Site icon 卓越實證概述 Best Evidence in Brief

Which type of education technology instruction model is more effective for Chinese ESL learners?

With the rapid development of modern technology and its extensive application in education, China seeks to popularize education technology in K-12 classrooms. A recent meta-analysis by Ni and colleagues provided insights into the impact of educational technology on English reading achievement for Chinese English second language learners (ESLs) and compared different instructional models. The meta-analysis included 35 eligible studies which targeted Chinese K-12 participants conducted from 2000 to 2020 in Greater China. Five learning models were classified in the study:

The primary finding of the meta-analysis indicated that educational technology had a modest positive impact on reading outcomes compared with the traditional teaching method (ES = +0.37). For different types of intervention, the comprehensive model had largest impact (ES = +0.60), followed by social media tools (ES = +0.46), integrated online-learning system (ES = +0.31), and multimedia-transmission model (ES = +0.27). Supplementary activities had no significant effect (ES = +0.05).

This meta-analysis provided a good insight into the effectiveness of various types of technology applications on English instruction. The authors believed that technology applications certainly improved Chinese students’ reading achievement and were worth implementation in K-12 English education. Moreover, the findings showed that the comprehensive model, social media tools, and the integrated online-learning system were more effective than the other two models. Schools and teachers have to know the characteristics and effects of different technologies to deploy them effectively in their English classrooms.

*Note: k = no. of studies.

 

Source (Open Access): Ni, A., Cheung, A. C. K., & Shi, J. (2022). Effects of educational technology on reading achievement for Chinese K-12 English second language learners: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1025761

Exit mobile version