<![CDATA[Critical reading in a second language depends on more than understanding individual words. Readers need enough lexical access, attention, self-monitoring, and feedback to question claims and compare evidence. This study reanalysed three existing technology-mediated vocabulary datasets to examine whether gamified platforms provide those enabling conditions. The source corpus comprised a Blooket questionnaire study (n = 20), a Quizizz open-ended questionnaire study (n = 18), and a Wayground questionnaire/interview study (n = 41). Because the original instruments did not directly test critical reading, the analysis deliberately treats the findings as evidence of critical-reading readiness rather than critical-reading achievement. A cross-platform coding framework examined five dimensions: lexical processing, engagement and persistence, formative feedback, metacognitive self-evaluation, and constraints created by time pressure or competition. Blooket received 94.5% positive responses overall, although its perception mean (3.20/4) exceeded its skill mean (3.11/4). Quizizz responses consistently linked scores with participation, progress monitoring, self-evaluation, and competitive effort. Wayground produced 70.0% positive responses, with its strongest item indicating greater engagement than traditional vocabulary work (M = 3.76/5). Across platforms, gamification appears to create useful conditions for sustained lexical attention and self-monitoring. Yet the same data show a gap between engagement and deeper evaluation. Timers, ranking, and rapid-response formats may reward retrieval before justification. The study proposes a staged design in which gamified vocabulary practice is followed by inference, evidence checking, source comparison, and written justification. The findings support technology as a gateway to critical reading, not as evidence that critical reading has already been acquired]]>
Copyrights © 2025
