Effects of Graded Texts on EFL College Students' Incidental ...

國立清華大學
碩士論文
英文文章分級及單字接觸次數對大學生
非刻意單字學習影響之研究
<strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Graded</strong> <strong>Texts</strong> on EFL College Students’ Incidental
Vocabulary Learning: Text Difficulty and Exposure Amount
所別:外國語文學系碩士班外語教學組
學號:g915253
姓名:黃虹慈
指導教授:劉顯親博士
中華民國九十三年六月

中文摘要
透過英文閱讀途徑非刻意所習得的單字(Incidental vocabulary learning) 已成
為成人終身學習中常見的一環;因此,我們經常鼓勵第二外語學習者培養泛讀
(extensive reading)習慣以增進單字能力。然而,第二外語學習者在閱讀時卻常因
為認字率不高而無法準確猜出新單字的意思,或因為新單字重複率低而難以對新
單字有再次遇見及深入的瞭解和認識的機會。準備適合不同單字程度之學習者以
及新單字重複率高的閱讀教材一直是英語教學界的一大挑戰。隨著字彙表相關研
究以及量化語料庫分析的進步,適合不同學習者且具有 i+1 可理解輸入
(comprehensible input)的閱讀教材可經由電腦分析以更快速準確的方式篩選出
來。此研究旨在研發一線上閱讀環境,內含自動選文功能,融入種種線上單字學
習工具,以提供學習者認字率高且新單字重複率高的閱讀教材。我們並測試受試
者使用此教材的單字學習狀況。
我們的研究問題包含(一)將此線上閱讀環境融入課程之可行性,(二)受
試者對於自動篩選線上閱讀教材之反應,(三)在線上閱讀教材自動篩選系統的
學習環境中,學習者對於學會新單字所需的接觸次數。自動篩選系統根據四種字
彙表 (The General Service Word List, 大學入學考試中心高中英文參考字彙表,
The University Word List, Sinorama Frequent Word List)將文章排序。系統篩選後,
將較為簡單且新單字重複率高的文章排序列為優先。此外,我們也將三種線上工
具:中文註解、雙語索引工具、以及以不同顏色標明文章中新單字,融入該線上
閱讀的學習環境中。38 位大一非英文系學生參與此實驗,在約 12 週內閱讀 16
篇由自動篩選系統所選出來的文章。實驗進行前,受試者填寫一份背景問卷。所
有受試者的字彙學習情況皆接受前測及後測評量。實驗結束後,受試者填寫一份
線上評估問卷及一份紙筆評估問卷。
資料分析結果,顯示第一、結合種種線上工具及自動篩選過之閱讀教材對於
單字學習是可行的,學生對單字認識有顯著的進步。第二、問卷結果顯示受試者
對利用線上閱讀教材自動篩選系統抱持著正面的態度,並肯定其學習單字的功
能。第三、在此閱讀環境中,15 次的新單字接觸次數尚不足讓學生將新單字用
於理解及表達。
本研究結果顯示利用英文線上閱讀教材自動篩選及泛讀學習可提升英文單
字能力。此外,我們認為該線上閱讀教材自動篩選系統有助於教師融合課堂中顯
性教學(explicit teaching)的精讀(intensive reading)課程以及課外隱性學習(implicit
learning)的泛讀練習,使學習者的單字學習更為有效。最後,此研究提供了利用
線上閱讀教材自動選文系統的教學建議以及未來系統設計修正方向。
i

Abstract
Incidental vocabulary learning while extensive reading has been regarded as
common for adults’ life-long learning <strong>of</strong> a foreign language. Extensive reading is
therefore encouraged to L2 learners for enhancing vocabulary ability. However,
while reading, L2 learners <strong>of</strong>ten struggle with their lack <strong>of</strong> sufficient word knowledge
necessary for precise guessing <strong>of</strong> word meanings and the ample opportunities to
encounter words repeatedly within various contexts required for more complicated
word development. Preparing texts reaching adequate familiar word coverage for
specific groups <strong>of</strong> learners and at the same time ensuring sufficient repetition for
target words is <strong>of</strong>ten challenging. With the help <strong>of</strong> word lists research and the
advances <strong>of</strong> quantitative corpus analyses using word frequency computer programs,
texts with i+1 (comprehensible input) are easier to obtain. By incorporating various
online tools, an effectiveness research study <strong>of</strong> using an online extensive reading
program with careful control <strong>of</strong> vocabulary difficulty and repetitive target word
exposure was conducted.
This study originated from an exploratory issue <strong>of</strong> what happens to the English
teaching process when we incorporate an online extensive reading syllabus with
graded texts for vocabulary acquisition purposes. The online extensive reading
syllabus was developed by graded texts, gloss, a bilingual concordancer, and
highlights <strong>of</strong> target words. With four word lists, the General Service Word List, the
Senior High Student’s Word List in Taiwan, the University Word List, and a high
frequent word list, a text grader program filtered articles based on vocabulary
difficulty out <strong>of</strong> the original 5008 articles <strong>of</strong> a parallel corpus, Sinorama. Easier
texts were sequenced first to provide texts with i+1 and repetitive exposure <strong>of</strong> target
words was ensured to induce quality incidental vocabulary acquisition. The online
ii

eading program was furthermore enhanced with gloss, a bilingual concordancer, and
highlights <strong>of</strong> target words. Thirty-eight English-as-a-foreign-language college
freshmen learners were recruited to read 16 sequenced texts using the online extensive
reading syllabus within a period <strong>of</strong> 12 weeks. A pretest, a posttest, a background
questionnaire, an online evaluation questionnaire, and an in-class evaluation
questionnaire were used as instruments for data collection. In addition to feasibility,
our second concern is to which extent learners liked the online extensive reading
syllabus. Finally, the study takes an interest in exploring the issue <strong>of</strong> the amount <strong>of</strong>
exposure required for successful receptive and productive incidental vocabulary
acquisition while reading extensively.
Through data analyses, the following findings were obtained. First, technically,
though manual efforts were laborious during certain steps in the selection and
sequencing processes, texts with comprehensible vocabulary were successfully
chosen and arranged with various online tools. Second, pedagogically, learners’
word gains were found and their attitudes towards the online extensive reading
syllabus were mostly positive after reading online. Yet, learners’ inexperience in
extensive reading was observed to somewhat impede the meaning making process
during reading. Third, no definite answer was found with regards to the amount <strong>of</strong>
exposure necessary for receptive and productive vocabulary acquisition. It is
estimated that, with texts <strong>of</strong> such difficult level in the study, in order for learners to
recall meanings <strong>of</strong> target words, an exposure amount <strong>of</strong> at least 15 times are needed in
an online extensive reading environment.
The results <strong>of</strong> the study showed that the online extensive reading syllabus could
foster incidental vocabulary learning while reading. Moreover, it is suggested that
accompanied with in-class explicit instruction, the online extensive reading syllabus
with implicit learning material, could serve as a bridge linking explicit teaching and
iii

implicit learning for learners’ quality vocabulary acquisition.
Finally, teaching implications recommended teachers’ input on reading strategy
training, word instruction, and evaluation for better incorporation <strong>of</strong> explicit teaching
and implicit learning using the online extensive reading syllabus. With regards to
directions for future refinements on developing an online extensive reading syllabus,
tools which foster learner interaction were encouraged for effective incidental
vocabulary learning.
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
中文摘要 i
ABSTRACT ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v
TABLE OF CONTENTS vi
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
Chapter One – INTRODUCTION 1
Chapter Two – REVIEW OF LITERATURE 5
2.1. Overview 5
2.2. Computerized Gloss and Incidental Vocabulary Learning 5
2.3. Vocabulary Acquisition with Word Lists 10
2.4. Vocabulary Acquisition Through Sequencing <strong>of</strong> Reading <strong>Texts</strong> 13
2.5. Amount <strong>of</strong> Exposure to a Word and Successful Vocabulary Acquisition 19
2.6. Measuring Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition 22
2.7. Summary 24
Chapter Three—METHODOLOGY 26
3.1.Overview 26
3.2.Participants 26
3.3.The Design <strong>of</strong> an Online Extensive Reading Syllabus 27
3.3.1. The Reading Material: the Sinorama Magazine 27
3.3.2. Four Word Lists 29
3.3.3. Sequencing <strong>of</strong> Reading <strong>Texts</strong> 33
3.3.4. Glossing <strong>of</strong> Reading <strong>Texts</strong> 44
3.3.5. Reading <strong>Texts</strong> Interfaces 44
3.4.Instruments 45
3.4.1. Pretest 45
3.4.2. Posttest 46
3.4.3. Questionnaires 48
3.5.Procedures 50
3.6.Data Analysis 53
Chapter Four—RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 55
4.1. Overview 55
4.2. Results 56
4.2.1. The Results <strong>of</strong> the Background Questionnaire 56
4.2.2. The Results <strong>of</strong> the Pretest 59
4.2.3. The Results <strong>of</strong> the Posttest 61
4.2.4. The Results <strong>of</strong> the Evaluation Questionnaire 66
vi

4.3. Discussion 70
4.3.1. The Feasibility <strong>of</strong> Incorporating Online Tools to an Online
Extensive Reading Syllabus for Vocabulary Learning Purposes
70
4.3.2. Learners’ Feedback towards an Online Extensive Reading
Syllabus 73
4.3.3. Amount <strong>of</strong> Exposure Necessary for Incidental Vocabulary
Acquisition 75
4.3.4. Summary 80
Chapter Five—CONCLUSION 82
5.1. Overview 82
5.2. Limitations <strong>of</strong> the Study 83
5.3. Directions for Future Research 84
5.4. Developmental Implications for an Online Extensive Reading Syllabus 85
5.5. Pedagogical Implications 87
References 90
Appendix A—The Background Questionnaire 96
Appendix B—The Pretest 99
Appendix C—The Posttest 101
Appendix D—An Example <strong>of</strong> the VKS Scoring 107
Appendix E—The Online Evaluation Questionnaire 109
Appendix F—The In-class Evaluation Questionnaire 110
Appendix G—The Syllabus for the Sixteen Readings 111
Appendix H—The Introductory Page on How to Use the Online Extensive Reading
Syllabus 112
Appendix I—The First Reading on the Syllabus 113
Appendix J—A Search Example <strong>of</strong> the Bilingual Concordancer TotalRecall 114
Appendix K—An Example <strong>of</strong> the Comprehension Questions 115
Appendix L-- Student Reading Process Recorded by Tracker 116
Appendix M—Consent Form 117
Appendix N—The Results <strong>of</strong> the Background Questionnaire 118
Appendix O—The Results <strong>of</strong> the Online Evaluation Questionnaire 121
Appendix P—The Results <strong>of</strong> the In-class Evaluation Questionnaire 122
vii

List <strong>of</strong> Tables
Table 3.1 Summary <strong>of</strong> four word lists 32
Table 3.2 Target word rate and target word repetition rate <strong>of</strong> the sixteen texts 38
Table 3.3 Distribution <strong>of</strong> target words in the sixteen reading texts 38
Table 3.4 Procedures in sequencing reading texts 39
Table 3.5 A comparison between Ghardirian’s (2002) study and the current study
42
Table 3.6 A comparison <strong>of</strong> sequencing procedures in TextLadder and the current
study 43
Table 3.7 Self-report categories in the VKS elicitation scale 46
Table 3.8 VKS scoring categories: Meaning <strong>of</strong> scores 47
Table 3.9 Instruments used in the study 50
Table 3.10 Research Procedures 52
Table 4.1 Learners’ use <strong>of</strong> computer and internet 57
Table 4.2 Learners’ perspectives on English learning 58
Table 4.3 Learners’ extensive reading experience 59
Table 4.4 The independent t-test for familiar and unfamiliar words in the pretest
60
Table 4.5 Target words completely unfamiliar to learners 61
Table 4.6 Learners’ overall vocabulary gains 62
Table 4.7 The ANOVA statistics for posttest scores among the five groups <strong>of</strong>
different exposure amount 63
Table 4.8 The independent t-test for the high vocabulary group and the low
vocabulary group 64
Table 4.9 Target words and COBUILD frequency bands 65
Table 4.10 Learners’ motivation <strong>of</strong> future use 67
Table 4.11 Learners’ attitudes towards features fostering vocabulary learning 68
Table 4.12 Learners’ attitudes towards features <strong>of</strong> reading texts 69
Table 4.13 Learners’ attitudes towards interface design <strong>of</strong> the system 69
viii

List <strong>of</strong> Figure
Figure 4.1 Percentage <strong>of</strong> known and not known words in the pretest and the
posttest 71
ix

Chapter One
INTRODUCTION
It is generally agreed by second language (L2) learning researchers that
vocabulary growth commonly occurs incidentally while learners are engaged in other
cognitive exercises involving comprehension. Among these cognitive activities,
reading, especially extensive reading, has attracted much research attention due to the
fact that tremendous vocabulary growth, high overall language competence, and better
academic performances were observed from first language (L1) learners with pleasure
reading habits (Nation, 2001). Moreover, incidental vocabulary acquisition through
reading is also used to explain how children acquire mass amount <strong>of</strong> L1 vocabulary
within a relatively short period <strong>of</strong> time.
Huckin and Coady (1999) defined incidental learning in reading as a by-product,
not the target, <strong>of</strong> the main cognitive activity. In the process <strong>of</strong> reading, learners’
incidental vocabulary learning is the unconscious acquisition <strong>of</strong> word meanings
through engaging in texts for comprehension or understanding. In such process,
word knowledge is thought to be cumulated and developed gradually through multiple
exposures in various reading contexts. Krashen (1989) further claimed that
“competence in spelling and vocabulary is most efficiently attained by
comprehensible input in the form <strong>of</strong> reading” (p. 440). Extensive reading, as a form
<strong>of</strong> comprehensible input, has the effect <strong>of</strong> providing learners with rich contexts ideal
for vocabulary learning. During the reciprocal process <strong>of</strong> extensive reading, the
acquisition <strong>of</strong> words is the result <strong>of</strong> successes in inferring word meanings from
meaningful context, and through more reading experiences the developed and
matured vocabulary inference ability could in turn contributes to reading pr<strong>of</strong>iciency.
For L2 learning, extensive reading is considered as beneficial for overall language
1

competence (Elley, 1991; Hafiz & Tudor, 1989;1990; Krashen, 1993; Mason &
Krashen, 1997; Renandya & Rajan, 1999) and fundamental to vocabulary
development as well. Researchers such as Krashen believe that similar to L1 word
learning, reading is the major means for acquiring vocabulary and have thus strongly
encouraged the implementation <strong>of</strong> extensive reading programs in an L2 learning
environment (Krashen, 1989).
While extensive reading does have an impact on vocabulary learning, studies
have found that reading for L2 vocabulary development may lead to problems such as
wrong inferences, lack <strong>of</strong> retention, and most importantly, superficial vocabulary
learning that impedes learners from using words actively and productively (Huckin &
Coady, 1999; Hulstijn, 1993; Raptis, 1993; Wesche & Paribakht, 2000). Unlike
native speakers, L2 learners <strong>of</strong>ten struggle with their lack <strong>of</strong> sufficient word
knowledge necessary for precise guessing <strong>of</strong> word meanings and the ample
opportunities to encounter words within various contexts required for more
complicated word development. Correct inference <strong>of</strong> word meanings is conditional
upon accurate recognition <strong>of</strong> surrounding words and sensitive use <strong>of</strong> reading
strategies (Huckin & Coady, 1999). However, with previous studies indicating L2
learners’ common insufficiency in word knowledge and lack <strong>of</strong> active use <strong>of</strong> different
reading strategies (Chen, 1998; Grabe & Stoller, 1997), learners’ frustration in
comprehension can be expected when facing overwhelming authentic texts in
extensive reading, let alone incidental vocabulary acquisition.
In addition to learners’ limited language competence, limited reading
opportunities impose yet another common stumbling block for incidental vocabulary
learning. Since word knowledge is not an all-for-nothing piece <strong>of</strong> learning, but a
continuum gradually developed with each encounter <strong>of</strong> words in different contexts,
meeting a certain word once is clearly inadequate for bringing learners further on the
2

word knowledge construct. Incidental vocabulary acquisition in L2 reading may
easily fail because “once the immediate communicative need has been met, the
learner does not undertake future mental processing <strong>of</strong> the word” (Wesche &
Paribakht, 2000, p. 197). That is, it is possible for extensive exposure to various
reading contexts to lead to basic vocabulary recognition, yet, development <strong>of</strong> further
knowledge <strong>of</strong> words, which enables learners to use words in productive mode, cannot
be guaranteed (Paribakht & Wesche, 1997). Furthermore, though exposure <strong>of</strong> words
is considered to be a major factor influencing the learning <strong>of</strong> vocabulary, the amount
<strong>of</strong> exposure needed for learning a word remains an unsettled question with mixed
results in previous studies (Nagy, et al., 1985; Nation, 1990; Saragi, et al., 1978; Rott,
1999).
The current study attempts to address the two major difficulties commonly
encountered by second language learners in reading texts: limited word knowledge,
and limited exposures to target words, by developing an on-line extensive reading
syllabus. With the help <strong>of</strong> computer programming, we wish to provide
comprehensible reading texts by sequencing reading texts according to word difficulty
level and to enhance vocabulary acquisition by ensuring repetitious occurrences <strong>of</strong>
target words. Implications and pedagogical suggestions from previous studies on
vocabulary acquisition via reading such as gloss, high frequency word lists, and
sequenced reading texts are incorporated in order to create a reading environment to
facilitate vocabulary learning. Learners’ vocabulary learning is tested to verify the
effectiveness <strong>of</strong> our on-line extensive reading syllabus. As the on-line extensive
reading syllabus was designed with repetitious exposure to target words, the number
<strong>of</strong> encounters needed for a word to be acquired successfully was another research
focus in this study. It is hoped that the study would shed some light on two aspects:
the feasibility <strong>of</strong> developing an on-line extensive reading syllabus incorporable to
3

EFL classes, and determining the amount <strong>of</strong> target word exposure sufficient for
Taiwanese college learners in vocabulary learning via reading.
4

2.1. Overview
Chapter Two
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
In this section, issues <strong>of</strong> incidental vocabulary learning while reading are
discussed to show where the gaps are and some possible improvements CALL may
help along this line <strong>of</strong> research. This chapter consists <strong>of</strong> four major sections each
maintaining a possible dimension <strong>of</strong> facilitating vocabulary acquisition for second
language learners in extensive reading contexts. The first section reviews studies
related to the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> computerized gloss and incidental vocabulary learning.
For designing a classroom syllabus, word lists for the purpose <strong>of</strong> vocabulary
acquisition are taken up in the second section. The third section concerns
enhancement <strong>of</strong> vocabulary acquisition through sequencing <strong>of</strong> reading texts. Last,
the issue <strong>of</strong> the degree <strong>of</strong> exposure to a word for successful word acquisition is
introduced.
2.2. Computerized Gloss and Incidental Vocabulary Learning
Contextual guessing <strong>of</strong> vocabulary while reading is <strong>of</strong>ten encouraged by
researchers rather than dictionary consultation due to the concern that dictionary use
in the process <strong>of</strong> reading could be interruptive and thus interfering the short term
memory which results in impeded reading comprehension. Empirical studies,
however, have not provided evidence to substantiate such assertions. Luppescu and
Day (1993) investigated the contribution <strong>of</strong> bilingual dictionary use on vocabulary
learning by recruiting 293 EFL Japanese university students and found dictionary
access led to superior vocabulary acquisition as opposed to no dictionary access.
Support for dictionary use while reading and teachers’ instructions on dictionary
5

consultation for second language learners were thus recommended. Taking the study
by Luppescu and Day a step further, Hulstijn, Hollander, and Greidanus (1996)
compared three reading conditions: reading with marginal glosses, reading with
dictionary, and reading without external help. Participants reading with marginal
gloss on paper in this study outperformed participants in two other groups. Marginal
gloss was therefore proposed as a possible solution to overcome the common obstacle
<strong>of</strong> inaccurate meaning inference in L2 reading. Knight (1994) randomly assigned
105 university students <strong>of</strong> Spanish learners in high and low intermediate verbal ability
levels into two reading conditions on the computer: on-line dictionary access and no
dictionary access. Recalls in immediate and delayed vocabulary definition selection
tests showed that subjects who used dictionaries achieved higher reading
comprehension scores than those who merely guessed from contexts. For
vocabulary acquisition, the low verbal ability subjects in the dictionary access
condition scored as high as subjects <strong>of</strong> high verbal ability in the same reading
condition, indicating that dictionary access enabled learners <strong>of</strong> low verbal ability to
learn as many words as their high verbal ability counterparts.
The above studies attributed the significance <strong>of</strong> dictionary use and marginal
gloss to learners’ additional knowledge source and deeper mental processing in the
process <strong>of</strong> looking up word meaning. They foregrounded the fact that though
extensive reading is doubtlessly conducive to vocabulary growth, reading for global
meaning alone is inadequate. To initiate word acquisition, learners’ attention must,
at some point <strong>of</strong> the cognitive activity, be directed to form-meaning relationships <strong>of</strong>
target words (Ellis, 1995; Huckin & Coady, 1999; Hulstijn et. al., 1996). The depth
<strong>of</strong> processing hypothesis was commonly discussed to explicate such outcome. It
states that “mental activities which require more elaborate thought, manipulation, or
processing <strong>of</strong> a new word will help in the learning <strong>of</strong> that word” (Schmitt & Schmitt,
6

1995, p. 135). Dictionary and marginal gloss use while reading encourage deeper
processing and allow conscious attention to form-meaning relationship <strong>of</strong> words
thereby enabling learners to integrate new words into broader mental lexical network,
a process indispensable for long-term storage. Compared to reading without
dictionary access in which readers are likely to ignore unfamiliar words or induce
incorrect word meanings, dictionary and gloss use could be regarded as additional
mental activities engaging learners in deeper processing <strong>of</strong> anchoring new words into
their existing mental lexicon.
In accordance with the concept <strong>of</strong> depth <strong>of</strong> processing, Laufer and Hulstijn (2001)
proposed the Involvement Load Hypothesis for the purpose <strong>of</strong> operationalizing
cognitive notions such as depth <strong>of</strong> processing in terms <strong>of</strong> L2 vocabulary learning tasks.
In this hypothesis, involvement load <strong>of</strong> a task is measured by three involvement
components— need, which is learners’ motivational involvement to accomplish the
task requirement; search, the endeavor to find word meaning, and evaluation, learners’
attempt to specify a given word meaning by comparing it with other word meaning
and surveying its surrounding context. The presence or absence <strong>of</strong> these three
elements could, as argued by Hulstijn and Laufer, explain and predict success in
vocabulary retention. The notion “search” defined as “the attempt to find the
meaning <strong>of</strong> an unknown L2 word or the attempt to find the L2 word form expressing a
concept” (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001, p. 543) entailed that vocabulary retention is, in
certain degree, contingent upon the meaning searching process that learners are
engaged in. Therefore, we reason that the access for learners to engage in word
searching activity should be provided even within extensive reading context.
Following the main line <strong>of</strong> research on dictionary and gloss, studies have
indicated that the intrusive nature <strong>of</strong> dictionary use could be amended by the
provision <strong>of</strong> marginal gloss, and the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> marginal paper glossing was
7

vastly reinforced with the ease and efficiency <strong>of</strong> meaning searching and greater
diversity <strong>of</strong> glossing types that computerized gloss could <strong>of</strong>fer (Chun & Plass, 1996;
Davis, 1989; Leffa, 1992; Liou, 2000; Hulstijn, 1993; Hulstijn, et al., 1996; Jacobs,
1994). The innovative potential <strong>of</strong> incorporating multimedia effects such as sounds,
pictures, animated pictures, or videos into glosses led researchers into the direction <strong>of</strong>
investigating specific modes <strong>of</strong> annotation, and found that pictures as annotation types,
especially, have received ample positive results from empirical studies (Chun & Plass,
1996; Kost et al.,1999; Schnotz & Grzondziel, 1996; Yoshii & Flaitz, 2002). Chun
and Plass (1996) examined a variety <strong>of</strong> annotations for individual words in the form
<strong>of</strong> text, graphics, video, and sound with 103 university students learning German.
The results demonstrated approximately a quarter <strong>of</strong> the new words learned by the
subjects, with the participants in the text-plus-picture condition scoring significantly
higher than those in other conditions. Kost, Foss, and Lenzini (1999) compared the
effects <strong>of</strong> pictorial and textual glosses on incidental vocabulary growth for foreign
language learners. Participants were divided into three conditions when reading,
textual gloss alone, pictorial gloss alone, and text combined with pictures. Both
production and reception tests delivered after reading showed that participants who
were allowed to use a combination <strong>of</strong> text and picture outperformed the others.
Though multimedia effects seemed promising in facilitating vocabulary learning,
they do, however, ineluctably possess limitations when applied to extensive reading
context. Previous studies probing into gloss effects have merely concentrated on
pre-developed glosses for a small number <strong>of</strong> reading texts, or searching and inserting
picture glosses for only concrete words due to the fact that abstract words are
complicated to express by still pictures in nature. In other words, various
multimedia effects inevitably face technical challenges when applied to the diversity
<strong>of</strong> word types in extensive reading. On the other hand, plain textual gloss is more
8

technically feasible for handling the abundant and distinct word types in extensive
reading environments.
In addition to technical constraints, results from empirical studies in learner
behavior have pointed to the direction <strong>of</strong> developing simple textual gloss for extensive
reading purposes. The study conducted by Davis and Lyman-Hager (1997) showed
that the most frequently consulted annotation type was learners’ first language,
English definition, which constituted 85% <strong>of</strong> the information accessed. Likewise,
Lomicka (1998) also reported students’ strong dependence on first language definition
when word meanings were unknown. It was suggested that though learners have the
option <strong>of</strong> various annotation types, they nevertheless tend to rely only on L1
definition and ignore other options for their goal <strong>of</strong> using glosses is to translate
sentences in order to achieve a minimal level <strong>of</strong> comprehension.
Gettys, Imh<strong>of</strong>, and Kautz (2001) further explained students’ behaviors with the
concept <strong>of</strong> human mental capacity. It was contended that <strong>of</strong>fering various
information to readers might overrun the real needs <strong>of</strong> readers and thus causes
cognitive overload in the process <strong>of</strong> reading. Because <strong>of</strong> the limited capacity <strong>of</strong>
learners’ working memory and attention, providing readers with rich kinds <strong>of</strong>
information will likely create unnecessary distraction and disruption. Therefore, the
major concern for developing a gloss “should not be to provide as many annotation
types as possible, but rather, reducing the information to the degree <strong>of</strong> minimum
sufficiency” (Gettys, et al., 2001, p. 99).
The pedagogical implications <strong>of</strong> incidental vocabulary acquisition drawn from
the studies on dictionary and gloss use <strong>of</strong> second language reading above underscored
the following points:
1. In the process <strong>of</strong> extensive reading, certain amount <strong>of</strong> attention, at some point,
should be drawn to words in order for vocabulary acquisition and ultimately L2
9

learning to occur.
2. Word meaning search activity could result in word acquisition <strong>of</strong> more quality,
hence, search access should be provided for learners while reading.
3. Gloss, especially computerized gloss is generally effective in bridging the gap
between L2 text and the L2 learners’ limited cultural and lexical knowledge.
Given technical difficulties and learners’ limited mental capacity, however, textual
gloss is regarded as more feasible for computerized extensive reading
environments.
2.3. Vocabulary Acquisition with Word Lists
Preliminary to discussing word list uses in vocabulary teaching, the salient term,
word family, needs to be defined first. A word family is a group <strong>of</strong> words which
have the same morphemic stem. It consists <strong>of</strong> a headword, its inflected forms such
as plural, past tense, and comparatives; and its closely related derived forms such as
words which are derived by adding affixes –ly, -ness, or un- to the headword (Nation,
2001). In other words, items within a common word family would have various
surface forms due to inflectional or derivational affixation. Word families are <strong>of</strong>ten
used as frequency counting units in word lists.
The significance <strong>of</strong> developing learners’ mental lexicon <strong>of</strong> an adequate
vocabulary consisting <strong>of</strong> high frequent words was repeatedly emphasized by
researchers in second language learning (Carter & McCarthy, 1988; Cobb & Horst,
2001; Kyongho & Nation, 1989; Nation, 2001). It was estimated that the most
frequent 1000 word families <strong>of</strong> English, including words such as put, end, come and
difficult, <strong>of</strong>fer a coverage <strong>of</strong> approximately 75% in any text (Cobb & Horst, 2001).
Apparently, the return for learning a core vocabulary consisting <strong>of</strong> the most frequent
words is significant. Based on the assumption that learning burden could be
10

minimized by learning high frequent words before less frequent words, several word
lists such as Thorndike and Lorge’s list and Kucera and Francis’s list have been
developed using the method <strong>of</strong> recording frequency counts <strong>of</strong> lexical items in actual
samples <strong>of</strong> language (Ghadessy, 1979). Among the word lists, the General Service
List (GSL, West, 1953) has remained as the most prominent word list today published.
Containing around 2000 word families, the GSL typically covers around 80% <strong>of</strong> the
running words in any text (Nation, 2001).
Recent research on constructing word lists as pedagogical material has
progressed beyond formulating a basic vocabulary list into two major aspects:
empirical testing on using word lists to facilitate vocabulary learning and
development <strong>of</strong> word lists for higher level learners <strong>of</strong> various learning needs.
Positive evidence for using word lists to accelerate vocabulary growth was found in
empirical studies, followed by further detailed course designs based on word lists
(Cobb & Horst, 2001; Flowerdew, 1993; Worthington & Nation, 1996). Cobb and
Horst (2001) recruited 58 ESL university students <strong>of</strong> intermediate level to study a
word list roughly equivalent to the GSL, the 2,387-word Cambridge Lexicon, with the
help <strong>of</strong> a concordancer, PET。2000. The results showed that learners were able to
successfully acquire a gain <strong>of</strong> 180 words within two months, or 1,080 words if
learning continued for a year.
Word counts in concordancers were suggested by Flowerdew (1993) as a tool for
course design. He maintained that by using a corpus <strong>of</strong> written and/or spoken text
from the target communicative situation with words appearing at different frequencies,
each level <strong>of</strong> frequency in the concordancer <strong>of</strong>fers a potential cut-<strong>of</strong>f point for
selection and grading <strong>of</strong> items. A robust lexical syllabus accompanied with precise
word counts is therefore available for classroom use.
The second research direction on word list vocabulary learning concentrates on
11

inging learners who are competent <strong>of</strong> basic general vocabulary further across higher
lexical thresholds. The University Word List (UWL) developed by Xue and Nation
(1984) with words that frequently occur in academic disciplines is <strong>of</strong>ten employed by
instructors for learners with basic word knowledge pursuing an academic career.
Worthington and Nation (1996) investigated the issue <strong>of</strong> how academic words in the
University Word List could be sequenced for learners to meet a manageable portion <strong>of</strong>
words in authentic texts at appropriate intervals. With 134 academic texts <strong>of</strong> various
fields as corpora, it was reasoned that it is not likely to meeting all or most <strong>of</strong> the
words in UWL within a period <strong>of</strong> a school semester. Moreover, learners without
academic background would be expected to encounter a disproportionate large
number <strong>of</strong> new words in their first few texts. Therefore, pedagogical suggestions <strong>of</strong>
explicit instruction or gloss help for high frequency words were proposed for learners
in the initial introductory stage. Nation and Kyongho (1995) proposed a dividing
line between a general service list and a special purpose vocabulary by using the
Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen corpus (LOB) and the Brown corpus. In their study, a
general service word list which served as a prerequisite for moving learners from
general high frequency words to a specialized vocabulary was first determined by
identifying words in GSL and high frequency words appearing more than ten times in
LOB and Brown corpora. Two cut-<strong>of</strong>f points were then determined based on two
criteria: words that appeared in all three sources (LOB, Brown, and GSL), and words
that appeared in either two <strong>of</strong> the three sources (LOB & Brown, LOB & GSL, and
GSL & Brown). These words together provided an 83.4% coverage in the corpora
and were therefore, judged as words making up the general service list. Next, the
words appearing only in one <strong>of</strong> the three sources were compared with words in the
University Word List in terms <strong>of</strong> percentage in the coverage <strong>of</strong> corpora. The
coverage figure for UWL is up to 8.5%, almost as high as words appearing in two <strong>of</strong>
12

the three sources. It was concluded that a general service vocabulary <strong>of</strong> close to
2000 words is suitable and sufficient for learners who are moving towards a
specialized vocabulary. Also, after learners have achieved this 2000 word level, a
specialized vocabulary such as UWL will contribute to more text coverage than the
next words in the general word lists.
While learning vocabulary by word lists does demonstrably result in eminently
word growth, caution is needed for incorporating standard word lists as teaching
material. As was warned by Ghadessy (1979), the idea <strong>of</strong> standard word lists
“ignores the simple fact that the acquisition <strong>of</strong> new vocabulary items differ for
various language learners because <strong>of</strong> differences in linguistic, cultural, and
motivational factors" (p. 25). In other words, no particular word list or sets <strong>of</strong>
word list can satisfy all learners, and word lists should be contingent upon and
carefully tailored for learners’ specific needs.
The above studies amply demonstrated the following contentions.
1. Using high frequency word lists to select appropriate instructional material can
substantively accelerate learners’ vocabulary growth.
2. Selection or development <strong>of</strong> particular sets <strong>of</strong> word lists should be conditional
upon learners’ specific needs.
2.4. Vocabulary Acquisition Through Sequencing <strong>of</strong> Reading <strong>Texts</strong>
Vocabulary difficulties encountered by L2 students in authentic reading texts are
major stumbling blocks to reading comprehension and also further acquisition <strong>of</strong> new
words. Laufer (1989) found that learners whose vocabulary size enabled them to
cover 95% <strong>of</strong> the words in a text were successful in achieving satisfactory text
comprehension. Under the condition that learners are able to use contextual
inference strategies for incidental vocabulary acquisition, Laufer (1997) and Nation
13

(1993) suggested a required 5,000 word lexicon for reaching this adequate 95%
understanding in general and non-specialized texts. However, most high school
graduates in EFL countries have a far smaller vocabulary than this (Kyongho &
Nation, 1989). With vocabulary size around 2000-3000 word level, Taiwanese
college students are among those who are likely to fail when reading unsimplified
texts (Chen, 1998). Due to the fact that authentic and unsimplified reading materials
are generally written to convey information to those who are already familiar with the
words in texts rather than for language learning, two essential vocabulary learning
conditions, intensive exposure <strong>of</strong> target words and comprehensible reading contexts,
can therefore hardly be found in authentic texts.
Incidental vocabulary learning from reading is not an all-or-nothing piece <strong>of</strong>
leaning, but a gradual process <strong>of</strong> one encounter with a word adding to, strengthening,
or further completing the knowledge established from previous encounters. Thus,
if the small amount <strong>of</strong> word knowledge is not soon reinforced by another meeting,
then the previously built word knowledge will inextricably be lost. Vocabulary
learning from extensive reading could therefore easily be lost, as Nation (2001)
cautioned “it is critically important in an extensive reading program that learners have
the opportunity to keep meeting words that they have met before” (p. 156). In
order to create a more optimal vocabulary learning environment, sequencing <strong>of</strong>
reading texts for the purpose <strong>of</strong> ensuring repetitive target word exposure and
providing adequately comprehensible texts are thus suggested.
By using newspaper articles as extensive reading materials, Kyongho and Nation
(1989) advised to sequence newspaper texts according to “running stories”, which are
very closely related stories, to reduce the vocabulary load and to create an optimal
word learning sequence for learners. It was postulated that newspaper stories with
similar topics would provide more repetitions <strong>of</strong> new words and therefore, naturally
14

lead to better vocabulary acquisition. 20 related texts from four running stories were
selected from four newspapers for analyses. In accordance to the vocabulary
knowledge <strong>of</strong> most high school graduates, which is a 2000 word level, words outside
this 2000 word level were considered as new words that learners have to learn in the
process <strong>of</strong> reading newspapers. New words in each text were calculated in terms <strong>of</strong>
target word repetition for both running stories and unrelated stories. In the examined
4 running stories, 17 <strong>of</strong> the 62 new word families (27%) occurred more than once
while in unrelated texts, only 14 <strong>of</strong> the 73 new word families (19%) occurred twice or
more. Compared with unrelated stories, texts in running stories were able to reduce
the density <strong>of</strong> target word families and also provide more repetitions <strong>of</strong> words outside
<strong>of</strong> 2000 words level. If some degree <strong>of</strong> word knowledge can be acquired through
only one encounter <strong>of</strong> words, then it was estimated that when learners have proceeded
into the second text in the running stories they would be able to reach about 94% to
95% lexical coverage, a percentage high enough for reading comprehension.
With the help <strong>of</strong> computer tools and analyses, large numbers <strong>of</strong> comprehensible
texts could be sequenced for readers’ needs. Using a self-developed computer
program, TextLadder, Ghadirian (2003) was able to conduct precise statistical
analyses as the basis for sequencing and arranging large amount <strong>of</strong> reading texts.
TextLadder was designed to attend to the problem <strong>of</strong> bringing foreign language
learners with limited vocabulary knowledge to the point where learners are able to
comprehend authentic texts in a specific genre. Word lists were included in the
program as a way to enhance vocabulary acquisition environments. In order to
achieve comprehensibility, Ghardirian first determined a set <strong>of</strong> word lists which
accounted for 95% <strong>of</strong> the running words in target texts, a percentage suggested by
Laufer (1989) for adequate reading comprehension. Considering the vocabulary
level and the needs <strong>of</strong> the target learners which are learners <strong>of</strong> academic purposes, the
15

words in this set <strong>of</strong> word lists were then grouped into two subsets, either a familiar
word list or an unfamiliar word list. The familiar word list consisted <strong>of</strong> high
frequency elementary words that learners have supposedly acquired before having
been exposed to this reading program. On the other hand, the unfamiliar word list
was comprised <strong>of</strong> lower frequency words that learners would be expected to acquire
in the process <strong>of</strong> reading texts.
After the selection and grouping <strong>of</strong> word lists by the researcher, Textladder then
take over to operate the following processes. First, it compared the running words in
each text to the word lists (which consisted <strong>of</strong> two subsets, the familiar and the
unfamiliar word list) and trimmed <strong>of</strong>f the ones that do not meet 95% requirement.
Second, it automatically sequenced the remaining texts by matching the words in the
texts to both subsets <strong>of</strong> word lists, the familiar word list and the unfamiliar word list.
The one text with the highest number <strong>of</strong> familiar words and the least number <strong>of</strong>
unfamiliar words was placed as the first on the reading list. Third, the unfamiliar
target words in the first text would be added to the familiar word list for TextLadder to
run the process once again to sort out the next text that contains a maximum number
<strong>of</strong> familiar words and a least number <strong>of</strong> new unfamiliar words. The sequence
therefore created an order for reading texts that enabled incremental vocabulary
acquisition for learners. Moreover, TextLadder kept in track the number <strong>of</strong>
occurrences for each word. A list <strong>of</strong> words which appeared under five times will be
recorded for instructors’ information.
By exposing a small amount <strong>of</strong> target words within meaningful texts to learners,
words in the unfamiliar word list will eventually be acquired by learners after they
have finished all the texts in TextLadder in order. In order to test whether
TextLadder could perform the aimed function <strong>of</strong> bridging the gap between learners’
limited vocabulary and a list <strong>of</strong> vocabulary consisting <strong>of</strong> words from a target genre,
16

simplified texts from Voice <strong>of</strong> America were chosen for a test-run in Ghardirians’
study. After comparing the texts with a newly constructed word list comprised <strong>of</strong>
GSL, UWL, and frequent words in Voice <strong>of</strong> America, 253 texts made the 95% cut-<strong>of</strong>f.
They were then sorted so that each text had a figure <strong>of</strong> the amount <strong>of</strong> new target
vocabulary which appeared in it. To reiterate, the purposes <strong>of</strong> TextLadder were to
ensure first, each text was able to provide incremental vocabulary learning thus
containing a small number <strong>of</strong> new words; second, words in the word list would be
encountered by readers for more than five times in the selected texts for better word
learning quality. Therefore, to better achieve these two purposes, some adjustment
was made after the first test-run. For example, the word list coverage point was
raised to 96%, and the sequence order was reversed after unfamiliar words <strong>of</strong> each
text dropped to below 5%. With these adjustments, 1817 target words appeared in
about 230 texts, with 1567 <strong>of</strong> the target words (86%) occurring more than five times.
Ghadirian (2003) mentioned five limitations <strong>of</strong> TextLadder. First, vocabulary
learning or justifying vocabulary learning sequence was TextLadder’s main function,
and grammar usage and difficulty <strong>of</strong> grammatical aspects in reading texts were not
considered. Second, TextLadder could only detect single word units, multi-word
units such as “blow up”, “home run”, or “kick <strong>of</strong>f” could not be located. Third,
TextLadder’s function has not yet able to distinguish different meanings <strong>of</strong>
homographs. Fourth, proper nouns in texts were all considered as familiar words in
TextLadder. Last, low frequency words in the selected reading texts may only
appear fewer than five times after learners have finished reading all 200 or so texts.
Furthermore, the study was only concerned with creating a reading program for
dealing with the problems <strong>of</strong> the high number <strong>of</strong> unfamiliar words in authentic texts;
whether this sequencing way will result in measurable learning was not the focus and
therefore unexplored.
17

Besides the above potential limitations, we suspect the following additional
constraints after closer scrutiny <strong>of</strong> text sequence in TextLadder. First, from the
quantitative results <strong>of</strong> Ghardirian’s study, learners may have to learn 2 to 25 new
words for each new text depending on the length <strong>of</strong> the text. The percentages <strong>of</strong> new
words are particularly high in the first 10 to 20 texts, ranging from 8% to 16%. In
other words, if a text is about 300 words long, a learner has to learn about 25 new
words after reading them in such a short text for the first time. Nation (2001)
pointed out that “extensive reading should contain no more than 5% unknown running
words “ (p. 150). Compared to Nation’s position, the new word percentages in the
first few texts in TextLadder are still higher.
Second, though TextLadder tried to ensure that target words in word list could
appear in reading for at least five times within about 300 reading texts, there is no
control on when or how <strong>of</strong>ten learners will encounter those new words again. This
therefore leads to another problem, the low frequency <strong>of</strong> appearance for target words
will degrade incidental vocabulary learning. It may be in the tenth or twentieth text
that learners finally once again encounter the target words read in the first text.
Whether words could be acquired with such interval is questionable. Moreover, the
amount <strong>of</strong> exposure necessary for word acquisition has remained a controversial issue
with some researchers suggesting a much higher exposure amount than five times
(Horst, Cobb, & Meara, 1998; Herman, Anderson, Pearson, & Nagy, 1987).
Therefore, the five-time word acquisition threshold determined by Textladder awaits
further research verification.
Lastly, as was admitted by Ghadirian (2002), Textladder was not tested out on
real learners, hence, the actual effect <strong>of</strong> sequenced text on vocabulary learning is left
to explore.
In sum, Ghadirian’s (2002) sequencing program, TextLadder, had successfully
18

created several ideal incidental vocabulary acquisition conditions within extensive
reading environments using computer tools. Nevertheless, enhancements could be
made by providing more frequent exposure <strong>of</strong> target words to further reduce learners’
vocabulary load, and to <strong>of</strong>fer empirical evidence <strong>of</strong> effective vocabulary learning
through such text sequencing.
2.5. Amount <strong>of</strong> Exposure to a Word and Successful Vocabulary Acquisition
Though it was persistently emphasized that enough exposure <strong>of</strong> a word is
necessary for an incremental learning process in which various features <strong>of</strong> words
could be picked up from the contexts, previous studies have, in fact, not been able to
reach an agreement on how much exposure is required for successful incidental
vocabulary acquisition. Exposure from only once to twenty times has been
suggested by different researchers. By inserting pseudo words in texts, Saragi,
Nation, and Meister (1978) proposed a number <strong>of</strong> ten exposures for L1 learners to
fully acquire new words. A probability <strong>of</strong> learning a word from context after only
one exposure is between .10 to .15 as estimated by Nagy, Herman, and Anderson
(1985). An even lower probability, .05, which is about an exposure amount <strong>of</strong>
twenty times, was found in their follow-up study (Nagy, et al., 1987). Nation (1990)
reviewed previous studies related to exposures required for word acquisition and
concluded that a range from five to sixteen exposures may be needed. Rott (1999)
recruited 95 learners <strong>of</strong> German as a second language and assigned them into a
control and an experimental group. Each group was further divided into three
subgroups based on numbers <strong>of</strong> exposure to unfamiliar words which appeared two,
four, or six times during reading. Learners read six passages containing six
unfamiliar words each week either for two weeks, four weeks, and six weeks. A
multiple-choice vocabulary test and a vocabulary definition test were delivered
19

immediately after reading, one week after reading, and one month after reading,
aiming to measure learners’ productive and receptive gain and word retention. The
results indicated that only two encounters with unfamiliar words during reading can
positively affect learners’ vocabulary growth. Yet, learners with six exposures did
significantly better on both immediate, delayed receptive and productive vocabulary
tests whereas two and four exposures resulted in a small difference. The findings
first suggested that long term effect on adult L2 vocabulary growth during reading can
be guaranteed under the condition that texts are sufficiently rich for building
vocabulary knowledge. Moreover, though two exposures during reading already
result in word knowledge gain, lexical growth is more likely to be speeded up if the
exposure is increased to six encounters.
The major reason leading to these disparate results with measuring encounters is
the incremental nature <strong>of</strong> word learning process. A single encounter with a word in
context could already result in some amount <strong>of</strong> learning, while 50 exposures will still
not enable learners to build the complete and complex word knowledge needed for
productive use. As Huckin and Coady (1999) stressed “word-learning outcomes can
range over continua <strong>of</strong> lexical knowledge and use competencies from partial
recognition knowledge to precise knowledge and productive use capability” (p. 185).
In other words, researchers’ concepts <strong>of</strong> successful acquisition were different, and
thus, vocabulary learning was measured in different ways.
The other possibility involved in measuring word encounter frequency could be
that different degree <strong>of</strong> exposure is needed by different learners (Zahar, et al., 2001).
Zahar, Cobb, and Spada (2001) investigated the issue by recruiting 144 ESL learners
coming from a variety <strong>of</strong> first language backgrounds at five pr<strong>of</strong>iciency levels ranging
from beginners to bilinguals. Each student’s performance on Nation’s (1990)
Vocabulary Levels Test involving matching words to brief definitions at five
20

frequency levels were recorded as pretest results. The story The Golden Fleece was
selected as the reading text since all the words in the story were classified into five
levels according to Naiton’s word frequency categories and proved to be neither too
difficult for beginners and nor effortless for advanced learners to read.
Thirty words <strong>of</strong> various frequency levels and numbers <strong>of</strong> occurrences in the story
were chosen as target words and a word definition match pretest was conducted to
ensure that learners’ pre-reading vocabulary knowledge parallels with their general
vocabulary knowledge (assessed in the Levels Test). The same vocabulary test
distributed in the pre-test was given in the post-test two days after learners’ reading.
Each learner’s pre and post tests were then compared to identify their word gain. It
was found that word occurrence frequency played a more crucial role for students <strong>of</strong>
lower vocabulary levels than those <strong>of</strong> higher vocabulary levels. The quantitative
data determined frequency as a factor three to four times more important for
beginners than it was for more advanced learners. In other words, weaker learners
were more dependent on word frequency than advanced learners. The study further
pointed out that future studies should take learner level into consideration when
examining the frequency factor in incidental vocabulary learning.
To summarize, the issue <strong>of</strong> the degree <strong>of</strong> exposures to word acquisition is left
much to be explored, the puzzle could be further untangled if learners’ level,
researchers’ concept <strong>of</strong> successful vocabulary learning, and purpose <strong>of</strong> vocabulary
measurements are more clearly defined.
21

2.6. Measuring Incidental Vocabulary Acquisition
Because <strong>of</strong> the incremental nature in vocabulary learning, for words to be fully
acquired by a learner after encountering it in merely several texts is clearly impossible.
It would be more realistic to assume that learners acquire a degree <strong>of</strong> partial
knowledge <strong>of</strong> a target word after several exposure opportunities. Receptive and
productive types <strong>of</strong> knowledge <strong>of</strong> a word therefore have commonly been used to
describe the degree <strong>of</strong> learners’ word knowledge (Nation, 2001; Read, 2000).
Receptive knowledge in vocabulary involves recognizing the form <strong>of</strong> a word while
reading or listening and retrieving its meaning from mental lexicon; on the other hand,
productive vocabulary knowledge involves expressing a message through speaking
and writing and producing the appropriate word form appropriately in context. It is
generally agreed that learner’s vocabulary knowledge can be located in a receptive to
productive continuum. Generally speaking, learners will first recognize a word’s
form, pronunciation, and basic meanings, then with further experiences or practices,
their word knowledge will move along the continuum and finally reach the point <strong>of</strong>
able to use these words freely in productive mode. From this sense, receptive and
productive types <strong>of</strong> word knowledge are not two separate word systems in learners’
lexicon, but rather one lexical store with receptive to productive continuum <strong>of</strong>
different words.
However, most available test measures <strong>of</strong>ten aim at measuring either receptive or
productive vocabulary respectively. If receptive and productive vocabularies are not
two distinct and dichotomous systems, then test measures that concentrate merely on
measuring either learners’ receptive or productive word knowledge would inevitably
overlook the diverse levels in word learning. In previous literature exploring the
issue <strong>of</strong> required amount <strong>of</strong> exposure for word acquisition, test measures such as
checklist, self developed multiple-choice questions, definition matching, clozes,
22

synonym selecting, translation and the standard Vocabulary Levels Test (Nation, 1990)
have all been used for the purpose <strong>of</strong> testing either receptive or productive knowledge
(Saragi et al., 1978; Nagy et al., 1985; Rott, 1999; Zahar et. al., 2001). There seem
to be no consistency in the way that the two types <strong>of</strong> vocabulary knowledge have been
measured. In other words, no consensus has been reached on what counts as a
receptive measure and what a productive one is (Read, 2000). Without a systematic
measure tapping into both receptive and productive vocabulary and viewing
vocabulary learning in terms <strong>of</strong> degrees, experimental results thus varied greatly.
Owing to the above reason, an appropriate test measure that aims at assessing the
quality <strong>of</strong> second vocabulary knowledge is needed. Paribakht and Wesche’s (1993)
Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) was adopted in the current study because “the
purpose <strong>of</strong> VKS is not to estimate general vocabulary knowledge, but rather to track
the early development <strong>of</strong> specific words in an instructional or experimental situation”
(Wesche & Paribakht, 1996. p. 33).
The VKS consists <strong>of</strong> two scales: one for eliciting self perceived work knowledge
from the test taker and one for scoring test takers’ responses. It had been used as a
tool to assess vocabulary acquisition in several studies (Joe, 1995; Paribakht &
Wesche, 1993, 1997) and proved to be a workable measure sensitive to increases in
vocabulary knowledge that result from reading activities. Since the purpose <strong>of</strong> the
current study was to assess vocabulary gains from learners’ extensive reading practice
and the relationship between learners’ vocabulary learning quality with amount <strong>of</strong>
word exposure, VKS was reasoned as one vocabulary measure that could address our
goal <strong>of</strong> investigating learners’ vocabulary knowledge depth.
23

2.7. Summary
We incorporated the empirical results and pedagogical implications from the
literature into the current study. They are succinctly underscored in the following
points.
1. In the process <strong>of</strong> extensive reading, certain amount <strong>of</strong> attention, at some point,
should be drawn to words in order for vocabulary acquisition and ultimately L2
learning to occur.
2. Gloss, especially computerized gloss is generally effective in bridging the gap
between L2 text and the L2 learners’ limited cultural and lexical knowledge.
Given technical difficulties and learners’ limited mental capacity, however, textual
gloss is regarded as more feasible for computerized extensive reading
environments.
3. Using high frequency word lists to filter appropriate instructional material can
substantively accelerate learners’ vocabulary growth.
4. Selection <strong>of</strong> particular sets <strong>of</strong> word lists should be conditional upon learners’
specific needs.
5. Though computerized text sequencing has its limitations and its effectiveness has
not been tested, it possesses the potential <strong>of</strong> reducing learners’ vocabulary load
and increasing target word exposures. More refinements may induce better
learning results.
6. For word acquisition, frequency <strong>of</strong> exposures to target words remains an unsettled
issue awaiting for careful investigation with clearly defined learners’ background
and vocabulary measurements.
In the current study, an extensive reading syllabus was developed by refining
Ghadirian’s (2003) sequencing methods in order to provide more comprehensible
reading context and more encounters with target words. Further, how much
24

exposure is needed in order to lead to different degrees <strong>of</strong> vocabulary acquisition was
investigated. To facilitate vocabulary acquisition, highlighting in reading texts to
raise learner awareness, texts graded by specific word lists to accelerate vocabulary
learning, and gloss as well as an on-line searching tool to ensure correct inference <strong>of</strong>
word meanings will be integrated. Since Zahar, Cobb, and Spada (2001)
suggested learner level to be a factor influencing the frequency issue, we attempted to
identify the frequency question within a single learning context and learner population
in order to limit the influence <strong>of</strong> other factors. The research questions in this study
are as follows:
1. Is it feasible to incorporate on-line searching tools, gloss, word lists, and
computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive reading syllabus for
college learners’ vocabulary learning purpose? What problems or limitations
will be encountered?
2. What is learners’ feedback on the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2a. What is learners’ attitude towards the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2b. What are learners’ difficulties and recommendations towards the on-line
extensive reading syllabus?
3. If the on-line extensive reading syllabus is effective in leading to vocabulary
acquisition, how much exposure <strong>of</strong> words do learners have to encounter for
successful word acquisition?
3a. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word is required to lead to learners’ receptive word
knowledge?
3b. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word is required to lead to learners’ productive word
knowledge?
25

3.1. Overview
Chapter Three
METHODOLOGY
In this study, an on-line extensive reading syllabus was designed and developed
based on previous research implications on effective online vocabulary learning. We
wish to probe into the issue <strong>of</strong> the feasibility <strong>of</strong> constructing an on-line extensive
reading syllabus that provides comprehensible input with control <strong>of</strong> target words and
repetitious exposure to those words and to evaluate subjects’ vocabulary learning
outcome after using this tool. Second, we wish to examine the issue <strong>of</strong> how much
exposure <strong>of</strong> target words is needed for Taiwanese college learners’ learning <strong>of</strong>
receptive and productive word knowledge. A one-group pretest and posttest design
was adopted. This chapter presents the methodology for constructing the extensive
reading syllabus and the experiment in order to address incidental vocabulary learning
effectiveness. Details on participants, instruments, procedures, and data analyses are
discussed.
3.2. Participants
Participants involved 70 college freshmen students in a public university <strong>of</strong>
northern Taiwan. These students were from two intact classes and were taking the
course, Freshmen English, as a required course. Freshmen English is a one-year
course emphasizing English listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Its aim is to
prepare students with reading and writing competence for academic purposes and also
equip them with public speaking ability. All <strong>of</strong> the 70 participants have had at least
six years <strong>of</strong> formal English learning experiences from junior high to senior high
school and were estimated to be in the intermediate level regarding their overall
English competence. Such previous learning experience in high school and the
26

<strong>of</strong>fered Freshmen English course both centered around intensive reading <strong>of</strong> texts
within explicit teaching environments.
3.3. The Designing <strong>of</strong> an On-line Extensive Reading Syllabus
We programmed our on-line extensive reading syllabus based on Ghadirian’s
(2003) work <strong>of</strong> the sequencing procedures and added some improvements by utilizing
other tools. The first step <strong>of</strong> constructing an on-line syllabus was to find a large
number <strong>of</strong> suitable reading texts and to identify a set <strong>of</strong> useful word list tailored for
our Taiwanese college learners. Moreover, the texts should contain a high
proportion <strong>of</strong> words in the word list so as to assure frequency <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> words
and to make vocabulary learning more efficient through each text that learners have
read. In other words, words in the word lists should be used frequently in reading
texts for learners to repetitively encounter them while reading.
3.3.1 The Reading Material: the Sinorama Magazine
Coady (1997) proposed that providing comprehensible input as a principal factor
encouraging learners to read. Research <strong>of</strong> the L2 reading process attributed
comprehension to three sources: (a) conceptual abilities, which is readers’ intellectual
capacity; (b) background knowledge, what the reader knows about the reading topic,
and (c) process strategies, readers’ strategies to comprehension such as knowledge <strong>of</strong>
syntactic information, lexical meaning, and contextual meaning (Nagy, 1997).
Therefore, to achieve comprehension entails overcoming reading difficulties
originated in these three aspects. With comprehensive vocabulary exposure
controlled by word lists in our program, reading texts which are conceptually suitable
and familiar to readers’ background knowledge would supposedly reduce readers’
possible reading difficulties to the least. Accordingly, texts from the Sinorama
magazine, published by Sinorama Magazine, were chosen in this study.
27

The Sinorama magazine is dedicated to introducing Taiwan to the world.
Articles in Sinorama are authentic materials in English, written for the purpose <strong>of</strong>
presenting a true picture <strong>of</strong> Taiwan on the international scene. Through special
in-depth reportage on Taiwan <strong>of</strong> all aspects, readers are hoped to gain a better
knowledge and understanding <strong>of</strong> Taiwan. Its articles include major developments
and issues in Taiwan over recent years in such areas as politics, economics, arts,
society, culture, ecology and the environment. For readers in this study, Sinorama
articles possess the advantage <strong>of</strong> first, <strong>of</strong>fering background-familiar reading texts and
second, providing chances <strong>of</strong> learning from authentic materials related to home
culture, which is rare since most reading materials <strong>of</strong>ten are imported, aim at
introducing foreign culture <strong>of</strong> English-speaking countries. In other words,
instruction or aid for further culture knowledge is not an additional demand with texts
from Sinorama and that reading difficulties generated from unfamiliarity <strong>of</strong>
background knowledge will be minimized. Moreover, for learners to read
extensively, selecting materials that interest readers is also another major factor. A
wide variety <strong>of</strong> texts providing various topics and themes would more likely enhance
readers’ motivation for English learning. With topics ranging from politics,
economics, arts, society, culture, ecology, sports, entertainment and environment,
texts in Sinorama possess this motivating feature. As a result, 5008 reading texts
from issues <strong>of</strong> the Sinorama magazine in 1989 to 2001 were selected for analyses and
sequencing.
28

3.3.2 Four Word Lists
As was pointed out by Laufer (1989), a 95% coverage <strong>of</strong> words is needed for
learners to adequately understand a text. Therefore, if our goal is for learners to be
able to read texts like those in the Sinorama magazine after finishing reading texts in
the on-line extensive reading syllabus, then a set <strong>of</strong> word list able to account for 95%
coverage in Sinorama texts is required. Moreover, according to Ghadirian’s work
(2003), word lists were further subdivided into the familiar word list and the
unfamiliar word list for the purpose <strong>of</strong> sequencing texts based on their difficulty level.
Thus, judging familiar words and determining target words suitable for learners’ need
was another criterion to take into consideration in addition to word lists with 95%
coverage.
Two word lists were first identified as learners’ familiar word lists in our study:
the General Service Word List (West, 1953) and the High School Frequent Word List
(鄭恆雄, 2002; 2003). The General Service Word List (GSL) includes about 2000
English word families based on printed and written materials such as encyclopedias,
magazines, textbooks, novels, and poetry. This list is <strong>of</strong>ten used as a basis for
English courses and simplified reading texts. Previous studies have confirmed that
knowledge <strong>of</strong> words in GSL generally gives access to about 80% <strong>of</strong> the words in any
written texts (Worthington & Nation, 1996). Though GSL was developed some time
ago, it has remained the best <strong>of</strong> the available lists because <strong>of</strong> its information about the
frequency <strong>of</strong> each word’s various meanings (Nation & Waring, 1997). Based on the
word families in GSL, Nation (2001) specified the words belonging in each family
and developed a word lists containing 7827 words.
From the previous word list studies, we reasoned that no one word list could be
used for all learners and consideration <strong>of</strong> word lists as teaching materials should be
conditional upon specific learners’ needs. For this reason, the High School Frequent
29

Word List (鄭恆雄, 2002; 2003), which includes the most frequent and useful 4600
words for high school students in Taiwan was employed in order to compensate GSL.
The High School Frequent Word List (HSF) was constructed by consulting previously
developed popular word lists such as GSL and COBUILD (Sinclair, 1995), and
modification on frequent words in these lists were conducted for Taiwanese high
school learners <strong>of</strong> English. It was used as a guideline for writing high school
English textbooks in Taiwan and therefore, college freshmen supposedly should have
already acquired these words when they were in high school. Since the original HSF
word lists does not provide the words belonging in each family, we completed the
words for each family by specifying the common inflectional forms such as –ing, -ly,
or –ed and affixed words such as –un, -ment, or -tion using Visual FoxPro 7.0.
Three teachers were involved in determining items in each word family to ensure the
inclusion for each entry was indeed frequently used. As a result, 7256 words were
determined as the HSF. The GSL and HSF together are thus able to address learners’
background English learning experiences and were determined as familiar word lists
in our on-line extensive reading syllabus.
To identify target word lists, learners’ learning purpose was also our first priority.
That is, depending on learners’ learning goals, learning words in the identified target
word lists should take priority over learning other kinds <strong>of</strong> vocabulary. The first
target word list that we selected was Xue and Nation’s University Word List (UWL,
1984). This word list consists <strong>of</strong> 800 word families, 3685 words, not in the GSL but
frequently found in academic texts (Nation & Kyongho, 1995). This academic
vocabulary gives an 8.5% coverage <strong>of</strong> academic text and 3.9% coverage <strong>of</strong>
newspapers (Kyongho & Nation, 1989). Since our learners are college freshmen
expecting to meet unsimplified English textbooks in future studies, adding UWL as a
target word list could be an introduction to these highly useful academic words.
30

To this point, we have identified two familiar word lists, the GSL and HSF, and
one target word list, UWL, yet, after comparing all the running words in the 5008
texts in the Sinorama magazine, we found these three word lists together unable to
reach the 95% coverage suggested by Laufer (1989). In order to calculate
percentage coverage <strong>of</strong> word lists in Sinorama texts, all proper nouns and punctuation
marks were first deleted from texts. Percentages were then calculated by comparing
words in each word list to all running words in Sinorama. The results showed that
the GSL and the HSF together give a coverage <strong>of</strong> 92.1%, whereas GSL, HSF, and
UWL together make a coverage <strong>of</strong> 93.48%. In other words, knowing all the words
in these three word lists (GSL, HSF, and UWL) are still not sufficient enough to have
adequate comprehension in all Sinorama texts. Therefore, a fourth word list was
developed by directly using the corpora we have available, texts from the Sinorama
magazine.
We extracted the most frequently used words in Sinorama texts and excluded the
ones that are already listed in GSL, HSF, and UWL. With GSL, HSF, and UWL
making up around 93% text coverage, we wish to extract other high frequent words
not on these three word lists but used frequently in Sinorama texts in order to make up
the remaining 2% for reaching 95% coverage. In order to do this, a s<strong>of</strong>tware
package, Visual FoxPro 7.0 was used. This s<strong>of</strong>tware package possesses
programming functions on its built-in database. In other words, by using Visual
FoxPro 7.0 we were able to store reading texts and word lists in the database and at
the same time operate computer programming for manipulating texts in the same
s<strong>of</strong>tware.
To develop a new word list, first, all words used in Sinorama texts were listed in
order along with a figure <strong>of</strong> their frequency <strong>of</strong> occurrences in Sinorama texts. Words
that are already included in GSL, HSF, or UWL are deleted. Then, we begin to look
31

for the cut <strong>of</strong>f point in word frequency in order to form our next word list. By
including the frequent words in Sinorama magazine to the other three word lists
according to frequency counts and compare it to the running words <strong>of</strong> Sinorama texts,
it was found that 781words which appear more than 124 times in the Sinorama texts
together with GSL, HSF, and UWL are able to achieve a 96.61% coverage in
Sinorama texts. Since these 781 running words are beyond the familiar word lists,
GSL and HSF, we then identified this fourth word list, the Sinorama High Frequent
Word List (SHF) as another target word list.
In sum, there were a total <strong>of</strong> four word lists needed to screen appropriate text
difficulty level for our on-line extensive reading syllabus, GSL, HSF, UWL, and SHF.
GSL and HSF are determined as familiar words already acquired by learners before
they are exposed to this extensive reading syllabus, and UWL and SHF are target
word lists that learners will be expected to acquire while reading in the syllabus.
There are a total <strong>of</strong> 8234 words in these four lists and they are able to meet the
96.61% coverage within Sinorama texts. The following table is a summary <strong>of</strong> the
four word lists.
Table 3.1 Summary <strong>of</strong> four word lists
Names <strong>of</strong> the lists Number <strong>of</strong> cumulated
words
GSL (familiar word list) 7827 84.7%
HSF (familiar word list) 9712 92.01%
UWL
(target word list)
SHF
(target word list)
12833 93.48%
13614 96.61%
Total 13614 96.61%
32
Cumulated % coverage

3.3.3 Sequencing <strong>of</strong> reading texts
After suitable reading texts and word lists were chosen, we then began to arrange
and sequence reading texts in an order that is able to provide learners with
comprehensible input and increase chances <strong>of</strong> exposure to target words. Visual
FoxPro 7.0 was again used. Our programming steps are as follows.
First, for the reason <strong>of</strong> providing learners with chances <strong>of</strong> reading longer texts
and at the same time not to overwhelm learners by lengthy texts, from the 5008 texts
in Sinorama, we selected only the texts that contained between 1500 and 3000
running words for sequencing procedures. A total <strong>of</strong> 959 texts met this criterion.
Second, the 959 texts were reexamined with the four word lists that we selected, texts
unable to reach 95% coverage were excluded. This sifting process left us with 856
reading texts. It should be noted that at this point, each <strong>of</strong> the remaining 856 text
would contain different proportion <strong>of</strong> words from the familiar word lists, words from
the target word lists, and other unfamiliar words not included in the familiar word and
target word lists. The 95% cut <strong>of</strong>f point in the second step ensured that the average
coverage <strong>of</strong> words from the familiar word lists and the target word lists together was
able to reach 95% <strong>of</strong> the running words in these 856 texts.
Third, running words in the qualified 856 texts were compared to those in the
familiar word lists, GSL and HSF, and the target word lists, UWL and SHF. Visual
FoxPro 7.0 sifted through the texts and sequenced texts according to vocabulary
difficulty. The one text that contained the highest number <strong>of</strong> familiar words and
smallest number <strong>of</strong> target words was placed first on the sequence. So far, the order
arranging procedures are similar to those used in Ghadirian’s (2003). We added the
following steps in order to increase the encounters <strong>of</strong> target words.
First, to find the second appropriate text, the program did not immediately add
the target words in the first text into the familiar word lists like that in Ghadirian’s
33

TextLadder; instead, our program put exposed target words in another newly created
word list, the Exposed Word List. With this new word list, our program then sifted
through texts again looking for the text that contained the highest number <strong>of</strong> familiar
words and the least number <strong>of</strong> target words, but this time a third standard was added
by using the Exposed Word List. The program searched for a text which not only
contained the highest number <strong>of</strong> familiar words and the least number <strong>of</strong> target words,
but a text that also contained the highest number <strong>of</strong> words from the Exposed Word list
(target words from previous texts on the sequence). That is, if the first text on the
sequence order had four target words computer, international, assist, and advantage,
after learners read this text, these four target words would be taken out <strong>of</strong> the target
word list and included into the Exposed Word List. After the first text was put in
order, the program then went through the remaining texts looking for the next easiest
text by comparing familiar words and target words to texts, and also with one more
screening guideline, seeking for a particular text that contained the highest number <strong>of</strong>
words from the Exposed Word List. The second text selected then might have its
new sets <strong>of</strong> target words, for example, qualify, situation, and paragraph, but also
include target words from the first text, computer, international, assist, and
advantages. Compared to other texts, the second text was the second easiest text and
the text that had the most number <strong>of</strong> first text target words. To select the third text,
the program automatically included the target words in the second text into the
Exposed Word List (now the Exposed Word List would contain the following words,
computer, international, assist, advantages, qualify, situation, and paragraph, which
are target words from the first text and the second text) and again went through the
same sifting process for the next text. In other words, the program ensured that the
target words appearing in the previous texts again reappear in the following texts.
After sequencing, the target words in each reading text were highlighted in red to
34

aise readers’ awareness and attention. The exposed words from previous reading
texts, on the other hand, were highlighted in green in texts to remind readers that they
have seen these words before. Ideally, the words in target word lists will gradually
be included into the Exposed Word List after learners have been exposed to more
readings during the extensive reading practice. The Exposed Word List also keeps
track <strong>of</strong> how many times each word is exposed to learners during their extensive
reading practice. It was hoped that with the above sorting process, a text which
contains the most familiar words, the least target words, and the most exposed words
would be placed in sequence.
For the purpose <strong>of</strong> measuring learners’ vocabulary acquisition, we selected the
first sixteen texts in the sequence for learners’ extensive reading practice. However,
after a test run with the Sinorama texts, it was discovered that the first sixteen texts
placed on the sequence were not able to reach a satisfying repetitive target word
exposure rate. The easiest text place on the syllabus reached a familiar word rate <strong>of</strong>
99%, indicating that the rate <strong>of</strong> words from the target word lists along with other
unfamiliar words outside the four word lists was extremely low. As a result <strong>of</strong> this
test run, the rate <strong>of</strong> the target words in the sixteen texts placed on syllabus was
relatively low, the low rate <strong>of</strong> target words implied that there were less target words
for learners to repetitively encounter in letter texts. Among the first five texts, only
one word repetitively occurred in the third and fifth text.
In an attempt to overcome the low repetitive rate, we arranged another screening
criterion. Since a 2%-5% <strong>of</strong> unfamiliar word rate within a text was suggested as an
optimal incidental vocabulary learning condition for second language learners (Nation,
2001), the original procedure <strong>of</strong> locating the easiest text have found texts which
contained too little target words for learners to learn. We refined our screening
procedure with the 2%-5% unfamiliar word rate suggestion in order to provide more
35

target words within each text. After sifting texts which met the 95% demand,
instead <strong>of</strong> immediately selecting the easiest text (the one with the most familiar word
and least target word), the program activated its new sifting guideline at this point,
locating texts which contains 2%-5% unfamiliar words. Notice that by 2%-5%
unfamiliar words, we mean that for each text, words from the two target word lists
and other unfamiliar words outside the four word lists together, would range from
2%-5%. To do this, each text was again compared to the four word lists. After this
new procedure, the program then continued to find the easiest text within the
remaining texts and finished up the whole process by searching the one with the most
exposed words. Compared to the original procedure, this new criterion ensured that
the first few texts placed on the syllabus will not only be comprehensible but also
contained certain number <strong>of</strong> target words for learners to acquire. Lastly, the
highlighting <strong>of</strong> target words in red and exposed words in green were incorporated
after the refined sequencing procedures.
During the process <strong>of</strong> sequencing, some texts may possess the same percentage
<strong>of</strong> familiar words, target words, and repetitive words. When this occurs, one text
should be selected in order for the program to run the next text on the sequence.
Human intervention takes over the responsibility <strong>of</strong> deciding which text to choose at
this point. While the program listed out titles <strong>of</strong> the texts with the same learning
conditions, the researcher selected the one text most likely to be interested to the
target reader for the program to continue sifting the next text. By examining the
words in the exposed word list, the new version <strong>of</strong> sequencing process can indeed
raise repetitive word rate. As a result, a total <strong>of</strong> thirty sequenced texts were placed
on our syllabus. Again, for the purpose <strong>of</strong> measuring learners’ word acquisition,
only the first sixteen texts were used as reading materials for learners to read.
With regards to the goal <strong>of</strong> ensuring comprehensible input and target word
36

epetition, the sixteen texts placed on the syllabus was controlled with an unfamiliar
word rate <strong>of</strong> 2%-5% and demonstrated a satisfying average target word rate <strong>of</strong> 1.9%
(see Table 3.2). The average target word repetition rate also reached a plausible
portion <strong>of</strong> 46% (see Table 3.2). In other words, for each text about half <strong>of</strong> the target
words were exposed to learners in previous readings. Moreover, <strong>of</strong> the 223 target
words in the sixteen texts, 29 <strong>of</strong> them appeared five times or more, and 16 <strong>of</strong> them
appeared more than 9 times (see Table 3.3). Compared to Ghardirins’ Textladder
(2003) in which amount <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> five times was ensured within almost 300
pieces <strong>of</strong> texts and word distribution interval not controlled, the distribution result in
our syllabus differ considerably. As is shown from the statistic numbers, our goal <strong>of</strong>
controlling unfamiliar word rate and ensuring repetitive target word exposure was
achieved.
37

Table 3.2 Target word rate and target word repetition rate <strong>of</strong> the sixteen texts
Number Number <strong>of</strong> Number <strong>of</strong> Rate <strong>of</strong> Number <strong>of</strong> Rate <strong>of</strong>
<strong>of</strong> texts total running target words target exposed exposed
words in
words target target
each text
words words
1 1785 43 2.4% 23 53%
2 1410 48 3.4% 30 63%
3 1864 51 2.7% 17 33%
4 1360 24 1.7% 4 16%
5 2270 48 2.1% 21 44%
6 1818 34 1.8% 16 47%
7 2145 39 1.8% 19 49%
8 2160 39 1.8% 16 41%
9 2539 49 1.9% 28 57%
10 2474 37 1.5% 13 35%
11 2011 29 1.5% 14 48%
12 2341 50 2.1% 34 68%
13 1301 24 1.8% 14 58%
14 1262 16 1.3% 5 31%
15 1762 31 1.7% 8 26%
16 2370 44 1.8% 31 70%
Average 1.9% 46%
Note: Rate <strong>of</strong> target words= Number <strong>of</strong> target words / Number <strong>of</strong> total running words in each text
Rate <strong>of</strong> exposed target words= Number <strong>of</strong> exposed target words / Number <strong>of</strong> target words
Table 3.3 Distribution <strong>of</strong> target words in the sixteen reading texts
Number <strong>of</strong> Number <strong>of</strong> target word exposure Number <strong>of</strong> target
Groups
words
1 Words appearing 1-2 times 151
2 Words appearing 3-4 times 43
3 Words appearing 5-6 times 13
4 Words appearing 7-8 times 4
5 Words appearing more than 9 times 12
38

A summary <strong>of</strong> procedures in sequencing texts is illustrated in Table 3.4. This
table includes the first 10 steps that we programmed in order to select the first sixteen
texts on the reading sequence.
Table 3.4 Procedures in sequencing reading texts
Procedures Purpose What the
program does
1. For appropriate length <strong>of</strong>
reading texts
2. For trimming <strong>of</strong>f the texts
that do not meet 95 %
coverage compared to the
four word lists.
3. Locating the texts which
have 2%-5% unfamiliar
word rate.
4. To select the easiest text
(the first reading text on
the sequence) for learners.
39
Select texts with
1500 to 3000
words
Compare the
running words in
every text to the
four word lists
(GSL, HSF, UWL,
and SHF)
Compare the
running words in
every text to the
four word lists
(GSL, HSF, UWL,
and SHF).
Compare words in
every text with the
familiar word lists
(GSL & HSF) and
target word lists
(UWL & SHF)
5. Select the easiest
text that has the
highest number <strong>of</strong>
familiar words and
least number <strong>of</strong>
target words.
6. To select the second text Target words in
on the sequence
Text #1 are added
Outcome
959 texts met the
qualification
856 texts met the
qualification.
30 texts met the
qualification.
Text #1 (the easiest
text or the first text
on the reading
sequence) is
selected.
The Exposed Word
List has target

7.
into the Exposed
Word List
Select the one text
that meets the
following three
criteria:
1. The highest
number <strong>of</strong>
familiar words
2. The least
number <strong>of</strong>
target words.
3. The highest
number <strong>of</strong>
words in the
Exposed Word
List.
8. To select the third text on Target words in
the sequence
Text #2 are added
into the Exposed
Word List
9. Select the one text
that meets the
following three
criteria:
1. The highest
number <strong>of</strong>
familiar words
2. The least
number <strong>of</strong>
target words.
3. The highest
number <strong>of</strong>
words in the
Exposed Word
List.
10. To select the fourth text on Target words in
the sequence
Text #3 are added
40
words from Text
#1.
Text #2 (second
easiest text or the
second text on the
sequence) is
selected.
The Exposed Word
List has target
words from Text
#1 and Text #2.
Text #3 (third
easiest text or the
third text on the
sequence) is
selected.
The Exposed Word
List has target

41
into the Exposed
Word List
words from Text
#1, Text #2, and
Text #3.
In order to gain a clearer picture on the differences between Ghadirian’s (2002)
study and the current one, a comparison on the target learners, texts, and the study
goals are displayed in Table 3.5. With regards to the sequencing improvements
incorporated by the current study to Ghadirian’s (2002) study, Table 3.6 demonstrated
the adjusted procedures in bold print. Broadly speaking, inspired by Ghadirian’s
(2002) TextLadder, the current study attempted to refine TextLadder’s sequencing
procedures and to test the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> sequenced texts on vocabulary learning by
working with specified learners and analyzing a smaller number <strong>of</strong> reading texts.

Table 3. 5. A comparison between Ghardirian’s (2002) study and the current study
Differences Ghardirian’s study The current study
Target learners EFL learners (level not Taiwanese college
specified)
freshemen (intermediate
EFL learners)
Target texts Voice <strong>of</strong> America
simplified news texts
Sinorama texts
Familiar word lists The first 176 words <strong>of</strong> GSL (familiar words),
GSL, and other words
found in a broad range <strong>of</strong>
elementary texts
HSF (familiar words)
Unfamiliar word lists GSL (words other than UWL (unfamiliar words),
the first 176 words),
Voice <strong>of</strong> America Special
word list, UWL,
Longman Defining
Dictionary word list
SHF (unfamiliar words)
Length <strong>of</strong> target texts 300-1500 words 1500-3000 words
Goals 1. Ensuring each text
contain reasonable
small number <strong>of</strong>
unfamiliar words.
2. Ensuring that most <strong>of</strong>
the words in the word
lists will be
encountered five
times or more.
42
1. Ensuring each text
contained reasonable
small number <strong>of</strong>
unfamiliar words.
2. Ensuring that target
words will be
encountered
repetitively.
3. Controlling the interval
<strong>of</strong> target word
encounter.
4. Testing whether
sequenced texts can
result in measurable
vocabulary learning.
5. Finding out the amount
<strong>of</strong> exposure needed for
successful word
acquisition.

Table3.6. A comparison <strong>of</strong> sequencing procedures in TextLadder and the current study
Ghadirian’s TextLadder The Current Study
1. Exclude the texts that do not meet 95
% coverage compared to the word
lists.
2. Select the easiest text (Text #1): The
one text which has the highest
number <strong>of</strong> words in the familiar
word lists (The first 176 words <strong>of</strong>
GSL) and the least number <strong>of</strong> words
in the unfamiliar word lists (GSL
words other than the first 176 words,
Voice <strong>of</strong> America Special word list,
UWL, Longman Defining Dictionary
word list).
3. Unfamiliar words in Text #1 added to
the familiar word list.
4. Select the second easiest text (Text
#2): The one text which has the
highest number <strong>of</strong> words in the
familiar word list (now containing
unfamiliar words from Text #1) and
the least number <strong>of</strong> words in the
unfamiliar word lists.
5. Unfamiliar words in Text #2 added to
the familiar word list.
6. Select the third easiest text (Text #3):
The one text which has the highest
number <strong>of</strong> words in the familiar
word list (now containing unfamiliar
words from Text #1and Text #2) and
the least number <strong>of</strong> words in the
unfamiliar word lists.
1. Exclude the texts that do not meet 95
% coverage compared to the word
lists.
2. Locating the texts which have
2%-5% unfamiliar word rate.
3. Select the easiest text (Text #1): The
one text which has the highest
number <strong>of</strong> words in the familiar
word lists (GSL & HSF) and the
least number <strong>of</strong> words in the target
word lists (UWL & SHF).
4. Target words in Text#1 added to
the Exposed Word List.
5. Select the second easiest text (Text
#2): The one text which has the
highest number <strong>of</strong> familiar words
(GSL & HSF), the least number <strong>of</strong>
target words (UWL & SHF), and the
highest number <strong>of</strong> words in the
Exposed Word List (now
containing target words in Text#1).
6. Target words in Text#2 added to
the Exposed Word List.
7. Select the third easiest text (Text #3):
The one text which has the highest
number <strong>of</strong> familiar words (GSL &
HSF), the least number <strong>of</strong> target
words (UWL & SHF), and the
highest number <strong>of</strong> words in the
Exposed Word List (now
containing target words in Text#1
and Text#2).
43

3.3.4 Glossing <strong>of</strong> reading texts
Gloss is beneficial to incidental vocabulary learning and therefore incorporated
in our online extensive reading syllabus. Luckily, we were able to obtain Chinese
translation <strong>of</strong> texts from Sinorama, thus, development <strong>of</strong> gloss involved first matching
and aligning sentences from two databases: the Chinese translation, and the original
English texts. After translation was aligned with English, manual double checking
was employed to make sure the correctness <strong>of</strong> each translation. After this,
JavaScript was used for displaying our gloss. Within the reading text, we provided
gloss for target words and proper nouns. The meaning <strong>of</strong> the target words and
proper nouns could be retrieved by a click on the word. The gloss containing the
appropriate Chinese translation in context would pop up in a separate box right by the
clicked word. An illustration <strong>of</strong> the gloss is displayed in Appendix I
.
3.3.5 Reading text interfaces
After sixteen texts were chosen according to our sequencing procedure, we then
constructed a website for extensive reading on-line. For the purpose <strong>of</strong> directing
readers’ main attention to reading for comprehension, three comprehension questions
were devised at the end <strong>of</strong> every text (see Appendix K). Learners were able to do
these questions on line and were provided with immediate feedback on the correctness
<strong>of</strong> the answers. Also, for the purpose <strong>of</strong> providing searching opportunity, the access
<strong>of</strong> an on-line search tool, TotalRecall, which is a bilingual concordancer (Wu, et al.,
2003), was provided for learners who may wish to further investigate into target word
use (see Appendix I and Appendix J). The on-line extensive reading website first
required learners to log on with their passwords, gave an orientation on available tools
and the meaning <strong>of</strong> highlighting, and provided the reading sequence list (see
Appendix G and Appendix H). Each reading text had the main text with target
44

words highlighted in red and exposed words highlighted in green, the glossing for
target words and proper nouns, access to on-line bilingual concordsancer, TotalRecall,
and three comprehension exercises on-line.
3.4. Instruments
Five types <strong>of</strong> instruments were used in this study. First, two sets <strong>of</strong> tests (a
pretest and a posttest) were designed for assessing learners’ vocabulary learning after
being exposed to the on-line extensive reading syllabus. Secondly, three
questionnaires (a background questionnaire, an online evaluation questionnaire and
an in class evaluation questionnaire) were distributed for tapping into learners’
English learning background and their reflections after the on-line extensive reading
experiences.
3.4.1 Pretest
In the pretest, a list on target words chosen within the sixteen reading texts
along with words from the GSL and HSF lists (familiar word lists) were randomly
selected and distributed for the purpose <strong>of</strong> measuring participants’ vocabulary
knowledge and ensuring target words to be unfamiliar to participants (See Appendix
B). There were a total <strong>of</strong> 60 items in the pretest including 50 target words (item 1 to
item 50) and 10 familiar words (item 51 to item 60). The 50 target words were
chosen according to the Exposed Word List in which numbers <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> each
target word appeared in the sixteen reading texts were recorded. The record showed
that among the target words, 29 <strong>of</strong> them appeared more than six times. These 29
words which appeared more than six times were all included in the test. For words
appearing under six times, we randomly selected ten words from words appearing 3 to
4 times and eleven words from words appearing only once, making up a total <strong>of</strong> 50
word items. The same 50 target words were tested in the posttest. In the pretest,
45

participants were required put a check on the words they have seen before and try to
provide an English definition or Chinese translation besides these words (see
Appendix B). They were to leave blank the words they have not seen before.
Correct target words and familiar word were graded and transformed to respectively
with 100% for each section. Each correct item in the target word section is scored 2
points whereas a correct item in familiar word section is scored 10 points.
3.4.2 Posttest
In order for more precise vocabulary measurement, we selected a measure that is
able to capture stages <strong>of</strong> vocabulary learning, the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale
(Paribakht & Wesche, 1996). The Vocabulary Knowledge Scale is developed “to
capture initial stages or levels in word learning that are subject to accurate self-report
or efficient demonstration, and that are precise enough to reflect gains during a
relatively brief instructional period” (Paribakht & Wesche, 1996, p. 33). The
Vocabulary Knowledge Scale (VKS) uses a combination <strong>of</strong> self-reported and
demonstrated knowledge on a specific word for its scaling. An elicitation scale
self-report category is as shown in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7 Self-report categories in the VKS elicitation scale (Read, 2000, p 133)
____________________________________________________________________
Self-report Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. I don’t remember having seen this word before.
II. I have seen this word before, but I don’t know what it means.
III. I have seen this word before, and I think it means ____________.
(synonym or translation).
IV. I know this word. It means ___________. (synonym or translation)
V. I can use this word in a sentence: _____________. (If you do this section,
please also do Section IV.)
____________________________________________________________________
46

For each target word, learners were provided with the above self-report categories in
order to assess their quality <strong>of</strong> word knowledge. Possible student responses and
scores are showed in Table 3.8.
Table 3.8 VKS scoring categories: Meaning <strong>of</strong> scores (Read, 2000, p 134)
_____________________________________________________________________
Self-report Possible Meaning <strong>of</strong> scores
Categories Scores
I. 1 The word is not familiar at all
II. 2 The word is familiar but its
meaning is not known.
III. 3 A correct synonym or translation
is given.
IV. 4 The word is used with semantic
appropriateness in a sentence.
V. 5 The word is used with semantic
appropriateness and grammatical
accuracy in a sentence.
From the above categories, we could see that the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale
aims to determine vocabulary knowledge ranging from complete unfamiliarity,
through recognition <strong>of</strong> the words and some idea <strong>of</strong> its meaning, to the ability to use
the word accurately in a sentence. Elicitation categories I and II were determined as
1 and 2 points respectively. Based on the correctness <strong>of</strong> the translation provided,
category III may lead to scores 2 (if translation is wrong) and 3 (if translation is
correct). Likewise, wrong answers in Category IV and Category V could result in a
47

score <strong>of</strong> 2. If a target word is used semantically correct but grammatically wrong in
a sentence, then a score <strong>of</strong> 4 was given. If a sentence is constructed with a target
word used correctly in both semantic and grammatical aspects, then this word was
credited with a score <strong>of</strong> 5. For sentence judging, two raters were employed and
scores that they graded were averaged to achieve inter-rater reliability. The
Self-report Categories were translated into learners’ native language, Chinese, for
learners to fully understand how to do this test (see Appendix C).
The VKS posttest consisted <strong>of</strong> the 50 target words tested in the pretest. Based
on the above VKS scoring system, each learner had a score for each target word on
their posttest. A real VKS scoring example is shown in Appendix D. The scores in
the posttest were analyzed for two purposes. First, to measure learners’ vocabulary
gain after they were exposed to the on-line extensive reading syllabus. Second, to
determine the relationship <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> target words and the quality <strong>of</strong> vocabulary
learning (receptive or productive word knowledge).
3.4.3 Questionnaires
Questionnaires <strong>of</strong> three kinds were constructed for investigating into
participants’ background and their attitudes towards extensive reading. The
questionnaires were written in participants’ native language, Chinese, in order to
prevent participants’ limited English ability from affecting their answers.
The first questionnaire, the Background Questionnaire, intends to obtain
information on learners’ use <strong>of</strong> computer and internet (the 1 st to 8 th item), their
perspectives on English learning (the 9 th to 12 th item), and their experiences <strong>of</strong>
extensive reading (13 th to 17 th item) (See Appendix A). The other two questionnaires,
the Online Evaluation Questionnaire and In-class Evaluation Questionnaire, were
designed to probe into participants’ perceptions on the on-line extensive reading
48

syllabus. The evaluation questionnaire includes the following four categories:
system interface design, features fostering vocabulary learning, features <strong>of</strong> reading
texts, and future learning motivation. It is supposed that learners’ fresh impressions
on the extensive reading syllabus would provide more beneficial feedback for some <strong>of</strong>
the designed questions. For example, the ones related to system interface design.
Therefore, questions closely related to specific features <strong>of</strong> the online extensive
reading syllabus were programmed online for learners to do immediately after they
have finished all sixteen readings. Questions which require lesser reading
experience impressions were collected together and distributed in class one week after
all learners have completed the sixteen readings (See Appendix E and Appendix F).
The five instruments employed in the current study are summarized in Table 3.9.
49

Table 3.9 Instruments used in the study
Instruments Functions
1. Pretest To investigate students’ previous word
knowledge and to ensure unfamiliarity
<strong>of</strong> target words.
2. Posttest
1. To investigate the effectiveness <strong>of</strong>
(the Vocabulary Knowledge Scale) vocabulary acquisition through the
on-line extensive reading syllabus
2. To investigate the relationship <strong>of</strong>
exposures <strong>of</strong> target words and the
degree <strong>of</strong> learners’ vocabulary
acquisition.
3. Background Questionnaire To obtain information about learners’
previous experiences on computer use
and extensive reading experiences.
4. Online Evaluation Questionnaire To probe into learners’ perception
toward the on-lien extensive reading
syllabus on issues closely related to
specific features <strong>of</strong> the online extensive
reading syllabus.
5.In-class Evaluation Questionnaire To probe into learners’ perception
toward the on-line extensive reading
syllabus.
3.5. Procedures
An on-line extensive reading syllabus was first designed and programmed with
systematic control <strong>of</strong> unfamiliar words in the selected texts to be read before exposing
participants to it. An evaluation experiment was designed to assess the program’s
effect. The experimental procedures proceeded from December, 2003 to March,
2004. An in-class pretest, a consent form (see Appendix M), and a Background
questionnaire were distributed at the end <strong>of</strong> the first semester before participants were
exposed to the extensive reading syllabus. Then, participants were provided with the
chance to become familiar with the on-line extensive reading syllabus from January, 1,
50

2004 to March, 16, 2004. About one week after the administration <strong>of</strong> the pretest,
participants’ on-line extensive reading course began.
The main extensive reading activity took place during winter vacation and the
first month <strong>of</strong> the second semester. Participants were required to complete a total <strong>of</strong>
sixteen reading texts during the eight-week period, that is, two reading texts were
scheduled per week. An account was created for each participant and they were to
log on the extensive reading website, read the text in sequence with on-line resources
and gloss help, and answer four to five comprehension questions on-line. A time
limit <strong>of</strong> five minutes for reading was set before learners is able to click to the part <strong>of</strong>
comprehension questions. A tracker was set up in order to record participants’
on-line behaviors, and to guarantee that learners were reading texts as scheduled
instead <strong>of</strong> saving all reading assignments at the end <strong>of</strong> the winter vacation. It was
hoped that learners would proceed with the reading process as it is in natural
extensive reading manner. Weekly monitors were scheduled during the winter
vacation each at third and sixth week for researchers to check students’ records from
the trackers (see Appendix L). E-mail was sent for learners who have not proceeded
with the reading as scheduled. Moreover, since the Freshmen English course is a
two-semester course, <strong>of</strong> the two classes, learners from one <strong>of</strong> the class were informed
in advance that their reading progress will be graded and accounted for as part <strong>of</strong> their
grades in the second semester. They were acknowledged that performances on
comprehension questions at the end <strong>of</strong> each reading would only be a practice and
would not be graded; however, their reading performances according to scheduled
time would be crucial in grades. The learners in the other class, on the other hand,
were told that the online extensive reading syllabus was a voluntarily assignment for
them to improve their English ability. All participants were not informed about the
vocabulary posttest. The posttest was distributed in class one week after learners
51

had finished all sixteen texts. The procedures are summarized in Table 3.8.
Table 3.10 Research Procedures
Period Research Procedures
Preparation 1. Programming <strong>of</strong> an on-line extensive reading syllabus.
2. Participants sign the consent form.
3. Participants take the pretest.
4. Participants fill in the Background Questionnaire.
5. Participants learn how to use the on-line extensive reading
syllabus.
On-line Extensive 3. Participants begin their extensive reading.
Reading Practices 4. Researchers monitor participants’ progresses.
Evaluation 1. Participants finish the Online Evaluation Questionnaire.
2. Participants take the posttest.
3. Participants fill in the in- class Evaluation Questionnaire.
52

3.6. Data Analysis
There are two main research directions in this study. First, we investigated the
feasibility <strong>of</strong> incorporating several vocabulary learning implications drawn from
previous studies to construct an on-line extensive reading syllabus and to evaluate
subjects’ vocabulary learning outcome after learning from the syllabus. Second, we
examined the issue <strong>of</strong> how many exposures <strong>of</strong> target words are needed for Taiwanese
college learners’ learning <strong>of</strong> receptive and productive word knowledge. Our detailed
research questions are as follows.
1. Is it feasible to incorporate on-line searching tools, gloss, word lists, and
computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive reading
syllabus for vocabulary learning purpose? What problems or limitations
will be encountered?
2. What is learners’ feedback on the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2a. What is learners’ attitude towards the on-line extensive reading
syllabus?
2b. What are learners’ difficulties and recommendations towards the
on-line extensive reading syllabus?
3. If the on-line extensive reading syllabus is effective in leading to
vocabulary acquisition, how many exposures <strong>of</strong> words do learners have to
encounter for successful word acquisition?
3a. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word is required to lead to learners’ receptive
word knowledge?
3b. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word is required to lead to learners’ productive
word knowledge?
Quantitative analyses were conducted for the above research questions. First, by
recording and observing computer programming process, we wish to report the
53

technical feasibility <strong>of</strong> incorporating on-line resources, gloss, word lists, and
computerized sequencing techniques into a pedagogically appropriate on-line
extensive reading syllabus. Limitations and difficulties <strong>of</strong> developing an on-line
extensive reading syllabus for vocabulary learning purpose are discussed to answer
our first research question. To answer research question 2, data collected from the
Evaluation Questionnaire were analyzed. To answer research question 3, learners’
performances in both pretest and posttest were analyzed. The pretest aimed to
double check subjects’ unfamiliar knowledge on target words, and its outcome was
compared with posttest performances. Learners’ performances on posttest and
recordings <strong>of</strong> the times that target words appeared throughout the extensive reading
practice were employed to answer research question 3. In order to do this, the
posttest scores and the frequency <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> target words were compared with
ANOVA.
54

4.1. Overview
Chapter Four
Research Results and Discussion
By developing a graded online extensive reading syllabus and incorporating it to
an EFL college freshmen course, this study attempts to explore the following research
questions:
1. Is it feasible to incorporate on-line searching tools, gloss, word lists, and
computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive reading syllabus for
vocabulary learning purpose? What problems or limitations will be
encountered?
2. What is learners’ feedback on the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2a. What is learners’ attitude towards the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2b. What are learners’ difficulties and recommendations towards the on-line
extensive reading syllabus?
3. If the on-line extensive reading syllabus is effective in leading to vocabulary
acquisition, how much exposure <strong>of</strong> words do learners have to encounter for
successful word acquisition?
3a. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word are required to lead to learners’ receptive word
knowledge?
3b. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word are required to lead to learners’ productive word
knowledge?
Subjects were recruited from college freshmen students who were taking a general
English course in two classes. To ensure equal reading practice effects, participants
who failed to complete all sixteen texts were excluded from further analysis.
Besides, students who were absent for either pretest or posttest were eliminated. As
55

a result, valid subjects dropped from 70 to 38 college freshmen.
In this chapter, the results gathered from the background questionnaire, the
pretest, the posttest, the online questionnaire, and the in-class questionnaire were
analyzed and presented first. Then, the feasibility <strong>of</strong> introducing an online extensive
reading syllabus to EFL learning environment for vocabulary purposes, learners’
attitudes towards the online syllabus, and times <strong>of</strong> vocabulary exposure needed for
acquisition in an online extensive reading environment are discussed.
4.2. Results
The research data in this study come from four sources: (1) participants’
responses to the background questionnaire, (2) participants’ pretest scores, (3)
participants’ posttest scores, and (4) participants’ responses to the online evaluation
questionnaire, (5) participants’ responses to the in-class evaluation questionnaire.
The results <strong>of</strong> data analyses are presented as follows.
4.2.1 The results <strong>of</strong> the background questionnaire
Before learners were exposed to the online extensive reading syllabus, copies <strong>of</strong>
the background questionnaires were delivered for obtaining information on learners’
use <strong>of</strong> computer and internet (the 1 st to 8 th item), their perspectives on English
learning (the 9 th to 12 th item), and their experiences <strong>of</strong> extensive reading (13 th to 17 th
item).
A very high percentage <strong>of</strong> learners (94.7%) used computers frequently and all <strong>of</strong>
them had a PC at school. Also, during winter vacation, 97.3% <strong>of</strong> the students had
Internet access at home. Despite learners’ frequent use <strong>of</strong> computers, merely 7.9%
<strong>of</strong> them used Internet resources to learn English on a regular basis and only 26.3% <strong>of</strong>
them had past experience <strong>of</strong> using computers to assist language learning in English
classes (see Table 4.1).
56

Table 4.1 Learners’ use <strong>of</strong> computer and internet
Item 1~8 The use <strong>of</strong> computer and internet Yes No
1. I use computers frequently. 94.7% 5.3%
2. I have a PC at school. 100% 0%
3. I have a computer to use during winter vacation. 97.3% 2.6%
4. I have internet access during winter vacation . 94.6% 5.4%
5. What is the internet connection during winter vacation? Regular
bandwidth
37.1%
57
Wide
bandwidth
62.9%
7. I use Internet resources for learning English regularly. 7.9% 92.1%
8. In the past English classes, my teacher used computer
assisted language learning methods in class.
26.3% 73.7%
On questions regarding learners’ English learning, about 31.6% <strong>of</strong> the learners
responded that they like English learning, however, only 5.3% <strong>of</strong> them was confident
<strong>of</strong> their English ability. As for feelings and learning towards respective skills,
vocabulary and grammar were reported as the most difficult skills while reading was
considered the easiest. Moreover, the one skill that learners wish to sharpen the
most is speaking, followed by vocabulary (see Table 4.2).

Table 4.2 Learners’ perspectives on English learning
Item 8~12 Learners’ Perspectives on English Learning
8. The way I feel
about learning
English.
9. The way I feel
about my
English ability.
Like
it very
much
5.3%
Very
good
0%
11. The way I feel about the
following English
skills: (1. Very difficult
2.Difficult 3.OK
4.Easy 5.Very easy)
12. The one skill that I want
to improve the most.
Like it
26.3%
Good
5.3%
58
No
preference
60.5%
OK
52.6%
Dislike it
5.3%
Bad
28.9%
Mean
Listening 2.5 Speaking 2.5 Reading 3.1
Writing 2.6 Vocabulary 2.4 Grammar 2.4
Listening
39.5%
Speaking
23.7%
Reading
5.3%
Writing
5.3%
Dislike it
very much
2.6%
Very bad
13.2%
Vocabulary
26.3%
For questions on learners’ past extensive reading experiences, up to 78.9% <strong>of</strong> the
students had been encouraged to form the habit <strong>of</strong> reading regularly by their English
teachers before, yet, only 13.2% <strong>of</strong> them had extensive reading habits. The reasons
for not having extensive reading habit were mainly because they did not have time for
reading (28%), they could not find suitable reading materials (24%), and that most
reading materials were too difficult to comprehend (20%) (see Table 4.3).

Table 4.3 Learners’ extensive reading experience
Item 13~15 Learners’ Extensive Reading
Experiences
13. In the past English classes, my
teachers have encouraged me to
form extensive reading habits.
Yes 78.9% (30/38)
No 21.1% (8/38)
14. I have extensive reading habit. Yes 13.2% (5/38)
No 86.8% (33/38)
15. The reasons why I do not have
extensive reading habits.
4.2.2 The results <strong>of</strong> the pretest
59
No time to read 28% (14/50)
No time to find suitable material
24% (12/50)
Most materials are too difficult to
comprehend 20% (10/50)
Cannot find interesting materials
16% (8/50)
Have no interest in learning English
12% (6/50)
The pretest was designed to tap into learners’ initial word knowledge with an aim
to locate learners’ unknown words for use <strong>of</strong> measuring the amount <strong>of</strong> word exposure
leading to vocabulary acquisition. In the pretest, learners were to put a check by the
word that they have seen before and try to provide a Chinese translation for it. Two
sets <strong>of</strong> words were included in the pretest, familiar words which included ten words
randomly selected from the familiar word lists, GSL and HSF, and unfamiliar words
which were fifty randomly chosen target words grouped according to their amount <strong>of</strong>
exposure in the sixteen readings. The 60 words were graded and transformed
respectively to 100% with each correct familiar word scoring 10 points and each
correct unfamiliar word scoring 2 points. An independent t-test was run to
determine whether learners’ performances on these two sets <strong>of</strong> words differ. With
mean scores <strong>of</strong> 84.73 and 39 respectively, significant differences between familiar and
unfamiliar words were revealed (t(2/38)=12.737, p

estimation <strong>of</strong> learners’ vocabulary level when we used the four word lists as criteria <strong>of</strong>
selection (see Table 4.4).
Table 4.4 The independent t-test for familiar and unfamiliar words in the pretest
n Mean SD t value df p
Familiar Words 38 84.74 15.89 12.737 74 .000*
Unfamiliar Words 38 39.00 15.41
Note: p

Table 4.5 Target words completely unfamiliar to learners
Number <strong>of</strong> Groups Amount <strong>of</strong> Words in the
Exposure Group
Group 1 (1-2 times) 2 times monopoly Noun
1 times recruitment Noun
61
Word Classes
Group 2 (3-4 times) 4 times startling Adjective
4 times deputy Adjective
Group 3 (5-6 times) 6 times calligraphy Noun
5 times epidemic Adjective
Group 4 (7-8 times) 8 times faculty Noun
Group 5 (more than 9 times) 15 times entrepreneur Noun
4.2.3 The results <strong>of</strong> the posttest
15 times hypnosis Noun
10 times administrative Adjective
A posttest was conducted one week after learners have finished sixteen reading
texts for two purposes: to measure overall word gain and to determine the necessary
amount <strong>of</strong> exposure for incidental word learning. Items designed as the Vocabulary
Knowledge Scale (Paribakht & Wesche, 1996) including the 50 target words tested in
pretest was adopted as posttest. Scorings in VKS were based on learners’
demonstration <strong>of</strong> self-report knowledge on each word. Knowledge from never
having seen the word before to being able to make a correct sentence with the target
word were scored on a scale <strong>of</strong> 1-5. For the purpose <strong>of</strong> examining word gains,
words with scores from 1 to 2 were classified as words that are “not known” to
learners and words with scores from 3 to 5 were the ones considered as “known”
(Paribakht & Wesche, 1997). Referring to the VKS scoring scale, with a correct
Chinese translation provided for a certain word, a score ranging from 3 to 5 could be
obtained, and therefore, the word could be considered “known” by the learner.
Otherwise, the word remains “not known”. Our pretest and posttest, though differ in
format, were comparable due to the common distinction <strong>of</strong> determining unknown

words from known words. The provision <strong>of</strong> a correct Chinese translation for a target
word was the indication in both tests. Percentage <strong>of</strong> known words in pretest and
posttest were analyzed in paired t-test. As is apparent from Table 4.6, highly
significant overall vocabulary gains (t(2/38)=8.849, p

Post hoc analysis using Least Significant Difference (LSD), procedures was used
to locate the differences among groups (see Table 4.7). The results indicated
learners’ performance in group one significantly inferior to group two, group four, and
group five. Again, learners’ word gain in group two was extremely high compared
to those <strong>of</strong> other groups. Leaving group two aside, a significant word gain was
observed in group four and group five. While group three did not result in
significantly different word gain compared to group one, group four and five reached
a level <strong>of</strong> significance, indicating word exposure <strong>of</strong> more than 7 times able to bring
learners from score 1 to score 2 on VKS scale.
Table 4.7 The ANOVA statistics for posttest scores among the five groups <strong>of</strong>
different exposure amount
Mean SD Group1 Group2 Group3 Group4 Group5
Group 1 (1-2 times) 1.68 .74 * * *
Group 2 (3-4 times) 2.37 .94 *
Group 3 (5-6 times) 2.05 1.35
Group 4 (7-8 times) 2.08 .67 *
Group 5 (9~ times) 2.39 1.03 *
Note: * Sig. p

vocabulary level, on the other hand, learners with scores below average were in the
low vocabulary level group. With an average <strong>of</strong> 49.5% known words in the pretest,
21 learners were allocated to the high vocabulary level group. Learners in the high
vocabulary level group had an average <strong>of</strong> 50% known target word and 90% known
familiar word initial knowledge when taking the pretest. 17 learners were allocated
to the low vocabulary level group. These learners had an average 25% known target
word and 78% known familiar words as their initial word knowledge. An
independent t-test was executed to compare the mean VKS scores on the ten target
words <strong>of</strong> learners from the two different vocabulary levels. The results indicated
that the two groups significantly differed from one another with the high vocabulary
level group achieving a mean <strong>of</strong> 2.17 on the 5-point VKS scale and the low
vocabulary group reached a mean <strong>of</strong> 1.79 (see Table 4.8), confirming our speculation
that with the same amount <strong>of</strong> exposure to target words, learners with higher
vocabulary entry level were capable <strong>of</strong> acquiring completely unknown words better
than learners <strong>of</strong> lower vocabulary level. Learners <strong>of</strong> low vocabulary level, on the
other hand, showed greater dependency on frequency <strong>of</strong> exposure while learning new
words.
Table 4.8 The independent t-test for the posttest performance <strong>of</strong> the high vocabulary
group and the low vocabulary group
n Mean SD t value df p
high 21 2.17 .97 4.210 378 .000*
low 17 1.79 .76
Note: p

the COBUILD Dictionary (Sinclair, 1995), which organizes words into five frequency
bands with band five being the most frequent easy words and band one the least
frequent difficult words. A table <strong>of</strong> target words in the study and the COBUILD
frequency bands that each word belongs to is showed in Table 4.9
Table 4.9. Target words and COBUILD frequency bands
Number <strong>of</strong> Groups Amount <strong>of</strong> Words in the COBUILD
Exposure Group
frequency bands
Group 1 (1-2 times) 2 times monopoly Band 1
1 times recruitment Band 3
Group 2 (3-4 times) 4 times startling Band 2
4 times deputy Band 4
Group 3 (5-6 times) 6 times calligraphy Not found
5 times epidemic Band 2
Group 4 (7-8 times) 8 times faculty Band 2
Group 5 (more than 9 times) 15 times entrepreneur Band 1
15 times hypnosis Band 1
10 times administrative Band 2
As can be seen from Table 4.9, except for words in group two, “startling” and
“deputy” which belong to band 2 and band 4 respectively, most words were found in
band 1 or band 2, the least frequent and most difficult two bands. This word
difficulty difference was also demonstrated in posttest results. While the mean
scores in other groups showed a gradual rise in word gains with the increase <strong>of</strong>
amount <strong>of</strong> exposure, group two displayed an unusually high mean score, almost as
high as words in group five, the ones which appeared for nine or more times,
indicating that words in group two could be easier to acquire than others.
65

4.2.4 The results <strong>of</strong> the evaluation questionnaire
After the 38 learners have completed all sixteen reading texts on the online
extensive reading syllabus, two evaluation questionnaires: an online one and an
in-class one, were distributed to probe learners’ perceptions on the syllabus. Due to
the reason that learners’ fresh impressions on the online extensive reading syllabus
would be more beneficial for some <strong>of</strong> the designed questions, question items closely
related to specific features <strong>of</strong> the online extensive reading syllabus were programmed
online for learners to do immediately after they have finished all sixteen readings.
On the other hand, questions which require lesser online reading experience
impressions were collected together and distributed in class one week after all learners
have completed the sixteen readings. The two evaluation questionnaires include the
following four categories: system interface design, features fostering vocabulary
learning, features <strong>of</strong> the online reading texts, and motivation <strong>of</strong> future use. The
results from both questionnaires are discussed together in terms <strong>of</strong> the above
categories and detailed results <strong>of</strong> each questionnaire are given in Appendix O and
Appendix P.
For questions on learners’ motivation <strong>of</strong> future use, about 49.9% <strong>of</strong> the learners
said that they liked learning English after the online extensive reading experience and
about 5.2 % <strong>of</strong> the learners said they disliked learning English after the online reading
experience. Compared to the responses in background questionnaire in which 31.6%
<strong>of</strong> the learners said that they liked English learning and 7.9% <strong>of</strong> the learners said they
disliked English learning, the number <strong>of</strong> the learners who have negative attitudes
towards English learning decreased slightly perhaps because the extensive reading
experience encouraged English learning motivation (see Table 4.10). In addition,
81.6% <strong>of</strong> the learners expressed their wish <strong>of</strong> continuing to use similar reading
syllabus in the future. Being able to improve English reading skills (42%) and able
66

to facilitate vocabulary learning (33%) were the two main reasons reported by the
learners. Only 18.4% <strong>of</strong> the learners indicated that they will not use similar tools for
learning English in the future, the main reason being that they are not used to reading
online (51%) (see Table 4.10). Of the 7 learners (18.4%) who indicated that they
will not use similar online reading syllabus in the future, four <strong>of</strong> them explained that
they regarded the online extensive reading syllabus as a helpful tool; however, they
already have extensive reading habits and satisfactory reading materials in print.
Table 4.10 Learners’ motivation <strong>of</strong> future use
The way I feel about English learning 1. Dislike it very much 0% (0/38)
after being exposed to the online 2. Dislike it 5.3% (2/38)
extensive reading syllabus.
3. No preference 44.7% (17/38)
4. Like it 42.1% (16/38)
5. Like it very much 7.9% (3/38)
Will I use similar online extensive Yes, I will 81.6% (31/38)
reading syllabus in the future?
No, I will not 18.4% (7/38)
The reasons why I will use similar Able to improve reading skills
online extensive reading syllabus in the
42% (24/64)
future:
Able to enhance vocabulary
33% (21/64)
The articles are interesting
11% (7/64)
There are various tools fostering
vocabulary learning 16% (10/64)
Other 3% (2/64)
The reasons why I will not use similar Not used to reading long articles
online extensive reading syllabus in the
8% (1/12)
future:
Not used to online reading
51% (6/12)
Dislike the fixed set schedules organized
by the online extensive reading syllabus
8% (1/12)
Other 33% (4/12)
67

Table 4.11 shows learners’ responses regarding features fostering vocabulary
learning in the online extensive reading syllabus. Learners perceived positively on
these features with a mean score <strong>of</strong> 3.3 on a five-point Likert scale. Repetitive
exposure (mean=3.9) and highlighting with different colors on target and exposed
words (mean=3.8) were considered most helpful; however, gloss was thought to be
least beneficial with the lowest mean <strong>of</strong> 2.9. Learners further indicated that more
words should be glossed to help reading comprehension.
Table 4.11 Learners’ attitudes towards features fostering vocabulary learning
(1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.No preference 4.Agree
5.Strongly Disagree)
Mean Rank
The repetitive target words is able to help me learn vocabulary. 3.8 1
The highlighting <strong>of</strong> target and exposed words is able to help me learn
vocabulary.
The bilingual concordancer, TotalRecall, is able to help me learn
vocabulary.
68
3.7 2
2.9 3
The gloss is able to help me learn vocabulary. 2.8 4
Mean 3.3
To investigate learners’ perception towards reading texts, Table 4.12 shows that
learners agreed the text genre as being dynamic (mean=3.8) and topics being
interesting (mean=3.4). Moreover, learners indicated that compared to selecting
reading texts on their own, they prefer the online extensive reading syllabus to prepare
texts for them (mean=3.7). Nevertheless, for the weaknesses <strong>of</strong> reading texts, the
long texts caused the greatest difficulties for most learners (mean=3.9).

Table 4.12 Learners’ attitudes towards features <strong>of</strong> reading texts
Strength <strong>of</strong> the reading texts
(1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.No preference 4.Agree
5.Strongly Disagree)
69
Mean Rank
The genres <strong>of</strong> the articles are dynamic. 3.8 1
Compared with searching suitable reading materials on my own, I
prefer the online extensive reading syllabus to prepare reading
materials for me.
3.7 2
The topics <strong>of</strong> the articles are interesting. 3.4 3
Weakness <strong>of</strong> the reading texts
(1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.No preference 4.Agree
5.Strongly Disagree)
Mean Rank
The articles are too long. 3.9 1
The vocabulary level in the articles is too hard. 3.3 2
The vocabulary level in the articles is too easy. 2.4 3
Learners’ perception towards the interface design <strong>of</strong> the system is shown in Table
4.13. Overall, learners were satisfied with the overall layout <strong>of</strong> the online extensive
reading syllabus.
Table 4.13 Learners’ attitudes towards interface design <strong>of</strong> the system
(1.Strongly Disagree 2.Disagree 3.No preference 4.Agree
5.Strongly Disagree)
Mean
The word font in the syllabus is suitable for reading. 3.7
The spaces between words in the syllabus are suitable for reading. 3.7
The word size in the syllabus is suitable for reading. 3.7
The layout in the syllabus is suitable for reading. 3.7
Mean 3.7

4.3 Discussion
4.3.1. The feasibility <strong>of</strong> incorporating online tools to an online extensive reading
syllabus for vocabulary learning purposes
Based on implications drawn from previous studies, we incorporated textual
gloss, highlighting, TotalRecall (a bilingual concordancer), high frequency word lists
and computerized sequencing techniques to the design <strong>of</strong> an online extensive reading
syllabus for vocabulary learning purposes. To reiterate, the use <strong>of</strong> textual gloss was
reasoned as being able to bridge the gap between L2 text and L2 learners’ limited
lexical knowledge (Chun & Plass, 1997; Davis, 1989; Leffa, 1992; Liou, 2000;
Hulstijn, 1993; Hulstijn, et al., 1996; Jacobs, 1994) while highlighting was used for
the purpose <strong>of</strong> raising learners’ attention to target words. The bilingual concordancer,
TotalRecall, was viewed as a search access deepening learners’ processing <strong>of</strong> words
(Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001). Finally, the text sequencing procedures with high
frequency word lists were designed to locate reading texts comprehensible for
learners’ existing word level as well as to ensure substantive amount <strong>of</strong> target word
exposure.
In regard to the aim <strong>of</strong> ensuring comprehensible input, the sixteen texts placed on
the syllabus demonstrated an average target word rate <strong>of</strong> 1.9%, a percentage within
the optimal range <strong>of</strong> 2%~5% suggested by Nation (2001). Also, for the purpose <strong>of</strong>
providing repetitive target word exposure, average target word repetition rate within
the sixteen texts reached a portion <strong>of</strong> 46%. Of the 223 target words in the sixteen
texts, 151 words appeared more than one time and 72 <strong>of</strong> them appeared three times or
more. The distribution result in our syllabus differ greatly compared to Ghardirins’
Textladder (2003) in which an amount <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> five times was ensured within
almost 300 pieces <strong>of</strong> reading text, suggesting that our goals <strong>of</strong> providing
comprehensible input and multiple exposure <strong>of</strong> target words were realized.
70

Measurable vocabulary learning was demonstrated in that the percentage <strong>of</strong>
learners’ “known” words increased and “not known” words decreased after 12 weeks
<strong>of</strong> extensive reading on the online extensive reading syllabus (see Figure 4.1).
Learners’ improved word knowledge verified the claim that such an online extensive
reading syllabus with various learning tools was adequate for effective incidental
word learning. Likewise, feedback in evaluation questionnaires also indicated
learners’ overall positive perception towards the above online tools, indicating the
feasibility <strong>of</strong> utilizing the online extensive reading syllabus for enhancing learners’
word acquisition while reading. Nonetheless, several technical difficulties were
observed throughout the process <strong>of</strong> developing <strong>of</strong> the syllabus.
Figure 4.1. Percentage <strong>of</strong> known and not known words in the pretest and the posttest
Percentage
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Percentage <strong>of</strong> "known" and "not known" words
in the pretest and the posttest
61
39
71
50.5
49.5
pretest posttest
Unknown words
Known words
The first technical difficulty encountered derived from the selection <strong>of</strong> texts.
<strong>Texts</strong> from the Sinorama magazine were originally maintained as being
background-familiar to target learners due to its home culture oriented topic themes
and therefore suitable for minimizing learner’s possible reading difficulties.
However, these particular features <strong>of</strong> Sinorama texts have resulted in unexpected
difficulties in the process <strong>of</strong> programming. In order to introduce Taiwanese culture,

direct phonetic translations <strong>of</strong> Taiwanese names on objects, idioms, or customs were
used in Sinorama texts, for example, shabing youtiao (燒餅油條) or jitong (乩童).
Such words were common but not easy to detect and isolate in Sinorama articles.
They have amounted to a percentage in the texts which attenuated the effect <strong>of</strong> word
lists frequency and sequencing <strong>of</strong> text if not excluded one by one. Constant
obstacles therefore emerged during the process <strong>of</strong> locating high frequent words,
calculating the percentage <strong>of</strong> unfamiliar words, highlighting <strong>of</strong> target words and
exposed words, and glossing for unknown words. During the process <strong>of</strong>
programming, time consuming manual modification and screening were required in
order to tackle such problems. Though texts in Sinorama do <strong>of</strong>fer the advantage <strong>of</strong>
being background-familiar, a corpus not as strongly culture-oriented as Sinorama
texts is suggested to be utilized in the future for an online extensive reading syllabus
in order to simplify sequencing procedures.
A second technical difficulty originated during the process <strong>of</strong> glossing. In order
to locate appropriate meaning for target words and proper nouns, development <strong>of</strong>
gloss involved first matching and aligning sentences from Chinese and English texts.
After Chinese translation was aligned with English, manual double checking was then
employed to make sure the correctness <strong>of</strong> each translation. However, the subtle
meaning differences in English-Chinese sentences were unable to guarantee the
correctness <strong>of</strong> single word translation. As a result, unexpectedly more manual
modification was invested. It is supposed that a more plausible method able to
generate gloss would remarkably reduce the difficulty <strong>of</strong> incorporating gloss to the
online extensive reading syllabus.
To sum up, technically, the feasibility <strong>of</strong> incorporating on-line searching tools,
gloss, word lists, and computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive
reading syllabus for vocabulary learning purpose could be more successfully realized
72

if appropriate non culture-oriented reading texts are selected and glossing problems
are overcame.
4.3.2. Learners’ feedback towards the online extensive reading syllabus
After the twelve-week extensive reading experience with the online extensive
reading syllabus, learners’ reaction towards the syllabus were largely positive and
they have approved <strong>of</strong> the various vocabulary enhancement features as being effective
for vocabulary acquisition. Improved reading and vocabulary abilities were
perceived by learners and indicated as the major advantages <strong>of</strong> the syllabus. Though
functions such as the bilingual concordancer Totalrecall, highlighting, and repetition
<strong>of</strong> target words were endorsed effective in general, a particular tool, gloss, however,
was considered unsatisfactory with the suggestion that more words be glossed. In
accordance with the opinions on gloss, about one-thirds <strong>of</strong> the learners felt that the
texts were too difficult to comprehend despite the fact that they had enjoyed the
reading process. Moreover, texts were regarded as being too long. Learners’
frustrations were evident in their performance <strong>of</strong> multiple choice comprehension
questions as they merely achieved a comprehension <strong>of</strong> about 75% while reading.
These feedback contradicted greatly with our previous attempt to ensure the
number <strong>of</strong> target words and the estimation <strong>of</strong> learner vocabulary level confirmed in
pretest. From observing learners’ reading process, we suspect that the above learner
difficulties might originate from the same problem, Taiwanese college learners’
inexperience in extensive reading. Learners reported that they were not used to long
texts and they either grew out <strong>of</strong> patience or their eyes easily felt tired from reading
on-line. Comprehensibility dropped as they struggled towards the end <strong>of</strong> the texts.
Thus, though the new word rate had been controlled by sequencing procedures and
pretest had confirmed our estimation <strong>of</strong> their vocabulary level, learner’ heavy reliance
73

on gloss suggested that they still did not grow out <strong>of</strong> habits in senior high
instruction—intensive reading. From results <strong>of</strong> the background questionnaire, it is
found that despite learners’ rich experience in receiving extensive reading instructions,
very few <strong>of</strong> them have extensive reading habits. Without much practice, their
intensive reading habits were remarkably obvious while reading texts from the on-line
reading syllabus. Low tolerance <strong>of</strong> ambiguity was observed as learners tended to
look up every word that they were not completely sure. From the tracking records, it
is shown that learners seldom looked up target words in the bilingual concordancer,
Totalrecall, for more information besides Chinese translation. Instead, unglossed
words, including words from the familiar word lists, were the ones searched. It is
speculated that instead <strong>of</strong> using extensive reading strategies such as contextual
guessing, learners immediately sought for help whenever they stumbled across
sentences they did not understand. Furthermore, learners had the tendency to make
clear every single sentence before proceeding to read, a habit not encouraged in
extensive reading. This intensive reading habit in turn made reading long text more
tiresome.
Day and Bamford (1998) pointed out that learners’ previous experiences on
reading might predispose learners against extensive reading. Since intensive reading,
in which all vocabulary and grammatical patterns were carefully studied within texts,
was the common in-class practice in Taiwan, learners’ reading habits were difficult to
adjust even with extensive strategy instruction implemented. It is suggested that in
addition to making extensive reading strategies explicit in class, more practice
sessions should be scheduled as guidance to the extensive reading ability. Moreover,
on-going time to time reminders on goals and strategies <strong>of</strong> extensive reading could be
emphasized throughout the activity.
One other explanation for the contradiction on the presumably low new word
74

ate and learners’ perception <strong>of</strong> insufficient glossed words is that learners’
comprehension difficulty might derive from sources other than vocabulary such as
complicated sentence patterns or ability to grasp main ideas (Berman, 1984; Nuttall,
2000). In other words, vocabulary control alone could only to certain extent
sequence text difficulty and thereby enhance comprehension, difficulties in syntax and
reading strategies might emerge as vocabulary obstruction was minimized to the least.
All in all, though learners have enjoyed the online extensive reading syllabus,
their extensive reading inexperience impeded fluency in reading. Due to the fact that
the current study only lasted for twelve weeks, the question <strong>of</strong> whether learners’
reading difficulty would gradually diminish with increase in extensive reading
experience awaits for further exploration.
4.3.3. Amount <strong>of</strong> Exposure necessary for incidental vocabulary acquisition
Discrepancy in amount <strong>of</strong> exposure required for successful word acquisition
suggested by various researchers has been documented in previous studies (Nagy,
Herman & Anderson, 1985;1987; Nation, 1990; Rott, 1999; Sarage, Nation &
Meister, 1978). The nature <strong>of</strong> word knowledge as a continuum leads to the
phenomenon that merely one exposure to target word could be able to push learners’
knowledge further along the continuum, yet, even with exposure up to fifty times,
learners’ word knowledge might still not be so satisfactory as to actively use words in
various contexts. Researchers’ discrete opinions on what may be considered as
successful word acquisition and the fact that previous studies might be measuring
different points along this developmental construct could be the factors attributing to
diverse results. Hence, by viewing word learning as a continuum with incremental
learning leading to learners’ receptive and productive knowledge for specific words,
the current study adopted VKS (Paribakht & Wesche, 1993) as a vocabulary
75

measurement tool for its function <strong>of</strong> being able to track early word developments.
Ten target words identified in pretest as completely unknown to all 38 learners were
assigned into five groups according to their amount <strong>of</strong> exposure within the sixteen
texts used in the online extensive reading syllabus.
In the current study, learners’ word gains were observed in all five groups,
including words in group one, the ones which appeared once or twice. This is in
accordance to the findings from Nagy’s (1985; 1987) and Rott’s (1999) studies that
though the improvements were minor, merely one or two exposure <strong>of</strong> target word
could still contribute to learners’ initial word knowledge. This contribution <strong>of</strong> one or
two encounters, <strong>of</strong> course, was not adequate for successful word acquisition <strong>of</strong> more
in-depth knowledge. In fact, the results from our study demonstrated that with
scoring below 3 points on the VKS scale, learners were unable to successfully recall
the Chinese meanings <strong>of</strong> target words even with words in group five, which contains
words with exposure amount from 9 up to 15 times. Moreover, very few learners
have attempted trying to make sentences using target words in the posttest. It seems
that exposure amount <strong>of</strong> up to 15 times was unable to guarantee receptive exposure,
let along more complex and pr<strong>of</strong>ound productive knowledge.
The limited word acquisition found in our study adds yet another piece <strong>of</strong>
evidence supported by already plentiful research that incidental vocabulary
acquisition while reading could take place; however, its gains could be superficial and
fragile (Wesche & Paribakht, 2000; Hulstijn, 1993; Huckin & Coady, 1999). Given
our various endeavors to foster a vocabulary inducing reading environment, learners’
performance seems unsatisfactory at first glance compared to some previous L2
studies assessing learners’ receptive and productive knowledge gain through reading.
Four possible factors might have contributed to this difference—namely, the use <strong>of</strong>
authentic material, learners’ depth <strong>of</strong> processing, target word difficulty, and individual
76

differences.
In Rott (1999)’s study, significant receptive and productive knowledge were
documented for words which appeared merely twice. Rott (1997) attributed
learners’ better word gain to the inferenceability <strong>of</strong> target words within well-designed
reading materials in which sufficient contextual cues were provided. Additionally,
target words in the reading were ensured to be main idea related in the texts.
Meanings <strong>of</strong> target words were more readily accessible in such a condition. Our
study is more comparable with Knight (1994) and Paribakht and Weshche (1997)
study in that authentic texts were used for reading. Paribakht and Wesche (1997)’s
study using VKS to assess learners’ word gain in reading only and reading plus
vocabulary exercise conditions. For the reading only condition in which learners
read a total <strong>of</strong> 24 texts with target words repetitively appearing in the texts, the
knowledge <strong>of</strong> target words mainly reached only the recognition level, a result similar
to the present study. With the purpose <strong>of</strong> conveying information rather than
fostering vocabulary learning, authentic materials could not provide readily adequate
contextual cues conducive to incidental vocabulary acquisition. Necessary amount
<strong>of</strong> exposure for successful acquisition therefore increased possibly due to the play <strong>of</strong>
inferenceability in authentic materials. The differences emerged from using
pre-written and authentic texts also point to the need <strong>of</strong> distinguishing between
authentic and pre-written texts in investigating frequency factors while reading.
Another reason influencing word acquisition outcome in the study could be
learners’ shallow depth <strong>of</strong> processing. In order to prevent incorrect inference <strong>of</strong>
target words and to raise learners’ awareness, textual gloss <strong>of</strong> Chinese translations and
highlighting were available to learners. However, it seems that such preliminary
noticing did not encourage learners to engage in deeper mental processing <strong>of</strong> forming
lexical-semantic-syntactic relationship. Due to the nature <strong>of</strong> extensive reading,
77

learners’ processing <strong>of</strong> texts was presumably meaning-based. Hence, only when
word meaning is not available at the time <strong>of</strong> use will learners take into account
surrounding contexts <strong>of</strong> target words and deeper analyses <strong>of</strong> target words contextual
cues be processed. As was indicated by Wesche and Paribakht (2000), in the context
<strong>of</strong> extensive reading “once the immediate communicative need has been met, the
learner does not undertake future mental processing <strong>of</strong> the word” (p. 197). The gloss
originally incorporated for ensuring correct target word meaning, though suggested by
previous studies as being beneficial to word learning, attenuated the possibility <strong>of</strong>
learners’ deeper mental processing.
A dilemma was posed here in that preciseness <strong>of</strong> word meaning and depth <strong>of</strong>
processing were both desired. It could be that more exposure along the reading
process might be able to mend learners’ superficial acquisitions at initial stages.
However, as was found in the current study, the amount <strong>of</strong> exposure for receptive and
productive knowledge should be greater than at least 15 times in an extensive reading
context. Whether learners have ample enough opportunities for such an amount <strong>of</strong>
encounter and whether the vocabulary pay<strong>of</strong>f in extensive reading is suitable in EFL
context are still in question. Thus, a more promising alternative for quality
vocabulary acquisition might be to use a combination <strong>of</strong> explicit vocabulary
instruction and implicit extensive reading. Positive evidence was found for the use
<strong>of</strong> explicit vocabulary instruction in conjunction with extensive reading (Paribakht
and Weshche, 1997; Quan, 1996), indicating the benefits <strong>of</strong> certain degree <strong>of</strong> teacher
intervention in second language vocabulary teaching.
Nation (1990) proposed that the intrinsic difficulty <strong>of</strong> words could be a
possibility underlying the ease <strong>of</strong> word acquisition. The results in the current study
seem to demonstrate such effect with learners needing more than an amount <strong>of</strong> 15
exposure on the ten target words mainly found in the most difficult band <strong>of</strong> the
78

COBUILD word lists. Compare to Rott (1999)’s study in which an amount <strong>of</strong> six
exposure was proposed as being sufficient leading to both receptive and productive
word knowledge on target words with higher frequency and easier than the ones in the
current study, the potential difficulty <strong>of</strong> target words, therefore, could serve as the
reason for increasing demands on amount <strong>of</strong> exposure necessary for word acquisition
in the present study. Such result furthermore points to the direction <strong>of</strong> taking into
consideration target word difficulty factor when dealing with frequency <strong>of</strong> target word
exposure issue while reading.
As was explicated previously, learners’ inexperience in extensive reading was
proposed as being the major factor leading to their unsatisfactory word acquisition in
the current study. Pulido (2003) pointed out that for advance readers, the
automaticity <strong>of</strong> activating reading strategies “free up the attentional resources for
further vocabulary development” (p 239). The learners involved in the present study
however, seems to be readers who have not mastered reading strategies to achieve
automaticity. With lack <strong>of</strong> reading experience and thereby insufficient text
comprehension, learners’ influenced incidental vocabulary acquisition could be
suspected. Aside from previous reading experience, learners’ entry vocabulary level
could also be a factor affecting incidental vocabulary acquisition. In accordance to
the study <strong>of</strong> Zahar, Cobb, and Spada (2001), the present study also found a stronger
dependence on frequency for low vocabulary level learners. Compared to the
participants in Zahar, Cobb, and Spada (2001) study, whose vocabulary ability ranged
from beginners to bilinguals, learners in the current study were all considered
intermediate L2 learners. The vocabulary entry ability effect persisted, however,
even with a group <strong>of</strong> high homogeneity such as ones in this study. Taken learners’
reading experiences and vocabulary ability together, it seems the complex issue <strong>of</strong> the
amount <strong>of</strong> exposure required for successful incidental vocabulary acquisition could
79

not be untangled without considering the impact <strong>of</strong> possible individual differences
factors.
4.3.4. Summary
summarized below.
Through the data analysis, answers to the research questions are
1. Is it feasible to incorporate on-line searching tools, gloss, word lists, and
computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive reading syllabus for
vocabulary learning purpose? What problems or limitations will be
encountered?
Technically, it is feasible to incorporate on-line searching tools, gloss, word lists,
and computerized sequencing techniques to an on-line extensive reading syllabus for
vocabulary learning purposes. <strong>Texts</strong> were successfully sequenced according to
difficulty levels with repetitious target word exposure. Moreover, learners’
measurable word gains were observed after reading on the extensive reading syllabus.
However, more laborious manual efforts could be saved given appropriate non
culture-oriented reading texts and a more advanced glossing method.
2. What is learners’ feedback on the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2a. What is learners’ attitude towards the on-line extensive reading syllabus?
2b. What are learners’ difficulties and recommendations towards the on-line
extensive reading syllabus?
The results revealed that learners have enjoyed reading from the online extensive
reading syllabus and their inclination for using such a reading program to facilitate
vocabulary learning is strong. Nonetheless, learners’ lack <strong>of</strong> experience in extensive
reading had influenced their reading fluency and comprehension.
3. If the on-line extensive reading syllabus is effective in leading to vocabulary
80

acquisition, how much exposure <strong>of</strong> words do learners have to encounter for successful
word acquisition?
3a. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word are required to lead to learners’ receptive word
knowledge?
3b. How much exposure <strong>of</strong> word are required to lead to learners’ productive word
knowledge?
The answer concerning the amount <strong>of</strong> exposure necessary for successful
receptive and productive word knowledge is inconclusive. Learners were not able to
recall correct translations even for words which had appeared up to 15 times. It
could only be assumed that an amount <strong>of</strong> exposure <strong>of</strong> at least 15 times is required for
word acquisition within extensive reading contexts. Inferenceability in authentic
materials, learners’ shallow depth <strong>of</strong> processing, difficulty <strong>of</strong> target words, and
individual differences were reasoned as factors for such results.
81

5.1. Overview
Chapter Five
Conclusion
This study originated from an exploratory issue <strong>of</strong> what happens to the English
teaching process when we incorporate an online extensive reading syllabus for
vocabulary acquisition purposes. The online extensive reading syllabus was
developed by integrating word lists and quantitative corpus analyses using word
frequency computer programs. With four word lists, The General Service Word List,
the Senior High Student’s Word List in Taiwan, the University Word List, and a high
frequent word list out <strong>of</strong> the original 5008 articles <strong>of</strong> a parallel corpus, Sinorama, the
syllabus graded articles based on filtering texts according to vocabulary difficulty.
Easier texts were sequenced first to provide texts with i+1 and repetitive exposure <strong>of</strong>
target words was ensured to induce quality incidental vocabulary acquisition. The
syllabus was furthermore enhanced with gloss, a bilingual concordancer, and
highlights <strong>of</strong> target words. Thirty-eight English-as-a-foreign-language college
freshmen learners were recruited to read 16 sequenced texts using the online extensive
reading syllabus within a period <strong>of</strong> 12 weeks. A pretest, a posttest, a background
questionnaire, an online evaluation questionnaire, and an in-class evaluation
questionnaire were used as instruments for data collection. In addition to feasibility,
our second concern is to which extent do learners liked the online extensive reading
syllabus. Finally, the study takes an interest in exploring the issue <strong>of</strong> the amount <strong>of</strong>
exposure required for successful receptive and productive incidental vocabulary
acquisition while reading extensively.
The results <strong>of</strong> the study indicate that it is both technically and pedagogically
feasible to incorporate an online extensive reading syllabus into English learning at
82

EFL settings. Technically, though manual efforts were laborious during certain steps
in the selection and sequencing processes, texts with comprehensible vocabulary were
successfully chosen and arranged with various online tools. Pedagogically, learners’
word gains were found and their attitudes towards online extensive reading syllabus
were mostly positive after reading online. Yet, learners’ inexperience in extensive
reading was observed to somewhat impede the meaning making process during
reading. No definite answer was found with regards to the amount <strong>of</strong> exposure
necessary for receptive and productive vocabulary acquisition. It is estimated that,
with texts <strong>of</strong> such difficult level in the study, in order for learners to recall meanings
<strong>of</strong> target words, an exposure amount <strong>of</strong> at least 15 times are needed on online
extensive reading environment. In the following section, the limitations <strong>of</strong> the
current study, the directions for future research, the developmental implications for an
online extensive reading syllabus and the pedagogical implications are presented.
5.2. Limitations <strong>of</strong> the Study
In order to address the need <strong>of</strong> learners, non-English-major college freshmen, the
criterions for selecting reading texts and word lists in this preliminary version <strong>of</strong>
online extensive reading syllabus were determined according to our specific learners’
vocabulary level. Doubtlessly, the same texts and word lists could not be used for
learners <strong>of</strong> different vocabulary levels. In regards to the selection <strong>of</strong> target text and
determination <strong>of</strong> familiar and target word lists, the decision was made based on
researchers’ experience exclusively, it is possible that despite the outcome <strong>of</strong> prettest,
the researcher had over or under estimate learners’ vocabulary level. Similar to
choosing teaching materials, the selection <strong>of</strong> target texts and word lists <strong>of</strong> such an
online extensive reading syllabus depend on teachers’ understanding <strong>of</strong> learners’
current vocabulary level and the judgment <strong>of</strong> learners’ learning priority, hence, even
83

with the same group <strong>of</strong> learners, different teachers might have diverse opinions when
dealing with such decisions.
Moreover, from previous descriptions on sequencing procedures within the
online syllabus, it is evident that the syllabus is merely an estimation <strong>of</strong> the general
vocabulary level <strong>of</strong> a group <strong>of</strong> learners rather than addressing to a particular
individual learner’s need. Questions may be raised on how the syllabus might not be
adequate for learners whose vocabulary level falls outside the norm.
In addition to learner differences, the current online extensive reading syllabus
possesses potential limitations in respect <strong>of</strong> learner interaction. With the main
purpose <strong>of</strong> the study being to discover the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> the syllabus and to quest
for an optimal sequencing method, this preliminary version lacks the access <strong>of</strong>
providing learners involvement and interaction during reading.
Besides the incompleteness <strong>of</strong> the online extensive reading syllabus design,
methodological limitations have resulted in an indefinite answer on the question <strong>of</strong>
exposure amount and degree <strong>of</strong> incidental word acquisition. Due to the time limit,
learners in this study read only 16 texts within 12 weeks. The highest amount <strong>of</strong>
target word exposure reached 15 times, an amount proved inadequate for building up
receptive or productive word knowledge. Moreover, in the current study, the
intrinsic difficulty <strong>of</strong> target words and the lack <strong>of</strong> inferential contextual cues in
reading texts seem to increase acquisition difficulties for learners.
5.3. Directions for Future Research
The issue <strong>of</strong> required word exposure for effective incidental vocabulary
acquisition within extensive reading environments remained inconclusive in this study.
Without further confirmation, the preliminary results merely <strong>of</strong>fer a dawning
understanding <strong>of</strong> an exposure amount <strong>of</strong> at least 15 times for prominent receptive
84

word knowledge. The puzzle could be further clarified if more target word
repetitions could be provided within reading texts. In addition, with careful control
<strong>of</strong> target word difficulty and selections <strong>of</strong> reading texts, future research might be able
to explore into the amount <strong>of</strong> exposure issue with more generalizable answers.
Future research should also consider the effects <strong>of</strong> individual differences factors such
as reading experiences, vocabulary level, and additional potential learner variables
which might account for differences in L2 incidental vocabulary while reading.
5.4. Developmental Implications for an Online Extensive Reading Syllabus
The most immediate developmental direction for the online extensive reading
syllabus is to incorporate substantive corpora and word lists <strong>of</strong> various levels in order
to meet the learning demands <strong>of</strong> different learners. Moreover, the laborious manual
modification invested during glossing process urged a more plausible method able to
generate gloss within an online extensive reading syllabus. Besides addressing the
need <strong>of</strong> diverse groups <strong>of</strong> learners, the online extensive reading syllabus could be
more adaptive to individual learners by introducing some extent <strong>of</strong> learners’
involvement in the process <strong>of</strong> selecting texts.
First, if texts could be pre-arranged according to text topics, such as sports,
health, entertainment or arts, learners can be provided with the opportunity <strong>of</strong>
choosing to read texts under the topics which interest them. In order to encourage
ESL students to read extensively, Coady (1997) stressed the importance <strong>of</strong> providing
materials interesting to learners as the most prominent factors within a reading
curriculum. Under the chosen topic, which contains texts a learner favor mostly, the
online extensive reading syllabus performs the sequencing procedures with a benefit
<strong>of</strong> processing fewer number <strong>of</strong> reading texts. Compared to the current version, a
syllabus which groups texts into topics would be able to <strong>of</strong>fer learner interaction and
85

also accelerate sequencing time with lesser texts.
Second, in the process <strong>of</strong> sequencing, some texts may pass all the necessary
requirements and still possess the same amount <strong>of</strong> target words and exposed words.
While selecting our sixteen texts, researchers’ intervention was involved in deciding
among these equally qualified texts. Thus, in the future, for texts which are equal in
terms <strong>of</strong> vocabulary learning condition, titles <strong>of</strong> these texts could all be listed on the
syllabus to allow learner involvement in selecting texts.
Third, a learner portfolio which includes sensitive recordings <strong>of</strong> individual
reading progress and learners’ personal notes could be established. The current
syllabus kept track <strong>of</strong> learners’ reading progress by showing learners whether they
have finished a certain text or not. However, as was suggested in the evaluation
questionnaire, most learners agreed that the texts are too long for online reading and
they were <strong>of</strong>ten lost in long texts. If page breaks could be added for long texts and
reading history kept so that learners can be sent back to the exact page where they left
<strong>of</strong>f last time, learners’ reading frustration could be reduced. In addition, learners
have suggested the functions <strong>of</strong> a vocabulary notepad, which includes individualized
records <strong>of</strong> exposed words during reading and also learners’ personal notes on specific
target words or reflections on readings. Furthermore, a text ranking device was
suggested. Learners indicated that they would be more motivated if they could rank
texts and express their feelings on whether they liked the article after reading.
All in all, a more sophisticated tracking mechanism should be set up to induce
interactions and for learners to record self-learning progresses. The suggestions
<strong>of</strong>fered by the learners in the current study are in accordance with Robb’s (2002)
recommendation as he argued that a tacking mechanism built in a learning website
could better motivate learners and integrate self-access learning resources.
86

5.5. Pedagogical Implications
In the present study, lack <strong>of</strong> extensive reading skills and experiences were found
as major obstacles interfering learners’ reading comprehension. Moreover, learners’
target word knowledge has not reached the receptive repertoire, albeit an exposure
amount <strong>of</strong> up to 15 times after reading. In an attempt to amend insufficient
extensive reading strategies and enhance vocabulary learning, a paradigm <strong>of</strong>
incorporating explicit instruction and implicit learning was suggested.
To begin with, careful orientation sessions in school lab will be needed not only
to familiarize learners with the functions on the on-line syllabus but to explain the
goals and methodology <strong>of</strong> extensive reading. Useful strategies in extensive reading
should be made explicit and practice sessions scheduled as guidance to the extensive
reading activity.
The online extensive reading syllabus is especially useful for incorporating
explicit teaching and implicit learning due to the fact that the syllabus is constructed
based on the word lists selected by instructors. The same set <strong>of</strong> word lists could be
utilized both in class and for the online extensive reading syllabus. In other words,
learners might have the chances to read the target words that they have learned in
class while engaging in extensive reading on-line. After direct and explicit
instruction <strong>of</strong> target words in class, the reading texts on the syllabus could provide
more diverse usage and contexts. The comprehensive exposure to target words in
extensive reading could bring learners a step further along the continuum <strong>of</strong>
vocabulary learning; on the other hand, the fragile and unstable word knowledge
resulted exclusively from extensive reading in turn could be more strongly anchored
to learners’ existing lexicon with explicit instruction.
It should be cautioned, however, that learners may not be aware <strong>of</strong> the
connection between these two types <strong>of</strong> learning. The instructor, hence, is
87

esponsible for connecting the two by directing learners’ attention to the relationship
<strong>of</strong> word use and contexts, the difference between intensive and extensive reading
strategies, and the initiative <strong>of</strong> utilizing an extensive reading approach to complement
in-class instruction. In other words, learners should be taught to make use <strong>of</strong>
different strategies for different reading purposes, a skill they will need for future life
long learning. Moreover, firmly established reading habits from prior experiences
might not be easy to amend especially when learners in Taiwan still have to cope with
two types <strong>of</strong> reading simultaneously in class and at home. Therefore, guidance
should not end with the initial orientation. On-going time to time reminder on goals
and strategies <strong>of</strong> extensive reading could be emphasized in class from teachers’
observation <strong>of</strong> learners reading progress and responses.
Concerns on how the online extensive reading syllabus satisfies the learning
need <strong>of</strong> those learners whose vocabulary level are remarkably superior or inferior to
the average vocabulary level <strong>of</strong> the group. Word knowledge is a continuous
development in which knowledge for a word is refined by each exposure and that
more exposure to words entails familiarization with word usage in related contexts.
Thus, for more advanced learners, it is without doubt that reading, even with texts
which are slightly simple compared to learner’s current vocabulary level, could enrich
learners’ vocabulary inventory. For less competent learners, nonetheless, special
attention and instruction from the instructor may be needed in order to overcome this
individual difference.
Evaluation is yet another aspect which inextricably demands instructor
intervention since the syllabus is only capable to the point <strong>of</strong> sequencing texts. In
addition to participation which could be recorded by a tracker, evaluation methods
could vary depending on the objectives that respective courses aim to achieve. With
limited time, comprehension questions which focus on general understanding <strong>of</strong> texts
88

may be the most time-economic way to examine learners’ comprehension. For
learners and teachers, performances on these questions could be a quick source to
check whether learners’ interpretations <strong>of</strong> texts are on the right track.
Extensive reading can play a role in developing the capacity for critical thinking
crucial for success in higher education (Day & Bamford, 1998), thus, activities could
be designed in order to involve learners in active thinking, reflecting, and commenting
<strong>of</strong> texts. Activities such as summarizing, research projects, oral reports, and writing
reflections require learners’ through understanding <strong>of</strong> text meanings and are therefore
plausible to be used as alternative ways for evaluation when class time allows. In
contrast to comprehension questions, these activities serve as more authentic and
meaningful purposes for learners’ reading.
In sum, with instructor’s input on reading strategy training, word instruction, and
evaluation, the online extensive reading syllabus is capable <strong>of</strong> serving as a bridge
linking explicit teaching and implicit learning for more ideal vocabulary acquisition.
89

REFERENCES
Berman, R.A. (1984 ). Syntactic components <strong>of</strong> the foreign language reading process
in Alderson, C. & Urquhart, A. (Eds) Reading in a Foreign Language. New
York: Longman.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (1988). Vocabulary and Language Teaching. New York:
Longman.
Chen, H. J. (1998). A preliminary investigation on Taiwanese EFL learners’
vocabulary size. Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the fifteenth conference on English teaching
and learning in the Republic <strong>of</strong> China. (pp. 193-211). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, H. J. (2003). Developing a technology-enhanced self-access reading
environment. Proceedings <strong>of</strong> 2003 International Conference on English
Teaching and Learning in the Republic <strong>of</strong> China. (pp. 103-116). Department
<strong>of</strong> English Language, Literature, and Linguistics, Providence University
Shalu, Taichung County.
Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996). Research on text comprehension in multimedia
environments. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 60-80.
Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (1997). Second Language Vocabulary Acquisiton: A Rationale
for Pedagogy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cobb, T., & Horst, M. (2001). Reading academic English: Carrying learners across
the lexical threshold. In J. Flowerdew & Peacock (Eds.), Research
perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 315-329). Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Davis, J. (1989). Facilitating effects <strong>of</strong> marginal glosses on foreign language reading.
The Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 41-47.
Davis, N., & Lyman-Hager, M. (1997). Computers and L2 reading: Student
performance, student attitudes. Foreign Language Annals, 30(1), 58-72.
Day, R., & Bamford, J. (1998). Extensive reading in the second language classroom.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elley, W. (1991). Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect <strong>of</strong> book-based
programs. Language Learning, 41(3), 375-411.
Ellis, N. (1995). Consciousness in second language acquisition: A review <strong>of</strong> field
studies and laboratory experiments. Language Awareness, 4, 123-146.
Flowerdew, J. (1993). Concordancing as a tool in course design. System, 21(2),
231-244.
Gass, S. (1999). Discussion: Incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second
Language Acquisiton, 21, 319-333.
Gettys, S., Imh<strong>of</strong>, L., & Kautz, J. (2001). Computer-assisted reading: the effect <strong>of</strong>
glossing format on comprehension and vocabulary retention. Foreign
90

Language Annals, 34(2), 91-101.
Ghadessy, M. (1979). Frequency counts, word lists, and materials preparation: A new
approach. English Teaching Forum, 17, 24-27.
Ghadirian, S. (2003). Providing controlled exposure to target vocabulary through
the screening and arranging <strong>of</strong> texts. Language Learning & Technology,
6(1), 147-164,
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. (1997). Reading and vocabulary development in a second
language: A case study. In James Coady & Thomas Huckin (Eds) Second
language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Groot, P. (2000). Computer assisted second language vocabulary acquisition.
Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 60-81.
Hafiz, F., & Tudor, I. (1989). Extensive reading and the development <strong>of</strong> language
skills. ELT Journal, 43(1), 4-13.
Hafiz, F., & Tudor, I. (1990). <strong>Graded</strong> readers as an input medium in L2 learning.
System, 18(1), 31-42.
Harley, B. (1996). Introduction: Vocabulary learning and teaching in a second
language. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 3-11.
Hazengerg, S., & Hulstijn, (1996). Defining a minimal receptive second-language
vocabulary for non-native university students: An empirical investigation.
Applied Linguistics, 17(20), 145-163.
Henriksen, B. (1999). Three dimensions <strong>of</strong> vocabulary development. Studies in
Second Language Learning, 21, 303-317.
Holley, F. (1973). A study <strong>of</strong> vocabulary learning in context: The effect <strong>of</strong> new-word
density in German reading materials. Foreign Language Annals, 6, 339-347.
Horst, M., Cobb. T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring
second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign
Language, 11(2), 207-233.
Huang, C. C. (2000). A threshold for vocabulary knowledge on reading
comprehension. Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the Seventeenth Conference on English
Teaching and Learning in the Republic <strong>of</strong> China. pp132-145.
Huang, C. C. (2001). An investigation <strong>of</strong> ESP students’ vocabulary knowledge
and reading comprehension. Selected Papers from the Tenth International
Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 436-445). Taipei: Crane.
Huckin, T., & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second
language: A review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 181-193.
Hulstijn, J. H. (1993). When do foreign-language readers look up the meaning <strong>of</strong>
unfamiliar words? The influence <strong>of</strong> task and learner variable. The Modern
Language Journal, 77(2), 139-147.
91

Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning
by advanced foreign language students: The influence <strong>of</strong> marginal glosses,
dictionary use, and reoccurrence <strong>of</strong> unknown words. The Modern Language
Journal, 80(3), 327-339.
Jacobs, G. M. (1994). What lurks in the margin: Use <strong>of</strong> vocabulary glosses as a
strategy in second language reading. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 5,
115-137.
Joe, A. (1995). Text-based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Second Language
Research, 11, 149-158.
Krasheh, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional
evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4),
440-455.
Krashen, S. (1993). The case for free voluntary reading. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 50(1), 72-81.
Knight, S. (1994). Dictionary use while reading: The effects on comprehension and
vocabulary acquisition for students <strong>of</strong> different verbal abilities. The Modern
Language Journals, 78(3), 285-299.
Kost, C., Foss, P., & Lenzini, J. (1999). Textual and pictorial gloss: Effectiveness on
incidental vocabulary growth when reading in a foreign language. Foreign
Language Annals, 32(1), 89-113.
Kyongho, H., & Nation, P. (1989). Reducing the vocabulary load and encouraging
vocabulary learning through reading newspaper. Reading in a Foreign
Language, 6(1), 323-335.
Laufer, B. (1989). What percentage <strong>of</strong> lexis is essential for comprehension? In C.
Lauren & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special Language: From humans thinking to
thinking machine (pp. 69-75). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Laufer, B (1997). The lexical plight in second language reading: Words you don’t
know, words you think you know, and words you can’t guess. In J. Coady &
T. Huckin (Eds.). Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for
Pedagogy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second
language: The construct <strong>of</strong> task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics,
22(1), 1-26.
Leefa, V.J. (1992). Making foreign language texts comprehensible for beginners: An
expreimnet with an electronic glossary. System, 20(1), 63-73.
Liou, H. C. (2000). The electronic bilingual dictionary as a reading aid to EFL
learners: Research findings and implications. Computer Assisted Language
92

Learning, 13(5), 467-476.
Lomicka, L. (1998). To Gloss or not to gloss: An investigation <strong>of</strong> reading
comprehension online. Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), 41-50.
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. (1993). Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning.
Language Learning, 43(2), 263-287.
Mason, B., & Krashen, S. (1997). Extensive reading in English as a foreign language.
System, 25(1), 91-102.
Nagy, W.E. (1997). On the role <strong>of</strong> context in first- and second-language vocabulary
learning. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description,
acquisition, pedagogy (pp. 64-83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1985). Learning words from context.
Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 233-253.
Nagy, W. E., Herman, P. A., & Anderson, R. C. (1987). Learning word meanings form
context during normal reading. American Educational Research Journal, 24,
237-270.
Nation, P. (1990). Teaching & learning vocabulary. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Nation, P. (1993). Vocabulary size, growth, and use. In Robert Schreuder & Bert
Welterns (Eds.), The bilingual lexicon, pp115-134. Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in anotherlLanguage. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P., & Coady, J. (1988). Vocabulary and reading. In Ronal Carter and Michael
McCarthy (Eds). Vocabulary and language teaching: 97-110. New York:
Longman.
Naiton, P., & Kyongho, H. (1995). Where would general service vocabulary stop and
special purposes vocabulary begin? System, 23(1), 35-41.
Nation, P. & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In N.
Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition,
pedagogy (pp. 64-83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Nuttall, C. (2000). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. UK: Macmillan
Education.
Paribakht, T. S. & Wesche, M. B. (1993). Reading comprehension and second
language development in a comprehension-based ESL program. TESL
Canada Journal, 11, 9-29.
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and
reading for meaning in second language vocabulary development. In Coady,
J., & Huckin, T. (Eds.). Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A
93

Rationale for Pedagogy (pp. 174-200). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Pulido, D. (2003). Modeling the role <strong>of</strong> second language pr<strong>of</strong>iciency and topic
familiarity in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition through
reading. Language Learning, 53(2), 233-284.
Qian, D. (1996). ESL vocabulary acquisition: Contextualization and
decontextualization. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 120-142.
Raptis, H. (1997). Is second language reading vocabulary best learned by reading?
The Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(3), 69-75.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Renandya, W., & Rajan, S. (1999). Extensive reading with adult learners <strong>of</strong> English as
a second language. RELC Journal, 30(1), 39-60.
Robb, T. (2002). Examining self-access. Paper presented at Second National
Conference on the Curriculum, Testing and New Technologies, Sultan
Qaboos University, Muscat, Oman.
Rott, S. (1999). The effect <strong>of</strong> exposure frequency on intermediate language
learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition and retention through reading.
Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 589-620.
Saragi, T., Nation, P., & Meister, G. (1978). Vocabulary learning and reading. System,
6, 72-80.
Sinclair, J. M. (1995). Collins COBUILD Dictionary (2 nd edn. ). London:
HarperCollins.
Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings
and practical suggests. ELT Journal, 49, 133-143.
Schnotz, W., & Grzondziel, H. (1996). Knowledge acquisition with static and \
animated pictures in computer-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 3,
247-249.
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T. (1996). Assessing second language vocabulary
knowledge: depth versus breadth. The Canadian Modern Language Review,
53(1), 13-39.
Wesche, M., & Paribakht, T S. (2000). Reading-based exercises in second language
vocabulary learning: An introspective study. The Modern Language Journal,
84(4), 196-213.
West, M. (1953). A General Service List <strong>of</strong> English Words. London: Longman, Green
& Co.
Worthington, D. & Nation, P. (1996). Using texts to sequence the introduction <strong>of</strong> new
vocabulary in an EAP course. RELC Journal, 27(2), 1-11.
Wu, J. C., Yeh, K. C., Chuang, T. C., Shei, W. C., & Chang, J. S. (2003). TotalRecall:
94

A bilingual concordance for computer assisted translation and language
learning. Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the 41 st Association <strong>of</strong> Computational Linguistics
Conference, Sappora, Japan, July 7-12.
http://candle.cs.nthu.edu.tw/totalrecall/concordance/concordance.aspx
Xue, G., & Nation, I. S. P. (1984). A university word list. Language Learning and
Communication, 3, 215-229.
Yoshii, M., & Flaitz, J. (2002). Second language incidental vocabulary retention: The
effect <strong>of</strong> text and picture annotation types. CALICO Journal, 20(1), 33-58.
Zahar, R., Cobb, T., & Spada, N. (2001). Acquiring vocabulary through reading:
<strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> frequency and contextual richness. The Canadian Modern
Language Review, 57(4), 541-572.
鄭恆雄 (2002),大學入學考試中心高中英文參考字彙表,台北:大學入學考試
中心。
鄭恆雄 (2003),大學入學考試中心高中英文參考字彙表之編輯方法及原則。
Proceedings the 7t International Conference on Multimedia Language
Education. (pp. 514-529). Taipei: Crane.
95

第 1-6 題 電腦方面
Appendix A
The Background Questionnaire
請回答以下問題,並在符合敘述的 □ 內打勾。謝謝 !
1. 我是否常使用電腦 是 □ 否 □
2. 我在宿舍裡有個人電腦 是 □ 否 □
3. 寒假期間家中是否有有電腦可使用? 是 □ 否 □
(答「是」者請答第 4 題,答「否」者跳答第 7 題)
4. 家中電腦是否能上網? 是 □ 否 □
5. 家中的電腦是用何種方式連接網路? 電話撥接 □ 寬頻系統 □
6. 寒假期間可以聯絡到你的 e-mail ______________________________________
7. 平常是否會利用網路上的資源學英文? 是 □ 否 □
8. 在過去的英文課中,英文老師是否曾經利用電腦輔助英文教學?
否 □
是 □ (答 “是” 者請繼續回答第 8(1)及 8(2)題)
8(1). 老師曾經利用電腦輔助 閱讀 □ 寫作 □ 單字 □
(可複選) 文法 □ 聽力 □ 會話 □
96
其他 □ ______________________
(請寫出輔助的教學內容)
8(2). 老師的教學方式 在電腦教室裡集體教學□
(可複選) 在家中上網自行學習□
其他□ __________________________
(請寫出教學方式)

第 9-12 題 英文學習方面
9. 我對學習英文的感覺
非常喜歡 □ 喜歡 □ 普通 □ 不喜歡 □ 非常不喜歡 □
10. 我覺得我的英文程度
非常好 □ 很好 □ 普通 □ 不好 □ 非常不好 □
11. 我對學習下列英文能力的感覺
(1)聽 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
(2)說 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
(3)讀 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
(4)寫 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
(5)字彙 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
(6)文法 非常困難 □ 困難 □ 普通 □ 容易 □ 非常容易 □
12. 我目前最想加強學習的英文能力: (單選)
聽 □ 說 □ 讀 □ 寫 □ 字彙 □
第 13-17 題 英文泛讀方面
泛讀是指利用空閒時間閱讀大量自己有興趣的小說、文章、雜誌、報紙…
等,也就是閱讀課外的英文讀物的習慣。
13 在過去的英文課程中,老師曾經鼓勵我培養英文泛讀的習慣 (老師曾經規
定我在課堂外自行閱讀英文雜誌或小說)
否 □
是 □ (答是者請繼續回答 13(2),13(3))
我曾經閱讀過的英文讀物:(可複選)
13(1). 英文小說 □ ________(請寫出你曾經閱讀過幾本小說)
13(2). 英文雜誌 □ (請繼續勾出閱讀過的雜誌名稱。如果你用雜誌
練習聽說能力,則不包括在內。)
空中英語教室□ 普及美語□ 長春藤美語□
大家說英語□ Time□ Newsweek□
其他□_________________________(請寫出名稱)
13(3). 英文報紙 □ (請繼續勾出閱讀過的英文報紙名稱)
China Post□ Taipei Times□ Taiwan News□
97

Student Post□ 其他□____________(請寫出名稱)
14. 我目前有英文泛讀的習慣 是 □ 否 □
(答「是」者請答第15 題,答「否」者跳答第17 題)
15. 我通常利用閒暇時間閱讀 (可複選)
15(1). 英文小說 □
15(2). 英文雜誌 □ (請勾出你習慣閱讀的雜誌名稱。如果你用雜誌
練習聽說能力,則不包括在內。)
空中英語教室□ 普及美語□ 長春藤美語□
大家說英語□ Time□ Newsweek□
其他□_________________________(請寫出名稱)
15(3). 英文報紙 □ (請勾出你習慣閱讀的英文報紙名稱)
China Post□ Taipei Times□ Taiwan News□
Student Post□ 其他□____________(請寫出名稱)
16. 我多常閱讀英文讀物
每天□ 每週一~三次□ 每週一次□
每兩週一次□ 每個月一次□ 不一定,有時間才閱讀□
17.我沒有英文泛讀習慣的原因 (可複選)
英文太差,文章大都看不懂□ 沒時間閱讀□
對學習英文沒興趣□ 沒找到有興趣的文章□ 沒時間找合適的文章□
其他 □_______________________________ (請寫出原因)
Thank You for Your Time !!
98

Appendix B
The Pretest
Please check the blank next to the words that you have seen before and provide all <strong>of</strong>
its translations that you know. Thank you!
請在你看過得英文單字旁打勾並提供中文翻譯。寫出關於此單字所有你知道的翻
譯或解釋。謝謝!
English Words (英文單字) Chinese Translations
(翻譯)
1. entrepreneur
2. institute
3. calorie
4. hypnosis
5. perform
6. administrative
7. immune
8. finally
9. constant
10. psychiatric
11. session
12. virtual
13. therapy
14. faculty
15. achieve
16. concept
17. series
18. combat
19. strain
20. personnel
21. calligraphy
22. clinical
23. potential
24. symbolic
25. negotiate
99

26. optimistic
27. consumption
28. interview
29. epidemic
30. inadequate
31. altitude
32. startling
33. deputy
34. accommodate
35. accumulate
36. embark
37. initial
38. precisely
39. import
40. inevitably
41. insufficient
42. monopoly
43. undertake
44. sustain
45. abolish
46. implicit
47. innovative
48. recruitment
49. sophisticated
50. eloquently
51. acceptable
52. believe
53. occasion
54. opinion
55. reduce
56. extension
57. favorable
58. keenly
59. luggage
60. tension
100

Appendix C
The Posttest
各位同學
先謝謝你們參與這次的測驗。以下的 50 個單字中各有五個選項,請你依照自己
對各個單字的認識圈出符合自己對此單字認識的描述。如果圈出的選項需要寫入
中文翻譯或造句請一併填入。造句時,你可以改變單字的時態、詞性、單複數以
符合句子需要。謝謝各位。
Example 1 :
Apple:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III
我看過這個字,意思可能是___蘋果___________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
Example2:
read:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是___閱讀__________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V.
我會用這個字造句。 I read newspapers very <strong>of</strong>ten.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
101

1. entrepreneur:
VI. 我對這個字沒印象。
VII. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
VIII. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IX. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
X. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
2. institute:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
3. calorie:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
4. hypnosis:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
5. perform:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
102
6. administrative:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
7. immune:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
8. finally:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
9. constant:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
10. psychiatric:
VI. 我對這個字沒印象。
VII. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
VIII. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IX. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
X. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)

11. session:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
12. virtual:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
13. therapy:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
14. faculty:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
15. achievement:
VI. 我對這個字沒印象。
VII. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
VIII. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IX. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
X. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
103
16. concept:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
17. series:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
18. combat:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
19. strain:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
20. personnel:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)

21.calligraphy:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
22. clinical:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
23. potential:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
24. symbolic:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
25. negotiate:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
104
26. optimistic:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
27. consumption:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
28.interview:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
29. epidemic:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
30. inadquate:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)

31. altitude:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
32. startling:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
33. deputy:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
34. accommodate:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
35. accumulate:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
105
36. embark:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
37. initial:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
38. precisely:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
39. import:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
40. inevitably:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)

41.insufficient:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
42. monopolistic:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
43. undertaking:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
44. sustain:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
45.abolish:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
106
46. inhibit:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
47. innovative:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
48. recruitment:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
49. sophisticated:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
50. eloquently:
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
VI. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
VII. 我看過這個字,意思可能是
_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
VIII. 我確知這個字,它的意思是
_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
IX. 我會用這個字造句。
___________________________________
___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選

1 point
Appendix D
An Example <strong>of</strong> the VKS Scoring
entrepreneur: (item one circled)
○I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II. 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
2 points
entrepreneur: (item two circled)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是_________________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
entrepreneur: (item three circled, but the meaning provided was incorrect)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是____娛樂__________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
entrepreneur: (item four circled, but the meaning provided was incorrect)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是______________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_____娛樂_____(請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
entrepreneur: (item five circled, but the meaning and the sentence provided was incorrect)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是______________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_____娛樂_____(請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。Watching movie is my entrepreneur.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
107

3 points
entrepreneur: (item three circled and the meaning provided was correct)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是_______企業家_____(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_________________ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
4 points
entrepreneur: (item four circled and the meaning provided correct)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是___________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_____企業家____ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 ___________________________________.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
entrepreneur: (item five circled, the meaning provided correct, the sentence is semantically
correct but grammatically wrong)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是___________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_____企業家____ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 I with to be ○a entrepreneur in the future.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
5 points
entrepreneur: (item five circled, the meaning provided correct, the sentence is both
semantically and grammatically correct)
I. 我對這個字沒印象。
II 我看過這個字但不知道它的意思。
III. 我看過這個字,意思可能是___________(請寫中文翻譯)。
IV. 我確知這個字,它的意思是_____企業家____ (請寫中文翻譯)。
V. 我會用這個字造句。 I with to be an entrepreneur in the future.
(如果你造了句子請同時完成第四個選項)
108

Appendix E
The Online Evaluation Questionnaire
109

Appendix F
The In-class Evaluation Questionnaire
各位同學好,首先謝謝你們填這份問卷。本問卷目的在了解同學們閱讀泛讀網站
的過程及感想,希望可藉此修正並提供同學真正需要的指導。對於下列的問題,
請同學以下列五種選項表達你的意見。
1 非常不同意 2 同意 3沒意見 4 同意 5 非常同意
1 2 3 4 5
1. 這個閱讀網站讓我在寒假時也能繼續學英文 □ □ □ □ □
2. 這個閱讀網站安排在寒假的閱讀進度適當 □ □ □ □ □
3. 這個閱讀網站讓需要學習的單字重複出現
可以幫助我學習新的單字 □ □ □ □ □
4. 這個閱讀網站的文章內容及類型相當多元 □ □ □ □ □
5. 這個閱讀網站的文章大部分都有趣 □ □ □ □ □
6. 比起自己找尋合適的文章,我比較喜歡這個閱讀網站
幫我安排合適的文章 □ □ □ □ □
7. 在接觸過網路泛讀後,我對學習英文的感覺
非常喜歡 □ 喜歡 □ 普通 □ 不喜歡 □ 非常不喜歡 □
8. 如果上網方便,未來是否會繼續使用類似網站來加強英文能力?
會 □ 不會 □
(答「會」者請答第 9 題,答「不會」者請答第 10 題)
9. 我會繼續使用類似網站的原因
可以加強英文閱讀能力 □ 可以加強英文字彙 □
文章多元有趣 □ 可以知道需要學習的單字有哪些 □
比起一般讀物,這樣的網站有單字查詢功能 □
其他 □_______________________________________________________
(請寫出原因)
10. 我不會繼續使用類似網站的原因
不習慣看長篇英文文章 □ 不喜歡自己讓網站安排文章和閱讀進度 □不
習慣在電腦上閱讀 □
其他 □_________________________________________________________
(請寫出原因)
11. 如果可以的話,你認為此閱讀網站的設計應該如何改進?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________
110

Appendix G
The Syllabus for the Sixteen Readings
111

Appendix H
The Introductory Page on How to Use the Online Extensive Reading Syllabus
112

Appendix I
The First Reading on the Syllabus
* The target words were highlighted in red and exposed words were highlighted in
green.
* The word “expand” was glossed with Chinese translation.
* The access to the bilingual concordancer, Total Recall, was at the bottom <strong>of</strong> the
interface.
113

Appendix J
A Search Example <strong>of</strong> the bilingual concordancer TotalRecall
* The word “expend” is searched.
114

Appendix K
An Example <strong>of</strong> the Comprehension Questions
115

Appendix L
Student Reading Process Recorded by Tracker
* The first table records each student’s performance on the comprehension questions
for every reading.
* The second table provides students’ emails and records how many readings each
student have completed.
116

親愛的同學
Appendix M
Consent Form
我們和資工系教授共同製作了一套網路閱讀教材,供同學課餘提昇英文程度之
用。總共有十六篇,提供單字解釋及「雙語關鍵字前後文檢索系統 TotalRecall」,
並有一些文意測驗之選擇題,希望你們在 1/10-3/10 間分次完成。我們同時需要
你們做兩次課堂之單字練習及回答兩份問卷。這項活動有助於我們了解你們學英
文情形,也同時能提昇你的英文能力。
如果你順利全程做完寒假部份之六篇,可得下學期大一英文期末成績 5%,另 10
篇在 2/16-3/10 期間完成,佔下學期成績 5%。先謝謝你們。如有任何進一步問題,
我很願意為你們解答。
外語研究所學姐 黃虹慈敬上 g915253@oz.nthu.edu.tw
指導教授及下學期大一英文老師 外語所劉顯親老師 hcliu@mx.nthu.edu.tw
如你同意參與,請簽名_______________________________
117

第 1-6 題 電腦方面
Appendix N
The Results <strong>of</strong> the Background Questionnaire
1. 我是否常使用電腦 是 94.7% (36/38) 否 5.3% (2/38)
2. 我在宿舍裡有個人電腦 是 100% (38/38) 否 0% (0/38)
3. 寒假期間家中是否有有電腦可使用? 是 97.3% (37/38) 否 2.6% (1/38)
(答「是」者請答第 4 題,答「否」者跳答第 7 題)
4. 家中電腦是否能上網? 是 94.6% (35/38) 否 5.4% (2/38)
5. 家中的電腦是用何種方式連接網路? 電話撥接 37.1% (13/38)
寬頻系統 62.9% (22/38)
6. 寒假期間可以聯絡到你的 e-mail ______________________________________
7. 平常是否會利用網路上的資源學英文? 是 7.9% (3/38) 否 92.1% (35/38)
8. 在過去的英文課中,英文老師是否曾經利用電腦輔助英文教學?
否 73.7% (28/38)
是 26.3% (10/38) (答 “是” 者請繼續回答第 8(1)及 8(2)題)
8(1). 老師曾經利用電腦輔助 閱讀 14.3% (2/14) 寫作 28.6% (4/14)
(可複選) 單字 0% (0/14) 文法 7.1% (1/14)
聽力 35.7% (5/14) 會話 14.3% (2/14)
其他 0% (0/14)
8(2). 老師的教學方式 在電腦教室裡集體教學 63.6% (7/11)
第 9-12 題 英文學習方面
9. 我對學習英文的感覺
(可複選) 在家中上網自行學習 36.4% (4/11)
非常喜歡 5.3% (2/38) 喜歡 26.3% (10/38) 普通 60.5% (23/38)
不喜歡 5.3% (2/38) 非常不喜歡 2.6% (1/38)
118

10. 我覺得我的英文程度
非常好 0% (0/38) 很好 5.3% (2/38) 普通 52.6% (20/38)
不好 28.9% (11/38) 非常不好 13.2% (5/38)
11. 我對學習下列英文能力的感覺
Mean 1.
非常困難
聽
2.5
說
2.5
讀
3.1
寫
2.6
字彙
2.4
文法
2.4
18.4%
(7/38)
13.2%
(5/38)
0%
(0/38)
7.9%
(3/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
10.5%
(4/38)
2. 困難 3. 普通 4. 容易 5.
非常容易
31.6%
(12/38)
50%
(19/38)
10.5%
(4/38)
23.6%
(10/38)
31.6%
(12/38)
42.1%
(16/38)
31.6%
(12/38)
34.2%
(13/38)
65.8%
(25/38)
60.5%
(23/38)
34.2%
(13/38)
42.1%
(16/38)
12. 我目前最想加強學習的英文能力: (單選)
119
18.4%
(7/38)
2.6%
(1/38)
23.7%
(9/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
13.2%
(5/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
聽 39.5% (15/38) 說 23.7% (9/38) 讀 5.3% (2/38)
寫 5.3% (2/38) 字彙 26.3% (10/38)
第 13-17 題 英文泛讀方面
0%
(0/38)
0%
(0/38)
0%
(0/38)
0%
(0/38)
2.6%
(1/38)
0%
(0/38)
泛讀是指利用空閒時間閱讀大量自己有興趣的小說、文章、雜誌、報紙…
等,也就是閱讀課外的英文讀物的習慣。
13 在過去的英文課程中,老師曾經鼓勵我培養英文泛讀的習慣 (老師曾經規
定我在課堂外自行閱讀英文雜誌或小說)
否 21.1% (8/38)
是 78.9% (30/38) (答是者請繼續回答 13(2),13(3))
我曾經閱讀過的英文讀物:(可複選)
13(1). 英文小說 28.3% (19/67)

13(2). 英文雜誌 41.7% (28/67) (請繼續勾出閱讀過的雜誌名稱。如
果你用雜誌練習聽說能力,則不包括在內。)
空中英語教室 39.4% (28/70) 普及美語 2.8% (2/70)
長春藤美語 9.9% (7/70) 大家說英語 28.2% (20/70)
Time12.7% (9/70) Newsweek4.2% (3/70)
Live ABC 1.4% (1/70)
13(3). 英文報紙 29.8% (20/67) (請繼續勾出閱讀過的英文報紙名稱)
China Post 31.4% (11/35) Taipei Times 8.6% (3/35)
Taiwan News 8.6% (3/35) Student Post 51.4% (18/35)
14. 我目前有英文泛讀的習慣 是 13.2% (5/38) 否 86.8% (33/38)
(答「是」者請答第15 題,答「否」者跳答第17 題)
15. 我通常利用閒暇時間閱讀 (可複選)
15(1). 英文小說 14.3% (1/7)
15(2). 英文雜誌 71.4% (5/7)
(請勾出你習慣閱讀的雜誌名稱。如果你用雜誌練習聽說能力,
則不包括在內。)
空中英語教室 40% (2/5) 普及美語 0% (0/5)
長春藤美語 0% (0/5) 大家說英語 0% (0/5)
Time 40% (2/5) Newsweek20% (1/5)
15(3). 英文報紙 14.2%(1/7) (請勾出你習慣閱讀的英文報紙名稱)
China Post 0% (0/1) Taipei Times100% (1/1)
Taiwan News 0% (0/1) Student Post 0% (0/1)
16. 我多常閱讀英文讀物
每天 0% (0/5) 每週一~三次 80% (4/5) 每週一次 0% (0/5)
每兩週一次 0% (0/5) 每個月一次 0% (0/5) 不一定,有時間才閱讀 20% (1/5)
17.我沒有英文泛讀習慣的原因 (可複選)
英文太差,文章大都看不懂 20% (10/50) 沒時間閱讀 28% (14/50)
對學習英文沒興趣 12% (6/50) 沒找到有興趣的文章 16% (8/50)
沒時間找合適的文章 24% (12/50)
其他 0% (0/50)
120

Appendix O
The Results <strong>of</strong> the Online Evaluation Questionnaire
Questions 非常
不同
意
1 這個閱讀網站的字型適合 0%
閱讀
(0/38)
2 這個閱讀網站的文字間距 0%
適合閱讀
(0/38)
3 這個閱讀網站的文字大小 0%
適合閱讀
(0/38)
4 這個閱讀網站的文章太長 0%
(0/38)
5 這個閱讀網站的文字難度 0%
太高
(0/38)
6 這個閱讀網站的文字難度 13.2%
太簡單
(5/38)
7 這個閱讀網站的及時查單 15.8%
字功能方便
(6/38)
8 這個閱讀網站提供的查詢 10.5%
網站 Total Recall 可以幫助
我更瞭解單字的用法
(4/38)
9 這個閱讀網站將新單字和 5.3%
學過的單字以顏色區分可
以提醒我哪些是重要,需要
學習的單字
(2/38)
121
不同意 沒意見 同意 非常
同意
13.2%
(5/38)
10.5%
(4/38)
13.2%
(5/38)
2.6%
(1/38)
13.2%
(5/38)
47.4%
(18/38)
28.9%
(11/38)
13.2%
(5/38)
7.9%
(3/38)
18.4%
(7/38)
21.1%
(8/38)
18.4%
(7/38)
28.9%
(11/38)
47.4%
(18/38)
34.2%
(13/38)
26.3%
(10/38)
26.3%
(10/38)
15.8%
(6/38)
52.6%
(20/38)
52.6%
(20/38)
52.6%
(20/38)
44.7%
(17/38)
31.6%
(12/38)
2.6%
(1/38)
44.7%
(17/38)
44.7%
(17/38)
57.9%
(22/38)
15.8%
(6/38)
15.8%
(6/38)
15.8%
(6/38)
23.7%
(9/38)
7.9%
(3/38)
2.6%
(1/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
13.2%
(5/38)

Appendix P
Results <strong>of</strong> the In-class Evaluation Questionnaire
1 非常
不同意
1 這個閱讀網站讓我在寒假時也能 0%
繼續學英文
(0/38)
2 這個閱讀網站安排在寒假的閱讀 0%
進度適當
(0/38)
3 這個閱讀網站讓需要學習的單字 0%
重複出現可以幫助我學習新的單 (0/38)
字
4 這個閱讀網站的文章內容及類型 0%
相當多元
(0/38)
5 這個閱讀網站的文章大部分都有 2.6%
趣
(1/38)
6 比起自己找尋合適的文章,我比 0%
較喜歡這個閱讀網站幫我安排合 (0/38)
適的文章
122
2 同意 3 沒意見 4同意 5非常
同意
2.6%
(1/38)
7.9%
(3/38)
10.5%
(4/38)
0%
(0/38)
5.3%
(2/38)
7.9%
(3/38)
31.6%
(12/38)
47.4%
(18/38)
18.4%
(7/38)
36.8%
(14/38)
55.3%
(21/38)
26.3%
(10/38)
52.6% 13.2%
(20/38) (5/38)
34.2% 10.5%
(13/38) (4/38)
55.3% 15.8%
(21/38) (6/38)
50% 13.2%
(19/38) (5/38)
31.6% 7.9%
(12/38) (3/38)
47.4% 15.8%
(18/38) (6/38)
7. 在接觸過網路泛讀後,我對學習英文的感覺
非常喜歡 7.9% (3/38) 喜歡 42.1% (16/38) 普通 44.7% (17/38)
不喜歡 5.3% (2/38) 非常不喜歡 0% (0/38)
8. 如果上網方便,未來是否會繼續使用類似網站來加強英文能力?
會 81.6% (31/38) 不會 18.4% (7/38)
(答「會」者請答第 9 題,答「不會」者請答第 10 題)
9. 我會繼續使用類似網站的原因
可以加強英文閱讀能力 42% (24/74) 可以加強英文字彙 19% (12/74)
文章多元有趣 11% (7/74) 可以知道需要學習的單字有哪些 14% (9/74)
比起一般讀物,這樣的網站有單字查詢功能 16% (10/74)
其他 3% (2/74) (沒時間找文章時很方便)
10. 我不會繼續使用類似網站的原因
不習慣看長篇英文文章 8% (1/12)
不喜歡自己讓網站安排文章和閱讀進度 8% (1/12)
不習慣在電腦上閱讀 51% (6/12)
其他 33% (4/12) (已有泛讀習慣和合適閱讀文章)
11. 如果可以的話,你認為此閱讀網站的設計應該如何改進?

123