Digital flashcard L2 Vocabulary learning out-performs traditional flashcards at lower proficiency levels: A mixed-methods study of 139 Japanese university students

dc.contributor.authorAshcroft, Robert Johnes_ES
dc.contributor.authorCvitkovic, Robertes_ES
dc.contributor.authorPraver, Maxes_ES
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-25T08:04:59Z
dc.date.available2019-01-25T08:04:59Z
dc.date.issued2018-07-31
dc.date.updated2019-01-24T13:58:14Z
dc.description.abstract[EN] This study investigates the effect of using digital flashcards on L2 vocabulary learning compared to using paper flashcards, at different levels of English proficiency. Although flashcards are generally believed to be one of the most efficient vocabulary study techniques available, little empirical data is available in terms of the comparative effectiveness of digital flashcards, and at different levels of student English proficiency. This study used a mixed-methods experimental design. The between-subjects factor was English Proficiency consisting of three groups: basic, intermediate and advanced. All participants underwent both a digital flashcards treatment and paper flashcards treatment using words from the Academic Words List. For each study mode, the two dependent variables were Immediate, and Delayed Relative Vocabulary Gain. The results of this study indicated that Japanese university students of lower levels of English proficiency have significantly higher vocabulary learning gains when using digital flashcards than when using paper flashcards. Students at higher levels of proficiency performed equally well using both study modes. It appears that by compensating for the gap in metacognitive awareness and effective learning strategies between students of lower and higher levels of language proficiency, digital flashcards may provide the additional support lower-level learners need to match their advanced-level peers in terms of their rate of deliberate vocabulary acquisition.en_EN
dc.description.accrualMethodSWORDes_ES
dc.description.bibliographicCitationAshcroft, RJ.; Cvitkovic, R.; Praver, M. (2018). Digital flashcard L2 Vocabulary learning out-performs traditional flashcards at lower proficiency levels: A mixed-methods study of 139 Japanese university students. The EuroCALL Review. 26(1):14-28. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2018.7881es_ES
dc.description.issue1
dc.description.referencesAshcroft, R. J., & Imrie, A. C. (2014). Learning vocabulary with digital flashcards. JALT2013 Conference Proceedings, 639-646. Retrieved from http://jalt-publications.org/proceedings/issues/2014-08_2013.1es_ES
dc.description.referencesBaddeley, A. D. (1990). Human memory: theory and practice. Hove: Erlbaum.es_ES
dc.description.referencesCohen, A. D. (1993). Language learning: insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.es_ES
dc.description.referencesCoxhead, A. (2000). A New Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly,34(2), 213. doi: 10.2307/3587951es_ES
dc.description.referencesCross, D., & James, C. V. (2001). A practical handbook of language teaching. London: Longman.es_ES
dc.description.referencesElgort, I. (2010). Deliberate Learning and Vocabulary Acquisition in a Second Language. Language Learning,61(2), 367-413. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00613.xes_ES
dc.description.referencesGartner Your Source for Technology Research and Insight. (n.d.). Retrieved March 07, 2017, from http://www.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp.es_ES
dc.description.referencesHirschel, R., & Fritz, E. (2013). Learning vocabulary: CALL program versus vocabulary notebook. System,41(3), 639-653.es_ES
dc.description.referencesHorst, M., Cobb, T., & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond A Clockwork Orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language,11, 207-223.es_ES
dc.description.referencesHughes, A. (2013). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.es_ES
dc.description.referencesHulstijn, J. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal, and automaticity. In P. J. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.es_ES
dc.description.referencesLaufer, B., & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing New Words: Does Teaching Have Anything To Do With It? RELC Journal,28(1), 89-108. doi:10.1177/003368829702800106es_ES
dc.description.referencesLees, D. (2013). A Brief Comparison Of Digital- And Self-Made Word Cards For Vocabulary Learning. Kwansei Gakuin University Humanities Review,18, 59-71. Retrieved June 2, 2017, from kwansei.repo.nii.ac.jp.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNakata, T. (2008). English vocabulary learning with word lists, word cards and computers: implications from cognitive psychology research for optimal spaced learning. ReCALL,20(1), 3-20.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNation, I. S., & Webb, S. A. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNation, I. (2003). Effective ways of building vocabulary knowledge. ESL Magazine, 14-15.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNation, I. (2005). Language education: Vocabulary. In I. C. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., Vol. 6, pp. 494-499). Oxford: Elsevier.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNation, I. (1995). Best practice in vocabulary teaching and learning. EA Journal, 7-15. Retrieved March 8, 2017, from http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/about/staff/publications/paul-nation/1995-Best-practice.pdf.es_ES
dc.description.referencesNikoopour, J., & Kazemi, A. (2014). Vocabulary Learning through Digitized & Non-digitized Flashcards Delivery. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1366-1373.es_ES
dc.description.referencesPuentedura, R. R. (2012, August 23). The SAMR Model: Background and Exemplars. Retrieved March 07, 2017, from http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2012/08/23/SAMR_BackgroundExemplars.pdf.es_ES
dc.description.referencesQuizlet. (2017). Retrieved March 07, 2017, from https://quizlet.com.es_ES
dc.description.referencesReinders, H., & White, C. (2011). The theory and practice of technology in materials development and task design. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: theory and practice (pp. 58-80). Cambridge: Cambridge University.es_ES
dc.description.referencesRichards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics. Harlow: Longman.es_ES
dc.description.referencesSoanes, C. (2010). The paperback Oxford English dictionary. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.es_ES
dc.description.referencesSuppes, P., & Crothers, E. J. (1967). Experiments in second-language learning. New York: Academic Press.es_ES
dc.description.referencesWebb, S. (2007). The Effects of Repetition on Vocabulary Knowledge. Applied Linguistics,28(1), 46-65. doi:10.1093/applin/aml048es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpfin28es_ES
dc.description.upvformatpinicio14es_ES
dc.description.volume26
dc.identifier.doi10.4995/eurocall.2018.7881
dc.identifier.eissn1695-2618
dc.identifier.urihttps://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/116112
dc.languageIngléses_ES
dc.publisherUniversitat Politècnica de València
dc.relation.ispartofThe EuroCALL Review
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2018.7881es_ES
dc.relation.references10.2307/3587951es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00613.xes_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.system.2013.07.016es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1017/CBO9781139524780.011es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1177/003368829702800106es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1017/S0958344008000219es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00678-7es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.554es_ES
dc.relation.references10.1093/applin/aml048es_ES
dc.rightsReconocimiento - No comercial - Sin obra derivada (by-nc-nd)es_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsAbiertoes_ES
dc.subjectVocabularyes_ES
dc.subjectDigital Flashcardses_ES
dc.subjectPaired-associateses_ES
dc.subjectAutonomyes_ES
dc.subjectEnglish Proficiencyes_ES
dc.subjectAcademic Words Listes_ES
dc.titleDigital flashcard L2 Vocabulary learning out-performs traditional flashcards at lower proficiency levels: A mixed-methods study of 139 Japanese university studentses_ES
dc.typeArtículoes_ES
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiones_ES
dspace.entity.typePublication
upv.uuid52a3c370-eccf-4168-b510-11dcc9b9cc28es_ES

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 2 de 2
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
7881-39656-2-PB.pdf
Tamaño:
288.64 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
7881-39665-4-PB.htm
Tamaño:
61.91 KB
Formato:
Hypertext Markup Language

Bloque de licencias

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Cargando...
Miniatura
Nombre:
license.txt
Tamaño:
359 B
Formato:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Descripción: