Full Text

Title
Author(s)
A study of using Chinese words learning applications to

enhance Chinese literacy learning of secondary non-Chinese
speaking students in Hong Kong = Li yong Zhong wen zi ci xue
xi ying yong cheng shi xue xi Zhong wen dui ti sheng Xianggang
fei Hua yu zhong xue sheng Zhong wen shi zi neng li de yan jiu
Sun, Ka-wa;
Citation
Issued Date
URL
Rights
2015
http://hdl.handle.net/10722/223655
Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License
A study of using Chinese words learning applications to enhance Chinese literacy

learning of secondary Non-Chinese speaking students in Hong Kong
Sun Ka Wa
(2008113865)
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Education at the University of Hong Kong
August, 2015
2015 8
___________________
Abstract of thesis entitled

A study of using Chinese words learning applications to enhance Chinese literacy
learning of secondary Non-Chinese speaking students in Hong Kong
submitted by
Sun Ka Wa
for the degree of Master of Education in The University of Hong Kong in
August 2015.
The aims of the research study is to investigate the impact of using Chinese
words learning applications, so as to enhance Chinese literacy learning of NCS
secondary students in Hong Kong.
The study included qualitative and quantitative research. Quantitative research
involves the comparison of pre-test and post-test data, to analysis the change of the
Chinese literacy ability (including shape, pronunciation and meaning) of the research
targets. Qualitative research includes classroom observation and teachers dairy, as
well two semi-structured interviews as focus groups form, in order to analyze the
effectiveness of their learning and the impact of their learning interest after using
Chinese words learning applications in class.
The results showed that using Chinese words learning applications can enhance
the literacy ability of non-Chinese speaking students. Research findings show that
students have a significant improvement overall, and the low ability learner have the
greatest improvement in particular. Also, students' learning differences have also been
narrowed down, while students generally enjoy using Chinese words learning
application to learning Chinese. Their interest in learning Chinese also been enhanced.
Therefore, this study can reflect the potential contribution of using Chinese word
learning application, as a tool of mobile assisted language learning, to the Chinese
teaching and learning of NCS students in Hong Kong.
Signature: ___________________
( Sun Ka Wa )
Declaration
I declare that this thesis represents my own work, except where due acknowledgment
is made, and that it has not been previously included in a thesis, dissertation or report
submitted to this University or any other institutions for a degree, diploma or other
qualifications.
Signed: _____________________
( Sun Ka Wa )
2014-2015
vii
vii
viii
1.1
1.2
1
2
1.3
1.4
1.5
3
3
4
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.6
4
4
5
5
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5

3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.8.1
3.8.2
3.8.3
( reliability ) ( validity)

4.1
6
6
8
9
10
11
13
13
13
14
17
18
19
20
21
21
21
22
23
23
4.1.1
4.1.1.1
4.1.1.2
4.1.1.3
4.1.2.
4.1.2.1
4.1.2.2
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.3.4
4.3.5
4.4
4.4.1
4.4.2
4.4.3
4.5
23
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
30
32
34
34
35
37
37
38
39
39
40
43
44
45
5.1
5.2
5.3
6.1
6.1.1
6.1.2
6.1.3
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.3
45
46
46
48
48
48
48
49
49
50
50
50
50
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Paired Samples Test

Effect Size
Paired Samples Test
20
24
25
26
27
28
30
31
34
1
2
3
4 -16
8
14
17
41-42
( 1)
( 2)
(ST07)
(ST08)
(ST09)
(ST01)
54
58
59
61
63
69
75
81
(ST05)
(ST06)
(ST10)
87
93
99
SPSS
(ST02)
(ST03)
(ST04)
105
111
117
123
1.1
2011
6.5% 20%
UrduHindiNepali
2008
36-37
2008
2012
2011
2012
20112012
2013
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
21
1.2
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.3
1.
2.
3.
1.4
1.5
1.5.1
1.5.2

CACLER mChinesemChinese
CACLERChinese DimensionmChinese
Chinese DimensionFlash Cards
iOS Quiz
Quiz resultmChinese
1.5.3
Lliteracy2012
1.6
2.1
first language
second language
2014 Theory of Second Language Acquisition
Behaviorist Innatist
Cognitivist Socioculturalist
1. Behaviorist Skinner 1958 rote
memoryrepetitiondrilling
2012
2. InnatistChomsky1965
language
acquisition device acquire Krashen 1985
Input-hypothesis model
i+12012
2012Krashen
Swain
Swain1985
3. Cognitivist
cognitive
structure
2012 Schmidt1990
Noticing hypothesis
Piaget 1926
Cognitive-developmental theory
assimilationaccommodation/
4. Socioculturalist Vygotsky
Socialcultural theory
Vygotsky1986
scaffolding
2006
Skinner1958
Krashen 1985Swain19852012
7
Piaget1926Vygotsky1986
2.2
Emmitt, Komaseroff, & Pollock, 2003; Krashen, 1987; 1988

2010
20012002
Tse, Marton, Ki, &Loh, 2007
2010
Smith & Truscott, 2005

Corder1977restructuring
recreationSelinker
1972Brown1973 Dulay 1982
2.3
Mobile assisted language learning MALL Chinnery
2006MALL
MP3 / MP4 PDAs
MALL

MALL
Chinnery2006
1.
9

2.
3.
4.
5.
seamless learning space

Chanet al2006
2.4
Authentic Learning
Donovan, Bransford, & Pellegrino, 1999
Sawyer, 2006
Newmann,
Marks, & Gamoran, 1995
10

Nagy & Townsend2012Krashen2012
2.5
Independent Learning
1997 Learner-Centered
Psychological Principles
McCombs & Vakili, 2005
/
Peer/Collaborative Learning
11
12
3.1
2-4
convenience sampling
3.2
triangulation
13
teachers diary focus group
2
3.3
14

GCSEGCSE
2010
31GCSE
60
602
30
303
20
21
15
39
(1) 1()
1. ?
2. ?
3.
4.
5. ?
6. ?
7. ?
(2) 2()
1. ?
2.
3. ? ?
4.
5. ?
6. /?
?
16
7.
?
8.
?
3.4
3
1.
40
17
2. 139
20
3.
540
10400
4.
5. 2920-30
3.5
18
SPSS19.0
(effect size)
Effect Size
3.6
(reliability)(validity)
inter-rater reliability
19
2010
3.7
1.
2.
3.
effect
size
(Paired
sample t-test
Effect
Size
20
1
3.8
3.8.1
3.8.2
10 10
21
3.8.3
10
22
4.1.
SPSS
4.1.1.
23.6 16.65
55 4
86 12.75 110
63 2
4.1.1.1.
23
30 4.7
27.7 90% 60
6.9 44.6 7
12 13.7 2
1 2.64 264%
5.46 546% 4.89 489%

14%
1.
60
2.
30
3.
2015 4
2015 6
15
6.90
5.63
14
4.70
4.85
26
12.00
8.33
/
4
55
23.60
16.65
10
10
37
54
44.60
4.84
19
30
27.70
3.97
26
13.70
8.53
63
110
86.00
12.75
4.1.1.2.
Paired Samples T-Test

t 14.788p < 0.001***
t 24.677 10.151p <
0.001*** 3
1
/ x 100%
24
1.
37.700
4.832
24.675
0.000***
2.
23.000
7.165
10.151
0.000***
3.
1.700
8.420
0.638
0.539
62.400
13.343
14.788
0.000***
*p<.05 **p<.01.
***p<.001
Paired Samples Test
4.1.1.3.
Effect Size
Cohan1977 Effect Size
___________________________________
+
Cohan1977 0.2 0.5

0.8 1.0
25
4.24
= 7.20
= 5.22 4
Effect Size
1.
7.20
2.
5.22
3.
0.20
4.24
Effect Size
4.1.2.
3 3
26
74.33 88.5 94.33 5

68.66
12 66.5 3.02
50.66 1.16
5
20
38
5.67
1.53
74.33
10.26
68.66
22.00
5.72
88.50
8.50
66.5
43.67
10.26
94.33
14.01
50.66
10
23.60
16.65
86.00
12.75
62.4
4.1.2.1.
27
Paired Samples T-Test
t 4.000 12.713 t 10.753 p < 0.01**

p < 0.01**
t 0.652 23.146
t 17.616 p < 0.001***
p < 0.001*** t
t 5.115 p < 0.05*
p < 0.05*
6
1.
12.713
0.006**
22.543
0.000***
8.315
0.014*
2.
10.678
0.009**
23.146
0.000***
2.538
0.126
3.
4.000
0.057
0.652
0.561
0.579
0.621
10.753
0.009**
17.616
0.000***
5.115
0.036*
*p<.05 **p<.01.
6
***p<.001
Paired Samples Test
4.1.2.2.
11.65
9.35
28
4.17 7
=13.94 = 12.27
=23.15
= 10.72
= 9.60
7
1
= -0.49 7
29
Effect Size
1.
13.94
10.72
9.60
2.
12.27
23.15
2.69
3.
1.36
0.59
-0.49
11.65
9.35
4.17
4.2.
4.2.1.
1. /
2.
3.
8
30
ST07
ST08
ST09
ST05
ST01
ST10
ST06
ST02
ST04
ST03
31
4.2.2.
ST02
ST06 ST10
ST09

32
ST07

ST01

ST03

ST06

33
ST10

ST02

4.3.
3 9
4.3.1.
34
difficultconfused
boringfun / interesting
good
hard / difficult
complicated
hopeless better
learn a lot of things in Chinese
gooduseful fun
4.3.2.
happyinterestedexcited /
35
amazing
become smart
good
fun / very interesting
excitingcool
focused
genius
identify
play around
somehow it doesnt
36
4.3.3.
efficientportable
individuallylearn stuffs from the machine
we are interacting with people

and learn in real world
eye catching
more organized
4.3.4.
37
superman
4.3.5.
I don't need to rush and I can learn in my own place

I can choose to know what I want to know
It helped me
38
very much with my academic and social learning
4.4.
4.4.1.
39
4.4.2.
4
40
5 6
7
8
1.
2.
3
1.
9 10
112.
12 13 14
15
16
41
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
4.4.3.
42
YOUTUBE
43
4.5.
44
5.1
triangulation
MALLChinnery2006
Chan et al2006
45
5.2
1997
Learner-Centered
Psychological PrinciplesMcCombs & Vakili, 2005
5.3
46
Authentic Learning
Newmann, Marks, &Gamoran, 1995
47
6.1
6.1.1
6.1.2
48
6.1.3
YOUTUBE
6.2
49
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
generalizability
6.3
50
51
1. 2013
2. 2008
3. 2012:
4. 2006
5633
5. 2014
http://www.edb.gov.hk/tc/curriculum-development/kla/chi-edu/second-lang/l-t.html
6. 2001 -
http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=2877&langno=2
7. 2002
http://www.edb.gov.hk/index.aspx?nodeID=3403&langno=2
8. 2008
http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/TC/Content_2810/pri_chi_lang_lo_web_version.pdf
9. 2008
10. 2000
11. 2001
12. 2014
13. 2012
2012 7 91 2 61-82
1. Bronw, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

2. Chan, T.-W., Roschelle, J., Hsi, S., Kinshuk, Sharples, M., Brown, T., et al. (2006). Oneto-one technology-enhanced learning: An opportunity for global research collaboration.
Research and Practice in Technology-Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 3-29 .
3. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press
4. Chomsky, N. (1972). Stages in language development and reading exposure. Harvard
Educational Review, 42, 1-33.
5. Cohen, J. (1998). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. San Diego, CA:
Academic Press.
52
6. Corder, S.P. (1977). Language continua and the interlanguage hypothesis. In S. P.

Corder& E. Roulet (Eds.), The notions of simplification, interlanguage and pidgins and
their relation in school language pedagogy. Geneva: Droz, Neuchatel, Universite de
Neuchatel.
7. Donovan, S., Bransford, J., & Pellegrino. (1999). How People Learn: Bridging Research
and Practice. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
8. Dulay, H., Burt, M., &Krashen, S. (1982). Language two. Oxford: Oxford University.
9. Ehri, L. C, &Wilce, L. S. (1979). The mnemonic value of orthography on reader's
conceptualization of the phonemic structure of words. Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 371-385.
10. Emmitt, Marie, Pollock, John and Komesaroff, Linda (2003) Language and learning : an
introduction for teaching. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press
11. George M. Chinnery (2006). EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES Going to the MALL:
Mobile Assisted Language Learning. Language Learning & Technology. Volume 10,
Number 1, pp. 9-16.
12. Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guess game. Journal of
the Reading Specialist, 5, 126-135.
13. Krashen, S. (1985). The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. New York: Longman
14. Krashen, S. (2012). Direct Instruction of Academic Vocabulary: What about real
reading?. Reading Research Quarterly, 2012, 47(3):233.
15. Maina, F. (2004). Authentic learning: Perspectives from contemporary educators. Journal
of Authentic Learning. Retrieved from
https;//dspace.sunyconnect.suny.edu/bitstream/handle/1951/389/maina.pdf?sequence=1&
isAllowed=y.
16. Marton, F., Tse, S. K., & Cheung, W. M. (2010). On the Learning of Chinese. Rotterdam:
The Sense Publisher.
17. McCombs &Vakili2005. A Learner-Centered Framework for E-Learning. Teachers College
Record Volume 107 Number 8, 2005, p. 1582-1600
18. Nagy, W. & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as
language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91-108.
19. Newmann, F., Marks, H., &Gamoran, A. (1995). Authentic pedagogy: Standards that
boost student performance. Issues in Restructuring Schools, 8, 1-12.
20. Piaget, J. (1926). The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: Harcourt Brace &
Company.
21. Sawyer, K. (2006). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
22. Schmidt, R. (1990). The Role of Consciousness in Second Language Learning. Applied
Linguistics, 11, 129-158.
23. Selinker, L. (1972). Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10 (3),
209.231.
24. Smith, M. S., & Truscott, J. (2005). Stage or continua in second language acquisition: A
Mongul solution. Applied Linguistics, 26 (2), 219-240.
25. Skinner, B. F. (1958) Verbal Behavior. Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.
26. Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and
comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. and Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in
Second Language Acquisition, pp. 235-256. New York: Newbury House.
53
27. Tse, S. K., & Loh, E. K. Y. (2010). A study of threshold standards of ethnic minority
students for immersion in Chinese language lessons in Hong Kong schools. Unpublished
research report, Faculty of Education, the University of Hong Kong
28. Vygotsky, L. (1986. Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
29. Wong, L.-H., Chin, C.-K., Tan, C.-L., & Liu, M. (2010). Students' Personal and Social
Meaning Making in a Chinese Idiom Mobile Learning Environment. Educational
Technology & Society, 13 (4), 1526.
30. UNESCO (2012). UIS-AIMS and Literacy Assessment. UNESCO Bangkok. Downloaded
through: http://www.unescobkk.org/education/planning-and-managingeducation/aims/uis-aims-activities/uis-aims-and-literacy-assessment/
54
___________________
__________(
__________
________
1. (Writing down words related to pictures)

(
)
Please observe the picture provided and write words or phrases (including name of
the persons, objects, behaviours and the vocabularies describing them) on the lines.
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
54
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
_______________________________
55
___________________
__________(
__________
________
2. (Vocabulary translation)
(30 )
Please write down the English meaning of the following words. (30 Marks)
school
community
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
56
___________________
31.
__________(
__________
________
(Matching correct words to sounds)
(60 )
Read the following characters according to the sequence. (60 Marks)
1.
11.
21.
31.
41.
51.
2.
12.
22.
32.
42.
52.
3.
13.
23.
33.
43.
53.
4.
14.
24.
34.
44.
54.
5.
6.
15.
16.
25.
26.
35.
36.
45.
46.
55.
56.
57
7.
17.
27.
37.
47.
57.
8.
18.
28.
38.
48.
58.
9.
19.
29.
39.
49.
59.
10.
20.
30.
40.
50.
60.
: 2 6
(1) 1()
?
?
?
7. ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
(2) 2()
1. ?
2.
3. ? ?
4.
5.
?
6. /
? ?
7.
?
8.
?
58
: 2 6
(1) 1()
?
?
?
7. ?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
(2) 2()
1. ?
2.
3. ? ?
4.
5.
?
6. /
? ?
7.
?
8.
?
58
(ST07)
63
64
65
66
67
68
(ST08)
69
70
71
72
73
74
(ST09)
75
76
77
78
79
80
(ST01)
81
82
83
84
85
86
(ST05)
87
88
89
90
91
92
(ST06)
93
94
95
96
97
98
(ST10)
99
100
101
102
103
104
(ST02)
105
106
107
108
109
110
(ST03)
111
112
113
114
115
116
(ST04)
117
118
119
120
121
122
SPSS
Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
pre_pronounciation_total
10
15
6.90
5.626
pre_translation_Total
10
14
4.70
4.855
pre_mental_lexicons
10
26
12.00
8.327
pre_overall
10
4.00
55.00
23.6000
16.65466
Valid N (listwise)
10
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
post_pronounciation_Total
10
37
54
44.60
4.84
post_translation_total
10
19
30
27.70
3.97
post_mental_lexicons
10
26
13.70
8.53
post_overall
10
63
110
86.00
12.75
Valid N (listwise)
10
123
()
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
15
12.33
3.06
14
8.67
6.81
pre_mental_lexicons
21
26
22.67
2.89
pre_overall
35
55
43.67
10.26
45
54
49.00
4.58
19
30
26.33
6.35
26
19.00
12.12
post_overall
83
110
94.33
14.01
Valid N (listwise)
()
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
12
6.75
5.12
5.00
2.16
pre_mental_lexicons
14
10.25
2.63
pre_overall
14
27
22.00
5.72
43
47
45.25
2.06
30
30
30.00
0.00
24
13.25
7.54
post_overall
82
101
88.50
8.50
Valid N (listwise)
()
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
1.67
2.89
.33
0.58
pre_mental_lexicons
3.67
3.51
pre_overall
4.0
7.0
5.6667
1.53
37
42
39.33
2.52
22
29
26.00
3.61
12
9.00
4.36
post_overall
63
83
74.33
10.26
Valid N (listwise)
124
T-TEST
Correlati
N
Pair 1
pre_pronounciation_total &
on
Sig.
10
.582
.077
10
-.310
.383
10
.501
.140
10
.617
.058
Pair 2
pre_translation_Total &
Pair 3
pre_mental_lexicons &
Pair 4
pre_overall & post_overall
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std.
Deviatio Std. Error
Mean
Pair 1
pre_pronounciation_total -
Mean
Interval of the
Sig.
Difference
(2-tail
Lower
Upper
df
ed)
-37.700
4.832
1.528
-41.156 -34.244 -24.675
.000
-23.000
7.165
2.266
-28.125 -17.875 -10.151
.000
-1.700
8.420
2.663
-.638
.539
-62.400
13.343
4.220
-71.945 -52.855 -14.788
.000
Pair 2
pre_translation_Total post_translation_total
Pair 3
pre_mental_lexicons -
-7.723
4.323
Pair 4
pre_overall - post_overall
125
T-TEST ()
Paired Samples Correlations
N
Pair 1
Correlation
Sig.
-1.000
0.000
-.679
.525
.500
.667
.025
.984
Pair 2
Pair 3
Pair 4
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Mean
Pair 1
Std.
Interval of the
Sig.
Std.
Error
Difference
(2-tail
Deviation
Mean
Lower
Upper
df
ed)
-36.667
7.638
4.410 -55.640 -17.694
-8.315
.014
-17.667
12.055
6.960 -47.614 12.281
-2.538
.126
3.667
10.970
6.333 -23.583 30.917
.579
.621
17.1561 9.9051 -93.284 -8.0484
-5.115
.036
Pair 2
Pair 3
pre_mental_lexicons post_mental_lexicons
Pair 4
-50.6667
90
126
T-TEST ()
Correlatio
N
Pair 1
n
4
Sig.
.892
.108
-.525
.475
.494
.506
Pair 2
Pair 3
Pair 4
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Std.
Mean
Pair 1
Std.
Interval of the
Sig.
Error
Difference
(2-tailed
Deviation Mean
Lower
Upper
df
-38.500
3.416
1.708
-43.935 -33.065 -22.543
.000
-25.000
2.160
1.080
-28.437 -21.563 -23.146
.000
-3.000
9.201
4.601
-17.642 11.642
-.652
.561
-66.500
7.550
3.775
-78.513 -54.487 -17.616
.000
Pair 2
Pair 3
Pair 4
127
T-TEST ()
N
Pair 1
Correlation
Sig.
-.803
.407
-.961
.179
.849
.354
-.468
.690
Pair 2
Pair 3
Pair 4
Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence
Mean
Pair 1
Std.
Interval of the
Std.
Error
Difference
Deviation
Mean
Lower
Upper
Sig.
t
df
(2-tailed)
-37.667
5.132
2.963 -50.414 -24.919 -12.713
.006
-25.667
4.163
2.404 -36.009 -15.324 -10.678
.009
-5.333
2.309
1.333 -11.070
.404 -4.000
.057
-68.667
11.060
6.386 -96.142 -41.191 -10.753
.009
Pair 2
Pair 3
Pair 4
128

Mean1 (Pre) SD1 Mean2 (Post)
SD2
Effect Size
1.
6.9
5.63
44.6
4.84
7.20
2.
4.7
4.85
27.7
3.97
5.22
3.
12
8.33
13.7
8.53
0.20
23.6
16.65
86
12.75
4.24
1.
1.67
2.89
39.33
2.52
13.94
2.
.33
0.58
26.00
3.61
12.27
3.
3.67
3.51
9.00
4.36
1.36
5.6667
1.53
74.33
10.26
11.65
1.
6.75
5.12
45.25
2.06
10.72
2.
5.00
2.16
30.00
0.00
23.15
3.
10.25
2.63
13.25
7.54
0.59
22.00
5.72
88.50
8.50
9.35
1.
12.33
3.06
49.00
4.58
9.60
2.
8.67
6.81
26.33
6.35
2.69
3.
22.67
2.89
19.00
12.12
-0.49
43.67
10.26
94.33
14.01
4.17
129

Full Text

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full Text

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Title

A study of using Chinese words learning applications to

Creative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License

A study of using Chinese words learning applications to enhance Chinese literacy

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Abstract of thesis entitled

Paired Samples Test

Paired Samples Test

Emmitt, Komaseroff, & Pollock, 2003; Krashen, 1987; 1988

Tse, Marton, Ki, &Loh, 2007

Smith & Truscott, 2005

teachers diary focus group

5.46 546% 4.89 489%

Paired Samples T-Test

Paired Samples Test

Cohan1977 Effect Size

Cohan1977 0.2 0.5

74.33 88.5 94.33 5

Paired Samples T-Test

t 4.000 12.713 t 10.753 p < 0.01**

Paired Samples Test

individuallylearn stuffs from the machine

we are interacting with people

I don't need to rush and I can learn in my own place

very much with my academic and social learning

1. Bronw, R. (1973). A first language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

6. Corder, S.P. (1977). Language continua and the interlanguage hypothesis. In S. P.

1. (Writing down words related to pictures)

(Matching correct words to sounds)

pre_overall & post_overall

Paired Samples Test

-41.156 -34.244 -24.675

-28.125 -17.875 -10.151

-71.945 -52.855 -14.788

pre_overall & post_overall

Paired Samples Test

4.410 -55.640 -17.694

6.960 -47.614 12.281

6.333 -23.583 30.917

17.1561 9.9051 -93.284 -8.0484

pre_overall & post_overall

Paired Samples Test

-43.935 -33.065 -22.543

-28.437 -21.563 -23.146

-78.513 -54.487 -17.616

pre_overall & post_overall

Paired Samples Test

2.963 -50.414 -24.919 -12.713

2.404 -36.009 -15.324 -10.678

6.386 -96.142 -41.191 -10.753

You might also like