Vocabulary Learning Through Audio-Visual Input of Thai Primary School EFL Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to improve the vocabulary knowledge of Thai EFL students by using audio-visual aids as instructional tools. Hopefully, this study serves as an initial foundation to develop students’ vocabulary knowledge and benefit the pedagogical development in Thailand. Consequently, this research aimed to explore the effectiveness of audio-visual instruction in acquiring vocabulary knowledge, with a specific focus on the form-meaning links in Thai EFL primary school students. Additionally, this study investigated the students’ perceptions of audio-visual input in enhancing vocabulary knowledge. The study included one experimental group consisting of 51 sixth-grade students. Two tests were used to measure the reception and production of form-meaning links (L2-to-L1 Translation Test and L1-to-L2 Translation Test). A questionnaire was used to examine the students’ perceptions of the form-meaning links of vocabulary knowledge through audio-visual input. The results showed that the participants achieved higher scores on the reception and production tests of form-meaning links in the post-test than in the pre-test, revealing statistically significant differences. Furthermore, the students performed better on the reception test of the form-meaning link than on the production test in both time points, and the reception test was also higher in advancement than the production test. Finally, the reports demonstrated that the instructional intervention of form-meaning links of vocabulary knowledge (audio-visual input) positively benefits the development of students’ vocabulary. The findings suggest that students’ reception of vocabulary knowledge through audio-visual input is more advanced than their production of vocabulary knowledge. Moreover, the input of students’ vocabulary knowledge contributes to acquiring and developing their knowledge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".