Vocabulary size and vocabulary learning strategy usage among Chinese undergraduates at Universiti Putra Malaysia

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Yasir Bdaiwi Jasim, Arifur Rahman, Yu-han Ma
{"title":"Vocabulary size and vocabulary learning strategy usage among Chinese undergraduates at Universiti Putra Malaysia","authors":"Yasir Bdaiwi Jasim, Arifur Rahman, Yu-han Ma","doi":"10.22452/JML.VOL29NO1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While studies have investigated the strategies used by Chinese English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners to learn new words and the relationship with their current vocabulary knowledge, there is a lack of studies that examine the vocabulary learning strategies (VLSs) and vocabulary sizes of Chinese students studying abroad in the L2 context. In view of the increasing number of Chinese students studying in ESL communities, this study aims to determine the vocabulary size of Chinese undergraduates at a high-ranking public university in Malaysia – Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) – and to discover the extent to which they employ a range of VLSs. Accordingly, 30 students enrolled in various degree programmes were randomly selected to take part in this study. The vocabulary size test (Schmitt, Schmitt, & Clapham, 2001) and a vocabulary level questionnaire based on Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy of VLSs were adopted as the data collection instruments. The findings showed that, on average, the participants have a “Threshold” vocabulary size at the 3,000 and the 5,000-word level, which according to Schmitt et al. (2001) enables learners in reading different authentic texts. However, Nation and Beglar (2007), Schmitt and Schmitt (2014), Coxhead, Nation, and Sim (2015) suggested that non-native undergraduates studying in English as a medium of instruction (EMI) colleges and universities require a vocabulary size of 9,000-word family. The findings of this research raised important concerns that require our attention on the Chinese undergraduates studying in EMI context are at risk due to their insufficient vocabulary size. Moreover, results also revealed that the participants used direct VLSs such as memory and cognitive strategies the most. Taken together, the findings of this research provide insights into undergraduates’ overall inadequate vocabulary size, and how different VLSs were employed to cope with academic demands.","PeriodicalId":53718,"journal":{"name":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","volume":"4 1","pages":"99-125"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/JML.VOL29NO1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

While studies have investigated the strategies used by Chinese English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners to learn new words and the relationship with their current vocabulary knowledge, there is a lack of studies that examine the vocabulary learning strategies (VLSs) and vocabulary sizes of Chinese students studying abroad in the L2 context. In view of the increasing number of Chinese students studying in ESL communities, this study aims to determine the vocabulary size of Chinese undergraduates at a high-ranking public university in Malaysia – Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) – and to discover the extent to which they employ a range of VLSs. Accordingly, 30 students enrolled in various degree programmes were randomly selected to take part in this study. The vocabulary size test (Schmitt, Schmitt, & Clapham, 2001) and a vocabulary level questionnaire based on Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy of VLSs were adopted as the data collection instruments. The findings showed that, on average, the participants have a “Threshold” vocabulary size at the 3,000 and the 5,000-word level, which according to Schmitt et al. (2001) enables learners in reading different authentic texts. However, Nation and Beglar (2007), Schmitt and Schmitt (2014), Coxhead, Nation, and Sim (2015) suggested that non-native undergraduates studying in English as a medium of instruction (EMI) colleges and universities require a vocabulary size of 9,000-word family. The findings of this research raised important concerns that require our attention on the Chinese undergraduates studying in EMI context are at risk due to their insufficient vocabulary size. Moreover, results also revealed that the participants used direct VLSs such as memory and cognitive strategies the most. Taken together, the findings of this research provide insights into undergraduates’ overall inadequate vocabulary size, and how different VLSs were employed to cope with academic demands.
马来西亚博特拉大学中文本科生词汇量与词汇学习策略的使用
虽然有研究调查了中国英语学习者学习新单词的策略及其与现有词汇知识的关系,但对中国留学生在二语语境下的词汇学习策略和词汇量的研究却很少。鉴于越来越多的中国学生在ESL社区学习,本研究旨在确定马来西亚一所高级公立大学——马来西亚博特拉大学(UPM)的中国本科生的词汇量,并发现他们使用一系列VLSs的程度。因此,我们随机选择了30名攻读不同学位课程的学生参加这项研究。采用词汇量测试(Schmitt, Schmitt, & Clapham, 2001)和基于Schmitt (1997) VLSs分类的词汇水平问卷作为数据收集工具。研究结果表明,平均而言,参与者的“阈值”词汇量在3,000和5,000单词水平,根据Schmitt等人(2001)的说法,这使学习者能够阅读不同的真实文本。然而,Nation and Beglar(2007)、Schmitt and Schmitt(2014)、Coxhead、Nation and Sim(2015)提出,在EMI(英语作为教学媒介)学院学习的非母语本科生需要9000个单词的家庭词汇量。本研究的结果提出了需要我们关注的重要问题,即在EMI环境下学习的中国本科生由于词汇量不足而面临风险。此外,研究结果还显示,参与者使用记忆和认知策略等直接VLSs最多。综上所述,本研究的发现有助于了解大学生词汇量的整体不足,以及不同的VLSs是如何被用来应对学术需求的。
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
0.50
自引率
50.00%
发文量
42
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信