The Impact of Web 2.0 Tools on Children’s Vocabulary Acquisition: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Year 2025, Volume: 35 Issue: 3, 963 - 971, 23.09.2025

Cansu Saydam Berivan Dikme Serdar Tekin

https://doi.org/10.18069/firatsbed.1578643

Abstract

In line with the immense developments in technology recently, Web 2.0 tools have been prevalently adopted and used in language education both in intramural and extramural settings. Previous research mostly investigated this issue from various perspectives, including learners’ and teachers' attitudes, learners’ motivations, focusing mostly on older learner settings such as high schools and tertiary education. Focusing on young learners, an under-researched area in language education, this study examines the effect of use of Web 2.0 tools on learners’ English vocabulary attainment through quasi-experimental method. A pre-test was applied to both control and experimental groups, consisting of 20 small children studying in the 2nd grade (eight year olds) which was followed a 4-week intervention of teaching the same topics with and without the use of Web 2.0 tools, and finally a post-test was applied to both groups. Findings revealed that the scores of experimental group were far better than those of control group, indicating that Web 2.0 tools had a positive impact on their vocabulary acquisition. Pedagogical implications are provided for young learner education based on the findings of this study.

Keywords

Web 2.0 tools , computer-assisted language learning , vocabulary acquisition , young English learners

Project Number

1919B012221947

Web 2.0 Araçlarının Çocukların Kelime Dağarcığı Edinimi Üzerindeki Etkisi: Yarı Deneysel Bir Çalışma

Abstract

Son zamanlarda teknolojideki hızlı gelişmelere paralel olarak, Web 2.0 araçları hem okul içi hem de okul dışı ortamlarda dil eğitiminde yaygın olarak benimsenmiş ve kullanılmaktadır. Daha önce yapılan araştırmalar çoğunlukla bu konuyu öğrencilerin ve öğretmenlerin tutumları, öğrencilerin motivasyonları dahil olmak üzere çeşitli bakış açılarından incelemiş ve çoğunlukla lise ve üçüncül eğitim gibi daha büyük öğrenci ortamlarına odaklanmıştır. Dil eğitiminde yeterince araştırılmamış bir alan olan küçük öocuklara odaklanan bu çalışma, yarı deneysel yöntemle Web 2.0 araçlarının kullanımının öğrencilerin İngilizce kelime dağarcığına olan etkisini incelemektedir. 2. sınıfta (sekiz yaş) okuyan 20 küçük çocuktan oluşan kontrol ve deney gruplarına bir ön test uygulanmış, ardından aynı konuların Web 2.0 araçları kullanılarak ve kullanılmadan öğretildiği 4 haftalık bir uygulama yapılmış ve son olarak her iki gruba da bir son test uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, deney grubunun puanlarının kontrol grubundan çok daha iyi olduğunu ortaya koymuş ve bu da Web 2.0 araçlarının kelime dağarcığı edinimleri üzerinde olumlu bir etkisi olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu çalışmanın bulgularına dayanarak küçük çocukların dil eğitimine yönelik pedagojik çıkarımlar sunulmaktadır.

Keywords

Web 2.0 araçları , bilgisayar destekli dil öğrenimi , kelime bilgisi edinimi , küçük İngilizce öğrenciler

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK

Project Number

1919B012221947

References

• Aikina, T. Y. & Zubkova, O. M. (2015). Integrating online services into English language teaching and learning: The case of Voki. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(3), 66-68. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i3.4546
• Arabaci, I. B. & Akilli, C. (2021). English teachers' views on the use of Web 2.0 tools in educational environments. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 7(2), 115-125.
• Aşık, A. & Gönen, S. I K. (2020). On-site technology use in language classrooms through the eyes of the pre-service teachers: A qualitative study. ELT Research Journal, 9(2), 194-218.
• Aydin, S. (2013). Teachers' perceptions about the use of computers in EFL teaching and learning: The case of Turkey. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26(3), 214-233.
• Balbay, S. & Erkan, G. (2018). Perceptions of instructors on using Web 2.0 tools in academic English courses. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 10(2), 45-60.
• Barrot, J. S. (2022). Social media as a language learning environment: a systematic review of the literature (2008-2019). Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(9), 2534-2562.
• Baytekin, M. E. & Su-Bergil, A. (2021). The role of Web 2.0 and social media tools in foreign language learning. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 20(2), 104-115.
• British Educational Research Association (BERA) (2024). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research Available at: http://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2024
• Bozna, H. & Yüzer, T. V. (2020). Digital natives’ use of Web 2.0 tools in learning foreign language: A case study. Language and Technology, 2(1), 26-43.
• Cephe, P. T. & Balçıkanlı, C. (2012). Web 2.0 tools in language teaching: What do student teachers think. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 3(1), 1-12.
• Chapelle, C. A. & Jamieson, J. (2008). Tips for teaching with CALL: Practical approaches to computer-assisted language learning. Pearson.
• Costa, C., Alvelos, H. & Teixeira, L. (2016). The use of Web 2.0 tools by students in learning and leisure contexts: A study in a Portuguese institution of higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(3), 377-394. Creswell, J. W. (2016). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.
• Cutrim Schmid, E. (2016). Interactive whiteboards and language learning. In F. Farr & L. Murray (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language learning and technology (pp. 307–321). Routledge.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford.
• Eren, O. (2015). Vocabulary learning on learner-created content by using Web 2.0 tools. Contemporary Educational Technology, 6(4), 281-300.
• Garton, S. & Tekin, S. (2022). Teaching English to young learners. In E. Hinkel (Ed.) Handbook of practical second language teaching and learning (pp. 83-96). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003106609-7
• Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L. & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70-105.
• Hall, I. & Higgins, S. (2005). Primary school students' perceptions of interactive whiteboards. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 102-117.
• Kayaoglu, M. N., Dag Akbas, R. & Ozturk, Z. (2011). A small scale experimental study: Using animations to learn vocabulary. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(2), 24-30.
• Kessler, G. (2018). Technology and the future of language teaching. Foreign Language Annals, 51(1), 205-218.
• Köse, T. & Mede, E. (2016). Perceptions of EFL learners about using an online tool for vocabulary learning in EFL classrooms: A pilot project in Turkey. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 362-372.
• Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
• Kurilovas, E. & Juskeviciene, A. (2015). Creation of Web 2.0 tools ontology to improve learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 1380-1386.
• Liu, C. C., Wang, P. C. & Tai, S. J. D. (2016). An analysis of student engagement patterns in language learning facilitated by Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 28(2), 104-122.
• Manidaki, I. & Zafiri, M. (2021). Enhancing young learners’ writing skills through the application of Web 2.0 tools and educational technology in project-based teaching and learning: An action research study. International Journal of English Linguistics, 11(6), 14-27.
• Nam, J. (2010). Linking research and practice: Effective strategies for teaching vocabulary in the ESL classroom. TESL Canada Journal, 28(1),127-135.
• Park, C. N. & Son, J. B. (2009). Implementing computer-assisted language learning in the EFL classroom: Teachers’ perceptions and perspectives. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 5(2), 80-101. O'Reilly, T. (2007). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. Communications & Strategies, 1, 17-37.
• Patel, D. S. (2014). Significance of technology enhanced language learning (TELL) in language classes. Journal of Technology for ELT, 4(2), 1-15.
• Pinter, A. (2017). Teaching young language learners. Oxford.
• Reinders, H. & Thomas, M. (2010). Task-based language learning and teaching with technology. Bloomsbury. Reinhardt, J. (2019). Social media in second and foreign language teaching and learning: Blogs, wikis, and social networking. Language Teaching, 52(1), 1-39.
• Richards, J. C. (2015). Technology in language teaching today. Indonesian JELT, 10(1), 18-32.
• Salman, M. & Akay, C. (2022). Web 2.0 araçlarının ortaokul öğrencilerinin yabancı dilde kelime öğrenme stratejilerine ve başarılarına etkisinin incelenmesi: Bir karma yöntem araştırması. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2), 362-388.
• Schmitt, N. (2019). Understanding vocabulary acquisition, instruction, and assessment: A research agenda. Language Teaching, 52(2), 261-274.
• Schmitt, N. & Schmitt, D. (2020). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge.
• Tekin, S. (2024a). MALL with young learners: Methodological and ethical considerations in quasi-experimental research design. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age, 9(1), 114-121. https://doi.org/10.53850/joltida.1313998
• Tekin, S. (2023b). CALL teacher education for young learner classrooms. In D. Tafazoli & M. Picard (Eds.), Handbook of CALL teacher education and professional development: Voices from under-represented contexts (pp. 117-133). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-0514-0_8
• Vasileiadou, I. & Makrina, Z. (2017). Using online computer games in the ELT classroom: A case study. English Language Teaching, 10(12), 134-150.
• Wang, S. & Vásquez, C. (2012). Web 2.0 and second language learning: What does the research tell us? CALICO Journal, 29(3), 412-430.
• Zainuddin, N. (2023). Technology Enhanced Language Learning Research Trends and Practices: A Systematic Review (2020-2022). Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 21(2), 69-79.