The Technology-Enhanced Training Effectiveness Model (TETEM) has been used to assess the effectiveness of various technology-driven solutions in improving students’ outcomes in multiple academic fields. However, limited research is available on the use of TETEM in the context of second language learning. Using a modified TETEM, this study seeks first, to assess the direct effects of students’ attitudes and experiences with video gaming on their achievement; and second, to evaluate the effects of students’ attitudes and experiences that are mediated by their motivation.
Methods
This study was conducted among preparatory year students at Al-Jouf University, Saudi Arabia. Students were randomly assigned to the technology-enhanced group (Duolingo® + workbook) or the control group (classroom workbook group). We started by comparing student performance between the two groups to evaluate the effect of the intervention. Subsequently, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to establish homogenous latent variables for experience, attitude, and motivation. Finally, we used structural equation models to evaluate the presence of direct and mediated effects.
Results
Students in the Duolingo® + workbook group scored higher on reading, grammar, vocabulary, and writing compared to the workbook group. Positive attitude toward video gaming had both a direct and mediating positive correlation with student achievement. Additionally, motivation toward ESL learning was independently and positively correlated with student achievement. As expected, the technology-enhanced group performed better in reading, grammar, and vocabulary while the control group showed more participation and timely completion of assignments.
Conclusion
Technology enhancement improves students’ performance for ESL, however, adequate integration of technology in the course curriculum is needed to minimize interference with class participation. Positive attitudes toward video games and motivation toward ESL learning are positive predictors of student achievement while experience with video games has no significant effect.
AbdugulovaZ. (2017). Allowing schools access to affordable computers. how schools can benefit from switching to inexpensive, cloud-based computing technologies. International Journal of Learning and Teaching, 9(3), 326-331. https://doi.org/10.18844/ijlt.v9i3.507.
2.
Al azawiR.BulshiM., & farsiF. (2016). Educational Gamification Vs. Game Based Learning: Comparative Study. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology (IJIMT), 7, 131-136. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijimt.2016.7.4.659.
3.
Al FattaH.MaksomZ., & ZakariaM. (2019). Game-based Learning and Gamification: Searching for Definitions. International Journal of Simulation: Systems, Science & Technology, 19. https://doi.org/10.5013/IJSSST.a.19.06.41.
4.
ArmstrongM. B.LandersR. N. (2017). An evaluation of gamified training: using narrative to improve reactions and learning. Simulation and Gaming, 48(4), 513-538. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878117703749.
5.
BourgonjonJeroenValckeMartinSoetaertRonald, & SchellensTammy (2010). Students’ perceptions about the use of video games in the classroom. Computers & Education, 54, 1145-1156. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.022.
6.
BreazealC.MorrisR.GottwaldS.GalyeanT.WolfM. (2016). “Mobile devices for early literacy intervention and research with global reach. In Proceedings of the Third (2016) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, L@S ’16, Edinburgh Scotland, UK, 25–26 April, 2016. New York, USA: Association for Computing Machinery.
7.
BredemeierM. E.BernsteinG.WendyO. (1982). Ba Fa Ba Fa and dogmatism/ethnocentrism: A study of attitude change through simulation-gaming. Simulation and Games, 13(4), 413-436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037550082134002.
8.
BrownA.GreenT. (2017). Issues and trends in instructional technology: increased use of mobile technologies and digital content to provide untethered access to training and learning opportunities. In OreyM.BranchR. M. (Eds.), 15–26 in Educational Media and Technology Yearbook: Volume 40, Educational Media and Technology Yearbook. New York, USA: Springer International Publishing.
9.
BryantF. B.YarnoldP. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99-136), Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Figueroa-FloresJ. (2016). Gamification and Game-Based Learning: Two Strategies for the 21st Century Learner. World Journal of Educational Research, 3, 507. https://doi.org/10.22158/wjer.v3n2p507.
12.
FisherD. J.BeedleJ.RouseS. E. (2014). Gamification: A study of business teacher educators’ knowledge of, attitudes toward, and experiences with the gamification of activities in the classroom. The Journal of Research in Business Education, 56(1), 1-16.
GygiJ. T.FuxE.GrobA.Hagmann-von ArxP. (2016). Measurement invariance and latent mean differences in the Reynolds intellectual assessment scales (RIAS): does the german version of the RIAS allow a valid assessment of individuals with a migration background?Plos One, 11(11), e0166533e0166533. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166533.
15.
HamariJ.KoivistoJ.SarsaH. (2014). Does gamification work?–A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS), Hawaii, USA, IEEE.
JacobsR. L.MaryanneB. (1987). Simulation and games in training and development: status and concerns about their use. Simulation and Games, 18(3), 385-394. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687818701800305.
18.
LandersR. N (2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation and Gaming, 45(6), 752-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114563660.
19.
LandersR. N.ArmstrongM. B. (2017). Enhancing instructional outcomes with gamification: an empirical test of the technology-enhanced training effectiveness model. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 499-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.031.
20.
LandersR. N.ArmstrongM. B.CollmusA. B. (2017). How to use game elements to enhance learning: applications of the theory of gamified learning. In MaM.OikonomouA. (Eds.), Serious Games and Edutainment Applications : Volume II (p. 457): Springer International Publishing.
21.
LandersR. N.BauerK. N.CallanR. C.ArmstrongM. B. (2015). Psychological theory and the gamification of learning. In ReinersI.WoodL. C.. Gamification in education and business (p. 165): Springer International Publishing.
22.
LandersRichardN., & RachelC. Callan. (2012). Training Evaluation in Virtual Worlds: Development of a Model. Journal For Virtual Worlds Research, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.4101/jvwr.v5i3.6335.
23.
LoewenS.CrowtherD.IsbellD. R.KimK. M.MaloneyJ.MillerZ. F.RawalH. (2019). Mobile-assisted language learning: a duolingo case study. ReCALL, 31(3), 293-311. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000065.
MonterratB.LavouéE.GeorgeS. (2014). Motivation for learning: Adaptive gamification for web-based learning environments. In 6th international conference on computer supported education (csedu 2014), Barcelona, Spain.
26.
MundayPilar (2016). The case for using DUOLINGO as part of the language classroom experience. RIED: Revista Iberoamericana de Educación a Distancia, 19(1), 83-101. https://doi.org/10.5944/ried.19.1.14581.
27.
ParkJ.DeLYiM. Y., & SanthanamR. (2019). GAMESIT: A gamified system for information technology training. Computers and Education, 142, 103643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103643.
28.
R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
29.
RandelJ. M.MorrisDBarbaraA. C. W.WhitehillB. V. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: a review of recent research. Simulation and Gaming, 23(3), 261-276. https://doi.org/110.1177/1046878192233001.
30.
ReigeluthC. M.SchwartzE. (1989). An instructional theory for the design of computer-based simulations. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 16(1), 1-10.
31.
RicciK. E.SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (1996). Do computer-based games facilitate knowledge acquisition and retention?Military Psychology, 8(4), 295-307. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327876mp0804_3.
32.
RieberLloydP. (1996). Seriously considering play: designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 43-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300540.
33.
RitterfeldU., & WeberR. (2006). Video Games for Entertainment and Education. Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses. and Consequences, 399-413.
34.
RosseelY. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
35.
SailerM.JanH.MandlH., & KleversM. (2013). Psychological perspectives on motivation through gamification. Interaction Design and Architectures Journal, 19, 28-37.
ThomasP.MacredieR. (1994). Games and the design of human‐computer interfaces. Educational and Training Technology International, 31(2), 134-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954730940310208.
38.
TuanH‐L.ChinC‐C.ShiehS‐H. (2005). The development of a questionnaire to measure students’ motivation towards science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 639-654. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000323737.
39.
UllmanJ. B.BentlerP. M. (2003). Structural equation modeling. In Handbook of Psychology (p. 607). American Cancer Society.
WeaverJ.KimP.MetzerR. L., & SzendreyJ. M. (2013). The impact of video games on student GPA, study habits, and time management skills: What’s the big deal?Issues in Information Systems, 14, 122-128.
42.
WilliamsR. H (1980). Attitude change and simulation games: the ability of a simulation game to change attitudes when structured in accordance with either the cognitive dissonance or incentive models of attitude change. Simulation and Games, 11(2), 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037550080112004.
43.
WuY-T.WangL-J. (2016). Research trends in technology-enhanced knowledge building pedagogies: a review of selected empirical research from 2006 to 2015. Journal of Computers in Education, 3(3), 353-375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-016-0065-2.
