Using data-driven learning activities to improve lexical awareness in intermediate EFL learners

References

• Asuman, A., Arzu, Ş. V., & Kadriye, D. A. (2016). Lexical awareness and development through data driven learning: attitudes and beliefs of EFL learners. Journal of Education & Training Studies, 4(3), 87–17. https:https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i3.1223
   Google Scholar
• Boers, F. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10(3), 245–261. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1191/1362168806lr195oa
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bolitho, R., Carter, R., Hughes, R., Ivanič, R., Masuhara, H., & Brian Tomlinson, B. (2003). Ten questions about language awareness. ELT Journal, 57(3), 251–259. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.3.251
   Google Scholar
• Bolitho, R., & Tomlinson, B. (1995). Discover English. Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Boontam, P., & Phoocharoensil, S. (2018). Effectiveness of english preposition learning through data-driven learning (DDL). The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 125–141. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2018-2403-10
   Google Scholar
• Boulton, A. (2009). Testing the limits of data-driven learning: language profificiency and training. ReCALL, 21(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344009000068
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulton, A. (2010). Data-driven learning: taking the computer out of the equation. Language Learning, 60(3), 534–572. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00566.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter, R. (2003). Language awareness. ELT Journal, 57(1), 44–46.
   Google Scholar
• Chen & Cheng. (2018). Corpus-based approach of innovative construction of second language. Foreign Language Research, 35(3), 63–67. 169.
   Google Scholar
• Ding, Y., & Qi, Y. (2005). Use of formulaic language as a predictor of L2 oral and written performance. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 28(3), 49–53.
   Google Scholar
• Ellis, R. (1998). Teaching and research: options in grammar teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 39–60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3587901
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Figueras, N. (2012). The impact of the CEFR. ELT Journal, 66(4), 477–485. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer, R. A. (1979). The inductive-deductive controversy revisited. The Modern Language Journal, 63(3), 98–105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1979.tb02433.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geluso, J., & Yamaguchi, A. (2014). Discovering formulaic language through data-driven learning: student attitudes and efficacy. Recall, 26(2), 225–242. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000044
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammerly, H. (1975). The deduction/induction controversy. Modern Language Journal, 59(1–2), 15–18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.1975.tb03619.x
   Google Scholar
• Hassan, M. (2018). The Impact of Using Concordances on Enhancing EFL Students’ Use of Collocations in Writing in English. Cairo University.
   Google Scholar
• He, X. (2016). Non-english majors’ listening teaching based on lexical chunks theory and schema theory. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 142. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v9n2p142
   Google Scholar
• Hsu, J. Y., & Chiu, C. Y. (2008). Lexical collocations and their relation to speaking proficiency of college EFL learners in Taiwan. Asian EFL Journal, 10(1), 181–204.
   Google Scholar
• Hua, T. K., & Azmi, N. A. (2021). Collocational competence as a measure of esl/efl competency: A scoping review. 3L:The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 27(1), 115–128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2021–2701-09
   Google Scholar
• Ilaria, V. (2015). Metalinguistic knowledge, language awareness and language proficiency. US-China Foreign Language, 13(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17265/1539-8080/2015.01.004
   Google Scholar
• James, C., & Garrett, P. (eds.). (1992). Language awareness in the classroom. Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Johns, T. (1991). From printout to handout: grammar and vocabulary teaching in the context of data-driven learning. English Language Research Journal, 4, 27–45.
   Google Scholar
• Kazemi, M., Katiraei, S., & Rasekh, A. E. (2014). The impact of teaching lexical bundles on improving Iranian EFL students’ writing skill. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98(special issue), 864–869. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.493
   Google Scholar
• Leckey, J., & Neill, N. (2001). Quantifying quality: the importance of student feedback. Quality in Higher Education, 7(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320120045058
   Google Scholar
• Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Language Teaching Publication.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. (1997). Implementing the lexical approach: Putting theory into practice. Language Teaching Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. (2000). Chapter 9. Materials and resources for teaching collocation. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation: Further development in the lexical approach (pp. 186–203). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Li, J. (2018a). An empirical study on teaching prefabricated chunks in english listening comprehension. Education Teaching Forum, 18, 217–218
   Google Scholar
• Li, X. (2018b). Exploring Chinese EFL learners’ acquisition development of depth of vocabulary knowledge based on input corpus and output corpus. Proceedings of the international conference on contemporary education, social sciences and ecological studies (CESSES 2018), 283. Moscow, Russia. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2991/cesses-18.2018.110
   Google Scholar
• Lin, M. H., & Lee, J.-Y. (2015). Data-driven learning: changing the teaching of grammar in EFL classes. ELT Journal, 69(3), 264–274. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luo, Q. (2016). The effects of data-driven learning activities on EFL learners’ writing development. Springerplus, 5(1), 1255. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2935-5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ma, R. (2012). Vocabulary proficiency instruction for Chinese EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(6), 1199–1205. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.6.1199-1205
   Google Scholar
• Mohammadi, M., & Enayati, B. (2018). The effects of lexical chunks teaching on EFL intermediate learners’ speaking fluency. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 179–192. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11313a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moudraia, O. (2001). Lexical approach to second language teaching. ERIC Digest, 06(00), 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Nagy, T. (2020). Raising collocational awareness with humour. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica, 12(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2020-0015
   Google Scholar
• Nattinger, J. R. (1980). A lexical phrase grammar for ESL. Tesol Quarterly, 14(3), 337–344. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3586598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Newell, A. (1990). Unified theory of cognition. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Özcan, M. S., & Kert, S. B. (2020). Use of mobile applications in collocation teaching. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 15(5), 1176–1190. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v15i5.4629
   Google Scholar
• Pang, J. (1996). Language awareness in english teaching. Foreign Language Circle, 63(3), 11–14.
   Google Scholar
• Pawley, A., & Syder, F. H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Native-like selection and native-like fluency. In J. C. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication (pp. 191–226). Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Peng, J. (1999). Language awareness and grammar teaching. Journal of Shandong University of Science and Technology (Social Science), 17(2), 76–80.
   Google Scholar
• Pereyra, N. (2015). Extensive reading in enhancing lexical chunks acquisition. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 15(2), 218–234.
   Google Scholar
• Peters, E. (2015). The learning burden of collocations: the role of interlexical and intralexical factors. Language Teaching Research, 20(1), 113–138. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814568131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinkham, J. (2000). The translator’s guide to Chinglish. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
   Google Scholar
• RÖmer, U. (2010). Chapter 2. Using General and Specialized Corpora in English Language Teaching: Past, Present and Future. In M. C. Campoy, B. Belles, & M. L. Gea (Eds.), Corpus-based approaches to English Language Teaching (pp. 18–35). Continuum International Publishing Group.
   Google Scholar
• Steyn, C., Davies, C., & Sambo, A. (2018). Eliciting student feedback for course development: the application of a qualitative course evaluation tool among business research students. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 44(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1466266
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suranakkharin, T. (2017). Using the flipped model to foster Thai learners’ second language collocation knowledge. 3L the Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 23(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2303-01
   Google Scholar
• Tang, J. (2013). Input of chunks and its effects on L2 learners’ listening competency. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(7), 1246–1269. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.3.7.1264-1269
   Google Scholar
• Valeo, A. (2013). Language awareness in a content-based language program. Language Awareness, 22(2), 126–145. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2012.666247
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., & Yang, J. (2020). Revisiting the Explicit Learning of Vocabulary of Chinese EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 13(2), 86–96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n2p86
   Google Scholar
• Wei, N. (2007). Phraseological characteristics of Chinese learners’ spoken english: evidence of lexical chunks from COLSEC. Modern Foreign Language (Quarterly), 30(3), 280–291.
   Google Scholar
• Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Yılmaz, M. (2017). The effect of data-driven learning on efl students’ acquisition of lexico-grammatical patterns in efl writing. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 75–88. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.460966
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, X. (2016). On the reform of traditional chunk approach: from the perspective of language awareness. Cross-Cultural Communication, 12(2), 13–17.https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3968/8148
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, L. (2018). Effectiveness of college student english writing teaching based on data-driven learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (Ijet), 13(04), 106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i04.8474
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng, Y. (2009). Exploring Chinese efl learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: Implications for EFL vocabulary teaching. Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(1), 163–188.
   Google Scholar