Search

This thesis compares two approaches to extensive reading to determine the extent that they facilitate vocabulary development. The first approach is a traditional reading-only approach, and the second approach is a task-based approach which supplements reading with post-reading meaning-focused discussions. These two approaches are compared using a battery of tests, most notably a measure for productive knowledge of word associations. For years, scholars have believed that word associations have potential to reveal important information about a person's language proficiency. One reason word associations are intriguing is that a large amount of a person's lexicon can be assessed (Meara, 2009). This is possible because a large amount of data from the learner can be gathered in a short period of time. Another intriguing aspect of word association data is that it is one aspect of vocabulary knowledge that is not based on correct performance. This raises the question of an appropriate means of assigning value to the associations, a question which still hinders research to this day. Recent research has made progress in this area with a multi-level taxonomy (i.e., Fitzpatrick, 2007), creating a picture of the types of associations which exist in a learner's lexicon. However, this taxonomy does not address the strength of the association. Wilks and Meara (2007) have attempted to tackle association strength through the use of self-report measures, whereby a test-taker reports strength of association on a four-point scale from weak to strong. This has left them with " ... problems which we have not yet solved, notably a tendency for some test takers to claim that most associations are strong, while others appear to be very reluctant to identify strong associations ..." (Meara, 2009, p. 80). In other words, the question of how to appropriately determine association strength is still unanswered. In the current study lexical development, in the form of word association knowledge, was

Includes bibliography (p. 340-376). Number of sources in the bibliography: 566 Thesis (Ph. D.) -- University of Cyprus, Faculty of Humanities, Department of English Studies, June 2010. The University of Cyprus Library holds the printed form of the thesis. Η παρούσα μελέτη είχε ως στόχο την ανάπτυξη ενός μοντέλου CLIL για διδασκαλία σε τάξεις του Δημοτικού (CLELD) βασισμένο σε σύνθεση ερευνητικών ευρημάτων στους τομείς της αποτελεσματικής μάθησης μαθήματος, εκμάθησης ξένης γλώσσας, και ανάπτυξης ξένου λεξιλογίου. Η εργασία διερευνά την αποτελεσματικότητα του CLELD στην εκμάθηση μαθήματος περιεχομένου και στη βελτίωση του ξένου λεξιλογίου σε τάξεις του Δημοτικού Σχολείου. Επιπλέον, διερευνάται κατά πόσον οι μαθητές οι οποίοι λαμβάνουν διδασκαλία CLIL με τις αρχές του CLELD έχουν θετικές στάσεις απέναντι στην προσέγγιση αυτή και εάν οι εκπαιδευτικοί οι οποίοι εφαρμόζουν το CLELD για σχεδιασμό μαθήματος, θεωρούν τη διδασκαλία τους πιο αποτελεσματική από το να μην χρησιμοποιούν το CLELD. Τέλος, εξετάζεται εάν το CLIL μπορεί να συμβάλει στη διαμόρφωση γλωσσικής θεωρίας. Χρησιμοποιήθηκε πειραματική έρευνα με χορήγηση προ και μετα-διαγνωστικών δοκιμίων για εξέταση των ακαδημαϊκών αποτελεσμάτων με τη χρήση του CLELD σε σύγκριση με τη διδασκαλία CLIL με CLELD χωρίς δραστηριότητες γλωσσικής ενίσχυσης και την παραδοσιακή μάθηση μέσω μητρικής γλώσσας. Τα μαθήματα CLELD με LEA περιλάμβαναν γλωσσική ενίσχυση με πολλαπλή παρέμβαση η οποία γινόταν με εστίαση στο νέο λεξιλόγιο. Ερωτηματολόγια τύπου Likert έδωσαν πληροφορίες για τις απόψεις των μαθητών. Ανάλυση λόγου έδειξε τις διαδικασίες οι οποίες οδήγησαν στην επιτυχία των μαθητών. Συνεντεύξεις από τους δασκάλους που δίδαξαν τα μαθήματα CLIL και με τις δύο προσεγγίσεις έδωσαν περισσότερες πληροφορίες. Τα δεδομένα έδειξαν ότι το μοντέλο CLELD προάγει τη μάθηση μαθήματος περιεχομένου και την εκμάθηση ξένου λεξιλογίου. Η ανάπτυξη στους δύο αυτούς τομείς φαίνεται να είναι σημαντικά καλύτερη από την περίπτωση της μάθησης με CLIL χωρίς γλωσσική ενίσχυση καθώς επίσης και από την παραδοσιακή μάθηση μέσω της μητρικής Ελληνικής γλώσσας. Οι μαθητές και οι δάσκαλοι επιβεβαίωσαν αυτό το αποτέλεσμα. Οι μαθητές είχαν πιο θετικές στάσεις απέναντι στο CLIL με CLELD με γλωσσική ενίσχυση από το CLELD χωρίς γλωσσική ενίσχυση. Οι δάσκαλοι θεωρούν τη διδασκαλία πιο αποτελεσματική όταν ακολουθούν το CLELD. Γενικά, τα αποτελέσματα εισηγούνται ότι όταν το CLIL εφαρμόζεται λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τις αρχές του CLELD, μπορεί να αναπτuxθεί και το ξένο λεξιλόγιο και η μάθηση μαθήματος περιεχομένου. Αυτά τα αποτελέσματα εισηγούνται ότι η εκμάθηση γλώσσας συμβαίνει ταυτόχρονα με την οικοδόμηση γνώσης και τη γνωστική ανάπτυξη. The current study aimed to develop a CLIL lesson delivery model for elementary school classes (CLELD) based on research findings in the area of effective subject-matter learning, L2 language learning, and L2 vocabulary development. The study investigates the effectiveness of the CLELD model in content and L2 vocabulary learning in elementary school classes. Further, it explores whether students receiving CLIL instruction with the CLELD principles have positive attitudes towards this approach, and whether the educators who apply the guidelines included in this model for lesson planning consider their teaching more effective than when not using CLELD. Finally, whether CLIL can contribute to linguistic theory is examined. A pre- post-test experimental research design was used to examine the academic effects of the CLELD model as compared to CLIL with CLELD without language enhancement activities (LEA), and traditional learning through L1. The CLELD with LEA lessons involved language enhancement through a multiple treatment approach that focused on new vocabulary. Likert–type questionnaires provided information about students’ views. Classroom interaction data shed more light on the processes leading to students’ success. Interviews from the teachers who taught the CLIL lessons using both approaches gave more information. Data showed that the CLELD model promotes subject matter learning and L2 vocabulary learning. Development in these areas appears to be significantly better than in the CLIL with CLELD without LEA case or traditional learning through L1 Greek. Students and teachers confirmed this outcome. Students exhibited more positive attitudes towards CLIL with CLELD with LEA than CLIL with CLELD without LEA. Teachers consider their teaching more effective when following CLELD with LEA. In general, findings suggest that when CLIL is implemented considering the principles of CLELD, it can develop both language and content learning. These results suggest that language learning grows along knowledge construction and cognitive development.

Traditional mnemonic methods of teaching vocabulary in the Second Language (L2) classroom are not providing the students with sufficient vocabulary knowledge to facilitate effective communication, i.e. students do not use the words they have learnt for communication as textbook presentation and drill do not ensure student use of these same structures in the student’s own spontaneous expression (Savignon, 2000). The strategies to facilitate meaning-vocabulary1 learning as part of a wider outcome to teaching elements of functional communication in a multilingual society is not clearly defined in the Revised National Curriculum Statement (DoE, 2003). This research report set in a constructivist framework, will attempt to raise awareness in language teachers of a need to recognize the importance to facilitate meaning-vocabulary in L2 in OBE and collaborative learning. The aim of this research was therefore to find an effective strategy to facilitate collaborative L2 meaning-vocabulary learning to develop functional communication. The research question in this study was: * How can facilitators more effectively guide collaborative meaning-vocabulary learning to improve functional communication? Secondary questions to this study were: * Why do L2 facilitators not spend enough time on collaborative meaning-vocabulary learning? * What is the role of the facilitator in L2 collaborative meaning-vocabulary learning through communicative teaching strategies? * How should meaning-vocabulary be taught to ensure students acquire the ability to use the L2 critically and creatively in functional communicative situations outside the classroom? I have set my methodology in a qualitative paradigm, used an action research design, made use of interviews and interpreted the interviews to clarify the research topic by means of a ‘thick description’ (Henning, et al. 2004:142). The data used in this research were not only gathered from describing and analyzing the practices of the classroom community, but it also originated in real life classroom situations and both of these are characteristics of action research (Burns, 2000). I have used different data collection methods to ensure the validity of the findings and the recommendations. The methodology used to gather the data guided me to explore qualitative content analysis, grounded theory analysis and to a lesser extent discourse analysis. I have used these three methods to condense the data to find some meaning in the form to enable me to construct a theory around facilitating meaning-vocabulary learning, i.e. construct my own interpretive text. Qualitative content analysis was the basis for grounded theory analysis, while the discourse was dissected to find alternative proof for the findings. Some of the findings included guidelines which a teacher should keep in mind when facilitating meaning-vocabulary learning: 1. Know your students. 2. Keep meaning-vocabulary learning enjoyable – use different strategies when possible, but let them ‘construct’ their own knowledge. The students must ‘do’ something when they are learning meaning-vocabulary. 3. Encourage the students to use the words during functional communication exercises and essay writing. 4. Encourage the students to engage in their L2 inside and outside the classroom as often as possible, e.g. listen to radio, watch television, engage in conversation with friends or family in the L2. 5. Focus on meaning-vocabulary in communicative language. 6. Engage in conversation with your students as often as possible, not only about a theme or topic but also about their experiences and feelings in your classroom. 7. Use pictures to explain word meanings. Let them create their own images where possible. 8. Use the new meaning-vocabulary during discussions. Mr. W.A. Janse van Rensburg