This study investigated the influence of practice distribution (i.e. spacing between practice sessions) on successful vocabulary learning by examining two different time distributions, i.e. 1-day spacing (1-DS) vs. 7-day spacing (7-DS) using a freely available computer-assisted language learning programme (Quizlet). The study achieved high ecological validity through a classroom-based study with low proficiency second language (L2) English language learners at an Omani college of technology. The sample consisted of 96 participants in control (n = 33), 1-DS (n = 34) and 7-DS (n = 29) groups. The control group was a test-only group with no explicit practice activities for the target words (34 nouns). Meanwhile, the 1-DS group (one day spacing between each practice session) and 7-DS group (seven day spacing between each practice session) received four 20-minute practice sessions using Quizlet to learn the target words. The participants completed baseline tests, including vocabulary level tests (VLTs), and working memory tests (WMTs), alongside performance tests at three time points (pre-test, immediate post-test, delayed post-test). The results revealed that the two experimental groups (1-DS, 7-DS) both scored significantly and equally higher than the control group at post-test, indicating that the spacing of practice sessions did not mediate learning success through this computer-based vocabulary practice. The technique feature analysis (TFA) model by Nation and Webb was applied to identify the key features of Quizlet activities, which may contribute to its effectiveness for vocabulary learning. The results revealed that the activities met a high percentage of the TFA criteria, which may account for the significant learning gains achieved by both the 1-DS and 7-DS groups.
AhmadiM. (2014). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 vocabulary learning and retention. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 109–115.
2.
Al-HammadiF.S. (2012). The role of recognition memory in L2 development. Journal of King Saud University – Languages and Translation, 24, 83–93.
3.
Al-KhatibH. (2011). Technology enhanced learning: Virtual realities; Concrete results case study on the impact of TEL on learning. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 14, 1–12.
4.
Al-MamariA.S. (2012). General foundation program in higher education institutions in Oman national standards: Implementation and challenges. Unpublished paper presented at the Oman Quality Network Regional Conference, Muscat, Oman. Available at: https://omjournal.org/images/229_M_Deatials_Pdf_.pdf (accessed December 2022).
5.
AlqarniI.R. (2019). Receptive vocabulary size of male and female Saudi English major graduates. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9, 111–119.
6.
AnjaniputraA.G.SalsabilaV.A. (2018). The merits of Quizlet for vocabulary learning at tertiary level. Indonesian EFL Journal, 4, 1–11.
7.
AverianovaI. (2015). Vocabulary acquisition in L2: Does CALL really help? In HelmF.BradleyL.GuardaM.ThouësnyS. (Eds.), Critical CALL – Proceedings of the 2015 EUROCALL conference, Padova, Italy (pp. 30–35). Research-publishing.net.
8.
BaddeleyA.D. (1990). Working memory. System, 255, 556–559.
9.
BarrB.W.B. (2016). Checking the effectiveness of Quizlet as a tool for vocabulary learning. The Center of EFL Journal, 1, 36–48.
10.
BarrowJ.NakanishiY.IshinoH. (1999). Assessing Japanese college students’ vocabulary knowledge with a self-checking familiarity survey. System, 27, 223–247.
11.
BaumanJ.CulliganB. (1995). About the General Service List. Available at: http://jbauman.com/gsl.html (accessed December 2022).
12.
BirdS. (2010). Effects of distributed practice on the acquisition of second language English syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 635–650.
13.
CepedaN. J.PashlerH.VulE.WixtedJ. T.RohrerD. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
14.
ChienC.W. (2015). Analysis of the effectiveness of three online vocabulary flashcard websites on L2 learners’ level of lexical knowledge. English Language Teaching, 8, 111–121.
15.
ChildersJ.B.TomaselloM. (2006). Are nouns easier to learn than verbs? Three experimental studies. In Hirsh-PasekK.GolinkoffR. (Eds.), Action meets word: How children learn verbs (pp. 311–355). Oxford University Press.
16.
ClimieE.A.RostadK. (2011). Test review: Wechsler adult intelligence scale. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 581–586.
17.
CobbT. (n.d.). Compleat Web VP v.2.6 [computer program]. Available at: https://www.lextutor.ca/vp/comp/ (accessed December 2022).
18.
CrandellE.R. (2017). Quizlet flashcard for the first 500 words of the academic vocabulary list. Unpublished MA dissertation, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6335 (accessed December 2022).
19.
CronbachL.J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
20.
DizonG. (2016). Quizlet in the EFL classroom: Enhancing academic vocabulary acquisition of Japanese university students. Teaching English with Technology, 16, 40–56.
21.
ElgortI. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61, 367–413.
22.
ElsayyadH.M. (2014). The relationship between working memory and reading comprehension in L1 Arabic and L2 English for Arabic speaking children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Bath Spa University, Bath. Available at: http://researchspace.bathspa.ac.uk/5175/1/Elsayyad%20thesis%20final.pdf (accessed December 2022).
23.
FieldA. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
24.
González-FernándezB.SchmittN. (2020). Word knowledge: Exploring the relationships and order of acquisition of vocabulary knowledge components. Applied Linguistics, 41, 481–505.
HorstM.CobbT.MearaP. (1998). Beyond a clockwork orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 11, 207–223.
HulstijnJ.H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal and automaticity. In RobinsonP. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258–287). Cambridge University Press.
29.
Jackson IIID.B. (2015). A targeted role for L1 in L2 vocabulary acquisition with mobile learning technology. TESOL Arabia Perspectives, 23, 6–11.
30.
JiangN. (2000). Lexical representation and development in a second language. Applied Linguistics, 21, 47–77.
31.
JiangN. (2002). Form–meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 617–637.
32.
KamanpooriH. (2014). Making 12 years of effective English learning at schools is important. Oman Observer. 5May.
33.
KasprowiczR.E.MarsdenE.SephtonN. (2019). Investigating distribution of practice effects for the learning of foreign language verb morphology in the young learner classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 103, 580–606.
34.
KeatingG.D. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The involvement load hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12, 365–386.
35.
KorluH.MedeE. (2018). Autonomy in vocabulary learning of Turkish EFL learners. The EuroCALL Review, 26, 58–70.
36.
KornellN. (2009). Optimising learning using flashcards: Spacing is more effective than cramming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1297–1317.
37.
KrishP.HussinS.SivapuniamN. (2011). Language learning and language acquisition in online forums. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 17, 91–100.
38.
Küpper-TetzelC.E.ErdfelderE.DickhäuserO. (2014). The lag effect in secondary school classrooms: Enhancing students’ memory for vocabulary. Instructional Science, 42, 373–388.
39.
Larsen-FreemanD. (2014). Complexity theory: Renewing our understanding of language, learning, and teaching. Unpublished keynote presentation at International TESOL Convention, Portland, OR, USA.
40.
LauferB. (2000). Task effect on instructed vocabulary learning: The hypothesis of ‘involvement’. In Selected papers from AILA’99 Tokyo (pp. 47–62). Waseda University Press.
41.
LauferB. (2006). Comparing focus on form and focus on forms in second-language vocabulary learning. Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 149–166.
42.
LauferB.GoldsteinZ. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54, 399–436.
43.
LinckJ.OsthusP.KoethJ.BuntingM. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21, 861–883.
44.
MaQ.KellyP. (2006). Computer assisted vocabulary learning: Design and evaluation. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19, 15–45.
45.
MiltonJ. (2013). Measuring the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to proficiency in the four skills. In BardelC.LindqvistC.LauferB. (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (pp. 57–78). 2nd edition. European Association of Second Language Acquisition Monographs.
46.
NakataT. (2008). English vocabulary learning with word lists, word cards and computers: Implications from cognitive psychology research for optimal spaced learning. ReCALL, 20, 3–20.
47.
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.
48.
NakataT.SuzukiY. (2019). Effects of massing and spacing on the learning of semantically related and unrelated words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41, 287–311.
49.
NakataT.WebbS. (2016). Does studying vocabulary in smaller sets increase learning?Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 523–552.
50.
NationI.S.P. (2001) Learning vocabulary in another language. 1st edition. Cambridge University Press.
51.
NationI.S.P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59–82.
52.
NationI.S.P. (2011). Research into practice: Vocabulary. Language Teaching, 44, 529–539.
53.
NationI.S.P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language. 2nd edition.Cambridge University Press.
54.
NationI.S.P.MearaP. (2010) Vocabulary. In SchmittN. (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 34–52). 2nd edition.Edward Arnold.
55.
NationI.S.P.WebbS. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Heinle.
56.
NunanD. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Heinle & Heinle.
57.
NurweniA.ReadJ. (1999). The English vocabulary knowledge of Indonesian university students. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 161–175.
58.
ÖzerY.E.KoçoğluZ. (2017). The use of Quizlet flashcard software and its effects on vocabulary learning. Language Journal, 168, 61–81.
59.
PlonskyL.OswaldF.L. (2014). How big is ‘big’? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.
RogersJ. (2015). Learning second language syntax under massed and distributed conditions. TESOL Quarterly, 49, 857–866.
62.
RogersJ. (2017). The spacing effect and its relevance to second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 38, 906–911.
63.
RogersJ.CheungA. (2018). Input spacing and the learning of L2 vocabulary in a classroom context. Language Teaching Research, 24, 616–641.
64.
RohrerD.PashlerH. (2007). Increasing retention without increasing study time. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 183–186.
65.
RuizS.RebuschatP.MeurersD. (2021). The effects of working memory and declarative memory on instructed second language vocabulary learning: Insights from intelligent CALL. Language Teaching Research, 25, 510–539.
66.
SanosiA.B. (2018). The effect of Quizlet on vocabulary acquisition. Asian Journal of Education and e-Learning, 6, 71–77.
67.
SchmittN. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230293977
68.
SchmittN.SchmittD.ClaphamC. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing, 18, 55–88.
69.
SerranoR.HuangH.Y. (2018). Learning vocabulary through assisted repeated reading: How much time should there be between repetitions of the same text?TESOL Quarterly, 52, 971–994.
70.
ShillawJ. (1995). Using a word list as a focus for vocabulary learning. The Language Teacher, 19, 58–59.
71.
SmithC.B. (2003). Vocabulary development: Elaboration for writing. ERIC Topical Bibliography and Commentary. Available at: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED480888 (accessed December 2022).
72.
SuzukiY. (2017). The optimal distribution of practice for the acquisition of L2 morphology: A conceptual replication and extension. Language Learning, 67, 512–545.
73.
SuzukiY.DeKeyserR. (2015). Comparing elicited imitation and word monitoring as measures of implicit knowledge. Language Learning, 65, 860–895.
74.
SwainM. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In HinkelE. (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 495–508). Routledge.
75.
TamS.S.KanN.H.NgL.L. (2010). Low proficiency learners in synchronous computer-assisted and face-to-face interactions. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 9, 61–75.
76.
TengM.F.ZhangD. (2021). The associations between working memory and the effects of multimedia input on L2 vocabulary learning [special issue]. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. Epub 11November2021. DOI: 10.1515/iral-2021-0130/html.
77.
ToppinoT.C.GerbierE. (2014). About practice: Repetition, spacing, and abstraction. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 60, 113–189.
78.
TungH.-T. (2015). Intentional vocabulary learning using digital flashcards. English Language Teaching, 8, 107–112.
79.
WebbS. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effect of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33–52.
80.
Zambrano AcostaE.J. (2018). The Quizlet App and English language vocabulary learning. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Universidad Técnica de Ambato, Ambato, Ecuador. Available at: http://repositorio.uta.edu.ec/jspui/handle/123456789/29097
