Using Output Tasks to Improve 11th Graders’ English Vocabulary: An Action Research Project

Using Output Tasks to Improve 11th Graders’ English Vocabulary: An Action Research Project

Le Thi Hong Thuy* lethihongthuy.gvtranphu@vinhphuc.edu.vn Tran Phu High School, Vinh Phuc, Vietnam
Vu Thanh Nam thanhnam0982@gmail.com Tank-Amour Officers School Vietnam
Summary: 
The study adopted an action research design to investigate the effectiveness of output tasks in increasing vocabulary for grade-11 students at a high school in Vinh Phuc Province, Vietnam. The study was conducted for 40 participants whose English proficiency was assessed at the levels of A2 or B1. In the study, several output tasks, mostly creative ones that involved prompting students to actively use their vocabulary in spoken or written production, were incorporated into the lessons using the textbook Tiếng Anh 11- Global Success. To assess the impact of the output tasks, the researcher employed multiple data collection tools. Pre-and post-study tests assessed improvement in the students’ vocabulary knowledge, while questionnaires mainly explored their attitudes towards the implemented activities and vocabulary learning. The teacher’s observation also helped provide valuable insights into students’ engagement and learning progress. After the two action research cycles, the results revealed that the students made satisfactory progress in their English vocabulary. The results also indicated that the students held positive attitudes towards the output activities in particular and vocabulary learning in general. This study, therefore, has pedagogical implications for the use of output tasks in facilitating English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) vocabulary acquisition.
Keywords: 
Output tasks
EFL
vocabulary acquisition
action research
Refers: 

[1] Bao, G. (2019). Comparing input and output tasks in EFL learners’ vocabulary acquisition. TESOL International Journal, 14(1), 1-12.

[2] Beck, I. L., McKeown, M. G., Kucan, L., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2013). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction (2nd ed). The Guilford Press.

[3] Brown, H. D. (2005). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed., [8. Nachdr.]). Longman.

[4] Burns, A. (2009). Doing Action Research in English Language Teaching: A Guide for Practitioners. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203863466

[5] Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (Third Edition). SAGE

[6] Duong, P. T., Perez, M. M., Desmet, P., & Peters, E. (2021). Learning vocabulary in spoken input- and output-based tasks. TASK, 1(1), 100–126. https://doi. org/10.1075/task.00005.duo

[7] Hinkel, E. (Ed.). (2005). The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research. In Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (0 ed., pp. 495–508). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410612700- 38

[8] Holster, T., & Delint, D. (2012). Output tasks and vocabulary gains. The Language Teacher, 36(2), 3. https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTTLT36.2-1

[9] Kaivanpanah, S., Alavi, S. M., & Ravandpour, A. (2020). The effect of input-based and output-based tasks with different and identical involvement loads on Iranian EFL learners’ incidental vocabulary learning. Cogent Psychology, 7(1), 1731223. https://doi.org/10.1080/2 3311908.2020.1731223

[10] Kwon, S. (2007). The Roles of Output on L2 Vocabulary Acquisition: Noticing, Retrieval and Retention. English Teaching, 62(4), 279–310. https://doi. org/10.15858/engtea.62.4.200712.279

[11] Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology

[12] Nassaji, H., & Tian, J. (2014). The Role of Language Coproduction in Learning English Vocabulary. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 143, 794– 798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.478

[13] Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Heinle & Heinle

[14] Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759

[15] Nowbakht, M. (2015). The Comparative Effects of Comprehensible Input, Output and Corrective Feedback on the Receptive Acquisition of L2 Vocabulary Items. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac. alls.v.6n.4p.103

[16] Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/ CBO9780511667305

[17] Sarani, A., Negari, G. M., & Ghaviniat, M. (2013). The role of task type in L2 vocabulary acquisition: A case of Involvement Load Hypothesis - doi: 10.4025/ actascilangcult.v35i4.21135. Acta Scientiarum. Language and Culture, 35(4), 377–386. https://doi. org/10.4025/actascilangcult.v35i4.21135

[18] Shirzad, M., Rasekh, A. E., & Dabaghi, A. (2017). The Effects of Input and Output Tasks on the Learning and Retention of EAP Vocabulary. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 7(2), 145. https://doi. org/10.17507/tpls.0702.09

[19] Swain. (1985). Communicative Competence Role of Input and Output PDF | PDF. https://www.scribd. com/doc/179356182/Swain-1985-communicativecompetence-role-of-input-and-output-pdf

[20] Vu, D. V., & Peters, E. (2021). Vocabulary in English Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing in Vietnam: A Review. Education Sciences, 11(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11090563

[21] Wilkins, D. A. (1972). Linguistics in Language Teaching (first Edition). MIT PRESS @

Articles in Issue