Research Article

Enhancing reading capability of young Thai students with augmented reality technology: Design-based research

Jaitip Nasongkhla 1 * , Siridej Sujiva 1
More Detail
1 Disruptive Innovation Technology in Education Research Unit, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, THAILAND* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(1), January 2023, ep403, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12721
Published Online: 15 December 2022, Published: 01 January 2023
OPEN ACCESS   1997 Views   1351 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The Thai language, which is part of the Indo-Iranian language family, carries on rituals and local knowledge that have been passed down from generation to generation. The Thai National Statistics Office found that 10% of elementary school students in Thailand cannot read. This means that 90% of elementary school students in Thailand can read. The numbers disagree with a report from an international assessment agency that said young Thai students’ reading skills were the 50th best out of 65 countries. So, it is still hard for young Thai people to read well. The main goals of this research are to: (i) make an augmented reality platform that will help students improve their reading skills and (ii) figure out how well the platform works. This study uses a method called “research design” (R&D) to look at how students feel about an educational product or method that was designed and then used. Research and development can be thought of as going through three different stages (research phase, development phase, and implementation phase). According to the results, the picture word inductive model (PWIM) strategy was put into place because the professionals said it should be. The most popular method of teaching was called “precision teaching.” Reading out loud and reading the same thing over and over were two ways that vocabulary was taught. According to the results of the experiment, the students’ scores after finishing the reading are higher than their scores after the first reading. As part of the second part of the study, reading comprehension skills were tested. The students have also gotten a lot better at understanding what they read as a whole.
Keywords: augmented reality, elementary school students, PWIM, reading ability, precision instruction

CITATION (APA)

Nasongkhla, J., & Sujiva, S. (2023). Enhancing reading capability of young Thai students with augmented reality technology: Design-based research. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(1), ep403. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12721

REFERENCES

  1. Alqahtani, S. S. (2020). iPad and repeated reading to improve reading comprehension for young adults with intellectual disability. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 103(October 2019), 103703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2020.103703
  2. An, S. (2013). Schema theory in reading. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(1), 130-134. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.3.1.130-134
  3. Ardoin, S. P., Morena, L. S., Binder, K. S., & Foster, T. E. (2013). Examining the impact of feedback and repeated readings on oral reading fluency: Let’s not forget prosody. School Psychology Quarterly, 28(4), 391-404. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000027
  4. Bellinger, J. M., & DiPerna, J. C. (2011). Is fluency-based story retelling a good indicator of reading comprehension? Psychology in the Schools, 48(4), 416-426. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20563
  5. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.889400
  6. Braud, T., Zhou, P., Kangasharju, J., & Hui, P. (2020). Multipath computation offloading for mobile augmented reality. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications. https://doi.org/10.1109/PerCom45495.2020.9127360
  7. Calhoun, E. F. (1999). Teaching beginning reading and writing with the picture word inductive model. ASCD.
  8. Carreiras, M., Armstrong, B. C., Perea, M., & Frost, R. (2014). The what, when, where, and how of visual word recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(2), 90-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.11.005
  9. Carrell, P. L. (1984). Evidence of a formal schema in second language comprehension. Language Learning, 34(2), 87-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1984.tb01005.x
  10. Chara, C. (2013). Learning development with bi-lingual AR and group process to enhance listening and speaking skills of kindergarten. KMTT Thonburi.
  11. Cheng, K. (2016). Reading an augmented reality book: An exploration of learners’ cognitive load, motivation, and attitudes. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 53-69. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2820
  12. Cotter, J. (2012). Understanding the relationship between reading fluency and reading comprehension: Fluency strategies as a focus for instruction. Education Masters. https://fisherpub.sjfc.edu/education_ETD_masters/224
  13. da Silva, M. M. O., Teixeira, J. M. X. N., Cavalcante, P. S., & Teichrieb, V. (2019). Perspectives on how to evaluate augmented reality technology tools for education: A systematic review. Journal of the Brazilian Computer Society, 25(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13173-019-0084-8
  14. Debue, N., & van de Leemput, C. (2014). What does germane load mean? An empirical contribution to the cognitive load theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(October), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01099
  15. Downs, J., & Morin, S. (1995). Improving reading fluency with precision teaching. Journal Precision Teaching, XII, 46-49.
  16. Dunleavy, M., & Dede, C. (2014). Augmented reality teaching and learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 735-745). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_59
  17. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
  18. Evans, A. L., Bulla, A. J., & Kieta, A. R. (2021). The precision teaching system: A synthesized definition, concept analysis, and process. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(3), 559-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-020-00502-2
  19. Gist, C., & Bulla, A. J. (2022). A systematic review of frequency building and precision teaching with school-aged children. Journal of Behavioral Education, 31(1), 43-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-020-09404-3
  20. Grabe, W. (2004). Research on teaching reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 44-69. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190504000030
  21. Gu, C., & Lornklang, T. (2021). The use of picture-word inductive model and readers’ theater to improve Chinese EFL learners’ vocabulary learning achievement. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(3), 120. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.3.p.120
  22. Ibili, E. (2019). Effect of augmented reality environments on cognitive load: Pedagogical effect, instructional design, motivation, and interaction interfaces. International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(5), 42-57. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.212.4
  23. Izzaty, S., Tolle, H., Dermawi, R., & Permana, F. (2019). Augmented reality objects design in augmented story book mobile application for better engagement. International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 9(1), 570. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v9i1.pp570-576
  24. Jamshidifarsani, H., Garbaya, S., Lim, T., Blazevic, P., & Ritchie, J. M. (2019). Technology-based reading intervention programs for elementary grades: An analytical review. Computers & Education, 128, 427-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.10.003
  25. Jasche, F., Hofmann, S., & Ludwig, T. (2021). Comparison of different types of augmented reality visualizations for instructions. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445724
  26. Jiang, X. (2018). Exploring young English learners’ perceptions of the picture word inductive model in China. TESOL International Journal, 13(1), 67-78.
  27. Jones, N. A., Ross, H., Lynam, T., Perez, P., & Leitch, A. (2011). Mental models: An interdisciplinary synthesis of theory and methods. Ecology and Society, 16(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-03802-160146
  28. Joyce, B., & Weil, M. (2004). The picture-word inductive model: Developing literacy across the curriculum. In B. Joyce, & M. Weil (Eds.), Models of teaching. Pearson.
  29. Kafipour, R., Jahansooz, N., Branch, M., Road, S., & Fars, P. (2017). Effect of content schema, vocabulary knowledge, and reading comprehension on translation performance. Indonesian EFL Journal: Journal of ELT, Linguistics, and Literature, 3(1), 22-39.
  30. 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(3-4), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-006-0036-4
  31. Kesim, M., & Ozarslan, Y. (2012). Augmented reality in education: Current technologies and the potential for education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 47(222), 297-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.654
  32. Kim, H.-Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
  33. Lee, B. C., Pandian, A., Rethinasamy, S., & Tan, D. A. L. (2019). Effects of PWIM in the ESL classroom: Vocabulary knowledge development among primary Malaysian learners. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 25(4), 179-197. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2019-2504-11
  34. Majeed, Z. H., & Ali, H. A. (2020). A review of augmented reality in educational applications. International Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Exploration, 7(62), 20-27. https://doi.org/10.19101/IJATEE.2019.650068
  35. Mannion, L., & Griffin, C. (2018). Precision teaching through Irish: Effects on isolated sight word reading fluency and contextualized reading fluency. Irish Educational Studies, 37(3), 391-410. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2017.1421090
  36. Martinho, M. T., Booth, N., Attard, N., & Dillenburger, K. (2022). A systematic review of the impact of precision teaching and fluency-building on teaching children diagnosed with autism. International Journal of Educational Research, 116(March), 102076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102076
  37. Mata, L., Mackaaij, M. J., & Calado, M. (2020). Emotional responses to reading in the first grade-the “L.E.R. cãofiante” * project. Psico-USF, 25(2), 321-330. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-82712020250210
  38. McInnes, M. D. F., Moher, D., Thombs, B. D., McGrath, T. A., Bossuyt, P. M., Clifford, T., Cohen, J. F., Deeks, J. J., Gatsonis, C., Hooft, L., Hunt, H. A., Hyde, C. J., Korevaar, D. A., Leeflang, M. M. G., Macaskill, P., Reitsma, J. B., Rodin, R., Rutjes, A. W. S., Salameh, J. P., …, & Willis, B. H. (2018). Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: The PRISMA–DTA statement. JAMA-Journal of the American Medical Association, 319(4), 388-396. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.19163
  39. Milgram, P., & Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 12, 1-14.
  40. Moghadam, S. H., Zainal, Z., & Ghaderpour, M. (2012). A review on the important role of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension performance. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 66, 555-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.11.300
  41. Na-songkhla, J. (2011). An effect of interactive media in a social awareness ubiquitous learning community. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Lifelong Learning (pp. 1-24).
  42. Nasongkhla, J., Supadaec, C., & Chiasiriphan, T. (2019). Implementing multiple AR markers in learning science content with junior high school students in Thailand. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(7), 48-60. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i07.9855
  43. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/smallbook
  44. OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results: Combined executive summaries: Vol. I. www.oecd.org/about/publishing/corrigenda.htm
  45. Pariyawatit, P. (2015). Effect of AR on basic Chinese vocabulary for grade 3rd students, Tanisamosorn Municipal. Prince Songkhla University.
  46. Pearson, P. D., & Cervetti, G. (2013). The psychology and pedagogy of reading processes. In W. Reynolds, & G. Miller (Eds.), Educational psychology, V. VII, of handbook of psychology (pp. 507-554). John Wiley & Sons.
  47. Potts, L., Eshleman, J. W., & Cooper, J. 0. (1993). Ogden R. Lindsley and the historical development of precision teaching. The Behavior Analyst, 16(2), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03392622
  48. Radu, I. (2012). Why should my students use AR? A comparative review of the educational impacts of augmented-reality. In Proceedings of the 11th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (pp. 313-314). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2012.6402590
  49. Rasinski, T. V. (2006). A brief history of reading fluency. In S. J. Samuels, & A. E. Farstup (Eds.), What research has to say about fluency instruction (pp. 70-93). International Reading Association.
  50. Redondo, E., Valls, F., Fonseca, D., Navarro, I., Villagrasa, S., Olivares, A., & Peredo, A. (2014). Educational qualitative assessment of augmented reality models and digital sketching applied to urban planning. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 447-454). https://doi.org/10.1145/2669711.2669938
  51. Samuels, S. J. (2013). Toward a theory of automatic information processing in reading, revisited. In D. E. Alvermann, N. J. Unrau, & R. B. Ruddell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 698-718). International Reading Association. https://doi.org/10.1598/0710.28
  52. Santosa, I., Nurkhamidah, N., & Wulandari, R. (2021). Identifying the criteria of designing augmented reality for vocabulary learning in primary school. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial Dan Pendidikan [Journal of Social Sciences and Education], 5(4), 1553-1561. https://doi.org/10.36312/jisip.v5i4.2634
  53. Spencer, C. (2006). Research on learners’ preferences for reading from a printed text or from a computer screen. Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 33-50.
  54. Srithamma, S., & Songserm, U. (2020). The development of reading and writing word spelling abilities of the first grade students taught by learning PWIM and mind mapping. Silpakorn Educational Research Journal, 12(1), 266-280.
  55. Thai National Reading Committee. (2010). Thai phonics (teaching manual). http://academic.obec.go.th/newsdetail.php?id=251
  56. Thailand National Statistical Office. (2019). The reading of population survey 2018. http://www.nso.go.th/sites/2014en/home
  57. Triwahyuni, E., Degeng, I. N. S., Setyosari, P., & Kuswandi, D. (2020). The effects of picture word inductive model (PWIM) toward student’s early reading skills of first-grade in the primary school. Elementary Education Online, 19(3), 1523-1526. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.733100
  58. Troscianko, E. T. (2013). Reading imaginatively: The imagination in cognitive science and cognitive literary studies. Journal of Literary Semantics, 42(2), 181-198. https://doi.org/10.1515/jls-2013-0009
  59. Tyng, C. M., Amin, H. U., Saad, M. N. M., & Malik, A. S. (2017). The influences of emotion on learning and memory. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01454
  60. Urquhart, A. H., & Weir, C. J. (1998). Reading in a second language. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of applied linguistics. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315841373
  61. Wahyuni, T., Degeng, I. N. S., Widiati, U., & Setyosari, P. (2020). Designing AR based PWIM to promote students’ English vocabulary in the higher education of Indonesia. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(12B), 8052-8062. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.082606
  62. Wang, K. (2021). A theoretical analysis method of spatial analytic geometry and mathematics under digital twins. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2021(2018), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8910274
  63. West, R., Young, K. R., & Spooner, F. (1995). Precision teaching: An Iintroduction. Journal of Precision Teaching, 12(2), 2-8.
  64. Wu, P., Fan, K.-Y., Chinag, H.-K., Wu, F. C., & Liu, P.-C. (2018). The influence of applying augmented reality to a pop-up book on creative thinking. The International Journal of Arts Education, 13(2), 35-44. https://doi.org/10.18848/2326-9944/CGP/v13i02/35-44
  65. Wu, Y., Guo, S., & Zhu, L. (2019). Design and implementation of data collection mechanism for 3D design course based on xAPI standard. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1696842
  66. Yuan, Y. (2021). An experimental study of the efficacy of augmented reality in Chinese kindergarten-level students’ learning of English vocabulary. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers (pp. 90-98). https://doi.org/10.1145/3498765.3498779
  67. Zarei, A. A. (2012). The effects of content, formal, and linguistic schema building activity types on EFL reading and listening comprehension. Teaching English Language, 6(2), 79-101.