English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article reports on a classroom-based experiment that tested the effects of threevocabulary teaching constructs (involvement load, spacing, and intentionality)on the learning of English verb-noun collocations—for example, “shelve a plan.”Laufer and Hulstijn’s (2001) “involvement load” predicts that the higher themotivational-cognitive load of a task, the more effectively it promotes word retention.“Spacing” refers to the advantage of spreading out learning opportunitiesfor words as opposed to massing them. “Intentionality” comprises two word processingmodes: intentional learning (posttest announced) and incidental learning(posttest unannounced), where the former is claimed to outperform the latter.The constructs were integrated into an intervention study with 59 adolescent L1Swedish learners of English in within- and between-subjects designs. Learnersprocessed target items three times when performing tasks that operationalized theconstructs. Three posttests of productive knowledge of target items were administered.Statistical analyses of gain scores show that neither involvement load norspacing had a significant positive impact on learning gains. Significant effectswere found on three measures for intentional learning when compared to incidentallearning. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research and theirimplications for English language teaching (ELT).Cet article rend compte d’une experience basee en salle de classe et qui evalueles effets de trois concepts pedagogiques en enseignement du vocabulaire (charged’implication, espacement et intentionnalite) sur l’apprentissage d’expressions figeesen anglais consistant d’un verbe et d’un nom. La « charge d’implication » deLaufer et Hulstijn (2001) predit que plus la charge motivationnelle et cognitived’une tâche est elevee, plus elle favorise la retention des mots. « L’espacement »fait reference a l’avantage de repartir les occasions d’apprentissage des mots plutotque de les rassembler. « L’intentionnalite » comprend deux modes de traitementdes mots: l’apprentissage intentionnel (post-test annonce) et l’apprentissage accidentel(post-test pas annonce), le premier supposement donnant de meilleursresultats que le second. Ces concepts ont ete integres dans une etude d’interventionimpliquant 59 adolescents suedois qui apprenaient l’anglais et suivant un modele amesures repetees et un modele inter-sujets. Les participants ont traite des elementscibles trois fois en accomplissant des tâches qui operationnalisaient les concepts.Trois post-test portant sur des connaissances productives des elements cibles ont eulieu. Des analyses statistiques des notes ont indique que ni la charge d’implicationni l’espacement n’avaient eu un impact positif significatif sur les notes. Trois mesures de l’apprentissage intentionnel compare a l’apprentissage accidentel ont revele des effets significatifs. Nous discutons des resultats par rapport a la recherche anterieure et en fonction de leurs incidences sur l’enseignement de l’anglais.

Improving English Learners’ Productive Collocation Knowledge: The Effects of Involvement Load, Spacing, and Intentionality