返回Google圖書搜尋

The Involvement Load Hypothesis and Its Impact on Vocabulary Learning

出版	University of Auckland, 2020
URL	http://books.google.com.hk/books?id=A2jTzQEACAAJ&hl=&source=gbs_api

註釋The Involvement Load Hypothesis (ILH) proposed by Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) is a framework to operationalize elaborate processing for L2 vocabulary learning. The hypothesis assumes that vocabulary learning is conditional upon a motivational factor, need, and two cognitive factors, search and evaluation, in vocabulary-learning tasks. Need was given three degrees of minus ( - ), moderate (+), and strong (++) depending on whether words need to be learned at all ( - ) and whether the motivation for learning is externally imposed (+) or is selfimposed (++). Search has two degrees of minus ( - ) and plus (+) depending on whether the meanings of words are given in a task ( - ) or must be looked up in a dictionary (+). Evaluation was given three degrees of minus ( - ), moderate (+), and strong (++) depending on whether words are elaborated at all ( - ) and whether elaboration is limited to making comparisons between words (+) or is in the form of using words in original contexts (++). The sum of need, search, and evaluation factors with their degrees of prominence is called the task involvement load. The hypothesis assumes that tasks inducing a higher involvement load are more effective for vocabulary learning compared to tasks inducing a lower involvement load. The strengths of the hypothesis are its potential instructional applicability and its simplicity. However, its weaknesses have been discussed in the literature, including uncertainty about the weight of the factors for vocabulary learning, uncertainty about the impact of distribution of the factors, and the limited range of scores the ILH gives to tasks. Considering this, the aim of the study was to develop the hypothesis while preserving its simplicity. To this end, ten groups of learners, including nine experimental groups and a control group at the intermediate level of proficiency, participated in the study. The treatment for each experimental group was designed to induce a specific combination of the factors. Before the treatment, the groups took a vocabulary pre-test and a homogeneity test. After the treatment, they took three vocabulary post-tests measuring active recall, passive recall, and passive recognition of words. The results could extend the evaluation factor by indicating that evaluation can be given four degrees of prominence rather than three. This extension may contribute to differentiating between a wider range of activities in terms of their effectiveness for vocabulary learning. The findings could also re-define the need factor by suggesting that need may consist of two different types of motivation, namely self-driven and task-driven motivation for learning, rather than being a motivational factor with three degrees. Re-defining the need factor may enrich the hypothesis by providing a broader view of motivation. The results also clarified the role of search by indicating that search does not have a fixed degree of prominence and its contribution to vocabulary learning depends on the type of evaluation it is combined with and the target aspect of vocabulary learning. It may provide a more precise estimate of the power of this factor in a variety of vocabulary-learning tasks. It was also concluded that, contrary to the ILH assumptions, task involvement indices are not good indicators of task effectiveness. Task effectiveness may depend on the type of evaluation, presence or absence of search, and the target aspect of vocabulary. The suggested modifications may make the hypothesis more accurate for designing vocabulary-learning tasks and judging their effectiveness.