Qualitative results for reflective cycle two.

The open-ended item on questionnaire two together with my field notes provided useful qualitative data. While the student responses were generally short, and my field notes only provided insight into the procedures, several patterns emerged during the analysis which are presented below. The student responses commonly emphasized the value of studying collocations and the problematic nature of delexicalized verbs. Many responses focused on the level of the material and how useful the targeted collocations were in their opinion. A final group of responses critiqued the procedures used during the intervention. Within this group, there was a pattern of support for productive tasks.

During my analysis of this data set, I made every effort to be objective, drawing extensively on the words of the students to convey the patterns I noticed within their responses. In analyzing these patterns it was important not to select data to support my preconceived notions as a teacher researcher or to use them selectively to support the outcomes I wanted to achieve. In Table 5.24, the qualitative data has been categorized to convey the themes which emerged during the analysis of the data. The full set of data can be seen in Appendix 21. The main themes which emerged through the qualitative analysis focused on the value of studying collocations, the problematic nature of delexicalized verbs, and the suitability of the materials and procedures used during the intervention. Additionally, the students made recommendations for techniques which in their opinion would help in the acquisition of collocations.

Category Sub-category Examples from the receptive group data Examples from the productive group data

Value of studying collocations

Important part of vocabulary learning

I’m really glad I learned collocation. I’m in group A. I read the questions and answer. I got many new vocabulary from it.

Studying collocation makes my English improve.

Comparison with individual word study

I don't like studying individual words, but this was collocations and I studied it so enjoy.

It was difficult to put verb and noun together before.

Productive challenges of

collocations It is really tough to study collocation for

me. Delexicalized verbs Variations in verb meanings It is difficult because the verbs like ‘have’,

‘take’, etc. are used the same but the meaning is different.

It was difficult to remember the meaning of the collocation.

Productive challenges It is easy to mix up the arrangement for

verbs like have and get. It was difficult to figure out that I should use ‘take’, ‘have’, or ‘make’.

Level appropriateness There were some familiar vocabulary. It was good there are many easy

vocabulary in the sentences.

The vocabulary was easy and good. It was really useful to study that

vocabulary. Materials used in the

intervention

Level That was the perfect amount of work and level. Vocabulary in the class is useful for ordinary conversation.

The collocation dictionary was good. The level was perfect for me. Learner need It was easy to understand and useful for

future.

Studying collocation is useful. Procedures used Exercises The exercises made me remember the

vocabulary.

I liked I could use the words which I memorized.

The filling up the gap was just like a game and fun!

dictionary. ourselves to memorize vocabulary. Because of we can fill up the gap after we look up the dictionary.

Memory It was easy to remember the

collocations.

It was enjoyable to memorize vocabulary.

Learner responses regarding exercises that should be used

Value of productive tasks It was good to learn vocabulary and arrange the sentence to future one and past one. But speaking is difficult.

It is difficult using the words in conversation.

5.3.9 Discussion for reflective cycle two.

The data collected during this reflective cycle proved useful to me in addressing the research questions shown in section 5.3.1. Each research question will be discussed individually to show what findings were made and what implications I could draw then out for further investigation.

The first research question asked about the students’ responses to studying collocations. As in reflective cycle one, the students formed a positive impression of the exercises which they undertook. This finding was also supported by the qualitative data collected. Many students responded in the open-ended question that they felt studying collocations was worthwhile and useful. In my field notes, I wrote ‘the students are engaged and seem to enjoy the tasks’. These findings support the incorporation of collocation

activities into low-proficiency English classes due to the students’ positive impression of these tasks. However, the collocation activities were a new approach to vocabulary study for the students, and there was a possibility that the students would become less enthusiastic about this approach over time.

As with the first reflective cycle, the students also indicated that in their opinion studying collocations was more beneficial than studying individual words. Several open- ended questionnaire responses also mentioned that collocations were more helpful than individual words. As mentioned in Chapter one, the initial area of concern for this study was the students’ inability to use the targeted items from the GSL. The hope was that by

teaching a verb + noun collocation, which represents a larger portion of an utterance, the students would be more able to use the collocations productively. One possible explanation for these results is that the students made the same assumption that collocations were easier to use while speaking.

The average score for the first and third questionnaire items was higher in reflective cycle two than in the first reflective cycle. I believe that this difference is largely the result of the students preferring the tasks in the second reflective cycle. I base this opinion on the number of positive responses about the procedure from the open-ended item on

questionnaire two.

The second questionnaire item addressed the second research question. In comparison to reflective cycle one, the students had a slightly more positive belief in their ability to use the targeted collocations while speaking (3.21 compared to 2.90). However, if the overall goal of this study was to be reached, this number needs to be higher. The lack of productive ability was also commonly mentioned in the qualitative data collected. It was clear that in the next reflective cycle, the tasks need to be designed with the goal of increasing the students’ confidence in their productive abilities.

Research question 3 concerns the students’ development of competence in using collocations from the teacher’s perspective. I believed that explicit instruction of

delexicalized verb collocations is beneficial for low-proficiency students. The exercises used helped the students identify a problematic area within their English knowledge and also provided a support system for them to gradually improve their productive abilities. The students answered favorably to the questionnaire items regarding the specific tasks used during the intervention (Tables 5.18 to Table 5.21). This impression was reinforced through the qualitative data which largely endorsed the procedures used during reflective cycle two. In particular, the students felt the dictionary and cloze activity were useful and effective. However, the low-proficiency students in this study identified delexicalized verbs as being especially problematic. Furthermore, they are not confident in their ability to use the targeted collocations in conversations. From my perspective as their teacher, I concurred with the students’ self-assessment. It is my opinion that these structures should be explicitly taught to low-proficiency students who do not receive a great deal of exposure to English outside of the classroom.

I also considered ‘level’ when answering research question 3. Both the quantitative data and qualitative data indicated the collocations targeted for this study were of a suitable level for my students. The Likert scale questionnaire items (quantitative data) showed a positive response for studying collocations and a more neutral response for the ability to use the collocations in conversations in the students’ opinion. Many student responses to the open-ended questionnaire item focused on level, specifically classifying the individual words as ‘easy’, but using this adjective in a positive way. By ‘positive way’, I am referring to the fact that, despite the words being ‘easy’, they mostly thought they were a suitable choice for this class (not too easy). I believe that over the course of the intervention, the students became aware that the targeted collocations were in fact problematic, especially in regard to their productive ability.

The fourth and fifth research questions were addressed through the spoken assessments. Both the productive and receptive group improved their spoken fluency as assessed by expert blind judges. However, only the improvement of the productive group was significant. While these results are somewhat disappointing considering the initial goal of this study, they did provide information which was used in subsequent reflective cycles.

The final research question concerns the number of collocations targeted each week. In reflective cycle one, each week 15 collocations were targeted and the students felt this was ‘just about right’ (85.4%). In the second reflective cycle, each week 12 collocations were targeted and 79% of the students classified this number as being ‘just about right’. However, there was a considerable difference between the receptive students (70%) and the

difference given that in my field notes I mentioned that both groups of students took about the same amount of time to complete the weekly tasks.

The data collected over the course of this reflective cycle was helpful in addressing the research questions. The students’ responses and quantitative findings also influenced the procedures used in the next reflective cycle.