近代，關聯式學習策略著重在教導學生連結過去所學知識在新知識的學習上。此策略被證實比強調死記硬背的機械式學習法(rote learning)有更好的記憶效果(retention)與更利於吸收新知識。對於需要不斷反覆習得大量字彙的英語學習中，此關聯式策略預期將可以有效地提升學生的字彙學習成就。但此關聯式字彙學習策略，在過去並沒有受到研究者與英文教師的注意。例如學生最常使用的記筆記學習策略裡，字彙往往還是被記錄成獨立的個體來背誦。學生本身對於如何有意義地組織大量字彙也感到的困惑。因此本論文提出一個研究架構試圖探討關聯式字彙學習策略的成效與實行此策略可能遇到的困難。此架構主要包含兩個部分:有字彙擴展輔助與無字彙擴展輔助的關聯式策略教導。無輔助的關聯策略教導中，本論文引入連結式組織法(link-based format)來輔助學生記單字筆記。此組織法將與傳統的列點式組織法(list-based format)比較。對於有輔助的關聯式策略教導中，本論文主要提供兩種字彙擴展輔助技術來幫助學習者有意義地連結相關字彙: 分別是形似近義相關字推薦與情境相關字推薦。透過三個實驗的研究資料收集，本研究不僅提供英語教師應用此策略於教學現場的實用建議，還給予後續對此策略實行有興趣的研究者一個研究探索藍圖。

A large and varied vocabulary is essential for communicative competence; however, its acquisition is an endless process and often creates insurmountable difficulties for language learners. Recording words in a vocabulary notebook can facilitate this challenging but critical job. Keeping vocabulary notebooks is viewed as an effective strategy to take control of, organize and manage individual vocabulary learning. While this strategy is beneficial for learning vocabulary, most researchers and teachers have demonstrated that learners need to receive more guidance in the proper use of vocabulary notebooks. For example, students simply tend to write vocabulary word by word because they commonly view words as individual units. Moreover, learners have trouble choosing valuable words on their own. In order to resolve these issues, an association-based strategy was developed to assist learners in compiling vocabulary notebooks. This deep processing strategy was found to be more effective in regard to vocabulary retention than rote repetition strategies. A research framework was proposed for investigating the potential benefits and pitfalls of carrying out this strategy in the act of learning vocabulary. The framework divided the strategy instruction into two application situations: instructing the strategy either with or without the support of word expansion techniques. The framework first investigated the effect of the link-type note-taking method (the association-based strategy) by comparing it with the list-type one (the conventional strategy), where the association-based strategy was conducted without the support of word expansion techniques. Second, an English vocabulary learning system was designed to support students linking of the words under consideration. This support method used both semantic relationships and written forms of the old words to suggest related words. Third, an enhanced association-based vocabulary notebook system was developed. This system included a word expansion method to help students meaningfully associate words that share the same context. The experimental data collected in these three studies was aimed at suggesting practical implementations to teachers for the purpose of instructing this strategy and to provide researchers with a potential research blueprint for exploring this strategy.

[1]. Aït-Mokhtar, S., Chanod, J.-P., & Roux, C. (2002). Robustness beyond shallowness: incremental deep parsing. Natural Language Engineering, 8(2-3), 121-144.
[2]. Amorim, R. R., Lama, M., Sanchez, E., Riera, A., & Vila, X. A. (2006). A learning design ontology based on the IMS specification. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 38-57.
[3]. Arthur, W. B. (1994). Inductive reasoning and bounded rationality. American Economic Review, 84(2), 406-411.
[4]. Arts, J. A. R., Gijselaers, W. H., & Segers, M. S. R. (2006). Enhancing problem-solving expertise by means of an authentic, collaborative, computer supported and problem-based course. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21(1), 71-90.
[5]. Askar, P., & Altun, A. (2009). CogSkillnet: An ontology-based representation of cognitive skills. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 240-253.
[6]. Ausubel, D. P., Novak, J. D., & Hanesian, H. (1978). Educational Psychology: A cognitive view (2 ed.). New York: Jolt, Rinchart and Winston.
[7]. Bahr, G. S., & Dansereau, D. F. (2001). Bilingual knowledge maps (BiK-maps) in second-language vocabulary learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 70(1), 5-24.
[8]. Bahr, G. S., & Dansereau, D. F. (2005). Bilingual knowledge maps (BiK maps) as a presentation format: Delayed recall and training effects. Journal of Experimental Education, 73(2), 101-118.
[9]. Brill, E. (1992). A simple rule-based part of speech tagger. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the third conference on applied natural language processing, Trento, Italy.
[10]. Brill, E. (1995). Transformation-based error-driven learning and natural language processing: A case study in part-of-speech tagging. Computational Linguistics, 21(4), 543-565.
[11]. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education ESL.
[12]. Brun, C., & Hagege, C. (2009, March 1-7). Semantically-driven extraction of relations between named entities. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics, CICLing 2009, Mexico City, Mexico.
[13]. Budanitsky, A., & Hirst, G. (2006). Evaluating WordNet-based measures of lexical semantic relatedness. Computational Linguistics, 32(1), 13-47.
[14]. Chalmers, P. A. (2003). The role of cognitive theory in human-computer interface. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(5), 593-607.
[15]. Chamot, A. U. (2005). Language learning strategy instruction: current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130.
[16]. Chapelle, C. A. (2009). The relationship between second language acquisition theory and computer-assisted language learning. Modern Language Journal, 93, 741-753.
[17]. Chen, C.-M., & Hsu, S.-H. (2008). Personalized intelligent mobile learning system for supporting effective English learning. Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 153-180.
[18]. Chen, N.-S., Kinshuk, Wei, C.-W., & Chen, H.-J. (2008). Mining e-Learning domain concept map from academic articles. Computers & Education, 50(3), 1009-1021.
[19]. Christou, C., & Papageorgiou, E. (2007). A framework of mathematics inductive reasoning. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 55-66.
[20]. Cobb, T. (1997). Is there any measurable learning from hands-on concordancing? System, 25(3), 301-315.
[21]. Coderre, S., Mandin, H., Harasym, P. H., & Fick, G. H. (2003). Diagnostic reasoning strategies and diagnostic success. Medical Education, 37(8), 695-703.
[22]. Cristea, A. I. (2004). What can the semantic web do for adaptive educational hypermedia? Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 40-58.
[23]. Dzbor, M., Motta, E., & Domingue, J. (2004). Opening up magpie via semantic services. In S. A. McIlraith, D. Plexousakis & F. VanHarmelen (Eds.), Semantic Web - Iswc 2004, Proceedings (Vol. 3298, pp. 635-649). Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin.
[24]. Dzbor, M., Stutt, A., Motta, E., & Collins, T. (2007). Representations for semantic learning webs: Semantic Web technology in learning support. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(1), 69-82.
[25]. Ellis, N. C. (1996). Sequencing in SLA: Phonological memory, chunking, and points of order. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(1), 91-126.
[26]. Fellbaum, C. (Ed.). (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
[27]. Fowle, C. (2002). Vocabulary notebooks: implementation and outcomes. English Language Teaching Journal, 56(4), 380-388.
[28]. Gasevic, D., Jovanovic, J., & Devedzic, V. (2007). Ontology-based annotation of learning object content. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 1-26.
[29]. Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2008). Technologies linking learning, cognition, and instruction. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. v. Merriënboer & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3 ed.). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
[30]. Gu, P. Y. (2003). Vocabulary learning in a second language: Person, task, context and strategies Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language TESL-EJ, 7(2).
[31]. Hagege, C., & Tannier, X. (2007, June 23-24). XRCE-T: XIP temporal module for TempEval campaign. Paper presented at the 4th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations, Prague, Czech Republic.
[32]. Haverty, L. A., Koedinger, K. R., Klahr, D., & Alibali, M. W. (2000). Solving inductive reasoning problems in mathematics: Not-so-trivial pursuit. Cognitive Science, 24(2), 249-298.
[33]. Henze, N., Dolog, P., & Nejdl, W. (2004). Reasoning and ontologies for personalized e-Learning in the semantic web. Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 82-97.
[34]. Horwitz, E. K. (1988). The beliefs about language-learning of beginning university foreign-language students. Modern Language Journal, 72(3), 283-294.
[35]. Huang, S. L., & Yang, C. W. (2009). Designing a semantic bliki system to support different types of knowledge and adaptive learning. Computers & Education, 53(3), 701-712.
[36]. Huang, Y. M., Chen, J. N., & Cheng, S. C. (2007). A method of cross-level frequent pattern mining for Web-based instruction. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 305-319.
[37]. Huang, Y. M., Chiu, P. S., Liu, T. C., & Chen, T. S. (2011). The design and implementation of a meaningful learning-based evaluation method for ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2291-2302.
[38]. Huang, Y. M., Huang, T. C., & Hsieh, M. Y. (2008). Using annotation services in a ubiquitous Jigsaw cooperative learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 3-15.
[39]. Huang, Y. M., Huang, T. C., Wang, K. T., & Hwang, W. Y. (2009). A markov-based recommendation model for exploring the transfer of learning on the web. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 144-162.
[40]. Huang, Y. M., Huang, Y. M., Huang, S. H., & Lin, Y. T. (2012). A ubiquitous english vocabulary learning system: evidence of active/passive attitudes vs. usefulness/ease-of-use. Computers & Education, 58(1), 273-282.
[41]. Huang, Y. M., Jeng, Y. L., & Huang, T. C. (2009). An educational mobile blogging system for supporting collaborative learning. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 163-175.
[42]. Huang, Y. M., Kuo, Y. H., Lin, Y. T., & Cheng, S. C. (2008). Toward interactive mobile synchronous learning environment with context-awareness service. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1205-1226.
[43]. Huang, Y. M., Liang, T. H., Su, Y. N., & Chen, N. S. (2012). Empowering personalized learning with an interactive e-book learning system for elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 60(4), 703-722.
[44]. Huang, Y. M., Lin, Y. T., & Cheng, S. C. (2009). An adaptive testing system for supporting versatile educational assessment. Computers & Education, 52(1), 53-67.
[45]. Huang, Y. M., Lin, Y. T., & Cheng, S. C. (2010). Effectiveness of a mobile plant learning system in a science curriculum in taiwanese elementary education. Computers & Education, 54(1), 47-58.
[46]. Huang, Y. M., & Liu, C. H. (2009). Applying adaptive swarm intelligence technology with structuration in web-based collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 52(4), 789-799.
[47]. Huang, Y. M., & Wu, T. T. (2011). A systematic approach for learner group composition utilizing u-learning portfolio. Educational Technology & Society, 14(3), 102-117.
[48]. Jamieson, J., & Chapelle, C. A. (2010). Evaluating CALL use across multiple contexts. System, 38(3), 357-369.
[49]. Jarmasz, M., & Szpakowicz, S. (2003). Roget's Thesaurus and semantic similarity. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP-03), Borovets, Bulgaria.
[50]. Jian, H. L., Sandnes, F. E., Law, K. M. Y., Huang, P., & Huang, Y. M. (2009). The role of electronic pocket dictionaries as an English learning tool among Chinese students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(6), 503-514.
[51]. Jiang, J. J., & Conrath, D. W. (1997, Aug. 22-24 ). Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Research in Computational Linguistics, Taipei, Taiwan.
[52]. Johnsonlaird, P. N., & Byrne, R. M. J. (1993). Precis of deduction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16(2), 323-333.
[53]. Jovanovic, J., Gasevic, D., Knight, C., & Richards, G. (2007). Ontologies for effective use of context in e-learning settings. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 47-59.
[54]. Jovanovic, J., Gasevic, D., Torniai, C., Bateman, S., & Hatala, M. (2009). The Social Semantic Web in Intelligent Learning Environments: state of the art and future challenges. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 273-309.
[55]. Karampiperis, P., & Sampson, D. (2004, Aug 30-sep 01). Adaptive instructional planning using ontologies. Paper presented at the 4th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Joensuu, FINLAND.
[56]. KILIÇKAYA, F., & KRAJKA, J. (2010). Comparative usefulness of online and traditional vocabulary learning TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 55-63.
[57]. Kohlhase, A., & Kohlhase, M. (2008). Semantic knowledge management for education. Proceedings of the Ieee, 96(6), 970-989.
[58]. Kojic-Sabo, I., & Lightbown, P. M. (1999). Students' approaches to vocabulary learning and their relationship to success. The Modern Language Journal, 83(2), 176-192.
[59]. Kowata, J. H., Cury, D., & Boeres, M. C. S. (2010). A review of semi-automatic approaches to build concept maps. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Concept Mapping, Viña del Mar, Chile.
[60]. Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.
[61]. Le Heron, J., & Sligo, F. (2005). Acquisition of simple and complex knowledge; a knowledge gap perspective. Educational Technology & Society, 8(2), 190-202.
[62]. Lee, C.-Y., & Liou, H.-C. (2003). A study of using web concordancing for English vocabulary learning in a Taiwanese high school context. English Teaching & Learning, 27(3), 35-56.
[63]. Lee, M. C., Tsai, K. H., & Wang, T. I. (2008). A practical ontology query expansion algorithm for semantic-aware learning objects retrieval. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1240-1257.
[64]. Lenders, O. (2008). Electronic glossing - is it worth the effort? Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(5), 457-481.
[65]. Lesk, M. (1986). Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries: How to tell a pine cone from an ice cream cone. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 5th Annual International Conference on Systems Documentation, , Toronto, Canada.
[66]. Levenshtein, V. I. (1966). Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady, 10, 707-710.
[67]. Lewis, M. (2000). Teaching collocation. London: Thomson Heinle.
[68]. Liu, P.-L., Chen, C.-J., & Chang, Y.-J. (2010). Effects of a computer-assisted concept mapping learning strategy on EFL college students' English reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 54(2), 436-445.
[69]. Lu, E. J. L., Horng, G., Yu, C. S., & Chou, L. Y. (2010). Extended relation metadata for SCORM-based learning content management systems. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 220-235.
[70]. Makany, T., Kemp, J., & Dror, I. E. (2009). Optimising the use of note-taking as an external cognitive aid for increasing learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 619-635.
[71]. Manning, C. D., Raghavan, P., & Schütze, H. (2007). Introduction to information retrieval. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[72]. Martin, M. (1984). Advanced vocabulary teaching: The problem of synonyms. The Modern Language Journal, 68(2), 130-137.
[73]. McCarthy, M. (1990). Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[74]. McCrostie, J. (2007). Examining learner vocabulary notebooks. English Language Teaching Journal, 61(3), 246-255.
[75]. Meara, P. (2009). Connected Words: Word Associations and Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[76]. Miller, G. A. (1990). Nouns in WordNet: A lexical inheritance system. International Journal of Lexicography, 3(4), 245-264.
[77]. Morin, R., & Goebel, J. (2001). Basic vocabulary instruction: teaching strategies or teaching words? Foreign Language Annals, 34(1), 8-17.
[78]. Nagata, N. (1999). The effectiveness of computer-assisted interactive glosses. Foreign Language Annals, 32(4), 469-479.
[79]. Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. New York: Newbury House.
[80]. Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[81]. Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner & A. L. Stevens (Eds.), MENTAL MODELS (pp. 7-14). New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
[82]. Novak, J. D., & Cañas, A. J. (2006). The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct and Use Them. Pensacola: Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition.
[83]. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
[84]. Piolat, A., Olive, T., & Kellogg, R. T. (2005). Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(3), 291-312.
[85]. Porter, M. F. (1980). An algorithm for suffix stripping. Program-Automated Library and Information Systems, 14(3), 130-137.
[86]. Proux, D., Segond, F., Gerbier, S., & Metzger, M. H. (2008, June 1-6). Addressing hospital acquired infection control through risk patterns detection in medical reports. Paper presented at the 2008 IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence, WCCI 2008, Hong Kong, China.
[87]. Resnik, P. (1999). Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 11, 95-130.
[88]. Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77-89.
[89]. Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, Acquisition and Pedagogy (pp. 199-227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[90]. Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. English Language Teaching Journal, 49(2), 133-143.
[91]. Shafrir, U., & Etkind, M. (2006). e-learning for depth in the semantic web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(3), 425-444.
[92]. Shamsfard, M., & Barforoush, A. A. (2004). Learning ontologies from natural language texts. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(1), 17-63.
[93]. Shimodaira, C., Shimodaira, H., & Kunifuji, S. (2006). A divergent-style learning support tool for English learners using a thesaurus diagram Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems (Vol. 4253, pp. 867-874). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
[94]. Sun, K. T., Huang, Y. M., & Liu, M. C. (2011). A WordNet-based near-synonyms and similar-looking word learning system. Educational Technology & Society, 14(1), 121-134.
[95]. Tseng, Y.-H., Chang, C.-Y., Rundgren, S.-N. C., & Rundgren, C.-J. (2010). Mining concept maps from news stories for measuring civic scientific literacy in media. Computers & Education, 55(1), 165-177.
[96]. Vekiri, I. (2002). What is the value of graphical displays in learning? Educational Psychology Review, 14(3), 261-312.
[97]. Walters, J., & Bozkurt, N. (2009). The effect of keeping vocabulary notebooks on vocabulary acquisition. Language Teaching Research, 13(4), 403-423.
[98]. Wenden, A. (1985). Learner strategies. TESOL Newsletter, 19(5), 1-7.
[99]. Wu, Z., & Palmer, M. (1994, June 27-30). Verbs semantics and lexical selection. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA.
[100]. Yeung, A. S., Jin, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Cognitive load and learner expertise: Split-attention and redundancy effects in reading with explanatory notes. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23(1), 1-21.