. 17

2.4.1 Positive Interdependence and Individual Accountability. 18

2.4.2. Processing Group Interaction. 18

2.4.3. Peer Feedback. 19

2.5. Cooperative writing in EFL classrooms. 19

2.6. Perspectives on cooperative writing. 21

2.7. Benefits of Cooperative Approach in EFL Writing Classroom.. 25

2.8. Preparing EFL Students for peer response in writing classrooms. 26

2.9. Guidelines for preparing EFL students for peer response. 27

2.10. Personality Factors and Teaching Writing. 30

 

C H A P T E R   III : METHODOLOGY.. 37

3.1. Overview.. 38

3.2. Participants. 38

3.3. Instrumentation. 39

3.3.1 Personality Questionnaire. 39

3.3.2 Preliminary English Test (PET) 40

3.2.2 Essay Writing Test 42

3.2.3 Writing Rating Scales. 42

3.4 Procedure. 43

3.5. Design. 45

3.6. Statistical Analysis. 45

 

C H A P T E R  IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.. 47

4.1. Introduction. 48

4.2. Participant Selection. 48

4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

4.2.2. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Administration. 50

4.2.3. Identifying the Degree of Extroversion. 51

4.3. Posttest 54

4.4. Testing the Null Hypothesis. 56

4.5. Discussion. 57

 

C H A P T E R   V : CONCLUSION, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 61

5.1. Introduction. 62

5.2. Restatement of the Problem.. 62

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 64

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 66

 

REFRENCES. 68

 

Appendices. 76

APPENDIX A: Eysenck Personality Inventory. 77

APPENDIX B: Preliminary English Test (PET) 80

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

Table 4.2 Reliability of the PET in the Pilot Phase. 50

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for PET Proficiency Test 51

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ Performance in EPI 52

Table 4.5 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ E-Score in EPI 53

Table 4.6 Reliability of the EPI Questionnaire. 54

Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for the Essay Writing Posttest in Both Groups  54

Table 4.7 Independent Samples T-Test on the Performance of Both Groups in the Essay Writing Posttest 56

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

 

Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Piloting. 49

Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Administration. 51

Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Participants’ Scores in EPI 52

Figure 4.4 Histogram of the E Scores of the Participants in EPI 53

Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Introvert Group  55

Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Extrovert Group  55

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C H A P T E R   I

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Living in 21 century and being a part of the global village, writing in English is a fundamental skill. Writing well is a necessity for academic success and a basic requirement for communication. ” It is unique and stands out of the four skills of language because its nature allows for examination and reexamination, debate and decision making, choice and revision and cognitive activities which require higher order thinking skills of communicator” (Hobson& Schafermeyer, 1994, p.51 ).

By the sake of writing, learners can participate in a productive practice which sometimes can motivates them to learn new language elements and structures during constant process of reviewing and drafting. Moreover, according to Celce-Murcia (1991), it fosters higher order cognitive activities and mental processing, which is an important component of learning. In addition, it invites feedback, either overt or covert, based on which students make adjustments in their learned language system.

Writing has always been regarded as an important part of academic life which serves different functions and purposes. But writing has always been a difficult skill (Graham, Harris & Manson, 2005) so teachers need some ways to encourage learners and motivate them to write. One way for motivating learners to write is use of cooperative learning techniques. Humans are social and cooperation has been used in all aspects of our lives.  So, cooperative learning groups in learning situations can be an acceptable teaching approach.  (Johnson & Johnson, 1994; Kagan, 1990; Slavin, 1995).

According to Deutch (1999) Kurt Lewin field theory and social interdependence have great roles in cooperative learning. Social interdependence started in early 1900s. Kurt Koffka who was one of the major figures of Gestalt psychology suggested that interdependence is different in dynamic wholes. “For interdependence to exist there must be more than one person or entity involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on each other in that a change in the state of one causes a change in the state of the others. It may be concluded that it is the drive for goal accomplishment that motivates cooperative and competitive behavior.” (Sharan, 2010, p.113)

In the late 1940s, one of Lewin’s graduate students, Morton Deutsch, extended Lewin’s reasoning about social interdependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and competition. Deutsch’s basic premise was that the type of interdependence structured in a situation determines how individuals interact with each other which, in turn, largely determine outcomes. “Positive interdependence tends to result in promotive interaction; negative interdependence tends to result in oppositional interaction, and no interdependence results in an absence of interaction.”(Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. 2008, p.121)

Cooperative writing is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning. In this way students will interact with each other and the teacher during the instructional session. As Johnson & Johnson (2008) stated within cooperative situations, individuals seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and beneficial to all other group members.

“The basic elements are Positive interdependence, Promotive interaction, Interpersonal and small group skills, Group processing, and individual and group accountability which are essential for effective group learning, achievement, and higher-order social, personal and cognitive skills (e.g., problem solving, reasoning, decision-making, planning, organizing, and reflecting).” (Johnson, D.W & Johnson R.T. 2005, pp.285-360)

According to Sharan, Y. (2010) the benefits of cooperative learning are a better mutual relationship, respect, and higher communication. It also has advantages in thinking strategies.  Competitive learners have difficulty in obtaining a balance between being competitive and interacting

 

 

C H A P T E R   III : METHODOLOGY.. 37

3.1. Overview.. 38

3.2. Participants. 38

3.3. Instrumentation. 39

3.3.1 Personality Questionnaire. 39

3.3.2 Preliminary English Test (PET) 40

3.2.2 Essay Writing Test 42

3.2.3 Writing Rating Scales. 42

3.4 Procedure. 43

3.5. Design. 45

3.6. Statistical Analysis. 45

 

C H A P T E R  IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.. 47

4.1. Introduction. 48

4.2. Participant Selection. 48

4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

4.2.2. Descriptive Statistics of the PET Administration. 50

4.2.3. Identifying the Degree of Extroversion. 51

4.3. Posttest 54

4.4. Testing the Null Hypothesis. 56

4.5. Discussion. 57

 

C H A P T E R   V : CONCLUSION, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS. 61

5.1. Introduction. 62

5.2. Restatement of the Problem.. 62

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 64

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 66

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

 

REFRENCES. 68

 

Appendices. 76

APPENDIX A: Eysenck Personality Inventory. 77

APPENDIX B: Preliminary English Test (PET) 80

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Piloting. 49

Table 4.2 Reliability of the PET in the Pilot Phase. 50

Table 4.3 Descriptive Statistics for PET Proficiency Test 51

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ Performance in EPI 52

Table 4.5 Descriptive Statistics of the Participants’ E-Score in EPI 53

Table 4.6 Reliability of the EPI Questionnaire. 54

Table 4.7 Descriptive Statistics for the Essay Writing Posttest in Both Groups  54

Table 4.7 Independent Samples T-Test on the Performance of Both Groups in the Essay Writing Posttest 56

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

 

Figure 4.1 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Piloting. 49

Figure 4.2 Histogram of the Scores Obtained on the PET Administration. 51

Figure 4.3 Histogram of the Participants’ Scores in EPI 52

Figure 4.4 Histogram of the E Scores of the Participants in EPI 53

Figure 4.5 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Introvert Group  55

Figure 4.6 Histogram of the Writing Posttest Scores Obtained by the Extrovert Group  55

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C H A P T E R   I

 

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Living in 21 century and being a part of the global village, writing in English is a fundamental skill. Writing well is a necessity for academic success and a basic requirement for communication. ” It is unique and stands out of the four skills of language because its nature allows for examination and reexamination, debate and decision making, choice and revision and cognitive activities which require higher order thinking skills of communicator” (Hobson& Schafermeyer, 1994, p.51 ).

By the sake of writing, learners can participate in a productive practice which sometimes can motivates them to learn new language elements and structures during constant process of reviewing and drafting. Moreover, according to Celce-Murcia (1991), it fosters higher order cognitive activities and mental processing, which is an important component of learning. In addition, it invites feedback, either overt or covert, based on which students make adjustments in their learned language system.

Writing has always been regarded as an important part of academic life which serves different functions and purposes. But writing has always been a difficult skill (Graham, Harris & Manson, 2005) so teachers need some ways to encourage learners and motivate them to write. One way for motivating learners to write is use of cooperative learning techniques. Humans are social and cooperation has been used in all aspects of our lives.  So, cooperative learning groups in learning situations can be an acceptable teaching approach.  (Johnson & Johnson, 1994; Kagan, 1990; Slavin, 1995).

According to Deutch (1999) Kurt Lewin field theory and social interdependence have great roles in cooperative learning. Social interdependence started in early 1900s. Kurt Koffka who was one of the major figures of Gestalt psychology suggested that interdependence is different in dynamic wholes. “For interdependence to exist there must be more than one person or entity involved, and the persons or entities must have impact on each other in that a change in the state of one causes a change in the state of the others. It may be concluded that it is the drive for goal accomplishment that motivates cooperative and competitive behavior.” (Sharan, 2010, p.113)

In the late 1940s, one of Lewin’s graduate students, Morton Deutsch, extended Lewin’s reasoning about social interdependence and formulated a theory of cooperation and competition. Deutsch’s basic premise was that the type of interdependence structured in a situation determines how individuals interact with each other which, in turn, largely determine outcomes. “Positive interdependence tends to result in promotive interaction; negative interdependence tends to result in oppositional interaction, and no interdependence results in an absence of interaction.”(Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. 2008, p.121)

Cooperative writing is the instructional use of small groups so that students work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning. In this way students will interact with each other and the teacher during the instructional session. As Johnson & Johnson (2008) stated within cooperative situations, individuals seek outcomes that are beneficial to themselves and beneficial to all other group members.

“The basic elements are Positive interdependence, Promotive interaction, Interpersonal and small group skills, Group processing, and individual and group accountability which are essential for effective group learning, achievement, and higher-order social, personal and cognitive skills (e.g., problem solving, reasoning, decision-making, planning, organizing, and reflecting).” (Johnson, D.W & Johnson R.T. 2005, pp.285-360)

According to Sharan, Y. (2010) the benefits of cooperative learning are a better mutual relationship, respect, and higher communication. It also has advantages in thinking strategies.  Competitive learners have difficulty in obtaining a balance between being competitive and interacting

Chapter One. 1

Introduction. 1

1.1. Background of Purpose. 1

1.2. Theoretical Framework. 2

Corrective Feedback Types. 2

1.2.1. Positive vs. Negative Feedback. 4

1.2.2. Implicit vs. Explicit Feedback. 5

1.2.3. Reformulations vs. Prompts Feedback. 6

1.3. Statement of the Problem.. 8

1.4. Research Questions: 9

1.5. Research Hypotheses. 9

1.6. Significance of the Study: 10

1.7. Definition of Key Terms. 10

Chapter Two. 13

Review of Related Literature. 13

2.1. Introduction. 13

2.3. Hypotheses behind Corrective Feedback. 14

2.3.1. Schmidt‘s Noticing Hypothesis. 14

2.3.2. Long‘s Interaction Hypothesis. 15

2.3.3. Swain’s Output Hypothesis. 16

2.4. Corrective Feedback and Accuracy. 16

2.5. Corrective Feedback and Fluency. 18

Chapter Three. 21

Methodology. 21

3.1. Introduction. 21

3.2. Participants and Setting. 21

3.3. Instrumentation. 21

3.4. Procedure. 23

Chapter One. 1

Introduction. 1

1.1. Background of Purpose. 1

1.2. Theoretical Framework. 2

Corrective Feedback Types. 2

1.2.1. Positive vs. Negative Feedback. 4

1.2.2. Implicit vs. Explicit Feedback. 5

1.2.3. Reformulations vs. Prompts Feedback. 6

1.3. Statement of the Problem.. 8

1.4. Research Questions: 9

1.5. Research Hypotheses. 9

1.6. Significance of the Study: 10

1.7. Definition of Key Terms. 10

Chapter Two. 13

Review of Related Literature. 13

2.1. Introduction. 13

2.3. Hypotheses behind Corrective Feedback. 14

2.3.1. Schmidt‘s Noticing Hypothesis. 14

2.3.2. Long‘s Interaction Hypothesis. 15

2.3.3. Swain’s Output Hypothesis. 16

2.4. Corrective Feedback and Accuracy. 16

2.5. Corrective Feedback and Fluency. 18

Chapter Three. 21

Methodology. 21

3.1. Introduction. 21

3.2. Participants and Setting. 21

3.3. Instrumentation. 21

3.4. Procedure. 23

3.5. Study Design. 24

Chapter Four. 25

Data analysis, Discussions and Results. 25

4.1. Introduction. 25

4.2. Data analysis and investigation of research questions. 25

4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics. 25

4.2.2 Inferential statistics. 29

4.3. Discussion. 34

Chapter Five. 36

Conclusion. 36

5.1. Introduction. 36

5.2. Conclusion. 36

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 38

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 38

References. 39

Appendix (1): Test specification. 44

Appendix (2): Accuracy measures. 48

Appendix (3): Fluency measures. 49

Appendix (4): Homogeneity Test and Pretest 50

Appendix (5): posttest 51

 

Abstract

 

The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of elicitation feedback on speaking accuracy and fluency. To fulfill the purpose of the study, 60 female intermediate learners at Marefat Language Institute were chosen by means of administering a proficiency test preliminary English test (PET). They were randomly divided into two homogeneous groups, one as the experimental group and the other as

 

3.5. Study Design. 24

Chapter Four. 25

Data analysis, Discussions and Results. 25

4.1. Introduction. 25

4.2. Data analysis and investigation of research questions. 25

4.2.1. Descriptive Statistics. 25

4.2.2 Inferential statistics. 29

4.3. Discussion. 34

Chapter Five. 36

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

Conclusion. 36

5.1. Introduction. 36

5.2. Conclusion. 36

5.3. Pedagogical Implications. 38

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 38

References. 39

Appendix (1): Test specification. 44

Appendix (2): Accuracy measures. 48

Appendix (3): Fluency measures. 49

Appendix (4): Homogeneity Test and Pretest 50

Appendix (5): posttest 51

 

Abstract

 

The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of elicitation feedback on speaking accuracy and fluency. To fulfill the purpose of the study, 60 female intermediate learners at Marefat Language Institute were chosen by means of administering a proficiency test preliminary English test (PET). They were randomly divided into two homogeneous groups, one as the experimental group and the other as

Abstract

Foreign language vocabulary learning and teaching is considered as a major aspect of L2 acquisition by both learners and teachers. It is still a contentious issue how learners acquire vocabulary effectively and efficiently or how it can best be taught. Although much research has been done to examine how vocabulary is learned by English as Foreign Language learners (EFL), few studies have examined how different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge are learned through reading a text. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of reading comprehension on three dimensions of vocabulary knowledge, namely form recognition, meaning recognition and production among EFL learners. Furthermore, it investigates which dimension of vocabulary knowledge benefits most from reading comprehension. To conduct the study, two reading texts included 20 target words with their Persian translation were employed as data collection instruments to measure the participants’ vocabulary knowledge. The participants were 40 Iranian male intermediate EFL learners at a language institute in Shiraz. They were asked to read the texts and answer a number of comprehension questions. Their vocabulary knowledge was examined immediately after reading the texts and two weeks later by three tests of form recognition, meaning recognition and production.

One-way repeated measure ANOVA was employed to examine the differential effects of reading a text on different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge. The results indicated that reading comprehension has statistical effects on the acquisition of three dimensions of vocabulary knowledge in both short and long term retention. It also indicated that in short term retention, reading comprehension promoted the acquisition of meaning recognition knowledge more than the form recognition and production in the post-test. However, with regard to long term retention, the findings revealed that reading comprehension promoted the acquisition of form recognition knowledge more than the other two dimensions of vocabulary knowledge.

Key words: EFL learners, reading comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, form recognition, meaning recognition, production

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

 

Abstract

Foreign language vocabulary learning and teaching is considered as a major aspect of L2 acquisition by both learners and teachers. It is still a contentious issue how learners acquire vocabulary effectively and efficiently or how it can best be taught. Although much research has been done to examine how vocabulary is learned by English as Foreign Language learners (EFL), few studies have examined how different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge are learned through reading a text. The purpose of this study is to investigate the effects of reading comprehension on three dimensions of vocabulary knowledge, namely form recognition, meaning recognition and production among EFL learners. Furthermore, it investigates which dimension of vocabulary knowledge benefits most from reading comprehension. To conduct the study, two reading texts included 20 target words with their Persian translation were employed as data collection instruments to measure the participants’ vocabulary knowledge. The participants were 40 Iranian male intermediate EFL learners at a language institute in Shiraz. They were asked to read the texts and answer a number of comprehension questions. Their vocabulary knowledge was examined immediately after reading the texts and two weeks later by three tests of form recognition, meaning recognition and production.

One-way repeated measure ANOVA was employed to examine the differential effects of reading a text on different dimensions of vocabulary knowledge. The results indicated that reading comprehension has statistical effects on the acquisition of three dimensions of vocabulary knowledge in both short and long term retention. It also indicated that in short term retention, reading comprehension promoted the acquisition of meaning recognition knowledge more than the form recognition and production in the post-test. However, with regard to long term retention, the findings revealed that reading comprehension promoted the acquisition of form recognition knowledge more than the other two dimensions of vocabulary knowledge.

Key words: EFL learners, reading comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, form recognition, meaning recognition, production

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

 

1.0. Overview

This chapter is concerned with an introduction of the study, statement of the problem, significance of the study, purpose of the study, research questions, research hypotheses, and definition of the key terms.

1.1. Introduction

Vocabulary is one of the significant aspects of language, which plays a great role in L2 learning. As noted by Swan and Walter (1984) vocabulary acquisition is the largest and the most significant task that language learners face.

Furthermore, vocabulary acquisition is crucial for the acquisition of skills: reading, writing, and listening. Without enough vocabulary, listening, reading comprehension, writing and speaking are inefficient. Besides, as noted by Wilson (1986) without grammar very little can be conveyed; without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed. Thus, vocabulary learning is an essential part of language learning. Learning words can be considered as the most important aspect of second language acquisition (Knight, 1994).

Learners, who recognize the communicative power of vocabulary, might reasonably aim to acquire a working knowledge of a large number of words – the more words they have, the more precisely they can express the exact meanings they want to.

Rubin and Thompson (1994) found that vocabulary learning is the heart of mastering a foreign language, since one cannot speak, understand, read, or write a foreign language without knowing many words. In many countries, there are many EFL students who have never had the opportunity to converse with any native speakers even though they have access to different types of materials written in the English language. Therefore, the need for reading and extracting information from these texts seems to be vital. As noted by Sofiyatun (2009), “The success of learning any subject matter depends on the competence of reading comprehension” (P.2). By reading books, magazines, newspapers, and bulletins, people can gain a lot of information. Therefore, it can be assumed that the success of obtaining information depends on the reading

 

1.0. Overview

This chapter is concerned with an introduction of the study, statement of the problem, significance of the study, purpose of the study, research questions, research hypotheses, and definition of the key terms.

1.1. Introduction

 

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

Vocabulary is one of the significant aspects of language, which plays a great role in L2 learning. As noted by Swan and Walter (1984) vocabulary acquisition is the largest and the most significant task that language learners face.

Furthermore, vocabulary acquisition is crucial for the acquisition of skills: reading, writing, and listening. Without enough vocabulary, listening, reading comprehension, writing and speaking are inefficient. Besides, as noted by Wilson (1986) without grammar very little can be conveyed; without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed. Thus, vocabulary learning is an essential part of language learning. Learning words can be considered as the most important aspect of second language acquisition (Knight, 1994).

Learners, who recognize the communicative power of vocabulary, might reasonably aim to acquire a working knowledge of a large number of words – the more words they have, the more precisely they can express the exact meanings they want to.

Rubin and Thompson (1994) found that vocabulary learning is the heart of mastering a foreign language, since one cannot speak, understand, read, or write a foreign language without knowing many words. In many countries, there are many EFL students who have never had the opportunity to converse with any native speakers even though they have access to different types of materials written in the English language. Therefore, the need for reading and extracting information from these texts seems to be vital. As noted by Sofiyatun (2009), “The success of learning any subject matter depends on the competence of reading comprehension” (P.2). By reading books, magazines, newspapers, and bulletins, people can gain a lot of information. Therefore, it can be assumed that the success of obtaining information depends on the reading

افزایش سطح دانش  لغتی و واژگان دانش آموزان همواره مورد توجه و خواست دبیران بوده است اما روش ها و تکنیک های موجود در این زمینه زیاد موفقیت آمیز نبوده اند و اکثر روش های موجود نیز وابسته به آموزگار و سطح توانایی وی  می باشند. در این تحقیق محقق سعی نموده تا تاثیر استفاده از روش تیم تیچینگ(تدریس گروهی) را در میزان یادگیری لغت دانش آموزان مقطع راهنمایی بسنجد. برای این منظور از مجموع 114 دانش آموز، پس از اجرای آزمون KET تعداد 76 نفر از دانش آموزان که نمره آنها یک SD بالا یا پائین میانگین بود انتخاب شده و به صورت تصادفی به دو گروه شاهد و گروه آزمایشی تقسیم شدند. سپس برای حصول اطمینان از همگن بودن دانش آموزان از لحاظ دانش واژگان، یک آزمون لغت نیز از آنها گرفته شد.

به هر کدام از این دو گروه(کلاس) تعداد 6درس از سال دوم راهنمایی( به مدت 12 هفته یا 24 جلسه 75  دقیقه ای) با استفاده از وسایل و ابزار مشابه و همچنین طرح درس مشابه تدریس شد با این تفاوت که در گروه آزمایش، تدریس بین دو آموزگار تقسیم شده و از روش تیم تیچینگ استفاده شد. در پایان یک آزمون پایانی لغت از دو گروه به عمل آمد و برای اینکه مشخص شود که آیا تفاوت معنا داری بین نمره کسب شده توسط گروه گواه و گروه آزمایش وجود دارد یا خیر از نرم افزار SPSS و آزمون T مستقل استفاده شد. مشخص شد  که دانش آموزان گروه آزمایش نتیجه بهتری را نسبت به گروه شاهد کسب کردند و درنتیجه مشخص شد که روش فوق( team teaching یا تدریس گروهی) تاثیر مثبتی را در افزایش سطح دانش لغتی دانش آموزان دارد.

 

Abstract

Improving students’ vocabulary achievement has always been a matter of interest for teachers, because of the diverse essence of the vocabulary, but current approaches; methods have not been successful enough in teaching and enhancing students’ word knowledge (Shen, 2003). Moreover, the practicality of most of these approaches is dependent on the teachers (Carten, 2007). The present study has examined the possible effects of team-teaching on the vocabulary achievement of Iranian junior high school students.  To this end, 114 intermediate EFL learners participated in the study. To ensure their homogeneity, initially, the researcher administered a Key English Test (KET). Those who scored one standard deviation above and below the mean were selected as the participants of the study. After excluding the extreme scores 76 participants remained, who were randomly assigned to experimental and the control groups. Then, to ensure the homogeneity of the participants in terms of their vocabulary knowledge of the current study a vocabulary test was given to both groups. A t-test was run and it was observed that there was no significant difference between the scores of the students in both groups. Both groups were taught six lessons of their formal textbook for about 24 sessions (12 weeks, each session about 75 minutes). The students in experimental group received the instruction by two teachers. Finally, a post-test was administrated to both groups. To see whether team-teaching had any statistically significant impact on vocabulary achievement of the students or not; an independent sample t-test was used. The analysis of the results showed that the participants receiving the treatment in the experimental group mastered taught vocabularies better. So team-teaching had positive effect on the vocabulary achievement of Iranian EFL learners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement

Abstract

CHAPTER I Background and Purpose

1.1 Introduction. 2

1.2 Statement of the Problem.. 8

افزایش سطح دانش  لغتی و واژگان دانش آموزان همواره مورد توجه و خواست دبیران بوده است اما روش ها و تکنیک های موجود در این زمینه زیاد موفقیت آمیز نبوده اند و اکثر روش های موجود نیز وابسته به آموزگار و سطح توانایی وی  می باشند. در این تحقیق محقق سعی نموده تا تاثیر استفاده از روش تیم تیچینگ(تدریس گروهی) را در میزان یادگیری لغت دانش آموزان مقطع راهنمایی بسنجد. برای این منظور از مجموع 114 دانش آموز، پس از اجرای آزمون KET تعداد 76 نفر از دانش آموزان که نمره آنها یک SD بالا یا پائین میانگین بود انتخاب شده و به صورت تصادفی به دو گروه شاهد و گروه آزمایشی تقسیم شدند. سپس برای حصول اطمینان از همگن بودن دانش آموزان از لحاظ دانش واژگان، یک آزمون لغت نیز از آنها گرفته شد.

به هر کدام از این دو گروه(کلاس) تعداد 6درس از سال دوم راهنمایی( به مدت 12 هفته یا 24 جلسه 75  دقیقه ای) با استفاده از وسایل و ابزار مشابه و همچنین طرح درس مشابه تدریس شد با این تفاوت که در گروه آزمایش، تدریس بین دو آموزگار تقسیم شده و از روش تیم تیچینگ استفاده شد. در پایان یک آزمون پایانی لغت از دو گروه به عمل آمد و برای اینکه مشخص شود که آیا تفاوت معنا داری بین نمره کسب شده توسط گروه گواه و گروه آزمایش وجود دارد یا خیر از نرم افزار SPSS و آزمون T مستقل استفاده شد. مشخص شد  که دانش آموزان گروه آزمایش نتیجه بهتری را نسبت به گروه شاهد کسب کردند و درنتیجه مشخص شد که روش فوق( team teaching یا تدریس گروهی) تاثیر مثبتی را در افزایش سطح دانش لغتی دانش آموزان دارد.

 

Abstract

Improving students’ vocabulary achievement has always been a matter of interest for teachers, because of the diverse essence of the vocabulary, but current approaches; methods have not been successful enough in teaching and enhancing students’ word knowledge (Shen, 2003). Moreover, the practicality of most of these approaches is dependent on the teachers (Carten, 2007). The present study has examined the possible effects of team-teaching on the vocabulary achievement of Iranian junior high school students.  To this end, 114 intermediate EFL learners participated in the study. To ensure their homogeneity, initially, the researcher administered a Key English Test (KET). Those who scored one standard deviation above and below the mean were selected as the participants of the study. After excluding the extreme scores 76 participants remained, who were randomly assigned to experimental and the control groups. Then, to ensure the homogeneity of the participants in terms of their vocabulary knowledge of the current study a vocabulary test was given to both groups. A t-test was run and it was observed that there was no significant difference between the scores of the students in both groups. Both groups were taught six lessons of their formal textbook for about 24 sessions (12 weeks, each session about 75 minutes). The students in experimental group received the instruction by two teachers. Finally, a post-test was administrated to both groups. To see whether team-teaching had any statistically significant impact on vocabulary achievement of the students or not; an independent sample t-test was used. The analysis of the results showed that the participants receiving the treatment in the experimental group mastered taught vocabularies better. So team-teaching had positive effect on the vocabulary achievement of Iranian EFL learners.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Acknowledgement

Abstract

CHAPTER I Background and Purpose

1.1 Introduction. 2

1.2 Statement of the Problem.. 8

1.3 Statement of the Research Question. 10

1.4 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 10

1.5 Definition of Key Terms. 10

1.5.1 Vocabulary achievement 10

1.5.2 Team-Teaching. 11

1.6 Significance of the Study. 11

1.7 Limitations and Delimitation. 13

1.7.1 Limitations of the study. 13

1.7.2 Delimitation of the study. 13

1.8 Assumptions. 13

CHAPTER II Review of the Related Literature

2.1 Introduction. 15

2.2 The characteristics of co-teaching. 17

2.3 Different version of co-teaching. 19

2.4 Issues Involved in Team Teaching. 23

2.5 Related studies. 27

2.6 Vocabulary teaching. 30

2.6.1 Presentation of new lexical items. 32

2.6.2 Review and consolidation of lexical items. 35

2.6.3 Studies on the vocabulary: 38

CHAPTER III Methodology

3.1 Participants. 46

3.2 Instrumentation. 46

3.2.1 Homogeneity vocabulary test 46

3.2.2 Language Proficiency test 47

3.2.3 Vocabulary achievement post test 48

3.2.4 Observation and conversation. 49

3.2.5 Questionnaire. 49

3.2.6 Materials. 50

3.3 Procedure. 50

3.3.1 Piloting the tests. 50

3.3.2 Homogenizing the Participants. 50

3.3.3 The Treatment 51

3.4 Design. 56

3.5 Statistical Analysis: 57

CHAPTER IV Results and Discussion

4.1 Introduction . 59

4.2 Results and Discussion. 60

4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics for the Piloting KET Proficiency Test 60

4.2.1.2 Descriptive Statistics of the KET Main Administration for Homogenization. 61

4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics of the grammar Pre-test 63

4.2.3 Analysis of posttest 65

4.2.3Analysis of Student Questionnaire. 67

4.2.3 Analysis of Teacher’s Questionnaire. 69

4.3 Discussion  ………………………………………………………………………………………70

CHAPTER V Conclusions, Pedagogical Implications, and Suggestions for Further Research

5.1 Restatement of the Problem.. 76

5.2 Overview of the Study. 76

5.3 Pedagogical Implications. 76

5.3.1 mplications for Teaching and Teacher Training. 77

5.3.2 Implications for Materials Development 77

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research. 77

References. 79

Appendices: 85

 

 

List of Tables

Table 2.1: different type of co-teaching ……………………………………….…….19

Table 3.1: The contents and titles of the lessons …………………………………….52

Table 3.2 Teacher’s Actions during Co-Teaching ……………………………………53

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test piloting…………………60

Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test ………………………….60

Table 4.3: Reliability of the KET Proficiency Test Piloting ………………….……..61

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics for KET Main Administration for Homogenization.61

Table 4.5: The Results of Normality Check of the Distribution of scores on KET…..61

Table 4.6: Independent Sample T-test for Control and Experimental Groups’ KET scores …………63

Table 4.7: Descriptive Statistics for the Results of the Pre-test……………….……. 64

Table 4.8: Results of Normality of Distribution of Scores for vocabulary homogeneity test …….….64

Table 4.9: Independent Samples T- Test for Pre-test ………………………………..65

Table 4.10 Group Statistics of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post test scores …….……65

Table 4.11 Independent Samples T-Test of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post-test ……67

Table 4.12 Student Responses to Social Validity Questions ……….………….…….68

Table 4.13 Teacher’s Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of Figures

Figure 4.1: The Histogram of Scores of KET Main Administration ………………62

Figure 4.2 Comparing scores obtained from post-test ……….…………………….66

Figure  4.3 Student Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

 

 

 

 

 

To those who have tried to wipe out unawareness and darkness and finally they died in Anonymity.

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

Background and Purpose

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Nowadays English is known as the language of the science, everyday communication and most widely used language in the world. Although it is a well-known fact that Mandarin Chinese is the most commonly spoken language on the planet, we should know that “while English does not have the most speakers, it is the official language of more countries than any other language” (Flamiejamie, 2008). English, also, is the language in which the sciences are most often discussed and presented. A study done in 1997 indicated that 95% of scientific publications and submissions, even at that time, were done in English (collegeofenglishmalta.com). Therefore, it seems that learning English is a need for everyone who wants to keep himself updated and in touch with real out world. In learning English, language skills and language components cannot be separated. Language components can complete the language skills. In order to learn English the students should be able to use suitable structures and master grammar and vocabulary. Vocabulary is an important language component for forming words and building English sentences. Harmer also claimed, “Language structures make up the skeleton of language and it is vocabulary that provides the vital organs and the flesh.” (Harmer, 1994 as cited in Baniabdelrahman, 2013) There is no doubt about the importance of vocabulary. “It is necessary in the sense that words are the basic building blocks of the language, the units of meaning from which larger structures such as sentences, paragraphs and whole text are formed” (Read, 2000, p 1).  “Without a good working knowledge of words and their meanings, both written and verbal communication will be muddied or poorly understood” (wisegeek.com). Wilkins (1972) believed that, without learning grammar very little can be conveyed and without learning vocabulary, nothing at all can be conveyed. Researchers suggest that early elementary students’ word knowledge is a determinant of reading comprehension both in early elementary school and throughout their schooling (Hansen, 2009). Some research findings also disclose that students who have acquired more vocabulary items, they will be more likely to articulate and communicate the massage. Therefore, as a result their achievement in speaking skills is better than those who are short of vocabulary understanding or have acquired less vocabulary items. Since vocabulary is important in communication, the students should master it. In this regard, Hippner-page also believes that “vocabulary is the key component which guarantees acquiring a second language and becoming a functional and fluent reader and writer of a second language” (2000, p. 7).

Baumann and Kameenui (1991) believed that we need to have a good vocabulary size to speak and write naturally and effectively. Students’ word knowledge is also linked strongly to their academic success (As cited in Baker, Simmons, & Kameenui, 2007). Moreover it is believed that “perhaps the greatest tools we can give students for succeeding, not only in their education but more generally in life, is a large, rich vocabulary and the skills for using those words” (Pikulski & Templeton, 2004). If we are not sure that Knowledge of this vocabulary will guarantee success, it will be clear that lack of knowledge of vocabulary can ensure failure (Biemiller, 1999 as cited in Jobrack, 2010).

Some researchers (Harley, 1996; Yoshii, and Flaitz, 2002) point to vocabulary learning as a vital part of each student’s life, while other researchers though accept the importance of vocabulary acquisition in language proficiency and academic achievement; their ideas about how vocabulary should be learned have varied widely. (Ghabanchi & Anbarestani, 2008) Unfortunately, learning vocabulary is not easy for students and most of students believe memorizing and learning vocabulary is a difficult, boring, and tedious task. Moreover, what is hard to learn, is easy to forget. So finding ways to increase students’ vocabulary growth throughout the school years must become a major educational priority.

Everyone remembers some words better than others, because of the nature of the words, the circumstances they are learnt under, and the methods of teaching (Ur, 1996). The attention drawn to the important role of vocabulary unveils the importance of vocabulary and the most effective ways to teach vocabulary. Here the teacher plays the most important role in creating the learning context and choosing methods used in the classroom. Especially in EFL contexts in which there is a little chance for the students to encounter English language out of the classroom.  In addition, Hedge believes that “Although the teacher’s ultimate role may be to build independence in students by teaching them good strategies for vocabulary learning, s/he will frequently need to explain new words” (2008, p. 112).  Books and materials developers provide teachers with different ways of presenting new words to the students such as using synonyms, antonyms, translation, minimal pairs, description, illustration, using context, association of ideas, examples, and many other ways, which usually demand qualified and knowledgeable teachers to put the most proper in practice. It was claimed that learners need to be given explicit instruction of vocabulary strategy in order to facilitate their awareness of vocabulary learning strategies that they can use to learn their own outside the classroom (Atay & Ozbulgan, 2007 as cited in Chen & Hsiao, 2009). Moreover, there is no doubt that “the teacher’s role in vocabulary development is critical” (Yopp, Yopp, & Bishop, 2010).

As mentioned before, there are different techniques and strategies by which the teachers can teach a new vocabulary; but most of them are teacher-dependent and their practicality or impracticality is a function of teachers’ performance. Since different teachers have different abilities, capabilities, resources, personalities and characteristics teaching vocabularies by two or more  teachers (known as co-teaching) sharing their knowledge and competence may be efficient and helpful in teaching vocabularies. Teaming can bring out the creative side of teachers. Woodrow Wilson once said, “I not only use all of the brains I have, but all I can borrow” (28th president of US, 1856 – 1924). His acknowledged reliance on others may fit our co-teaching context as well. This also shows the fact that “A community of peers is important not only in terms of support, but also as a crucial source of generating ideas and criticism” (Sykes, 1996, as cited in Jang, 2006).

The very binging point of co-teaching was in 1975, in which Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This act stated that free and appropriate public education (FAPE) must be provided for all children (Right, 2010). After that, a very important project (No-Child Left behind) in USA was applied in which they tried to provide a better teaching context for students with disabilities (either physical or mental) and facilitate their learning by using two teachers in the classroom. In those classes, they used a pull out model in which these types of students; were pulled out by the second teacher and there they were taught individually and privately.  A similar approach was used in classes in which most of the students were emigrants whose native language was something rather than English. In these classes one of the teachers was mainstream teacher (e.g. math, geology) and the second teacher was an English teacher who tried to eliminate the speaking and listening problems of the students. The setting of the classroom and the role of teachers in those classes shaped different models of co-teaching.

Co-teaching has many benefits for both teachers and students; it can reduce the stigma often associated with being identified as having a disability. It creates a stronger system of support for effective instruction among the adults responsible for educating students (Friend, 2008 as cited in Mulgrew & Gentile, 2010). It also develops respect for differences,   teamwork skills, and an appreciation for diversity(flexibility), it also provides peer models, empathetic skills, affirmation of individuality; beside that co-teaching enhances instructional knowledge base, increases ways of creatively addressing challenges, foster better peer relationship among students in the classroom and promotes a more rigorous curriculum,  teachers will learn from each other’s expertise and expand the scope of their teaching capacity(Rosario, Coles, Redmon, & Strawbridge, 2010; Walther-Thomas, 1997; Leavitt, 2006; Nickelson, 2010)

 

Cook and Friend (1996) described five forms of variations in co-teaching:

(1) One teaching/one assisting: a technique in which one teacher takes an instructional lead while the other assists students when necessary.

(2) Station teaching: dividing the class content and room arrangement, with each teacher working on a specified part of the curriculum and classroom, so that students rotate from one station to the other.

(3) Parallel teaching: both teachers plan the instruction but divide the class into two halves, each taking responsibility for working with one-half of the class.

(4) Alternative teaching: organizing a classroom into one large group and one small group, where one teacher is able to provide main instruction, the other to review a smaller group of students; and

(5) Team teaching: teachers take turns in leading discussions or both playing roles in demonstrations.

Among mentioned diversities of co-teaching, team-teaching has received special attention and if we go through the history of co-teaching this approach has been applied more (e.g. teaching ESP), which may be because of its advantages over the other approaches. Despite the potential for problems to arise through a lack of collaboration and cohesiveness within a team, there are potential pedagogical advantages for those willing to adopt this form of teaching. Historically, team teaching has been seen as a practice suited for gaining better control of large groups of students (Ivins, 1964 as cited in Wang, 2010).  When team teaching is organized and carried out effectively, students, parents and school faculty feel positive effects. Research shows that students taught using a team teaching approach have higher levels of achievement.  Additionally, schools that employ team teaching have teachers who are more satisfied with their job, resulting in an improved work climate (Flynn , 2010). Leavitt believes that “team-teaching boasts many pedagogical and intellectual advantages: it can help create a dynamic and interactive learning environment, provide instructors with a useful way of modeling thinking within or across disciplines, and inspire new

 

1.3 Statement of the Research Question. 10

1.4 Statement of the Research Hypothesis. 10

1.5 Definition of Key Terms. 10

1.5.1 Vocabulary achievement 10

1.5.2 Team-Teaching. 11

1.6 Significance of the Study. 11

1.7 Limitations and Delimitation. 13

1.7.1 Limitations of the study. 13

1.7.2 Delimitation of the study. 13

1.8 Assumptions. 13

CHAPTER II Review of the Related Literature

2.1 Introduction. 15

2.2 The characteristics of co-teaching. 17

2.3 Different version of co-teaching. 19

2.4 Issues Involved in Team Teaching. 23

2.5 Related studies. 27

2.6 Vocabulary teaching. 30

2.6.1 Presentation of new lexical items. 32

2.6.2 Review and consolidation of lexical items. 35

2.6.3 Studies on the vocabulary: 38

CHAPTER III Methodology

3.1 Participants. 46

3.2 Instrumentation. 46

3.2.1 Homogeneity vocabulary test 46

3.2.2 Language Proficiency test 47

3.2.3 Vocabulary achievement post test 48

3.2.4 Observation and conversation. 49

3.2.5 Questionnaire. 49

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

3.2.6 Materials. 50

3.3 Procedure. 50

3.3.1 Piloting the tests. 50

3.3.2 Homogenizing the Participants. 50

3.3.3 The Treatment 51

3.4 Design. 56

3.5 Statistical Analysis: 57

CHAPTER IV Results and Discussion

4.1 Introduction . 59

4.2 Results and Discussion. 60

4.2.1 Descriptive Statistics for the Piloting KET Proficiency Test 60

4.2.1.2 Descriptive Statistics of the KET Main Administration for Homogenization. 61

4.2.2 Descriptive Statistics of the grammar Pre-test 63

4.2.3 Analysis of posttest 65

4.2.3Analysis of Student Questionnaire. 67

4.2.3 Analysis of Teacher’s Questionnaire. 69

4.3 Discussion  ………………………………………………………………………………………70

CHAPTER V Conclusions, Pedagogical Implications, and Suggestions for Further Research

5.1 Restatement of the Problem.. 76

5.2 Overview of the Study. 76

5.3 Pedagogical Implications. 76

5.3.1 mplications for Teaching and Teacher Training. 77

5.3.2 Implications for Materials Development 77

5.4 Suggestions for Further Research. 77

References. 79

Appendices: 85

 

 

List of Tables

Table 2.1: different type of co-teaching ……………………………………….…….19

Table 3.1: The contents and titles of the lessons …………………………………….52

Table 3.2 Teacher’s Actions during Co-Teaching ……………………………………53

Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test piloting…………………60

Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics for KET Proficiency Test ………………………….60

Table 4.3: Reliability of the KET Proficiency Test Piloting ………………….……..61

Table 4.4: Descriptive Statistics for KET Main Administration for Homogenization.61

Table 4.5: The Results of Normality Check of the Distribution of scores on KET…..61

Table 4.6: Independent Sample T-test for Control and Experimental Groups’ KET scores …………63

Table 4.7: Descriptive Statistics for the Results of the Pre-test……………….……. 64

Table 4.8: Results of Normality of Distribution of Scores for vocabulary homogeneity test …….….64

Table 4.9: Independent Samples T- Test for Pre-test ………………………………..65

Table 4.10 Group Statistics of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post test scores …….……65

Table 4.11 Independent Samples T-Test of the team-teaching and normal class Participants for post-test ……67

Table 4.12 Student Responses to Social Validity Questions ……….………….…….68

Table 4.13 Teacher’s Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

List of Figures

Figure 4.1: The Histogram of Scores of KET Main Administration ………………62

Figure 4.2 Comparing scores obtained from post-test ……….…………………….66

Figure  4.3 Student Responses to Social Validation Questions ……………………69

 

 

 

 

 

To those who have tried to wipe out unawareness and darkness and finally they died in Anonymity.

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

Background and Purpose

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Nowadays English is known as the language of the science, everyday communication and most widely used language in the world. Although it is a well-known fact that Mandarin Chinese is the most commonly spoken language on the planet, we should know that “while English does not have the most speakers, it is the official language of more countries than any other language” (Flamiejamie, 2008). English, also, is the language in which the sciences are most often discussed and presented. A study done in 1997 indicated that 95% of scientific publications and submissions, even at that time, were done in English (collegeofenglishmalta.com). Therefore, it seems that learning English is a need for everyone who wants to keep himself updated and in touch with real out world. In learning English, language skills and language components cannot be separated. Language components can complete the language skills. In order to learn English the students should be able to use suitable structures and master grammar and vocabulary. Vocabulary is an important language component for forming words and building English sentences. Harmer also claimed, “Language structures make up the skeleton of language and it is vocabulary that provides the vital organs and the flesh.” (Harmer, 1994 as cited in Baniabdelrahman, 2013) There is no doubt about the importance of vocabulary. “It is necessary in the sense that words are the basic building blocks of the language, the units of meaning from which larger structures such as sentences, paragraphs and whole text are formed” (Read, 2000, p 1).  “Without a good working knowledge of words and their meanings, both written and verbal communication will be muddied or poorly understood” (wisegeek.com). Wilkins (1972) believed that, without learning grammar very little can be conveyed and without learning vocabulary, nothing at all can be conveyed. Researchers suggest that early elementary students’ word knowledge is a determinant of reading comprehension both in early elementary school and throughout their schooling (Hansen, 2009). Some research findings also disclose that students who have acquired more vocabulary items, they will be more likely to articulate and communicate the massage. Therefore, as a result their achievement in speaking skills is better than those who are short of vocabulary understanding or have acquired less vocabulary items. Since vocabulary is important in communication, the students should master it. In this regard, Hippner-page also believes that “vocabulary is the key component which guarantees acquiring a second language and becoming a functional and fluent reader and writer of a second language” (2000, p. 7).

Baumann and Kameenui (1991) believed that we need to have a good vocabulary size to speak and write naturally and effectively. Students’ word knowledge is also linked strongly to their academic success (As cited in Baker, Simmons, & Kameenui, 2007). Moreover it is believed that “perhaps the greatest tools we can give students for succeeding, not only in their education but more generally in life, is a large, rich vocabulary and the skills for using those words” (Pikulski & Templeton, 2004). If we are not sure that Knowledge of this vocabulary will guarantee success, it will be clear that lack of knowledge of vocabulary can ensure failure (Biemiller, 1999 as cited in Jobrack, 2010).

Some researchers (Harley, 1996; Yoshii, and Flaitz, 2002) point to vocabulary learning as a vital part of each student’s life, while other researchers though accept the importance of vocabulary acquisition in language proficiency and academic achievement; their ideas about how vocabulary should be learned have varied widely. (Ghabanchi & Anbarestani, 2008) Unfortunately, learning vocabulary is not easy for students and most of students believe memorizing and learning vocabulary is a difficult, boring, and tedious task. Moreover, what is hard to learn, is easy to forget. So finding ways to increase students’ vocabulary growth throughout the school years must become a major educational priority.

Everyone remembers some words better than others, because of the nature of the words, the circumstances they are learnt under, and the methods of teaching (Ur, 1996). The attention drawn to the important role of vocabulary unveils the importance of vocabulary and the most effective ways to teach vocabulary. Here the teacher plays the most important role in creating the learning context and choosing methods used in the classroom. Especially in EFL contexts in which there is a little chance for the students to encounter English language out of the classroom.  In addition, Hedge believes that “Although the teacher’s ultimate role may be to build independence in students by teaching them good strategies for vocabulary learning, s/he will frequently need to explain new words” (2008, p. 112).  Books and materials developers provide teachers with different ways of presenting new words to the students such as using synonyms, antonyms, translation, minimal pairs, description, illustration, using context, association of ideas, examples, and many other ways, which usually demand qualified and knowledgeable teachers to put the most proper in practice. It was claimed that learners need to be given explicit instruction of vocabulary strategy in order to facilitate their awareness of vocabulary learning strategies that they can use to learn their own outside the classroom (Atay & Ozbulgan, 2007 as cited in Chen & Hsiao, 2009). Moreover, there is no doubt that “the teacher’s role in vocabulary development is critical” (Yopp, Yopp, & Bishop, 2010).

As mentioned before, there are different techniques and strategies by which the teachers can teach a new vocabulary; but most of them are teacher-dependent and their practicality or impracticality is a function of teachers’ performance. Since different teachers have different abilities, capabilities, resources, personalities and characteristics teaching vocabularies by two or more  teachers (known as co-teaching) sharing their knowledge and competence may be efficient and helpful in teaching vocabularies. Teaming can bring out the creative side of teachers. Woodrow Wilson once said, “I not only use all of the brains I have, but all I can borrow” (28th president of US, 1856 – 1924). His acknowledged reliance on others may fit our co-teaching context as well. This also shows the fact that “A community of peers is important not only in terms of support, but also as a crucial source of generating ideas and criticism” (Sykes, 1996, as cited in Jang, 2006).

The very binging point of co-teaching was in 1975, in which Congress passed the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. This act stated that free and appropriate public education (FAPE) must be provided for all children (Right, 2010). After that, a very important project (No-Child Left behind) in USA was applied in which they tried to provide a better teaching context for students with disabilities (either physical or mental) and facilitate their learning by using two teachers in the classroom. In those classes, they used a pull out model in which these types of students; were pulled out by the second teacher and there they were taught individually and privately.  A similar approach was used in classes in which most of the students were emigrants whose native language was something rather than English. In these classes one of the teachers was mainstream teacher (e.g. math, geology) and the second teacher was an English teacher who tried to eliminate the speaking and listening problems of the students. The setting of the classroom and the role of teachers in those classes shaped different models of co-teaching.

Co-teaching has many benefits for both teachers and students; it can reduce the stigma often associated with being identified as having a disability. It creates a stronger system of support for effective instruction among the adults responsible for educating students (Friend, 2008 as cited in Mulgrew & Gentile, 2010). It also develops respect for differences,   teamwork skills, and an appreciation for diversity(flexibility), it also provides peer models, empathetic skills, affirmation of individuality; beside that co-teaching enhances instructional knowledge base, increases ways of creatively addressing challenges, foster better peer relationship among students in the classroom and promotes a more rigorous curriculum,  teachers will learn from each other’s expertise and expand the scope of their teaching capacity(Rosario, Coles, Redmon, & Strawbridge, 2010; Walther-Thomas, 1997; Leavitt, 2006; Nickelson, 2010)

 

Cook and Friend (1996) described five forms of variations in co-teaching:

(1) One teaching/one assisting: a technique in which one teacher takes an instructional lead while the other assists students when necessary.

(2) Station teaching: dividing the class content and room arrangement, with each teacher working on a specified part of the curriculum and classroom, so that students rotate from one station to the other.

(3) Parallel teaching: both teachers plan the instruction but divide the class into two halves, each taking responsibility for working with one-half of the class.

(4) Alternative teaching: organizing a classroom into one large group and one small group, where one teacher is able to provide main instruction, the other to review a smaller group of students; and

(5) Team teaching: teachers take turns in leading discussions or both playing roles in demonstrations.

Among mentioned diversities of co-teaching, team-teaching has received special attention and if we go through the history of co-teaching this approach has been applied more (e.g. teaching ESP), which may be because of its advantages over the other approaches. Despite the potential for problems to arise through a lack of collaboration and cohesiveness within a team, there are potential pedagogical advantages for those willing to adopt this form of teaching. Historically, team teaching has been seen as a practice suited for gaining better control of large groups of students (Ivins, 1964 as cited in Wang, 2010).  When team teaching is organized and carried out effectively, students, parents and school faculty feel positive effects. Research shows that students taught using a team teaching approach have higher levels of achievement.  Additionally, schools that employ team teaching have teachers who are more satisfied with their job, resulting in an improved work climate (Flynn , 2010). Leavitt believes that “team-teaching boasts many pedagogical and intellectual advantages: it can help create a dynamic and interactive learning environment, provide instructors with a useful way of modeling thinking within or across disciplines, and inspire new

Abstract ………………………………………………………………….…………….…VIII CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Overview……………………………………………………………………………….1 Rationale and Background…..……………………………………..………………….1 1-2-1. Foreign Language Learning Strategies..……………………………………………1 1-2-2. Learning Strategies and Learning Skills………….….………….…………….…..2 1-2-3. Learning Strategies and Reading Comprehension…..…………………..…………3 1-2-3-1. Visual Reading vs. Reading Comprehension………………………………5 1-2-4. Semantic Mapping and Reading Comprehension……….…………….… ……….6 1-2-4-1. The Effectiveness of Semantic Maps………..……………………………8 1-2-4-2. Problems of Implementation. ……………….……………………..…….12 Statement of the Problem ……………………………………………………..……..13 Purpose of Study…………………………………………………………….……….14 The Significance of the Study……………………………………………………..…15 Research Questions………………………………………………………………..…16 Research Hypotheses……………………………………….……………………..….16 Definition of Key Words……………………………………………………………..17 1-8-1. Semantic Map……………………………………………………………………17 1-8-1-1. Characteristics of Semantic Maps………….……………………………20 1-8-1-2. Constructing semantic Maps……………………..………………………22 1-8-1-3. Steps of Semantic Mapping……………………………………………..24 1-8-1-4. Types of Semantic Mapping…………………………………………….24 1-8-2. Reading Comprehension……………………………………….……………….. 32 1-8-2-1. Decoding………………………………………………..………….……..33 1-8-2-2. Vocabulary…………………………………..…………….……….……..34 1-8-2-3. World Knowledge………………………..…….…………………….…..34 1-8-2-4. Active Comprehension Strategies…………..……………………………35 Limitations of the Study…………………………………………..………………….36 CHAPTERTWO: REVIW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 2-1. Introduction………………………………………………..…………………………….37 2-2. Theories Relating to Semantic Maps…………………………………………………….37 2-3. Theoretical Section………………………………………………….……………….….39 2-4. Practical Section…………………………………………………………..…………..…42 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 3-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………55 3-2. Participants…………………………………………………………………………….…55 3-3. Instrumentation…………………………………………………………………….…….56 3-4. Procedures…………………………………………………………………………..……58 3-4-1. Procedures of Developing a Semantic Map……………………………………..58 3-4-2. Procedures of a Semantic Mapping Activity…..……………………….……….61 3-4-2-1. Introducing the Topic………………………..…………………………….61 3-4-2-2. Brainstorming…………………………………….……………………….61 3-4-2-3. Categorization…………………………………………………………….62 3-4-2-4. Personalizing the Map……………………………………………………63 3-4-2-5. Post-assignment Synthesis……………….……..…………………….….63 3-4-3. Procedures of Reading Tests………………………….……………………….…64 3-5. Design……………………………………………………………………………………66 CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 4-1. Introduction………………………………………..………………………………….…67 4-2. Validity and Reliability of the Study………………………………………..…………..68 4-2-1. Validity of the Pre-test and Post-test……………………………..…….…………68 4-2-2. Validity of the Semantic Maps……………………………..…………….…..…..68 4-3. Reliability of the Tests…………………………………………….………………….…69 4-4. The Conditions of the Research Variables………………….…………………….……..70 4-4-1. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Experimental Group……..…..………..70 4-4-2. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Control Group………..….…..…………73 4-5. Consideration of Research Hypotheses……………………………….…………….…..75 4-5-1. First Hypothesis……………………………………………………………………75 4-5-2. Second Hypothesis……………………………..…………………………………78 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION 5-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………81 5-2. Summery…………………………………………………………………………………81 5-3. Discussion of Findings………………………………………..……………………..…..82 5-4. Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………….….84 5-5. Suggestions for Further Study…………………………………………….……….……86 References…………………………………………………………….……………………..88 Appendixes………………………..………………………………..……………………..…96 Appendix A: Reading Comprehension Test as Pre-test……………….…………………..…96 Appendix B: Reading Comprehension Test as Post-test………………………..….……….98 Appendix C: Reading Comprehension Lesson 1 and the Related Semantic map..…………100 Appendix D: Reading Comprehension Lesson 2 and the Related Semantic map………..…102 Appendix E: Reading Comprehension Lesson 3 and the Related Semantic map…….…….104 Appendix F: Reading Comprehension Lesson 4 and the Related Semantic map…….…….106 Appendix G: Reading Comprehension Lesson 5 and the Related Semantic map……….….108 Appendix H: Reading Comprehension Lesson 6 and the Related Semantic map…….…….110 Appendix I: Reading Comprehension Lesson 7 and the Related Semantic map……….…..112 Appendix J: Reading Comprehension Lesson 8 and the Related Semantic map………..….114 List of Tables Table 4.1: The correlation of test-retest…………………………………….…………….…69 Table 4.2: Pre-test and post-test statistics in experimental group………………..………….71 Table 4.3: Pre-test and post-test statistics in control group……………………………….….73 Table 4.4: T-test statistics for comparison between mean scores of experimental and control groups in post-test………………………………….…………………………………….…..76 Table 4.5: The comparison between the pre-test and the post-test in experimental group…………………………….……………………………………………………………77 Table 4.6: The post-test statistics for three subgroups: A, B and C………………….………79 List of Graphs Graph 4.1: Pre-test descriptive statistics in experimental group…………………..………..72 Graph 4.2: Post-test descriptive statistics in experimental group……………………………72 Graph 4.3: Pre-test descriptive statistics in control group…………………………………..74 Graph 4.4: Post-test descriptive statistics in control group………………………………….74 Graph 4.5: The comparison of the post-test scores distributed in experimental and control group………………………………………………………………………………………….76 Graph 4.6: Statistics of sub-groups A, B and C in the post-test……………………………..80 Abstract The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies on reading comprehension of learners in intermediate level and also to determine the most effective strategy type among: teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive strategies. Some 60 female participants in high school participated in the study. Two valid reading comprehension tests were used in this study as pre-test and post-test. To investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies a treatment after the pre-test and before the post-test was conducted in order to teach semantic mapping strategies to learners. To analyze the recorded data, Sample T-test was used. To determine the best strategy among the three considered kinds, factor analysis was conducted. The final analysis showed that using semantic mapping strategies before, during or after reading texts increased the comprehension of the learners and among the three kinds of semantic mapping strategies in this study; teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive kind; the latter is the most effective one. Keywords: Semantic mapping strategies, Reading comprehension CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Abstract ………………………………………………………………….…………….…VIII CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Overview……………………………………………………………………………….1 Rationale and Background…..……………………………………..………………….1 1-2-1. Foreign Language Learning Strategies..……………………………………………1 1-2-2. Learning Strategies and Learning Skills………….….………….…………….…..2 1-2-3. Learning Strategies and Reading Comprehension…..…………………..…………3 1-2-3-1. Visual Reading vs. Reading Comprehension………………………………5 1-2-4. Semantic Mapping and Reading Comprehension……….…………….… ……….6 1-2-4-1. The Effectiveness of Semantic Maps………..……………………………8 1-2-4-2. Problems of Implementation. ……………….……………………..…….12 Statement of the Problem ……………………………………………………..……..13 Purpose of Study…………………………………………………………….……….14 The Significance of the Study……………………………………………………..…15 Research Questions………………………………………………………………..…16 Research Hypotheses……………………………………….……………………..….16 Definition of Key Words……………………………………………………………..17 1-8-1. Semantic Map……………………………………………………………………17 1-8-1-1. Characteristics of Semantic Maps………….……………………………20 1-8-1-2. Constructing semantic Maps……………………..………………………22 1-8-1-3. Steps of Semantic Mapping……………………………………………..24 1-8-1-4. Types of Semantic Mapping…………………………………………….24 1-8-2. Reading Comprehension……………………………………….……………….. 32 1-8-2-1. Decoding………………………………………………..………….……..33 1-8-2-2. Vocabulary…………………………………..…………….……….……..34 1-8-2-3. World Knowledge………………………..…….…………………….…..34 1-8-2-4. Active Comprehension Strategies…………..……………………………35 Limitations of the Study…………………………………………..………………….36 CHAPTERTWO: REVIW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE 2-1. Introduction………………………………………………..…………………………….37 2-2. Theories Relating to Semantic Maps…………………………………………………….37 2-3. Theoretical Section………………………………………………….……………….….39 2-4. Practical Section…………………………………………………………..…………..…42 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 3-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………55 3-2. Participants…………………………………………………………………………….…55 3-3. Instrumentation…………………………………………………………………….…….56 3-4. Procedures…………………………………………………………………………..……58 3-4-1. Procedures of Developing a Semantic Map……………………………………..58 3-4-2. Procedures of a Semantic Mapping Activity…..……………………….……….61 3-4-2-1. Introducing the Topic………………………..…………………………….61 3-4-2-2. Brainstorming…………………………………….……………………….61 3-4-2-3. Categorization…………………………………………………………….62 3-4-2-4. Personalizing the Map……………………………………………………63 3-4-2-5. Post-assignment Synthesis……………….……..…………………….….63 3-4-3. Procedures of Reading Tests………………………….……………………….…64 3-5. Design……………………………………………………………………………………66 CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 4-1. Introduction………………………………………..………………………………….…67 4-2. Validity and Reliability of the Study………………………………………..…………..68 4-2-1. Validity of the Pre-test and Post-test……………………………..…….…………68 4-2-2. Validity of the Semantic Maps……………………………..…………….…..…..68 4-3. Reliability of the Tests…………………………………………….………………….…69 4-4. The Conditions of the Research Variables………………….…………………….……..70 4-4-1. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Experimental Group……..…..………..70 4-4-2. Pre-test and Post-test Variable Scores in Control Group………..….…..…………73 4-5. Consideration of Research Hypotheses……………………………….…………….…..75 4-5-1. First Hypothesis……………………………………………………………………75 4-5-2. Second Hypothesis……………………………..…………………………………78 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION 5-1. Introduction………………………………………………………………………………81 5-2. Summery…………………………………………………………………………………81 5-3. Discussion of Findings………………………………………..……………………..…..82 5-4. Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………….….84 5-5. Suggestions for Further Study…………………………………………….……….……86 References…………………………………………………………….……………………..88 Appendixes………………………..………………………………..……………………..…96 Appendix A: Reading Comprehension Test as Pre-test……………….…………………..…96 Appendix B: Reading Comprehension Test as Post-test………………………..….……….98 Appendix C: Reading Comprehension Lesson 1 and the Related Semantic map..…………100 Appendix D: Reading Comprehension Lesson 2 and the Related Semantic map………..…102 Appendix E: Reading Comprehension Lesson 3 and the Related Semantic map…….…….104 Appendix F: Reading Comprehension Lesson 4 and the Related Semantic map…….…….106 Appendix G: Reading Comprehension Lesson 5 and the Related Semantic map……….….108 Appendix H: Reading Comprehension Lesson 6 and the Related Semantic map…….…….110 Appendix I: Reading Comprehension Lesson 7 and the Related Semantic map……….…..112 Appendix J: Reading Comprehension Lesson 8 and the Related Semantic map………..….114 List of Tables Table 4.1: The correlation of test-retest…………………………………….…………….…69 Table 4.2: Pre-test and post-test statistics in experimental group………………..………….71 Table 4.3: Pre-test and post-test statistics in control group……………………………….….73 Table 4.4: T-test statistics for comparison between mean scores of experimental and control groups in post-test………………………………….…………………………………….…..76 Table 4.5: The comparison between the pre-test and the post-test in experimental group…………………………….……………………………………………………………77 Table 4.6: The post-test statistics for three subgroups: A, B and C………………….………79 List of Graphs Graph 4.1: Pre-test descriptive statistics in experimental group…………………..………..72 Graph 4.2: Post-test descriptive statistics in experimental group……………………………72 Graph 4.3: Pre-test descriptive statistics in control group…………………………………..74 Graph 4.4: Post-test descriptive statistics in control group………………………………….74 Graph 4.5: The comparison of the post-test scores distributed in experimental and control group………………………………………………………………………………………….76 Graph 4.6: Statistics of sub-groups A, B and C in the post-test……………………………..80 Abstract The purpose of the present study was to investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies on reading comprehension of این مطلب را هم بخوانید : این مطلب را هم بخوانید : learners in intermediate level and also to determine the most effective strategy type among: teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive strategies. Some 60 female participants in high school participated in the study. Two valid reading comprehension tests were used in this study as pre-test and post-test. To investigate the effect of semantic mapping strategies a treatment after the pre-test and before the post-test was conducted in order to teach semantic mapping strategies to learners. To analyze the recorded data, Sample T-test was used. To determine the best strategy among the three considered kinds, factor analysis was conducted. The final analysis showed that using semantic mapping strategies before, during or after reading texts increased the comprehension of the learners and among the three kinds of semantic mapping strategies in this study; teacher-initiated, student-mediated and teacher-student interactive kind; the latter is the most effective one. Keywords: Semantic mapping strategies, Reading comprehension CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Overview Overview