Por favor, use este identificador para enlazar este ítem: https://repositoriosed.educacionbogota.edu.co/handle/001/2564
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.advisorMaldonado Chacón, Pedro Pablospa
dc.contributor.authorAlonso Ramírez, Yeimy Janneth-
dc.contributor.authorCausil Camargo, Levis-
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-04T20:28:42Z-
dc.date.available2019-10-04T20:28:42Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositoriosed.educacionbogota.edu.co/handle/001/2564-
dc.description113 p.spa
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this action research was to check the effectiveness of guided vocabulary practice through board games as a strategy to improve students’ level of oral production in English. This study was conducted with two groups of 12 students each, from two different public schools located in the south of Bogotá, Colombia. 11 boys and 13 girls, ranging in age from 10 to 13, whose English level was A1, according to the Common European Framework of Reference (2001), made up the group of 24 participants. The two groups evidenced common behaviours of apathy and poor participation in activities that involved oral communication in English. The initial analysis revealed the lack of vocabulary as the main reason students felt restrained and insecure when they were required to participate in oral activities. The instruments used to collect the information before, during, and after the pedagogical intervention were vocabulary tests, oral production tests, questionnaires, checklists and teachers’ journals. The data analysis revealed positive results regarding the implementation of teaching and learning vocabulary guided through games. There was evidence that students increased their vocabulary in English as they improved their attitude towards oral activities in the target language. The results of this study provided a pedagogical alternative for the development of oral production skills in second language learners. First, this pedagogical intervention emphasized the need to teach vocabulary in context and provide students with the tools for them to become able to participate actively in oral activities. In this sense, the learning and practice of a high-frequency words list through board games presented positive results. Second, promoting collaborative work and practice of the target language, through board games, raised learners’ self-confidence and security.spa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherUniversidad de La Sabanaspa
dc.rightsUniversidad de La Sabanaspa
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/spa
dc.sourcehttp://hdl.handle.net/10818/30770spa
dc.titleThe impact of guided vocabulary practice through board games to enhance A1 sixth graders’ oral production in Englishspa
dc.typeTrabajo de grado - Maestríaspa
dc.identifier.handlehttp://hdl.handle.net/10818/30770-
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.rights.creativecommonsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadasspa
dc.subject.lembVocabulary development-
dc.subject.lembEducational games-
dc.subject.lembTeacher directed practice-
dc.subject.lembSpeaking skills-
dc.subject.proposalVocabulary developmentspa
dc.subject.proposalEducational gamesspa
dc.subject.proposalTeacher directed practicespa
dc.subject.proposalSpeaking skillsspa
dc.type.dcmi-type-vocabularyTextspa
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisspa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionspa
dc.relation.referencesAckerman, D. (2004). An alchemy of mind: The marvel and mystery of the brain. New York: Scribner.spa
dc.relation.referencesAmiryousefi, M. (2016). Willingness to communicate, interest, motives to communicate with the instructor, and L2 speaking: A focus on the role of age and gender. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 14, 1-14. doi: 10.1080/17501229.2016.1170838spa
dc.relation.referencesArhar, J. M., Holly, M. L., & Kasten, W. C. (2001). Action research for teachers: Traveling the yellow brick road. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill, Prentice Hallspa
dc.relation.referencesAugust, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 50-57. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00120.xspa
dc.relation.referencesAusubel, D. (1963). The psychology of meaningful verbal learning. Oxford, UK: Grune & Stratton.spa
dc.relation.referencesAvinash, M. (2016). Use of puzzle solving games to teach English. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(15). doi: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i15/86940 or http://www.indjst.org/index.php/indjst/article/view/86940/68914spa
dc.relation.referencesBailey, A. L. (2005). Cambridge young learners English (YLE) tests. Language Testing, 22(2), 242-252. doi: 10.1177/026553220502200206spa
dc.relation.referencesBandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development, Vol. 6. Six theories of child development 1-60. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesBarón, P. C., & Martínez, O. M. (2013). Metacognitive learning strategies: Their influences on vocabulary learning through a webquest. (Master’s thesis, Universidad de La Sabana, Chia, Colombia). Retrieved from: http://intellectum.unisabana.edu.co/handle/10818/8305spa
dc.relation.referencesBiemiller, A. (2001). Teaching vocabulary: Early, direct, and sequential. American Educator, 25(1), 24-28.spa
dc.relation.referencesBlachowicz, C. L. Z. & Fisher, P. (2011). Best practices in teaching vocabulary revisited. In L. Morrow & L. Gambrell (Eds.), Best practices in literacy instruction (pp. 224-249). New York: Guilfordspa
dc.relation.referencesBlock, D., & Cameron, D. (Eds.). (2002). Globalization and language teaching. London: Routledgespa
dc.relation.referencesBogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.spa
dc.relation.referencesBolton, K., & Butler, S. (2004). Dictionaries and the stratification of vocabulary: Towards a new lexicography for Philippine English. World Englishes, 23(1), 91-112. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 971X.2004.00337.xspa
dc.relation.referencesBorg, S. (2001). The research journal: A tool for promoting and understanding researcher development. Language Teaching Research, 5(2), 156-177. Retrieved from: http://ltr.sagepub.com/content/5/2/156.short. doi:10.1177/136216880100500204spa
dc.relation.referencesBouchard, T.J. (1976). Unobtrusive Measures: An Inventory of Uses. Sociological Methods & Research. 4(3), 267-300. doi: 10.1177/004912417600400301spa
dc.relation.referencesBrown, A. L., & Ferrara, R. A. (1985). Diagnosing zones of proximal development. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp. 273- 305). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesBrown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving learning in diverse classrooms. Education, 124(1), 49.spa
dc.relation.referencesBrown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Pressspa
dc.relation.referencesBrown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to program development. Heinle & Heinle Publishers, 20 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116spa
dc.relation.referencesBurns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. New York, NY: Routledgespa
dc.relation.referencesBurns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on speaking. National Centre for English language teaching and research, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia 2109.spa
dc.relation.referencesButtjes, D. (1990). Teaching foreign language and culture: Social impact and political significance. Language Learning Journal, 2(1), 53-57. doi: 10.2307/3587769spa
dc.relation.referencesBygate, M. (2006). Areas of research that influence L2 speaking instruction. In E. Uso-Juan, & A. Martinez-Flor (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills. (pp. 159-186). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.spa
dc.relation.referencesCarrier, M., & the Centre for British Teachers. (1985). Take 5: games and activities for the language learners. Nelson, Walton-on-Thames, Surreyspa
dc.relation.referencesCelce-Murcia, M. (2001). Language teaching approaches: An overview. Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 2, 3-10.spa
dc.relation.referencesCinamon, D. & Elding, S. (1998). Tracking Talk. In Holderness, J. & Lalljee, B. (Eds), Introduction to oracy: Frameworks for talk. London, England: A&C Black.spa
dc.relation.referencesCoady, J., & Huckin, T. (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.spa
dc.relation.referencesCook, G. (1994). Repetition and learning by heart: An aspect of intimate discourse, and its implications. ELT journal, 48(2), 133-141. doi: 10.1093/elt/48.2.133spa
dc.relation.referencesCorbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.spa
dc.description.degreenameMagíster en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomospa
dc.description.degreelevelMaestríaspa
dc.publisher.programMaestría en Didáctica del Inglés con Énfasis en Ambientes de Aprendizaje Autónomospa
Aparece en las colecciones: RA. Tesis de Maestría

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
Yeimy Janneth Alonso Ramírez (Tesis).pdf3.26 MBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons