تاثیر ترکیب مهارتهای زبان بر اشتغال ذهنی حاصل از فعالیت زبانی

Subject Areas : آموزش زبان انگلیسی

عاطفه امینی ¹ (Department of English, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran)
پرویز مفتون ² (دانشگاه علوم تحقیقات تهران دانشکده زبان)

Received: 2017-12-10 Accepted : 2017-12-10 Published : 2017-11-22

Keywords: یادگیری لغت, اشتغال ذهنی, اینفورمیشن گپ, جیگ ساو,

Abstract :

این نظریه توسط لافر وهالستاین در سال 2001 مطرح شد که اشتغال ذهنی را مبتنی بر میزان سه مولفه (ضرورت و جستجو و ارزیابی ) واژگان در طی یک فعالیت زبانی میداند. از نظر آنها هر چه درجه این سه مولفه یا میزان اشتغال ذهنی بالاتر باشد میزان به خاطر سپردن و یادگیری لغات بیشتر خواهد بود. بدین منظور 64 زبان آموز ایرانی پس از عملکردشان در آزمون تعیین سطح پت برای این تحقیق انتخاب شدند. سپس به دو گروه جیگ ساو(گروه A) و اینفورمیشن گپ (گروه B) تقسیم شدند و بطور تصادفی در آنها برگزیده شدند. در واقع تحقیق حاضر به دنبال پژوهش در این مساله است که کدامیک از فعالیت های اشتغال ذهنی, اینفورمیشن گپ یا جیگ ساو تاثیر بیشتری در یادگیری(سپردن در حافظه کوتاه مدت) و به خاطر سپردن واژگان ( ذخیره در حافظه بلند مدت) دارد.این در حالی است که درجه اشتغال ذهنی جیگ ساو بالاتر از اینفورمیشن گپ است. محقق در طول 10 جلسه صد لغت را آموزش داد و نهایتا با یک پس-آزمون فوری , بلافاصله پس از اتمام تسک و یک پس-آزمون بعد از یک ماه میزان موفقیت گروهها بررسی کرد. نتایج حاصل این تحقیق نشان داد که گروه A یعنی جیگ ساوکه اشتغال ذهنی بیشتری داشته اند در پس آزمونهای فوری موفقتر عمل کردند .اما در پس آزمونی که بعد از یک ماه برگزار شد هر دو گروه نتایج نزدیکی به هم داشته اند. در واقع در این تحقیق نظریه لافر وهالستاین بطور نسبی تایید شد.

References:

References

Baleghizadeh, S., &Abbasi, M. (2013). The effect of four different types of involvement indices on vocabulary learning and retention of EFL learners. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills,5(2), 1-26.

Barcroft, J. (2009). Effects of synonym generation on incidental and intentional L2 vocabulary learning during reading. TESOL Quarterly, 43, 79-103.

Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework of memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-683.

Eckerth, J., &Tavakoli, P. (2012). The effects of word exposure frequency and elaboration of word processing on incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language Teaching Research, 16, 227-252.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: OUP.

Ellis, R., & He, X. (1999). The role of modified input and output in the incidental acquisition of word meaning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 285-301.

Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 273-293.

Fuente, M. J. (2002). Negotiation and oral acquisition of L2 vocabulary: The roles of input and output in the receptive and productive acquisition of words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 81–112.

Hedeen, T. (2003). The reverse jigsaw: A process of cooperative learning and discussion. Teaching Sociology, 325-332.

Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second-language vocabulary learning: A

reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction. Cambridge: CUP, 86-258.

Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. J. Doughty &M. H. Long (Eds.). The hand book of second language research, 349-381 Oxford: Blackwell.

Hulstijn, J. H., &Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.

Jing, L., & Jianbin, H. (2009). An empirical study of the involvement load hypothesis in incidental vocabulary acquisition in EFL listening. Polyglossia, 16, 1-11.

Joe, A. (1995). Text-based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Second Language Research, 11, 149-158.

Keating, G. H. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The Involvement Load Hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 365-386.

Kim, Y. (2008). The role of task induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58(2), 285-325.

Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on form in second language vocabulary learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 5, 223-250.

Laufer, B., &Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.

Maftoon, p. & Haratmeh, M. S. (2012). Effect of Input and Output-oriented Tasks with Different Involvement Loads on Receptive Vocabulary knowledge of Iranian EFL Learners. Iranian Journal of Research in English Language Teaching, 1 (1), 28-52.

Martinez-Fernandez, A. (2008). Revisiting the involvement load hypothesis: Awareness, type of task and type of item. Selected Proceedings of the 2007 Second Language Research Forum, 210-228.

Mengduo, Q., &Xiaoling, J. (2010). Jigsaw strategy as a cooperative learning technique: Focusing on the language learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 113-125.

Nagy, W, E., Hermn, P., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.

Nasrollahy Shahry, M. N. (2010). The effect of receptive and productive vocabulary learning through reading and writing sentences on vocabulary acquisition. (Unpublished master's thesis). Shahid BeheshtiUniversity, Tehran, Iran.

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: CUP.

Newton, J. (1995). Task-based interaction and incidental vocabulary learning: A case study. Second Language Research 11(1), 159-177.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: CUP

Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Coady,J., & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rational for pedagogy (pp. 174-200). Cambridge: CUP.

Pica, T., Sook Kang, H., &Sauro, Sh. (2006). Information gap tasks:  Their multiple roles and contributions to interaction research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(2), 301-338.

Preliminary English Test (2006). Cambridge: University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching, Cambridge: CUP.

Richek, M. A. (2011). The world of words: Vocabulary for college students,(8^th ed.). Illinois: Illinois University Press.

Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign-language skills. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.

Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12 (3), 329-363.

Shehadeh, A. (2005). Task-based language learning and teaching: Theories and applications. Inc. Edwards & J. Willis (Eds.). Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching (pp. 13-30). Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing of word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27,33-52. 

Yaqubi, B., Rayati, R. A., & Gorgi, A. (2010). The involvement load hypothesis and vocabulary learning: The effect of task types and involvement index on L2 vocabulary acquisition. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 1(1), 146-163.