Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11

A review of digital storytelling in language

learning in children: methods, design and
reliability
Clare Ong 1 and Vahid Aryadoust 2 *

*Correspondence: Abstract
[email protected]
National Institute of Education,
Nanyang Technological Digital storytelling (DS) is an innovative approach to language learning and teaching.
University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Generally, DS refers to the form of storytelling that utilizes digital technology for
Singapore, 637616, Singapore expression. Scholars have established the value of DS in both traditional and non-
Full list of author information is traditional (online) classrooms as a tool to teach and learn languages. However, the
available at the end of the article
research methods and standards of such studies continue to be overlooked even
though the robustness of these studies needs to be established for the
implementation of DS into the language curriculum for children. Thus, the present
research conducted a systematic investigation of research methods, design and
reliability in DS studies on children’s language learning. We identified and extracted
50 documents from the Scopus database that satisfied the criteria of inclusion. In
the initial evaluation, we coded every paper for (a) the research method applied, (b)
research design and (c) reliability investigation of the instruments. We observed
that most studies in the dataset used qualitative methods (n = 24, 48%) and most
examined the effect of DS on children’s written abilities (n = 25, 50%). The abilities
of children to speak (n = 15, 30%) and read a specific language (n = 10, 20%) were
investigated to a lesser extent. Yet, none of these studies investigated listening
skills. Notably, more than 92% of DS studies on children language learning provided
no evidence of reliability investigation. While we coded for eight reliability statistics
in the DS dataset, only two of the indexes were identified. Among these methods,
Cronbach’s α was most often used to examine internal reliability, whereas
correlation coefficient was applied to establish external reliability. Based on these
findings, we offer some suggestions and guidelines for future DS research.

Keywords: Children, Digital storytelling, Educational technology, Language learning

Introduction
As natural storytellers, humans have relied upon storytelling to impart knowledge, beliefs
and traditions (Suwardy et al., 2013). Since it is well-accepted that stories facilitate a

© The Author(s). 2023 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate
credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were
made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless
indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons license and your
intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 2 of 25

listener’s understanding of complex concepts and ideas (Chung, 2006), schools have
encouraged students to nurture their storytelling abilities, using both written and oral
assessments, while educators have depended on stories to deliver their curriculum (Ballast
et al., 2008). Furthermore, it has been suggested that the integration of storytelling in school
curriculums creates an immersive environment for learners thereby improving learning
outcomes (Coulter et al., 2007). When applied to the educational context, good storytelling
allows students to easily recall earlier lessons, helping learners build a stronger foundation
in that particular subject (Schank, 1990; Zull, 2002). Likewise, such stories may motivate
students to pose questions and contribute to a livelier classroom (Bruner, 1996). Educators
have utilised traditional storytelling methods that relied on language and verbal
communication, and sometimes used basic visual aids to support the storytelling processes
(Baim, 2015). However, modern efforts to digitalise storytelling have progressed
significantly, especially with technological advancements. These advancements have
increased the availability and affordances of new media devices, such as digital cameras,
smartphones and software. Thus, a novel, multimedia form of digital storytelling (DS) has
emerged. Through multimedia presentations and other computer-driven enhancements, the
storytelling experience is said to have been substantially enhanced for both educators and
students alike (Hung et al., 2012; Xu et al., 2011).
Notably, DS has been made popular with the initiatives by the Center for Digital
Storytelling (or StoryCenter). The StoryCenter has identified the seven elements of DS (see
Appendix A). Scholars have, in contrast, offered different definitions of DS. For instance,
Xu et al. (2011) defined DS as “storytelling that is conducted using digital technology as
the medium or method of expression, in particular using digital media in a computer-
network environment” (p. 181). From these definitions, the common understanding of DS
involves the use of multimedia, such as soundtracks to complement storylines. In addition,
the immersive nature of DS differentiates it from the traditional methods of storytelling.
Ever since DS has gained considerable traction, it has been examined from various lenses,
such as mental and emotional health (Lim et al., 2022; Wexler et al., 2013), and from the
perspectives of educators (Kildan & Incikabi, 2015; Yee et al., 2018) and students alike
(Chen & Liu, 2019). For instance, Wexler et al. (2013) demonstrated that the DS process
enabled youths to form more certain and positive identities, which are associated with
positive youth health outcomes. On the other hand, Yee et al. (2018) studied the effects of
DS on pre-service teachers who taught children literature. They observed that DS improved
the pedagogical content knowledge, professional development, and teaching methods of
the teachers (Yee et al., 2018). Furthermore, the educators became familiarized with DS
and were more comfortable with the implementation of DS in their classrooms (Yee et al.,
2018). Similarly, Diaz (2016) identified that the use of DS to train foreign language
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 3 of 25

teachers encourages them to implement DS in their lessons and, therefore, facilitate better
knowledge transfer from educators to students (Diaz, 2016).
The present study will focus on the literature on DS in educational contexts from the
perspective of students, especially in language learning. For student education, DS can be
used in different forms, such as instructor-created stories, narrated documentaries of
historical events and student-led and produced videos (Castañeda, 2013; Liang, 2019;
Oppermann, 2007). In addition, DS has been noted to enhance educational outcomes and
the attitudes of learners since it encourages student engagement (Chen & Liu, 2019; Hung
et al., 2012). For instance, Hung et al. (2012) observed that DS technologies enabled
elementary school students to adopt an active role in the storytelling process through
participation in the creation and documentation of their personal digital stories. They
demonstrated that the use of digital technologies in storytelling assisted learners in
organising their own observations and story elements in a coherent manner, increased
interaction, and collaboration among students to achieve better educational outcomes
(Hung et al., 2012).
Likewise, Chen and Liu (2019) tested the effects of DS on language learning outcomes
in an elementary school. They aimed to improve the writing of students by focusing on
story structures through a six-stage structure that was integrated with digital books. The
approach adopted includes six elements namely, “setting”, “theme”, “attempt”,
“consequence”, “climax” and “resolution”. These six elements support the understanding
of story structures for students. Following their DS intervention, Chen and Liu (2019)
reported a significant improvement in the written abilities of students, as compared to
students in the control group who were assigned to a paper-based storybook. Furthermore,
DS has improved classroom engagement, thereby encouraging positive attitudes towards
writing, as reflected in the increased levels of affection and helpfulness towards their peers
with regard to writing among the young student participants (Chen & Liu, 2019). This
observation was supported by their results which revealed significant statistical differences
for the interest dimensions measured, namely “triggering”, “immersing” and “extending
interests”.
While the studies reviewed above explored the use of DS in traditional (language learning)
classrooms, it should be noted that DS is not restricted to formal, and/or traditional
educational venues (Baim, 2015). For instance, students enrolled in online courses can also
learn novel content and benefit from instructional videos created based on DS (Baim, 2015).
Baim (2015) observed that videos, multimedia presentations, audio recordings, and other
similar tools are some of the most effective methods for learners who are engaged in remote
learning to connect with their online instructors. Other studies have also recorded the
success of DS in online contexts, regardless of whether they took place in a unidirectional
method of instructor-generated content, or in a bidirectional format where learners generate
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 4 of 25

digital content as part of their coursework (Jenkins & Healey, 2012; Palacios, 2012; Rigney,
2010; Rossiter & Garcia, 2010). Furthermore, Lindgren and McDaniel (2012) identified
that the implementation of advanced DS technologies and use of relevant computer
applications can advance learning outcomes as compared to lecture-based classrooms.
They observed that students better comprehended course concepts and reported increased
satisfaction with their coursework following the DS intervention. DS features such as
personalised interactive instructions help to take online learning in a different direction as
students have control over their learning progress as opposed to classroom-based learning
(Lindgren & McDaniel, 2012).
As demonstrated in the above research, DS improves online learning outcomes. While
this educational technology is suitable for the current generation of students that are
familiar with technology and experiments with new technological tools to keep themselves
abreast with knowledge (Suwardy et al., 2013), DS has to be utilised by educators in a
suitable manner to unlock its potential as a means to transform the language learning
processes of children into one that focuses on production, collaboration, project
management, teamwork and critical thinking (Moradi & Chen, 2019).

Research gap
Most of the studies surveyed above investigated DS and established its utility as a tool for
language learning. Here, the utility of DS refers to the use of DS to nurture the language
abilities of young learners. A review of DS could examine the utility, robustness and
trustworthiness of previous research all of which are tied to the replicability of research.
Current studies often fail to demonstrate the robustness of their results, as they seem to lack
reliability or validity reports. Low reliability means that the results of a study could be
confounded with errors and are not highly trustworthy (Field, 2018). Consequently, there
are increased chances of Type I and II errors when unreliable data is used in follow-up
influential statistics such as t-test and ANOVA. In addition, if the result of studies cannot
be replicated, then they could be biased or not generalizable (Marsden et al., 2018).
In this study, we first attempt to address gaps in understanding through a systematic
investigation of research methods in DS studies on language learning of children, with the
aim to facilitate its integration with current education curriculums. We will consider the
research features of these studies to evaluate their research standards. Second, we examine
how the DS studies are designed to seek evidence about the trustworthiness and
replicability of the studies. The replicability of a study is influenced by factors such as the
theoretical framework employed, the design of the study – whether it was an experimental
or cross-sectional study – as well as the test instruments used, data analysis method and the
type of data analyses. Replicability in research establishes how reliable the findings of
studies are and indicates whether or not their results can be generalized (Marsden et al.,
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 5 of 25

2018). Particularly, the demand for replication research has surged as language acquisition
studies are increasingly challenged to prove their validity and reliability (Marsden et al.,
2018).
Finally, previous research has highlighted that reliability reports of instruments and
coding practices have been neglected in previous language learning or assessment research
(e.g., Hou & Aryadoust, 2021). Therefore, we focus on the reliability reports of each
research study. Generally, this factor is closely associated with the standards of language
research (Johnson & Saville-Troike, 1992), and describes the extent to which a test
measures what it claims to evaluate consistently and accurately (Chiedu & Omenogor,
2014; Nunally, 1982). This factor is also essential to ensure research standards, especially
if the aim is to generate better research and knowledge on DS for educators to consult in
their implementation of DS methods for the language learning of children.
The research questions of the study are, therefore, as follows:
1. What are the research methods adopted in DS studies of language learning of
children?
2. How were DS studies on language learning of children designed?
3. How reliable are the instruments and coding practices of DS studies on language
learning of children?

Methodology

Literature search
We carried out a broad literature search to find published research relevant to DS. To
collect articles that explored DS, a literature search of DS studies on child language
learning was conducted on the Scopus database. Scopus is recognised as the “largest single
abstract and indexing database ever built” (Burnham, 2006, p.1), and was chosen because
of the broader coverage of peer-reviewed journals it offers. Scopus is also intuitive to use
as compared to other databases such as the Web of Science. Subsequently, we decided on
the key search terms, “digital storytelling” and “child” to define the search for DS studies.
These two phrases were integrated with other terms to achieve a comprehensive focus on
language studies.
Adapted from Lado’s (1961) skills and elements of language proficiency, which
continues to be one of the most dominant approaches to language in learning and
assessment, we targeted the four language skills namely, “listening”, “reading”, “speaking”
and “writing”. Lastly, to ensure that all relevant DS studies on child language learning were
included, the general terms “language” and “oral” were added as search terms. No
limitations on the year of publications were applied for the search protocol (see Appendix
B for the search protocol). The year 2004 is the lower limit as it is the earliest year of
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 6 of 25

coverage by Scopus and the final date of publication inclusion was the end of September
2020 when the data was extracted.

Initial results
Overall, 117 documents were found with the search protocol. The most common type of
document published were articles (49.6%), with conference papers being the second most
common type of documents found (29.1%). Appendix C presents the total number of
articles published by year in the Scopus database. An increased number of DS studies is
recorded between 2008 and 2011. Specifically, the number of DS studies in 2011 were six-
fold of that in 2008.
The top three journals or publishers were Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS),
including the subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (LNAI) and Lecture Notes
in Bioinformatics (LNBI), Digital Education Review and ACM International Conference
Proceedings Series, with a total of five, four and three papers published between 2004 and
2019 respectively (for documents per year by source, see Appendix D). It should be noted
that a high number of publications from LNCS, LNAI, and LNBI are recorded. This is
because the three journals tend to feature studies in computer science and information
technology research, and teaching – areas which are relevant to DS.
The top five countries or territories producing the greatest number of articles were the
United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), Italy, Canada and Australia (see Appendix
E for list of countries or territories). The top three academic institutes were Università della
Svizzera italiana (n = 5), Universidad de Oviedo (n = 4) and Bournemouth University
(n = 4). However, two of the top three academic institutes publishing articles were not from
these top five countries or territories; only Bournemouth University is located in the UK.
Based on the Scopus dataset, DS studies tend to be Eurocentric.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

In this analysis, the inclusion criteria for research consists of four elements: target language,
technology used, publication source and research design. Table 1 details the inclusion and

Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: The paper… Exclusion criteria: The paper…

1. investigated language learning of young 1. investigated language learning of
children. groups other than young children.
2. used at least one digital device and/or 2. did not use a digital device and/or
software for language learning. software for language study, which do
3. used qualitative or quantitative not lend themselves to digital
methods for data collection and/or storytelling.
analysis.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 7 of 25

Fig. 1 Graph represents publication dates of DS studies included in the final dataset

exclusion criteria, which was designed following Grotjahn’s (1987) framework. According
to Grotjahn (1987), research design is characterised by three components namely: (1) data
collection methods, (2) data analysis, and (3) characteristics of the data.
In the initial review, a total of 55 publications were irrelevant and therefore excluded,
resulting in 62 papers remaining. Thereafter, the inclusion and exclusion criteria in Table
1 were applied to assess the remaining 62 papers and determine their eligibility. Finally,
12 papers were excluded since they did not investigate the language learning of young
children. The remaining 50 studies were included for coding and analysis. The final dataset
which consists of DS studies published from 2004 to 2020 is illustrated in Figure 1.
In the dataset, an exponential growth in papers was recorded between 2012 and 2014.
Specifically, an upward trend is observed in the publication of DS studies from 2015, with
a record number of nine studies published in 2018. From the dataset, we observed that the
publication of DS studies peaked in the years 2010, 2014 and 2018. It must be noted that
in the dataset, the number of publications in 2020 is not representative of the total
publications for that year, as the search period in Scopus concluded in September 2020.
The years of publication indicated here represent the online publication years, as several
papers may have received an issue number after they have been presented online.

Coding scheme and reliability

We adapted a coding scheme from various sources (e.g., see Appendix F) to record the
research methods adopted, research design, and reliability analysis, which respectively
pertain to research questions 1, 2, and 3. The scheme includes multiple variables which
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 8 of 25

were classified and presented in Table 2, which offers a detailed overview of the variables
used in the study. The table is organized based on the research questions.
To ensure that all admissible publications were included in the review, a second coder
was invited to review and code these articles for target language, research design and the
use of digital devices and/or software. The second coder was a researcher from the
university where the study was conducted. The inter-coder agreement was 93.2%, which
suggests high reliability in the exclusion of irrelevant publications. Thereafter, the
disagreement was resolved between the coders in an online meeting conducted over Zoom.

Data analysis
In response to the first question, data were organised according to the research methods.
For example, we were able to recognise the frequency and percentage of the application of
different research methods such as quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. To answer

Table 2 Overview of criteria used in the study

Category Research question(s) Criteria Description of criteria

Research method RQ1: What are the Method of the What research method was
research methods study adopted? (i.e., true and quasi
adopted in DS studies experiment, cross-sectional
of language learning studies)
of children? Data analysis How were the data analysed
in the research? (i.e.,
quantitative, qualitative,
mixed-method, review or
synthesis of the literature)
Types of data What type of data analysis
analysis method is applied to the
research? (i.e.,
phenomenological method,
case studies)
Research design RQ2: How were DS Target language Which language skills are
studies on language skills examined in the studies? (i.e.,
learning of children Writing, Reading, Listening,
designed? Speaking)
Language of Which language is the
research research conducted in? (i.e.,
English, Non-English)
Participants’ What is the average age of
average age participants in the published
research?
Reliability analysis RQ3: How reliable are Reliability index What is the reliability index
the instruments and used used in the research? (i.e.,
coding practices of DS external reliability, internal
studies on language reliability)
learning of children? Type of What type of reliability index
reliability index is reported in the research?
used (i.e., Cronbach’s α,
correlation coefficient)
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 9 of 25

the second research question, data were coded in terms of specific research designs. We
analysed the descriptive features of studies for targeted language skills as well as the
languages that were investigated in the studies. Finally, the frequency of the methods
applied for reliability assessment was computed, with consideration of the target language
skills. An in-depth examination of the findings of the studies is synthesized and presented
in the Discussion.

Results

Research method
The research methods adopted in the dataset of the DS studies are summarised in Table 3.
Appendix F describes in detail each of these research methods. The quantitative methods
included descriptive design (n = 7, 14%), correlational analysis, quasi-experimental design,
and experimental design (n = 2, 4%). The qualitative methods include case studies (n = 8,
16%), grounded theory studies (n = 3, 6%), phenomenology (n = 9, 18%), ethnography
(n = 4, 8%), and historical method, which altogether accounted for 48% (n = 24) of total
research methods used. Among the qualitative methods, phenomenology (n = 9, 18%) was
the most frequently used method followed by case studies (n = 8, 16%), ethnography
(n = 4, 8%), and grounded theory studies (n = 3, 6%). We note that the experiences of
participants in language studies are often interpreted and understood using the

Table 3 Breakdown of research methods used

# of studies
Research methods Research types %
using the type
Quantitative Descriptive 7 14
Correlational 0 0
Quasi-Experimental 0 0
Experimental 2 4
Subtotal 9 18
Qualitative Case Study 8 16
Grounded Theory 3 6
Phenomenology 9 18
Ethnography 4 8
Historical 0 0
Subtotal 24 48
Mixed Method Sequential Explanatory Design 2 4
Sequential Exploratory Design 0 0
Sequential Transformative Design 1 2
Concurrent Triangulation Design 8 16
Subtotal 11 22
Review or Synthesis of the literature Not Applicable 6 12
Subtotal 6 12
Total Number 50 100
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 10 of 25

phenomenological method (Tuohy et al., 2013; Wilson, 2014). In contrast, the historical
method was the least used qualitative research method since none of the studies utilised the
method in the dataset.

Investigation of research design

To explore the research design of the studies, the descriptive features of the participants of
the studies were investigated. Table 4 presents the average age of participants investigated
in the studies in the DS dataset. Among the 50 studies examined, 21 (42%) studies
investigated participants of ages six to 11. Of these 21 studies, speaking (n = 10, 20%) was
the most commonly investigated language skill, followed by writing (n = 8, 16%) and
reading (n = 3, 6%).
For other descriptive features relevant to research design such as target skills investigated
and the language of the studies, the same reporting technique as in Table 4 was used (see
Table 5, for further details). Firstly, writing was the most investigated language component
for both English and non-English studies, regardless of the average age of participants
(n = 25, 50%). This is followed by speaking (n = 15, 30%) and reading (n = 10, 20%).
Notably, none of these studies investigated the listening skill.

Table 4 Breakdown of average participant age

# of studies investigating
Targeted language skills Average age of participants %
participant age group
Listening Ages 0-5 0 0
Ages 6-11 0 0
Ages 12-17 0 0
Ages 18-23 0 0
Age 24 and above 0 0
Subtotal 0 0
Reading Ages 0-5 6 12
Ages 6-11 3 6
Ages 12-17 0 0
Ages 18-23 1 2
Age 24 and above 0 0
Subtotal 10 20
Speaking Ages 0-5 5 10
Ages 6-11 10 20
Ages 12-17 0 0
Ages 18-23 0 0
Age 24 and above 0 0
Subtotal 15 30
Writing Ages 0-5 12 24
Ages 6-11 8 16
Ages 12-17 2 4
Ages 18-23 1 2
Age 24 and above 2 4
Subtotal 25 50
Total Number 50 100
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 11 of 25

Table 5 Breakdown of the languages investigated

Targeted skills # of studies investigating the skill %

English
Listening 0 0
Reading 8 16
Speaking 11 22
Writing 20 40
Subtotal 39 78
Non-English
Listening 0 0
Reading 2 4
Speaking 4 8
Writing 5 10
Subtotal 11 22
Total Number 50 100

Reporting reliability
Table 6 demonstrates the reliability of research instruments and data coding practices in
the studies in the DS dataset. We note that few papers carried out reliability analysis
(n = 4, 8%) and the majority of the studies did not report reliability (n = 46, 92%). Among
the studies, writing (n = 25, 50%) was the most frequently investigated language skill,
followed by speaking (n = 15, 30%) and reading (n = 10, 20%). Some of the studies
investigated internal reliability (n = 3, 6%). External reliability of the instruments used was
significantly under-researched, with only one study on writing (n = 1, 2%) that investigates
the external reliability of the test instrument and no studies on other language components.
We used our coding scheme to determine which one of the eight types of reliability
statistics were applied in the DS dataset namely, Cronbach’s α (n = 3, 6%), Cohen’s κ,
Fleiss’s κ, Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficients, Spearman-Brown prophecy formula,
correlation coefficient (n = 1, 2%), Kendall’s W, and coder/rater agreement percentage (see
Table 7). However, we identified only two out of the eight reliability statistics in the DS
dataset. The most commonly used index to assess internal consistency in the DS studies
was Cronbach’s α, while only correlation coefficient was applied for external reliability
investigation.

Table 6 Investigation of reliability

Target skills # of studies reporting internal % # of studies reporting %

reliability external reliability
Listening 0 0 0 0
Reading 1 2 0 0
Speaking 1 2 0 0
Writing 1 2 1 2
Total 3 6 1 2
Notes: Studies that reported multiple reliability indices were counted several times.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 12 of 25

Table 7 Reliability indices used in the DS dataset

Types of reliability Reliability indices # of studies using the index %

Internal reliability Cronbach’s α 3 6
Cohen’s κ 0 0
Fleiss’s κ 0 0
K-R reliability coefficient 0 0
S-B prophecy formula 0 0
Subtotal 3 6
External reliability Correlation coefficient 1 2
Kendall’s W 0 0
Coder/rater agreement percentage 0 0
Subtotal 1 2
Total Number 4 8
Notes: K-R reliability denotes Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficient. S-B prophecy formula refers to
Spearman-Brown prophecy formula.

Discussion
This study set out to investigate the methodological quality of DS research on the language
learning of children. In the following sections, we discuss the findings of the analysis of
the three research questions of the study.

Research question one: research methods in DS research

Overall, the findings revealed that most studies in the DS dataset used a qualitative research
method (n = 24). For language research, there are some benefits of qualitative methods
(Chalhoub-Deville & Deville, 2008; Denzin, 1989). For instance, Denzin (1989) identified
that they enable researchers to form a rich, vivid account of the emotions, ideas and
experiences of the participants based on interpretation. Likewise, Chalhoub-Deville and
Deville (2008) reported that qualitative methods allow for the collection of in-depth
perspectives into issues relevant to the design, administration and interpretation of
language assessment. While we acknowledge these benefits, it must be noted that such
methods are dependent on an “interpretive and naturalistic approach to its subject matter”
(Flick, 2014, p. 542). Therefore, qualitative methods are not appropriate for research
investigations that are intended to be generalizable to a larger population of language
learners.
Phenomenological studies were most common in the dataset. The advantage of
phenomenology research is that it allows the researcher to investigate the perception and
attitude of DS users towards its utility, thus broadening “our understanding of the complex
phenomena involved in learning, behaviour, and communication that are germane to our
field” (Neubauer et al., 2019, p. 95). The limitation of phenomenology-based research in
DS was the weak alignment between the research processes adopted and the theoretical
roots that underlie the DS phenomenon investigated (Neubauer et al., 2019). In addition, a
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 13 of 25

well-known limitation of phenomenology in general has been highlighted by a number of

scholars who argued the phenomenological approach tends to avoid contextual sensitivities
due to its emphasis on meanings and experiences (Silverman, 2010; Tuhoy et al., 2014).
In all, the examination of storytelling processes is centred on the learners’ experiences,
which makes qualitative methods a natural choice for researchers, because of the
interpretive and naturalistic approach. However, researchers must consider the aims of their
studies in the selection of research methods. For instance, a study that aims to prove the
effects, as opposed to processes, of DS on children’s language learning would have to adopt
some means of quantification. In this case, the application of qualitative methods would
detract from the robustness of the study. The availability of cutting-edge technologies such
as eye tracking and neuroimaging for language and education research make it possible for
researchers to quantify the cognitive, emotional, and behavioural processes underlying
language learning in DS research. Thus, we stress that for research claims to be
extrapolated beyond the sample of participants in the study, it would behoove researchers
to use quantitative designs founded upon theoretically justifiable models of DS, language
learning, and educational psychology.

Research question two: investigation of research design

Research question two examined the research design of studies in the DS dataset. In
comparison to the other language competencies, most DS studies tend to focus on the
written abilities of children (n = 50). Coincidentally, there has been a wealth of literature
beyond this comprehensive review that established the value of DS in improving the
written work of children (see Chen & Liu, 2019).
We found that previous research investigated and supported the use of DS to facilitate
the speech development of children (Hwang et al., 2016; Lestariyana & Widodo, 2018),
and enhance their abilities to read and comprehend texts (Hamdy, 2017; Liu et al., 2019).
For instance, Hwang et al. (2016) examined the effects of DS on the speaking skills of
children who were non-native speakers of English. They identified that the process of
recording composed stories orally allowed learners to practice speaking in the target
language, thereby enhancing their English-speaking performance, as well as their general
learning achievement in English (Hwang et al., 2016). Similarly, Lestariyana and Widodo
(2018) tested the effects of DS on the speech development of English-as-a-foreign-
language speakers in an Indonesian primary school. They implemented DS as a
pedagogical innovation with the aim to boost the confidence of students in speaking
English. For their experiment, students were encouraged to narrate their personal digital
stories. Eventually, Lestariyana and Widodo (2018) observed that the process of reviewing
and editing their voice recording allowed the students to become more confident in
speaking English. Furthermore, students were also observed to make use of the learned
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 14 of 25

vocabularies, which include difficult and technical terms (i.e., “propagation”, “pruning”,
and “weeding”) to better express their ideas verbally in English (Lestariyana & Widodo,
2018).
In contrast, Liu et al. (2019) studied the effects of DS on the reading skills of elementary
school students. They observed that the students became proficient in oral reading through
participation in the DS intervention (Liu et al., 2019). Concurrently, the DS intervention
fostered a collaborative language learning environment, which encouraged students’
engagement and sustained their learning progress (Liu et al., 2019). Likewise, Hamdy
(2017) identified that the use of DS to teach students reading comprehension achieved
better outcomes than conventional modes of instruction. Specifically, he noted that DS
approaches combine visual images with written text to enhance and accelerate the students’
abilities to read (Hamdy, 2017).
However, there are some limitations to the preceding studies with respect to research
design. First, these studies have not utilised any theoretical framework to examine the issue
rigorously and systematically. Thus, their findings appear to lack theoretical basis and
explanatory power. In addition, we observed that some studies attempted to demonstrate
the effects of DS on the children’s motivation to learn languages or other intangible factors.
However, it is not certain how these researchers delineated and operationalized the target
constructs to assess the participants’ levels of motivation, since no robust framework was
employed in the first place. This limitation calls for further investigation of the validity and
accuracy of the findings of previous DS research. Ioannidis’s (2005) seminal research
showed that the probability that findings of a stream of research are reliable depend on a
variety of factors including “study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same
question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships
probed in each scientific field” (p. 696). According to Ioannidis (2005, p. 696), the findings
of previous research would be less likely to be reliable when “the studies conducted in a
field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser
preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions,
outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and
prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical
significance.” Lamentably, much of the information underscored by Ioannidis (2005) are
missing in the DS published literature. Therefore, future DS researchers should consider
elaborating on these factors in drawing conclusions from the data they collect and examine.
Next, the DS studies explored a wide-ranging age group of “children”. From this, we
infer a lack of consensus among studies on the age range that best characterises “children”.
As a consequence, the proponents of DS programmes may struggle to demonstrate the
language learning outcomes for this particular demographic. Instead, DS research should
be informed by educational psychology research where the age group of students are
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 15 of 25

thoroughly investigated. Lenneberg (1967) first established that language acquisition is

limited to a “critical period” which extends from early infancy until puberty. This suggests
that young children are better language learners than adults. Thereafter, Johnson and
Newport (1989) tested Lenneberg’s (1967) assumption and compared the English
proficiency of Asians (Koreans and Chinese) who arrived in the United States (US)
between 3 and 39 years old to those who lived in the United States between 3 and 26 years
old. Their findings corresponded with Lenneberg’s (1967) as they identified a strong
correlation between the age at which participants arrived in the US and their second
language acquisition and performance. In particular, the participants who were taught
English before the age of 10, were expected to reach native proficiency in the language
(Johnson & Newport, 1989). Recently, Hartshorne et al. (2018) have found support for the
existence of a “critical period” for second language learning. They also estimate that the
rate of language learning declines at 17.4 years old (Hartshorne et al., 2018). From this, we
observe the influence of the participants’ age on language learning outcomes. Thus, it is
critical to establish the age group of language learners to ensure that results of future studies
can be replicated.
Lastly, we identified a lack of studies in the dataset which investigated the listening skills
of children. Listening is an important language skill and serves as the most crucial skill for
receiving language input, which is essential in language learning. Thus, future research
should examine whether the digitization of input via DS can benefit young language
learners.
We recognize that it is difficult to differentiate the key language competencies examined
in a research. This is because DS methods create an immersive environment that evokes
the various senses of the learner, such as visual and auditory senses through vibrant sights,
sounds, and even encourages speech. Furthermore, DS can be considered as a tool that
simultaneously increases the digital literacy of language learners. For instance, Churchill
et al. (2008) reported that interaction with advanced technologies used for DS enhanced
the abilities of students to make sense of and represent multimodal texts. Specifically, the
multimodal characteristic of digital texts nurtures digital literacy (Churchill et al., 2008).
All of these suggest that DS is capable of developing various language competencies
simultaneously, which would make it an appropriate tool for engaging young language
learners in authentic language learning where different language components are not
disaggregated. Thus, more focus should be placed on the processes that enable the
simultaneous enrichment of various language competencies, instead of a narrow focus on
individual language competencies. We recognize the difficulties of conducting broader
studies, and, thus, attempt to offer some suggestions to guide for future researchers in the
next section.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 16 of 25

Research question three: reporting of reliability

An overwhelming majority of the studies in the DS dataset (92%) have not reported the
reliability of test instruments and the results achieved. As mentioned earlier, the exclusion
of reliability analysis is another factor that affects the robustness of DS studies.
Concurrently, it hinders the accurate inference of research outcomes (Grabowski & Oh,
2018). Moreover, DS researchers were more likely to focus on reporting internal reliability
of instruments used, whereas only one research paper analysed external reliability.
Coincidentally, internal reliability investigation has been popular in applied linguistics
studies (Grabowski & Oh, 2018). We also observed that the most used index in DS studies
on the language learning of children was Cronbach’s α, followed by the correlation-
coefficient. Nonetheless, this observation raises the question of the precision of the
instruments used, as well as the results obtained. Crucially, it echoes the earlier concerns
of researchers over the neglect of reliability reports of instruments and coding practices
(Hou & Aryadoust, 2021).
When the precision of the instruments used is low in quantitative research or when there
is no or minimal agreement between coders in a qualitative research design, the results of
the study are convoluted with error and consequently cannot be trusted. This results in
multiple drawbacks such as undermining the replicability of the results across other
contexts and erroneous conclusions. Reliability, therefore, becomes an essential factor to
be taken heed of in the future DS research.

Implications of the study

Following this review, we make several recommendations for future research. First, future
DS research should attempt to adopt quantitative methods, while considering the
aforementioned research guidelines expounded by Ioannidis (2005). This shift is crucial to
encourage future implementation of DS into the curriculum of children as a novel approach
for them to learn languages. We make this suggestion in view of the insufficiencies of
qualitative studies mentioned above, as well as the fact that policymakers and/or
stakeholders tend to ascribe low credibility to the results of qualitative studies (Rahman,
2016; Sallee & Flood, 2012), likely because qualitative research, despite its utility, is not
appropriate for drawing generalizable conclusions. In fact, Ravitch (2010) found that
stakeholders in the US educational field deemed quantitative studies as more credible, and
relied upon them to account for the performances of students and educators alike.
As reflected in the Scopus dataset, DS research tends to be Eurocentric. Most of these
studies reported the outcomes of DS interventions in European countries. In comparison,
the experiences of using DS in Asian or African classrooms for language learning are
overlooked. Hence, DS researchers should conduct and compare DS interventions across
other geographic areas to consider whether cultural differences may influence the
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 17 of 25

educational outcomes of DS and whether research outcomes are reproducible across

different cultures.
Next, DS researchers should examine and indicate the reliability and possibly the validity
of the instruments and/or coding schemes utilised in their studies to increase the reliability
of DS studies. Both reliability indices are overlooked, with only one paper in the dataset
reporting external reliability. Therefore, we advocate for an increased focus on external
reliability as it ensures the replicability of the test results. Finally, DS researchers should
consider the exploration of multiple language competencies in their studies, especially with
consideration of the immersive nature of DS methods that simultaneously engages the
various senses of the learners. Additionally, increased calls for the adoption of
multimodality in language learning are observed (Perniss, 2018). Some research on the use
of multimodal teaching methods have also highlighted its relevance in higher education
institutions (Reid et al., 2016). This strand of research stresses the integration of different
language skills such as listening, reading and viewing, which are increasingly emphasized
in language learning and assessment. DS, with its integration of several forms of media,
thus offers exciting opportunities to operationalize multimodality in language learning and
assessment.
Finally, DS researchers should investigate language learning in a more holistic manner
to focus on the processes that enable the simultaneous enrichment of various language
competencies, rather than a narrow focus on individual language competencies.

Conclusion
The present study investigated the methodological quality of DS studies on children’s
language learning. From a comprehensive literature search in Scopus, we identified 117
DS studies relevant to children language learning, of which 50 that met our criteria were
subsequently coded and examined to address our three research questions.
With regard to the first question, most studies in the DS dataset utilised qualitative
research methods, as compared to quantitative methods, mixed-methods or literature
reviews. However, the reliance on qualitative methods may be problematic, especially if
the aim is to convince international stakeholders in the educational field to implement DS
methods into their existing curriculums as a novel approach to improve language learning
outcomes for children – and even more so as a viable alternative for remote learning that
continues to take place under the COVID-19 global pandemic. Proponents of such
programmes must be able to demonstrate learning outcomes.
The second research question examined the research design (descriptive features) of
studies in the DS dataset. While most DS studies tend to focus on the written abilities of
learners, we opined that it is difficult to differentiate the key language competencies
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 18 of 25

examined in a research. Instead, DS should be investigated as a tool that can be used to

nurture different language competencies at the same time.
Finally, the third research question addressed the reliability reports of instruments and
coding practices. We found that more than 92% of DS studies on children language
learning provided no evidence of reliability investigation. This observation exemplifies
existing concerns of researchers over the neglect of reliability reports of instruments and
coding practices. We hope the results of this study will be useful as inspiration to
researchers in the field of applied linguistics and encourage the implementation of DS into
the language curriculum for children around the world.

Appendices

Appendix A
The Seven Elements of Digital Storytelling
Element of DS Description
Point of View What is the main point of the story and what is the perspective of the
author?
A Dramatic Question A key question that keeps viewer’s attention and will be answered by
the end of the story.
Emotional Context Serious issues that come alive in a personal and powerful way and
connects the story to the audience.
Gift of Voice A way to personalise the story to help the audience understand the
context.
Power of Soundtrack Music or other sounds that support and embellish the storyline.
Economy Using just enough content to tell the story without overloading the
viewer.
Pacing The rhythm of the story and how slowly or quickly it progresses.
Source: Adapted from the University of Houston

Appendix B
The following search protocol was used in Scopus to generate datasets:
( ( TITLE-ABS-KEY ( "digital storytelling" ) AND TITLE-ABS-KEY ( child* ) ) ) AND
( language OR reading OR listening OR speaking OR writing OR oral )
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 19 of 25

Appendix C

Notes: The graph above indicates the total number of documents released per year in the Scopus
database.

Appendix D

Notes: Graph above indicates the total number of documents released per year by source.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 20 of 25

Appendix E

Notes: The graph above indicates the total number of documents released per year by countries or
territories.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 21 of 25

Appendix F
Quantitative Research Methods*
Research Type Description
Descriptive Describes the current status of an identified variable.
Correlational Seeks to determine the extent of a relationship between two or more
variables using statistical data.
Quasi-Experimental Seeks to establish cause-effect relationships among the variables.
Experimental Uses the scientific method to establish the cause-effect relationship
among a group of variables that make up a study.
Qualitative Research Methods**
Research Type Description
Case Study Reveals a phenomenon by studying in depth a single case example of
the phenomenon.
Grounded Theory Comprehends the social and psychological processes that characterize
an event or situation.
Phenomenology Describes the structures of experience as they present themselves to
consciousness, without recourse to theory, deduction, or assumptions
from other disciplines.
Ethnography Focuses on the sociology of meaning through close field observation of
sociocultural phenomena.
Historical Systematic collection and objective evaluation of data related to past
occurrences in order to test hypotheses regarding causes, effects, or
trends of these events that help to explain present and future events.
Mixed Methods***
Research Type Description
Sequential A two-phase project that is more focused on quantitative data and
Explanatory Design consists of:
(1) Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis; and
(2) Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis
Phase (1) informs Phase (2). For Example: Survey data informs
interviews.
Sequential A two-phase project that is more focused on qualitative data and
Exploratory Design consists of:
(1) Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis; and
(2) Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis
Phase (1) informs Phase (2). For Example: Focus group shapes survey
questions.
Sequential A four-phase project that consists of two data collection series:
Transformative (1) Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis; and
Design (2) Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis
Phase (1) informs Phase (2) and vice versa. Process is repeated twice.
Concurrent A one-phase project that collects quantitative and qualitative data at
Triangulation Design the same time.
Results from qualitative data are compared to those from quantitative
data.
Analysis for qualitative and quantitative data is conducted separately.
Literature Review****
Research Type Description
NA A search and evaluation of the available literature in the given subject
or chosen topic area.
Notes: Description of research methods are adapted from various sources, indicated with asterisks.
Source/Legend: *Winston Salem State University ; **University of Wisconsin-Madison ;
***Georgia State University Library ; ****Royal Literary Fund .
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 22 of 25

Abbreviations
DS: Digital storytelling; LNAI: Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence; LNBI: Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics;
LNCS: Lecture Notes in Computer Science; StoryCenter: Center for Digital Storytelling; US: The United States;
UK: The United Kingdom.

Authors’ contributions
Clare Ong and Vahid Aryadoust conceived the study, created the coding scheme, and discussed the content of the
paper. Clare Ong wrote the paper, and Vahid Aryadoust reviewed and revised it.

Authors’ information
Clare Ong is a Final Year Public Policy & Global Affairs Undergraduate at the School of Social Sciences of Nanyang
Technological University (NTU), Singapore. She is a student researcher under NTU’s Undergraduate Research
Programme (URECA). As a student researcher, she has (co)authored research in language learning and public
administration.

Vahid Aryadoust is Associate Professor of language assessment at the National Institute of Education of Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore. His areas of interest include language assessment, quantitative methods, eye
tracking, and brain imaging in language assessment. Vahid has published his research in Computer Assisted Language
Learning, Language Testing, System, Current Psychology, Language Assessment Quarterly, Assessing Writing,
Educational Assessment, Educational Psychology, etc. He has also (co)authored a number of book chapters and books
that are published by Routledge, Cambridge University Press, Springer, Cambridge Scholar Publishing, Wiley Blackwell,
etc. Vahid has also led a number of assessment research projects supported by educational fund-providers in
Singapore, USA, UK, and Canada. He is a member of the Advisory Board of multiple international journals and has
been awarded the Intercontinental Academia Fellowship (2018–2019). His YouTube channel, Statistics and Theory,
has been awarded the John Cheung Social Media Award, 2020, which recognizes exemplary and innovative use of
social media. The channel is available from: https://www.youtube.com/user/vahidaryadoust .

Funding
The authors acknowledge the funding support from Nanyang Technological University – URECA Undergraduate
Research Programme for this research project.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations

Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author details
1 School of Social Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. 2 National Institute of Education, Nanyang

Technological University, Singapore.

Received: 3 August 2021 Accepted: 9 August 2022

Published: 28 February 2023 (Online First: 6 October 2022)

References
Baim, S. A. (2015). Digital storytelling: Conveying the essence of a face-to-face lecture in an online learning
environment. Journal of Effective Teaching, 15(1), 47–58. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1060431
Ballast, K., Stephens, L., & Radcliffe, R. (2008). The effects of digital storytelling on sixth grade students’ writing and
their attitudes about writing. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and
Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 875–879). Association for the Advancement of Computing
in Education.
Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: A Review. Biomedical Digital Libraries, 3(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-
5581-3-1
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.
Castañeda, M. E. (2013). “I am proud that I did it and it’s a piece of me”: Digital storytelling in the foreign language
classroom. CALICO, 30(1). https://www.equinoxpub.com/CALICO/issue/view/1920
Chalhoub-Deville, M., & Deville, C. (2008). Utilizing psychometric methods in assessment. In E. Shohamy & N. H.
Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopaedia of language and education (2nd ed., Vol. 7, pp. 211–224). Springer Science +
Business Media LLC.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 23 of 25

Chen, Z. H., & Liu, W. Y. (2019). A six-stage story structure approach for elementary students’ story production:
Quality, interest, and attitude. Computer Assisted Learning Language, 34(1-2), 184–207.
https://doi.org.remotexs.ntu.edu.sg/10.1080/09588221.2019.1688354
Chiedu, R. E., & Omenogor, H. D. (2014). The concept of reliability in language testing: Issues and solutions. Journal of
Resourcefulness and Distinction, 8(1), 1–9.
https://globalacademicgroup.com/journals/resourcefulness/The%20Concept%20of%20Reli ability%20in.pdf
Chung, S. K. (2006). Digital storytelling in integrated arts education. Journal of Arts Education, 4(1), 33–50.
Churchill, N., Lim, C. P., Oakley, G., & Churchill, D. (2008). Digital storytelling and digital literacy learning. Readings in
Education and Technology: Proceedings of ICICTE 2008 (pp. 418–430).
https://www.academia.edu/831867/Digital_storytelling_and_digital_literacy_learning
Coulter, C., Michael, C., & Poyner, L. (2007). Storytelling as pedagogy: An unexpected outcome of narrative inquiry.
Curriculum Inquiry, 37(2), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467- 873X.2007.00375.x
Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Sage.
Diaz, M. A. (2016). Digital storytelling with pre-service teachers: Rising awareness for refugees through ICTS in ESL
primary classes. Digital Education Review, 30, 1–16. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1125503.pdf
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
Flick, U. (2014). An introduction to qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications Ltd.
Georgia State University Library. (2022). Mixed methods.
https://research.library.gsu.edu/c.php?g=1050115&p=7622501
Grabowski, K. C., & Oh, S. (2018). Reliability analysis of instruments and data coding. In A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L.
Plonsky & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 541–565).
Palgrave Macmillan.
Grotjahn, R. (1987). On the methodological basis of introspective methods. In C. Fæ rch & G. Kasper (Eds.),
Introspection in second language research (pp. 54–81). Multilingual Matters.
Hamdy, M. F. (2017). The effect of using digital storytelling on students’ reading comprehension and listening
comprehension. Journal of English and Arabic Language Teaching, 8(2), 112–123.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342364293_The_Effect_of_Using_Digital_Story
telling_on_Students'_Reading_Comprehension_and_Listening_Comprehension
Hartshorne, J. K., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Pinker, S. (2018). A critical period for second language acquisition: Evidence
from 2/3 million English speakers. Cognition, 177, 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.04.007
Hou, Z., & Aryadoust, V. (2021). A review of the methodological quality of quantitative mobileassisted language
learning research. System, 100, 102568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102568
Hung, C. M., Hwang, G. J., & Huang, I. (2012). A project-based digital storytelling approach for improving students’
learning motivation, problem-solving competence and learning achievement. Educational Technology and Society,
15(4), 368–379.
Hwang, W.-Y., Shadiev, R., Hsu, J.-L., Huang, Y.-M., Hsu, G.-L., & Lin, Y.-C. (2016). Effects of storytelling to facilitate EFL
speaking using web-based multimedia system. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 215–241.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.927367
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med, 2(8), e124.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
Jenkins, M., & Healey M. (2012). Developing and embedding inquiry-guided learning across an institution. New
Directions for Teaching and Learning, 129, 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20004
Johnson, D. M., & Saville-Troike, M. (1992). Validity and reliability in qualitative research on second language
acquisition and teaching: Two researchers comment. TESOL Quarterly, 26(3), 602–605.
https://doi.org/10.2307/3587189
Johnson, J. S., & Newport, E. L. (1989). Critical period effects in language learning: The influence of maturational state
on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 60–99.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(89)90003-0
Kildan, A. O., & Incikabi, L. (2015). Effects on the technological pedagogical content knowledge of early childhood
teacher candidates using digital storytelling to teach mathematics. International Journal of Primary, Elementary
and Early Years Education, 43(3), 238–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.804852
Lado, R. (1961). Language testing: The construction and use of foreign language tests. A Teacher’s Book. McGraw-Hill.
Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological foundations of language. Wiley.
Lestariyana, R. P. D., & Widodo, H. P. (2018). Engaging young learners of English with digital stories: Learning to mean.
Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 489–495. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v8i2.13314
Liang, M.-Y. (2019). Beyond elocution: Multimodal narrative discourse analysis of L2 storytelling. ReCALL, 31(1), 56–
74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344018000095
Lim, N. Z. L., Zakaria, A., & Aryadoust, V. (2022). A systematic review of digital storytelling in language learning in
adolescents and adults. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 6125–6155.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10861-0
Lindgren, R., & McDaniel, R. (2012). Transforming online learning through narrative and student agency. Educational
Technology and Society, 15(4), 344–355.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 24 of 25

Liu, C. C., Yang, C. Y., & Chao, P. Y. (2019). A longitudinal analysis of student participation in a digital collaborative
story. Educational Technology Research, 67(4), 907–929. https://doi.org.remotexs.ntu.edu.sg/10.1007/s11423-
019-09666-3
Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research:
Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391.
https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12286
Moradi, H., & Chen, H. (2019). Digital storytelling in language education. Behavioural Sciences, 9(12), 147.
https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9120147
Neubauer, B. E., Witkop, C. T., & Varpio, L. (2019). How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of
others. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8, 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-019- 0509-2
Nunally, C. (1982). Reliability of measurement. Encyclopaedia of Educational Research, 4, 15–16.
Oppermann, M. (2007). Writing in “that other space”: Digital storytelling and the scholarship of teaching in American
studies. Teaching American Studies in The Twenty-First Century, 52(3), 22–28.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41158317
Palacios, J. (2012). Traditional storytelling in the digital era. Fourth World Journal, 11(2), 41–56.
https://search.informit.org/doi/abs/10.3316/informit.021672701588162
Perniss, P. (2018). Why we should study multimodal language. Fronters in Psychology, 9(1109), 1–5.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01109
Rahman, S. M. (2016). The advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative approaches and
methods in language “testing and assessment” research: A literature review. Journal of Education and Learning,
6(1). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1120221.pdf
Ravitch, S. M. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining
education. Basic Books.
Reid, G., Snead, R. C., Pettiway, K. M., & Simoneaux, B. A. (2016). Multimodal communication in the university:
Surveying faculty across disciplines. Across the Discipline, 13.
http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/reidetal2016.cfm
Rigney, A. (2010). When the monograph is no longer the medium: Historical narrative in the online age. History and
Theme, Theme Issue 49, 100–117.
Rossiter, M., & Garcia, P. A. (2010). Digital storytelling: A new player on the narrative field. New Directions for Adult
and Continuing Education, 126, 37–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.370
Royal Literary Fund. (n.d.). What is a literature review. https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/whatis-a-literature-review/
Sallee, M. W., & Flood, J. T. (2012). Using qualitative research to bridge research, policy, and practice. Theory into
Practice, 51(2), 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.662873
Schank, R. (1990). Tell me a story: Narrative and intelligence. North-western University Press.
Silverman, D. (2010). Qualitative research. Sage.
Suwardy, T., Pan, G., & Seow, P. S. (2013). Using digital storytelling to engage student learning. Accounting Education,
22(2), 109–124. https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soa_research/921/
Tuohy, D., Cooney, A., Dowling, M., Murphy, K., & Sixsmith, J. (2013). An overview of interpretive phenomenology as a
research methodology. Nurse Researcher, 20(6), 17–20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23909107/
University of Houston. (n.d.). The seven elements of digital storytelling.
https://digitalstorytelling.coe.uh.edu/page.cfm?id=27&cid=27&sublinkid=31
University of Wisconsin-Madison. (n.d.). Nursing resources: Types of research within qualitative and quantitative.
https://researchguides.library.wisc.edu/c.php?g=861013&p=6170080
Wexler, L., Gubrium, A., Griffin, M., & DiFulvio, G. (2013). Promoting positive youth development and highlighting
reasons for living in Northwest Alaska through digital storytelling. Health Promotion Practice, 14(4), 617–623.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839912462390
Winston Salem State University. (n.d.). Key elements of a research proposal: Quantitative design.
https://www.wssu.edu/about/offices-and-departments/office-of-sponsoredprograms/pre-
award/_Files/documents/develop-quantitative.pdf
Xu, Y., Park, H., & Baek, Y. (2011). A new approach toward digital storytelling: An activity focus on writing self-efficacy
in a virtual learning environment. Educational Technology and Society, 14(4), 181–191.
Yee, B. C., Abdullah, T., & Nawi, M. (2018). A reflective practice of using digital storytelling during teaching practicum.
Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies, 5, 708–715.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59427-9_73
Zull, J. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of exploring the biology of learning. Stylus
Publishing.
Ong and Aryadoust Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (2023) 18:11 Page 25 of 25

Publisher’s Note
The Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education (APSCE) remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.

Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning (RPTEL)

is an open-access journal and free of publication fee.