You are on page 1of 10

Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary Improvement through

Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques


[PP: 122-131]
Akbar Afghari
Parinaz Khayatan
(Corresponding author)
Islamic Azad University
Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Iran
ABSTRACT
The present study was an attempt to look into the effect of collaborative learning on the
learners’ improvement in vocabulary learning. Moreover, the learners’ attitudes about vocabulary
learning were taken into account as well. The study was conducted with the participation of 30
intermediate Iranian EFL (English as a foreign language) learners, who were studying in a private
language institute. To collect the data, OPT (Oxford Placement Test) was applied to check the
learners’ proficiency level and meet the homogeneity requirements. Then, the learners took the
vocabulary pre- and post-test to check the effectiveness of treatment sessions on the learners’
vocabulary learning. Semi-structured interview was also done to investigate the learners’ awareness
regarding learning vocabularies before and after the treatment sessions. Findings showed that the
applied collaborative techniques, i.e. word-webbing and snowball techniques paved the way for the
experimental group to outperform the control group since improvement in vocabulary learning was
found to be significant. Moreover, Qualitative results revealed the occurrence of positive changes in
the learners’ attitudes about vocabulary learning since almost all the learners concurred that the above-
mentioned collaborative techniques assisted them in their better speaking and, by having more
interaction through group work, enjoyable environment was created for learning target vocabularies.
It was suggested that collaborative instruction should be implemented in teaching vocabulary as it can
pave the way for both teachers and learners to benefit from a communicative language classroom.
Keywords: Collaborative Learning, Word-Webbing Technique, Snowball Technique, Learners’ Attitudes,
Vocabulary Learning
ARTICLE The paper received on Reviewed on Accepted after revisions on
INFO 01/04/2017 16/06/2017 10/07/2017
Suggested citation:
Afghari, A. & Khayatan, P. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary Improvement
through Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques. International Journal of English Language & Translation
Studies. 5(2). 122-131.

1. Introduction needs to be attended is how vocabulary


It is noteworthy that the role of should be taught to assist the learners to get
collaboration in learning might be well- mastery over syntactic and semantic
recognized by L2 scholars. However, there properties of the word. Much research
seems to be more research done to highlight conducted in the area of second language
the effectiveness of collaborative learning vocabulary acquisition has been concerned
in teaching and learning language skills in with vocabulary instruction (e.g. Quian,
the context of task-based and interactional 2004; Zimmerman, 1997) to reveal the
learning environment. Learning new significance of vocabulary learning and
vocabularies, which is one of the most teaching and paving the way for learners
important sub-skills of the language, seems and teachers to acquire the best knowledge
to be a complicated process involving a of vocabulary acquisition and pedagogy.
variety of sub-processes and tasks Collaborative learning can be based
demanding more elaboration to be on a variety of techniques or strategies;
internalized. Before a word becomes a part however researchers agreed that all
of one’s automatic linguistic competence, it successful collaborative learning strategies
has to be recognized as a word, its syntactic require learners to negotiate roles,
and semantic properties should be learned, timelines, tasks, knowledge, and
and it has to be integrated into one’s mental experiences (Gross Davis, 1993). Barkley,
lexicon so that it can be retrieved Cross, and Major (2005) identified some of
automatically when needed. The thing that the collaborative learning techniques used
Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary… Afghari Akbar & Khayatan Parinaz.

in these types of groups:(a) techniques for learners’ vocabulary development;


discussion, (b) techniques for reciprocal therefore, paving the way for the present
teaching, (c) techniques for problem study to probe the effect of collaboration on
solving, (d) techniques for using graphic the learners’ vocabulary learning through
information organizers, and (e) techniques word-webbing and snowball techniques to
for focusing on writing. In addition, they stimulate the learners’ background
also presented some of the strategies knowledge for the purpose of learning the
identified within these techniques, such as target vocabularies while collaborating and
(a) think-pair-share, (b) round robin, (c) working on the tasks based on the above-
three-step interview, (d) critical debate, (e) mentioned tasks. The learners’ attitudes
note-taking pairs, (f) learning cell, (g) about vocabulary learning were also taken
fishbowl, (h) role play, (i) jigsaw, (j) test- into account to check the learners’
taking teams, (k) case study, (l) structured awareness regarding how vocabulary can be
problem solving, (m) group investigations, taught and whether their probable simplistic
(n) group grid, (o) sequence chains, (p) attitudes about vocabulary learning can be
word webs, (q) round table, (r) collaborative changed by the treatment sessions.
writing, (s) peer editing, etc. Slavin (1996) The study intended to answer the
stated that regardless of the strategy used, following research questions:
every collaborative learning endeavor must 1. Does collaborative learning result in the
have the common denominator, i.e. the EFL learners’ vocabulary improvement
purpose of engaging students in their own through word-webbing and snowball
active learning, while providing a techniques?
supportive and challenging environment. 2. To what extent can collaborative learning
As to the role of word-webbing in affect the learners’ attitudes about
vocabulary learning, it seems that using a vocabulary learning?
word web can results in mapping out a new 2. Methodology
word. One way to expand the learners’ 2.1 Participants
vocabulary depth and breadth is to find new A group of 40 intermediate EFL
words and discuss them at length, which can (English as a Foreign Language) learners
be achieved by creating a word web that who were studying English in a private
maps out the new word. If the learner is language institute were the potential
struggling with vocabulary from a candidates in order to examine the effect of
particular unit or theme, it is useful for him collaborative learning on their
to creating a vocabulary word web for improvement in vocabulary learning
common words that he/she might encounter through word-webbing and snowball
(Laufer, 1992). Similar to word-webbing, techniques. The participants were divided
the purpose of the snowball strategy is to into one experimental group and one control
predict, summarize, justify, and think group based on the purpose of the study. In
critically. Teachers can adapt the strategy fact, the experimental group included 15
to their own purposes. The Snowball participants, and 15 participants were
techniques enforces writing, responding to assigned to control group. Though the
text, critical thinking, justifying, and participants seemed to be homogeneous in
collaboration (Zimmerman, 1997). The terms of their levels of proficiency (i.e.
anonymity of the activity also encourages intermediate level according to the records
students to respond even if they are unsure of the Institute), Oxford Placement Test
of the ‘right’ answer. In fact, both above- (OPT) was also administered to make sure
mentioned techniques can pave the way for of the sample homogeneity. Meanwhile, 10
the teachers to create a collaborative of the students identified as outliers were
learning atmosphere to help the learners discarded from the study.
improve their vocabulary knowledge. 2.2 Instruments
Although recent years have seen an The instruments used in the study
increase in investigation of general beliefs include: 1) OXFORD PLACEMENT TEST
about language acquisition, beliefs about (OPT)
acquisition of vocabulary and their Oxford Placement Test (OPT) was
influence on learning strategies have been administered before the treatment sessions
under-researched. To date, no studies have to select homogenous samples in terms of
investigated vocabulary learning beliefs in their proficiency levels. It is noteworthy
the context of Iran. that the participants of the study were of
To sum up, up to present, a few intermediate level and OPT was applied to
studies have been carried out in terms of select the students who are all intermediate
applying collaborative learning on the learners.
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org ) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017
Page | 123
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017

2) VOCABULARY PRE-TEST interview session to explore their


After the participants responded to perceptions about grammar learning before
the OPT, the researcher-made vocabulary the treatment. The interview questions the
pre-test (see appendix 1) was taken by the learners were supposed to answer include:
participants before the treatment. The pre- 1. What’s your attitude towards vocabulary
test was based on the course syllable learning? Is it easy or difficult for you to
content. It was in a form of 25 multiple learn new vocabularies?
choice questions to check their initial 2. Do you agree that learning new
knowledge of the target vocabularies prior vocabularies is essential for language
to the treatment. learning, why?
As to the reliability measure of the 3. Are you interested in learning
pre-test, a pilot study was conducted with vocabularies?
the participation of 40 intermediate students 4. Does your teacher have any special plan
(from another private institute with similar for teaching new words?
characteristics of the participants of the After the treatment, they were
present study) to check test score invited for the second semi-structured
consistency. Reliability coefficient was interview to see whether collaborative
found to be 0.70 (using KR-21 formula), learning through word-webbing and
which appeared to be an acceptable value in snowball techniques may lead to probable
terms of consistency of scores as changes in their attitudes about vocabulary
highlighted in Farhady, Jafarpour, and learning. It is noteworthy that semi-
Birjandi (1994). The reliability of the pre- structured interview was taken by the
test is shown in Table 1. experimental groups and conducted almost
Table 1: Reliability of Vocabulary Pre-Test with the same above-mentioned questions
to check consistency among the learners’
answers. It should be noted that the semi-
structured interview sessions were audio
3) VOCABULARY POST-TEST
recorded.
The researcher-made vocabulary
2.3 Procedure
post-test (see appendix 2) was taken to look
The present study was done with the
into the effectiveness of the treatment
participation of intermediate students.
sessions in terms of collaborative learning
Moreover, the study attempted to examine
through word-webbing and snowball
the effect of collaboration through word-
techniques. In fact, the post-test served as a
webbing and snowball techniques on EFL
measurement of the students’ progress after
language learners’ vocabulary learning in
the treatment.
one hand, and explore their attitudes about
Similar to the pre-test, the post-test
grammar learning on the other. As to the
contains 25 multiple choice questions based
homogeneity of the learners regarding their
on the treatment sessions. It aimed to see
proficiency levels, they took OPT. Then,
whether vocabulary instruction through
the participants were divided into
collaboration and word-webbing and
experimental and control groups. Prior to
snowball techniques might have any impact
the administration of pre- and post-tests, a
on the learners’ vocabulary development.
pilot study was done to measure their
Regarding the reliability coefficient
reliability in order to guarantee the
of the post-test, the same participants, who
consistency of the scores. Then, both groups
took part in the pilot study for the pre-test,
took the vocabulary pre-test to examine
carried out the post-test to check the
their initial knowledge of vocabularies in
consistency of the post-test scores with the
their syllabus material. Then, the
application of KR-21 formula. The
experimental group took part in a semi-
reliability was calculated as 0.75
structured interview session to explore their
highlighting a logical amount of
attitudes about vocabulary learning. After
consistency measure. Reliability of the
that, the experimental group underwent five
post-test is shown in Table 2.
1.5-hour treatment sessions of collaborative
Table 2: Reliability of Vocabulary Post-Test
learning through word-webbing and
snowball techniques explained in the
following:
4) SEMI-STRUCTURED INTERVIEW Word-webbing technique is a
To examine the learners’ attitudes graphic organizer strategy that provides a
about vocabulary learning, they were visual of how words or phrases connect to a
invited to participate in a semi-structured topic as in the steps below:

Cite this article as: Afghari, A. & Khayatan, P. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’
Vocabulary Improvement through Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques. International Journal of English
Language & Translation Studies. 5(2). 122-131.
Page | 124
Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary… Afghari Akbar & Khayatan Parinaz.

Step 1. Students were divided into groups of interview session was recorded for further
4 or 5 randomly. examination.
Step 2. Each group receives a paper 3. Data Analysis
and different color markers. As to the data analysis, quantitative
Step 3. One student draws a circle in the measures included both descriptive and
middle of the paper and writes the main idea inferential statistics to measures were
in it. adopted to look into the impact of
Step 4. Each student adds a concept to it collaborative learning on the learners’
with different color markers. They write vocabulary improvement. To do so, the
subtopics in the corners. learners’ pre- and post-tests results of the
Step 5. Each student selects one corner and experimental group and the control were
writes her/his words. All students have a quantitatively analyzed through SPSS
chance to add their ideas. software (version 20).
Step 6. Papers are displayed around the In order to analyze the learners’
classroom and each group reports their interview, learners’ partial transcriptions of
word-web. their interview session in line with
Snowball technique is also useful grounded theory methodology (Glaser &
when the aim is to generate ideas and Strauss, 1967) were provided to get into
involves the following steps: their perceptions about vocabulary learning
Step 1. Each student receives a task. They before and after treatment sessions.
receive the same task. They have to work Regarding the application of the
within a preset period of time (5 minutes, grounded theory in second language
more or less). research, Dornyei (2007) states that it is a
Step 2. They work on the task in pairs, they qualitative research methodology which is
share ideas. in favor of stepwise guidelines for data
Step 3. Pairs then form groups of 4 to share analysis providing an in-depth analysis of a
their ideas and knowledge. phenomenon. In fact, grounded theory
Step 4. Snowball is finished until they solve codes the data regarding the learners’
their problems. perceptions about vocabulary learning. For
In fact, the application of the above- this purpose, three steps were identified by
mentioned techniques paved the way for the Dornyei (2007) including:
collaborative learning to take place in a 1. Open coding of textual data and break
form of tasks to foster communication them to chunks. Each of these segments is
among the learners to learn the target assigned a category.
vocabularies adopted from the materials 2. Axial coding of the data that the
covered in the syllabus content. The researcher tries to make associations
experimental group (15 learners) was also between the categories of interview data
divided into three groups (each included found in the first step to create a sensible
five members) to collaboratively work on categorization.
the target words with regard to the above- 3. Selective coding by which the researcher
mentioned techniques. aims to finally identify the main codes that
It should also be noted that no have already been specified in the second
techniques were applied in the control stage.
group and they received traditional 4. Results
vocabulary instruction without the use of 4.1 Investigation of the First Research Question
specific tasks for collaboration. The first research question of the
After five sessions of vocabulary study was to look into the effect of
treatment, the participants took the collaborative learning through word-
vocabulary post-test based on the target webbing and snowball techniques on
word items for the second time to look into Iranian intermediate learners’ vocabulary
the experimental groups’ achievement of improvement. Hence, quantitative measures
vocabulary development, and compare the were conducted both descriptively and
results of the experimental group with the inferentially as in the following.
control one. Test of normal distribution (see
In the post-test session, students Table 3) was initially conducted to see if the
were interviewed in groups for the second scores of the learners in both groups, i.e.
time in order to see whether their experimental and control learners were
perceptions toward learning vocabulary via distributed normally.
word-webbing and snowball techniques Table 3: Test of Normality Distribution for
might have been changed .Moreover, the Experimental and Control Groups

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org ) ISSN:2308-5460


Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017
Page | 125
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017

Levene’s test, it can be seen that the


assumption of equal variances is not
violated (p= .637). Therefore, the results of
the first line could be used to report the data.
The results of the first line showed a non-
First of all, tests of normal significant p-value (p=.314, df= 68, t= -
distribution were run to see if the data were 1.01). The mean difference was -.40 with
distributed normally. The results of 95% confidence interval ranging from -1.18
Kolmogorov-Smirnov goodness-of-fit test to .38 indicating that the learners performed
showed .134 and .133 for the pre-test and similarly prior to the treatment.
post-test of the experimental group, and Regarding the fact that parametric
.139 and .130, for the pre-test and post-test, tests lack enough power to test the
scores of the control group. Since the assumptions, it is safer to report the results
sample size, in each group, was rather small of the second line of the independent-
(n=15), under 50, the results of Shapiro- samples t-test called Welch’s procedure, as
Wilk test of normal distribution were taken well, which assumes that the variances are
into consideration as well. The results of not equal. The results of the second line
Shapiro-Wilk goodness-of-fit test showed showed a non-significant p-value as well
.143 and .214for the learners’ scores in the (p=.314, df= 67.58, t= -1.01). The mean
experimental group on the pre-test and post- difference was -.40 with 95% confidence
test, and .086 and .125 for the learners’ interval ranging from -1.18 to .38 which
scores in the control group on the pre- and confirms the results of the first line.
post-tests. The results of both tests, showing In order to examine the efficacy of
non-significant p-values, indicated that the collaborative learning through word-
scores were normally distributed. webbing and snowball techniques on the
Therefore, parametric tests could be used to learners’ vocabulary learning, the
analyze the data. experimental and control groups'
After checking normality performance was compared (see Table 6).
distribution, a set of paired-samples t-test Table 6: Descriptive Statistics of the Post-Test
(Table 4) was conducted to compare the
experimental and control groups’
performance on the pre-test.
Table 4: Descriptive Statistics of the Pre-Test
The results of the descriptive
statistics showed a difference between the
performances of the learners in the
Looking at the table of descriptive experimental group (M= 13.74, SD= 1.70)
statistics, it can be inferred that the learners’ and those in the control group (M= 10.40,
mean score, in the experimental group, SD= 2.08) showing that the learners in the
(M=9.71, SD= 1.58) was not too much experimental group performed so much
different from that of the learners in the better than those in the control group
control group (M=10.11, SD= 1.71) following the treatment sessions.
showing that the groups were different, but The results of the independent-
to a little extent. In order to compare the samples t-test were also analyzed to find the
groups' mean scores on the pre-test, statistical difference between the two sets of
independent samples t-test was provided scores obtained from the post-test of the two
(Table 5). groups (Table 7).
Table 5: Independent Samples T-Test for the Table 7. Independent Samples T-Test for
Pre-Test the Post-Test

Examining the Levene’s test, a non-


The results of the independent- significant p-value can be seen (p=.158)
samples t-test table were analyzed to see if suggesting that the assumption of equal
there was any significant statistical variances in not violated. Therefore, the
difference between the learners’ mean first line of the table could be reported. The
scores on the pre-test. Looking at the results of the first line of the table showed a
Cite this article as: Afghari, A. & Khayatan, P. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’
Vocabulary Improvement through Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques. International Journal of English
Language & Translation Studies. 5(2). 122-131.
Page | 126
Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary… Afghari Akbar & Khayatan Parinaz.

significant p-value (p= .000, df= 68, t= interpretively analyze the data. Concerning
7.33). The mean difference was 3.34 with the first category of the learners’ attitudes,
95% confidence interval ranging from 2.43 the following classifications can be made as
to 4.25. The Cohen’s d statistics also to the coding procedure:
indicated a large difference as well (d= a) Vocabulary learning is a difficult activity
1.75) indicating that the learners in the in the classroom
experimental group significantly b) Learning vocabulary is monotonous
outperformed those in the control group. As to the learners’ attitudes about
The results of the second line of the table vocabulary learning before the treatment,
showed similar results as well. As to the following codes can be introduced:
considering the second line of the table, a c) Vocabulary learning interactively helps
significant p-value (p= .000, df= 65.35, t= speaking
7.33) can be observed. The mean difference d) Group work makes the vocabulary
is 3.34 with 95% confidence interval learning more enjoyable
ranging between 2.43 and 4.25 which It should also be mentioned that 15
denotes the outperformance of the learners learners of the experimental group were
in the experimental group, highlighting the selected to take part in interview. Since the
fact that the above-mentioned vocabulary experimental group’s responses were of
techniques paved the way for the learners to importance regarding the purpose of the
engage in collaborative learning study, their attitude change was thoroughly
environment, which resulted in analyzed. In the following, each of these
improvement in their vocabulary learning. sub-categories is taken into account and
4.2 Investigation of the Second Research interview extracts are provided as well.
Question 4.3 Learners’ Attitudes about Vocabulary
The second research question of the Learning Before the Treatment
study was ‘to what extent can collaborative As to the learners’ attitudes about
learning affect the learners’ attitudes about vocabulary learning, interview data showed
vocabulary learning?’. In order to answer that their attitudes seemed to be rather
the question, learners’ responses to the simplistic and negative toward learning
interview were specified and then vocabularies, which clearly denotes their
categorized with regard to the coding of unfamiliarity with this important sub-skill.
data, and then selected transcriptions of the Below, learners’ sub-categories as well as
semi-structured interviews were provided interview extracts are provided to
to be in line with the categories. Before demonstrate the learners’ lack of awareness
starting with the categories of the learners’ about vocabulary learning before the
attitudes, it is beneficial to review the treatment.
interview questions: a) Vocabulary Learning is a Difficult
1. What’s your attitude towards vocabulary Activity in the Classroom
learning? Is it easy or difficult for you to Regarding the difficulty of
learn new vocabularies? vocabulary learning that the learners might
2. Do you agree that learning new face, almost all the participants (n=13)
vocabularies is essential for language believed that vocabulary learning was not as
learning, why? easy as the other skills such as reading or
3. Are you interested in learning speaking. In fact, the learners might not
vocabularies? have sufficient knowledge of hwo to teach
4. Does your teacher have any special plan vocabulary as effectively as possible to
for teaching new words? make it seem less difficult for them. Here, it
As to the interview transcripts, was found that learners’ were not interested
coding of the interview transcripts were in vocabulary exercises and they always
initiated to find out the categories emerged face difficulty in understanding target
according to the initial coding of the vocabularies particularly within sentence.
answers. Then, axial coding of data was As an example, one of the participants’
conducted to discover the main categories interview extracts is as follows:
of data for the purpose of selective coding Extract 1.
which is the final stage. Therefore, the main “I think that learning vocabulary is
categories of the learners’ interview were 1) the most difficult … it does not have any fun
learners’ attitudes about vocabulary and therefore less energetic and full of hard
learning before the treatment; and 2) vocabularies.”
learners’ attitudes about vocabulary The learner appeared not to be
learning after the treatment. Each of these satisfied with tasks of vocabulary done in
two main categories has sub categories to the class and believes that it is less energetic
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org ) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017
Page | 127
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017

and without any interaction while teaching they would like to pass the time as fast as
vocabulary. Although teaching vocabulary possible when they were supposed to work
is of great importance, it seems that on vocabulary exercises. In fact, these types
teaching and learning vocabulary did not of learners might need more justification
satisfy the learners’ expectations though and attention to be more aware of the
they were not fully aware of what exactly purpose of vocabulary instruction to make
teaching vocabulary is since most of them them be consciously involved in vocabulary
contended that vocabulary should be taught learning, and what they were expected to do
directly. Learners’ attitudes appeared to be during vocabulary learning. On the other
simplistic and this may be due to their hand, there were learners who liked more
teachers’ teaching methodology in teaching interactive classes while the vocabulary
vocabulary less communicatively or maybe section of the textbook was started, and they
there is no teaching of vocabularies in the were not satisfied with less-energetic and
classroom leading to keeping such attitudes. boring atmosphere caused by no interaction
The thing to be attended is the participants’ in the classroom.
lack of understanding of what exactly 4.4 Learners’ Attitudes about Vocabulary
teaching and learning vocabulary is and Learning after the Treatment
what the main purpose of vocabulary task As to the learners’ attitudes after the
is. treatment of collaborative learning through
b) Learning Vocabulary is Monotonous word-webbing and snowball techniques,
This category of the learners’ their responses to the interview highlighted
attitudes shows that the participants’ their satisfaction with the methodology
responses to the interview revealed their adopted in teaching vocabulary leading to
reluctance to learn target vocabularies. It holding positive attitudes about vocabulary
seems that learners’ less eagerness in learning. It seemed that teaching
vocabulary learning might be due to the vocabulary through collaboration, to a large
difficulty of the skill they may encounter as extent, resulted in changes in the learners’
it was highlighted in the previous extracts attitudes about vocabulary learning. Hence,
above. Regarding the lack of interest in it is of value to go for sub-categories of the
vocabulary learning making it monotonous learners’ attitudes about vocabulary
without any variety, the majority of the learning after the treatment.
participants (n=12) believed that when they c) Vocabulary Learning Interactively Helps
were working on tasks of vocabulary, there Speaking
were no additional activities to make the Regarding the learners’ attitudes’
learning process less boring, leading to have change about vocabulary learning, all the
the learners more interested in doing the participants (n=15) in semi-structured
vocabulary exercises. This attitude is shown interview agreed that collaborative
in the following extract: vocabulary instruction was so effective in
Extract 2. that they felt improvement in vocabulary
“When we are doing vocabulary since they were able to carry out the tasks
activities, we have to to do the tasks of the individually and benefit from peer
book individually or with our classmates in interaction and simultaneously interact with
a form of a machine … right or wrong. It is the teacher and improve their speaking as
boring just to answer the questions of the well. The extract below reflects one
book without having any talking with the learners’ positive attitude about vocabulary
friends or very little or no interaction with learning after receiving the treatment of
the teacher. This makes it boring for us.” vocabulary instruction:
The above extract delineates that Extract 3.
participants were in favor of more “The new method of teaching
interaction in vocabulary instruction and vocabulary, for example, snowball, we
they were not pleased with the current could have more talk with our friends and
method of teaching vocabulary in the do the exercise and speak about that after
classroom. More importantly, it can be choosing the words, and talk to our friends.
found that they were probably indifferent to It was very enjoyable.”
vocabulary learning. More than half of the The learner had a positive
learners concurred that a vocabulary impression in terms of teacher’s vocabulary
exercise was just to do it uniformly and instruction. An interesting point is that she
jump to a reading or speaking task like a mentioned ‘new method of teaching’ and
machine. It seems that some of the ‘snowball’, showing that she was aware of
participants were, to some extent, lazy or the technique in vocabulary teaching and it
might be for the first time that the learners
Cite this article as: Afghari, A. & Khayatan, P. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’
Vocabulary Improvement through Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques. International Journal of English
Language & Translation Studies. 5(2). 122-131.
Page | 128
Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary… Afghari Akbar & Khayatan Parinaz.

experienced such an interactive class while attitudes about vocabulary learning after the
focusing on target vocabularies through treatment sessions
word-webbing and snowball techniques. It To conclude, the second research
can also be found that the participants were question aimed to find out whether
affected by having more interaction with collaborative learning through word-
their peers as well as the teacher helping webbing and snowball techniques could
them to improve their speaking ability while affect the learners’ attitudes about
learning the target vocabularies. In other vocabulary learning and change their
words, collaborative vocabulary instruction simplistic attitudes about learning
through the above-mentioned techniques vocabularies. It was found that almost all
paved the way for the learners to freely the students seemed to hold simplistic
speak with their friends and teachers about attitudes about vocabulary learning and
the vocabulary tasks and enjoy the context were not much interested in learning
of interaction. vocabularies since it was boring and rather
d) Group Work Makes the Vocabulary difficult for therm. After receiving the
Learning more Enjoyable treatment of collaborative learning through
Regarding changes in the learners’ the above-mentioned techniques, nearly all
attitudes about vocabulary learning, it the participants in the experimental group
seems that teaching vocabulary through changed their attitudes about vocabulary
word-webbing and snowball techniques learning and they put much more emphasis
caused the majority of the participants on the role of vocabularies since it assisted
(n=13) to put much more emphasis on the them in their better speaking and made the
role of collaboration by mentioning ‘group classroom more interactive through group
work’ in their responses to the interviews. work while creating an enjoyable
They apparently understood the role environment for learning target
vocabulary may play in their success in the vocabularies.Findings demand the
process of language learning as it helped implementation of collaborative instruction
them to improve their self-confidence in in teaching vocabulary in the language
speaking skill as highlighted in the previous classroom, which can pave the way for both
section. By contending that collaborative teachers and learners to benefit from a
learning through the so-called techniques communicative classroom.
fostered the learners’ group work activities 5. Discussion
by the participants, it, therefore, values the The present study was conducted to
role of collaborative instruction in teaching look into the effectiveness of collaborative
vocabulary and the teacher’s’ abilities to learning on EFL learners’ vocabulary
successfully implement the collaborative improvement through word-webbing and
techniques in the classroom, paving the way snowball techniques. As to the quantitative
for the learners to benefit from peer and measures of the pre- and post- test scores of
teacher interaction to interactively do the the learners in the experimental and control
vocabulary tasks. group, it was found that the experimental
Extract 4. group significantly outperformed the
“I think that in our classroom the control group after the treatment (i.e.
students were very close to each other ….. collaborative learning through word-
This was because of the group work that the webbing and snowball techniques),
teacher made groups and we were working demonstrating that collaboration was quite
on the target vocabularies together and the successful in helping the learners to
teacher helped us if we had questions.” improve their vocabulary learning. In other
The fact that they could speak with words, the experimental group, which was
their classmates and benefit from the taught through collaborative learning and
teachers’ support created a positive feeling benefiting from snowball and word-
in the learners’ mind leading to keep this webbing techniques, outperformed the
attitude that by group work they could be control group, which underwent the
more successful in doing the tasks and traditional method of vocabulary
improve their vocabulary learning. In fact, instruction. Hence, the study, to a large
group work, which was resulted due to the extent, proved that collaboration can be
collaboration in the classroom, created a accounted for at the service of teaching
fruitful and interactive educational vocabulary within communicative context.
environment for the participants to learn the The present study found empirical support
vocabularies in a communicative context to those of Roschelle and Teasley (1995)
resulting in fairly raising awareness in their and Barkley, Cross, and Major (2005),
which concluded that collaborative learning
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org ) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017
Page | 129
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org) ISSN:2308-5460
Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017

can pave the way for the learners to engage learning through word-webbing and
in an interactive learning environment and snowball techniques. It is noteworthy that
be as an active participant in the language above-mentioned studies did not take into
learning process and improve their account the changes in the learners’
language skills and sub-skills. attitudes about vocabulary learning while
To add more value concerning the the present study aimed to highlight the
effectiveness of collaborative learning effectiveness of collaborative learning as a
instruction, Johnson and Johnson (2004) tool to bring about positive changes in the
suggested that it can provide an interactive learners’ simplistic attitudes about
learning environment in order for the vocabulary learning and, by creating an
teachers and learners to benefit from interactive learning atmosphere by word-
purposeful classroom involvement, which webbing and snowball techniques, helping
leads to success in the language learning them to hold more realistic attitudes about
process. They also pointed out that developing their vocabulary knowledge.
mastering and utilizing the elements of 6. Conclusion
cooperation allow educators and facilitators The present study was conducted to
to make adjustments to existing curricula: look into the impact of collaborative
First, educators have taken existing learning on the EFL intermediate language
instructional units and courses and structure learners’ vocabulary learning through
them in a collaborative form. Second, they word-webbing and snowball techniques in
have tailored cooperative learning one hand, and to explore their beliefs about
instructional units to fit needs,
vocabulary learning on the other. The
circumstances, subjects, students and
findings of the study can be summarized as
assessment goals. Third, educators analyzed
the challenges that students face in their follows:
group dynamics and intervene to promote As to the quantitative analysis of the
and increase effective collaboration. Finally, learners’ performance on the two occasions
educators have the ability to assure thorough of the vocabulary pre- and post-tests, it was
assessments of students at both the found that the learners in the experimental
individual and group level (pp. 31-32). group outperformed the control group,
Regarding the incorporation of denoting that snowball and word-webbing
collaborative learning to have possible techniques created a collaborative learning
effect on the learners’ attitudes about environment for the learners to improve
vocabulary, since there seems to be very their vocabulary learning. The study, to a
few studies which have been conducted to large extent, highlighted the practical and
investigate the learners’ attitudes about productive application of collaborative
vocabulary learning, findings highlighted instruction at the service of teaching
the effective role collaborative learning to language skills and sub-skills in the context
bring about changes in the learners’ of meaningful interaction. It was revealed
attitudes about vocabulary learning. In fact, that almost all the students seemed to
it was concluded that almost all the initially hold simplistic attitudes about
participants in the experimental group held vocabulary learning and were not much
positive beliefs about and were satisfied enthusiastic in learning vocabularies since it
with collaborative learning through word- was boring and rather difficult for therm.
webbing and snowball techniques to help On the other hand, after the treatment
them improve their vocabulary learning and sessions of collaborative instruction, nearly
change their simplistic and less-positive all the participants in the experimental
attitudes about vocabulary learning. group changed their attitudes about
Regarding the learners’ attitudes about vocabulary learning and they put much
vocabulary learning, it can be in alignment more emphasis on the role of vocabularies
with studies done by Li (2011) and Rashidi since it assisted them in their better
and Omid (2011) who looked into the speaking and made the classroom more
learners’ beliefs about rote learning of interactive through group work while
vocabulary, while changes in the learners’ creating an enjoyable environment for
beliefs about vocabulary learning, as learning target vocabularies. Findings of the
mentioned in the paragraph above, have not study support the fact that implementation
been taken into account by previous of collaborative instruction in teaching
research, paving the way for the present vocabulary in the language classroom can
research to uncover the complex nature of pave the way for both teachers and learners
the learners’ changes in their attitudes about to benefit from a communicative classroom.
vocabulary learning as a result of being
exposed to collaborative vocabulary
Cite this article as: Afghari, A. & Khayatan, P. (2017). Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’
Vocabulary Improvement through Snowball and Word-Webbing Techniques. International Journal of English
Language & Translation Studies. 5(2). 122-131.
Page | 130
Collaborative Learning and Iranian EFL learners’ Vocabulary… Afghari Akbar & Khayatan Parinaz.

References Appendix: 1 Vocabulary Pre-Test


Barkley, E., Cross, P., & Major, C. (2005).
Collaborative learning techniques: A
handbook for college faculty. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in
applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
university press.
Farhady, H., Jafarpour, A., &Birjandi, P.
(1994). Testing language skills.
Tehran: SAMT Publications.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss. A. (1967). The
discovery of grounded theory:
Strategies for qualitative research.
Chicago: Aldine.
Gross Davis, B. (1993). Tools for teaching. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson R., T. (2004).
Assessing students in groups:
Promoting group responsibility and
individual accountability. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary
for reading comprehension? In H.
Bejoint& P. Amaud (Eds.), Vocabulary
and applied linguistics (pp. 126-132).
London: MacMillan.
Li, S. (2011). Vocabulary learning beliefs,
strategies and language learning
outcomes. LAP, Lambert Academic
Publishing.
Qian, D. D. (2004). Second language lexical
inferencing: Preferences, perceptions,
and practices. In P. Bogaards& B.
Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second Appendix: 2 Vocabulary Post-Test
language (pp. 155-169).
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Rashidi, N., & Omid, A. (2011). A survey on
Iranian EFL learners' beliefs on the role
of rote memorization in learning
vocabulary and its effect on vocabulary
achievement. Journal of Pan-Pacific
Association of Applied Linguistics, 15,
139-161.
Roshelle, J., &Teasley, S. D. (1995). The
construction of shared knowledge in
collaborative problem solving. In C.
O'Malley (Ed.), Computer supported
collaborative learning (pp. 69-197).
Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
Slavin, R. E. (1996). Cooperative learning:
Theory, research, and practice. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Do reading and
interactive vocabulary instruction make
a difference? An empirical study.
TESOL Quarterly, 31, 121-140.

International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies (www.eltsjournal.org ) ISSN:2308-5460


Volume: 05 Issue: 02 April-June, 2017
Page | 131

You might also like