A Study On Glossing Modes In The Incidental Vocabulary Learning For Less Proficient English Learners

This study is intended to explore an approach to solve the problems of incidental vocabulary learning during L2extensive reading and at same time emphasize the importance of instructional intervention to the development of vocabulary knowledge for L2learners. Previous studies in this field show that the incidental learning for L2is problematic. In addition, the studies on vocabulary acquisition for L2learners also substantiate this argument. Considering this, new pedagogical approaches are developed to fix these problems in L2incidental learning.Input enhancement is one of these instructive intervening approaches. Glossing, as one of Input Enhancement tools, is singled out as the independent variable of this experiment. The former studies in this domain seldom yield consensus results and many fields have been left unexplored. Motivated by this state of affairs, and based on the cognitive theories on Working Memory and the Depth of Processing Hypothesis, this study is to explore the differential effect of MC glossing (Multiple Choice glossing) and S glossing (Single glossing) on reading comprehension and subsequently on the vocabulary acquisition by Chinese non-English major college freshmen at B level. In order to solve this problem, three research questions are advanced here:Question1:Given adequate and equal time limits for experimental tasks, does the S glossing team perform better in reading comprehension than the MC team?Question2:Under the same condition with question1, does the MC glossing team pick up more new words incidentally than the S glossing team?Question3:Given equal intervals between lexical encounter and tests, does the MC glossing team retain vocabulary knowledge more effectively both in quantity and quality than the S glossing team?The whole study involves a questionnaire survey and an experiment. The subjects for this experiment are151non-English college students of low proficiency in three classes. These experimentees are equally divided into two teams (S team and MC team) according to the glossing mode they will use in the experiment. After a rigorous filtering process,120subjects are qualified for the questionnaire survey and63subjects for the experiment.31students of63subjects are assigned to the S team and the rest32students to the MC team. The experiment lasts a week and, meantime, the following experimental tasks are to be done by the subjects:1) to read an English fable of251words from one of their text books the subjects has not read yet;2) to translate the reading by rote after the reading paper is handed in;3) to take two vocabulary tests, one immediately after the translation task and the other two days later;4) and to fill a questionnaire paper about their English vocabulary learning belief, motivation, strategy and background information sometime during the experimental week. The tested lexical items are English pseudo-words which are orthographically English but not real English words and they are used to substitute the real words in the original text to ensure an utter strangeness to the subjects. There are24pseudo-words in the short reading and among them20will be selected and equally divided into two teams for the two vocabulary tests. Each vocabulary test comprises ten pseudo-words in the experimental reading and five pseudo-words coined as confounding words and used to test the credit of the subjects during the process of screening qualified answer sheets for later statistic analysis. The vocabulary test is designed on the basis of the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS). After all these tasks are done, the answer sheets are sorted and selected for a statistic analysis by using a popular computer program, SPSS. The specific statistic test used for this experiment is called independent-samples t-tests.what can be concluded from analyzing the independent-samples t-tests results is that, for the Chinese less proficient non-English major freshmen,1) students using S glossing are much better that the students using MC glossing in comprehending English texts;2) which team is better at vocabulary learning is inconclusive;3) though some less substantial evidence partially confirms that the MC team is credited with some lexical retention advantage over the S team.