Mohammed and Swales (1984)indicated that written English language technical vocabulary is perceived as difficult for ESL adults. In particular, use of technical documents and procedures by ESL adults in many socio-technical environments (e.g. military and medical fields) has been deemed challenging. Other factors that may influence understanding of technical vocabulary are related to ESL adult English language proficiency, background knowledge of the technical subject (e.g. medicine, aviation), and strategy they utilize to interpret written English language. The next study discusses the impact of technical vocabulary impact on ESL adult reading
comprehension.
Wanpen et al (2013) investigated effect of ESL adult technical vocabulary proficiency, background knowledge of a technical discipline, and strategy use to read and comprehend technical vocabulary. Approximately fifty participants that were taking an English
language-engineering course were selected for the study, 28 had general education background and 22 participants had a vocational background. Three instruments were utilized to complete the study. The first instrument was a technical vocabulary
assessment with several parts. The assessment included levels of proficiency including high, medium, and low. The first part of the assessment was a matching exercise (e.g. electronic equipment and functionality matching) followed by a fill in the blank exercise to identify technical words, and finally multiple-choice questions related to technical vocabulary. The second instrument was a strategy questionnaire with many questions and several categories. The questionnaire included the following categories coined by the author as Technical Vocabulary Learning Strategies (TVLSs): strategy determination (strategy used to explore new word meanings), strategies utilized in the social context (interaction with social media to understand English language), remembering strategies (decoding of words based on previous knowledge), cognitive (similar to remembering strategies), and metacognitive strategies (evaluation of an individual’s understanding of word meaning). A rating scale with six levels was utilized to provide insight on strategy utilized. Last, interviews were conducted that were semi-structured. Results indicated that participants with vocational backgrounds were rated high regarding technical
vocabulary proficiency. Participants with general education rated low regarding technical vocabulary proficiency. This result could be related to the vast amount of English
language for Specific Purposes (ESP) curriculum that participants with vocational background were accustomed to in the engineering context. Their experience with technical vocabulary words likely enabled them to score higher on proficiency test than the participants with academic background. General perspective of ESP is to provide participants with specific courses related to technical disciplines such as engineering and science. Regarding strategy use by participants to understand technical vocabulary, individuals with an academic background used metacognitive strategies more often than those with a vocational background. This result could be because participants with a vocational background had adequate knowledge of technical vocabulary and were able to use their background to assimilate word meaning. However, both groups utilized
metacognitive strategies frequently. In particular, some of the aspects of strategy use by participants to understand technical vocabulary were the following: evading unfamiliar words, reviewing words and their meanings often, and using existing English language information in the media to help them understand technical words. Use of metacognitive strategies was likely due to participants’ desire to develop their technical vocabulary. On the other hand, participants with an academic background used social cues,
determination, memory, and cognitive strategies less than ESL participants with a vocational background. The participants with a vocational background utilized the aforementioned strategies more often during the study. Finally, the author concluded that technical vocabulary words competence was higher with participants whose background was vocational than with participants that had an academic background. The next study reveals more important details on the effect of scientific technical text on ESL adult ability to read and comprehend written English language.
Abdul-Hamid and Samuel (2012) focused on written English language scientific text and the impact on ESL adult reading comprehension. Their qualitative study consisted of 10 ESL adults that read two types of scientific texts. It was noted that participants’ range of English language proficiency was either proficient or less than proficient. The goal of the study was to compare/contrast ESL adult reading difficulty of two texts. Each of the participants had background knowledge of the texts in their native language. The first text contained 592 words and the latter text was 744 words. Participants had background knowledge of more than 50 percent of the first text, and participants knew (familiarity) approximately 20-30 percent of the second text. Each text contained several academic vocabulary words mixed with scientific words. Regarding scientific text, results indicated participants’ highlighted text they were unfamiliar with or deemed difficult. They also translated written English language words in to their native lexis and utilized lexical inferencing to understand words that they did not know the meaning. Omission of words that participants did not understand was also noted during the study. Interviews revealed reading and understanding issues with complex scientific words. It was indicated by participants that long complex sentences were very difficult to understand and resulted in them re-reading sentences. Results regarding reading of scientific text by ESL
participants indicated that their level of English language proficiency could have contributed to their difficulties understanding scientific text. Academic vocabulary was difficult to interpret within the scientific text. Although there were difficulties reading
the scientific text, academic vocabulary words embedded within the structure of the scientific text were more difficult to understand. The reason for these difficulties could be the participants’ English language proficiency level and their familiarity with academic vocabulary words in the scientific text. Regarding number of words in the texts, these could also be important determinants of ESL adult English language proficiency levels. As Mehrpour and Riazi (2004)indicated, if text is simplified, long, original, or sentence length altered, these factors could be contributors that effect ESL adult reading
comprehension. Wanpen’s et al (2013)study corroborated Abdul-Hamid and Samuel’s (2012) study regarding technical vocabulary and its potential to impact ESL adults’ reading comprehension. Interestingly, in Abdul-Hamid and Samuel’s (2012) study, ESL adults translated words that were unfamiliar to them into the native language. This strategy appears to help facilitate ESL adults understanding of written English language scientific text. As ESL participants had background knowledge in the text in their native language, (certain percentage from each of the texts), it is peculiar as to why they did not understand some of the words in the text. Next study reveals important details on the impact of low frequency words on ESL adults reading comprehension.
3.1.3 Low frequency and high frequency vocabulary words in technical text