English teachers’ gamification satisfaction and perception scale (ETGSPS) development and validation

IF 4.8 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Jakub Helvich, Lukas Novak, Petr Mikoska, Stepan Hubalovsky, Katerina Juklova
{"title":"English teachers’ gamification satisfaction and perception scale (ETGSPS) development and validation","authors":"Jakub Helvich, Lukas Novak, Petr Mikoska, Stepan Hubalovsky, Katerina Juklova","doi":"10.1007/s10639-024-13001-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the years, gamification has played an important role in English education. Despite the promising results, there is a scarcity of research on gamified English teaching. Additionally, most studies addressing this topic used tools with problematic validity, posing challenges in interpreting their findings. Therefore, the objectives were to develop and validate a measure assessing the teacher-perceived applicability of gamification applications and the perceived effect on learners’ motivation and learning outcomes. Two samples of 278 (M = 41.2, SD = 9.38; 81.3% females) and 333 (M = 43.7, SD = 9.2; 87% females) participants were used for Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses, respectively. Network analysis examined the mutual dynamics between the items. Additionally, two retest samples were collected to explore the stability of the scale. Measurement invariance was examined between the samples and education levels. The construct validity was assessed by examining associations with other constructs using Spearman’s Rank correlations. The results supported the four-factor model (CFI = 0.863; TLI = 0.85; RMSEA = 0.076; SRMR = 0.077) with excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.91 and McDonald’s ω = 0.94) and excellent stability (ICC = 0.96). The network analysis identified 9 communities. The measurement invariance revealed that the scale measures the same across different education levels and samples. Spearman’s Rank correlations suggested statistically significant associations between individual subscales and selected constructs except between learning outcomes and general point averages. Altogether, the scale exhibits a high temporal and cross-level robustness, making it a valuable tool for gamification assessment in English teaching.</p>","PeriodicalId":51494,"journal":{"name":"Education and Information Technologies","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Information Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13001-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Over the years, gamification has played an important role in English education. Despite the promising results, there is a scarcity of research on gamified English teaching. Additionally, most studies addressing this topic used tools with problematic validity, posing challenges in interpreting their findings. Therefore, the objectives were to develop and validate a measure assessing the teacher-perceived applicability of gamification applications and the perceived effect on learners’ motivation and learning outcomes. Two samples of 278 (M = 41.2, SD = 9.38; 81.3% females) and 333 (M = 43.7, SD = 9.2; 87% females) participants were used for Exploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses, respectively. Network analysis examined the mutual dynamics between the items. Additionally, two retest samples were collected to explore the stability of the scale. Measurement invariance was examined between the samples and education levels. The construct validity was assessed by examining associations with other constructs using Spearman’s Rank correlations. The results supported the four-factor model (CFI = 0.863; TLI = 0.85; RMSEA = 0.076; SRMR = 0.077) with excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.91 and McDonald’s ω = 0.94) and excellent stability (ICC = 0.96). The network analysis identified 9 communities. The measurement invariance revealed that the scale measures the same across different education levels and samples. Spearman’s Rank correlations suggested statistically significant associations between individual subscales and selected constructs except between learning outcomes and general point averages. Altogether, the scale exhibits a high temporal and cross-level robustness, making it a valuable tool for gamification assessment in English teaching.

Abstract Image

英语教师游戏化满意度与感知量表(ETGSPS)的开发与验证
多年来,游戏化在英语教育中发挥了重要作用。尽管取得了可喜的成果,但有关游戏化英语教学的研究却很少。此外,大多数针对这一主题的研究使用的工具在有效性方面存在问题,这给解释研究结果带来了挑战。因此,我们的目标是开发并验证一种测量方法,评估教师认为游戏化应用的适用性以及对学习者学习动机和学习成果的影响。研究人员分别对 278 名(男 = 41.2,女 SD = 9.38;81.3% 为女性)和 333 名(男 = 43.7,女 SD = 9.2;87% 为女性)参与者进行了探索性因素分析和确认性因素分析。网络分析研究了各项目之间的相互动态关系。此外,还收集了两个重测样本,以探讨量表的稳定性。对样本和教育水平之间的测量不变性进行了检验。通过使用斯皮尔曼等级相关检验与其他建构之间的关联,评估了建构效度。结果支持四因素模型(CFI = 0.863; TLI = 0.85; RMSEA = 0.076; SRMR = 0.077),具有良好的内部一致性(Cronbach's α = 0.91 和 McDonald's ω = 0.94)和出色的稳定性(ICC = 0.96)。网络分析确定了 9 个群体。测量不变性表明,该量表在不同教育水平和样本中的测量结果相同。斯皮尔曼等级相关性表明,除了学习成绩和总平均分之间的相关性外,各分量表和选定的建构之间都存在统计意义上的显著相关性。总之,该量表具有较高的时间和跨层次稳健性,是英语教学游戏化评估的重要工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Education and Information Technologies
Education and Information Technologies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
12.70%
发文量
610
期刊介绍: The Journal of Education and Information Technologies (EAIT) is a platform for the range of debates and issues in the field of Computing Education as well as the many uses of information and communication technology (ICT) across many educational subjects and sectors. It probes the use of computing to improve education and learning in a variety of settings, platforms and environments. The journal aims to provide perspectives at all levels, from the micro level of specific pedagogical approaches in Computing Education and applications or instances of use in classrooms, to macro concerns of national policies and major projects; from pre-school classes to adults in tertiary institutions; from teachers and administrators to researchers and designers; from institutions to online and lifelong learning. The journal is embedded in the research and practice of professionals within the contemporary global context and its breadth and scope encourage debate on fundamental issues at all levels and from different research paradigms and learning theories. The journal does not proselytize on behalf of the technologies (whether they be mobile, desktop, interactive, virtual, games-based or learning management systems) but rather provokes debate on all the complex relationships within and between computing and education, whether they are in informal or formal settings. It probes state of the art technologies in Computing Education and it also considers the design and evaluation of digital educational artefacts.  The journal aims to maintain and expand its international standing by careful selection on merit of the papers submitted, thus providing a credible ongoing forum for debate and scholarly discourse. Special Issues are occasionally published to cover particular issues in depth. EAIT invites readers to submit papers that draw inferences, probe theory and create new knowledge that informs practice, policy and scholarship. Readers are also invited to comment and reflect upon the argument and opinions published. EAIT is the official journal of the Technical Committee on Education of the International Federation for Information Processing (IFIP) in partnership with UNESCO.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信