Search

The present study addresses the effectiveness of an educational mathematics game for improving proportional reasoning in students from prevocational education. Though in theory game-based learning is promising, research shows that results are ambiguous and that we should look into ways to support game-based learning. The current study explored two factors (i.e., collaboration and competition) that have been associated with motivational and cognitive effects, and have potential to optimize game-based learning. In a fully crossed design, four conditions were examined: collaboration and competition, collaboration control, competition control, and control. It was found that, over all, gameplay did improve students' proportional reasoning skills but that learning effects did not differ between conditions. However, when students' ability levels were taken into account, an interaction between collaboration and competition was found. For below-average students, the effect of collaboration was modified by competition, showing a negative effect of competition on domain knowledge gains in a collaborative learning situation. In contrast, for above-average students, the data demonstrated a trend that suggests a positive effect of competition on domain knowledge gain in a collaborative learning situation. This study explored game-based mathematics learning for prevocational education (age 11-15).Two factors were investigated: competition and collaboration.An interaction between collaboration and competition, modified by ability level was found.For below-average students competition negatively affected collaborative learning.For above average students competition positively affected collaborative learning.

The challenge in serious games is to improve the effectiveness of learning by stimulating relevant cognitive processes. In this paper, we investigate the potential of surprise in two experiments with prevocational students in the domain of proportional reasoning. Surprise involves an emotional reaction, but it also serves a cognitive goal as it directs attention to explain why the surprise occurred and can play a key role in learning. In our experiments, surprises were triggered by a surprising event, ie, a nonplaying character who suddenly appeared and changed characteristics of a problem. In Experiment 1—comparing a surprise condition with a control condition—we found no overall differences, but the results suggested that surprise may be beneficial for higher level students. In Experiment 2, we combined Expectancy strength (Strong vs. Weak) with Surprise (Present vs. Absent) using higher level students. We found a marginal overall effect of surprising events on learning indicating that students who experienced surprises learned more than students who were not exposed to these surprises but we found a stronger effect of surprise when we included existing proportional reasoning skill as factor. These results provide some evidence that a narrative technique as surprise can be used in game-based learning for the purpose of learning.

This dissertation focused on evaluating game-based learning in prevocational education. Though many researchers seem convinced of the potential of game-based learning, researchers also acknowledge that the empirical evidence for games as learning tools is ambiguous. Comparison between studies is difficult due to diversity in content, gameplay, and population (among other things). To distinguish between effective and ineffective practices and elements, and to optimize game-based learning, value-added comparison studies are required. Therefore, studies in the current dissertation adopted a value-added approach: a standard version of the game (i.e., an educational math game ‘Zeldenrust’) was compared to versions that were enhanced with different forms of instructional support (i.e., self-explanation prompts, collaboration, and faded worked examples). Three consecutive empirical studies investigated the effect of these forms of instructional support on the in-game performance and knowledge acquisition of prevocational students. It is important to highlight the outcome that learning was significantly enhanced in all three studies. The overall pretest to posttest Cohen’s d effect sizes for studies 1, 2, and 3 were 0.44, 0.46, and 0.46 respectively, which are regarded as medium-sized effects. These findings show that the intervention involving the educational game ‘Zeldenrust’ formed a solid foundation for learning about the domain of proportional reasoning. The results of the three studies show that further improvement of this environment was difficult, but possible. The investigated implementations of self-explanation prompts and collaboration did not result in improved effectiveness, but the addition of faded worked examples did. This seems to suggest that prevocational students benefit from continuous support that contains expert advice. Though game designers show a tendency to hide the instructional component and educational content in educational games, results of the current line of study suggest that a formal representation of the educational content in the game-environment could support students gameplay and learning.

This study investigates the impact of integrating conceptual clarifications as support in an educational math game, and explores the impact of adding this (internal vs. external) support on students game and mathematical performance, intrinsic motivation, and game perception. Three conditions are established: a condition in which internal support is offered, a condition in which (identical) external support is offered, and a control condition in which no support is added to the game. One hundred twenty-two vocational secondary education students participated in this study. The results of this study indicate that students benefit from playing with an educational game in order to enhance their proportional reasoning skills. Adding conceptual clarifications as instructional support in an intrinsically integrated game is not recommended. If the support is given to the students anyhow, it is advised to offer it externally because internally integrating this support leads to a decrease in performance and motivation. Hence, not only support as such, but also the way it is integrated in the game-based learning process, might be decisive for its effectivity. Obviously, further research is warranted in order to replicate these findings also for other types of support, other game-based learning environments and other target groups. Playing with the GBLE stimulated students proportional reasoning ability.Conceptual clarifications in an intrinsically integrated GBLE are not recommended.Support, and the way it is integrated in a GBLE, are decisive for its effectivity.

Reviews regarding serious games show that the effect on learning can be qualified as moderately positive. Despite the active involvement of players it seems that they sometimes refrain from relevant cognitive processes during game play. This study addresses a technique involving the generation of manageable cognitive conflicts to stimulate these cognitive processes. Surprise comprises events that undermine an expectation which trigger players to evaluate the new situation more extensively. Participants (N = 94) played a game in which they practiced proportional reasoning skills. The pretestposttest design involved two factors: Surprise (surprise vs. no surprise) and Expectancy (strong vs. weak). Surprise was implemented as an appearing game character that modified some parameters of a problem while the player was solving that problem. We expected that this would prompt players to evaluate their solution strategy and decide whether another strategy was more appropriate. Expectancy pertains to the type of problems that players expect. In the strong expectancy version players received a series of problems with the same structure as before. In the weak expectancy version problems with different structures are randomly presented to the players and each problem may involve a different solution strategy. We hypothesized an interaction between Surprise and Expectancy, next to a main effect of Surprise. The results show that participants learned from the game. We also did find a weak positive effect of Surprise, but no effect of Expectancy nor interaction effect on learning. The facilitating effect of Surprise was stronger when existing proportional reasoning skill was included as factor. These results indicate that surprise as implemented in the game has effect on learning regardless whether expectancy was weak or strong. We discuss some suggestions for finding stronger effects of surprise such as the fact that the repetitive nature may have weakened the 'surprisingness' of the surprises and the observation that our sample may not have possessed a sufficient level of metacognitive skills to interpret the changes caused by the surprises.

In this study we focus on the integration of mathematical learning content (i.e. proportional reasoning) in a GBLE. More specific two kinds of GBLEs are set up; an extrinsically integrated GBLE and an intrinsically integrated GBLE. In the former environment, the mathematical content is not part of the core mechanics and structure of the gaming world. In the latter environment, the mathematical content is delivered through the parts of the game that are the most fun to play and embodied within the structure of the gaming world and the players interactions with it. Fifty-eight vocational track students participated in the study, all working in one of the two versions of the self-developed game-based learning environment ‘Zeldenrust’. The results of this study provide evidence for the effect of this different way of implementing learning content in an educational math game. More specific, students playing in an extrinsically integrated game show higher learning gains, motivational gains and perceived usefulness than students who played with a game in which the content was intrinsically integrated

In this contribution, we present a game-based learning environment for 12–16-year-old vocational students in which they can practice proportional reasoning problems. The learning content and goals, as well as the specific game features are discussed. We can conclude that developing a serious game implies many choices and decisions led by theoretical foundations, as well as by practical limitations and pragmatic considerations.