Degree Project with Specialisation in English Studies and
Education
15 Credits, Second Cycle
Effective Teaching Methods and Strategies
for Incorporating Word Frequency in the
EFL Classroom
- The importance and use of word frequency for English teaching
Effektiva lärmetoder och strategier för att inkorporera ordfrekvens i EFL klassrummet -Betydelsen och användningen av ordfrekvens för lärandet i Engelska
Johan Espmarker
Emanuel Tedenby
Master of Arts in Primary Education: School years 4-6, Examiner: Chrysogonus Siddha Malilang
240 credits Supervisor: Shaun Nolan
English Studies and Education 2020-03-28
Abstract
Word frequency seems to be unknown for many teachers’ and possibly deemed not very
important for vocabulary development. We set out to investigate the importance of incorporating word frequency in the EFL classroom. The aim of the study was to conclude if teachers
incorporate word frequency into their teaching, as well as how this could be done efficiently. In order to collect data for this study, we used a questionnaire and semi-structured interviews. Despite a focus on teachers in years 4-6, in an effort to not only expand our potential sample group and to take into account the importance of transition between school forms,we reached out to teachers of English in years 4-9. This was accomplished with the help of various teacher forums on Facebook and a convenience sample. The initial results from the questionnaire showed that the majority of teachers were aware of word frequency. However, on closer inspection of the questionnaire, it became clear that several of the teachers did in fact not have sufficient knowledge of word frequency. Previous research has shown the importance of high-frequency words and that the 2,000 most frequent words are a necessary learning goal.
Implications of not considering word frequency when teaching vocabulary can have a negative effect on students' progression. Our research has found a discrepancy between steering
documents in Sweden, in which word frequency is not explicitly considered, and previous studies analysing the use of word frequency. This could be seen as the explanation for why teachers are not aware of word frequency.
Key words:
Word frequency, EFL, Vocabulary development, Vocabulary acquisition,
Vocabulary teaching, Vocabulary instruction
Table of contents
1. Introduction ... 1
2. Aim and research questions ... 4
2.1 Research questions: ... 4 3. Theoretical background... 5 3.1 Key terminology ... 5 3.1.1 Vocabulary development ... 5 3.1.2 Word frequency ... 6 3.1.3 Word families ... 6
3.2 Second language acquisition theories on vocabulary acquisition ... 7
3.2.1 Function-based teaching ... 7
3.2.2 Visual Instruction ... 7
3.3 Previous research on word frequency and strategies for teachers’ ... 8
3.3.1 Word frequencies importance to vocabulary development ... 8
3.3.2 Teaching strategies for teachers ... 9
3.4 Vocabulary in relation to the steering documents ... 11
4. Method... 12
4.1 Participants ... 12
4.1.2 Selection process ... 12
4.2 Materials and data collection instruments ... 14
4.2.1 Questionnaire ... 14 4.2.2 Semi-Structured Interviews ... 14 4.3 Procedure ... 15 4.4 Analysis ... 16 4.5 Ethical considerations ... 16 5. Results ... 17 5.1 Questionnaire ... 17
5.1.1 Questionnaire results from teachers in grades year 4-6 ... 17
5.1.2 Questionnaire results from teachers in years 7-9 ... 19
5.1.3 Overview of combined questionnaire results ... 21
5.2 Interviews ... 21
5.2.1 Teacher 1 ... 21
5.2.2 Teacher 2 ... 22
5.2.3 Teacher 3 ... 23
6. Discussion ... 25
6.1 To what extent and how do teachers incorporate word frequency ... 25
6.2 Teaching strategies for word frequency ... 29
6.2.1 Suggestions of how to incorporate word frequency into teaching... 30
7. Conclusion ... 32
References ... 34
1
1. Introduction
Vocabulary growth is necessary for EFL students since a larger vocabulary will aid their
understanding of the target language (Sheridan & Markslag , 2017). According to Karakoça and Köse (2017), vocabulary is central for language learning and constitutes a crucial part for learners of English. Moreover, lexical knowledge of words and their derivations creates a foundation of language learning rather than focusing on grammar. Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) found that the first 1,000-word families occur 80-83% in many texts and movies. One word family is based on a word and the suffixes that belong to the word, such as sing, sings, singer and singers (Bauer & Nation, 1993).
In compulsory school, which ends in year 9 (for students at around 15 or 16 years old), it is vital to collaborate to promote successful student transitioning between teachers and/or school forms. It is stated in the curriculum that teachers should share knowledge and information about their students in order to help this transition process (Skolverket, 2018). As such, the transition between years 6 and 7 is pertinent and important to highlight. Successful transitions can facilitate continuity and progression in students' vocabulary development. Research shows that pupils who attain the 2,000 most frequent words also perform better in listening, reading, and writing
(Staehr, 2008). Word frequency refers to how frequently the word will appear in written and spoken language (Schmitt & Schmitt, 2014). Staehr (2008) found that the majority of students in year 9 do not have the necessary vocabulary to perform well in listening, reading and writing. Moreover, this demonstrates the importance of high-frequency words in order to advance in the English language since students are able to understand various texts easier, as well as produce language. Lundahl (2014) agrees that word frequency is important and believes that students should focus on high-frequency words. However, according to Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016), to understand a text, it is necessary to know 98% of the words. Moreover, low-frequency words are also required in order to understand texts and movies, since high-frequency words only cover about 85% of most texts.
The syllabus emphasises that teaching the English language should provide students the ability to “understand and interpret the content of spoken English and in different types of texts”
(Skolverket, 2018, p.34). The syllabus for English does not use the term word frequency nor does it mention vocabulary, however, it does mention communication, speaking and listening
2
(Skolverket, 2018). In order for a student to speak or listen to someone speaking English, they need to have a certain vocabulary and understanding of the words. Wilkins (1972, p. 110) states that “while without grammar very little can be conveyed; without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed”. Vocabulary is therefore fundamental for language learning in general. Moreover, if students are going to progress in the English language efficiently, teachers need to have word frequency in mind. Nordlund (2016) conducted a study that shows English textbooks used in Swedish schools contain a lot of low-frequency words. Furthermore, textbooks are widely used in Swedish schools and Nordlund raises the question if teachers are aware of word frequency and if they plan their lessons with this in mind. According to Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) teachers should focus more on vocabulary learning and word frequency. Additionally, they argue that word frequency should be a part of the curriculum.
To our knowledge, there is no research that has investigated teachers’ didactic choices with regards to word frequency in Swedish contexts. Since many researchers point to the importance of having strategies when it comes to teaching word frequency, it is significant to know whether teachers incorporate word frequency and how they do it (Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb 2016; McCrostie, 2007; Johns and Wilke, 2018). According to Christ and Wang (2010), in schools, there is a major gap between students’ vocabulary size. Furthermore, Christ and Wang argue that this may be due to socioeconomic factors. However, Sundqvist and Sylvén (2012) claim that the gap among students' vocabulary is due to English activities outside of school. This means that socioeconomic differences might not be the only factor, rather if students are into gaming or watching English movies. The awareness of word frequency could support teachers to develop students’ vocabulary, even though there is a gap. According to McCrostie (2007), teachers of English should use frequency lists (wordlist based on how often words appear) to support them in determining which words to teach. Furthermore, teachers need to have knowledge of how to assess students’ vocabulary size in order to select relevant words that the students should learn. This could support teachers to develop each individual's vocabulary, as well as challenge the students regardless of their proficiency levels.
According to Karakoça and Köse (2017), learning vocabulary is most effective with activities which are explicit and focus on meaning and form with regards to vocabulary. Moreover, as a scaffold in teaching vocabulary, visual instruction such as using pictures to learn new words is effective since students will make connections and meaning of the words (Sadeghi & Farzizadeh, 2013). Johns and Wilke (2018) claim that it is of importance to teach high-frequency words and
3
provide word lists as a guide for teachers. Using vocabulary levels tests (VLT) to assess students' vocabulary size could be a supportive tool for teachers in order to establish vocabulary goals and use frequency as a guide for students' vocabulary progression (Siyanova-Chanturia & Webb, 2016). Another aspect of learning vocabulary is to develop strategies to acquire and retain words. Ghazal (2007) emphasises that it is important to teach students to be more independent in their learning. Therefore, teaching metacognitive thinking could support their vocabulary
4
2. Aim and research questions
This study aims to ascertain if Swedish teachers in years 4-9, and especially in years 4-6, plan their English lessons with word frequency in mind and how they incorporate it in their lessons.
Additionally, the study will provide strategies for incorporating word frequency into lessons.
2.1 Research questions:
1. To what extent and how do teachers of English in years 4-9 incorporate concerns related to word frequency in their planning and teaching?
5
3. Theoretical background
In this part of the study, several theoretical approaches are highlighted, as well as definitions of terminology. Furthermore, previous research in the area is presented along with connections to the Swedish syllabus for English.
3.1 Key terminology
The key terminology used in this study is vocabulary development, word frequency, and word families.
3.1.1 Vocabulary development
Karakoça and Köse (2017) argue that there are two main ways of acquiring vocabulary, incidental and intentional. Incidental vocabulary learning means to learn vocabulary when it is not the main goal of the activity, instead, it is a by-product of the activity. On the other hand, intentional vocabulary learning is an activity that is explicitly targeted towards teaching vocabulary.
Furthermore, Karakoça and Köse discuss the importance of meaning and form when teaching vocabulary. Horst (2013) agrees that incidental vocabulary learning exists, however, argues that it is not an efficient way of acquiring new vocabulary. When discussing vocabulary development, it is important to understand what it means to know a word, moreover, how many words do the students need to know. Knowing a word includes being able to know which word to use, when to use it, and how. There is also a difference between vocabulary breadth and depth, Karakoça and Köse explain breadth as the number of words the learner knows whereas depth refers to how well they know the word, in other words, how good they are at using the word in various contexts.
6
3.1.2 Word frequency
Word frequency is words that occur more or less often in various contexts where the language is used. Schmitt and Schmitt (2014) have conducted a study in which they problematize the term word frequency and how it should be used. Moreover, they define high-frequency vocabulary as the words that cover the higher percentage of how frequently words occur in various texts. In fact, corpora lists can be found of the most frequent, as well as the least frequent words in the English language (Davies & Gardner, 2010). Low-frequency words are words that occur less often but are also needed in order to understand most texts. Furthermore, low-frequency words also include one-time words that are only used in specific contexts and themes. For example, ‘offside’ is a specific term which may not be important to know unless you are talking about football or ice-hockey.
3.1.3 Word families
In a word family, there is a root word and its various derivations due to affixes and suffixes. Based on the grammatical structure, the word is divided into different levels depending on how frequently the word is used, for example, level 2 could be ‘developed’ and level 3 ‘developable’ (Bauer & Nation 1993). Furthermore, the words that are within one word family have to have the same meaning in order to consist of the same word family, for example, hard, harder, and
hardest. However, the word hardly has the same root but does not have the same meaning, and therefore is not part of the word family of ‘hard’ (Duff & Brydon, 2020). According to Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016), the 1,000 most frequently used word families consist of about 80-83% in various texts. In contrast, when writing and speaking, the 1,000 word families are used even more.
7
3.2 Second language acquisition theories on vocabulary
acquisition
3.2.1 Function-based teaching
Certain teaching beliefs have shown to be more successful than others when it comes to acquiring new vocabulary. Hassankiadeh, Jahandar and Khodabandehlou (2012) conducted a study on different teaching beliefs, tested on EFL students, to investigate which theory was superior when teaching vocabulary. Such theories were memory-based, meaning-based, and function-based teaching. Results indicated that function-based teaching was superior.
Hassankiadeh, Jahandar and Khodabandehlou explain that function-based teaching is a theory which applies the vocabulary into meaning. Further, uses it in various activities in order to retain the words or make connections to students' experiences. Students in function-based teaching will be active in their learning process to acquire and retain new vocabulary. Such activities could be role-playing or interactive tasks.
3.2.2 Visual Instruction
Scaffolding plays an important role in vocabulary acquisition. With the use of visual cues and instructions, teachers can aid their students in acquiring, as well as retention of vocabulary. Mashhadi and Jamalifar (2014) argue that visual aids, such as videos and flashcards can be useful tools in the EFL classroom. Further, visual aids contribute to the students’ vocabulary depth, as well as motivate and interest the students as a result of the variation in the aids used. According to Sadeghi and Farzizdeh (2013) pictures can contribute to the imagination, which supports a mental connection to the word that is being taught. Rather than using traditionally based teaching theories such as repetition and memorization, visual instructions are supportive and facilitate students’ vocabulary learning. In Mashhadi and Jamalifar and Sadeghi and Farzizadeh’s research they compared a traditional approach of teaching vocabulary in relation to visual aids. In this case, traditional vocabulary teaching is defining words and using text to aid learners. Both results indicated that visual aids were superior to the traditional way of teaching.
8
3.3 Previous research on word frequency and strategies for
teachers’
This section is divided into two parts which highlight research on word frequency and strategies for teachers to use in practice.
3.3.1 Word frequencies importance to vocabulary development
In pedagogical contexts, Staehr’s (2008) research tested students’ vocabulary level with the help of a range-program (VLT), which assigned students’ range of vocabulary. Subsequently, Staehr tested all of the students in reading, listening, and speaking to investigate if vocabulary size had an impact on their results. Results indicated a difference between the students who attained the 2,000 most frequent words, in comparison to those who did not. Moreover, it showed that students who attained the 2,000 most frequent words performed over average. In fact, the students differed in all the abilities, especially in the reading tests, which indicate the significance of vocabulary size and attaining words that occur more often than others.
In school, English teachers often use textbooks as material in their teaching. Nordlund (2016) has conducted a study where she compares two textbooks that are commonly used by Swedish teachers in middle school, New Champion and Good Stuff. Although the study showed that the books contained to a large extent high-frequency words, the results also indicated that it consists of many low-frequency words and one-time words. With that in mind, students need high-frequency, as well as low-frequency words in order to understand texts. Research has shown that students need to know about 98% of the words in a text to comprehend what they read and also to acquire new vocabulary (Siyanova-Chanturia & Webb, 2016). When the students had a text coverage of 80%, they could not understand what they read. Moreover, with a text coverage of 90%, some could understand, whilst the larger number of students did not comprehend or had a minor understanding of what they read. To confirm that students are progressing in their reading ability and vocabulary development, research indicates that 98% of text coverage is required. Sheridan and Markslag (2017) state that EFL textbooks do not provide students with enough high-frequency words. Moreover, texts do not recycle words, as a result, students do not encounter the words many times. Sheridan and Markslag (2017) and Nordlund and Norberg
9
(2020) claim it is necessary that texts recycle words since students need to encounter words at least five to twenty times in order to acquire it. In addition, Sheridan and Markslag have conducted several teaching activities that could support teachers in their classroom to exercise high-frequency vocabulary. They propose making word cards and key features of this exercise is to: (1) translate to first language (L1); (2) writing in English on one side and on the reverse side L1; (3) use pictures, preferably let student draw; (4) make sure the words in each word pack are suited for the student’s vocabulary level. Additionally, students could write a meaning, form, or a few similar collocates on the card.
McCrostie (2007) investigated whether teachers attain the knowledge of knowing the frequency levels of words or not. McCrostie made a test on educated English teachers, and students at the university level if they could recognize frequency level. The study showed that both were equal when it comes to the categorization of the words. High-frequency words and low-frequency words were easy to recognize, however, mid-frequency words were not. Although these teachers had graduate degrees in linguistics, it acknowledges that teachers are not educated in word frequency. Moreover, it is difficult to determine which words are more frequent than others.
3.3.2 Teaching strategies for teachers
Many strategies and methods can be used in order to acquire new vocabulary. According to Horst (2013), intentional vocabulary learning is the most effective way to learn new words. Since the teacher can guide and instruct the students with activities that support their learning forward. Karakoça and Köse (2017) explain several strategies that could be used in pedagogical situations such as, word cards, mnemonics, and using dictionaries to look up different words. Sadeghi and Farzizadeh (2013) have conducted a study where they measured the effect of visual instruction to acquire vocabulary on EFL students. In the study, they compared visual instruction with a traditional way of teaching vocabulary where they only defined the word. Results show that the students who were taught using visual instructions outperformed the other test group.
Furthermore, teaching in this way supports students to understand the word easier, especially for younger students. Ghazal (2007) emphasises another approach to support students' learning. Instead of teaching vocabulary explicitly with certain activities, teachers should provide students with strategies that are necessary in order to develop meta-cognitive thinking. In this case,
10
different strategies for memorization could be a strategy that would help students to acquire and retain vocabulary.
Johns and Wilke (2018) present 13 words that occur more often than others. Those words could be a starting point for teachers that educate novice students in the English language to be more efficient and support their learners to progress faster. These words are a, and, for, he, in, is, it, of, that, the, to, was, you. Additionally, John and Wilke also provide various lists of words and phrases that could be used for teachers in practice. When students have learned these words and phrases or already attain this vocabulary, teachers could further work with high-frequent words. Since lists can easily be found, teachers could use strategies that are effective to acquire and retain vocabulary. As Staehr’s (2008) study showed, those who possessed 2,000 words also performed better than average in all abilities, which is a strong argument for why teaching high-frequency words should be incorporated.
Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) have conducted a study where they present strategies for teachers to use related to word frequency. First of all, establish goals and needs which further address the importance of diagnosing students with help of vocabulary levels tests, such as VLT. When the students have been assessed, vocabulary goals can be established since the teacher knows their vocabulary and what vocabulary they need to acquire. Moreover, frequency should guide the teacher towards what words should be learned and when. Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb’s vocabulary learning strategies are in line with Karakoça and Köse (2017); Ghazal (2007), to provide students with metacognitive strategies and using word cards. In addition, Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb present the importance of involving the students in the process of what it means to know a word, which consists of meaning, how to use it in various situations, and the form. Thus, Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb emphasise that strategies of learning new vocabulary should occur in various contexts. Furthermore, the words should be strategically chosen based on the students’ vocabulary level. Teachers should provide the students with opportunities to
encounter the words in different situations such as reading, listening, speaking, and writing activities. The last principle of teaching vocabulary should include an assessment, in the form of a test or quiz to examine the students’ progression and measure their achievements. After the classroom teaching aspect, Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb highlight the importance of evaluating and reflecting upon whether the goals were achieved or not.
11
With the use of word cards, as mentioned in Sheridan and Markslag’s (2017) study, teachers could use those in several activities. As an example, Sheridan and Markslag present the exercise ‘Slap Down’ which is followed by the teacher groups the students into groups of three or four. Furthermore, the teacher instructs them to choose five to ten cards and then one student at a time will be responsible to teach the word on the whiteboard. The student who is the teacher will start off by saying the word, secondly, they will repeat the word, thirdly say the L1 meaning, and then say an example sentence. According to Sheridan and Markslag, activities such as ‘Slap Down’ have many beneficial effects on students’ language learning. They gain new vocabulary, it is meaningful and they will practice the ability to write the word.
3.4 Vocabulary in relation to the steering documents
Vocabulary is fundamental for all abilities in language teaching. However, the syllabus for English in years 4-6 does not explicitly mention what words to teach and how. In order to meet certain learning goals, students need a varied vocabulary. The syllabus for English states that the students should develop their ability to “express themselves and communicate in speech and writing and adapt language for different purposes, recipients and contexts” (Skolverket, 2018, p.34-35). The commentary material for the English syllabus presented by Skolverket (2017) explains that a varied vocabulary will be needed to develop these abilities since higher grades require more from the students. Therefore, explicitly teaching vocabulary would be necessary to meet the
requirements in the syllabus. Moreover, Skolverket (2018) highlights the importance of collaboration between teachers in order to facilitate successful transitions. Through such interaction, teachers will acquire necessary information about students which can support their teaching and aid students in their vocabulary development.
12
4. Method
This study consists of investigating teachers' professional perspectives of incorporating word frequency in their planning and teaching. To achieve this, we use a quantitative and qualitative approach. We start with a questionnaire that is both qualitative and quantitative to gather
information on a larger scale and provides data that is not only statistical in quality. Data from the questionnaire helps us answer to what extent teachers use word frequency in their planning and teaching. Following the questionnaire, we choose participants who are able to participate in a semi-structured interview (SSI), which involves tailored questions based on their answers in the questionnaire. Furthermore, the questions in these SSIs are open-ended concerning how teachers can incorporate word frequency into their lessons. According to Adams (2010), open-ended questions in interviews create the opportunity for a dialog between the researcher and the informants which could be difficult to achieve with the questionnaire.
4.1 Participants
The participants in this study are English teachers in Sweden in years 4-9. Based on data collected from the questionnaire, 102 participants answered the survey. These participants were made up of 12 males and 90 females. The range of age was 24-65 years old.
4.1.2 Selection process
To fulfill the aim of the study we decided to limit the survey participants to teachers who taught English in years 4-9. As a result, out of the 102 respondents, 43 participants were removed from the questionnaire results. This left us with 59 remaining participants, 52 females and seven males. Interview participants were selected from those survey participants who showed an interest in being interviewed. Out of the seven participants that showed an interest in being interviewed, we selected two informants who answered yes, as well as two who answered no to the question: “Do you think about word frequency in your teaching?”. We wanted to ensure that we covered both perspectives since that can provide a broader viewpoint to our study. However, one participant decided to withdraw from the interview which means that we ended up with three interviews. As
13
a result of the limited number of 4-6 teachers available for interviews we chose to include two 7-9 teachers as well.
In the questionnaire, participants were able to choose if they wanted to participate in an interview. According to Christoffersen and Johannessen (2015), it is common to use questionnaires to request people to participate in an interview at a later appointment.
Furthermore, Christoffersen and Johannessen argue that it has benefits since the researcher gets identification, as well as the participants’ permission. We chose to use Facebook as a platform to recruit teachers for this study by sending out a questionnaire to several teacher forums.
According to Kim-Keung Ho (2014) using Facebook to recruit people to participate in a questionnaire is powerful and could be a valuable tool for academic research. Additionally, sharing survey links with friends can be an effective strategy in order to reach a wider audience. We also chose to contact friends that work within the teaching profession and encouraged them to participate, as well as forward the questionnaire to their colleagues. Christoffersen and Johannessen explain this method as the “snowball method”. The researcher recruits informants by contacting persons that are suited for the study and those persons could then refer to other informants.
Table 1
Interview participants
Teacher Grades Subjects Date of interview
Teacher 1 3-9 English & Social Science 2021-02-10
Teacher 2 7-9 English & Swedish 2021-02-12
14
4.2 Materials and data collection instruments
As mentioned above, in this study we collect data through a questionnaire (see appendix A), as well as through an interview based on the participants’ answers in the survey. The questionnaire is used to gain quantitative and qualitative data about teachers’ vocabulary strategies and their knowledge of word frequency. Furthermore, the interview will add richness and depth to the qualitative data to answer our research questions.
4.2.1 Questionnaire
Since a questionnaire is a tool that can provide quantitative and qualitative data, it partly supports answering to some extent our research questions and increases the validity. According to
Christoffersen and Johannessen (2015), validity is the relationship between concrete data and the phenomenon that is being investigated. With closed questions and open-ended questions, we could get access to both qualitative and quantitative answers. Krosnick and Presser (2009) write that open questions can be useful in order to bring more depth to the questionnaire, additionally, provide further information from closed questions. By including open-ended questions, we can tailor the interviews to each person based on their responses to those questions.
A questionnaire is fairly easy to create and can be sent out to a major public. We chose to make a questionnaire to reach out to as many teachers as possible. “Web surveys are attractive because they allow for simple, fast, and cheap access to large groups of potential respondents”
(Biffignandi, Bethlehem, 2011, p. 31.). Moreover, we used the questionnaire as a tool to recruit participants for our follow-up interviews.
4.2.2 Semi-Structured Interviews
As an additional part of the study, we chose to have SSIs as a follow-up to the questionnaire, since they can add valuable qualitative data. Surveys have their limits to the extent informants can
15
explain their thought process even on the open-ended questions. Adams (2010) argues that the SSI can add value and depth to other research approaches, for example, a questionnaire. Furthermore, if open-ended questions cannot be efficiently answered in the questionnaire, the SSI could be an effective method to breach the gap. Moreover, Adams writes that the SSI is well suited when several open-ended questions require follow-up. Kvale (2007) explains that SSIs should be accompanied by different themes, which should include prepared questions. In
addition, the interviewer has the opportunity to ask the participant follow-up questions based on their answer to the prepared questions.
4.3 Procedure
In the construction of the questionnaire, we chose to divide it into sections which consist of personal facts, general vocabulary teaching, and questions regarding word frequency (see appendix A). Additionally, we decided to create the questionnaire in both English and Swedish. On the 26th of January, we sent out the questionnaire in a Facebook forum that includes many teachers in Sweden. However, the response rate did not provide as many participants as we would like. Due to that fact, on the 29th of January, we chose to reach out to more forums, as well as sharing the survey link with friends that work as English teachers. We used the “Snowball Method”, which helped us to recruit even more respondent teachers (Christoffersen &
Johannessen, 2015). On the 1st of February, we closed the questionnaire with 102 participants. In order to keep the results relevant for the aim of the study, we removed the answers from teachers that did not teach in years 4-9, this left us with 59 answers.
The interview guide we created was divided into three parts: (1) establishing contact with the participant by asking questions related to their work experience; (2) questions regarding their general vocabulary teaching and strategies; (3) discussing word frequency, if they use it in their classroom, and possible strategies for incorporating it into other teachers’ lessons (see appendix B). The interviews had some slight variations since we would ask the participants follow-up questions based on their answers to the prepared questions.
16
4.4 Analysis
After collecting the data from the questionnaire and interview we began analysing the data. We started by compiling the results from the relevant questions in the questionnaire. In the interview section, we selected parts of the participants’ answers with relevance to our research question. Due to time constraints, we chose not to transcribe the interview data and instead select the parts that were relevant for this study. According to Christoffersen and Johannessen (2015), the
researchers can choose parts of the interview that are relevant for the study instead of
transcribing everything. The interviews were conducted in Swedish and thus have been translated into English for this study.
4.5 Ethical considerations
In this study, we followed Vetenskapsrådet’s (2017) guidelines, which consist of four principles: (1) Secrecy, (2) Professional secrecy, (3) Anonymity, and (4) Confidentiality (Vetenskapsrådet, 2017, p.40-41). In the construction of the questionnaire, we chose questions that would not aid in identifying the participants. The participants who chose to attend the interview were given
consent of participation form to sign. This included information on the participant’s rights and our obligations (see appendix C). Another aspect that we took into consideration in the interview was the recording. The participants were able to choose whether they wanted to be recorded or not.
Data collected from the questionnaire could exist of potential biases since we recruited friends that work within the teaching profession to participate in the survey. We decided to exclude those participants from the interviews because that could affect our results due to our personal
17
5. Results
In this section, we start by presenting results from our questionnaire where we have compiled answers based on the participants' responses which are both quantitative and qualitative through three tables. The questionnaire results are divided into two different sections, teachers in years 4-6 and teachers in years 7-9. This is followed by a presentation of three teacher interviews.
5.1 Questionnaire
5.1.1 Questionnaire results from teachers in grades year 4-6
Based on participants' answers in the questionnaire, 13 teachers think about word frequency in their teaching, whilst seven do not (see Results Table 1). Moreover, the majority of teachers who did not think about word frequency were not familiar with the term. Two teachers had other methods or strategies on how to teach vocabulary (see Results Table 2). Meanwhile, those teachers who do think about word frequency do so for a variety of reasons (see Results Table 3).
Results Table 1
Participants answer to the question
Do you think about word frequency in your teaching?
Yes [13] No [7]
As shown in the table above, more than half of the respondents answered that they think about word frequency in their teaching. This question is quantitative in nature because they could only answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’. This was then followed up by a qualitative question where the respondents could elaborate on why they do or do not think about word frequency, the answers for which are
18
summarized in the Results Table 2 below. We categorized their answers into two general descriptions which can be seen in this table below.
Results Table 2
General description and categorization of participants answers to the question
Why do you not think about word frequency in your teaching?
Due to...
Not familiar with the term [5]
Use of other strategies or methods [2]
Results Table 2 presents an answer to why the participants did not think about word frequency in their teaching. This table indicates that more than half of the participants who did not think about word frequency are not familiar with the term (5). According to our interpretation, two of the participants used other strategies or methods to teach vocabulary.
Results Table 3
General description and categorization of participants answers to the question
Why do you think about word frequency in your teaching?
Due to...
Developing vocabulary [4]
Repetition and understanding [2] Connections [2]
Variation [1]
Use of high-frequency words [4]
In this Results Table 3, the participants’ answers were more diffused which indicates that teachers have different views of the concept and how they use it in their teaching. Four respondents
19
answered that they think about word frequency to develop students’ vocabulary, whereas
‘connections’ (synonyms or L1 connections) and ‘repetition and understanding’ had two answers each. Meanwhile ‘use of high-frequency’ had four answers and ‘variation’ had the least with one answer.
This table follows the same model as the previous one where we created categories based on the answers. However, it is important to note that some of the participants’ answers on why they think about word frequency were vague.
5.1.2 Questionnaire results from teachers in years 7-9
In this section, most of the teachers do not think about word frequency in their teaching (see Results Table 4). Why teachers do not think about word frequency is mostly due to the use of other strategies or they are not aware of the term. Moreover, some considered it was not
important (see Results Table 5). In contrast, teachers who thought about word frequency in their teaching were fairly split (see Results Table 6).
Results Table 4
Participants answer to the question
Do you think about word frequency in your teaching?
Yes [18] No [21]
In this Results Table 4, there was almost an equal number of teachers who did think about word frequency in their teaching as those who did not.
20 Results Table 5
General description and categorization of participants answers to the question
Why do you not think about word frequency in your teaching?
Due to...
Not familiar with the term [9]
Use of other strategies or methods [8] Not important [4]
Several teachers preferred the use of other strategies or methods instead of word frequency (8). Moreover, some respondents also thought word frequency was not important (4). However, most of them were not familiar with the term (9).
Results Table 6
General description and categorization of participants answers to the question
Why do you think about word frequency in your teaching?
Due to...
Developing vocabulary [7]
Repetition and understanding [3] Connections [3]
Variation [4]
Use of high-frequency words [1]
In this table, there is a wide spread of answers on why teachers think about word frequency. Respondents who answered ‘connections’ or ‘repetition and understanding’ had three each. Most
21
of the teachers answered ‘developing vocabulary’ (7), whilst the second most, ‘variation’, had four answers. Lastly, one teacher thought about ‘use of high-frequency words’ in their teaching.
5.1.3 Overview of combined questionnaire results
Based on participants’ answers in Results Table 2 and 4, instead of thinking about word
frequency, many teachers use other strategies or methods. These strategies include using various texts and literature, synonyms, and base the lessons on students’ interests and needs. Some participants mention that the words in their texts are naturally frequent for the students. Moreover, in Results Table 3 and 6, participants’ who answered ‘developing vocabulary’ had either a fundamental approach of why they think about word frequency in their teaching, or grammar in mind. When it comes to repetition and understanding, some participants emphasised the importance of encountering the words frequently and in various situations. Meanwhile, ‘connections’ focused more on synonyms, using the words in various contexts, as well as making connections to students’ L1. In the category of ‘use of high-frequency words’ and ‘variation’, the participants' answers were in line with one another.
5.2 Interviews
Some of the interview participants are currently working in years 7-9 and we are aware of the fact that this study is focusing on teachers in years 4-6. However, as mentioned above, there is a transition between grades 6 and 7 and thus the students in years 4-6 need to be prepared for what is coming next.
5.2.1 Teacher 1
Teacher 1 preferred to work thematically and use books as a tool for developing students' vocabulary. When Teacher 1 told us about how they choose books, they said: “It should
definitely be age adapted, but also challenging enough. Even though we have some students who are at E level and some at A level in the same classroom we choose depending on their
difficulties and also how thick the book is, as well as how long we are going to work in that area”. Mostly, Teacher 1 starts off the lesson by highlighting the didactic questions explicitly for the students. Following that, the students work independently and towards the end of the lesson, they tie it all together.
22
They were able to define the concept of word frequency, however, gave two explanations: “How many words that show up per minute or words per page. That is what I think about when I think about word frequency, how frequently something appears. But at the same time, I can also think about how often a specific type of words appear”. Teacher 1 provides an example of how to incorporate word frequency. They say: “You either do it thematically or in a writing exercise. A lot of it is about hearing the words and learning to spell them. Otherwise, they do not really know what it means, it is also important to understand why you should teach this.” Teacher 1 explains: “Many teachers choose to work thematically, they select several high frequency words as well as some regular words which are relevant for the subject. What we often notice in years F-6 is that some words might be unnecessary but fit thematically”. Moreover, they say: “instead they learned the word ‘astronaut’, which might be unnecessary at an older level”. Furthermore, Teacher 1 suggests word frequency could be incorporated through working thematically by introducing specific words or concepts that occur within this theme. Teacher 1 emphasises that: “It has to be a natural part of what we are working with otherwise it will be difficult for them.”. Additionally, they say: “I think a lot of it lies with introducing, we do for example in the Social sciences subjects usually work with specific terms and analysing because we want to teach them how to think. The same method applies for teaching English, you have to use words that you think will be important and provide these as a part of their feedback”.
5.2.2 Teacher 2
Teacher 2 focuses on the abilities mentioned in the Syllabus for English. Teacher 2 is currently working in years 7-9, however they have worked in years 4-6 as well. They try to adapt a varied teaching method by working with different materials for a period of time. For example, they might start with a traditional teaching methodology where they use textbooks. Teacher 2 says: “We have one period of time where we use traditional textbooks and follow a really traditional procedure. We often start off by highlighting words, then listen to the text and talk about it, read it, they read alone, we translate”. After having worked with the textbook for a period of time Teacher 2 switches over to films. As a scaffold for these situations Teacher 2 explains their procedure: “Before a lesson, we have selected words that we think can be difficult for them, new words, and we talk about these in various ways. Either you ask them if they know them or show pictures and ask them if they can recognize it, or if they know what it means in English. Then we
23
watch the film sequence and then we have questions that we talk about or write about afterwards.”
In this interview, Teacher 2 attempted to explain word frequency and mentioned that it could be that students are able to use many words or how frequently they use the words. They favored students’ fluency as opposed to their breadth of vocabulary. Teacher 1 explained word frequency as: “They can use many words and frequency is how quickly you can use the words”. When we provided an explanation of word frequency, the teacher told us about an experience where they knew all the words necessary for the one-time word ‘digestion’, however, they did not know the words for kitchen tools which could be more useful. After this, Teacher 2 said: “It is pointless to learn words that just occur once a year”.
Teacher 2 believes that teachers, in general, think about the concept of word frequency, since various texts have many words that might be out of the students’ vocabulary range. They say: “I believe most teachers do it but if you highlight the term, so it becomes clearer, for example, maybe if you are a new teacher as a scaffold to be more aware of which words are useful, but I think they know that actually”. Following this, Teacher 2 presents several strategies that they use in their teaching which could also be used to incorporate word frequency. Based on the students’ vocabulary range, Teacher 2 suggests tailoring material and lessons for their level. As an example, they choose books that might challenge the students at the higher levels whilst also supporting the lower-level learners.
5.2.3 Teacher 3
Teacher 3 varies a lot in their teaching and the main focus is to be comfortable in the language. Teacher 3 uses short tasks that are being evaluated with some form of feedback. Mainly, they use special subjects based on students’ interests in order to progress their English learning. When choosing words for the glossary, Teacher 3 has a dialogue with the students individually in which they ascertain which words they already know. They explain their procedure when selecting words as: “I use to proceed from the student, what words do you know? For example, which knowledge do you have within the video game world? Following this I often get a list consisting
24
of 10-20 words that the student already knows, from there I try to add 10-20 new words that the student does not know”.
Teacher 3 did not attempt to explain word frequency, because they were not familiar with the term. When we provided a definition and asked if it is something teachers should be aware of, they thought it was important to be aware of since you might take words for granted and also that all students have the base of high-frequency words. This was something Teacher 3 would like to know more about, and if their view of high-frequency words is in line with the students’. We did not get any suggestions on how to incorporate word frequency in teaching. However, when we proposed if teachers could use any word frequency list to proceed from in their planning, Teacher 3 said: “Yes, I believe so, definitely!”. Although they were positive about that proposal, Teacher 3 continues: “Words that are commonly used are important but then nerdy or specific words which are equally important actually. I don’t know, I believe you cannot think one word is more important than the other”.
Teacher 3 planned their teaching with a focus on students’ interests and therefore told us that low-frequent words are definitely something that the students work a lot with. The balance between what should be learned and what students need to learn was not a priority, rather the students were motivated and comfortable with the language and their learning.
5.2.4 Comparing results
All teachers have their own approaches to teach vocabulary. Teacher 1 works a lot with books, whilst Teacher 2 and Teacher 3 teach with variation. Their strategies differ since their working procedures are not the same. Teacher 1's strategy is to choose material adapted to the students' different levels. Compared to Teacher 2’s strategy, instead of adapting, they scaffold with vocabulary instruction. Meanwhile, Teacher 3 has close contact with their students' learning progress, as well as vocabulary development.
25
6. Discussion
This section is divided into two parts, first, we discuss whether teachers incorporate word frequency into their teaching and compare their methods with previous research. In the second part, we present strategies for teachers to incorporate word frequency into their teaching.
6.1 To what extent and how do teachers incorporate word
frequency
The majority of teachers in this study use texts in their vocabulary teaching. Reading material teachers use needs to be suited for the students’ different levels. Students come to school with various backgrounds which often results in a vocabulary gap among students in the English classroom (Christ & Wang, 2010; Sundqvist & Sylvén 2012). This vocabulary gap will exist throughout their schooling and therefore concerns not only teachers in years 4-6 but also in years 7-9. As mentioned above, the transition between years 6 to 7 is important and is acknowledged as such by Skolverket (2018) and since students' vocabulary level could be at various levels, this reinforces the importance of such research.
When Teacher 1 decides what text to use, they look for age adequate texts, as well as how many words there are in the text, so the students will be sufficiently challenged. In contrast, Teacher 2 extracts words they think are difficult from chosen texts. Before reading, Teacher 2 provides the students with vocabulary instruction, such as choosing words to learn beforehand to understand the texts they will be reading. The curriculum states that “Teachers should take into account each individual’s needs, circumstances” (Skolverket, 2018, p.12). Teacher 1, 2, and 3 achieve this, however, they do so with different approaches. To further challenge students in year 6, it would be required from the teacher to have knowledge of necessary steps to develop their vocabulary. The commentary material for English highlights that students need a varied vocabulary to achieve higher grades (Skolverket, 2017).
Teacher 1, as well as Teacher 2, use different texts in their classroom and highlight the importance of providing either scaffolding to low-level students in their reading or provide reading material at students’ vocabulary level. The syllabus for English states that students should
26
practice their ability to “understand and interpret the content of spoken English and in different types of texts” (Skolverket, 2018, p.34). However, managing to provide the students with books at their vocabulary level might be difficult without knowledge of students’ vocabulary size. In fact, two textbooks for years 4-6, New Champion and Good stuff which are used in Swedish schools have been investigated and shown to contain many low frequent words (Nordlund, 2016). We know that there is a big gap among students and those who possess less vocabulary will struggle reading low-frequency texts (Christ & Wang, 2010; Sundqvist & Sylvén, 2012). Although low-level learners struggle, those at higher levels could also have problems reading when texts consist of many low-frequency words. Books are often adapted to age but might not take word frequency into consideration when assessing the level of its content. Adaptation considering word frequency is important in order to meet students' vocabulary level, as well as develop their vocabulary. Moreover, if teachers provide texts that have the most frequent words, they will likely learn them faster. Sheridan and Markslag (2017); Nordlund (2016) emphasise that EFL textbooks do not recycle words enough, especially high-frequency words. Furthermore, Sheridan and Markslag argue that students have to encounter the words several times in order to acquire them. Staehr (2008) asserts that 2,000 most frequent words are a necessary learning goal which supports students in all abilities. As a result, when students reach that level, their ability in English will be over average as shown in Staehr’s study.
Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) highlight that 98% text coverage is needed in order to comprehend and acquire new vocabulary. When teachers choose texts and scaffold their students with vocabulary instruction, they will understand more words and as a result, their text coverage will be higher. Using visual instruction is superior to other vocabulary instructions since students can easily understand the words if they are scaffolded with a picture (Sadeghi & Farzizadeh, 2013). Teacher 2’s strategy can therefore be effective in order for the students to comprehend, as well as acquire vocabulary. Teacher 1’s strategy, on the other hand, might be more difficult since the teacher needs to have an accurate assessment of the students’ level. Choosing texts based on the number of words is only one aspect to critically choose reading material. A text could be short but consist of many difficult words or sentences. The amount of high or low-frequency words in a text matters since it will determine how difficult or easy the text is. Moreover, when selecting texts, it might be difficult to know how much text coverage the students will have. With that in mind, using Teacher 1’s strategy of selecting texts based on word count or length might create some challenges in terms of text coverage for the students. If teachers keep track of the
27
student's vocabulary size, they can more accurately select texts based on their students’ vocabulary levels. This can be achieved with the help of a vocabulary levels test (Siyanova-Chanturia & Webb, 2016).
The term word frequency appears to be unknown for most respondents. There were some who showed an understanding of the term, however, the majority did not. Out of the 31 respondents that answered ‘Yes’ in the questionnaire regarding if they were familiar with word frequency, only eight showed that knowledge in the follow-up question. In other words, eight out of 59
respondents in this study have sufficient knowledge about word frequency. In the interview, Teacher 2 answered that they knew the term but did not show the knowledge of word frequency in the interview. Teacher 1 showed knowledge about word frequency even though they answered ‘No’ in the questionnaire. There is a discrepancy between the teachers answers in the
questionnaire and interview. This indicates that more teachers might have been able to show knowledge of word frequency if they were interviewed.
In the questionnaire results, there was a difference between teachers in years 4-6 and 7-9. Teachers in years 4-6 seem to have more knowledge of word frequency than 7-9 teachers. It is difficult to pinpoint exactly why this is the case, one possibility is that teachers in years 4-6 think it is more pertinent to consider which words to teach as their students’ are new to the language. Another possibility could be that teachers in years 7-9 think their students’ already know enough high frequency words and thus do not incorporate them as frequently. Moreover, when analysing why teachers are not incorporating word frequency, many teachers in years 7-9 have other strategies and methods when teaching vocabulary or do not think word frequency is important. Meanwhile, most teachers in years 4-6 who do not incorporate word frequency are not familiar with the term. When comparing the results from teachers who work with word frequency, we can see that teachers in years 4-6 are split between ‘developing vocabulary’ (4) and ‘use of high
frequency words’ (4) (Results Table 3). This indicates that teachers in years 4-6 have varying opinions as to why word frequency should be taught. On the other hand, teachers in years 7-9 are more in agreement here, most (7) teach word frequency to develop students’ vocabulary (Results Table 6). There are no specific examples as to how they teach vocabulary with a focus on word frequency, however, this does provide a general idea of how teachers perceive word
28
The majority of teachers were not able to show knowledge regarding word frequency in our questionnaire. Yet, as shown in Staehr’s (2008); Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb’s (2016) research, word frequency has been proven to be an important step in students’ vocabulary learning. However, most teachers seem to be unaware of how to teach with word frequency in mind. This could be due to the lack of education on the subject, or perhaps they find other aspects of vocabulary teaching more important. Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) argue that course designers should include word frequency in their course designs, this is currently not the case. There is a discrepancy between research and the educational guidelines since several researchers have highlighted the importance of word frequency, however, this sentiment is not shared by course designers.
The course designers for Swedish schools have several main contents that the teachers should be teaching. Many teachers choose to work thematically since the content represented in the syllabus for English provides that opportunity. However, there is not a clear guide of which vocabulary is needed in order to efficiently progress in that area. To facilitate teachers in that manner, various word lists based on frequency could be helpful. Instead of teachers using their feelings to address which words are more important than others, lists of words that are more necessary than others could support teachers to make a rational choice. Johns and Wilke (2018) and Mcrostie (2007) suggest that teachers should use word frequency lists in their teaching practice.
McCrostie’s (2007) study shows that teachers cannot solely rely on their intuitions when it comes to knowing whether the words are high frequency or not. As Teacher 2 mentioned, “it’s pointless to learn words that just occur once a year”. Teaching words that are pointless is more likely to occur if the choice is based on a feeling, rather than a frequency list. Teacher 3 thought such an approach would be useful. In years 4-6, students should communicate about “Daily life, ways of living and social relations in different contexts and areas where English is used.” (Skolverket, 2018, p.35). Moreover, which vocabulary is necessary when speaking or writing about daily life is uncertain. The teacher decides which words the students should learn, however, it might not be obvious which words to select in order to progress most efficiently. For example, if the students are going to learn to communicate about the weather it would be necessary to, first of all, learn the most frequent words to use, such as sun, cloud, or rain. As opposed to words such as hurricane, blizzard, or avalanche. If teachers do not have the competence within this area, they are more likely to choose low-frequency words (McCrostie, 2007).
29
6.2 Teaching strategies for word frequency
Teacher 1 suggested that word frequency could be incorporated when working thematically and choose words that would be necessary to acquire in order to gain knowledge about the content. Teacher 2 and Teacher 3 agree that selecting important words, which students will encounter in various materials and activities is a vital step for incorporating word frequency into their teaching. With that in mind, all teachers suggest having a plan of which vocabulary will be required to acquire within a theme, however, they do not recommend choosing words based upon frequency. Low-frequency words are necessary to understand various texts since 98% of text coverage is needed (Siyanova-Chanturia & Webb 2016).
The balance of selecting to learn words that are high frequency and low frequency could be based on the material teachers use since that will support students in their tasks. Teacher 1 provided an example of necessary words that would be required when working with the theme ‘space’. Low frequency words such as astronaut and all the planets would be required to build knowledge within the theme. Although these words are low frequency in general, they are highly appropriate to teach when working with this content. When teaching words that might be more difficult than others, visual instruction is an effective strategy to use (Sadeghi & Farzizadeh 2013; Mashhadi & Jamalifar 2014). Moreover, it provides students with a better understanding of the word.
However, these words need to be put into context, such as building sentences with the words. Hassankiadeh, Jahandar, and Khodabandehlou (2012) suggest students to be active in their vocabulary learning and use it in functional situations. Moreover, Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) highlight that teachers should provide students with various situations where they
encounter words which are in focus to learn.
Sheridan and Markslag (2017) encourage the use of vocabulary cards when teaching high-frequency words. They provide five important points for creating good and efficient vocabulary cards: make use of L1 translations; have L1 on one side of the card and English on the other; try to use pictures; keep the cards as simple as possible for the learners; make sure the words are appropriately suited for the level of the learners. Furthermore, to ensure students are provided with meaning and form regarding the word, it is advised to provide them with some similar collocates, such as, how the word is pronounced (Sheridan & Markslag, 2017). These cards can
30
then be used in various co-operative tasks, for example, re-telling a story or making connections between words and pictures. Teacher 2 used pictures in a similar way when teaching important words, they attempted to create connections between pictures and important words in order for the students to have an easier time understanding the material. Another aspect which none of the teachers highlighted was meta cognitive strategies. Ghazal (2007) argues that this is a tool for teachers to use in their vocabulary teaching since students can then be more independent in their learning.
When it comes to vocabulary knowledge, there are two terms which have a major role, depth, and breadth (Karakoça & Köse, 2017). Teacher 2 mentioned ‘vocabulary range’ in the interview and how lessons could be tailored based on students’ vocabulary knowledge. Duff and Brydon (2020) explain the importance of defining what it means to know a word. The curriculum states that students should be able to use and understand words in various contexts (Skolverket, 2018). However, without systematically sampling the students’ vocabulary knowledge with the help of a VLT program, it could prove difficult to pinpoint each student's vocabulary size. Assessing students’ vocabulary knowledge cannot be done simply by providing students with glossary tests since that will only take the students’ vocabulary breadth into account. According to Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) assessment is a good tool for establishing goals. Moreover, Teacher 1 mentioned that some sort of feedback would be necessary to progress students' vocabulary. By providing feedback on what words are required to take the next step, the teacher has provided the student with a goal. Siyanova-Chanturia and Webb (2016) also emphasise the importance of selecting words at an appropriate level for students. Additionally, they point out that
encountering these words in various situations and contexts develops vocabulary depth.
6.2.1 Suggestions of how to incorporate word frequency into teaching
● Choose a content and select central words: Depending on the content teachers choose to work with, it often includes some central words for that area which are necessary to attain in order to understand and produce language. These central words might be considered low frequency, but nonetheless important words in order to understand the theme. However, in addition to learning the central words, it is of importance to learn high frequency words that can aid in the development of a more elaborate vocabulary.
31
● Consult word frequency lists: Research has shown that teachers are not better at recognising high frequency words than regular University students. Therefore, it is important that teachers use word frequency lists when they are deciding what words to teach in their classroom. Evidently, it is not sufficient to rely on the teachers’ intuition when it comes to selecting words.
● Put the words into various teaching contexts: Function-based teaching could be a valuable method to apply in order to put high frequency words into context. Further, visual instructions can aid the integration of the chosen vocabulary, which can be used as a scaffold to help the students to learn the words. Vocabulary cards can be integrated over several lessons and be re-used for different activities. It could be of importance to showcase strategies on how to memorize words with some metacognitive exercises. ● Assess and provide feedback: Finally, test the students in various situations to be sure that
32
7. Conclusion
In addressing our first research question, we have investigated to what extent and how teachers of English incorporate concerns related to word frequency in their planning and teaching. In our study, whilst some teachers might have knowledge of word frequency, most seemed unfamiliar with how it should be applied in their teaching and therefore might not use it in their teaching. We experienced discrepancies between respondent’s questionnaire results and their interviews with regards to their knowledge of word frequency. Teachers in years 4-6 seemed to have more knowledge of word frequency in comparison to teachers in years 7-9. Moreover, if teachers in years 4-6 try to implement high-frequency words whilst teachers in 7-9 do not, the vocabulary progression could be hindered when students make the transition from years 6 to 7. It is important that teachers take word frequency into account at every stage in order to effectively develop students' vocabulary. Since high frequency words are not fully developed by most students, it is relevant to teach these words in years 7-9 as well.
Our second research question relates to how teachers’ can incorporate word frequency into their teaching. Research suggests assessing students is important in order to keep track of their
vocabulary and provide them with a goal. Based on the words chosen, teachers should use visual instructions to scaffold their students and put the words into contexts. These strategies are important to gain vocabulary breadth, as well as depth. If students have acquired the 2,000 most frequent words, it will be easier for them to work with low-frequency words. Teachers suggest, on the other hand, working thematically and choosing words that will be necessary to acquire in order to be successful in that area. The syllabus provides teachers with that opportunity because of the design with central content. However, course designers do not provide a clear picture of what vocabulary is needed in different content which could be a problem since teachers might select words based on feelings. Although teachers might have a sense of which words are more important to know, research shows that they cannot solely rely on their intuition when it comes to word frequency. Moreover, teachers need to be rational in their choice of which words to teach since that will influence students' vocabulary development. Tools, such as word frequency lists, could be useful in order to select words that are more important.
33
Based on the results from this study and previous research about word frequency, we propose to incorporate this into the lesson plan as follows. To incorporate both low frequency as well as high frequency words into the lesson, teachers could choose a theme and select central words for vocabulary development. It could be of importance to consult a word frequency list of high frequency words to avoid excluding or including taught words based on unconscious bias. There are several available teaching methods that could be of value when efficiently teaching words. One such method is the function-based teaching method, which uses activation of students to facilitate learning. Finally, assessment of students’ learning is of importance to evaluate acquired vocabulary and provide feedback to establish new goals.
Some questions in the questionnaire survey could have been formulated in a better way. For example, when it comes to the question regarding word frequency and their understanding of the term. We only have three interviews which is a small number and therefore results from these cannot be generalized. To ensure that results will be more accurate, similar research could be carried out and further enhance our knowledge and practices in incorporating word frequency into teaching. Also, conducting a study focused on investigating the discrepancy between steering documents and word frequency would also focus teachers’ attention on the importance of this concept in EFL teaching.
34
References
Adams W. C. CONDUCTING SEMI - STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS. (2010). Wholey, Hatry & Newcomer. Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
http://blancopeck.net/HandbookProgramEvaluation.pdf#page=409
Bauer, L & Nation, P. (1993). Word Families, 6(4), 253-279.
https://www.lextutor.ca/morpho/fam_affix/bauer_nation_1993.pdf
Biffignandi, S & Bethlehem, J. G. (2011). Handbook of Web Surveys. New Jersey: Wiley.
Christ, T. & Wang, X.C. (2010) Bridging the Vocabulary Gap: What the Research Tells Us about Vocabulary
Instruction in Early Childhood, 84-91.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234742213_Bridging_the_Vocabulary_Gap_What_th e_Research_Tells_Us_about_Vocabulary_Instruction_in_Early_Childhood
Christoffersen, L & Johannessen, A. (2015). Forskningsmetoder för lärarstudenter. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB
Davies, M. & Gardner, D. (2010). Word Frequency List of American English.
https://www.wordfrequency.info/files/entries.pdf
Duff, D & Brydon, M. (2020). Estimates of individual differences in vocabulary size in English: how many words
are needed to ‘close the vocabulary gap’? https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-9817.12322
