SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International / 2026 / Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2

Pre-Service Teachers’ Vocabulary Strategy Implementation and Effectiveness: Linking Preference to Practice in Turkish Primary EFL Contexts

Tercihi Uygulamaya Bağlamak: Türk İlköğretim Düzeyi Yabancı Dil Olarak İngilizce Bağlamlarında Hizmet Öncesi Öğretmenlerin Kelime Bilgisi Stratejisi Uygulama ve Etkinliğine İlişkin Yarı Deneysel Bir Çalışma

Muhammed Özgür Yaşar(ESKISEHIR OSMANGAZI UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-7167-2192
Pages
568–590
Publication Date
2026-06-24
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Findings revealed a strong preference for memory-based (30.4%) and cognitive strategies (21.7%), along with the specific technique of Pictures/Imagery (19.6%).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This quasi-experimental study investigates the implementation of Vocabulary Learning Strategies (VLS) by pre-service English language teachers in Turkish primary schools, aiming to bridge the persistent theory-practice gap in language teacher education.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The research examines two core questions: (1) which VLS categories are most preferred by pre-service teachers after theoretical familiarization with a prominent VLS taxonomy, and (2) which categories yield the greatest short-term vocabulary gains when implemented through strategy-based vocabulary instruction with young learners.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Findings revealed a strong preference for memory-based (30.4%) and cognitive strategies (21.7%), along with the specific technique of Pictures/Imagery (19.6%).
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Öğretmen adayları · yarı deneysel çalışma · öğretmen eğitimi

Abstract

This quasi-experimental study investigates the implementation of Vocabulary Learning Strategies (VLS) by pre-service English language teachers in Turkish primary schools, aiming to bridge the persistent theory-practice gap in language teacher education. The research examines two core questions: (1) which VLS categories are most preferred by pre-service teachers after theoretical familiarization with a prominent VLS taxonomy, and (2) which categories yield the greatest short-term vocabulary gains when implemented through strategy-based vocabulary instruction with young learners. Employing a two-phase design, the study first documented the strategy preferences of 46 final-year pre-service teachers. Subsequently, during their Community Service Practicum, these teachers implemented their chosen strategies in grade 3–4 classrooms (480 learners, ages 9–11, CEFR A1–A2). Vocabulary acquisition among the primary school learners was measured using a pre-test/post-test model, with data analyzed via descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVA. Findings revealed a strong preference for memory-based (30.4%) and cognitive strategies (21.7%), along with the specific technique of Pictures/Imagery (19.6%). Statistical analysis indicated that all strategy-based instruction led to significant vocabulary gains. However, Memory strategies produced significantly greater gains than Determination and Orthographic/Phonological strategies, while Pictures/Imagery and Cognitive strategies showed comparably high short-term gains. The study concludes that pre-service teachers intuitively select concrete, visually-supported strategies that are empirically effective for young beginners. This validates a “practice-to-theory” model for teacher education, where experiential implementation of preferred strategies can serve as an anchor for deeper theoretical understanding and repertoire expansion. The research provides an empirical model linking teacher cognition, classroom practice, and learner outcomes in VLS instruction.

Özet

Bu yarı deneysel çalışma, Türkiye'de ilkokul düzeyindeki hizmet öncesi İngilizce öğretmenleri tarafından Kelime Öğrenme Stratejilerinin (VLS) uygulanmasını inceleyerek yabancı dil öğretmeni eğitimindeki kalıcı teori-pratik açığını kapatmayı amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma iki temel soruyu incelemektedir: (1) önde gelen bir VLS taksonomisiyle teorik aşinalıktan sonra hizmet öncesi öğretmenler tarafından hangi VLS kategorileri en çok tercih edilmektedir ve (2) çocuklara uygulandığında hangi kategoriler en büyük kısa vadeli kelime dağarcığı kazanımlarını sağlamaktadır. İki aşamalı bir tasarım kullanan çalışma, ilk olarak 46 son sınıf öğretmen adayının strateji tercihlerini belgelemiştir. Daha sonra, Toplum Hizmeti Uygulamaları sırasında bu öğretmenler seçtikleri stratejileri 3-4. sınıflarda (yaklaşık 480 öğrenci, yaşları 9-11, CEFR A1-A2) uygulamıştır. Kelime edinimi, ön test/son test modeli kullanılarak ölçülmüş ve veriler betimsel istatistikler ve tek yönlü ANOVA ile analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, hafızaya dayalı (%30,4) ve bilişsel stratejilere (%21,7) yönelik güçlü bir tercihi ve Resim/Görsellik (%19,6) gibi özel teknikleri ortaya koydu. İstatistiksel analiz, stratejiye dayalı tüm öğretimin önemli kelime dağarcığı kazanımlarına yol açtığını gösterdi. Ancak, Hafıza stratejileri, Kararlılık ve Ortografik/Fonolojik stratejilerden önemli ölçüde daha fazla kazanım üretti, Resim/Görsellik ve Bilişsel stratejiler ise karşılaştırılabilir derecede yüksek etkinlik gösterdi. Çalışma, hizmet öncesi öğretmenlerin genç başlangıç ​​seviyesindekiler için deneysel olarak etkili olan somut, görsel olarak desteklenen stratejileri sezgisel olarak seçtikleri sonucuna varmıştır. Bu, tercih edilen stratejilerin deneysel olarak uygulanmasının daha derin teorik anlayış ve repertuar genişletmesi için bir çapa görevi görebileceği öğretmen eğitimi için bir "pratikten teoriye" modelini doğrular. Araştırma, VLS öğretiminde öğretmen bilişini, sınıf içi pratiği ve öğrenci sonuçlarını birbirine bağlayan deneysel bir model sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yaşar, M. Ö. (2026). Pre-Service Teachers’ Vocabulary Strategy Implementation and Effectiveness: Linking Preference to Practice in Turkish Primary EFL Contexts. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, Cilt: 16 Sayı: 2, 568–590. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1837312

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (39)

  1. Aljasir, N. (2025). Vocabulary learning strategies among Saudi EFL learners: a proficiency-level comparison using think-aloud protocols. Cogent Education, 12(1), 2472480. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2472480
  2. Al-Kalbani, H. S. R. (2024). Investigating the Experiences of Omani EFL School Learners in Enhancing Their Vocabulary Acquisition Through English Popular Culture (Master's thesis, Sultan Qaboos University (Oman)). Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/3195709934?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true&sourcetype=Dissertations%20&%20Theses
  3. Assagung, Z. M. H., Lestari, L. A., & Munir, A. (2025). The relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and reading ability for Indonesian Efl students: English. Journal of English Development, 5(2), 327-340. Retrieved from https://journal.iaimnumetrolampung.ac.id/index.php/jed/article/view/5316/1945
  4. Belleca, F. C. D., Caampued, K. R., Caballas, R. B., Guiruela, J. M. N., & Ocampo, D. M. (2025). Effectiveness of Mnemonic Method on Students' Language Information Retention. Journal of English Language and Pedagogy (JELPA), 3(2), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.51826/jelpa.v3i2.1578
  5. Bengochea, A., & Sembiante, S. F. (2023). A review of the methodological characteristics of vocabulary interventions for emergent bilinguals in preschool to sixth grade. Review of education, 11(1), e3386. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3386
  6. Borg, S. (2009). Language teacher cognition. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 163–171). Cambridge University Press.
  7. Catalán, R. M. J. (2003). Sex differences in L2 vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 54-77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00037
  8. Cirocki, A., Wyatt, M., & Gao, X. (2024). Reflective practice in TESOL: An introduction. In Developing reflective TESOL practitioners through teacher education: Insights from Asia (pp. 1-30). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
  9. Çelik, S., & Toptaş, V. (2010). Vocabulary learning strategy use of Turkish EFL learners. Procedia-Social and Behavioural Sciences, 3, 62-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.013
  10. Eidshaug, J. S. P., Bjerck, H. B., Lohndal, T., & Risbøl, O. (2024). Words as archaeological objects: A study of marine lifeways, seascapes, and coastal environmental knowledge in the yagan-english dictionary. International Journal of Historical Archaeology, 28(3), 722-766.
  11. Gilquin, G. (2025). Second and foreign language learners: The effect of language exposure on the use of English phrasal verbs. International Journal of Bilingualism, 29(2), 456-473. https://doi.org/10.1177/13670069231169123
  12. Griffiths, C., & Oxford, R. L. (2014). The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: Introduction to this special issue. System, 43, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.009
  13. Griffiths, C. (2018). The strategy factor in successful language learning: The tornado effect (Vol. 121). Multilingual Matters.
  14. Gu, P. Y. (2003). Fine brush and freehand 1: The vocabulary‐learning art of two successful Chinese EFL learners. TESOL quarterly, 37(1), 73-104. https://doi.org/10.2307/3588466
  15. Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. R. (2016). Mindful L2 teacher education: A sociocultural perspective on cultivating teachers' professional development. Routledge.
  16. Johnson, V., Kwon, K., & Kim, K. (2025, March). Empowering Educators: Addressing Teacher Needs through Professional Development in Artificial Intelligence Education. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2781-2791). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/225872/
  17. Kong, N. Y., & Hurless, N. (2023). Vocabulary interventions for young emergent bilingual children: A systematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 43(1), 17-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214211027625
  18. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2018). English language curriculum for primary and secondary schools (Grades 2–8). Ankara: MoNE. Retrieved from https://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=327
  19. Mizumoto, A., & Takeuchi, O. (2009). Examining the effectiveness of explicit instruction of vocabulary learning strategies with Japanese EFL university students. Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 425-449. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168809341511
  20. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language (Vol. 10, pp. 126-132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Newton, J. (2013). Incidental vocabulary learning in classroom communication tasks. Language Teaching Research, 17(2), 164-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812460814
  22. Nelson, G. S. (2025). Using AI in Preparing Pre-Service Teachers for Field Experience. In Enhancing Classroom Instruction and Student Skills With AI (pp. 199-226). IGI Global Scientific Publishing.
  23. Oxford, R. L. (2016). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context. Routledge.
  24. Söğüt, S. (2024). Reconstruction of pre-service efl teachers’ conceptual understandings about sla and language pedagogy through experiential tasks. Educational Academic Research, (54), 11-25.
  25. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  26. Pokharel, K. (2024). A review on perceptions of the teachers on the applicability of post-method pedagogy in language teaching. Lumbini Journal of Language and Literature, 4(1), 50-62. https://doi.org/10.3126/ljll.v4i1.73856
  27. Pullen, P. C., Tuckwiller, E. D., Konold, T. R., Maynard, K. L., & Coyne, M. D. (2010). A tiered intervention model for early vocabulary instruction: The effects of tiered instruction for young students at risk for reading disability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 25(3), 110-123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2010.00309.x
  28. Qiu, Q., Xie, Z., Xiong, Y., & Zhou, F. (2021). Belief change before and after the teaching practicum among Chinese pre-service ELT teachers. Sage Open, 11(1), 21582440211004934. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211004934
  29. Rasekh, Z. E., & Ranjbary, R. (2003). Metacognitive strategy training for vocabulary learning. Tesl-Ej, 7(2), 1-18. Retrieved from https://tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume7/ej26/ej26a5/?wscr
  30. Sagarra, N., & Alba, M. (2006). The key is in the keyword: L2 vocabulary learning methods with beginning learners of Spanish. The Modern Language Journal, 90(2), 228-243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00394.x
  31. Schmitt, N., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (1998). Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge University Press.
  32. Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
  33. Tu, H. L. (2025). Enhancing vocabulary acquisition efficiency through metacognitive strategies and vocabulary tasks: A study of Efl learners in a Taiwanese university of technology. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 16(1), 89-96. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1601.10
  34. Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in second language acquisition, 27(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050023
  35. Webb, S., & Nation, P. (2017). How vocabulary is learned. Oxford University Press.
  36. Widia, N., & Sugesti, I. (2025). The Students' Vocabulary Mastery: Mnemonic or Translation Technique. Journal of English Language Learning, 9(2), 157-162. https://doi.org/10.31949/jell.v9i2.15327
  37. Yang, Y. (2025). AI-supported L2 vocabulary acquisition–a systematic review from 2015 to 2023. Education and Information Technologies, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13417-8
  38. Yaşar, M. Ö. (2025). The digital turn in elt: Exploring ai, moocs, blended, and self-regulated learning. Nisan Yayınları.
  39. Yücedağ, Z., & Arslan, R. Ş. (2025). Uncovering language learning strategies of digital native EFL students in a Turkish EFL context. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 8(1), 64-79. https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.1515469