In the matching exercise, students were required to match English vocabulary items with their Chinese
equivalents. Submission was allowed after ten pairs were done. Similarly, in the filling-in-the-blanks activity,
students were asked to drag a word icon to match its corresponding picture. After all blanks were filled, students
could submit their answers. The translation exercise demands students to type in a target word based on its
Chinese equivalent given. Each item was evaluated immediately and scores were displayed. In unscrambling
sentences, students needed to shift the order of word icons so that a sentence based on the word icons was
grammatically accepted. Students could continue trying until the order was correct. Finally, the word puzzle
game required students to type in a target word to fill in the blank of a given sentence.
Materials and instrument
The 30 target words in the study were selected by the participating English teacher and the other two veteran
English teachers. The target words were not chosen from the textbook to ensure that the participants had no
previous encounters. In each instructional session 10 target words were taught and practiced. The participants
received the same vocabulary instructions from the same English teacher in a normal classroom. The only
instrument for the study was an achievement test of English vocabulary. The test consisted of 30 recognition
questions, each of which asked the participants to choose the correct Chinese word equivalent matching its
English counterpart out of three options. Each question weighs one point; thus, the highest point of the test is 30,
the lowest 0. The achievement test was administered on papers to each student apiece. The immediate posttest
and delayed posttest contain identical items but in different orders.
Procedures and data analysis
The study adopted a non-equivalent control group quasi-experimental research design. The three classes of the
same English teacher were randomly assigned to computer-supported collaboration group (experimental group
A), computer-free collaboration group (experimental group B), and computer-free non-collaboration group
(control group). The experimental group A, in seven groups, was asked to learn the target English vocabulary
collaboratively in the technology-supported classroom. When doing the exercises they were allowed to look up
digital references. In the experimental group B, the students in a normal classroom were divided into seven
groups but were asked to solve the same questions on worksheets. They were allowed to consult dictionaries and
class notes when necessary. In the control group, each student was given worksheets of the vocabulary exercises;
dictionary and note consultation were allowed.
The study took place immediately after the school’s first monthly exam, fall 2009; all participants’ scores of their
English monthly test were used as the pretest scores. Prior to the treatment, the experimental group A received a
30-minute pre-activity instruction to familiarize themselves with the all-in-one computers. The treatment
consisted of three review activities of 10 target words in three class meetings, 30 minutes for each and 90
minutes in total. After each instructional session, the three groups received an immediate posttest. Thirty days
after the experiment, a delayed posttest of 30 vocabulary items was administered without prior notice. Three sets
of scores were collected: the results of the monthly test as the pretest scores and those of the vocabulary test as