Skip to main content

A better way to learn vocabulary?

Vocabulary learning - setting words to memory at home using word lists or apps - is a staple of much language learning practice in schools. The advent of Google Translate has meant that teachers are even more likely to set vocab learning than they used too. When I was teaching it was a common rule of thumb homework policy to have two homeworks a week, with one devoted to learning words for a test. (I rarely stuck to this for three reasons: learning words is boring, running vocab tests is dull and I was aware that less conscientious students wouldn’t do the task well enough, if at all.)

But the reality is that learning vocabulary is widespread and even gets official support from NCELP whose schemes of work and lessons include regular Quizlet exercises. Apps have made the process a little more palatable, and no doubt many students enjoy the routine and challenge of learning words. In addition, keeping a separate vocabulary book may be much rarer than it once was, but the practice still exists.

Could vocabulary learning be made more productive and enjoyable? 

First, it’s only fair to say that research lends support for the efficiency of word learning when it comes to simply knowing what words mean. But it’s well established in the literature (notably through the work of Paul Nation), that ‘knowing a word’ is much more than knowing its meaning or knowing how to write it down accurately in a test. Really knowing words also means knowing what they sound like, what other words they keep company with, when and how they are used, how they relate to other forms of the word (e.g. play - player - playing), not to mention their relationship with synonyms, antonyms and first language words. Gianfranco and I have written a good deal about this in our books and blogs.

In addition, every minute spent learning isolated words could be spent using these words in context, in connected, meaningful sentences or chunks. Rehearsing this language in this connected way is more likely to enable students to later retrieve useful chunked language in order to make meaning. This sort of ‘chunking and chaining’ of language is one way we speak and write fluently. Learning words together with other words in meaningful multi-word units or whole sentences builds a deeper understanding of vocabulary and produces more ‘bang for your buck’ in terms of communicative usefulness. Put differently, memorising chunks and sentences provides better ‘surrender value’ - more learning for the time spent.

In addition, it may be actually more enjoyable, creating more motivation, more self-efficacy and more learning.

In practice, here is one way to do it. Provide pupils with a sentence builder they are familiar with, or even one similar but not identical to one you have used in class. Tell the class to practise reading aloud as many sentences as they can in, say, 15 minutes. Suggest they record their work on to their phones. Suggest also, that within the time they allocate, they close their eyes and say the sentences from memory. (Closing eyes is a good way to avoid distraction.) Advise them, furthermore, to divide their time up so that their practice is spaced out, e.g. between other bits of homework.

Then, in class, tasks could include:

From memory, producing as many sentences as possible to a time limit.

Working with a partner, each student gives a sentence until one can’t (competitive element).

Write down as many sentences from the SB as possible.

As above, but add new, adapted sentences , slotting in alternative words.

Doing a gap-fill activity using sentences from the SB.

Doing a traditional L1 to L2 written test (harder) or L2 to L1 test (easier).

Giving sentence starters. Pupils much finish the sentence.

Harder: asking questions, the answers to which can be supplied by students from their SB.


You could no doubt think of more variations.

To me, this process seems more enjoyable and productive than the traditional single word vocabulary test. All the practice done in the process will leave long-term memory traces - chunks of language students can call upon when trying to converse or write. As I sometimes say, the alternative approach of learning isolated words which may later be glued together using grammatical rules doesn’t work for most learners.

It was famously said by David Wilkins that you can convey meaning with words alone, but not grammar alone. It’s also true that you can convey much more meaning when words are strung together and rehearsing lots of sentences helps achieve that goal.






Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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).

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,