European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Iranian Undergraduate EFL

Students and its Relation to their Vocabulary Size

Mohd. Sahandri Gani Hamzah

Faculty of Educational Studies,Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400, UPM Serdang Selangor
E-mail: sahandri@putra.upm.edu.my

Reza Kafipour
Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia
43400, UPM Serdang Selangor
E-mail: rezakafipour@gmail.com

Saifuddin Kumar Abdullah

Department of Politechnic and Community College
Education Research and Development Centre
43300 Seri Kembangan Selangor
Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia
E-mail: sainash6565@hotmail.com

Abstract
The main objective of this study is to evaluate undergraduate EFL learners' vocabulary
learning strategies and its relation to the learners' vocabulary size. There are five different
categories of vocabulary learning strategies as determination, memory, social, cognitive,
and metacognitive. These categories cover an overall 35 strategies included in vocabulary
learning strategies questionnaire. The reliability index obtained for vocabulary learning
strategies showed a reliability coefficient of 0.74. The other instrument used in the current
study, vocabulary size test, is a standardized test developed by Nation (2007). A total of
125 Iranian undergraduate students majoring in TEFL participated in the study. Cluster
sampling was used to select participants of the study. The data were analyzed by using
descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation) and statistical multiple regression at
significant of p<0.05. The findings of this study led to some suggestions to enhance
students' vocabulary learning, increase their vocabulary size, and subsequently improve
their English learning.

Keywords: Vocabulary learning strategy; vocabulary size; strategy

1. Introduction
Calls for helping learners improve the way they go about learning vocabulary have been made on a
number of grounds. Sokmen (1997: 225) argues for helping learners learn how to acquire vocabulary
on their own, noting that it is “not possible for students to learn all the vocabulary they need in the
classroom”. Cunningsworth (1995: 38) regards helping learners develop their own vocabulary learning
strategies as “a powerful approach”, which can be based on sensitization to the systems of vocabulary,
encouragement of sound dictionary skills and reflection on effective learning techniques.

39
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

Second language (L2) acquisition depends crucially on the development of a strong vocabulary.
In the second language acquisition (SLA) sub-discipline known as second language vocabulary
acquisition (SLVA), researchers have focused their attention on the need for second language learners
to optimize their vocabulary knowledge (Singleton, 1999; Schmitt, 2000). Vocabulary learning
strategies (VLS) are a part of language learning strategies which are receiving more attention since the
late 1970s and their investigation has advanced our understanding of the processes learners use to
develop their skills in a second or foreign language. Nation (2001, p.217) has taken this conscious
choice factor into account when defining vocabulary learning strategies. A strategy would need to a)
involve choice, that is, there are several strategies to choose from; b) be complex, that is, there are
several steps to learn; c) require knowledge and benefit from training; and d) increase the efficiency of
vocabulary learning and vocabulary use.

1.1. Statement of the problem

Learning a second language involves the manipulation of four main skills; speaking, writing, listening
and reading, which lead to effective communication. One crucial factor is the amount of vocabulary
one possesses as vocabulary forms the biggest part of the meaning of any language (McCarthy, 1988).
Vocabulary, however, is the biggest problem for most learners. In view of this, vocabulary acquisition
is currently receiving attention in second language pedagogy and research. But it is still a contentious
issue how learners acquire vocabulary effectively and efficiently or how it can best be taught.
In addition, modern approaches -as holistic approach and integrative approach- to learning
English place emphasis on communicative activities in order to help students to use English to
communicate. Many workshops have been held in order to pursue a new purpose of EFL. Teachers
have tried activities which are effective for facilitating the four skills. Many teachers have tried to shift
their teaching styles from a traditional method as grammar translation method to communicate one as
holistic approach. Thus, study of teaching techniques is very popular among teachers. However, a
study of students themselves has not had much focus yet. Studying vocabulary learning strategies is a
study which focuses more on students themselves. In most Asian countries, curriculum designers and
EFL instructors try to emphasize on holistic or integrative approach but in most cases they cannot
change teacher-centered classrooms to student-centered ones. It is only in a few cases that they succeed
in making a student-centered classroom environment where they often use methods and materials that
have been developed with the learning needs of native speakers of English in mind. In many cases,
neither students nor teachers are aware that difficulty in learning class material, high frustration levels,
and even failure may not rest solely in the material itself.
Vocabulary is generally given little emphasis in the university curriculum in Asian countries
(Fan, 2003). The situation is the same in Iran as an Asian country. Generally, the emphasis on English
teaching in universities in Asian countries is on the four language skills. Vocabulary teaching in many
classrooms is largely incidental (Fan, 2003; Catalan, 2003). This means that when a particular word or
phrase appears difficult for the students, they are told the definitions. Occasionally, this may be
supplemented with the collocations of the target words or information about how the words are used,
for example, whether they are used to express negative emotions or whether the word is used in formal
situations etc. More often, however, finding out about new vocabulary items is left to the discretion of
the students, and they are encouraged to turn to dictionaries to look up for meanings of words (Catalan,
2003). Catalan continues that vocabulary learning is, therefore, largely ad hoc and very dependent on
the efforts of the teachers and students. This ad hoc approach to vocabulary learning may lead to a
general inadequacy in vocabulary knowledge among Asian university students. As Fan (2003) states
this inadequacy has been repeatedly pointed out by the researchers and lecturers as one of the factors in
the unsatisfactory performance of students in their exams. He continues that the inadequacy in lexical
knowledge may hinder students’ proficiency development and affect their performances in public
exams. It is high time for teachers to look into ways to enhance vocabulary knowledge in university
students.
40
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

1.2. Significance of the study

This study aims to survey students’ vocabulary learning strategies. The researcher believes that an
awareness of individual differences in learning makes EFL educators and curriculum designers more
sensitive to their roles in teaching and learning. Furthermore, it will permit them to match teaching and
learning so as to develop students’ potentials in EFL learning as well as to assist students to become
cognizant of the ways they learn most effectively. It also helps the students to develop strategies and
ways to become more motivated and independent learners. The understanding of the students’ beliefs
of vocabulary learning and their vocabulary learning strategies use enables teachers and researchers to
design appropriate materials and activities to help them improve their vocabulary learning so as to
enhance their lexical competence.

1.3. Objectives of the study

This study is mainly about trying to understand aspects of one area of language learning that is
vocabulary learning in order to possibly identify implications for teaching. As Johnson and Johnson
(1998:280) state, it seems “increasingly unlikely that we are going to understand very much about
teaching if we fail to try to understand learning at the same time”. This study was designed to provide
baseline data for future research on the vocabulary learning strategies of EFL speakers and to provide
insights for the EFL classroom. The present study mainly aims:
1) To explore the most and least frequently used vocabulary learning strategies by Iranian
undergraduate students.
2) To explore the overall frequency of strategy use by Iranian EFL undergraduate learners as high
strategy users, medium strategy users and low strategy users.
3) To explore the contribution of Iranian EFL undergraduate learners’ vocabulary learning
strategies to their vocabulary size.

1.4. Research questions

This research will investigate a few effective factors in learning English as a foreign language. The
following research questions can be formulated for the following study:
1) What are the most and least frequently used categories of vocabulary learning strategies by
Iranian undergraduate EFL students?
2) Are Iranian EFL students, high, medium, or low vocabulary learning strategy users?
3) Do vocabulary learning strategies contribute to the vocabulary size of the students?

2. Review literature
Vocabulary learning strategies can be considered a subset of general learning strategies in second
language acquisition. Interest in learning strategies first developed in the 1970s with research to
identify the characteristics of good language learners (Naiman et al., 1978; Rubin, 1975). O'Malley and
Chamot define learning strategies as “the special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to help
them comprehend, learn or retain new information” (1990:1). This very broad definition is echoed by
Schmitt in defining vocabulary learning strategies. Schmitt says learning is “the process by which
information is obtained, stored, retrieved and used... therefore vocabulary learning strategies could be
any which affect this broadly defined process” (1997:203). This definition leaves open to question
whether vocabulary learning is incidental or deliberate, a factor which has been much debated in the
literature. In his definition Nation makes clear the intentional character of vocabulary learning and,
interestingly, bases his description on the qualities a strategy must possess in order to warrant attention
from a teacher.
Call for helping learners improves the way they go about learning vocabulary have been made
on a number of grounds. Sokmen (1997: 225) argues for helping learners learn how to acquire
41
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

vocabulary on their own, noting that it is “not possible for students to learn all the vocabulary they
need in the classroom”. Cunningsworth (1995: 38) regards helping learners develop their own
vocabulary learning strategies as “a powerful approach”, which can be based on sensitization to the
systems of vocabulary, encouragement of sound dictionary skills and reflection on effective learning
techniques. In view of the importance of these strategies, it is useful to find out what vocabulary
learning strategies are and examine how they help to build up one’s vocabulary, and what strategies the
textbooks should introduce to learners.
Brown and Payne (1994) identify five steps in the process of learning vocabulary in a foreign
language: (a) having sources for encountering new words, (b) getting a clear image, either visual or
auditory or both, of the forms of the new words, (c) learning the meaning of the words, (d) making a
strong memory connection between the forms and the meanings of the words, and (e) using the words.
Consequently, all vocabulary learning strategies, to a greater or lesser extent, should be related to these
five steps (Fan, 2003: 223).
It is possible to view a vocabulary learning strategy from at least three different angles. First, a
vocabulary learning strategy, very broadly speaking, could be any action taken by the learner to aid the
learning process of new vocabulary. Whenever a learner needs to study words, he/she uses
strategy/strategies to do it. Second, a vocabulary learning strategy could be related to only such actions
which improve the efficiency of vocabulary learning. Hence, there are actions which learners might
employ but which do not enhance the learning process – a perfectly possible scenario with poor
learners. Third, a vocabulary learning strategy might be connected to conscious (as opposed to
unconscious) actions taken by the learner in order to study new words. Ideally, learners should be made
aware of ‘good’, efficient strategies, so that they could freely and consciously choose the one(s)
suitable for them. It should be borne in mind, though, that a strategy that works well for one student
may completely fail with another and that for a concrete learning situation one strategy may work
better than another.

2.1. Importance of Vocabulary Learning Strategies

The main benefit gained from all learning strategies, including strategies for vocabulary learning, is the
fact that they enable learners to take more control of their own learning so that students can take more
responsibility for their studies (Nation, 2001; Scharle & Szabó, 2000). Consequently, the strategies
foster “learner autonomy, independence, and self-direction” (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989: 291). Equipped
with a range of different vocabulary learning strategies students can decide upon how exactly they
would like to deal with unknown words. A good knowledge of the strategies and the ability to apply
them in suitable situations might considerably simplify the learning process of new vocabulary for
students for instance, independence in selecting which words to study results in better recall of the
words than when the words are chosen by someone else. (Ranalli, 2003: 9)
Nation (2001) believes that a large amount of vocabulary could be acquired with the help of
vocabulary learning strategies and that the strategies prove useful for students of different language
levels. As learning strategies are “readily teachable” (Oxford & Nyikos 1989: 291), the time teachers
spend on introducing different ways of vocabulary learning and practicing to students cannot be
considered as wasted. Cameron (2001) believes that children may not implement vocabulary learning
strategies on their own and they should be trained to use the strategies.
A number of linguists have long recognized the importance of learner independence in
vocabulary acquisition. The view of Gairns and Redman (1986) is that students should be more
responsible for their learning and pay greater attention to individual needs. The reason is that after
elementary level, it is increasingly difficult for teachers to select vocabulary equally useful to all
students; thus time spent on teaching may be wasted. Schmitt (2000) sees the need to help learners
acquire the strategies necessary to learn words on their own. Oxford and Scarcella (1994) advocate the
provision of systematic vocabulary instruction to let learner master specific strategies to acquire words
even outside their classes.
42
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

For Nation (1990; 2001), the most important way to learn vocabulary is learners using
strategies independently of a teacher. In his recent publication, strategy training is suggested to be part
of a vocabulary development program. According to Schmitt and Schmitt (1995), the best teaching
plan may be to introduce a variety of learning strategies to students so that they can decide for
themselves the ones they prefer. This echoes learners' need to develop their strategy knowledge.

2.2. Types of Vocabulary Learning Strategies

As demonstrated by the classifications of vocabulary learning strategies proposed by different
researchers, the range of different vocabulary learning strategies is wide. The following part aims to
take a closer look at the most important category of the strategies. The general organization of the
strategies below is based on Schmitt’s (1997) taxonomy, i.e. the names of the broad categories of the
strategies derive from his classification. Schmitt (1997, 2000), however, suggests two dimensions of
L2 vocabulary learning strategies: discovery and consolidation strategies which distinguish the
strategies that learners use to determine the meaning of new words when they first encounter them
from the ones they use to consolidate meanings when they encounter the words again. The former
refers to determination and social strategies whereas the latter includes social, memory, cognitive, and
metacognitive strategies, with 58 individual strategies in total. This categorization is based, in part, on
Oxford’s (1990) taxonomy of language learning strategies and offers a taxonomy that classifies
strategies into five groups: determination, social, memory, cognitive, and metacognitive. Each of these
will now be examined in turn.

3. Research Subject
In order to reach the maximum statistical power parameters all available second year EFL
undergraduate students at Fars province which were around 250 included in the present study. The
second year students were selected since they had received enough input to answer the vocabulary
learning strategies questionnaire while the first year students might had not received enough input and
could not answer vocabulary learning strategy questionnaire. Fars province was randomly selected
among 30 provinces around the country based on cluster sampling.

4. Research Instrument
This research utilizes two kinds of instruments, namely Schmitt's vocabulary learning strategy
questionnaire adopted from Bennet (2006) with a reliability coefficient of 0.78. All 41-items in the
questionnaire are classified under 5 different groups of strategies as determination, memory, social,
cognitive, and metacognitive. The other instrument utilized for this piece of research is Nation's
standardized vocabulary size test which includes 140 items and will determine the learners' vocabulary
size in a range of 0 to 14000. Each item in the test has a score value of 100.

5. Research Findings
Research findings will be discussed based on the order of research questions. First, vocabulary learning
strategies and their frequency of use will be discussed according to the participants' responses to
vocabulary learning strategies by using descriptive statistics. Second, it will be determined if Iranian
EFL students are high, medium, or low strategy users. Finally, contribution of vocabulary learning
strategies to the learner' vocabulary size will be analyzed and discussed based on the data analysis that
used multiple regression statistics stepwise method.

43
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

5.1. Vocabulary learning strategies' frequency of use

The descriptive statistics related to the participants' reported use of vocabulary learning strategies,
measured by the vocabulary learning strategy questionnaire is summarized in the following table.

Table 1: Rank order of the most and least frequently used categories of strategies

Strategy Mean SD Rank Strategy use

Determination 3.25 0.60296 1 Medium
Memory 3.15 0.64180 2 Medium
Metacognitive 3.08 0.79952 3 Medium
Cognitive 2.92 0.72703 4 Medium
Social 2.70 0.74284 5 Medium

According to the above-mentioned table, determination strategies (mean= 3.25; SD=0.60) are
determined as the most frequently used strategies by the respondents followed by memory (mean=3.15;
SD=0.64), metacognitive (mean=3.08; SD=0.79), and cognitive strategies (mean=2.92; SD=0.72)
respectively. Furthermore, social strategy is determined as the least frequently used strategy with mean
score of 2.70 and standard deviation of 0.74.
Analyzing all 41 strategies categorized under the above-mentioned categories of strategies
revealed the most and least frequently used strategies in more details which are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Rank order of the most and least frequently used strategies

Strategy Category Mean SD Rank

Use monolingual dictionary Determination 4.26 0.78492 1
Guess meaning from context Determination 4.06 0.63968 2
Study new words many times Metacognitive 3.91 0.98081 3
Connect the word to its synonyms and antonyms Memory 3.76 0.89763 4
Use new words in sentences Memory 3.73 1.04826 5
Use Eng. language media Metacognitive 3.71 1.06148 6
Take note or highlight Cognitive 3.63 1.21721 7
Study the sound of a word Memory 3.56 1.04000 8
Make lists of new words Cognitive 2.36 1.18855 9
Write paragraphs using several new words Memory 2.33 0.95893 10
Study the word with classmates Social 2.30 0.79438 11
Ask classmates for the meaning Social 2.20 0.88668 12
Check for L1 cognate Determination 2.16 1.01992 13
Use physical action when learning a word Memory 2.06 1.14269 14
Talk with native speakers Social 1.89 0.97320 15
Ask the teacher to check definition Social 1.66 0.71116 16

As table 2 displays, analysis of the mean scores show that the first eight strategies are the most
frequently used strategies as reported by the respondents. These eight strategies consist of 'use
monolingual dictionary' (mean=4.26; SD=0.78), 'guess meaning from context' (mean=4.06; SD=0.63),'
study new words many times' (mean=3.91; SD=0.98), 'connect the word to its synonyms and
antonyms' (mean=3.76; SD=0.89), ' use new words in sentences' (mean=3.73; SD=1.04), 'use English
language media' (mean=3.71; SD=1.06), 'take note or highlight' (mean=3.71; SD=1.06), 'study the
sound of the new word' (mean=3.56; SD=1.04) respectively. The second eight strategies were reported
by the respondent as the least frequently used strategies which include the strategies 'ask the teachers to
check definition' (mean=1.66; SD=0.71), 'talk with native speakers' (mean=1.89;SD=0.97), 'use
physical action when learning a word' (mean=2.06; SD=1.14), 'check for L1 cognate' (mean=2.16;
SD=1.01), 'ask classmates for the meaning' (mean=2.20; SD=0.88), 'study the word with classmates'
(mean=2.30; SD=0.79), 'write paragraphs using several new words' (mean=2.33; SD=0.95), 'make lists
of new words' (mean=2.36; SD=1.18) respectively.
44
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

To answer the second research question and determine to what extent learners use the
strategies, the mean score and standard deviation of overall strategy use (Table 3) were calculated.
Scoring system suggested by Schmitt (1997) and Oxford (1990, 2001) categorizes the scores to three
different levels. Scores below 2.4 show a low strategy use, scores between 2.4 and 3.5 show a medium
strategy use and scores above 3.5 show high strategy use.

Table 3: Score analysis for overall strategy use

Mean SD Min Max

3.02 0.56362 1.59 4.35

According to table 3, the respondents of the present study were found to be medium strategy
users with mean score of 3.02 and standard deviation of 0.56362 for overall strategy use.

5.2. Relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and vocabulary size

To determine if a relationship and variance contribution exists between 41 independent variables
(vocabulary learning strategies) and total vocabulary size of the learners, multiple regression stepwise
analysis was used. Table 4 shows the analyzed results of the multiplied regressive analysis of the
"stepwise" method which involve a total of 41 vocabulary learning strategies. Only nine vocabulary
learning strategies showed a correlation and significant contribution (p< 0.05) toward the learners' total
vocabulary size.

Table 4: Stepwise multiple regression analysis for vocabulary learning strategies which influence EFL
learners' vocabulary size

Contrib
Variables B Beta (ß) T Sig. T R² ution
(%)
Use physical action when learning a word (Mem.) 382.110 0.311 3.251 0.002 0.096 9.6
Interact with native speakers (Soc.) 403.390 0.318 3.510 0.001 0.197 10.1
Take note or highlight (Cog.) 235.670 0.213 2.178 0.032 0.235 3.8
Study new words many times (meta.) 331.269 0.265 2.562 0.012 0.284 4.9
Use Bilingual dictionary (deter.) 208.036 0.209 2.335 0.022 0.323 3.9
Use English language media (meta.) 273.087 0.227 2.609 0.011 0.368 4.5
Study the word with classmates (Soc.) 216.866 0.211 2.377 0.020 0.387 1.9
Study the sound of a word (Mem.) 196.414 0.177 2.135 0.035 0.416 2.9
Repeat the words verbally (Cog.) 228.462 0.192 2.125 0.036 0.443 2.7
44.3
Note: Mem=Memory; Cog=Cognitive; Soc=Social; Deter=Determination; Meta=Metacognitive

The stepwise multiple regression analysis in table 4 reveals nine vocabulary learning strategies
which have correlations and contributions (34.7%) of significance (p< 0.05) toward learner's
vocabulary size.
The test results revealed a correlation between the dependent variable (vocabulary size) and the
whole of the independent variable group is 0.423 (multiple regression). The variance value of
dependent variables correlated significantly with all independent variables. This can be explained
through the power which is able to describe the regression model with the value (R2), which is 44.3.
The main practice and the highest for the learner's vocabulary size is 'interacting with native
speakers' which is one of the strategies under the category of social (B= 0.318, T= 3.510, Sig. T=
0.001) and its contribution is as much as 10.1 percent. This circumstance shows that when 'interacting
with native speakers' adds up by one unit, the level of vocabulary size increases by 0.318 units.
The beta (B) value for 'using physical action when learning a word' shows great effect on
learner's vocabulary size if they use physical action when learning new words. (B= 0.311, T= 3.251,
45
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

Sig. T= 0.002). When the score of 'using physical action when learning a word' adds up by one unit,
learner's vocabulary size increases by 0.311 units with contribution of 9.6 percent. 'Study new words
many times' has an effect on the learners' vocabulary size (b= 0.265, T= 2.562, Sig. T= 0.012). Related
to this is when the score of studying new words many times adds up by one unit, the learners'
vocabulary size increases by 0.265 units, with a contribution of 4.9 percent. In other words, the
learners who study new words more times show greater size of vocabulary compared to those who
study new words less times.
Learners who use 'English language media' exhibited a higher vocabulary size than those who
do not use or use less English language media (B= 0.227, T= 2.609, Sig. T= 0.011) and contributed to
4.5 percent. This circumstance is clear when seen through statistics; when the score of using English
language media increases by one unit, a direct effect exists towards learners' vocabulary-size which
increases by 0.227 units. The Beta (B) value for 'using bilingual dictionary' variable reveals the
learners who stated that using bilingual dictionary is important toward building a higher vocabulary
size (B= 0.209, T= 2.335, Sig. T= 0.022) and contributing to 3.9 percent. This circumstance can be
explained when the score for 'using bilingual dictionary' increases one unit, learners' vocabulary size
increases by 0.209 units. In other words, when the learners used bilingual dictionary, they showed a
greater size of vocabulary compared to those who preferred monolingual dictionary.
The sixth strategy which has an effect and contribution as much as 3.8 percent toward learners'
vocabulary size is 'taking note or highlighting a new word' (B= 0.213, T= 2.178, Sig. T= 0.032). This
circumstance clearly reveals that when the score for 'taking note or highlighting' strategy increases by
one unit, the size of learners' vocabulary increases by 0.213 units. In other words, learners who always
take note or highlight new words, the also display a higher vocabulary size compared to groups who
didn't take note or highlight new words.
The next strategy which has an effect on learners' vocabulary size is 'studying the sound of a
word' (B= 0.177, T= 2.135, Sig. T= 0.035) and directly contributing to as much as 2.9 percent. This
circumstance occurs when the score of 'studying the sound of a new word' increases by one unit, the
size of vocabulary increases by 0.177 units. In other words, learners who study the sound of new words
display a higher vocabulary size compared to those who don't study the sound of new words.
Another strategy which is found to affect vocabulary size of learner is 'verbal repetition' (B=
0.192, T= 2.125, Sig. T= 0.036) with contribution as much as 2.7 percent. This circumstance shows
that when the score of verbal repetition increases by one unit, the learners' vocabulary size increases by
0.192 units. In other words, learners who always repeat new words verbally show a higher size of
vocabulary compared to those who do not repeat the words verbally or those who use written
repetition.
'Study the word with classmates' is the last strategy which influences learners' vocabulary size
(B= 0.211, T= 2.377, Sig. T= 0.020) and directly contributing to as much as 1.9 percent. This
circumstance happens when the score of 'studying the word with classmates' increases by one unit, the
size of vocabulary increases by 0.192 units. In other words, those who study words with classmates
show a higher vocabulary size compared to those who study the words with other persons as relatives
and teachers.
From the discussion above, the power which explains the regression model by using the
stepwise framework reveals only the selected nine independent variables have a correlation in
contributing and having an affiliated effect toward increasing vocabulary size. It is clear that the
learners vocabulary size is influenced by nine vocabulary learning strategies of best practices and of
significance, namely using physical action when learning a word, interacting with native speakers,
taking note or highlighting, studying new words many times, using bilingual dictionary, using English
language media, studying the word with classmates, studying the sound of a word, and repeating the
word verbally.

46
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

6. Discussion
Iranian undergraduate EFL learners are medium strategy users. Even all five categories of vocabulary
learning strategies were reported at a medium level. It may be due to the course –study skills- they pass
in the first semester of their studies. This course makes freshmen familiar with different learning
techniques and strategies in order to have better learning. However, Iranian EFL learners revealed
more interest in discovering the meaning of new words –determination strategy- rather than other
categories of strategies which mostly used to retain the meaning of new words. Among the strategies
used to retain the meaning of new word, Iranian EFL learner used memory strategies more frequently
while social strategies were used less frequently. This finding is consistent with the results of other
studies which investigated Iranian EFL learners' learning strategies as Sarani and Kafipour (2008) and
Zarafshan (2002). Sarani and Kafipour stated why memory strategy is the most frequently used
strategy for the purpose of retaining new words while current training setting is communicative
approach. They stated that the current communicative university training setting which depends
relatively little on the requirement to memorize a lot of materials is not followed and practiced
correctly by lecturers and students in Iran. Both sides have strong interest to follow the traditional
approach which put a high emphasis on the role of memory in learning. They continue that teaching
material are not totally consistent with communicative approach and needs to be revised. The
researcher believes that it is necessary to justify the lecturers why communicative approach needs to be
followed strictly. Some short-term training courses for the lectures may be more beneficial. They will
learn how to promote this approach in their teaching and how to motivate their students to follow it.
Furthermore, curriculum designers should try to revise the books and teaching materials to be
more appropriate for communicative approach. On the other hand, Iranian EFL learners use social
strategies less frequently. Zarafshan (2002) stated in his MA thesis why Iranian EFL learners don't tend
to use social strategies. He stated that curriculum design doesn't promote collaborative and social
learning. Opportunities for such approach have not been provided in educational institutes and
universities. He continued that the formal approach is communicative approach but it is not practiced
actually. Both learners and lecturers interested in traditional approach in which the teacher is the center
of learning. The teacher provides all materials and students only follow the lecture's instruction. Thus,
there is no room for learning through discussion and applying social strategies. However, this study
showed that two out of five social strategies directly contribute to the learners' vocabulary size (See
table 4). It seems that curriculum designers need to pay more attention to this strategy when designing
teaching material. Educational institutes should prepare any necessary facilities to conduct social
learning such as discussion rooms and etc.
Looking at sub-categories of strategies applied by Iranian undergraduate EFL learners reveals
more interesting results. Iranian EFL learners use monolingual dictionary as a determination strategy
more than any other strategy among overall 41 sub-categories of strategies while this strategy doesn't
contribute to their vocabulary size. Unlikely, using bilingual dictionary has been proved to help them
increase their vocabulary size. This may be due to insufficient knowledge toward how to use
monolingual dictionary. Sarani and Kafipour (2008) pointed to this problem. He said the students are
offered a course namely "study skills" in the first semester of their studies. The lecturers talk a lot
about the importance of using a monolingual rather than bilingual dictionary but they don't provide
enough information on how to use monolingual dictionary more appropriately. Lecturers of other
courses also instructs the students to bring monolingual dictionary at classroom to use when necessary
but they don't talk at all about how to use monolingual dictionary to fit their different academic needs.
The researcher believes that the respondents of the current study are aware of the importance of
monolingual dictionary and try to use it more frequently. However, their lack of sufficient knowledge
on how to use monolingual dictionaries leads them to improper use. That is why using monolingual
dictionary didn't contribute to their vocabulary size.
Among the most frequently used strategies by the respondents only three of them contributed to
the learners' vocabulary size as taking note or highlighting, studying new words many times, and using

47
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

English language media. It seems the learners are aware of the role of these strategies in their
vocabulary learning and use them frequently. The researcher believe that lecturers and curriculum
designers should be advised to focus more on these strategies in their teaching and designing teaching
materials such as books, assignments, and etc. According to Oxford (1990), focusing on the strategies
preferred by the learners in teaching and curriculum design will enhance learning and make it more
enjoyable for learners.
Three strategies among the least frequently used strategies contributed to learners' vocabulary
size. These strategies consist of talking with native speakers, studying the word with classmates, and
using physical action when learning a word. Two out of three least frequently strategies belong to the
category of social strategy. As Zarafshan (2002) states, few native speakers exist in Iran and it is not
easy to find native speakers to interact with. He mentioned it as the main reason why this strategy is
reported less frequently by the learners. The researcher suggests the lecturers try to make the learners
aware of the contribution of these strategies to their vocabulary size and ask them to use these
strategies in their vocabulary learning. The lecturers should teach the learners how to use these
strategies whenever necessary and try to include these strategies in class activities, assignments, etc, in
order to force the learners to internalize these strategies. Oxford (2001) stated that making the students
aware of the strategies they use in learning is one of the ways to enhance their learning. When they are
aware of the strategies which help them to learn better, they are motivated to use them more frequently
in their learning.
Verbal repetition and bilingual dictionary are next strategies found to influence the learners'
vocabulary size. These two strategies were reported by the respondents in a medium level. (1990)
suggested that using a strategy at a medium level shows the learners are aware of the strategy but they
need to be encouraged to use the strategy more in their learning. It can be done by asking the students
in class to repeat the new word verbally after the lecturer and asking them to continue the use of this
strategy at home.

7. Suggestions
It is suggested that future studies should take into consideration qualitative data collection to
triangulate the data. It may show if what the learners reported in questionnaire is consistent with what
they actually do. To achieve this purpose, journal writing as a qualitative data collection is beneficial.
Furthermore, other relevant variables can be investigated to find if vocabulary learning contribute to
them or not. One of these variables which is expected to be affected by vocabulary learning strategies
is reading comprehension. Theoretically, schema theory shows a relationship between reading
comprehension and vocabulary leaning strategies.

8. Conclusion
In summary, this study showed that vocabulary learning strategies contribute to vocabulary size of the
learners. However, only nine out of 41 vocabulary learning strategies showed a contribution and
significant relation to vocabulary size. These strategies consist of three most frequently used strategies
belong to cognitive (take note or highlight: the third strategy contributed to vocabulary size) and
metacognitive (study new words many times: the fourth strategy contributed to vocabulary size; using
English language media: the sixth strategy contributed to vocabulary size) and three least frequently
used strategies belong to social (talking with native speakers: the first strategy contributed to
vocabulary size; studying the word with classmates: the seventh strategy contributed to vocabulary
size) and memory (using physical action when learning: the second strategy contributed to vocabulary
size) strategies. Using bilingual dictionary and verbal repetition reported at a medium level are the fifth
and ninth strategies contributed to vocabulary size of the learners.

48
European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

References
[1] Bennett, P. (2006). An evaluation of vocabulary teaching in an intensive study programme.
Unpublished MA thesis. University of Birmingham, Birmingham. United Kingdom.
[2] Brown, C. & Payne, M. E. (1994). Five essential steps of processes in vocabulary Learning.
Paper presented at the TESOL Convention, Baltimore, Md.
[3] Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Children. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
[4] Catalan, R. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal
of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 54-77.
[5] Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann.
[6] Fan, Y. M. (2003). Frequency of use, perceived usefulness, and actual usefulness of second
language vocabulary strategies: A study of Hong Kong learners. The Modern Language
Journal, 87(2), 222-241.
[7] Gairns, R. & Redman, S. (1986). Working with Words. A Guide to Teaching and Learning
Vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
[8] Johnson, K. & Johnson, H. (1998). Encyclopaedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Oxford:
Blackwell.
[9] McCarthy (1988). Vocabulary and Language Teaching. NewYork: Longman
[10] Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H., & Todesco, A. (1978). The Good language Learner.
Clevelond: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
[11] Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. Boston: Newbury House.
[12] Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[13] Nation, I.S. P. & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. JALT, 31(7),10-
[14] O'Malley, J. & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[15] Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston:
Newbury House.
[16] Oxford, R. (2001). Language learning strategies. In R. Carter & D. Nunan, The Cambridge
Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages. (pp. 166-171). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
[17] Oxford, R. & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables Affecting Choice of Language Learning Strategies
by University Students. The Modern Language Journal, 79(3), 291-300.
[18] Oxford, R. & Scarcella, R.C. (1994). Second language vocabulary learning among adults: state
of the art in vocabulary instruction. System, 22(2), 231-243.
[19] Ranalli, J. (2003). The Treatment of Key Vocabulary Learning Strategies in Current ELT
Coursebooks: Repetition, Resource Use, Recording. Unpublished MA thesis. University of
Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom. http://www.cels.bham.ac.uk/resources/
essays/RanalliDiss.pdf. Accessed on October 16, 2007.
[20] Rubin, J. (1975). What the "Good Language Learner" can Teach Us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(11),
41-90.
[21] Sarani, A. & Kafipour, R. (2008). The study of language learning strategies use by Turkish and
Kurdish EFL university students. Language Forum, 34(2), 173-188.
[22] Scharle, A. & Szabó, A. (2000). Learner Autonomy. A Guide to Developing Learner
Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[23] Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.),
Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[24] Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[25] Schmitt, N. (2001). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

49
 European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 11, Number 1 (2009)

[26] Schmitt N. & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: theoretical underpinnings and
practical suggestions. ELT Journal, 49, 133-243.
[27] Singleton, D. (1999). Exploring the second language mental lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
[28] Sokmen, A. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In N. Schmitt &
M. McCarthy (eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. (pp.237-257).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[29] Zarafshan, M. (2002). Effects of attitude and motivation on the use of language learning
strategies of Iranian EFL university students. Unpublished MA Thesis. Shiraz Azad University.
Iran.

50