MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100646635 · doi:10.5539/elt.v4n1p174

Contribution to Vocabulary Learning via Mobiles

2011· article· en· W2100646635 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Saeed Khazaie, Saeed Ketabi

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyVocabulary learningPsychologyVocabulary developmentRecallVisual learningMobile deviceRealmMultimediaAuditory learningComputer scienceTeaching methodMathematics educationCognitive psychologyExperiential learningLinguisticsWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As mobile connectedness continues to sweep across the landscape, the value of deploying mobile technology at the service of learning and teaching seems to be both self-evident and unavoidable. To this end, this study employed multimedia to develop three types of vocabulary learning materials. Due to the importance of short-term memory in the realm of vocabulary learning, careful consideration was given to the L2 learners’ different visual and verbal short-term memories. 158 L2 learners aged 18-23 participated in the major phases of vocabulary learning experiment through mobile. Based on their scores on the English Vocabulary and Recall tests and statistical analysis of the results it was revealed that L2 learners with high-visual and high-verbal abilities find it easier to learn the content presented with both pictorial and written annotations. However, L2 learners with low-visual and low-verbal abilities benefit from learning materials presented without annotations. Furthermore, delivery of learning materials with pictorial annotation to learners with high-visual ability and the delivery of learning materials with written annotation to learners with high-verbal ability result in better vocabulary learning. The findings of this study could perform as a roadmap in creating learning materials for mobile learning English language.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language TeachingSame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207