Guessing from Context as a Vocabulary Learning Technique

text. Guessing from context enables individuals to make an informed guess of the new word. Therefore, the researcher believes it is important for any language teacher to teach guessing from context to his students bearing in mind how important this technique will be for the students, not only during their formal study period, but also throughout their lifetime. In order to help language teachers easily transfer this vocabulary learning technique to the students, some experts have formulated their own steps of how one can guess a word’s meaning from the context in which the word is embedded. The two prominent procedures for guessing from context have been prescribed by Bruton and Samuda as cited in Nation, 1990, p. 161 and Clarke and Nation as cited in Nation, 1990, p. 162. There are two major things that differentiate one procedure from the other. Bruton and Samuda’s procedure for guessing from context consists of six steps. On the other hand , Clarke and Nation’s procedure comprises only five steps. The other thing that distinguishes the two procedures is that Bruton and Samuda’s procedure is “based more on a trial-and-error approach, with guessing occurring very early in the procedure and being followed by justification and elaboration” Nation, 1990, p. 162. Meanwhile, in Clarke and Nation’s procedure guessing occurs at a later stage after students have gained sufficient information needed to guess the meaning of an unknown word. Figure 2.4 displays Bruton and Samuda’s procedure for guessing from context while Table 2.2 display the steps of Clarke and Nation’s guessing from context procedure. Stage 1: Focus on The Unknown Word Stage 2: Teacher Asks for Guesses Students Hazard Guesses Are Any Students Close? Stage 3: Context Clues Leading to Approximate Meaning Stage 4: Justify Choices Stage 5: Teacher Elaboration Stage 6: Backup YES NO Figure 2.1 Bruton and Samu da’s Procedure for Guessing from Context Table 2.1 Clarke and Nation’s Procedure for Guessing for Context By examining both procedures for guessing from context shown in Figure 2.4 and Table 2.2, one can notice the slight difference between the two distinct procedures, where the guessing occurs at two different stages of each procedure. Clarke and Nation’s procedure might seem rather confusing than the other procedure being discussed in the paper, yet, when applied, it is “basically very simple” Nation, 1990, p. 162. The researcher discusses how one should apply the procedure in the last section of this chapter. Although one might conclude that guessing from context is a vocabulary learning technique which does not require the use of a dictionary, it actually does. By using this technique, one’s dependence on the use of dictionary may be reduced. Nation 1990 argues that “unless the learners already have a reasonable idea of what a word means, they will be unable to choose the most suitable meaning from those given in the dictionary” p. 165. The learners may use a Step 1 Determine the part of speech of the unknown word. Step 2 Pay attention to the sentence in which the unknown word is embedded and see if there are other words modifying the word or going with it. Step 3 Observe the relationship of the sentence with other sentences or paragraphs as it can help determine the meaning of the unknown. Punctuations and conjunctions may also serve as a clue. Step 4 Guess the meaning of the unknown word using the information gained from steps 1-3. Step 5 Check if your guess is correct by: a. Seeing the parts of speech of your guess and the unknown word. If they are of the same part of speech, you are probably correct. b. Substituting the unknown word with your guess. You guess is probably correct if the sentence makes sense. c. Breaking the unknown word into its prefix, root, and suffix. dictionary as another means of checking whether or not their guess is correct p. 165. Another noteworthy thing that teachers should bear in mind when teaching guessing this technique of vocabulary learning to students, despite which procedure being employed, is that they must not tell the students the meaning of the unknown words. The idea of teaching this technique is that the students may someday become independent learners or users of the technique who know how to deal with unknown words. McGregor 1970 strongly argues that every time a teacher tells their student what a word means they take away the opportunity to practice the skill from the student as cited in Nation, 1990, p. 164.

2. The Dependent t-Test and the Null Hypothesis

This research sought to find out whether or not Clarke and Nation’s procedure for guessing from context could help the first semester students of English Extension Course learn vocabulary in a significant manner. To determine this, the researcher had to compare the mean of the pretest results of the research subjects to the mean of the posttest results using the dependent t-test. The result of the t-test, known as t, would then determine the researcher’s decision to either retain or reject the null hypothesis. The following paragraphs provide the reader with brief theories about the dependent t-test and the null hypothesis. Ary, Jacobs, and Razavieh 1990 stated that the dependent t-test is a statistical test used to measure the mean difference between two sets of scores p. 196. This test is usually used when one intends to find out whether a certain treatment will lead to a change when given to one group of research subjects and requires a pretest and a posttest administered before and after the experimentation. It is called the dependent t-test because the two sets of scores from both the pretest and posttest belong to the same group of subjects. The result of the dependent t- test determines whether or not the treatment has resulted in a significant change in the subjects after the exposure of the treatment for a certain period of time and will enable a researcher to either retain or reject the null hypothesis. According to Ary et al. 1990, the null hypothesis is “a statement that there is no actual relationship between the variables and that any observed relationship is only a function of chance” p. 162. A null hypothesis must always be stated in a negative sentence and can either be retained or rejected by a researcher depending on the result of the statistical test done previously. In order for a researcher to retain or reject the null hypotheses, the t-test result must either exceed or be less than the t-value required for significance at a certain level. By retaining the null hypothesis, a researcher states that he didn’t find any or less than enough evidence to prove that his experimentation had led to a change he had expected, or that any change observed after the experimentation could not be attributed to the variables he had modified. By doing the opposite, a researcher states that the change observed after the experimentation was likely to be the result of his experimentation; that the variables he had modified caused the change. This theory would be used by the researcher to answer research question number one. Here are the null and alternative hypotheses in this research:  Null Hypothesis H There is no significant difference between the mean of the pretest scores and the mean of the posttest scores.  Alternative Hypothesis H 1 The mean of the posttest scores is significantly higher than the mean of the posttest scores. An important part of the null hypothesis theory is the theory of level of significance. Ary et al. 1990 define the level of significance as the “predetermined level at which a null hypothesis would be rejected” p. 165. A researcher must determine the level of significance before he carries out his research. The level of significance one chooses may vary, but the most used level of significance is the .05 level, as was the level of significance set by the researcher before the experiment. If, for example, a researcher decides that he uses the .05 level of significance for his research and based on the test of significance he rejects the null hypothesis, he implies that he does not believe that “the null hypothesis is true because the chances are only 5 out of 100 .05” Gay, 1992, p. 431. Apart from the theory of level of significance, another inseparable part of any type of tests of significance is degrees of freedom. According to Gay 1992, degrees of freedom constitute “a function of such factors as the number of subjects and the number of groups” p. 434. Different formulas to determine degrees of freedom apply depending on the test of significance one would like to carry out. This research, for instance, used the t-test for dependent samples. The