The effect of combining interactive digital stories with smart games on developing problem-solving skills and creativity of first grade students

Jamehshorani, E.; Alimohamadi, Ya.; AlizadehJamal, M.

doi:10.22061/tej.2026.12642.3322

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Research Paper

Authors

¹ Department of Persian Language and Literature, Farhangian University, P.O. Box 14665-889, Tehran, Iran

² Department of Educational Sciences and Psychology, University of Birjand, Birjand, Iran

³ Department of Mathematics Education, Farhangiyan University, P.O. Box 14665-889, Tehran, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22061/tej.2026.12642.3322

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Problem-solving and creativity skills are key 21st-century competencies and play a fundamental role in students' cognitive and social development, especially in the early years of education. These skills are essential for academic success and for preparing students to face future life challenges. However, findings from international assessments and domestic studies indicate that Iranian students show relative weaknesses in these areas—weaknesses that can limit their ability to solve complex problems and innovate. This underscores the need to adopt innovative teaching methods in Iran’s education system. In this regard, interactive digital storytelling and intelligent games, due to their multimedia and interactive nature, hold great potential for enhancing students’ motivation and engagement. Nevertheless, the combination of these two approaches in teaching the Persian language, with an emphasis on Iranian culture, has been less explored. Accordingly, the present study aimed to examine the effect of combining interactive digital storytelling and intelligent games on developing problem-solving and creativity skills among first-grade primary students in the Persian language course, using culturally relevant Persian content, and to provide scientific evidence for improving learning quality.
Methods: This quasi-experimental study, employing a pretest–posttest design, compared an innovative teaching method (interactive digital storytelling and intelligent games) with a conventional teaching approach (lecture and class discussion) in the first-grade Persian language course. The study population consisted of first-grade female students in Bojnord (aged 6–7 years) during the 2024–2025 academic year. A total of 60 students were selected through convenience sampling and randomly assigned to experimental and control groups (30 students each) using Random.org. The instruments included the Children’s Problem-Solving Test (10 visual items, reliability = 0.83) and the simplified Torrance Creativity Test (reliability = 0.80). The 10-week intervention for the experimental group involved 30 minutes of digital storytelling (Persian content from Fibido and Taghche) and 60 minutes of intelligent gaming (from Bazaar and Myket) using group tablets (five students per device). The control group received 60 minutes of lecture-based teaching followed by 30 minutes of class discussion. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANCOVA, the Anderson–Darling test, and fuzzy analysis (MATLAB), while qualitative data from interviews (10 students, five teachers) and questionnaires from 20 parents were analyzed through fuzzy content analysis. Informed consent was obtained from parents, and all data were anonymized.
Findings: The results showed that the posttest mean scores of the experimental group were 30.8 ± 3.8 for problem-solving skills and 9.8 ± 1.4 for creativity, whereas the control group scored 25.2 ± 4.0 and 7.4 ± 1.6, respectively. ANCOVA, controlling for pretest scores, confirmed the significance of these differences: problem-solving (F(1,57) = 28.45, p < 0.001, η² = 0.33) and creativity [F(1,57) = 22.67, p < 0.001, η² = 0.28]. Fuzzy analysis using triangular membership functions indicated that 73% of the experimental group fell into the “high problem-solving” category and 68% into the “high creativity” category, compared with only 20% and 23% in the control group, respectively. Qualitative findings highlighted five main themes: enjoyment and motivation in learning (92%), increased self-confidence (88%), enhanced social interaction (80%), development of creative thinking (85%), and cultural-emotional alignment (82%). These themes were consistent with the educational content inspired by classical Persian literature, reinforcing the effectiveness of the innovative teaching approach within the Iranian cultural context.
Conclusion: This study, by providing empirical evidence, demonstrated that the digital teaching approach using Persian content enhanced the problem-solving and creativity skills of first-grade students, while also fostering motivation, self-confidence, social interaction, and cultural adaptation. This method can be effectively applied in innovative curricula and teacher training programs, particularly in underprivileged areas, using simple tools such as projectors and group tablets. Limitations included the use of convenience sampling, the 10-week intervention period, and the absence of individual tablets. It is recommended that future research involve more diverse samples, longer interventions, and advanced technologies (e.g., augmented reality) to explore the applicability of this approach in other subjects.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Educational computer games

COPYRIGHTS
© 2026 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

References

[1] Fullan M, Langworthy M. A rich seam: how new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson; 2014.

[2] Schwab K. The fourth industrial revolution. New York: Crown Business; 2017.

[3] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. PISA 2022 results (volume I): the state of learning and equity in education. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2023.

doi:10.1787/53f23881-en.

[4] World Economic Forum. The future of jobs report 2023 [Internet]. Geneva: World Economic Forum; 2023.

[5] Voogt J, Roblin NP. A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: implications for national curriculum policies. J Curric Stud. 2012;44(3):299-321. doi:10.1080/00220272.2012.668938.

[6] Runco MA, Acar S. Divergent thinking as an indicator of creative potential. Creat Res J. 2012;24(1):66-75.

doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.652929

[7] Greiff S, Wüstenberg S, Molnár G, Fischer A, Funke J, Csapó B. Complex problem solving in educational contexts—something beyond g: concept, assessment, measurement invariance, and construct validity. J Educ Psychol. 2013;105(2):364-79. doi:10.1037/a0031856 .

[8] Sternberg RJ. A triangular theory of creativity. Psychol Aesthet Creat Arts. 2018;12(1):50-67. doi:10.1037/aca0000095.

[9] Runco MA, Jaeger GJ. The standard definition of creativity. Creat Res J. 2012;24(1):92-6.

doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.650092.

[10] Torrance EP. Torrance tests of creative thinking: norms-technical manual. Bensenville (IL): Scholastic Testing Service; 1974.

[11] Plucker JA, Beghetto RA, Dow GT. Why isn't creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educ Psychol. 2004;39(2):83-96. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3902_1.

[12] Amabile TM. Creativity in context. Boulder (CO): Westview Press; 1996.

[13]. Csikszentmihalyi M. Creativity: flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: HarperCollins; 1996.

[14] Barbot B, Besançon M, Lubart T. Creative potential in educational settings: its nature, measure, and nurture. Education 3-13. 2015;43(4):371-81.

doi:10.1080/03004279.2015.1020643.

[15] Beghetto RA. Creative learning: a fresh look. J Cogn Educ Psychol. 2016;15(1):6-23. doi:10.1891/1945-8959.15.1.6.

[16] Ruiz del Pino B, Fernández Martín FD, Arco Tirado JL. Creativity training programs in primary education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Think Skills Creat. 2022; 46:101172.

doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101172.

[17] Kaufman JC, Beghetto RA. Beyond big and little: the four C model of creativity. Rev Gen Psychol. 2009;13(1):1-12.

doi:10.1037/a0013688.

[18] Mayer RE. The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learn Instr. 2003;13(2):125-39.

doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6.

[19] Jonassen DH. Learning to solve problems: a handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York: Routledge; 2011.

[20] Dörner D, Funke J. Complex problem solving: what it is and what it is not. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1153.

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01153.

[21] Plass JL, Homer BD, Kinzer CK. Foundations of game-based learning. Educ Psychol. 2015;50(4):258-83.

doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533.

[22] Hung CM, Hwang GJ, Huang I. A project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students' learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educ Technol Soc. 2012;15(4):368-79.

[23] Karakuş M, Turhan Türkkan B, Arslan Namlı N. Investigation of the effect of digital storytelling on cultural awareness and creative thinking. Educ Sci. 2020;45(203):309-26.

doi:10.15390/EB.2020.8576.

[24] Gorzinmataee Z, Rezaee F. The effect of digital storytelling on improving the social problem solving skills of primary school students. Research and Innovation in Primary Education. 2024;6(1):175-89. doi:10.48310/reek.2024.16590.1325.

[25] Mar RA, Oatley K. The function of fiction is the abstraction and simulation of social experience. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008;3(3):173-92. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2008.00073.x.

[26] Green MC, Brock TC. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000;79(5):701-21. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701.

[27] Robin BR. Digital storytelling: a powerful technology tool for the 21st century classroom. Theory Pract. 2008;47(3):220-8. doi:10.1080/00405840802153916.

[28] Sadik A. Digital storytelling: a meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2008;56(4):487-506.

doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9091-8.

[29] Chung SK. Art education technology: digital storytelling. Art Educ. 2007;60(2):17-22.

doi:10.1080/00043125.2007.11651632.

[30] Yang YTC, Wu WCI. Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: a year-long experimental study. Comput Educ. 2012;59(2):339-52. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.012.

[31] Niemi H, Multisilta J. Digital storytelling promoting twenty-first century skills and student engagement. Technol Pedagog Educ. 2016;25(4):451-68.

doi:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1074610.

[32] Mayer RE. Computer games in education. Annu Rev Psychol. 2019;70:531-49.

doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102744.

[33] Shute VJ, Rahimi S, Smith G, et al. Maximizing learning without sacrificing the fun: stealth assessment, adaptivity, and learning supports in educational games. J Comput Assist Learn. 2021;37(1):127-41. doi:10.1111/jcal.12473.

[34] Papastergiou M. Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Comput Educ. 2009;52(1):1-12. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.004.

[35] Tokac U, Novak E, Thompson CG. Effects of game-based learning on students' mathematics achievement: a meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Learn. 2019;35(3):407-20.

doi:10.1111/jcal.12347.

[36] Sun L, Hu L, Zhou D. Which way of design programming activities is more effective to promote K-12 students' computational thinking skills? A meta-analysis. J Comput Assist Learn. 2021;37(4):1048-62. doi:10.1111/jcal.12545.

[37] Hwang GJ, Chiu LY, Chen CH. A contextual game-based learning approach to improving students' inquiry-based learning performance in social studies courses. Comput Educ. 2015;81:13-25. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.006.

[38] Clark DB, Tanner-Smith EE, Killingsworth SS. Digital games, design, and learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res. 2016;86(1):79-122.

doi:10.3102/0034654315582065.

[39] Dickey MD. Murder on Grimm Isle: the impact of game narrative design in an educational game-based learning environment. Br J Educ Technol. 2011;42(3):456-69. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01032.x

[40] Mishra P, Koehler MJ. Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teach Coll Rec. 2006;108(6):1017-54. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.

[41] Koehler MJ, Mishra P, Cain W. What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? J Educ. 2013;193(3):13-9. doi:10.1177/002205741319300303.

[42] Fisser P, Voogt J. Teacher collaboration in curriculum design teams: effects on teacher professional growth and student achievement. In: Pieters J, Voogt J, Pareja Roblin N, editors. Collaborative curriculum design for sustainable innovation and teacher learning. Cham: Springer; 2018. p. 159-73.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-90961-8_9.

[43] Bojadziev G, Bojadziev M. Fuzzy logic for business, finance, and management. 2nd ed. Singapore: World Scientific; 2007.

[44] Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 6th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2023.

[45] Heppner PP. The development and implications of a personal problem-solving inventory. J Couns Psychol. 1982;29(1):66-75. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.29.1.66.

[46] Bojadziev G, Bojadziev M. Fuzzy sets, fuzzy logic, applications. Singapore: World Scientific; 1995.

[47] Heppner PP, Wang Y. Assessing problem-solving in the context of personal problem-solving: the Problem-Solving Inventory (PSI). In: Thomas JC, Hersen M, editors. Handbook of clinical psychology competencies. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 1239-62. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-09757-2_44.

[48] Almeida LS, Prieto LP, Ferrando M, Oliveira E, Ferrándiz C. Torrance Test of Creative Thinking: the question of its construct validity. Think Skills Creat. 2008;3(1):53-8.

doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2008.03.003.

[49] Liljedahl P, Santos-Trigo M, Malaspina U, Bruder R. Problem solving in mathematics education. Cham: Springer; 2016. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-40730-2.

[50] Bruner J. The narrative construction of reality. Crit Inq. 1991;18(1):1-21. doi:10.1086/448619.

[51] Gee JP. What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Comput Entertain. 2003;1(1):20.

doi:10.1145/950566.950595.

[52] Dickey MD. Engaging by design: how engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instruct