Enhancing Vocational Students’ English Communication Skills through the KIPAR Plus AI Learning Model
Main Article Content
Abstract
This classroom research aimed to examine the effects of English learning management using the KIPAR Plus AI learning model on English learning achievement and attitudes toward English learning among vocational students. The research participants consisted of three vocational students enrolled in the Agro-Industrial Technology program at the higher vocational certificate level (Diploma level), selected through purposive sampling. The learning activities were implemented over a period of four weeks within the learning unit entitled Food Safety Rules. The KIPAR Plus AI learning model consists of five instructional stages: Kick-off, Introduce, Practice, Apply, and Review. Artificial Intelligence (AI) was integrated as a supportive learning tool in the Introduce, Practice, and Apply stages under the supervision of the teacher in order to assist students in checking grammatical accuracy and receiving immediate feedback for improving their language use. The research instruments included lesson plans based on the KIPAR Plus AI model, a pretest and posttest to measure English learning achievement, an attitude questionnaire toward English learning, and a student interview form. All research instruments were validated for content validity by five experts. Quantitative data were analyzed using mean and standard deviation, while qualitative data were analyzed through content analysis. The results revealed that the students’ English learning achievement scores increased from a mean of 6.33 to 9.00 out of 10 after the implementation of the learning activities. In addition, the students’ attitudes toward English learning showed a mean score of 41.33 out of 50, indicating a generally positive tendency toward learning English. Qualitative findings further suggested that students became more confident in using English and gradually improved their language use through AI-supported feedback during classroom activities. The findings suggest that the KIPAR Plus AI learning model may support the development of English communication skills and positive attitudes toward English learning among vocational students within this classroom research context. However, the findings should be interpreted within the limitations of a small-scale classroom study. The model may also be adapted for English teaching and learning in vocational education settings with appropriate consideration of learner context and instructional conditions.
Article Details
References
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press. https://books.google.com/books?id=XhjRBrDAESkC
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. George Washington University. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336049
Chen, X., Xie, H., Zou, D., & Hwang, G. J. (2020). Application and theory gaps during the rise of artificial intelligence in education. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2020.100002
Chen, X., Zou, D., Xie, H., Cheng, G., & Liu, C. (2022). Two decades of artificial intelligence in education. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 28–47. https://index.j-ets.net/Published/25_1/ETS_25_1_03.pdf
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/task-based-language-learning-and-teaching-9780194421591
Godwin-Jones, R. (2021). Emerging technologies: Artificial intelligence and language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 25(1), 5–12. https://hdl.handle.net/10125/73474
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign. https://curriculumredesign.org/our-work/artificial-intelligence-in-education/
Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2023). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of artificial intelligence in education. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100102
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Long, M. H. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Second+Language+Acquisition+and+Task-Based+Language+Teaching-p-9780470658949
Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson. https://edu.google.com/pdfs/Intelligence-Unleashed-Publication.pdf
Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
Zhai, X. (2023). ChatGPT for AI-assisted learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100124