Application of game based approaches

Kiili (2005) describes a three component model for effective application of educational games, these he considers should allow for:

(i) Storytelling – The use of stories in games is a fundamental part of game application. Games should have some sort of story embedded in them that generally integrates the challenges set within the game into a larger task or problem. Stories lead to enhanced learner engagement and motivation.

(ii) Game balance – The main objective of balancing is to provide a game that is internally consistent and fair, without allowing participants to exploit flaws to gain advantages as well as to make sure that the game is fun and engaging. Typically progress in a game is rewarded by positive feedback and rewards, this can lead to a situation where the player or partners are ahead, they gain advantage from their increased level of understanding and being ‘in the lead’. Kiili (2005, p.20) describes this scenario as a situation where “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer”, the effect is that other participants can become demotivated by the game. Thus it is important to ensure that positive feedback loops are incorporated, which balance scores and keep the game fun and engaging. Although good performance should be rewarded, Kiili advocates that the progress of not so good players should

be supported in order to ensure that they can catch up and retain the possibility of ultimately winning the game

(iii) Optimising cognitive load – The third component is to ensure that the instructional learning element within games remains within the working memory capacity of learners. Although this point applies primarily to computer based games with complex multimedia elements, the principle can be applied to all game composition. The objective is to ensure the knowledge required to ‘play the game’ remains within working memory limits, Kiili suggests this can be achieved by cutting down on irrelevant elements or unnecessary complications.

The second model proposed by Garris et al (2002, p.445) provides a theoretical framework for the application of games, which is founded on experiential learning theory. The model proposes that games should follow an “input-process-outcome” framework and include the following:

(i) Input – In the first stage instructional content and game characteristics are described. Examples would include time limits, rules and participant roles

(ii) Game Cycle – The second stage is described by Garris et al as the ‘trigger cycle’, this stage includes user judgements or reactions such as enjoyment or interest and user behaviours such as persistence and feedback to improve performance. The point that Garris et al make, is that the game should allow for recycling around the ‘game cycle’ loop in a similar manner to that advocated by classic experiential learning theory

(iii) Debriefing – In the final stage, the game should allow for debriefing, which should be linked to learning outcomes and reinforce the learning emanating from the game.

Another model for effective game application is proposed by McClarty et al (2012), who advocate a five-point model. This framework is summarised as follows:

1. Games should be built on sound learning principles; these include clear goals and immediate feedback

2. Games should provide personalised learning settings; the main point is that game composition should be based on students’ needs

3. Games need to provide engagement for the learner; this includes stories, challenge and personal attachment

4. Games should teach 21st century skills; these include collaboration, problem solving and procedural thinking

5. Games should provide authentic and relevant assessment; which includes a means for quantifying progress and achievement.

In conclusion, there are several common features in the three application models, all highlight the need for feedback and debriefing, which is seen as a key element linking game based approaches to conventional learning theory. There is also a link here to simulation theory, for example Keys and Wolfe

(1990) assert that simulations also foster greater engagement/motivation and this is critical to the learning process. Finally, Garris et al and McClarty et al highlight the need for goals and rules providing a logical link between the fundamental definition of a game and learning theory.

4.7.6 Critical review and summary

Whilst the literature clearly shows that there are a number of benefits of using game-based learning strategies, it is evident there are also some potential disadvantages. Pho and Dinscore (2015) assert that it is important to consider whether the technology or game is being used for its own sake, or if it actually improves learning. McClarty et al raise a similar point and claim that despite the strong debate on how games improve learning, very little empirical research has been carried out to demonstrate the relationship between games and academic performance. However, this criticism is countered by theorists such as Ebner and Holzinger (2007) and Burguillo (2010), who provide clear evidence of learning improvement from game based settings. Finally, Pho and Dinscore (2015) highlight the importance of considering the student’s proficiency with technology when applying digital game based approaches. The point they make is that it is important to ensure a lack of proficiency in technology itself doesn’t become a barrier to learning.

To conclude this section the main theories emanating from the game based learning literature reviewed are summarised in Table 4.9. These are incorporated into the learning model presented in Chapter Five.

Table 4.9 – Summary of game based learning theory and application constituents (after Pivec and Dziabenko, 2004 and others cited below)

Major theorists Learning and application constituents

Potential contribution to learning model

Pivec and Dziabenko (2004) Kiili (2005) Charles et al (2011) McClarty et al (2012) Trybus (2015) Engagement – Games enhance engagement through a blurring of instructional content with game characteristics

To support engagement games should be fun, have rules, characters and stories

Garris et al (2002) Kiili (2005)

Bainbridge (2007) McClarty et al (2012)

Gameplay - Game based learning should balance subject matter with gameplay

Designs should include choices, goals, consequences and feedback Sutter (2010) Deterding et al (2011) Charles et al (2011) McClarty et al (2012) Game Elements -

Gamification applies game elements to a non-game setting

Learning settings should include points, rewards, tables of scores and leader boards

Prensky (2005) Kiili (2005) Burguillo (2010) Charles et al (2011) Van der Meij et al (2011)

McClarty et al (2012)

Competition and Collaboration – Are important elements in supporting adult learning

Games allow the

introduction of competition to learning. Positive feedback loops should be included and participants should work in pairs/teams to solve problems

4.8 Chapter conclusion