Channels, Fall 2017

Channels • 2017 • Volume 3 • Number 1 Page 35 retrieved and used when needed (Zi-Gang, 2015). Explicit vocabulary instruction may be a means to an end, whereby the instructor’s only objective is that the students achieve a receptive knowledge of the novel word so that they are later able to incidentally acquire productive knowledge as they interact with the language. Deep Level Processing In order to accommodate for a more vocabulary heavy approach to language education, as described above, or even an approach where vocabulary and grammar have equal priority, multiple methods have been proposed, refined, and tested with the aim of increasing vocabulary retention (Sagarra & Alba, 2006). These methods include vocabulary acquisition through reading (Aiping, 2016; McQuillan, 2016; Reynolds, 2015), the Keyword Method, and other mnemonic based approaches (Atkinson, 1975), visual aids (Cohen & Johnson, 2011), semantic mapping or word webbing (Sagarra & Alba, 2006), contextual inference (Tsae & Jia, 2010), project-based learning (Reisi & Saniei, 2016), grouping (Akpınar, 2015), utilizing games (Mohd Tahir & Tunku Mohtar, 2016), and context embedding (Zi-Gang, 2015). Each of these methods seeks for vocabulary to be learned and retained through a deep level of cognitive processing. The underlying belief is that “In the case of vocabulary, the more one engages with a word (deeper processing), the more likely the word will be remembered for later use” (Schmitt, 2000, p. 120). If students simply read or hear a new word, or even repeat the word with its translation many times (i.e., rote memorization), they will be unlikely to remember it for long, because the level of cognitive processing in this case is shallow (Lessard-Clouston, 2013). The efficacy of deep-level processing on vocabulary retention has been confirmed by many researchers (Nemati, 2013; Sagarra & Alba, 2006). In studies, groups that were taught with methods incorporating deep-level processing regularly retained significantly more of the vocabulary than their counterparts who used rote memorization or personal memorization strategies (Nemati, 2013; Prince, 2012; Sagarra & Alba, 2006). However, other studies have found that greater cognitive involvement may not necessarily produce higher retention when the amount of time given is considered (Keating, 2008; Webb, 2005). It is my belief, due to greater scholarly support and my personal experience, that deep-level processing does indeed lead to higher retention. For example, many novel L1 vocabulary words such as ambivalence , trepidation, and aloof were taught to me in 8th grade using a type of mnemonic method. For the word ambivalence , the class was given a story of a person named Val , who is in an ambulance about to give birth (the word ambivalence looks like the word val in the middle of ambulance ). Val was having birth pains and ready to go in the ambulance, but she also wanted her husband, who was on his way, to go with her. So, Val could not decide whether to go or to wait a few more minutes. She was ambivalent . The ridiculousness of the story added to the other students’ and my ability to remember the word, and I was able to retain these words and each of the others from the first day they were presented to me. They were locked into my long-term memory through deep-level processing.