|
" Using processing instruction to teach Biblical Hebrew grammar "
Jennifer Elizabeth Quast
S. A. H. Kaufman, Fenfang
| Document Type
|
:
|
Latin Dissertation
|
| Language of Document
|
:
|
English
|
| Record Number
|
:
|
53930
|
| Doc. No
|
:
|
TL23884
|
| Call number
|
:
|
3374596
|
| Main Entry
|
:
|
Jennifer Elizabeth Quast
|
| Title & Author
|
:
|
Using processing instruction to teach Biblical Hebrew grammar\ Jennifer Elizabeth Quast
|
| College
|
:
|
Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion (Ohio)
|
| Date
|
:
|
2009
|
| Degree
|
:
|
Ph.D.
|
| student score
|
:
|
2009
|
| Page No
|
:
|
202-n/a
|
| Abstract
|
:
|
The present study compares the relative effects of two types of instruction (Grammar-Translation Method and Processing Instruction) on the acquisition of the Qal perfect in Biblical Hebrew with students at Christian colleges and seminaries. The Grammar-Translation Method uses explicit grammar information, vocabulary memorization, and translation exercises to teach the target language. Processing Instruction includes explicit grammar information and input-based practiced aimed at changing learners' processing strategies. The current study includes a discussion of teaching methods that have historically been used for teaching Biblical Hebrew, plus a discussion of the theory and research behind Processing Instruction and its potential for use with Biblical Hebrew. This is followed by analysis of an in-depth survey of Biblical Hebrew instructors, focusing on textbooks and teaching techniques currently in use. The results of the survey helped to identify the Grammar-Translation Method as the most commonly used method of teaching Biblical Hebrew in Christian colleges and seminaries and therefore the "traditional" method to be compared in this study. For the experimental study itself, participants completed a pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest, each involving an interpretation test and a production test. Results were submitted to an analysis of variance, revealing that both groups improved significantly from pretest to posttest and that the gains were sustained through the delayed posttest. However, there were no significant differences found between the gains of two instructional groups. The results are slightly different from those of the original studies of Processing Instruction (VanPatten and Cadierno, 1993a and 1993b), but they are similar to the results of some subsequent research studies (for example, DeKeyser and Sokalski, 1996, Collentine. 1998, and Cheng, 2002).
|
| Subject
|
:
|
Philosophy, religion and theology; Education; Language, literature and linguistics; Biblical Hebrew; Processing instruction; Language pedagogy; Grammar translation; Second language acquisition; Hebrew; Language arts; Ancient languages; Biblical studies; Hebrew language; Grammar; 0321:Biblical studies; 0289:Ancient languages; 0279:Language arts
|
| Added Entry
|
:
|
S. A. H. Kaufman, Fenfang
|
| Added Entry
|
:
|
Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion (Ohio)
|
| |