The Use of Quizlet Flashcard Software and Its Effects on Vocabulary Learning

Abstract

The main goal of this paper is to investigate the effect of two vocabulary learning approaches: 1) Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) with a computer-based flashcards program, Quizlet, 2) Keeping vocabulary notebooks on high school EFL learners’ vocabulary learning. The vocabulary targeted for the study is determined from three sequential units of the textbook. The units are selected randomly considering the starting date of the study. Eighty-nine students in four beginner EFL classes were assigned as control or treatment groups. The flashcard software program (Quizlet) and paper-based vocabulary notebook was implemented in two different classes over a week period. The remaining two classes were control groups following the same curriculum with the same materials without using Quizlet or keeping vocabulary notebooks. Vocabulary learning and recall was measured by pre, post and delayed post-tests of unannounced vocabulary tests including knowledge of orthography, grammar and use adapted from Laufer and Goldstein (2004) and, meaning and form, adapted from Webb (2009). Pre, post and delayed post-test scores were analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of vocabulary learning and retention. The results show that there was no significant difference about vocabulary learning and recall among the groups. However, the improvements were observed between pre-test/ post-test and pre-test/ delayed post-test among control, Quizlet and vocabulary notebook groups

Keywords

• Vocabulary Learning
• Intentional

Quizlet Flashcard Programının Kullanımı ve Kelime Öğrenimi Üzerindeki Etkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel hedefi kelime öğrenme yöntemlerinden iki tanesinin etkisini araştırmaktır: 1)Quizlet, kelime kartları dijital programını kullanarak, bilgisayar destekli yabancı dil (İngilizce) öğreniminin kelime öğrenimine etkisi, 2) İngilizce’yi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen lise öğrencilerinin kelime defteri tutarak öğrenmelerinin kelime öğrenimine etkisi. Araştırmadaki hedef kelimeler, ders kitabında art arda gelen üç üniteye göre karar verildi. Rastgele seçilen üniteler çalışmanın başlangıç tarihi düşünülerek seçildi. Başlangıç seviyesinde, İngilizce’yi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen başlangıç seviyesinde 4 sınıfa control veya deneysel grup olmak üzere görev verildi. Bilgisayar destekli kelime kartları programı vekağıt tabanlı kelime defteri, iki farklı sınıfa 3 haftalık bir süre içinde uygulandı. Kalan iki sınıf, aynı müfredat ve materyalleri, Quizlet veya kelime defteri kullanmaksızın takip eden control gruplarıydı. Kelime öğrenimi ve hatırlanması, Laufer ve Goldstein’den (2004) uyarlanan yazım, gramer ve kullanım; Webb’ten (2009) uyarlanan anlam (2009). Pre, post and delayed post-test scores were analyzed to evaluate the effectiveness of vocabulary learning and retention. The results show that there was no significant difference about vocabulary learning and recall among the groups. However, the improvements were observed between pre-test/ post-test and pre-test/ delayed post-test among control, Quizlet and vocabulary notebook groups. ve yapı bilgisi öğrencilere önceden duyurulmadan yapılan pre, post ve delayed post test kelime testleri ile ölçüldü. Test sonuçları kelime öğreniminin ve hatırlanmasının etkisini değerlendirmek için incelendi. Sonuçlar gösterdi ki, gruplar arasında kelime öğrenimi ve hatırlanması ile ilgili belirgin bir farklılık gözlenmedi; fakat control, Quizlet ve kelime defteri tutan katılımcılar arasında pre-test/ post- test ve pre-test/ delayed post-test arasında gelişmeler gözlemlendi

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kelime Öğrenimi
• İsteyerek
• Quizlet Flashcard

Kaynakça

1. Allum, P. (2004). Evaluation of CALL: Initial vocabulary learning. ReCALL, 16(2), 488-501.
2. Altiner, C. (2011). Integrating a computer-based flashcard program into academic vocabulary learning. (Master of Science Dissertation).Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations and Theses database. UMI No. 1498719.
3. Ashworth, D. (1996). Hypermedia and CALL. In M.C. Pennington (Eds.), The power of CALL (pp. 79–95). Hong Kong: Athelstan.
4. File, K. & R. Adams (2010). Should vocabulary instruction be integrated or isolated?,TESOL Quarterly, 4, 222–249.
5. Fowle, C. (2002). Vocabulary notebooks: Implementation and outcomes. ELT Journal, 56(4),380- 388.
6. Hasebrook, J.P. (1997). Learning with multimedia and hypermedia: Promises and pitfalls. Paper presented at Fifth European Congress of Psychology, Dublin. Retrieved from http://www. unioldenburg.de/zef/cde/media/readings/apahyper.pdf
7. Hulstijn, J. (2001). Intention and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal, and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Eds.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Hulstijn, J. H., &Laufer, B. (2001).Some emprical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisation.Language Learning, 51, 539-558. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00164

9. Kilickaya, F.,&Krajka, J., (2010). Comparativeusefulness of onlineandtraditionalvocabularylearning. TOJET: TheTurkish Online Journal of EducationalTechnology, 9, 55-57.
10. Kelly, P. & Ma, Q. (2006) Computer assisted vocabulary learning: Design and evaluation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1),15-45.
11. Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 565– 585.
12. Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on form in second language vocabulary learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 5, 223-250.
13. Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004) Testing vocabulary knowledge: size, strength, and computer adaptiveness, Language Learning, 54(3), 399-436.
14. Levy, M. (1997). CALL: Context and Conceptualisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Are we asking the right question? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1-19.
16. Mayer, R.E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17. Mayer, R.E. (2005). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Mayer, R. (2009). Multimedia Learning.Retrieved from http:// dx.doi.org/ 10.1017/ CB09780511811678.003
19. McCarthy, M. (1990).Vocabulary. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. McCrostie, J. (2007). Examining learner vocabulary notebooks.ELT Journal, 61(3),246-255.
21. Nakata, T. (2011). Computer- assisted second language vocabulary learning in a pair- associate paradigm: A critical investigation of flashcard software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(1),17-38.
22. Nation, I. S. P. (2000).Learning vocabulary in another language.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Nation, I. S. (2001). Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
24. Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
25. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Quizlet (2016).Our mission. Retrieved from http://quizlet.com/mission
27. Schmitt, D. & Schmitt, N. (1995) Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT Journal, 49(2), 133-143.
28. Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning.Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329-363.
29. Watts, N. (1997). A learner-based design model for interactive multimedia language learning packages.System, 25, 1–8.
30. Webb, S. (2009). The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on vocabulary knowledge.RELC Journal, 40, 360-376.doi: 10.1177/0033688209343854
31. Wilkins, D. A. (1972).Linguistics in Language Teaching. London: Arnold.