The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district

The study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for Form One students at SMK Sungai Tiang Pendang District. Systematic vocabulary instruction is one of the most important and powerful tools we have for raising achievement and learning....

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Umazah, Omar
Format:	Thesis
Language:	eng eng
Published:	2009
Subjects:	LB1603 Secondary Education High schools
Online Access:	https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/1/s88415.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/2/s88415_abstract.pdf
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

id	my-uum-etd.4282
record_format	uketd_dc
institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection	UUM ETD
language	eng eng
advisor	Yaacob, Aizan
topic	LB1603 Secondary Education High schools
spellingShingle	LB1603 Secondary Education High schools Umazah, Omar The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
description	The study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for Form One students at SMK Sungai Tiang Pendang District. Systematic vocabulary instruction is one of the most important and powerful tools we have for raising achievement and learning. So, this study focused on how the students acquired vocabulary through contextualization. Participants of the study were the Form 1 students from one of the FELDA schools in Northern Zone in Kedah. The study was conducted within two to three months. The subjects were assigned to two almost homogeneous groups, based on their scores on a general test which had been standardized and validated before. All the students came from the same linguistic background and the teacher and teaching materials were the same for the two groups. The experimental group received different treatments. In experimental class vocabulary items were used in contexts and model sentences. In the control group, the new words were presented through definitions and synonyms using the traditional methods. The treatment of the study took 10 sessions using 10 lessons. Before starting the treatment, two similar tests were prepared as the pretest and posttest. Each of them consisted of 45 multiple-choice items of vocabulary. At the first session, the pretest was administered to determine if there was any significant differences between the two groups. By utilizing one-way ANOVA technique, it was revealed that the two groups were almost homogeneous. At the end of the term, the post test was administered. Then, the statistical techniques of one-way ANOVA and t-test were utilized to analyze the collected data. Analysis of the results in the posttest revealed significant differences between control and context group. The results showed that the context enhanced vocabulary development of the learners Then, the student' essays were assessed by the experienced inter-raters. The statistical data had been analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 12.0 version. The result of the study will be the yard stick for assessing the effectiveness of the strategy in teaching vocabulary successfully and it was proven that teaching vocabulary through contextualization was an effective strategy in helping the students to learn vocabulary in the classroom contexts.
format	Thesis
qualification_name	masters
qualification_level	Master's degree
author	Umazah, Omar
author_facet	Umazah, Omar
author_sort	Umazah, Omar
title	The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
title_short	The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
title_full	The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
title_fullStr	The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
title_full_unstemmed	The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district
title_sort	effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at sekolah menengah kebangsaan sungai tiang pendang district
granting_institution	Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department	College of Arts and Sciences (CAS)
publishDate	2009
url	https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/1/s88415.pdf https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/2/s88415_abstract.pdf
_version_	1747827706248036352
spelling	my-uum-etd.42822014-12-31T09:29:41Z The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district 2009 Umazah, Omar Yaacob, Aizan College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) College of Arts and Sciences LB1603 Secondary Education. High schools The study was conducted to investigate the effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for Form One students at SMK Sungai Tiang Pendang District. Systematic vocabulary instruction is one of the most important and powerful tools we have for raising achievement and learning. So, this study focused on how the students acquired vocabulary through contextualization. Participants of the study were the Form 1 students from one of the FELDA schools in Northern Zone in Kedah. The study was conducted within two to three months. The subjects were assigned to two almost homogeneous groups, based on their scores on a general test which had been standardized and validated before. All the students came from the same linguistic background and the teacher and teaching materials were the same for the two groups. The experimental group received different treatments. In experimental class vocabulary items were used in contexts and model sentences. In the control group, the new words were presented through definitions and synonyms using the traditional methods. The treatment of the study took 10 sessions using 10 lessons. Before starting the treatment, two similar tests were prepared as the pretest and posttest. Each of them consisted of 45 multiple-choice items of vocabulary. At the first session, the pretest was administered to determine if there was any significant differences between the two groups. By utilizing one-way ANOVA technique, it was revealed that the two groups were almost homogeneous. At the end of the term, the post test was administered. Then, the statistical techniques of one-way ANOVA and t-test were utilized to analyze the collected data. Analysis of the results in the posttest revealed significant differences between control and context group. The results showed that the context enhanced vocabulary development of the learners Then, the student' essays were assessed by the experienced inter-raters. The statistical data had been analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) 12.0 version. The result of the study will be the yard stick for assessing the effectiveness of the strategy in teaching vocabulary successfully and it was proven that teaching vocabulary through contextualization was an effective strategy in helping the students to learn vocabulary in the classroom contexts. 2009 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/1/s88415.pdf text eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/4282/2/s88415_abstract.pdf text eng public http://lintas.uum.edu.my:8080/elmu/index.jsp?module=webopac-l&action=fullDisplayRetriever.jsp&szMaterialNo=0000803194 masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Akbari, 0. (2008) Teaching Vocabulary Items through Contextualization and Picture to Elementary Iranian EFL Students. Asian EFL Journal. Vol. 10. Issue 3. Article 3. Brown, H.D. (2000). Principals of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). San Francisco: Longman. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983), Discourse Analysis Cambridge University. Press. Beck, I.L., Mc Keown, M.G. & McCaslin, E.S. (1983), "Vocabulary Development: All Contexts Are Not Created Equal", Elementary School Journal 83: 177-181. Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford Press. Bensoussan, M., & Laufer, B. (1984). Lexical guessing in context in EFL reading comprehension. Journal of Research in Reading, 7, 15-32. Burt, M., Peyton, J., & Van Duzer, C. (2005). How should adult ESL reading instruction differ from ABE reading instruction? Washington, D.C. Center for Applied Linguistics (CAELA). Carter, R. (2000) Vocabulary: Applied Linguistic Perspectives. (2nd ed). London. Colin. Coady, J. (1997). L2 vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In second language vocabulary acquisition( pp. 225-237). Eds. J. Coady and T. Huckin. New York: Cambridge University Press. Colorado, C. (2007). Vocabulary development. Learning Store. Org. Corona, Cathy, Spangenberger, Sandra, & Venet, Iris.(1998). Improving student writing through a language rich environment. Action Research Project, St. Xavier University and IRI/Skylight. Diamond, L., & Gutlohn, L. (2006). Teaching vocabulary. Retrieved September 16, 2009 from Pro Quest database. Diamond, L.,& Gutlohn. L,. (2006). Vocabulary handbook. Consortium on Reading Excellence. Inc. Duquette, L.,& Painchaud, G. (1996). A comparison of vocabulary acquisition in audio and video contexts. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 54(1), 143-172. Ediger, M. (1999). Reading and vocabulary development. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26(1), 7-15. Fukkink, R.G.,& de Glopper, K. (1998). Effects of instruction in deriving word meaning from context: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 68, 450-469. Graves, M., & Watts-Taffe, S. (2002). The place of word conscious in a research-based vocabulary program. In A. Farstrup & .I. Samuels (Eds.). What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed.) (pp. 140-165). Newark, DE; International reading Association. Grabe, W., and F. Stoller. (1997). Reading and vocabulary development in a second language: A case study. In Second language vocabulary acquisition(pp. 98-122). Eds. J. Coady and T. Huckin. New York: Cambridge University Press. Gu, Y. (2003). Vocabulary learning in a second language: Person, Task, Context and Strategies. TESL-W Quarterly, 7(2). Gersten, R. & Baker, S. (2003). English-language learners with learning disabilities. In H. Swanson, K. Harris, & S. Graham (Ed.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 94-109). New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Haastrup, K. (1991). Lexical inferencing procedures or talking about words (Gunter Narr Verlag Tubingen). Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanaus, T.(1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, 80(3), 327-339. Hulstijn, J. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A Reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal, and automaticity. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). New York: Cambridge University Press. Hever, B. (1995). Estimating vocabulary size. Retrieved September 18. 2009, from http://www.wordsandtools. com/vocdemo/background.html. Hutson, B. A. (1983). Advances in reading/language research: A research annual, vol. 2 (pp. 233-248). Greenwich: JAI Press. Jenkins, J.R., Stein, M. & Wysocki, K. (1984). Learning vocabulary through reading. American Educational Research Journal, 21, 767-787. Kuhn, M.R. & Stahl, S.A. (1998). Teaching children to learn word meanings from context: A synthesis and some questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 30, 119-138. Kamil, M. L., & Hiebert E. H. (n-d.). The teaching and learning of vocabulary: Perspectives and persistent issues. In E. H. Hiebert & M. Kamil (Eds.), Teaching and learning vocabulary: Bringing scientific research to practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Retrieved August 13, 2009. Lasky, S.,& Canaday, D. (n.d.). Contextualization and correctness in instruction. University of California. Santa Cruz. Retrieved August 2, 2009. Lesaux, N. & Geva, E. (2006). Synthesis: Development of literacy in language-minority students. In August, D. & Shanahan, T. (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-language learners. Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-minority children and youth (pp. 53-74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Laufer, B. (1998). The development of passive and active vocabulary in a second language: Same or different? Applied Linguistics, 19, 255-271. Laflamme, John G. (1997). "The Effect of Multiple Exposure Vocabulary Method and the Target Reading/Writing Strategy on Test Scores." Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 40(5), 372-384. Lehr, F., Osborn, J. & Hiebert, E.(n.d.). A focus on vocabulary. Researchbased practices in early reading. Regional Educational Laboratory at Pacific Resources for Education and Learning. Retrieved October, 4, 2009, from www.prel.org/products/re ES0419.html. Longman Dictionary. (1999) Dictionary of Contemporary English (New Edition). Longman Corpus Network. McCarthy, M. J. (1984). A new look at vocabulary in EFL. Applied Linguistics, 5, 12-22. Meara, P. (2001). The importance of an early emphasis on L2 vocabulary. University of Wales. Swansea. Retrieved August, 10, 2009. Murdoch, G. (2002). Exploiting well-known short stories for language skills development. IATEFL LCS SIG Newsletter 23, 9-17. Mora, S.(2001). Teaching vocabulary to advanced students: A lexical approach. Brazil. Retrieved October 20, 2009. Nation, P.(2005). Teaching vocabulary. Asian EFL Journal. September, 7(3), 4. Oster, J. (1989). Seeing with different eyes: Another view of literature in the ESL class. TESOL Quarterly, 23(1), 85-103. Paribakht, S., and M. Wesche. (1997). Vocabulary enrichment activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Second language vocabulary acquisition, (pp. 238-254). Eds. J. Coady and T. Huckin. New York: Cambridge University Press. Plonsky, M. (2009). Analysis of variance-one way. Retrieved September 2009, from www.mplonsky@uwsp.edu. Qian, D. D. (1996). ESL vocabulary acquisition: Contextualization and decontextualization. Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 120-42. Rapaport, W.J. (2003), "What is the 'context' for contextual vocabulary acquisition?". In P.P. Slezak (ed.), Proc. 4th Int 7. Conf. Cog. Sci./7th Australasian Soc. Cog. Sci. Conf. (ICCS/ASCS-2003) (Univ. New South Wales), Vol. 2 (pp. 547-552). Rivers, W. M. (1981). Foreign language skills. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stahl, Steven A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Cambridge. MA: Brookline Books. Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In Schmitt, N. and Mc Carthy, M.(eds) Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy. Cambridge University Press. Schatz, E.K.,& Baldwin, R.S. (1986). Context clues are unreliable predictors of word meanings. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 439-53. Seo, K. (2002). Research Note: The effect of visuals on listening comprehension: A study of Japanese learners" listening strategies. International Journal of Listening, 16, 57-82. Sternberg R.J. (1987). Most vocabulary is learned from context. In M.G. McKeown & M. E. Curtis (Eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition (pp. 89-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sytsma, S. (2009). The basics of experimental design [A quick and non technical guide]. Retrieved November 2, 2009. Thirumalai, M.S. (2002). Language in India. Strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow. Vol. 2(8).

The effectiveness of teaching vocabulary items through contextualization for form 1 students at Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Sungai Tiang Pendang district

Similar Items