Using the Learner's terminological thesaurus and dictionary yields a statistically significant pooled advantage over regular instruction in lexical-skill outcomes¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
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? A Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test on post-test results showed a significant connection between application of the method and outcomes (p = 0.02231), with a common odds ratio of 2.857143. → Chainikova 2018
Evidence¶
Chainikova 2018¶
Chainikova, G.R., Zatonskiy, A.V., Mitiukov, N.W., Busygina, H.L. (2018). Development of Foreign Language Lexical Competence on the Basis of a Learner’s Terminological Thesaurus and Dictionary. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2018.1.51
q2 · i? · causal · r1
A pedagogical experiment at the Berezniki Branch of Perm National Research Polytechnic University compared an experimental group of 17 students with a control group of 15. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test, implemented in R, gave "p-value = 0.02231" and a "common odds ratio 2.857143" with a 95% confidence interval of 1.147503 to 7.113937.
"Mantel-Haenszel X-squared = 5.2212, df = 1, p-value = 0.02231 alternative hypothesis: true common odds ratio is not equal to 1 95 percent confidence interval: 1.147503 7.113937 sample estimates: common odds ratio 2.857143"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- 95% of experimental-learning participants reached sufficient or high levels of lexical skills and speech abilities by course end — related
- Within individual assignment types, Fisher exact tests show almost no difference between experimental and control groups — related
- Kindergartners who independently read an e-book with a built-in dictionary improved in receptive word comprehension and word explanation more than controls in regular kindergarten; results for word production were inconsistent — related
- University freshmen learning academic vocabulary via SMS show no significant short-term advantage over freshmen learning the same words with a dictionary — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.