| تعداد نشریات | 24 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 852 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,575 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,420,661 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,583,380 |
The Effect of Post-teaching Techniques on the English Vocabulary Recall and Retention of Iranian Students with Learning Disability | ||
| Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills) | ||
| دوره 40، شماره 1، فروردین 2021، صفحه 117-152 اصل مقاله (976.9 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22099/jtls.2021.38334.2878 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Akbar Abbasi Bagherian Poor* ؛ Elahe Serati | ||
| Vali-e-Asr University of Rafsanjan | ||
| چکیده | ||
| One of the most important needs in learning a second or foreign language is vocabulary acquisition. Certainly, failure to keep vocabulary in mind is a problem for both typically-developing learners as well as those with a learning disability (LD). This language demand requires teachers to use techniques in order to reinforce vocabulary recall. The current study is an attempt to investigate the effect of two post-teaching vocabulary learning techniques of diglot-weave and cooperative learning on vocabulary knowledge of LD students and to compare them with the common instruction of picture-word definition. To this end, 90 Iranian female LD students from 10 intact classes in two Junior Exceptional Schools in Shiraz were randomly assigned to one of the three groups. After the intensive teaching sessions, the test was administered to examine their vocabulary recall performance in each group and after a two-week interval, the same test was used to examine their vocabulary retention. The results by conducting the one-way ANOVA indicated that both experimental groups of diglot-weave and cooperative learning techniques outperformed the control group of picture-definition in the vocabulary recall and retention tests. However, there was no significant difference between the performance of diglot-weave and cooperative learning groups. Therefore, the findings of the present study could provide useful implications for foreign language teaching programs particularly in Special Education and students with LD. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Cooperative Learning؛ Diglot Weave؛ Learning Disability (LD)؛ Post-teaching Techniques؛ Retention؛ Vocabulary Recall | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Ahmadi, M. (2014). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 vocabulary learning and retention. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (98), 109-115.
Allen, V. F. (1983). Techniques in teaching vocabulary. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th Ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Aronson, E., Stephan, C, Sikes, J., Blaney, N., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom, Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Bachman, L. F. (2004). Statistical analyses for language assessment. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Baleghizadeh, S. (2012). Comparing traditional with cooperative pairs: The case of Iranian EGAP students. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (66), 330-336.
Baleghizade, S., & Naeim, M. Y. (2011). Promoting vocabulary retention through etymology presentation. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 7(1), 111-123.
Blasco, M. E. (2015). A cognitive linguistic analysis of the cooking domain and its implementation in the EFL classroom as a way of enhancing effective vocabulary teaching. Social and Behavioral Science, (178), 70-77.
Bos, C. S., & Anders, P. L. (1990). Effects of interactive vocabulary instruction on the vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of junior-high learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13(1), 31-42.
Bryant, D. P, Goodwin, M., Bryant, B. R., & Higgins, K. (2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26 (2), 117-128.
Carnine, D., Johnson, G., & Gersten, R. (1987). Effects of instructional design variables on vocabulary acquisition of LD students: A study of Computer-Assisted Instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20 (4), 206-213.
Castell, E., & Kroese, B. S. (2016). Midwives’ experiences of caring for women with learning disabilities-A qualitative study. Midwifery, (36), 35-42.
Celik, M. (2003). Teaching vocabulary through code-mixing. ELT Journal, 57(4), 361-369. Retrieved from ERIC database. (EJ676320)
Cen, S., & Aytac, B. (2017). Ecocultural Perspective in Learning Disability: Family Support Resources, Values, Child Problem Behaviors. Learning Disability Quarterly, 40 (2), 114-127.
Cheatham, G. A., & Barnett, J. E. (2016). Overcoming common misunderstandings about students with disabilities who are English language learners. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53( 1), 58-63.
Cohen, J.W. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Condus, M. M., Marshall, K. J., & Miller, S. R. (1986). Effects of the keyword mnemonic strategy on vocabulary acquisition and maintenance by learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19 (10), 609-613.
Decarrico, J. S. 2001. Vocabulary learning and teaching. Celce-Murcia, M. (ed.). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Demir, Y. (2013). The role of in-class vocabulary strategies in vocabulary retention of Turkish EFL learners. Elementary Education Online, 12 (4), 1173-1187.
Denham, S. A., Weissberg, R. P. (2004). Social-emotional learning in early childhood: What we know and where to go from here. In E. Chesebrough, P. King, T. P. Gullotta, & M. Bloom (Eds.), A blueprint for the promotion of prosocial skills. New York: Kluwer/Academic Publishers.
Deshler, D. D., Kennedy, M. J., & Lloyd, J. W. (2015). Effects of multimedia vocabulary instruction on adolescents with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 22-38.
Dilek, Y., & Yuruk, A. (2013). Using semantic mapping technique in vocabulary teaching at pre-intermediate level. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (70), 1531-1544.
Douglas, K. H., & Jozwik, S. L. (2017). Effects of multicomponent academic vocabulary instruction for English learners with learning difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 40 (4), 237-250.
Dornyei, Z. (1995). On the teachability of communication strategies. TESOL Quarterly, (29), 55-84.
Eslami, Z., & Huang, Sh. (2013). The use of dictionary and contextual guessing strategies for vocabulary learning by advanced English language learners. English Language and Literature Studies, 3 (3), 1-7.
Espin, Ch., & Seifert, K. (2012). Improving reading of science text for secondary students with learning disabilities: Effects of text reading, vocabulary learning, and combined approaches to instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35 (4), 236-247.
Faraj, A. K. (2015). Effective strategies for turning receptive vocabulary into productive vocabulary in EFL context. Journal of Education and Practice, 6 (27), 10-19.
Fredrick, L. D., & Hughes, T. A. (2006). Teaching vocabulary with students with learning disabilities using class-wide peer tutoring and constant time delay. Journal of Behavioral Education, 15 (1), 1-23.
Freedman, J. (2003). Key lessons from 35 years of social-emotional education: How self-science builds self-awareness, positiverelationships, and healthy decision-making. Perspectives in Education, 21 (4), 69-80.
Gerami, E., & Tavakoli, M. (2012). The effect of keyword and pictorial methods on EFL learners’ vocabulary learning and retention. Porta Linguarum, (19), 299-316.
Goldstein, S. (2011). Learning disabilities in childhood. In S. Goldstein, J. A. Naglieri, & M.
Gresham, F. M., & Reschly, D. J. (1986). Social skills deficits and low peer acceptance of mainstreamed learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 9 (1), 23-32.
Harris, M. L., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2011). The effects of strategic morphological analysis instruction on the vocabulary performance of secondary students with and without disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34 (1), 17-33.
Hendrickson, J., Roberts, M., & Shores, R. E. (1978). Antecedent and contingent modeling to teach basic sight vocabulary to learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11(8), 524-528.
Karimian, Z., & Talebinejad, M. R. (2013). Students’ use of translation as a learning strategy in EFL classroom. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4 (3), 605-610.
Mafra, H. (2015). Development of learning and social skills in children with learning disabilities: An educational intervention program. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (209), 221-228.
Maleki, E., & Nemati, A. (2014). The effect of teaching vocabulary through the diglot-weave technique on vocabulary learning of Iranian high school students. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (98), 1340-1345.
Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.
Piaget, J. (1932). The language and thought of the child (2nd ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Rahimi, H. (2014). The effect of method of vocabulary presentation (code- mixing, thematic clustering, and contextualization) on L2 vocabulary recognition and production. Social and Behavioral Sciences, (98), 1475-1484.
Rich, Y. (1996). The heterogeneous class. Jerusalem, Bar-Ilan University.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (3rd Ed.). London: PearsonEducation.
Ruutmets, K. (2005). Vocabulary learning strategies in studying English as a foreign language (Master’s thesis). University of Tartu, Estonia. Retrieved from http://www.utlib.ee/ekollekt/diss/mag/2005/b17557100/ruutmets.pdf
Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shu, H., Anderson, R. C., and Zhang, H. 1995: Incidental learning of word meanings while reading: a Chinese and American cross-cultural study. Reading Research Quarterly, (30), 76 – 95.
Simpson, B. (2003). Sex, fear, and greed: A social dilemma analysis of gender and cooperation. Social Forces, 82, (1), 35-52.
Spies, T. G., & Dema, A. A. (2014). Beyond word meaning: vocabulary instruction for students with exceptional language needs. Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(5), 271-280.
Steadward, R. D., Watkinson, E. J., & Wheeler, G. D. (2003). Adapted physical activity. Canada: University of Alberta.
Steele, S. C., & Watkins, R. V. (2010). Learning word meanings during reading by children with language learning disability and typically-developing peers. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 24(7), 520-539.
Swanson, H. L. (1986). Do semantic memory deficiencies underlie learning readers’ encoding processes? Journal of Exceptional Child Psychology, (41), 461-488.
Wanzek, J., Swanson, E., Vaughn, Sh., Roberts, G., & Fall, A. (2015). English learner and non-English learner students with disabilities: Content acquisition and comprehension. Exceptional Children, 82 (4), 428-442.
Wei, Z. (2014). Does teaching mnemonics for vocabulary learning make a difference? Putting the keyword method and the word part technique to the test. Language teaching research, 19( 1), 43-69.
Williams, M., & Robert, L. Burden. (1997). Psychology for Language Teachers: a Social Constructivist Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, C. H., Brice, C., Carter, E. I., Fleming, J. C., Hay, D. D., Hicks, J. D., Picot, E., Taylor, A. M., & Weaver, J. (2011). Familiar technology promotes academic success for students with exceptional learning needs. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED 530541)
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Yedla, S. (2013). Etymology of technical vocabulary in English. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 2 (3), 9-14.
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 657 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 743 |
||