8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
1/29
The impact of educational gaming on student engagement
by
Amy Barrieau
230 Barrieau St
Miramichi NB
E1N 4V1
MUN Student ID#200975332
In fulfilment of the requirements for ED6590
Professor Robert Kelly
April 2nd, 2012
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
2/29
Abstract
The active learners of todaysNet Generation seek engaging experiences through digitalgaming. This paper reviews research literature that examines the impacts ofcomputer-based
educational gaming on student engagement in K-12 learning. Popular commercial games can
inform educational game design, when attempting to enhance learner engagement. Certain design
elements that engage students also provide exploratory, scaffolded and collaborative learningopportunities. These games in turn fulfill constructive and 21st Century learning requirements that
prepare students for the modern workforce. This review suggests that educational gaming merits
attention as a potentially powerful medium for engaging students in 21st Century learning. Digitalgames were found to incite engagement in learning through elements of interactivity, risk,
feedback, narrative, context, flow, scaffolding, competition and collaboration. Drawbacks
regarding engagement in educational gaming include opposing philosophies for instructionaldesign and the somewhat difficult transfer from commercial to educational gaming.
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
3/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 3
Table of Contents
Introduction..........................................................................................................................................4
Purpose, Audience and Organization.............................................................................................5
Shift in Pedagogy..................................................................................................................................6
The Role of the Teacher......................................................................................................................8
Game Design: Engagement as a Precursor to 21st Century Learning...............................................10
Entertaining Game Design Informing Educational Gaming. ..................................................10
Interactivity....12
Risk and Feedback.........13 The Impact of the Narrative.....14
Personal Relevancy and Context....16
Games and Flow....16
Scaffolding.17
Competition. ..18
Socialization and Collaboration.. ..19
The 21st Century Learner as an Active Participant.....................................20
Constructivism, PBL and Accommodating All Learners...21
Other Challenges. ...22
Conclusion......22
References.. 24
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
4/29
Introduction
Young people today are enamoured by the engaging experience afforded by commercial
video games. TheNet Generation is digitally literate, prefers to learn by doing, and has been
raised in the presence of computers and computer games (Oblinger, 2004). They are also willing
to dedicate many hours of their free-time to gaming. The Entertainment Software Association of
Canada (ESAC, 2011) reported that 96% of Canadian households own a computer, while 47% of
households own a video game console. Commercial games are very powerful in engaging young
players, and are thus attractive to educators who seek similar engagement in learning for their
students.
Paulus, Horvitz and Shi (2006) described engagement as a key component of learning
environments, made evident through a students emotional reaction to, and perceived credibility of
content, as well as their level of reflection and application of learning. Similarly, Lim, Nonis and
Hedberg (2006) characterised engagement as a kind of mindfulness, intrinsic motivation, cognitive
effort and focused attention. According to Annetta, Lamb, Bowling and Cheng (2011),
engagement occurred when students were motivated to participate because they felt a sense of
belonging and connectedness to the activity. Engagement was also described as an important
prerequisite to learning. Herrington, Oliver and Reeves (2003) also found that learner engagement
was important to academic success.
In definition, Oblinger (2004) likened educational gaming to a virtual interface that
integrates learning into self-directed game play. Educational games are digital platforms involving
components and tasks that serve a dual purpose, to be both engaging and genuinely educational
(Carr & Blanchfield, 2011). Games like Second Life, Quest Atlantis, VR Engage, Astroversity
and Dr. Fiction present a virtual or augmented reality environment by using intricate visuals, audio
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
5/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 5
and point of view to immerse the player in an educational gaming scenario (Cavanaugh, 2009).
Harnessing gaming as a medium for engaged student learning is a worthy consideration for
educators who struggle firsthand with the increasingly shortened attention span of learners today
(Annetta et al., 2011). However, the integration of digital game-play into education meets with
challenges and considerations. One challenge includes assessing the efficacy of games designed
for education (Leonard, Minogue, Holmes & Cheng, 2009). Certain effective elements and design
strategies must be present in educational games. Otherwise, authentic engagement will not occur
(Dickey, 2005). Teachers, as both designers and software assessors, may benefit from learning
about such elements of successful game play. They may then be better equipped to help create and
facilitate student engagement in both the game and the intended learning within. This is important
since, as Carr and Blanchfield (2011) found, the right computer game has the ability to capture the
attention of students, even those considered the most difficult to engage.
Purpose, Audience and Organization
The purpose of this paper is to present an analysis of the theme of student engagement in
computer-based educational gaming. In doing so, this paper will attempt to answer the following
question: What are the impacts ofcomputer-based educational gaming on student engagement
in K-12 learning? The intended audience includes teachers, administrators, district personnel and
also parents who are curious about the impact of computer-based gaming on student engagement.
Included are reported findings and an analysis of relevant engagement and gaming theory, the role
of the teacher, elements of game design for both entertainment and educational engagement, and
challenges.
Shift in Pedagogy
Computers in education offer students the opportunity for enhanced and meaningful,
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
6/29
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
7/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 7
content material, was pleasurable and didnt feel like working. Hoffman and Nadelson (2010)
reported that engagement in video gaming replicated the enjoyment of childhood play through
active involvement, the quick forgiveness of failure and the expectation of mistakes. Mallan, Foth,
Greenaway and Young (2011) found that a students investment in the non-serious and playful
aspects of an educational game, like modifying their avatars or making them move, positively
affected their engagement in the game as a whole. The concept of digital play in education is one
that holds significance, especially for engaging todays learners.
Despite these findings, shifting pedagogy by embracing digital gaming in education can be
challenging, especially with regard to buy-in from parents and other school faculty. Lim, Nonis
and Hedberg (2006) found that stakeholder buy-in was one of the core challenges and tensions of
implementing virtual gaming in a science classroom. They found that stakeholders were
uncomfortable with the mode of assessment for game-play since it differed from the traditional
drill-and-practice, pen-and-paper examination process. Also, concerns exist about how exactly to
assess student learning in gaming and whether standardized testing accurately measures the
learning experienced through immersive digital environments (Annetta et al, 2009b). Another
obstacle includes general philosophical opposition to the use of games for learning (Cavanaugh,
2009). Not everyone is comfortable with digital game play as a medium for education since it is
conventionally an activity of escapism. Engaging students through game play also sees a dramatic
and potentially daunting shift in the role of the teacher, who is tasked with embracing, training for
and implementing this new student-centered approach to learning.
The Role of the Teacher
A knowledgeable and skilful teacher can make a significant difference in student
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
8/29
engagement and performance. Sanders and Rivers (1996) reported that the influence of the teacher
is the single most important factor in determining student achievement. Teachers today struggle
with a shifting paradigm that urges them to give up certain long-standing lesson formats and
previous best practice (McNabb et al, 1999). A call for more active, learner-centric education sees
the role of teachers evolve from Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side (O Shea, Allen,
Onderdonk & Allen, 2011). The teacher is tasked with engaging students of the current generation
who are accustomed to having instant access and feedback at the click of a button, and who also
have shorter attention spans (Annetta et al., 2011). Engaging theNet Generation in learning means
that educators need to find out about the preferred electronic media of their students and how it
motivates them in the classroom (Zemsky & Massey, 2004). Gaming is popular and preferred
media for todays students. Adopting digital game-play in the classroom requires teachers to
support and encourage students, especially in the beginning when activities can be unfamiliar and
challenging (Herrington et al., 2003). Teachers are also required to coach, monitor and verify
student achievements on an ongoing basis (McNabb et al., 1999). In order to participate in this
process, it would be beneficial for teachers to understand the language of games. According to
Carr and Blanchfield (2011), if games are to realize their full potential as a medium for learning
as well as engagement we, as educators, must seek to understand the language of games in order to
best utilize them for educational means (p. 653).
In the aforementioned study, teachers were available virtually as a playing piece to offer
interaction and advice to student players. This way, teachers were able to better understand, gain
perspective and offer continued support to students by playing and enjoying games firsthand
themselves. The researchers also advocated for a partnership between educators and game
designers so that factors of education and factors of engaging game play are represented in the
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
9/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 9
game. Without the help of game designers, academic games may lack familiar and important game
play elements that young gamers come to expect. Annetta et al. (2009b) also endorsed the
partnership between teachers and game designers but insisted that, in the end, the ultimate
responsibility for design should lie with the teacher. The teacher would thus be responsible for
marrying the best game techniques with proven learning techniques. In a study that involved a
fifth grade teacher who created, developed and facilitated a science game, engagement in the
lesson was found to increase (Annetta et al., 2009b). The studys findings also showed a
significant gain in achievement from pre-test to post-test. In opposition, Dickey (2005) found that
game designers were the best creators of educational games since they were well versed in creating
scenarios and events that would engage learners and invoke skills like critical thinking, analysis
and synthesis. Whether designing or choosing gaming software, teachers are heavily implicated in
the implementation of digital game play. As Dickey (2005) mentions, The teacher acts both as a
facilitator in creating the tasks and environment, and as the guide and co investigator to helping
scaffold student learning (p.70).
In addition to being conscious of aspects of design, teachers are responsible for deciding if
games should be used for quick demonstrations of concepts, for homework, or more ambitiously,
for a central learning activity over a longer period of time (Oblinger, 2004). Teachers must help
ensure that students are well supported and they must make certain that engaged game play, goals,
and concepts covered in the unit are well aligned with curricular expectations (Annetta et al,
2009b). Teachers who understand the impact of gaming on student engagement also need the
appropriate tools, software and backing of school administration.
Game Design: Engagement as Precursor to 21st Century Learning
The impact of game design on student engagement in digital gaming is significant.
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
10/29
Themes regarding game design found in the literature include interactivity, feedback, flow, risk
and competition. It is important that educational gaming borrows and integrates some methods of
design from popular, commercial games that will result in engagement for players (Dickey, 2003).
This includes sophisticated virtual environments so that educational games may be seen as credible
to avid young gamers (Virvou & Katsionis, 2008). From the perspective of 21st Century learning,
game design must also allow for a constructivist approach to engaging learners (Dickey, 2005).
Such elements, as also gleaned from the literature, include scaffolding, active participation,
problem based learning, collaboration, authenticity and meeting the needs of diverse learners. The
aforementioned themes and game design elements will be discussed in the sections to follow.
Entertaining Game Design Informing Educational Gaming
The popularity of commercial games with young people cannot be ignored, especially by
those attempting to integrate gaming into the classroom. There is however a tendency for some
educational games to focus solely on education while neglecting the engaging elements of game
play (Carr & Blanchfield, 2011). Bruckman (1993) likened such edutainment games to a
chocolate coating on a broccoli-like educational core. Papert (1998) argued that edutainment,
where gaming is the reward for academic applications in the game, represents the worst aspects of
both gaming and education. Taking these failures into account, it is important that educational
games consider certain elements of game design to achieve student engagement and buy in. Lim et
al. (2006) found that activities in an online educational gaming quest needed to be more interactive
and move beyond text and graphics to more multimodal interfaces, where a complete virtual world
with few discontinuities was available to engage students. Educational games have to provide
highly developed virtual reality settings to compete with the commercial games to which students
are accustomed (Virvou & Katsionis, 2006).
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
11/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 11
Dickey (2003) found that research into educational gaming had often ignored the design
methods of popular games that lead to player engagement and how these methods might be
integrated into educational game play. Dickey also identified certain interactive, aesthetic game
play mechanisms that lead to heightened engagement, including setting, characters, hooks and
feedback. Other engaging elements of digital game play include authenticity, inquiry,
collaboration and technology (Blumenfeld, Kempler & Krajcik, 2006) as well as challenge,
curiosity and control (Malone & Lepper, 1987). Transferring these elements into the realm of
educational game play is significant since, as Carr and Blanchfield (2011) found, the novelty factor
associated with computer games was also responsible for increased interest and engagement from
students. As described by Wheatley (1999), music, magic and fun improve the dynamism and
excitement of education. The fun features of design may play an important role in engaging
students in educational gaming.
Nevertheless there is research that contradicts the use of novelty factors in educational
games. Virvou et al., (2006) revealed that distractions in the 3D virtual gaming environment
hindered some students from attaining the educational goals of the game. Some students were so
taken with the interactive, immersive environment that they even forgot what their ultimate goal
was. This study also found that usability of sophisticated educational games was difficult for non-
expert game-playing students. Some student gamers reported less engagement because the
educational game lacked violence; a common characteristic of commercial games that would be
unacceptable in a school setting.
Hoffman and Nadelson (2010) found that although students were motivated and engaged in
commercial gaming, it was for reasons of escapism, fun, connectivity, stress relief and
contentment. They thus concluded that such engagement would be difficult to authentically
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
12/29
transfer to a classroom context. Despite this, Carr and Blanchfield (2011) suggested that designers
attempt to integrate the play elements of commercial games into educational games, so that the fun
elements of these games help engage students in learning.
Interactivity
Carr and Blanchfield (2011) found that when middle school students played an educational
game with commercial design elements, they remained engaged during both the educational and
game-play portions of game. The interactive experience allotted by virtual worlds, including the
aesthetic design and movement control of personal avatars, can be capitalized on for learning
(Mallan et al. 2010). Interactive features that stir initial learner engagement include the ability to
navigate space, interact with other players, objects and places and to manipulate the course of
events (Johnson & Levine, 2008). Lim et al. (2006) found that hooking initial student interest
with interactivity served as extrinsic motivation and was an indication as to whether a student
would progress onto higher levels of engagement. Hooks that allow choice and control are
central to interactive game design and allow for a personalized experience (Dickey, 2005).
Interactivity that permits a player to control their environment engages them by making them
active participants, rather than passive observers (Lim et al., 2006). This study found that students
felt empowered by being able to control multiple features and make choices. Despite these
encouraging findings, they also found that some students were distracted by the freedom and
interactivity available in the game and they lost focus on the learning task at hand. Therefore,
achieving the correct balance of interactivity in educational game design is important to ensure that
students are engaged in play and not overwhelmed by the experience.
Risk and Feedback
Interactivity in gaming allows the player to make choices that involve varying levels of
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
13/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 13
risk. Cavanaugh (2009) found that virtual risk taking was a prime motivator and source of
engagement in educational gaming. Some of the appeal of gaming includes the ability to strive for
a goal and take risks, with few negative consequences associated with such risk-taking (Provenzo,
1991). Annetta et al. (2011) found that the engagement level of students fluctuated based on the
feedback responses experienced within the game. Games that could adapt to player ability by
intuitively assessing the risk and choices that players make were most engaging since there was
little fear of failure or consequences for error (Cavanaugh, 2009). Immediate and unambiguous
feedback also helped students feel engaged and become comfortable with risk-taking and making
choices in the game (Dickey, 2005). Feedback to students was received instantly through quick
visual and aural cues. Such immediacy fulfills theNet Generations need for instant feedback
(Oblinger, 2005). According to Dickey (2005), ideal feedback is based on learner choices and also
quickly advances the storyline of the game.
Gaming can provide a forum for risk-taking where students are uninhibited by fears of
failure and negative consequence. This may also allow students who are traditionally passive in
the classroom, to fully engage, participate and make decisions in their own learning. The choices
and risks that students take in a game may also allow them to control aspects of the narrative, again
contributing to their level of involvement and engagement in the game.
The Impact of the Narrative
Interactivity, coupled with effective storytelling in game play, is important in engaging
students in learning. Human beings are naturally inclined to engagement in narrative worlds as a
means of surrogate experience and learning (Tooby & Cosmides, 2001). Clark and Ernst (2009)
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
14/29
named storytelling as one of the major competencies of game art and design. Intriguing story lines
are influential factors in continued game play for students (Hoffman & Nadelson, 2010). Oblinger
(2004) found that students who use the game find that difficult tasks can be engaging, intriguing -
and amusing - when incorporated into a story and a meaningful context (p. 9). Game designers
should understand storytelling techniques and create scenes and worlds that are credible,
controllable and allow the player choice (Clark & Ernest, 2009).
Stories in educational gaming were found to promote student engagement by appealing to
feelings and emotions and by rousing empathetic reactions and personal understanding (Annetta et
al., 2009b). Paulus et al. (2006) found that emotional reactions to characters prompted an initial
engagement for students who were empathetic to the characters situation. Developed scenes and
characters gave context and credibility to the scenarios and consequently encouraged student
engagement. Scenarios that were underdeveloped or unrealistic left students demotivated and
disengaged. Students were engaged in learning when scenarios prompted personal reflection and
awareness. When students were granted the opportunity to apply the learning by relating the
scenario to their personal lives, students were also more engaged.
Storytelling in digital game play upholds credibility by intersecting and weaving in and out
of the actuality of everyday life (Martin & Chatfield, 2006). Engagement in the story of the game
is enhanced through a variety of media, like text, pages, and dialogue that support the integrity of
the story (Whitton, 2011). Herrington et al. (2003) found that learners must be willing to submit
themselves to a suspension of disbelief in the story before engagement could occur. They also
noted an initial delay learners experienced before committing themselves to the disbelief presented
in the stories of the game. One participant likened the delay of engagement in simulated learning to
a theatre-going experience, where if the actors dont win you over then you dont enjoy it, and
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
15/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 15
you dont mentally participate. (p.6). The proper application of narrative in educational gaming
may positively affect a students level of engagement.
Gaming also provides a space for students to participate in the production of the narrative
(Mallan et al., 2010). Engagement is increased when players can affect characters in the story
through interactions, choices and control (Hall, Woods, Aylett, Newall & Paiva, 2005). Carr and
Blanchfield (2011) discovered similar finding about role playing games (RPG): An RPG
featuring interactive branching storylines and character interaction where the player has real
influence to affect the storys characters could be a powerful learning environment as well as an
engaging game experience (p. 643). Narrative is most engaging when players have the ability to
advance and help construct the story of the game.
Despite a strong backing for the impact of narrative on engagement in gaming, there are
some opponents to storytelling in games. Dickey (2005) found that because narrative is a
historically linear structure, there are limits on how it can be constructed and influenced by players
in the non-linear realm of the game. The linear narrative is seriously altered by the fact that
players make choices that can affect the storyline (Pedersen, 2003). Rouse (2001) implicated game
designers by stressing the importance of story branching so that storylines and character outcomes
may vary based on the unique decisions of the player. Educational game designers who consider
these concessions may better ensure engagement in the gaming narrative.
Personal Relevancy and Context
Stories in gaming have the ability to offer context to learning (Oblinger, 2004). When
gaming has elements of personal relevance and context, engagement is increased. Students, who
were found to feel connected and personally interested in a virtual space, were more apt to
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
16/29
experience engagement (Skinner, 2009; Glahn et al., 2009). Feelings of connectedness leading to
engagement were synonymous with feelings of empathy, credibility and worth for the tasks put
forth (Paulus et al., 2006). Similarly, Skinner (2009) also came to this conclusion, finding that a
lack of connectedness on the part of the student equated to poor engagement. Paulus et al. (2006)
also found that personally relatable aspects of contextualized online learning, as well as
opportunities for personal reflection regarding virtual scenarios, positively impacted student
engagement. Opportunities for personal connection to the game may help student reach a state
where they show engagement in learning.
Games and Flow
Csikszentmihalyi (1990) characterized flow state as intense concentration and
excitement. Players experiencing flow find themselves in a heightened state of personal interest
where they become contently absorbed in an activity (Konradt & Sulz, 2001). During the flow
state, outside distracters are not a factor, students feel a sense of connectedness and control and
they also demonstrate high performance (Annetta et al., 2011). Therefore, attaining flow is a
valuable goal for educational gaming, not to mention the benefits of acquiring massive amounts of
time on task. Bowman (1982) asserts that although commercial games as simple as Pac-Man can
incur a flow state, educational games with clear tasks and scaffolded challenges may also induce
this phenomenon in students. In using flow theory to assess student engagement in a science
game, Shernoff, Csikszentmihalyi, Schneider and Shernoff (2003) found that students experienced
more engagement when the challenges were well-adjusted to the highest level of their individual
skill. Using Csikszentmihalyis (1990) eight characteristics for flow state, in an educational game
design context, is crucial when seeking flow engagement for students. These characteristics
include anticipation of success, requiring concentration, clear goals, immediate feedback,
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
17/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 17
interactivity, a sense of control, suspending disbelief and a feeling of timelessness. According to
Hoffman and Nadelson (2010), students experienced flow when they reported a heightened sense
of awareness, a degree of separation from the real world and a loss of a sense of time while playing
educational games. Instances of flow derived from educational gaming can allow the
opportunity for students to intensely engage with academic material.
Scaffolding
As mentioned, obtaining a flow state of engagement requires scaffolded challenges that
appropriately confront the highest limits of an individuals skill. Whitton (2011) found that
gaming embodied this learning practice when tasks in the game increased from easy to hard.
Game play for learning is optimal when a task is positioned slightly above a learners existing skill
and students should only be challenged with more complex material, after they have experienced
an initial engagement in the game (Annetta et al., 2011). Gaming that assesses and adjusts to a
students specific skill set can help them more thoroughly engage.
Another purpose of scaffolding is to adequately support players in solving the problem set
forth by the game. Scaffolds can take the form of multi-player information sharing and the ability
to consult experts, electronic tutors and tool options within the game (Brush & Saye, 2002). These
scaffolds direct student attention to key variables that enhance knowledge, skill and cause them to
question and reflect (Land, 2000). Such comprehensive support may help facilitate a healthy
comfort level for students and affect successive engagement and learning.
Scaffolding in educational gaming may favour the teacher as game designer since teachers
may carefully construct these complex learning experiences, according to specific learner needs
(Mallan et al.; 2010, Lim et al., 2006). Teachers, whether designers or facilitators, may better
understand how scaffolding smoothens the learning process by helping students avoid the
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
18/29
cognition overload that can lead to disengagement.
Competition
Another distinguishing feature of flow state is the tendency for students to compare and
compete with their peers to show their progress in the game (Barab, Thomas, Dodge, Carteaux &
Tuzun, 2005). Competition prompts students to learn and excel (Yu, 2000). Students desire to
compete as it is innate to human nature and education already indirectly endorses competition with
its grading systems and assessments (Trespalacios, Chamberlin & Gallagher, 2011). Elements of
competition in game design may help affect educational engagement.
Digital gaming has the ability to embrace the competitive nature of the human psyche and
draw the learner to the intended outcomes (Annetta et al., 2009a, p. 1094). Annetta et al. also
found that problem-based gaming involving competition, invoked higher levels of student
engagement. Students want to compete, as one player articulated: I like multiplayer best because
you can compete against your friends and have fun with them, rather than competing against a
computer that doesnt have fun with you (Trespalacios et al., 2011, p. 53). Again, fun and
learning find themselves working together- in this case, under the theme of competition.
Multiplayer games allow for constructive competition where students can compete, but also
solve problems together (Attle & Baker, 2007). Such learning, in the right context, can be viewed
as a variant of cooperative learning (Trespalacios et al., 2011). Competition engages students in
hard work as they attempt to gain status through peer acknowledgement (Oblinger, 2004). Student
achievement is also positively affected by competition (Hoffman & Nadelson, 2010). Jayakanthan
(2002) found that multi-player games exhibited improved participation, motivation and
achievement due in part to the competitive aspects of the game.
The use of competition in education can sometimes prove contentious. Using competition
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
19/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 19
and play in school has been opposed by some (Annetta et al., 2009a). Some experts claim it can
leave learners with a skewed self worth and unreal competency beliefs (Kohn, 1987). Students
may become more affixed on scores than actual learning in the game, creating anxiety and stress
(Pope, 2003). A game designer attempting to engage players may consider all of these findings
when implementing competition into educational games.
Socialization and Collaboration
Games can be highly social. Commercial gaming has created an intricate online
community of collaboration that involves teaming, competition, discussion boards and sharing
(Oblinger, 2004). Many educational games are now designed so that certain elements cannot be
conquered by individuals alone (Cavanaugh, 2009). In their study, Lim et al. (2006) employed a
science game that allowed both synchronous and asynchronous forms of communication between
players. Findings revealed that both forms of communication facilitated engaged interactions that
supported a shared construction of knowledge among all student players. Collaboration between
players provides opportunity for peer-to-peer teaching and the formation of learning communities
(Oblinger, 2004). Authentic peer communication in gaming also provides emotional support
between players and offers students a sympathetic audience (Bruckman, 1993). Trespalacios et al.
(2011) dubbed communication and collaboration as essential skills for 21 st century learning.
Engaging in 21st century learning activities is integral for todays students who need to develop
skills for the modern workforce.
The 21st Century Learner as an Active Participant
Students today prefer to learn by doing. Learners in the 21st century are internally
motivated, unconstrained by time, place or structure and they rely on technology to help facilitate
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
20/29
learning (Oblinger, 2004). When it comes to engaged learning, digital gaming is a preferred
medium for students because it offers them the ability to control characters, environment and
challenges (Hoffman & Nadelson, 2010). When students are actively engaged in games, they are
learning (Annetta et al., 2009b). In addition to this, gaming teaches skills that employers want in
the 21st century, including critical thinking, collaboration, multitasking and problem solving under
duress (Clark & Ernst, 2009; Trespalacios et al., 2011). Self-reliant learning is also an appealing
trait for todays market since virtual environments allow student to explore the boundaries of given
content, cultivating a proactive and exploratory nature where a student is encouraged to become a
self-reliant learner (Taradi, Taradi, Radic, & Pokrajac, 2005). Students will be encouraged to learn
this way in the modern job market as well.
Educational games intentionally rely on players to actively solve problems and they require
a challenging cognitive effort from players in order for them to succeed (Cavanaugh, 2009). This
player-centered focus is also why educational games are following the lead of commercial games,
by changing the physical player positioning in the game to a first person point of view. This way,
players become part of the environment and encounter information, events, actions and activities as
they move through the environment (Dickey, 2005). Mallan et al. (2010) found students were
more engaged when they navigated the game with a through your own eyes perspective of their
avatars. Through simulation, gaming has the ability to offer these engaging, active, first person
approach, all involving an interaction with academic content.
Constructivism, PBL and Accommodating All Learners
Education is changing. As player positioning in commercial gaming shifted from an
outside to a first person orthographic view, so did learner positioning in instructional design in
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
21/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 21
education (Dickey, 2005). Constructive epistemology in education consists of engaging learning
environments that support the construction of knowledge through experience with authentic tasks
(Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Papert, 1998). Dickey (2005) found that game design containing
interactivity, narrative, role play, and learner positioning assisted instructional design in the
development of constructivist learning environments. Constructivist learning through educational
gaming should be interesting, relevant and offer meaningful problems to solve (Mallan et al.,
2010).
Constructivist theory, put into practice through problem-based learning (PBL)
opportunities, reported higher levels of engagement for students (Carle, Jaffee, Vaughan & Eder,
2009). PBL design encourages students to develop their own approaches to investigating and
answering the driving question (Petrosino, 1998). Annetta et al. (2011) found that problem-based
learning in educational gaming positively affected levels of student engagement.
Engaging all students in constructive learning can be a difficult task. In some of the most
challenging cases, educational gaming has been used to effectively engage the attentions of
adolescents who required intense behaviour therapy (Carr & Blanchfield, 2011). Annetta et al.
(2009b) found that gaming was able to engage high school science students who do not usually
experience success in science class. Clark and Ernest (2009) found that digital gaming had the
ability to make learning fun and increase motivation for students who were at risk of dropping out
of school. Overall, students may experience more engagement in educational games that employ
constructivist activities.
Other Challenges
Despite the many ways in which educational gaming was found to encompass elements of
21st Century learning, there are challenges associated with implementation and subsequent learner
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
22/29
engagement. Belle (2001) found that many overseas students were not comfortable with the self
direction, active participation and critical thinking of gaming education. Belle also noted that the
gaming scenarios encompassed the designers western cultural assumptions, language and sense of
humour, which were confusing for non-native learners and those struggling with the English
language.
Another challenge of educational gaming is the fact that games do not engage and excite
everyone. According to Whitton (2011), games have the capability to disengage and demotivate
some learners, especially those who take a more strategic approach to learning. Gender may also
play a role in gaming engagement since boys have more positive attitudes toward digital media
than girls (Butler, 2000).
Conclusion
The needs of learners today have changed. Digital media, like gaming, has impacted the
way theNet Generation receives information and learns from it (Oblinger, 2004). Educational
pedagogy and the role of the teacher are also changing, in an attempt to seize opportunities to
engage learners and help them learn theirway. A common indication of authentic learning is
engagement exemplified by intense time-on-task (Annetta et al., 2011). Gaming can provide a
platform for such engaged learning and has the potential to hook and maintain student interest
through constructivist-based activities. Elements of commercial games may inform educational
game design and enhance engagement in learning for students. Such elements include
interactivity, risk, feedback, narrative, context, flow, scaffolding, competition and collaboration.
Despite the numerous possibilities and endorsements for gaming in education, there are
also many challenges. Some experts question whether the quintessential elements of commercial
game design can successfully crossover to the educational realm. Another difficulty is the
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
23/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 23
availability of appropriate educational games, since they vary in quality and efficacy (Annetta et
al., 2009b; Leonard et al., 2009). Parent, teacher and administrative buy-in for the use of games
for learning can also prove a contentious issue (Annetta et al., 2009b; Cavanaugh, 2009; Lim et al.,
2006).
Overall, the findings reported here suggest that educational gaming merits attention as a
potentially powerful mechanism for reaching and teaching children in the 21st century. These
children will also require unique skills for an ever evolving job market. The technology of
computers and virtual gaming are understood and highly engaging for todays active learners. It
only seems fitting to explore in more detail the possibilities of their use in education.
References
Annetta, L., Lamb, R., Bowling, B., & Cheng, R. (2011). Assessing engagement in serious
educational games: The development of the student engaged learning in a technologyrich interactive classroom (SELTIC). In Felicia, P. (Ed.),Handbook of research on
improving learning and motivation through educational games: Multidisciplinaryapproaches. (pp. 310-329). MUN Library Online Reserve: IGI Global.
Annetta, L., Mangrum, J., Holmes, S., Collazo, K., & Cheng, M. (2009a). Bridging realty to
virtual reality: Investigating gender effect and student engagement on learning through
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
24/29
video game play in an elementary school classroom.International Journal of Science
Education, 31(8), 1091-1113.
Annetta, L., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. & Cheng, M. (2009b). Investigating the impact of videogames on high school students engagement and learning about genetics. Computers &Education, 53(1), 74-85.
Attle, S., & Baker, B. (2007). Cooperative learning in a competitive environment: Classroomapplications.International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 19(1),
77-83.
Barab, S. A., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R. & Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun:
Quest Atlantis, a game without guns.Educational Technology Research and
Development, 53(1), 86107.
Bell, M. (2001). Online Role-Play: Anonymity, engagement and risk.Educational Media
International, 38(4), 251-260.
Bruckman, A. (1993). Community support for constructivist learning. Computer Supported
Cooperative Work, 7, 4786.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive
engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook
of the learning sciences (pp. 475488). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bowman, R. F. (1982). A Pac-Man theory of motivation: Tactile implications for classroom
instruction.Educational Technology, 22(9), 1417.
Brush, T.A., & Saye, J.W. (2002). A summary of research exploring hard and soft scaffoldingfor teachers and students using a multimedia supported learning environment.Journal of
Interactive Online Learning, 1(2). Retrieved from:
http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/showissue.cfm?volID=1&IssueID=3
Butler, D. (2000). Gender, girls, and computer technology: Whats the status now? The Clearing
House, 73(4), 225229.
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
25/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 25
Carle, A. C., Jaffee, D., Vaughan, N. W., & Eder, D. (2009). Psychometric properties of threenew national survey of student engagement based engagement scales: An item response
theory analysis.Research in Higher Education, 50(8), 775794.
Carr, J., & Blanchfield, P. (2011). Engaging the un-engageable. In Felicia, P. (Ed.),Handbookof research on improving learning and motivation through educational games:
Multidisciplinary approaches. (pp. 633-657). MUN Library Online Reserve: IGI
Global.
Cavanaugh, C. (2009). Augmented reality gaming in education for engaged learning. In Ferdig,R. (Ed.),Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education. (pp. 83-95).
MUN Library Online Reserve: IGI Global.
Clark A., & Ernst, J. (2009). Gaming in technology education. The Technology Teacher. 21-26.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990).Flow: The psychology of optimal experience.New York: Harper &Row.
Dickey, M. D. (2003).An investigation of computer gaming strategies for engaged learning.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association. Chicago, IL.
Dickey, M. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and
video games can inform instructional design.Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 53(2), 67-83.
Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and
delivery of instruction. In D. Jonassen (Ed.),Handbook of research for educationalcommunications and technology.New York: Macmillan.
Entertainment Software Association of Canada (2011).Essential facts about the Canadian
computer and video game industry. Retrieved from: www.theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Essential-Facts-2011.pdf.
http://www.theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Essential-Facts-2011.pdfhttp://www.theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Essential-Facts-2011.pdfhttp://www.theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Essential-Facts-2011.pdfhttp://www.theesa.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/.../Essential-Facts-2011.pdf8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
26/29
Glahn, C., Specht, M., & Koper, R. (2009). Visualisation of interaction footprints forengagement in online communities.Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 44-57.
Hall, L., Woods, S., Aylett, R., Newall, L., & Paiva, A. (2005). Achieving empathic engagement
through affective interaction with synthetic characters. InProceedings of AffectiveComputing and Intelligent Interaction, (pp. 731-731). Springer.
Herrington J., Olivier, R., Reeves, T. (2002). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning
environments. Australian Research Council: ASCILITE. Retrieved from:
http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet19/herrington.html
Hoffman, B., & Nadelson, L. (2010). Motivational engagement and video gaming: A mixedmethods study.Education Technology, Research & Development, 58, 245270.
Jayakanthan, R. (2002). Application of computer games in the field of education. The Electronic
Library, 20(2), 98102.
Johnson, L.F., and A.H. Levine. 2008. Virtual worlds: Inherently immersive, highly
social learning spaces. Theory Into Practice, 47, 16170.
Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C. & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in
critical thinking. TechTrends, 43 (2), 24-32.
Kohn, A. (1987). The case against competition. New York: Vanderbilt Press.
Konradt, U. & Sulz, K. (2001). The experience of flow in interacting with a hypermedia learning
environment.Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(1), 6984.
Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments.
Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 6178.
Leonard, A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S., & Cheng, M. (2009). Investigating the impact of video
8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
27/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 27
games on high school students engagement and learning about genetics.
Computers & Education, 53, 7485.
Lim, C., Nonis, & D., Hedberg, J. (2006). Gaming in a 3D multiuser virtual environment:
Engaging students in Science lessons.British Journal of Educational Technology, 37( 2),211231.
Mallan,K., Foth, M., Greenaway, R., & Young, G. (2010). Serious playground: using Second
Life to engage high school students in urban planning.Learning, Media and
Technology, 35(2), 203225.
Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic
motivations for learning. In Snow, R. E., & Farr, M. J. (Eds.),Aptitude, Learning andInstruction: III. Cognitive and affective process analyses (pp. 223253).
Martin, A. and Chatfield, T. (2006). Alternate reality games: White paper.International Game
Developers Association. Retrieved from: http://igda.org/arg
Oblinger, D. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement.Journal of Interactive
Media in Education, 8(8), 1-18.
O Shea, P. M., Allen, D., Onderdonk, J. C. & Allen, D. W. (2011).A Technological Reinventionof the Textbook: A Wikibooks Project. Retrieved from:
http://www.iste.org/learn/publications/journals/jdlte-
issues/A_Technological_Reinvention_of_the_Textbook_A_Wikibooks_Project.aspx
Papert, S. (1998). Does easy do it? Children, games and learning. Game Developer, 87-88.
Paulus, T. M., Horvitz, B., & Shi, M. (2006). "Isn't it just like our situation?" Engagement andlearning in an online story-based environment.Educational Technology Research and
Development, 54(4), 355-385.
Pedersen, R. E. (2003). Game design foundations. Plano, TX: Worldware Publishing Inc.
http://igda.org/arghttp://igda.org/arghttp://www.iste.org/learn/publications/journals/jdlte-%09issues/A_Technological_Reinvention_of_the_Textbook_A_Wikibooks_Project.aspxhttp://www.iste.org/learn/publications/journals/jdlte-%09issues/A_Technological_Reinvention_of_the_Textbook_A_Wikibooks_Project.aspxhttp://igda.org/arghttp://www.iste.org/learn/publications/journals/jdlte-%09issues/A_Technological_Reinvention_of_the_Textbook_A_Wikibooks_Project.aspxhttp://www.iste.org/learn/publications/journals/jdlte-%09issues/A_Technological_Reinvention_of_the_Textbook_A_Wikibooks_Project.aspx8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
28/29
Pope, D. (2003).Doing School: How we are creating a generation of stressed-out, materialistic,
and miseducated students.New Haven, NE: Yale University Press.
Prensky, M. (2001).Digital game-based learning.New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pretrosino, A. (1998). Project based learning space.Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Retrieved from:
http://college.cengage.com/education/pbl/background.html
Provenzo, E. F. (1991). Video kids: Making sense of nintendo. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Rouse, R. (2001). Game design: Theory and practice. Plano, TX: Worldware Publishing, Inc.
Sanders, W., & Rivers, J. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student
academic achievement. University of Tennessee Value-Added Assessment Center, 1-7.
Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Studentengagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School
Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158176.
Skinner, E. (2009). Using community development theory to improve student engagement inonline discussion: A case study.ALT-J: Research in Learning Technology, 17(2), 89-100.
Taradi, S.K., Taradi, M., Radic, K., & Pokrajac, N. (2005). Blending problem-based learningwith Web technology positively impacts student learning outcomes in acid-base
physiology.Journal of Advanced Physiological Education, 29, 3539.
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2001) Does beauty build adapted minds? Towards an evolutionary
theory of aesthetics, fiction and the arts. SubStance,30, 94-95.
Trespalacios, J., Chamberlin, B., & Gallagher, R. R. (2011). Collaboration, engagement & fun:How youth preferences in video gaming can inform 21st century education. Techtrends:
Linking Research and Practice To Improve Learning, 55(6), 49-54.
http://college.cengage.com/education/pbl/background.htmlhttp://college.cengage.com/education/pbl/background.htmlhttp://college.cengage.com/education/pbl/background.html8/2/2019 The Impact of Educational Gaming on Student Engagement
29/29
THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL GAMING ON STUDENT ENGAGEMENT 29
Virvou, M., & Katsionis, G. (2008). On the usability and likeability of virtual reality games for
education: The case of VR-ENGAGE. Computers & Education, 50, 154178.
Virvou, M., Katsionis, G., & Manos, K. (2005). Combining software games with education:
Evaluation of its educational effectiveness.Educational Technology & Society, 8 (2),54-65.
Wheatley, W. (1999). Enhancing the effectiveness and excitement of management education: Acollection of experiential exercises derived from childrens games. Simulation Gaming,
30(2), 181-198.
Whitton, N. (2011). Encouraging engagement in game-based learning.International Journal of
Game-Based Learning, 1(1), 75-84.
Yu, F.Y. (2000).Promoting student learning and development in computer-based cooperative
learning. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computers in
education/International Conference on Computer-Assisted Instruction, Taiwan.
Zemsky, R., Massey, W. (2004). Thwarted innovation: What happened to e-learning and why.
The Learning Alliance for Higher Education: University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved
from http://www.thelearningalliance.info/WeatherStation.html.
http://www.thelearningalliance.info/WeatherStation.htmlhttp://www.thelearningalliance.info/WeatherStation.html