A study utilizing an online application to improve student reading comprehension of undergraduate students in a Private International University


  • Edward Bacon Department of Bilingual Education, Faculty of Education, Rangsit University, Patumthani 12000, Thailand
  • Supinda Lertlit Department of Bilingual Education, Faculty of Education, Rangsit University, Patumthani 12000, Thailand


curriculum development, Eddie’s Vocab Challenge, flash-based vocabulary-oriented in-class online application, in-class online application, reading comprehension


Technology is very much a part of our daily lives, and is only natural to want to implement the same technology in our classrooms.  Thus, this study engaged undergraduate international university students from distinctive linguistic backgrounds, utilizing Eddie’s Vocab Challenge, testing its impact on the students’ capacity to comprehend fundamental English reading passages.  When initially introducing technology into a classroom setting, it is not a matter of simply adding an interactive online exercise randomly, but rather making sure the newly integrated technological application and/or feature is synchronized with a classes’ or course’s overall curriculum development or design.  During the course of this study, a mixed method of both quantitative and qualitative approach was utilized.  First of all, both (control and experimental) groups participated in a 100-question reading comprehension pre-test and post-test.  Secondly, students were asked to participate in focus groups that were randomly selected.  Lastly, the researchers kept audio journals after each teaching session.  When compared to utilizing teaching methods, the findings of this study showed that by using a flash-based vocabulary-oriented in-class online application, students reading comprehension scores in the experimental group improved 12% as opposed to the control group’s 5%.  Additional unintended findings of the study also found that student motivation improved 14.2% more in the experimental group than did in the control group.  The other unintended finding was that the student truancy decreased 6.8% more in the experimental group when compared to the control group.


Allsop, Y., Yildirim, E. Y., & Screpanti, M. (2013). Teachers' beliefs about game based learning: A comparative study of pedagogy, curriculum and practice in Italy, Turkey and the UK. Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Games Based Learning, 1, 1-10.

Alodail, A. (2016). The instructors' attitudes toward the use of E-learning in classroom in College of Education at Albaha University. Turkish Online Journal Of Educational Technology, 15(1), 126-135.

Alresheed, S., Leask, M., & Raiker, A. (2015). Integrating computer-assisted language learning in Saudi schools: A change model. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 14(4), 69-77.

Asmaa, A., Noorizah Mohd, N., & Zaini, A. (2015). The effect of data driven learning on receptive vocabulary knowledge of Yemeni University learners. 3L; Language,Linguistics and Literature: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 21(3), 13-24.

Beserra, V., Nussbaum, M., Zeni, R., Rodriguez, W., & Wurman, G. (2014). Practising arithmetic using educational video games with an interpersonal computer. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(3), 343-358.

Beydarani, V. (2015). The influence of concept mapping on reading comprehension of Iranian English students employing persuasive and descriptive texts. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 6(1), 196-203. DOI: 10.17507/jltr.0601.24

Brosseuk, D. (2014). A new direction: Using mobile technology devices to motivate and engage boys in literacy learning. Practically Primary, 19(1), 17-21.

Carlson, E., Jenkins, F., Li, T., & Brownell, M. (2013). The interactions of vocabulary, phonemic awareness, decoding, and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 120-131. DOI: 10.1080/00220671.2012.687791

Chunwadee, C., Unchalee, S., Angkana, T., & Niwat, S. (2015). Developing local curriculum framework on water resource and disaster course in the basic educational system. Educational Research and Review,10(16), 2216-2225. DOI: 10.5897/ERR2015.2277

Conefrey, T. (2016). Technology in the college classroom: Crisis and opportunity. Educational Technology, 56(4), 37-40.

Ersoy, A., & Bozkurt, M. (2015). Understanding an elementary school teachers' journey of using technology in the classroom from sand table to interactive whiteboard. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 8(1), 469-488.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Content area vocabulary learning. The Reading Teacher, 67(8), 594-599. DOI: 10.1002/trtr.1258

Hall, R., Greenberg, D., Laures-Gore, J., & Pae, H. K. (2014). The relationship between expressive vocabulary knowledge and reading skills for adult struggling readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 37(S1), S87-S100. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2012.01537.x

Kelley, M. F., Roe, M., Blanchard, J., & Atwill, K. (2015). The influence of spanish vocabulary and phonemic awareness on beginning english reading development: A three-year (K-2nd) longitudinal study. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 29(1), 42-59. DOI: 10.1080/02568543.2014.973127

Kim, H. J., Park, J. H. , Yoo, S., & Kim, H. (2016). Fostering creativity in tablet-based interactive classrooms. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 207-220.

Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). Flash: Engaging learners through animation, interaction, and multimedia. Teacher Librarian, 33(4), 54-56.

Lan, L., Worch, E., YuChun, Z., & Aguiton, R. (2015). How and why digital generation teachers use technology in the classroom: An explanatory sequential mixed methods study. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 9(2), 1-9.

Lane-Kelso, M. (2014). Got Game? Playing to learn in Omani education. Proceedings of The European Conference on Games Based Learning, 2, 818-820.

Levene, J., & Seabury, H. (2015). Evaluation of mobile learning: Current research and implications for instructional designers (abstract). Techtrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 59(6), 46-52. DOI: 10.1007/s11528-015-0904-4

Lineros, J. V., & Hinojosa, M. (2012). Theories of learning and student development. National Forum of Teacher Education Journal, 22(3), 1-5.

Lougheed, L. (2014). Barron's practice exams with audio CDs: 2nd edition. Hauppauge, NY, USA: Barron's Educational Series.

McClanahan, L. (2014). Training using technology in the adult ESL classroom. Journal of Adult Education, 43(1), 22-27.

McKeown, M. G., Crosson, A. C., Artz, N. J., Sandora, C., & Beck, I. L. (2013). In the media: Expanding students' experience with academic vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 67(1), 45-53. DOI: 10.1002/TRTR.1179

Meyer, L. (2015). 4 Innovative ways to teach with video games. T H E Journal, 42(5), 20-24.

Mokhtari, K., & Niederhauser, D. S. (2013). Vocabulary and syntactic knowledge factors in 5th grade students' reading comprehension. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 5(2), 157-169.

Nowell, S. D. (2014). Using disruptive technologies to make digital connections: stories of media use and digital literacy in secondary classrooms. Educational Media International, 51(2), 109-123. DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2014.924661

Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental relations between vocabulary, knowledge and reading comprehension: A latent change score modeling study. Child Development, 86(1), 159-175. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12292

Rehmat, A., & Bailey, J. (2014). Technology integration in a Science classroom: Preservice teachers' perceptions. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(6), 744-755. DOI: 10.1007/s10956-014-9507-7

Safitry, T. S., Mantoro, T., Ayu, M. A., Mayumi, I., Dewanti, R., & Azmeela, S. (2015). Teachers' perspectives and practices in applying technology to enhance learning in the classroom. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(3), 10-14. DOI: 10.3991/ijet.v10i3.4356

Schaffhauser, D. (2013). Can gaming improve teaching and learning? (cover story). T H E Journal, 40(8), 26-33.

Spencer, R., & Smullen, T. (2014). Future reading: Using technology in the classroom. Practically Primary, 19(2), 28-31.

Suzuki, M., & Daza, C. (2004). A Review of the Reading Section of the TOEIC. TESL Canada Journal, 22(1), 16-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v22i1.163

Trew, G. (2007). A teacher’s guide to TOEIC ® listening and reading test: Preparing your students for success. Oxford University Press. Retrieved January 21, 2017, from https://elt.oup.com/elt/students/exams/pdf/elt/toeic_teachers_guide_international.pdf

Warren, M. C. (2016). Teaching with technology: Using digital humanities to engage student learning (abstract). Teaching Theology & Religion, 19(3), 309-319. DOI: 10.1111/teth.12343

Wistner, B., Sakai, H., & Abe, M. (2009). An analysis of the Oxford Placement Test and the Michigan English Placement Test as L2 proficiency tests. Bulletin of the Faculty of Letters, Hosei University, 58, 33-44. https://www.hosei.ac.jp/bungaku/museum/html/kiyo/58/articles/Wistner.pdf




How to Cite

Edward Bacon, & Supinda Lertlit. (2023). A study utilizing an online application to improve student reading comprehension of undergraduate students in a Private International University. Journal of Current Science and Technology, 7(1), 23–32. Retrieved from https://ph04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JCST/article/view/521



Research Article