How Effective Are Intentional Vocabulary‐Learning Activities? A Meta‐Analysis

Abstract

The present meta-analysis aimed to summarize the extent to which second language vocabulary is learned from the most frequently researched word-focused activities: flashcards, word lists, writing, and fill-in-the-blanks. One hundred effect sizes from 22 studies were included in meta-regression analyses and administered separately for the observations measured with meaning-recall and form-recall tests. The results revealed that the average percentage learning gains were 60.1% and 58.5% on meaning-recall and form-recall immediate posttests. These gains dropped to 39.4% and 25.1% on delayed meaning-and form-recall tests, respectively. These results suggest that learning through word-focused tasks is far from guaranteed. Moreover, the percentage learning gains among the different activities ranged from 18.4% to 77.0% on immediate posttests and from 23.9% to 73.4% on delayed posttests indicating that there is much variation in efficacy among the activities. Moderator analyses revealed that learners' place of study and direction of learning affected learning.

Teaching Academic Words With Digital Flashcards: Investigating the Effectiveness of Mobile-Assisted Vocabulary Learning for University Students

“…Intentional vocabulary learning for L2 learners might be undertaken in different ways. Besides using available resources such as dictionaries and course books in the classroom, a range of approaches including using flashcards, learning from word lists, writing tasks, serious games, and fill-in-the-blanks activities contribute significantly to vocabulary learning ( Webb et al, 2020 ; Li and Hafner, 2022 ; Soyoof et al, 2022 ). In this regard, one of the most effective approaches for intentional learning, paper, and digital flashcards has been employed extensively to augment vocabulary learning among EFL learners ( Nakata, 2019 ).…”

The Relationship Between Utterance and Perceived Fluency: A Meta‐Analysis of Correlational Studies

“…Saito et al., 2019). Scholars should also report speakers’ proficiency levels in relation to established benchmarks such as CEFR (for a similar suggestion, see Webb, Yanagisawa, & Uchihara, 2020), with some justification for their assessment of proficiency (Plonsky & Kim, 2016). Second, our comprehensive library search did not find studies correcting utterance fluency measures by the speakers’ L1 utterance fluency.…”

Teachers’ Verbal Lexical Explanation for Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Meta‐Analysis

“…Lexical FonF refers to the method that “attends to lexical items … since these lexical items are necessary for the completion of a communicative or an authentic language task” (Laufer, 2006, p. 150). In addition to decontextualized and intentional vocabulary learning approaches (see Webb, Yanagisawa, & Uchihara, 2020, for a meta‐analysis), and incidental vocabulary learning approaches (for a meta‐analysis see Uchihara, Webb, & Yanagisawa, 2019), some lexical FonF techniques have been examined in L2 vocabulary intervention research (Barclay & Schmitt, 2019; Laufer, 2009; and see Yanagisawa & Webb, 2021, for a meta‐analysis). Teachers’ verbal lexical explanation (TVLE, henceforth) in meaning‐focused activities (e.g., listening and reading comprehension) has been considered one of the effective types of lexical FonF in both first language (L1; e.g., Biemiller & Boote, 2006; Brett, Rothlein, & Hurley, 1996; Elley, 1989) and L2 research (e.g., J. H. Lee & Levine, 2020; Tian & Macaro, 2012).…”