Content uploaded by Nor Sanak
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nor Sanak on Oct 15, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
135
Teaching English Language Skills Using Augmented Reality:
Secondary Schools Teachers Experience
NOR SANAK MOHD NABIL
Universiti Utara, Malaysia
sanak.nabil@gmail.com
HASNIZA NORDIN
Universiti Utara, Malaysia
FAIZAHANI AB RAHMAN
Universiti Utara, Malaysia
Abstract: Utilizing technology in teaching English has been found to be more engaging than using conven-
tional teaching methods. Researchers have found that augmented reality (AR) to be a captivating emerging
technology with various empirical studies recognizing its benefits for achieving lesson goals, making lessons
more interesting, and being an alluring technology in the teaching and learning of English. However, most
studies on teachers’ experience with AR are still focusing on teachers’ acceptance and readiness to use AR
technology in English Language teaching, which is similar to the Malaysian secondary school context. Based
on this gap, the present qualitative study focuses on how the two secondary school teachers utilize AR in their
English language teaching. This study’s findings reveal that while most current studies on AR use in Malay-
sia focus on teachers’ readiness and acceptance of AR, teachers have been utilizing AR in teaching English
skills particularly for teaching vocabulary and reading. Teachers have found AR to be an excellent technol-
ogy in assisting their teaching of English language skills. This study concludes with the recommendation to
explore the integration of using AR for developing learners’ English skills outside of vocabulary and reading.
Keywords: Augmented Reality, English language skills, Teachers, Secondary School Teaching
INTRODUCTION
The recent changes in education due to the previous COVID-19 pandemic increased the need to implement technol-
ogy utilization in English language teaching. In addition to the tragic human loss and suffering, we have witnessed a time
full of transformation of education via the integration of technologies and digital tools. For instance, technologies such as
video calls, messages, and websites have been integrated into online classes. Although augmented reality (AR) technol-
ogy is still an emerging technology and has not been explored fully, empirical evidence has shown that AR is an effective
tool for teaching in online contexts and distance learning (Eldokhny & Drwish, 2021; Mystakidis et al., 2021). Nonethe-
less, studies that focus on teachers’ experiences with AR are still lacking in a Malaysian context.
Thus, this chapter’s objective is to explore the experience of two English language teachers use of AR in their in-
struction. The two research questions that guided this chapter are:
1. Why do teachers utilize Augmented Reality in teaching English Language skills?
2. What are the teachers’ experiences with using augmented reality for teaching English language skills?
LITERATURE REVIEW
As English has become an international language and a lingua franca, the teaching of English language skills is vital
in this era of convergence. Within the teaching of English, there are four language skill that include reading, writing, lis-
136
tening, and speaking. The teaching of these skills ensure that students are competent communicators. However, the teach-
ing of English using traditional or conventional methods is found to be uninteresting, dull, and ineffective (Bistaman et
al., 2018) as the new generation of learners are often more technological savvy compared to previous generations. Hence,
teachers’ instruction needs fresh and innovative use of technology integration for increasing student engagement. Various
technologies have been inculcated for improving the teaching and learning of English language skills, with AR being one
of them.
AR is an immersive technology where virtual elements are layered onto physical reality. According to Milgram &
Kishino (1994), AR is defined as a technology that combines digital objects with the real-world environment in real-time.
AR is a mixed reality form of extended reality, with other forms being virtual reality and augmented virtuality. However,
different from virtual reality, AR is inculcated in the real world through a device, which means that digital objects are
utilized within the real environment. There are various types of AR technology, such as marker-based, markerless, and
location-based. Marker-based AR requires a photo, code, or trigger image to activate the AR experience. Markerless AR,
on the other hand, does not require a trigger image or photo. Location-based AR is integrated with a global positioning
system (GPS) to create the AR experience (Majid & Salam, 2021). Most studies in the educational field, particularly in
language learning, have employed marker-based AR (Bacca et al., 2014 in Farah et al., 2022).
Educators’ knowledge of AR applications helps them effectively use the technology, which adds value to it (Aldos-
sari & Alsuhaibani, 2021). Taskiran (2019) found that AR offers advantages to learners and teachers across the globe. For
example, it is utilized in various subjects such as medicine, engineering, architecture, geography and language teaching
(Parmaxi & Demetriou, 2020a). Although AR is employed in teachers’ instruction across fields, researchers found that
the adoption of AR technology in the education field is still low (Romano et al., 2020). In language learning, AR has sup-
ported learners acquiring a second language, but it is mostly employed for learning vocabulary, reading skills, and pro-
nunciation (Simonova & Kolesnichenko, 2022).
Globally, in English language learning, AR is utilized across various regions including the United States, Europe,
Africa, and Asia (Hasbi & Md Yunus, 2021). For instance, in China, AR is employed in teaching phonics for learning
English through the integration of virtual objects and video clips (Chen, 2018). In India, teachers are using AR for lan-
guage instruction related to simulations (Ramya & Madhumathi, 2017). Nevertheless, research on AR technology’s utili-
zation among English teachers, particularly in Malaysia, is scarce.
Although Malaysia is among the top 20 countries in AR usage, exposure to AR technology is still at a moderate level
(Farah et al., 2022). Empirical studies have explored the integration of AR in primary, secondary, and higher education,
with most studies focusing on students’ use of AR (Bistaman et al., 2018; Elaish et al., 2017; Vedadi et al., 2019). There-
fore, existing research on teachers’ utilization of AR is still very limited. This is due to the existing teacher-centric studies
focusing on their readiness to employ AR in urban areas. Because there is limited research on using AR in suburban and
rural areas, there is a need for further investigation into these areas. Therefore, the limited existing literature on teachers’
use of AR in secondary English language teaching contexts and suburban Malaysian contexts provides the opportunity
for this study to fill in two practical gaps in the literature.
METHOD
Setting and Participants
This research is a qualitative case study (Yin, 2018) that sought to explore the experiences of two in-service Eng-
lish teachers using AR for teaching English language skills. The study was conducted in two suburban schools in two
northern states of Malaysia. The male participant, Shawn, was teaching in a boarding secondary school while the female
participant, Azie, was teaching in a public secondary school (both pseudonyms). Shawn was an experienced teacher with
more than seven years of teaching experience and has always integrated technology into his instruction using various
tools. Azie, on the other hand, was a novice teacher with fewer than three years of experience in teaching English, but she
is a knowledgeable and tech-savvy teacher who is passionate about incorporating technology into her English lessons.
Both were teaching different classes of students, as Shawn taught upper secondary students aged from 16 to 17, while
Azie taught lower secondary students aged from 13 to 15 years old. Although different levels, both lower secondary and
upper secondary instruction requires teachers to incorporate all four skills in English (e.g., speaking, listening, reading,
and writing) that includes grammar and vocabulary skills.
137
Data Collection
This study utilized two main data collection sources. The first data collection source was teacher interviews. Semi-
structured interviews were utilized to elicit teachers’ experience with the teaching of English skills using AR (Cohen et
al., 2018). Interviews were carried out for two sessions and extra information was obtained through messages and voice
notes between researchers and teachers to reach data saturation. The second data collection source included a review of
teaching artifacts that were gathered after the interviews. The teaching artifacts were collected to understand how the
teachers integrated AR technology into their instruction of English skills, which includes the photos used in their English
lessons. To ensure trustworthiness in this study, member checking procedures were used to review the data.
Procedure
The data collection process lasted for three weeks. Each interview took about 30 minutes, and they were centered on
the teachers’ experiences in teaching English skills using AR. The interviews were conducted in the participants’ schools.
Before the interview, permission was gained from the gatekeeper through the Educational Research Application System
(ERAS) website and once permission was granted, the researcher went to the teachers’ school and explained the study to
them. During the interview, the participants were asked questions about their instruction of English skills using AR. After
the interviews, the researcher asked the participants to provide the artifacts that they utilized when teaching English lan-
guage skills using AR. The interviews were transcribed in full and coded.
Data Analysis
The qualitative data obtained through this study that included a semi-structured interview with each participant and
corresponding teaching artifacts were subject to inductive content analysis. The interview transcripts and teaching ar-
tifacts were repeatedly read and analyzed to determine the codes, sub-codes, and common themes. The data were then
analyzed using the Braun and Clerk (2006) thematic analysis procedure. There are six main stages that were followed to
produce a reliable and trustworthy case study (Braun & Clerk, 2006). These stages included:
1. Familiarization with the data that includes the transcribing, reading, and rereading of the interview data
2. Generating initial code categories was by identifying interesting and unique features and categorizing them into codes
3. Searching for themes by categorizing the codes into themes
4. Building validity in the themes by member checking them with the participants and other experts in the field
5. Defining and naming the themes based on feedback gained through member checking and continual, iterative data
analysis
6. Producing the report by identifying compelling and vivid extracts and describing them in detail as findings
FINDINGS
This study’s findings are summarized below. The participants’ succinct responses to the research questions are pre-
sented, classified, and reported.
Question 1: Why do teachers utilize Augmented Reality in teaching English Language skills?
There were various reasons for the participants’ use of AR in teaching English skills. The reasons were that AR
improves teaching practice by being fun and engaging while being effective and minimalist. It also suits lesson objec-
tives and has support from the school, but requires a stable internet connection, and these findings will next be further
explained.
138
Improve Teaching Practice
Improving teaching was the most common reason that both participants used AR. Azie stated that as a novice teach-
er, she was still exploring various instructional methods and technologies in her teaching of English because she was
unsure of which may have a greater impact on her students. For example, Azie shared that “I’m not too sure which tech-
nology is better to be used but I’ll just explore first and look at how my kids react to the lesson.” However, when experi-
menting with AR in her English lesson, she believed that AR did not only benefit her students but also helped to improve
her teaching practice .
Shawn, as a more experienced teacher, was found to be more confident as he had tried various technology tools in
his English lessons, which included the use of iPad applications, smart boards, smartphones, and computers. About it,
Shawn said, “I used kind of various technologies since learners nowadays are so into it. You know they are sometimes
more advanced, so in my lesson, I usually use technology.” Hence, because he believed that his students are more techno-
savvy and he has been experimenting with various technologies in his English lesson, he was more confident to use AR.
Fun and Engaging
Shawn and Azie revealed that AR is a fun technology that they have employed in their classrooms. For instance, both
expressed that the fun part of AR was how they can manipulate it as part of their instruction, to make their lesson more
fun. Pertaining to it, Shawn said that “When I want to inculcate a little bit of fun, like, when they have different kinds of
images of AR inside the gadgets, like, they can see different costumes.” Azie shared that “Not just AR in games that we
can use, but also in education and learning, it is enjoyable when they can see large dinosaurs at their home and not only
in the book!” In this example, Azie cited that her students could see dinosaurs at their homes, and she further added that
she integrates AR books in her lessons where her students can scan the book and a dinosaur will appear in front of them.
This also shows the use of marker-based AR in her English lessons to add engagement and fun to her lessons. Thus,
other than just looking at the picture, when the dinosaur comes to life, the students feel more excited to learn about the
dinosaur’s body parts. The captivating of AR element that attracted both teachers to explore and use it in their English
language instruction is its scaffold features. AR allows digital objects to be applied in a real environment, which makes
producing an immersive environment easier than other technologies. In this way, Shawn also declared that AR could
scaffold his students’ learning and this includes the sharing of new information or problem-solving, with AR-enhanced
features.
Effective and Minimalist
AR was also found to be an effective and inexpensive technology. AR is simple to utilize because it can be accessed
through personal mobile phones and school-provided tablets. Shawn mentioned that “AR can be accessed through mobile
phones and iPads, so it is more useful when I want to do activities or when scaffolding my learners.” In this area, Azie
suggested that AR is minimalist because it can be used through smartphones, as almost all her students have one. “My
students mostly have smartphones, and it is not a big problem since they can just access AR technology via it. What[‘s]
more [is] it is free!”. Thus, it can be understood that both teachers utilized AR via tablets and smartphones. Furthermore,
the fact that AR is free allows teachers and students to use it without having to be worried about any payment, hence it is
cost-effective for students as well as teachers.
Suits Lesson Objective
Another theme that emerged is that teachers employed AR because it suited their lesson objective. For instance,
Shawn indicated that he would use AR when the technology suits his lesson objective. He further suggested that using
AR in language learning is different from other subjects, as language learning sometimes requires the context of the
background of the topic to be well-explained. For example, he utilized AR when teaching about costumes worn by peo-
ple from other cultural contexts. So other than using video, which is quite frequently used, he incorporated AR to show
139
the 3D picture of the costumes. Additionally, Azie will use AR if it suits her lesson objective, but she preferred to use AR
to introduce vocabulary because it helps show pictures that clearly represents lessons’ vocabulary. For example, Figure 1
below shows how Azie integrated AR in her lesson to show the differences between a laptop and a computer.
Figure 1. Using AR in an English lesson to show the difference between laptop and desktop computer.
Support from School
When teachers were asked what affects their utilization of AR in teaching English, these teachers mentioned that
school facilitation is important. Shawn stated that “My students have access to an iPad to be used in English learning.
Through this iPad, I use AR. Since my school also encouraged us to use technology in class and we are an Apple Aspired
school, I’m quite privileged to be having the support from [my] school.” Furthermore, Azie mentioned that even though
her students do not have tablets or iPads provided by her school, they have smartphones that they can use for learning
and teaching. “Pupils have their own mobile phones. Even those who do not have it, they’ll just use their parents’ smart-
phones. But I need to ask special permission from [my] school before they can bring their phone, as it is not permitted.
But my school’s principal is usually okay with it”. From these statements, it can be seen clearly that Azie’s and Shawn’s
schools have different facilities, but schools managed to support their teachers by giving them iPad or permission for
students to bring their phone when they needed to use it in their classroom.
Connectivity
Having a reliable internet connection is important for AR use. For instance, Shawn believed that he is privileged
to be teaching in a boarding secondary school where his school has provided a strong internet connection for the use of
teachers and students. In addition, as one of the top boarding schools in the northern state, the school is an Apple Distin-
guished School, hence, almost all students have access to tablets. About that, Shawn commented, “...like nearly all stu-
dents have access to tablets as well as iPad since we are striving to become an Apple Distinguished School, so we have
access to iPads and a great connection of internet”. Meanwhile, Azie, although teaching in a public secondary school,
stated that the internet connection is not particularly excellent, so she usually brought her own hotspot to the classroom
to help. “Frankly speaking, the connection is not that good, you know. In this school the signal will be good in two or
three places, so every day I’ll bring my own pocket Wi-Fi.” Both situations revealed that the teachers believed a reliable
internet connection was vital whenever they wanted to use AR technology. Azie’s case exemplified extra effort that teach-
ers may need to invest while trying to adopt AR in teaching.
Question 2: What are the participants’ experiences with augmented reality in teaching English language skills?
Other than expressing the reasons why they utilized AR in teaching English skills, both Shawn and Azie mentioned
that they have positive experiences with using AR for instructional purposes. For example, Azie mentioned AR attracted
her students’ attention when she used it in her English lesson.
Similarly, Shawn shared that his passion for using technology
140
was to be aligned with 21st century practices. For example, he said that he is a young teacher and therefore uses a lot of technol-
ogies, which includes AR. He mentioned, “You know, teaching in the 21st century, and as I would say, [I am a] young teacher
[who] is [a] very a big fan of technology, so I use technology a lot and this includes using AR technology.”
Both these responses strengthen the fact that for teachers to use AR in English, they need to have an optimistic view
and accept the technology. The willingness to integrate AR will likely lead to the effective utilization of it. Shawn men-
tioned that “I would say that something unique that will stand out from the rest [is that] I’ve used AR as well in my class
as part of my activities. So, I think those are like the new and emerging technologies that I experiment with at the end of
the day.” His response was similar with Azie, as she mentioned that “Well, basically, in teaching, I use AR with my kids.
You know the apps. I sometimes used them and let my kids try it on their own.” From these comments based on their ex-
periences, two themes emerged from their experience with AR that were (1) AR helped to explain lesson content, and (2)
AR makes activities more interesting.
AR to Explain Lesson Content
When using AR, both participants stated that they incorporate it into their lessons, because it can explain lesson
concepts to students. In Shawn’s case, he mentioned that AR helps in his lesson to extend his students knowledge, and
that his lesson become more interesting when he uses it compared to a more traditional approach. In Azie’s case, she AR
helps her clearly explain lesson content, especially vocabulary words. She explained that “I use AR to explain the vocab-
ulary to my students. There are some vocabularies that is a bit complicated to be explained like verb. So, for verb, I just
explain the vocab through AR and give examples in the video”.
In addition, both participants utilized AR in various teaching environments, where Shawn explained that he incorpo-
rated AR in his face-to-face lesson while Azie used it in her face-to-face teaching and online English lessons. For Shawn,
he mentioned the benefit of AR in face-to-face instruction was that he can use AR apps “in class when teaching, some-
times when I want to introduce [a] topic like culture or traditional clothes, I will let students use AR to scan the picture
and get information from there.” Azie extended her use to social media, so she would use platforms like WhatsApp to
share her lesson content which she incorporated AR via social media with her students.
AR Made Activities More Interesting
Both participants mentioned that AR made the activities in their English classes more interesting. For example,
Shawn utilized AR to attract his students’ attention when he used it to make himself look like a cartoon in his online les-
son. Shawn also utilized AR in the form of picture cards, so that his students’ can scan a code to engage with it. He men-
tioned that he used the small AR cards and put the cards on the whiteboard, so that his students could scan the picture
card. Similar with Shawn, Azie utilized AR in the form of pictures, but she also included the words on the pictures. Azie
will “put pictures in front of the class, together with the words, I mean vocabulary to make them understand better. For
example, ‘sore throat,’ ‘cough,’ ‘stomach-ache,’ [and] ‘headache.’” This shows that AR was utilized in both teachers’ les-
son to make activities in their classroom more captivating.
Additionally, when using AR, Shawn implied that not only his students were feeling excited, but as a teacher he was
also feeling motivated. Shawn explained “You know, like engaging the students with the lesson even with you, yourself.”
Azie explained a similar phenomenon. “When I use AR to show the vocabulary, students are found to be more into the
lesson. It is so different, like, when I just ask them to list words and find the meaning in the dictionary, sometimes they
will just copy their friends’ work. But with AR, when they scan the vocab cards, the words and picture shows so they feel
more excited!”
Marker-based AR was utilized by Shawn and Azie to make the activities in their English lesson more captivating.
Shawn and Azie also incorporated AR in their online and physical lesson using marker-based AR by incorporating AR
in the video of their online lessons. Various studies have shown that AR has been incorporated into vocabulary learning
(Aizan et al., 2019; Lai & Chang, 2021; Zhang, 2021). Thus, the practice in Azie and Shawn’s English lessons is aligned
with most studies conducted with AR in English classrooms.
141
DISCUSSION
The positive views that both participants had towards AR were the most important factors concerning the integration
of AR into their teaching of English skills. Acceptance of AR is important for using this technology, which is aligned
with previous studies (Banerjee & Walunj, 2019; Wei et al., 2021). However, the teachers in these studies are focusing
on urban areas. The present study shows that even teachers in suburban areas have been using AR in their instruction
of English language skills. These findings supplement other research (Wei et al., 2021) that mentioned teachers’ accep-
tance of AR as part of their English instruction is quite high in urban areas. The finding from this study suggested that
both participants, although teaching in suburban parts of Malaysia, have incorporated AR technology into their English
language instruction. Furthermore, although both come from different school backgrounds, Azie and Shawn have shown
that curiosity and eagerness to explore AR are the core reasons for their use of it.
This study’s findings also denote that teaching English skills with AR can be accomplished by using it to explain
English lesson content and making English lessons more interesting. Interview data from this study showed that AR is
mostly employed in vocabulary teaching, which is aligned with various empirical studies on AR in English language
(Che Dalim et al., 2020; Cheng et al., 2016; Tsai, 2020).
Furthermore, both teachers incorporated AR in their starter activity to introduce vocabulary or as a tool to increase
students’ comprehension in their English lessons. Although this is a useful practice, future studies can also explore how
AR can be utilized in the middle of a lesson or at the end of a lesson. Because both teachers mentioned that students en-
gage well when using AR, it is important to also explore questions such as to what extent they can maintain engagement
and how long students are able to engage in the lesson when using AR. This is because few studies have found that AR
also decreases students’ attention and they tend to deviate or lose focus in learning (Khan et al., 2019).
Among the reasons for teachers’ utilization of AR was because they found it to be an effective and minimalist tech-
nology. Although both participants taught in two different secondary school settings, they shared the same views toward
AR. For example, they both mentioned that AR is a free technology where it can be easily accessed by students using
mobile devices. Studies that investigated AR usage also provide the same justification for AR adoption, where the authors
asserted that AR is increasingly being used due to the emergence of handheld devices. Because AR can be incorporated
into mobile applications, books, and in websites, it is being used more often via handheld devices (Çakir, 2015; Parmaxi
& Demetriou, 2020).
Another reason for the participants’ integration of AR in teaching English language skills was because it suited their
English lesson objectives. As previously mentioned by the participants, AR was used to introduce vocabulary and to
differentiate between different vocabulary terms such as laptop and computer. This can help clarify misunderstandings
about words and indirectly enhance students’ performance. Because various empirical studies have found AR resulted in
improved performance (AlNajdi, 2022; Chen et al., 2020), Azie’s strategy may also increase students’ comprehension of
content (Tobar-Muñoz et al., 2017).
PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS
Pedagogical Implication for Administrators
Support teachers’ curiosity and risk-taking to support their views of AR. In the current study, it is important to
note that school administrators played crucial roles in supporting teachers’ use of technology, particularly emerging tech-
nology like AR. Because AR is still considered an emergent technology, teachers are found to be in the state where they
are still exploring best practices for using it. Thus, the support given by school administrators, particularly the principal,
is important to keep teachers momentum to try this new technology. This is not only limited to AR but also other tech-
nologies.
Support the use of AR in teachers’ instruction by providing high wi-fi coverage, bandwidth, and moral sup-
port. Support from schools was also vital in teachers’ integration of AR. For instance, Shawn emphasized that his school
was well-equipped with a good internet connection. Meanwhile, Azie mentioned that her principal fully supported her ef-
forts to use AR technology by giving permission for her students to bring smartphones to school, when they needed them
for her class. The good facilities and moral support from each school’s principal were vital for teachers to use AR in the
142
classroom. This is because when teachers were provided with the support they need, it increased their motivation to use
AR. As seen in this study, even though Azie was still a novice teacher, the support given by her principal helped her to
experiment with AR, which increased her confidence.
The last reason is good connectivity. Both participants mentioned that they utilize AR simultaneously with the in-
ternet because they employed marker-based AR in their lessons. Some marker-based AR in the form of quick response
(QR) codes from books and picture cards require the internet to be able to depict the video, sounds, or pictures. How-
ever, the misunderstanding of the participants should be made clear, as not all AR require the internet. For instance, Azie
mentioned that she used a QR code from the book to show dinosaurs. Because she brought her wireless internet every
time she teaches, she thought AR usage should be linked to the internet. In reality, not all AR require the internet, but the
integration of AR and the internet had been found to be promising in product research and development (Syahidi et al.,
2021). Nevertheless, this does not imply that all AR tools require an internet connection, as there are AR tools that will
work without having access to the internet.
Pedagogical Implication for Teachers
Use marker-based AR to bring instruction alive. In this study, the participants explained that AR is beneficial in
developing engagement between teachers, students, and lessons. Other studies came to similar findings in English lan-
guage teaching where AR was found to improve cognitive engagement (Wen, 2020; Wen & Lau, 2021). Even though the
participants in this study did not mention the types of engagement their students experienced, it is believed that AR em-
bedded in their English lessons helped their students relate well to the learning content. Furthermore, when teachers em-
ployed this technology, students were found to be more engaged to their teachers’ lessons, as they were curious to know
what their teacher would show them. This element of mystery made teaching English skills more fascinating, which can
indirectly increase learners’ motivation to learn (Wang & Khambari, 2020).
Additionally, Azie found that AR in books make her lesson more interesting and this is also aligned with what has
been done by Paredes-Velastegui et al. (2018). Using marker-based AR has been popular in learning and teaching in sec-
ond and foreign languages, particularly in vocabulary and reading (Parmaxi & Demetriou, 2020). Shawn integrated AR
to introduce costumes that are part of cultural elements in one of the English topics that he taught. Apart from that, Azie
also incorporated this technology to show dinosaurs and explain illnesses to her students. Hence, the present findings
illustrate the usefulness of AR to be a great technological tool for introducing topics in English lessons like extinct ani-
mals, health, and cultural-related as well as topics like costumes, languages, or even society’s values and artifacts. This
was executed by both participants through AR in the form of video, picture cards, and AR books.
Pedagogical implication for teachers. Use AR to demonstrate vocabulary terms in context. As previously dis-
cussed, the participants in this study utilized AR to explain vocabulary in the context of their lesson. For example, Shawn
and Azie incorporated AR when teaching vocabulary related to costumes, when explaining verbs, and when introducing
types of costumes to their students. By integrating AR, it helps to explain difficult vocabulary and clarify complex terms.
This reduces confusion among students and teachers feel excited to explore more on the types of vocabulary that can be
introduced using AR. Thus, the integration of AR in both digital and face-to-face instruction helps portray the vocabu-
lary, which supports findings from other researchers (Aizan et al, 2019; Hasbi & Md Yunus, 2021; Tsai, 2020).
CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RESEARCH
In conclusion, this study focused on the experience of two English teachers and their teaching of English language
skills using AR. The participants’ both have positive views of AR, and they integrate it predominantly in their instruction
of the English language to explain content or to increase student interests in their lessons. In addition, the participants ex-
plained that students viewed AR as being a fun and engaging tool, effective and minimalist in nature, helpful for teaching
lesson objectives, and supported by their schools and administrators. This study also includes pedagogical implications
for teachers as well as for administrators when supporting the integration of AR for instructional purposes.
143
REFERENCES
Aizan, Y., Farazilla, Z., Norazali, A., Nurfuady, A., Nurul Aini, O., & Rabiatul Adawiyah, M. F. (2019). AR flashcards as a tool
to improve rural low ability students vocabulary. Practitioner Research, 1, 29–52.
Aldossari, S., & Alsuhaibani, Z. (2021). Using Augmented Reality in Language Classrooms: The Case of EFL Elementary Stu-
dents. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(6), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.6.p.1
AlNajdi, S. M. (2022). The effectiveness of using augmented reality (AR) to enhance student performance: using quick re-
sponse (QR) codes in student textbooks in the Saudi education system. Educational Technology Research and Develop-
ment, 70(3), 1105–1124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10100-4
Banerjee, G., & Walunj, S. (2019). Exploring in-Service Teachers’ Acceptance of Augmented Reality. Proceedings - IEEE 10th
International Conference on Technology for Education, T4E 2019, 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1109/T4E.2019.00043
Bistaman, I. N. M., Idrus, S. Z. S., & Rashid, S. A. (2018). The Use of Augmented Reality Technology for Primary School
Education in Perlis, Malaysia. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1019(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-
6596/1019/1/012064
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77-101.
Çakir, İ. (2015). Instructional materials commonly employed by foreign language teachers at elementary schools. Internation-
al Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(1), 537–550. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-
84943263099&partnerID=40&md5=a68d3e9dbbeaf343cf12d4da731a8167
Che Dalim, C. S., Sunar, M. S., Dey, A., & Billinghurst, M. (2020). Using augmented reality with speech input for non-native
children’s language learning. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 134, 44–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhcs.2019.10.002
Chen, H.-L., Vicki Widarso, G., & Sutrisno, H. (2020). A ChatBot for Learning Chinese: Learning Achieve-
ment and Technology Acceptance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(6), 1161–1189. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0735633120929622
Chen, I.-C. (2018). The Application of Augmented Reality in English Phonics Learning Performance of ESL young Learn-
ers. Proceedings - 2018 1st International Cognitive Cities Conference, IC3 2018, 255–259. https://doi.org/10.1109/
IC3.2018.000-7
Cheng, L. K., Puteh, F., Selamat, A., & Mohamed, F. B. (2016). A review of recent usability measures in English Language
Teaching (ELT) technologies. In H. S.A., A. R. W.N., A. R., P. N.C., & M. A. N. (Eds.), 9th Malaysian Software Engineer-
ing Conference, MySEC 2015 (pp. 278–283). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. https://doi.org/10.1109/
MySEC.2015.7475233
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education (8
th
Edition). Routledge.
Czerkawski, B., & Berti, M. (2021). Learning experience design for augmented reality. Research in Learning Technology,
29(1063519), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v29.2429
Elaish, M. M., Shuib, L., Abdul Ghani, N., Yadegaridehkordi, E., & Alaa, M. (2017). Mobile Learning for English Language
Acquisition: Taxonomy, Challenges, and Recommendations. IEEE Access, 5, 19033–19047. https://doi.org/10.1109/AC-
CESS.2017.2749541
Eldokhny, A. A., & Drwish, A. M. (2021). Effectiveness of Augmented Reality in Online Distance Learning at the Time of
the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(9), 198–218. https://doi.
org/10.3991/ijet.v16i09.17895
Farah, M. Z., Siti Nazuar, S., Marini, K., Abdul Malek, A. K., & Nurfarah Najlaa, Z. (2022). Developing an Augmented Reality
Immersive Learning Design (AILeaD) Framework: A Fuzzy Delphi Approach. International Journal of Interactive Mobile
Technologies, 16(11), 65–90. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i11.30063
Hasbi, A., & Md Yunus, M. (2021). A Systematic Review of Augmented Reality in English Language Learning. International
Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(2), 163–183. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/
v10-i2/9218
Khan, T., Johnston, K., & Ophoff, J. (2019). The Impact of an Augmented Reality Application on Learning Motivation of Stu-
dents. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2019, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/7208494
Lai, J. Y., & Chang, L. T. (2021). Impacts of Augmented Reality Apps on First Graders’ Motivation and Performance in
English Vocabulary Learning. SAGE Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211047549
Majid, S. N. A., & Salam, A. R. (2021). A Systematic Review of Augmented Reality Applications in Language Learning. Inter-
national Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(10), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i10.17273
Milgram, P., & Kishino, F. (1994). A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays. Industrial Engineering, 12, 1–15.
Mystakidis, S., Fragkaki, M., & Filippousis, G. (2021). Ready Teacher One: Virtual and Augmented Reality Online Professional
Development for K-12 School Teachers. Computers, 10(134), 1–16.
Paredes-Velastegui, D., Lluma-Noboa, A., Olmedo-Vizueta, D., Avila-Pesantez, D., & Hernandez-Ambato, J. (2018). Augment-
ed reality implementation as reinforcement tool for public textbooks education in Ecuador. 2018 IEEE Global Engineering
Education Conference - Emerging Trends and Challenges of Engineering Education, EDUCON 2018, 2018-April, 1243–
1250. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363372
144
Parmaxi, A., & Demetriou, A. A. (2020). Augmented reality in language learning: A state-of-the-art review of 2014–2019. Jour-
nal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(6), 861–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12486
Ramya, G., & Madhumathi, P. (2017). Adopting Augmented Reality for English Language Teaching and Learning. Approved
List of Journals Serial Number, 17(7), 352–360. www.languageinindia.com
Romano, M., Díaz, P., & Aedo, I. (2020). Empowering teachers to create augmented reality experiences: the effects on the edu-
cational experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1851727
Simonova, O., & Kolesnichenko, A. (2022). The effectiveness of the augmented reality application in foreign language teaching
in higher school. SHS Web of Conferences, 137, 01025. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202213701025
Syahidi, A. A., Arai, K., Tolle, H., Supianto, A. A., & Kiyokawa, K. (2021). Augmented Reality in the Internet of Things
(AR + IoT): A Review. The IJICS (International Journal of Informatics and Computer Science), 5(3), 1–8. https://doi.
org/10.30865/ijics.v5i3.3341
Taskiran, A. (2019). The effect of augmented reality games on English as foreign language motivation. E-Learning and Digital
Media, 16(2), 122–135. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753018817541
Tobar-Muñoz, H., Baldiris, S., & Fabregat, R. (2017). Augmented Reality Game-Based Learning: Enriching Students’ Experi-
ence During Reading Comprehension Activities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(7), 901–936. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0735633116689789
Tsai, C. C. (2020). The effects of augmented reality to motivation and performance in EFL vocabulary learning. International
Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 987–1000. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13460a
Vedadi, S., Abdullah, Z. B., & Cheok, A. D. (2019). The effects of multi-sensory augmented reality on students’ motivation in
english language learning. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, April-2019, 1079–1086. https://
doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2019.8725096
Wang, D., & Khambari, M. N. M. (2020). An AR-based Gamified English Course in Vocational College through Interest-driven
Approach. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(1), 132-137. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081317
Wei, C. Y., Kuah, Y. C., Ng, C. P., & Lau, W. K. (2021). Augmented Reality (AR) as an Enhancement Teaching Tool: Are Edu-
cators Ready for It? Contemporary Educational Technology, 13(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/10866
Wen, Y, & Lau, S. Y. (2021). Investigating Pupils’ Cognitive Engagement in Augmented Reality-Supported Second Language
Learning Classrooms. In Lecture Notes in Educational Technology (pp. 3–17). Springer Science and Business Media
Deutschland GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7579-2_1
Wen, Y. (2020). Augmented reality enhanced cognitive engagement: Designing classroom-based collaborative learning activities
for young language learners. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 843–860. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11423-020-09893-z
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.). Sage.
Zhang, S. (2021). Integrating Augmented Reality into a Task-Based Thematic Language Teaching Unit. Journal of Technology
and Chinese Language Teaching, 12(2), 29–48.
