Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

General Discussion for Study 2 (Chapter 6) and Study 3 (Chapter 7)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Writing to Learn Academic Words

Part of the book series: Second Language Learning and Teaching ((SLLT))

  • 322 Accesses

Abstract

The first study reported in this book (Chap. 5) measured the receptive knowledge of academic vocabulary of first- and second-year BA-level students. It was carried out in order to find a threshold in the Vocabulary Size Test (VST; Nation and Beglar in Lang Teach 31:9–13, 2007) that could reliably identify Polish higher-education learners in need of extra practice with academic words. The threshold that was identified, a VST score of 9900, revealed that 45.28% of first- and second-year Polish English majors did not possess sufficient knowledge of academic words.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Brown, R., Waring, R., & Donkaewbua, S. (2008). Incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading, reading-while-listening, and listening to stories. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 136–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: A tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, R., Yang, X., & Yang, Y. (2020). Prediction differs at sentence and discourse level: An event-related potential study. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000235

  • Chen, C., & Truscott, J. (2010). The effects of repetition and L1 lexicalization on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31(5), 693–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, M. (2019). Mixed models for big data: Explorations of a fast penalized regression approach with mgcv. Retrieved from https://mclark.github.io/posts/2019-10-20-big-mixed-models/. Accessed November 27, 2020.

  • Corson, D. (1997). The learning and use of academic English words. Language Learning, 47(4), 671–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour, 11, 671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, J. F, Schriefers, H., & Lemhöfer, K. (2019). Noticing vocabulary holes aids incidental language word learning: An experimental study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(3), 500–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vos, J. F., Schriefers, H., Nivard, M. G., & Lemhöfer, K. (2018). A meta-analysis and meta-regression of incidental second language word learning from spoken input. Language Learning, 68(4), 906–941.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgort, I., Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., & Van Assche, E. (2017). Contextual word learning during reading in a second language: An eye-movement study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 341–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgort, I., Candry, S., Boutorwick, T. J., Eyckmans, J., & Brybaert, M. (2018). Contextual word learning with form-focused and meaning-focused elaboration. Applied Linguistics, 39(5), 646–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgort, I., Perfetti, C., Rickles, B., & Stafura, J. (2015). Contextual learning of L2 word meanings: Second language proficiency modulates behavioral and ERP indicators or learning. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 506–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgort, I., & Warren, P. (2014). L2 Vocabulary learning from reading: Explicit and tacit lexical knowledge and the role of learner and item variables. Language Learning, 64(2), 365–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 59–84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263104261034

  • Field, A. (2017). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frear, M. W., & Bitchener, J. (2015). The effects of cognitive task complexity on writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 45–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frishkoff, G. A., Perfetti, C. A., & Collins-Thompson, K. (2010). Lexical quality in the brain: ERP evidence for robust word learning from context. Developmental Neuropsychology, 35(4), 376–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gánem-Gutierrez, G. A., & Gilmore, A. (2018). Tracking the real-time evolution of a writing event: Second language writers at different proficiency levels. Language Learning, 68(2), 469–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gohar, M. J., Rahmanian, M., & Soleimani, H. (2018). Technique feature analysis or involvement load hypothesis: Estimating their predictive power in vocabulary learning. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 47, 859–869.

    Google Scholar 

  • González-Fernández, B., & Schmitt, N. (2020). Word knowledge: Exploring the relationships and order of acquisition of vocabulary knowledge components. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajduk, G. K. (2019). Introduction to linear mixed models. Retrieved from: https://ourcodingclub.github.io/tutorials/mixed-models/#crossed. Accessed November 27, 2020.

  • Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/200772468_Identifying_the_organization_of_writing_processes. Accessed September 6, 2020.

  • Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 11(2), 207–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell, D. C. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, M. H.-C. (2013). The effects of word frequency and contextual types on vocabulary acquisition from extensive reading: A case study. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(3), 487–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, M.H.-C., & Nassaji, H. (2016). Effective vocabulary learning tasks: Involvement load hypothesis versus technique feature analysis. System, 56, 28–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hui, B. (2020). Processing variability in intentional and incidental word learning: An extension of Solovyeva and DeKeyser (2018). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 327–357. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Incidental and intentional learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 349–381). Blackwell Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joe, A. (1998). What effects to task-based tasks promoting generation have on incidental vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 357–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 37, 13–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. D. (2020). Planning in L1 and L2 writing: Working memory, process, and product. Language Teaching, 53, 433–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, H., & Nation, K. (2018). Examining incidental word learning during reading in children: The role of context. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 166, 190–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319, 966–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, R. T. (1990). Effectiveness of prewriting strategies as a function of task demands. The American Journal of Psychology, 103(3), 327–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg, R. T., Whiteford, A. P., Turner, C. E., Cahil, M., & Mertens, A. (2013). Working memory in written composition: An evaluation of the 1996 model. Journal of Writing Research, 5(2), 159–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. (2008). The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 58(2), 285–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klepsch, M., Schmitz, F., & Seufert, T. (2017). Development and validation of two instruments measuring intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoch, U., Rouhshad, A., Oon, S. P., & Storch, N. (2015). What happens to ESL students’ writing after three years of study at an English medium university. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kormos, J., & Trebits, A. (2012). The role of task complexity, modality, and aptitude in narrative task performance. Language Learning, 62(2), 439–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krashen, S. D. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence by the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kweon, S., & Kim, R. (2008). Beyond raw frequency: Incidental vocabulary acquisition in extensive reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 191–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4), 567–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. (2019). Time-on-task as a measure of cognitive load in TBLT. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 16(3), 958–969. https://doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2019.16.3.12.958

  • Lubliner, S., & Hiebert, E. H. (2011). An analysis of English-Spanish cognates as a source of general academic language. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(1), 76–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malone, J. (2018). Incidental vocabulary learning in SLA: Effects of frequency, aural enhancement, and working memory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 651–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manchón, R. M. (2014). The internal dimension of tasks: The interaction between task factors and learner factors in bringing about learning through writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 27–52). John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manchón, R. M., & Roca de Larios, J. (2007). On the temporal nature of planning in L1 and L2 composing. Language Learning, 57(4), 549–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manchón, R. M., Roca de Larios, J., & Murphy, L. (2009). The temporal and problem-solving nature of foreign language composing processes: Implications for theory. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research (pp. 102–129). Multilingual Matters.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Meteyard, L., & Davies, R. A. I. (2020). Best practice guidance for linear mixed-effects models in psychological science. Journal of Memory and Language, 112, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2020.104092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, E., Van de Ven, M., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2019). Context, word, and student predictors in second language vocabulary learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40, 137–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olive, T. (2004). Working memory in writing: Empirical evidence from the dual-ask technique. European Psychologist, 9(1), 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olive, T. (2011). Working memory in writing. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 485–504). Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olive, T., Kellogg, R. T., & Piolat, A. (2008). Verbal, visual, and spatial working memory demands during text composition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 29, 669–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega, L. (2009). Sequences and processes in language learning. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty (Eds.), Handbook of second and foreign language teaching (pp. 81–105). Wiley-Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega, L. (2012). Epilogue: Exploring L2 writing-SLA interfaces. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 404–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellicer-Sánchez, A., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 31–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, F. L. (2011). Research in applied linguistics: Becoming a discerning consumer (3rd ed.). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E. (2019). Factors affecting the learning of single-word items. In S. Webb (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 125–142). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pichette, F., de Serres, L., & Lafontaine, M. (2012). Sentence reading and sentence writing for second language vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 33(1), 66–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigada, M., & Schmitt, N. (2006). Vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading: A case study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 18(1), 1–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, C. A., & Tokowicz, N. (2020). State of the scholarship: A review of laboratory studies of adult second language vocabulary training. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 439–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43, 1–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45, 193–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (2011). Second language task complexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, language learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Researching the cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 3–37). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.2

  • Roca de Larios, J., Nicolás-Conesa, F., & Coyle, Y. (2016). Focus on writers: Processes and strategies. In R. M. Manchón & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), Handbook of second language writing (pp. 267–286). De Gruyter.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rott, S. (1999). The effect of exposure frequency on intermediate language learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 589–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Funes, M. (2014). Task complexity and linguistic performance in advanced college-level foreign language writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 163–191). John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Funes, M. (2015). Exploring the potential of second/foreign language writing for language learning: The effects of task factors and learner variables. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salkind, N. J. (2011). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (4th ed.). Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saragi, T., Nation, I. S. P., & Meister, G. F. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System, 6(2), 72–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoonen, R., Snellings, P., Stevenson, M., & van Gelderen, A. (2009). Towards a blueprint of the foreign language writer: The linguistic and cognitive demands of foreign language writing. In R. M. Manchón (Ed.), Writing in foreign language contexts: Learning, teaching, and research (pp. 77–101). Multilingual Matters.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Skehan, P. (2003). A cognitive approach to language learning (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skehan, P. (2014). Limited attentional capacity, second language performance and task-based pedagogy. In S. Peter (Ed.), Processing perspectives on task performance (pp. 211–260). John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 592–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soderstrom, N. C., Kerr, T. K., & Bjork, R. A. (2016). The critical importance of retrieval and spacing for learning. Psychological Science, 27(2), 223–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, M., Schoonen, R., & de Glopper, K. (2006). Revising in two languages: A multidimensional comparison of online writing revisions in L1 and FL. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 201–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics: Studies in honour of Henry Widdowson (pp. 125–144). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M. (2000). The output hypothesis and beyond: Mediating acquisition through collaborative dialogue. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning (pp. 97–114). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1995). Problems in output and the cognitive processes they generate: A step towards second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 371–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tahmasbi, M., & Farvardin, M. T. (2017). Probing the effects of task types on EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: The case of involvement load hypothesis. SAGE Open, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244017730596

  • Teng, M. F. (2019). The effects of context and word exposure frequency on incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading. The Language Learning Journal, 47(2), 145–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teng, M. F. (2020). Retention of new words learned incidentally through reading: Word exposure frequency, L1 marginal glosses, and their combination. Language Teaching Research, 24(6), 785–812. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uchihara, T., Webb, S., & Yanagisawa, A. (2019). The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis of correlational studies. Language Learning, 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12343

  • Van den Broek, G. S. E., Takashima, A., Segers, E., & Verhoeven, L. (2018). Contextual richness and word learning: Context enhances comprehension but retrieval enhances retention. Language Learning, 68(2), 546–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vidal, K. (2011). A comparison of the effects of reading and listening on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 61(1), 219–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waring, R., & Takaki, M. (2003). At what rate do learners learn and retain new vocabulary from reading a graded reader? Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(2), 130–163. Retrieved from http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl/October2003/waring/waring.pdf

  • Webb, S. (2007). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 46–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2008). The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 232–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2019). Incidental vocabulary learning. In S. Webb (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 225–239). Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, C. D. (1981). Processing resources in attention, dual task performance, and workload assessment. Technical report. Engineering-psychology Research Laboratory. University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(3), 449–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wittrock, M. C. (1974). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 11(2), 87–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou, D. (2017). Vocabulary acquisition through cloze exercises, sentence-writing and composition-writing: Extending the evaluation component of the involvement load hypothesis. Language Teaching Research, 21(1), 54–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of English Studies, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland

    Breno B. Silva

Authors
  1. Breno B. Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Breno B. Silva .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

B. Silva, B. (2022). General Discussion for Study 2 (Chapter 6) and Study 3 (Chapter 7). In: Writing to Learn Academic Words. Second Language Learning and Teaching. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06505-7_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06505-7_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-06504-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-06505-7

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation