Teaching new words using collocations has been acknowledged as an effective way in vocabulary classes

Mean:	242:15=16,1
237:15=15,8

Table 10. The results of Experimental group

	Name	Multiple–choice test (20 point)	Definition-sentence test (20 point)
1	Ozodova Umida	17	17
2	Odilova Iroda	18	18
3	Pirmatova Mubina	18	16
4	Muhammedbekov Sunnat	16	15
5	Tohirov Otabek	19	18
6	Tursunov Farhod	17	14
7	Shamsiddinova Nodira	15	14
8	Valiyeva Madina	14	15
9	Xolmurodova Barno	14	16
10	Hikmatova Aynura	13	18
11	Shohmurodov Islombek	16	17
12	Turdiyeva Hamida	17	17
13	Gulomjonova Sitora	18	16
14	Yodgorov Oybek	18	13
	Mean:	16,6	16,4

Table 11

Means of Multiple-Choice and definition sentence Post-Tests
Groups__n__Mean_1__Mean_2'>Groups	n	Mean 1	Mean 2
Collocation	14	16,6	16,4
Definition	15	16,1	15,8

n-the number of the students

Figure 4

An examination of Table 11 shows that in multiple-choice tests, the mean for the collocation group was 16,6 and for definition sentence test’s mean was 16,4. The mean for the definition group was 16,1 and 15,8. As can be seen, the collocation group had higher means than the definition group, which explains that there is a difference between the groups in terms of learning words either in collocation or definition only. This might show that collocations help learners to learn new words; otherwise, the mean of the collocation group would be the lowest.

4.2 General findings
The data obtained after administering the post-test were analyzed using parametric statistics. Since there were two means from two different groups (control and experimental groups), the mean differences were analyzed.
Table 12. CG results

Central tendency			Dispersion
Mean	mode	median		Low	high	range
16,1	16	15		13	19	7

Table 13. EG results

Central tendency			Dispersion
mean	mode	median		Low	high	range
16,6	18	17		14	19	6

In the following figure, mode, median and range in results of both groups were given. It can be seen that the collocation group again raised the difference. 16,6>16,1; 18>16; 17>15; 7>6.

Figure5

In both tests, the collocation group got higher mean than the definition group, which might suggest the effectiveness of the treatment.

The descriptive statistics is summarized in the following table.

Table 14
Descriptive statistics for the pre and post-test.

Groups	Mean	Mean 2	Std Error Mean
Control	16,1	15,8	0,3
Experimental	16,6	16,4	0,2

Figure 6

As shown in Figure 6, the Std error mean for the difference between the two groups was found to be 0.2 and 0.3 which is highly significant at 0.1 (0.2 < 0.3).

It could be concluded that the use of collocation as a strategy for vocabulary instruction was influential in improving learners’ vocabulary learning and knowledge.

Groups	Pre-test		Post-test
	M	M2		M	M2	Total
Collocation	7,6	7,4		16,4	16,6	40,4
Definition	7,2	6,9		15,8	16,1	38,8

It can be seen that collocation group got a higher mean in the pre and post-test (40,4>38,8), which suggests collocations helped the students to remember the words, whereas the mean of the definition group decreased in the tests.

4.3 Conclusion
The results of the data obtained from the experimental research were so decisive that they could absolutely make us conclude that teaching vocabulary through collocations led to a better learning of the words than presenting them using classical ways. The obtained results may also propose that it would be desirable to teach vocabulary through collocations. In spite of the fact that using collocation was a very new way for the learners, and previous to the study, they had never been taught via a vocabulary learning such method even similar to that, the experimental group's scores were superior to the control group's scores in every one of the vocabulary tests. It is supposed that if they had more time, they would get used to learn the new words through their collocations and score even higher. This can persuade younger and less experienced teachers to employ such a new way into their classrooms to get more confidence applying scientific findings to their teaching. Noticing is paying attention to the vocabulary and being conscious of it. It can be concluded that introducing different groupings of new words can help student notice them and go through the first process to remember words.
The findings of this study were in line with the expectations since this new way seemed both motivating and helpful to EFL learners.

4.4 Recommendations

Based on the results, the difference in the pre and post-tests definitely leads us to conclude that the proficiency level of the experimental group who learned new vocabulary through collocations was improved in the treatment stage of the study, and, accordingly, it can be proposed that teaching vocabulary via collocations is an efficient way for the learners’ proficiency improvement.

Based on this investigation, it is considered very important to make the following recommendations:

• 
  to apply new and modern teaching ways in vocabulary classes in order better remembering the words
  
• 
  to show the contribution of collocations to vocabulary learning of students in English Foreign Language (EFL) classes
  
• 
  to establish an English atmosphere in vocabulary classes using various types of collocations
  
• 
  to research and identify best ways of implementing collocations
  

V. FINAL REFLECTIONS

The intention of this study was to investigate whether teaching vocabulary using collocations was an effective way. It is hypothesized that learning vocabulary through collocations is an effective strategy that positively contributes to the development of vocabulary learning. Thus, this study aimed at finding a solution for the problem that in most EFL classes, classical techniques such as synonyms, antonyms, mother tongue translation and definition are still generally used for teaching new words.

The interest in collocations has increased in the last decades and considerable research has been done to find out about the collocational behavior of words. However, there seems to be a gap between what has been discovered and the application of the findings in language teaching.
It is thought that there is an essential requirement of applying new vocabulary teaching ways in EFL classes. Siyanova and Schmitt (2008) advise that teachers should make crucial changes in their vocabulary teaching pedagogies by emphasizing on phrasal elements rather than individual words. Therefore, based on the existing literature, our above research motivation and results the present study was seeking to find answers to some questions: 1. What is a collocation? 2. Does presenting new words through collocations have a more positive effect on vocabulary teaching compared to presenting them using classical technique-definitions? 3. How could collocations be used in classrooms? 4. What problems appear during classes when collocations are used and how can teachers overcome them? Relying on the results gained, we found out the answers that, in particular, teaching new words using collocations could result in a better learning and remembering of those words than teaching them with definitions only. The results of the multiple-choice immediate post-tests and definition-sentence immediate posts-tests showed a significant difference among the groups. The means and scores of the treatment groups were higher than the control group in both immediate post-tests.
This study may be useful for teachers and students to become adapted to a relatively new way, which will be ready to lend a hand in their vocabulary development. Nist and Simpson (1993) state that knowing the definition of a word is essential and may be adequate in many situations; however, it is just a beginning point. Based on them, a memorized definition is normally the tip of the iceberg, the part erroneously supposed to be the total iceberg because it is so visible and noticeable. Underneath the surface of the water is a much larger mass of ice, which is much more important. Their illumination about knowing the definition of a word advocates the hypothesis that traditional vocabulary instruction ways do not lead to the development of new words.


Reference List
1. The Decree I.A.Karimov “On Measures on Further Improvement of Teaching of Foreign Languages” December 10, 2012
2. Biskup, D. (1992). LI influence on learners’ renderings of English collocations: A Polish /German study. In P. J. L. Arnaud & H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 85 - 93). Basingstoke: Macmillan.
3. Brown, P. R. (1994). Lexical collocation; a strategy for advanced learners. Modern English Teacher, 3, 24 - 27.
4. Bartsch, Sabine. 2004. Structural and functional properties of collocations in English: A corpus study of lexical and pragmatic constraints on lexical co-occurrence. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
5. Beck, Isabel L., Margaret G. McKeown, & Richard C. Omanson. 1987. The effects and use of diverse vocabulary instruction techniques. In The nature of vocabulary acquisition, eds. Margaret G. McKewon & Mary E. Curtis, 147-163. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Benson, Morton, Evelyn Benson, & Robert F. Ilson. 1997. The BBI dictionary of English word combinations. 3rd ed. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
7. Celce-Murcia, M., & McIntosh, L. (1979). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. Massachusetts: Newbury House.
8. Celce-Murcia, M., & Rosensweig, F. (1979). Teaching vocabulary in the ESL
9. Classroom. In M. Celce-Murcia & L. McIntosh (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 241- 257). Massachusetts: Newbury House.
10. Carter, R., & McCarty, M. (1988). Vocabulary and language teaching. London: Longman Group Limited.
11. Coady, J. (1997). L2 Vocabulary acquisition through extensive reading. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary accjuisition (pp. 225 - 237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Elkhatip, A. S. A. (1984). A classification of the lexical problems of EFL/ESL students. ERIC Clearinghouse, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 246691).
14.Farghal, M., & Obiedat, H. (1995). Collocations: A neglected variable in EEL.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language leaching, 33, 315 - 332.


Bibliography
1.Carter, R. (1998). Vocabulary: applied linguistic perspectives (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
2. Cowie, A. P. (1988). Stable and creative aspects of vocabulary use. . In Carter, R., & McCarthy,
3. M. (Eds.). Vocabulary and language teaching. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
4. Cowie, A. P. (2009). Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Harrison, T. (2009). What's in a wordle: vocabulary learning made fun. IATEFL Conference:Cardiff.
6. Kennedy, G. (2003). Amplifier collocations in the British National Corpus: implications for
7. English language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 467- 487.
8. Lewis, M. (2000) (Ed.). Teaching collocation: further developments in the lexical approach. .
9. Lewis, M. (2002). Implementing the lexical approach: putting theory into practice. Boston: Thomson Learning Inc.
10. McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press
11. Moon, R. (1997). Vocabulary connections: multi-word items in English. In Schmitt, N., &
12. McCarthy, M. (Eds.). Vocabulary: description, acquisition, pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
14. Nation, P., & Meara, P. (2002). Vocabulary. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.). An introduction to applied linguistics. London: Arnold.
15. Nattinger, J. (1988). Some current trends in vocabulary teaching. In Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). Vocabulary and language teaching. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
16. Nattinger, J., & DeCarrico, J. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press
17. Nesselhauf, N. (2003). The use of collocations by advanced learners of English and some implications for teaching. Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 223-242.
18. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
19. Pawley, A., & Syder, F. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: nativelike selection and native like fluency. In Richards, J., & Schmidt, R. (Eds.). Language and communication. New York: Longman Group Limited.
20. Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Nation, I. S. P., & Waring, R. (1997). Vocabulary size, text coverage and word lists. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 6 -19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Nattinger, J. R. (1988). Some current trends in vocabulary teaching. In R. Carter & M. McCarty (Eds.), Vocabulary and language teaching (pp. 62 - 82). New York: Longman.
23. Nattinger, J. R. & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. New York: Prentice Hall Macmillan.
25. Nunan, D. (with F. Byrnes). (1995). Atlas 3 (Teacher’s extended edition). Boston: Heinie & Heinle.
26. Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10
27. Richards, J. C. (with 0. Hull & S. Proctor). (1991). Interchange 3 (Student’s book). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Rivers, W. (1983). Communicating naiurally in a .second language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Wallace, M. J. (1982). Teaching vocabulary. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
30. Woolard, G. (2000). Collocation-encouraging learner independence. In M. Lewis (Ed.), Teaching collocation (pp. 28 - 46). London: Language Teaching Publications.
31. Twadell, F. (1973). Vocabulary expansion in the TESOL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 7, 61 -78.
32. Zimmerman, C. B. (1997). Historical trends in second language vocabulary
acquisition. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 5 - 19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Appendix A

Here is the list of words, please tick the column “I know the word", "I don't know the word” which indicates your knowledge of each word.