Promoting learner autonomy in learning vocabulary for second-year students at Hai Phong Medical University = Phát huy tính tự chủ trong việc học từ vựng cho sin

1
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES




TRẦN THỊ HÒA

PROMOTING LEARNER AUTONOMY IN LEARNING
VOCABULARY FOR SECOND-YEAR STUDENTS AT HAI PHONG
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
(Phát huy tính tự chủ trong việc học từ vựng cho sinh viên năm thứ hai,
Trƣờng Đại học Y Hải Phòng)
M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60.14.10









HANOI - 2010

2

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES




TRẦN THỊ HÒA

PROMOTING LEARNER AUTONOMY IN LEARNING
VOCABULARY FOR SECOND-YEAR STUDENTS AT HAI PHONG
MEDICAL UNIVERSITY
(Phát huy tính tự chủ trong việc học từ vựng cho sinh viên năm thứ hai,
Trƣờng Đại học Y Hải Phòng)
M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60.14.10
Supervisor: Phùng Hà Thanh, M.Ed







HANOI - 2010

6
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

Declaration i
Acknowledgement ii
Abstract iii
List of tables and figures viii
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study 1
2. Aims and objectives of the study 2
3. Scope of the study 3
4. Methods of the study 3
5. Significance of the study 4
6. Overview of the study 4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Vocabulary 5
1.1. Definition of vocabulary 5
1.2. Processes of vocabulary acquisition 5
2. Vocabulary learning and teaching 7
2.1. Aspects of learning a word 7
2.2. Explicit approach vs. Incidental learning approach 8
3. Learner autonomy 10
3.1. Definition of autonomy 10

7
3.2. Principles of developing autonomy 12
4. Vocabulary learning strategies 14
4.1. Definition of learning strategies 14
4.2. Classification of vocabulary learning strategies 15
4.3. Frameworks for strategy training 16
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
1. Background of the study 18

1.1. Current learning and teaching of English at Hai Phong
Medical University 18
1.2. Identification of the problem 18
2. Participants 19
3. Implementation of the action research 19
4. Instruments of data collection 22
4.1. Description of the pre-treatment questionnaire 22
4.2. Description of the vocabulary – learning records 23
4.3. Description of the vocabulary learning diary 24
4.4. Description of the post – treatment questionnaire 26
5. Data collection procedures 26
6. Data analysis procedures 26
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
1. Phase One - Research question 1: Students’ problems in independent
vocabulary learning 28
2. Phase Two 29

8
2.1. Research question 2: Students’ performance in the use of the taught
strategies 29
2.1.1. Students’ performance in the use of Strategy Set 1 and Set 2 29
2.1.2. Students’ performance in the use of Strategy Set 3 30
2.2. Research question 3: Students’ participation in the use of the taught
strategies 31
2.2.1. Students’ participation in the use of Strategy Set 1 and Set 2 31
2.2.2. Students’ participation in the use of Strategy Set 3 32
3. Phase Three 32
3.1. Research question 4: Students’ maintenance of the taught strategies
in independent vocabulary learning 33
3.2. Research question 5: Students’ perception of the effectiveness of

the strategy training programme 34
3.2.1. Students’ frequency of using the taught strategies before and
after the training programme 34
3.2.2. Usefulness of the taught strategies 35
3.2.3. Students’ evaluation of the strategy training programme 36
PART C: CONCLUSION
1. Conclusion 39
2. Pedagogical implications from the findings 40
3. Limitations of the study and suggestions for further study 40
REFERENCES 41


9
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Schmitt’s taxonomy of vocabulary learning strategies (1997) I
Appendix 2: Three lesson plans III
Appendix 3: Three word-learning records XXIV
Appendix 4: Sample vocabulary-learning diaries XXXIII
Appendix 5: Pre-treatment questionnaire survey (English version) LVIII
Appendix 6: Pre-treatment questionnaire survey (Vietnamese version) LX
Appendix 7: Post-treatment questionnaire survey (English version) LXII
Appendix 8: Post-treatment questionnaire survey (Vietnamese version) LXV





10
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
TABLES PAGE

Table 1: Criteria for evaluating word-learning records 24
Table 2: Holistic rubric for marking the maintenance of the trained strategy sets 25
Table 3: Students’ performance in the use of Dictionary-related strategies and
Vocabulary-recording strategies 29
Table 4: Students’ performance in the use of Affix-studying strategies 30
Table 5: Students’ participation in the use of Dictionary-related strategies and
Vocabulary-recording strategies 31
Table 6: Students’ participation in the use of Affix - studying strategies 32

FIGURES
Figure 1: Students’ problems in independent vocabulary learning 28
Figure 2: Students’ maintenance of the taught strategies in independent
vocabulary learning 33
Figure 3: Frequency of vocabulary strategy use before and after training 34
Figure 4: Usefulness of the taught strategies 35
Figure 5: Effectiveness of the strategy training programme 36
Figure 6: Students’ recommendations for vocabulary-learning strategy training 38

11
PART A: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the study
Learner autonomy, a concept promoted by Holec (1981) and others in the context
of European language education, has become a favorite topic for analysis for the last
twenty years. In many parts of the world, learner autonomy has been put forward as a goal
to achieve (Pemberton et al., 1996; Sinclair et al., 2000; Little et al., 2000; Benson, 2001).
Several arguments may be used in favor of developing autonomy in language learners. For
example, according to Naimen et al. (1978), autonomous learning is more effective than
other approaches to learning, and Waite (1994) specifies that learners need to take charge
of their own learning in order to make the most of available resources, especially outside
the classroom.

Despite being widely discussed worldwide, learner autonomy remains a fairly
novel concept in Vietnam. Whether or to what extent learner autonomy is developed and
practiced in Vietnamese schools and universities is still open to question. Furthermore,
since the idea of learner autonomy originated from Western cultures, it hardly suffices to
just transfer the concept to an Asian context (Benson, Chik & Lim, 2003; Smith, 2003).
Rather, the implementation of learner autonomy in Asian countries should be tailored so
that an appropriate methodology for developing learner autonomy in non-Western contexts
can be devised (Smith, 2003). Another argument is that learner autonomy is a universal
social phenomenon, which manifests itself differently in different local contexts (Holliday,
2003). Because of all these complex and interesting points, it seems appealing to explore
how autonomy can be enhanced in an Asian educational institution like Hai Phong Medical
University. Moreover, developing learners’ autonomy becomes increasingly important as
far as tertiary education is concerned. A student at university is required to do a substantial
amount of research for his assignments, so he is supposed to know when and how to work
independently so that he can achieve a satisfactory result.
Specifically, the local context of Hai Phong Medical University calls for the idea of
promoting learner autonomy. The second-year students, who are at pre-intermediate level,
do not seem to study English as well as in the first year. Having taught them for three
successive semesters, I immediately take notice of the situation and intend to design a
remedy plan to improve it. After my open talk with the whole class, several problems came
12
to light. Most of the students feel discouraged by a large number of words they encounter
in each English lesson. As many of them confess, learning vocabulary seems to be the
most difficult and most important to them. However, as English non-majors, the students
have only four periods per week for English lessons. It means the time spent on vocabulary
learning is really limited in class. In order to develop the students’ vocabulary, it is crucial
that they practice independent vocabulary learning regularly outside class. Therefore, it has
become increasingly essential to provide them with useful learning strategies so that they
can employ in their self-study time. In this case, the success of learning vocabulary
depends very much on how effectively and autonomously the students practice vocabulary

self-study. As Waite (1994) says, learners need to take charge of their own learning in
order to make the most of available resources, especially outside the classroom.
For all the reasons above, I have decided to undertake a study on promoting
learner autonomy in learning vocabulary for second-year students at Hai Phong
Medical University. The focus of the study is a training programme of vocabulary –
learning strategies conducted for ten weeks.
2. Aims and objectives of the study
Firstly, the study aims at improving the students’ autonomous vocabulary learning
by teaching them some helpful strategies, namely dictionary-related strategies, recording
vocabulary and studying affixes. Secondly, it is intended to evaluate their employment of
these vocabulary-learning strategies in terms of performance, participation and
maintenance. These aims can be achieved by answering the following research questions:
1. What are the problems that the students encounter in their independent
vocabulary learning?
2. How well do the students use the taught strategies in their guided vocabulary
practice?
3. How much do the students use the taught strategies in their guided vocabulary
practice?
4. To what extent do the students maintain the taught strategies in their
independent vocabulary learning?
5. How effective is the strategy training programme in helping the students learn
vocabulary, as perceived by the students?

13
3. Scope of the study
The research focuses on one specific way of developing learner autonomy: the
explicit teaching of learning strategies. A vocabulary-learning strategy training programme
is conducted for ten weeks. Within the scope of the study, only three strategy sets, namely
dictionary-related strategies, recording vocabulary and studying affixes, are taught. The
effectiveness of the taught strategies is measured in terms of performance, participation

and maintenance. Performance refers to the extent of correctness when the students use the
taught strategies while participation means how much they use these strategies in their
guided vocabulary practice. Lastly, maintenance refers to the extent of retaining the taught
strategies in their independent vocabulary study.
The participants include 27 second-year students of the same English class at Hai
Phong Medical University and their teacher. In this study, the teacher is in charge of
teaching the class and plays the role of the researcher at the same time.
4. Methods of the study
The current study is carried out as an action research, which combines qualitative
and quantitative approaches. The action actually taken is a vocabulary-learning strategy
training programme designed for the duration of ten weeks. The programme is divided into
three phases.
In phase one, pre-treatment questionnaires are distributed to seek the answer for
research question one regarding the students’ problem in learning vocabulary. Then, the
students are taught about three strategy sets, namely dictionary-related strategies,
vocabulary-recording and affix-studying.
In phase two, three word-learning records are provided as guided practice of the
taught strategies. The data from the word-records aim at answering the research question
two and three about the students’ performance and participation in the use of the taught
strategies.
In phase three, the students keep free-style vocabulary learning diaries, in which
they record the vocabulary they want to learn in their self-study time. The diaries are used
to answer the research question four about the extent of maintaining the taught strategies in
the students’ independent vocabulary learning. By the end of phase three, post-treatment
questionnaires are distributed to answer the research question five about the learners’
perception of the strategy training programme.
14
The data from the pre-treatment and post-treatment questionnaires, the word-
learning records and vocabulary-learning diaries are calculated with regard to items’
frequency, mean, and percentage.

5. Significance of the study
First and foremost, the habit of independent vocabulary learning will hopefully be
developed for the second-year students at Hai Phong Medical University. The students can
overcome their difficulties in learning vocabulary by means of monitoring and regulating
their self-study with appropriate learning strategies. In this way, the researcher hopes that
the students’ awareness of learning strategies and learner autonomy can be raised and
nurtured.
Second, the study offers an example of how learner autonomy can be fostered in an
Asian context. It is expected that the study will contribute an insightful picture of the
practice of Asian learner autonomy to the literature and help to shed light on the concept of
learner autonomy.
6. Overview of the study
The research paper consists of the following parts:
Part A. Introduction
Part B. Development
The development is divided into three chapters:
 Chapter one (Literature review) provides the theoretical background of the
study, covering the key terms and review of related studies.
 Chapter two (Methodology) justifies and describes the methodology of the
study in details.
 Chapter three (Results and discussion) presents full analysis of the collected
data and discusses the findings.
Part C. Conclusion
15
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1. LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter offers a review of the literature related to learner autonomy and
vocabulary learning and teaching. In each section, the definition or explanation of the key
terms is presented together with the studies worldwide.
1. Vocabulary

1.1. Definitions of vocabulary
There exist several definitions of vocabulary in the literature review, all of which
seem to share the idea of what vocabulary is. According to Longman dictionary of
language teaching and applied linguistics (Richard, Platt & Platt, 1992), vocabulary is
defined as “a set of lexemes, including single words, compound words and idioms”. This
way of defining is similar to the one given in the Merriam-Webster online dictionary: “a
list or collection of words and phrases usually alphabetically arranged and explained or
defined.” It is clear from these two definitions that vocabulary includes not only individual
words but also fixed expressions. This point is directly identified by Ur (1996: 60),
“Vocabulary can be defined, roughly, as the words we teach in the foreign language.
However, a new item of vocabulary may be more than a single word”. He highlights that
some vocabulary items such as “post office” and “mother-in-law” express a single idea.
Besides, the meaning of idioms such as “call it a day” can not be deduced from an analysis
of the component words. Therefore, Ur (1996: 60) suggests that “A useful convention is to
cover all such cases by talking about vocabulary items rather than words” . In the same
vein, McCarthy (1990) argues that multi-word units including idioms and phrasal verbs
should clearly be treated as single lexical items since their meaning are partly identified by
their fixedness. The central idea of these definitions can be best summed up by Lewis
(1993, cited in Nguyen, 2007: 7) who defines vocabulary as “individual words, or full
sentences – institutionalized utterances – that convey fixed social or pragmatic meaning
within a given community”.
1.2. Processes of vocabulary acquisition
According to Nation (2001), in order to remember a word, the learner needs to
experience three processes, namely noticing, retrieval and creative (generative) use.
Most simply, noticing means giving attention to an item. This can happen in a
variety of ways, including learners deliberately studying a word or having a word
explained to them and the word appearing crucial in the textual input. Noticing involves
decontextualization, which occurs when “the word is removed from its message context to
be focused on as a language item” (Nation, 2001: 64). The role of decontextualization is
16

underlined by Nation (2001: 64) “ in order to acquire the language, learners need to
consciously see language items as parts of the language system rather than only as
messages”.
Nation (2001) further distinguishes two kinds of decontextualization: negotiation
and definition. Although a large number of studies demonstrate that negotiated vocabulary
items are more likely to be learned than non-negotiated ones, he points out that it is not the
means by which most vocabulary is learned, suggesting the need for other complementary
ways of decontextualizing items. Especially noteworthy is the discovery that not only the
learners actually negotiating but also those observing the negotiation learn the words.
Regarding definition, an interesting and significant finding is that simple, short definitions
are the most effective while more elaborate ones tend to be confusing rather than helpful
for vocabulary learning (Ellis, 1995; Chaudron, 1982, cited in Nation, 2001). In addition,
Nation himself has shown that many learners find learning faster if the word meaning is
conveyed by a first language translation. In the classroom, teachers directly influence
students’ noticing process by deciding the context to put the wanted vocabulary items, by
pre-teaching or consciousness-raising of the items before the activity and by using different
attention-drawing techniques.
The second process of vocabulary acquisition is retrieval, which reinforces the
meaning of the word in the learner’s mind. The more frequent the retrieval of a particular
item in the learning process, the greater the chances that the item will strike deeper in the
learner’s memory. It should be noted that a repetition of a word can only be effective if
there is some memory of the previous meeting with the word. Thus, the span of time
between encounters cannot be too long. As Nation (2001: 68) states:
It is very useful to try to estimate how much listening and reading a learner would
need to be doing per week in order for incidental receptive vocabulary learning to
proceed in an effective way ( ) On average learners would need to listen to stories
at least three times a week for about fifteen minutes each time. They would need to
read about one graded reader every two weeks.
The last but major process of vocabulary acquisition is generation, which occurs
when “previously met words are subsequently met or used in ways that differ from the

previous meeting with the word” (Nation 2001: 68). Those new encounters push learners
towards reconceptualization of their knowledge of these words. There are also receptive
and productive forms of generation. Receptive generation occurs when a word is
encountered in listening and reading and has slightly different meaning whereas productive
generation involves using the word in a new context.
17
The three processes discussed above tend to correspond to the three-point scale for
describing depth of processing suggested by Stahl (1985, cited in Nation, 2001). The scale
includes three levels, namely association, comprehension and generation.
2. Vocabulary learning and teaching
2.1. Aspects of learning a word
The question of what it means for a language learner to “know” a word is a central
issue of second language vocabulary acquisition. A close examination of the literature has
revealed that the nature of lexical knowledge can be depicted as a continuum of several
dimensions.
On the one hand, several writers have regarded vocabulary learning as the task of
mastering its constituents. As illustrated by Ur (1996), learners have to know the word
form - including pronunciation and spelling, grammar, collocation, aspects of word
meaning, and word formation. By grammar, he means the information such as irregular
past form, irregular plural form, which should be showed to learners, especially when an
item has an unpredictable change of form. Ur differentiates two levels of meaning aspects.
The first level includes denotation, connotation and appropriateness of use in a certain
context, and the second level covers meaning relationships, namely synonyms, antonyms,
hyponyms, co-hyponyms, superordinates. Clearly, knowing a word requires more than just
its meaning and form. Sharing the view with Ur, Harmer (1991: 158) presents a more
detailed and systematic summary of “knowing a word” in the following chart:

WORDS
WORD INFORMATION
MEANING
WORD GRAMMAR
WORD USE
Meaning in context
Sense relation
Metaphor and idiom
Collocation
Style and register
Parts of speech
Prefixes and suffixes
Spelling and pronunciation
Nouns: countable and
uncountable, etc.
Verb complementation,
phrasal verbs, etc.
Adjectives and adverbs:
position, etc.
18

In a much more concise manner, as stated by Finegan (2004: 40), using a word
requires that the mental lexicon of children and adults alike should store four kinds of
information:
 its sounds and their sequencing (phonological information)
 its meaning (semantic information)
 how related words such as the plural and past tense are formed (morphological
information)
 its category and how to use it in a sentence (syntactic information)
On the other hand, some researchers have approached the learning of vocabulary
from a broader view. For example, Chapelle (1994) suggests a three-component construct
of vocabulary ability including (1) the context of vocabulary use, (2) vocabulary
knowledge and fundamental processes and (3) metacognitive strategies for vocabulary use.
As regards context, it can influence lexical meaning in various ways. The second
component is further divided into four elements, namely vocabulary size, knowledge of
word characteristics, lexicon organization (the way in which lexical items are organized in
the mental lexicon) and fundamental vocabulary processes that users apply to access their
lexical knowledge. Finally, metacognive strategies or strategic competence can be
avoidance, paraphrase, guessing meaning, asking teacher or consulting dictionary etc.
Another direction in the research of lexical competence is to head for links and
interrelationships between the different kinds of word knowledge (Schmitt & Meara,
1997).
2.2. Explicit approach vs. Incidental learning approach
Vocabulary learning has been emerging in the literature review as a complex,
interesting issue that involves different processes. The most notable topic is the distinction
between explicit and implicit (or incidental) learning.
As regards explicit learning, the central idea is that the application of
vocabulary learning strategies can greatly facilitate vocabulary acquisition, and learners
play an active role in processing information (Ellis, 1995). Unsurprisingly, a large number
of books have focused on numerous activities and exercises for explicit study of
vocabulary. According to a survey by Sokmen (1997 cited in Schmitt, 2000: 146), explicit

vocabulary teaching should adhere to the following principles:
 build a large sight vocabulary
 integrate new words with old
 provide a number of encounters with a word
 promote a deep level of processing
 facilitate imaging
19
 make new words “real” by connecting them to the students’ world in some
way
 use a variety of techniques
 encourage independent learning strategies
In addition, Schmitt (2000) points out some other important principles. First, the
problem of cross – association should be prevented. This usually happens when similar
words, such as “left” and “right”, are initially taught together. Students are confused when
matching the word form with the right meaning. Antonyms, synonyms, and closely related
semantic groupings are particularly subject to cross-association. As Nation (1990 cited in
Schmitt, 2000) suggests, cross association can be avoided by teaching the most frequent
word of a pair first and introducing the other only after the first word is well established.
Second, the underlying meaning concept of a polysemous word is worth teaching. For
example, to define the verb “run”, it is best to explain it as “go quickly, smoothly, or
continuously”. This definition keeps the common underlying trait of several meaning
senses like “the girl ran”, “the road runs up the hill”, and “run a business” (Nation, 1990
cited in Schmitt, 2000). Accordingly, students can understand the word in a variety of
contexts and the effect of teaching is maximized. Last, teaching word families should be
made a habit to enhance vocabulary learning.
Implicit learning, on the other hand, is defined as “accidental learning of
information without the intention of remembering that information” (Hustijn et al., 1996).
Sternberg (1987) argues that most vocabulary is learned implicitly from context. An
extreme position, having its roots in Krashen’s Input Hypothesis (Krashen, 1989), even
states that meanings of new words are acquired subconsciously as a result of repeated

exposures in a range of contexts, where the conscious focus is not on form, but on the
message. To put it simply, the key to incidental learning approach is to make sure that
learners get maximum exposure to the language. In second language classrooms, this can
be best achieved through reading.
However, much of the literature has showed that incidental learning through
reading occurs only to a limited degree. This is attributed to several factors. Firstly, lexical
inferencing is not always successful. For example, word meanings are not inferable from
context or lead learners to make wrong inferences. Alternatively, not all contexts are
equally conducive to make informed guesses. Secondly, incidental vocabulary acquisition
is unlikely if new words are not noticed or processed deeply. Furthermore, the question of
how many and what kind of exposures are necessary for acquisition to occur remains
unanswered. As Hulstijin et al. (1996) concludes, incidental learning in second language
20
only occurs incrementally and in small quantities. Besides, according to Schmitt and
McCarthy (1997), the prerequisites for successful incidental acquisition include:
 Level of language proficiency
 Learner’s large L2 vocabulary
 Strategic knowledge of inferencing process
 Rich context with sufficient cues
All things considered, it is generally agreed that any vocabulary program needs to
include both explicit teaching and activities which promote incidental learning. In the
words of Schmitt (2000: 146), explicitly teaching all the words is necessary for beginners
whereas beyond this level, “incidental learning should be structured into the program in a
principled way.” Incidental learning not only helps to consolidate vocabulary but also
exposes learners to different contexts in which a word is used, thus expanding the
knowledge about the word. Moreover, some aspects of word knowledge, especially
collocation and register constraints, can only be fully acquired through numerous
exposures. Another reason is that explicitly presenting all the uses of a word to students is
obviously an impossible task. More specifically, Ellis (1995) contends that both implicit
and explicit learning suit different levels of word meaning. In his view, implicit vocabulary

learning is suitable for simple pattern recognition of surface form, called “shallow
processing” while explicit learning necessarily facilitates the mapping of those surface
forms to their corresponding semantic/conceptual presentation. Explicit learning, therefore,
refers to the recognition of word meaning by means of “deep processing”.
3. Learner autonomy
3.1. Definition of autonomy
A close look at the literature has revealed that it is not easy to put forward a proper
definition of the concept “autonomy”. There exists a range of definitions, each of which
explores autonomy from a different perspective and within a certain scope. Accordingly, it
is essential to study a variety of interpretations in order to capture the full meaning of the
concept.
To start with, Holec (1981: 3), the so-called “father” of learner autonomy, provides
a broad definition which considers learner autonomy “the ability to take charge of one’s
own learning”. This general but concise definition, from the researcher’s view, really
touches upon the spirit of autonomy. It is obvious from Holec’s definition that an
autonomous learner not only possesses a sense of responsibility for his learning but he/she
is also self-conscious of that responsibility.
Other writers offer more specific definitions than Holec’s in that they detail what
constitutes the ability to take charge of one’s own learning. For example, in terms of
21
behavior, Nunan (2000) describes autonomous learners as the ones who make decision on
their own style of learning, actively involve themselves in learning process and
independently choose their learning materials. Alternatively, Little (1991) tends to focus
on mental processes when he asserts that learner autonomy is “essentially the matter of the
learner’s psychological relation to the process and content of learning – a capacity for
detachment, critical reflection, decision making, and independent action.”
Turning attention to the aspect of attitudes, Scharle and Szabo (2000) seem to share
the same interest with Holec (1981) when they present a persuasive analysis of the
interrelationship between autonomy and responsibility. According to the authors,
autonomy is defined as “the freedom and ability to manage one’s own affairs, which

entails the right to make decisions as well” whereas responsibility is understood as “being
in charge of something, but with the implication that one has to deal with the consequences
of one’s own actions.” (Scharle & Szabo, 2000: 4). They argue that autonomy and
responsibility are interrelated and both require learners’ active involvement. Since
successful learning depends considerably on learners having a responsible attitude,
students need to develop a sense of responsibility together with autonomy capacity.
However, Benson (2001: 47) states that it is preferable to define autonomy as the
capacity to take control of one’s own learning, largely because the construct of “control”
appears to be more open to investigation than the constructs of “charge” or
“responsibility.” In his definition, he specifies three levels of control that a learner should
take in order to develop his/her learning autonomy: “An adequate description of autonomy
in language learning should at least recognize the importance of three levels at which
learner control may be exercised: learning management, cognitive processes and learning
content” (Benson, 2001: 50). This definition will be the guideline for the current study.
Most interestingly, several writers have approached the concept of autonomy with
reference to the combination between independence and interdependence. Although
independence from a teacher is often seen as an observable sign of autonomy, the value of
interdependence, defined as “the ability of learners to work together for mutual benefit,
and to take shared responsibility for their learning” (Palfreyman, 2003: 4), can hardly be
denied. Little and Dam (1998) also argue for the interdependence inside independence:
We are social creatures, and as such we depend on one another in infinity of ways.
Without the stimulus and comfort of social interaction, for example, child
development is disastrously impaired: it is our condition that we learn from one
another. Thus, the independence that we exercise through our developed capacity
for autonomous behavior is always conditioned and constrained by our inescapable
22
interdependence. In contexts of formal learning as elsewhere, we necessarily
depend on others even as we exercise our independence.
Admittedly, autonomy does not exclude interdependence. Learning, like other
social communication activities, is more fruitful with the cooperation of people involved.

So is autonomous learning. Teachers and learners collaborate to contribute to the learning
community and to the process of autonomy training. Likewise, knowing how and when to
seek for help does not mean learners are not independent. Therefore, autonomy should be
understood as the freedom to choose what action to take, whether to do it oneself or to
consult others. In fact, according to Palfreyman (2003), collaboration has come to be seen
as an important component of learner autonomy. Boud (1981, cited in Palfreyman, 2003)
has even gone further to regard interdependence as a more developed stage of autonomy
than independence.
A more general interpretation of the concept “autonomy” is to put it into the frame
of daily life. An autonomous learner is then depicted as being a fulfilled and effective
citizen in a society. For example, Candlin (1997, cited in Palfreyman, 2003:2) refers to
“autonomy in language, learning, and above all else, in living.” Similarly, in the words of
Delores et al. (1996, cited in Palfreyman, 2003) “each individual must be equipped to seize
learning opportunities throughout life, both to broaden her or his knowledge skills and
attitudes and to adapt to a changing, complex and interdependent world.”
All in all, learner autonomy is a stimulating, multifaceted concept which can be
interpreted from different viewpoints. Learners’ autonomy encompasses not only their
attitudes but also their behaviors. It is both a process and a goal in language learning, in
education and in living as well.
3.2. Principles of developing autonomy
Varied as it may be, the literature on principles of developing autonomy seems to
have a common feature. It is all concerned with explicit teaching and providing
opportunities for learner autonomy to express and develop.
First and foremost, in order to foster learner autonomy, it is crucial to increase a
sense of responsibility. A complete analysis of how to build up learner responsibility is
presented by Scharle and Szabo (2000). They identify the building blocks of responsibility
and autonomy on the part of learners and teachers. The building blocks required of learners
include motivation and self-confidence, monitoring and evaluation, learning strategies and
finally cooperation and group cohesion. Particularly noteworthy is their emphasis on
monitoring and evaluation. According to Scharle and Szabo (2000: 7), “when we

encourage students to focus on the process of their learning rather than the outcome, we
help them consciously examine their own contribution to their learning.” This is really the
23
vital step to the development of a responsible attitude. Another key point is the teaching of
learning strategies, which are regarded as the tools for students to expand their language
competence and to undertake their own learning responsibility. Students should be shown a
variety of available strategies and encouraged to find out which strategies work best for
them in certain contexts. Meanwhile, certain attitudes are also required of teachers. They
should be willing to share information with the learners in terms of both short and long
term objectives, to take consistent control by clearly establishing expectations towards
learners and lastly to delegate tasks and decisions to learners.
With a view to reinforcing these skills and attitudes for learners and teachers,
Scharle and Szabo (2000) go on to detail the process of developing responsibility that
learners and teachers go through. This process is divided into three phases: raising
awareness, changing attitudes and transferring roles. First, the stage of raising awareness
includes highly controlled activities which are intended to present new experiences to
learners and to make them conscious of the inner processes of their learning. Second, the
changing – attitude – stage allows repeatable, less controlled activities through which
students practise and reinforce their new roles and habits. Finally, the stage of transferring
roles contains loosely structured activities that give students considerable freedom. It is
clear that as learners move from one phase to the next, they are facilitated to exercise
greater autonomy and more responsibility.
More specifically, Vieria (2003) puts principles in a common framework for learner
and teacher development. This framework should be highly recommended for its thorough
presentation of action principles to promote learner autonomy. Besides, it nicely compares
autonomous learner development side by side with reflective teacher development.
However, for the scope of the present study, the researcher will only make use of the
principles concerning learners. According to Vieria (2003: 226), the action principles to
develop learner autonomy include:
Reflection: Developing language / learning awareness

 Developing awareness of language (formal and pragmatic properties;
sociocultural dimension)
 Developing awareness of learning (sense of agency; attitudes,
representations, beliefs, preferences and styles; aims and priorities;
strategies: cognitive, metacognitive, strategic, socio-affective tasks: focus,
purpose, rationale, demands; instructional / didactic process: objectives,
activities, materials, evaluation, roles)
Experimentation: Experiencing learning strategies
 Discovering and trying out learning strategies (in class and outside class)
24
 Exploring resource materials (pedagogical and non-pedagogical)
Regulation: Regulating learning experience
 Identifying learning problems or needs
 Setting learning goals
 Planning learning strategies
 Monitoring/evaluating attitudes, representations, beliefs, strategic
knowledge and ability
 Assessing learning outcomes and progress
 Evaluating the instructional / didactic process
Negotiation: Co-constructing learning experience
 Working in collaboration
 Taking the initiative, choosing and deciding
The four principles presented above indicate “major learner roles that bring the
language learner closer to the learning content and process” (Vieria, 2003: 227). As can be
seen, each principle paves the way for a particular realization of autonomy. Within the
scope of this study, the researcher will exploit the first two principles: reflection and
experimentation.
4. Vocabulary learning strategies
Strategy training can be used to help students achieve learner autonomy and
linguistic autonomy (Cohen, 1998). By choosing their own strategies without continued

prompting from the language teacher, learners should be able to monitor and evaluate the
relative effectiveness of their strategy use, and more fully develop their problem-solving
skills. In this way, learners are encouraged to become more autonomous, to diagnose some
of their own learning strengths and weaknesses, and to self-direct the process of language
development. This section offers a literature review concerning the training of vocabulary
learning strategies.
4.1. Definition of learning strategies
There is no consensus on a definition of learning strategies due to different
interpretations of the term strategy in the literature.
Several writers seem to pay attention to the utility of learning strategies when
defining them. For example, Rubin (1975: 43) provides a very broad definition of learning
strategies as “the techniques or devices which a learner may use to acquire knowledge.”
Similarly, in the view of Willing (1989), learning strategies may be identified as specific
study skills or techniques, a general ability to take the initiative or just an enthusiasm for
learning while Beckman (2006) considers learning strategies a set of steps to accomplish a
particular task such as taking a test, comprehending text and writing a story. In a more
25
specific manner, Oxford (1990: 8) states that “ learning strategies are operations
employed by learners to aid the acquisition, storage, retrieval, and use of information.” She
further stresses the richness of learning strategies by expanding the definition, “ learning
strategies are specific actions taken by learners to make learning easier, faster, more
enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations”
(Oxford, 1990:8). It is obvious from these definitions that learning strategies serve as the
tool to facilitate learning.
Other writers, however, put more focus on the inner process that learners
experience when they employ learning strategies. In a helpful survey article, Weinstein and
Mayer (1986: 315) define learning strategies broadly as "behaviours and thoughts that a
learner engages in during learning" which are "intended to influence the learner's encoding
process." Later Mayer (1988: 11) more specifically defines learning strategies as
"behaviours of a learner that are intended to influence how the learner processes

information." These definitions have the root in cognitive science, with its essential
assumption that learning involves information processing. In a similar vein, Rubin (1987:
29) views learning as “the process by which information is obtained, stored, retrieved, and
used”, so learning strategies can be any set of operations, steps, plans, routines used by the
learner which affect this process. More specifically, Cohen (1998: 4) portrays learning
strategies as “ learning processes which are consciously selected by the learner.” He
emphasizes that, “The element of choice is important here because this is what gives a
strategy its special character. These are also moves which the learner is at least partially
aware of, even if full attention is not being given to them” (Cohen, 1998:4). In his view,
the element of consciousness is what distinguishes strategies from those processes that are
not strategic. Although some writers maintain that strategies can be used unconsciously
(Barnett, 1988 and Davies, 1995, cited in Yang, 2006: 316), Cohen’s emphasis on
consciousness is quite reasonable. In the researcher’s view, since learning strategies are
operations used by learners to ease the learning process, the strategies can only work best if
learners are well aware of what strategies they are using, how and when to use them.
4.2. Classification of vocabulary learning strategies
Among several taxonomies of vocabulary learning strategies available in the
literature, the one proposed by Schmitt (1997) is highly appreciated because of its
advantages over the others; thus, the present study is conducted in the light of Schmitt’s
comprehensive taxonomy.
The classification in Schmitt’s study was based on the two dimensions
developed by Oxford (1990) and Nation (1990). The first dimension was adopted from
Oxford’s system of learning strategies which contain six groups: social, memory,
26
cognitive, metacognitive, affective and compensation. Social strategies (SOC) use
interaction with other people to improve language learning. Memory strategies (MEM)
relate new material to existing knowledge. Cognitive strategies (COG) exhibit the common
function of manipulation or transformation of the target language by the learner.
Metacognitive (MET) strategies involve a conscious overview of the learning process and
making decisions about planning, monitoring, or evaluating the best ways to study.

Affective strategies exhibit how to manage one’s emotions in language learning.
Compensation strategies involve different ways of compensating for missing knowledge.
However, Schmitt (1997) only adopted four strategy groups: Social, Memory, Cognitive,
and Metacognitive. Besides, he added a new category – Determination Strategies (DET) to
account for situations when an individual discovered a new word meaning without
resource to another person’s expertise. The second dimension is the distinction between
initial discovery of word meanings and remembering words that divide strategies into
discovery and consolidation groups respectively (Nation, 1990). Taken together, Schmitt’s
taxonomy contains 58 individual strategies characterized by the discovery – consolidation
division and into five groups, namely social, memory, cognitive, metacognitive and
determination. Appendix 1 presents Schmitt’s final version of taxonomy of vocabulary
learning strategies.
4.3. Frameworks for strategy training
Before any discussion on setting an appropriate framework for strategy training, it
is important to investigate some central issues in instruction in learning strategies.
The first topic concerns whether strategy instruction should be provided as a
separate program or as an integrated component in the language or content subject course.
Those in favor of separate strategy training programs argue that students will learn
strategies better if all their attention is focused on strategic processing skills (Jones et al.
1987, cited in O’Malley & Chamot, 1990: 152). However, integrated strategy instruction
programs tend to have much more advantages. First, Wenden (1987) asserts that learning
in contexts outperforms learning separate skills. Scharle and Szabo (2000) also regard the
regular school curriculum a meaningful context for strategy training. Second, it saves time
and money to combine strategy training with regular courses. In the case of Vietnam,
where few separate strategy training courses are offered, it is advisable that teachers
integrate strategy instruction into their daily teaching.
The second argument is between direct and embedded strategy instruction, which
can be named explicit and implicit instruction respectively. As defined by O’Malley and
Chamot (1990: 153), “ In direct instruction, students are informed of the value and purpose
of strategy training, whereas in embedded instruction, students are presented with activities

27
and materials structured to elicit the use of the strategies being taught but are not informed
of the reasons why this approach to learning is being practiced.” Again, direct instruction is
more advantageous than embedded one. Although Jones (1983, cited in O’Malley &
Chamot, 1990) points out that embedded strategy training requires little teacher training,
other researchers criticize it for not fostering learner autonomy. For example, in the words
of Wenden (1987), “ students who are not aware of the strategies they are using do not
develop independent learning strategies and have little opportunity of becoming
autonomous learners.” In contrast, strategy training which includes a metacognitive
component by informing students about the purpose and importance of the strategies can
help to maintain strategy use over time and to transfer strategies to new tasks (Brown et al.,
1986, cited in O’Malley & Chamot, 1990: 153). In addition, according to Scharle and
Szabo (2000), explicit training may also encourage a collaborative spirit between the
teacher and the learner. Because of the advantages discussed above, the strategy training
component of the present study will be conducted as an integrated part of the language
course in the most explicit manner.
As regards frameworks for learning strategy instruction, most of them have been
designed to raise students’ awareness as to the purpose and rationale of strategy use, to
give students opportunities to practice the strategies that they are being taught, and to help
them understand how to use the strategies in new learning contexts. Cohen (1998)
recommends seven steps towards the design of strategy training for learners. They are
outlined below:
 Determining the learners’ needs and the resources available for training
 Selecting the strategies
 Considering the benefits of integrated strategy training
 Considering motivational issues
 Preparing the materials and activities
 Conducting explicit strategy training
 Evaluating and revising the strategy training
Cohen (1998) emphasizes that an integral part of the strategy training is ongoing

evaluation and revision. The training program can be evaluated by means of student
performance across language tasks and skills, maintenance of the new strategies over time,
effective transfer of strategies to other learning tasks and a positive attitude towards the
training program (Wenden, 1987; Oxford, 1990). This ongoing assessment is certainly
based on feedback from the learners themselves.
In the present research, the general guidelines from O’Malley & Chamot (1990)
and Cohen (1998) will be followed.
28
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY
This chapter is devoted to presenting the methodology of the current research,
including the research design, the participants, the data collection instruments and
procedure, and data analysis.
1. Background of the study
1.1. Current learning and teaching of English at Hai Phong Medical University
English, a compulsory subject for all the students at Hai Phong Medical University,
is taught in two separate stages. In the first stage, the students learn General English for
four successive semesters. They are expected to complete the elementary level after the
first two semesters and then the pre-intermediate level after the next two semesters. In the
second stage, they study English for Medicine during the fifth semester. Each semester
lasts 15 weeks, and the English class meets for a four-period lesson each week. Obviously,
the time spent on English learning and teaching is rather limited.
1.2. Identification of the problem
By the end of 2009, the second-year class that I had been teaching at Hai Phong
Medical University seemed to have a declining performance in English. They showed a
lack of interest in reading and vocabulary lessons and their first-term test results were
rather low. Having taught them for three successive semesters, I immediately realized that
they were having some problems learning English. I decided to investigate the situation by
having an open talk with the whole class. The talk turned out to be a lively discussion in
which my students expressed their feelings about learning English. Most of them shared
the view that learning vocabulary was the most difficult and most important to them. More

specifically, a considerable number of new words in each English lesson might discourage
them. To make the matter worse, only four English periods per week meant that the in-
class time for vocabulary learning was inadequate. In order to help my students overcome
their difficulty in learning vocabulary, I intended to further investigate the situation and
then design a remedy plan. Considering that the time in class was so restricted, the first
thought that came to my mind then was how to teach my students to learn vocabulary
effectively in their self-study time. That idea was then further clarified into two tasks. First,
I needed to raise my students’ awareness of learner autonomy in learning vocabulary.
Second, I wanted to teach them some vocabulary-learning strategies that might help them