A REVIEW OF RECENT METHODOLOGIES, TECHNOLOGIES AND USABILITY IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE CONTENT DELIVERY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v78.10017Keywords:
English language teaching, augmented reality, mobile learning, usabilityAbstract
English Language Teaching (ELT) and content delivery have undergone vast shift in this era of modernization. With analogue content digitized as a common form of knowledge delivery, methodologies equipped with current technologies have produced new perspectives on English Language Learning. This paper reviews the status, context, teaching parameters, assessment parameters, teaching strategies and usability in the current research capacity of ELT, highlighting the current works with technologies in their content delivery methods. Emerging technologies in ELT has also inspires the other spectrum of study involving the usability of technological interfaces, which has evolved constantly with the progression of human and computer interactivity. The aim of this research is to rediscover usability evolution surrounding the technologies in ELT and to redefine the gap existed in between English learning and tools interactivity. Current technologies and usability measures used in ELT will be discussed, highlighting the current trends in gauging interface interaction. A summary of comparative results in the aforementioned works will also be highlighted in this review paper, together with the categorization of reviewed parameters, variables and metrics in ELT. The reviews conducted have shown that there are still many unexplored areas in ELT, ELT technologies and usability in ELT.Â
References
Thirusanku, J., and Yunus, M. M. 2014. Status Of English in Malaysia. Asian Social Science. 10(14): 254.
Yamat, H., Fisher, R., and Rich, S. 2014. Revisiting English Language Learning Among Malaysian Children. Asian Social Science. 10(3), 174-180.
Chen, C., and Chung, C. 2008. Personalized Mobile English Vocabulary Learning System Based On Item Response Theory And Learning Memory Cycle. Computers & Education. 51(2): 624-645.
Liu, P., and Chen, C. 2015. Learning English Through Actions: A Study Of Mobile-Assisted Language Learning. Interactive Learning Environments. 23(2): 158-171.
Lin, C. 2014. Learning English Reading In A Mobile-Assisted Extensive Reading Program. Computers & Education. 78: 48-59.
Oz, H. 2015. An Investigation Of Preservice English Teachers’ Perceptions Of Mobile Assisted Language Learning. English Language Teaching. 8(2): 22.
He, J., Ren, J., Zhu, G., Cai, S., and Chen, G. 2014. Mobile-based AR application helps to promote EFL children's vocabulary study. IEEE 14th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. 7-9 July. Athens, 431-433.
Sandberg, J., Maris, M. and de Geus, K. 2011. Mobile English Learning: An Evidence-Based Study With Fifth Graders. Computers & Education. 57(1): 1334-1347.
Chen, C., and Chung, C. 2008. Personalized Mobile English Vocabulary Learning System Based On Item Response Theory And Learning Memory Cycle. Computers & Education. 51(2): 624-645.
Raman, A. and Halim Mohamed, A. 2013. Issues Of ICT Usage Among Malaysian Secondary School English Teachers. English Language Teaching. 6(9): 74-82.
Lee, K. 2012. Augmented Reality in Education and Training. TechTrends. 56(2): 13-21. US: Springer.
Azuma, R. T. 1997 A Survey Of Augmented Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. 6: 355-385. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Zhou, F., Duh, H., B., L. and Billinghurst, M. 2008. Trends in augmented reality tracking, interaction and display: A review of ten years of ISMAR. IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality, 15-18 September. Cambridge, UK: IEEE. 193-202.
Yuen, S., Y., Aoyuneyong, G. and 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.
Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., and Stone, S. 2010. Simple Augmented Reality. The 2010 Horizon Report. 21-24. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
Vate-U-Lan, P. 2012. An Augmented Reality 3D Pop-Up Book: The Development of a Multimedia Project for English Language Teaching. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. 9-13 July. Melbourne. IEEE: 890-895..
Chang, Y., Chen, C., Huang, W., and Huang, W. 2011. Investigating Students' Perceived Satisfaction, Behavioral Intention, And Effectiveness Of English Learning Using Augmented Reality. IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. 6-13 July. Monterrey, 1-6.
Barreira, J., Bessa, M., Pereira, L. C., Adao, T., Peres, E., & Magalhaes, L. 2012. MOW: Augmented Reality Game To Learn Words In Different Languages: Case Study: Learning English Names Of Animals In Elementary School. 7th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies. 20-23 June. Madrid, 1-6.
Antonioli, M., Blake, C., and Sparks, K. 2014. Augmented Reality Applications In Education. Journal of Technology Studies. 40(2), 96.
Korucu, A. T., and Alkan, A. 2011. Differences Between M-Learning (Mobile Learning) And E-Learning, Basic Terminology And Usage Of M-Learning In Education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 15: 1925-1930.
Martin, F. and Ertzberger, J. 2013. Here And Now Mobile Learning: An Experimental Study On The Use Of Mobile Technology. Computers and Education 68: 76-85.
Ally, M., And Prieto-Blázquez, J. 2014. What Is The Future Of Mobile Learning In Education? RUSC : Universities and Knowledge Society Journal. 11(1): 142-151.
Hockly, N. 2013. Mobile learning. ELT Journal. 67(1): 80-84.
Stephens, M. 2012. Learning Everywhere. Library Journal. 137(7): 48-48.
Cavus, N., and Al-Momani, M. M. 2011. Mobile System For Flexible Education. Procedia Computer Science. 3: 1475-1479.
Keengwe, J., and Bhargava, M. 2014. . Mobile Learning And Integration Of Mobile Technologies In Education. Education and Information Technologies. 19(4): 737-746.
Huang, R. 2014. Exploring The Moderating Role Of Self-Management Of Learning In Mobile English Learning. Educational Technology & Society. 17(4): 255-267.
Hsu, L., & Lee, S. 2011. Learning Tourism English On Mobile Phones: How Does It Work? Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education. 10(2): 85-94.
Liu, T. 2009. A Context-Aware Ubiquitous Learning Environment For Language Listening And Speaking. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 25(6): 515-527.
Liu, P., and Tsai, M. 2013. Using Augmented-Reality-Based Mobile Learning Material In EFL English Composition: An Exploratory Case Study. British Journal of Educational Technology. 44(1): E1-E4.
Fitzgerald, E., Adams, A., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Mor, Y. and Thomas, R. 2012 Augmented Reality And Mobile Learning: The State of The Art. 11th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning. 16-18 Oct. Helsinki, Finland. 62–69.
Beauchamp, G. and Parkinson, J, 2005. Beyond the ‘wow’ Factor: Developing Interactivity With the Interactive Whiteboard. School Science Review. March 86(316).
Murray, L. and Barnes, A. 1998. Beyond The "Wow" Factor Evaluating Multimedia Language Learning Software From A Pedagogical Viewpoint. System. 26(2): 249–259.
Furió, D., González-Gancedo, S., Juan, M., SeguÃ, I., and Costa, M. 2013. The Effects Of The Size And Weight Of A Mobile Device On An Educational Game. Computers and Education. 64: 24-41.
International Standards Organization. 1998 ISO 9241-11: Ergonomic Requirements For Office Work With Visual Display Terminals (VDTs); Part 11-Guidance on usability.
Tullis, T & Albert, B. 2008, Measuring the user experience, Interactive Technologies series, Morgan Kaufmann, Massachusetts, USA.
Read, J. C., MacFarlane, S. J. and Casey, C. 2002 Endurability, Engagement And Expectations: Measuring Children's Fun, in Proceedings of Interaction Design and Children. Shaker Publishing, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 189-198.
Dunser, A. and Bilinghurst, M. 2011 Evaluating Augmented Reality Systems. In Furht, B. (Ed.) Handbook of Augmented Reality. 289-307. New York: Springer.
Santos, M. E. C. Taketomi, T., Sandor, C., Polvi, J., Yamamoto, G. and Kato, H. 2014. A Usability Scale for Handheld Augmented Reality. Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. 11-13 November. Edinburgh. 167-176.
Olsson, T. 2013. Concepts and Subjective Measures for Evaluating User Experience of Mobile Augmented Reality Services. In Huang, W., Alem, L., Livinston, M. A. (Ed.) Human Factors in Augmented Reality Environments. 203-232. New York: Springer.
Liu, T., Tan, T., & Chu, Y. 2010. QR Code And Augmented Reality-Supported Mobile English Learning System. 37-52. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Erasmus, E., Rothmann, S., & van Eeden, C. 2015. A Structural Model Of Technology Acceptance. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology. 41(1): 1.
Baharin, A. T., Lateh, H., Nathan, S. S., & Nawawi, H. M. 2015. Evaluating Effectiveness Of IDEWL Using Technology Acceptance Model. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 171: 897-904.
Ibrahim, H. 2014. Technology Acceptance Model: Extension To Sport Consumption. Procedia Engineering. 69: 1534-1540.
Abroud, A., Choong, Y. V., Muthaiyah, S., & Fie, D. Y. G. 2015. Adopting E-Finance: Decomposing The Technology Acceptance Model For Investors. Service Business. 9(1): 161-182.
Mattson, D. C. 2015. Usability Assessment Of A Mobile App For Art Therapy. Arts in Psychotherapy. 43: 1-6.
Ryan, RM 2006, Intrinsic motivation inventory (IMI), Self-Determination Theory (SDT), University of Rochester, viewed on 12 January 2010, <http://www.psych.rochester.edu/SDT/measures/IMI_description.php>.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright of articles that appear in Jurnal Teknologi belongs exclusively to Penerbit Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (Penerbit UTM Press). This copyright covers the rights to reproduce the article, including reprints, electronic reproductions, or any other reproductions of similar nature.
