Do you play in class? Board games to promote cognitive and educational development in primary school: A cluster randomized controlled trial

IF 4.7 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning and Instruction Pub Date : 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101946
Nuria Vita-Barrull , Verónica Estrada-Plana , Jaume March-Llanes , Pablo Sotoca-Orgaz , Núria Guzmán , Rosa Ayesa , Jorge Moya-Higueras
{"title":"Do you play in class? Board games to promote cognitive and educational development in primary school: A cluster randomized controlled trial","authors":"Nuria Vita-Barrull ,&nbsp;Verónica Estrada-Plana ,&nbsp;Jaume March-Llanes ,&nbsp;Pablo Sotoca-Orgaz ,&nbsp;Núria Guzmán ,&nbsp;Rosa Ayesa ,&nbsp;Jorge Moya-Higueras","doi":"10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.101946","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Research aims</h3><p>The aim of this study was to assess the effects of a school intervention programme based on modern board games during school hours on basic executive functions and on academic skills (reading and maths).</p></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><p>A total of 522 (age in years = 8.83 ± 1.85 SD; % female = 45.5) primary school students were enrolled. We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial, with one experimental group (playing board games in class) and one control group (regular classes) in all grades from first to sixth. Mixed model analysis was applied.</p></div><div><h3>Results and conclusion</h3><p>In the pre-post comparisons, children from the experimental group showed greater improvements in updating and in academic skills than the control groups. To conclude, playing modern board games in the classroom could be better for learning and cognitive development than direct-instruction methodologies.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48357,"journal":{"name":"Learning and Instruction","volume":"93 ","pages":"Article 101946"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224000732/pdfft?md5=cd2dbab97dc8a5e14aab01070e622c6e&pid=1-s2.0-S0959475224000732-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475224000732","RegionNum":1,"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

Research aims

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of a school intervention programme based on modern board games during school hours on basic executive functions and on academic skills (reading and maths).

Methodology

A total of 522 (age in years = 8.83 ± 1.85 SD; % female = 45.5) primary school students were enrolled. We conducted a cluster-randomised controlled trial, with one experimental group (playing board games in class) and one control group (regular classes) in all grades from first to sixth. Mixed model analysis was applied.

Results and conclusion

In the pre-post comparisons, children from the experimental group showed greater improvements in updating and in academic skills than the control groups. To conclude, playing modern board games in the classroom could be better for learning and cognitive development than direct-instruction methodologies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
你在课堂上玩游戏吗?促进小学认知和教育发展的棋盘游戏:分组随机对照试验
研究目的 本研究旨在评估基于现代棋盘游戏的学校干预计划对基本执行功能和学业技能(阅读和数学)的影响。方法 共招募了 522 名小学生(年龄为 8.83 ± 1.85 SD;女生比例为 45.5)。我们进行了分组随机对照试验,在一至六年级各设一个实验组(在课堂上玩棋盘游戏)和一个对照组(正常上课)。结果和结论在前后比较中,实验组儿童在更新和学习技能方面比对照组有更大的进步。总之,在课堂上玩现代棋盘游戏比直接教学法更有利于学习和认知发展。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: As an international, multi-disciplinary, peer-refereed journal, Learning and Instruction provides a platform for the publication of the most advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching. The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may refer to any age level, from infants to adults and to a diversity of learning and instructional settings, from laboratory experiments to field studies. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction, and the rigor of the study.
期刊最新文献
Competitive and non-competitive school climate and students’ well-being Comparison effects on self- and external ratings: Testing the generalizability of the 2I/E model to parents and teachers of academic track school students Testing the CONIC model: The interplay of conscientiousness and interest in predicting academic effort Metacognitive scaffolding for digital reading and mind-wandering in adults with and without ADHD Retrieval supports word learning in children with Down syndrome
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1