Mobile-assisted Vocabulary Learning

Utilizing mobile devices for vocabulary learning has received most attention among all the related MALL studies (Burston, 2013, 2015; Godwin-Jones, 2011; Sung, Chang, &Yang, 2015). Many empirical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of mobile devices for vocabulary learning by adopting experimental designs and comparing learning outcomes between experimental groups and control groups.

Learners were often randomly assigned to either group, receiving treatments that were investigated by the studies.

Since the emergence of MALL, experimental studies have been conducted concerning whether mobile devices or mobile integration would benefit learners as well as or more than traditional paper-based learning could (Lu, 2008; Suwantarathip

& Orawiwatnakul, 2015; Thornton & Houser, 2005; Wu, 2018; Zhang, 2011; Zhou &

Yadav, 2017). For example, Thornton and Houser (2005) e-mailed English vocabulary

6

lessons to 44 Japanese university students on their mobile phones. Compared to those receiving same lessons printed on papers or on desktop PC web pages, students learning on their mobile phones performed significantly better in the post-test. Lu (2008) divided 30 Taiwanese high school students into two groups, and provided them with SMS (Short Message Service) vocabulary lessons or paper-based vocabulary lessons. Students receiving SMS lessons on their mobile phones recognized more vocabulary after the lessons than those in paper-based ones. Zhang (2011) engaged 50 Chinese university students in SMS vocabulary learning and another 50 students in paper-based vocabulary learning, with the former students achieving significantly higher scores for the post-test. Suwantarathip and Orawiwatnakul (2015) provided new words and dictations in class for 80 university students. 40 of them were assigned into experimental group doing SMS vocabulary exercises while the others were assigned into control group doing the same exercises on paper. Students doing SMS exercises outperformed the control group in vocabulary knowledge after the experiment. In order to explore the effects of multimedia story reading and questioning strategies on preschool children’s literacy skills and vocabulary acquisition, Zhou and Yadav (2017) recruited 74 children aged five in the United States. They were randomly assigned to multimedia or paper story reading with or without questions. The multimedia story reading groups were provided with touch-interactive mobile devices. For learners not receiving questions when reading, the multimedia story reading group performed significantly better than paper story reading group in vocabulary post-test. For those who received questions when reading, however, performances from the multimedia group and the paper group were equally well. Recently in Taiwan, Wu (2018) recruited 32 university freshmen for game‐based vocabulary learning and another 30 for traditional paper-based vocabulary learning. Students assigned to game‐based vocabulary learning

7

outperformed their counterparts after a semester. Generally, these studies proved that learning vocabulary on mobile devices can benefit learners more than paper-based learning.

In addition to comparing the effects between mobile-assisted and paper-based vocabulary learning, some experimental studies also have investigated the application of mobile devices (Ç akmak, F., & Erçetin, G., 2018; Chen, Hsieh, & Kinshuk, 2008;

Lin & Yu, 2017; Sandberg, Maris, & de Geus, 2011; Uosaki, Ogata, Sugimoto, Li, &

Hou, 2012; Vatalaro, Culp, Hahs-Vaughn, & Barnes, 2018). For instance, in the Netherlands, Sandberg, Maris, and de Geus (2011) engaged 75 fifth graders in English lessons about zoo animals, and divided them into one control group and two experimental groups. All groups took lessons at school while the experimental groups additionally visited a public zoo and used mobile application to learn the English words about zoo animals. The first experimental group handed back the mobile phones right after the visit; the second experimental group were allowed to keep the mobile phones for two weeks. The results showed that the second experimental group improved the most. Lin and Yu (2017) explored the effectiveness of learning English vocabulary presented in different modes in MMS (Multimedia Message Service) messages. 32 Taiwanese high school students were presented four sets of target words on their mobile phones, including text mode, text-picture mode, text-sound mode, and text-picture-sound mode. No significant effects were found on vocabulary gains among different presentation modes. However, text-picture-sound mode had a better effect on vocabulary retention among all modes, and significantly reduced the students’ cognitive load of learning new words. Ç akmak and Erçetin (2018) in Turkey also investigated the effects of gloss type on incidental vocabulary learning on 88 university freshmen. When using mobile devices to listen to narrative texts, the students were assigned to four groups: no gloss group, text group, picture group, and

8

text-and-picture group. All three gloss groups performed better on vocabulary recognition than no gloss group, with no significant differences observed among gloss types.

In sum, the previous studies supported that using mobile devices could increase the effectiveness of vocabulary learning. While many mobile-assisted vocabulary learning studies investigated the effectiveness of vocabulary learning, they often adopted a between-subject experimental design. Learners were often assigned to mobile-based learning or paper-based learning, or assigned to a particular learning method using mobile devices. During the experiments, learners could not access the learning activities or exercises using the devices as they preferred.