Article

Received 12.01.2025

Revised 02.05.2025

Accepted 29.05.2025

Retrieved from Vol. 28, No. 1, 2025

Pages 6 -13

Zatserkovnyi, O. (2025). A comparative analysis of gamification tools in enhancing content retention in CLIL-based EFL classrooms. Pedagogical Sciences, 28(1), 6-13. https://doi.org/10.33989/2524-2474.2025.1.6

A comparative analysis of gamification tools in enhancing content retention in CLIL-based EFL classrooms

Oleh Zatserkovnyi

In the digital age, integrating gamification into Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has become crucial for engaging EFL learners and enhancing pedagogical outcomes. This study aims to evaluate comparatively the impact of three widely used gamification platforms – Kahoot, Genially, and Quizizz – on content retention and learner experiences among university-level EFL students. Employing a quasi-experimental, mixedmethods design, 53 participants were assigned to one of the three tool conditions and assessed through retention tests, perception questionnaires, focus-group interviews, and structured classroom observations. Quantitative analysis via one-way ANOVA revealed a significant effect of tool type on retention scores (F(2.50) = 5.67, p = .005, η² = .115). Post hoc comparisons showed Quizizz users achieved the highest mean retention (M = 85.6, SD = 5.9), significantly outperforming Genially (M = 78.2, SD = 7.4; p = .004), with Kahoot (M = 82.5, SD = 6.2) yielding intermediate results. Qualitative findings indicated that Quizizz’s self-paced format and immediate corrective feedback reduced anxiety, fostered autonomy, and promoted metacognitive reflection. Kahoot’s competitive, time-pressured rounds drove high short-term engagement but sometimes imposed cognitive load that impeded deeper comprehension. Genially’s rich multimedia interface enhanced initial motivation and visual immersion, yet learners required additional scaffolding and follow-up retrieval exercises to consolidate learning. These results underscore that design features – pacing controls, feedback immediacy, and interface complexity – must be strategically aligned with instructional goals to maximise both cognitive and affective outcomes. Educators and curriculum designers can apply these insights to select or combine gamified tools in CLIL settings, tailoring activities to balance engagement, comprehension, and long-term retention. The practical value of this research lies in its applicability for EFL instructors, curriculum designers, and educational technologists seeking evidence-based guidance on selecting and integrating gamified tools to enhance content retention in CLIL-based university language courses

digital tools; Quizizz; Kahoot; Genially; language education; learner engagement
  1. Achivida, J.J. (2025). Multimodal language teaching and language skills development with AI and VR integration: A systematic literature review. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 31(6), 581-594. doi: 10.5281/ zenodo.14797458.
  2. Alawadhi, A., & Abu-Ayyash, E.A.S. (2021). Students’ perceptions of Kahoot!: An exploratory mixed-method study in EFL undergraduate classrooms in the UAE. Education and Information Technologies, 26, 3629-3658. doi: 10.1007/ s10639-020-10425-8.
  3. Arip, A.J., & Hashim, H. (2024). Gamification in English as a Second Language (ESL) learning: A systematic review. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(4), 2837-2853. doi: 10.6007/ IJARPED/v13-i4/24069.
  4. Cabrera-Solano, P. (2022). Game-based learning in higher education: The pedagogical effect of Genially games in English as a foreign language instruction. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(4), 719-729. doi: 10.12973/ijem.8.4.719.
  5. Çelik, F., & Ersanlı, C.Y. (2022). The use of augmented reality in a gamified CLIL lesson and students’ achievements and attitudes: A quasi-experimental study. Smart Learning Environments, 9, article number 30. doi: 10.1186/s40561022-00211-z.
  6. Council of Europe. (2020). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment – companion volume. Retrieved from https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages.
  7. Coyle, D. (2007). Content and language integrated learning: Towards a connected research agenda for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-562. doi: 10.2167/beb459.0.
  8. Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, J.D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  9. Enríquez, M. (2020). Characteristics of multimedia tools for the development of interactive presentations. Journal of Science and Research, 5(1), 873-891. doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4452944.
  10. Gebbels, M. (2018). Re-engineering challenging and abstract topics using Kahoot! A student response system. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(2). doi: 10.21100/compass.v11i2.844.
  11. Hamedi, A., Fakhraee Faruji, L., & Amiri Kordestani, L. (2022). The effectiveness of using formative assessment by Kahoot application on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge and burnout level. Journal of New Advances in English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 768-786. doi: 10.22034/jeltal.2022.4.1.5.
  12. Ibad, W., Sabat, Y., Musyarofah, L., & Sulistyaningsih, S. (2023). Comparing Kahoot, Quizizz, and Wordwall in EFL reading class. Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies, 3(11), 1984-2000. doi: 10.59188/eduvest.v3i11.954.
  13. Kalleny, N.K. (2020). Advantages of Kahoot! Game-based formative assessments along with methods of its use and application during the COVID-19 Pandemic in various live learning sessions. Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure, 8(4), 175-185. doi: 10.4103/JMAU.JMAU_61_20.
  14. Lai, C.J. (2024). Enhancing multimodal output in CLIL education: The impact of VR games on fourth-grade students’ English poster designs and presentations in Taiwan. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), article number 1465. doi: 10.1057/s41599-024-03999-y.
  15. Lopatynska, I., Bratanych, O., Biletska, I., Cherednychenko, V., & Pustovoichenko, D. (2024). Evaluating the efficacy of Kahoot as a computer-assisted language learning tool in higher education. Revista Eduweb, 18(1), 152-163. doi: 10.46502/issn.1856-7576/2024.18.01.11.
  16. Marsh, D. (2002). CLIL/EMILE – the European dimension: Actions, trends, and foresight potential. Brussels: European Commission.
  17. Mykhailenko, V. (2024). Formation of the sound-syllabic structure of primary school pupils’ speech with intellectual disabilities in Ukrainian language lessons. Scientific Bulletin of Mukachevo State University. Series “Pedagogy and Psychology”, 10(4), 50-61. doi: 10.52534/msu-pp4.2024.50.
  18. Nozhovnik, O., Harbuza, T., Teslenko, N., Okhrimenko, O., Zalizniuk, V., & Durdas, A. (2023). Chatbot gamified and automated management of L2 learning process using Smart Sender platform. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 9(3), 603-618. doi: 10.12973/ijem.9.3.603.
  19. Sassmannová, P. (2023). Kahoot! – a case study of retention, engagement, and classroom dynamics at a secondary vocational school (Master’s Thesis, Masaryk University, Faculty of Arts, Brno, Czech Republic). 
  20. University of Nevada. (2025). 410. Maintaining data confidentiality. Retrieved from https://www.unr.edu/researchintegrity/human-research/human-research-protection-policy-manual/410-maintaining-data-confidentiality.
  21. Vo, T., Truong, D., & Nguyen, P. (2023). The impact of digital technology on content and language integrated learning in higher education: A systematic review of literature. ICTE Conference Proceedings, 3, 137-147. doi: 10.54855/ ictep.23311.
  22. Zhang, S., & Hasim, Z. (2023). Gamification in EFL/ESL instruction: A systematic review of empirical research. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, article number 1030790. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1030790.

https://doi.org/10.33989/2524-2474.2025.1.6