This study investigated the effectiveness of a digital reading proficiency assessment platform compared with traditional paper-and-pencil methods and examined users’ perceptions of its performance. It employed a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest control group design involving two comparable groups of secondary school students: a control group assessed using conventional reading assessment procedures and an experimental group assessed using the digital platform for reading proficiency assessment. Pre-test and post-test scores in linear and non-linear reading tasks were analyzed using paired and independent sample t-tests to determine differences in reading proficiency gains between the two groups. To evaluate user perception, survey questionnaires grounded in the ISO/IEC 25010 software quality standards were administered to students and teachers, focusing on functional suitability, usability, security, and maintainability. Results revealed that the experimental group achieved significantly higher reading proficiency gains than the control group in both assessment types, with statistical analyses confirming that the improvements were significant. In contrast, the control group showed minimal or no meaningful improvement. User perception findings indicated a high level of satisfaction across all evaluated quality dimensions, suggesting that the digital assessment platform was perceived as reliable, user-friendly, secure, and adaptable to instructional needs. The results provide empirical evidence that digital reading proficiency assessment is both more effective and more positively perceived than traditional methods. The study concludes that integrating digital assessment platforms in reading evaluation can enhance assessment accuracy, efficiency, and user acceptance, offering a viable and evidence-based alternative for improving reading assessment practices in secondary education.
Ivy M. Tarun (Thu,) studied this question.