TY - JOUR
T1 - The effectiveness of voice-on and voice-off instruction on ASL vocabulary acquisition
AU - Traxler, Rachel Elizabeth
AU - Nakatsukasa, Kimi
N1 - Funding Information:
We are thankful to our colleagues, Debbi Tapp-Meier, Melissa Hays, and Alec Cattel who assisted the data collection, and Carolyn Scott and James Whitfield who provided expertise that greatly assisted the research. We are also grateful for the ASL students who participated in this study. Last but not least, we are also immensely grateful to the anonymous reviewers and Dr. Frank Boers for their comments on an earlier versions of the manuscript, although any errors are our own. We particularly would like to thank the late Jess Ingalls who tragically passed away during the preparation of this manuscript. This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2018.
PY - 2020/3/1
Y1 - 2020/3/1
N2 - Whether to use spoken English for the instruction of American Sign Language (ASL) is a pedagogical debate for those teaching hearing second language learners. Previous investigations have found the use of learners’ first language to be beneficial for vocabulary acquisition. Studies on sign languages, however, have found that a class taught completely using signs is more beneficial than a class that incorporates spoken English, although the cognitive theory of multimedia learning argues that receiving input in various modalities fosters learning. In the present study, the efficacy of voice-on or voice-off instruction for acquisition of ASL vocabulary is examined. Twenty-six hearing adult students in an ASL class received either voice-on (spoken English) or voice-off (ASL only) instruction for 13 vocabulary items. They completed a comprehension test in the pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest, as well as a production test in the immediate and delayed posttest. The results showed significant improvements over time for both conditions for comprehension and production; however, no differences between the two conditions were observed.
AB - Whether to use spoken English for the instruction of American Sign Language (ASL) is a pedagogical debate for those teaching hearing second language learners. Previous investigations have found the use of learners’ first language to be beneficial for vocabulary acquisition. Studies on sign languages, however, have found that a class taught completely using signs is more beneficial than a class that incorporates spoken English, although the cognitive theory of multimedia learning argues that receiving input in various modalities fosters learning. In the present study, the efficacy of voice-on or voice-off instruction for acquisition of ASL vocabulary is examined. Twenty-six hearing adult students in an ASL class received either voice-on (spoken English) or voice-off (ASL only) instruction for 13 vocabulary items. They completed a comprehension test in the pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest, as well as a production test in the immediate and delayed posttest. The results showed significant improvements over time for both conditions for comprehension and production; however, no differences between the two conditions were observed.
KW - American Sign Language
KW - vocabulary acquisition
KW - voice-on instruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85052328196&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/1362168818791601
DO - 10.1177/1362168818791601
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85052328196
SN - 1362-1688
VL - 24
SP - 273
EP - 286
JO - Language Teaching Research
JF - Language Teaching Research
IS - 2
ER -