Slide #

1. Opening

Narrative
The purpose of this online slidecast is to share the results of an analytic review of the literature related to gaming and learning written by Katherine Halas Moulton. This slidecast begins with a definition of the importance of studying gaming and learning. Game based learning is the multi-faceted integration of the educational content of computer games into the classroom (9). This allows motivated learners to construct and apply knowledge, and solve real-life problems. Gaming has only been introduced relatively recently to the classroom as a tool for learning and assessment. However, Delwiche has called this tool the learning environment of the future because of its power to motivate and engage students (4). It also serves the purpose of teaching difficult skills like critical thinking (1, 4), problems solving (1, 9), practicing, experimenting (1) and persisting (10). Also earlier studies have also shown that gaming can enhance visual attention, visual literacy and reaction time. This study analyzed ten scholarly articles from seven peer-reviewed educational technology journals off of a selected list.

2. Definition

3. Methods 4. My methods Map

This analysis only included sources whose titles contained clear references to gaming and learning. For instance, studies referring to educational tasks such as addition, subtraction and persistence were included. To figure as part of the analysis, the journal sources had to include research participants. This means that meta-analysis and book reviews were excluded. The studies selected ranged from 2005 to 2013. 5. Studies The studies had a wide range contexts, software, foci and methods. Most of the studies were qualitative (1, 2, 3,4 ,5 ,6, 7) methods Map while three were quantitative (8, 9, 10). Two groups of researchers designed their own games while the rest use commercial off-the-shelf software. The studies were implemented in six different subject areas as well as one study that looked at two courses at the undergraduate level. Several researchers were interested in context for learning (1, 3, 5, 6, 8), others in knowledge acquisition (2, 3, 6, 8, 9), cooperative learning (3, 6, 7), or motivation (2, 6, 9). They also used a range of methods including surveys (2, 3 6, 10), interviews (1, 3, 4), collection of documents (4, 5, 7), observations (1, 3, 5, 6 ,8) field notes (5, 7), focus-groups (1), and testing (3, 6, 8, 9, 10) 6. Findings The main findings in the studies were about collaboration, motivation, and achievement through gaming as well as the lack of appropriate software for the classroom. 7. Collaboration The three studies that considered specifically whether collaborative learning games contributed to academic success proved their hypotheses. 8. Collaboration One study found that the collaborative class did significantly better than the other groups who were working independently Map or competitively with the low-achievers making the greatest gains (3). Significantly, 87.5% of participants said it was easier to work collaboratively and all students responded that they benefited from discussions with classmates. Two other studies also showed that collaborative groups were the most successful and the most motivated. One studies show that collaborative games specifically improve achievement over individualistic or competitive class structures. 9. Motivation In the studies that looked specifically at engagement and motivation most found high levels of these with two exceptions (2, 4, 5, 6).

10. Motivation Map

Of the studies that found improvements in motivation through gaming, one showed that connecting classroom content to students prior experiences in video games enhanced engagement for normally disengaged students (1). Other studies characterize the gaming classroom as a place where students were highly motivated, learning, and engaged with the material in an atmosphere of playful intellectual freedom. (4). Another study characterized it in a similar way calling it a positive, messy classroom culture where the students were collaboratively, enthusiastically and actively involved in problem solving (3). One of the studies that considered motivation found lower than expected levels of engagement. This was perhaps caused by time limitations and lack of experience with this game which frustrated students as they were not able to learn the navigation or accomplish the quests in the time allotted. This lack of ability to play the game lead to frustration. It was speculated that there was not really enough time in the project to apply the abstract math concepts to the game though they did improve in general learning skills (9).

11. Achievement 12. Achievement map

Most of the studies found that the students not only enjoyed themselves but they were learning too (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9). Participants reported that they felt learning had occurred and others proved it in testing or in the quality of their assignments. Some rare students did not improve and authors speculate that perhaps this type of learning does not work for those students. Not all researchers found an academic improvement. One group did not show a statistically significant difference between the computer and paper groups in the math testing though the computer group had much higher motivation, better mastery of general learning outcomes, and showed use of metacognitive strategies during the think-aloud (8, 9). The group who used the computers cooperatively was the most successful and motivated (8).

13. Lack of Software 14. Lack of Software Map

Even though it was not the expressed purpose of the studies many of them expressed the same finding: that there is a dearth of appropriate quality gaming software available for the classroom. The challenge of putting the right game in teachers' hands is multifaceted: first of all there is limited funding in schools for games and hardware. Even when these are available it is a challenge to find games that would meet the needs of all specific teachers, curriculums, students, and learning styles (4, 5). The two studies that came from countries where they dont speak English had even more of a challenge finding appropriate software. One researcher ended up creating having grad students create their own software while the group from Singapore struggled with the language (3, 5). But even for those working in English there is a challenge to find exactly the right activity at the right level (9). Other challenges included lack of access to computers, computer hardware limitations, time restraints of the school periods, the amount of time spent orientating participants to the game, and technological glitches. Games need to be easy to use and focused on the educational objective. Several games took a lot of time to learn the navigation and many students were frustrated (3, 4, 7). The time spent creating games to use in the classroom is excessive; and therefore, not practical for most teaching found it hard to compete with students expectations for games which is based on the multi-billion dollar industry standards (4, 5).

15. Discussion

16. Discussion Map

It is a challenge to generalize about the quality of these studies some of the studies were innovative, well-thought out and clearly reported. On the other hand, a few of the studies are quite irrelevant in their scope, lack rigor and even clear research goals. The others fall somewhere in the middle of those extremes where they are reasonably well executed and written. Some of the studies had a clear purpose, design and execution. Three studies had really well controlled variables where the experimental and control groups did identical work with only the one independent variable changing (3, 9, 10). On the other hand some studies lacked a clear purpose or offered very little to the scientific literature about gaming. One study sought only proof of concept and only counted number of hours on the software in their data (7). Another study did not actually prove whether learning had occurred and only asserted that in surveys participants felt that they had learned (2). Some studies used sample sizes that are too small to be generalizable. However, since several studies found that motivation is increased with gaming despite their relatively small sample size the fact that several researchers had similar finding makes it is more generalizable (2, 3, 4, 6) On the other hand a couple of the studies made strong recommendations without providing enough detail to follow the advice (2, 5, 7). Furthermore, the treatment of the results is not always even handed. Some researchers play up the results that fit their hypotheses and try to justify results ideas that don't fit. In two cases where the results did not show that learning was improved in the experimental group over the control group the authors of the study just placed the emphasis in their conclusions on increased motivation or generalized learning outcomes (3, 9) Several of the studies concluded that the lack of time available to do the experiment was not favourable to their results. Some of the software used in the studies required time to learn orientation and navigation. Students were frustrated earning goals were not met in the limited time that they had with the software (4, 7, 8, 9). If the researchers redid the study with more time to fully explore appropriate software the learning gains may have been more remarkable.

17. Conclusion 18.

To conclude, several studies showed that there was an increase in motivation and that students reported enjoying their learning more (2, 3, 5, 6). The consensus of all these ten studies is that gaming does improve learning in the classroom. There are limitations and challenges but essentially each study concludes that gaming lead to improved achievement, motivation, persistence, or engagement. In another study where they did not find that attitudes towards school, learning and math changed significantly they speculate that there was not really enough time in the project to apply the abstract math concepts to the game (9). The implications of these studies is that video games are an effective tool in the classroom; however there needs to be enough time, resources and contextualization to successful implement games as part of a lesson. Moreover, collaborative games can further increase achievement and motivation.

19. Implications

20.

The most crucial finding was the importance of context, goal setting, and design of in-class learning exercises for effective teaching with gaming. The role of the teacher needs to become one of the facilitator to ensure that learning occurs.

Teachers need to react appropriately when learning is not occurring with scaffolding and resources, as well as provide assessment, and establishing clear learning objectives (4). Abrams' study (1) while small also shows that teachers can help students learn new academic information by contextualizing new learning with their knowledge of video games. Moreover, teachers need to be aware and react to ensure that students are learning and not just spending time free roaming in the game (8). They also need to allow time in the schedule to orientate to the game to prevent future frustrations. Also if good collaborative learning is to occur the lesson needs to be structured and contextualized by the teacher (5). Teachers should also use a cooperative structure for their classes. Several studies showed a cooperative game structured can improve learning over a competitive or individualistic one (6, 7) with low-achievers making the greatest gains (3). Whereas games take time to learn how to navigate and play where possible the actual school infrastructure could change to allow for longer blocks of time spent on-task (5). Before any of this can happen time needs to be spent on getting a buy-in from parents and the school (8). Clearly as Abrams (3) puts it, all games are not created equal and the right game needs to be found for the lesson. When good games are used to simulate real situations than learning and motivation are really good. The choice of software needs to be very selective for there are games like the Astra Eagle game used by Ke where the actual learning task can be avoided by a good gamer (2008). One of the implications of this analysis is that funding needs to be available for video game design specifically for education (5). In order to enhance learning and teach the curriculum software needs to be well chosen and designed and available in several languages. 21. Limitations There is a limit to how much these studies can be generalized because of the range of software, contexts, implementation strategies and research purposes. Furthermore, certain studies have less generalizable results because of their limited sample size (1, 8), the use of software that is no longer current (7, 8), or limited conclusions (7). Despite the variety there was consensus on the key issues: that there is need to choose appropriate software for the classroom, the need to contextualize gaming in a lesson, will result in increased motivation and learning if these needs are met. For more information On this literature review Please visit gamingandlearning.weebly.com

22.

23. References 24. 25. 26.