Acceso usuarios
Hugo Wing Yu Tam, Sun A. Kim
Correction: This article was originally published with errors. It has now been corrected online and in print.
The corrected text now appears as provided below:
There were 80.2% ethnic Han Chinese students and 12.9% ethnic Korean students, but 6.9% were unknown or missing values. The participants were speaking in different languages at home but more than half of the total participants using Korean at home mainly (N = 240, 53.3%), with more than one-third of the total participants using Mandarin at home mainly (N = 182, 40.4%), with fewer participants using mixed languages (N = 18, 4%), Cantonese (N = 4, 0.9%), English (N = 3, 0.7%), and Taiwanese (N = 1, 0.2%) mainly at home. Therefore, it was not possible to include a field of study as a variable. However, there are some participants’ characteristics as categorical variables in these analyses. The group of Mandarin (including Standard Mandarin Chinese and Shandong dialect), Cantonese, and Taiwanese were in the same group because they are a family of Chinese languages.
The 450 participants were divided into three Chinese proficiency groups (high, intermediate, and low) according to their scores in a mid-term standardised Chinese test designed by Chinese subject teachers at the heritage Chinese schools to assess students’ written Chinese proficiency. The test focuses on reading and writing skills. The reading paper is a multiple-choice test; the writing paper includes one practical writing question and one essay question (either descriptive or narrative). The scores of the high proficiency group ranged from 80 to 100 (N = 179, 39.8%), the intermediate proficiency group ranged from 60 to 79 (N = 141, 31.3%), and low proficiency group ranged from 0 to 59 (N = 125, 27.8%). However, 58% were Taiwanese (ROC) nationals, 23.1% were Chinese (PRC) nationals, 12.9% were Korean nationals, and 3.3% were multiple nationals, with fewer participants’ nationality were from USA (N = 3, 0.7%), Hong Kong SAR (N = 2, 0.4%), and Singapore (N = 1, 0.2%).
This article notice facilitates the correction of these errors.
This present study investigated the Chinese vocabulary learning strategies of adolescent learners of Mandarin at two heritage language (HL) schools in Korea. A total of 450 participants from two secondary schools completed the Vocabulary Learning Strategy Inventory (VLSI). The quantitative analysis of the questionnaires was conducted through exploratory factor analysis and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) in order to explore the Chinese vocabulary learning strategies and learner variables. The results found that ethnicity made no statistical differences in the four VLSI factors, but students’ gender, home language use, Chinese proficiency, and nationality caused statistical differences in vocabulary learning strategies. This study can contribute to re-developing the VLSI for traditional character learning and the Sinographosphere context. The findings shed light on how individual learner differences relate to Chinese vocabulary learning strategies, which yields pedagogical implications.
