| تعداد نشریات | 24 |
| تعداد شمارهها | 851 |
| تعداد مقالات | 7,575 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 13,413,754 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 11,580,454 |
The Influence of Lexically-Based Language Teaching on Task Response and Coherence and Cohesion Aspects of Writing Proficiency of Iranian University EFL Learners | ||
| Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills) | ||
| دوره 42، شماره 1، فروردین 2023، صفحه 61-90 اصل مقاله (969.41 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Research Paper | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22099/tesl.2023.45219.3160 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Moussa Ahmadian* ؛ Ghodrat - Momeni | ||
| Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Literature and Languages, Arak University, Arak, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| The current quasi-experimental research aimed at exploring the influence of Lexically-Based Language Teaching (LBLT) on task response and coherence and cohesion aspects of the writing proficiency of Iranian university EFL learners. The research sample of the study included sixty male and female university students (N = 60) attending two university classes. They were selected by using a convenient sampling procedure and were assigned to experimental and control groups. To ascertain the groups' homogeneity at the beginning of the study, the researchers gave two groups the Key English Test (KET). Prior to starting treatment, two groups took the pretest writing task. While the participants comprising the experimental group were instructed consistent with the lexical approach's underlying practices and activities, those constituting the control group were instructed based on conventional techniques applied to present essay writing in universities. At the end of the experiment, the posttest writing, identical to the pretest, was given to both groups. To compare the two groups' mean scores with respect to coherence and cohesion and task response aspects of post-test writing, One-way Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) and independent T-test were drawn upon. Version 20th of the SPSS software was applied for this end. The attained results were indicative of a significantly positive influence of the lexically-based language teaching on both coherence and cohesion and task response aspects of writing proficiency. However, the attained improvement was greater in the task response aspect. The findings suggest some implications for English language teachers and university instructors. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Coherence and cohesion؛ Lexically-based language teaching؛ Task response؛ Writing proficiency | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
Alsowat, H. (2022). The mediating roles of gender and academic field in the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension of EFL students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 10(2):146-159. https://doi.org:10.13189/ujer.2022.100204
Amirian, Z., Ketabi, S., & Eshaghi, H. (2013). The use of lexical bundles in native and non-native post-graduate writing: the case of Applied Linguistics M.A. theses. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 5 (11). 1-29.
Ashouri, S., Mashhadi Heidar, D. (2015). The impact of teaching corpus-based collocation on EFL learners' writing ability. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 3(13),53-62.
Azadnia, M. (2021). A Corpus-based analysis of lexical richness in EAP texts written by Iranian TEFL students. Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (TESLQ) (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills) 40(4), 61-90. DOI: 10.22099/JTLS.2021.40043.2960
Baba Ahmadi, H.R., & Babaie Shalmani, H. (2022). Types and tokens of lexical bundles in Civil Engineering students' genre-specific English articles. Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly (TESLQ) (Formerly Journal of Teaching Language Skills), 41(2), 37-74. DOI: 10.22099/TESL.2021.39319.2928
Bagheri, M. S., & Riasati, M. J. (2016). EFL graduate students' IELTS writing problems and students and teachers' beliefs regarding writing skill improvement. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7(1), 198-209.
Debabi, M., & Guerroud, N. (2018). The lexical approach in action: Evidence of collocational accuracy and the idiom principle in the writing of EFL intermediate students. Arab World English Journal, 9 (3), 176-187. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no3.12.
Duin, A.H., & Graves, M.F. (1987). Intensive vocabulary instruction as a prewriting technique. Reading Research Quarterly, 22(3), 311–330.
Ebrahimi, F., Namaziandost, E., Ziafar, M., & Ibna Seraj, P.M. (2021). The effect of teaching formulaic expressions through contrastive lexical approach on Iranian pre‑intermediate EFL learners’ writing skill. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-021-09778-z
Faghih, A. & Sharafi, M. (2006). The impact of collocation on Iranian EFL learners' interlanguage. Scientific Information Database. Science and Research Quarterly of Alzahra University, 16(58), 11-23.
Fasihzadeh, S. (2020). The effect of reading humorous texts on Iranian EFL learners’ collocations learning. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Translation Studies, 5 (3), 67-92.
Fu, K. (2016). A Brief literature review of studies on lexical chunks at home and abroad. English Language and Literature Studies, 6 (2), 187-192. Gao, L. (2019). Study on teaching college English writing based on lexical chunks. English Language Teaching, 12(9), 1-5.
Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2015). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). Taylor and Francis.
Ghafarsamar, R., Shokrpour, N., & Nasiri, E. (2018). The applicability of teaching lexical bundles on medical students' writing proficiency in an EFL context. Teaching English Language, 12 (2), 27-44.
Halliday M.A.K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman.
Hashemi, M., Azizinezhad, M. & Dravishi, S. (2012). Collocation a neglected aspect in teaching and learning EFL. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 522-525. Hedge, T. (2008). Teaching and learning in language classroom. Oxford University Press.
Hilton, H. (2008). The link between vocabulary knowledge and spoken L2 fluency. Language Learning Journal, 36 (2), 153- 166. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730802389983
Hsu, J. (2007). Lexical collocations and their relation to the online writing of Taiwanese college English majors and non-English majors. Electronic journal of foreign language teaching. 4(2), 192-209.
Jafarpour, A.A., & Koosha, M. (2006). Data-driven learning and teaching collocation of preposition. Research on Foreign Language. Journal of Faculty of Letters and Humanity, Tabriz, Iran, 49(200), 1-30.
Johnson, M. D., Acevedo, A., & Mercado, L. (2016). Vocabulary knowledge and vocabulary use in second language writing. TESOL Journal, 7(3), 700-715.
Kazemi, M., Katiraei, S., & Rasekh, A.E. (2014). The impact of teaching lexical bundles on improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skill. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98 ,864 – 869.
Khodareza, M., & Ashouri, S. (2016). The effect of lexical collocation instruction on intermediate EFL learners’ vocabulary size. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, (S1), 416-425. www.cibtech.org/sp.ed/jls/2016/01/jls.htm.
Kilic, M. (2019). Vocabulary knowledge as a predictor of performance in writing and speaking: A case of Turkish EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Learning in Thailand, 57, 133-164.
Laufer, B., & Nation, I. S. P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307-322.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: the state of ELT and a way forward. Language Teaching Publications.
Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach: putting theory into practice. Language Teaching Publications.
Lewis, M. (Ed). ( 2006). Teaching Collocation. Further Development in Lexical Approach. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Lin, L. H. F. (2015). Role of depth of vocabulary knowledge in EFL Learners’ writing proficiency. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Mahvelati, E. (2016). EFL learners’ writing progress through collocation awareness-raising approach: An analytic assessment. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 4 (16), 69-84.
McCarthy, M.& O'Dell, F. (2020). English collocation in use. Cambridge University Press.
Mehrpour, S., & Rahimi, M. (2010). The impact of general and specific vocabulary knowledge on reading and listening comprehension: A case of Iranian EFL learners. System, 38(2), 292-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.01.004.
Menzel, K., Lapshinova-Koltunski, E , & Kunz, K. (2017). Cohesion and coherence in multilingual contexts. In Katrin Menzel, Ekaterina Lapshinova- Koltunski & Kerstin Kunz (eds.), New perspectives on cohesion and coherence, 1–11. Language Science Press. doi:10.5281/zenodo.814458
Mirzaie, A. Beyzaei, A. & Roohani, A. (2018). Focus on lexis and L2 learners' development of oral complexity, accuracy, and fluency measures. Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS),37(2), 91-123.DOI: 10.22099/jtls.2019.31417.2601
Mohammadi, M. & Enayati, B. (2018). The effects of lexical chunks teaching on EFL intermediate learners’ speaking fluency. International Journal of Instruction July, 1, (3), 179-192.
Mohseni, A., Samadian, S. (2019). Analysis of cohesion and coherence in writing performance of Iranian intermediate EFL Learners. Issues in Language Teaching, 8(2)213-247.
Mounya, A. (2010). Teaching Lexical Collocation to Raise Proficiency in Foreign Language Proficiency (Publication No. 324482405) [Master's Thesis, Malaysia University].
Nattinger, J., & DeCarrico, J. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford University Press.
Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59–82.
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
Pakdaman1.S, & Pourhosein Gilakjani, A. (2019). The impact of collocation activities on Iranian EFL learner's knowledge of vocabulary. International Journal of Research in English Education. 4(4),70-82. https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.4.4.70.
Poorahmadi, M. (2012). Investigating the efficiency of task-based instruction in improving reading comprehension ability. Journal of Language and Translation, 3 (11), 29-36.
Pérez-Llantada, C. (2014). Formulaic language in L1 and L2 expert academic writing: Convergent and divergent usage. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 84–94. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jeap.2014. 01. 002.
Rahimi, R., & Momeni, Gh. (2012). The effect of teaching collocations on English language proficiency. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 37-42.
Richard, J.C, & Rodgers, S.T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Richard, J.C, & Schmitt, R. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics (3rd ed). Longman.
Sadeghi. K, & Panahifar, A. (2013). The relationship between collocational knowledge, speaking proficiency, and the use of collocation in Iranian EFL learners' oral performance. Teaching English Language and Literature. 7(1).1-31.
Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge: What the research shows. Language Learning, 64, 913–951.
Schmitt, N, & Gonzalez-Fernandez, B. (2020). Word knowledge: Exploring the relationships and order of acquisition of vocabulary knowledge components. Applied Linguistics, 41(4),481-505.
Sewbihon-Getie, A. (2021). The effectiveness of using the lexical approach to developing Ethiopian EFL learners’ vocabulary competence. HOW Journal. 28 (1), 69 – 93. https://doi.org/10.19183/how.28.1.586.
Shamsabadi, R. Ketabi, S, & Eslami Rasekh, A. (2017). Developing Iranian EAP students’ writing skill through explicit instruction of lexical bundles. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning. 19,25-52.
Shooshtari, Z.G, & Karami, N. (2013). Lexical collocation instruction and its impact on Iranian non-academic EFL learners’ speaking ability. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4, (4), 767-776. doi:10.4304/jltr.4.4.767-776 Stæhr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152.
Stæhr, L. S. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31(4), 577–607.
Shi, L., & Qian, D. (2012). How does vocabulary knowledge affect Chinese EFL learners’ writing quality in web-based settings? Evaluating the relationships among three dimensions of vocabulary knowledge and writing quality. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 35(1), 117–127.
Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Longman.
Thornbury, S. (2019). Learning language in chunks. Part of the Cambridge Papers in ELT series. Cambridge: Available at cambridge.org/cambridge-papers-elt.
Vahid Dastjerdi, H., & Hayati Samaian., S. (2011). Quality of Iranian EFL learners' argumentative essays. Cohesive devices in focus. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 65-76.
Webb, S.(ed) (2020). The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies. Routledge.
Wilkins, D.A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching. Edward Arnold.
Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus: A new approach to language learning. Collins ELT.
Willis, D & J. Willis. (2006). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford University Press.
Zahedi, H., & Mirzadeh, M. (2010). Collocational cloze: The effect of deletion procedure and gender. Iranian EFL Journal, 6(1), 143-157. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 349 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 559 |
||