Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancing L2 learners’ lexical gains via Quizlet learning tool: the role of individual differences

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Technology integration in second language acquisition (SLA) has become prevalent and prominent in the modern age. Quizlet has emerged as a vocabulary learning tool integrated not only into computers (CALL) but also into mobile phones (MALL), over the years; its effectiveness has already been proved via several quasi-experimental studies. However, such research is still limited; some did not even include a control group. Further, whether learners’ individual differences may have any impact on Quizlet effectiveness in promoting lexical gains remains unknown. To address these gaps, this study was conducted with the participation of 68 Vietnamese undergraduates, following a pretest-posttest design together with semi-structured interviews. While the control group (N = 35) reviewed lexical items in a conventional way, the experimental group (N = 33) used Quizlet for vocabulary revision. Prior to the five-week treatment, all participants took the pretest, receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge tests, and three working memory tests. When all revision sessions were completed, all participants took the posttest. Then, five random learners in the experimental group were invited to join the semi-structured interviews. Results showed that while revision on Quizlet led to greater lexical gains, working memory and prior vocabulary knowledge did not play any significant role in predicting such improvements. Pedagogical implications for teachers and recommendations for future research were also provided to address vocabulary retention, individual differences, and the use of Quizlet more effectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

All the data used in this study belong to the authors and will be shared upon reasonable request.

Abbreviations

CALL:

Computer-assisted language learning

CEFR:

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

EFL:

English as Foreign Language

ESL:

English as Second Language

GLMM:

Generalized Linear Mixed Model

L2:

Second language

L1:

First language

MALL:

Mobile-assisted language learning

SLA:

Second language acquisition

SPSS:

Statistical Packages for Social Sciences

VIF:

Variance Inflation Factor

References

  • About Quizlet (2022). Quizlet. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://quizlet.com/mission

  • Arnold, K. M., & McDermott, K. B. (2013). Test-potentiated learning: distinguishing between direct and indirect effects of tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 39(3), 940.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascher, A., & Saslow, J. (2022). (n.d.). Top Notch | Online Placement Test—All Levels (24 months). Pearson ERPI. Retrieved September 1, from https://www.pearsonerpi.com/en/elt/integrated-skills/top-notch-online-placement-test-all-levels-24-months-9780132470308

  • Ataş, U. (2018). The Role of Receptive Vocabulary Knowledge in Advanced EFL Listening Comprehension. TESL-EJ, 21(4).

  • Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barianos, A. K., Papadakis, A., & Vidakis, N. (2022). Content manager for serious games: theoretical framework and digital platform. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(1), 251–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1406.5823.

  • Bi, X., & Shi, X. (2019). On the Effects of Computer-Assisted Teaching on Learning Results Based on Blended Learning Method.International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(1).

  • Çeçen, G. (2020). Tertiary level EFL students’ perceptions regarding the use of Edmodo, Quizlet, and Canva within technology acceptance model (Tam) (Doctoral dissertation, Bilkent University).

  • Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

  • Dang, T. N. Y., Lu, C., & Webb, S. (2022). Incidental learning of single words and collocations through viewing an academic lecture. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 44(3), 708–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Neys, W., d’Ydewalle, G., Schaeken, W., & Vos, G. (2002). A dutch, computerized, and group administrable adaptation of the operation span test. Psychologica Belgica, 42(3), 177–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dizon, G. (2016). Quizlet in the EFL classroom: enhancing academic vocabulary acquisition of japanese university students. Teaching English with Technology, 16(2), 40–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dörnyei, Z. (2014). The psychology of the language learner: individual differences in second language acquisition. Routledge.

  • Dreyer, J. (2014). The Effect of Computer-Based Self-Access Learning on Weekly Vocabulary Test Scores.Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 5(3).

  • Duman, G., Orhon, G., & Gedik, N. (2015). Research trends in mobile assisted language learning from 2000 to 2012. ReCALL, 27(2), 197–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duong, P. T., Perez, M. M., Desmet, P., & Peters, E. (2021a). Learning vocabulary in spoken input-and output-based tasks. TASK, 1(1), 100–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duong, P. T., Perez, M. M., Nguyen, L. Q., Desmet, P., & Peters, E. (2021b). Incidental lexical mining in task repetition: the role of input, input repetition and individual differences. System, 103, 102650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eickhoff, L., Frazier, L., & Vosters, M. (2018). University Success, Reading, Advanced. Pearson.

  • Faraj, A. K. A. (2015). Effective strategies for turning receptive vocabulary into productive vocabulary in EFL Context. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(27), 10–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G* power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feng, Y., & Webb, S. (2020). Learning vocabulary through reading, listening, and viewing: which mode of input is most effective? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(3), 499–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40(2), 273–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J., Weisberg, S., Adler, D., Bates, D., Baud-Bovy, G., Ellison, S., Firth, D., Friendly, M., Gorjanc, G., & Graves, S. (2012). Package ‘car.’ Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 16.

  • Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 235–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, Z., & Webb, S. (2020). Incidental vocabulary learning through listening to teacher talk. The Modern Language Journal, 104(3), 550–566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44(2), 137–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444810000509

  • Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons.

  • Kasahara, K., & Kanayama, K. (2021). When to conduct a vocabulary quiz, before the review or after the review? System, 103, 102641.

  • Korlu, H., & Mede, E. (2018). Autonomy in vocabulary learning of turkish EFL learners. The EUROCALL Review, 26(2), 58–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krashen, S. (1992). The input hypothesis: An update. Linguistics and Language Pedagogy: The State of the Art, 409–431.

  • Laufer, B., & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: the construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1999). A vocabulary-size test of controlled productive ability. Language Testing, 16(1), 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229901600103

  • Li, Y., & Hafner, C. A. (2022). Mobile-assisted vocabulary learning: investigating receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge of chinese EFL learners. ReCALL, 34(1), 66–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linck, J. A., & Cunnings, I. (2015). The utility and application of mixed-effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65(S1), 185–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, M. (2008). Effectiveness of vocabulary learning via mobile phone. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(6), 515–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Jiménez, R., Pedrosa-Ortega, C., Licerán-Gutiérrez, A., Ruiz-Jiménez, M. C., & García-Martí, E. (2021). Kahoot! As a tool to improve student academic performance in business management subjects. Sustainability, 13(5), 2969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakata, T., & Suzuki, Y. (2019). Effects of massing and spacing on the learning of semantically related and unrelated words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(2), 287–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakata, T., & Webb, S. (2016). Does studying vocabulary in smaller sets increase learning?: the effects of part and whole learning on second language vocabulary acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 523–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, L. T. C., & Nation, P. (2011). A bilingual vocabulary size test of English for Vietnamese learners. RELC Journal, 42(1), 86–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, L. Q., & Le, H. V. (2022). Quizlet as a Learning Tool for Enhancing L2 Learners’ Lexical Retention: Should It be Used in Class or at Home?. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2022, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8683671

  • Norris, J. M. (2015). Statistical significance testing in second language research: Basic problems and suggestions for reform. Language Learning, 65(S1), 97–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’brien, I., Segalowitz, N., Collentine, J., & Freed, B. (2006). Phonological memory and lexical, narrative, and grammatical skills in second language oral production by adult learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(3), 377–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (2010). Dual coding theory and the mental lexicon. The Mental Lexicon, 5(2), 205–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019). Evaluating the effectiveness of a game-based learning approach in modifying students’ behavioural outcomes and competence, in an introductory programming course: a case study in Greece. International Journal of Teaching and Case Studies, 10(3), 235–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pawlak, M. (2021). Teaching Foreign Language Grammar to Children: the role of individual differences. In J. Rokita-Jaśkow, & A. Wolanin (Eds.), Facing diversity in child Foreign Language Education (pp. 55–71). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66022-2_4.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pellicer-Sánchez, A., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: do things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez, M. M. (2020). Incidental vocabulary learning through viewing video: the role of vocabulary knowledge and working memory. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(4), 749–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, E. (2019). Factors affecting the learning of single-word items 1. The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 125–142). Routledge.

  • Phi, T. T. (2016). Application of Quizlet to teaching and learning business English vocabulary at Ho Chi Minh City University of Economics. In Proceedings of The First International Conference on Language Development (ICLD 2016).

  • R Core Team (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computin, Vienna, Austria. Retrieved August 20, 2022, from https://www.R-project.org

  • Rivera, E. S., & Garden, C. L. P. (2021). Gamification for student engagement: a framework. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(7), 999–1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language: a case study of an adult learner of portuguese. Talking to Learn: Conversation in Second Language Acquisition, 237, 326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. Input in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. L., & Engle, R. W. (1989). Is working memory capacity task dependent? Journal of Memory and Language, 28(2), 127–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waluyo, B. (2020). Learning outcomes of a general English course implementing multiple e-learning technologies and active learning concepts. Journal of Asia TEFL, 17(1), 160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waluyo, B., & Bucol, J. L. (2021). The impact of gamified vocabulary learning using Quizlet on low-proficiency students. Computer Assisted Language Learning Electronic Journal, 22(1), 164–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2008). The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20(2), 232–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xezonaki, A. (2022). Gamification in preschool science education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(2), 308–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou, S. (2010). Comparing receptive and productive academic vocabulary knowledge of chinese EFL learners. Asian Social Science, 6(10), 14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., & Elphick, C. S. (2010). A protocol for data exploration to avoid common statistical problems. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 1(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our deepest gratitude to the school’s management board, our colleagues and the praticipants. Without their agreements and wholehearted participation, this research could not have been conducted.

Funding

This study has not been supported by any funding agency or institution.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FPT University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Long Quoc Nguyen & Ha Van Le

Authors
  1. Long Quoc Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ha Van Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, N.L.Q. and L.H.V.; methodology, N.L.Q.; software, N.L.Q.; validation, L.H.V.; formal analysis, N.L.Q.; investigation, L.H.V.; resources, L.H.V.; data curation, N.L.Q. and L.H.V.; writing—original draft preparation, N.L.Q.; writing—review and editing, L.H.V.; visualization, N.L.Q.; supervision, L.H.V.; project administration, N.L.Q. and L.H.V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Long Quoc Nguyen.

Ethics declarations

Declarations

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics statement

All subjects participated voluntarily and provided their written informed consent to participate in this study. Research approval was granted by the school’s management board (463/QĐ-ĐHFPT).

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Interview questions.

  1. 1.

    What do you like about using Quizlet to review vocabulary? Please explain.

  2. 2.

    Do you think Quizlet practice can help you memorize new words better? Please explain.

  3. 3.

    What problems do you have when using Quizlet to review vocabulary? Please explain.

  4. 4.

    Do you learn or review vocabulary using Quizlet by yourself at home? Please explain.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nguyen, L.Q., Le, H. Enhancing L2 learners’ lexical gains via Quizlet learning tool: the role of individual differences. Educ Inf Technol 28, 12143–12167 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11673-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11673-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation