This study examined the optimal learning schedule for second language vocabulary within an authentic classroom setting in Hong Kong. Following a pretest, treatment, delayed posttest design, fifty-two primary school students (Cantonese first language) studied 20 English adjectives over two learning episodes under spaced-short (1-day interval) or spaced-long (8-day interval) learning conditions. The spacing of the vocabulary items was manipulated within-participants, and learning was assessed on a multiple-choice posttest, administered following a four-week delay. In contrast to previous laboratory-based findings, the results here indicated superior learning of the items presented under the spaced-short format, suggesting that lag effects might be attenuated by age, learning context and teaching procedure.
BarcroftJ. (2007). Effects of opportunities for word retrieval during second language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 57, 35–56.
2.
BloomK.C.ShuellT.J. (1981). Effects of massed and distributed practice on the learning and retention of second-language vocabulary. The Journal of Educational Research, 74, 245–248.
3.
BrownP.C.RoedigerH.L.McDanielM.A. (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
CarpenterS.K. (2017). Spacing effects on learning and memory. In WixtedJ.T. (Ed.), Cognitive psychology of memory: Volume 2: Learning and Memory: A comprehensive reference (pp. 465–485). 2nd edition.Oxford: Academic Press.
5.
CepedaN.J.PashlerH.VulE.WixtedJ.T.RohrerD. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380.
6.
CepedaN.J.VulE.RohrerD.WixtedJ.T.PashlerH. (2008). Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19, 1095–1102.
7.
CepedaN.J.CoburnN.RohrerD., et al. (2009). Optimizing distributed practice: Theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56, 236–246.
8.
ChanS. (2012). Qualitative differences in novice teachers’ enactment of task-based language teaching in Hong Kong primary classrooms. In ShehadehA.CoombeC. (Eds.), Task-based Language learning and teaching in EFL contexts: Research and implementation (pp. 187–214). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
9.
CobbT. (2016). VocabProfile [computer software]. Available at: http://www.lextutor.ca/vp/eng (accessed September 2018).
10.
CraikF.I.LockhartR.S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 11, 671–684.
11.
DeKeyserR.M. (2007). Situating the concept of practice. In DeKeyserR.M. (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 1–18). New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
DeKeyserR.M. (2018). Foreword. In JonesC. (Ed.), Practice in second language learning (pp. xiv–xviii). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
DempsterF.N. (1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43, 627–634.
14.
DunloskyJ. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost learning. American Educator, 37, 12–21.
15.
DunloskyJ.RawsonK.A.MarshE.J.NathanM.J.WillinghamD.T. (2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 4–58.
16.
EllisN.C. (2005). At the interface: Dynamic interactions of explicit and implicit language knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 305–352.
17.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). GPower 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191.
18.
GoossensN.A.CampG.VerkoeijenP.P.TabbersH.K.ZwaanR.A. (2012). Spreading the words: A spacing effect in vocabulary learning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 965–971.
19.
GoossensN.A.CampG.VerkoeijenP.P., et al (2016). Distributed practice and retrieval Practice in primary school vocabulary learning: A multi-classroom study. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30, 700–712.
20.
HenrichJ.HeineS.J.NorenzayanA. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135.
21.
IshiiT. (2015). Semantic connection or visual connection: Investigating the true source of confusion. Language Teaching Research, 19, 712–722.
22.
JASP Team (2018). JASP (Version 0.8.6) [computer software]. Available at: https://jasp-stats.org (accessed September 2018).
23.
KarpickeJ.D.RoedigerH.L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319, 966–968.
24.
KasprowiczR.MarsdenE. (2017). Towards ecological validity in research into input-based practice: Form spotting can be as beneficial as form-meaning practice. Applied Linguistics. Electronic publication ahead of print version. Published online: 13 February 2017 (doi: 10.1093/applin/amw051).
25.
Küpper-TetzelC.E. (2014). Strong effects on weak theoretical grounds: Understanding the distributed practice effect. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 222, 71–81.
26.
Küpper-TetzelC.E.ErdfelderE. (2012). Encoding, maintenance, and retrieval processes in the lag effect: A multinomial processing tree analysis. Memory, 20, 37–47.
27.
Küpper-TetzelC.E.ErdfelderE.DickhäuserO. (2014). The lag effect in secondary school classrooms: Enhancing students’ memory for vocabulary. Instructional Science, 42, 373–388.
28.
LauferB.HulstijnJ. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22, 1–26.
29.
LeowR.P. (2015). Explicit learning in the L2 classroom: A student-centered approach. New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
30.
LeowR.P.HamaM. (2013). Implicit learning in SLA and the issue of internal validity: A response to Leung and Williams’s (2011) ‘The implicit learning of mappings between forms and contextually derived meanings’. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35, 545–557.
31.
MitchellR. (2000). Applied linguistics and evidence-based classroom practice: The case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics, 21, 281–303.
32.
NakataT. (2015). Effects of expanding and equal spacing on second language vocabulary learning: Does gradually increasing spacing increase vocabulary learning?Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 677–711.
33.
NakataT.SuzukiY. (2018). Effects of massing and spacing on the learning of semantically related and unrelated words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Electronic publication ahead of print version. Published online: 10 September 2018 (doi: 10.1017/S0272263118000219).
34.
NationI.S.P. (2000) Learning vocabulary in lexical sets: dangers and guidelines. TESOL Journal, 9, 6–10.
PavlikP.I.AndersonJ.R. (2005). Practice and forgetting effects on vocabulary memory: An activation-based model of the spacing effect. Cognitive Science, 29, 559–586.
37.
PlonskyL. (2015). Statistical power, p values, descriptive statistics, and effect sizes: A ‘back-to-basics’ approach to advancing quantitative methods in L2 research. In PlonskyL. (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 23–45). New York: Routledge.
38.
PlonskyL.OswaldF.L. (2014). How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.
39.
PutnamA.L.NestojkoJ.F.RoedigerH.L. (2016a). Improving student learning: Two strategies to make it stick. In HorvathJ.C.LodgeJ.HattieJ.A.C. (Eds.), From the laboratory to the classroom: Translating the science of learning for teachers (pp. 94–121). Oxford: Routledge.
40.
PutnamA.L.SungkhasetteeV.RoedigerH.L. (2016b). Optimizing learning in college: Tips from cognitive psychology. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 652–660.
41.
PycM.A.RawsonK.A. (2007). Examining the efficiency of schedules of distributed retrieval practice. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1917–1927.
42.
RogersJ. (2015). Learning second language syntax under massed and distributed conditions. TESOL Quarterly, 49, 857–866.
43.
RogersJ. (2017). The spacing effect and its relevance to second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 38, 906–911.
44.
RohrerD. (2015). Student instruction should be distributed over long time periods. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 635–643.
45.
RohrerD.PashlerH. (2007). Increasing retention without increasing study time. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 183–186.
46.
SerranoR. (2012). Is intensive learning effective? Reflecting on the results from cognitive psychology and the second language acquisition literature. In MuñozC. (Ed.), Intensive exposure experiences in second language learning (pp. 3–22). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
47.
SerranoR.HuangH.-Y. (2018). Learning vocabulary through assisted repeated reading: How much time should there be between repetitions of the same text?TESOL Quarterly. Electronic publication ahead of print version. Published online: 30 May 2018 (doi: 10.1002/tesq.445).
SpadaN. (2005). Conditions and challenges in developing school-based SLA research programs. The Modern Language Journal, 89, 328–338.
50.
SpadaN. (2015). SLA research and L2 pedagogy: Misapplications and questions of relevance. Language Teaching, 48, 69–81.
51.
SpadaN.LysterR. (1997). Microscopic and macroscopic views of second language classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 787–795.
52.
SuzukiY. (2017). The optimal distribution of practice for the acquisition of L2 morphology: A conceptual replication and extension. Language Learning, 67, 512–545.
53.
SuzukiY.DeKeyserR. (2017a). Effects of distributed practice on the proceduralization of morphology. Language Teaching Research, 21, 166–188.
54.
SuzukiY.DeKeyserR. (2017b). Exploratory research on second language practice distribution: An Aptitude× Treatment interaction. Applied Psycholinguistics, 38, 27–56.
55.
ToppinoT.C.GerbierE. (2014). About practice: Repetition, spacing, and abstraction. In RossB.H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Volume 60: The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 113-189). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.
56.
ToppinoT.C.PhelanH.A.GerbierE. (2018). Level of initial training moderates the effects of distributing practice over multiple days with expanding, contracting, and uniform schedules: Evidence for study-phase retrieval. Memory and Cognition, 46, 969–978.
57.
UllmanM.T.LovelettJ.T. (2018). Implications of the declarative/procedural model for improving second language learning: The role of memory enhancement techniques. Second Language Research, 34, 39–65.
58.
WebbS. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33–52.
59.
WillinghamD. (2009). Why don’t students like school?: A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
