Developing a Vocabulary

Learning Program

Stuart Webb

Victoria University of Wellington

stuart.webb@vuw.ac.nz

Post-RELC Seminar, Bangkok, Thailand,

22 March, 2013

• In this presentation we will look at the following three questions:

1. Which words should we be targeting for

teaching?

2. What is a realistic number of words to learn in a week, a course, a year, and within an institution?

3. What should be considered when aiming to optimize vocabulary learning within institutions?

1.Which words should we be targeting for teaching?

• Criteria for selecting words for teaching

should be according to greatest value to

learners

– Frequency

– Need

• The highest frequency words have the

greatest relative value

• The following slide shows the proportion

of words at different frequency levels in

a unit of Malaysian school science text

WORD LIST TOKENS/% TYPES/% FAMILIES

one 4532/71.45 482/56.18 341

two 743/11.71 142/16.55 99

three 323/ 5.09 45/ 5.24 33

four 207/ 3.26 31/ 3.61 26

five 170/ 2.68 13/ 1.52 10

six 26/ 0.41 6/ 0.70 6

seven 9/ 0.14 4/ 0.47 4

eight 55/ 0.87 7/ 0.82 4

nine 42/ 0.66 7/ 0.82 6

ten 5/ 0.08 3/ 0.35 3

11 4/ 0.06 3/ 0.35 3

12 1/ 0.02 1/ 0.12 1

13 1/ 0.02 1/ 0.12 1

14 0/ 0.00 0/ 0.00 0

15 49/ 0.77 24/ 2.80 24

16 1/ 0.02 1/ 0.12 1

not in the lists 175/ 2.76 88/10.26 ?????

Total 6343 858 562

•Need can also play a role

•Learners may have greater motivation

to learn words that they see as most

useful

•However, communication is likely to be

negatively impacted if the high

frequency words are not mastered first

• How many words should our L2

students learn each week, in a course,

and in each year?

• Research is limited

L1 vocabulary growth

• Around 1000 word families learned per

year until about 20 (Goulden, Nation,

and Read, 1990)

• L1 vocabulary size of around 15,000-

20,000 word families

• Most L1 words are learned incidentally

L2 vocabulary growth

• L1 vocabulary growth ≠ L2 vocabulary

growth

• amount of L2 input

• opportunities to use the L2

• Cobb’s (2007) research reveals the challenges of L2

vocabulary growth

• questions Krashen’s (1989) claim that reading alone can

give L2 learners enough vocabulary to read

• L2 learners are unlikely to read enough to learn the most

frequent 3000 words

• Teachers need to maximize L2 input

• Research yet to examine the challenges for output

• the way words are

initially learned

– learning through listening

to simplified speech

– initial vocabulary size

provides scaffolding for

explicit L1 learning

• the amount of explicit and incidental

learning

– L1 incidental learning > L2

– L2 explicit teaching may be responsible for

much of L2 vocabulary learning (Laufer,

2001, 2003, 2005)

• L1 knowledge may facilitate (overlap

between L1 and L2) and inhibit L2

learning (differences between L1 and

L2)

• amount of learning will be a function of: – the amount of time spent on learning,

– the technique used for learning,

– the depth of learning

• To fully learn words you need to: – encounter these words when reading and listening to

learn how they are used

– use the words in speaking and writing – many students know a lot of words but are unable to use them

– try to improve your fluency of those words – try to use them in a more natural way. For many students this means focusing on increased speed.

Language learning goals

• count vocabulary growth in units of 1000

• 1000, 2000, 3000, 5000, 10,000 words is

rather abstract

• language learning goals provide some

context

• If you know the most frequent 1000 word

families you will understand 96.75% of the words

in a level 5 graded reader

• If you know 3000 word families, you will

understand 98.86% of the words in a graded

reader (Nation, 2006)

• If you know the most frequent 3000 word

families, you will understand 95% of the words in

television programs, movies, and conversation

• If you know 8000-9000 word families, you will

know 98% of the words in novels and

newspapers (Nation, 2006)

Language learning goals

• How many word families do second

language learners who are taking

undergraduate and doctoral degrees

know?

• Undergraduates – usually have a

minimum vocabulary size of 5000-6000

word families

• PhD students - 9000 word families

In one study, one student was able to learn

the meanings of over 600 words in four hours

using word cards. However, another student

learned 132 words in four hours (Webb,

1962).

• In another study, Cobb & Horst (2001) found

140-180 words were learned in two months

through one hour a week of concordance-

based learning

L2 vocabulary growth over short

periods of time

L2 research on vocabulary growth

• first year university students in

Indonesia knew approximately 900-

1000/2000 high-frequency words after

about 600 hours of prior English

language instruction over six years

(Quinn, 1968)

Indonesia

• after six years of formal English

language instruction, first year university

students in Indonesia knew

approximately 60% of the most frequent

1000 word families, and 37% of the

second 1000 word families (Nurweni &

Read, 1999)

• Taken together, the research indicates

that vocabulary learning in an EFL

context may often be inefficient

Taiwan

• 166 EFL learners in Taiwan

– 15-16 years old in high school at the start

– 20-21 years old in university at the end

• Three groups: A, B, C

• The Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation,

1983, 1990; Schmitt, Schmitt, &

Clapham, 2001) was administered to

participants at the start of each school

year over five year period

Results

• reveal a gradual increase in vocabulary

knowledge each year

• greatest increase on the overall VLT

scores between years was 12.91

(approximately 430 words, each point

represents knowledge of 33.3 words)

• Typical increase ranged from about 6 to

9 points (200 to 300 words per year)

• difference between Group A and the

other groups indicates that the amount

of formal instruction was a factor

• Group A had an average increase of 9.0

(300 words) on their overall scores –

high of 430 words

• the average increase was 4.68 and 4.83

(150-160 words) for Groups B and C,

respectively – low of 18 words

Mastery of levels

• 78/166 (47%) of Taiwanese university

students had mastered the 1000 word

level

• 16% had mastered the 2000 word level

• This was after 9 years of formal

instruction (two years of elementary,

three years of junior high school, three

years of high school, and one year of

university)

Taken together, the results indicate:

• greater emphasis on vocabulary

learning was necessary

• highlights a need for concrete

vocabulary learning goals within and

between courses

• maximum gains of 259, 282, and 430

words over one year suggest that a

vocabulary learning target of 400 words

per year may be achievable

• indicates that some form of vocabulary

learning plan at the institutional level is

necessary

• a lack of knowledge of the high

frequency words is likely to have a

negative impact on all aspects of

English language learning

• proportion of learning at the 3000 and

5000 levels and the limited knowledge

at the 1000 and 2000 levels indicates

inefficient learning

• Greater focus on the high frequency

words would provide more benefit to

students

• What are realistic vocabulary

learning goals for a course, a

year of study, and a program of

study within your teaching

context?

Pedagogical implications

• an institutional program for vocabulary

learning may help to optimize learning

• The following 5 steps outline key

features that should be included in a

vocabulary learning program

1. Determine the vocabulary to be

learned during the program

• A reliable measure of vocabulary

knowledge is needed at the start of

each year

• Students should

– know their test scores

– be aware of how their vocabulary

knowledge relates to language learning

goals

2. Set vocabulary goals for each year

and for the full learning period

• Institutional targets will depend on the

previous knowledge of students and

the amount of time available for

learning

• primary goal should be for students to

master the high frequency words

• sets of words to be learned according to

their frequency of occurrence and value

• first 1000-word list should be learned

before items from the second 1000-

word list

• knowledge of these items is likely to

continue to develop as they are

encountered

• helps students to attain some degree of

fluency with these words, which is

unlikely to occur if target words are less

frequent

• Goals for individual courses and years

of study should be created to allow for

the continued development of

vocabulary knowledge

• goals should:

– represent a manageable learning burden

for students

– be practical in terms of the time that

teachers can devote to the development of

vocabulary knowledge

• Providing instructors with specific word

lists for each course should:

– make learning more efficient because it

ensures that all target words are taught

– avoids the repeated teaching of the same

items between courses

3. Outline a plan that is practical, can be

easily followed by teachers and applied

to different courses

• a plan needs to be made for the

introduction and distribution of target

words

• sets of words from the target list should

be introduced at predetermined points

in the course

• plan should include

– time for review

– time for measurement of learning

• plan should account for the increased

burden of learning sets of words later in

the course

• the biggest challenge for teachers is to

ensure that there are repeated

opportunities for students to encounter

and use the words

– helps develop aspects of knowledge such

as collocation and grammatical functions

– helps to move from understanding to use

– best way to ensure repeated encounters

with high frequency words is to include

extensive reading as part of the overall

language learning program

• should also be some focus within a

vocabulary learning program on helping

learners to more effectively deal with

unknown vocabulary on their own

– vocabulary learning strategies

– best strategies are those which will help

with current and future word learning

– helps to build learner autonomy

Plan - summary

• Plan should include

– scheduled distribution of words

– repeated encounters and opportunities for

use

– time for review

– time to measure progress

4. Raise awareness of key aspects of the

plan to teachers and students

• For a plan to be effective within an

institution, it is important that all of those

involved can see its benefits

• All of those involved need to be aware

of the following key principles of a

vocabulary learning plan:

– the relative value of the target words to the

learners

– the need to develop receptive and productive

knowledge of multiple aspects of knowledge

– the need to repeatedly encounter target words in

reading and listening

– the need for repeated opportunities to use the

words in spoken and written discourse

– strategy training

– the significance of measuring progress

– the value of the vocabulary learning program in

relation to language learning goals

5. Evaluate the effectiveness of the plan each year

• evaluation might draw on the following 3 questions

– Are the target vocabulary learning goals within

and between courses achieved?

– Does the development of vocabulary knowledge

extend beyond the learning of form and meaning

and allow learners to use target vocabulary

effectively? If not, are there sufficient

opportunities for students to encounter and use

the target vocabulary within courses?

– Are teachers and students happy with the

vocabulary learning program? If not, do they

understand its key components?

Challenges to institutional plans

• students with varying vocabulary sizes

within the same class

• teachers who do not buy into the plan

• other challenges?

• How can these challenges be

overcome?

Useful References Barnard, H. (1961). A test of P.U.C. students' vocabulary in Chotanagpur. Bulletin of the Central Institute of English, 1, 90-100.

Clark, M. K. & Ishida, S. (2005). Vocabulary knowledge differences between placed and promoted EAP students. Journal of English for

Academic Purposes, 4, 225-238.

Cobb, T., & Horst, M. (2001). Reading academic English: Carrying learners across the lexical threshold. In John Flowerdew & Matthew Peacock

(Eds.) The English for Academic Purposes Curriculum (pp. 315-329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goulden, R., Nation, P., & Read, J. (1990) How large can a receptive vocabulary be? Applied Linguistics, 11, 341-363.

Karpicke, J. D., & Bauernschmidt, A. (2011). Spaced retrieval: Absolute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing. Journal of

Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1250-1257.

Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Canadian Modern

Language Review, 59(4), 565-585.

Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16, 36-55.

Milton, J. (2006). Language lite: learning French vocabulary in school. Journal of French Language Studies, 16(2), 187-205.

Nagy, W. E., Anderson, R., Schommer, M., Scott, J. A., & Stallman, A. (1989). Morphological families in the internal lexicon. Reading Research

Quarterly, 24(3), 263-282.

Nation, I. S. P. (2008). Teaching vocabulary: Strategies and techniques. Boston, MA: Heinle.

Nation, I. S. P. (2007). The four strands. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 1-12.

Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? The

Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59–82.

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

Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. New York: Heinle and Heinle.

Nation, I. S. P. (1983). Testing and teaching vocabulary. Guidelines, 5(1), 12-25.

Nation, P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9-13.

Nation, I.S.P., & Heatley, A. (2002). Range: A program for the analysis of vocabulary in texts [software]. Downloadable from

http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/staff/paul-nation/nation.aspx

Nation, I.S.P., & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and Analyzing Vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle.

Nurweni, A., & Read, J. (1999). The English vocabulary knowledge of Indonesian university

students. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 161-175.

Quinn, G. (1968). The English vocabulary of some Indonesian university entrants. English

Department Monograph IKIP Kristen Satya Watjana: Salatiga.

Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two

new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88.

Webb, S. (2009). The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on

vocabulary knowledge. RELC Journal, 40: 3, 360-376.

Webb, S. (2007). The effects of synonymy on vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign

Language, 19, 120-136.

Webb, S. & Nation, I.S.P. (2008). Evaluating the vocabulary load of written text. TESOLANZ

Journal, 16, 1-10.

Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2009a). The vocabulary demands of television programs.

Language Learning, 59, 335–366.

Webb, S., & Rodgers, M. P. H. (2009b). The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics,

30, 407–427.

Webb, W. B. (1962). The effects of prolonged learning on learning. Journal of Verbal

Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1, 173-182.

West, M. (1953). A General Service List of English Words. London: Longman, Green & Co.