LUẬN VĂN THẠC SỸ - A STUDY INTO THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT TEACHING IN TERMS OF TEACHING VOCABULARY FOR VIETNAMESE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES
THE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES

TRẦN THÚY
TRẦN AN
THÚY AN

A STUDY INTO THE DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT TEACHING
A STUDY
INTO THEFOR
DIFFERENCES
IN TERMS OF TEACHING
VOCABULARY
VIETNAMESE
BETWEEN
EXPLICIT
AND
IMPLICIT
TEACHING
HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
IN TERMS OF TEACHING VOCABULARY FOR VIETNAMESE
HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

Major: ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING
Code: LLPP.K41
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
RESEARCH PROPOSAL
MASTER THESIS

MASTER THESIS

SUPERVISOR:

Da Nang, 2022

Da Nang, 2022


I.

INTRODUCTION

1.1 RATIONALE

Vocabulary is an important aspect of the second language learning process. Numerous
studies have revealed that the English language proficiency of second language learners
in great measure, correlates with their vocabulary learning ( Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown,
1999). Hence, learning a second language largely means learning its vocabulary (Gass,
1999) as vocabulary skills make a significant contribution to almost all aspects of second
language proficiency. There have been a great number of different approaches to
language learning, each with a different outlook on vocabulary (Richards & Rodgers,
2001). Consequently, research on vocabulary acquisition is likely to yield insightful
implications for effective second language learning and instruction. A review of the
related literature shows that vocabulary learning and teaching research has followed
basically two approaches: vocabulary can be either learned implicitly and incidentally, or
taught explicitly and intentionally. In effect, there has been a long-running debate about
which of these two methods of learning vocabulary is more important. Conventionally,
the related literature proposes either an explicit or an implicit approach to the teaching
and learning of vocabulary. Explicit vocabulary learning engages learners in activities

that focus attention primarily on vocabulary. Several key principles which can help guide
teachers in deciding basic questions of what to teach and how to teach include integrating
new vocabulary with old, facilitating imaging, using a variety of techniques, providing a
number of encounters with a word, encouraging independent learning strategies, and
promoting a deep level of processing (Sokmen, 1997). Of these, promoting a deep level
of cognitive processing seems to be of paramount importance considering the
aforementioned theories of forgetting. In other words, the importance of promoting a
deep level of processing is to transfer information from short-term memory to long-term
memory, which has almost unlimited storage capacity. Therefore, it is held that the more
learners manipulate and think about a word, the more likely it is that the word will be
transferred into long-term memory. Research suggests that efficient learning of
vocabulary is an incremental process, one that requires meaningful recurring encounters
with a word at successive levels of difficulty over time (Decarrico, 1999). On the other
hand, implicit vocabulary learning occurs when the mind is concentrated elsewhere, such
as on comprehending a written text or understanding spoken material. One of the
premises of implicit vocabulary learning is that new words should not be presented in
isolation and should not be learnt by mere rote memorization. It follows that new
vocabulary items should be presented in contexts rich enough to provide clues to
meaning and that learners should be given multiple exposure to items they are supposed
to learn (Nation, 2001).
According to Thornbury (2020), if there were not any knowledge about grammar, the
meaning is delivered in very small amounts, but without knowledge of vocabulary,
nothing can be received (Subon, 2013). This statement points out that teaching-learning
ESL vocabulary should precede and any other methods must come in for criticism.
2


Maiguashca (1993) stated that until the middle of the 1980s, vocabulary was not
considered to be important. In 2010, John Dewey claimed that vocabulary is truly
important as a word is an instrument for thinking about the meaning which is expressed.

There is a wide variety of learning styles, methodologies and techniques by which
students can learn vocabularies and the two chosen types of vocabulary teaching-learning
to compare in the study are explicit vocabulary teaching-learning versus implicit
vocabulary teaching-learning.
As a second language teacher who has an endeavor to improve students’ learning
development and ability, I make effort to discover the differences between the two
methods, from which I can suggest solutions to an effective teaching and learning
manner.
This study is titled as “A Study into the Differences between Explicit and Implicit
Teaching in terms of Teaching Vocabulary for Vietnamese High school Students”, which
is conducted to analyze how different teaching methods have had impact on students’
vocabulary acquirements.
1.2.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1.2.2. Aims

The study aims to investigate the differences between explicit teaching and implicit
teaching in terms of vocabulary. It looks at the significance of explicit teaching method
and gives teachers advice about how to integrate these types of methods into their
language lessons.
1.2.2. Objectives
-To identify the differences between explicit teaching and implicit teaching in terms of

vocabulary.
-To find out which method between the two is more effective in teaching vocabulary
-To suggest some solutions for teachers to integrate these types of methods into their
language lessons.

3


1.3.

SCOPE OF STUDY:

- The research studies that focus on the vocabulary teaching and learning follow
basically two approaches:
1) Implicit or incidental vocabulary learning that focuses on acquiring vocabulary as
the by-product of other activities.
2) Explicit or intentional approach that proposes teaching words through direct
instruction that engages language learners in activities that focus attention primarily
on vocabulary.
-

30 Vietnamese tenth-graders students joined this study. The students were divided into
2 groups randomly. The level of students is intermediate, which was determined based
on a proficiency test conducted by the teacher after the teacher had taught the two
group vocabularies through explicit and implicit approaches. Due attention was given
to the following matching criteria:
All the students are attending a high-quality class and at the same level.
The students join the course in the same duration.

1.4.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

In order to fulfill the objectives mentioned above, this study tries to answer the
following questions:

1. What are the differences between explicit teaching and implicit teaching in terms of
vocabulary?
2. Which method of implicit - vocabulary instruction or explicit - has a better influence
on students’ vocabulary learning?
1.5.

SINGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:

The study can have several pedagogical implications in that they can provide information
for foreign language teachers on clearer ways for teaching-learning vocabulary items in
EFL contexts. Besides, it helps EFL teachers be aware of the importance of methods of
teaching-learning vocabulary in classrooms and should try to use the best methods in
their classes as much as possible to help learners learn more vocabulary.

4


II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
II.1. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.1 VOCABULARY
In learning a mother tongue or any foreign language, vocabulary is the most
significant
component. Language acquisition cannot take place without learning its lexis with
unlimited shifts in meaning caused by various contextual variables (Yang & Dai, 2012).
Vocabulary is one of the most essential parts, along with phonetics/pronunciation and
grammar, required to learn a foreign language (Pan & Xu, 2011). In addition, vocabulary
is the basis for language skills, namely, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Without
learning the vocabulary, it is difficult to attain any language proficiency. Vocabulary is the
basis of acquiring a second language. Rohmatillah (2017) asserts that without learning
the vocabulary communication in the second language becomes harder. Further,

vocabulary knowledge is an integral part of the language; it is central to communicative
competence. Low vocabulary knowledge poses severe problems to its learners, which
consequently impedes the learning of English language (Alqahtani, 2015). Schmitt (2002)
argues that vocabulary plays a vital role in teaching and learning the second language as
lexical knowledge is fundamental to communicative effectively. The language of the
human beings depends on the vocabulary used or gained. Thus, without vocabulary, the
learners will be demotivated to use the language (Richards & Renandya, 2002).
The term vocabulary has a variety of meanings proposed by teachers. To some, it
represents sight-word vocabularies as the immediate recognition of words by students.
Others describe it as meaning-vocabularies representing the words understood by
students; it is also considered as listening-vocabularies or students’ understanding of the
heard and spoken words. The content teachers further describe it as an academic
vocabulary that reflects the content-specific words or students’ understating of the oral
and print words (Antonacci & O’Callaghan, 2011). Hiebert and Kamil (2005) provide
another definition for the term vocabulary, which is the knowledge that the learners
should have about the meanings of words. They argued that words come into two types,
oral and print and the knowledge, too, comes in at least two types: receptive (understand
or recognize) and productive (write or speak). The oral vocabulary belongs to a set of
words for which the learners know the meanings while speaking or reading orally. The
print vocabulary consists of words for which the learners know the meanings when they
write or read silently. To Hiebert and Kamil, the productive vocabulary is a set of words
that are well- known and used frequently by the learners in speaking or writing. The
receptive vocabulary is a set of words, which are less frequent and for which learner
assign meanings while listening or reading (Hiebert & Kamil,2005).
Also, the vocabulary has two types as active and passive. The active vocabulary
refers to the words taught to students, and they can use these words in speech or writing
as oral or written expressions. The passive vocabulary refers to the words that students
5

recognize and understand in a context. Such a passive type of vocabulary occurs in a
listening or reading material (Harmmer, 2007). Besides, Webb (2009) advocates that
students recognize the receptive vocabulary when it is used in a context, i.e. the one seen
in a reading text and the one that cannot be produced by students in a written or spoken
form. To Neuman and Dwyer (2009), vocabulary refers to the words in spoken
(expressive vocabulary) and listening (receptive vocabulary) forms that the learners need
for a competent interaction. Hatch and Brown (1995) consider vocabulary as a group of
words that the language users use differently. Vocabulary knowledge usually indicates the
learners’ progress. Learning the vocabulary has always been a skill taught and evaluated
in other language skills such as reading, writing, listening, and speaking (Schmitt, 2000).
Instead, it promotes the development of language skills (Mart, 2012).
According to Richards and Renandya (2002), vocabulary plays a vital role in
language proficiency and is the foundation on which leaners can listen, speak, read and
write. They then keep using extensive vocabulary as well as strategies to acquire new
vocabulary. Learners seek to achieve their fullest potential and make the most out of
language learning chances around them like listening to the radio, practicing listening to
native speakers, utilizing the language in various contexts or watching movies.
Vocabulary can also be defined as ‘the words we must know to communicate
effectively: words in speaking (meaning expressive vocabulary) and words in listening
(meaning receptive vocabulary)’ (Neuman & Dwyer, 2009). Therefore, learning second
language is much related to the size of learnt vocabulary of learners (Nassaji, 2006).
When it comes to acquiring vocabulary, Harmon, Wood and Kiser (2009) clarified that it
is an on-going process of encountering new words in different meaningful contexts.
Vocabulary becomes even more important when speaking and writing English as a
second language requires at least from 1000 to 2000 vocabulary items (McCarthy, O’Dell
and Mark, 1999). Regarding explicit vocabulary learning, it means direct and rote ways
of learning for retention but if they are not practiced regularly, the vocabulary will be
forgotten (Ausubel, 1964). Explicit vocabulary teaching-learning involves word lists or
textbooks by which you can increase the size of your vocabulary from elementary level to
advanced one (Dimas, 2009). According to Berry (1994), explicit learning will take place

when people start to employ the structure of the learning environment. On the contrary,
implicit teaching-learning does not take advantage of those deliberate methodologies.
Instead, implicit learning is so extensive in language work and this method is important
because of the similarity to first language acquisition which is received in an unconscious
manner.
2.1.2. VOCABULARY TEACHING METHODS

It is commonly known that some certain basic techniques have supported learners in
developing their vocabulary such as flash cards, repetition, writing, revision and so on.
According to Hulstijn and Béjoint (1992), target vocabulary items could be remembered

6


much longer if their meanings were correctly inferred than when given explanation with
synonyms. Joe (1995) also states that the retention of unfamiliar words was boosted
significantly if students got involved in a text-based exercise demanding a higher level of
generativity. A composition task can also help students better retain target words than a
reading comprehension or a fill in one (Hulstijn & Laufer, 2001). In other words, students
who join higher levels of vocabulary production will be able to remember target words
longer and better than those who do not. Last but not least, students can remember
unknown words more effectively thanks to both pictorial and written methods instead of
just receiving only one kind of annotations or without them.
Oxford and Scarcella (1994) propose a new research-based approach to vocabulary
teaching after examining relevant research concerning student motivation and need, the
complexity of knowing a word, as well as factors that affect L2 vocabulary acquisition.
Compared with traditional approaches, in which vocabulary is often taught
unsystematically in class and teachers tend to leave their students to learn vocabulary on
their own without much instruction or guidance, teachers following this new researchbased approach focus on words students are expected to meet frequently, and present
words systematically based on a careful consideration of needs analysis. Vocabulary

instruction is personalised according to learners’ different learning needs, goals, and
styles. Since most vocabulary learning takes place outside of the language classroom,
learners are also trained to raise their awareness of the knowledge involved in knowing a
lexical item and the process of learning a new word. Substantial emphasis on vocabulary
learning strategies helps students become independent language learners inside and
outside class. Among the numerous vocabulary learning strategies, guessing from context
is held to be the most useful one. However, somestudies (e.g. Pressleyet al.1987; Kelly
1990) indicate that learners seldom guess the correct meanings. In this approach,
therefore, teachers guide students to use this strategy effectively and give them
opportunities to practice the skill in class. A final point to note is that teachers reduce
“decontextualized” vocabulary learning activities in class (e.g. word lists, flashcards)
whereas implementing more “partially contextualized”(e.g. word association, visual and
aural imagery, semantic mapping) or “fully contextualized” activities (e.g. reading,
listening, speaking, and writing in authentic communication activities).The arguments
mentioned above are mostly supported by Sökmen (1997),commenting that the skill of
guessing/inferring from context is a useful strategy in vocabulary learning and should be
covered in a language classroom. Nevertheless, some potential problems arise if learners
mainly acquire vocabulary in this way. For example, acquiring vocabulary through
guessing in context is probably a rather slow process given the limited amount of time
learners can afford in class. In addition, guessing from context does not necessarily help
learners commit the guessed words into their long-term memory. For example, a study of
intermediate level adult ESL students by Wesche and Paribakht (1994, cited Sökmen
1997) shows that learners who read and complete accompanying vocabulary exercises
perform better in word acquisition than those who only do extensive reading. As a result,
scholars come to call for a greater need of an explicit approach to vocabulary instruction,
7


such as word unit analysis, mnemonic devices, etc. Sökmen (1997) thus states that “the
pendulum has swung from direct teaching of vocabulary (the grammar translation

method) to incidental (the communicative approach) and now, laudably, back to the
middle: implicit and explicit learning” (p.239). In addition, considerable emphasis is put
on encouraging independent learning strategies among students so that they know how to
continue to learn vocabulary on their own. After experiencing what Resnick (1989)calls a
‘cognitive apprenticeship’, students will acquire some skills to promote the depth of word
processing and manage individual vocabulary learning through the model of their
teachers (Sökmen 1997). The time and efforts spent on developing learning strategies will
reflect its value afterwards

2.1.3. EXPLICIT AND IMPLICIT TEACHING
Schmitt (1998) has explained at great length the role of awareness in implicit and explicit
teaching-learning, the definition of the former being “learning without awareness”
whereas the latter is, “learning with awareness”. The sheer weight that Schmitt (1998) has
allocated to awareness (or attention/consciousness) is not accidental. Greenwood and
Flanigan (2007, p. 249) argue that “90% of the words that a student learns over the course
of a year are without direct instruction; these words are learned through incidental
contact”. Jenkins, Matlock, and Slocum (1989) assert that by explicit instruction, the
instructor clearly outlines what the learning goals are for students, and offers clear,
unambiguous explanations of the skills and information structures they are to be
presented with in teaching. They continued that by implicit instruction, the instruction
does not outline such goals or makes such explanation overtly, but rather simply in
teaching. An overall review of literature will guide learners to investigate different ways
of teaching-learning and the superiority of one to another.
McCarthy, O'Dell, and Mark (1999) have proposed that speaking and writing English
as a second language needs at least 1000-2000 vocabulary items. Marzban and Kamalian
(2013, p. 85) have sought how to “transfer information from short term memory to long
term memory, which has almost unlimited storage capacity”. Explicit vocabulary learning
refers to direct, rote ways of learning for retention, but when they are not practiced the
vocabulary will not be “subsumed” and will be forgotten (Ausubel, 1964). Explicit
vocabulary teaching-learning can involve word lists or handbooks and textbooks to help

increase the size of vocabulary from elementary students to advance (Dimas, 2009).
Berry (1994) has defined explicit learning as when people learn to employ the structure
of the learning environment. But implicit teaching-learning does not use such deliberate
strategies; implicit learning is so extensive in language work and the importance of this
method is proposed due to the similarity to first language acquisition which is
unconsciously received. Winter and Reber (1994) have asserted that the spirit of implicit
learning is mirrored in the notion that people can absorb knowledge or information from
the environment without being aware of the learning process. Similar viewpoints are
presented by Schmitt and McCarthy (1997), who considers explicit learning the
allocation of attention directly to the information to be learned. Explicit vocabulary
8


learning refers to “conscious awareness and intention to learn” (Brown, 2000, p. 217) and
implicit learning is the “acquisition of knowledge about the underlying structure of a
complex stimulus from the environment by a process which takes place naturally, simply
and without conscious operations” (Ellis, 1994, p. 1). In contrast to implicit teachinglearning, explicit vocabulary teaching-learning uses kinds of teaching-learning that are
employed consciously (Marzban & Kamalian, 2013). The performance of implicit
learning in task-based language learning has caused this method to be one of the richest
methods of learning (Marzban & Kamalian, 2013). Hulstijn (2001) has drawn a
distinction between explicit vocabulary learning and implicit learning processes by which
explicit vocabulary teaching-learning describes the sort of learning where students are
officially informed and directly involved in this kind of learning, but in implicit teachinglearning participants are involved through the retention of information incidentally
(Marzban & Kamalian, 2013). (Schmidt, 2000, p. 88), as cited in (Marzban & Kamalian,
2013), gives three definitions for incidental learning:
1. Learning without any intention to learn,
2. Learning of one stimulus aspect while paying attention to other stimuli,
3. Learning of formal features through a focus of attention on semantic features.
Winter and Reber (1994) stated that the concept behind implicit learning is reflected
in the notion that leaners can acquire knowledge or information from the environment

without taking the learning process into consideration. Similarly, Schmitt and McCarthy
(1997) regards explicit learning as the allocation of attention directly to the information
that should be learnt. Explicit vocabulary learning means conscious awareness and
intention to learn (Brown, 2000) while implicit learning is the process of acquiring
knowledge regarding the underlying structure of a complicated stimulus from the
environment by a process taking place in a natural and simple way without conscious
operations (Ellis, 1994)
Unlike implicit teaching-learning, explicit vocabulary teaching-learning makes use of
consciously employed teaching – learning types (Marzban & Kamalian, 2013). The
performance of implicit learning in task-based language learning has made this method
become among the richest methods of learning. Also concerning this field, Hulstijn
(2001) has also differentiated explicit vocabulary learning and implicit learning processes
in which learners are informed and directly involved in this kind of learning; however, in
implicit teaching-learning, learners are involved through the retention of information in
an incidental way (Marzban & Kamalian, 2013). According to Schmidt (2000), incidental
learning is learning without any intention to learn, learning of one stimulus aspect while
focusing on other stimuli and learning of formal features via paying attention to semantic
features.
Also interested in the field, Coady, Magoto, Hubbard, Graney and Mokhtari (1993)
looked into explicit teaching in high-frequency vocabulary and its impact on ESL reading
comprehension. They carried out a study with the subject of 42 students of different

9


proficiency levels in an intensive English program at the university. Twenty-two of whom
were assigned to the experimental group and the rest to the control one. The study was
conducted in two phases. In the first one, all students needed to complete a multi-choice
vocabulary test with 36 items based on the basic vocabulary list and the Degrees of
Reading test from the College Entrance Examination Board which was made for native

speakers. Both groups then got English instruction. Apart from the common treatment,
the experimental group also received an additional computerized vocabulary learning
program for one hour each week, within a period of total eight weeks. In every session,
the program showed the students 20 words from the range of 600 to 2000 most frequently
used words. The students could access the computerized enhances to the vocabularies that
they do not know. Any chosen word would then be recycled into a personalized file for
each student. At the end of the period, all participants had finished the same vocabulary
and reading needed for the pre-test. In the second phase of the study, the vocabulary was
chosen randomly from the computer program, and the reading comprehension measures
and the reading texts were changed. The student was completed with a short closed-ended
questionnaire as an assessment of the computer program. The results pointed out that in
the first phase, the students in the experimental group could perform better in both
reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge. In the second phase, the students
dramatically increased their reading comprehension scores as well as vocabulary scores.
Most participants claimed that they would love to use the program by which they could
learn new words to improve their reading comprehension. This means there is a
connection between reading comprehension and vocabulary. According to Coady et al.
concluded that explicit teaching – learning of vocabulary will bring about more benefits
and result in longer retention because effective vocabulary should be retrieved from
memory easily and automatically.
Marzban and Kamalian (2013) also carried out a research to figure out which method
is better between explicit and implicit teaching and the result was that explicit vocabulary
teaching-learning method was more efficient. Another study done by Mirzaii (2012) also
revealed that explicit vocabulary teaching-learning was also found to be better than
implicit solution. What’s more, Karimi (2013) reported that explicit vocabulary teachinglearning could improve her learners’ vocabulary much more than implicit one after 15
sessions of experiment with two groups. In this research, 36 pre-university students were
chosen randomly so as to study the effect of these two kinds of teaching-learning for
vocabulary. She divided the class into two groups for explicit and implicit teachinglearning. The group receiving explicit method was called the experimental group and the
other one following the implicit learning method was called the control group. Both
groups took a pre-test to assess their writing capability at the beginning of the term and

after the class room treatment, all the participants received the same topic to write about
in the post test. The performance of them in the pre-test was rather the same, but the
performance in the post-test was significantly different. The result of this study pointed
out that the group receiving the explicit method of teaching-learning produced better
competence in using accurate collocations in their English vocabulary.

10


On the contrary, Zimmerman (1997) pointed out three benefits of implicit learning.
More precisely, this is a method of learning in context to know how the words mean and
how they should be used. Implicit learning is also beneficial for both vocabulary
acquisition and reading comprehension. Finally, it takes learners as center to get the
meanings in reading comprehension.
Zimmerman (1997) has, however, stated three advantages of implicit/ incidental
learning:
1. It is learning in context to get the use of words and their meaning.
2. It is academically useful for both vocabulary acquisition and reading
comprehension.
3. It is more learner-centred to get the meanings in reading comprehension.
In the past, explicit vocabulary teaching-learning was more commonly used but in the
latest methods, the place of implicit learning is higher. According to Marzban and
Kamalian (2013), this is true although some teachers still keep using explicit vocabulary
teaching-learning in English as a Foreign Language classes (Zimmerman, 1997). For
Hunt and Beglar (2005), teaching-learning of vocabularies incidentally will be a better
way for advanced students than novice learners while Brown (2007) has argued that
‘children implicitly learn phonological, semantic and pragmatic rules for language but
they do not have any approach to an explanation of such rules.’ In implicit teachinglearning, the learner’s capability to think about the meaning of words from the context is
tangible (Hulstijn & Béjoint, 1992)
2.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

It is clear that the current English teaching method relies heavily on the students '
competence in vocabulary and grammar. As having mentioned in Rationale, without
grammar, little can be conveyed but without vocabulary, nothing can be expressed.
People need vocabularies in order to convey what they mean in any language. As a
teacher, the researcher has realized that students, especially those who do not major in
English, often find it difficult to speak English fluently due to lack of vocabularies. They
could not make their speaking or writing tasks smooth because they just keep using the
same words at all times. Also, other students encounter the issue of forgetting the words
right after the teacher has just elicited their meaning or after they have looked them up in
the dictionary, which also leads to the lack of vocabulary.
Being an ESL teacher, the researcher should find ways to help students improve their
vocabulary. By the beginning of 19880s, there was a change in teaching English. The
focus moved from the Direct Method and Audio-lingualism to the Communicative
Approach in which vocabulary teaching importance is emphasized. Many words started
to be introduced during classes and students were more motivated to express themselves
as much as they can.

11


Nowadays, there is more options to choose the methods used during English classes. The
English syllabus is built with both vocabulary and grammar in mind. Vocabulary is now
being considered to be more important instead of just an add-on. However, the learners
still encounter difficulties in speaking English fluently because of their incapability to
memorize words.
Therefore, this study has discovered the main differences between implicit teaching
and explicit teaching then offered effective and positive strategies to gradually improve

the quality of teaching vocabulary in Vietnamese ESL classes in particular and the quality
of teaching English in general.
3. RESEARCH METHODS

3.1. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
The experimental design for this study was a quantitative design. Specifically, the design
was a quasi-experimental, single-group interrupted time-series design. This research used
a single group with no treatment (implicit instruction) and a treatment (explicit
instruction). The two methods of instruction were compared.
For the vocabulary acquisition measures, participants took pre-tests to identify whether or
not they had any existing knowledge about the vocabulary that was the focus for the
particular unit. For this study, it was important to be able to identify the number of
vocabulary words that were gained (pre- versus post- scores) as opposed to identifying
only the number of vocabulary words that were known at the end of the unit (post-test
only). By administering pre-and post-tests, the researcher was able to remove any
influence of prior knowledge of these vocabulary words by the participants. By obtaining
several values for each participant and alternating the methods of instruction, there
searcher was able to help overcome the small sample size and the possibility of
maturation of the participants. This also helped to decrease the effect for a particularly
interesting or particularly uninteresting unit. Table 1 illustrates the timeline of the
experiment with reference to the pre-tests and the units of instruction.
Table 1:
Week

Action taken

1

Pre-test unit 1,2,3

2

Unit 1 (Implicit Instruction)

3

Unit 2 ( Explicit Instruction)

4

Unit 3 (Implicit Instruction)

12


5

Pretest units 4,5,6

6

Unit 4 ( Explicit Instruction)

7

Unit 6 (Implicit Instruction)

8

Unit 5 ( Explicit Instruction)

3.2. SELECTED SUBJECT:
They are Vietnamese students in grade 10, whose ages are 15 and who were picked
according to the results from the proficiency test. They were given a second end-term test
to make sure all of them are at about the same level of vocabulary proficiency.
3.3. SAMPLING:
The samples of the study may be entire of student who join the instruction of both
methods because the number of participants is not many, only 15 persons.
3.4. DATA ANALYSIS:
In the process of data analysis, the researchers used the SPSS software pack version for
Windows. In order to compare the mean differences between the pre-test and the post-test
scores within each group, test scores of a single group of fifteen students will be analized
to determine if a statistically significant gain existed. The dependent t-test (paired t-test)
will be used to determine if the mean net gains of the two groups of scores are
significantly different from one another. The t-test will be chosen because it adjusts for
the distribution of the small sample size.(Gay & Airasian, 2003). Statistically significant
gains in the means of the groups of scores (control vs. treatment) would indicate that
explicit vocabulary instruction does have an effect in ESL reading instruction. A positive
difference would be an indication of additional benefits (more vocabulary acquired
and/or higher reading comprehension) derived from the explicit instruction. In examining
the overall classroom performance, a higher average on units taught using explicit
vocabulary instruction would indicate an overall benefit for using explicit vocabulary
instruction in the classroom.
4. LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
Since this study focuses on only fifteen ESL students out of the hundreds of high
school students in all across Vietnam, this is the primary limitation of this study. 10
weeks was not so enough to compare completely the difference between these methods to
know which one would be more successful. Therefore, it somehow cannot thoroughly
13

reflect why students of different levels find it hard to express their ideas and how they try
to overcome those difficulties. The teachers should also make use of more creative
activities offering students to use the pre-learnt vocabularies in their speaking or writing
freely.
5. ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY:
The study includes 5 chapters:
I.
Introduction

II.

Literature review and theoretical background

III.

Research methods

IV.

Finding and disscussion

V.

Conclusion

6. TIMELINE OF THE STUDY:
To complete the study, the researcher may spend 1 weeks to select the students who will
participate in the survey. After that it takes the teacher doing the study 8 weeks to teach
the two group of students the specific vocabularies by explicit and implicit methods and

to carry out the test. In the final step to complete the study, the teacher spent about 2
weeks to give the result and do report.

14


REFERENCES
ENGLISH
[1]

Berry, V. (1994). Current assessment issues and practices in Hong Kong: A preview.
Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Language in Education
Conference, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.

[2]

Brown, D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching. White Plains, N. Y.:
Longman.

[3]

Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language
pedagogy. New York: Pearson Education.

[4]

Carter, R., & Nunan, D. (2002). Vocabulary. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The
Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 42-47).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[5]

Coady, J., Magoto, J., Hubbard, P., Graney, J., & Mokhtari, K. (1993). High
frequency vocabulary and reading proficiency in ESL readers. In T. Huckin, M.
Haynes, & J. Coady (Eds.), Second language reading and vocabulary acquisition
(pp. 289- 298). Norwood, N. J.: Ablex.

[6]

Dimas, H. M. S. (2009). Teachers' own identities concocting a potion to treat the
syndrome of Doctor Jekyll and Edward Hyde in teachers. Íkala, 10(1), 43-59.

[7]

Ellis, N. C. (1994). Vocabulary acquisition: The implicit ins and outs of explicit
cognitive mediation. In N. C. Ellis (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages
(pp. 211-282). London: Academic Press.

[8]

Harmon, J. M., Wood, K. D., & Kiser, K. (2009). Promoting vocabulary learning
with the interactive word wall. Middle School Journal, 40(3), 58-63.

[9]

Hulstijn, J. H. (Ed.) (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary
learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

[10] Hulstijn, J. H., & Béjoint, H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings:

Experiments in incidental learning. In P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Béjoint (Eds.),
Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113-125). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
[11] Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement

15


load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.
[12] Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2005). A framework for developing EFL reading vocabulary.

Reading in a Foreign Language, 17(1), 23-59.
[13] Joe, A. (1995). Text-based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Second

Language Research, 11(2), 149-158.
[14] Karimi, M. N. (2013). Enhancing L2 students' listening transcription ability through

a focus on morphological awareness. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 42(5),
451-459.
[15] Maiguashca, R. U. (1993). Teaching and learning vocabulary in a second language:

Past, present and future directions. Canadian Modern Language Review, 50(1), 83100.
[16] Marzban, A., & Kamalian, K. (2013). Effects of implicit versus explicit vocabulary

instruction on intermediate EFL learners' vocabulary knowledge. ELT Voice, 3(6), 8495.
[17] McCarthy, M., O'Dell, F., & Mark, G. (1999). English vocabulary in use:

Elementary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[18] Mirzaii, M. (2012). Implicit vs explicit vocabulary learning: Which approach serves

long-term recall better? 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature, The Southeast
Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18(2), 1-12.
[19] Nassaji, H. (2006). The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and L2

learners’ lexical inferencing strategy use and success. The Modern Language
Journal, 90(3), 387-401.
[20] Neuman, S. B., & Dwyer, J. (2009). Missing in action: Vocabulary instruction in pre ‐

K. The Reading Teacher, 62(5), 384-392.
[21] Nezakat-Alhossaini, M., Youhanaee, M., & Moinzadeh, A. (2014). Impact of explicit

instruction on EFL learners' implicit and explicit knowledge: A case of English
relative clauses. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(2), 183-199.
[22] Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An

anthology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[23] Schmidt, R. (2000). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language

16


instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[24] Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and

pedagogy (Vol. 2035). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[25] Subon, F. (2013). Gender differences in the use of linguistic forms in the speech of

men and women in the Malaysian context. Journal of Humanities and Social
Science, 13(3), 67-79.
[26] Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Harlow: Longman.

[27] Winter, B., & Reber, A. S. (Eds.). (1994). Implicit learning and the acquisition of

natural languages. London: Academic Press.
[28] Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and interactive vocabulary instruction make a

difference? An empirical study. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 121-140.

17