Sina problems; first, fast forgetfulness. Second, need a

 

 

Sina Khosravi .M

Kerman Farhangian
University

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Email: [email protected]

 

 

1-Abstract

 Learning words is a main problem in section of
learning a new language learning(1). Problems like fast forgetting and need a
lot of time for learning one of the newest teaching methods is the “coding
method” that make learning easier for learners. Coding is a branch of mnemonic in which a link is created between
the new word of a second language that must be learned and former concepts that
are in the first language.the ability to successfully do coding method is
highly dependent on teacher skill In my observations on a small community, I realized
that it was a great teaching technique for learning vocabulary and  analysis shown when you link up unfamiliar with
familiar knowledge and learner use different parts of the brain

 

 

Keywords:  coding method, Memorizing, Vocabulary,
learning ,

 

2-Introduction

Learning new words is an undeniable necessity in process of learning a
new language. Learning new words have two basic problems; first, fast
forgetfulness. Second, need a lot of time for memorizing. For this reason,
different strategies are designed to learn and preserve vocabulary to overcome
this problem. The urge need to learn a foreign language has promoted language
researchers around the word to constantly devise techniques and new methods to
make easier for learners to keep in their minds in short time and making
language learning a fun activity.

One of the effective methods in learning new vocabulary is coding
which is based on three phases. First, a link is identified and created in the
first language or it can be a link in the second language, which the learner
already knows. Second for this connection a universal code must be defined that
contain link and word. Third, it is placed in a sentence to create more
connections in the memory and learner use different parts of the brain.

 

Mnemonic /n??m?n?k/ (1),devices, or memory devices, are
learning techniques that aid information retention or remembering in the human
memory. Ancient Greeks and Romans distinguished between two types of memory:
the “natural” memory and the “artificial” memory. The
former is inborn, and is the one that everyone uses instinctively. The latter
in contrast has to be trained and developed through the learning and practice
of a variety of mnemonic techniques. The simplest and creative mnemonic devices
usually are the most effective for teaching. In the classroom, mnemonic devices
must be used at the appropriate time in the instructional sequence to achieve
their maximum effectiveness (1). Academic study of the use of mnemonics has
shown their effectiveness. In one such experiment, subjects of different ages
who applied mnemonic techniques to learn novel vocabulary outperformed control
groups that applied contextual learning and free-learning styles. Mnemonic is
well known by Professor Atkinson in 1975, and many professors such as Cohen
(1990) believed that this is the best way to learn vocabulary (2). Coding is a
branch of mnemonic in which a link is created between the new word of a second
language that must be learned and former concepts that there are in the first
language.

The question in this research is:

Does coding method have a remarkable effect on learning vocabulary?

 

                                                                  
3- Methodology

 

3.1.
Design and Context of the Study  

 

Two types of method of teaching vocabulary are
used. The first type was to give the meaning of English words in Persian and
students were made to memorize them. The second type were taught in coding
method. In both types of methods these words were used:

Eleven words were selected in lesson one. The
words were:

Above, Add, At least, attention, aware of,
according to, anxious, aloud, audience, bare, injured

It is necessary to say that words  in which the code method were used to teach
their meaning are presented in the appendix 1.

Appendix 1

Above:?? ????!??? ????? ????? ????

Add :??? ???? ????? ???

Attention:??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ???? ?????

At least:????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?????

Aware of:??? ???? ?? ??? ?? ?? ????

Danger: ?? ??????? ??? ????!?????

According to :??? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ??

 Anxious  :?????  ???? ??????

Aloud :?? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????

Audience:????? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ??

Bare:??? ??? ????? ???? ??? ?? ? ?? ???? ?????

3.2. Participants 

For this
research, the participants were two groups of students of technical high school
in Kerman, Iran. their native language was Persian and they were male.
altogether the number of them were 23 and the number that participate in
the test was twenty. the students
were between 15 to 17 years old and all of them were beginner students in
English. all these beginner learners spending two hours per week in English
class

Table 1.

Demographic Background of the Participants

No.
of Students 

             23

Gender 

Male 

Native
Language 

Persian

Major 

            technical

Stage

    High school juniors

school

technical
high school(secondary), Kerman, Iran

Education
Years 

2017-2018 

 

3.3. Instrument(s)

The instrument used in this study was 20 students were
chosen among 23 students. but the procedure was applied to whole students and
the student didn’t Know about the particular group. In analysis of data,
researcher just consider about those 20 students.

3.4. Procedure 

Based on observation, the level of two groups of students
was realized as low. Selected students (in each group was ten person) were
divided into two groups. First group were taught in the coding method
separately and the teacher uses his creativity to create new codes for new
words. Second group were asked to memorize the meaning of the words in regular
way (read the new words and the meaning of them). A same test was taken from
both groups. The time for test was 10 minutes.

Data collection started in 14 December 2017 and finished
in 16 December 2017.

 

3.4.
Data Analysis Procedure 

All collected questionnaire were carefully classified and their results
were analyzed through EXEL software. The results of data analysis will be
presented in the next part.

4. Results

 

    The
participants were divided in two groups by their scores. Base on research group
A they were taught by coding method average score was 8. 888.in group B they
were taught by ordinary method (read the vocabulary and their meaning) average
score was 3.55.test was out of 10 in both group.

Maximum
score in group A was 10 and minimum was 8. maximum score in group B was 5 and minimum
was 1.this indicates a sharp difference between the two methods

                                                                                                  

 

Table 2. 

Students’ scores

 

 

As we can see  in below charts it shows the differences
between two groups result.

 

5. Discussion and conclusion

 

Based on examinations, I realized that the group A, Had
Significant growth on word learning. Their average scores were significantly
higher than group B. In coding method students are using visual memory, audio, visual,
and make a Meaningful connection between Persian and English words It makes it
easier to learn. In this way, familiar words are used to capture the mind of
the listener That makes learning with enjoyment. Teaching is using the Persian words
that familiar to the students’ minds and it’s cause to stick in their mind and
by using the voices of new words and use imagine memory they quickly understand
the meaning of the words. The coding method for learning is most effect and
this method can be true.

References

Author:Sina khosravi 2017

1.      ^ Soanes, Catherine; Stevenson, Angus;
Hawker, Sara, eds. (29 March 2006). Concise Oxford English Dictionary (Computer
Software): entry “mnemonic” (11th ed.). Oxford University Press. 

 

1————————-Levin, Joel R.;
Levin, Mary E.; Glasman, Lynette D.; Nordwall, Margaret B. (April 1992).
“Mnemonic vocabulary instruction: Additional effectiveness evidence”.
Contemporary Educational Psychology. 17 (2): 156–174.
doi:10.1016/0361-476x(92)90056-5.

 

 

2————————–McAlum, Harry G.,
and Sharon S. Seay.,”The use/application of mnemonics as a pedagogical
tool in auditing””Academy of Educational Leadership Journal”,
May 2010

 

 

 

das Nair R, Lincoln N, Cognitive
rehabilitation for memory deficits following stroke (Review), p.2. 2008 The
Cochrane Collaboration. Published by JohnWiley & Sons, Ltd.