| 441 |
Kurdish Language Class in New York: A Platform for Social, Political and (Inter)personal Engagement
|
|
|
|
In: Bellaterra: journal of teaching and learning language and literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 14-31 ; Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 14-31 (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 442 |
“Broken Arabic” and Ideologies of Completeness: Contextualizing the Category of Native and Heritage Speaker in the University Arabic Classroom
|
|
|
|
In: Bellaterra: journal of teaching and learning language and literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 78-93 ; Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 78-93 (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 443 |
The Burden of ‘Nativeness’: Four Plurilingual Student-Teachers’ Stories
|
|
|
|
In: Bellaterra: journal of teaching and learning language and literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 32-52 ; Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 32-52 (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 444 |
Uncovering Language Policy in Higher Education: Reflections from the Classroom
|
|
|
|
In: Bellaterra: journal of teaching and learning language and literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 6-13 ; Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 6-13 (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 445 |
An Interview with Dr. Ofelia García on the Past, Present and Future of Language Policy
|
|
|
|
In: Bellaterra: journal of teaching and learning language and literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 120-130 ; Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature; Vol. 9, Núm. 2 (2016): May/June; p. 120-130 (2016)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 446 |
Integrated versus decontextualized approaches to vocabulary instruction in a second language writing course ; Master of Arts
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
thesis ; While vocabulary is generally understood to be an obvious part of language learning and instruction, the actual "nuts and bolts" of vocabulary instruction are not fully understood. Though there has been a renewal of interest in research into vocabulary in recent years, in terms of both theoretical motivations and pedagogical applications, many questions remain about the most effective ways of teaching vocabulary and promoting successful vocabulary development among English Language Learners (ELLs). These considerations are particularly important when it comes to the development of academic vocabulary in a higher-educational context. This study reports results from a research experiment conducted at a public research university in the western United States. The study sought to compare two possible approaches to teaching vocabulary within the context of an academic, second language (L2) composition program. Both approaches offered students explicit instruction in academic vocabulary. The two approaches examined were a decontextualized, memorization dependent approach and a contextualized, integrated approach. Because previous research has indicated that integrated approaches to vocabulary instruction can be effective for L2 learners, it is hypothesized that students taught using a contextualized and integrated approach would learn targeted academic vocabulary more effectively than those taught using a decontextualized approach. In addition, because previous research also indicates that success in learning a second language is highly correlated with an individual's attitudes towards their own language learning, this study examined students' perceptions about each of these approaches, as well as how these perceptions appeared to influence their learning. The perceptual data were collected via student responses to a survey that used a Likert scale which was then examined in the context of students' scores on a test of vocabulary administered at the end of the course. Within-group results showed that a semester was not enough time for either group to make significant gains in their vocabulary knowledge and did not confirm the hypothesis that students who were taught vocabulary using a contextualized and integrated approach would learn more target vocabulary in a single semester than those taught using a decontextualized approach, confirming the results of previous research in the field. Students taught using both approaches also seemed to show positive attitudes regarding their own learning. A strong positive correlation was observed between students' attitudes and their performance on a vocabulary posttest.
|
|
Keyword:
Academic Vocabulary; Applied Linguistics; Course Design; ESL; Second-Language Writing; Vocabulary
|
|
URL: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/ark:/87278/s6xd4908
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|
|
