Critical Thinking Ability and Vocabulary Learning Strategy Use: The Case of EFL Learners in an ESL Context

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Faculty of languages and linguistics, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Abstract

Critical thinking is considered important in the field of education due to its possible effects on language learning. Therefore, the reasons behind the success and failure of language learners have provoked researchers to examine different aspects of the language learning process. Moreover, improving learners’ critical thinking ability in the course of learning will enable students to rely on their own decisions and thoughts regarding the strategies and techniques that they would want to employ in learning the language. This paper reports the findings from a mixed-method study of 75 postgraduate students’ critical thinking ability and vocabulary learning strategy use, as well as comparing the critical thinking score of proficient and less proficient students. Data were collected using Schmitt’s vocabulary learning strategies question- naire, California critical thinking skills test and semi-structured interviews. The findings revealed a statisti- cally significant relationship between learners’ critical thinking ability and vocabulary learning strategies.
 

Keywords

References

Abdollahzadeh, S., & Kashani, F. A. (2011). The effect of task complexity on EFL learn-ers’narrative writing task performance. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 8, 1-28.Baralt, M. (2010). Task complexity, the cognition hypothesis, and interaction in CMC and FTF environments (Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington DC) Retrieved February 2015 fromhttps://repository.library.georgetown
 
.edu/bitstream/handle/10822/553230 Birjandi, P., & Ahangari, S. (2008). Effects of task
 
repetition on the fluency, complexity and accuracy of Iranian EFL learners’ oral dis-course. Asian EFL Journal, 10(3), 28-52.
 
Birjandi, P., & Seifoori, Z. (2009). The effect of training and task-planning on the com-plexity of Iranian learners’ oral speech.
 
Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 57-80.Choong, K. P. (2011). Task complexity and lin-
 
guistic complexity: An exploratory study. Teachers  College,  Columbia  University
 
Working  Papers  in  TESOL  &  Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 1-28.
 
Choong, K. P. (2014). Effects of task complexity on written production in L2 English (Doctoral Dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University). Retrieved February 2015 from http://gigalib.org/index.aspx
 
DeKeyser, R. M. (2000). The robustness of criti-cal period effects in second language ac- quisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499-533.
Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
 
Ellis, R. (2009). Task‐based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. Inter-national
 
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221-246.Frear, M.W. (2014). The effects of cognitive task complexity on writing. (Doctoral dissertation, Auckland University of Technolo-gy). Retrieved August 2014 from http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/1 0292/7309
 
Frear, M. W., & Bitchener, J. (2015). The effects of cognitive task complexity on writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 45-57.
 
Gilabert, R. (2005). Task complexity and L2 nar-rative oral production (Doctoral disserta-tion, University of Barcelona, Spain). Retrieved August 2014 from
 
http://www.tdx.cat/handle/10803/1662 Ishikawa, T. (2006). The effect of manipulating
 
task complexity along the [here-and now] dimension on L2 written narrative dis-course. In M. D. P. Garcia-Mayo (Ed.),Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp.136-156). Clevedon: Multi-lingual Matters.Iwashita, N., McNamara, T., & Elder, C. (2001). Can we predict task difficulty in an oralproficiency test? Exploring the po-tential of an information processing ap-proach to task design. Language Learn-ing, 51(3), 401–436.
Kim, Y. (2009). The effects of task complexity on learner-learner interaction. System, 37(2), 254–268.
 
Kuiken, F., Mos, M., & Vedder, I. (2005). Cogni-tive task complexity and second language writing performance. Eurosla yearbook, 5(1), 195-222.
 
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2007). Task complexity and measures of linguistic performance in L2 writing. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 45(3), 261-284.
 
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2008). Cognitive task complexity and written output in Italian and French as a foreign language. Jour-nal of Second Language Writing, 17(1),48-60.
 
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2011). Task perfor-mance in L2 writing and speaking: The effect of mode. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Second language task complexity: Re-searching the
 
cognition hypothesis of language learning and performance (pp. 91–104). Amsterdam:John Benjamin.
 
Kuiken, R., & Vedder, I. (2012). Syntactic com-plexity, lexical variation and accuracy as a function of task complexity and profi-ciency level in L2 writing and speaking. In A.
 
Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.). Dimen-sions of L2 Performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp.143-169). Amsterdam: John Benja-mins.
 
Lee, Y. G. (2002). Effects of task complexity on the complexity and accuracy oforal pro-duction in L2 Korean (Doctoral disserta-tion, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Honolulu). Retrieved August 2014 from http://thesis1gigalib/docview/276045459
Lee, E., & Rescorla, L. (2002). The use of psy-chological state terms by late talkers at age 3. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 623-641.
 
Levkina, M. (2013). The role of task sequencing in L2 development as mediated by work- ing memorycapacity. (Doctoral disserta-tion, University of Barcelona). Retrieved August 2014 from http://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/handle/2445/ 54846?mode=full
 
Long, M. (1989). Task, group and task-group in-teractions. Retrieved August 2014 fromhttp://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED366184.pdf
 
Long, M. H., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three ap-proaches to task‐based syllabus design. Tesol Quarterly, 26(1), 27-56.
 
Maftoon, P., Birjandi, P., & Pahlavani, P. (2014). The impact of using computer-aided ar-gument mapping (CAAM) on the im-provement of writing achievement of Ira-nian learners of English. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 982-988.
 
Maftoon, P., & Sharifi Haratmeh, M. (2012). The relative effectiveness of input and output-oriented tasks with different involvement loads on the receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 52.
 
Nuevo, A. M. (2006). Task complexity and interac-tion: L2 learning opportunities and devel-opment (Doctoral dissertation, GeorgetownUniversity). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ana_ Maria_Nuevo/publication/275969754.pdf
 
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF ininstructed SLA: The case of complexi-ty. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555-578.
 
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communi-cative classroom. Cambridge: CUP.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 79-295.
 
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teach-ing. Cambridge: CUP.
 
Preliminary English Test (PET). (2015). Retrieved March 2016 from http://www.cambridgeenglish.org/exams/ preliminary/exam-format
Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accu-racy in second language writing research.
 
Language Learning, 47(1), 101-143.Prabhu, N. (1987). Second language pedagogy.
 
Oxford: OUP.
 
Rahimpour, M., & Hosseini, P. (2010). The im-pact of task complexity on L2 learners’ written
 
narratives. English Language Teaching, 3(3), 198-205.
 
Revesz, A. (2011). Task complexity, focus on L2 constructions, and individual differences: A classroom-based study. Modern Lan-guage Journal, 95(1), 162-181.
 
Robinson, P. (1995a). Task complexity and sec-ond language narrative discourse. Lan-guage Learning, 45(1), 99-140.
 
Robinson, P. (1995). Introduction: Connecting tasks, cognition and syllabus design. In Peter Robinson (Ed.), Task complexity and second language syllabus design: Data-based studies and speculations (pp.1-16). Brisbane: CLTR.
 
Robinson, P. (2001a). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp.287-318). Cambridge: CUP.
 
Robinson, P. (2001b). Task complexity, task dif-ficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Ap-plied Linguistics, 22, 27-57.
 
Robinson, P. (2003). The cognition hypothesis, task design, and adult task-based lan-guage learning. Second Language Stud-ies, 21(2), 45-105.
 
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componen-tial framework for second language task design. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 43(1), 1–32.
 
Robinson, P. (2007a). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, and perceptions of task difficulty. Interna-tional Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45, 191-213.
 
Robinson, P. (2007b). Criteria for classifying and sequencing pedagogic tasks. In M. G. Mayo (Ed.), Investigating tasks in formal language learning (pp. 7-27). Clevedon:Multilingual Matters.
Robinson, P. (2010). Situating and distributing cognition across task demands: The SSARC model of pedagogic task se-quencing. In M. Putz & L. Sicola (Eds.), Cognitive processing in second language acquisition: Inside the learner’s mind (pp. 243-268). Amsterdam: John Benjamins
 
Robinson, P. (2011). Second language task com-plexity, the Cognition Hypothesis, lan-guage learning, and performance. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Researching task com-plexity: Task demands, task-based lan-guage learning and performance (pp. 3-38). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
 
Robinson, P., & Gilabert, R. (2007). Task com-plexity, the cognition hypothesis, second language learning and performance. In-ternational Review of Applied Linguis-tics, 45(3), 161-177.
 
Robinson, P., Ting, S., & Urwin, J. J. (1995). Investigating second language task com-plexity. RELC Journal, 26(2), 62–79.
 
Romanko, R., & Nakatsugawa, M. (2010). Task sequencing based on the cognition hy-pothesis. In A. M. Stoke (Ed.), JALT2009 Conference Proceedings (pp. 436-445).Tokyo: JALT.
 
Salimi, A., Dadashpour, S., & Asadollahfam, H. (2011). The effect of task complexity on EFLlearners' written performance. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1390–1399.
 
Scarborough, H. (1990). Index of productive syn-tax. Applied Psycholinguistics,11(1), 1–22.
 
Shatz, M., Wellman., & Silber, S. (1983). The acquisition of mental verbs: A systematic investigation of first references to mental states. Cognition, 14, 301-321
Shehadeh, A., & Coombe, C. A. (Eds.). (2012).Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and imple-mentation (Vol. 4). John Benjamins Publishing.
 
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the imple-mentation of task-based instruction. Ap-plied linguistics, 17(1), 38-62.
 
Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Lan-guage Teaching, 36, 1-14.
 
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, ac-curacy, fluency and lexis. Applied Lin-guistics, 28, 510-532.
 
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1997). Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Lan-guage Teaching Research, 1(3), 185-211.
 
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language learn-ing, 49(1), 93-120. The Wechsler AdultIntelligence Scale (WAIS). (n.d.). Re-trieved March (2016) from https://www.wechsleradultintelligencesca le.com/.
 
Thompson, C. (2014). Guided planning, task complexity and second language oral de-velopment. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Lancashire). Retrieved August 2014 from http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/10568/2/Thompson.
 
Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based lan-guage teaching: from theory to practice.Cambridge: CUP
Journal of Language and Translation
Volume 6, Issue 1
Summer 2016
Pages 1-16

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics