Computer game-based learning in Higher Education Nicola Whitton May 2007

Background Games Human- computer interaction games design online learning Learning in Higher Education computer game- based learning games-based learning

Can computer games be used to support learning in HE? 1.Is there a rationale for using computer game-based learning in Higher Education? 2.How best can computer games be designed to be usable and enhance learning? 3.How can the educational effectiveness of computer game- based learning be measured? 4.How do differences in game design effect the learning experience?

Overview of activities Games analysis Preliminary interviews Preliminary survey Literature review Questionnaire design Game design and development Comparative study } } } }

Key influences Constructivism (Bruner, Jonassen) Experiential learning (Kolb) Problem-based learning (Boud, Barrows) Collaborative learning (Vygotsky, Wenger) Adult learning (Knowles) Games-based learning (Prensky, Gee) Multimedia learning (Mayer) Engagement (Malone, Csikszentmihalyi)

Q1: Why use games in HE? Rationales in literature –Motivation –‘Stealth’ learning However… games can be constructivist learning environments Students in HE motivated to use games to learn if seen as most effective way

Research activities Interviews (12) –What is a game? –Motivations to play games? –Acceptability of game-based learning? Survey (200) –What types of game do people play? –What are their motivations? –Are educational games intrinsically motivating for students in HE?

What is a game? Challenge Competition Fantasy Goals Immersion Fun? Interaction Outcomes People Rules Safety

Why do people play games? Cerebral Social Physical Boredom Social facilitation

Some results ComputerNon-computer Social (52%) Cerebral (52%)Cerebral (34%) Boredom (48%)Boredom (30%) Physical (6%)Physical (27%) Social facil. (6%)Social facil. (12%)

Factors influencing motivation Motivators Swift and steady improvement Perception of being good Demotivators Difficulty getting started Getting stuck Lack of trust with the game Intrinsic uninterest in the subject

Motivation Are you motivated or demotivated by game-based learning? Motivated 63% Neither 28% Demotivated 9%

Q2: What is best practice? Evaluation of existing guidelines –Constructivist learning environments –Educational multimedia –Designing for engagement Analysis of existing games –Potential educational value –Evaluation of interface design

Criteria (1) Game design for learning –Supports active learning –Engenders engagement –Appropriateness –Supports reflection –Provides equitable experience –Provides ongoing support

Criteria (2) Interface design –Flexible interaction –Support for player community –Transparent navigation –User control –Robustness –Appropriate visual design

Effective games for learning Games that involve: –Problem solving –Exploration –Collaboration –Authentic activities For example: –Adventure –Role play –Simulation

Game-based learning design Activity to teach basic group skills Two games designed with identical –learning outcomes –support materials –debriefing

The Time Capsule Based on existing classroom activity Challenge Interaction Competition  Outcomes  Fantasy People Goals Rules Immersion  Safety

The Time Capsule

Pharaoh’s Tomb Developed from scratch Challenge Interaction Competition Outcomes Fantasy People Goals Rules Immersion Safety

The Pharaoh’s Tomb

Development Iterative prototyping –Game play evaluation (observation) –Group interface evaluation (think- aloud / observation) –Individual interface evaluation (Wizard-of-Oz, think-aloud)

3. How can educational effectiveness measured? Learning –Pre-test/post-test not applicable –Self-perception of learning questionnaire Engagement –Post-experience questionnaire –42 question scale tested –Reduced to 18 questions

Engagement factors Challenge –Motivation –Clarity –Achievability Control Immersion Interest Purpose

4. Comparing game-based learning Comparative experiment –Time Capsule groups –Pharaoh’s Tomb groups Examining differences –Learning –Engagement

Experiments Edinburgh computing students –8 Pharaoh’s tomb –9 Time capsule Hong Kong marketing students –12 Pharaoh’s tomb –7 Time capsule Edinburgh computing students –43 Pharaoh’s Tomb –36 Time Capsule

Results Learning –No significant difference –But questionable reliability Engagement –No significant difference overall –Significant difference in control –Difference in immersion

Conclusions Games can be collaborative, authentic, active and experiential learning environments. To be effective games must be designed with learning in mind and seen as the best way to learn by students. Games do not have to have every game characteristic to be engaging. How does novelty fit in?