review journal

Resyi fatmawati

English Education Department 17

Assalamu'alaikum, hallo everybody in this opportunity I would like to share you about review of my international journal still about mnemonic method for teaching vocabulary.

Review of the Related Literature

           Similar to many other aspects of language pedagogy, not a perfect orthodoxy of results has been found in the literature of the studies that are done on the mnemonic key word method and its differential impact is yet to be explored. A relatively long time ago, Atkinson and Raugh (1975) conducted a research on the effectiveness of the key word method for vocabulary development in Russian as a non-Romance language. The key word method proved to be highly effective, resulting for the most critical test a score of 72 percent correct for the key word group compared to 46 percent correct for the control group. LaterLater, a similar finding was reported by Pressley et al. (1982) who compared the key word method with 5 methods in experiments 1 to 3 within which the recall of vocabulary definition was the critical dependent measure, and found the key word method as producing greater learning than any of the semantic-based or control conditions. AfterAfter the revision of 50 studies of the key word method, Pressley and his colleagues concluded that the key word method is superior to the rote learning, contextual and definitional methods. The results of such studies implied that it is worthwhile to add intentional direct vocabulary teaching and learning activities and they enabled the proponents of the key word method to state that the keyword method “helps to facilitate the linking of a word‟s form with its meaning” (Hulstijn, 1997, p. 218) and it has a facilitating role in vocabulary learning. In addition to the mentioned studies and many other researches that were done since Atkinson and Raugh (1975)up to the outset of the new millennium, some more recent studies have also focused on the mnemonic key word method.

           Moreover, the keyword method‟s effective utilization has been reported to be largely dependent on the proficiency level of L2 learners, allowing associations to be made with L2 vocabulary with which they are already familiar. Cohen and Aphek (1980) found that if students were initially more proficient, they were better able to use associations in recall tasks. Mc. Daniel and Pressley (1984), in a study in which the key word method was compared to learning new vocabulary when the meaning of the new vocabulary items had to be inferred from a meaningful context found that combining the key word method with the context method improved recall over that of context alone. Few years later, Cohen (1987) in his review of the literature on the use of mnemonics in foreign language learning discussed the issues of contention regarding retrieving foreign words or their meanings. He pointed out the difficulties involved in activating the link between the target word and the native word meaning. Furthermore, several researchers highlighted the negative effect of the key word method on the pronunciation and spelling of the foreign words.  Purpose of the study Based on a rather comprehensive review of the related literature, it appeared to the researchers that many of the studies that investigated vocabulary learning via the key word method have chosen mostly concrete nouns that are easy to find key words for, and there has been no attempt to deliberately select words from different parts of speech that are phonologically or semantically responsive to the key word method.

Thanks for reading...

Wassalam