1.  METHODOLOGY 1. Subjects 2. Instruments 3. Procedures 4. Data Analysis 4. Data Analysis The Questionnaire The Oral Production Testing Material The Written Dictation Testing Material Administration of the Questionnaires The Oral Production Test The Written Dictation Test 4

2.  1. Subjects  Yang-ming Junior High School  1st grade students  In June 2002  Learn English for at least one year ClassMaleFemaleDeletedTotal A2614733 B23171327 Total49312060 3

3.  2. Instruments : The Oral Production Testing Material  Less familiar words could not be visually recognized directly and were proper for evaluating participants’ skills in using grapheme-phoneme correspondences.  Oral test material was composed of 64 less familiar words to the first-grade junior high school students, including 40 multi-syllabic test items.

4.  2. Instruments : The Oral Production Testing Material

5. 

6.  The principles for selecting vocabulary  Taiwan Nine-year integrated curriculum word list (2263 words): Formally compiled for use in the elementary and junior high school curriculum (Kuo, 2003).  Words in the list were more frequently used.  1011 monosyllabic and disyllabic words were out of the word list by researcher  Word list of 208 unfamiliar words was compiled by 10 students from the third class.  64 unfamiliar words were determined and administered to the subjects in the oral production test 2. Instruments: The Oral Production Testing Material 3

7.  2. Instruments : The Written Dictation Testing Material 3

8.   The questionnaires were distributed to all the students in the two classes on the first day of school.  The researcher explained how to answer the questionnaires to the students.  The administration of the questionnaires, including instructions, took about 10 minutes.  20 had to be eliminated because they had learned English for less than one year or they didn’t have phonics instruction before entering junior high school. 3. Procedures -- Administration of the Questionnaires 3

9.  3. Procedures -- The Oral Production Test 5 minutes preparation pre-test post-test marked with stress To determine whether the subjects had some knowledge of stress or otherwise. The subjects’ responses judged by the researcher 3

10.  3. Procedures -- The Written Dictation Test 3

11.  3. Procedures -- Data Analysis 3

12.  RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1. Basic Data Analysis from the Questionnaire 2. Distribution of Subject into Three Proficiency Levels 3. The Statistical Results of the Intermediate Proficiency Group 4. The Results of the Higher Proficiency Group 5. The Statistical Results of the Lower Proficiency Group 6. Analysis of Students’ Accurate Responses in the Oral Pre- and Post-tests 7. Analysis of Students’ Accurate Responses in the Written Test 8. Summary 5 ?

13.  Gendermalefemale Total4119 %68%32% DurationTotalPercentage 1 or 2 years1118.3% 2 and 3 years2541.7% 3 and 4 years1118.3% more than 4 years 1321.7% English learning experience

14.  Frequency Nation Foreign F % Chinese + Foreign F % Total F % the U.S.3 7.9% 9 23.7%12 31.6% Canada2 5.3%14 36.8%16 42.1% England0 0% 1 2.6% Australia1 2.6% 2 5.3% New Zealand1 2.6% 2 5.3% 3 7.9% South Africa1 2.6% 3 7.9% 4 10.5% Total8 21.1%30 78.9%38 100% 4 Table 3

15.   The highest possible score for the three tests was 197, while the lowest score was 20.  The mean of subjects’ total scores is 86.53, and the standard deviation is 36.70.  The subjects were classified into three groups— Lower Proficiency Group (LPG): 1 Intermediate Proficiency Group (IPG): 2 Higher Proficiency Group (HPG): 1 ?

16.  2.1 A Comparison of the Total Scores of the Oral and Written Tests among the Three Groups 2.2 A Comparison of the Scores of the Oral Pre-test among the Three Groups 2.3 A Comparison of the Scores of the Oral Post-test among the Three Groups 2.4 A Comparison of the Accuracy Frequency of the Stressed Vowels in the Oral Pre- and Post-tests 2.5 A Comparison of the Scores of the Written Test among the Three Groups 2.6 The Correlation between the Oral and Written Tests  4   

17.  NMean SDMin Max LPG1646.199.792057 IPG2981.8614.9159111 HPG15 138.6017.89115168 Total6086.5336.7020168 2.1 A Comparison of the Total Scores of the Oral and written Tests among the Three Groups Descriptive Statistics of the Three Proficiency Groups’ Total Scores of All the Tests Total score of the three tests= 197 Table 4

18.  2.2 A Comparison of the Scores of the Oral Pre- test among the Three Groups NMean SDMin Max LPG1610.944.42218 IPG2922.865.841335 HPG1542.206.253350 Total6024.5212.70250 Descriptive Statistics for the Oral Pre-test Scores among the Three Groups Total score in the oral pre-test = 64 Table 5

19.  2.3 A Comparison of the Scores of the Oral Post-test among the Three Groups NMean SDMin Max LPG1612.563.95319 IPG2923.665.601535 HPG1544.006.623554 Total6025.7812.78354 Descriptive Statistics for the Oral Post-test Scores among the Three Groups Total score in the oral post-test = 64 Table 6

20.  2.3 A Comparison of the Scores of the Oral Post-test among the Three Groups GroupNMeanM Diff t-test LPG Pre post 16 10.94 12.56 1.622.340* IPG Pre post 29 22.86 23.66 0.801.312 HPG Pre post 15 42.20 44.00 1.802.946* Total Pre post 60 24.52 25.78 2.263.358* Comparison of the Oral Pre- and Post-test Scores of the Three Groups Total score is each test = 64 *p <.05 Table 7 ?

21.  2.4 A Comparison of Accuracy Frequency of the Stressed Vowels in the Oral Pre- and Post-tests NMean SDMin Max M Diff t-test Pre-test4029.3811.81653 -1.15-2.075* Post-test4030.5312.58855 There were 40 multi-syllables in the oral tests. The possible highest frequency =60 (t=2.075*, p<.05). Table 8

22.  2.5 A Comparison of the Scores of the Written Test among the Three Groups NMean SDMin Max LPG1622.694.351530 IPG2935.346.772247 HPG1552.407.103865 Total6036.2312.451565 Descriptive Statistics for the Written Test Scores among the Three Groups Total score in the oral pre-test = 69 Table 9 ?

23.  As in the previous results so far presented, the mean score of the IPG is lower than that of all the subjects, although their mean score in the written test is higher than that of the oral pre- or post-tests. The above results indicate that it was a difficult task for the students in the IPG to spell (or encode) unfamiliar monosyllabic words by merely applying phonics rules. ? LPG

24.  2.6 The Correlation between the Oral and Written Tests Test FormatsCorrelation (r) Oral Pre-test vs. Written Test.862** Oral Post-test vs. Written Test.974** Summary of the Correlation Coefficients between the Oral Tests and the Written Test (r=.862**, p<.01) (r=.974**, p<.01) **Correlation is significant at the o.o1 level (2-tailed) Table 10 Students’ “decoding” (speaking) abilities were closely related to their “encoding” (spelling) abilities