Vocabulary acquisition remains a persistent challenge for English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners, particularly in mixed-proficiency classrooms where conventional instructional approaches often fail to sustain learners’ different levels. Although digital gamification has demonstrated potential for enhancing language learning, limited research has examined its effectiveness across different English proficiency levels within authentic school settings. This study investigated the impact of a digital gamified vocabulary intervention on vocabulary acquisition among ninth-grade EFL learners with low, intermediate, and high English proficiency levels. The study employed a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with proficiency-based subgroup comparisons. Fifty-four ninth-grade EFL learners from two intact classes were classified into three proficiency groups (low, intermediate, and high) based on their pretest scores. Participants engaged in a structured digital gamified vocabulary intervention using the Blooket platform. Data were collected using a researcher-developed Vocabulary Achievement Test administered before and after the intervention. Statistical analyses included within-group and between-group comparisons to examine changes in vocabulary achievement across proficiency levels. The findings revealed a statistically significant improvement in vocabulary achievement following the intervention, with the overall mean score increasing from 47.53% to 63.46% and a large effect size (Cohen's d = 0.82). Although all proficiency groups achieved significant vocabulary gains, the magnitude of improvement differed significantly across groups (p = .032), with low-proficiency learners demonstrating the greatest mean gain. The study concludes that digital gamification is an effective instructional approach for improving vocabulary acquisition in mixed-proficiency EFL classrooms. This research contributes empirical evidence supporting the integration of theory-informed digital gamification into vocabulary instruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bashuti et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: