Game-based learning and reading catch-up in Grade 3

The gist. After eight weeks of reading lessons built from games the class already played, all 36 learners in one rural Philippine Grade 3 class moved from below the pass mark to a class average of 'satisfactory' on a validated reading test. It is an early signal, not a tested method: there was no comparison class, so an ordinary term's progress cannot be ruled out.

What the study found

A class teacher at a small, remote elementary school in Malaybalay City Division, Bukidnon, ran eight weeks of game-based reading lessons with her own Grade 3 class of 36 learners, from an Indigenous Peoples and mixed-tribe community. Vocabulary, word decoding and reading comprehension were tested before and after with a validated 45-item reading test, using games built from activities the class already knew rather than a bought resource.

Every learner (all 36, 100%) scored 'did not meet expectations' on the pretest. Afterwards the class average rose from 20 to 37 out of 45, moving from 'did not meet expectations' to 'satisfactory'. Vocabulary and word decoding reached 'very satisfactory' and comprehension reached 'satisfactory', the smallest of the three gains. A paired t-test found the pre/post difference statistically significant (t = -20.40, p = .00001, n = 36); no standardised effect size such as Cohen's d was reported.

What it might mean for your classroom

The striking part of this account is not that games can carry a reading lesson, it is that these were games the class already played at home and in the community, folded into vocabulary, decoding and reading comprehension tasks rather than replaced by a new resource. Before assuming any game-based product would produce the same shift, it may be worth testing whether familiarity with the game, rather than the fact of playing one, is doing the work. It is a close cousin of the wider case for play-based learning, and it leans on the same reading comprehension skills you already teach.

• Audit what your class already plays. Before buying a reading-games resource, find out what games your own learners already know, at home or in the playground, and build the reading task into that.
• Test before, test after, on all three sub-skills. Use a simple, consistent check of vocabulary, decoding and comprehension before and after any games unit, so it shows its own evidence, not just enjoyment.
• Hold back a comparison where you can. Where timetabling allows, run the same weeks with one class or group doing the games and one continuing as usual, so gains are not just an ordinary term's progress.

Treat it as an experiment, not a recipe: build one familiar game into a single upcoming reading unit, test the same three sub-skills before and after, and compare against a class or group that did not get the games.

How solid is this?

We grade this an early signal. The reading test is comparatively well-built and the pre/post difference is highly significant, but there was no comparison group at all, the class's own teacher was also the sole researcher and interviewer, the published tables carry internal numerical inconsistencies we worked around by citing only the self-consistent figures, and it is one class in one under-resourced community using games that are never individually named. A version taught with a matched comparison class, an independent tester, and a named, described set of games would raise this to developing.

The source

Valmores, R. S., and Albacete, V. (2026). Game-Based Learning: A Teaching Intervention Strategy to Improve the Reading Performance of Grade 3 Learners. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 57(3), 268-283. Open access under a CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 licence.

Read the original study