The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The impact of using the digital educational games blog on enhancing mathematical concepts among sixth-grade students in Jordan
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the impact of using the educational games blog on developing mathematical concepts among sixth-grade students in Jordan. To conduct the research experiment, the researcher followed a quasi-experimental design with pre-tests and post-tests for two experimental and control groups. The study included 50 intentionally selected students from the third grade, distributed into two groups: Group A represented the experimental group consisting of 25 students who were taught using the digital educational games blog, while Group B represented the control group consisting of 25 students taught using conventional methods. The study tool was a test for acquiring mathematical concepts, and its validity and reliability were ensured. The results showed a statistically significant impact on the acquisition of mathematical concepts test in favor of the experimental group (F = 8.13, p = 0.00, η² = 0.39), indicating that the teaching method using the digital educational games blog was more effective than traditional methods, which was attributed to the teaching method using the educational digital game. Based on the results, by integrating these games into the curriculum, students can be motivated to learn innovatively, improving their academic performance. The study recommends using digital educational games in the educational learning process, especially in mathematics, due to their clear positive impact on acquiring and understanding mathematical concepts among sixth-grade students.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Participants prefer electronic methods to assess diet over traditional methods”
From Educational intervention using a mobile app to enhance sports nutrition knowledge and dietary habits in student-athletes: a randomized controlled trial (2025) · cites this paper as Al-Nawaiseh, 2025
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Department of Preschool Education, F. O. E., Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Faculty of Education & Department of Preschool Education, T. U. O. C., Zaranis, N., & Faculty of Education & Department of Preschool Education, T. U. O. C. (2021) · Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research · doi:10.25082/amler.2021.01.002 · Cited by 171
Cited by
AlKasasbeh, W. J., Amawi, A. T., Al-Nawaiseh, S. J., Alshorman, D., Alshdaifat, K., Alawamleh, T., & Orhan, B. E. (2025) · Frontiers in Education · doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1622166 · Cited by 14
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Al-Nawaiseh, S. J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Innovative Research and Scientific Studies
- Publisher
- Innovative Research Publishing
- Published
- 2025-02-14
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1421-1428
- ISSN
- 2617-6548
- Cited by
- 2
- References
- 1
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
