Luận văn This part discusses the rationale, aims, scope, an overview of the research method and the design of the study

PART I : INTRODUCTION 1. Rationale Our students are often frustrated with trying to learn new words. We cannot count how many times the students have come up to us to express their frustration with vocabulary when they say things like, “I have such a high level of vocabulary in my language, so it is very frustrating that I can’t express myself as well in English. What can I do? How can I increase my vocabulary?” or “Why is my use of this word awkward? How can I use new words that I learn?” or “I need to use my dictionary. How can I read without using my dictionary? - It’s too hard!” We hope by teaching them the strategies of elaboration it will help them with learning vocabulary and minimize some of their frustrations. Vocabulary is an essential constituent of second language acquisition and is of great significance to language learners. Without words that are the building blocks of a language, a speaker cannot convey the intended meaning. "Learning the most frequent 2 - 3,000 words in a language provides a firm basis of about 80 percent of the words likely to be encountered” (Carter, 1988, p.166). Learning vocabulary is the important basis to gain all other skills. Vocabulary deficiency leads to poor reading comprehension, poor listening comprehension, poor writing performance, poor conversational competence and poor grammatical knowledge. Thus, vocabulary learning is one of the major challenges foreign language learners face during the process of learning a language. One way to alley the burden is to assist students in becoming independent learners during the process of L2 vocabulary learning. To do this task, we have to know the strategies that the learners are using as well as the effectiveness to teach suitable vocabulary learning strategies (VLS) because learning strategies instruction can help “EFL learners become better learners. In addition, skill in using learning strategies assists students in becoming independent, confident learners” (Chamot, 1999, p.1). Psychologists, linguists, and language teachers have been interested in VLS for a long time. Numerous studies have been conducted comparing the retention effects of different vocabulary presentation strategies. In fact, the vocabulary field has been especially productive in the last two decades. We have seen a number of classic volumes on theories (e.g., Carter, 1987; Carter & McCarthy, 1988; Mc Carthy, 1990; Nation, 1990), researches (e.g., Arnaud & Bejoint, 1992; Gass, 1987; Meara, 1989; Nation & Carter, 1989), and practical tips (e.g., Gairns & Redman, 1986; McCarthy & O'Dell, 1994). Recent volumes shed significant light upon different aspects of vocabulary acquisition include Huckin, Haynes, and Coady (1993), Harley (1995), Hatch and Brown (1995), Coady and Huckin (1997), Schmitt and Mc Carthy (1997), Atkins (1998), Wesche and Paribakht (1999), Read (2000), Schmitt (2000), and Nation (2001). These researches solved the present problems. Hence, based on the significance attributed to VLS in the process of vocabulary learning and enhancement, this research aims at studying on the effectiveness of Cognitive Strategies (CS) in learning vocabulary. 2. Aims of the study The aim of this study is to introduce CS into vocabulary learning syllabus at Nghe An Continuing Education Center (NACEC) so that we can examine the effectiveness of those strategies and to elicit students' opinions about the application of CS. From these aims, this study was an attempt to meet the need of the students at NACEC for an alternative way to improve their vocabulary learning ability. It was expected that the results of this study would serve as a useful source of reference for the teachers and administrators at NACEC. To gain the aims which are mentioned above, this study was designed to test the following hypothesis: H1: Students who take part in the application of CS in learning vocabulary will make more improvement in vocabulary ability than those who do not participate in such a program. The acceptance of this hypothesis would result in the rejection to the following null hypothesis or vice versa: H0: There is no difference in vocabulary proficiency as measured by a proficiency test between students who take part in the experiment program and those who do not. In order to draw the conclusion on which hypothesis would be accepted, the answers to the research questions presented below would be found: ® Is there a significant difference in using CS to learn vocabulary between the control group (students who do not participate in applying program of CS) and the experimental group (students who participate in the program)? ® Do CS make the students' vocabulary learning ability improved? ® What are the students' opinions about CS and their suggestions for future programs? The first and the second questions are the focal points. The answer to them would yield empirical evidence for the effectiveness of CS in learning vocabulary. The answer to the last question would provide invaluable information about students' evaluation of CS necessary for further application. 3. Scope of the study Given the time constraint, the study was conducted on the 1st non-English students at NACEC only. The thesis limited itself to the experimental research of CS in learning vocabulary to find out their effectiveness. This means the study was not extended to measure students' common VLS. Therefore, data for analysis were collected from those students in the researcher's hope of gaining a better understanding of the issue in consideration. 4. Method of the study The main research method employed in this study to find out the answers to the proposed research questions within the scope of the study is a quasi-experimental design which involves the three basic components of experiments as presented by Selinger and Shohamy, that is, the population (1st students at NACEC), the treatment (CS) and the measurement of the treatment (t-test) (1989, p.136). Beside this main method, a questionnaire was also delivered to the students taking part in applying program of CS as a complementary tool to obtain their feedback on the program and their suggestions for future programs. 5. Design of the study The study comprises three main parts: Part I: Introduction This part discusses the rationale, aims, scope, an overview of the research method and the design of the study. Part II: Development This part is divided into four chapters: Chapter 1: presents a brief theoretical background for the thesis Chapter 2: presents a detailed discussion of the method used in the study with all of its components encompassing the justification for using the quasi-experimental design, the participants, the design of the pretest and posttest. Chapter 3: is the most important part of the study presenting significant findings and discussions of the study. Chapter 4: presents some pedagogical implications derived from the main findings and some suggested vocabulary practicing activities. Part III: Conclusion This part summaries the main findings and points out some limitations of the study that serve as the basis for the researcher’s suggestions for further study. PART II: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1. Language Learning Strategies 1.1. Background of Language Learning Strategies There has been a prominent shift within the field of language learning and teaching over the last twenty years with greater emphasis being put on learners and learning rather than on teachers and teaching. In parallel to this new shift of interest, how learners process new information and what kinds of strategies they employ to understand, learn or remember the information has been the primary concern of the researchers dealing with the area of foreign language learning. So, language learning strategies (LLS) for foreign language learning and the teacher's role in strategy training is very important. Research into LLS began in the 1960s. Particularly, developments in cognitive psychology influenced much of the research done on LLS. In most of the research on LLS, the primary concern has been on “identifying what good language learners report they do to learn a second or foreign language, or, in some cases, are observed doing while learning a second or foreign language.” (Rubin and Wenden 1987:19). In 1966, Aaron Carton published his study entitled “The Method of Inference in Foreign Language Study”, which was the first attempt on learner strategies. After Carton, in 1971, Rubin started doing research focusing on the strategies of successful learners and stated that, once identified, such strategies could be made available to less successful learners. Rubin classified strategies in terms of processes contributing directly or indirectly to language learning. Wong-Fillmore (1976), Tarone (1977), Naiman et al. (1978), Bialystok (1979), Cohen and Aphek (1981), Wenden (1982), Chamot and O'Malley (1987), Politzer and Mc Groarty (1985), Conti and Kolsody (1997), and many others studied strategies used by language learners during the process of foreign language learning. 1.2. Definition of Language Learning Strategies The term strategies, in the second-language-learning sense, has come to be applied to the conscious moves made by second-language speakers intended to be useful in either learning or using the L2. Strategies can be very different in nature, ranging from planning the organization of one's learning (a metacognitive learning strategy) through using mnemonic devices to learn vocabulary (cognitive learning strategies) and rehearsing what one expects to say (a performance strategy) to bolstering one's self-confidence for a language task by means of “self-talk” (an affective strategy). A learning strategy is a series of actions a learner takes to facilitate the completion of a learning task. A strategy starts when the learner analyzes the task, the situation, and what is available in his/her own repertoire. The learner then goes on to select, deploy, monitor, and evaluate the effectiveness of this action, and decides if he needs to revise the plan and action. Ever since Naiman et al. (1976) noted that “good” language learners appeared to use a larger number and range of strategies than “poor” language learners, the implications of understanding strategy use have seemed increasingly important. However, there are still many questions to resolve. Does strategy use actually aid language learning, or is it just something that good learners do? Are some strategies better than others, or is it the number and range of strategies used that counts? Are there “bad” strategies that actually making learning or performance worse? Can “poor” language learners benefit from being taught the strategies that “good” learners use, or do you need to be a good learner already to use some of the strategies? Does strategy training affect language learning, and if so is the effect direct, or does such training serve mainly to raise motivation and awareness? If learners are encouraged to use strategies to organize their own learning, for example, what are the implications for the role of the classroom teacher? Such issues have already prompted a considerable volume of research and writing, and directly or indirectly made a significant impact on language learning, at least in some places. For example, the establishment of self-access centers and the encouragement of learner independence are essentially based on the assumption that students will be able to use viable metacognitive learning strategies. Ellis (1994) writes: "The study of learning strategies holds considerable promise, both for language pedagogy and for explaining individual differences in second language learning. It is probably true to say, however, that it is still in its infancy. For this reason, perhaps, discussions of learning strategies typically conclude with the problems that have surfaced and that need to be addressed before progress can be made” (p. 558). So far, the term LLS has been defined by many researchers. But few seem to agree on what a language strategy actually is (Bialystok, 1983) because each researcher has defined strategy within the context of his or her own study. Learning strategies are defined by O'Malley and Chamot (1990) as “special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to comprehend, learn, or retain new information” (p.1) while Oxford (1994) defines strategies as “actions, behaviors, steps, or techniques students use, often unconsciously, to improve their progress in apprehending, internalizing, and using the L2” (p.1). Rubin' s (1987) view of strategies relates more to how they might contribute directly to L2 development, while Stern (1983), concerned more with the observability of strategies, describes a strategy as a general approach to learning by the individual learner and “techniques” as “particular forms of observable learning behaviors”. Richards and Platt (1992:209) stated that learning strategies are “intentional behavior and thoughts used by learners during learning so as to better help them understand, learn, or remember new information”. Faerch Claus and Casper (1983:67) stress that a learning strategy is “an attempt to develop linguistic and sociolinguistic competence in the target language”. All language learners use LLS either consciously or unconsciously when processing new information and performing tasks in the language classroom. Since language classroom is like a problem-solving environment in which language learners are likely to face new input and difficult tasks given by their instructors, learners' attempts to find the quickest or easiest way to do what is required, that is, using LLS is inescapable. 1.3. Classification of Learning Strategies In the 1980s and early 90s, research mainly focused on categorizing the strategies found in the studies of the previous decade. As a result, several taxonomies were proposed to classify them, including classifications of LLS in general and language sub-skills strategies in particular. è One of the most famous to date that proposed by O'Malley and Chamot (1990). Their hierarchical framework of strategies distinguishes three major strategy types: Ÿ Metacognitive Strategies Ÿ Cognitive Strategies Ÿ Socio-affective Strategies O'Malley and Chamot's framework of strategies has considerable intuitive appeal and many practitioners have used this taxonomy in planning their teaching. However, O'Malley and Chamot have never examined the construct validity of their taxonomy. As a result, it is unclear enough to teach students and to train them to use these three separate strategies. è According to Rubin, there are three types of strategies used by learners that contribute directly or indirectly to language learning. These are: Ÿ Learning Strategies Ÿ Communication Strategies Ÿ Social Strategies è According to Stern (1992:262-266), there are five main LLS. These are as follows: Ÿ Management and Planning Strategies Ÿ Cognitive Strategies Ÿ Communicative - Experiential Strategies Ÿ Interpersonal Strategies Ÿ Affective Strategies è It seems that among numbers of classifications of learning strategies given by researchers, Oxford’s scheme is the most comprehensive detailed system of six strategies, classified as direct and indirect. Oxford's (1990:17) taxonomy of LLS is shown as following: Direct strategies Ÿ Memory strategies Ÿ Cognitive strategies Ÿ Compensation strategies Indirect strategies Ÿ Metacognitive Strategies    Ÿ Affective Strategies    Ÿ Social Strategies    It can be seen that much of the recent work in this area has been underpinned by a broad concept of LLS that goes beyond cognitive processes to include social and communicative strategies. 1.4. The importance of Language Learning Strategies in Language Learning and Teaching Bridging the gap between students’ learning styles and teachers’ teaching styles will be a powerful means to guide students towards successful learning. Thus, teaching students learning strategies should not be neglected. Oxford (1990) describes learning strategies as “specific actions taken by the learners to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations” (p.8). Learning strategies will compensate for the weakness of a learning style and maximize the strengths of a learning style powerfully. To emphasize the importance of LLS, Chamot et al. (1999) stated, “Differences between more effective learners and less effective learners were found in the number and range of strategies used, in how the strategies were applied to the task, and in whether they were appropriate for the task” (p.166). Therefore, teaching learning strategies is especially useful for the latter learners. If they can find effective strategies, they will be able to successfully, through effective strategy teaching, students will acquire not only vocabulary but also the way for studying. The language learner capable of using a wide variety of LLS appropriately can improve his language skills in a better way. According to Oxford (1990), memory strategies “help students store and retrieve new information”, cognitive strategies “enable learners to understand and produce new language by many different means”, compensation strategies “allow learners to use the language despite their often large gaps in knowledge” (p.37), metacognitive strategies “allow learners to control their own cognition - that is, to coordinate the learning process by using functions such as centering, arranging, planning, and evaluating”, affective strategies “help to regulate emotions, motivations, and attitudes” and social “help students learn through interaction with other” (p.135). Developing skills in three areas, such as metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective can help the language learner build up learner independence and autonomy whereby he can take control of his own learning. Lessard-Clouston (1997:3) states that LLS contribute to the development of the communicative competence of the students. Being a broad concept, LLS are used to refer to all strategies foreign language learners use in learning the target language and communication strategies are one type of LLS. As Oxford (1990:1) stated, LLS “... are especially important for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed movement, which is essential for developing communicative competence”. Besides developing the communicative competence of the students, teachers who train students to use LLS can help them become better language learners. Helping students understand good LLS and training them to develop and use such good LLS can be considered to be the appreciated characteristics of a good language teacher. Research into the good LLS revealed a number of positive strategies so that such strategies could also be used by bad language learners trying to become more successful in language learning. However, there is always the possibility that bad language learners can also use the same good LLS while becoming unsuccessful owing to some other reasons. At this point, it should be strongly stressed that using the same good LLS does not guarantee that bad learners will also become successful in language learning since other factors may also play role in success. 1.5. The factors influencing the choice of L2 learning strategies When a person approaches a relatively challenging task, he adopts certain strategies to solve the problem. This problem-solving process is constrained by the learning context where the problem is being tackled. Language learning in general and vocabulary acquisition in particular are such problem-solving tasks at different levels of complexity. The strategies a learner uses and the effectiveness of these strategies very much depend on the learner him/herself (e.g., attitudes, mot