Claims

After regular instruction on Unit 1, the class's receptive knowledge of the prescribed vocabulary was partial, averaging 14.23 out of 40 on the VKS

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · checked against its sources 2026-11-02 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2021: local conditions change quickly

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? All thirty participants' VKS responses on Unit 1 words yielded a total average of 14.23, with 21 the highest and 1 the lowest score on a total of 40. → Vincy 2018

Evidence

Vincy 2018

Vincy, R. I. (2018). The impact of explicit instruction and intentional learning in the reception of vocabulary: An experimental study. i-manager's Journal on English Language Teaching, 8(2). doi:10.26634/jelt.8.2.14155

q2 · i? · causal · r1

VKS self-report test on the fifteen Unit 1 prescribed words administered to all 30 participants after Session One; responses were evaluated and tabulated. The result supports the hypothesis that learners "receive vocabulary partially in the selected context".

"The total average performance of the entire class was found to be 14.23 with 21 and 1 as the highest and the lowest scores observed from the test which was on a total of 40."

Discussion

Learner Variables

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.