2nd presentation at APLI624, Concordia!

1. Don’t just repeat after me: !
Retrieval practice is better than
imitation for foreign vocabulary learning
Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan & Harold Pashler (2013)
APLI 624,13th November, 2014
Presented by Takashi Oba

2. Outline
• Introduction: L2 vocabulary learning!
• The present study!
- Theoretical background: two practice conditions!
- Method!
- Result & main findings!
- Theoretical accounts and pedagogical implications !
• Your turn! Discussion questions !

3. Before we start…

4. Today’s focus: L2 vocabulary learning
• How can we effectively learn L2 words?!
• How did you learn (memorize) L2 words for the test
preparation?

5. Word list Flashcard

6. Cue Target
picture L2 word
!
apple!
!
!
!
!
L1 (translation) L2 word
!
apple !
!
! りんご!
!

9. Goal of this study
Compare the effects of retrieval practice with imitation
and on learning L2 spoken vocabulary

10. Two practice conditions
• Imitation: repeat aloud words spoken by a native
speaker or a teacher
• Retrieval practice: produce (write / say aloud) L2
words from memory when cued by concept
(picture / L1 presentation), followed by presentation
of correct answer (Ex. flashcard-typed drills)

11. Imitation
cue target
Retrieval practice (testing effect)
cue target

12. Previous studies
Previous studies:!
- Repeated imitation (saying aloud) > silent learning
(i.e. Seibert, 1927; Ellis & Beaton, 1993)!
→tapping phonological loop function?
- Retrieval practice with cues (L1) > reading English (L1)-L2 pairs
(i.e. Carrier & Pashler,1992; Kang, 2010)!
→ ◎ recall=write out the English translation; × “pronouncing” the words!
This study: First attempt to measure the effects of retrieval
practice of learning of L2 phonological word forms

13. Let’s experience the two conditions!

14. Let’s learn Japanese nouns!
Japanese
nouns
Image romaji
Meaning in
English
いぬ（犬） inu dog
ねこ（猫） neko cat
うし（牛） ushi cow
ひつじ（羊） hitsuji sheep

15. Imitation

20. Retrieval practice

25. Comprehension test
a b c
d e f

26. Production test
1 2
Ans. ひつじ (羊:hitsuji) Ans. いぬ (犬:inu)
3 4
Ans. ねこ (猫:neko) Ans. うし (牛:ushi)

27. Method
Experiment 1 Experiment 2
Participants Native speakers(undergraduates)of English learning Hebrew
how many? 41 59
Task &
procedure
- Learn 40 Hebrew nouns: picture presentation & hearing the
corresponding Hebrew word !
- 4 semantic categories (i.e. body, animals, food, households)!
- imitation vs. retrieval practice
times of training 3 6
Assessment
- comprehension (hear a Hebrew word and choose the corresponding picture)
- production (see a picture cue and say aloud corresponding Hebrew words)!
when? immediately after two days later
order of the
tests
comprehension→production counterbalanced order

28. Fig.1 Sequence of events in a training session in the two conditions

29. Result
Significant!

30. Main findings
• Learners engaged in retrieval practice performed
better in comprehension as well as production
ability of the L2 words than imitation group’s
performance!
• No significant difference in the pronunciation quality
was found in both groups (Exp.1&2)

31. Theoretical accounts
• Why retrieval practice >>imitation?!
• Due to the influence of “Transfer appropriate processing
(TAP)”? (but positive effects on comprehension!)!
• Neutral-network model of test-enhanced learning (Mozer et al,
2004): “error-correction mechanism”!
- “actual output” and make errors !
→ feedback & error-correction !
→ “desired output”!
• Role of “mediators”: cues - - - (retrieving process) - - - target

32. Swain’s output hypothesis
<Internal> <External>
Output
Formulating4
Hypothesis
Noticing4a4
hole
(Syntactic4processing)
Testing4Hypothesis
Confirmation Modification4or
Rejection
Modified4or4confirmed4output
Relevant4
Input
Feedback
(interlocutor/
teacher)
Selective4
attention
Problem4
solving
Noticing4
the4gap
!
“Actual output”
“Desired output”
Error correction

33. Pedagogical implications
• Retrieval practice will yield long-lasting effects of
learning as “desirable difficulties” are entailed in the
practice (Bjork, 1999)!
• Effects of imitation seems to be short-lived, but the
effects of imitation (i.e. better pronunciation:Ellis &
Beaton, 1993 ) must not be dismissed !
• Taking into account individual differences in L2
classrooms (proficiency level, learning style,
language aptitude…), both types of training can be
effectively incorporated into L2 classrooms !
Ex. imitation practice → retrieval practice

35. Discussion questions: What do you think?
• Suppose you teach English vocabulary to 20-30 students at
a L2 classroom. How can you incorporate “retrieval practice”
in your classroom?!
• Do you think “imitation” is crucial for L2 vocabulary learning?
If so, how can we effectively use this type of practice for
individual learning or classroom-based learning? !
• Some instructors claim that “L2 vocabulary must be learned
in more contextualized situation (dialogue or short passage).
Flashcard and using world list are not effective.” Do you
agree? Do you think flashcard or word list is still effective to
use the vocabulary in meaningful settings (reading, writing or
conversation)?