1887
Volume 145, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0019-0829
  • E-ISSN: 1783-1490
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This research aimed at studying the efficacy of Audiolingual and Total Physical Response (TPR) methods in helping the Iranian Elementary EFL learners learn and recall new vocabulary items. In the Audiolingual method new vocabulary is taught through repetition, mimicry, and memorization (Richards & Rodgers, 1986), while in TPR this is done through synchronization of the new vocabulary items with the learners’ body movements (Asher, 1965 & 1977). Sixty elementary male students participated in this study in two groups of 30. Both groups took the Nelson test, a vocabulary test, and recall test at the beginning of the research program. T- test analyses revealed no significant differences between the two groups in any of the three tests. One group (exp 1) received its vocabulary lessons in the Audiolingual method and the other group (exp 2) did this in TPR. The students covered six units of the book “Headway, Elementary” in 15 sessions. After the treatment, they took the same vocabulary and recall tests they had taken at the outset of the study. T-tests on the data gathered from the two groups on pre-tests and post-tests of vocabulary and recall revealed significant differences between the two groups after the treatment. These analyses showed that the subjects who received their vocabulary lessons in TPR out-performed those who received their vocabulary lessons in the Audiolingual method, both in vocabulary learning and vocabulary recall.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.145.0.562917
2004-01-01
2019-09-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. ALLEN, V.
    (1983) Techniques in teaching vocabulary. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. ASHER, J.J.
    (1965) The strategy of the Total Physical Response: An application to learning Russian. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 277–289.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (1966) The learning strategy of the Total Physical Response: A review. Modern Language Journal, 50, 79–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. (1969 a) The Total Physical Response approach to second language learning. Modem Language Journal, 53, 3–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. (1972) Children’s First Language As a Model for Second Language Learning. Modern Language Journal, 56, 133–139.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. (1977) Children learning another language: A developmental hypothesis. Child Development, 48, 1040–1048.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. (1981) Learning another language through actions. The complete teacher’s guidebook (third printing). Los Gatos, California: Sky Oaks Productions.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (l981a) The extinction of second language learning in American schools: An intervention model. In H. Winitz (1981) The comprehension approach to foreign laguage instruction (pp. 49–68). Rowley, Massachusettes: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. BOWEN, J.D. , H. MADSEN , and A. HILFERTY
    (1985) TESOL techniques and procedures. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. BROOKS, N
    (1964) Language and language learning. New York: Harcourte Brace.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. BROWN, R. , C. HANLON
    (1970) Derivational complexity and order of acquistion in child Speech. In J. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. CARROLL, J.B.
    (1960) Wanted: A research basis for educational polIcy on foreign language teaching. Harward educational Review, 30, 128–140.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. CHOMSKY, N.
    (1957) Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. COADY, J. , T. HUCKINS
    (eds) (1997) Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. FREEMAN, D. L.
    (1986) Techniques and principles in laguage teaching. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. FRIEDLANDER, B. Z.
    (1970) Receptive language development in infancy: Issues and problems. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Dn’elopment, 16(1), 7–51.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. FRIES, C.C.
    (1945) Teching and learning English as a foreign language. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. HOCKETT, C. F.
    (1959) The objectives and process of language teaching. Reprinted in D. Byrne (Ed.) (1969), English teaching extracts. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. HUMPHREY, J.H.
    (1972) The use of motor activity in the development of Science concepts with slow learning fifth grade children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 9, 261–266.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. JAKOBOYITS, L.
    (1969) Research findings and foreign language requirements in colleges and universities. Foreign Language Annals, 4, 448.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. KELLY, L. G.
    (1969) 25 Centuries of language teaching. Rowley, Massachusettes: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. KRASHEN, S.
    (1980b) The theoretical and practical relevance of simple codes. In R. Scarcella . And S. Krashen (Eds.), Research in second language acquisition (pp. 7–18). Rowley, Massachusettes: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. KUNIHARA, S. , and J.J. ASHER
    (1965) The strategy of the Total Physical Response: An application to learning Japanese. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 277–289.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. LADO, R.
    (1957) Linguistics across cultures: Applied linguistics for language teachers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. LAUFER, B.
    (1997) The lexical plight in second language reading. In J. Coady and T. Huckins (Eds), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 20–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. LAWSON, J. H.
    (1971)  Should foreign language be eliminated from the curriculum?Foreign Language Annals, 4, 427.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. LESSARD-CLOUSTON, M.
    (1994) Challenging student approaches to ESL vocabulary development. TESL Canada Journal, 12 (1), 68–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. LIBERMAN, L. R. and S. ALTSCHUL
    (1971) Memory for a list of commands: Imagining, seeing, doing. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 33, 530.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. MOULTON, W.G.
    (1961) Linguistics and language teaching in the United States: 1940-1960. In C. Mohamann , A. Sommerfelt , and J. Whatmough (Eds.). Trends in European and A merican Linguistics 1930-1960 (pp. 82–109), Utrecht: Spectrum.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. OLLER, J. W. JR , and P. A. RICHARD-AMATO.
    (Eds.) (1983) Methods that work. Rowley, Massachusettes: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. PALMER, H. E. , and D. PALMER
    (1970) English through actions. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. PIAGET, J.
    (1955) The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic Books.
  33. RICHARDS, J. C. and T. S. RODGERS
    (1986) Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Skinner, W. M.
    (1957) Verbal behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. SWAFFER, J. , and M. WOODRUFF
    (1978) Language for comprehension: Focus on reading, a report on the University of Texas German Program. Modern Language Journal, 62, 27–32.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. WALLACE, M.
    (1982) Teaching vocabulary. London: Heinmann.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. WINITZ, H.
    (Ed.) (1981) The comprehension approach to foreign language instruction. Rowley Massachusetts: Newbury House.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.2143/ITL.145.0.562917
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error