Stuart Webb’s research while affiliated with Western University and other places

There has been increasing interest in the effects of note taking in second language (L2) research. However, no meta-analysis has been conducted to examine the relationship between note taking and learning through exposure to L2 input. We retrieved 28 effect sizes from 21 studies ( N = 1992) to explore the overall effects of note taking as well as to examine the extent to which the effectiveness of note taking is likely to vary as a function of a set of potential moderators (i.e., learner variables, treatment variables, note-taking features, learning target, and measurement type). Results revealed that note taking had a small to medium positive overall effect on learning through exposure to L2 input ( g = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.24–0.88). Subsequent moderator analyses revealed that variability in the size of note-taking effects across studies was explained by learner variables (context, region, orthographic scripts, institutional level), treatment variables (mode of input, material type), note-taking features (note-taking behavior, number of note-taking sessions, provision and type of note-taking strategy instruction, total length of instruction, opportunity to review notes), learning target, and measurement type. Based on the obtained findings, teachers are recommended to incorporate note taking in L2 classrooms. Pedagogical suggestions and directions for future research are also provided.

There has been increasing interest in the effects of notetaking in second language (L2) research. However, no meta-analysis has been conducted to examine the relationship between notetaking and learning through exposure to L2 input. We retrieved 28 effect sizes from 21 studies (N = 1992) to explore the overall effects of notetaking as well as to examine the extent to which the effectiveness of notetaking is likely to vary as a function of a set of potential moderators (i.e., learner variables, treatment variables, notetaking features, learning target, and measurement type). Results revealed that notetaking had a small to medium positive overall effect on learning through exposure to L2 input (g = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.24-0.88). Subsequent moderator analyses revealed that variability in the size of notetaking effects across studies was explained by learner variables (context, region, orthographic scripts, institutional level), treatment variables (mode of input, material type), notetaking features (notetaking behavior, number of notetaking sessions, provision and type of notetaking strategy instruction, total length of instruction, opportunity to review notes), learning target, and measurement type. Based on the obtained findings, teachers are recommended to incorporate notetaking in L2 classrooms. Pedagogical suggestions and directions for future research are also provided.

This study examined the effects of spaced practice on second language (L2) vocabulary learning under different learning conditions. One hundred fifty Korean learners of L2 English were divided into five groups: one control (no treatment) and four experimental groups based on learning condition (fill‐in‐the‐blanks vs. flashcards) and spacing type (massed [no spacing interval] vs. spaced [1‐day interval]). The participants studied 48 low‐frequency English words. Results showed that the effects of spaced practice were greater for fill‐in‐the‐blanks than flashcards on an immediate posttest and that spaced practice was more effective than massed practice for both activities on a 2‐week delayed posttest with no overall significant difference between the learning gains from the two activities. Feedback timing (immediate, delayed) did not affect vocabulary learning in either activity.

There is a great deal of variation in gains found between studies of second language (L2) incidental vocabulary learning, as well as many factors that affect learning. This meta-analysis investigated the effects of exposure to L2 meaning-focused input on incidental vocabulary learning with an aim to clarify the proportional gains that occur through meaning-focused learning. Twenty-four primary studies were retrieved providing 29 different effect sizes and a total sample size of 2,771 participants (1,517 in experimental groups vs. 1,254 in control groups). Results showed large overall effects for incidental vocabulary learning on first and follow-up posttests. Mean proportions of target words learned ranged from 9-18% on immediate posttests, and 6-17% on delayed posttests. Incidental L2 vocabulary learning gains were similar across reading (17%, 15%), listening (15%, 13%), and reading while listening (13%, 17%) conditions on immediate and delayed posttest. In contrast, the proportion of words learned in viewing conditions on immediate posttests was smaller (7%, 5%). Findings also revealed that the amount of incidental learning varies according to a range of moderator variables including learner characteristics (L2 proficiency, institutional levels), materials (text type and audience), learning activities (spacing, mode of input), and methodological features (approaches to controlling prior word knowledge).

The current study investigated the effects of repetition on the learning of second language (L2) spoken word forms. Japanese university students learning L2 English were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions (one, three, and six exposures) and learned 40 words while hearing them and viewing their corresponding pictures. A picture-naming test was administered before, immediately after, and approximately one week after the treatment. The elicited speech samples were evaluated for two aspects of spoken vocabulary knowledge: pronunciation (accentedness and comprehensibility) and form-meaning connection (spoken form recall). Results showed that (a) the number of exposures positively affected measures of form-meaning Uchihara et al. Frequency and L2 Pronunciation Learning connection and pronunciation immediately after the treatment, and (b) cognateness moderated how strongly repetition impacted the pronunciation of L2 words. Moderate learning gains occurred for comprehensibility after six exposures to new words. However, with six exposures, only small effects of repetition were observed for accent-edness.

This study examined how mode of input affects the learning of pronunciation and form-meaning connection of second language (L2) words. Seventy-five Japanese learners of English were randomly assigned to one of 3 conditions (reading-while-listening, reading-only, listening-only), studied 40 low-frequency words while viewing their corresponding pictures, and completed a picture-naming test 3 times (before, immediately, and about 6 days after treatment). The elicited speech samples were assessed for form-meaning connection (spoken form recall) and pronunciation accuracy (accentedness, comprehensibility). Results showed that the reading-while-listening group recalled a significantly greater number of spoken word forms than did the listening-only group. Learners in the reading-while-listening and listening-only modes were judged to be less accented and more comprehensible compared to learners in the reading-only mode. However, only learners receiving spoken input without orthographic support retained more targetlike (less accented) pronunciation compared to learners receiving only written input. Furthermore, sound-spelling consistency of words significantly moderated the degree to which different learning modes impacted pronunciation learning. Taken together, the findings suggest that simultaneous presentation of written and spoken forms is optimal for the development of form-meaning connection and comprehensibility of novel words, but provision of only spoken input may be beneficial for the attainment of targetlike accent.

This meta‐analysis investigates earlier studies of spaced practice in second language learning. We retrieved 98 effect sizes from 48 experiments (N = 3,411). We compared the effects of three aspects of spacing (spaced vs. massed, longer vs. shorter spacing, and equal vs. expanding spacing) on immediate and delayed posttests to calculate mean effect sizes. We also examined the extent to which nine empirically motivated variables moderated the effects of spaced practice. Results showed that (a) spacing had a medium‐to‐large effect on second language learning; (b) shorter spacing was as effective as longer spacing in immediate posttests but was less effective in delayed posttests than longer spacing; (c) equal and expanding spacing were statistically equivalent; and (d) variability in spacing effect size across studies was explained methodologically by the learning target, number of sessions, type of practice, activity type, feedback timing, and retention interval. The methodological and pedagogical significance of the findings are discussed.