An Action Research Study Exploring the Effects of Augmented Reality for English Vocabulary Learning in an Elementary School in Taiwan

The purpose of this study is to compare the use of traditional English flash cards and the vocabulary learning method of Augmented Reality to see which English vocabulary learning method is more efficient for elementary school students. The study was conducted at an elementary school in Taiwan, and there were 60 student participants in total. This study adopted an unequal pre-test and post-test experimental design. The study was conducted in two stages in terms of data collection. In the first stage, the control and experimental group took the English vocabulary test, without any teacher instruction, as the pretest. In the second stage, the control group used flashcards to learn 20 target English words by themselves for 40 minutes. The experimental group adopted the Augmented Reality 3D effect on the 20 target words by themselves for 40 minutes. After that, both groups took the same English vocabulary test again, as the posttest. On the whole, Augmented Reality teaching effects apparently exceed the effects of the traditional vocabulary learning method. The results of this study show that the learning method of Augmented Reality was more efficient than that of learning with English flash cards among the various proficiency levels (high, intermediate, and low) in terms of English vocabulary learning. The way of using English flash cards showed significant differences between high and low level groups, as well as between intermediate and low level groups, with the exception being the difference between high and intermediate level groups. It is worthwhile improving children’s English vocabulary learning by using Augmented Reality, by incorporating it into their daily lives through mobile learning.

REFERENCES:

• Bordbar, F. (2010). English teachers’ attitudes toward computer-assisted language learning. International Journal of Language Studies, 4, 27-54.
• Bower, M., Howe, C., McCredie, N., Robinson, A., & Grover, D. (2014). Augmented reality in education cases, places, and potentials. Educational Media International, 51(1), 1-15.
• Bull, S., & Wasson, B. (2016). Competence visualization: Making sense of data from 21st-century technologies in language learning. ReCALL, 28(2), 147-165
• Carmigniani, J., Furht, B., Anisetti, M., Ceravolo, P., Damiani, E., & Ivkovic, M. (2010). Augmented reality technologies, systems and applications, Multimedia Tools and Applications, 51(1), 341-377. doi:10.1007/s11042-010-0660-6
• Hossain, M.M., & Prybutok, V.R. (2008). Consumer acceptance of RFID technology: An exploratory study. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(2), 316-328.
• Huang, T.C. (2009). Applying Augmented Reality to the Teaching of English Nouns, Verbs, and Adjectives (master’s thesis), Graduate Institute of e-Learning, National Changhua University of Education.
• Juan, C.M., Llop, E., Abad, F., & Lluch, J. (2010). Learning Words Using Augmented Reality. In 2010 IEEE 10t International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 422-426).doi: 10.1109/ICALT.2010.123
• Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A.(2006). ”Making it real”: exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality, 10(3), 163-174.
• Kirova, S., Petkovska, B., & Koceva, D. (2012). Investigation of Motivation and Anixety in Macedonia While Learning English as a Second/Foreign Language. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3477-3481.
• Lin, B.J. (2009). A study of augmented reality on language teaching - A case study of elementary English teaching (master’s thesis), Graduate Institute of e-Learning, National Changhua University of Education.
• Mahadzir, N., & Phung, L.(2013). The use of augmented reality pop-up book to increase motivation in English language learning for national primary school. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1(1), 26-38.
• Richardson, D. (2016). Exploring the potential of a location based augmented reality game for language learning. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 6(3), 34-49.
• Rose, F.J., & Bhuvaneswari, R. (2014). Word recognition incorporating augmented reality for linguistic e-conversion. Educational Media International, 51(1), 1-15.
• Shin, D.H. (2007). User acceptance of mobile Internet: Implication for convergence technologies. Interacting with Computers, 19(4), 472-483.
• Sole, R.C., Calic, J., & Neijmann, D. (2010). A social and self-reflective approach to MALL. ReCALL, 22, 39-52.
• Stockwell, G. (2008). Investigating learner preparedness for and usage patterns of mobile learning. ReCALL,20 (3),253-270.
• Traxler, J. (2007). Defining, discussing and evaluating mobile learning. The International Review in Open and Distance Learning, 8, 1-13.
• Van Krevelen, D.W.F., & Johnson, E. (2010). A survey of augmented reality technologies, applications and limitations. International Journal of Virtual Reality, 9(2), 1.
• Yang, F, & Yang, G. (2010). The content analysis papers on M-learning during recent 10 years. Journal of Distance Education, 6, 39-45.
• Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented Reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 4(1), 119-140.