Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this paper presented an app of Chinese character learning game addressed to Singaporean primary school pupils. Moreover, an experiment is organized to show that the app improves students’ interest in learning Chinese and improves students’ ability to learn Chinese characters.

The experiment and its’ analysis explained thoroughly.

But the paper has a major drawback. The review is too short with a limited number of references. Also, the authors have not given any implementation details. Finally, figure 1 and figure 2 have very poor quality.

Author Response

The authors thank the reviewer for the fruitful advice and helpful comments. We have prepared the responses and updates as follows.

1. The review is too short with a limited number of references.

Thanks for the kind suggestion. We have appended the literature review, in Sec 2, and the reference list citing more adequate articles. In the revised manuscript, we added the following paragraphs as follow.

“Applications (apps) in education, built or installed in mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets etc., have been regarded as the assistance for teaching and learning. To make the teaching more deliverable and to make the learning more accessible, App development takes the responsibility for connecting learners and teachers with knowledge-based content…..” For complete literature review, please see the Sec 2 in the revised manuscript.

And reference added as follow,

3. Lee, S.-M.; Park, M. Reconceptualization of the context in language learning with a location-based AR app. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2020, 33, 936-959, doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.1602545.
4. Pellas, N.; Fotaris, P.; Kazanidis, I.; Wells, D. Augmenting the learning experience in primary and secondary school edu-cation: a systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based learning. Virtual Reality 2019, 23, 329-346, doi:10.1007/s10055-018-0347-2.
5. Herodotou, C. Young children and tablets: A systematic review of effects on learning and development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2018, 34, 1-9, doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12220.
6. Dong, H.; Wang, D.; Gao, Y.; Qian, F.; Wu, G. APP Based Teaching/Learning Mode and Quality Evaluation of MMT Course. Singapore, 2020; pp. 598-606.
7. Hisbullah, T.W.; Heru Supriyono, S. Tutor And Student Management And Learning Assistant In Pesma KH Mas Mansur Based On Android Studio App. Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta, 2019.
8. Qian, J.; Wang, Z. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Online Automatic Scoring of English Writing in Juku Correction Network and Mosoteach APP under Blended Teaching Mode. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2020, 1533, 042082, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1533/4/042082.
9. Ho, W.Y.J. Self-Directed Language Learning: A Semiotic Analysis of a Language Learning App. In Virtual Sites as Learning Spaces: Critical Issues on Languaging Research in Changing Eduscapes, Bagga-Gupta, S., Messina Dahlberg, G., Lindberg, Y., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2019; pp. 295-327.
10. Nami, F. Educational smartphone apps for language learning in higher education: Students’ choices and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2020, 36, 82-95, doi:10.14742/ajet.5350.
11. Shakirov, B.; Khairullina, L.; Mingalieva, L.; Bronskaya, V.; Khabibullina, G.; Fadeeva, E.; Kharitonova, O. Using emotional evaluation of text in a foreign language learning app. 2021; pp. 188-195.

 

2. Also, the authors have not given any implementation details.

In Sec 3.3, we added "Implementation process" to describe the process of how the trial class implements with deploying the app in the school teaching. Please see the revised manuscript.

3. Finally, figure 1 and figure 2 have very poor quality.

We tried to divide the original figures into several sub-parts and replaced Figure 1 and Figure 2 with them, for better image quality. Please see the Figure 1 and Figure 2abcd in the revised manuscript.

Reviewer 2 Report

Relevant subject and framed in the journal and special issue.
Some typos were found, so a linguistic review should be carried out.
The literature review should be more developed and incorporate a greater diversity of bibliographical references, namely on learning through technology and gamification. 
There are too many figures that do not add value; it would be advisable to reduce the number of figures, e.g., eliminate Figures 3, 4 and 5 and, from Figures 9 to 22, choose 2 or 3 that do not allow the identification of students' faces, opting instead to describe and reflect on the observations.
The presentation and analysis of the data should be better explained. I cannot find the statistical tests mentioned in relation to the pupils' questionnaire and the presentation of the data from the teachers' questionnaire needs to be improved, as does the explanation of how it was carried out.
In the Conclusion and Discussion there is no interconnection of the results with the literature review.

Author Response

The authors thank the reviewer for the fruitful advice and helpful comments. We have prepared the responses as follows.

 

 

1. Relevant subject and framed in the journal and special issue. Some typos were found, so a linguistic review should be carried out.

 

We have conducted a linguistic review and corrected the typos for the revised manuscript.

 

2. The literature review should be more developed and incorporate a greater diversity of bibliographical references, namely on learning through technology and gamification.

 

Thanks for the kind suggestion. We have appended the literature review, in Sec 2, and the reference list citing more adequate articles. In the revised manuscript, we added the following paragraphs as follow.

“Applications (apps) in education, built or installed in mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets etc., have been regarded as the assistance for teaching and learning. To make the teaching more deliverable and to make the learning more accessible, App development takes the responsibility for connecting learners and teachers with knowledge-based content…..” For complete literature review, please see the Sec 2 in the revised manuscript.

And reference added as follow,

3. Lee, S.-M.; Park, M. Reconceptualization of the context in language learning with a location-based AR app. Computer Assisted Language Learning 2020, 33, 936-959, doi:10.1080/09588221.2019.1602545.
4. Pellas, N.; Fotaris, P.; Kazanidis, I.; Wells, D. Augmenting the learning experience in primary and secondary school edu-cation: a systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based learning. Virtual Reality 2019, 23, 329-346, doi:10.1007/s10055-018-0347-2.
5. Herodotou, C. Young children and tablets: A systematic review of effects on learning and development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2018, 34, 1-9, doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12220.
6. Dong, H.; Wang, D.; Gao, Y.; Qian, F.; Wu, G. APP Based Teaching/Learning Mode and Quality Evaluation of MMT Course. Singapore, 2020; pp. 598-606.
7. Hisbullah, T.W.; Heru Supriyono, S. Tutor And Student Management And Learning Assistant In Pesma KH Mas Mansur Based On Android Studio App. Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta, 2019.
8. Qian, J.; Wang, Z. A Comparative Study on the Effectiveness of Online Automatic Scoring of English Writing in Juku Correction Network and Mosoteach APP under Blended Teaching Mode. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2020, 1533, 042082, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1533/4/042082.
9. Ho, W.Y.J. Self-Directed Language Learning: A Semiotic Analysis of a Language Learning App. In Virtual Sites as Learning Spaces: Critical Issues on Languaging Research in Changing Eduscapes, Bagga-Gupta, S., Messina Dahlberg, G., Lindberg, Y., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2019; pp. 295-327.
10. Nami, F. Educational smartphone apps for language learning in higher education: Students’ choices and perceptions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2020, 36, 82-95, doi:10.14742/ajet.5350.
11. Shakirov, B.; Khairullina, L.; Mingalieva, L.; Bronskaya, V.; Khabibullina, G.; Fadeeva, E.; Kharitonova, O. Using emotional evaluation of text in a foreign language learning app. 2021; pp. 188-195.

 

3. There are too many figures that do not add value; it would be advisable to reduce the number of figures, e.g., eliminate Figures 3, 4 and 5 and, from Figures 9 to 22, choose 2 or 3 that do not allow the identification of students' faces, opting instead to describe and reflect on the observations.

 

We have removed some figures for making the layout more concisely, such as Figure 3-8 in the previous version. To avoid recognizing pupils' faces, we also replaced those figures easy to identify pupils, with the blurred-in-face ones, accordingly. Please see Figure 7-8 in the revised manuscript.

 

4. The presentation and analysis of the data should be better explained. I cannot find the statistical tests mentioned in relation to the pupils' questionnaire and the presentation of the data from the teachers' questionnaire needs to be improved, as does the explanation of how it was carried out.

 

We have re-paragraphed and added a detailed statement about the data analysis in Sec 4, as well as the statistical testing result. For the presentation of the teacher's feedback, we also edited and rearranged the explanation to make the table more readable. Please the paragraphs in page 14, we added the following paragraphs:

 

“For Table 3, we conducted statistical testing to examine the difference between the control class and the experimental class. The mean difference between them equals 0.1000 and t statistic value is 0.0955, not sufficient to show the statistical significance considering the 95% confidence level. Even though the above statistical testing inference, we balanced the concept with Table 2 and conclude the result: the implementation of trial class might be affected by the social distancing measure amid the pandemic.”

 

“The feedback, in Table 4, has been collected from school teachers and classified into four categories: app content, students' interest in the app, teachers' perceptions of the app, and teachers' suggestions for the app. For the content delivered by the app, teachers who were involved in the trial class and adopted the app in their class thought the content is appropriate and suitable for students' ability current quo of placement. To summarize the feedback about students' interest in the app, observed from teachers, pupils feel it interesting and amusing when operating tasks assigned by the app function and listening to the phonics for matching a corresponding Chinese character. They enjoyed the game inside the app in their Chinese class and expected to engage in it for the next class, or after school class. In teachers' view-points and perceptions, the app can properly help the implementation of consoli-dation and review for pupils' Chinese knowledge through the user experience and appropriate content. For the app's future development and revision, the teachers interviewed also provided several suggestions in the user interface, adaptive learning content, and component refinement.”

 

 

5. In the Conclusion and Discussion there is no interconnection of the results with the literature review.

 

In the revised manuscript, we have re-written and re-paragraphed the conclusion section for making it more connective with the experimental results and the literature review. Please see Sec 5 in the revised manuscript.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper improved. I dont think that needs any more improvements.

Reviewer 2 Report

I believe that a number of improvements have been made.

It also reviewed figures 2a, 4(2b), 2c and 2d., removing or it will be better to use the reduced of the 1st version.