Aprendizaje del vocabulario y Retención: Marco de Carga Cognitiva de Prueba
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi33.26660Palabras clave:
aprendizaje de vocabulario, aprendizaje EFL, hipótesis de carga de implicación, marco de carga cognitiva, retención de vocabularioResumen
La literatura ha tenido en cuenta un gran número de estudios que investigaronlos méritos y la eficacia de los métodos disponibles de enseñanza y aprendizaje de vocabulario en diferentes contextos EFL / ESL entre los cuales podemos incluir la hipótesis de carga de participación. A pesar de su uso general, algunas críticas han sido niveladas contra este modelo. Se ha propuesto recientemente un nuevo marco, marcado de carga normalmente cognitivo (CLF). Aunque CLF ha sido validado por algunos expertos en TESL, aún no se ha puesto en la prueba de acidez. El presente estudio de diseño cuasi-experimental pretest-post-test se llevó a cabo para determinar si las actividades con un alto grado de carga cognitiva, según lo predicado por el marco CLF son más efectivas para el aprendizaje y la retención de vocabulario. Para este fin, una muestra de 60 estudiantes de EFL Iraníes fue asignada a tres grupos experimentales y fue expuesta a las tareas de aprendizaje de vocabulario con diferentes índices de carga cognitiva durante 8 semanas. Los resultados revelaron que las tareas de vocabulario con la carga cognitiva más alta fueron las más efectivas.
Descargas
Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.
Citas
Allan, D. (2004). Oxford placement test 2. Oxford University Press.
Cho, Y. A., & Ma, J. H. (2013). The effects of task-induced involvement and word exposure frequency on L2 college students’ vocabulary acquisition. Studies in English Language & Literature, 38(1), 339-367.
Craik, F. M. I. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Craik, F. M. I. & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10(4), 268-294.
Ellis, R. & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and modified output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 285–301.
Haratmeh, M. S. (2012). Involvement load and task type in task effectiveness: two aspects of vocabulary knowledge. International Journal of Academic Research, 4(4), 86-95.
Huang, S., Eslami, Z.R. & Willson, V. L. (2012). The effects of task involvement load on L2 incidental vocabulary learning: a meta-analytic study. Modern Language Journal 96(4), 544-557.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In P. J. Arnaud & H. B’joint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics, (113-125). Macmillan.
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, 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, 327-339.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.
Keating, G. D. (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.
Kim, Y. (2011). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2. Language Learning, 61(1), 100-140.
Krashen, S. (2008). Language education: Past, present and future. RELC Journal, 39, 178–87.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307–322.
Laufer, B., & Rozovski-roitblat,B. (2011). Incidental vocabulary acquisition: The effects of task type, word occurrence and their combination. Language Teaching Research, 15(4), 391-411.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Mármol, G. A., & Sánchez-Lafuente, Á. A. (2013). The Involvement Load Hypothesis: Its effect on vocabulary learning in primary education. Revista Española De Lingüística Aplicada, 26, 11-24.
Martínez-Fernández, A. (2008). Revisiting the involvement load hypothesis: Awareness, type of task and type of item. In Selected proceedings of the 2007 second language research forum (pp. 210-228). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Nassaji, H., & Hu, H. C. M. (2012). The relationship between task-induced involvement load and learning new words from context. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50(1), 69-86.
Nation, P. & Newton, J. (1997). Teaching vocabulary. In J. Coady and T. Huckin (eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P. & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge.
Nation, P. & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Heinle Cengage Learning.
Peters, E. (2012). The differential effects of two vocabulary instruction methods on EFL word learning: a study into task effectiveness. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50(3), 213-238.
Peters, E., Hulstijn, J.H., Sercu, L., & Lutjeharms, M. (2009). Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning, 59, 113–51.
Pellicer-Sánchez, A. & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do Things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22, 31–55.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Sarani, A., Negari, G. M., & Ghaviniat, M. (2013). The role of task type in L2 vocabulary acquisition: a case of Involvement Load Hypothesis. Language and Culture, 35(4), 377-386.
Saslow, J.M. & Ascher, A. (2011). Top notch. Pearson Education ESL.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (1997). Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge University Press.
Stahl, S. A., & Nagy, W. E. (2006). Teaching word meanings. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Teng, F. (2015). Involvement load in translation tasks and EFL vocabulary learning. The New English Teacher, 9(1), 83-101.
Xudong, W. U. (2010). Can learning tasks affect incidental vocabulary acquisition? involvement load hypothesis revisited. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 42 (2), 109-116.
Yaqubi, B., Rayati, R. A., & Allemzade, N. (2012). The involvement load hypothesis and vocabulary learning: The effect of task types and involvement index on L2 vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 29(1), 145-163.
Zarifi, A. (2013). Establishing and evaluating phrasal verb use in a Malaysian ESL secondary school textbook (Doctoral dissertation). Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang.
Zarifi, A., Jayakaran, M., & O’Dowd, E. (2020). Cognitive Load Framework: an alternative to the Involvement Load Hypothesis. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (in Press).
Zou, D. (2012). A study of the components of the involvement load hypothesis: How involvement load should be allocated to” Search” and” Evaluation” (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Cho, Y. A., & Ma, J. H. (2013). The effects of task-induced involvement and word exposure frequency on L2 college students’ vocabulary acquisition. Studies in English Language & Literature, 38(1), 339-367.
Craik, F. M. I. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Craik, F. M. I. & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 10(4), 268-294.
Ellis, R. & He, X. (1999). The roles of modified input and modified output in the incidental acquisition of word meanings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 285–301.
Haratmeh, M. S. (2012). Involvement load and task type in task effectiveness: two aspects of vocabulary knowledge. International Journal of Academic Research, 4(4), 86-95.
Huang, S., Eslami, Z.R. & Willson, V. L. (2012). The effects of task involvement load on L2 incidental vocabulary learning: a meta-analytic study. Modern Language Journal 96(4), 544-557.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In P. J. Arnaud & H. B’joint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics, (113-125). Macmillan.
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, 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, 327-339.
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.
Keating, G. D. (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.
Kim, Y. (2011). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2. Language Learning, 61(1), 100-140.
Krashen, S. (2008). Language education: Past, present and future. RELC Journal, 39, 178–87.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16, 307–322.
Laufer, B., & Rozovski-roitblat,B. (2011). Incidental vocabulary acquisition: The effects of task type, word occurrence and their combination. Language Teaching Research, 15(4), 391-411.
Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and the way forward. Hove: Language Teaching Publications.
Mármol, G. A., & Sánchez-Lafuente, Á. A. (2013). The Involvement Load Hypothesis: Its effect on vocabulary learning in primary education. Revista Española De Lingüística Aplicada, 26, 11-24.
Martínez-Fernández, A. (2008). Revisiting the involvement load hypothesis: Awareness, type of task and type of item. In Selected proceedings of the 2007 second language research forum (pp. 210-228). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
Nassaji, H., & Hu, H. C. M. (2012). The relationship between task-induced involvement load and learning new words from context. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50(1), 69-86.
Nation, P. & Newton, J. (1997). Teaching vocabulary. In J. Coady and T. Huckin (eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P. & Macalister, J. (2010). Language curriculum design. New York: Routledge.
Nation, P. & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Heinle Cengage Learning.
Peters, E. (2012). The differential effects of two vocabulary instruction methods on EFL word learning: a study into task effectiveness. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50(3), 213-238.
Peters, E., Hulstijn, J.H., Sercu, L., & Lutjeharms, M. (2009). Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning, 59, 113–51.
Pellicer-Sánchez, A. & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do Things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22, 31–55.
Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Sarani, A., Negari, G. M., & Ghaviniat, M. (2013). The role of task type in L2 vocabulary acquisition: a case of Involvement Load Hypothesis. Language and Culture, 35(4), 377-386.
Saslow, J.M. & Ascher, A. (2011). Top notch. Pearson Education ESL.
Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (1997). Vocabulary: description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge University Press.
Stahl, S. A., & Nagy, W. E. (2006). Teaching word meanings. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Teng, F. (2015). Involvement load in translation tasks and EFL vocabulary learning. The New English Teacher, 9(1), 83-101.
Xudong, W. U. (2010). Can learning tasks affect incidental vocabulary acquisition? involvement load hypothesis revisited. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 42 (2), 109-116.
Yaqubi, B., Rayati, R. A., & Allemzade, N. (2012). The involvement load hypothesis and vocabulary learning: The effect of task types and involvement index on L2 vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 29(1), 145-163.
Zarifi, A. (2013). Establishing and evaluating phrasal verb use in a Malaysian ESL secondary school textbook (Doctoral dissertation). Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang.
Zarifi, A., Jayakaran, M., & O’Dowd, E. (2020). Cognitive Load Framework: an alternative to the Involvement Load Hypothesis. Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (in Press).
Zou, D. (2012). A study of the components of the involvement load hypothesis: How involvement load should be allocated to” Search” and” Evaluation” (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Descargas
Publicado
31-01-2020
Cómo citar
Zarifi, A. ., & Azizinezhad, Z. (2020). Aprendizaje del vocabulario y Retención: Marco de Carga Cognitiva de Prueba. Porta Linguarum Revista Interuniversitaria De Didáctica De Las Lenguas Extranjeras, (33), 265–278. https://doi.org/10.30827/portalin.vi33.26660
Número
Sección
Artículos
Licencia
Los autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:
- Los autores conservan los derechos de autor y garantizan a la revista el derecho de ser la primera publicación del trabajo al igual que licenciado bajo una Creative Commons Attribution License que permite a otros compartir el trabajo con un reconocimiento de la autoría del trabajo y la publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Los autores pueden establecer por separado acuerdos adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión de la obra publicada en la revista (por ejemplo, situarlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro), con un reconocimiento de su publicación inicial en esta revista.
- Se permite y se anima a los autores a difundir sus trabajos electrónicamente (por ejemplo, en repositorios institucionales o en su propio sitio web) antes y durante el proceso de envío, ya que puede dar lugar a intercambios productivos, así como a una citación más temprana y mayor de los trabajos publicados (Véase The Effect of Open Access) (en inglés).
