Improving students dictionary skills an action research study at the university of transport and communications m a

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY – HO CHI MINH CITY
UNIVERSITY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES & HUMANITIES
FACULTY OF ENGLISH LINGUISTICS & LITERATURE

IMPROVING STUDENTS’ DICTIONARY SKILLS:
AN ACTION RESEARCH STUDY AT THE UNIVERSITY
OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS

A thesis submitted to the
Faculty of English Linguistics & Literature
in partial fulfillment of the Master’s degree in TESOL

By
NGUYỄN KIM VŨ BẢO

Supervised by
Nguyễn Nhã Trân, PhD

HO CHI MINH CITY, APRIL 2020


Table of contents
Table of contents .............................................................................................................................. i
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ v
Statement of candidate .................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ vii
List of tables .................................................................................................................................. viii
List of figures .................................................................................................................................. ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
1.1. Background to the study ........................................................................................................... 2
1.2. Aims of the study ..................................................................................................................... 5

1.3. Research questions ................................................................................................................... 5
1.4. Significance of the study .......................................................................................................... 6
1.5. Organization of the study ......................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................... 8
2.1. The dictionary .......................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.1. Definitions and classifications .......................................................................................... 9
2.1.2. Structure ........................................................................................................................... 9
2.1.3. Contents .......................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.4. Research ......................................................................................................................... 11
2.2. Dictionary use ........................................................................................................................ 13
2.2.1. The dictionary user ......................................................................................................... 13
2.2.2. Dictionary use situations and purposes .......................................................................... 13
2.2.3. Dictionary consultation process ..................................................................................... 15
2.3. Dictionary skills ..................................................................................................................... 18
2.3.1. Definitions ...................................................................................................................... 18
2.3.2. Specifications ................................................................................................................. 18
2.3.2.1. Dictionary structures ............................................................................................ 18
2.3.2.2. Stages of the consultation process ........................................................................ 19
2.3.2.3. Dictionary typology .............................................................................................. 21
2.3.2.4. Users’ language proficiency ................................................................................. 24
2.3.3. Assessment ..................................................................................................................... 25
2.3.3.1. Dictionary skills testing ........................................................................................ 25
2.3.3.2. Student’s self-assessment of dictionary skills ...................................................... 30
2.3.3.3. Issues in dictionary skills assessment ................................................................... 30
i


2.4. Why need to improve students’ dictionary skills? ................................................................. 32
2.4.1. Dictionaries play a central role in language learning ..................................................... 32
2.4.2. Using a dictionary is not easy ......................................................................................... 32

2.4.3. Students indeed lack dictionary skills ............................................................................ 33
2.5. How to improve students’ dictionary skills? .......................................................................... 34
2.5.1. The lexicographical triangle: The role of the teacher ..................................................... 34
2.5.2. Recommendations from the literature ............................................................................ 35
2.5.2.1. Teach students dictionary skills............................................................................ 35
2.5.2.2. Improve dictionary culture ................................................................................... 40
2.5.3. Previous research on improving students’ dictionary skills ........................................... 41
2.6. Research gap .......................................................................................................................... 44
2.7. Summary ................................................................................................................................ 45
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 46
3.1. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 47
3.1.1. The interpretivist paradigm and qualitative inquiry ....................................................... 47
3.1.2. Practitioner research ....................................................................................................... 48
3.1.3. Action research ............................................................................................................... 50
3.1.3.1. Definitions ............................................................................................................ 51
3.1.3.2. Underlying assumptions ....................................................................................... 52
3.1.3.3. Action research ‘cycles’ and ‘models’ ................................................................. 54
3.1.3.4. Quality criteria ...................................................................................................... 57
3.2. Research design ...................................................................................................................... 59
3.2.1. My action research.......................................................................................................... 59
3.2.2. Cycle 1: Getting to know the situation ........................................................................... 61
3.2.2.1. Area of focus ........................................................................................................ 61
3.2.2.2. Data collection ...................................................................................................... 62
3.2.2.3. Data analysis and interpretation ........................................................................... 66
3.2.2.4. Action plan 1 ........................................................................................................ 68
3.2.2.5. Cycle 1 model ....................................................................................................... 69
3.2.3. Cycle 2: Evaluating the intervention .............................................................................. 69
3.2.3.1. Area of focus ........................................................................................................ 69
3.2.3.2. Data collection ...................................................................................................... 70
3.2.3.3. Data analysis and interpretation ........................................................................... 73

3.2.3.4. Action plan 2 ........................................................................................................ 74
3.2.3.5. Cycle 2 model ....................................................................................................... 74

ii


3.3. Research site ........................................................................................................................... 74
3.4. Participants ............................................................................................................................. 75
3.5. Ethical considerations ............................................................................................................ 76
3.6. Summary ................................................................................................................................ 80
CHAPTER 4: THE FIRST CYCLE AND INTERVENTION ................................................ 81
4.1. Findings .................................................................................................................................. 82
4.1.1. Students’ perceptions of dictionary use .......................................................................... 82
4.1.2. Students’ practices of dictionary use .............................................................................. 87
4.2. Discussion .............................................................................................................................. 93
4.3. Action plan of Cycle 1 ........................................................................................................... 96
4.4. Intervention ............................................................................................................................ 97
4.4.1. Teaching dictionary skills to the students....................................................................... 98
4.4.2. Integrating dictionary use into class activities .............................................................. 101
4.4.3. Modifications of the intervention plan and other decisions along the way .................. 103
4.5. Summary .............................................................................................................................. 104
CHAPTER 5: THE SECOND CYCLE ................................................................................... 105
5.1. Findings ................................................................................................................................ 106
5.1.1. Effectiveness of materials and activities used in the intervention ................................ 106
5.1.2. The teaching of the 10 skills in the intervention .......................................................... 108
5.1.3. Changes in students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use................................ 111
5.1.3.1. Changes in students’ perceptions of dictionary use ........................................... 112
5.1.3.2. Changes in students’ practices of dictionary use ................................................ 114
5.1.4. Students’ suggestions about the intervention ............................................................... 120
5.2. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 120

5.3. Action plan of Cycle 2 ......................................................................................................... 123
5.4. Summary .............................................................................................................................. 125
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 126
6.1. Summary of the study .......................................................................................................... 127
6.1.1. Findings of the two cycles ............................................................................................ 127
6.1.2. Contributions of the study ............................................................................................ 127
6.1.3. How I have changed through this research ................................................................... 128
6.2. Limitations of the study........................................................................................................ 129
6.3. Recommendations and suggestions for further research ...................................................... 130
6.4. Updates ................................................................................................................................. 130
iii


REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 132
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................... 141
CYCLE 1
APPENDIX 1: Preliminary Test of dictionary skills .............................................................. 142
APPENDIX 2: Preliminary Questionnaire .............................................................................. 145
APPENDIX 3: Preliminary Interview ..................................................................................... 149
APPENDIX 4: Sample entries in my Research Journal .......................................................... 150
APPENDIX 5: Complete data from Part 4 of Preliminary Questionnaire .............................. 151
INTERVENTION
APPENDIX 6: Eighteen dictionary skills omitted from the action plan of Cycle 1 ............... 152
APPENDIX 7: Sample dictionary skill lesson ........................................................................ 154
APPENDIX 8: A post on the class Facebook group related to dictionary skills..................... 157
APPENDIX 9: Some dictionary-related questions in the end-of-course games ..................... 158
APPENDIX 10: Dictionaries and other language learning materials available in the library 159
CYCLE 2
APPENDIX 11: Evaluative Test of dictionary skills .............................................................. 160
APPENDIX 12: Evaluative Questionnaire .............................................................................. 163

APPENDIX 13: Evaluative Interview ..................................................................................... 166
APPENDIX 14: Student feedback form .................................................................................. 168

iv


Abstract
This thesis recounts my journey as a teacher undertaking practitioner research. Using a first-person
narrative style, it reports a two-cycle qualitative action research study which I conducted to improve
my students’ dictionary skills.
In the first cycle, I investigated my students’ perceptions and practices regarding their dictionary use,
using data from the Preliminary Test of dictionary skills, Questionnaire, Interview, and my Research
Journal. I found that my students were using a variety of dictionaries, among which the most popular
and frequently used were phone-based and online products. They generally appreciated the roles of
dictionaries in their learning but had not had proper instructions on how to use them. By analyzing
the problems that they were having, I determined 10 dictionary skills that the students needed to learn
most based on Nesi’s (1999) specification and taught these skills in an intervention afterward.
In the second cycle, I evaluated this intervention in terms of the effectiveness of the materials and
activities I used, the teaching of the 10 dictionary skills, the changes in my students’ perceptions and
practices of dictionary use after the intervention, and their suggestions and comments about the
intervention. With data from the Evaluative Test of dictionary skills, Questionnaire, Interview and
my Research Journal, I found that my students benefited most from learning Stage-2 skills in Nesi’s
(1999) specification, and that they appreciated the materials and activities I used, particularly the
explanations, slides and handouts. The students also made positive changes in their perceptions and
practices of dictionary use after the intervention and offered valuable suggestions to improve my
teaching practices.
Keywords: dictionary skills, dictionary use, ESP, students’ perceptions and practices

v

Statement of candidate
I hereby certify that the work in this thesis entitled ‘Improving students’ dictionary skills: An action
research study at the University of Transport and Communications’ has not been previously accepted
for the award of any other degree to any other university or educational institution.
I also certify that this thesis presents my original research and has been written solely by me. Any
assistance and support that I have received towards the completion of this thesis has been duly
acknowledged.
Finally, I certify that all the material used in the thesis is clearly indicated.

……………………………………………
Nguyễn Kim Vũ Bảo (166014011106)
April 2020

vi


Acknowledgements
The completion of this thesis could not have been possible without the assistance and encouragement
of so many people I was fortunate to meet. Their invaluable contributions are sincerely appreciated
and gratefully acknowledged.
First and foremost, I wish to sincerely thank my supervisor, Dr. Nguyễn Nhã Trân, for her generous
and insightful guidance. Without her timely encouragement, I would not even have chosen the thesis
track, which turned out to bring me on this wonderful journey. Besides being a supervisor, she has
always been a close friend of mine through the ups and downs of my life. I always feel blessed to be
one of her students.
I would like to thank the Department of English of the University of Transport and Communications
(UTC), especially Ms. Hà Thị Thanh and Ms. Trần Thị Thanh Loan, for the support they have given
me during this MA course. My heartfelt appreciation also goes to the UTC Library staff for letting
me hold the library orientation session, to the Registrar’s Office for rescheduling my courses so that

I could conduct this research. I also thank my beloved students, whose curiosity and enthusiasm have
always motivated me to be a better teacher.
Thank you my friends of the class MA 2016A and ‘Team Thesis’, especially ‘Má Châu’, ‘Chị Huyền’,
Duyên, Phúc, Diễm and Anne. You all have made my life so fun and meaningful in ways I could
never have expected. Thank you my old friend Điềm for helping me organize my data.
My final thoughts are to my Mom and Dad, to whom I am indebted for everything I have achieved in
my life.

vii


List of tables
Table 2.1 Learning activities generally associated with dictionary use ........................................... 14
Table 2.2 Purposes for dictionary use in language learning ............................................................ 14
Table 2.3 Nesi’s (1999) specification of dictionary reference skills in higher education ................ 20
Table 2.4 Engelberg and Lemnitzer’s (2009) search techniques in electronic dictionaries ............. 22
Table 2.5 Pastor and Alcina’s (2010) search options in electronic dictionaries .............................. 23
Table 2.6 Lew’s (2013b) specification of dictionary skills .............................................................. 23
Table 2.7 Dictionary skills rubric for level B1 (CEFR) ................................................................... 24
Table 2.8 Dictionary skills tested in the Okayama project (1985) ................................................... 26
Table 2.9 Specifications of the Dictionary Research Test (Atkins & Varantola, 1998) .................. 27
Table 2.10 Dictionary skills tested in Lew and Galas (2008) .......................................................... 29
Table 3.1 Goals of action research and quality criteria .................................................................... 58
Table 3.2 Cycle 1: Research questions aligned with data collection tools ...................................... 62
Table 3.3 Brief descriptions of data collection tools of Cycle 1 ...................................................... 63
Table 3.4 Cycle 2: Research questions aligned with data collection tools ...................................... 70
Table 3.5 Brief descriptions of data collection tools of Cycle 2 ...................................................... 71
Table 4.1 Cycle 1: Ten dictionary skills with highest means in Questionnaire Part 4 ..................... 85
Table 4.2 Cycle 1: Mean values of Stage-2 skills in Questionnaire Part 4 ...................................... 86
Table 4.3 Cycle 1: Students’ problems when using dictionaries in the Preliminary Test................ 91

Table 4.4 Ten dictionary skills students needed to learn most......................................................... 95
Table 4.5 Action plan of Cycle 1 ..................................................................................................... 96
Table 4.6 Intervention: Dictionary skills teaching contents integrated into course syllabus ........... 99
Table 4.7 Intervention: Activities and procedures of the dictionary skills lessons ........................100
Table 5.1 Cycle 2: Usefulness of the materials and activities used in the intervention .................106
Table 5.2 Cycle 2: Usefulness of the skills taught in the intervention ...........................................109
Table 5.3 Cycle 1 vs. Cycle 2: Number of dictionaries in total vs. used most frequently .............115
Table 5.4 Cycle 1 vs. Cycle 2: Number and results of dictionary consultations ...........................117
Table 5.5 Cycle 1 vs. Cycle 2: Students’ problems when using dictionaries ................................118

viii


List of figures
Figure 2.1 An entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th edition) ............................. 11
Figure 2.2 Practical and theoretical directions of lexicography ........................................................ 11
Figure 2.3 The decision-making process in dictionary consultation for comprehension .................. 17
Figure 2.4 Factors in dictionary skills assessment ............................................................................ 31
Figure 2.5 The lexicographical triangle: Stakeholders in improving dictionary skills ..................... 35
Figure 3.1 The Dialectic Action Research Spiral .............................................................................. 55
Figure 3.2 Research outline ............................................................................................................... 60
Figure 3.3 Specific themes of Cycle 1 research questions ................................................................ 61
Figure 3.4 A student’s notes of dictionary use showing three types of consultation results ............ 67
Figure 3.5 Cycle 1 model .................................................................................................................. 69
Figure 3.6 Specific themes of Cycle 2 research question ................................................................. 70
Figure 3.7 Cycle 2 model .................................................................................................................. 74
Figure 4.1 Cycle 1: Type and number of dictionaries reported in total vs. most frequently used .... 87
Figure 4.2 Cycle 1: Types of dictionary consultations...................................................................... 89
Figure 4.3 Intervention: Course timeline showing research and teaching progress.......................... 97
Figure 5.1 Cycle 2: Type and number of dictionaries reported in total vs. most frequently used ..114

ix


CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. (Lao Tzi)

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. But in many cases, we did not know in
the first place what journey that single first step would take us on, nor did (or will) we know where
our journey would bring us. Sometimes we did not even know which step it was, first or last. A
single step might, therefore, end up beginning a journey of a thousand miles.
The research that I am about to recount in this thesis is one example. My interest in improving
students’ dictionary skills is in the spotlight of this work, but it has been here in me for a while,
since a time I now frankly cannot remember. And it will certainly be there, for who knows how
long. Taken this way, this work is just a polished, convenient extract of a much longer and messy
story of how I have been trying to help my students improve their dictionary skills, told from my
perspective as a language learner, a dictionary user, a teacher, and a researcher.
As I will explain more clearly in Chapter 3, choosing the action research design for a master’s
thesis seemed an ambitious and risky decision for me, given the fact that this research would be
among the first of its kind at the Faculty. Perhaps even more so was the first-person narrative style
that I decided to use to write up this thesis (see Elliott, 2005, for the use of narrative in research).
These important decisions, as well as many others, were methodologically strategic. To a certain
extent, they also reflected my eagerness to try something new. After all, once one has determined
to embark on an adventure, why not choose a less trodden path?

1


1.1. Background to the study
Me and my dictionaries

I was seven when my family moved from Khánh Hòa to Đồng Nai in 1996. We settled in a remote
area in Xuân Lộc, where I lived until I went to college in 2007. The first dictionaries that I knew
were the ones I found in a wooden cupboard in the living room. There were five of them, I
remember, all thick, old, and often dusty. My favorite one was a Sino-Vietnamese dictionary,
which had beautiful pictures and strange-looking characters in it1.
Like other kids at that time, I started learning English in my sixth grade. Around that year, my
mother bought me a dictionary2. I was not particularly interested in the book then. I cannot even
recall the moment my mother gave it to me. Yet that first dictionary was to be so important to me,
at least for the next six years. Looking back, I think it was that ‘single step’ that began my journey
of learning English. And I am grateful to my mother for that.
English became one of my favorite subjects at secondary school. I began to use my dictionary
more and more over the years, so much that my mother once had to use duct tape to toughen the
spine of the book for fear that too much use would tear it apart. It became my second teacher,
always there by my side, 24/7. Interestingly, I felt that I was being more independent and proactive
in my learning. Above all, I knew that I was making great progress, and that I was having a lot of
joy.
I bought myself a new dictionary in my first year at college. It was the Oxford Advanced Learner’s
Dictionary (7th edition), the dream of many students at that time. I was not disappointed. In fact, I
cannot imagine going through those four years without it. I learned so much from it! And not just
me, many friends of mine also had their dictionaries with them all the time. So did some of our
teachers. One teacher I met in my second year proudly told us that she had had her dictionary for
years, and that it was still useful. Another I met in a course on translation said that: “If you don’t
understand a word, look it up in a dictionary. If you still don’t understand, look it up in another
dictionary. And yet another, if necessary.” As I recalled such memories to write this passage, I
suddenly realized that, as successful language learners, we teachers are all deeply indebted to those
early dictionaries3.

The others were English, French, Latin and Vietnamese dictionaries. These had been my father’s dictionaries when
he studied languages at college. Regrettably, they were all destroyed by termites a few years later.
1

2 It was an English-English-Vietnamese dictionary by Trần Hồng Phúc (2000). The book has been republished
many times since then but keeps its distinctive red cover, which brings back pleasant memories whenever I see it in
a bookstore.
3

I believe many of us share these memories. Nguyen, H. C. (2017), for example, narrated passionately how a
monolingual dictionary transformed his learning.

2


As a student of language, I loved dictionaries. I loved the scent and touch of the paper, I was
amazed at the hidden wisdom, and I admired the meticulous work of the compilers. Dictionaries
enabled learning beyond classroom walls. They made me feel confident, autonomous, responsible
and happy in my learning.
Expectations meet reality
I became a teacher in late 2011 and have been teaching English at a small university since then.
As a teacher, I began to take up new roles and responsibilities, but my beliefs about the position
of dictionaries in language learning did not changed much. In some way, my personal experience
with dictionaries led me to expect that my students would use a dictionary like I used to. And I
assumed that they already knew how to use their dictionary. “It’s not rocket science,” I thought.
However, my observations gradually revealed a different story. When I asked students to bring
their dictionaries to class, I was disappointed to know that most of them did not have any dictionary
at all. Those few who did have one appeared to be struggling with every word they looked up, as
if it was the first time they opened it. Most of them did not get what they wanted from their
dictionaries. They were wasting a wonderful learning resource.
In recent years, more students have a dictionary on their cell phone4. There are also online
dictionaries, which can be accessed easily from their personal devices. These handheld electronic
resources allow students to locate a word in seconds. But wait, most of my students still cannot

get the right thing from their dictionary! I am sure there is something not right. But I do not know
what it is. What do they need? Better dictionaries? More grammar and vocabulary? Dictionary
skills? What is going on? What can I do?... Such questions have crossed my mind more than once,
but they were quickly forgotten amid the everyday realities of the classroom.
Theoretical confirmation
In 2016, I decided to enroll in a master’s program in TESOL at the University of Social Sciences
& Humanities, Vietnam National University – Ho Chi Minh City (USSH, VNU-HCM). The
courses of the program provided me with valuable insights about the current issues of my
profession. Above all, I began to understand what it meant to ‘do research’, and I wanted to give
it a go. About a year later, it was time to choose a topic for my thesis proposal. I was quite sure
then that I would do some research into the use of music in the classroom5. But when the writing
began, I got stuck. It seemed that I was not ready for it. I was not comfortable and confident in it.

4

Or rather, they have a cell phone that happens to have a dictionary on it?

5

Besides language, I am really into music. I can play piano and guitar quite well. At that time, I was planning to
study the effects of background music on students’ performance in speaking activities.

3


I was looking for a new research idea when I noticed how much I had been using dictionaries to
help me write up the proposal. At that moment, I thought about my students, about all those
unanswered questions that had always been there in the back of my mind. I began to read more
research on students’ dictionary use.
As I expected, dictionaries are widely believed to play a central role in learning a language (e.g.

Cubillo, 2002; East, 2008; Kirkness, 2004). Yet it is not easy to use them. The process of looking
up a word turned out to be much more complicated than I had thought. In fact, many studies
showed that students did not have the skills and knowledge to use their dictionaries effectively6
(e.g. Carduner, 2003; Chi, 2013; Lew & Galas, 2008; Nesi, 1999, 2013; Nesi & Haill, 2002; Tono,
2001). The more I read, the more I appreciated the position of dictionaries in language learning,
the difficulties my students could have, and the well-grounded need to improve their dictionary
skills. I felt compelled to do something.
A quick review of the literature later suggested that I explicitly teach my students the skills they
needed to use their dictionaries better (Nesi, 1999; Tono, 2001; Wingate, 2004). Additionally, I
could nurture a dictionary-friendly classroom environment, which would not only benefit my
dictionary skills teaching but also help develop the dictionary culture at my institution in the long
run (Gouws and Prinsloo, 2012; Lew & Galas, 2008). But what exactly would I have to do? What
skills would I teach my students? And how?
To answer these questions, I went on to search the literature for reports of previous projects to
improve students’ dictionary skills so that I could learn from them. Unfortunately, although
researchers had long called for teaching dictionary skills (e.g. Bishop, 2000, 2001; Cubillo, 2015;
Nesi, 1999; Tono, 2001; Wingate, 2002, 2004), there had been few such projects ever recorded. In
the Vietnamese context, it seemed that no previous studies had been conducted to improve
language students’ dictionary skills. Furthermore, very little was known about how Vietnamese
students were using their dictionaries, which made it even more difficult for teachers like me to
decide what to do to help our students. Therefore, I knew that I had to understand more about my
students’ dictionary use before I could improve their dictionary skills. I had the first ideas of an
action research study.
And that was how my research began. As narrated above, the rationale for this study is threefold:
my personal values about dictionaries and learning, my first-hand observations and experiences as
a teacher, and theoretical support from the literature. I think there are numerous ways a research
project begins. But for me, it started with “a gap between the real world of [my] daily teaching

6

Somehow I managed to teach myself to use dictionaries, but research shows that many students are not that lucky.

4


practices and [my] vision of an ideal one” (Mills, 2011, p. xii). I wanted to understand my students’
dictionary use so that I could do something in my capacity to improve their dictionary skills. This
action-oriented approach was the main reason I chose an action-research design.
1.2. Aims of the study
The overall aim of action research is to generate contextual knowledge that prompts action to
improve the immediate situation (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006; Mills, 2011). In this way, my
research generally aims to create local knowledge that can be directly translated into action to
improve my students’ dictionary skills.
This overall aim has two specific objectives. First, I need to understand the current situation by
investigating my students’ perceptions and practices of dictionary use. The knowledge I obtain
will guide an intervention program to improve their dictionary skills. Second, I need to evaluate
my intervention. This evaluation will show what is working and what is not so that I can further
enhance my students’ dictionary skills in the future. These two objectives are the backbones of the
two cycles of my research.
1.3. Research questions
Like all action researchers, I start with a general question: How do I improve my practice? (McNiff
& Whitehead, 2006). In my case, this question is translated into: How do I improve my students’
dictionary use in learning English? But before taking action, I have to know how my students are
doing with their dictionaries, particularly their perceptions and practices regarding their dictionary
use. These two areas prompt the focus of the two research questions (RQ) for the first cycle:
RQ 1.1 What are my students’ perceptions of dictionary use in learning English?
Cycle 1:

RQ 1.2 What are my students’ practices of dictionary use in learning English?

In answering these questions, I can understand the current situation, particularly the problems my
students are having in using dictionaries. These problems become the focus of an intervention I
implement to improve their dictionary skills. Once I carry out the intervention, it is useful for me
to evaluate the impacts of my effort. I want to know if it ‘works’ or not, and what else I can do.
This leads me to the research question of the second cycle:
Cycle 2:

RQ 2 How did the intervention go?

It should be noted that these research questions were not carved in stone from the beginning.
Rather, they were distilled over time as the focus of my study became clearer and more defined, a
distinctive feature of the action research design.

5


1.4. Significance of the study
My study is significant in a number of dimensions. On the practical level, it is an on-going datadriven effort to reformulate my personal knowledge of the problem. This informed understanding,
being highly relevant, specific and reflective, is then directly translated into solutions to improve
my practices. Metaphorically speaking, it is another step forward in my professional development
as a reflective practitioner (Schön, 1983).
This study is equally significant to my participants, who are also my students, in that they have
had an opportunity to further develop their dictionary skills. Although their actual improvement
might be, as shown in a following chapter, rather humble and preliminary, it clearly shows how
my learning and improved practice can positively influence their learning (McNiff & Whitehead,
2006).
The power of action research is not in its generalizability but rather, in “the relevance of the
findings to the researcher or the audience of the research” (Mills, 2011, p. 114). In this way, the
reader of this thesis will benefit not only from the insights and solutions, but also from the
frustration and challenges that I recounted as long as they can identify with my setting. This

transferability, among other attributes, constitutes the “trustworthiness” of an action research study
(Mills, 2011, p. 104) and is achieved through detailed descriptions of the contexts, activities and
events (Stringer, 2007).
On the theoretical level, action research is in contrast with applied research in that it looks for “a
theory for practice rather than a theory of practice” (Burns, 2010, p. 14, original emphasis). From
this epistemological standpoint, my study contributes to the knowledge of the field, firstly, through
the personal theories I have developed for my own teaching and learning. Secondly, it adds to the
literature a richly descriptive case, with an in-depth understanding characterizing its interpretivist
paradigm. Finally, the action research design combined with a first-person narrative style of
writing offers a relatively new perspective in the landscape of ELT research in Vietnam. To my
knowledge, this is one of the first of its kind to be conducted for a master’s degree in TESOL at
the Faculty of English Linguistics and Literature, USSH, VNU-HCM.
1.5. Organization of the study
Although my thesis has all the required components of a typical master’s thesis, it does not strictly
follow the standard five-chapter structure recommended by the Faculty. More specifically, I will
present the findings of my research in, not one, but two separate chapters to accentuate the two
action research cycles. This is a risky decision, but it allows me to organize my ideas more clearly,
as well as to be more faithful to the course of action I took when doing this research.

6


Chapter 1 is an introduction, setting the background for my study. Here I also present the aims and
significance of the study, the research questions, and the structure of my thesis.
In Chapter 2, I will review the existing literature about dictionary use in language teaching and
learning, with the aim of exploring ways to improve my students’ dictionary skills.
Chapter 3 will focus on the methodology employed in the study. I will describe in detail the
research design and research questions, the participants, the instruments for collecting data, and
the procedures for collecting and analyzing these data.
In Chapter 4, I will report the findings of the first cycle. These findings are the foundation of an

intervention to improve my students’ dictionary skills. Chapter 5 will follow with the findings of
the second cycle, which attempts to evaluate the intervention.
Finally, Chapter 6 will summarize the findings and contributions of the study, followed by my last
reflections on how I have grown in my profession through this study. Then I will discuss the
limitations of my study before offering some practical recommendations and suggestions for
further research.
As you reach these lines, you might have noticed that I am writing my thesis in a much more
personal and expressive tone than what is usually expected in a master’s thesis at the Faculty. This
chapter, for example, started with an intimate first-person narrative of how my research took shape.
Except in Chapter 2, where I tend to sound more distant in my writing, all the following chapters
will keep this tone to different degrees. This is an important methodological decision, which I will
explain fully in Chapter 3. In one way, it has turned my writing into an enjoyable experience,
which makes me believe that reading this work will also be an enjoyable experience to you.

7


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Wherever languages are used and wherever languages are taught and learned, especially
in educational settings, dictionaries play a central role. (Kirkness, 2004, p. 65)

The dictionary has a long and fascinating history. Since thousands of years ago, dictionaries have
been made and used in all corners of the globe, making them arguably the most common type of
reference works. When it comes to language teaching and learning, the role of dictionaries is
simply beyond dispute. Perhaps because of their prevalence, however, their use is often taken for
granted by both teachers and learners.
In this chapter, I am taking a step backwards to appreciate one of the most important resources in
language teaching and learning. I want to understand what dictionaries are and how they are used
by language learners, with the aim of exploring ways to improve my students’ dictionary skills.

8


2.1. The dictionary
2.1.1. Definitions and classifications
A dictionary is a resource that “allows humans to store and retrieve information relatively easily
and rapidly” (Hartmann & James, 1998, p. 117). In layman’s terms, they are basically books or
electronic resources that list the words of a language (often alphabetically) and give their meanings
and/or their equivalents in another language. In the context of this thesis, unless otherwise
indicated, the term dictionary refers to dictionaries of the English language, in their full range of
variations, which can be used by learners of English.
People have long been interested in making dictionaries, with the oldest known ones dating back
to 2300 B.C.E. However, it was not until the 17th century that the first English dictionaries were
printed (Osselton, 2009). Nowadays, there are so many kinds of dictionaries that their
classifications are becoming extremely complicated. Common criteria to distinguish dictionary
types are size (e.g. unabridged, gem), coverage (e.g. general, specialized), medium (e.g. print,
electronic), language (e.g. monolingual, bilingual, multilingual) and user type (e.g. scholarly,
learner’s, translator’s) (Hartmann & James, 1998, p. 147). Some researchers suggested describing
dictionaries with a “set of properties” rather than trying to put them into distinct classes (Atkins &
Rundell, 2008, p. 26).
Such typological complexity can pose challenges for dictionary users, especially language
learners. With the sheer abundance of dictionaries available, they might be confused as to which
to choose for their purpose. On the other hand, they might not be aware that there are dictionaries
which could better cater for their needs.
2.1.2. Structure
The dictionary structure refers to the component parts of a dictionary in terms of its overall design
(macrostructure) and contents of the entry (microstructure). The macrostructure is the overall “list
structure”, which allows the user to locate information in a dictionary (Hartmann & James, 1998,
p. 91). One of the most basic macrostructural conventions in English dictionaries, for example, is
the alphabetical ordering of headwords7. The microstructure is the internal structure of an entry.

It is how a dictionary selects and displays the contents of a headword (usually its spelling,
pronunciation and meanings). Dictionaries vary considerably not only in the amount of
information they provide for an entry, but also in how this information is presented (Hartmann &
James, 1998).

7

Yet even for this basic principle, further strategic decisions are frequently to be made, especially in the case of
compounds, idioms and derivatives. Alternatively, entries can be listed thematically, phonologically, or by
frequency.

9


Although less frequently, lexicographers are also interested in the megastructure and
mediostructure of a dictionary. The former refers to the totality of the component parts of a
reference work, including the macrostructure and the ‘outside matter’, i.e. the front matter and
appendices. The latter, also known as the cross-reference structure, refers to the network of crossreferences which allows users to locate information that spreads over different parts of a dictionary
(Hartmann & James, 1998).
Efficient dictionary use requires adequate understanding of these structures. Arguably, knowledge
of the microstructure is critical since it is at this level that users spend most of their time with and
get the most from a dictionary (Tono, 2001). In addition, microstructural conventions are highly
complicated and vary greatly across dictionary-makers, which could make it challenging for users
to cope with.
Although not as important, knowledge of the mediostructure is also necessary because crossreferences are extensively used in most dictionaries, whether paper or electronic (Hartmann &
James, 1998). Understanding of the megastructure and macrostructure is less useful. This is even
more true in electronic dictionaries, where the burden of locating information, which typically
demands megastructural and macrostructural knowledge, has been virtually removed thanks to the
use of type-in search boxes and hyperlinks (Lew, 2013a, 2013b).
2.1.3. Contents

From a megastructural perspective, there are three parts to a dictionary: the front matter, the body,
and the appendices. The front matter typically includes the title page, table of contents, preface,
user’s guide, phonetic symbols and abbreviations used in the dictionary. Appendices may be
various and even non-lexical, covering almost anything the compiler considers helpful for the
target user, such as abbreviations, map of the world, measurement units, punctuation rules. Some
dictionaries also have additional pages in the middle called ‘middle matter’. In fact, there are no
hard and fast rules about these ‘outside’ matters. It is a matter of choice by the compiler (Jackson,
2002).
The body of a dictionary contains a systematic list of headwords. Each headword is explained with
some information, which, together with the headword, constitutes an entry8. These entries
“represent the particular selection of vocabulary and other items that the editors have decided merit
inclusion, given the size and purpose of the dictionary” (Jackson, 2002, p. 25). Most of the
information a dictionary provides is organized under the microstructure of the entry. The type and
amount of this information will vary across dictionaries, but will usually include a word’s spelling,

8

Also called a ‘reference unit’.

10


pronunciation, inflection, word class, definition, example, usage, and etymology (Jackson, 2002).
As an illustration, Figure 2.1 shows an entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th
edition) (Hornby et al., 2013).

Figure 2.1 An entry in the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (8th edition)
It can be said that the body, specifically the contents of the entry, is what a dictionary is all about.
Although electronic and online dictionaries have made dramatic changes to the way dictionaries
are made and used, the contents and structure of their entries have remained largely the same as

those found in their traditional print fellows (Lew, 2013a, 2013b).
2.1.4. Research
The area of research that studies dictionaries as their primary focus is lexicography. According to
Hartmann and James (1998), it is “the professional activity and academic field concerned with
dictionaries and other reference works” (p. 85). As the definition specifies, there are two basic
divisions: practical lexicography (dictionary making) and theoretical lexicography (dictionary
research). The former is concerned with the professional activity of compiling dictionaries and
was traditionally assumed to be the only focus of lexicography. The latter, i.e. dictionary research,
is a relatively young field. This field takes a wide range of interests, which Hartmann (2003, p. 2)
summarizes in Figure 2.2:
Lexicography

Dictionary-making

Recording/
Fieldwork

Editing/
Description

Publishing/
Presentation

Dictionary research

Dictionary
History

Dictionary
Criticism

Dictionary
Typology

Figure 2.2 Practical and theoretical directions of lexicography
11

Dictionary
Structure

Dictionary
Use

Other


Research on dictionary use, under dictionary research, is where my study belongs. According to
Hartmann (2001, p. 83), this line of research focuses on six aspects of dictionary use:
▪ Pedagogical lexicography
▪ Awareness of dictionary types and their use
▪ The dictionary user as a complex quantity
▪ Activity contexts for dictionary use (needs analysis)
▪ Strategies necessary for efficient dictionary consultation (skills analysis)
▪ Deliberate instruction of dictionary reference skills
Other researchers appear to have slightly different ideas. Hulstijn and Atkins (1998), for example,
proposed seven areas of focus for dictionary use research:
▪ The attitudes, needs, habits and preferences of dictionary users
▪ Text or word comprehension (decoding learning activities)
▪ Text or word production (encoding learning activities)
▪ Vocabulary learning

▪ Dictionary-related performance in testing
▪ Teaching dictionary skills (user education)
▪ Critical comparisons and reviews of dictionaries
Elaborating this framework, Tono (2001) suggested a “tentative list of research areas and topics”
for dictionary use research (p. 61). However, his list appears unnecessarily complicated (see his
work for detailed descriptions of the list).
While researchers are yet to reach a definite framework for dictionary use research, these first
sketches are well made. As Nesi (2013) rightly concluded, the aim of all dictionary use research
is to discover ways to “increase the success of dictionary consultation” and involves “the
identification of users’ needs and skills deficits, and the making of appropriate matches between
types of dictionary, types of dictionary user and types of dictionary use” (pp. 62-63).
Given my current interest in improving students’ dictionary skills, this study is perfectly nested
under dictionary use research. I am particularly interested in my students’ perceptions and
practices of dictionary use as well as the feasibility and effects of dictionary skills training in the
classroom context.

12


2.2. Dictionary use
As briefly presented above, research on dictionary use takes a wide range of interests. In the
following sections, I will zoom in on some of the areas that are most relevant to my study. I start
by taking a closer look at who dictionary users are, what purposes and situations prompt dictionary
use, and the process of consulting a dictionary.
2.2.1. The dictionary user
According to Varantola (2002), dictionary users can be roughly categorized as either language
learners, professional users or non-professional users. Language learners are distinctive in that
they use dictionaries to learn a language, whether on their own or guided by a teacher. Professional
users, such as translators, use dictionaries “to perform a task that they get paid for” (p. 32). The
last category refers to people using dictionaries for non-professional purposes such as doing

puzzles. The dictionary user profile also includes a wide range of other attributes such as age,
mother tongue, language proficiency and level of dictionary skills (Nesi, 2013).
Research on dictionary users plays a central role in lexicography. Understanding dictionary users
is critical to dictionary makers who want to match their products with their target customers’ needs.
User attributes are also important variables in dictionary use research because they strongly
correlate with dictionary use perception and behavior: what dictionaries to use, for what purposes,
what strategies or skills are employed, etc. (Hartmann, 2001).
In this study, the dictionary users I focus on are language learners, to be more specific, my
students. Knowledge of the ‘learner-user’, in my case, serves as a foundation for the designing,
implementation and evaluation of dictionary skills training programs.
2.2.2. Dictionary use situations and purposes
Dictionaries are used in various situations and for multiple purposes. Now that I have narrowed
down this discussion to the use of dictionaries by language learners, this part will focus on the
learning situations and purposes for which language students resort to their dictionary.
Researchers widely agree that language learners generally use dictionaries for either receptive
(decoding) or productive (encoding) purposes9, although dictionaries are also used for other tasks
such as learning vocabulary or finding out about a language. Nesi (2013) summarized these
activities as follows (Table 2.1):

This distinction between ‘receptive’ and ‘productive’ dictionary use is rather problematic. In reality, learning
activities often involve both types. On the contrary, students can use dictionaries for purposes that are neither
receptive nor productive. Therefore, when necessary, I will mention specific learning activities (e.g. reading,
writing) instead of these loosely-defined terms.
9

13


Table 2.1
Learning activities generally associated with dictionary use

Written medium

Receptive

Productive

Reading
Translating from L2 to L1

Writing
Translating from L1 to L2

Listening
Speaking
Interpreting from L2 to L1
Interpreting from L1 to L2
Gathering language information

Spoken medium

Note. From Nesi (2013, p. 67)

Being more specific, Nation (2001) classified dictionary use in language learning as either for
comprehension, production, or learning purposes (Table 2.2). Although the list he proposed
“covers most purposes for dictionary use” while learning a language (Nation, 2001, p. 446), it is
not intended to be exhaustive.
Table 2.2
Purposes for dictionary use in language learning
Comprehension

(decoding)

Production
(encoding)

Learning

▪ Look up unknown words met while listening, reading or translating.
▪ Confirm the meanings of partly known words.
▪ Confirm guesses from context.
▪ Look up unknown words needed to speak, write, or translate.
▪ Look up the spelling, pronunciation, meaning, grammar, constraints on use, collocations, inflections
and derived forms of partly known words needed to speak, write, or translate.
▪ Confirm the spelling, etc. of known words.
▪ Check that a word exists.
▪ Find a different word to use instead of a known one.
▪ Correct an error.
▪ Choose unknown words to learn (vocabulary learning).
▪ Enrich knowledge of partly known words, including etymology.

Note. From Nation (2001, pp. 446-447)

As shown in Table 2.2, dictionary use benefits an extensive range of language learning contexts.
The specific learning activity as well as students’ L2 proficiency will largely determine the type
and format of the dictionaries that students prefer to use and the kind of information they look for
(Nesi, 2013; Tono, 2001). It is important to note that most dictionary use is for receptive
(decoding) purposes such as reading and L2-L1 translation (Nesi, 2013). This is also the area of
research that has been more thoroughly investigated, compared with other purposes of dictionary
use. Therefore, it is not a coincidence that much of my discussion so far and hereafter concerns
dictionary use for receptive purposes.

14


2.2.3. Dictionary consultation process
Some vocabulary item is impeding comprehension as the learner reads. “If you can’t
work out what it means, just look it up in the dictionary”, says the teacher. The
implication is clear: looking it up is a mechanical, last resort activity […] But how
true is this? Is it such a negative and straightforward activity to look up a vocabulary
item in a monolingual learners’ dictionary when reading? (Scholfield, 1982, p. 185)
The imaginary situation above is something I believe most of us can easily relate to. Many people,
including teachers, take it for granted that using a dictionary is an easy, simple and mechanical last
resort. Unfortunately, as this author soberly wondered, it might not be what it looks like.
Scholfield (1982) provided one of the first and most comprehensive descriptions of the process of
consulting a dictionary, in this case, for reading comprehension. This process involves seven steps,
which are summarized below for brevity (Scholfield, 1982, pp. 186-193):
Step 1. Locating the unknown word or phrase.
Step 2. Finding the citation form of inflected forms.
Step 3. Locating the unknown word in the alphabetic list.
Step 4. If the targeted entry cannot be found, users have to (a) look up each main entry if the
unknown item is a compound or belongs to a phrase; (b) look for the stem if the
unknown word seems to have a suffix; (c) scan nearby entries if the unknown item seems
to be an irregularly inflected form or spelling variant; (d) search the addendum.
Step 5. Reducing the unsuitable senses in entries of polysemous words by elimination.
Step 6. Understanding the definition and integrating it into the context with the unknown item.
Step 7. Inferring the appropriate sense from the senses listed in case none of these senses fit.
Scholfield concluded that the consultation process is much more complex than commonly thought
and requires quite an amount of knowledge and effort from the user’s part. He did not discuss the
steps involved in productive dictionary use (e.g. writing), which he believed are “distinct” and
“equally complicated” (Scholfield, 1982, p. 194), nor did he discuss non-print dictionaries, perhaps

because these were still rare at the time10. The key takeaway is clear, though: Dictionary use,
whether receptive or productive, is not as easy as it looks.

10

Although the roots of electronic lexicography date back to the early 1960s, electronic dictionaries had not been
popularized until the 1990s (Granger, 2012).

15