The design of technology-enhanced vocabulary learning: A systematic review

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
{"title":"The design of technology-enhanced vocabulary learning: A systematic review","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s10639-023-12423-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Some meta-analyses have confirmed the efficacy of technology-enhanced vocabulary learning. However, they have not delved into the specific ways in which technology-based activities facilitate vocabulary acquisition, or into first-language vocabulary learning. We conducted a systematic review that retrieved 1,221 journal articles published between 2011 and 2023, of which 40 met our inclusion criteria. Most of the sampled studies focused on teaching receptive vocabulary knowledge and vocabulary breadth. All utilized cognitive strategies. Their common design features included noticing and receptive or productive retrieval, and most implicitly drew upon dual-coding theory. Our findings highlight the need for a balanced approach to vocabulary learning, encompassing both vocabulary breadth and depth, as well as receptive and productive knowledge. They also suggest that affective and social learning strategies should be promoted alongside the cognitive ones that are currently dominant. Additionally, our identification of commonly and rarely used design features can guide curriculum designers to develop more effective tools. Lastly, we argue that the design of technology-enhanced learning should be theory-driven.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12423-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Some meta-analyses have confirmed the efficacy of technology-enhanced vocabulary learning. However, they have not delved into the specific ways in which technology-based activities facilitate vocabulary acquisition, or into first-language vocabulary learning. We conducted a systematic review that retrieved 1,221 journal articles published between 2011 and 2023, of which 40 met our inclusion criteria. Most of the sampled studies focused on teaching receptive vocabulary knowledge and vocabulary breadth. All utilized cognitive strategies. Their common design features included noticing and receptive or productive retrieval, and most implicitly drew upon dual-coding theory. Our findings highlight the need for a balanced approach to vocabulary learning, encompassing both vocabulary breadth and depth, as well as receptive and productive knowledge. They also suggest that affective and social learning strategies should be promoted alongside the cognitive ones that are currently dominant. Additionally, our identification of commonly and rarely used design features can guide curriculum designers to develop more effective tools. Lastly, we argue that the design of technology-enhanced learning should be theory-driven.

技术强化词汇学习的设计:系统回顾
摘要 一些荟萃分析证实了技术强化词汇学习的有效性。然而,它们并没有深入研究基于技术的活动促进词汇习得的具体方式,也没有深入研究第一语言词汇学习。我们进行了一次系统性回顾,检索了 2011 年至 2023 年间发表的 1221 篇期刊文章,其中 40 篇符合我们的纳入标准。大多数抽样研究都侧重于教授接受性词汇知识和词汇广度。所有研究都采用了认知策略。它们的共同设计特点包括注意和接受性或生产性检索,而且大多数都隐含地借鉴了双重编码理论。我们的研究结果突出表明,词汇学习需要一种平衡的方法,既包括词汇的广度和深度,也包括接受性知识和生产性知识。研究结果还表明,除了目前占主导地位的认知策略外,还应提倡情感和社会学习策略。此外,我们对常用和少用的设计特点的识别可以指导课程设计者开发更有效的工具。最后,我们认为技术强化学习的设计应该以理论为导向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信