DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Fecha de recepción: 02/09/2024

Fecha de aceptación: 08/11/2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17979/digilec.2024.11.11176

e-ISSN: 2386-6691

LITERACY DEVELOPMENT THROUGH GAME-BASED

LEARNING AND GAMIFICATION IN EFL IN PRIMARY

EDUCATION: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

DESARROLLO DE LA ALFABETIZACIÓN A TRAVÉS DEL

APRENDIZAJE BASADO EN JUEGOS Y LA GAMIFICACIÓN EN LA

CLASE DE INGLÉS COMO LENGUA EXTRANJERA EN

EDUCACIÓN PRIMARIA: UN ESTUDIO COMPARATIVO

Silvia CANTERO CORTINAS

Universitat de Valéncia

Orcid: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7338-7895

Agustín REYES TORRES

Universitat de Valéncia

Orcid: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1058-3513

Abstract

This paper explores the integration of games into foreign language teaching through

Game-Based Learning (GBL) and Gamification within the English as a Foreign Language

(EFL) classroom at a public Primary School in Valencia, Spain. The study analyses the

benefits of these approaches, emphasizing their unique contributions to language

learning. To this end, both methodologies were implemented separately in two parallel

classrooms using the same curricular contents and following the tenets of the Pedagogy

of Multiliteracies (New London group, 1996). The primary objective was to foster

students’ literacy development and empower them as meaning-makers in a second

language through engaging game-based activities. Employing a qualitative approach, the

study observed significant positive impacts on literacy development across conceptual,

personal, sociocultural and aesthetic dimensions. A complementary quantitative analysis

revealed a marked increase in student motivation, with most participants expressing high

levels of excitement and satisfaction averages in both classes. The findings suggest that

GBL and Gamification not only enhance student motivation and engagement in EFL but

also promote cooperative learning through group activities. However, the results caution

that these methodologies should not be seen as standalone solutions for effective teaching

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 241

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

and learning. Rather than being opposing strategies, GBL and Gamification are

complementary, each serving distinct purposes that can be harmoniously integrated

within the classroom. Consequently, educators are encouraged to integrate both

methodologies concurrently to optimize language learning outcomes.

Keywords: English as a Foreign Language (EFL); game-based learning (GBL);

gamification; literacies; multimodality.

Resumen

Este artículo explora la integración de los juegos en la enseñanza de lenguas extranjeras

mediante el Aprendizaje Basado en Juegos (ABJ) y la Gamificación en el aula de Inglés

como Lengua Extranjera (ILE) en una escuela primaria pública de Valencia, España. El

estudio analiza los beneficios de estos enfoques, destacando sus contribuciones únicas al

aprendizaje de idiomas. Con este fin, ambas metodologías se implementaron por separado

en dos aulas paralelas utilizando los mismos contenidos curriculares y siguiendo los

principios de la Pedagogía de las Multiliteracidades (New London Group, 1996). El

objetivo principal fue fomentar el desarrollo de la literacidad en los estudiantes y

capacitarlos como creadores de significado en una segunda lengua a través de actividades

basadas en juegos. Empleando un enfoque cualitativo, el estudio observó impactos

positivos significativos en el desarrollo de la alfabetización en dimensiones conceptuales,

personales, socioculturales y estéticas. Un análisis cuantitativo complementario reveló un

aumento notable en la motivación estudiantil, con la mayoría de los participantes

expresando altos niveles de entusiasmo y satisfacción en ambas clases. Los hallazgos

sugieren que el GBL y la Gamificación no solo mejoran la motivación y el compromiso

de los estudiantes en ILE, sino que también promueven el aprendizaje cooperativo a

través de actividades grupales. Sin embargo, los resultados advierten que estas

metodologías no deben considerarse soluciones únicas para una enseñanza y aprendizaje

efectivos. En lugar de ser estrategias opuestas, el ABJ y la Gamificación son

complementarias, cada una con propósitos distintos que, al combinarse, optimizan los

resultados de aprendizaje de idiomas. En consecuencia, se anima a los educadores a

integrar ambas metodologías simultáneamente para maximizar el impacto educativo en

el aula de lenguas.

Palabras clave: inglés como lengua extranjera (ILE); aprendizaje basado en juegos

(ABJ); gamificación; alfabetización; multimodalidad.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 242

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

1. INTRODUCTION

In the ever-evolving field of foreign language education, teachers are constantly

looking for innovative approaches to engage and motivate students, especially in the area

of EFL instruction at the primary level. As traditional teaching methods come under

debate for their ability to engage the attention of digital-native learners, the integration of

games, particularly Game-Based Learning (GBL) and Gamification, emerges as a

promising avenue (Mercan and Varol, 2024). This article delves into the transformative

potential of GBL and Gamification in the context of primary EFL education, with the aim

of shedding light on their benefits, challenges and implications for language teaching and

learning.

Games make language learning more practical and engaging. Not only do they

trigger active learning and are student-centred oriented, but also allow learners to interact

in particular social contexts, work collaboratively, make mistakes and construct

knowledge (Reyes-Torres and Portalés, 2020). Playing games thus provides students with

the opportunity of experiencing language in a memorable way (Schank et al., 1999).

Varol, Mercan and Köseğlu (2024) claim that these methodologies come under the

broader category of active and multimodal learning, a progressive educational trend that

gives priority to students’ participation.

In line with these active learning principles, preparing students for active

participation in today’s multimodal societies also requires guiding their learning towards

an expanded understanding of language, imagery, culture, and literature (Kern, 2000). As

Paesani, Allen, and Dupuy (2016) emphasize, the Pedagogy of Multiliteracies offers a

relevant framework for achieving this, as it encourages students to navigate and interpret

various forms of communication beyond text alone. Reyes-Torres and Portalés (2020)

argue that reflective practices and multimodal strategies not only enable young learners

to use foreign languages for communication but also empower them to critically analyze

and discuss multimodal resources, thereby cultivating a deeper, more comprehensive

literacy.

This article presents a research study in which GBL and Gamification were

separately implemented to examine their specific contributions to language learning. The

main objective was to study whether games in the classroom can meet the objectives and

competences required for learning a foreign language in the 21st century. For this

purpose, two educational interventions were designed based on the same curricular

content of the English class for 3rd graders in Primary Education. Game-Based Learning

(GBL) was implemented in one classroom while gamification was used in the other.

Through this study, we explore how each of these approaches contribute to enhance

students’ literacy, allowing them to become active agents and meaning makers who

construct their own knowledge (Zapata, 2022; Paesani and Menke, 2023).

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 243

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Game-based learning and gamification: key features and learning aims

As the demands of a digital and global society evolve, it is essential for students to

not only comprehend English texts but also use the language to communicate, interact

and think (Kern, 2000; Menke and Paesani, 2023). Likewise, Zapata (2022) highlight

that factors such as motivation significantly impact the foreign language learning process.

Consequently, active methodologies like GBL and Gamification have gained

prominence, especially in primary EFL education, by fostering a dynamic and engaging

learning environment. These approaches enable young learners to become meaning-

makers and develop their literacy skills through multimodal resources (Reyes-Torres and

Portalés, 2020).

GBL integrates game elements into educational activities, transforming language

acquisition into an immersive and interactive experience. According to Sánchez (2021),

GBL aims to support learning by using games to teach content, develop skills, and assess

knowledge. This methodology focuses not just on content acquisition but also on

developing broader competencies (Ramírez de Arellano, 2022). GBL operates on the

principle of “educating by playing,” where the game serves as a tool for learning and skill

development (Ortiz, 2021). Sánchez (2021) identifies three levels of GBL

implementation: the initial level, which introduces simple, short games; the intermediate

level, which encourages deeper engagement with the content; and the advanced level,

where games become central to learning in classrooms familiar with this methodology.

In contrast, Gamification involves applying game-like elements, such as

competition and rewards, in non-game contexts to influence behaviours and enhance

engagement (Teixes, 2015). It is often used alongside other methodologies, serving as a

"ludic layer" that transforms the learning experience without altering the core teaching

structure (Sánchez, 2021). Gamification can be categorized by its duration: superficial or

content gamification is applied to specific activities, while structural or deep gamification

is integrated throughout an entire curriculum (Alejaldre and García, 2015). Another

classification is based on the type of game elements used, such as board games, role-

playing games or video games (Sánchez, 2021).

Both GBL and Gamification share the goal of enhancing motivation and

engagement in EFL learning. As noted by Ramírez de Arellano (2022), these

methodologies promote multiliteracies by placing learners at the centre of education,

enabling them to actively participate in the creation of knowledge. Additionally, both

approaches cultivate a sense of curiosity and challenge, which motivates students to

engage meaningfully with the language. Fonseca et al. (2023) argue that GBL and

Gamification foster cooperative learning, as students collaborate to achieve common

goals, thereby strengthening communication, socialization, responsibility and leadership.

Despite their similarities, GBL and Gamification differ in their application. GBL

utilizes intentional games —whether pre-existing or teacher-created— to support learning

(Ortiz, 2021), whereas Gamification involves embedding game elements into existing

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 244

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

educational frameworks without the use of actual games. These differences allow for the

complementary use of both approaches in the EFL classroom (Zhang and Yu, 2022).

While research on game-based methodologies in second language acquisition

remains limited, several studies have reported positive outcomes. Cabrera-Solano (2022)

found that using GBL with tools like Genially improved academic performance in EFL

classes, helping students activate prior knowledge and better prepare for challenges.

Esquivel (2019) noted that Gamification promotes interaction among students, facilitating

more dynamic and engaging English lessons. Similarly, Redjeki and Muhajir (2021)

demonstrated that Gamification boosts motivation and encourages greater effort in

learning English.

2.2. Literacy development, multimodality and games in EFL

Traditionally, an individual was considered literate if he/she had the ability to read

and write. These two skills were thought to be sufficient in order to encode and decode

messages; however, decoding without making sense of it leads to no real learning (Yates

2007). In the 21st Century society, children are constantly exposed to different types of

texts and modes of expression. Hence, the concept of literacy goes beyond reading and

writing (Paesani and Menke, 2023). As Kern (2000) emphasizes, literacy involves

interpretation, collaboration, conventions, cultural knowledge, problem solving,

(self)reflection and language use. In short, it involves communication and, as will be

shown, it can be developed through multimodal resources such as games, picture books,

graphic novels, short-animated films, advertisements, etc. In this line of thought, Reyes-

Torres, Portalés-Raga and Torres-Mañá (2021, p.302) define literacy as “a dynamic and

multidimensional process of construction of meaning that enable students to grasp and

evaluate information, organize ideas, exchange perspectives and reflect critically on a

variety of sociocultural contexts”. As learners develop their literacy, they develop their

language skills, visual thinking strategies, dialogic attitudes and social practices.

Also, literacy must be considered taking into account the three dimensions that

characterize it: personal, conceptual and sociocultural (Kern, 2000; Kucer, 2014). The

personal dimension is based on the learner’s identity, prior knowledge, attitude, values

and natural ability to address a text and create new ideas; the conceptual dimension

consists of the contents, topics or linguistic aspects that students need to learn in order to

construct meaning through multimodal texts; finally, the sociocultural dimension draws

attention to the importance of offering students the opportunity to interact both with the

text and with their peers to exchange their points of view. Since this is a process that

teachers can expect students to enjoy, this dimension incorporates the notion of aesthetic

learning (Rosenblatt, 1986; Kucer, 2014; Reyes-Torres and Portalés, 2020). Students are

guided to be open-minded and to value other cultures, ideas, and opinions. Taken

together, these dimensions are complementary and equally relevant in the teaching and

learning process.

Most importantly, this approach to literacy can be effectively applied through GBL

and Gamification in foreign language teaching. In today’s multimodal world, learners

have access to a wealth of resources that facilitate meaning-making and knowledge

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 245

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

construction. Multimodality refers to the use of various modes of representation—images,

sounds, text, colours, and music—working together to create a communicative act (Jewitt

and Kress, 2010). In games, learners must decode and create meaning from visual

elements, movements, sounds, dialogues, and words, all of which contribute to the

learning process.

Additionally, games integrate visual elements that contribute to foster visual

thinking, a powerful cognitive tool that helps students to interpret what they see. Visual

thinking enhances creativity, improves memory and concentration, helps to organise ideas

and involves all the senses in the learning process (McLoughlin and Krakowski, 2001).

For this reason, foreign language education must offer a diversity of symbolic and visual

forms that enable learners to create meaning from the information they receive, analyse

it and produce new ideas. As a result, authors such as the New London Group (1996),

Cope and Kalantzis (2015), Paesani (2016), Warner and Dupuy (2018), Lacorte and

Reyes-Torres (2021) and Zapata (2022) defend that in the 21st century the term literacy

should be replaced by multiliteracies due to the diversity of texts and the different modes

of representation.

Multiliteracies not only embrace diverse modes of representation but also

incorporate sociocultural practices and new perspectives (New London Group, 1996;

Kucer, 2014; Cope and Kalantzis, 2015). Given that children are daily exposed to

numerous communication channels, the messages they receive come in a variety of forms.

Thus, it is crucial to integrate multimodal resources into classrooms to offer students

opportunities to interpret, access, and share information in diverse forms. For EFL

teachers, this means using a variety of authentic, multimodal resources to guide students

in knowledge construction, ensuring they engage in meaningful, multimodal learning

experiences.

In conclusion, the evolving landscape of literacy requires educators to adapt to the

multimodal nature of communication in the digital age. By incorporating GBL and

Gamification into EFL classrooms, teachers can provide students with opportunities to

develop literacy skills that reflect the diverse ways in which language and meaning are

constructed today.

2.3. The tenets of the pedagogy of multiliteracies

This study follows the postulates of the Pedagogy of multiliteracies, as it seeks to

train students to be creators and consumers of various modes of expression. It was in 1994

when the New London Group (NLG) met in New Hampshire to reconsider new ways of

looking at how and what students needed to learn in school (Cope and Kalantzis, 2009).

Led by Mary Kalantzis and Bill Cope, this group of scholars coined the term

multiliteracies with the purpose of adapting literacy to diverse social realities. This

pedagogy transcends the limitations of traditional teaching approaches by focusing on

learners’ linguistic and cultural differences. It is based on the idea that language and the

meaning-making process are dynamic resources that learners constantly remake as they

interact with them in a given sociocultural context.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 246

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

This pedagogy incorporates the concept of Learning by Design as the backbone of

the multiliteracies framework, which involves three elements: Available designs,

Designing and the Redesigned (New London Group, 1996; Cope and Kalantzis, 2009).

The Available designs are based on the idea that any type of text incorporates signs or

elements –existing meanings and expressions– that can be interpreted, whether verbal,

visual or literary-cultural. The act of designing happens when students recognize the

available designs and develop their own meaning, which leads to Redesign, which is the

result of the students’ new interpretation, becoming thus active designers of meaning. In

the words of Sánchez (2014), it is the result of human agency, and it can be conveyed

through the production of any type of multimodal text that connotes a new understanding

(Reyes-Torres et al., 2021). Therefore, the co-construction of meaning between teachers

and students always involves the transformation of the available designs. This model is

conceived as a cyclical one, since learning is an active process in which learners

continuously evolve with the mediation of teachers.

To implement it, the NLG proposes the Knowledge Processes Framework (KPF)

that consists of four pedagogical acts: experiencing, conceptualizing, analyzing and

applying. Since it is a recurrent process, as illustrated in Figure 1, Cope and Kalantzis

(2015) suggest combining them depending on the learning objectives.

Figure 1

The knowledge processes framework

Note. Prepared by the authors based on NLG (1996).

“Experiencing” consists of engaging learners cognitively to use the language. The

goal of the teacher is to activate students’ minds to reflect and relate content to previous

experiences. Secondly, in order to prepare learner to reflect, it is crucial to design sessions

based on the concepts they need to learn to develop their knowledge. This is what the act

of “conceptualizing” is all about. Next, “analyzing” is based on the relationship between

textual and visual meaning with social, cultural, historical and ideological contexts and

Applying

4 pedagogical acts

Experiencing

Analyzing

Conceptualizing

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 247

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

objectives. Finally, “applying” refers to the fact that learners should become producers of

knowledge during the whole learning path. As can be seen, the four pedagogical acts are

fundamental for the effective and meaningful implementation of the multiliteracies

pedagogy.

3. RESERCH DESIGN

The research employs a mixed methodology, strategically leveraging the strengths

of both qualitative and quantitative methods, specifically, utilizing a convergent design

(Creswell and Plano Clark, 2018). As emphasized by Creswell (2009), the integration of

these approaches offers more advantages than their individual use, given their

interdisciplinary nature, enhancing the depth of analysis and understanding of results. In

this study, a qualitative methodology is used, recognizing observation as a method of

argumentation. Qualitative procedures draw upon data from textual and visual sources,

with the researcher serving as a pivotal instrument in data collection. Simultaneously, a

quantitative methodology is utilized, with numerical data collection to yield objective and

measurable outcomes. This method encompasses the entire processes of collecting,

analysing, interpreting and writing up research results (Creswell, 2009).

3.1. Research objectives and questions

The primary objectives of this research are to assess the effectiveness of Game-

Based Learning (GBL) and Gamification in enhancing multiple literacies among EFL

students and to investigate the differences and commonalities in learner engagement and

motivation between these two approaches. Specifically, the research seeks to answer the

following questions:

• How do Game-Based Learning (GBL) and Gamification influence the

development of literacy in primary EFL classrooms?

• What are the differences and similarities in learner engagement and motivation

between Game-Based Learning and Gamification approaches in the EFL context?

3.2. Context and participants

The educational intervention was conducted during the 2022-2023 academic year

at Federico Maicas School, a public school in Torrent, a suburban area of Valencia, Spain.

The school serves a socioeconomically diverse neighbourhood and enrols students across

two classes per year, with a maximum of 25 students per class. Table 1 below presents

key demographic and academic characteristics of two third-grade classes (3rd A and 3rd

B) participating in the study.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 248

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Table 1

Students’ characteristics

3rd A

3rd B

Number of students

Number of girls

Number of boys

Age of students

8-9-10

8-9

Nationalities

Spanish

Russian

Colombian

Iraqi

Spanish

Moroccan

Italian

Argentinean

Students at 2nd level of Primary

Education (split level)

SEN

Which one(s)?

1 ADHD

2 high capacities

1 ADHD

Note. Prepared by the authors.

The school’s English course relied mainly on textbooks, with few activities beyond

these resources. During the initial days of classroom observation previous to the

investigation, the teacher-researcher noted the students’ enthusiasm for board games and

the Mario Bros video game. These observations inspired the design of two tailored

educational interventions based on these interests. This research aimed to show students

that language learning could be engaging and enjoyable.

3.3. Procedure

The research followed three phases. First, initial student motivation towards

English was assessed via focus group interviews and a pre-questionnaire. This was

followed by a classroom intervention using the teacher’s work diary to collect

observational data. The intervention was centred on two units around identical content

but used different methodologies for each class. Both groups discussed gender stereotypes

in professions through a video (https://bit.ly/3Wo8DWQ) and engaged in vocabulary-

building team activities on “Jobs.”

Class 3rd A used gamification, tackling five Mario Bros-themed challenges (see

Annex 1) to “save Luigi,” integrating video game elements. Class 3rd B engaged in

Game-Based Learning (GBL) with five games—Memory, Domino, Bingo, Who’s Who,

and Goose Game (see Annex 2)—to introduce the vocabulary. Finally, student motivation

and satisfaction were measured via post-activity questionnaires, and a vocabulary test was

administered to assess learning outcomes.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 249

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Tables 2 and 3 outline the schedules for classes 3rd A and 3rd B. Each timetable

divides the phases into specific dates and activities, starting with data collection on prior

motivation, followed by the intervention phase, and concluding with post-intervention

assessments.

Table 2

3rd A class schedule

3rd A class

Wed 3rd

May

Fri 5th

May

Mon 8th

May

Tue 9th

May

Phase I: Collection of background

information

Focus group interview and quick pre-

questionnaire

Phase II: Classroom intervention

Classroom intervention

Phase III: Final data collection

Data collection on satisfaction with the

activity

Interview with focus group

Collection of data in terms of

knowledge acquired

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Table 3

3rd B class schedule

3rd B class

Wed 26th

April

Fri 28th

April

Mon 1st

May

Tue 2nd

May

Phase I: Collection of background

information

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 250

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Focus group interview and quick pre-

questionnaire

Phase II: Classroom intervention

Classroom intervention

Phase III: Final data collection

Data collection on satisfaction with the

activity

Interview with focus group

Collection of data in terms of

knowledge acquired

Note. Prepared by the authors.

On the other hand, regarding students’ literacy development, the specific learning

objectives were categorized into three major groups, aligning with the three dimensions

of literacy (Kucer, 2014) explained earlier and linked to the four pedagogical acts and

specific competences in the Spanish national educational curriculum, as detailed in Tables

4, 5 and 6.

Table 4

Learning objectives for the conceptual dimension of literacy

Specific

competences

Objectives of the intervention

Pedagogical acts

C.E.1

Multilingualism and

interculturalism

Pronounce the vocabulary correctly (Jobs)

Conceptualizing

Reflect on the difference between the Spanish

and English language in relation to the gender of

nouns

Analyzing

C.E.2 Oral (and

visual)

comprehension

Interpret information from audiovisual

resources

Experiencing

C.E.3 Reading

comprehension

Decode the information expressed in written

texts

Experiencing

C.E.4 Oral

expression

Express ideas and solutions using the foreign

language

Experiencing and

applying

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 251

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

C.E.5 Written

expression

Know how to write correctly the vocabulary

worked on (Jobs)

Conceptualizing

C.E.6 Oral

interaction

Communicate with peers orally during activities

using the foreign language

Experiencing and

analyzing

C.E.7 Oral

mediation

Reflect ideas and emotions using an audio-

visual resource

Experiencing and

analyzing

Explain what an activity consists of to

classmates

Applying

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Table 5

Learning objectives for the personal dimension of literacy

Specific

competences

Objectives of the intervention

Pedagogical acts

C.E.1

Multilingualism and

interculturalism

Associate the new vocabulary with their

previous knowledge

Conceptualizing

C.E.1

Multilingualism and

interculturalism

Reflect on a current issue (gender stereotypes at

work)

Analyzing

Create a welcoming and safe working

environment, so that they can express their

opinions freely and develop their critical

thinking

Experiencing

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Table 6

Learning objectives for the sociocultural and aesthetic dimension of literacy

Specific

competences

Objectives of the intervention

Pedagogical acts

C.E.6 Oral and

written interaction

Know how to work in a team

Experiencing

C.E.6 Oral and

written interaction

Interact with peers

Experiencing and

applying

Enjoy learning English

Experiencing

Increase interest in and motivation for the

subject

Experiencing

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 252

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

C.E.1

Multilingualism and

interculturalism

Understand that there are other ways of learning

languages

Experiencing and

analyzing

Note. Prepared by the authors.

3.4. Instruments

To achieve the research objectives, several instruments were employed. As already

noted, classroom observation was documented daily in a teacher’s work diary. During

Phases I and III, focus group interviews with five representative students per class were

conducted to compare their motivation levels and explore their ideas for alternative

learning methods in English. For this purpose, the following quick pre-questionnaire

assessed initial motivation levels for the entire group in Phase I, through two questions

focusing on EFL.

Figure 2

Pre-questionnaire

Note. Prepared by the authors.

The two didactic units—one focused on Mario Bros gamification, the other on

various board games—formed the core of the classroom intervention. The activities

carried out are specified in Annexes 1 and 2. Furthermore, a post-session questionnaire

using a Likert scale (0 to 4) measured satisfaction and motivation (see Figure 3).

According to Maldonado (2007), this scale effectively quantifies responses, providing

reliable data for academic research (Blanco and Alvarado, 2005; Bedoya, 2017). Through

these questions, the aim was to find out whether the students had enjoyed the class,

whether they would like to repeat this type of session and whether they had learned new

concepts and how to work collaboratively. Students also rated the session on a 1–10 scale

and identified their primary emotions during the activities.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 253

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Figure 3

Post-questionnaire

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Three days later, a written test evaluated vocabulary retention to compare learning

outcomes between the GBL and Gamification methods. In addition, a rubric has been

used to evaluate the research process carried out, taking into account different categories.

According to Stevens and Levi (2012), rubrics are valuable pedagogical tools because

they make us more aware of our individual teaching styles and methods and allow us to

impart more clearly our intentions and expectations.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 254

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Figure 4

Intervention rubric

Note. Prepared by the authors.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 255

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

4. RESULTS

The achievement of research objectives hinges on the obtained results. Given the

mixed methodology employed, results are categorized into two main blocks, those

referring to the qualitative method and, in addition, those derived from the quantitative

method.

4.1. Qualitative methodology

Results were gathered and categorized based on the three dimensions of literacy

(conceptual, personal and socio-cultural and aesthetic) described in Tables 4, 5 and 6.

Tables 7, 8 and 9 present the definition of each category, along with their corresponding

codes and subcodes extracted from the content analysis conducted in the context of this

study.

Table 7

Definition of codes and subcodes of the conceptual dimension

Categories

Definition

Codes

Definition

Subcodes

Definition

Sociocultural

and aesthetic

dimension

This

category is

based on the

cultural

Cooperative

learning

Peer-to-peer

knowledge

building

Interaction

with peers

INT

Use of the

English

language to

communicate

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 257

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

context in

which the

learners are

situated.

Teamwork

TEA

Skills to be

able to work

in groups

Increased

interest in the

subject

INT

Situations

demonstrati

ng learner

motivation

towards the

foreign

language

Enjoyment of

learning

English

ENJ

References

to enjoyment

of learning

English

Knowledge of

other ways of

learning

languages

References

to learning a

language in

different

ways

Note. Prepared by the authors.

According to this classification, the findings highlight the nuanced effects of the

educational interventions. Each dimension reflects unique aspects of how students

engaged with the learning process and responded to the activities.

The conceptual dimension revealed significant improvement in students’

vocabulary mastery and linguistic awareness. Activities such as team-based

communication tasks enabled students to practice correct pronunciation and writing while

reinforcing vocabulary through repetition. For example, groups successfully identified

and described professions like "nurse" and "firefighter," which strengthened their

confidence in both oral and written language. Additionally, students demonstrated an

ability to reflect on linguistic differences, such as observing that English uses a singular

form for "nurse," unlike the gendered forms in Spanish. Multimodal tools like videos and

written texts further encouraged active interpretation and teamwork, as seen during the

Goose Game, where students collaboratively solved challenges. Moreover, open

discussions allowed learners to express their preferences for engaging learning methods,

including songs and videos, over traditional textbooks.

The personal dimension emphasized how students connected new knowledge to

their personal lives, engaged in critical reflection, and benefited from a safe and

supportive learning environment. Many students related the new vocabulary to their

personal experiences, such as referencing family members’ professions or prior

knowledge. Through discussions and video-based activities, students reflected on societal

issues like gender stereotypes, concluding that "you can be anything you want to be,"

regardless of gender. The creation of a safe space played a pivotal role in boosting

students’ confidence. Learners who were previously hesitant to participate due to fear of

making mistakes reported feeling more at ease, with one student noting, "I liked this class

because no one laughed if I made a mistake".

The sociocultural and aesthetic dimension highlighted the importance of

collaborative learning and its impact on motivation. Group activities fostered teamwork

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 258

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

and cooperative problem-solving, with students noting that tasks were completed faster

and with greater enjoyment when working together. This sense of collaboration extended

beyond the classroom, as some students expressed a desire to continue activities like the

Goose Game during their free time. The combination of these activities sparked

excitement and sustained interest in learning English. One student remarked, "Can we use

some of the games in the playground? They are so fun!" This enthusiasm reflects the

potential of collaborative and enjoyable methods to transform students’ attitudes toward

language learning.

4.2. Quantitative methodology

The quantitative findings reinforced the qualitative insights, revealing the

transformative effects of GBL and gamification on student motivation, satisfaction, and

knowledge retention. An initial assessment of students’ motivation levels revealed a

diverse range of interest in English before the intervention. For this first specific category,

emphasis was placed on two questions, graded on a Likert scale ranging from 0 to 4. The

cumulative score, therefore, ranges from 0 to 8, representing the sum of the two questions.

In both Class 3A and Class 3B, approximately 50% of students scored below 4 on an 8-

point scale, indicating low motivation. This highlighted the potential for targeted

interventions to enhance engagement and enthusiasm for language learning.

Figure 5

Students’ previous motivation

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Following the intervention, students’ satisfaction levels soared, as depicted in

Figures 6 and 7. Every student rated the sessions above 6 on a 10-point scale, with mean

satisfaction scores of 9.17 for Class 3A and 9.50 for Class 3B. Emotional responses during

the sessions further underscored the success of these methods. In Class 3A, nearly half

012345678

Number of responses

Punctuation

Students' previous motivation

3ºA 3ºB

3rd A 3rd B

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 259

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

the students reported feeling "excited," while others described feeling "happy" or a mix

of both (Figure 8). Similarly, in Class 3B, 53% of responses reflected excitement and

happiness, with one student even expressing sadness at the class’s conclusion, wishing

the activities could continue (Figure 9).

Figure 6

Satisfaction with the activity

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Figure 7

Class score

Note. Prepared by the authors.

7-8 9-10 11-12 13-14 15-16

Number of responses

Punctuation

Satisfaction with the activity

3ºA 3ºB

3rd A 3rd B

5678910

Number of responses

Punctuation

Class score

3ºA 3ºB

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 260

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Figure 8

Graph of the 3rd A students’ emotions

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Figure 9

Graph of the 3rd B students’ emotions

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Knowledge assessments after the sessions highlighted notable differences between

the two methodologies. In the GBL group (Class 3B), 91% of students answered the

majority of questions correctly, compared to 53% in the gamification group (Class 3A)

(Figure 10). This disparity can be attributed to the higher frequency of vocabulary

repetition in GBL activities, which allowed students to engage with key terms multiple

times across various games. Additionally, students in Class 3B excelled in recalling extra

vocabulary, outperforming their counterparts in Class 3A (Figure 11). One student

remarked “I can remember words better because we used them in all the games”,

emphasizing the value of repeated, meaningful interactions with the material.

47%

24%

29%

Emotions during the activity (3rd A)

Excited Excited and happy Happy

37%

53%

5% 5%

Emotions during the activity (3rd B)

Excited Excited and happy Happy Sad

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 261

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Figure 10

Knowledge through questions 1 and 2 from the questionnaire

Note. Prepared by the authors.

Figure 11

Extra words

Note. Prepared by the authors.

The primary reason for these outcomes could be attributed to the fact that in

Gamification, each vocabulary word appeared only once during the lesson. In contrast,

all the words were featured in all the GBL games. Consequently, students in 3rd A

engaged with each job only once in one of the challenges, while in 3rd B, all the jobs

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Number of responses

Punctuation

Knowledge (questions 1 and 2 from the questionnaire)

3ºA 3ºB

3rd A 3rd B

1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15

Number of words

Punctuation

Extra words

3ºA 3ºB

3rd A 3rd B

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 262

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

were addressed five times, once in each game. This facilitated a more meaningful

acquisition of the new vocabulary for the 3rd B students.

5. DISCUSSION

This research, grounded in both quantitative and qualitative methods, examined the

effects of GBL and Gamification on literacy development and learner engagement in

primary EFL classrooms. By analyzing data from literacy assessments, engagement

surveys, student interviews, and classroom observations, the study provides a multi-

dimensional perspective on how these methods influence not only academic skills but

also personal, conceptual, sociocultural and aesthetic experiences of students.

Personal Dimension: GBL and Gamification both shaped students’ personal

connections to language learning, though in different ways. The immersive narratives in

GBL allowed students to explore personal meaning in language, fostering self-expression

and individual interests, as supported by qualitative interviews where students shared

feelings of personal achievement and enjoyment in narrative-based tasks. Gamification,

with its reward-based system, appealed to personal ambition and a sense of

accomplishment, particularly for students motivated by competition. This personal

dimension reveals how both approaches encourage students to view language learning as

a meaningful part of their identity, with GBL fostering intrinsic motivation through

exploration and Gamification providing motivation through visible progress.

Conceptual Dimension: From a conceptual perspective, the findings indicate that

GBL is effective in promoting critical thinking and deeper understanding of language as

a system, while Gamification supports memorization and recall of language rules.

Quantitative data revealed that GBL contributed to advanced literacy skills, like

comprehension and inference, as students engaged with complex scenarios that required

critical thinking. Observational data corroborated this, as students used language more

flexibly and creatively during GBL activities. In contrast, Gamification provided a

scaffold for conceptual mastery of foundational elements, such as vocabulary and

grammar, making it an effective approach for developing a strong base in language

mechanics. Both methods thus contribute distinctively to conceptual literacy

development, underscoring the complementary nature of GBL’s depth and

Gamification’s breadth.

Sociocultural Dimension: This dimension, essential in language acquisition,

emerged strongly in the way GBL and Gamification fostered collaboration and social

engagement. Observational data showed that GBL often facilitated peer interaction and

collective problem solving, aligning with social constructivist principles where learners

co-construct understanding through interaction. Many students reported feeling a sense

of belonging and teamwork within GBL activities, reflecting a sociocultural integration

into language learning. Meanwhile, Gamification, while more individually oriented, also

tapped into students’ desire for social recognition, as leader boards and badges motivated

friendly competition and social engagement. These sociocultural elements support the

idea that both approaches create interactive learning environments, GBL through

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 263

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

cooperative play and Gamification through competitive dynamics, enriching the social

context of the EFL classroom.

Aesthetic Dimension: Due to its narrative richness, GBL provided an aesthetic

dimension where students could engage with language as part of a larger, often visually

captivating story, adding a layer of emotional resonance to language tasks. Classroom

observations and interviews revealed students’ enjoyment of the world-building aspects

of GBL, where language was presented not merely as a skill but as a creative experience.

Gamification, though structured around goals and rewards, also introduced an aesthetic

element through the design of badges, points, and levels that visually marked students’

progress. These aesthetic features increased motivation by making learning visually

rewarding, though perhaps more extrinsically.

6. CONCLUSION

The findings of this study address the research questions and highlight the benefits

of incorporating GBL and gamification in EFL instruction. These methods significantly

enhanced students’ motivation and interest in English while fostering literacy

development. Notably, the GBL approach produced superior outcomes in terms of

vocabulary retention and application, as students engaged with repeated use of words

across multiple games. Gamification also demonstrated effectiveness, particularly for

smaller sets of vocabulary consistently reinforced throughout the challenges.

However, these methodologies are not without limitations. While students actively

participated and acquired new vocabulary, they lacked opportunities for reflective

practice and real-world application of their learning. Reflection occurred primarily

through external activities, such as video discussions, rather than being embedded within

the games themselves. Similarly, the application of acquired knowledge —a core

pedagogical goal— was underdeveloped during the sessions. Incorporating

supplementary activities designed for reflection and practical application is essential to

fully realize the potential of these methods. Consequently, GBL and gamification should

not be used in isolation but as complementary tools alongside other instructional

methodologies to foster a well-rounded learning experience.

Furthermore, the effectiveness of GBL and gamification may depend on broader

contextual factors that were not addressed in this study. For instance, the availability and

quality of technological resources (e.g., tablets, interactive whiteboards, or stable internet

access) can significantly impact how well these methods are implemented and received

by students. Additionally, parental involvement in reinforcing language-learning games

at home could play a crucial role in extending the benefits of these methods beyond the

classroom, fostering deeper engagement and retention of knowledge. Lastly, the influence

of peer dynamics —whether through collaboration, encouragement, or rivalry— can

shape how students perceive and participate in gamified or game-based activities. These

factors warrant further investigation, as they may hold the key to optimizing the

implementation of GBL and gamification in diverse educational contexts.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 264

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

The study’s limitations include its small sample size and single-school setting,

which constrain the generalizability of the findings. Future research should expand to

more diverse populations to assess whether these results hold across varying

demographics. Longitudinal studies could also explore the sustained benefits of these

approaches, examining whether their motivational effects persist over time. Additionally,

comparative research in different cultural and educational contexts would provide

valuable insights into the broader applicability of these methods.

In conclusion, GBL and gamification offer powerful tools for enhancing

engagement and language acquisition in EFL classrooms. Their value lies not in replacing

traditional methods but in supplementing them to create more dynamic, interactive, and

motivating learning environments. Language educators are encouraged to experiment

with these approaches, integrating them thoughtfully into their teaching practices. After

all, play is a vital part of life and, consequently, a crucial element of education. So, we

pose the question to you, teacher: “Are you ready to play?”.

REFERENCES

Alejaldre, L. & García, A. (2015). Gamificar: el uso de los elementos del juego en la

enseñanza de español. Mahidol University International College y Sichuan

International Studies University, College of International Education.

Bedoya Laguna, C. (2017). Diseño de un instrumento tipo escala Likert para la

descripción de las actitudes hacia la tecnología por parte de los profesores de un

colegio público de Bogotá. Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas.

Beltrán, M. (2017). El aprendizaje del idioma inglés como lengua extranjera. Revista

Boletín Redipe, 6(4), 91-98.

Blanco, N., & Alvarado, M. E. (2005). Escala de actitud hacia el proceso de investigación

científico social. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 11(3), 537-546.

Cabrera-Solano, P. (2022). Game-based learning in higher education: The Pedagogical

Effect of Genially Games in English as a Foreign Language Instruction.

International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(4), 719-729.

Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The things you do to know: An introduction to the

Pedagogy of multiliteracies. In B. Cope y M. Kalantzis (Ed), A Pedagogy of

multiliteracies (pp. 1-36). Palgrave Macmillan.

Cope, Bill y Kalantzis, Mary. (2009). “Multiliteracies”: New Literacies, New Learning.

Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4, 164–95.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800903076044

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods

Approaches. SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods

Research. Psychology, 11(3).

Esquivel, L. M. (2019). Gamification: a mission to foster students’ engagement and

interaction in the EFL classroom.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 265

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Fonseca, I., Caviedes, M., Chantré, J. & Bernate, J. (2023). Gamification and Game-

Based Learning as Cooperative Learning Tools: A Systematic Review.

International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 18(21).

Jewitt, C., & Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality, literacy and school English. The Routledge

international handbook of English, language and literacy teaching, 342-353.

Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and Language Teaching. Oxford UP.

Kucer, S. (2014). Dimensions of Literacy: A Conceptual Base for Teaching, Reading and

Writing in School Settings. Routledge.

Lacorte, M., & Reyes-Torres, A. (2021). Didáctica del español como 2/L en el siglo XXI.

Arco/Libros.

Maldonado, S. M. (2007). Manual práctico para el diseño de la Escala Likert. Xihmai,

2(4).

McLoughlin, C., & Krakowski, K. (2001). Technological tools for visual thinking: What

does the research tell us. Apple University Consortium Academic and Developers

Conference, 128-139.

Mercan, G, & Varol, Z. (2024). Investigating the Impact of Game-Based Learning and

Gamification Strategies in Physical Education: A Comprehensive Systematic

Review. Journal of Interdisciplinary Education: Theory and Practice, 6(1), 1-14.

New London Group. (1996). A Pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures.

Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-93.

Ortiz, F. (2021). Aprendizaje Basado en Juegos (ABJ) como herramienta de innovación

educativa. Educ@rnos, 13, 109-116.

Paesani, K. (2016). Literature, literacy, and the undergraduate foreign language

curriculum. ADFL Bulletin, 40(1), 39-51.

Paesani, K., & Menke, M. (2023). Literacies in language education: A guide for teachers

and teacher educators. Georgetown University Press.

Paesani, K., Allen, H.W. and Dupuy, B. (2016). A Multiliteracies Framework for

Collegiate Foreign Language Teaching. Pearson.

Ramírez de Arellano, I. (2022). Comunicación y Juego: aprender idiomas de una forma

diferente. Saralejandría ediciones.

Redjeki, I. S., & Muhajir, R. (2021). Gamification in EFL classroom to support teaching

and learning in 21st century. JEES (Journal of English Educators Society), 6(1),

68-78.

Reyes-Torres, A. & Portalés, M. (2020). A Multimodal Approach to Foster the

Multiliteracies Pedagogy in the Teaching of EFL through Picturebooks: The Snow

Lion. ATLANTIS, 42.1, 94-119.

Reyes-Torres, A., Portalés-Raga, M., & Bonilla-Tramoyeres, P. (2020). Multimodalidad

e innovación metodológica en la enseñanza del inglés: el álbum ilustrado como

recurso literario y visual para el desarrollo del conocimiento. Revista Nebrija de

Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza de Lenguas, 14(28), 54-77.

Reyes-Torres, A., Portalés-Raga, M., & Torres-Mañá, C. (2021). The potential of sound

picturebooks as multimodal narratives: Developing students’ multiliteracies in

primary education. AILA Review, 34(2), 300-324.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 266

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Rosenblatt, L. M. (1996). The Journal of Aesthetic Education. University Of Illinois

Press, 20 (4), 122-128.

Sánchez, A. L. (2014). Hacia una pedagogía para la multialfabetización: El diseño de una

unidad didáctica inspirada en las propuestas del New London Group. Hispania,

281-297.

Sánchez, M. (2021). En clase sí se juega. Paidós.

Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing.

Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory,

2(2), 161-181.

Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2013). Introduction to Rubrics: An Assessment Tool to Save

Grading Time, Convey Effective Feedback, and Promote Student Learning.

Routledge.

Teixes, F. (2015). Gamificación. Motivar jugando. Editorial UOC, S.L.

Varol, Z., Mercan, G. & Köseoğlu, P. (2024). Enhancing neurology and neuroscience

education through gamification: Investigating its applications, confronting

challenges, and identifying opportunities. International Journal of Education

Technology and Scientific Researches, 9 (26), 184-193.

Warner, C., & Dupuy, B. (2018). Moving toward multiliteracies in foreign language

teaching: Past and present perspectives… and beyond. Foreign Language

Annals, 51(1), 116-128.

Yates, S. (2007). Understanding reading and literacy. In P. Hunt (Ed.), Understanding

Children’s Literature (pp. 159-167). Routledge.

Zapata, G. C. (2022). Learning by design and second language teaching: Theory,

research, and practice. Taylor & Francis.

Zhang, Q. and Yu, Z. (2022). Meta-Analysis on Investigating and Comparing the Effects

on Learning Achievement and Motivation for Gamification and Game-Based

Learning. Education Research International.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 267

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

ANNEX 1

Gamification activities

Challenge 1: “Match the image with its word”

In the first Gamification challenge, students matched images to corresponding words,

focusing on recognizing trades and ensuring the correct pairing of words with visuals.

Challenge 2: “Choose the correct word)

Students worked in teams to place the vocabulary cards next to the corresponding picture,

fostering collaboration while reinforcing their understanding of word meanings.

Challenge 3: “Circle the correct option”

Presented with three options for each image, students collaboratively identified and

eliminated incorrect choices. This activity encouraged discussion and teamwork to reach

a consensus.

Challenge 4: “Complete the following words”

Students completed vocabulary words by filling in missing letters, relying on image

recognition and spelling knowledge. This activity emphasized precision in word

construction.

Challenge 5: “Kahoot”

Using the school’s tablets, students participated in a fast-paced, interactive Kahoot quiz.

This final challenge assessed their mastery of the content while also enhancing their

digital competence.

ANNEX 2

GBL activities

Memory

One of the games used in the GBL methodology has been the memory game. This classic

game was adapted to reinforce vocabulary. Students took turns flipping over two face-

down cards, aiming to match pictures of jobs. The player with the most pairs at the end

won. This activity enhanced memory and visual recognition.

Domino

In this modified domino game, pieces featured a vocabulary word on one side and a

corresponding picture on the other. To place pieces, the image on one had to match the

word on another. Students worked together to form a complete circular domino layout,

emphasizing teamwork over individual competition.

Bingo

Each student received a card featuring 12 job-related pictures. Words were drawn

randomly from a bag, and students marked corresponding images on their cards.

Completing a line required calling out “Line,” while filling the entire card called for

“Bingo.” This game developed reading, pronunciation, and image-word associations.

DIGILEC Revista Internacional de Lenguas y Culturas 268

Digilec 11 (2024), pp. 240-268

Who’s who

In this guessing game, one student selected a card featuring a job, while others used a

board with 36 images to deduce the chosen profession. By asking yes/no questions,

players practiced question formulation and speaking skills. Structured prompts helped

students construct their queries effectively.

Goose game

The Goose Game adapted its traditional format to include vocabulary-based challenges.

Players advanced by rolling a die, landing on squares with job-related questions such as

“Who works at the fire station?” Correct answers allowed them to stay; incorrect answers

sent them back. Special squares, like “Goose,” offered opportunities to move ahead. The

game combined language practice with a playful, competitive element.