Motaei, B., Ahangari, S., Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2019). Impact of Interaction and Output Modality on the Vocabulary Learning and Retention of Iranian EFL Learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 7(25), 65-85.
Bahman Motaei; Saeideh Ahangari; Nasrin Hadidi Tamjid. "Impact of Interaction and Output Modality on the Vocabulary Learning and Retention of Iranian EFL Learners". International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 7, 25, 2019, 65-85.
Motaei, B., Ahangari, S., Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2019). 'Impact of Interaction and Output Modality on the Vocabulary Learning and Retention of Iranian EFL Learners', International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 7(25), pp. 65-85.
Motaei, B., Ahangari, S., Hadidi Tamjid, N. Impact of Interaction and Output Modality on the Vocabulary Learning and Retention of Iranian EFL Learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2019; 7(25): 65-85.
Impact of Interaction and Output Modality on the Vocabulary Learning and Retention of Iranian EFL Learners
1Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz , Iran
3Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz Iran
Receive Date: 03 August 2018,
Revise Date: 17 November 2018,
Accept Date: 17 December 2018
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of interaction and output modality on vocabulary learning and retention of EFL learners. To investigate the impact of Interaction, solitary (n =69) and collaborative (n =62) groups served as experimental and No Interaction No Output (n =26) as control group. To address the effect of modality, spoken (n =39) and written (n =31) modalities served as experimental and No output modality (n =26) as control group. The study was done in 8 weeks. The groups read passages with target words highlighted. Solitary and collaborative groups reconstructed the passages individually or in dyads. The spoken and written modality groups reconstructed them in the respective modality. Then, pretest, immediate, and delayed posttests were administered. The ANOVA results showed that the collaborative group outperformed the other groups and spoken modality outperformed the written modality group focusing on interaction and modality separately. The 2×2×2 ANOVA results showed significant main effects for time, interaction, and output modality. An ‘interaction’ effect was found between time and interaction, time and modality, and modality and Interaction. The ‘interaction’ between time, Interaction, and modality was insignificant. The findings have implications for language teachers, syllabus designers, and language testing experts.
Top