## 3 Methodology
### Analysis  
This stage was based on an analysis model proposed by [PERSON] et al. [46], where evaluation methods are applied to identify the child profile with hearing impairment, including direct observation, interviews and inquiry. These methods collect information about the child such as feelings (emotions), behaviors, motivation and limitations. The participants were children and teachers from the Institute of Blind and Deaf Children, Valle del Cauca (Colombia). Seven children participated (4 girls and 3 boys, with mean age = 10.3, and SD = 1.5), all of whom were enrolled in the third academic grade. Three teachers also participated. Other academic grades were not considered, as they included students in the very early stages of verbal and written language development. The group of children selected comprised three boys with hearing aids, three girls with a cochlear implant, and a hearing girl. For each child, informed consent for participation in the study was signed by the parents, at which point the conditions and protocol of the experiment regarding the publication of data were explained. In this stage, evaluation methods were applied to understand a set of aspects of the user-child's profile [46]. In this process, the user, product, activity, and context of use were included, in order to explore and identify the human factors, since not all users have the same level of experience of the game or learn at the same speed. Therefore, four qualitative methods were applied: (1) direct observation, (2) interviews, (3) thinking aloud, and (4) Wizard of Oz. The order of applying the evaluation methods is important since each method was designed based on the results of the previous method. The first method applied was direct observation in the classroom, where it was observed that children with hearing impairment were at low reading and writing levels compared to a hearing child at the same grade level. This means they employ the phonological code less than hearing children due to the difficulty of linking the so-nest with the letter. However, they can use the phonological code when graphic information is presented to them, although they will never reach the level of a hearing child. This is because the deaf child is faced with the difficult and complex task of memorizing vocabulary, and when they find a new word they will not understand its meaning until it is visualized  
Figure 1: MECONESIS (Acronym in Spanish, METdologia para CONcepción de juEgos Serios para nIfnos con discapacidad auditiva) methodology for children with hearing impairment. graphically. It was also observed that the children worked in groups, since they helped each other in the different activities assigned. In fact, the great majority of decisions that they made were first approved by the other group members. It was also observed that they worked with tangible objects within the classroom to facilitate their relationship with the real environment. Moreover, teachers used a visual learning style, using symbols, graphics, images and physical elements to help them relate concepts. During observation, the children were found to have a problem with spatial orientation in respect of how to identify laterality (to the right of, to the left of), depth (above, below), and anteriority (in front of, behind) [47, 48]. The second method, an interview composed of five questions, was carried out with three teachers from the institute. The objective was to inquire about how much knowledge teachers had of the term CT. The questions were as follows: (1) what do you understand by CT? (2) What teaching/learning strategies or methods do you use to stimulate CT in the child? (3) What CT tasks involve the most difficulty for the child? (4) Do you have a way of measuring the CT of the child? (5) Are you familiar with Scratch programming and have you used it? Some of the answers given by the teachers showed little knowledge related to CT, since they related it to mathematics, reasoning, and mental calculations.