The Development of Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) for Modal Verbs in English Language Learning for Grade 9 Students
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Modal verbs encode functions such as ability, possibility, permission, obligation, prohibition, advice, requests, and suggestions, and their context-dependent meanings can present difficulties in secondary English learning. This study developed an interactive Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI) package for Grade 9 students and evaluated learning achievement and learner acceptance. Methods: The source research used a one-group pretest–posttest design with 41 Grade 9 students at Bang Sai Witthaya School in the 2025 academic year. The intervention comprised four functionally organized modal-verb units delivered through a Flash-based multimedia environment. Instruments were a 40-item multiple-choice achievement test and a 20-item five-point satisfaction questionnaire. The report also documented one-to-one, small-group, and field try-outs. Results: The reported pretest mean was 12.45 (SD = 3.21) and the posttest mean was 25.87 (SD = 2.98), with t = 15.62 and significance reported at the .05 level. A secondary calculation from these reported aggregates yielded a mean gain of 13.42 points (95% CI 11.68–15.16), dz = 2.44, and normalized gain = 0.49. Overall satisfaction was high (M = 4.35, SD = 0.56). Efficiency results were internally inconsistent: Chapter 4 reported E1/E2 = 86.75/82.35, whereas the appendix reported 79.85/81.77 for the field trial; direct recalculation from the 40 displayed field-trial rows yielded 79.50/81.63. Because the report does not provide evidence sufficient to reconcile these values, no single final efficiency estimate is asserted here. Conclusion: The available evidence supports substantial within-group improvement following CAI use and positive learner acceptance, but the absence of a control group prevents causal claims of superiority over conventional instruction. The study contributes a transparent, curriculum-aligned account of interactive digital grammar instruction and identifies reporting requirements for stronger future evaluations.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Ai, H. (2017). Providing graduated corrective feedback in an intelligent computer-assisted language learning environment. ReCALL, 29(3), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095834401700012X
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.
Chapelle, C. A. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing and research. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524681
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). e-Learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119239086
Gagné, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., & Keller, J. M. (2005). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Wadsworth/Thomson Learning.
Golonka, E. M., Bowles, A. R., Frank, V. M., Richardson, D. L., & Freynik, S. (2014). Technologies for foreign language learning: A review of technology types and their effectiveness. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(1), 70–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2012.700315
Grgurović, M., Chapelle, C. A., & Shelley, M. C. (2013). A meta-analysis of effectiveness studies on computer technology-supported language learning. ReCALL, 25(2), 165–198. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344013000013
Heift, T., & Vyatkina, N. (2017). Technologies for teaching and learning L2 grammar. In C. A. Chapelle & S. Sauro (Eds.), The handbook of technology and second language teaching and learning (pp. 26–44). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118914069.ch3
Hockly, N. (2013). Mobile learning. ELT Journal, 67(1), 80–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccs064
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863
Levy, M. (1997). Computer-assisted language learning: Context and conceptualization. Oxford University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Ministry of Education, Thailand. (2008). Basic Education Core Curriculum B.E. 2551 (A.D. 2008). Office of the Basic Education Commission.
Moon, S., & Oh, S.-Y. (2018). Unlearning overgenerated be through data-driven learning in the secondary EFL classroom. ReCALL, 30(1), 48–67. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344017000246
Nagata, N. (1996). Computer vs. workbook instruction in second language acquisition. CALICO Journal, 14(1), 53–75.
Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and modality (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139167178
Sagarra, N., & Zapata, G. C. (2008). Blending classroom instruction with online homework: A study of student perceptions of computer-assisted L2 learning. ReCALL, 20(2), 208–224. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344008000621
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Torres-Martínez, S. (2019). Taming English modals: How a Construction Grammar approach helps to understand modal verbs. English Today, 35(2), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078418000081
Trapsaphon, P. (2025). The development of computer-assisted instruction for Modal Verbs for Grade 9 students [Unpublished research report]. Bang Sai Witthaya School.
Warschauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31(2), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800012970
