Claims

During the 30-day experimental period students averaged 3.21 hours of weekly application use and learned 968.21 new vocabulary items on average

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · 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? Weekly hourly usage averaged M = 3.21 (SD = 1.49) and students learned 968.21 new vocabulary on average (SD = 498.76). → Whitaker 2016 q2 i? Student productivity, measured as new vocabulary learned per hour, averaged M = 77.99 (SD = 30.69). → Whitaker 2016

Evidence

Whitaker 2016

Whitaker, J. T. (2016). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Computer Applications in Developing English Learning. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(18), 12947-12958. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Descriptive analysis of application usage and performance logs during the 30-day experimental period for the 24 experimental-group students; the author used "new vocabulary learned per hour" as the productivity measure (M = 77.99, SD = 30.69).

"In analyzing computer application usage and performance during the 30 day experimental period, weekly hourly usage was (M = 3.21, SD = 1.49, Min = 1.10, Max = 7.57). Students learned 968.21 new vocabulary on average (SD = 498.76 Min = 95, Max = 2502)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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