This research investigates the potential of gamified tools to enhance motivation as well reading and writing skills in pupils, from 8 to 11 years old. The study compares the impact of gamified applications to traditional pen-and-paper activities, utilizing standardized reading and writing tests. The training duration spans 12 h within the school setting, and the sample comprises 113 children with typical development, evenly distributed across two groups. The results indicate significant improvements in reading and writing speed and accuracy for each group, with a slightly higher effect observed in the experimental gamified training group, although this difference was not statistically significant. Although motivation did not directly mediate performance in either group, students in the experimental training groups expressed greater enthusiasm for the activities. These findings emphasize the importance of comprehensive training and pave the way for future investigations into the effects of gamified tools on other real-life skills and motivational aspects. Such studies would prove fundamental to understand the limitations and benefits of gamification, enabling its effective integration into school programs.

How to improve reading and writing skills in primary schools: A comparison between gamification and pen-and-paper training / Cattoni, Angela; Anderle, Francesca; Venuti, Paola; Pasqualotto, Angela. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHILD-COMPUTER INTERACTION. - ISSN 2212-8689. - 2024:100633(2024). [10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100633]

How to improve reading and writing skills in primary schools: A comparison between gamification and pen-and-paper training

Cattoni, Angela;Anderle, Francesca
;
Venuti, Paola;Pasqualotto, Angela
2024-01-01

Abstract

This research investigates the potential of gamified tools to enhance motivation as well reading and writing skills in pupils, from 8 to 11 years old. The study compares the impact of gamified applications to traditional pen-and-paper activities, utilizing standardized reading and writing tests. The training duration spans 12 h within the school setting, and the sample comprises 113 children with typical development, evenly distributed across two groups. The results indicate significant improvements in reading and writing speed and accuracy for each group, with a slightly higher effect observed in the experimental gamified training group, although this difference was not statistically significant. Although motivation did not directly mediate performance in either group, students in the experimental training groups expressed greater enthusiasm for the activities. These findings emphasize the importance of comprehensive training and pave the way for future investigations into the effects of gamified tools on other real-life skills and motivational aspects. Such studies would prove fundamental to understand the limitations and benefits of gamification, enabling its effective integration into school programs.
2024
100633
Cattoni, Angela; Anderle, Francesca; Venuti, Paola; Pasqualotto, Angela
How to improve reading and writing skills in primary schools: A comparison between gamification and pen-and-paper training / Cattoni, Angela; Anderle, Francesca; Venuti, Paola; Pasqualotto, Angela. - In: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CHILD-COMPUTER INTERACTION. - ISSN 2212-8689. - 2024:100633(2024). [10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100633]
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Cattoni et al., 2024.pdf

Solo gestori archivio

Tipologia: Post-print referato (Refereed author’s manuscript)
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 1.78 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.78 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri
1-s2.0-S2212868924000011-main.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 1.79 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.79 MB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11572/401279
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact