Content uploaded by Stamatios Papadakis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Stamatios Papadakis on Dec 12, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Stamatios Papadakis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Stamatios Papadakis on Jun 10, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
I
nt. J. Teachin
g
and Case Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1, 2018 1
Copyright © 2018 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
The use of computer games in classroom
environment
Stamatios Papadakis
Department of Preschool Education,
Faculty of Education,
University of Crete,
Crete, Greece
Email: stpapadakis@gmail.com
Abstract: As part of the educational use of ICT, digital games can be learning
tools, motivators and generators of curiosity and as a result an effective means
of optimising student learning and performance in daily educational practice.
The positive relationship between learning and students’ engagement while
using digital games has been confirmed by various independent studies over the
years. Thus, the integration of digital games at different levels of education for
teaching multiple learning objects comes as no surprise. Despite the many
studies on the learning and motivational effects of digital games, teaching with
digital games is not yet widespread in secondary education. Current research
emphasises that most of these factors appear to stem from difficulties with the
implementation of games in classroom settings. Problems with technology, the
cost/expense of games/equipment, the lack of technical support are defined as
some of the barriers to the addition of games and simulations in education.
Keywords: digital game; primary and secondary education; learning through
play.
Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Papadakis, S. (2018)
‘The use of computer games in classroom environment’, Int. J. Teaching and
Case Studies, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.1–25.
Biographical notes: Stamatios Papadakis is a graduate of the Economics and
Business (AUEB) University, Athens, Greece, Department of Information. He
received his MSc in Education from the University of the Aegean, Greece, and
his PhD from the University of Crete, School of Education. He has been
working for a series of years as an ICT teacher in public sector secondary
education. He has published many articles in journals and has presented several
papers in conferences. His research interests include ICT in education, mobile
learning, novice programming environments and teaching of programming in
primary and secondary education.
1 Introduction
In recent years, there is a growing appreciation that the conventional approach to the
process of teaching does not address the social, emotional, mental and motivational needs
of the new generation [Tapscott, (2009), p.131]. Today’s students are no longer the
people our educational system was designed to teach, argues Marc Prensky in his book
2 S. Papadakis
Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, published in 2001. Since then, the term has become
popular, especially in educational circles and is often used as a justification for making
broad assumptions about the digital literacy of young people today [Becker, (2016),
p.219; Palfrey and Gasser, 2013]. The term is used to describe the ‘net generation’ who
spend most of their time on the internet, permanently ‘turned on’ (Prensky, 2001; Van
Eck, 2006). They represent the “native speakers who have grown up in the digital era,
have excellent knowledge of computer language, digital games and the internet” unlike
digital immigrants such as their parents and older teachers [Prensky, (2005a), p.8]. On the
contrary, digital technologies are often described as tools that will enhance collaboration
and motivate learners to reengage with education (Papadakis, 2016) and enable them to
develop the new multimodal literacy skills required for today’s knowledge economy
(Lacasa, 2013). Lowering the barrier between education and real entertainment is an
important challenge to better exploiting the potential of computers (Papadakis et al.,
2016a, 2016b, 2016c; Kalogiannakis and Papadakis, 2017) and reaching a demographic
that is traditionally averse to learning (Bellotti et al., 2009).
Digital games are an important part of most children’s leisure lives nowadays and are
going to become the predominate form of popular culture interaction in our society (Gee,
2004; Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004). Studies show that even young children under the
age of 8 years are frequent users of digital games and applications (Judge et al., 2015;
Orfanakis and Papadakis, 2014; Papadakis et al., 2016a, 2016c). The popularity of the
game in the dominant culture of the new generation has spurred the interest of the
educational community, with several educators and researchers to seek different
approaches, in using digital games in the classroom environment (Carvalho, 2016;
Orfanakis and Papadakis, 2016; Papadakis et al., 2016b). In 2009, US children between 8
and 18 years old played video games for an average of 1 hour and 13 minutes per day,
according to a Kaiser Family Foundation study, which represents a substantial increase
compared to 2004 (Meeri, 2017).
Digital games are gaining wide recognition as an effective way to create socially
interactive and constructivist learning environments. Studies indicate that playing video
games gives learners a ‘mental workout’ and the structure of activities embedded in
computer games develops a number of cognitive skills (Giannakos, 2013). Additionally,
many games use the same sorts of techniques we recognise as sound pedagogy, even if
they were not designed that way deliberately. The dots connecting what is done in games
and what is accepted as good instruction are increasingly connected [Becker, (2016),
p.336]. This has been the case for both educational games and commercial games, which
were built for entertainment but at times have been used as instructional tools in the
classroom [Groff et al., (2015a), p.20].
Many educators see digital games as powerfully motivating digital environments
(Papadakis et al., 2014) because of their potential to enhance student engagement and
motivation in learning (Hsu et al., 2017) as well as an effective way to create socially
interactive and constructivist learning environments (Chan et al., 2017). According to
Gee (2007, p.216), “Video games engage players in powerful forms of learning, forms
that we could spread in various guises, into schools, workplaces and communities where
we wish to engage people with ‘education’”. There are at least three features of games
that make them intrinsically educational: a motivational, a cognitive and a sociocultural
perspective (Chan et al., 2017). During the completion of an activity through a
custom-tailored digital game, students deal with concepts and more easily embrace the
key points of the didactic module. Additionally, students take responsibility for their
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
3
learning and become more autonomous in their decision-making (Sumuer and Yakin,
2009). Hence, several researchers have tried to identify the obstacles for the slow
adoption of games in education. For instance, personal experience with games and
simulations affect the potential adoption of games and simulations by a teacher. Problems
with technology, the cost/expense of games/equipment, the lack of technical support are
defined some of the barriers to the addition of games and simulations in education
(Justice and Ritzhaupt, 2015).
This paper is a review of the literature and is organised as follows. Section 2
introduces terminology used throughout this paper as well as a brief history of the
educational use of digital games. Section 3 describes the advantages and the
disadvantages of using educational games as well as the obstacles-barriers to the addition
of games in education. In Section 4, different frameworks for introducing digital games
in the classroom are presented. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusions of this paper.
2 An introduction to digital educational games
Since the advent of Spacewar in 1962, which is considered the first commercial digital
game, digital games have been playing an important role within the world’s social,
political and economic framework for more than 50 years (Newman, 2004). In the
literature, one can find various definitions and terms referring to digital games. This
diversity is due to the plethora of electronic devices on which a person can come across a
digital game. Numerous researchers use the term video games when they intend to refer
to all types of digital games, whereas other researchers use this term when they are
referring exclusively to video console games. Thus, a wide range of definitions has been
attributed to the concept of a game such as digital game, computer game, video game,
electronic game, etc. Digital games are generally based on a digital model that allows for
reproducing a reference situation, an ordinary and real situation. Digital games, as they
consist of a mix of games and computers, combine attractive features such as graphics,
physics and motion, to create virtual environments e.g., interactive simulations of the real
world (Prensky, 2007). This situation might be, for example, a physics system (Angry
Birds), a historical period (Civilisation), or the management of a city (Sim City) (Sanchez
et al., 2016). Additionally, digital games include mobile applications for entertainment
that are easily available today through various ubiquitous devices. According to Huizenga
et al. (2017) each game has some basic components, which are shown in Figure 1.
Digital educational games are software applications which use both the characteristics
of video games and computer games, to create attractive and motivational learning
experiences to successfully bring specific educational objectives into educational
practice. The games may either be designed to promote learning or the development of
cognitive skills, or otherwise take the form of simulations allowing learners to practice
their skills in a virtual environment (Erhel and Jamet, 2013). As a result, therefore, digital
game based learning (DGBL) can be defined as the use of computer games (or digital
games) to support or supplement learning within an educational context (Prensky,
2005b). There are a slew of video games, digital applications (‘apps’) and adaptive
software platforms that can be used for instruction (Shapiro, 2014). These include
entertainment games, or games designed for leisure that have been adapted into an
educational setting, simulation games, which aim to simulate an aspect of reality and are
4 S. Papadakis
generally coupled with external learning material and learning games, which seek to
provide the majority of the learning content within the game. The latter two types of
game have both been designed with a particular learning outcome in mind (Grace, 2016).
Figure 1 Game basic components (see online version for colours)
Theories of DGBL suggest that digital games are not only persuasive in terms of real and
virtual world parity; but also, a medium to foster complex values. Educational computer
games could be an effective way of providing a more interesting learning environment
for acquiring knowledge and can enhance students’ learning interest and motivation
(Sung and Hwang, 2013). Game-based learning remarks on the potential value of
learning through play in education and skills training (Paule-Ruiz et al., 2017). Digital
games provide a forum in which learning arises as a result of tasks stimulated by the
content of the games, knowledge is developed through the content of the game and skills
are developed as a result of playing the game (McFarlane et al., 2002). As Grace (2016)
states, a game is a closed system of meaning that is limited by time and space. There are
agreed upon rules and constraints that are embedded in the game and these govern how
the player/s are able to interact with the game. The interactions that the player has with
the game are known as the game mechanics. Players will use these game mechanics in
order to overcome challenges presented in the game while also being given feedback on
their progress towards overcoming these challenges.
The characteristics which make digital games attractive are the existence of a
structured framework, the pleasant environment, the great gameplay and the spectacular
graphics, sound and music, the didactic goals which are presented as problems to be
solved and finally a sense of playfulness which attracts the child’s attention (Prensky,
2007). Additionally, educational digital games utilise the Internet and multimedia
technologies. Students have the ability to understand challenging concepts and acquire
difficult skills with their own learning pace, through interactive and engaging activities.
For the same reasons, Prensky (2007), states that educational digital games belong to the
category of active educational environments.
Often those involved in the educational process, are just looking for games which
have been created exclusively for educational purposes, ignoring that, within an
appropriate context, even commercial games can be used for a variety of educational
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
5
disciplines. According to Van Eck (2006), the research on using games for formal
education focuses on three different approaches:
a using commercial games as learning tools
b integrating serious games, games for learning and multi-user virtual environments in
the learning process
c designing games with the students in which the practice of designing serves as a
learning process.
A large number of commercial games are suitable for use in the classroom and there are
various examples of commercial games which have been effectively used such as
Civilization, Age of Empires, CSI, The Sims, Age of Mythology and SimCity (Van Eck,
2006). Other examples of similarly successful integration of commercial games in the
formal learning environment and a variety of subjects are Pirates! for the revival of
historical periods and SimEarth for simulation experiments in the subject of chemistry,
Caesar and Colonization for reviving ancient and more recent civilisations, etc. Prensky
(2005a) has compiled a list of 500 serious games which can be integrated in the
curriculum.
As games have become more complex in terms of graphics, complexity, interaction
and narrative, so have a variety of genres have come to dominate the market. There is,
however, no standard categorisation of such games; different stakeholders in the games
industry, e.g., game outlets, developers, academics, web review sites, use a taxonomy
appropriate to their own audience (Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004). According to the
Herz system (Herz, 1997 as cited by Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004) a game taxonomy
is the following: action games (shooting games, ‘platform’ games, reaction-based
games), adventure games, fighting games, puzzle games, simulations, sports games and
strategy games. Another classification, among many, which is used by many researchers
is the following (Laird and Lent, 2005 as cited by Lacasa, 2013):
• Adventure: the gamers must solve problems when they interact with other characters,
progressing through different moments in the adventure.
• Strategy: humans confront problems that need solving, for example, distributing
resources, organising production, defences and attacks.
• Sports: these games cover almost all sports imaginable.
• Action: they are the most popular and they assume that the human action controls a
character in a virtual environment.
• Simulation: providing the player with control in a simulated world.
• Role play: a human can play with different types of characters, for example, a
magician or other appealing types.
Game-based learning can be done through either the adoption of existing recreational
games in the commercial market for educational use, or the development of educational
games with constructivist learning paradigms in mind (Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004).
The games, in general, can be classified into three broad categories according to their
educational scope: leisure games, educational leisure games and educational games (see
Figure 2) (Ulicsak and Williamson, 2010).
6 S. Papadakis
Figure 2 Game classification per educational use (see online version for colours)
Figure 3 Snapshots of the commercial games Age of Mythology and SimCity (see online version
for colours)
Educational games are those characterised as having been designed with clear learning
objectives and are intended to facilitate the teaching-learning process. This definition
therefore includes edutainment games, serious games, game-based simulations as well as
epistemic games. Leisure games are games that have not been designed with a clear
learning objective in mind, without, however, excluding the fact that they can be used to
enhance learning. This category includes commercial off-the-shelf games (COTS). These
games are produced firstly for commercial purposes and sold largely through commercial
retail outlets. Some COTS games have been used quite successfully in learning situations,
such as Minecraft [Becker, (2016), p.38]. Educational leisure games are games such as
The Sims, the Roller Coaster Tycoon series, Civilization and Age of Empires, which have
been used in classrooms to enhance learning, although originally designed for
commercial purposes. Figure 3 shows snapshots of two successful commercial games,
Age of Mythology and SimCity. As stated by De Jans et al. (2017), a new wave of
massively prominent casual video games that interest a wide of audience has emerged,
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
7
having over 200 million players around the globe. These mini-games are brief games that
are easy to learn and clearly differ from regular videogames which demand some time for
the rules and setups to be mastered.
2.1 A brief history of the educational use of digital games
The concept of using digital games to support learning activities is not novel as there
have been studies found dating back more than 40 years (Grace, 2016). As Zhen (2017)
states educational gaming has changed a lot over the past 40 years. From the 8-bit
survival game Oregon Trail to the voxel-based building game Minecraft, educational
gaming continues to follow the trends of technology and innovation by trying to create
the perfect blend of learning and fun. Since the 1960s, the effectiveness and benefits of
technology-enhanced learning have been examined and reported to enhance the interest
and motivation of learners of all ages in various fields (Sung et al., 2017).
Already in 1970, at the dawn of the modern computer game era, studies were
conducted on the effect of using computer games to enhance learning [Van Eck, 2006 as
cited in Hansen and Storjord, (2016), p.29]. As Becker (2016) states, this was the era that
produced such noteworthy titles as Oregon Trail (1985) and Where in the World is
Carmen Sandiego? (1985). Perhaps the most well-known educational game, Oregon
Trail, developed by MECC, was released in 1971. Although not available at home until
the first mass-produced personal computers, Oregon Trail could be found in some form at
virtually every school from the 1970s until today and it put educational gaming on the
map. The goal of this game is to teach American geography and history by having the
player guide a family on their way across the country during the 1800s (Zhen, 2017).
In the 1980s, there was great enthusiasm for harnessing the design knowledge
embedded in video games to improve instruction (Squire, 2003). At first the adoption was
slow, but growing steadily (Groff et al., 2016). The self-proclaimed ‘edutainment era’
(Van Eck, 2006), which began in the mid-80s and lasted until the mid-90s was the time of
the introduction of digital games in the educational process. Initially, the use of digital
games was considered by many educators as a panacea. As Squire (2003) states, since the
widespread popularity of PacMan in the early 1980s, some educators have wondered if
“the magic of Pac-Man cannot be bottled and unleashed in the classroom to enhance
student involvement, enjoyment and commitment” [Bowman, (1982), p.14]. As a result,
anyone involved in the educational process could ‘insert’ a game in their teaching
practice and believed that their lesson would become more fun and more efficient,
spurring students’ interest. Needless to say, this did not happen, which caused this
approach to fall out of favour causing various negative comments regarding its
educational efficiency. Finally, in the late 90s, several factors led to shrinkage and,
finally, to the integration of the digital games market in only a few key players. A
development, which, in turn, prevented the rapid adaptation of game industry
requirements, to the requirements of the school curriculum (Shuler, 2012).
Ben Sawyer coined the term serious games, marking the beginning of the second age
of computer games in schools with the first being the edutainment era of the 80s and 90s
[Becker, (2016), p.338]. The game learning-based method has been particularly active in
recent years (Richards et al., 2013), as a result of the integration of the various forms of
information and communications technology (ICT) and the widespread use of smart
phones and other handheld electronic devices (Zaranis et al., 2013).
8 S. Papadakis
3 The benefits and obstacles of introducing digital games in the
educational process
3.1 The benefits of introducing digital games in the educational process
Education in the 21st century needs to be concerned with making learning activities
similarly engrossing and passionate – school is a place where learners want to go to in
order to explore their passions rather than out of duty or compulsion (Lacasa, 2013). In
the current traditional education, the learners can be positioned as passive receivers and
are expected to memorise content without getting much context (Hansen and Storjord,
2016). On the other hand, ‘digital natives’, ‘digital literacy’, ‘digital divide’, ‘digital
media’ – these and other such mantras such as ‘21st century learning’ – are phrases that
continue to be used to characterise both students today as well as the necessary scope of
the educational system (Lacasa, 2013).
The majority of school students face school as a boring break from their engagement
in various forms of ICT. It seems that the current generation of students is not motivated,
nor has sufficient learning outcomes in existing traditional education system (Gee, 2007).
The instructional model based on the traditional teaching format is an inefficient method
and cannot ensure the high-quality learning outcomes that modern, post-industrial society
requires. Traditional instruction is an emotional, social and cognitive experience in which
teachers use their knowledge, voice and movement to address the learners with questions
and stories (Giannakos, 2013). Many modern educators and researchers advocate for a
shift from the traditional standard practice, which is still dominantly practiced in most
schools today, to the critical reflective practice (Chan et al., 2017). Schools of all types
and on all levels should redesign their curriculum as well as their policies regarding the
use and integration of ICT, to best meet the levels of computer literacy of current students
and staff (Squire, 2003). Several studies comparing games to more common teaching
methods point to the fact that games can provide an enhanced experience (Carvalho,
2016). Digital games are an engaging medium for learning, since games can stimulate
cognitive processes such as reading explicit and implicit information, deductive and
inductive reasoning, problem-solving and making inferences from information displayed
across a number of screens (Bellotti et al., 2009).
Research recognises that gaming can be an effective tool for motivating and
enhancing student interest in learning and a valid instructional platform for cognitive
stimulation (Willis et al., 2017). Game-based learning has the potential to put information
inside the world and give it more contexts (Hansen and Storjord, 2016). This can happen
in a safe environment that Gee (2007) calls the ‘sandbox principle’. Educational games
create a new culture of learning which is in line with the habits and interests of students.
Evidence suggests that games can be used to scaffold learning, a process involving the
provision of temporary support to assist individuals in learning, which is gradually
reduced as the student improves (Dunwell et al., 2017). Additionally, games-based
learning can also provide a better challenge level when it manages to operate at the edge
of the learner competence, while traditional learning usually stays at the lowest common
denominator and may not be challenging enough for some (Hansen and Storjord, 2016).
As Meeri (2016) states video games involve mostly active forms of learning through
practicing and doing, rather than by passively watching and listening.
The report of the Federation of American Scientists mentions that the integration of
digital games in schools could contribute positively to the reform of the education system
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
9
(Kebritchia et al., 2010). Adding fun to the learning process makes learning not only
more pleasant and attractive, but also more accessible (Prensky, 2002). Hence, digital
games can promote the active involvement of students, as well as reasoning and problem
solving strategies (Gros, 2007). Digital games can enable players to achieve a ‘flow
state’, a situation described in the literature by an intense concentration of attention, so as
to make hard and often boring school work look simple and often entertaining
(Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004). Csikszentmihalyi (1990) describes flow as a state of
optimal experience, whereby a person is so engaged in activity that self-consciousness
disappears, time becomes distorted and people engage in complex, goal directed activity
not for external rewards, but simply for the exhilaration of doing (Squire, 2003).
Since 1981, Malone claimed that video games have the potential to enhance learning
and both learner and tutor satisfaction with learning through challenge, curiosity, fantasy
and control (Malone, 1981). If properly designed, digital games can be very effective as
educational tools, providing an alternative way of presenting educational content
(Protopsaltis et al., 2011). Digital educational games using the overwhelming enthusiasm
and desire of students to play (Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004), encourage the
development of logical and critical thinking as well as a greater acquisition of knowledge
and skills. Stimulating the interest of even the most demanding students, they fully
integrate them into the learning process, through learning activities diametrically opposed
to the traditional teaching methods adopted by most schools today (Dunwell et al., 2017).
The non-profit educational organisation common sense media notes that it is
generally recognised that properly designed educational games can be a suitable approach
to modify some of the barriers of knowledge-based teaching approaches used in schools,
enabling a shift to student centred learning (Rideout and Saphir, 2013). Additionally, they
can stimulate students in ways that abolish the effects of age or level of learning and can
provide the right environment for different groups of students to work together to achieve
common learning goals. Good educational games can also help teachers to enact the
curricula in ways that will help students develop deep understanding of and connections
among concepts (Allen et al., 2013).
Educational digital games are rich and stimulating learning environments, because
they allow the conduct of virtual experiments that would be impossible to conduct in a
real setting, such understanding the complexity of a city, looking back in history, etc.
(Klopfer et al., 2009a). Digital games which include simulations, virtual environments,
social and cooperative play have the potential to turn into a key educational tool because
they focus on interactive and participatory educational activities (Gee, 2007). As Thomas
(2009) states the approach described above is applicable even in younger age groups. One
such example is the title ‘The Sims’, which is aimed at children of almost all ages and
helps them, through unforeseen circumstances, to simulate social situations as accurately
as possible, such as the relationships between family members, the role of economic
goods, etc. Another successful example is the title ‘Minecraft’ with worldwide sales
exceeding 20 million copies. Minecraft is a virtual world where players can build their
own environments using Lego-like blocks that can be coloured to look like almost
anything (Becker, 2016).
Michael Gallagher, president and CEO of the Entertainment Software Association
(ESA), the trade association of the video game industry in the USA, states that digital
games can revolutionise education in terms of enhancing student learning. The education
system can harness the passion and energy of students for digital games to transform the
10 S. Papadakis
face of education for the 21st century, to expand critical thinking skills, to foster
student-student teaching and learning and may reinforce evidence-based learning
(Institute of Play, 2012). Integrating technology with the game has been proven to be
effective for the learning process in all development stages (Schaumberg et al., 2012).
According to Garris et al. (2002) games are related to the learning process, as shown in
Figure 4.
Figure 4 Educational game cycle (see online version for colours)
Source: Adapted from Garris et al. (2002)
Game-based learning in the classroom can encourage students to understand subject
matter in context, as part of a system. In contrast to memorisation, drilling and quizzing,
which is often criticised because the focus is on isolated facts, games force players to
interact with problems in ways that take relationships into account (Shapiro, 2014).
Digital games can not only be used as learning tools, but also as motivators or generators
of interest. For instance, the game ‘Age of Mythology’ features a huge number of
references to ancient mythology (Greek, Roman, Egyptian). It is not uncommon that a
game makes players curious about references and their sources so they look them up and
voluntarily start reading books or watching documentaries on these topics (Breuer and
Bente, 2010). Most recently, with the rapid proliferation of smart mobile technology,
several researchers highlight the advantages of using mobile games, focusing mainly on
increasing motivation and their numerous positive effects on cognitive, emotional and
social aspects of students (Papadakis and Kalogiannakis, 2017; Papadakis et al., 2016a,
2016b, 2016c).
Summarising, there is an increasing body of evidence for the contribution of digital
games in developing students’ skills and abilities (Groff et al., 2010). A critical review of
learning opportunities based on games, conducted by TEEM, an organisation that
evaluates educational software, identified several skills which were developed through a
number of properly designed studies (McFarlane et al., 2002). These skills are directly
related to the development of students’ strategic thinking, problem-solving skills,
research-design skills, communication skills and an increase in their self-regulation
competence as well as communication skills, creativity skills, IT skills, etc. Similar
results were reported by several other researchers (Klopfer et al., 2009b, 2009c; Groff et
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
11
al., 2010; McFarlane et al., 2002). Kirriemuir and McFarlane (2004) state that teachers
recognise that playing games can support valuable skill development, such as: planning,
communication, negotiating skills, group decision-making, data-handling. Students have
an active role in their learning by using games. They can repeat activities several times,
they can progress at their own pace and failure is an opportunity for learning and for
trying again, not something to be concerned about (Cruz et al., 2016). Summing up, the
arguments for the use of digital games in education are that they (Ke, 2008):
• encourage active participation of students
• encourage active learning
• can be effective tools to enhance the learning process particularly in complex or
obscure topics
• promote cooperation among students.
Therefore, educational games can help students to (Prensky, 2007):
• use action (and therefore experience) instead of interpretation-explanation
• create personal motivation for learning
• ‘accept’ multiple learning styles and skills
• reinforce their skills through an interactive decision-making environment.
3.2 Skepticism – barriers about the use of digital games in the educational
process
As Giannakos (2013) points out the introduction of games in teaching is often complex
and learners do not always use them as expected and/or learners do not have the expected
performance when they are using them. Despite the many studies of the learning and
motivational effects of digital games, teaching with digital games is not yet widespread in
secondary education (Huizenga et al., 2017). Games still carry a stigma for some
educators and the idea of “games in the classroom” is frowned upon in some schools
(Groff et al., 2015a). Additionally, the results of studies comparing serious game
environments (SGEs) with conventional media are still highly contradictory. Those
results do not allow us to conclude that educational games and simulations have a
positive effect on learning and motivation. Some authors believe that these contradictions
stem from that fact that the effects of digital games based learning can be modulated by a
range of different factors (Erhel and Jamet, 2013).
In schools, barriers to adoption include not only negative perceptions towards the
educational value of games but also the difficulty of providing good enough games to
keep students interested (Carvalho, 2016). An analysis of the digital games market shows
that successful games offer complex experiences for players, feature beautifully rendered
characters and landscapes and show ever more realistic animations, but have very little, if
any, educational purpose and value (Bellotti et al., 2009). On the other hand, most
edutainment has failed to realise expectations (Kirriemuir and McFarlane, 2004). For
some learning game designers, the emphasis of the design and primary driver is the
game’s playful mechanics and design; whereas for others, the primary focus is on
assessment and data collection. However, too often these approaches fall short in the
12 S. Papadakis
other areas. Balanced design argues for the coordination and alignment of these three
areas – game design, content and assessment – for a more powerful learning experience
and a more robust learning tool (Groff et al., 2015b) (see Figure 5).
Figure 5 Effective game design for a powerful learning experience (see online version
for colours)
Source: Adapted from Groff et al. (2015b)
Some researchers are skeptical of the use of the game as an educational tool. The reason
is that technology alone cannot guarantee effective learning, as a suitable educational
design based on fundamental principles of learning is necessary. Digital games are rarely
considered a valuable asset and teachers hold the belief that they are not likely to fit
easily into existing teaching routines (De Grove et al., 2012). One of the most frequently
encountered obstacles is that it is difficult for teachers to quickly identify how a particular
game is relevant to some component of the statutory curriculum, as well as the accuracy
and appropriateness of the content within the game (Groff et al., 2015a). For example,
Van Eck (2006) states that one of the biggest misconceptions among educators is that if a
game is missing content or has inaccurate content, it cannot be used responsibly for
DGBL. Negative teacher perceptions can be an important barrier to technology
integration in general and to using digital games for learning in particular (Huizenga et
al., 2017). Teacher perceptions are important because teachers play a crucial role in
selecting, implementing and evaluating educational games for their students (Huizenga et
al., 2017). However, educators can use these teachable moments to create cognitive
disequilibrium (through instructional strategies and activities) by presenting or designing
activities by which students discover information that conflicts with the game and the
student’s knowledge (Van Eck, 2006).
The challenges in embedding serious games into formal education lie in their ability
to demonstrate the complexity and interconnectedness of issues. These challenges can be
approached through the use of three frameworks, namely the identification of learning
goals, identification of teaching enhancement and game assessment. In the area of
pedagogy, the learner needs to be active while playing rather than be cognitively
overloaded (Papanastasiou et al., 2017). The greatest obstacle to integrating the use of
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
13
games into the curriculum is the mismatch between the skills and knowledge developed
in games and those recognised explicitly within the school system. It seems that the final
obstacle to the use of games in schools is a mismatch between game content and
curriculum content and the lack of opportunity to gain recognition for skill development.
This problem is present in primary schools, but significantly more acute in secondary
(McFarlane et al., 2002).
Gee (2005) points out to those involved in the educational process that is not enough
the use of digital games in education, but it would be most effective when used in
conjunction with effective learning tools, environments and systems. The same researcher
states that a game is not evaluated as educational because it has modern
three-dimensional graphics, but the extent to which the games features are exploited, both
inside and outside the classroom. The overriding objective in a typical playful learning
activity is a successful combination of education and entertainment, something that is not
always feasible. Although there are typically elements that are repeated in successful
games, their simple integration does not guarantee a good outcome, especially when it
comes to educational games (Prensky, 2005b). Also as Becker (2016, p.337) state, we
cannot assume everyone will like a lesson just because the teacher is using a game. Some
students do not play many games and a few do not play them at all. Some may even
resent the fact that teachers are using their favourite out-of-school activity in school.
Becker suggests that the teacher must be prepared to tell students why they are doing it
and what they should get out of it (Becker, 2016).
Even though some games can foster positive educational outcomes for a variety of
learners in specific subjects, this conclusion cannot be generalised to all games in all
learning areas for all learners (Kordaki and Gousiou, 2017). Simply introducing a game
in the classroom, without a preconfigured teaching context, will be more negative than
positive (Squire, 2003), as not all games are appropriate nor addressed to each student.
For example, students’ attention may be disrupted by introducing a game in the
classroom and thus the desired objectives will not be achieved. Additionally, a game has
to not only be age-appropriate, but also time-appropriate. Students may ultimately fail to
extract the required knowledge of a game, especially when it is not based on a
well-designed interface or when there inapplicable learning objectives incorporated in its
structure. Other researchers who are associated with game design, are worried that the
creation of games in which the main objective is to ‘facilitate’ the learning process will
eventually converge on losing the playful, yet attractive nature, so it is no longer
attractive to students (Smith and Mann, 2002).
Although Cordova and Lepper (1993) note that digital games enhance learning by
increasing student pleasure, they sound the alarm that these kinds of activities may
distract students’ attention from the learning content, undermining the learning process
and students’ achievement. The obstacles which contribute to the negative view on the
use of games include poor or low quality graphics, the lack of time in the curriculum, the
inadequate representations of the learning objectives when games are used in the
educational process and a general mistrust of the term ‘game’ and its use in the classroom
as an educational tool (Rice, 2007a). Corresponding research findings suggest to
researchers and practitioners (Garris et al., 2002, Van Eck, 2006, Gee, 2007) that in order
for a game to be effective in the educational procedure it must meet some basic features
such as a functional interface, proper use of graphics and multimedia features, the proper
integration of learning activities in the game plot, well designed characters etc.
14 S. Papadakis
Despite the potential of games as tools for teaching and learning, teachers, as
indicated by Klopfer et al. (2009a, 2009b, 2009c), could possibly face barriers to
adopting games in class. For instance, they might have little experience of integrating
games into the classroom and they might have problems engaging students due to
insufficient understanding of the variety of games available as well as the lack of data
and assessment feedback from games (Groff et al., 2015a; Hsu et al., 2017). Several other
types of barriers teachers face when they use games to teach include: expertise (they need
training), systemic (it is difficult to integrate game playing in the rigid curriculum),
financial (the cost of games) and technical (lack of dedicated equipment in school) as
well as a lack of documentation and training support, technical support and research and
development support (Van Eck, 2006). Consequently, the choice of digital games can be
limited (De Grove et al., 2012). As Rice (2007b) states, teachers are limited when they
use video games because they do not have the technology to support video games within
the classroom. The same researcher notes that many of today’s advanced games require
newer technology to operate than what the older operating systems within the classroom
can tolerate. The use of mobile devices by students will address some of these barriers as
they can use them anytime and anywhere, playing the game inside and outside the
classroom (Cruz et al., 2016).
To sum up, as with any new instructional tool, there are barriers to digital game use in
the classroom. Some are physical barriers, some are cultural and some are perceptual
(Groff et al., 2015b) as shown in Figure 6.
Figure 6 Barriers to digital game use in the classroom (see online version for colours)
Source: Adapted from Groff et al. (2015b)
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
15
4 Games implementation strategies in the formal educational context
Using digital technologies is a creative experience in which learners actively engage with
solving problems in authentic environments that underline their productive skills rather
than merely passively consuming knowledge (Lacasa, 2013). Digital games are based on
the principle that playing is learning in a challenging environment where students can
make mistakes and experiment through a process of trial and error (Papanastasiou et al.,
2017). As Gee (2004, p.23) states: “When we think of games, we think of fun. When we
think of learning we think of work. Games show us this is wrong. They trigger deep
learning that is itself part and parcel of the fun”. Games can make learning more
engaging and satisfying, offering at the same time, the possibility to expose learners to
experiences that would be impossible, unsafe or at least impractical to reproduce in the
real world (Carvalho, 2016).
Many researchers and educators have indicated that teachers play the dominant role in
the use of games in a formal educational context (Hsu et al., 2017). Alexander et al.
(2010) state that teachers can implement video games into classroom instruction as
follows:
1 digital games possess educational value and by having players interact with them
they are engaged in significant learning
2 digital games do not possess initial educational value, but content can be interwoven
through instruction
3 video games are used as a simulation and have a direct tie to the curriculum.
Figure 7 Teachers roles in a game-based learning scenarios (see online version for colours)
Source: Adapted from Becker (2016)
16 S. Papadakis
Accordingly, Becker (2016, p.221) states that there is a list of nine roles that teachers can
take on in game-based learning scenarios. These roles are not mutually exclusive. It is
common for a teacher to take on multiple roles at once as well as slip back and forth
between roles (see Figure 7).
When a teacher is to use an educational game in his/her teaching, the decision is not
easy, as there is a wide variety of different kinds and types (Groff et al., 2016). For the
reasons above, Squire (2008) created taxonomy of digital games based on two axes:
timetable and implementation. The reason he chose to use these two classification axes is
because the choices of educators are guided or restricted by the available time as well as
the type of teaching method or pedagogical method they implement. At this point, it
should be noted that the time the researcher counts in his classification, refers to the time,
that is required for someone dealing with the game for recreational purposes, generally
and not necessarily to the time required for use in the classroom (see Table 1).
Table 1 Timetable for the completion of various games genres
Game genre Time to completion Timescale Open-endedness
Targeted games 1–4 hours Weeks Low
Linear games 20–40 hours Month Low
Open-ended games 100–200 hours 2–24 months High
Persistent words 500+ hours 6–48 months High
Source: Adapted from Squire (2008)
Targeted games have been designed with a specific theme or concept, such as adding
fractions or photosynthesis. These types of games are easier to integrate into the
classroom, because they can act complementary to the curriculum and can be
implemented within the traditional school curriculum. Linear games can be either short or
long term and generally include a story path through the game. An example of such an
approach is the game ‘Lure of the Labyrinth’. It is a game that rewards the student for
learning algebraic concepts and is addressed to students of secondary education. It
includes a large collection of mathematical puzzles, embedded in a compelling narrative,
in which students work to find their lost pet and save the world from monsters.
Open-ended games provide tools and a platform to build objects and/or scenarios and
generally offer a rich learning context through which specific learning objectives can be
achieved. For example, ‘Civilization’ is a strategy game that takes place on a flat map of
a computer-constructed world. The player develops several skills and learning objectives
such as the cultivation of critical and moral thinking through the development of empires
and civilisations (Fitzgerald and Groff, 2011). Finally, virtual worlds, such as those
which occur in massively multiplayer online role-playing game, e.g., the ‘World of
Warcraft’ (WoW), are often difficult to be integrated into the classroom because of their
complexity. Several studies have found that games of this type provide rich learning
environments. Positive claims have been made about the educational potential and
learning opportunities provided by commercial games, such as increased motivation,
raised interest in specific subjects, multiple representations, an open- ended approach to
information, students in control of their own learning processes and peer collaboration
(Bourgonjon et al., 2013). Correspondingly, Groff et al (2016) created a simple model of
games categorisation based on the aforementioned work, as shown in Table 2.
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
17
Table 2 Digital game categorisation
Examples
Commercial Educational
Short form Angry birds Lure of the Labyrinth
Long form World of Warcraft Minecraft
Source: Adapted from Groff et al. (2016)
Short form games include games that have been categorised as targeted games and some
linear games, such as ‘Angry Birds’ or ‘Mario Kart’. ‘Angry Birds’ can be used to
explore the physics behind trajectories. This game involves “firing” an angry bird at a
structure in order to knock it down and get at the green pigs hiding inside (Becker, 2016).
This category of games can be more easily integrated into the classroom environment in
relation to long form games. Additionally, they show a sharp increase in their number due
to the rapid development of smart mobile devices and their accompanying mobile
applications (Richards et al., 2013). Long form games extend beyond the regular teaching
period. They require extensive planning and preparation by the teacher, an optimal
alignment with respect to the curriculum. However, they can be used in the ‘flipped
classroom’ model, in which learning takes place outside of the classroom, but also could
serve as a framework for further ‘exploration’ in the classroom (Richards et al., 2013). A
further advantage of the use of games of this type is that they develop new approaches to
teaching 21st-century skills such as problem-solving, decision-making, appropriate use of
ICT resources, action planning, etc. (Klopfer et al., 2009).
With regard to the suitability of each digital game for age and content, a teacher can
be helped greatly in his/her choice by using the Pan European game information system,
(PEGI) (Felicia, 2009). The PEGI system takes into account the suitability of a game for
a certain age and not the difficulty level or skills required for a game (Felicia, 2009). This
system includes age rating labels and content classification labels, that may help guide
parents and teachers in the selection of age appropriate digital games for children (see
Figure 8).
Figure 8 Age-rating and content classification labels (see online version for colours)
Source: Adapted from http://www.pegi.info
Also, given the popularity and the frequent efficiency of commercial games compared to
educational games, it is useful for the teacher to know the key differences between the
18 S. Papadakis
two types of games, because they highlight the dynamic influence of genres and
environments on school-related processes (Gee, 2003). Commercial games are rarely
linked with the curriculum and they cannot be used without ‘interpretation’ or
‘translation’ to provide a student-scoring mechanism. Unlike in the case of serious
games, i.e., games that are designed specifically for educational use, the integration of
games in the core curriculum is feasible, which seems to be important in facilitating both
a formative and summative assessment of students’ learning. Educational digital games
or serious games are powerful, innovative learning tools whose foremost goal is to
integrate education rather than provide entertainment (Kordaki and Gousiou, 2017). The
term “serious game” is often used to refer specifically to the class of digital games
intentionally created for teaching certain skills, knowledge, competence, or promoting a
specific attitude towards a topic, as an instructional tool in itself, or as part of a larger
curriculum of activities [Carvalho, (2016), p.24].
At this point, it is considered useful to explain how serious games differ from other
concepts like edutainment or entertainment education. As Breuer and Bente, (2010) state
edutainment became a buzzword in the production and evaluation of educational media
during the 1990s. Although some researchers use serious games and edutainment as
synonyms, most game designers and researchers agree that serious games go beyond
edutainment. Game-based learning and gamification are not the same. Edutainment
games are a subset of serious games. Digital game-based learning is learning that happens
with the help of digital games. A serious game is a digital game designed for purposes
other than or in addition to pure entertainment (Becker, 2016). Edutainment games are
those games within the serious games family which are mainly developed for use in K–12
education, have a focus on the conveyance of curricular textbook knowledge and rather
pursue additive combinations of entertainment and education in a motivator or
reinforcement paradigm (see Figure 9).
Figure 9 The relation between games and educational concepts (see online version for colours)
Source: Breuer and Bente (2010)
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
19
Entertainment education refers to any attempt to make learning (more) enjoyable, no
matter if media-based, mediated or within a classroom setting. Digital game-based
learning is the section of serious games, which incorporates education/learning as the
main or sole purpose. These games are usually educational in subject matter, engaging
and motivating the students to learn (Breuer and Bente, 2010). Gamification, while
related, is the use of game design elements (as opposed to entire games) in a non-game
context (Becker, 2016). The classic edutainment video games that experienced their
advent in the 1990s are one segment of digital game-based learning (Breuer and Bente,
2010).
The most successful commercial games for educational use are those referred to as
the ‘big G’ games (Gee, 2012). These are games which include not only the game itself,
but also the social interaction that develops around it. Typically, games of this type
comprise a plurality of features which Gee (2003) has incorporated in a list of 36
principles known to contribute to the creative use of games. As Becker (2016) states, Gee
principles have become well known for connecting notions of what is considered good
practice in situated learning to what is experienced while playing (good) games. Some of
these features are the promotion of collegiality, the development of critical thinking
ability across different fields, etc. In general, there are very few examples of commercial
games, which can be effectively used in school conditions. The most representative
example is the commercial game ‘Civilization III’ as shown by a study conducted among
students in Boston. Similarly, positive results were shown by the results of Simon
Egenfeldt-Nielsen’s study with the game ‘Europa Universalis II’ as part of his doctoral
thesis in 2005 (Groff et al., 2016). In summary, these studies showed that commercial
games can promote thinking and problem solving skills, however, always within an
appropriate teaching context and the corresponding necessary teacher preparation.
Corresponding findings have been seen with the use of games such as ‘The Sims’, ‘CSI’
and ‘FIFA World Cup Soccer’.
On the other hand, are the ‘small G’ games, which according to Gee (2012), include
only the gameplay of the game and probably do not include the majority of the 36
principles which are used by the same researcher in order to evaluate a game, most
notably the lack of social interaction. What is clear, though, focusing on a game alone is
not enough to create the best learning environment, but there is a need to develop shared
meanings through social engagements and interactions among students (Gee, 2012).
5 Conclusions
Whether in the form of smartphones, laptops, or tablets, digital technologies may be
increasingly ubiquitous in a person’s social life but marginal in their daily educational
experience once they enter a classroom (Lacasa, 2013). In many cases, digital games
have proven to be powerful education tools not inherently, by their design, but mainly
through their effective classroom implementation (Groff et al., 2010). Besides, the vast
majority of the research literature related to the use of digital games in education
confirms the positive relationship between active learning and student outcomes. Gaming
presents an opportunity to engage adolescents through a medium which is increasingly
prevalent as a leisure activity (Dunwell et al., 2017). As far as is known, ‘fun’ and
‘learning’ are not mutually exclusive terms, while, on the contrary, learning can be fun
20 S. Papadakis
and effective too. Thus, it is not a surprise that games are growing in popularity at all
levels of education, to include simulations, virtual environments, social and cooperative
play and alternative reality games. As Van Eck (2006) states, the combined weight of
three factors has resulted in widespread public interest in games as learning tools: the
ongoing research conducted by digital games based learning proponents, the ‘net
generation’ who has become disengaged from traditional instruction and the third factor
is the increased popularity of games.
Considering the fact that various studies show that digital games are an effective and
useful tool for learning, often gives the false impression that the integration of each and
every game is beneficial to the educational process (Becker and Gopin, 2016; Van Eck,
2006). Clearly, the above approach does not apply. In fact, it is important to note that if a
game is intended to be introduced in formal education, the environment and the activities
that will facilitate the integration of the game are the key to realising the full potential of
its use. The size of the game, which is translated as the amount of time and effort devoted
by the teacher to adapt the gameplay according to classroom requirements and the
expected duration of the game are also important when considering several constraints
when analysing game integration in the school environment. Finally, the appropriateness
of each game, like any other educational technology, depends not only on the value of the
digital game itself, but also on the requirements, characteristics and limitations of the
learning environment, as well as the teachers and students who will ultimately use it. A
central component of the movement to help game-based learning be a central tool in
today’s classroom is to provide educators with the knowledge, resources and support
necessary to overcome these barriers (Groff et al., 2015a).
Much has been written during the first decade of the new millennium about the
potential of digital technologies to radically transform education and learning. Education
in the digital age is precisely concerned with harnessing and activating the potential of
the learner’s voice and video games offer a means of doing so (Lacasa, 2013).
References
Alexander, G., Eaton, I. and Egan, K. (2010) ‘Cracking the code of electronic games: some lessons
for educators’, Teachers College Record, Vol. 112, No. 7, pp.1830–1850.
Allen, G., Sosnik, E., Swanson, K. and White, C. (2013) Achievement Unlocked Digital Games as
a Key for Learning, A Whitepaper for K–12 Parents, Guardians, Family Members.
BrightBytes Labs and co.lab, San Francisco.
Becker, K. (2016) ‘Choosing and using digital games in the classroom: a practical guide’, in
Advances in Game-Based Learning, Vol. 1, Springer, Dordrecht.
Becker, K. and Gopin, E. (2016) ‘Selection criteria for using commercial off the shelf games
(COTS) for learning’, in Learning, Education and Games, Ch. 2, Vol. 2 pp.43–60, Bringing
Games into Educational Contexts, ETC Pres.
Bellotti, F., Berta, R., Gloria, A.D. and Primavera, L. (2009) ‘Enhancing the educational value of
video games’, Computers in Entertainment, Vol. 7, No. 2, p.23.
Bourgonjon, J., De Grove, F., De Smet, C., Van Looy, J., Soetaert, R. and Valcke, M. (2013)
‘Acceptance of game-based learning by secondary school teachers’, Computers and
Education, Vol. 67, pp.21–35, ISSN 0360-1315.
Bowman, R.F. (1982) ‘A Pac-Man theory of motivation. Tactical implications for classroom
instruction’, Educational Technology, Vol. 22, No. 9, pp.14–17.
Breuer, J. and Bente, G. (2010) ‘Why so serious? On the relation of serious games and learning’,
Journal for Computer Game Culture, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp.7–24, Eludamos.
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
21
Carvalho, M.B. (2016) Serious Games for Learning: A Model and a Reference Architecture for
Efficient Game Development, Technische Universiteit, Eindhoven.
Chan, K.Y.G., Tan, S.L., Hew, K.F.T., Koh, B.G., Lim, L.S. and Yong, J.C. (2017) ‘Knowledge for
games, games for knowledge: designing a digital roll-and-move board game for a law of torts
class’, Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 12, No. 1, p.7.
Cordova, D.I. and Lepper, M.R. (1993) ‘Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial
effects of contextualization, personalization and choice’, Journal of Educational Psychology,
Vol. 88, No. 4, pp.715–730.
Cruz, S., Carvalho, A.A.A. and Araújo, I. (2016) ‘A game for learning history on mobile devices’,
Education and Information Technologies, VOL. 22, NO. 2, pp.515–531.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990) Flow: The Psychology of Optical Experience, Harper Perennial, New
York.
De Grove, F., Bourgonjon, J. and Van Looy, J. (2012) ‘Digital games in the classroom? A
contextual approach to teachers’ adoption intention of digital games in formal education’,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28, No. 6, pp.2023–2033.
De Jans, S., Van Geit, K., Cauberghe, V., Hudders, L. and De Veirman, M. (2017) ‘Using games to
raise awareness: how to co-design serious mini-games?’, Computers and Education [online]
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.009 (accessed 27 January 2017).
Dunwell, I., Condon, L.A., Bul, K.C., Lang, A.R., Atkinson, S., Coulson, N.S. and Collins, E.
(2017) ‘Promoting healthy adolescent lifestyles through serious games: enacting a
multidisciplinary approach’, in Serious Games and Edutainment Applications, pp.323–348,
Springer International Publishing.
Erhel, S. and Jamet, E. (2013) ‘Digital game-based learning: impact of instructions and feedback on
motivation and learning effectiveness’, Computers and Education, Vol. 67, pp.156–167, ISSN
0360-1315.
Felicia, P. (2009) Digital Games in Schools: A Handbook for Teachers, European Schoolnet,
Brussels, Belgium.
FitzGerald, R. and Groff, J. (2011) ‘Leveraging video games for moral development in education: a
practitioner's reflection’, in Schrier, K. and Gibson, D. (Eds.): Designing Games for Ethics:
Models, Techniques and Frameworks, pp.234–273, IGI Global, Hershey, PA.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R. and Driskell, J.E. (2002) ‘Games, motivation and learning: a research and
practice model’, Simulation and Gaming, Vol. 33, No. 4, pp.441–467.
Gee, J.P. (2003) ‘What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy?’, Computers in
Entertainment (CIE), Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.20–20.
Gee, J.P. (2004) ‘Learning by design: games as learning machines’, Digital Education Review,
Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.5–16.
Gee, J.P. (2005) Why Video Games Are Good for your Soul: Pleasure and Learning, Common
Ground, Melbourne, AU.
Gee, J.P. (2007) What Video Games have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy, Palgrave
Macmillian, New York.
Gee, J.P. (2012) ‘Keynote: big-G games are good for learning’, 9th Annual Games for Change
Festival (G4C) [online] http://goo.gl/dUr6Wz (accessed 15 January 2017).
Giannakos, M.N. (2013) ‘Enjoy and learn with educational games: examining factors affecting
learning performance’, Computers and Education, Vol. 68, pp.429–439, ISSN 0360-1315.
Grace, T. (2016) Digital Game-Based Learning: Effects on Students’ Perceptions and
Achievements in a Business Process Management Course, Doctoral dissertation, Wits
University, School of Economic and Business Sciences, South Africa [online]
wiredspace.wits.ac.za/handle/10539/22119 (accessed 12 January 2017).
Groff, J., McCall, J., Darvasi, P. and Gilbert, Z. (2015a) ‘Using games in the classroom’, in
Schoenfield, K. (Ed.): Learning, Education and Games, Vol 2, Bringing Games into
Educational Contexts, IGI Global Harrisburg, PA.
22 S. Papadakis
Groff, J., Clarke-Midura, J., Owen, V.E., Rosenheck, L. and Beall, M. (2015b) Better Learning in
Games: A Balanced Design Lens for a New Generation of Learning Games [online]
http://citeweb.info/20151584354 (accessed 25 January 2017).
Groff, J., Howells, C. and Cranmer, S. (2010) The Impact of Console Games in the Classroom:
Evidence from Schools in Scotland, Futurelab, UK.
Groff, J., McCall, J., Darvasi, P. and Gilbert, Z. (2016) ‘Using games in the classroom’, in, Schrier,
K. (Ed.): Learning, Education and Games: Bringing Games into Educational Contexts,
pp.19–42, ETC Press, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Gros, B. (2007) ‘Digital games in education: the design of games-based learning environments’,
Journal of Research on Technology in Education, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp.23–28.
Hansen, D.S. and Storjord, D. (2016) Learning through a Game-Exploring Fun and Learning in a
Project Management Game, Master’s thesis, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology [online] https://brage.bibsys.no/xmlui/handle/11250/2411523 (accessed 17
January 2017).
Hsu, C-Y., Tsai, M-J., Chang, Y-H. and Liang, J-C. (2017) ‘Surveying in-service teachers’ beliefs
about game-based learning and perceptions of technological pedagogical and content
knowledge of games’, Educational Technology and Society, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.134–143.
Huizenga, J.C., Ten Dam, G.T.M., Voogt, J.M. and Admiraal, W.F. (2017) ‘Teacher perceptions of
the value of game-based learning in secondary education’, Computers and Education,
Vol. 110, pp.105–115.
Institute of Play (2012) Groundbreaking Video Game Design Lab will Research and Develop Video
Games to Engage Students and Measure Learning [online] http://www.theesa.com/
newsroom/release_detail.asp?releaseID=175 (accessed 17 January 2017)
Judge, S., Floyd, K. and Jeffs, T. (2015) Using mobile media devices and apps to promote young
children’s learning’, in Heider, K.L. and Jalongo, M.R. (Eds.): Young Children and Families
in the Information Age, pp.117–131, Springer Science + BUsiness Media, Dordrecht, DOI:
10.1007/978-94-017-9184-7.
Justice, L.J. and Ritzhaupt, A.D. (2015) ‘Identifying the barriers to games and simulations in
education: creating a valid and reliable survey’, Journal of Educational Technology Systems,
Vol. 44, No. 1, pp.86–125.
Kalogiannakis, M. and Papadakis, St. (2017) ‘Combining mobile technologies in environmental
education: a Greek case study’, International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation,
Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.108–130.
Ke, F. (2008) ‘A case study of computer gaming for math: engaged learning from gameplay?’,
Computers and Education, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp.1609–1620.
Kebritchia, Μ., Hirumi, A. and Bai, H. (2010) ‘The effects of modern mathematics computer
games on mathematics achievement and class motivation’, Computers and Education, Vol. 55,
No. 2, pp.427–443.
Kirriemuir, J. and McFarlane, A.E. (2004) Literature Review in Games and Learning, Nesta
Futurelab Series, Report 8, Bristol [online] www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/
lit_reviews/Games_Review.pdf (accessed 17 January 2017).
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S. and Katie, S. (2009a) Moving Learning Games Forward: Obstacles,
Opportunities and Openness, An Education Arcade white paper [online]
http://education.mit.edu/papers/MovingLearningGamesForward_EdArcade.pdf (accessed 17
January 2017).
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S. and Salen, K. (2009b) Moving Learning Games Forward, The Education
Arcade, Cambridge, MA.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Groff, J. and Haas, J. (2009c) ‘Using the technology of today in the
classroom today: the instructional power of digital games, social networking, simulations and
how teachers can leverage them’, The Education Arcade, pp.1–20.
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
23
Kordaki, M. and Gousiou, A. (2017) ‘Digital card games in education: a ten year systematic
review’, Computers and Education, Vol. 109, pp.122–161, ISSN 0360-1315, [online]
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.011.
Lacasa, P. (2013) Learning in Real and Virtual Worlds. Commercial Video Games as Educational
Tools, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
Malone, T. (1981) ‘What makes computer games fun?’, Byte, Vol. 6, No. 12, pp.258–277.
McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A. and Heald, Y. (2002) Report on the Educational Use of Games,
TEEM (Teachers evaluating educational multimedia) Cambridge.
Meeri, K. (2016) Video Games can be Good for Brain Health? [online] http://bold.expert/video-
games-can-be-good-for-brain-health/ (accessed 17 January 2017).
Meeri, K. (2017) Not all Video Games are Equal in Terms of Executive Functioning Skills [online]
http://bold.expert/not-all-video-games-are-equal-in-terms-of-executive-functioning-skills/
(accessed 17 January 2017).
Newman, J. (2004) Videogames, Routledge, London.
Orfanakis, V. and Papadakis, St. (2014) ‘A new programming environment for teaching
programming. A first acquaintance with enchanting’, The 2nd International Virtual Scientific
Conference – Scieconf, EDIS – University of Zilina, Slovakia, pp.268–273.
Orfanakis, V. and Papadakis, St. (2016) ‘Teaching basic programming concepts to novice
programmers in secondary education using Twitter, Python, Ardruino and a coffee machine’,
Hellenic Conference on Innovating STEM Education (HISTEM), 16–18 December 2016
University of Athens, Greece.
Palfrey, J. and Gasser, U. (2013) Born Digital: Understanding the first Generation of Digital
Natives, Basic Books, 387 Park Avenue South, New York, NY 10016-8810, USA.
Papadakis, S. (2016) ‘Creativity and innovation in European education. 10 years eTwinning. Past,
present and the future’, International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 8,
Nos. 3/4, pp.279–296.
Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M. and Zaranis, N. (2016a) ‘Comparing tablets and PCs in teaching
mathematics: an attempt to improve mathematics competence in early childhood education’,
Preschool and Primary Education, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.241–253.
Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Orfanakis, V. and Zaranis, N. (2016b) ‘Using scratch and app
inventor for teaching introductory programming in secondary education. A case study’,
International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, Vol. 8, Nos. 3/4, pp.217–233.
Papadakis, St., Kalogiannakis, M., Zaranis, N. (2016c) ‘Developing fundamental programming
concepts and computational thinking with scratch jr in preschool education, a case study’,
International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp.187–202.
Papadakis, St. and Kalogiannakis, M. (2017) ‘Mobile educational applications for children: what
educators and parents need to know’, International Journal of Mobile Learning and
Organisation, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.256–277.
Papadakis, St., Kalogiannakis, M., Orfanakis, V., Zaranis, N. (2014) ‘Novice programming
environments’, in Fardoun, H.M. and Gallud, J.A. (Eds.): Scratch and App Inventor: A First
Comparison, Proceedings of the 2014 Workshop on Interaction Design in Educational
Environments, ACM, New York, pp.1–7.
Papanastasiou, G.P., Drigas, A.S. and Skianis, C. (2017) ‘Serious games in preschool and primary
education: benefits and impacts on curriculum course syllabus’, International Journal of
Emerging Technologies in Learning, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp.44–56.
Paule-Ruiz, M., Álvarez-García, V., Pérez-Pérez, J.R., Álvarez-Sierra, M. and
Trespalacios-Menéndez, F. (2017) ‘Music learning in preschool with mobile devices’,
Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp.95–111.
Prensky, M. (2001) ‘Fun, play and games: what makes games engaging’, in Prensky, M. (Ed.):
Digital Game-Based Learning, pp.16–47, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
24 S. Papadakis
Prensky, M. (2002) ‘The motivation of gameplay’, On the Horizon, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp.5–11.
Prensky, M. (2005a) ‘Listen to the natives’, Educational Leadership, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp.8–13.
Prensky, M. (2005b) ‘Computer games and learning: digital game-based learning’, in Joost, R. and
Goldstein, J. (Eds.): Handbook of Computer Game Studies, pp.97–122, The MIT Press,
Cambridge, London.
Prensky, M. (2007) ‘Digital game-based learning’, Paragon House, Saint Paul, MN, USA.
Protopsaltis, A., Pannese, L., Pappa, D. and Hetzner, S. (2011) Serious Games and Formal and
Informal Learning, eLearning Papers, p.25.
Rice, J.W. (2007a) ‘Assessing higher order thinking in video games’, Journal of Technology and
Teacher Education, Vol. 15, No. 1, pp.87–100.
Rice, J.W. (2007b) ‘New media resistance: barriers to implementation of computer video games in
the classroom’, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Vol. 16, No. 3,
pp.249–261.
Richards, J., Stebbins, L. and Moellering, K. (2013) Games for a Digital Age: K–12 Market Map
and Investment Analysis, Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, New York.
Rideout, V. and Saphir, M. (2013) Zero to Eight: Children’s Media Use in America 2013, San
Francisco, Common Sense Media, CA.
Sanchez, E., Young, S. and Jouneau-Sion, C. (2016) ‘Classcraft: from gamification to ludicization
of classroom management’, Education and Information Technologies, pp.1–17.
Schaumberg et al. (2012) Technology and Interactive Media as Tools in Early Childhood Programs
Serving Children from Birth through Age 8, National Association for the Education of Young
Children and Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent
College.
Shapiro, J. (2014) What the Research Says about Gaming and Screen Time, Mind/Shift: Guide to
Digital Games and Learning, New York.
Shuler, C. (2012) What in the World Happened to Carmen Sandiego? The Edutainment Era:
Debunking Myths and Sharing Lessons Learned, A white paper from the Joan Ganz Cooney
Center.
Smith, L. and Mann, S. (2002) ‘Playing the game: a model for gameness in interactive game based
learning’, in Mann, S. (Ed.): Proceedings of the 15th Annual NCCQ, Wickliffe, Hamilton,
New Zealand, Dunedin, NZ.
Squire, K. (2003) ‘Video games in education’, International Journal of Intelligent Simulations and
Gaming, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp.49–62.
Squire, K. (2008) ‘Open-ended video games: a model for developing learning for the interactive
age’, in, Salen, K. (Ed.): The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games and Learning,
pp.167–198, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media
and Learning, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Sumuer, E. and Yakin, I. (2009) ‘Effects of an educational game development course on preservice
teachers’ concerns about the use of computer games in the classroom’, 9th International
Educational Technology Conference (IETC2009), Ankara, Turkey
Sung, H.Y. and Hwang, G.J. (2013) ‘A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving
students’ learning performance in science courses’, Computers and Education, Vol. 63,
pp.43–51, ISSN 0360-1315.
Sung, H-Y., Hwang, G-J., Lin, C-J. and Hong, T-W. (2017) ‘Experiencing the analects of
confucius: an experiential game-based learning approach to promoting students’ motivation
and conception of learning’, Computers and Education, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY,
USA, DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.014.
Tapscott, D. (2009) Growing Up Digital: The Rise of the Net Generation, The Mere, Upton Park,
Slough SL1 2DQ, UK.
The use of computer games in classroom environmen
t
25
Thomas, Κ. (2009) A Social Worker Took the Kids Away: The Power of Games to Help Children
Learn [online] http://archive.futurelab.org.uk/resources/publications-reports-articles/web-
articles/Web-Article1507 (accessed 25 January 2017).
Ulicsak, M. and Williamson, B. (2010) Computer Games and Learning, Futurelab [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/sites/default/files/Computer_games_and_learning.pdf (accessed
25 January 2017).
Van Eck, R. (2006) ‘Digital game-based learning: it’s not just the digital natives who are restless’,
EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 41, No. 2, p.16.
Willis, J., Greenhalgh, S., Nadolny, L., Liu, S., Aldemir, T., Rogers, S., Trevathan, M., Hopper, S.
and Oliver, W. (2017) ‘Exploring the rules of the game: games in the classroom, game-based
learning, gamification and simulations’, in Resta, P. and Smith, S. (Eds.): Proceedings of
Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference,
pp.475–480, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE),
Chesapeake, VA.
Zaranis, N., Kalogiannakis, M. and Papadakis, S. (2013) ‘Using mobile devices for teaching
realistic mathematics in kindergarten education’, Creative Education, Special Issue in
Preschool Education, Vol. 4, No. 7Α1, pp.1–10.
Zhen, J. (2017) The History of Educational Video Gaming [online]
http://www.immersedgames.com/the-history-of-educational-video-gaming/ (accessed 25
January 2017).
