Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JSLTE - Volume 6 - Issue 1 - Pages 133-149
JSLTE - Volume 6 - Issue 1 - Pages 133-149
133
134 Gh. Tayebi and S. Marefat
1. Introduction
2. Review of Literature
learning style preferences. In this light, they found out that in compari-
son to the undergraduate students, the graduate students generally were
in favor of visual and tactile learning style. On the other hand, the un-
dergraduate students leant on more auditory learning style (Dunn &
Dunn, 1979).
Additionally, males liked visual and tactile learning styles better than
females. Likewise, those learners who lived in the US showed preference
for auditory learning style compared to those who did not. It is worth
mentioning that in comparison to those who lived in the US for a shorter
time, those who lived there more than three years were in favor of audi-
tory learning style. It suggested that the learners adjusted their learning
styles to the learning environment. This result complies with Kafipour,
Yazdi, and Shokrpour’s (2011) finding. They reached the conclusion that
the learners chiefly depended on individual learning styles. To put differ-
ently, they favored visual, group, tactile, and kinesthetic learning styles,
and auditory learning style was discovered to be the least desired learn-
ing style.
The following section involves the method through which this study was
carried out.
3. Method
3.1. Participants
In order to carry out this study, the participants belonging to the avail-
able sampling was homogenized through the Oxford Placement Test
(2007). As a result, 31 basic-level female learners in the 18-23 age group
who studied English as a foreign language for about one year at the ILI
in Bushehr, Iran, and had the similar background knowledge, and the
proficiency were selected.
3.2. Instrumentation
In order to conduct this study, the researchers carried out the Oxford
Placement test (2007), Barsch learning style inventory (1991), as well as
four researcher- made tests.
The Oxford Placement test (2007) which is a standardized placement
test by Oxford University Press consisted of the different parts including
The Impact of Rote Learning on Vocabulary ... 139
by looking
�������
������� �� at the
�� ���
��� �����
�����items
��� and
��� agreed
������
������ ����that
���� ��� the test
��� ����
���� ��� was
��� a valid
�� �����
����� measure
�������
������� �� of
�� ���
���
the concept
�������
������� �����
�����which
��� was being
��� �����
����� measured
��������
�������� ���� just
���� ��
�� ���
���on����
the��
���� face
�� �� of ����
�� ��
�� it as��
���� ��well as
�����
�����
their
�������content validity.
���������
������� ���������
3.3. ���������
����
���� Procedure
���������
Initially,
����������
���������� ��� the ������������
��� participants ����
������������ were �����������
���� homogenized �������
����������� through ����������
������� conducting ���
���������� the ���
��� Ox-
���
ford ���������
����
���� Placement ����
��������� Test �������
���� (2007). ��
������� On ����
�� this ��������
���� account, ��
�������� 31 ��������
�� learners ����
�������� were ��������
���� selected
��������
in
�� the
�� ��� terms
��� �����
����� �� of the
�� ��� same
��� ���� proficiency
���� ����������
���������� ������ level. Barsch
������ ������ learning
������ ��������
�������� ������ styles inven-
������ ������
������
tory �������
����
���� (1991), �����
������� then, ���
����� was ������������
��� administered ��
������������ in �����
�� order ��
����� to ���������
�� recognize �����
��������� their ��������
����� learning
��������
styles. �����
�������
������� After �����
����� that, ���
����� one ��
��� of ���
�� the ���������������
��� researcher-made �����
��������������� tests ���
����� was ��������
��� employed ��
�������� as ���
�� the
���
piloting
�������� test
���� whose
����� reliability
����������� was
��� reported
��������
�������� ���� ����� ����������� ��� �������� ���� ��� �������� ��� ����� .78,
���� and
��� validity
�������� was
��� exam-
�����
ined ��
����
���� by �������
�� subject ������
������� matter ��������
������ experts; �����������
�������� thereafter, ���
����������� the �������
��� pretest ���
������� was �������
��� carried ���
������� out ��
��� to
��
know
���� the
��� unfamiliar
���������� words
����� to
�� be
�� taught
������
���� ��� ���������� ����� �� �� ������ �� ��� ��������� ������ ������ in
�� the
��� treatment
��������� phase.
������ There-
������
upon, ��
�����
����� on ���
�� the �����
��� basis ��
����� of ���
�� the ��������
��� pretest, ���
�������� the ���������
��� treatment �����
��������� phase �������
����� started ���
������� for ��8 ����
��� ses-
����
sions.
������ Based
����� on
�� the
��� objective
��������� of
�� the
��� study,
������
������ ����� �� ��� ��������� �� ��� ������ ��� �������� ��������� ��� the
��� learners
�������� underwent
��������� the
���
treatment ��
���������
��������� in ���
�� the ����
��� form ��
���� of ���
�� the ����
��� rote ���������
���� learning. ������������
��������� Accordingly, ����
������������ they ����
���� were ���
���� re-
���
quired
������
������ �� to learn
�� �����
����� ��� the words
��� ����� through
����� �������
������� ����� doing
����� ��� the translations
��� ������������
������������ �� in their
�� ����� mother
����� ������
������
tongue.
������� Subsequently, to realize the numbers
������� ������������� �� ������� ��� ������� �� ��� ����� �������� ��
������������� �� ������� ��� ������� of
�� the
��� words
����� obtained
�������� by
��
���
the����participants,
���������� ��� ����the������� ���� ���������
post-test was ���������� ���� ����������
administered. ��� ����
After a ����� ��� ���� �����
two-week in-
���
��� �������������
������������� ��� ��� ���������
��������� ��� ��� �������������
������������� ����� ����� �� ��������
�������� ������ ������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
terval,
���� ���
���� ��� the
�������
�������delayed posttest
�������� ��� was
��� run
�� �� so
�� as to
��������� determine
��� the
���������� differences
�� ���
������ ������� ���������������� ��� ���
�������������� �� ������
��� �������� �� ��������
��������� ���������
��� ���� ����������
����������� ������
����
in the
�����
����� total �����
�������
������� average
����� ������� score ���
������� between
��� ���������
���������the immediate
���
��� �������
������� and�����������
delayed post-
�����������
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ���
���
tests.
�� ��� And
��� ���� the
���� end, Independent-sample
������������������ �������
������� ���� t-tests
����were
���� �� used to determine
�� ���������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�� ������������������ ���� ��������� ��������
��������
discrepancies
������
��������
������ ��
�� ���
������������in the performance
��� �����������
����
����������� ��� ���� ��
�� ���
�������� ���� of ������
the test
�������������������
���� ������ ����
����takers
�������� with ������
��������
�����
�������� different
�����
����������� styles
������
������������
������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
of
���� learning.
����
�
4. ������
��
�� Result
������
��� �������
����������������������������������������������������������
4.1. ���
����
���� The ������
��� result ��
������ of ������
�� Barsch��������
������ learning������
�������� styles���������
������ inventory������
��������� (1991)
������
� The results �� of ���
the ������
Barsch ��������
learning ������
styles ���������
inventory ������
(1991) �������
replied �� by ���
the
���
��� �������
������� �� ��� ������ �������� ������ ��������� ������ ������� �� ���
participants
������������
���� were
����
�������� ��� ���� depicted
��������
������� in
�����������
������������ ���� �������� �� ����� ���� table
�����
������� 4.1.
����
���������� ������� �������� ��� ���� ������������� �����
������������������������
�
Table ����
�����
����� 4.1:
���� Descriptive ����������
�����������
����������� statistics ��
���������� of ���
�� the ��������
���
������������������������������������������������� learners
��������
�
������ ��������������� ������
�������� ���������
��� �� ��� ��
����������������������������� ��� ������� �� ������ ���
�
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������
��������������� ���� �������� ������������������������� ���� ������������������� ������������ �����
���������������������������������
�
�
�
����������������������������������������������������������
�
���� �������� ��� ���� ������� ��������� ������� ���������� ������� �������� ��� ���� ������������� �����
������������������������
�
�������������������������������������������������
�
������
The
��� Impact ��
������ of ����
Rote ��������
Learning ��on���������������
Vocabulary ���
���������� ... 141
������
���
�������� ���������
��� �� ��� ��
The�����������������������������
��� total ������
����� number �� of ������������
participants was�������
��� ��� 31 ��������
�� students among
�� ����� whom ��
����
������ 21 ��
of
���
them
�
���� were ������
���� visual ��������
learners ���
and �7 ����
were ��������
auditory ���������
learners. ��
To ���
put ��it �������
another
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
way,
���� 77.41
����� percent
������� of
�� the
��� participants
������������ favored
������� visual
������ learning
�������� style,
������ while
�����
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
22.5
���� percent ���������
������� preferred ��������
auditory ��������
learning ������
style.
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������
4.2.
���� Result ��
������
���������������of the
������� learners’
���������
�������� performance
�����������
������������������������� ���� ������������������� ������������ �����
���������������������������������
Tables ���
������ 4.2 ���
and ���
4.3 �������
present ���the ������
result ��of ���
the ������
visual ���
and ��������
auditory ���������
learners’
�
performance
����������� when exposed to word list
���� ������� �� ���� ���� ��������� learning.
� �
�
Table ����
����� Group ����������
4.2: ����� statistics �� of ���
the ������
visual ���
���������������������������������������������������������������� and ��������
auditory ��������
learners
�
� ������ �� ����� ��������������� ����������������
�������� ������� ��� ����� ����� �����
��������� �� ����� ����� �����
��������� ������� ��� ������ ����� �����
��������� �� ������ ����� �����
�������� ������� ��� ������ ����� �����
��������� ��������� �� ������ ����� �����
�
�
�
Table ����
� ����� Independent ������
4.3: ����������� sample ������ t-test ��of ���
the ������
visual ���
and ��������
auditory
�
�
learners
��������
������������������������������������������������������������������������
�
�
� �
� ���������������
� ����������������
�
�����������
�� ���� �� ��� ��������������� ����� ����������� ������ ������
� ����������� �����������
�������� ����� ����� ��� ����� ����� ����� ���� ����
��������� ����� ����� ��� ����� ����� ����� ������ �����
���������������� ����� ����� ��� ����� ����� ����� ����� ������
�
���� ��������� ��������� ������ ��� ����� ������ ������� �������� ��� ���� ������ ���� �� ������������
The
��� research
��������
����������� ��������question
�������� posed�����
�����
���� ������������ in�������
this����
���� study
����� sought
������
��������� whether
�������
��������� or ���
�� not
��� ����������� there
�����
����������
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
was �a ����������
significant ���������
difference �������
between ��� the �����������
performance �� of ������
visual ���
and ���au-
���
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������
ditory ��������
������ learners
���������������� in ��������
��
��� ������ vocabulary
���������� retention ����
��������� when
�������������������������� exposed ��
�������
�����������������
������������������������������������������� to�������������������
rote ��������
���� learning
approach.
��������� On ����
�� this ��������
account, ��� the ������
scores ��of ���
the ������
visual ���
and ��������
auditory ������
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� learn-
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
ers ����
��� were ��������
analyzed �������
through ��������
applying �����������
Independent ������ Sample �������
t-tests �� as ����
fol-
������������������������������������
lows.
�����
�� In
�� the
��� pretest,
�������� as
�� tables
����� 4.2
��� and
��� 4.3
��� indicated,
���������� the
��� visual
������ learners
��������
were �� 24 �����
while ��� the ��������
auditory ��������
learners ����
were ��7. ���
The ����
mean ������
scores �� of ���
the ������
visual
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
����
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
learners
�������� and
��� auditory
�������� learners
�������� were
���� 5.54
���� and
��� 4.71,
����� respectively.
������������� The
��� find-
����
����� ��� ������� ���������� ���� ������� ��������� ���� ����� ������� ��� ���� ���������� �������������
ing
��� showed ����
������ that ���the ������
visual ��������
learners ���did ����
much ������
better ����
than ��� the ��������
auditory
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������������
learners
�������� [t(29) �
������ = �����
1.85, � P �= ������
.010].
�
�����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
������������������������������������������������������������������� �������������������������
�����������������������������������������������������������
��� �����������
142 Gh. Tayebi and S. Marefat
In the posttest, there was a rise in the mean score of the visual learners
from 5.54 in the pretest to 30.62 in the posttest. Likewise, the mean score
of the auditory learners was increased from 4.71 to 29.57. Moreover, the
visual learners did much better in the posttest. Nonetheless, considering
table 3, there was no meaningful difference between the mean scores of
the visual and auditory learners [t(29) = .945, P = .336].
Regarding the delayed posttest, there was a decrease in the mean
scores of both visual and auditory learners from the posttest to the de-
layed posttest. In other words, the mean scores of the visual and auditory
learners were 25.62 and 17.42, respectively, in the delayed posttest. Be-
sides, the learners with visual learning style outperformed those with
auditory learning style [t(29) = 4.78, P = .00]. Consequently, the find-
ings did reject the null hypothesis that held that there was no important
difference between the performance of visual and auditory learners in vo-
cabulary retention when exposed to traditional approach.
5. Discussion
Table 4.1 showed the result of the questionnaire answered by the test
takers. The result indicated that the majority of the learners in this
study were visual learners. To put it differently, they had strong prefer-
ence for visual learning style. This result is in line with Gilakjani (2012)
who investigated the learners’ preference learning style at the Islamic
Azad University of Lahijan, Iran. He concluded that about 50% of the
learners were visual learners, while 35% preferred auditory learning style
and 15% expressed their preference for kinaesthetic learning style. It im-
plied that visual learning style was the common learning style among
learners at the Islamic Azad University of Lahijan. In the same vein,
Kafipour, Yazdi, and Shokrpour (2011) studied learners’ learning style
preferences in gaining knowledge. They reached the conclusion that the
majority of learners favored visual learning style over auditory learn-
ing style. They also accentuated that visual learning style was the most
pervasive learning style among Iranian EFL learners.
This finding echoes the result achieved by Reid (as cited in Zokaee,
Zaferanieh & Mahdieh, 2012) argued that different learners prefer differ-
ent learning styles in learning language. He stated that the Korean learn-
The Impact of Rote Learning on Vocabulary ... 143
ers gained knowledge more through visual learning style. They seemed
to be mainly more visual than American and Japanese students. In com-
parison with Arabic and Chinese language learners, Japanese students
seemed to be less auditory.
The finding contradicted with the study carried out by Hyland (1993)
on Japanese learners to find out their preferred learning style. The results
revealed that most learners showed great preference for auditory and tac-
tile styles, and were not interested in visual and group styles. In order to
answer the research question, the performances of the visual and audi-
tory learners were compared in the pretest-posttest and posttest-delayed
posttest as follows. The result yielded through applying Independent
sample t-tests threw light on fact that the visual learners outperformed
the auditory learners in the pretest.
However, there was no significant difference between the perfor-
mance of the visual and auditory learners in the posttest. But in the
delayed posttest the visual learners performed better than the auditory
learners. In fact, the results produced in the posttest and the delayed
posttest appeared to be rather unexpected. Actually, against expecta-
tions, the auditory learners failed to succeed in retaining the new vocab-
ularies. Based on the ample evidence in the literature review (e.g. Carbo,
1983; Dunn & Dunn, 1978; Eisenstein, 1982; Reid, 1984) auditory learn-
ers lean highly on hearing and speaking to gain knowledge of material. In
this study, one of the researchers who was also the teacher read out the
new vocabularies three times. In this way, the participants picked up
the right pronunciation, and decided upon the syllabus receiving the
prime stress; soon afterwards, they were required to utter each word
after her first chorally and then individually. Finally, they were offered
the translations of each word. Accordingly, the auditory learners were
supplied with the sufficient stimuli; in spite of that, their performance in
recalling the vocabularies was different to what expected. One possible
explanation might be that due to disability of the auditory learners in
decoding the unfamiliar words, they failed to retain them successfully.
Another likely reason which was consistent with Chastain’s (1988)
claim is associated with a phenomenon referred to as decay. In actual
fact, recollection will occur effectively when information moves to the
144 Gh. Tayebi and S. Marefat
6. Conclusions
words,
words, in in
order
order to tobecome
become ananattentive
attentive learner
learner and andsucceed
succeed in in
achieving
achieving
goals,
goals,identifying
identifying individual’s
individual’s learning
learning styles
styles cancan bebeveryverybeneficial.
beneficial. In In
this
this
way,
way, learners
learners areareaware
awareof of
their
theirstrengths
strengths and and weaknesses.
weaknesses.
Regarding
Regarding aforementioned
aforementioned advantages
advantages of oflearning
learning styles,
styles,it it
is is
wise
wise
to to
identify
identify thetheoptimum
optimum learning
learning styles
styles of of
language
language learners
learners andandincor-
incor-
porate
porate them
them into
into educational
educational systems.
systems. Moreover,
Moreover,teachers teachers cancan match
match
teaching
teaching methods
methods to to
learning
learning styles
styles in inorder
order to totackle
tackle thethefundamen-
fundamen-
taltal
problems.
problems. It It
leads
leadsto to
promote
promote learners’
learners’ overall
overall learning
learning effects,
effects,boost
boost
their
their
motivation,
motivation, efficiency
efficiencyandandpositive
positive attitude
attitude towards
towards language
language learn-
learn-
ing.
ing.
Accordingly,
Accordingly, thethemostmostimportant
important reason
reasonbehind
behind identifying
identifying learning
learning
styles
styles
is to
is to
findfind
outout thetheright
right
ways
ways forfor
learners
learners to to
achieve
achieve learning
learning success
success
andandforforteachers
teachers to toteach
teach effectively
effectively andand successfully.
successfully.
ToTo recap
recap what
what hashas been
beendiscussed
discussed so so
far,far,thethe performance
performance of of
thethe
visual
visualand andauditory
auditory learners
learnersthrough
through wordword listlist
learning
learning waswascompared
compared in in
this
this
study.
study. The The findings
findings shed
shedlight
lightonon thethefactfactthatthat thethevisual
visuallearners
learners
diddid
a lot
a lotbetter
better in in
recalling
recalling thethe
newnew words
words than
than thetheauditory
auditory learners
learners byby
means
means of of
wordword listlist
learning.
learning. Besides,
Besides, a great
a great number
number of of
thethe
participants
participants
favored
favored visual
visual learning
learning style.
style.
References
References
[1][1]
Balmuth,
Balmuth,
M.M.(1968).
(1968).
Visual
Visualandand
auditory
auditory
modalities:
modalities:
HowHow
important
importantareare
they?
they?
Paper
Paper
presented
presented
at at
thethe
Thirteenth
Thirteenth
Annual
Annual
Convention
Convention
of of
thethe
Inter-
Inter-
national
national
Reading
Reading
Association,
Association,
Boston,
Boston,
Massachusetts.
Massachusetts.
[2][2]
Barbe,
Barbe,
W.W.B.,B.,
&& Milone,
Milone,M.M.
N. N.
(1981).
(1981).What
What
weweknow
know
about
about
modality
modality
strengths.
strengths.
Educational
Educational
Leadership,
Leadership,
38(5),
38(5),
378-380.
378-380.
[3][3]
Barsch,
Barsch,
J. (1991).
J. (1991).
Barsch
Barsch
learning
learning
style
style
inventory.
inventory.
Novato,
Novato,
CA:CA:
Academic
Academic
Therapy.
Therapy.
[4][4]
Behlol,
Behlol,
M.M.
(2010).
(2010).
Effectiveness
Effectiveness
of of
structural
structural
method
method
of of
teaching
teaching
vocabu-
vocabu-
lary.
lary.
English
English
Language
LanguageTeaching
Teaching
3(2),
3(2),
125-135.
125-135.
[5][5]
Boyatzis,
Boyatzis, R. R.
E.,E.,
&& Kolb,
Kolb,
D. D.A. A.
(1995).
(1995).
From
From learning
learning
styles
styles
to to
learn-
learn-
inging
skills:
skills:
TheTheexecutive
executive
skills
skills
profile.
profile.
Journal
Journal
of of
Managerial
Managerial Psychology,
Psychology,
10(5),
10(5),
3-17.
3-17.
146
146 Gh.
Gh.Tayebi and
Tayebi S. S.
and Marefat
Marefat
[6][6]Carbo,
Carbo,M.M.
(1983). Research
(1983). Researchin in
reading and
reading andlearning style:
learning style:Implications
Implications
forfor
exceptional children.
exceptional Exceptional
children. ExceptionalChildren, 49,49,
Children, 486-494.
486-494.
[7][7]Chamot,
Chamot, A.A.
U.,U.,
&& Kupper,
Kupper,L. L.
(1989). Learning
(1989). Learningstrategies in in
strategies foreign lan-
foreign lan-
guage instruction.
guage Foreign
instruction. Language
Foreign Language Annals, 22,22,
Annals, 13-24.
13-24.
[8][8]Chastain,
Chastain,K.K.
(1988). Developing
(1988). second
Developing language
second skills:
language Theory
skills: and
Theory prac-
and prac-
tice. Florida:
tice. Harcourt
Florida: HarcourtBrace Jovanovich.
Brace Jovanovich.
[9][9]Coffield, F.,F.,
Coffield, Moseley,
Moseley,D.,D.,
Hall, E.,E.,
Hall, && Ecclestone, K.K.
Ecclestone, (2004).
(2004).Learning styles
Learning styles
and pedagogy
and pedagogy in in
post-16 learning:
post-16 AA
learning: systematic and
systematic andcritical review.
critical Learn-
review. Learn-
inging
andandSkills
SkillsResearch
ResearchCentre,
Centre,London.
London.
[10]
[10]Cornett,
Cornett,C.C.
(1983). What
(1983). Whatyou should
you know
should about
know teaching
about and
teaching learning
and learning
styles. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
styles. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa.
[11]
[11]DeDe
Groot, A.A.
Groot, M.M.B.B.(2006).
(2006).Effects
Effectsof of
stimulus
stimuluscharacteristics and
characteristics back-
and back-
ground music
ground onon
music foreign language
foreign languagevocabulary
vocabulary learning and
learning forgetting.
and Lan-
forgetting. Lan-
guage Learning,
guage 56(3),
Learning, 463-506.
56(3), 463-506.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00374.x
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00374.x
[12]
[12]Dörnyei,
Dörnyei,Z. Z.
(2005). The
(2005). Thepsychology of of
psychology thethe
language learner:
language learner:Individual
Individual
differences
differencesin in
second
secondlanguage
languageacquisition.
acquisition.Mahwah,
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
NJ: Lawrence Erl-
Erl-
baum.
baum. Associates,
Associates,Publishers.
Publishers.
[13]
[13]Dunn,
Dunn,R.,R.,
&& Dunn, K.K.
Dunn, (1978). Teaching
(1978). students
Teaching through
students their
through individual
their individual
learning styles.
learning AA
styles. practical approach.
practical Prentice
approach. Hall,
Prentice Reston.
Hall, Reston.
[14]
[14]Dunn,
Dunn, R.,R.,
&& Dunn,
Dunn, K.K.
(1979). Learning
(1979). styles/teaching
Learning styles/teachingstyles:
styles:Should
Should
they ... ...
they can they
can ... ...
they bebematched? Educational
matched? EducationalLeadership, 36,36,
Leadership, 238-244.
238-244.
[15]
[15]Eisenstein, M.M.
Eisenstein, (1982). AA
(1982). study of of
study social variation
social in in
variation adult second
adult language
second language
acquisition. Language Learning, 32(4), 367-391.
acquisition. Language Learning, 32(4), 367-391.
[16]
[16]Felder, R.R.
Felder, M.,M.,
&&Silverman, L. L.
Silverman, K.K.
(1988). Learning
(1988). and
Learning teaching
and styles
teaching in in
styles
engineering
engineeringeducation. Eng.
education. Educ.,
Eng. 78,78,
Educ., 674-681.
674-681.
[17]
[17]Felder,
Felder,R.R.M.M.(1993). Reaching
(1993). thethe
Reaching second
second tier:
tier:Learning and
Learning teaching
and teaching
styles in in
styles college science
college education.
science J. J.College
education. CollegeScience
ScienceTeaching,
Teaching,23(5),
23(5),
286-290.
286-290.
[18]
[18]Fitzpatrick,
Fitzpatrick,T.,T.,
Al-Qarni, I., I.,
Al-Qarni, && Meara,
Meara,P. P.
(2008). Intensive
(2008). Intensivevocabulary
vocabulary
learning: AA
learning: case
casestudy. Language
study. Language Learning
LearningJournal, 36(2),
Journal, 239-248.
36(2), 239-248.
The
The
Impact
Impact
of of
Rote
Rote
Learning
Learning
onon
Vocabulary
Vocabulary
... ... 147
147
[19]
[19]Folse,
Folse,
K.K.
S. S.
(2004).
(2004).
Vocabulary
Vocabulary
myths.
myths.
AnnAnn
Arbor,
Arbor,
MI:
MI:
University
University
of of
Michi-
Michi-
gangan
Press.
Press.
[20]
[20]Gilakjani,
Gilakjani,
A.A.
P. P.
(2012).
(2012).
Visual,
Visual,
auditory,
auditory,
kinaesthetic
kinaesthetic
learning
learning
styles
styles
andand
their
their
impacts
impactsonon
English
English
language
language
teaching.
teaching.
Journal
Journal
of of
Studies
Studies
in in
Educa-
Educa-
tion,
tion,
2(1),
2(1),
104-113.
104-113.
[21]
[21]Grenfell,
Grenfell,
M.,M.,
& Harris,
& Harris,
V.V.
(1999).
(1999).
Modern
Modern
languages
languages
and
and
language
language
learning
learning
strategies:
strategies:
In In
theory
theory
and
andpractice.
practice.
London:
London:
Routledge.
Routledge.
[22]
[22]Hunt,
Hunt,A.,A.,
&& Beglar,
Beglar,
D.D.(2005).
(2005).
AAframework
framework
forfor
developing
developing
EFL
EFL
reading
reading
vocabulary.
vocabulary. Reading
Reading
in in
a Foreign
a Foreign
Language,
Language,
17(1),
17(1),
23-59.
23-59.
[23]
[23]Hyland,
Hyland,T.T.
(1993).
(1993).
Competence,
Competence,knowledge
knowledge
and
and
education.
education.
Journal
Journal
of of
Philosophy
Philosophy
of of
Education,
Education,
27(1),
27(1),
57-68.
57-68.
[24]
[24]Jensen,
Jensen,
A.A.
R.R.
(1971).
(1971).
Individual
Individual
differences
differences
in in
visual
visual
andand
auditory
auditory
mem-
mem-
ory.
ory.
Journal
Journal
of of
Educational
Educational
Psychology,
Psychology,83(2),
83(2),123-131.
123-131.
[25]
[25]Kafipour,
Kafipour,R.,R.,
Yazdi,
Yazdi,
M.,M.,
&& Shokrpour,
Shokrpour,N.N.
(2011).
(2011).
Learning
Learningstyles
styles
and
and
lev-
lev-
elsels
of of
vocabulary
vocabularylearning
learning
among
amongIranian
Iranian
EFL
EFL
learners.
learners.
European
EuropeanJournal
Journal
of of
Social
Social
Sciences,
Sciences,
25(3),
25(3),
305-315.
305-315.
[26]
[26]Kassaian,
Kassaian,Z. Z.
(2007).
(2007).
Learning
Learningstyles
styles
andandlexical
lexical
presentation
presentation
modes.
modes.
Es-Es-
tudios
tudios
DeDeLinguistica
Linguistica
Inglesa
Inglesa
Aplicada
Aplicada(elia),
(elia),
7, 7,
53-78.
53-78.
[27]
[27]Kia,
Kia,
M.M.
A.,A.,
Alipour,
Alipour,A.,A.,
&& Ghaderi,
Ghaderi,E. E.
(2009).
(2009).Study
Study
of of
learning
learning
styles
styles
onon
their
their
roles
roles
in in
thethe
academic
academic achievement
achievement of of
thethe
students
studentsof of
Payame
Payame Noor
Noor
University.
University.
TOJDE,
TOJDE, 10(2),
10(2),
24-37.
24-37.
[28]
[28]Laufer,
Laufer,B.B.
(1997).
(1997).
Incidental
Incidental
vocabulary
vocabulary acquisition:
acquisition:In In
praise
praise
of of
out-
out-
put.
put.
Unpublished
Unpublished paper
paper
presented
presented
at at
thethe
Second
SecondLanguage
Language Research
Research Fo-Fo-
rum,
rum,
East
East
Lansing,
Lansing,
MI.
MI.
[29]
[29]Laufer,
Laufer,
B.,B.,
&& Shmueli,
Shmueli,
K.K.(1997).
(1997).
Memorizing
Memorizingnew
new words:
words:
Does
Does
teaching
teaching
have
have
anything
anythingto to
dodo
with
with
it?it?
RELC
RELC Journal,
Journal,
28(1),
28(1),
89-108.
89-108.
[30]
[30]LdPride.
LdPride.
(n.d.).
(n.d.).
What
What
areare
learning
learning
styles?
styles?
Retrieved
Retrieved
January
January
18,18,
2009,
2009,
from-http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.mi.htm
from-http://www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.mi.htm
[31]
[31]Margrain,
Margrain,S. S.
A.A.(1967).
(1967).
Short-term
Short-term
memory
memoryas as
a function
a functionof of
input
input
modal-
modal-
ity.ity.
Quarterly
Quarterly
Journal
Journal
of of
Experimental
Experimental
Psychology,
Psychology,19,19,
109-114.
109-114.
[32]
[32]McCarthy,
McCarthy,B.B.
(1982).
(1982).
Improving
Improvingstaff
staff
development
development
through
through
CBAM
CBAM
and
and
4MAT.
4MAT.Educ.
Educ.
Leadership,
Leadership,
40,40,
20-25.
20-25.
148148 Gh.Gh.
Tayebi
Tayebi
andand
S. S.
Marefat
Marefat
[33][33]
Mehrpour,
Mehrpour,S. (2008).
S. (2008).
A comparison
A comparison
of the
of the
effects
effects
of two
of two
vocabulary
vocabulary
teach-
teach-
inging
techniques.
techniques.
Asian
Asian
EFLEFL
Journal,
Journal,
10(2),
10(2),
192-209.
192-209.
[34][34]
Milton,
Milton,J. J.
(2009).
(2009).
Measuring
Measuring
second
second
language
language
vocabulary
vocabulary
acquisition.
acquisition.
North
North
York:
York:Multilingual
Multilingual
Matters.
Matters.
[35][35]
Nation,
Nation,
I. S.
I. S.
P. P.
(2001).
(2001).
Learning
Learning
vocabulary
vocabulary
in in
another
another
language.
language.
Cam-
Cam-
bridge:
bridge:
Cambridge
CambridgeUniversity
University
Press.
Press.
[36][36]
Noraizan,
Noraizan,A.,A.,
Bahry,
Bahry,F.,F.,
Saiful,
Saiful,
D.,D.,
Zulkefli
Zulkefli
Mohd,
Mohd, Y.,Y.,
&& Szarina,
Szarina,
A. A.
(2011).
(2011).
Learning
Learningstyles
styles
of of
non-science
non-scienceandand
non-technology
non-technologystudents
students
on on
technical
technical
courses
courses
in in
an an
information
information management
management program.
program.Paper
Paper
pre-
pre-
sented
sented
at at
thethe
Asia-Pacific
Asia-PacificConference
Conferenceon on
Library
Library
andand
Information
InformationEd-Ed-
ucation
ucation
andand
Practice
Practice
(A-LIEP),
(A-LIEP), University
University
Technology
Technology MARA,
MARA, Malaysia.
Malaysia.
[37][37]
Owen,
Owen,R. R.
S. S.
(1991).
(1991).
Clarifying
Clarifying
thethe
simple
simple
assumption
assumptionof of
thethe
secondary
secondary
task
task
technique.
technique.
Advances
Advances
in in
Consumer
Consumer Research,
Research,
18,18,
552-557.
552-557.
[38][38]
Oxford
Oxford
University
University
Press,
Press,
(2007).
(2007).
Solutions
Solutions
placement
placement
test:
test:
Elementary
Elementary
to to
intermediate.
intermediate.
Retrieved
Retrieved
January
January
7, 2015,
7, 2015,
from
from
http://www.ubd.ua/upload/other-resourses/solutions/solutions-
http://www.ubd.ua/upload/other-resourses/solutions/solutions-
placement-test.pdf
placement-test.pdf
[39][39]
Oxford,
Oxford,R. R.(2001).
(2001).Language
Languagelearning
learningstyles
stylesandandstrategies.
strategies.In.In.M.M.
Celce-Murcia
Celce-Murcia (Ed),
(Ed),
Teaching
Teaching
English
English
as asa second
a second or or
foreign
foreign
language
language
(3rd.)
(3rd.)
(pp.150-170).
(pp.150-170).USA:
USA:
Heinle
Heinle
& Heinle.
& Heinle.
[40][40]
Price,
Price,
G. G.
E.,E.,
Dunn,
Dunn,
R.,R.,
& Sanders,
& Sanders,W.W.
(1980).
(1980).
Reading
Readingachievement
achievement
andand
learning
learning
style
style
characteristics.
characteristics.
TheThe
Clearing
Clearing
House,
House,
5, 5,
223-226.
223-226.
[41][41]
Qian,
Qian,
D. D.
D. D.
(1996).
(1996).
ESLESL
vocabulary
vocabulary
acquisition:
acquisition:
Contextualization
Contextualization
andand
decotextualization.
decotextualization.
TheThe
Canadian
Canadian
Modern
Modern
Language
Language
Review,
Review,
53(1),
53(1),
120-
120-
142.
142.
[42][42]
Raj,
Raj,
S. S.
B.,B.,
Dharmangadan,
Dharmangadan, B.,B.,
& Subramony,
& Subramony, S. S.
(2007).
(2007).
Recall
Recall
of of
visual
visual
andandauditory
auditorystimuli
stimulias as
a function
a function
of of
hemispheric
hemispheric dominance
dominanceandandpre-
pre-
ferred
ferred
modality
modalityin in
learning.
learning.
Journal
Journal
of of
thethe
Indian
IndianAcademy
Academyof of
Applied
Applied
Psychology,
Psychology,
33(2),
33(2),
275-284.
275-284.
[43][43]
Read,
Read,J. J.
M.M.(2000).
(2000).
Assessing
Assessing
vocabulary.
vocabulary.
Cambridge:
Cambridge:Cambridge
Cambridge
Uni-
Uni-
versity
versity
Press.
Press.
[44][44]
Reid,
Reid,
J. J.
M.M.(1984).
(1984).
Perceptual
Perceptual
learning
learning
style
style
preferences
preferences
of of
international
international
students.
students.
Paper
Paper
presented
presented
at the
at the
National
National
NAFSA
NAFSA Conference,
Conference,Cincinnati.
Cincinnati.
The
TheImpact
Impact
of of
Rote
Rote
Learning
Learning
onon
Vocabulary
Vocabulary
... ... 149
149
[45]
[45]Reid,
Reid,J. J.
M.M.
(1987).
(1987).
The
The
learning
learning
style
style
preferences
preferences
of of
ESLESL
students.
students.
TESOL
TESOL
Quarterly,
Quarterly, 21(1),
21(1),
87-111.
87-111.
[46]
[46]Spear,
Spear,N.N.
E.E.(2014).
(2014).
The
Theprocessing
processing
of of
memories:
memories:Forgetting
Forgetting
and
andreten-
reten-
tion.
tion.
Hillsdale,
Hillsdale,
New
NewJersey:
Jersey:Psychology
PsychologyPress.
Press.
[47]
[47]Wilkins,
Wilkins,D.D.
A.A.
(1972).
(1972).
Linguistics
Linguistics
in in
language
language
teaching.
teaching.
London:
London:Arnold.
Arnold.
[48]
[48]Zokaee,
Zokaee,S.,S.,
Zaferanieh,
Zaferanieh,E.,E.,
&& Naseri,
Naseri,
M.M. (2012).
(2012).
OnOn
thethe
impacts
impactsof of
per-
per-
ceptual
ceptual
learning
learningstyle
style
and
andgender
genderonon
Iranian
Iranianundergraduate
undergraduateEFL
EFLlearners’
learners’
choice
choice
of of
vocabulary
vocabulary learning
learningstrategies.
strategies.
English
English
Language
Language Teaching,
Teaching,5(9),
5(9),
138-144.
138-144.