todoELE

Texto completo

This study set out to re-examine the effectiveness of study abroad programs in second language (L2) acquisition through a multi-level meta-analysis. Overall, 42 primary studies published between 1995 and 2019 were identified, and in total 283 effect sizes were meta-analysed. This study implemented a three-level random effects model to account for the clustered, mutually dependent effect sizes often nested in the primary studies of L2 study abroad research. The results indicated a medium-to-large effect (g = 0.87) on study abroad language programs. Essentially, the featured moderators in general explained more heterogeneity variances at level 3 (i.e. the between-study level) than at level 2 (i.e. the within study level). For study abroad language learners, language acquisition is optimal when learners, in particular those of a lower proficiency level, take both formal and content-based language courses while living with host families. Learners’ age and pre-program training may not moderate the effectiveness of study abroad language programs. Importantly, this study further established that the length of study abroad programs are positively associated with learners’ language gains, but that an extended and prolonged domestic program does not necessarily lead to such gains. Research and pedagogical implications are further discussed based on the research findings.

Texto completo

Glossing is a widely used and examined vocabulary learning tool, and one of the major branches of glossing research has compared the relative effects of first language (L1) and second language (L2) glosses on reading comprehension and vocabulary learning. However, the findings in this literature have not been consistent, calling for a comprehensive and systematic review. To this end, we conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the relative effects of L1 and L2 glossing on L2 reading comprehension and L2 vocabulary learning. Based on 78 effect sizes gathered from 26 studies representing 30 independent samples (N = 2,189), we found that L1 glossing was more effective than L2 glossing in general (Hedge’s g = .33, SE = .09, p < .001), but the effect size may vary depending on the target outcome measure. The relative effectiveness of L1 glossing was particularly supported by the results of immediate posttests of vocabulary, rather than delayed posttests of vocabulary and reading comprehension tests. Further, among a few selected moderator variables, the results of meta-regression revealed that learners’ L2 proficiency level significantly influenced the average effectiveness, such that L1 glossing is particularly effective for beginner learners compared to those with intermediate or higher L2 proficiency levels.