Gamified Spaced Repetition for Technical Vocabulary Learning in Vocational Engineering Education
A Quasi-Experimental Study
Abstract
The abstract This research aims to analyze the effectiveness of gamification-based spaced repetition in improving the mastery and retention of civil engineering vocabulary among students of Politeknik Dewantara Palopo. The research method employed is a quasi-experimental design with experimental and control groups. The instruments used include a civil engineering vocabulary test and a motivation questionnaire. The results show a significant improvement in vocabulary mastery in the experimental group using gamified spaced repetition media. This research contributes to the application of technology-based learning methods to enhance the quality of vocational education. Furthermore, it suggests that the integration of gamification with spaced repetition provides a more engaging and effective learning environment, promoting better retention and long-term recall of technical vocabulary. The study also highlights the importance of incorporating modern educational technologies in vocational education to address the challenges of traditional learning methods. This study provides empirical evidence of the potential benefits of using gamification-based spaced repetition techniques in improving vocabulary acquisition in technical fields such as civil engineering, contributing to the advancement of educational practices in vocational training settings. As such, it has significant implications for curriculum development and the enhancement of teaching methodologies in technical education.
References
Bai, S., Hew, K. F., & Huang, B. (2020). Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review, 30, 100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322
Carpenter, S. K., Cepeda, N. J., Rohrer, D., Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2012). Using spacing to enhance diverse forms of learning: Review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 369–378. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43546797
Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5
Huang, R., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Sommer, M., Zhu, J., Stephen, A., Valle, N., Hampton, J., & Li, J. (2020). The impact of gamification in educational settings on student learning outcomes: a meta-analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(4), 1875–1901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09807-z
Kang, S. H. K. (2016). Spaced Repetition Promotes Efficient and Effective Learning: Policy Implications for Instruction. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215624708
Küpper-Tetzel, Caroline. E. (2014). Understanding the Distributed Practice Effect. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie, 222(2), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000168
Lo, S. (2024). Vocabulary learning through viewing dual-subtitled videos: Immediate repetition versus spaced repetition as an enhancement strategy. ReCALL, 36(2), 152–167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344024000053
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263109990520
Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(8). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
Nakata, T., & Webb, S. (2016). Does Studying Vocabulary In Smaller Sets Increase Learning?: The Effects of Part and Whole Learning on Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 523–552. https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S0272263115000236
Pass, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Design: Recent Developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How Big Is “Big”? Interpreting Effect Sizes in L2 Research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860
Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The Gamification of Learning: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (2020). Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge university press. https://www.cambridge.org/highereducation/books/vocabulary-in-language-teaching/1C01668DA6F51F9CC8192A70F21FE2EB#contents
Subhash, S., & Cudney, E. A. (2018). Gamified learning in higher education: A systematic review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 192–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.028
Toda, A. M., Valle, P. H. D., & Isotani, S. (2017). The Dark Side of Gamification: An Overview of Negative Effects of Gamification in Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 832, 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97934-2_9
UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54675/ASRB4722
Webb, S., & Nation, P. (2017). How Vocabulary Is Learned. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/how-vocabulary-is-learned-9780194403559?cc=dk&lang=en
Zainuddin, Z., Shujahat, M., Haruna, H., & Chu, S. K. W. (2020). The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Computers & Education, 145, 103729.
Copyright (c) 2025 Alviani Alviani, Andi Wafda
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In submitting the manuscript to the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
License and Copyright Agreement
Authors who publish with FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
.jpg)
.jpg)
1.jpg)
.jpg)
