O n f e r e n c e

 
Results 
To demonstrate the result of obtained data some statistical methods such as independent 
sample t-test, repeated measure ANOVA and descriptive statistics were used. 
Data analysis began with pre-test to be sure that the control and experimental groups 
were homogeneous enough to start the study. An independent t-test was run to see if 
the two groups performed significantly different on pre-test or not. 
Groups
N 
t 
Sig 
(Two-
tailed) 
control
40 
.094 
.925 
Experimental
54 
Table 1. Independent t-test between control and experimental group in pre-test 
The result of t-test revealed non-significant values in pre-test considering 
t
(92)=.094, 
P
= 
.925 hence, confirming matching of groups in the pre-test situation.
Pre-test
 
 
Post-test 
Groups 
M 
SD
 
 
M 
SD 
control (N=40) 
2.650 
1.051 
12.675 
5.085 
Experimental
(N=54) 
2.629 
1.033 
14.833 
4.970 
 
Table 2. Means and standard deviations of vocabulary scores 
 
The minimum scores in post-test for both groups was 8 and the maximum was 18.
 
To 
work out the better performance of the experimental group the mean scores tabulated in 
Table 2 were taken advantage of.

---

-267- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
Based on the table, the mean score of the experimental group was 2.629 in pre-test, 
which increased to 14.833 in. Whereas, the pre-test mean score of the control group was 
2.650, and increased to 12.675 in post-test. This improvement is less than that of 
experimental group. Table 3 which is the result of repeated measure ANOVA will show 
this significant difference statistically.