MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416724720 · doi:10.5539/ies.v18n6p135

Effects of Teaching Strategies Using Multimedia on Vocabulary Retention of Grade 6 Students

2025· article· W4416724720 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kochakon Thangprasert, Nutthaporn Owatnupat, Jira Jitsupa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Learning and COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSuan Dusit University
KeywordsVocabularyVocabulary developmentLanguage proficiencyTest (biology)Vocabulary learningTeaching methodSignificant difference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although English language instruction has been available in Thailand since childhood, the proficiency level remains very low compared to other non-native English-speaking countries. This research aims to provide alternative instructional methods for further development of English language instructions in Thailand by focusing on vocabulary retention and how words are retained (Sayed, 2022). Vocabulary is essential in language learning since rich vocabulary enhances language proficiency (Aswad, Yassi, Pammu, Nasmilah, & Rezaei, 2022; Mahmood & Ahmed, 2023). This article reports the effects of teaching strategies using multimedia on vocabulary retention of Grade 6 students. Multimedia, such as visual aids and an online self-review platform, combined with teaching models, teaching and explaining vocabulary, blended learning, TPACK, and bite-sized learning, were used to design multimedia lessons. The research found that multimedia significantly affected the students’ short-term and long-term vocabulary retention. The short-term vocabulary retention test scores averaged 47.85, while the long-term vocabulary retention test scores averaged 39.47. The students maintained 82.5% of their vocabulary even after seven days, demonstrating the effectiveness of the multimedia teaching strategies in enhancing vocabulary retention. Students also expressed high satisfaction with the multimedia approach, with an average satisfaction score of 4.14 out of 5. Female students averaged higher satisfaction than male students across all dimensions, with the difference being significant in overall satisfaction.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.837

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.420 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicE-Learning and COVID-19French-language works237,207