those who are taught with a traditional instructional approach while controlling for previous academic self-efficacy.
Alternatively, the following are the null hypotheses:
Ho1: There is no statistically significant difference in the Spanish language achievement of elementary students who are taught with gamification (i.e. Duolingo® learning) versus those who are taught with a traditional instructional approach while controlling for previous Spanish language achievement.
Ho2: There is no statistically significant difference in the academic self-efficacy of elementary students who are taught with gamification (i.e. Duolingo® learning) versus those who are taught with a traditional instructional approach while controlling for previous academic self-efficacy.
Identification of Variables
The independent variable was the type of instruction (traditional elementary Spanish class or instruction with gamification). Traditional Spanish class is defined as the Spanish teacher using class time as she normally would. This includes introducing and practicing new vocabulary and phrases in Spanish and other elements of face-to-face instruction. Gamification is defined as the adding of game-like elements to contexts that normally do not have those game-like elements (Deterding, 2013; Frey, 2012; Giannetto et al., 2013). In this study, instruction with gamification is defined as students using the Spanish class period working with Duolingo® on a mobile device or a computer. See further definition of the independent variable in the problem statement and explanation of the setting in chapter 4.
The dependent variables are student Spanish language achievement and student academic self-efficacy. Spanish language achievement is defined as understanding of vocabulary and grammar as indicated by their score on the Spanish language achievement test. Student academic self-efficacy is defined as “students’ perceptions of their
confidence to do their classwork” as indicated by their responses on the PALS Academic Self-Efficacy scale (Midgley et al., 2000, p. 19).
As noted above, the control variables are the level of Spanish language
achievement and student academic self-efficacy at the initiation of the study. Differences in these variables would be controlled for through a pretest and the use of an ANCOVA if the pretest results showed a significant difference between the treatment group and the control group. The potentially confounding variables, sex and socioeconomic status,
were controlled by the use of homogenous groups. The site school has procedures for grouping the students so as to create generally homogenous groups.
Definitions
English L1/Spanish L2 – denotes that English is the native language and Spanish is the second language. This terminology can be used to refer to curriculum, instruction, etc. (Flege, Frieda, & Nozawa, 1997).
Duolingo® – a free language learning software app available for iOS and Android devices, as well as available for computers via a web-based version. Duolingo® has gamification incorporated into its design (Vesselinov & Grego, 2012).
Spanish language achievement – the student’s ability to translate from Spanish to English and from English to Spanish as indicated by the number of correct responses from multiple-choice questions regarding vocabulary, phrases, and grammar on the Spanish Language Achievement Test that was created for the study.
Gamification – the incorporation of game-like elements into contexts that
normally do not have game-like elements for the purpose of creating greater engagement and improving user experience (Deterding et al., 2011; Frey, 2012; Giannetto et al., 2013).
Serious game – a game which is designed for a purpose beyond mere entertainment (Breuer & Bente, 2010).
Self-efficacy - one’s belief in how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations (Bandura, 1977).
Academic Self-Efficacy – “students’ perceptions of their confidence to do their classwork” as indicated by their responses on the PALS Academic Self-Efficacy scale (Midgley et al., 2000, p. 19).
Traditional Spanish class instruction – the instructional methodology normally used by the Spanish language teacher, as distinguished from the gamified instruction used for the experimental group. Further details on the traditional instructional methodology can be found in chapter 3 under “Setting.”
Sex – male or female (Education, 2013).
Socioeconomic status – A combination of social and economic factors that are used as an indicator of household income and/or opportunity (Education, 2013).
Summary
In this chapter the significance of the study was discussed along with the
theoretical framework for the study, including a review of Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development, Csikszentmihalyi’s flow theory, and Bandura’s social cognitive theory and their relation with gamification, achievement, and self-efficacy. English L1/Spanish L2 instruction in U.S. elementary schools was discussed, along with problems and
weaknesses in the current system of instruction in the U.S. The purpose of the study, the significance of the study, research questions, hypotheses, and identification of the variables were reviewed along with the research summary and the assumptions and limitations of the study.
This quantitative study examined the effect of gamification on Spanish language achievement and student academic self-efficacy for elementary students. More
was used to compare elementary school students at a private school in South Florida. The treatment group had Duolingo® significantly incorporated into their class while the control group continued with a traditional instructional model. Students took pretests to control for prior Spanish language achievement and academic self-efficacy.
This research design is strong among the quasi-experimental studies that can be used when true random sampling is not feasible (Campbell & Stanley, 1963). This research design allows for the control of prior Spanish language achievement and academic self-efficacy since groups cannot be assumed equivalent at the start of the study.
The treatment group significantly incorporated the use of Duolingo® into their elementary Spanish program. It was used as their sole curriculum for the duration of each of their once-per-week, 40-minute class sessions for the duration of the 12-week study. Students were given iPads to use during class time and were taught how to log in to Duolingo® and work primarily independently through the levels of the program. Students in the treatment group tracked their progress on a physical display board in the classroom.
The control group continued with traditional Spanish instruction. For the duration of the study, the control group classes focused on the same words and grammar as the Duolingo® group. This ensured that the primary difference between the groups was the method of instructional delivery, as opposed to having an additional significant difference in content. Both classes continued to meet once a week for 40 minutes. The study continued for 12 weeks (see Figure 1).
At the conclusion of the 12 weeks, the students took the Spanish Language Achievement Test and the PALS Academic Efficacy subscale (Midgley et al., 2000). Since the analysis of the pretest showed no significant differences between the treatment group and the control group, an independent t-test was used to analyze the posttests to determine the effects of gamification on Spanish language achievement and academic self-efficacy.
Figure 1. Research process for this study.
In this chapter the problem statement, purpose statement, significance of the study, research questions, hypotheses and variables were discussed. In chapter two the theoretical framework will be discussed more thoroughly. Gamification and the literature supporting the study will also be examined.
Research Duolingo Content
Create Spanish Language Achievement Instrument based on
Duolingo content
Create Traditional Lessons for Control
Group Based on Duolingo Content Select Instrument to Assess Academic Self-‐EfAicacy Develop GamiAication Instructional Plan Pretest with Achievement and Self-‐EfAicacy Instruments Begin Control and Treatment Programs Run Programs for 12 Weeks Posttest with Achievement and Self-‐EfAicacy Instruments
Analyze the Data
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE