As digital entertainment technology has evolved over the past three decades, the complaint that students spend too much time on video games and not enough time on their studies has become cliché. An adversarial relationship seems to exist between computer-based games, as an entertainment medium, and classroom instruction. Students complain that school assignments are boring, while teachers complain that students neglect their studies and home assignments. As teachers who grew up on video games move into the classroom, however, they question whether these virtual entertainments that so fascinate students might not be employed to foster meaningful learning. I plan to evaluate the potential of computer-based games to foster engagement and improved performance on assessments, particularly of higher-order thinking skills, among secondary school students. To do so, I must find answers to three questions. Do students demonstrate more engagement (on-task behavior) when learning activities are game-based? Might students taught through game-based learning experiences outperform those taught through more traditional instructional methods? What are students’ and teachers’ feelings about, perceptions of, gaming in the classroom, and how might these attitudes affect implementation of game-based learning programs? The future of video-game based instruction depends on understanding what elements of successful commercial off-the-shelf video (COTS) video games contribute to user engagement, what potential video games (both games specifically designed for learning and COTSs) have to foster meaningful curricular learning, and whether attitudes of stakeholders in formal education will prove an aid or impediment to implementation.
Motivation is one of the most important problems any learning program must solve, and the success of video games as “the fastest growing form of human recreation” suggests that their designers have had some success in developing intrinsically motivating activities (Ryan, Rigby, & Przybylski, 2006, p. 347). Ryan et al. (2006) conducted four studies to examine the motivational effects of video games through the lens of self-determination theory (SDT). The first three studies observed subjects playing a selection of video games, noting the relation between player enjoyment and their perceptions of relatedness, self-efficacy, and self-determination fostered by the games. The fourth study surveyed members of a massive multiplayer online (MMO) gaming community to determine their motives for playing and the effects playing had on their short-term feelings of well-being. The first study examined players’ experiences with Super Mario 64, a relatively simple (yet immersive) platform game that, being a relatively linear single player game, emphasizes competence over autonomy and relatedness. Subjects responded, before and after play, to a “Player Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS)” based survey with questions probing players’ feelings about in-game experiences regarding competence, autonomy, presence, intuitiveness of controls, vitality, self-esteem, mood, enjoyment, preference for future play, and continued play behavior (Ryan et al., 2006, p.349). The results of this initial study suggested to researchers that “that gaming motivation and enjoyment can be accounted for by experiences of competence and autonomy while playing” (Ryan et al., 2006, p. 353). The second study chose two more commercial 3-D adventure games and randomly divided members of a group of fifty undergraduates in half, each half to play a different game. One group played the top-rated Zelda: The Ocarina of Time first, while the other played the much lower-rated game A Bug’s Life. Again, Ryan et al. (2006) found that “perceived in-game competence and autonomy accounted for differences in preference for future play, enjoyment and presence” (p. 355). The third study allowed participants to choose from among four game offerings to accommodate and examine the effects of individual preferences. Researchers found strong individual variance in game experience and preference, but found that “satisfaction of autonomy and competence predicted greater enjoyment and sense of presence and increased preference for future play” (Ryan et al., 2006, p. 357). The fourth study, a survey of active MMO gamers, gave researchers a chance to examine relatedness as it applies to online games with multiple human players, along with the factors examined in the previous three studies. Autonomy, competence, and relatedness all stood out as contributors to participants’ satisfaction with the gaming experience and motivation to continue. Knowing what contributes to satisfactory experiences in recreational gaming offers a key to understanding the motivational power of video games. This is particularly important to developers of educational games, which are often trumped by COTS games in competition for student interest.
The value of educational video games depends on two factors: whether they can be designed to interest students, and whether they can be designed to foster higher-order cognitive skills. One powerful measure of cognitive skills (such as application, analysis, evaluation, and creation) is student writing. Warren, Dodlinger, and Barab (2008) investigated the potential of the educational Anytown video game to facilitate the employment of problem-based learning (PBL) methods for writing instruction in order to reduce the amount of teacher time devoted to procedural and administrative (rather than instructional) tasks, increase students’ voluntary writing practice, and increase student achievement on standardized descriptive writing assessments. Participants were a convenience sample of forty-four fourth grade students selected from two fourth grade classrooms in the same Midwestern elementary school. Students in the treatment group completed a reading and language arts unit in a multi-user virtual environment in which they addressed problem-based writing tasks “customized to prompt the practice of descriptive writing, engagement in problem solving, and student reflection upon their own personal experiences” (Warren et al., 2008, p. 124). Students in the comparison classroom completed a previously developed, traditional instruction unit with an experienced teacher “apprised of the standards that would be addressed by the Anytown curriculum and what assessment measures would be used to compare the performance of her students with the performance of those students in the treatment group” (Warren et al., 2008, p. 125). Warren et al. (2008) employed three types of assessment: activity-oriented written assessments completed during instruction, pre-and post-treatment curriculum-based writing prompts, and pre-and post-treatment standards-based writing prompts. Upon completion of the study, Warren et al. (2008) determined that, after the first two days, teachers in the treatment group spent significantly less time answering procedural and administrative (rather than instructional) questions than those in the comparison group. Students in the treatment group completed twenty-six voluntary writing activities, while students in the comparison group did not complete any. (It should be noted that students in the treatment group received in-game rewards for completing voluntary writing tasks, although these writings were not required or included in grading.) Activity-oriented written assessments completed during instruction were not compared because they were not included in instruction for the comparison group. Pre-and post-treatment curriculum-based writing prompts were scored using rubrics tailored for each prompt by teachers trained in their use, and scores showed that the treatment group significantly outperformed the comparison group. Pre-and post-treatment standards-based writing prompts were also scored using standard, norm-based rubrics and also showed significantly better performance in the treatment group. Researchers admit that these findings have limited generalizability and that members of the treatment group may have been subject to the Hawthorne effect (in which subjects’ awareness that they are participants in a study affects their behavior) (Merrett, 2006). Although this learning experience was designed around a virtual environment specifically designed to facilitate curricular learning, many suggest that, just as literature originally designed for entertainment can be used as centerpieces of instruction in traditional English classes, games and simulations designed for entertainment might be just as effective, if not more so, than dedicated educational software.
In an experimental study, Chang and Chen (2009) investigated the potential of COTS video games to facilitate students’ cognitive learning and achievement more effectively than more traditional computer assisted instruction (CAI). The one-hundred and eight participants were third-graders of middle to high socioeconomic status from a single school district in Taiwan. Participants were divided into two groups. The control group received more traditional computer assisted instruction comprising text-based materials while the experimental group received instruction using a commercially available 3-D video game entitled Fire Department 2: Fire Captain. Chang and Chen (2009) selected this game based on its reflection of “design principles derived from Keller’s (1987) attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (ARCS) model of motivation to facilitate children’s learning” (p. 2). This manner of instruction was the only independent variable. Dependent variables were measured using disaggregated data from a three-part post-test including sixteen multiple-choice questions, six matching questions, and an application section that, according to Chang and Chen (2009) “measures a higher-level cognitive task that shows understanding of what is being taught and its use in other circumstances” (p. 3). Researchers began with a null hypothesis that “there are no statistically significant differences in students’ achievement when they receive two different instructional treatments: (1) traditional CAI; and (2) a computer-based video game” (Chang & Chen, 2009, p. 2). After analysis of the assessments, researchers determined that the experimental group’s performance on the multiple-choice section of the test was significantly higher. Students who learned with the game also performed slightly better on the matching test, but the null hypothesis was retained because the difference was not statistically significant. But the experimental group did have significantly higher scores on the application section, demonstrating that COTS game-based instruction can increase performance on an assessment of higher-level cognitive application of learning. One of the great potential advantages of COTS games is that student learning based on these games might spill out of the classroom into students’ recreational time.
In “Designing Centers of Expertise for Academic Learning through Video Games,” Squire, DeVane, and Durga (2008) investigate the potential of COTS video games to facilitate relevant learning outside of the school setting. Specifically, their year-long study examined “whether an open-ended game (Civilization III) can engage children who are normally alienated from school in more advanced academic thinking” (Squire et al., 2008, p. 241). The researchers worked with a group of twelve fifth and sixth graders of lower socio-economic backgrounds to develop a learning community around the game Civilization III, with the goal of helping them “develop fluency in world history and advanced problem-solving skills” (Squire et al., 2008, p. 242). In interviews prior to intervention, students showed a lack of interest and competence in both Windows based software and history. After introducing the game to participants, researchers periodically assessed participants’ learning through pop quizzes testing their ability to name early military units, describe the historical importance of military units, name and explain the significance of ancient technologies, name early civilizations and locate them on a map, and other similar tasks (Squire et al., 2008, p. 243). Students demonstrated the ability to respond to questions that had significance in game performance, but demonstrated less improvement on questions (such as the locations of civilizations on a map) that were less germane to success in the game. Throughout the study, mentors consulted with students regarding strategy and other aspects of the game, including modifying the game as developers. The three students who stayed in the program for the full year dedicated many “leisure” hours to the game, developing beyond game-play expertise to explore game modification and scenario design. They also showed “dramatic increases in school performance, as evidenced by an increase in their grades” (Squire et al., 2008, p. 245). Within the game, they developed familiarity with new historical concepts, and demonstrated the ability to apply this knowledge strategically in complex problem solving tasks. In essence, they increased both content-area knowledge and the higher-order thinking skills required to use it. Students who participated in the program, including those who did not complete the year, expressed positive attitudes toward the game and the belief that the game would improve their performance in school history classes.
Of course, game-based learning only has the potential to increase academic performance if all stakeholders in education are willing and able to implement it. Sara de Freitas (2006) investigates the potential and perceptions of gaming to learn in “Using Games and Simulations for Supporting Learning.” The qualitative study relied on interviews, surveys, and workshop activities to collect data regarding participants’ “beliefs and perceptions about the use of games and simulations in educational and training contexts” (de Frietas, 2006, p. 347). Study participants included tutors of information communication technology (ICT), adult learners studying ICT and Advanced Level physics, and experts on a variety of related subjects including education, e-learning, and game development. Thirty-one tutors and learners were surveyed about their use and perceptions of computer-based games and simulations for learning, while field experts were polled and interviewed. Tutors and learners responding to the survey overwhelmingly (93%) reported enjoyment of learning with simulations and games, felt this method increased understanding of complex concepts (85%), reported increased confidence (73%), and believed that their attention improved (78%). Interviews with experts suggested that some believed that the distinction between games and simulations was becoming less significant, and de Frietas suggests that this distinction will become even less meaningful as games, particularly those geared toward learning, become more representative of external reality. Regardless of this semantic argument, de Frietas (2006) found that “The majority of those experts interviewed thought that simulations and games significantly improved learner motivation” (p. 350). In this study, at least, stakeholder attitudes toward the use of this technology to support learning were very positive.
Each of these studies informs the question of the potential of computer-based games to foster engagement and improved performance on assessments, particularly of higher-order thinking skills, among students. At the same time, there is much left to address. Ryan et al. (2006) provide important insight into the qualities that engage players in successful COTS video games. This information is potentially useful to the developers of education games, but, although the study is only four years old, the game software researchers used is already distinctly dated. Current COTS video games are routinely much more complex, providing users, to a much greater degree, the very qualities this study found to be appealing to gamers, along with many qualities educators might find interesting. Warren et al.’s (2008) investigation of the potential of the educational Anytown video game to facilitate the employment of problem-based learning (PBL) methods shed some light on how game environments can support teachers, motivate students to engage in traditional academic tasks (like writing), and increase students’ achievement on writing assessments. Still, the circumstances of this study might be hard to replicate and conclusions probably cannot be generalized to schooling nationwide. Moreover, it is unclear whether the treatment group students’ voluntary writing was the result of intrinsic motivation brought about by the multi-user virtual environment, or extrinsic motivation based on in-game rewards for completing writing tasks. The Chang and Chen (2009) study on the potential of COTS video games to facilitate students’ cognitive learning and achievement was very interesting, both for its relevance to my topic, focusing on higher-level cognition, and for its use of COTS software rather than targeted educational software. Although the results were promising, it may be unrealistic to generalize the results of a study conducted with Taiwanese third-graders to secondary students in the United States. Squire et al.’s 2008 investigation of the potential of COTS video games to facilitate relevant learning outside of the school setting is probably the most interesting of these studies. The sixth-graders who participated in the study are somewhat closer to the age range of this focus, and the rationale underlying their choice to use the COTS game Civilization III reflects my own observations leading to my initial interest in this topic. Still, the study does not objectively compare the performance of students who received game-based intervention with peers receiving more traditional interventions, leaving some question of whether students’ gains might have been replicated without the use of gaming software. Finally, Sara de Freitas’s 2006 investigation of various stakeholders’ attitudes toward gaming to learn offers some hope that the use of video games in formal education may receive a warmer reception than it may have years ago. Still, the population used for the study does not represent the common secondary school students, teachers, parents, and administrators that interest me, leaving the question of whether political, as well as material, impediments may scuttle our best-laid plans to implement game-based instruction in public schools, even if research wholly vindicates the practice.
These studies, and many others, indicate a burgeoning interest in the potential of video-game based learning. At the same time, they vividly illustrate the need for further investigation. Several of the questions that have been troubling have been addressed. There does seem to be evidence that video game-based learning experiences do increase student engagement, at least in the short term. Still, my investigation should attempt to determine whether this effect is the result of the game or of intervention in general (a Hawthorne or novelty effect). I was concerned about what software I could use in video-game based instruction that would address curricular needs. Civilization III, its sequels, and other games in the geopolitics and history-based strategy genre provide an excellent starting point, although the potential of other game genres is certainly worth investigating. I can easily see collaborating with colleagues to design an A.P. World History unit or course to incorporate such a game. This would help to solve the problem of finding measurement tools to assess students’ ability to apply understandings developed through game interaction to higher-order thinking tasks, as both the objective and rubric-scored essay portions of the A.P. exam for that subject provide an excellent model. I still believe that this problem lends itself to a quantitative design. Questions can be divided into quasi-experimental and non-experimental categories, with some questions approachable in both ways. Because true experimental groups cannot be easily assigned in the school setting intended for this study, the following questions can be addressed using a quasi-experimental design:
A. Do students demonstrate more engagement (on-task behavior) when learning activities are game-based? (Difference Question: This is an observable behavior that can be monitored and documented during game-based and more traditional lessons.)
B. Do students taught through game-based learning experiences outperform those taught through more traditional instructional methods? (Difference Question: Assessments of experimental and control groups’ performances can be compared .)
These questions can be answered through surveys:
1. What are students’ feelings about, perceptions of, gaming in the classroom? (Descriptive Research Question)
2. What are teachers’ feelings about, perceptions of and anticipated problems with implementing gaming in the classroom? (Descriptive Research Question)
Regardless of how I address these questions, it is clear that this area of research, based in ever evolving technology, will require ongoing study for the foreseeable future.
References
Chuang, T., & Chen, W. (2009). Effect of Computer-Based Video Games on Children: An Experimental Study. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 1-10. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ERIC database.
de Freitas, S. (2006). Using Games and Simulations for Supporting Learning. Learning, Media & Technology, 31(4), 343-358. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Merrett, F. (2006). Reflections on the Hawthorne Effect. Educational Psychology, 26(1), 143-146. doi:10.1080/01443410500341080.
Ryan, R., Rigby, C., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The Motivational Pull of Video Games: A Self-Determination Theory Approach. Motivation & Emotion, 30(4), 344-360. doi:10.1007/s11031-006-9051-8.
Squire, K., DeVane, B., & Durga, S. (2008). Designing Centers of Expertise for Academic Learning through Video Games. Theory Into Practice, 47(3), 240-251. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Warren, S., Dondlinger, M., & Barab, S. (2008). A MUVE towards PBL Writing: Effects of a Digital Learning Environment Designed to Improve Elementary Student Writing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(1), 113-140. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from ERIC database.
Posts
