The Conceptualization of Balanced and Multifaceted Vocabulary Learning Systems (M.A.)

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308416438

Thesis · January 2015 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22161.84327/1

CITATIONS READS 0 74

1 author:

Louis Lafleur Ritsumeikan University, Osaka Ibaraki Campus, Japan

3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Indirect Spaced Repetition (ISRS) Testing View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Louis Lafleur on 22 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Recommended Citation:

Lafleur, Louis. (2015). The Conceptualization of Balanced and Multifaceted Vocabulary Learning Systems

(M.A.). Available on researchgate.net. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22161.84327/1

The Conceptualization of Balanced and Multifaceted Vocabulary Learning Systems

A Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of Education Okayama University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Education

Louis Lafleur 22425052 January, 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LISTS, FIGURES & TABLES iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv

ABSTRACT v

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Organization of the Study 4

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Incidental Vocabulary Learning vs. Intentional Vocabulary Learning 5

2.2 Early Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Wordlists, Word Cards without strategies) 8

2.3 Contributions to Memory: from Ancient Greece to Early Cognitive Psychology 10

2.4 Recent Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Word Cards with strategies and SRS) 13

2.5 Recent Implications of Cognitive Psychology for Vocabulary Learning 15

2.6 Balanced Approaches Towards Vocabulary Teaching 16

2.6.1 Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge 17

2.6.2 The Four-strands of Vocabulary Teaching 18

2.7 Summary 19

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Selecting Effective Vocabulary Content for JHS students in Japan 22

3.2 Reasons for Conceptualizing Indirect Spaced Repetition Software (ISRS) 28

3.3 Questions/Tasks for ISRS Implementation 29

3.4 Interval Efficiency and Spacing in ISRS 40

3.5 Flashcard Priority/Management and Ordering 43 ii

3.6 Research Context 51

3.7 Research Questions 51

3.8 Participants 52

3.9 Materials 52

3.10 Analysis of the Data 58

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Research Question 1: Do the participants find the software useful for JHS students? 59

Research Question 2: Do the participants find the software easy to use for JHS students? 63

Research Question 3: Do the participants find the software enjoyable for JHS students? 65

Research Question 4: Do the participants think JHS teachers would like to integrate the

software in their classes or in parallel to their class? 67

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

5.1 Discussion 69

5.2 Limitations of the Study 70

5.3 Recommendations 70

5.4 Final Remarks 71

APPENDIX A. New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 72

APPENDIX B. New Horizon words in the American Corpus Word 1346-2000 Frequencies 77

APPENDIX C. New Horizon words in the American Corpus Word 2001-5000 Frequencies 78

APPENDIX D. New Horizon words outside of 5000 American Corpus Word Frequencies 80

APPENDIX E. 615 words from the first 1345 ACWF not included in New Horizon 82

APPENDIX F. Pre-Project Questionnaire 86

APPENDIX G. Post-Project Questionnaire 87

BIBLIOGRAPHY 89 iii

LISTS, FIGURES & TABLES

FIGURE 2.1 Ebbinghaus’ Forgetting Curve 12

TABLE 2.1 What is involved in “word knowledge” (Nation, 2001: 27) 17

TABLE 2.2 Four strands of vocabulary teaching (Nation, 2001: 390) 18

FIGURE 3.1 Vocabulary correspondence between the NH textbooks and ACWF list 24

FIGURE 3.2 Three elements in language acquisition 28

TABLE 3.1 Example of questions/tasks for ISRS implementation 29

FIGURE 3.3 CVT mechanics 40

FIGURE 3.4 The Lafleur System, an Indirect Spaced Repetition System (ISRS) 42

LIST 3.1 Example of alphabetical lexical word ordering of items 33 to 54 43

LIST 3.2 Example of lexical word ordering by page number of items 1 to 21 44

TABLE 3.2 Pre-project survey responses 54

TABLE 4.1 Post-project survey responses in respect to usefulness (General) 59

TABLE 4.2 Post-project survey responses in respect to usefulness (Specifics) 62

TABLE 4.3 Paired samples statistics and test (Usefulness) 62

TABLE 4.4 Post-project survey responses in respect to usability 63

TABLE 4.5 Paired samples statistics and test (Usability) 64

TABLE 4.6 Post-project survey responses (Enjoyment) 65

TABLE 4.7 Paired samples statistics and test (Enjoyment) 66

TABLE 4.8 Post-project survey responses in respect to classroom integration 67

*** Because of their large number, screenshots from the author’s software are not listed here.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the people who have supported me. First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis advisor, Professor Shigenobu Takatsuka for his guidance and comments on my thesis. Without his assistance, the realization of this paper would not have taken place. I would also like to thank my other professors in the department of English Language Education of the Graduate School of Education of Okayama university: Shintetsu Fukunaga, whose hospitality and kindness reminded me to put heart into my work, Yukito Seta, who expanded my knowledge of linguistics beyond expectations, Kyoko Wakimoto, whose passion and wit have always inspired me to dig deeper into my ideas, Takashi Koyama, who taught me diligently and widened my knowledge of second language pedagogy, Kazuya Okada, whose charismatic presence, wit and encouragement have inspired me to pursue my unconventional ideas, Scott Gardner for his helpful comments in regards to my thesis and also for his sense of humor which put everything in a positive perspective. Moreover, I am indebted to all the participants in my study who took the time out of their busy schedules to contribute to my research. Sharing this whole experience with wonderful classmates was truly a blessing. Also, I would like to thank my friends at Lumina-Fx for their help in the area of software programming. Finally, I would like to thank my wife and daughters whose support made this all possible.

Louis Lafleur January 2015

ABSTRACT

The main goal of this thesis is to conceptualize, design, develop and test a prototype of Spaced Repetition Software (SRS) titled “Indirect Spaced Repetition Software” (ISRS) customized specifically to help Japanese Junior high school (JHS) students acquire the content of their English textbook more effectively. As this software is still in its developmental stages, this study will enroll volunteer university students majoring either in Education or Psychology for a period of two weeks in order to assess enjoyment, usefulness and usability of the prototype software in regards to future classroom integration.

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

To achieve success in second language learning, much like everything in life, one must engage oneself actively in the process and more importantly invest a lot of time. I know this firsthand as English is not my mother tongue. Becoming proficient in my second language broadened my horizons, and also gave me a great sense of joy and personal fulfillment. Now, for the better half of the last decade helping students in Japan of all ages (because it’s never too late or too early) achieve the same has become my full time vocation. It was after a couple of months working as an Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Japanese Junior High Schools (JHS) that I first noticed students’ difficulty not in learning per say but reaching similar fluency to what I, as a French Canadian, had achieved at their age. At first, it came to me as a surprise because I had estimated my students’ motivation, and innate language ability to be as good as mine, if not superior. It was at this time that my interest to study and research English Education and more specifically Second Language Acquisition (SLA) started. At first, I attributed this to the fact that speaking an L1 (native language) closely related to English was in itself an advantage; it is a known fact that English shares a common alphabet with French, has a substantial number of loanwords in common (Greek and Latin) and has loanwords from French itself. However, it must also be noted that non-linguistically-European countries have also produced large numbers of fluent English language speakers without having an L1 closely related to English (e.g., India, amongst others). I soon came to understand that English in Japan was taught in a foreign language (EFL) context compared to Quebec, Canada or India where it is taught in a second language (ESL) one. To put things in perspective, Quebec hosts a substantial population of native speakers and more than half of the channels on TV are in English, if not more nowadays with the coming of digital cable and satellite.

It’s fair to assume that for a good number of Quebecers, most L2 exposure takes place outside of the classroom. In the end, it is easily arguable that the most compelling difference remains how much more time students are exposed to English overall in ESL contexts than those in EFL ones. In an effort to close this gap, the Japanese ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) has implemented a number of reforms in recent years. In 2003, MEXT started requiring that English language classes be conducted in English and not Japanese to increase in class L2 exposure (MEXT, 2003). This was reaffirmed in 2009, when MEXT stated in the high school guidelines, “classes, in principle, should be conducted in English in order to enhance the opportunities for students to be exposed to English” (MEXT 2009: 7). In April 2011, foreign language communication activities were made compulsory for the fifth and sixth grade in Elementary School (MEXT, 2008b). In April 2012, MEXT increased the number of hours per year dedicated to the study of English at JHS from 105 to 140, making it the most taught class in the JHS curriculum (MEXT, 2008a). Although I agree with these changes and believe that they will ultimately increase L2 exposure, realistically I doubt that these changes alone will be enough to completely close the exposure gap between the amount of English exposure here to that of an ESL context. The answer, at least in JHS, cannot rely anymore on just increasing class time as it has reached its scheduling limit. As English teachers and researchers we must now take a hard look at ourselves, review our present pedagogy and incorporate and research more effective means to increase L2 class exposure if not in quantity, then at least in quality. First, before going into detail, identifying what basic skills learners need to develop remains key. MEXT since 2008 has stressed a more balanced and integrated approach towards teaching the four skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) (MEXT, 2008a). In order to teach these efficiently, it becomes important to identify effective areas of focus. Nation (2001) stated that vocabulary knowledge constitutes an integral part of learner’s general proficiency in a second/foreign language (L2) and adds that it is a prerequisite for successful communication. This opinion is also shared by Cihi (2013) who in a presentation in Okayama, Japan, identified vocabulary as a 2 common denominator of all four skills and claimed that vocabulary study itself benefited them all at once. I found myself agreeing that a certain focus on vocabulary could prove to be an efficient learning strategy, and I decided to expand my knowledge about the different ways to effectively increase one’s vocabulary. Second language research indicated that learning new vocabulary through reading could be an important way of acquiring new vocabulary (Day, Omura, & Hiramatsu, 1991; Dupuy & Krashen 1993). However, Laufer (2005) and Schmitt (2008) support explicitly focused intentional vocabulary learning as a faster and more effective approach to learning in comparison to incidental vocabulary learning from activities such as reading and listening. Moreover, I too have personally witnessed how effectively JHS English teachers in Japan use physical word cards in order to introduce and thoroughly practice as many as twelve words in very little time. It was also during my ALT years, that many of my fellow foreign friends and colleagues introduced me to digital flashcard software they had used to increase their Japanese vocabulary in a relatively short period of time. Upon their recommendation, I tried out such software with comparable results. I also found out that there were many such programs out there, and that they were listed under the same category as “Spaced Repetition Software” (SRS). My interest in such systems grew and as I learned that it was discoveries in the field of cognitive psychology that had enabled the development of SRS, I soon expanded my research efforts to include it as I also believed that it holds some of the keys to future improvements. Although there are numerous SRS programs available for English such as Anki, WordEngine and Supermemo, which I had been considering using as the basis for my research, I was surprised to find the vast number of studies already conducted to assess their effectiveness and questioned the pertinence of adding another. Moreover, I realized that these programs are often not easily customizable to accommodate Japanese JHS students in terms of level of content (learning level) and/or usability. So, I decided to design JHS student-friendly software from scratch and incorporate level-appropriate content from their current textbook. I also designed a new prototype SRS, which I have named “Indirect Spaced Repetition Software” (ISRS) in an effort to 3 increase overall effectiveness. Finally in order to better assess my software and ideas, I’ve enlisted university students majoring in English education or psychology (many of whom already have teaching experience) to use the new prototype software for a period of two weeks and then answer a post-project questionnaire about their motivation, concerns and opinions about integrating such software as part of, or in parallel to, class curriculum, as research addressing the viewpoints of teachers is quite scarce.

1.2 Organization of this study

The traditional format will be used in this thesis. Chapter 2 will review older and more contemporary research regarding vocabulary acquisition in the fields of SLA and cognitive psychology that have contributed to the development of present-day SRS. Chapter 3 will explain the pedagogical vision behind my development of ISRS and the reasoning behind the choice of content loaded into the software for JHS students. This chapter will also examine the methodology of data analysis, including a detailed report on participants, instruments and procedures utilized in this study. Chapter 4 will present the results and findings of the study concerning the research questions. Chapter 5 will conclude this research by noting the implications and limitations of the study as well as make suggestions for future research.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The ever-expanding sea of literature on vocabulary acquisition and memorization with all the different techniques, methodologies and surrounding debates can prove to be quite overwhelming for educators who are trying to find answers. So, it comes as no surprise that choosing the right method for one’s students proves difficult for teachers (Nation, 2001; Schmitt 2008). Vocabulary has become such a focal point for English proficiency testing that most preparation books or study kits for tests like TOEIC, TOEFL and IELTS attend to it as an important point among others while others focus on it entirely. Moreover, recently software geared towards vocabulary, especially SRS, is becoming a popular alternative for learners, as prices range from free to quite affordable while also benefiting from the conveniences of the digital world such as automatic word card (flashcard) scheduling/management. In this chapter, several topics of importance related to effective vocabulary acquisition will be addressed. First, both incidental vocabulary learning and intentional vocabulary learning will be explained. Second, early vocabulary learning strategies (wordlists, word cards without strategies) will be presented. Third, the historical contributions to memory from ancient Greece to early cognitive psychology will be overviewed. Fourth, recent vocabulary learning strategies (word cards with strategies, and SRS) will be presented. Fifth, contemporary implications of cognitive psychology will be discussed. Sixth, balanced approaches towards vocabulary teaching will be presented. Finally, a short summary will conclude this chapter.

2.1 Incidental Vocabulary Learning vs. Intentional Vocabulary Learning

A somewhat historic, yet still contemporary debate in the field of SLA is to decipher whether incidental or intentional is more the effective vocabulary learning approach. The former “incidental” refers to activities for which the primary purpose isn’t vocabulary learning, for example message-focused reading or listening activities

5 where vocabulary learning occurs incidentally or as a by-product. The latter “intentional” refers to activities where the primary intention or purpose is to build up the learner’s vocabulary; word lists and word cards are prime examples which fall into this category. Learning here is often accomplished by “rehearsal” which is defined as “a learning strategy that involves saying a new word or sentence to oneself (usually silently) in order to memorize.” (Richards: Schmidt, 2010 : 494) Although incidental learning’s contribution to L2 vocabulary learning isn’t contested, it’s effectiveness in doing so is. In her studies (Laufer, 2003) estimated that ESL/EFL learners might have to read up to 200,000 words in order to learn 108 words from the reading context (0.00054% new word acquired for every word read). In contrast, (Laufer, 2005) in her review of explicit (intentional) vocabulary studies revealed that such activities enabled between 33% and 86% of words to be learned and obtained similar results in her own 2005 study, 70% on immediate posttests. Although that number later declined to 21%-41% on two-week delayed posttests, that lower result still by far exceeds that of incidental learning. As these numbers speak for themselves, one would assume that intentional vocabulary learning ought to be widely used in classrooms but research such as Tang and Nesi (2003) demonstrate that this is not the case. Nakata (2008a) attributes this to the widespread use of communicative language teaching (CLT) where “intentional” vocabulary activities prove unpopular. Godwin-Jones (2010) attributes it to the fact that such “intentional” activities evoke the idea of language as something fixed and mechanical, which is out of touch with the CLT model. Moreover, Read (2004) cites that there had been a long standing assumption within the communication approach philosophy that learners could acquire new vocabulary without any pedagogical intervention. Based on the empirical evidence, the benefits of intentional vocabulary learning are clear and teachers and teaching guidelines shouldn’t rule out such effective activities because they aren’t seemingly communicative at first sight. Moreover, Coady (1993) recommends that vocabulary should be taught explicitly (intentionally) to the point of automaticity in early stages of acquisition (notably for beginners), and contextual learning (incidental) at later stages. Although statistically 6 speaking (Laufer, 2003; 2005) incidental vocabulary learning even when executed at its highest efficiency (i+1 level)1 may trail behind intentional learning, researchers such as Baicheng (2009) and Smith (2008) agree that it remains a valuable method to not only increase vocabulary but also fluency for the content that is already known. According to Segalowitz (1997: 103) fluency training helps lower the cognitive load on one’s short term memory and moves the chunking items into higher-meaning units2 which increases automaticity. So, it comes as no surprise that Nation (2001) encourages both incidental and intentional learning in his model for language learning called, “Four strands of vocabulary teaching” 3 (meaning-focused input, meaning-focused output, language-focused learning and fluency development). Moreover, the effectiveness of incidental vocabulary learning may be enhanced as Hulstijn (2001: 273-274) points to empirical evidence provided by studies conducted between 1991-1999 which demonstrated that using tools and methods such as forewarning4 (pre-reading), marginal glosses5, dictionary look-up6 (while reading), and cloze exercises (post-reading) can help learners process vocabulary more elaborately and increase the chances of retention. However, not all pre-activity interventions may actually be beneficial as Chang and Read’s (2006) study shows that the deliberate teaching of vocabulary before a listening comprehension task was less effective than playing the listening segment twice or just discussing or reading about the topic beforehand. Hulstijn (2001: 275), also warns us about getting caught up in the dichotomy of incidental and intentional learning labels, as it is not the categorization of learning

1 Krashen’s (1989) indicator for efficient incidental vocabulary learning from reading (Input Hypothesis). At this level, some sentences or lengths of text will not contain any new words. Researchers such as Hu & Nation (2001) identify such a level of efficiency at the 98-99% readability mark which entails that approximately only one or two in 100 words will be unknown. 2 The learning of expressions, phrases as a whole unit in memory. 3 Please refer to Table 2.2 on page 18 : 50% of class time according to Nation should be used to develop fluency, as much as possible no new words should be introduced during that time to allow show fluency training. 4 E.g., when a teacher tells the students to focus on the new vocabulary before a reading exercise. It may prove more effective if he/she tells them that they will be tested on it later (Hulstijn, 2001). 5 When translations are provided in the students L1 for new or difficult words in the beginning, margin or end of a text. 6 Hulstijn, Hollander & Greidanus (1996) found dictionary look up to be more effective than glosses for vocabulary learning. 7 activities that determines the retention or the lack thereof of the new information but ultimately differences in the quality and frequency of the information processing activities.

2.2 Early Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Wordlists, Word Cards without strategies)

The “wordlist” is the traditional tool of intentional learning and became vastly popular in the 60’s and early 70’s with the behaviorist-cognitivist paradigm shift that occurred in pedagogy. The learning technique behind a wordlist is “rote learning”, which can be described as systematic repetition without focus on meaning until retention occurs. In more recent years, it along with everything that can be associated with behaviorism (concept, activity, etc..) has been cast in a negative light by researchers due the immense unpopularity of this school of thought. Additionally, there have also been more specific criticisms directed towards wordlists, four-in-all as reported by Nakata (2008a) (the last of which will be addressed later). Firstly, rote memory learning was heavily criticized for the absence of focus on meaning. Secondly, wordlists were criticized for a phenomenon known as the “list effect” which results in the learners experiencing difficulty in retrieving memory outside of the context of the list. Thirdly, wordlists were also criticized because the middle of a list doesn’t get as much attention as the beginning and end (Baddeley 1990). Ebbinhaus had described this phenomenon more than a century ago as the “serial position effect” where recall can be affected by the position of an item. This effect can be divided into two sub-categories: the “recency effect” and the “primacy effect”. The former describes the higher success of recall for information recently activated as it is still in short-term memory. The latter describes how the first items of lists are often better memorized than others7. Hulstijn (2001), although warning against systematic and orderly list repetition (rote learning) suggests that the amount of discredit given is unwarranted as he provides the following example:

7 Wozniak (1999) states that Ebbinghaus should be credited for the discoveries of both the “recency effect” and “primacy effect”. 8

“For instance, suppose a learner has encountered some new vocabulary items in a meaningful reading or listening task and has done all of the following: tried to infer their meaning, checked these inferences by consulting a dictionary, and listed the word forms (along with other relevant lexical information) in a personal notebook. It would then only be profitable for him or her to regularly consult that list and rehearse its contents.” (Hulstijn, 2001 : 281)

Even without such an approach Hulstijn (ibid) notes that if wordlist or dialog word-for-word remembering (learning by heart8) are followed up with a communicative task which uses the words meaningfully such as a role play, there shouldn’t be any reason to condemn such learning. Additionally, pundits should keep in mind that wordlist learning has systematically outperformed incidental learning in numerous studies (Laufer, 2003; Nakata, 2008b, Nation, 2001). Probably in a response to the surrounding criticism of wordlists, word card vocabulary learning gained momentum among researchers, as they were exempt from the previously noted criticisms. First, word cards work on the principle of “active recall” which assures cognitive effort by the learner when he/she tries to recall the correct information before being presented with it. This is guaranteed as an L2 word can be written on one side of a card and its feature(s) such as an L1 translation can be written on the opposite side. It is widely accepted in literature that the process of active recall results in far better retention than mere presentation. Although active recall through “delayed presentation” is generally superior, it should be also be noted that experimental studies reviewed by Nation (2001) indicated that presenting simultaneously word form and meaning is more effective on the first encounter but not when reviewing them afterwards. Baddeley (1990) explains the superior effectiveness of reviewing new words through the action of the “recalling procedure” because in comparison to simply encountering words over and over, retrieving/recalling requires

8 A somewhat similar activity to rote learning 9 much greater effort which increases the chances of remembering the target words. Barcroft (2007) also makes the claim that recalling leads to a more permanent learning. Second, word cards are immune to the “list effect” as learners are reportedly able to perform memory retrieval just as well with or without the aid of word cards. In other words, they can transfer their learning to normal language use (Webb, 2009). Third, as word cards offer the flexibility of being easily re-shuffled, this resolves the primacy effect issue and others regarding any deficit in attention given to specific word cards because of their particular order.

2.3 Contributions to Memory: from Ancient Greece to Early Cognitive Psychology

Memory can be viewed as both an old and young field of study. Interest in it has peaked and faded over the last millennium of human civilization. Our will to better understand it has always been driven by the deeper desire to improve it. In this section, I will cover two eras that have contributed most to better its understanding: Classical Greece (which the author will refer to as the Pre-Ebbinghaus Era) and the Ebbinghaus Era. The Post-Ebbinghaus Era will be discussed in a later section. In ancient Greece, a time where smartphones were not remembering everything for us, memory training was a serious ordeal. Great scholars like Cicero were able to accomplish great feats of memory such as memorizing long speeches or sizeable amounts of knowledge in little time. They were able to do this by “visually” memorizing them using a technique which is known best as the “Memory Palace”9 which enabled them to store or link their speech or knowledge to previously acquired visual memory. A common given example is to imagine for example one’s home and then visualize the new items/information 10 to be memorized in rooms and/or on furniture11 and so recalling the newly acquired items will be as easy as re-visiting one’s made-up “Memory Palace”. Although centuries old, this highly effective technique

9 Other names include the Roman Room, the Peg System, the Nook and Cranny method and the term “journeys” according to Godwin-Jones (2010) 10 Or metaphoric representations of them 11 No matter how silly it may seem, actually the sillier the better according to practitioners of the memory palace technique. 10 has been passed down through the generations, yet it shows no signs of being discarded anytime soon. As Godwin-Jones (2010) remarks, it’s still widely used today by memory contest winners and has even implemented in an electronic vocabulary tool called “Skill Builder” which uses “external structures” in an Iraqi environment to introduce and systematize new material as part of the U.S. military Iraqi language learning program. The imagery of storing information in the compartments of our “Memory Palace” has long served as a metaphor in how we store information into different parts of our brains, although simplistic in nature, this holds some truth in actual neuroscience. The concept of linking new information to already well-established memory in order to strengthen its retention was a concept already well understood as long ago as ancient Greece. The next great period of progress in furthering our understanding of memory was enabled by the pioneering work of Hermann Ebbinghaus, a German psychologist who lived in the late 19th century. Although more than a century old, his pioneering findings are still very much supported and relevant to this day, therefore the author finds it is only fitting to refer to this time as the “Ebbinghaus Era”. Ebbinghaus’ first and most noted publication, “Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology”12 elaborated on his discoveries of the “spacing effect” and “forgetting curve”. The latter demonstrates the exponential loss in retention strength that occurs right after learning or reviewing before slowly stabilizing into a slower and slower decline with time13 (Brink, 2008; 126). In terms of learning, this decline means that if a learner fails to rehearse/review newly learned information, his/her chance of forgetting it increases with time 14 but if he/she successfully reviews 15 before forgetting, the accessed information will regain its form16 and becomes less prone to memory decay17 and the

12 “Über das Gedchtnis” in German 13 (Refer to Figure 2.1, p.12) Notice how the drops in the orange lines slow and continues onto the projected pointed lines in the figure below 14 (Refer to Figure 2.1, p.12) Notice the declining orange line and succeeding pointed lines 15 (Refer to Figure 2.1, p.12) Notice intersecting green & orange line encounter(s) 16 (Refer to Figure 2.1, p.12) Notice how immediately following a successful review, retention probability goes back to 100% before declining again. 17 (Refer to Figure 2.1, p.12) Notice how the subsequent curve declines less dramatically than the previous one. 11 cycle continues with later decay and later reinforcement with subsequent successful reviews. In essence, Short, medium, long are just arbitrary words used to describe memory strength; visualizing memory retention as a curve instead of arbitrary points or stages is a more appropriate representation to the reality of memory retention.

Figure 2.1

(retrieved on December 17th, 2014 from: https://p2pu.org/he/groups/studying- psychology-the-p2pu-way/content/task-21-the-ebinghaus-forgetting-curve/)

The former “spacing effect” is regarded as the phenomenon that accounts for why learners who engage in “spaced learning” 18 (e.g., Five spread out rehearsing sessions of five minutes (5 X 5 = 25mins) yield significantly higher retention than those who engage in “massed learning” 19 (e.g., a single rehearsing session of 25 minutes in all). Moreover “massed learning” is viewed as inefficient as Ebbinghaus’ “learning curve”

18 rehearsing activities scheduled to be spread-out over a long period of time 19 rehearsing activities crammed into a single or few longer sessions 12 demonstrates that the most exponential gain in retention is already achieved by the first rehearsal within a study session and notes that consecutive rehearsals contribute exponentially less and less to increasing memory strength. In other words, an equal amount of time spent across spaced rehearsals bear a far greater overall effect than an equal amount of time spent in a single or a few massed repetition rehearsals. Although Ebbinghaus has a long list of alleged accomplishments including establishing the drafting standard for research reports20 and laying the foundation for future intelligence testing21 (Thorne, B. M.; Henley, T. B., 2001 : 207), his most revered contributions will remain those in the field of cognitive psychology in widening our understanding of memory. His discoveries left pedagogues with a blueprint for elaborating more effective study/review systems and made it possible for further research pertaining to memory to take place within the field of psychology.

2.4 Recent Vocabulary Learning Strategies (Word Cards with strategies, and SRS)

What can be arguably one of the best, yet also one of the earliest successful elaborations of Ebbinghaus’ discoveries into a study/review system was accomplished in the 1970’s by another German named Sebastian Leitner. His system would later be commonly known as the “Leitner System”. In his book “How to learn to learn: The road to success”22, he explains how his 5-step process uses a “learning box”23 with five compartments24 (each with a separately scheduled review time25) which enables word cards to move up a compartment26 when successfully reviewed or go back to the first compartment27 when unsuccessfully reviewed (Leitner, 1972). Systems like Leitner’s

20 He is credited to being the first to organize his own research reports into four sections: the introduction, the methods, the results and a discussion 21 based on his study of evaluating how children’s mental abilities declined during the school day. 22 “So lernt man lernen: Der Weg zum Erfolg” in German. 23 “Lenkartei” in German and reportedly still used today in Germany, according to Godwin-Jones (2010) 24 An alternate version is to use 5 separate boxes instead of one divided-up into five sections. 25 The Leitner system lets learners set their own review times for each compartment but a common example could be the following: 1st = once a day, 2nd = once every 3 days, 3rd = once every 9 days, 4th = once every 27 days 5th = once every 81 days 26 when a word card completes all 5-steps successfully it is taken out of the system as permanent acquisition is claimed 27 There also exists a version where unsuccessfully reviewed cards are brought down a single box or compartment at a time. 13 enable what is commonly referred to as “enhanced rehearsal” and are proven to be more effective than common rehearsal which cannot reap the full benefits of the spacing effect. Fitzpatrick, Al-Qarni, & Meara’s (2008) study showed that such flashcard learning permitted learners to memorize large number of words in a short time 28 . However, Nation (2001), indicates that the extent of flashcard learning ultimately depends on the implementation, or lack thereof, of effective learning strategies by the user. In regards to the Leitner system, learners are required to have good scheduling, index card management and monitoring skills in order for it to be effectively used. Nakata (2011) states that a lack of such skills could even cause inefficient learning. Nowadays, with the current surge in popularity of “digital flashcards” or “Spaced Repetition Software” (SRS) this issue has resolved itself by letting computers perform the planning and monitoring tasks for the learner (Hulstijn, 2001). This in itself has led to accelerating the learning/review process indirectly as learners no longer have to juggle with word cards, compartments and calendars while rehearsing their digital flashcards. Although these new SRS solutions may seem very different from an outside perspective, Godwin-Jones (2010) noted that the “Leitner system” is widely used as the basis for many of these programs such as StudyProf, Teachmaster, Phase-6 and other educational software use a version of the Leitner method called “the box system” such as The MemoryLifter. Many researchers have been quick to praise and assert the superiority of SRS over words cards and more so over word lists, for a number of reasons. The first is that computers can arrange the order of words that will enable the learner to review difficult words more often than easy ones and record progress over time (Nakata, 2008a). The second is the multimedia capacities digital flashcards can offer such including audio and video which can increase learners’ motivation (Hulstijn, 2001). However few have supplied empirical evidence to support their claim of computer superiority. This prompted Nakata (2008a) to conduct an extensive comparative

28 A large number of word cards becomes more manageable under such systems as they don’t all have to be reviewed at once but only according to their scheduled review times. 14 study29 measuring the effectiveness of wordlists, word cards and SRS which concluded the following: “In summary, the study has demonstrated the superiority of computers over lists, the limited advantage of word cards over lists, and no statistical difference between computers and cards.” However, Nakata (2008a) also notes in his discussion that his study didn’t exploit the full potential of computers such as incorporating multimedia activities and new types of exercises. In other words, he believes computers effectiveness could become more significant than word cards if utilized to their full potential.

2.5 Contemporary Implications of Cognitive Psychology for Vocabulary Learning

Many of Ebbinghaus’ earlier discoveries such as the spacing effect are now substantiated by discoveries in neuroscience which have confirmed that spacing repetitions (or intervals) allow enough time for the regeneration of neuro-chemical substances to occur which are necessary for establishing and strengthening brain connections (Baddeley 1990). It should also be noted that the degree to which memory is strengthened (with a successful review/recall) is in direct relation to the length of the last occurred interval and therefore achieving the largest spacing effect possible requires conducting successful retrieval/review with the longest delay possible (Ellis, 1995: 121). Contemporary researchers and enthusiasts who seek to find more effective spacing algorithms are faced with a daunting task:

1- If they set review delays too far apart, the higher number of unsuccessful recalls will undermine overall effectiveness, as the greater benefits in retention will only apply to the few successfully reviews. (Aiming too high, in other words too hard)

2- If they set review delays too close, the weaker benefits for retention will undermine overall effectiveness, as retention strength for the successful recalls although numerous will increase by very little. (Aiming too low, in other words too easy)

29 This study was limited to a single study session (massed learning) of only ten unknown words, therefore “enhanced rehearsal” (spaced learning) could not be enabled by word cards nor SRS. Results were assessed by immediate and delayed post-tests. 15

Moreover, they must consider a multitude of learner-dependent factors which vary from learner to learner, such as their language background, L2 knowledge base (familiarity), motivation30 and language learning aptitude when setting such study intervals and by consequence the number of repetitions31 necessary for permanent acquisition to be achieved. In addition, Hulstijn (2001) also points out that some linguistic items are more difficult to learn than others, for example abstract nouns compared to concrete nouns. He also discusses the “codability”32 of the word forms as another factor. Tinkham (1993) noted quite a range of difference between learners, as some needed as little as 5 to 7 repetitions to acquire new vocabulary while others needed more than 20 repetitions. While some researchers claim a certain number of repetitions are necessary for learning new vocabulary or that certain spacing between intervals is more efficient, others like Nation claim that there is no set number of repetitions that will ensure learning and (ibid, 2001; 77) that although he agrees in principle with Pimsleur’s (1967) exponential scale measurement guide for intervals33, he also states that there is no particular reason for interval spacing to be of any kind of precise measurement. In the end, although there are disagreements among researchers about the length of study intervals and the number of necessary repetitions for learning new vocabulary, all agree with Schmitt’s (2008) basic recommendation that teachers and material writers should think about vocabulary learning in longitudinal terms.

2.6 Balanced Approaches Towards Vocabulary Teaching

This section will present two key elaborations by Nation (2001) which explain and promote the importance of balance within vocabulary learning and teaching in

30 Schmitt (2000) states that learners who are passive and wait for involuntary actions to trigger their attention/noticing will be unsuccessful in learning as it will be very slow. 31 As closer intervals will require more repetitions to move knowledge into longer termed memory compared to more distanced intervals which would need fewer repetitions to achieve the same. 32 The ability of the learner (prior L1 & L2 knowledge) to learn certain morphological and phonological forms of the L2. In other words, strange words both written and/or heard will require more reviews for acquisition to be successful. 33 E.g., if the first interval is 5 seconds, the second should be 52 = 25 seconds, the third should be 53 = 125 seconds etc… 16 order to achieve more effective results. The first concept involves recognizing and attending to all aspects of “word knowledge” in more depth. The second concept involves integrating a balanced approach towards teaching vocabulary, better known as the “four strands of vocabulary teaching”.

2.6.1 Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge

Although aiming for a wide or large vocabulary base is an important objective, students and teachers shouldn’t speed through the process and only scratch the surface of the words. It may prove unwise to consider words as “learned” after the mere establishment of the meaning-form link as much more in-depth learning of vocabulary is necessary in order to “use” them correctly through output. Nation (2001) gives a detailed overview of the various categories of “word knowledge” which should also be given attention (refer to Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 What is involved in “word knowledge” (Nation, 2001: 27) (Receptive = R, Productive = P)

Form: Spoken R What does the word sound like? P How is the word pronounced?

Written R What does the word look like? P How is the word written and spelled?

Word parts R What parts are recognizable in the word? P What word parts are needed to express this meaning?

Meaning: Form and meaning R What meaning does this word form signal? P What word form can be used to express this meaning?

Concept and referents R What is included in the concept? P What items can the concept refer to?

Associations R What other words does this make us think of? P What other words could we use instead of this one?

Use: Grammatical functions R In what patterns does the word occur? P In what patterns must we use this word?

Collocations R What words or types of words occur with this one? P What words or types of words must we use with this one?

Constraints on use R Where, when and how often would we expect to meet this word? (register, frequency…) P Where, when and how often can we use this word?

2.6.2 The Four-strands of Vocabulary Teaching

In order to introduce, consolidate and enhance vocabulary knowledge, Nation (2001) suggests a balanced four-strand approach to the teaching of vocabulary:

1- Meaning focused-input, which focuses on the incidental learning of vocabulary through listening and reading within meaningful contexts. 2- Meaning-focused output, which focuses on the production (spoken or written) of vocabulary to foster learning. 3- Language-focused learning, which focuses on giving explicit attention to the intentional learning of vocabulary (e.g., wordlists, word cards, SRS) 4- Fluency development, which focuses on building up input and output speed of lexical knowledge for live language usage.

In essence each strand should be given equal time and attention (25% each) in a classroom setting with a balance between input and output opportunities and further consolidation (fluency development). Refer to Table 2.2 for more detail.

Table 2.2 Four strands of vocabulary teaching (Nation, 2001: 390)

Strand General conditions Vocabulary requirements Activities and techniques

Meaning-focused input l Focus on the message l 95% + coverage (preferably 98%) l Reading graded readers l Some unfamiliar items l Skill at guessing from context l Listening to stories l Understanding l Opportunity to negotiate l Communication activities l Noticing l Incidental defining and attention drawing Meaning focused output l Focus on the message l 95% + coverage (preferably 98%) l Communication activities with l Some unfamiliar items l Encouragement to use written output l Understanding unfamiliar items l Prepared writing l Noticing l Supportive input l Linked skills Language-focused learning l Focus on language items l Skill in vocabulary learning l Direct teaching of vocabulary Strategies l Direct learning l Appropriate teacher focus on l Intensive reading high-frequency words, and l Training in vocabulary strategies for low-frequency words strategies Fluency development l Focus on the message l 99% + coverage l Reading easy graded readers l Little or no unfamiliar language l Repetition l Repeated reading l Pressure to perform faster l Speed reading l Listening to easy input l 4/3/2 speaking exercise l Rehearsal tasks l 10-minute writing l Linked skills 18

2.7 Summary

For a number of years, teachers and researchers have been directing more and more focus towards vocabulary as it has been identified as an integral part of a learner’s general L2 proficiency and a prerequisite for successful communication, according to researchers such as Nation (2001). Due to its surge in popularity, there has been an expanding pool of literature on the subject and also a boom in the production of educational materials entirely dedicated to it. Moreover, the relatively new field of “computer-assisted Language Learning” (CALL) has focused more in the area of vocabulary than any other which must have prompted the creation of a second field “computer-assisted vocabulary teaching and learning” (CAVTL). Although researchers agree that vocabulary learning should be an area of focus, there remains vast debate over how it should be learned. There are two schools of thought when it comes to how vocabulary should or can be learned. The first is that vocabulary should be acquired incidentally as a by-product of learning activities where it is not focused on specifically, like in reading. The second is that vocabulary should be acquired intentionally through rehearsal type activities where it often uttered silently in order to be memorized. Many researchers, such as Laufer (2003 & 2005) have compared the effectiveness of the two types and have concluded that intentional learning through rehearsal type activities produces much higher retention in both immediate posttests and delayed posttests. Although incidental learning seems to be lagging behind in terms of efficiency, researchers such as Baicheng (2009) and Smith (2008) recognize it as an important complementary method to increase vocabulary and agree with how Nation (2001) integrates it within his general vocabulary teaching model called “The four learning strands”. Moreover, incidental activities like reading offer other benefits that shouldn’t be overlooked such as the building of fluency (automaticity) in regards to the content which is already known to the learners. Finally, Hulstijn (2001) warns researchers to not categorize vocabulary-learning activities in terms of incidental or intentional labels but in terms of the quality and frequency of the learning.

In the 1960’s and early 1970’s, intentional vocabulary teaching through wordlists was popular, but later drew criticism for reasons such as a lack of focus on meaning, the lower success rate in recalling words without the aid of the list (aka the “list effect”), the “primacy effect” which describes how the items in the middle area of list aren’t memorized as well. As a result, learning with word cards grew in popularity as it received more support and less scrutiny from the academic community. The study of memory has a long history that can be traced as far back as ancient Greece, where the memory palace technique was born. Later, in the late 1800’s pioneering research in the field of cognitive psychology by Hermann Ebbinghaus enabled deeper understanding of memory, more specifically how we learn and forget. He made many discoveries including the spacing effect which accounts for why learners have better memory retention when they engage in spaced learning (multiple but short study sessions) compared to when they engage in massed learning (a single or very few long study sessions). Such discoveries permitted Leitner (1972) to elaborate his study system which required good learning strategies on the part of learners to take full advantage of the spacing effect while studying with word cards. In more recent years, his system would often become the inspiration or basis for current spaced repetition software SRS according to Godwin-Jones (2010). We have also arrived at a time where neuroscience has supplied further explanations about the inner-workings of the brain. Baddeley (1990) states that the “spacing effect” promotes better memorization as it is found that it leaves enough time for neuro-chemical regeneration to occur which plays a positive role in memory strengthening. Although we have made incredible progress in understanding memory, it remains a very complicated matter, and one with many lingering questions. For instance, because of the numerous learner-dependent-factors involved and the range in difficulty for items to be learned it remains very difficult to establish the correct spacing between intervals which mustn’t be too long or too short in order to maximize the effectiveness of memorization. A very popular method for interval scaling remains Pimsleur’s (1967) exponential scale guide. However, although Nation (2001) agrees 20 with it in principle, he also states that there is no particular reason for interval spacing to be of any kind of precise measurement. In order to teach vocabulary effectively, Nation (2001) has suggested an “in-depth” learning of vocabulary to assure the correct “use” of the words in terms of production (output). Moreover, he has also recommended a balanced teaching approach between the “four strands of vocabulary teaching”: 1-Meaning-focused input, 2-Meaning-focused output, 3-Language-focused learning, and 4-Fluency development. Finally, although there still remain many areas of disagreement among researchers, there seems to be a common consensus with Schmitt’s (2008) statement that vocabulary learning should be viewed in longitudinal terms by both material writers and teachers.

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the software/material design and methods for data collection are described. The first few sections will go over the vocabulary content, pedagogical thinking and design behind Indirect Spaced Repetition in general terms and the software (ISRS) in more specific terms. The following sections will describe the participants and their perceptions of the new software. Finally, the chapter will conclude with an analysis of the data methods utilized in regards to the research questions.

3.1 Selecting Effective Vocabulary Content for JHS Students in Japan

This section, in contrast to the general line of this paper which focuses mostly on the “how to” teach or learn vocabulary, will focus on the “what to” learn or teach in terms of vocabulary. Many researchers strongly suggest that an efficient way to study vocabulary is to proceed by following word frequency lists34 compiled by either the American or British Corpora. Paul Nation (2001) describes the mastery of the first 2000 entries as a requirement for “general proficiency” (GP) and suggests that it should be attended to first by students as it has been shown to make up as much as 80%35 of English words used in authentic texts before proceeding to a more “Academic Word List”36 whose mastery is viewed as the minimal requirement to be able to engage in higher education in English. As a teacher in Japan I have always been curious about how well JHS textbooks in Japan agreed with such frequency lists, so for this research I decided to compile a list using all three New Horizon (NH) JHS 2012 edition textbooks and compare it to the “American Corpus Word Frequency (ACWF) 5000 list”. The results of this analysis will help determine the efficiency of the NH lexicon in nurturing students’ general proficiency (GP).

34 (studying the most frequent word entries first and then proceeding down the list) 35 Approximately one in every five words will still be unknown. 36 Such as Coxhead’s (2000) Academic Word List 22

In order for there to be an appropriate comparison significant editing of the NH word list and some editing of the ACWF list was undertaken. The NH word list’s additional entries listed below (as l points) were deleted (with the exception of word abbreviations) to allow the comparison. Furthermore, for software compatibility 37 reasons hyphens between words and apostrophes were deleted on both lists to allow a more accurate word count. In the end, the NH list was reduced to 1345 entries from its original 2333 word count. It should be noted that the MEXT guidelines requires textbook makers to include a minimum of 1200 entries, all text books largely exceed this number when all lexical entries are counted but when edited under the same format as the ACWF list the number becomes much closer to the minimal standard set by MEXT.

The following points illustrate the differences between the two word lists: l The NH word list allowed multiple entries under the same part of speech38 l The NH word list included some colloquial expressions (e.g., good morning…) l The NH word list included irregular plurals (e.g., children, people39…) l The NH word list included conjugated forms of verbs40 (e.g, am, were, had, ate…) l The NH word list included personal nouns (e.g., names of people, places, months…) l The NH word list included contractions & original forms (e.g., can’t & cannot…) l The NH word list included unhyphenated compound words (e.g., fine arts…) l The NH word list included abbreviations (e.g., ASAP, CD, CU, DVD…)

37 (AntConc version 3.4.3m was used by the author to calculate word frequencies) 38 For example in the NH list, the word play had 5 entries: (4 under verb) 1-play a sport 2-play an instrument 3-play games 4-play a role in a theatric play and (1 under noun) 1-a theatric play. In contrast, the ACWF list had only two entries: One under verb and the other under noun. 39 The ACWF list included “people” as well, I suspect this may have been a mistake as other irregular plurals weren’t included. 40 The ACWF list only included the root form of the verb (e.g., eat, like…), although “do” was surprisingly absent from the list 23

The 1345 NH words were divided into four ACWF categories:

1- The first 1345 ACWF category41 (green) (also refer to Appendix A) 2- The 1346~2000 ACWF category (yellow) (also refer to Appendix B) 3- The 2001~5000 ACWF category (orange) (also refer to Appendix C) 4- Words outside of the 5000 ACWF category (red) (also refer to Appendix D)

In essence, the combination of the first two categories (green and yellow) account for word frequencies included under “general proficiency” and the last two (orange and red) account for word frequencies above it.

The following results were obtained: Figure 3.1

Vocabulary Correspondence between : the 2012 JHS New Horizon (NH) Textbooks (1345 entries) and the American Corpus Word Frequency (ACWF) List

NH words within ACWF 1345 (207) 15.4% NH words within ACWF 1346-2000 (263) (730) "General Proficiency" 54.3% 19.5% NH words within ACWF 2001-5000 "Academic Readiness" (145) 10.8% NH words outside of ACWF 5000

Analysis of discordance:

(General Proficiency –First 2000 ACWF) *combination of the green and yellow sections l 875 / 2000 (43.8% of general proficiency words are encountered in NH) l 875 / 1345 (65.1% of NH words are geared towards the study of general proficiency) l The remaining 470 NH words (34.9%, orange & red) are above “general proficiency”.

41 A number equal to the total number of NH word entries (after editing) 24

With a deeper overview of these words (by referring to the relevant appendices), it becomes quite apparent that no general concordance can be established between word frequencies and difficulty or at least for the words which comprise this study. There are plenty of examples of infrequent words that are easier for students to learn in comparison to more frequent words that are harder to learn. Please refer to the following tables:

Examples of easy NH words (in later ACWF) within the 2001-5000 cake (2563), clock (2658), cow (3103), gym (3912), hat (2033), ACWF category hello (2258), homework (4831), jacket (2287), notebook (4477), pen (3618), pig (3517), pizza (3956), rice (2763)… beyond the 5000 bye, cloudy, dvd, fox, frog, jam, kilometer, kiwi, panda, rainy, ACWF category taxi, tiger, zoo… (above 5000, yet these words pose little difficulty as well)

In contrast: Examples of difficult words42 (in earlier ACWF and not included in NH) Not included in NH according (479), attorney (1073), authority (835), institution yet within the first (990), investigation (1179), Republican (595), statement 1345 ACWF (924)… (refer to Appendix E)

In fact, there are three sides of the debate for “what” vocabulary content should be prioritized. The first is represented by those who advocate a more orderly study of vocabulary frequency lists as the acquisition of words will be statistically more beneficial when encountering authentic texts. The second is represented by those who believe that vocabulary should be listed in terms of difficulty where easier words should be learned first as they can be acquired faster. The third is represented by those

42 Words which are difficult in terms of form (phonological/morphological) or not contextually relevant (age, politics) for Japanese Junior high school students. 25 who advocate presenting contextually relevant vocabulary to the targeted learners and by consequence facilitate the learning process without any particular attention to word difficulty or frequency. I am of the opinion that the NH textbook sits somewhat in between these three schools of thought for a number of reasons. First, a respectable percentage of lexical entries (65.1%) is geared towards general proficiency. Second, there is a considerable number of easy words included outside of the first 2000 ACWF. Moreover, the introduction of grammar points such as verb tenses is carefully sequenced from easy to difficult in terms of form throughout the textbooks, for example the progressive tense is taught before the perfect tense. Third, many of the units within the textbooks revolve around themes which are relevant to JHS students such as school life, family, food, future dreams, games, hobbies, Japanese culture, meeting new friends, movies and television, music, shopping, sports and traveling among others43. Although this third point (relevant themes/contexts) lays the inherent foundation for the textbooks, a more detailed inspection reveals that it is in constant negotiation with the other two. As I believe that each of the three opinions holds some truth, I find myself agreeing in principle with the vocabulary learning sequence proposed by textbooks. To summarize my opinion, I would define a balanced JHS textbook in regards to vocabulary acquisition as the following: A textbook where vocabulary learning is natural and set in contexts relevant to students with a high proportion of vocabulary from the first 2000 ACWF and a considerable number of easy or at least compelling words in regards to the storyline. Moreover students should master the vocabulary of their textbook before moving on to different lists of study because it will aid them more efficiently in achieving better academic results as it is more likely that their teacher will use such vocabulary as the basis for evaluating them (e.g., tests, homework). Success in terms of academic results cannot be disregarded as an important motivating factor for language learning as researchers such as Ellis (1997) lists “resultative motivation” as an

43 Also includes cross-culture understanding, human rights and ecology which are also covered in other classes apart from English. 26 important factor in the learning of a second language and I believe that this may hold even more truth in EFL contexts such as Japan’s where contact with the language for most takes place in an educational context. The only criticism that I have towards JHS textbooks in general is that a considerable amount of words (especially content words) are encountered very few times (often just once) throughout the three-year span of textbooks within the same series. For a good number of students in EFL contexts, English class and their textbook remains their sole direct contact with the language. Unfortunately the insufficient “word recycling” (see Nation, 2001) within their textbook will result in many of the words they’ve encountered to be later forgotten. Here is a short list of words encountered only once throughout the first New Horizon textbook and will not be encountered again within subsequent textbooks of the same series:

Examples of lexical items only encountered once in the first new horizon textbook Easier words ball, bookstore, egg, hat, jam, light, nine, volleyball, yellow… Harder words cheer, clam chowder, eighty, entertainer, February, field trip…

As for easier words44 although the establishment of the meaning-form link might only need a few number of repetitions to assure receptive ability, more frequent exposure might be required to assure productive ability in regards to speaking and writing. As for harder words, the number of repetitions will have to be increased in order to achieve similar success. In order to compensate for this lack of word recycling, I will showcase a newly designed spaced repetition system customized to review textbook vocabulary content to not only help them maintain a larger vocabulary but also increase their overall linguistic fluency for both spoken and written input and output.

44 Words that might be very close to words in their L1 and/or phonologically/morphologically simple, or previously encountered/studied in Elementary School. 27

3.2 Reasons for Conceptualizing Indirect Spaced Repetition (ISRS)

The main motivation behind developing “Indirect Spaced Repetition” was to resolve the often unaddressed yet present issue of “Over-drilling Complacency”45. This can be best described as the narrowing of student’s focus to master either Meaning, Form or Function* (Nation, 2001, calls it “use”) of the current linguistic item of study as achieving the right answer (goal) doesn’t require additional focus on the other features. In other words, achieving full communicative competency normally achieved by a mastery of Meaning, Form and Function proves unnecessary.

Figure 3.2

Meaning: Understanding what the target language item word or grammar structure means.

Form: Mastering the ability to use the target word or grammatical structure correctly in both speech and writing.

Function: Understanding when native speakers make use of the target word or language structure and for what purpose (context).

*Adaptation from Nation’s (2001) Meaning, Form and Use.

Moreover, because of the high frequency of repetition, students may find unhealthy shortcuts when going through flashcards :

1- Remembering that the right box to click for a specific multiple-choice quiz was the top-left one when using computer based SRS. 2- Being able to find/produce the right answer after only reading part or skipping the question altogether “Over-drilling Automaticity”46.

45 Term coined by the author 46 Term coined by the author 28

3- The one-directed nature of the line of questioning where students can produce answers but find it difficult to produce the questions when presented first with the answers or finding answers to slightly different questions.

“Indirect Spaced Repetition” is designed to reduce such issues as each linguistic item or flashcard is linked to a balanced and alternating set of questions/tasks which cover all three elements more efficiently and thoroughly. In the next section, I will discuss the variety of questions chosen and their purpose in regards to nurturing communicative competence.

3.3 Questions/Tasks for ISRS Implementation

In order to nurture communicative competence two sets of questions/tasks were elaborated for each linguistic feature (Meaning, Form and Function). Schmitt (1998, 2008) implies that different teaching approaches may be more beneficial for different stages of word knowledge (lexical feature knowledge) as some are mastered earlier than others, therefore focusing on the form-meaning link first and later enhancing contextual knowledge (function) may prove to be more effective. Following Schmitt’s recommendations, I ordered the sequence of my tasks/questions as follows:

Table 3.1 Example of Questions/Task for ISRS Implementation Q# Main Focus Level Flow Task Type

1 Meaning Word ENG audio to JPN word Multiple Choice

2 Meaning Word JPN word to ENG word Multiple Choice

3 Form Word ENG audio to ENG word Spelling/Writing

4 Form(s) Sentence ENG (blank) to ENG word Multiple Choice

5 Function Sentence JPN sentence to ENG sentence Writing

6 Function Sentence ENG sentence to JPN sentence Writing

7* Fluency Paragraph / Dialog Reading & Listening (all ENG) Voiced Reading * = Bonus activity ENG = English JPN= Japanese

(Main Focus)

Although each question has a specific feature of focus, the focus is never limited to a single feature. The first two questions focus on meaning but they also present the (spoken) form in #1 and the (written) form in #2. As for questions #3 & #4, although the focus is on the form element, meaning and even function elements are also likely to be recalled by the learner while reviewing. The last two questions #5 & #6 and bonus task #7 are also likely to activate all three elements, irrespective of their primary focus.

(Level)

Currently ESL/EFL study content for SRS rarely includes tasks involving full sentences and even less so for paragraphs and texts. Unfortunately this limits the acquisition of forms with an “s” as it is difficult to demonstrate the changes that occur in form for example in verb conjugation and other instances47 at the sentence level and in broader text48. Another limitation is the acquisition of function as it is tied to the surrounding context (or co-text) and elaborated through the “bottom-up process”49 which cannot be enabled by a single written or spoken word.

(Flow)

Although some researchers recommend a completely L2 to L2 approach in teaching, others such as Schmitt (2008) point out the benefits of a flow between L1 and L2 as being more efficient at least in the beginning stages of learning such as for the acquisition of the meaning element of words. Afterwards, acquiring the elements of form(s) and function can also be done effectively without passing through the L1. As a skill among many others, translation remains an important skill to acquire and

47 plurals, irregular plurals, articles a & an 48 For example when demonstrating relative pronouns (it, he, she, etc…) 49 Making use of the information in the input to achieve higher meaning (and of course function). 30 develop50, however it shouldn’t be used continuously as a crutch for enabling text comprehension or communication as the learners’ overall L2 to L2 fluency would suffer if this proves to be the case. Based on earlier research it is safe to conclude that a balance with initial emphasis on L1 to L2 or vice-versa flow and later emphasis on L2 to L2 is an effective process of learning. In the end, the flow of questions in my software respects this principle of balance between questions and tasks with two from L2 to L1, two from L1 to L2, and three from L2 to L2.

(Type) In order to keep the questions/tasks interesting and challenging three varieties were elaborated: 1-Multiple Choice, 2-Writing and 3-Voiced Reading. The premise of the first type (multiple choice) is that the inclusion of common mistakes such as homographs, homophones, words that are closely related in terms of sound or form and words from the same category (animals, school, time) will help the users avoid such mistakes in the future. The second type (writing) is set to increase students’ writing output ability for both isolated words and sentences in terms of fluency (speed) and quality (accuracy). The third type (voiced reading) aims at building up both learners’ reading and speaking fluency.

The following section will present the various questions and tasks used in the newly developed software in detail. One question/task will be shown per page for presentation purposes.

50 I compromise in using translation at the function stage (question 5 & 6) as it works in both increasing students’ translation skill and serves as a tool for checking their comprehension of the function element. Moreover as they are often tested on in this manner it becomes an essential skill to have academically. 31

Question #1 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- The sentence audio file attached to the item is played51. →(What day is it tomorrow?) 2- The word audio file attached to the item is played. →(tomorrow) 3- The user has to choose the corresponding L1 (JPN) meaning52. A:明後日 B:来週 C:明日 D:将来 4- If answered incorrectly the word audio file will be repeated and the right answer will be shown.

The sentence audio is played before the word audio as it permits the user to avoid mistakes as in the instance of homophones (e.g., by, bye) and also to provide repetition and more importantly context. For this question, it was deemed better to play the English audio without displaying the associated text as it will prove more challenging53 and permits the users focus more on the audio itself.

51 If the word is isolated (not linked to a sentence in the textbook) the word audio file will be played twice in all. 52 Distractors include common mistakes or close meanings/spellings, homophones, homographs etc… 53 Listening is a live skill (must be performed on the fly) while reading is not (can be performed at one’s own pace). 32

Question #2 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- The Japanese word →明日 is presented 2- The user has to choose the corresponding L2 (ENG) meaning. A: tomorrow B: ashita C: today D: next 3- If answered incorrectly the word audio file will be repeated and the right answer will be shown.

This question, which also focuses on the meaning feature, is placed in second position as there is a possibility that it might be skipped if the user answers question #1 correctly within the required time. This makes sense as there’s a high probability that the user would have answered it correctly anyway as it is very similar to question number #1 with the exception of flow ( ENG audio to JPN word → JPN word to ENG word ).

Question #3 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- The sentence audio file attached to the item is played54. →(What day is it tomorrow?) 2- The word audio file attached to the item is played. →(tomorrow) 3- The user has to type the word. 4- The right answer is shown and the user must confirm his/her answer. (O or X) 5- While the user is confirming his/her answer, the word audio is played.

As with question #1 playing the sentence audio is important in providing (grammatical) context and minimizing the chance of misunderstandings (e.g., homophones). At this point in time, this question utilizes the honor system where after writing his/her answer in the field the user must confirm his/her answer by himself/herself. This resolves the issues concerning capital letters and apostrophes if an automatic check would be performed by the computer. That being said, it might prove effective to release a future version of the software with an automatic but lenient check system.

54 If the word is isolated (not linked to a sentence in the textbook) the word audio file will be played twice in all. 34

Question #4 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- An English sentence containing a blank is presented55. →(What day is it ______?) 2- The user has to choose the answer or word form as the answer. A: tamorrow B: tumorrow C: tomorrow D: next today 3- If answered incorrectly the sentence audio file will be played and the right answer will be shown.

Question #4 explores common conjugation, grammar and spelling mistakes within the multiple-choice options. Of course there can be many grammatically correct answers for the blank but the multiple-choice quiz will limit it to one which corresponds to the linguistic item of study. For example the past tense form of irregular verbs can be juxtaposed to an ungrammatical regular past. This is also great for practicing prepositions and conjunctions. Nouns can explore ungrammatical options beyond just spelling such as singular/plural forms (number agreement).

55 In the case where a word isn’t linked to a sentence, one letter or two of the word is erased and replaced with a blank. Then the user must choose the correct answer between four choices. 35

Question #5 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- A Japanese sentence56 is shown. →(明日は何曜日ですか。) 2- The user has to type-in an L2 translation (ENG) for it. 3- A correct translation is shown and the user must confirm or infirm his translation. 4- While the user is confirming his/her answer, the (ENG) sentence audio is played.

This question is probably the most challenging for users as they may sometimes be asked to write long sentences in English. Although the difficulty level may be high, there are also benefits as their writing fluency will increase through practice. This question utilizes the honor system where the users must confirm their answers. Such a system is beneficial for sentence translation type questions as there may be more than a single right answer when it comes to translation. Therefore the user himself/herself may be the judge if their answer was appropriate or not irrespective of the example given as an answer.

56 If the linguistic item isn’t attached to a sentence, only the word will be displayed. 36

Question #6 Flow and Process (e.g. linguistic item #105 tomorrow)

1- An English sentence61 is shown. →(What day is it tomorrow?) 2- The user has to type-in an L1 translation (JPN) for it. 3- A correct translation is shown and the user must confirm or infirm his translation. 4- While the user is confirming his/her answer, the (ENG) sentence audio is played.

This question is a little easier than the previous as the flow is from English to the users’ L1 (Japanese). As this question also uses the honor system when confirming one’s answer it permits users to confirm the validity of his/her own translation as there may exist other appropriate translations than the set example.

Question #7 Flow and Process57 (e.g. New Horizon P.2 Dialog)

1- The user is asked to orally read the passage a first time. 2- An audio file of a reading by a native speaker is played. (this enables the user to “notice the gap” between his reading and the audio file) 3- The user is asked to orally read the passage a second time.

In essence this task is one of extensive practice to increase the user’s speaking and reading fluency, as all the included words will have been reviewed at least once beforehand. Because of the relatively low level of difficulty and the fact that the user must perform an oral reading twice, this task moves two intervals forward every time it is completed. There is no way to fail this activity for the time being. Future versions of the software will include voice recording to enable users and their teacher to verify performance and progress. Such recordings could also be accessed to verify if users are performing the task diligently.

57 Once all the linguistic elements of dialogs or readings have been encountered at least once this voiced-reading exercise must be completed by the users.

The National Reading Panel (2000) concluded the following about oral reading:

“The panel also concluded that guided oral reading is important for developing fluency- the ability to read with efficiency and ease […] Specifically, guided oral reading helped students across a wide range of grade levels to learn to recognize new words, helped them to read accurately and easily, and helped them to comprehend what they read.”

The main reason for including such an activity was because most current SRS do not specifically attend to building up reading fluency above the word level and do not attend to speaking fluency.

(Total number of questions/tasks prepared for the first textbook58) l802 flashcards X 6 questions/tasks = 4812 tasks/questions l4812 task/questions + 48 oral reading exercises = 4860 tasks/questions overall

Preparing such a large amount of questions/tasks might be viewed as a colossal task but in order to cover all three linguistic features and different flows of items to be learned it is a necessity. Moreover, although this gives the question/task writer more work, the student/user will not feel the weight of the extra questions/tasks load if processed under ISRS as study becomes much more manageable under 850 flashcards rather than under 4860 flashcards (traditional SRS) which would sometimes cause unnecessary overlap59. The next section will explain how the spacing of multiple tasks/questions can be managed effectively with ISRS.

58 The software was limited to encompass the first textbook as to create a working and usable sample. 59 For example the movement/shuffling of cards could cause similar questions to be asked at very close intervals or even consecutively which would diminish the spacing effect (some questions are basically the same but with a reverse flow (from JPN/ENG to ENG/JPN e.g., #1 & 2, #5 & 6). 39

3.4 Interval Efficiency and Spacing in ISRS

Since ISRS includes various types of questions and tasks to be included under each flashcard, it requires a flexible system with multiple intervals to fit and space these tasks appropriately and effectively. In order to conceptualize a more efficient spacing along the learning curve, some good ideas can be found in the field of mechanics, in particular how some car transmissions are more efficient60 than others throughout acceleration (which can act as a good analogy for the learning process, as both can be represented by mathematical curves). Although memory and mechanics are completely different fields both can utilize the power of mathematics to calculate and find better and more effective algorithms for either finding better gear ratios in car acceleration or better spacing review intervals in the memorization process.

l A more efficient algorithm (more efficient mechanical solution) Analogy: A car with a CVT (continuously variable transmission) is proven more efficient than the same car with a standard 5 gear transmission because the CVT transmission finds the best gear ratio throughout acceleration which translates into a smoother acceleration and therefore better gas mileage. Often cars with CVT systems gain 15%, 20% in efficiency.

Figure 3.3 CVT mechanics

(retrieved on December 17th, 2014 from: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmission) (www.mitsubishi-motors.co.jp) (www.nissan-global.com))

60 Require less gas (energy output) 40 l This system also uses an alternating “gear” system (in this case 18 different “gear ratios”61. Multiple gears enable more flexibility in finding intervals which are closer to the user’s actual memory span for each item to be memorized and therefore are more efficient. As discussed earlier in the literature summary (p.15) it is important to establish correct spacing (not too far as the chance of a successful review decrease beyond realistic probability, nor too close as the benefit of the spacing effect will be weak). lAn important indicator for establishing more precise intervals that is largely unutilized in SRS remains the user’s answering speed. A wrong answer remains a wrong answer, but when it comes to right answers it would be unwise to consider an answer which was given slowly through lots of hesitation or long reflection on equal standing with an answer which was given quickly. This is an important indicator to establish whether the next interval should be closer (easier) or farther (more difficult) for the current item of study. Specifically in this system, questions/tasks have been purposely combined in sets of two to permit the skipping of a question when the user answers correctly under the set time limit.

A correct response within the time limit (see green lines, Figure 3.4) enables the learner to skip an interval to proceed through the intervals more quickly. Although the learner will skip a question/task the ordering of these will assure that the learner will always move from Meaning to Form to Function back to Meaning and so on as such focus comes in sets of two questions/tasks. A correct yet slower response (see yellow lines, Figure 3.4) enables the learner to only move one interval ahead. An incorrect response will make the learner either repeat the same interval if committed within in the first six intervals or greatly reduce the interval by a tier (minus six interval positions) if the mistake is committed in later intervals (see red lines in Figure 3.4).

61 3 tiers X 6 questions/tasks = 18 gears. This doesn’t include the 7th task which operates differently, see P.42. 41

3.5 Flashcard Priority/Management and Ordering

There are 2333 linguistic items included in the JHS New Horizon textbooks. These items were first listed in alphabetical order with their page number written down next to them (see List 3.1). In order to make flashcards follow page order to facilitate chronological study, these were rearranged starting with the first textbook from the first page62 (see List 3.2). Linguistic entries on the same page were ordered alphabetically from A to Z. Such an order accommodates users in their progressive study of their textbook and can permit page selection/skip. Therefore, specific review for upcoming tests/quizzes may be done more easily.

List 3.1 Example of alphabetical lexical word ordering of items63 33 to 54

*Another interesting observation to make here is column F where repeating words that differ under the same part of speech (column H64) are numbered progressively and repeating words that are categorized under a different part of speech (column H) are indicated with an arrow.

62For example an entry from page 2 of the first textbook would be entered as 1002, an entry from page 101 of the second textbook would be 2101. 63 One has to be subtracted to the seen item numbers because they start from horizontal line 2. Therefore the first entry should be 33 and not 34 on this page. 64 Written in Japanese to save space. 43

List 3.2 Example of lexical word ordering by page number of items 1 to 21

* Another point to note is that an asterisk (*) in this list indicates the absence of the word in the particular textbook (NH1 = textbook for JHS 1st grade). The page number indicates the page where the word first appears in the series and the software uses this as the indicator to start study/review of the item.

(Review and Progress count) When a flashcard is encountered for the first time, the progress count goes up by one. After this point, the card enters the established interval system (refer to p.42). When the set interval timer has elapsed (shorter or longer depending on the interval stage) it comes back as a review card (the review card count goes up by one). Review cards have priority over new cards; therefore all pending65 review cards must be reviewed first (review card count most go back to zero) before the user may encounter new cards. Once reviewed, these cards re-enter the interval system and are set with their appropriate timers before resurfacing as review cards again. Some SRS programs such as Anki allow users to set parameters and prioritize between the number of new cards and review cards encountered but I disagree with letting the user make such a decision because if review cards are pending to be reviewed they have already passed the point in time where recall has become

65 Cards within the interval system whose current interval timer has elapsed. 44 challenging for the user. Any extra wait66 will make their recall harder and therefore cause inefficiency in the system as this will increase the probability of unsuccessful reviews.

On the left side of the screen a progress count and review card count can be seen :

Card progress analysis: l22 cards have been encountered and are included within the interval system. l14 / 22 cards have seen their interval review times elapse and are pending for review. l8 / 22 cards’ review timers haven’t yet elapsed and are therefore not ready for review. lOnce the user reviews the pending 14 cards, new cards will be presented and the progress count will continue to increase from this point until a card or some cards are ready for review again.

66 For example, if the study of new cards is prioritized over review cards. 45

(Daily timer and question timer) Another feature included in the program is the use of different timers. The question timer in the bottom left of the screen determines the learner’s fluency in regards to the current linguistic item/feature of study. In this case if the learner answers correctly within 8 seconds, he/she will skip an interval (see green lines on p.42). Another important timer is the daily timer which records the learners’ daily usage. A color scheme is used to promote good study habits. Under five minutes the time remains red, above five minutes it becomes yellow, and green for above 10 minutes. A rough estimate of 5-10 minutes a day, 4-5 days a week should be more than enough to enable a healthy learning and review pace to easily cover the study of 850 JHS 1st grade items and allow enough study time for the additional influx of 2nd and 3rd grade flashcards as they progress through the JHS English curriculum.

(Character and Context pictures) Another add-in included above the questions/tasks flashcards (top-center screen) is a picture representing the context of the linguistic item (such as a picture of a calendar when the item being studied is a weekday or a month) and sometimes as many as three pictures with a second picture to the left of the context picture (representing the speaker of the word/linguistic item) and a third picture to the right of the context picture (representing the character listening to the speaker) 67. In essence these pictures are used as reminders of the surrounding context of who, where, when and how the word (what) is used.

67 The audio files also change to match the voice pitch of the speaker (gender, age). When there is no identified speaker or listener these screen areas remain blank. 46

In later stages of linguistic knowledge acquisition, specific/original contextual knowledge linked to a linguistic knowledge usually fades and what remains is the form-meaning link and probably some type of subconscious or generalized contextual memory. For example, although we can’t remember the specifics of when and where we learned a word like “dog”, we can still use it correctly across various contexts. As for beginner learners, it can be hypothesized that reinforcing contextual knowledge in the early stages of acquisition might prove essential in promoting longer-term retention and better functional use of the lexical items especially in an EFL learning context where there is a higher possibility that the language is often encountered unlinked to any particular context68.

(Mobile phone version) One of the challenges with the cellphone version was deciphering what must be kept and what can be left out in terms of on-screen information because of the limited screen size. If everything was to be kept, the text size would be so small that a magnifying glass or a considerable amount of zooming in and out would become

68 Isolated words, phrases and sentences in study material such as word lists. 47 necessary when using the software. Therefore choices had to be made and the final decision was to prioritize the flashcard (question) itself and leave a slim menu bar on the top to indicate the number of review cards, progress and question timer (see screenshots below). In the end, cellphones present the advantage of being extremely portable and usable at any given time. However they also have disadvantages such as their small screen size. Another issue with cellphones is that they often have an integrated and automated spell check/prediction tool which functions even while web browsing (see picture to the right below), it gives away the answer to some questions which is unfortunate. This will have to be addressed in the future.

Smartphone version screenshots

*In the picture on the right, the answer “lake” is unfortunately displayed by a spell checker/predictor after typing only a part of the word.

(Collecting statistics for software improvement and group evaluation) A great advantage of SRS software that has not been discussed often in the past is the possibility to accumulate what is currently known as “big data”. This can be 48 described as the accumulation of huge amounts of data tracking user utilization in the utmost detail. In terms of educational software, pertinent information such as user login times, performance and results can be easily stored to be later analyzed and interpreted. For example, educational researchers of SRS can analyze user performance results to compare interval, question type success rates (see table for global stats below) and linguistic item success rates (see table for item stats p.50). Such information can later be used by researchers to adjust/find more efficient learning intervals or to balance question types and by teachers to become aware of their students’ strengths and weaknesses.

Performance statistics (Global Stats) –question types by columns and interval tiers by rows

*Includes all 18 intervals, arranged in 3 memory tiers (first three horizontal lines) and 6 main question types (first six vertical columns) including their tier and question type averages and an overall grand total. Questions answered under the set time limit are counted under green, questions answered correctly over the time limit are counted under yellow, and questions answered incorrectly are counted under red and the answering time averages are also included. 49

Performance statistics –per flashcard/linguistic items

*this picture includes item 1 to 15. Having access to such statistics for a whole group of students or even individual students could be quite beneficial for a teacher when he/she is planning on what linguistic items to focus on when conducting in-class review exercises/sessions. The number of responses are sorted with percentages and the average response time is also listed. If these were real statistics, a teacher could notice #9 as an item that might need to be reviewed during class time.

3.6 Research Context

The research was conducted at Okayama University in Japan. The main departments involved were the departments of Education and Psychology as students from these departments were judged as being most qualified to understand either English curriculum at JHS and/or the science of memorization. The experimentation of the software was done voluntarily by the participants via the Internet (computer or cellphone) in their own time because of the nature of the software which favors short but numerous and spread out study sessions69. They were given login names and passwords with the directive to use the software for a period of two weeks around five minutes a day.

3.7 Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to conceptualize, develop, program and test new prototype software “Indirect Spaced Repetition Software” (ISRS) and to assess the perceptions of the next generation of educators in regards to integrating such software in English classes. The research questions addressed in this study: What are the perceptions of the participants in regards to integrating new software within and/or in parallel to JHS English classes? a. Do they find the software useful for JHS students? b. Do they find the software easy to use for JHS students? c. Do they find the software enjoyable for JHS students? d. Do they think JHS teachers would like to integrate the software in their classes or in parallel to their class (homework)?

69 Favors spaced repetition and not massed repetition. 51

3.8 Participants

The participants in this study included five undergraduate students of English education, one undergraduate student of Elementary School education and one graduate student of psychology. Two of the participants were female and the other five were male. A larger number had teaching experience through working at cram schools and most had undergone four weeks of teacher training in a public Junior High School. To the author’s knowledge, they all owned smartphones and were without a doubt digitally fluent individuals, this paired with their educational background and experience made them ideal candidates for the study. Their pre-project survey responses (a summary of the results can be found in Table 3.2) also reflected the author’s impressions of the participants. Five out of seven participants showed interest and willingness to become English teachers with a majority aiming to teach at the JHS level. Participants affirmed they were confortable using a computer (or smartphone) and the Internet (mean = 4.43, SD = 0.53). Four out the seven participants had prior experience using “SRS” software. Although the majority agrees that e-learning can make study more effective (mean = 3.71, SD = 0.76), the reality is that they don’t implement e-learning in their own study of English to the level of this belief (mean = 2.86, SD = 1.21).

3.9 Materials

This research utilized experimental and newly designed ISRS software by the author described earlier in this chapter. The participants accessed the software directly through Internet browsing software70 via either a smartphone or a computer and their utilization was monitored and recorded71 by the software. A pre-project questionnaire was given before the start of the two-week trial and a post-project questionnaire was given at the end of the trial. The questionnaires adapted from Ranalli (2009) and Altiner (2011) permitted the collection of both quantitative and

70 The designed software streamed live through web browsers and therefore did not require any download or installation process. 71 Their login times, answers, progress etc… 52 qualitative data throughout the research process.

(Pre-project questionnaire) A pre-project questionnaire was given to all seven candidates before engaging in the two-week trial of the experimental software (see Appendix F). The first section collected general and academic background information about the participants such as their name, gender and study major. The second section was filled up by those who had previous experience using “SRS” to assess their perceptions of it. Likert-scale items were used (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = no opinion, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree). These were assessed with three items, “I feel that “SRS” is useful for language learning.”, “I feel that “SRS” is easy to use.” And “I feel that “SRS” is enjoyable.” The third section also used a Likert-scale to assess the candidates’ digital fluency, digital learning experience, pedagogical opinion of review and e-learning in general. These were assessed with five items, “I feel confortable using a computer (or smartphone) and the internet.”, “I often use e-learning resources when studying foreign languages.”, “I know how to learn vocabulary effectively.”, “I feel that review is an important part of the learning process.” and “I think that e-learning can make language study more effective.” The pre-project questionnaire’s reliability was verified with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient within an SPSS program which produced a score of 0.736 which indicates an acceptable degree of reliability according to George and Mallery (2003: 231). George and Mallery provide the following scale for interpreting Cronbach’s alpha : “_ > .9 – Excellent, _ > .8 – Good, _ > .7 – Acceptable, _ > .6 – Questionable, _ > .5 – Poor, and _ < .5 – Unacceptable”.

Table 3.2 Pre-project survey responses Section 1 Participant Information and Academic Background 1.1 Name and contact information (e-mail) Male Female 1.2 Gender 5 2

1.3 What is your major in university? 5 English Education 1 Elementary School Education 1 Psychology 1.4 In the future, would you like to be an English Yes Maybe No teacher? 3 2 2 JHS HS Other 1.5 If yes or maybe, at what academic level? 4 1 0

Section 2 “SRS” Experience Yes No 2.1 Have you ever used “SRS” for language learning? 4 3 *4 out of 7 respondents answered the following questions (Likert-scale) Mean SD 2.2 I feel that “SRS” is useful for language learning. 4.25 0.5 2.3 I feel that “SRS” is easy to use. 4.25 0.96 2.4 I feel that “SRS” is enjoyable. 3.25 1.5

Section 3 Digital Experience and Pedagogical Opinions

(Likert-scale) Mean SD 3.1 I feel confortable using a computer (or smartphone) and the internet. 4.43 0.53 3.2 I often use e-learning resources when studying foreign languages. 2.86 1.21 3.3 I know how to learn vocabulary effectively. 3.29 0.95 3.4 I feel that review is an important part of the learning process. 4.43 0.53 3.5 I think that e-learning can make language study more effective. 3.71 0.76

(Post-Project questionnaire) A post project questionnaire (see Appendix G) was given to all seven participants after a two-week trial of the experimental software which also utilized a Likert-scale paired with follow-up open-end qualitative questioning which asked them to explain their answers in more detail. The first section assessed the participants’ general perceptions in terms of usefulness, usability and enjoyment for JHS students and their teachers. These were assessed with four items, “I think that this software is an effective tool for JHS students learning English.” (usefulness), “I think that this software would be easy to use for JHS students.” (usability), “I think that JHS students would enjoy using such software as part of their study of English.” (enjoyment), and “I think that teachers would like to incorporate such software in their class or in parallel to class.” (usefulness, usability and enjoyment). The second and final section focused on assessing perceptions about the effectiveness of the software in regards to the goals established by the author for his experimental “ISRS” method. These were assessed with eight items: “I think this software schedules review effectively for students.”, “I think that this software reviews word meaning, form and function well.”, “I think that this software incorporates both spoken/written and output/input aspects well”, “I think that the questions are well balanced between the word, sentence and paragraph levels.”, “I think that the questions are well balanced between the 4 skills (Listening, Speaking, Reading, Writing).”, “I think that integrating voiced reading exercises is a good idea.”, “I think that using content directly from the textbook makes the software easier to integrate into class.” and “If integrated, I think such software can help teachers monitor their students’ English.” The post-project questionnaire’s reliability was verified with Cronbach’s alpha coefficient based on standardized items within an SPSS program which produced a score of 0.701 showing an acceptable degree of reliability according to George and Mallery (2003).

(Data Collection Process and Observations) Volunteer participants agreed to use the experimental software where possible for 5 minutes everyday and were expected to access a secured internet website with the provided login and password keys. Upon their agreement, they were also asked to fill out the pre-project questionnaire mentioned earlier. On the same-day all of the participants received a first e-mail which thanked them for their participation and gave them advice on how to test and use the software. First, they were reminded to engage in spaced repetition as much as possible, in other words limit their login time to between five and ten minutes daily but try to use the software everyday during the two-week trial. Second, they were recommended to test out the software on both PC and smartphone platforms and notice the differences. Third, they were asked to deepen their exploration of the experimental interval system by purposely making mistakes or answering questions over the time limit as the content used in the software was well within their own proficiency levels. Finally, they were asked to imagine how JHS students and teachers would react to such software in terms of usefulness, usability, and enjoyment. During the two-week trial the researcher observed a general decline in use of the software by the end of the first week, a second email was sent out at this time to thank the participants for their participation thus far and encouraged them to continue with their exploration of the software as their progression would unlock different question types. They were also reminded that they could skip through pages by using the page skip field as the first 178 items were from pre-unit pages and contained few example sentences and no paragraph or dialog readings.

Example of Daily Timer Administrator View (not from trial period)

*Access to such information could easily be given to teachers to overview their students’ study habits.

Having access to the participants’ login times aided the author to grasp the depth of their exploration of the software and verify to what degree they had effectively engaged in spaced repetition. Beyond mere traffic overview, such a tool would also be great for teachers to assess future student participation and help instill good study habits. Unfortunately, most teachers involuntarily encourage short term study practices as explicit vocabulary study is commonly geared towards the memorization of wordlists set for particular testing dates. This perspective leads to many of the learnt words being later forgotten. Therefore, it should become imperative for teachers to instill good study habits in students to permit a more effective study of vocabulary. One idea to encourage good habits could be to reserve a large portion of the overall grade to participation. Teachers can explain the higher benefits of spaced repetition and award higher participation marks to the students who engage in it. Out-of-class participation (or study habits) is often overlooked but ultimately it is what separates average students from great students. Now, we live in the digital age which can provide such tools to teachers to enable a clearer look into the study habits of their students and this information can ultimately help them increase their understanding and help them guide their students better. At the end of the two-week trial, the participants completed the post-project survey mentioned earlier. They were given the option of completing it either through e-mail or fill a paper version hand-out. Most (five out of seven participants) preferred to 57 fill-out the questionnaire on paper. In the end, the quantitative and qualitative data from both surveys combined with the data accumulated from the online software provided reliable and accurate answers for the research questions.

3.10 Analysis of the Data

In order to answer the questions pertaining to usefulness, usability and enjoyment of the software for both JHS students and teachers, the study used data accumulated from both surveys and observations by the researcher. The data of Likert-scaled items was verified by the SPSS program through Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. These research questions were answered with the calculated mean scores and standard deviations of relevant items. Moreover, further comments given by the participants in their post-project survey provided background and explained their Likert-scale choices. This qualitative data obtained from the post-survey questionnaire was further analyzed through a “coding scheme” where data falling under the same piece of information was grouped together (Parson & Brown, 2002). This scheme suggests that researchers, while reading through documents, should make effort to notice commonly occurring themes72 and code73 them accordingly. For this study, the author focused on finding comments which were at minimum echoed by as few as one other participant in consideration of the small pool of participants.

72 This can be carried out specifically by looking for words or phrases which repeat themselves (Parson & Brown, 2002). 73 A highly recommended procedure may be to use colors to code the different items (Schwalbach, 2003). 58

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter will present the results from the data analysis respective of the three specific research questions. These three questions originated from the same general objective which was to assess the participants’ perception in regards to integrating new experimental software within and/or parallel to JHS English classes.

Research Question #1: Do the participants find the software useful for JHS students? (Usefulness assessment)

This question was answered by the participants’ responses to the post-project questionnaire and was substantiated with additional (qualitative) comments. This question was asked deliberately in the first section of the post-project questionnaire. Overall, participants revealed that they mostly agreed that the software would be an effective tool for JHS students learning English (mean = 3.71, SD = 0.76).

Table 4.1 Post-project survey responses in respect to usefulness (General)

Section 1 General Perceptions

(Likert-scale) Mean SD

1.1 I think that this software is an effective tool for JHS students learning English. 3.71 0.76

The results were also explained and expanded upon in the commentary sections of their post-project questionnaire. In terms of being useful for students, some of their comments praised the software for aiding students’ memorization of English, while others noted possible improvements in terms of difficulty setting and performance feedback:

(Positive comments for item 1.1)

It’s good for students because the words they must memorize or recall are suggested automatically. So I think it’s effective. (P1) 59

At the JHS level, I believe that students who have difficulty with English also have a general difficulty with memorization. With the use of such a tool, students can become more familiar with the concept of memory and increase it. Moreover, as the software asks users to type the words frequently, memorization becomes easy. (P2)

I think that this software is a very effective tool for learning English because it utilizes a quiz style approach. Also when answers are checked we can listen to the pronunciation. (P5)

(Constructive criticism for item 1.1)

The loaded content (questions/tasks) might be too easy for some students, so if the users could chose the difficulty level it would make the software better. (P4)

I think this software would be better if it provided the users with more detailed records of their progress and a daily performance report; this could be used as a reminder to login. Also some sentences took some time to be loaded (lag). (P6)

The comments provided by the participants were very eye-opening because although they seem to appreciate the efforts put into the extra questions and scheduling (area of focus in the design process), they also note the needs of the user to have more control over the software in terms of setting difficulty and get more feedback about their performance. In other words, making study more effective doesn’t stop at calculating and building a more time-effective or higher quality study system but also attending the needs of the users such as giving them more control and feedback over the learning process. The issue of software lag is one that is hard to get around as the software is one of a streaming nature, although this presents the advantage of not requiring any download the overall speed is slower. In future research, having a downloadable format of the software available could be an interesting option for a number of users. Finally, the issue of allowing the students set their own level of difficulty is one that is hard to address because essentially they all have the same textbook and the program already shuffles the flashcards according to their success 60 rate. Once they complete the first set of flashcards, letting users proceed to the next grade set of flashcards, would be more than welcome, but drastically changing the decided flow of the cards would literally be like throwing their textbook away in the middle of the year, therefore I think teachers and not students should have control over such a decision. A number of questions were elaborated upon to address issues related to usefulness more specifically as the author regards these as being important points that educational software designers should focus on before attending to usability and enjoyment. Actually, all of the questions below (see Table 4.2) were specific goals for the software set by the author. In this study, the last two items (11 & 12) were the most highly evaluated with good agreement (having a low number in terms of SD) between participants. These two items were also particularly geared towards making the designed software a tool specifically designed for JHS teachers to integrate smoothly within their classes. Unfortunately the first six items (5 to 10) weren’t as highly evaluated by the participants. The author hypothesizes that this may be due to the participants limited exploration of the software; none of them progressed beyond the study of linguistic item #178. This marks the point74 where better balance is achieved due to the higher proportion of voiced reading activities75 (spoken output) and a higher proportion of example sentences linked to the linguistic items. Unfortunately, the participant who had progressed the most only encountered 102 items. The author had not expected this as he had estimated that the majority of participants should be able to reach up to 300 items within a two-week time frame and therefore exceeding the pivotal 178 mark.

74 This is the point where proper textbook unit study begins, beyond the alphabet, number and calendar item pages. 75 Paragraph or dialog readings. (question type #7, refer to page 38). 61

Table 4.2 Post-project survey responses in respect to usefulness (Specifics)

Section 2 Specific questions in terms of usefulness

(Likert-scale) Mean SD

5. I think this software schedules review effectively for students. 4.14 0.69

6. I think that this software reviews word meaning, form and function well. 4.14 0.69

7. I think that this software incorporates both spoken/written and output/input aspects well. 4.00 0.82

8. I think that the questions are well balanced between the word, sentence and paragraph levels. 3.57 0.79

9. I think that the questions are well balanced between the 4 skills (L, S, R, W). 3.71 1.11

10. I think that integrating voiced reading exercises is a good idea. 4.14 0.90

11. I think that using content directly from the textbook makes the software easier to integrate into class. 4.29 0.76

12. If integrated, I think such software can help teachers monitor their students’ English. 4.29 0.76

Another interesting comparison to make is to compare the usefulness scores given in the pre-project survey for SRS answered by the four participants who had experience using SRS with the scores they gave to the new software in the post-project survey. In this case, participants score their general SRS experience on relatively equal standing with the new software (see table 4.3).

Table 4.3 Paired samples statistics and test (Usefulness) Participant SRS exp. (Likert-scale score) New software (Likert-scale score) #1 4 4 #2 5 4 #4 4 4 #7 4 4 Mean 4.25 4 SD 0.5 0 Std. Std. Error Sig. pre-project Mean t df Deviation Mean (2-tailed) post-project .25 .50 .25 1.00 3 .39

Research Question #2: Do the participants find the software easy to use for JHS students? (Usability assessment)

This question was asked deliberately in the first section of the post-project questionnaire. Participants somewhat agreed that the software would be easy to use for JHS students learning English (mean = 3.43, SD = 0.98). This question received the lowest score of the three and was somewhat expected because JHS students aren’t necessarily expected to be digitally fluent at their age. Moreover, there’s always a possibility that they don’t have any e-learning experience, let alone SRS experience.

Table 4.4 Post-project survey responses in respect to usability

Section 1 General Perceptions

(Likert-scale) Mean SD

2.1 I think that this software would be easy to use for JHS students. 3.43 0.98

The scores given by participants were also explained and expanded upon in the commentary sections of their post-survey questionnaire. In this section few comments praised the software as being easy to use, as most noted flaws and provided suggestions for improvement:

(Constructive criticism for item 2.1)

The font on the cellphone version is hard to read, even more so for JHS students. Moreover, the software doesn’t include enough explanations in terms of how-to use it. (P3)

For people who aren’t accustomed to using computers or smartphones, using this software may prove a little difficult. But most students will be able to easily use it without any trouble. (P4)

The font issue was addressed after the trial period ended. It appears that because the PC version was using the Comic Sans MS font76 which was unfortunately

76 This font was chosen because it was the closest font to the one used in JHS English Textbooks. 63 not supported by Smartphone web-browsers and therefore a random and extremely italicized font was set by default in that version of the software. The participants also shared that it became a major issue they had with the software as most of them tried the PC version maybe only once for the sake of trying it but preferred using the Smartphone version as they could do so anytime and anywhere such as during their commute to Okayama University. As for helping future JHS students who might be digitally-challenged use the software, some suggestions were about including additional and longer explanations within the software and/or possibly having an explanation video such a link to a YouTube video. Another interesting comparison to make is to compare the usability scores given in the pre-project survey for SRS answered by the four participants who had experience using SRS with the scores they gave to the new software in the post-project survey. In this case, most participants scored the usability of their previously used SRS quite higher than that of the new software (see table 4.5). As explained previously, the lower score might be partly explained by the fact that the new software was oriented towards JHS students and therefore their evaluation might have been stricter.

Table 4.5 Paired samples statistics and test (Usability) Participant SRS exp. (Likert-scale score) New software (Likert-scale score) #1 3 5 #2 5 4 #4 5 3 #7 4 3 Mean 4.25 3.75 SD 0.96 0.52 Std. Std. Error Sig. pre-project Mean t df Deviation Mean (2-tailed) post-project .50 1.73 .87 .58 3 .60

Research Question #3: Do the participants find the software enjoyable for JHS students? (Enjoyment assessment)

Table 4.6 Post-project survey responses (Enjoyment)

Section 1 General Perceptions

(Likert-scale) Mean SD

3.1 I think that JHS students would enjoy using such software as part of their study... 3.57 0.98

The scores given by participants were also explained and expanded upon in the commentary sections of their post-survey questionnaire. In this section some of the comments praised the software for being enjoyable and others noted suggestions for improvement:

(Positive comments for item 3.1)

Students are used writing on paper or listening to CDs, so using software with their PC or phone would be fun and interesting to them. (P4)

Incorporating native English voices is a great point and they can feel the passion (of the characters/voice actors). The change in colors of buttons when running out of time was a nice touch too. (P6)

(Constructive criticism for item 3.1)

As users progress through the software, I think that they need to have a better sense of their progress. For example, just as in a game, the screen could change and show their level going up. (P2)

The software could be more convincing with illustrations/animations of words, as just writing “good” or “wrong” in plain text seemed a bit regrettable. (P6)

One of the best and uncontested advantages of digital flashcards remains the possibility to easily include multimedia capabilities. Other than the more obvious advantages of teaching pronunciation and enabling audio input, it seems to also be 65 something generally enjoyable as pointed out by a number of participants. Moreover the issue of giving users more detailed feedback about their performance doesn’t only seem to be one of usefulness but also enjoyment, therefore improving this should take priority in future software updates. Also, designers working in the field of educational software have to be aware of competition from the video game realm where player accomplishments and progress are often accompanied by flashy visual demonstrations. The reality is that unanimated congratulatory text is not sufficient even in the digital software world of today. Another interesting comparison to make is to compare the enjoyment scores given in the pre-project survey for SRS answered by the four participants who had experience using SRS with the scores they gave to the new software in the post-project survey. In this case, the participants scores varied considerably on an individual basis but the overall average remained the same (see table 4.7). It could be hypothesized that this might be due to the various and different SRS used by the participants. This could indicate that some had used more enjoyable SRS and some had used less enjoyable SRS in the past. There is also the possibility that because their reflections were geared towards JHS students that this might also have an influence on their choices depending on whether they believe that JHS students are hard or easy to please.

Table 4.7 Paired samples statistics and test (Enjoyment) Participant SRS exp. (Likert-scale score) New software (Likert-scale score) #1 4 2 #2 2 3 #4 5 4 #7 2 4 Mean 3.25 3.25 SD 1.5 0.52 Std. Std. Error Sig. pre-project Mean t df Deviation Mean (2-tailed) post-project 0.00 1.83 .91 .00 3 1.00

Research Question #4: Do the participants think JHS teachers would like to integrate the software in their classes or in parallel to their class (homework)?

The participants agreed with somewhat split cohesion (considerable variance in scores) that the software would be something that teachers would like to incorporate in or in parallel to their class (mean = 3.86, SD = 1.21).

Table 4.8 Post-project survey responses in respect to classroom integration

Section 1 General Perceptions

(Likert-scale) Mean SD

4.1 I think that teachers would like to incorporate such software in their class… 3.86 1.21

The participants also provided commentary on how the software can potentially be even more effective if teachers provide additional encouragement and monitoring. However they also commented on the difficulty of integrating such a system in present day classrooms:

(Positive comment for item 4.1)

I think that with the cooperation of teachers this tool/software’s effectiveness can be even greater for students. I want to incorporate such a system as part of the routine of my future classes. (P6)

(Constructive criticism for item 4.1)

The all-surrounding Internet equipped environment required by the software is probably the biggest hurdle facing current classroom integration. (P3)

One remaining problem is that whether students have computers or not to enable review at home. (P5)

As far as integrating SRS in the classroom, no data (quantitative or qualitative) in this study, nor in other studies have doubted the general effectiveness of such software. The main issue is and always has been the technical difficulties surrounding integration. However, the minimum requirements are already met as most, if not all, schools in Japan have computer rooms and internet access. Moreover, students are usually granted access to use the internet at school after class hours. Although establishing the ideal digital learning environment with students connecting to the software through a Wi-Fi connection within their regular classroom via a tablet computer or other device might not be possible for all schools, it is becoming an increasingly viable reality.

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION

This chapter will discuss the findings of this study, explore its limitations and provide recommendations for future research in ISRS (Indirect spaced repetition software), classroom software integration and software assisted-learning for JHS students.

5.1 Discussion

This research was comprised of four questions to evaluate perceptions of the author’s designed ISRS in terms of usefulness, usability and enjoyment to assess possible future JHS classroom integration. The first question was “Do the participants find the software useful for JHS students?” The survey results and comments showed the software was perceived as useful by participants as they agreed it thoroughly and effectively reviewed what the students learn in class and also appreciated the multimedia capabilities such as the included audio. Nakata (2008a) also agreed that the hidden potential of digital flashcard software may very well lie in the utilization and exploration of such multimedia capabilities. The participants also provided recommendations to improve the software such as the importance of giving users more feedback on their progress to foster a higher sense of accomplishment. The second question was “Do the participants find the software easy to use for JHS students?” The survey results and comments showed the software as being usable but not necessarily easy to use as many participants noted that longer and additional explanations could make the software easier to use. Usability remains an important factor and should also be an important area of focus for software developers. The third question was “Do the participants find the software enjoyable to use for JHS students?” The survey results and comments showed the software as being somewhat enjoyable, some participants noted that they found the software to be visually appealing and also believed that students would enjoy the integration of contextual pictures and sound files. They also noted that the software could benefit 69 from integrating game-like components like congratulatory animations and motivating progress feedback. Such small details become crucial, especially in regards to software which is intended for daily usage on a long term scale. The fourth question was “Do the participants think that JHS teachers would like to integrate the software in their classes or in parallel to their class (homework)?” The survey results and comments communicated positive interest but also raised concerns due to the fact that schools and students might not be sufficiently technologically equipped for such software integration to take place.

5.2 Limitations of the Study

Most of the limitations concerning this study are due to the fact that its goals were limited to assess the participants’ perceptions of prototype software (ISRS) designed by author for JHS students and didn’t explore or test the software beyond these goals. The literature review and the conceptualization phase of software development were prioritized and this left little time to engage in finding a large number of participants. That being said, this study was comprised of quality participants who were all individuals knowledgeable in the field of education and/or memorization. However their login times during the trial period were judged to be insufficient by the researcher to permit a more complete view of the software and its various tasks/questions. Moreover because this study didn’t enroll JHS students to test the software, some features such as the tool to accumulate and view performance statistics couldn’t acquire student data which could be used to assess and improve the software.

5.3 Recommendations

After reflecting upon the different results, a number of suggestions can be made for future research. Firstly and maybe most importantly, it would be interesting to conduct research comparing the effectiveness of traditional SRS to the ISRS system developed for this research. Although, this research couldn’t find any quantitative data 70 of statistical significance in terms of perceptions when comparing general SRS to ISRS, it can be hypothesized that statistical significance in terms of participants’ test scores could be found in a study comparing pretest, posttest and delayed posttest scores. Such research could be conducted in the same spirit as Nakata’s (2008a) study which compared different means of study (lists, word cards and SRS) and recorded the differences in participants’ test scores. Secondly, as mentioned earlier data collected through the software on student performance could be analyzed and used to set more efficient intervals / question patterns etc… Thirdly although volunteer participants who were knowledgeable in my field have tremendously benefited this research by providing quality feedback, following research should be conducted if possible with various levels of students. It would also prove interesting to analyze the study patterns of students if awarded higher participation marks for good diligence.

5.4 Final Remarks

If there is one message that this research and others before have tried to communicate to the teaching community is that review should be the cornerstone of second language learning and that some review methods are proven more efficient than others. More importantly than conducting group review sessions in class, teachers should teach students good study/review practices and help them acquire good habits so they can successfully engage in their own individually customized review in their own time more efficiently. Teaching them these basic principles will not only help improve their second language acquisition but their overall learning skills. Nowadays digital software such as SRS can assist students in their review efforts and maximize their study efforts as it can help them manage it better. The time gained through using such software could be used towards engaging in other activities that cannot be performed such as person to person communication based activities.

(Appendix A) New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 730 correspondences (54.3% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 1 of 5) a art box college dream able artist boy color drink about as break come drive above ask bright communication during across at bring company each action attack brother compare early actually attention build computer earn after audience building continue easily afternoon away but could east again baby buy country easy against back by course eat ago bad call create eight agree bag camera culture either all ball camp cup else almost bar campaign cut encourage alone be can dark end along beautiful car date enjoy already because card daughter enough also become care day enter always bed carry dead environment am before catch decide especially american begin cause deep even among behind chair degree evening and believe change design event animal best check die ever another better child difference every answer between chinese different everyone any big choice difficult everything anyone bird choose dinner example anything black church discover experience appear blue city do explain apply boat class doctor express area body close dog eye arm book club door face around born cold down fact arrive both collect draw fall 72

New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 730 correspondences (54.3% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 2 of 5) family future hole just make fan game home keep man far get hope kid manager farm girl hospital kill many fast give hot kind market father go hotel kitchen may feel goal hour know maybe feeling gold house knowledge me few good how land mean field great however language measure fight green huge large meet figure ground human last meeting fill group hundred late member find grow hurt later message fine guess husband laugh million finish hair i lead mind fire hand ice learn minute first handle idea leave miss fish happen if left moment five happy imagine leg money flight hard impact let month floor have important letter more fly he improve life morning follow head in light most food hear indeed like mother for heart information line mountain foreign help inside listen mouth forest her instead little move forget here interested live movie four high interesting long mr free him into look mrs freedom himself introduce lose ms friend his it love much from history its low music front hit job machine must full hold join main my 73

New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 730 correspondences (54.3% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 3 of 5) myself on plane result shot name once play return should national one player rich show natural only please ride sign nature open pm right simple near opinion point rise since necessary or police river sing need original poor road sister never other popular rock sit new our practice room six news out present rule size newspaper outside president run skill next over price safe sky nice own problem same sleep night page produce save slowly nine pain product say small no paper program school smile north parent purpose science so not park put scientist some nothing part question sea someone notice party quickly season something now pass quite seat sometimes nt peace radio second son nuclear people raise see song number perfect read seem soon of perform real sell sorry off performance really send sound offer perhaps reason series south office period receive service space officer person red set speak official phone remember seven special often pick report share speech oh picture reporter she spend oil piece resource shoot sport ok place rest shop spot old plan restaurant short spring 74

New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 730 correspondences (54.3% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 4 of 5) stand there turn while all star these tv white answer start they two who around station thing under whose as stay think understand why before still third university wife best stone this until wild better stop those up will by store though us win change story thought use window down street thousand usually winter each strong three value wish early student through various with experience study throw very without future subject time video woman hard such title view wonder home suddenly to village wood hope summer today visit word little sun together voice work long sure tomorrow wait worker more table tonight walk world most take too want worry much talk tool war write no teach touch watch writer on teacher town water wrong one team track way year only tell trade we yes other ten tradition wear yet over test traditional week you play than travel weekend young point thank tree well your return that trip west yourself right the trouble what second their truck when (2nd part of speech) show them TRUE where about sign then try which after so 75

New Horizon words in the first 1345 American Corpus Word Frequencies 730 correspondences (54.3% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 5 of 5) sound that there very well when work

(3rd part of speech) as little no one that

(Appendix B) New Horizon words in the American Corpus Word 1346-2000 Frequencies 145 correspondences (10.8% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 1 of 1) actor cry internet straight move advice dad invite strange smile afraid dance japanese surprised visit ancient dangerous jump surround angry depend lunch sweet anyway desk map tall anywhere disappear mark temperature baseball dry meal terrible basketball earth meaning ticket beach egg meat tie bear enemy minister tired beauty english mirror tour bedroom equal mistake traffic below ethnic mix train beside everywhere mom truly bone fair nod unique border famous nurse user bottle favorite photograph vast bridge flower planet visitor burn football plastic warm bus fourth pleasure waste busy fruit pocket wave careful fun proud weather carefully gather quiet welcome cat german rain wine cheap gift salt wonderful chicken golden separate yellow classroom grade shirt yesterday clean guide shoe clothes hall sick (2nd part of speech) cloud hate smart clean coffee hey snow cut combination holiday soft english comment host solve kind cook importance steal last cool industrial storm late

(Appendix C) New Horizon words in the American Corpus Word 2001-5000 Frequencies 263 correspondences (19.5% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 1 of 2) abroad concert fifteen instructor net addition confuse fifth italian noon africanamerican convenience fifty jacket notebook album cookie forever joke nut alien cousin forty journalist oclock architect cow found joy online arrest crowded friendly juice oral arrow cute friendship junior orange asian dear garbage king ours aunt debut gate knock passion award dessert glad korean peaceful ban destination glove lake peak barrier detective grandchild library peanut bath diamond grandfather lion pen battery disagree grandmother lobby pencil bean dot grandparent lonely pet beef drama guitar luck photographer bike drum gym lucky piano birthday dutch habitat magic pig bitter echo hat mail pizza blanket eighth headache mask plenty blind elderly hello math plus bomb electronic helpful mayor pond borrow elephant hers meaningful pop breakfast eleven hi medium powder cake engineer hill melt praise cap everyday homework meter pride celebrate excited horizon mexican print championship exciting huh milk priority charm excuse hungry mine quietly cheer fade hunt monkey retire chef fare hurry moon rice chocolate favor impress mouse roof clerk festival incredibly musical rose clock fever injure musician round cloth fiction instruct nail sad 78

New Horizon words in the American Corpus Word 2001-5000 Frequencies 263 correspondences (19.5% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 2 of 2) salad towel photograph seal tower shop sentence trainer short seventh trash stay severe treasure stop shade twelve sure shall twentieth this shine twenty waste shock uh watch shopping uncle welcome shout uniform white singer useful wish sixth vacation wonder ski volunteer smell walking soccer wash someday weak sometime wilderness soup wolf spanish workshop square wow stadium wrap steep yours storage suggestion (2nd part of speech) sunny any survival dump sweater favorite swim first symbol fish taste good tea high tennis joke textbook magic thirty ok tightly orange

(Appendix D) New Horizon words outside of 5000 AC Word Frequencies 207 correspondences (15.4% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 1 of 2) advertise dictionary inuit popcorn theirs alaskan dome jam pr thirsty amazed downstairs japantown programmer thirteen an dump jersey quiz thirteenth ant dvd jeweler racket thirtieth apron eighteen jpop rainbow tiger arctic eighty kilometer rainy toast asap eleventh kindergarten recycle told astronaut entertainer kiwi robber toothache badminton eraser koala rookie tundra bark erhu led ruler twelfth bathtub felt lowlands sadness umbrella blossom fifteenth lullaby scissors unbelievable blueberry firework lunchtime seventeen upside bookstore fluently majestic seventy violin braille flute mangrove shining volleyball brightness fourteen mexicanamerican shrine waiter btw fourteenth minus sightseeing website bye fox mommy sixteen women cacao frog motto sixty wool cafeteria glacier moving skate wrapper cannot glue mt smiley wrestler castle goodbye mvp snowboard wrestling cd grandma newscaster softball yogurt cereal graph nineteen sold yunnori cherry hamburger ninety soloist zebra chinatown hammer ninth sour zero chorus hatred noodle spaceship zoo classmate hawaiian octopus stomachache clever heard pamphlet subway (2nd part of speech) cloudy homestay panda sunrise africanamerican comic housework pardon surf and convenient hymn passport sweetheart between cu illustrator percent taco burn deaf ink playful taxi chinese delicious interpreter poncho tenth goodbye 80

New Horizon words outside of 5000 AC Word Frequencies 207 correspondences (15.4% of the total 1345 NH words) (Page 2 of 2) here korean left many some sorry thank then these third those today tomorrow treasure try what which yesterday

(3rd part of speech) best first high home more much some well what

(4th part of speech) that

(Appendix E) 615 words from the first 1345 ACWF not included in NH (Page 1 of 4) ability attend central conversation director absolutely attitude century corner discuss accept attorney certain cost discussion access author certainly count disease according authority challenge couple distance account available chance court district achieve average character cover dozen act avoid charge credit driver activity band Christian crime drop add bank citizen crisis drug additional base civil critical ear address basic claim crowd economic administration basis clear cultural economy admit battle clearly current edge adult beat client customer education advantage beginning coach data effect affect behavior collection deal effective African benefit commercial death effort age beyond common debate election agency bill community decade element agent billion complete decision emerge agreement bit completely defense employee ahead block concept define energy air blood concern deliver entire allow board concerned demand environmental although brain condition democrat establish amount british conduct democratic European analysis budget conference department eventually announce business conflict describe everybody apartment cancer congress despite evidence approach candidate consider detail exactly argue capital consumer determine examine argument career contain develop executive article case contract development exist assume cell contribute direction expect attempt center control directly expert

615 words from the first 1345 ACWF not included in NH (Page 2 of 4) facility half law model per factor hang lawyer modern personal fail health lay mostly physical faith heat leader movement plant fear heavy leadership nation policy feature herself least nearly political federal hide legal neighborhood politics feed highly less network population film horse lesson nobody position final identify level none positive finally image lie nor possibility financial immediately likely normal possible finger include list note potential firm including living object pound focus income local observe power foot increase loss obviously powerful force independent lot occur prepare form indicate magazine onto presence former individual maintain operate press forward industry major operation pressure fresh institution majority opportunity pretty fund insurance manage option prevent gain interest management order previous garden international marriage organization prison gas interview marry others private general investigation material owner probably generally investment matter painting process generation involve media participant production glass involved medical particular professional global issue memory particularly professor government item mention partner project growth itself method past promote guard judge middle path property guest key might patient protect gun labor military pattern protection guy lack mission pay prove 83

615 words from the first 1345 ACWF not included in NH (Page 3 of 4) provide republican similar suggest unless public require simply support upon publish research single supposed variety pull researcher site surface vehicle push resident situation survey version quality respond skin system victim quick response social target violence race responsibility society task vision range reveal soldier tax vote rate risk solution technique wall rather role somebody technology weapon reach roll sort television weight reader sales source tend western ready sample southern term whatever reality scale soviet terms whether realize scene species text whole recall score specific themselves whom recent screen spirit theory wide recently section staff therefore willing recognize security stage threat wind record seek standard throughout within reduce senate stare thus would refer senior state tiny yard reflect sense statement top yeah reform serious status total refuse serve step tough (2nd part of speech) region settle stick toward act relate several stock training along relation sex strategy treat american relationship sexual strength treatment away release shake strike trial back religious shape structure troop base remain ship stuff truth because remove shoulder style type bit replace side successful understanding both represent significant suffer unit break 84

615 words from the first 1345 ACWF not included in NH (Page 4 of 4) call note (3rd part of speech) care off before cause once close close open like control out right cost own course past (4th part of speech) deal place no design plan end present enough public even rather face report fall run far safety figure set force share form since front state head step help study her success identity such in support increase talk individual test inside than instead through less to light top like turn look up love use middle vote name where need while

(Appendix F) Pre-Project Questionnaire

Name : ______email : ______

Gender : Male / Female teacher # (assigned by researcher)

University Major : ______

In the future, would you like to be an English teacher? Yes / Maybe / No

If yes or maybe, at what academic level? (JHS / HS / Other) ______

2.1 Have you ever used “Spaced Repetition software” for language learning? Yes / No If yes, please circle the number which corresponds to your opinion for the following. Strongly No Strongly Disagree Agree disagree opinion agree 2.2 I feel that “SRS” is useful for 1 2 3 4 5 language teaching.

2.3 I feel that “SRS” is easy to use. 1 2 3 4 5

2.4 I feel that “SRS” is enjoyable. 1 2 3 4 5

Circle the number which corresponds to your opinion for the following questions. Strongly No Strongly Disagree Agree disagree opinion agree 3.1 I feel confortable using a computer 1 2 3 4 5 (or smartphone) and the internet. 3.2 I often use e-learning resources 1 2 3 4 5 when studying foreign languages.

3.3 I know how to learn vocabulary 1 2 3 4 5 effectively.

3.4 I feel that review is an important 1 2 3 4 5 part of the learning process.

3.5 I think that e-learning can make 1 2 3 4 5 language study more effective. 86

(Appendix G) Post-Project Questionnaire

Name : ______Account＃teacher (assigned by researcher)

Circle the number which corresponds to your Strongly No Strongly disagree agree opinion for the following questions. disagree opinion agree 1.1 I think that this software is useful/ an effective 1 2 3 4 5 tool for JHS students learning English. #1.2 Please explain your answer in more detail. Any suggestions for improvement?

2.1 I think that this software would be easy to use 1 2 3 4 5 for JHS students. #2.2 Please explain your answer in more detail. Any suggestions for improvement?

3.1 I think that JHS students would enjoy using 1 2 3 4 5 such software as part of their study of English. #3.2 Please explain your answer in more detail. Any suggestions for improvement?

4.1 I think that teachers would like to incorporate such 1 2 3 4 5 software in their class or in parallel to class (homework). #4.2 Please explain your answer in more detail. Any suggestions for improvement?

Circle the number which corresponds to your Strongly No Strongly Agree Disagree opinion for the following questions. agree opinion disagree

5. I think this software schedules review effectively for 1 2 3 4 5 students.

6. I think that this software reviews word meaning, 1 2 3 4 5 form and function well.

7. I think that this software incorporates both spoken 1 2 3 4 5 and written output and input well.

8. I think that the questions are well balanced between 1 2 3 4 5 the word, sentence and paragraph levels.

9. I think that the questions are well balanced between 1 2 3 4 5 the 4 skills (L, S, R, W).

10. I think that the idea of integrating voiced reading 1 2 3 4 5 exercises are a good idea.

11. I think that using content directly from the textbook 1 2 3 4 5 makes the software easier to integrate into class?

12. If integrated into class, I think such software can help 1 2 3 4 5 teachers monitor their students’ English (mistakes, etc).

#LAST Please give some of your opinions, thoughts and ideas about questions 5 to 12. Also please feel free to add additional comments and suggestions.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Altiner, Cennet. (2011). Integrating a computer-based flashcard program into academic vocabulary learning. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 10160.

Baddeley, A. (1990). Human Memory. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Baicheng, Z. (2009). Do example sentences work in direct vocabulary learning? Issues in Educational Research, 19(2), 175-189.

Barcroft, J. (2007). Effects if opportunities for word retrieval during second language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 57(1), 35-56.

Brink, T.L. (2008). Psychology: A Student Friendly Approach. "Unit 7: Memory, p.126. Retrieved December 07, 2014 from http:// www.saylor.org / site / wp-content / uploads / 2011 / 01 / TLBrink_PSYCH07.pdf

Chang, A. C-S., Read, J. (2006). The effects of listening support on the listening performance of EFL Learners. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 375-397.

Cihi, Guy. “WordEngine Vocabulary System – Case Studies”. Okayama University. General Education Block A, L-Café. July 6th 2013.

Coady, J. (1993). Research on ESL/EFL vocabulary acquisition: Putting it in context. In T.Huckin, M. Haynes, & J. Coady (eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary learning, pp. 3-23, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly 34(2), 213-238.

Day, R. R., Omura, C. and Hiramatsu, M. (1991). Incidental EFL vocabulary learning and reading, Reading in a Foreign Language, 7, 541-551.

Dupuy, B. & Krashen, S. D. (1993). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in French as a foreign language, Applied Language Learning, 4, 55-63.

Ebbinghaus, Hermann. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 1968. Retrieved December 07, 2014 from Encyclopedia.com : http:// www.encyclopedia.com / doc / 1G2-3045000327.html

Ellis, R. (1995). Modified input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied Linguistics, 16,4.

Ellis, R. (1997). Second language acquisition. In Oxford Introduction to Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fitzpatrick, T. Al-Qarni, I., & Meara, P. (2008). Intensive vocabulary learning: A case study. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 239-248.

George and Mallery (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. 11.0 update (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2010). From memory palaces to spacing algorithms: approaches to second language vocabulary. Language, Learning & Technology. 14(2),pp.4-11 ISSN 1094-35014.

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: Cambridge University Press, 258-286.

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.

Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: additional evidence for the Input Hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4): 440-464.

Laufer, B. (2003) Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: do leaners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? some empirical evidence. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4):567-587.

Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on form in second language vocabulary learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 5, 233-250.

Leitner, S. (1972). So lernt man lernen: Der Weg zum Erfolg [How to learn to learn: The road to success], Freiburg i. Br. 1972/2003

MEXT. (2003). Eigo ga tsukaeru nihonjin no ikusei no tameno koudoukeikaku an [Action plan to cultivate “Japanese with English abilities”]. Retrieved from .

MEXT. (2008a). Chugakkou gakushu shidou yoryo kaisetu gaikokugo hen [Explanatory comment for the new study of course guideline for foreign languages in junior 91

high schools]. Retrieve from www.mext.go.jp / component / a_menu / education / micro_detail / _icsFiles / afieldfile / 2011 / 01 / 05 / 1234912_010_1.pdf.

MEXT. (2008b). Shogakkou gakushu shidou yoryo eigoban gaikokugo katsudou [Study of course guideline for foreign language activities in elementary schools; provisional version]. Retrieved from www.mext.go.jp / a_menu / shotou / new-cs / youryou / eiyaku / 1261037.htm

MEXT. (2009). Koutougakkou gakushu shidou yoryo gaikokugo eigoban kariyaku [Study of course guidance for foreign languages in senior high schools; provisional version]. Retrieved from .

Nakata, T. (2008a). English vocabulary learning with word lists, word cards and computers: Implications from cognitive psychology research for optimal spaced learning. ReCALL, 20(1),3-20.

Nakata, T. (2008b). English collocation learning through meaning-focused and form-focused tasks. Bulletin of Foreign Language Teaching Association, 11.

Nakata, T. (2011). Computer-assisted second language vocabulary learning in a paired-associate paradigm: a critical investigation of flashcard software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(1), 17-38

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

New Horizon English Course 1～3 textbooks. (2012). Tokyo Shoseki.

Parson, R. D., & Brown, K. S. (2002). Teacher as reflective practitioner and action researcher. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.

Pimsleur, P. (1967). A memory schedule, Modern Language Journal, 51,73-75.

Ranalli, J. (2009). Prospects for Developing L2 Students’ Effective Use of Vocabulary Learning-Strategies via Web-based Training. CALICO Journal, 27(1), 161-186.

Read, J. (2004). Research in teaching vocabulary. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 146-161.

Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.). London: Longman (Pearson Education).

Schmitt, N. (1998). Tracking the incidental acquisition of second language vocabulary: A longitudinal study. Language Learning, 48(2), 281-317.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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

Schwalbach, E. M. (2003). Value and validity in action research: A guidebook for reflective practitioners. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

Segalowitz , N. (1997). Individual differences in second language acquisition. Tutorials in bilingualism: Psycholinguistic perspectives, 85-112.

Tang, E., & Nesi , H. (2003). Teaching vocabulary in two Chinese classrooms: Schoolchildren’s exposure to English words in Hong Kong and Guangzhou. Language Teaching Research, 7, 65-97.

The National Reading Panel. (2000). Reports Combination of Teaching Phonics, Word Sounds, Giving Feedback on Oral Reading Most Effective Way to Teach Reading. Retrieved December 07, 2014 from http:// www. nih . gov / news / pr / apr 2000 / nichd-13.htm

Thorne, B. M.; Henley, T. B. (2001). Connections in the history and systems of psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21, 371-380.

Webb, S.A (2009). The effects of pre-learning vocabulary on reading comprehension and writing. Canadian Modern Language Review, 65(3), 441-470.

Wozniak, R. H. (1999). Introduction to memory: Hermann Ebbinghaus (1885/1913).Classics in the history of psychology, 1855-1914: Historical Essays. Bristol, UK: Thoemmes Press.

Recommended Citation:

Lafleur, Louis. (2015). The Conceptualization of Balanced and Multifaceted Vocabulary Learning Systems

(M.A.). Available on researchgate.net. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22161.84327/1

View publication stats