A Multiple-Choice Exercise on Collocations: What Do Learners Actually Remember?

IF 1.7 3区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Alyssa Mengxue Li, Frank Boers
{"title":"A Multiple-Choice Exercise on Collocations: What Do Learners Actually Remember?","authors":"Alyssa Mengxue Li,&nbsp;Frank Boers","doi":"10.1111/ijal.12666","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Contemporary materials for second language (L2) learning feature exercises on collocations (i.e., word partnerships such as <i>catch fire</i>), many of which require learners to select correct word combinations from two or more candidates. A few studies of the effectiveness of these selected-response exercises, which are essentially multiple-choice exercises, have found that learners later reproduce wrong collocations that they were exposed to in the exercise. However, it is unclear if this is a side effect of the exercises or if the re-emergence of wrong candidate responses is just accidental. The present study examines if wrong candidate responses that learners see in collocation exercises interfere with learners’ recall of the correct responses by having learners of L2 English tackle multiple-choice items on verb-noun collocations and verbally report two weeks later in a post-test what they remember about them. The verbal reports revealed that the learners recalled reading and responding to most of the exercise items, but for only one- third of them did they also recall which candidate response had turned out to be correct according to the feedback they received. Furthermore, for close to one- fifth of collocations that learners said they already knew at the start of the exercise, these participants mistook a wrong candidate response for the correct one when they revisited the exercise two weeks later. The findings call for a cautious approach to the implementation of selected-response exercises for collocation learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":46851,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":"35 2","pages":"824-833"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ijal.12666","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijal.12666","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Contemporary materials for second language (L2) learning feature exercises on collocations (i.e., word partnerships such as catch fire), many of which require learners to select correct word combinations from two or more candidates. A few studies of the effectiveness of these selected-response exercises, which are essentially multiple-choice exercises, have found that learners later reproduce wrong collocations that they were exposed to in the exercise. However, it is unclear if this is a side effect of the exercises or if the re-emergence of wrong candidate responses is just accidental. The present study examines if wrong candidate responses that learners see in collocation exercises interfere with learners’ recall of the correct responses by having learners of L2 English tackle multiple-choice items on verb-noun collocations and verbally report two weeks later in a post-test what they remember about them. The verbal reports revealed that the learners recalled reading and responding to most of the exercise items, but for only one- third of them did they also recall which candidate response had turned out to be correct according to the feedback they received. Furthermore, for close to one- fifth of collocations that learners said they already knew at the start of the exercise, these participants mistook a wrong candidate response for the correct one when they revisited the exercise two weeks later. The findings call for a cautious approach to the implementation of selected-response exercises for collocation learning.

关于搭配的多项选择题:学习者实际上记住了什么?
当代第二语言(L2)学习材料的特点是搭配练习(例如,单词伙伴关系,如catch fire),其中许多要求学习者从两个或多个候选单词中选择正确的单词组合。对这些选择反应练习(本质上是多项选择练习)有效性的一些研究发现,学习者后来会重复他们在练习中接触到的错误搭配。然而,目前尚不清楚这是练习的副作用,还是再次出现错误的考生回答只是偶然的。本研究通过让二语英语学习者解决动词与名词搭配的多项选择题,并在两周后的后测中口头报告他们对这些选择题的记忆,来检验学习者在搭配练习中看到的错误候选答案是否会干扰学习者对正确答案的回忆。口头报告显示,学习者记得阅读和回答了大部分的练习项目,但只有三分之一的人还记得根据他们收到的反馈,哪些候选人的回答是正确的。此外,对于近五分之一的学习者说他们在练习开始时已经知道的搭配,这些参与者在两周后重新进行练习时,将错误的候选人回答误认为是正确的。研究结果呼吁对搭配学习的选择反应练习的实施采取谨慎的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Applied Linguistics (InJAL) publishes articles that explore the relationship between expertise in linguistics, broadly defined, and the everyday experience of language. Its scope is international in that it welcomes articles which show explicitly how local issues of language use or learning exemplify more global concerns.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信