• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.20 no.10
• /
• pp.679-687
• /
• 2020

The present study aims to investigate lexical coverage of BNC (British National Corpus) word lists and 2015 Basic Vocabulary of Ministry of Education in 2020 EBS-linked textbooks and CSAT. For the data analysis, AntWordProfiler was used to find lexical coverage and frequency. The findings showed that Students can understand 95% of the tokens with a vocabulary of BNC 3,000 and 4,000 word-families in 2020 EBS-linked listening and reading books respectively. 98% can be understood with 4,000 word-families in the EBS-linked listening book while the same lexical coverage can be covered with 8,000 word-families in the EBS-linked reading textbook. By the way, 95% of the tokens can be understood with 2,000 and 4,000 word-families in 2020 CSAT listening and reading tests respectively, while 98% requires 4,000 and 7,000 word-families in the 2020 listening and reading tests respectively. In summary, students should understand more words in 2020 EBS-linked textbooks than in 2020 CSAT tests confirming Kim's (2016) findings. In summary, students should understand more words in 2020 EBS-linked textbooks than in 2020 CSAT tests.

• English Language & Literature Teaching
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.89-112
• /
• 2005

This study investigated the effects of collocation-based vocabulary instruction for the experimental group (G2). It was compared to the traditional wordlist-based vocabulary instruction for the control group (G1). This results reflect the development of low level high school EFL learners' vocabulary learning strategy use and the positive change in the affective domain. In the analysis of the survey responses, G1 and G2 did not differ significantly on the first questionnaire. They did, however, differ significantly on the second questionnaire. G2 used more strategies to discover and to consolidate the meaning of the words by means of combining words. In terms of the affective domain, G2 participated more actively in the learning activities, which had a significant effect on vocabulary growth, memory, self-confidence, motivation, and cooperative learning. This is attributable to the fact that G2 was more inquisitive, interested, challenged, participatory, cooperative, and attentive than G1 in performing the vocabulary task activities. Moreover, the data collected from the questionnaire showed that G2 performed more interactive and dynamic activities in solving the given tasks.