Skip to main content

Review: Vocabulary in Language Teaching by Joe Barcroft

This short booklet of 36 pages published in 2017 is a beginner’s introduction to vocabulary, vocabulary learning and teaching. It is one of Joe Barcroft’s language teaching modules at Washington University in St Louis, USA. Joe is a leading researcher in the field of vocabulary acquisition as well as being a Professor of Spanish and Second Language Acquisition.

As well as providing concise analyses of the issues for language teachers, the booklet includes questions for reflection and short quizzes to check understanding. For many readers these will seem superfluous, I think.

Barcroft begins by defining what vocabulary is, reminding is that apart from isolated words, it includes lexical phrases and formulaic language such as “What can I do for you?”. It's worth repeating his reminder that nearly 50% of what we say is in the form of chunks which don't require us to syntactically code sentences. He gives a simple lesson in grammar by providing handy definitions of different types of morphemes. He summarises the importance of three aspects of knowing vocabulary: the meaning, form and mapping dimensions (the latter meaning how learners map forms to meaning). He explains that we acquire new vocabulary both incidentally and purposefully, e.g. from word lists or by the teacher presenting new words with pictures. He makes it clear that vocabulary is best acquired in a variety of ways, but principally by presenting it repeatedly in meaningful input.

Among other things he talks about how research suggests that some common activities may actually inhibit acquisition, notably learning words in semantic sets, writing sentences with new words in the early stages of learning and copying out words. He also questions the validity of forced output in the form of choral repetition in the early sages of learning words (although he points out that more research is need about this).

He invites teachers and course writers to think about whether the tasks they set target a balance of meaning, form and mapping based activities. Perhaps we favour some exercises at the expense of others. In any case we should plan for vocabulary as thoroughly as we do for syntax.

On page 22 he lists his 10 principles for teaching vocabulary which I shall not write out here, but among them are the importance of presenting new words frequently and repeatedly (and in a spaced manner); the importance of promoting both purposeful and incidental vocabulary acquisition (incidental alone is just too inefficient); and presenting new words in an “enhanced manner”, e.g. with different voices, using bold or colour print - the sort of thing we might more commonly do when teaching grammar.

Readers should find this booklet very useful as a clear introduction to the field which, to some extent, confirms common-sense views about teaching vocabulary. The book is published by Routledge and is available as a paperback for about $15 or £9 (overpriced given its length). It might be worth purchasing more cheaply as an e-book at about £4.50.




- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

12 principles of second language teaching

This is a short, adapted extract from our book The Language Teacher Toolkit . "We could not possibly recommend a single overall method for second language teaching, but the growing body of research we now have points to certain provisional broad principles which might guide teachers. Canadian professors Patsy Lightbown and Nina Spada (2013), after reviewing a number of studies over the years to see whether it is better to just use meaning-based approaches or to include elements of explicit grammar teaching and practice, conclude: Classroom data from a number of studies offer support for the view that form-focused instruction and corrective feedback provided within the context of communicative and content-based programmes are more effective in promoting second language learning than programmes that are limited to a virtually exclusive emphasis on comprehension. As teachers Gianfranco and I would go along with that general view and would like to suggest our own set of g