The Influence of Synectics Model as a Prewriting Technique on Vocabulary Development

Year 2019, , 2115 - 2127, 15.09.2019

Nalan Bayraktar Balkır Ece Zehir Topkaya

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.3424

Cited By: 2

Abstract

This study
aimed to investigate the influence of the Synectics Model as a prewriting
technique on a group of Turkish EFL learners’ vocabulary development in higher
education. For this reason, a mixed research design utilising both quantitative
and qualitative techniques was employed. 
The quantitative part included repeated measures design to observe the
participants’ progress in vocabulary over time. The quantitative data
collection instruments were learner-written texts analysed via an online text
analysis programme in terms of type, family, and word frequency levels. The
data were analysed through Friedman Test for repeated measures and Wilcoxon
Signed Ranks Test for pairwise comparisons. As for the qualitative part, a
descriptive qualitative research design was used to gain a deeper understanding
of the participants’ experiences. To this end, semi structured interviews were
conducted, and inductive content analysis technique was employed. The results
indicated a significant increase in almost all indicators of vocabulary
development. In addition, qualitative findings revealed the participants had
mostly positive perceptions about the use of synectics in learning and
retaining new vocabulary items.  It is
concluded that the Synectics Model could be used as a prewriting technique in
EFL contexts.  

Keywords

family and type, prewriting technique, Synectics Model, vocabulary development, word frequency levels

Bir Yazma Öncesi Tekniği Olarak Sinektik Modeli’nin Kelime Gelişimine Etkisi

Abstract

Bu çalışma, bir yazma öncesi tekniği olarak
Sinektik Modeli’nin, İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen bir grup Türk
yükseköğretim öğrencisinin kelime haznesi gelişimlerine etkisini araştırmayı
amaçlamıştır. Bu sebeple, hem nicel hem de nitel tekniklerin kullanıldığı karma
bir araştırma deseni uygulanmıştır. Nicel kısım, katılımcıların zaman içindeki
kelime dağarcığındaki gelişmelerini gözlemlemek için tekrarlı ölçümlerden
oluşmaktadır. Nicel veri toplama araçları, çevrimiçi bir metin analizi programı
aracılığıyla tür, kelime ailesi ve kelime sıklığı düzeyleri açısından analiz
edilen öğrenciler tarafından yazılmış metinlerdir. Veriler, tekrarlı ölçümler
için Friedman Testi ve çift yönlü karşılaştırmalar için Wilcoxon İşaretli
Sıralar Testi ile analiz edilmiştir. Nitel kısım için ise, katılımcıların
deneyimlerini daha derinden anlamak için betimleyici niteliksel bir araştırma
deseni kullanılmıştır. Bu amaçla, yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yürütülmüş ve
verilerin analizi için tümevarımcı içerik analizi tekniği kullanılmıştır.
Sonuçlar, kelime dağarcığının neredeyse tüm göstergelerinde önemli bir artış
olduğunu göstermiştir. Ayrıca, nitel bulgular, katılımcıların, sinektik
tekniğinin kullanımının yeni kelimeleri öğrenme ve akılda tutma üzerinde
çoğunlukla olumlu algıları olduğunu ortaya çıkarmıştır. Sinektik Modeli’nin,
İngilizce’nin yabancı dil olarak öğretildiği ortamlarda bir yazma öncesi
tekniği olarak kullanılabileceği sonucuna varılmıştır.

Keywords

kelime ailesi ve türü, yazma öncesi tekniği, Sinektik Modeli, kelime haznesi gelişimi, kelime sıklığı düzeyleri

References

• Aiamya, M. & Haghanib, F. (2012). The effect of synectics and brainstorming on 3rd grade students’ development of creative thinking on science. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47, 610 – 613. Asmalı, M., & Dilbaz Sayın, S. S. (2016). The effects of the Synectics Model on vocabulary learning, attitude, and desire to learn English. Asian EFL Journal, 18(3), 41-60. Bayraktar Balkır, N. & Zehir Topkaya, E. (2017). Synectics as a prewriting technique: Its effects on writing fluency and lexical complexity. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 325–347. Decarrico, J. S. (2001). Vocabulary learning and teaching. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as second or foreign language (pp. 285-299). Boston, MA: Heinle&Heinle. Erişti, B. & Polat, M. (2017). The effectiveness of synectics instructional model on foreign language vocabulary teach-ing. International Journal of Languages’ Education and Teaching, (5)2, 59-76. Estes, T. H., Mintz, S. L. & Gunter, M. A. (2010). Instruction: A models approach. London: Pearson. Fatemipour, H. & Kordnaeej, M. (2014). The effect of synectics and journal creative writing techniques on EFL stu-dents’ creativity. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 7 (3), 412-424. Re-trieved from http://www.ijllalw.org/finalversion7331.pdf. File, K. & Adams, R. J. (2010). Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated?. TESOL Quarterly, 44, 10.5054/tq.2010.219943. Genç, E. & Savaş, S. (2011, July). Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated?. Paper presented at Teacher-Research Studies at Foreign Language School: Inquiries from Teacher Perspectives, Gediz University, İzmir. Gordon, W. J. J. (1961). Synectics: The development of creative capacity. New York: Harper and Row. Hunt, A. & Beglar, D. (2002). Current research and practice in teaching vocabulary. In J.C. Richards & W.A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching (pp. 258-266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://www.lextutor.ca/vp/comp/ Kleiner, C. S. (1991). The effects of synectics training on students’ creativity and achievement (Unpublished Doctor of Education Dissertation). United States International University, San Diego, the USA. Laufer, B. & Nation, P. (1994). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307-322. Luppescu, S. & R. Day, R. (2006). Reading, Dictionaries, and Vocabulary Learning. Language Learning. 43, 263 - 279. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1992.tb00717.x. Muncie, J. (2002). Process writing and vocabulary development: Comparing Lexical Frequency Profiles across drafts. System, 30, 225–235 Nation, I.S.P. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary. In E. Hinkel (Ed.) Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 581-595). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Nation, P. & Meara, P. (2002). Vocabulary. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 35-54). London: Arnold. Nolan, V. (2003). Whatever happened to Synectics? Creativity and Innovation Management, 12(1), 24-27. Pany, S. (2008). Effectiveness of Synectics Model of teaching in enhancing creativity, academic achievement and achievement motivation of learners. EJAIAER, 20(1&2), 63-65. Patil, R. (2012). The effectiveness of Synectics Model. Indian Stream Research Journal, 1(5), 1-4. Tekmen, E.A.F. & Daloğlu, A. (2006). An investigation of incidental vocabulary acquisition in relation to learner proficiency level and word frequency. Foreign Language Annals, 39(2), 220- 243. Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Essex: Person Education Limited. Walker, D. E. (2009). Promoting metaphorical thinking through synectics: Developing Deep thinking utilizing abstractions. Retrieved from http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/dwalker/ ConferenceInformation/IUT/Synectics.pdf. Weaver, W. T. & Prince, G. M. (1990). Synectics: Its potential for education. The Phi Delta Kappan, 71 (5), 378-388. Yagnik, A. G. (2010). Effect of synectics method of teaching on development of language creativity in English. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Sardar Patel University, Gujarat, India. Zahedi,Y. & Abdi, M. (2012). The effect of semantic mapping strategy on EFL learners’ vocabulary learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 2273-2280, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.198. Zarei, A. & Esmaeili, S. (2015). The effects of isolated, integrated and synonym generation techniques on L2 vocabulary learning. Research Journal of Educational Studies and Review, 1(4), 98-105.