Game­Based Learning: An Investigation of Academic Growth

The University of South Carolina’s Educational Technology Program

EDET 780 ­ Research Seminar in Educational Technology

May 29, 2014

David Corso

Chris Humphreys

Sarah Tolson

Abstract

Game­based learning is a developing field that facilitates learning in the classroom.

Game­based learning incorporates a number of design features that help educators present

material and content in an interactive and engaging way, and game­based learning helps drive

student motivation and mastery. Games, play, video games, and video game play use a variety

of tools, elements, and features, and this study investigates how these factors contribute to

student learning, academic acquisition, and adherence to curricular standards.

Introduction

Traditional classroom environments struggle to engage and motivate students. Whether

it’s morning math lessons or social studies at the end of the day, students become detached

from the lesson and the material, and when students disengage from the teacher and the

classroom, they have difficulty connecting with the information and understanding the content.

Fortunately, new research and technology are investigating ways to engage and motivate

1

student learning as well as drive classroom involvement, energy, and value. Games and play are

being incorporated into the classroom as game­based learning to captivate and focus students.

Game­based learning comes in a variety of forms, and some forms are more successful at

educating students than others. Some settings use games as motivation for students, but do not

incorporate the learning aspect of game­based learning: “One reason for this unsuccessful

hybrid is that designers have taken a ‘chocolate­covered broccoli’ approach in which the gaming

element is a reward for completing the educational component. Educational games need to be

designed in a way that allows for the learning material to be delivered through the parts of the

game that are most motivating” (Habgood, Ainsworth, & Benford, 2005 & Bruckman, 1999, as

cited in Tran et al., 2012, p. 1). This study investigates the role of game­based learning on

elementary school students, and it evaluates how elements of game­based learning facilitate

mastery of content and adherence to curriculum.

Game­Based Learning

Game­based learning is the combination of educational content and gamic properties,

and it works to mirror and improve upon the educational results of traditional learning methods

(Prensky, 2001). At the core of game­based learning is a game and gamic properties. A game is

any mental and/or physical activity that is defined by goals, rules, challenges, a feedback

system, voluntary participation, and results in a quantifiable outcome (Game, n.d.; McGonigal,

2011; Salen & Zimmerman, 2004). Digital game­based learning is a technological advancement

of game­based learning, and it is the marriage between educational content and video games

(Prensky, 2001). A video game is a complex form of digital media that incorporates gamic

properties, and it requires the active interaction between a human and computer (Galloway,

2006; Wardrip­Fruin, 2009).

2

Games, video games, game­based learning, and digital game­based learning come in

different shapes and flavors; however, they inherently possess fundamental features that can be

designed and understood. These features include the player(s) of the game, i.e. who is the

decision­maker that interacts with the system; the purpose(s) of the game, i.e. the reason for the

game’s existence; the procedure(s) of the game, i.e. what actions and methods guide the player

and help him/her acquire skills; the rule(s) of the game, i.e. what boundaries limit and control the

player’s behavior; the resistance(s) of the game, i.e. the uncertainty, opposition, tension, and

conflict the player experiences; the resource(s) of the game, what objects, attributes, and states

the player acquires and uses; the feedback(s) of the game, i.e. how the system evaluates and

responds to player actions; and finally the format(s) of the game, i.e. the game’s

blackbox­­formal elements and the physical engine that contains the game (Dignan, 2011;

Fullerton, 2008). The combination and manipulation of these properties create a unique

experience that has affects students in various ways.

Examples of Game­Based Learning

Game­based learning occurs through non­digital games, like the World Peace game,

through digital games, like Wii Sports, in game­focused school systems, like Quest to Learn

schools, with gamic elements, like avatar representation and experience acquisition in

Classcraft, and through a number of different methodologies. For example, there are elaborate

video games like SimCity that immerse players in a world of challenge wherein players actively

solve problems and reflect over the dynamics of processes. Alternatively, there are ‘brain fitness’

games like Math Blaster that provide mini­tasks for players to practice in a rinse­and­repeat

fashion (Green, 2012; Ito, 2009). Educators can use games to teach specific lessons like

fractions in Wii bowling, explore the complex dynamics of microworlds like Civilization, build

3

interest and engagement on a topic such as history through Age of Empires, and practice

specific skills such as engineering and management abilities in RollerCoaster Tycoon (Foster,

2009; Winner, 2014; Van Eck, 2006). As game­based learning continues to develop, game

designers are creating video games for specific courses and content, such as Industry Giant II

for business, Zapitalism for economics, and Virtual U for management (Blunt, n.d.). Game­based

learning incorporates these educational paradigms, i.e. children’s software, learning games, and

edutainment, to create a site of learning (Ito, 2009).

The Effects of Game­Based Learning

Game­based learning brings a priceless phenomenon to the classroom: play. Play

requires a participant to voluntarily interact with a game, and through his or her voluntary

participation, the player enters a ‘magic circle’ that transforms the activity into entertainment and

recreation (Huizinga, 1955). Through play, the classroom experience becomes fun. Play is

enjoyable, and it is biologically encouraged. Human brains are wired to motivate exploration and

learning ‘in the moment’­­in one’s immediate experience (Dignan, 2011). Game­based learning

promotes student exploration and learning by motivating students to interact with their current

situation, i.e. the game, and as Dignan and other researchers point out, “games are learning

engines” that train and develop players (2011).

One way games and video games develop players is through cognitive develop.

Cognition is the ability to think, and cognitive abilities include mental processes involved in

thinking, like memory, attention, language, and problem solving (Goldstein, 2011). Various

aspects of life train and develop cognitive abilities: reading, writing, cooking, driving, riding a bike,

and playing a sport to name a few. In order to be successful in life’s activities and in an

educational setting, students need to train and develop their cognitive abilities. Games and video

4

games train a number of cognitive skills (Croisile, 2007; Gentile et al., 2012; Green & Bavelier,

2012; Green & Bavelier 2006; Green & Bavelier, 2003; Mayas et al., 2014; Oei & Patterson,

2013), and by developing these cognitive skills, students can master educational content (Boyan

& Sherry, 2011).

Mastery refers to the expert performance or literacy of an individual, and it occurs through

deliberate learning and practice (Ericsson et al., 1993). Deliberate learning consists of three key

components: setting specific goals, obtaining immediate feedback, and concentrating as much

on technique as on outcome (Levitt & Dubner, 2009). Game­based learning encourages

deliberate learning because it provides players with an engaging learning environment that

motivates, provides feedback, and develops problem solving and decision­making skills.

Through a cyclical process, games promote volition­­the will to do something­­and faculty­­the

ability to do it­­which drive deliberate learning, which in turn develop student motivation and

mastery, and ultimately, provide the student with the will and ability to continue to train (Dignan,

2011).

Games, video games, and game­based learning can be created, modified, and integrated

with instructional strategies for specific outcomes, like fostering active learners (Van Eck, 2006).

“Active learners embark on a process of discovery through video game play, allowing students to

develop their own understanding and concept of both content and environment. Students are

more likely to remember their experiences and be able to connect them to future situations and

are more likely to engage and invest in the learning goals and outcomes presented by the game”

(Barab, Barnett, & Squire, 2002 & Gee, 2004, as cited by Blunt, n.d., p. 4). Blunt references three

research studies with similar findings: students using games to reinforce concepts learned in

class scored higher on assessments than their counterparts who did not use game­based

learning. The data also showed that there was no discrepancy between the effect of

5

game­based learning and its advantages between genders or ethnic groups when it came to a

given assessment. As Fishman & Aguilar state, “good games succeed because they tap into our

deep­seated desire to learn and be engaged “(Gee, 2003, as cited in Fishman & Aguilar, 2012, p.

111). Good games promote self­efficacy, and as learners experiment and play through a game,

they learn that failure, i.e. restarting an activity or level, is a necessary component of the

experience. By playing these games, students gain confidence and begin taking risks in as well

as ownership of their education.

Games, play, and game­based learning affect players mentally and physically. From a

psychological perspective, they make learning more accessible: they present information in a

variety of ways, provide several ways to plan and perform tasks, and motivate and engage

players (About UDL, n.d.). From a physical perspective, they affect several areas in the brain:

sensory and recognition areas such as the visual cortex, the auditory cortex, and the

somatosensory cortex, strategy and execution regions like the premotor cortex, the motor

cortex, and the prefrontal cortex, as well as reward centers and affective networks such the

basal ganglia, the limbic system, and structures in the medial forebrain circuit (Gazzaniga, 2009;

Goldstein, 2011; Kalat, 2013; Linden, 2011). In other words, games, play, and game­based

learning use the entire brain to learn, and more brain involvement means more interaction and

engagement with the immediate experience.

Game­based learning makes information interactive, which allows a player to recognize

and understand that information in a personal way (Figure 1 ­ Column 1). Allowing players to

recognize and understand objects, controls, and other gamic properties is an important and

easily employable characteristic of game­based learning. As players learn, plan, and execute

physical and mental tasks, they make choices to achieve goals and objectives, which reflect

what they know and how they express that knowledge (Figure 1 ­ Column 2). Each action is

6

coupled with feedback, which promotes deliberate learning and mastery towards the task at

hand. When successful, feedback provides gratification for actions executed at the right time

with a reward for each accomplishment. By giving players small and frequent rewards, they

maintain a constant level of interest, and it instills in them self­belief and confidence to achieve

larger goals (Figure 1 ­ Column 3). Students show greater attention to learning when they have

clear and specific goals­­including both short­ and long­term educational goals (Garris, et al.

2002, as cited in Alkhafaji et al., 2012, p.51). Game­based learning is challenging and rewarding,

and game­based learning research has shown that student choice has a positive impact on

motivation and engagement (Fishman & Aguilar, 2012). As Gabe Zichermann asserts,

status­­not cash­­is the best reward. Introducing skill levels encourages positive competition,

and it reduces the fear of failure because students’ skill levels can only increase (Moth, 2012).

Figure 1: The Universal Design for Learning Guidelines depict three main principles:

Representation, Action, and Engagement.

7

Columbia University researchers Lee & Hammer point out, “Gamification attempts to

harness the motivational power of games and apply it to real­world problems­­such as, in our

case, the motivational problems of schools” (as cited in Arora, 2013). In order to be effective,

games should challenge students. If the game is too easy, students will become bored. If the

game is too difficult, students will become frustrated. Effective games allow students to win by a

small margin to keep them engaged. (Alkhafaji et al., 2012). Teachers can personalize

instruction and assess knowledge through game­based learning, which provides them with

useful data on their students (Millstone, 2012). Game­based strategies can be applied to

assignments and assessments as a purpose to engage and motivate learners. When students

have choice of and control over their assignments, research shows that students are

encouraged to work harder. For example, an education course used experience points for

assignments that were given and skill points to increase their grades. If students lost points,

such as for missing a class or assignment, they could select assignments on their own to earn

enough points for their desired grade. In other words, students worked to earn the grade they

wanted by obtaining extra points that bumped their grade. The research showed that students

greatly enjoyed this game­inspired grading system and many worked harder (Fishman & Aguilar,

2012).

Research Question

This study is interested in finding out how:

Games and video games can help players learn academic content.

Game­based learning drives student activity and if students learn more than, less than, or

as much as traditional methods.

8

Game­based learning and video games educate students on curricular content and

lessons.

Game­based learning engages and motivates students in a productive / meaningful way.

We hypothesize that:

1. Games and video games will help players learn and recall more academic content.

2. Game­based learning will drive student activity; the students will learn more than

students learning with just a traditional method.

3. Game­based learning and video games will educate students on curricular content and

lessons, while enforcing concepts studied within the classroom.

4. Game­based learning will engage and motivate students in a meaningful way, making the

content more enjoyable and relevant to the learners.

Methods

This study will investigate the use of game­based learning through a quasi­experimental

setup that investigates the effects of game­based learning on student achievement and

engagement. A school in PseudoCity, US volunteers to participate. Forty subjects from two

classes of X graders will participate in the study. One class (n=19) will comprise the control

group, and the other class (n=21) will comprise the experimental game­based learning group.

Both classes will receive a standard intelligence battery, i.e. the Woodcock­Johnson Test of

Cognitive Abilities, and a brief questionnaire will be sent to their parents asking for personal

information such as age and ethnicity, at home activities such as time spent watching tv, playing

sports, video games, and so on, as well as the child’s general interests in school courses and

material.

9

Both classes will receive the same curriculum and class structure, i.e. both classes start

with the same traditional set­up, standards, and support. However, the experimental group will

supplement the traditional style Lessons 2 and 3 with GameA, Lesson 5 with GameB, and

Lesson 7 with GameC. Students in the experimental group will use 2014 computers with

Windows 8 to access and play GameA, GameB, and GameC. During and after lessons,

students will be tested with traditional methods, i.e. quizzes, tests, class participation, and

small­scale projects. At the end of the semester, both classes will receive another intelligence

test and the same questionnaire will be sent to their parents again. Assessment data from each

class will be compared along with the results from the parent questionnaire, and the results will

be analyzed using a t­test with independent samples.

Results

This study is a hypothetical study. There is no actual data.

Discussion

Our hope is that the experimental game­based group experiences:

1. A deeper understanding and/or better recall of the lesson’s content.

2. Motivate students to pursue the material more.

3. More enjoyment from the classroom.

Once the study is conducted, we’ll be able to analyze the data we collect to determine

the effects of game­based learning on student achievement and motivation. However, we lack

the games, the content and curriculum focus, and the age / grade level to test this study. Ideally,

we would prioritize the study based on funding or budgetary constraints. This would give shape

and direction to the study. For example, the games used in the study could range from free

10

online games to purchasable games for devices like an iPad to games that must be created for

a custom lesson. Additionally, there may be a specific grade level or content area that we have

to focus on.

Limitations that can impact the results of the study include factors such as the individual

differences among students and the prior knowledge they activate, learning behaviors, learning

styles, any accommodations they need, access to the games and interactive material, and other

personal and environmental differences. Many of these limitations would be noted with the

results from the initial questionnaire. In addition to the student’s learning styles, teacher’s

instructional styles need to be taken into consideration as well. Teachers present information in

different ways and have access to various resources, which can impact their comfort level with

the content, as well as their command of the subject matter. Another limitation can be found

with the technology that is offered in the classroom. If a teacher is not comfortable with

technology, or is unable to use gaming technology, he or she may not be able to implement the

technology into his or her classroom. The amount of technology offered in a classroom also

could have a large impact on the study, such as if the classroom has one­to­one technology or

has a high ratio of students to technology in the classroom, which may impact how the time is

allotted for students to play games.

For future research, we will design a study that investigates the elements within each

game, test the games outside of the classroom environment, and then analyze those results

using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. Each game will be broken into the player(s),

purpose(s), procedure(s), rule(s), resistance(s), resource(s), feedback(s), and format(s) of the

game. Next, we would compare the elements of each game, the results of each group, and how

the elements affected the results. After analyzing which factors, such as resources or

11

resistances, differed in the more successful groups, we would reconstruct the games with the

amended features and measure the new outcomes.

Game­based learning is a promising field that offers a lot to students and teachers. As

we understand more about game­based learning, we’ll be able to design for specific students,

content, and curriculums. “It is also important to acknowledge that there is no single approach,

but rather a tremendous variety of ways that game­based and game­inspired thinking may

transform the way we think about formal education” (Fishman & Aguilar, 2012, p. 116).

References

1. Alkhafaji, A., Grey, B., & Hastings, P. (2012) Establishing a new framework to measure

challenge, control, and goals in different games. Proceedings. GLS 8.0 games + learning

+ society conference. 49­54.

http://www.brainpop.com/new_common_images/files/14/142916_GLS8.0­proceedings­2

012dl.pdf

2. Arora, K. (2013). Gamification in education: Gamifying the classroom.

http://edtechreview.in/trends­insights/insights/240­gamification­in­education

3. Blunt, R. (n.d.) Does game­based learning work? Research from three recent studies.

Advanced distributed learning. 1­11. Retrieved from

http://patrickdunn.squarespace.com/storage/blunt_game_studies.pdf

4. Boyan, A., & Sherry, J. (2011). The challenge in creating games for education: Aligning

mental models with game models. Child Development Perspectives, 5(2), 82­87.

5. Croisile, B., Miner, D., Belier, S., Noir, M., & Tarpin­Bernard, F. (2007). Online cognitive

training improves cognitive performance. Retrieved from

12

http://www.happy­neuron.com/rsc/hn_vital/docs/Online%20Cognitive%20Training%20Im

proves%20Cognitive%20Performance.pdf

6. Dignan, A. (2011). Game frame: Using games as a strategy for success. New York, NY:

FREE PRESS.

7. Ericsson, K., Krampe, R., & Tesch­Romer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in

the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363­406.

8. Fishman, B., & Aguilar, S. (2012) Gaming the class: Using a game­based grading

system to get students to work harder… and like it. Proceedings. GLS 8.0 games +

learning + society conference. 111­117.

http://www.brainpop.com/new_common_images/files/14/142916_GLS8.0­proceedings­2

012dl.pdf

9. Foster, A. N. (2009). Gaming their way: Learning in simulation strategy video games?

(Order No. 3381242, Michigan State University). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, ,

248­n/a. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/304946067?accountid=13965. (304946067).

10. Fullerton, T. (2008). Game design workshop: A playcentric approach to creating

innovative games. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2nd.

11. Galloway, A. R. (2006). Gaming: Essays on algorithmic culture. Minneapolis, MN:

University of Minnesota Press.

12. Game. (n.d.). In Oxford Dictionaries. Retrieved from

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/game?q=game

13. Gazzaniga, M., Ivry, R., & Mangun, G. (2009). Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the

mind. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.

13

14. Gentile, D., Swing, E., Lim, C., & Khoo, A. (2012). Video game playing, attention

problems, and impulsiveness: Evidence of bidirectional causality. Psychology of Popular

Media Culture, 1(1), 62­70. doi: 10.1037/a0026969

15. Goldstein, E. (2011). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday

experience. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

16. Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2012). Learning, attentional control, and action video

games. Current Biology, 22: 197­206. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2012.02.012

17. Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2006). The cognitive neuroscience of video games. In P.

Messaris & L. Humphreys (Eds). Digital Media: Transformations in Human

Communication. New York: Peter Lang. Retrieved from

http://vision.psych.umn.edu/users/csgreen/Publications/publications.html

18. Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Action video game modifies visual selective attention.

Letters to Nature, 423, 534­537. Retrieved from

www.dtso.org/jclub/20030825/Green_03.pdf

19. Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston, MA:

Beacon Press.

20. Ito, M. (2009). Engineering play: A cultural history of children’s software. Cambridge, MA:

The MIT Press.

21. Kalat, J. (2013). Biological Psychology (11th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage

Learning.

22. Levitt, S. & Dubner, S. (2009). Superfreakonomics: Global cooling, patriotic prostitutes,

and why suicide bombers should buy life insurance. New York, NY: HarperCollins

Publishers.

14

23. Linden, D. (2011). The compass of pleasure: How our brains make fatty foods, orgasm,

exercise, marijuana, generosity, vodka, learning, and gambling feel so good. New York,

NY: the Penguin Group.

24. Luterbach, K., & Brown, C. (2011). Education for the 21st Century. International Journal

Of Applied Educational Studies, 10(2), 14­32.

25. Mayas, J., Parmentier, F., Andres, P., & Ballesteros, S. (2014). Plasticity of attentional

functions in older adults after non­action video game training: A randomized controlled

trial. PLoS ONE 9(3): e92269. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0092269

26. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can

change the world. New York, NY: The Penguin Group.

27. Millstone, J. (2012) Teacher attitudes about digital games in the classroom. The Joan

Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop in collaboration with BrainPOP, 1­2.

Retrieved from

http://www.brainpop.com/educators/community/wp­content/uploads/2013/10/jgcc_teach

er_survey.pdf

28. Moth, D. (2012). Gabe zichermann: Gamification isn’t about offering “free stuff,” it’s

about status.

https://econsultancy.com/blog/9720­gabe­zichermann­gamification­isn­t­about­offering­fr

ee­stuff­it­s­about­status#i.kq6q8519h0cu31

29. Oei, A., & Patterson, M. (2013). Enhancing cognition with video games: A multiple game

training study. PLoS ONE 8(3): e58546. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0058546

30. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game­based learning. New York: McGraw Hill.

31. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals.

Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

15

32. Tran, C., Chen, J., Warschauer, M., Conley, A., & Dede, C. (2012) Applying motivation

theories to the design of educational technology. Proceedings. GLS 8.0 games +

learning + society conference. 291­297.

http://www.brainpop.com/new_common_images/files/14/142916_GLS8.0­proceedings­2

012dl.pdf

33. Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game­based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are

restless. Educause. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0620.pdf

34. Wardrip­Fruin, N. (2009). Expressive processing: Digital fictions, computer games, &

software. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

35. Whitton, N. (2012). The Place of Game­Based Learning in an Age of Austerity. Electronic

Journal Of E­Learning,10(2), 249­256.

http://www.brainpop.com/new_common_images/files/14/142916_GLS8.0­proceedings­2

012dl.pdf

36. Winner, M. (2014) Teach math with the wii: Engaging your K­7 students through gaming

technology. Webinar presented by edweb.net. Retrieved from

http://www.instantpresenter.com/WebConference/RecordingDefault.aspx?c_psrid=EA59

D986844C.

16