Research Bibliography - Vocabulary
Patrick Cole
04/28/14
Asiyaban, A.R., & Bagheri, M.S. (2012). Does translation contribute to learners’ free active vocabulary? Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 111-121.
This article sought to answer the question of whether direct translation of new vocabulary words from students’ L2 to L1 increased their “free active” vocabulary. “Free active,” or “uncontrolled active” vocabulary, refers to a learner’s lexicon which is readily accessible in speech and written communication. It differs from the learner’s “passive” vocabulary, which is usually much larger and used primarily in reading and listening. The article first outlined some of the controversies regarding using the L1 in the classroom and opined that a complete ban of the L1 leads to more inefficient learning. Citing some recent literature, the authors of the paper asserted that translation can play a valuable role in teaching, particularly EFL contexts, as long as it used judiciously. Through a study of 88
Iranian intermediate students, the two researchers determined whether students’ “free active” vocabulary was increased using direct translation and whether the results differed along gender lines.
Two experimental groups consisting of 22 students each (one group was female and the other male) were taught 20 difficult nouns in English using the students’ L1. The two control groups, which also contained 22 students each, were taught the same 20 nouns using English definitions. Afterwards, a strictly timed test was administered to measure whether the words had been incorporated into the students’ “uncontrolled active” vocabulary. The researchers concluded that direct translation was more effective at this task, but that gender played no significant role. This article was eye-opening regarding my future teaching because I always assumed use of the L1 should be minimized when teaching English.
While I believe that the classroom is best served when conducted mostly in English, I now feel that some direct translation can be utilized for the students’ benefit.
Folse, K.S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly,
40(2), 273-293.

Patrick Cole
The article from Folse opened with a discussion on the increasing consensus among the TESOL
04/28/14 community regarding the importance of vocabulary in communicative competence. Further, the article established that vocabulary is arguably the biggest barrier learners face in their study of English. While vocabulary research is assuming center stage in pedagogical research, debate exists regarding which writing activities are most effective in expanding vocabulary retention. Folse conducted a sophisticated study of 154 ESL students of varying levels in intensive English programs in the United States to determine the most effective writing activity for vocabulary using three different exercises. In addition, the study tested whether the length of time it took to complete the activities played a significant role in vocabulary retention. Folse continually stated throughout the article that many experts and teachers alike naturally assume that the most salient tool for vocabulary study was learners creating their own sentences. Surprisingly, the study did not bear this out. The second activity, which had learners complete three fill-in-the-blank exercises using a group of words, proved more effective than the other two activities. Further, the study confirmed that time spent completing an activity does not play a significant role in vocabulary retention. The main conclusion from the article concerned the importance of “multiple retrievals,” or interacting with a particular word multiple times. This has a profound effect on me personally as I routinely have students creating their own sentences. After reading this article, I have realized that it would be a far more efficient use of time if my exercises embraced the concept of
“multiple retrievals”.
Gao, X., & Ma, Q. (2011). Vocabulary learning and teaching beliefs of pre-service and in-service
teachers in Hong Kong and mainland China. Language Awareness, 20(4), 327-342.
This paper sought to analyze the pre-conceived notions of teachers and learners with respect to the teaching methodology of English vocabulary. The paper states that while extensive research has been conducted on vocabulary acquisition, retention, and use, scant research has been conducted on the beliefs of instructors themselves of what exactly constitutes effective vocabulary teaching. Taking a contextualized approach, this paper hypothesized that the individual beliefs relating to this topic are

Patrick Cole
04/28/14 dynamic and dependent upon one’s environment and previous experiences rather than fixed and unchanging. To support these claims, a study was conducted consisting of pre-service and in-service teachers from Hong Kong and mainland China respectively. Thus, the researchers wondered if location and/or prior teaching experience played a role in influencing teacher beliefs on vocabulary teaching.
The study reached several conclusions. Location played a significant role in influencing beliefs, with mainland China placing more emphasis on contextualized vocabulary teaching and Hong Kong valuing
list learning, fixed meaning, and repetition more. Further, the study determined that prior experience played a negligible role in shaping the way teachers taught vocabulary. The researchers theorized that the way an individual teaches vocabulary depends largely on previous life experiences. The mainland
Chinese found rote memorization less effective due to this being the dominant method in their own study and Hong Kong teachers claimed the dictation method from their childhood was also ineffective.
The mainland Chinese teachers placed more importance on “strategies,” while Hong Kong classrooms encouraged oral production. For my own teaching, the paper leads to a crucial learning point. It is important to foster student reflection on their own vocabulary learning styles so that they are making the best use of their time. Further, teachers need to utilize a variety of vocabulary teaching techniques rather than simply focusing on “dictation” or “memorization”.
Hatami, S. & Tavakoli, M. (2012). The role of depth versus breadth of vocabulary knowledge in success and ease in L2 lexical inferencing. TESL Canada Journal, 30(1), 1-19.
Hatami and Tavakoli open their article with an acknowledgement of the importance of vocabulary.
Additionally, the authors claim that readers will often use “lexical inferencing,” or guessing meaning from context, as a strategy in lieu of complete knowledge of a passage’s vocabulary. The researchers tested to determine if breadth (size) or depth (knowing many meanings of one word) led to more successful “lexical inferencing”. As an aside, they also tested whether “perceived ease” of using this strategy was correlated with either depth or breadth. Using sophisticated testing mechanisms, the breadth and depth of vocabulary each participant in the study was determined, and then a reading

Patrick Cole
04/28/14 passage with ten unknown words was distributed. The students were asked to use the strategy of guessing meaning from context to determine the definitions of the bolded, unknown lexical items. The study found that both breadth and depth were correlated positively with successful “lexical inferencing,” but that breadth led to stronger results than did depth. Further, “perceived ease” did not result in significant gains throughout the study. The seeming importance of breadth surprised the researchers, who assumed that depth of vocabulary would play a far larger role in the successful reading strategies of students. As a teacher, this research indicates the importance of general vocabulary knowledge in terms of number of words, rather than the need to analyze specific words in-depth. It is imperative that my students be exposed to a wide variety of words in order to increase their breadth of vocabulary, which will ultimately make them more effective readers of complex passages.
Lu, M. (2013). Effects of four vocabulary exercises on facilitating learning vocabulary meaning, form, and use. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 167-176.
This shorter article opened by affirming the value for learners when they do a written task such as a fillin-the-blank vocabulary exercise while reading. The article then sought to test the effectiveness of four written vocabulary tasks: single fill-in-the-blank, triple fill-in-the-blank, summary with blanks, and writing a summary. Thus, some of Lu’s methodology paralleled that of Folse’s (2006), whose research concluded that triple fill-in-the-blank exercises are far more effective and efficient than others.
However, while Lu’s initial findings coincided with those of Folse’s (2006), she diverged somewhat with her own research by testing the vocabulary recall of the students two weeks after initial exercises had occurred. This was done as an attempt to measure the longevity of learner vocabulary retention. Lu’s study concluded that none of the four exercises was significantly more effective than their counterparts in the delayed test scores. She hypothesized that this surprising result is likely due to the lack of
“repeated rehearsals,” or “multiple retrievals” as referred to by Folse (2006). For my own teaching, this research again confirms the value in exposing students to vocabulary words and exercises multiple times

Patrick Cole
04/28/14 and in multiple contexts. Even if activities are deemed productive initially with students demonstrating recall of particular vocabulary words, the teacher cannot assume that the work is done and the meanings will be remembered. Repeated exposure is the key for the words to truly “stick” to the students’ brains and become part of their “free active” repertoire.