The Comparative Effect of Non-Task and Provide-A-Model Preparation Activities on EFL Learners’ Vocabulary Retention

Mona Khabiri, Saeedeh Charmgar


This study investigated the comparative effective of non-task preparation activities and providing a model as two types of pre-task activities on vocabulary retention of 60 EFL students from a language school in Karaj, Iran. The participants were sorted out of a larger population of 90 intermediate students based on their scores on a piloted Preliminary English Test (PET) and a vocabulary test. As a result of the two mentioned tests, first 65 participants were selected and then randomly divided into two experimental groups: non-task preparation activities group and providing a model group. However, the results of five participants who did not attend the classes regularly during the treatment were finally discarded. The two experimental groups received different treatments. In one class, vocabularies were taught through doing some non-task preparation pre-task activities by the learners and in the other, the teacher provided the model of doing the activity. At the end of the treatment period, the researchers administered a vocabulary retention posttest. Analyzing the collected data through an independent samples t-test revealed that non-task preparation pre-task activities had a significantly higher impact on the vocabulary retention of the participants. The significant difference between the two pre-task activities is interpreted to be the possible outcome of the difference in the type of schemata each activates and the type of load each reduces. 


non-task preparation activities, providing a model, vocabulary retention, TBLT, pre-task phase

Full Text:



Beglar, D., & Hunt, A. (2002). Implementing task-based language teaching. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 96-106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Boston, J. S. (2008). Learner mining of pre-task and task input. English Language Teaching, 62(1), 62-66.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy (2nd ed.). Longman: Pearson Education Company.

Bygate, M. (1999). Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners’ language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research, 3(3), 185-214.

Chen, I. J. & Chen, Ch. W. (2008). Cross-border telecommunication: A task-based collaboration at college level. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 5(4), 163-189.

Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.

Craik, F. I. M. & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 104(3), 268-294.

Crooks, G., & Chaudron, C. (1991). Guidelines for language classroom instruction. In M. In M. Celce – Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 29-42). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Motivational strategies in the classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2006). The methodology of task-based teaching. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 1-17.

Hulstjin, H. J. Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.

Lee, J. (2000). Tasks and communicating in language classrooms. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Lee, L., & Gunderson, E. (2001). Select reading. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Liu, J. (2011). The effects of glossing on incidental vocabulary learning through reading-based oral tasks. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(3), 221-241.

Lockhart, R. S. & Craik, F. I. M. (1990). Levels of processing: A retrospective commentary on a framework for memory research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44(1), 87-112.

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.

Nemati, A. (2010). Enhancing long-term retention by memory vocabulary learning strategies. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 7(1), 171-195.

Nunan, D. (2001). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richards, J. C. (1999). Addressing the grammar gap in task work. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 153-166). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rivers, D. J. (2008). Task design to task enactment: How teacher interpretations of a given task manipulate its evolution as a pedagogical construct. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 5(3), 31-54.

Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. English Language Teaching, 49(2), 133-143.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38-62.

Skehan, P. (2003). Task-based instruction. Langauge Teaching, 36, 1-14.

Tajeddin, Z. & Chiniforoushan, N. (2011). Visual intelligence and lexical enhancement tasks: Their impacts of EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(3), 109-134.

Vasiljevic, Z. (2009). Incorporating rich vocabulary instruction into a language classroom. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(1), 189-214.

Verhelst, M. (2002). A box full of feelings: Promoting infants’ second language acquisition all day long. In K. Van den Branden (Ed.), Task-based language education: From theory to practice (pp. 197-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wang, L. (2009). An empirical study of differences in the use of English vocabulary learning strategies. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(4), 151-192.

Willis, D. (1990). The lexical syllabus. Birmingham: Colins Coubuild English Language Teaching.

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Oxford: Longman.

Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Weimer, M. (2002). Learner-centered teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Zheng, Y. (2009). Exploring Chinese EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: Implications for EFL vocabulary teaching. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(1), 163-188.

Zheng, Y. (2011). Exploring Chinese EFL learners’ vocabulary depth knowledge: The role of L1 influence. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(3), 191-219.

Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Historical trends in second language vocabulary instruction. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 5-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2021 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.