The exploration of mnemonic strategies used by students of ...filosofia.uatx.mx/42.pdf · Mnemonic strategies are precisely, the type of techniques that students appeal to in order

MMeemmoorriiaass ddeell XXIIII EEnnccuueennttrroo NNaacciioonnaall ddee EEssttuuddiiooss eenn LLeenngguuaass ((22001111)) ISBN: 978-607-7698-57-9

Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala - Facultad de Filosofía y Letras | The exploration of mnemonic strategies used by students of

English to learn vocabulary 554

The exploration of mnemonic strategies used by students of English to learn

vocabulary.

Rosalina Domínguez Angel

Eliana Delgadillo Lira

Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala

Abstract

The present article reports the research design and preliminary results of a study

carried out with three-competence level students, namely: basic, pre-intermediate

and advance students of English. The study intended to explore the declarative and

procedural knowledge of students in relation to the use and effectiveness of

mnemonic techniques. Mnemonic methods, memory strategies or mnemotechnic

strategies are those mental procedures that allow us to remember information and

are highly useful in improving our rote learning capacity. In this study, a productive

task was given to the three groups of students in order to determine the strategies

used to retain new vocabulary.

I. Introduction

Learning vocabulary is a very complex issue since receptive and productive features are

involved in the ‘knowing of a word’. Nation (2001) points out that knowing a word

implies a) knowing the spoken and b) written form as well as c) the word parts, d) what

the word sounds like and e) how it is pronounced, f) what the word looks like and g)

how it is written and spelled, h) what parts can be recognized in the word and i) what

parts are needed to express meaning. Hence, in order to learn the different aspects of a

word, learners appeal to different vocabulary strategies where memory strategies take

priority since they deal with a basic feature: meaning.

The use of memory strategies is a type of decontextualized learning where the student

can focus on one or more features of the word and attempt to establish relationships in

order to retain a generalized underlying concept of a word. The decontextualized

learning of vocabulary is often considered less effective than contextualized learning

(Anderson & Nagy 1992) but others have found certain advantages that are worth

considering. Nation (2001) for example, states that this approach to the learning of

vocabulary is a) efficient in terms of return and effort, b) it allows learners to focus on

one aspect of word knowledge that is not gained from other means and c) it allows

learners to control de repetition and processing of the vocabulary to ensure learning.




Consequently, it is important to explore what the procedures are that learners use in

order to do decontextualized learning of vocabulary through the use of memory

strategies on the spot, to further analyze the frequency and effect of those strategies.

II. Theoretical background

Language teaching scholars acknowledge two basic forms of vocabulary acquisition

which are incidental and explicit learning, (Nagy & Herman 1987, Hultsijn 2001,

Nation 1990, Rott et al. 2002). According to Schmitt (2000), both approaches are

necessary and should be seen as complementary. In relation to the explicit learning of

vocabulary it is understood that the more a student manipulates, thinks about and uses

mental information the more able he/she will be to retain the vocabulary information. In

Psychology, these processes are explained through the depth of processing hypothesis

which relies on the principle that when greater effort is made in accessing information,

(the meaning of vocabulary), the the possibility one has to remember that information is

greater as well. In contrast, shallow processing like writing vocabulary on a page does

not contribute much to retention, (Craik & Lockhart 1972, Craik & Tulving 1975).

The keyword method is acknowledged by many as the prototypical example of deep

processing where the phonological form and meaning in a mental image are combined

to store target words in working memory or short term-memory (O’Malley & Chamot

1990). This meaning could be used later and through several exposures one can be able

to use the word and have it available in long-term memory.

Mnemonic strategies are precisely, the type of techniques that students appeal to in

order to memorize vocabulary through different types of mental associations. These

strategies vary according to the degree of depth in processing, Thompson (1987:211)

provides the following definition of memory strategies.

… mnemonics work by utilizing some well-known principles of psychology: a

retrieval plan is developed during encoding, and mental imagery, both visual and

verbal, is used. They help individuals learn faster and recall better because they

aid the integration of new material into existing cognitive units and because they

provide retrieval cues.




Memory strategies have been classified through different taxonomies, for example:

Purpura (1994) divides storing and memory strategies into the following areas:

repeating, using mechanical means, associating, linking with prior knowledge, using

imagery and summarizing. Hulstijn (1997: 216) on the other hand mentions the

following types:

1.- Forming and association with an L1 or L2 word similar in sound and

meaning.

2.- Decomposing a morphologically compound word

3.- Forming associations with familiar words based on some sort of sound

familiarity.

4.- Forming nonverbal sound associations e.g. the noise made by objects,

animals or humans associated with affective responses.

Schmitt (1997) provides a classification of memory strategies that seems to be the most

comprehensive since it specifies the type of mental associations that learners make in

consolidation when the meaning of the target words has been known. This classification

is provided in table 1

Table 1 Strategies for consolidating a word once it has been encountered (Schmitt 1997).

MEMORY

STRATEGY

Study word with a pictorial

representation of its meaning

Image word´s meaning

Connect word to a personal

experience PICTURES/ IMAGERY

Associate the word with its

coordinates

Connect the word to its synonyms

and antonyms

Use semantic maps

Use scales for gradable adjectives RELATED WORDS

Peg Method Loci Method UNRELATED WORDS

Group words together to study

them

Group words together spatially on

a page

Use new word in sentences

Group words together within a

storyline GROUPING

Study the spelling of a word

Study the sound of a word

Say new word aloud when studying

Image word form

Underline initial letter of the word

Configuration

Use Keyword Method

WORD´S

ORTHOGRAPHICAL OR

PHONOLOGICAL FORM

Affixes and roots (remembering)

Part of the speech (remembering)

Paraphrase the word´s meaning

Use cognates in study

Learn the words of an idiom

together

Use physical action when learning

a word

Use semantic feature grids

OTHER MEMORY

STRATEGIES

Schmitt (1997) provides in table 1 the different mental associations that learners make

in order to learn vocabulary. He also reports the results of a survey carried out with 600




Japanese students in a) junior high school, b) high school, c) university students and d)

adult learners, 150 students in each category were part of the survey. The subjects

indicated the frequency and success of vocabulary strategies including memory

strategies. We need to consider that this information is basically declarative and not

procedural. The results indicate that frequency is tightly related to success and the

memory strategies that registered a high index in frequency of use and success can be

seen in table 2.

Table 2 Frequency and success of memory strategies in Schmitt (1997)

Strategy Frequency Success

Study the spelling of a word 74% 87%

Say new word aloud when studying 69% 91%

Study the sound of a word 60% 81%

Image word’s meaning 50% 38%

From the results in table 2 we can conclude that for Japanese Students of English the

first association is with the written form, in second place with pronunciation and in third

place with the image of the meaning. For these students the frequency of use is always

lower than their respective success except for imagining the word’s meaning, whose

effectiveness is not great according to the subjects. It should be noted, however that

there are strategies where the frequency and success were not registered, e.g. a)

grouping words together to study them or within a storyline, b) using semantic feature

grids, c) underlining the initial letter. Using physical action and the keyword method

were considered by the subjects as the least frequent and as a consequence the least

successful of all memory strategies.

The Schmitt’s study is interesting because it settles possible preferences of determined

learners in the use of strategies and the beliefs that these learners have in connection

with the strategies effectiveness. However, as we have highlighted before, this is

declarative information collected from the subjects and it would be interesting to find

out what is the procedural knowledge that learners have.




In the Mexican context we find an explorative study carried out by Marín (2008), who

administered a Vocabulary strategies questionnaire to 150 BA students, in order to

know the frequency of use of 78 strategies, among which some memory strategies

(association strategies) were explored as well. The responses from the learners indicate

that the most frequently used mnemonic strategies were: a) associate word with similar

L1 word, b) associate word with context / situational use, c) visualize written form or

meaning, d) associate word with physical action, e) associate word with personal

experience. Other strategies moderately used were: relate word with antonyms

/synonyms, associate words with semantically related words, relate word to L2 word

with similar sound. The least frequent were: relate word to collocations, think of

prefixes / suffixes for the word, relate word in L2 / L4, use the keyword method. It is

important to mention the results in Marin’s (2005) because the context where the data

were collected are similar to our own context, the data however refers only to

declarative knowledge.

III. Research questions

In our study, both declarative and procedural knowledge will be discussed and we will

be able to compare our results with other studies. From the information mentioned

above we can pose the following research questions in our study.

1.- What are the mnemonic strategies that learners appeal to in order to learn new

vocabulary?

2.- What is the frequency of use and success of these mnemonic strategies in declarative

and procedural knowledge?

3.- Are there significant differences among the groups in relation to types of mnemonic

strategies used, frequency and success?

4.- What differences are found between the declarative and procedural knowledge of the

learners concerned with the use of mnemonic strategies?




IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4.1 Subjects

This exploratory study was carried out with three different groups of students learning

English at the Philosophy and Literature Department at the Autonomous University of

Tlaxcala. It was important for the purpose of the research to select students of basic,

intermediate and advanced level hence, the general profile of the three classes is given

below.

1. The students with a basic level of English were 30 learners studying the BA in

Applied Modern Languages. There were 18 women and 12 men, they were in the

2nd

term of their BA program and their ages ranged between 18- 25 years old.

This group of students took classes in the afternoon shift.

2. The pre-intermediate class was made up of 21 students in the 4th term of the

same BA program. Their ages were around 19-25 years and they were also in the

afternoon shift. The group was made up of 11 women and 10 men.

3. The third group of students who took part of the study were 11 learners of the

Language Center in the same school. Most of the students were teenagers around

14-19 years old. They were in the 14th

level which implies 520 hours of language

study.

4.2 Instruments

The data collection instruments used in the present study were two: a) a background

questionnaire and b) the tasks to explore the mnemonic strategies used by the three

groups of students. These data collection instruments are described below.

4.2.1 Background questionnaire

The background questionnaire aimed at getting a general profile of the type of learners

we had in our study. It explored in detail the decoding strategies and vocabulary

practice strategies that students usually used. This instrument consisted of four different

sections where the first one explored personal information of the subjects. The second

section aimed at getting information about their beliefs and previous learning

experiences. The third section aimed at knowing the students’ needs to learn the




language. Finally the fourth section explored the vocabulary strategies that learners

claimed using in the different stages of the lexical acquisition process: reception,

practice/ exposure, consolidation/ retention. The questionnaire was administered in

Spanish for reliability issues.

4.2.2 The mnemonic-strategy exploration task

The tasks for the three classes were designed by selecting ten different words that

according to the level of the learners could be unknown. The ten words had to be nouns

and special attention was put in incorporating words with different initials. The words

also varied according to length. The instructions of the task were written and provided

in Spanish to avoid confusion (see appendix 1).

4.2.3 Procedures

The administration of the instruments followed the same order with the three different

groups of learners. The exploration task was carried out first to avoid any influence

from the answers given in the questionnaire, especially from the section devoted to

know the vocabulary strategies that the subjects used to apply. Therefore, the

background questionnaire was given once the task was already finished.

The task implied giving the students the list of 10 unknown words and their respective

meanings to be memorized in five minutes. The other side of the paper was used to

verify how many of the ten words were remembered, the researcher said the word in

Spanish and the subjects had to write the word in English. It was not allowed to write

anything in Spanish, the word had to be recalled at once because the next word came

immediately after. The order of the words provided in Spanish was different from the

order found in the original list. The learners had to tick or cross out the words they

successfully remembered or those they did not. Then they calculated the number of

correct words and wrote down the results. Moreover, the subjects indicated the

mnemonic strategy they used in order to memorize each of the ten target words on the

space provided for this purpose. These task procedures were repeated with the three

groups of students.




V. Results and discussion of results

The results of the task will be discussed in terms of a) word retrieval success, b) type of

mnemonic strategy used, and c) identification of the most successful mnemonic strategy

according to the retrieval success. Also, the results will be discussed following the order

of language competence of the learners, basic, pre-intermediate and advanced

respectively.

Figure 1 Basic Level: success in word retrieval.

Figure 1 illustrates the number of times that each target word was recalled successfully

by basic students. The total success of the class was 56.1% average of retrieval. From

the graph we can assume that apparently, basic students were more successful in

retrieving the meaning of words with a high degree of interlingual similarity, namely,

ambush. Another feature found in successfulness is related to compounds, this is

perhaps because if they knew the meaning of one part of the compound it was easier for

them to create a link that could ease the associations and retrieval of the words.

Footman, chopsticks and landmark are examples of those compounds that register a

high level of retrieval.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30




Figure 2 Type of mnemonic strategies used by basic-level students

The mnemonic strategies that were codified after the analysis of the responses in the

tasks were the following:

Table 1 Codification of mnemonic strategies 1 Verbal repetition

2 Imagery

3 L2 written association

4 L2 Pronunciation association

5 L2 meaning association

6 L2 music association

7 L1 pronunciation association

8 L1 suffix association

9 L1 written association

10 Word segmentation

11 Word-class analysis

12 TV program association

13 Previous experiences

14 Order of words in the list

15 Spelling

16 Used in a sentence

This codification allowed us to measure the frequency of use and success of the

strategies when attempting to learn the target words in the task. Figure 2 shows that

students with a basic level of English used a broad array of strategies. They appealed to

the use of all the strategies codified except for 5 which stands for L2 meaning

association, which is pretty reasonable since the subjects do not have plenty of L2

meanings that could be linked to the newly accessed vocabulary. Lexicographers state

that beginners tend to use more strategies to learn vocabulary than advanced learners

0

5

10

15

20

25




because they have a greater amount of words to learn while advanced learners use fewer

strategies because they already have a good lexical inventory. Further in the article we

will be able to confirm if this also applies to our subjects or not.

Figure 2 highlights the most frequently used strategies as well e.g. Imagery, L2

pronunciation association, verbal repetition, and word class analysis. It is evident that

for this group of students, the first resource they have to establish connections is their

own mental referents that are triggered when seeing the word or when attempting to

pronounce it. Another remarkable feature is the automaticity of repetition. These

students do not have enough linguistic referents to link the new words, hence repetition

is for them a good resource. Basic students reported a 47% frequency of use of the

strategies codified in the previous list, Only 3 items were known by the subjects before

carrying out the task. The type of mnemonic strategies used most frequently by learners,

are in line with the Schmitt’s study. Table 2 illustrates the coincidences.

Table 2 Frequency of use: a comparison between two studies.

Schmitt’s study Our study

Study the spelling of a word Imagery

Say new word aloud when studying L2 pronunciation association

Study the sound of a word Verbal repetition

Image word’s meaning Word class analysis

The most frequently used strategies in our study were ‘imagery’ which is equivalent to

‘image word’s meaning’, ‘L2 pronunciation association’ can be related to ‘study the

sound of a word’, moreover, ‘verbal repetition’ is directly related to ‘say new word

aloud when studying’, finally word-class analysis could be in a way refer to ‘study the

spelling of word’

The effectiveness of the mnemonic strategies was calculated by relating the strategy

used to the successfulness of the item. Naturally, subjects tended to report strategies

only for the items they were able to recall either if they were correct or not. Figure 3

compares the frequency of use and the effectiveness of strategies. We can see that

strategies that were used frequently risked being ineffective, e.g. imagery and L2




pronunciation association. There were others that were not used frequently and

presented incorrect items namely, ‘L1 pronunciation association’, ‘previous

experiences’ and ‘order of words in the list’ which is a type of imagery as well since the

students had to picture that order in their minds and try to recall meanings in the same

order.

Figure 3 Basic level: frequency of use and the effectiveness of mnemonic

strategies.

The pre-intermediate group was given a different list of words and figure 4 illustrates

the results of success in recalling their meanings.

Figure 4 Pre-intermediate Level: success in word retrieval.

Pre-intermediate students had 86% success in word retrieval. This group was made up

of 21 learners and many of them claimed knowing some of the target words, therefore

0

5

10

15

20

25

frecuency

success

0

5

10

15

20

25




the high percent of success is also due to the previous knowledge of the vocabulary. For

instance, apricot was known by 9 subjects, mud, beaver and tuxedo were known by 3

subjects.

Again, like basic students, pre-intermediate students were successful in recalling words

that were made up of segments with meaning, that is to say compounds. Tadpole,

hedgehog, whirlpool, were moderately long words where the cognitive hook was

established through the component words. The type of strategy used also had a great

impact in the recalling of the word, for example ‘Whirlpool’ was said to be recalled

because of the brand for washing machines. Hence, background knowledge or previous

experiences had to do a lot with the retention of meaning. This phenomenon is a clear

indication that the nature of words is determining to a great extent the type of memory

strategy used.

Figure 5 Type of mnemonic strategies used by upper-intermediate students

Figure 4 displays that four mnemonic strategies were used significantly more than the

others. These strategies were: 2, imagery; 3, L2 written association; 14, order of words

in the list, and 1, verbal repetition. The variety of strategies used has diminished

because learners know more words. Actually 20% of the target words were known by

the learners before doing the task.. Therefore, the strategies that these learners are using

are related to features in L2 and imagery.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40




The strategies more frequently used by intermediate students coincide with the basic

group partially, for instance, ‘imagery’ and ‘verbal repetition’ are frequent in both

groups, the intermediate students however are not concerned with pronunciation much

but with the written representation of the word. Naturally, they are a step forward from

the basic students and want to consolidate the meaning of the word that goes beyond the

meaning and pronunciation, the graphic representation of the word tends to be more

challenging (Nation 2001).

The last analysis will be carried out with the 11 advanced students who also had a

different list of target words. Their percent of success is illustrated below.

Figure 6 Advanced level: success in word retrieval.

The group of advanced learners had 79% success in word retrieval. This time the

amount of words that were previously known was not high (2.7%). The frequency of

use of strategies will exemplify what learners did to learn the target words and some

examples will be cited to illustrate this use.

The interlingual similarity of the language helped learners retain the word ‘acre’ since

they indicated it meant the same. Many examples coincided with the use of L1

pronunciation association e.g. ‘hut’ was related to ‘hot’, ‘hug’ and ‘hurt’. Cricket

fostered the use of previous knowledge since learners related the word with the

onomatopoeic sound and with the sport. Other instances can be illustrated with figure 7.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

OUTCRY HINGE POD MAGGOT ACRE HUT BADGER STOPPER CRICKET PROW




Figure 7 Type of mnemonic strategies used by advanced students

We can observe in figure 7 that the variety of strategies used by the advanced learners is

reduced in comparison with the previous two groups since from the 16 strategies

codified 6 were not used at all and 7 are used minimally. This group of students are only

appealing to ‘verbal repetition’ and L2 referents namely, written form and

pronunciation. These results confirm the fact that advanced learners tend to use fewer

strategies than beginners and they rely less on L1 resources. With these students the

effectiveness of strategies was almost complete except for imagery that registered two

incorrect meanings. We are confirming the hypothesis referred to the frequent use of

strategies by beginning learners and the decrease of this use as the students progress in

their knowledge of the language, as we can see in the graph the amount of strategies

used is not broad. As mentioned above, only a few strategies (1, 3, 4) were used

significantly more than the others.

Conclusions

The results discussed above portray the expected picture and behaviors in relation to the

amount of strategies used and their respective effectiveness. In this sense, we can

reiterate that beginners do not have great experience in trying out and selecting the

strategies that are more productive for them. They rather indiscriminately use those

strategies in the hope that they might eventually be effective. Intermediate and advance

learners make more informed decisions about the strategies they use, hence the variety

is not broad but those they do use result more effective. We verify that with the percents

of word retention that were: 56%, 86% and 79% respectively. We have to bear in mind

0

5

10

15

20

25




that 20% has to be discounted from the 86% registered by intermediate students, since

that is the percentage of words they previously knew. It is evident then, that as students

are progressing in their mastering of the language they are also refining their methods

and appeal to those that result effective. Moreover, the number of strategies the learners

appeal to, diminish as they achieve higher levels of competence because the knowledge

of the language does not require such a frequent use of strategies any more.

One of the questions posed in this paper referred to the declarative and procedural

knowledge of the three different groups of students who took part in the study. In this

respect, we can say that we found a strong sense of coherence between what the

students reported (in the questionnaire) they did and the actual practice they

demonstrated in the task. The three groups are in line concerning the frequency of use

of strategies: 1.- Verbal repetition,( repetición oral y escrita) 2.- Imagery, (Combinación

de sonidos con imágenes, Imágenes mentales o dibujos, visualización mental de la

escritura), 3.- L2 written association (visualización mental de la escritura) and 4.- L2

pronunciation association (Asociación del sonido con palabra similar). The only

strategy they reported using with frequency but they did not apply that much in the task

was L1 pronunciation association. Actually basic students tended to use this strategy

with more frequency because they rely more on L1 resources to retain vocabulary.

The frequency of use of memory strategies in declarative knowledge in Marín (2005)

does not correspond with the declarative nor with the procedural knowledge of our

subjects. We found only two traits of mnemonic similarity in relation to ‘visualize

written form or meaning’ that to us is a form of imagery and ‘association with personal

experience’ that matches our strategy (13) association with previous experiences. This

indicates that eliciting the actual use of strategies from learners can lead us to the

determination of typologies in a more reliable form.

Bibliography

Anderson & Nagy (1992). The vocabulary conundrum, in Nation, I.S.P. (2001).

Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R.S. (1972). Levels of processing: a framework for memory




research. Journal of Verbal learning and verbal behaviour, 11, 671-684.

Craik, F. I. M. & E. Tulving (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in

episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology 104 :268-284.

Hulstijn (1997) Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: a

reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed)

Cognition and Second language Instruction. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Marín, M. A. (2005) Extraversion and the use of vocabulary learning strategies among

university EFL students in Mexico. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of

essex.

Nagy, W. E. & P. A. Herman (1987). Breath and depth of vocabulary knowledge:

implications for acquisition and instruction. In McKeown, M. G. & M. E. Curtis

(Eds) The Nature of Vocabulary Acquisition (19-35). London: Lawrence

Erlbaum.

Nation, I.S.P. (1990). Teaching & Learning Vocabulary. Boston, Massachusetts:

Heinle & Heinle.

Nation, I.S.P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

O’Malley, J. M. & A. U. Chamot. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language

Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Purpura (1994) The role of learning strategies in language learning and testing, in

Schmitt, N. & M. McCarthy (1997). Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and

Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rott, S., J.,Williams & R. Cameron (2002). The effect of multiple-choice L1 glosses

and input-output cycles on lexical acquisition and retention. Language Teaching

Research 6/3, 183-222.

Schmitt, N. & M. McCarthy (1997). Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and

Pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, N. (2000). Vocabulary in Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Thompson (1987). Memory in language learning. In A. Wenden & Rubin (Eds) Learner

strategies in Language learning. New York: Prentice Hall.




APPENDIX 1

ACTIVIDAD: LISTA DE PALABRAS

TABLA 1- GRUPO 1

INSTRUCCIONES:

1. Para la realización de ésta actividad deberás memorizar la siguiente lista de

palabras así como su significado (10 en total).

Tiempo= 5 minutos.

Word Meaning

1. Footman Lacayo

2. Beggar Mendigo

3. Chopsticks Palillos chinos

4. Hearse Carroza fúnebre

5. Landmark Punto de referencia

6. Ambush Emboscada

7. Lullaby Canción de cuna

8. Nostril Fosa nasal

9. Gloom Penumbra, tristeza

10. Slime Baba




PAG-2

2. Anota en la primera columna la palabra que el aplicador te indique. Si no

recuerdas una de las palabras mencionadas continúa con la siguiente.

PALABRA X / ESTRATEGIA

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

PALABRAS CORRECTAS = _______

3. De manera honesta coloca una (X) si tu respuesta no fue satisfactoria o una ()

si fue correcta en la segunda columna.

4. Para finalizar la actividad, anota en la última columna (ESTRATEGIA) lo que

tuviste que hacer para recordar la palabra y su significado.

¡GRACIAS POR TU COLABORACIÓN!

Documents

The exploration of mnemonic strategies used by students of ...filosofia.uatx.mx/42.pdf · Mnemonic strategies are precisely, the type of techniques that students appeal to in order