No significant difference in preschool vocabulary gain between computer assisted and traditional vocabulary instruction¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? An independent-samples t-test found no significant difference between the CAVI and TVI groups' post-test vocabulary scores, with a small effect size; equivalence was not tested. → Basoz 2016

Evidence¶

Basoz 2016¶

Basoz, T. & Can, T., D. (2016). The effectiveness of computers on vocabulary learning among preschool children: A semiotic approach. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 11(1), 02-08. http://sproc.org/ojs/index.php/cjes/

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Independent-samples t-test comparing post-test scores of the CAVI group (n=16) and TVI group (n=19) after the four-week experiment. The article reports no significant difference, t(33) = -1.012, p = .319, d = .02, a small effect size.

"The result signified that there was no significant difference between the CAVI group’s (M = 13.31, SD = 4.28) and t he T VI group’ s (M = 14.78, SD = 4.31), t (33) = -1.012, p = .319, d = .02 post-test scores with a small effect size."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Vocabulary — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• CAVI and TVI groups were equivalent in target vocabulary knowledge before the experiment — related
• Computer assisted vocabulary instruction produces a statistically significant vocabulary gain in preschool EFL children — related
• Traditional vocabulary instruction also produces a statistically significant vocabulary gain in preschool EFL children — related