Game-Based Learning - Science method

Hello! Generally speaking, these three terms can be put like this:

While GBL and Serious games can be confused with each other, gamification is quite a bit different.

A nice explanation was provided in:

And if you want to see some websites:

"Exploring the Impact of communicative Game-based learning experiences on students' and lecturers' perceptions in a tertiary grammar context."

Note: This research title/topic is appropriate to utilize for Quantitative, qualitative, & mixed-method research approaches. Best!

Game-based learning makes learning and instruction fun and immersive. Games give experiences meaning, they provide a set of boundaries within a safe environment, to explore, think, and try things out. They provide the motivation to succeed and reduce the sting of failure. https://elearningindustry.com/game-based-learning-for-increased-learner-engagement-new-hires/amp

Potential drawbacks of game-based learning

Too much screen time.

Games aren't always created equally.

Games can be a source of distraction.

It requires a technology learning curve.

Doesn't replace traditional learning strategies.

Not always aligned to teaching or learning goals.

Dear Mr. Atmaja!

Hereby below I searched articles that might be of value for YOU:

1) Dorfner, N., Zakerzadeh, R. Academic Games as a Form of Increasing Student Engagement in Remote Teaching. Biomed Eng Education 1, 335–343 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43683-021-00048-x Open access:

2) Pakinee, A., Puritat, K. Designing a gamified e-learning environment for teaching undergraduate ERP course based on big five personality traits. Educ Inf Technol 26, 4049–4067 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10456-9 Free access:

3) Agbo, F.J., Oyelere, S.S., Suhonen, J. et al. Co-design of mini games for learning computational thinking in an online environment. Educ Inf Technol 26, 5815–5849 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10515-1 Free access:

4) Noora, L. Laakso et al. 2021. Developing students’ digital competences through collaborative game design, Computers & Education, Volume 174, December 2021, Free access:

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Using the same subject as control and experimental group will depend on the study design. If it is a crossover study, then it may be fine as different groups would undergo different interventions or control at various time points. However, if you have only one group and use it as control and experimental group, then it may lead to issues regarding the confounding factors. The groups may not be of the same age when treated as control and experimental. Furthermore, growth may play a role in giving you different outcomes which may not necessarily be due to treatment or experiment. The upside is that the control and experimental groups would be matched perfectly as they are the same group.

Dear Dr. Pastoors!

I found a case study you might want to look at:

Ton A.M. Spil et sl. (2021). Are serious games too serious? Diffusion of wearable technologies and the creation of a diffusion of serious games model, International Journal of Information Management, Volume 58, June 2021, Citation:..."129 interviews to find requirements and validate first prototype of the game.Results are positive from a formal technology acceptance point of view showing relevance and usefulness." ,Open access:

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

Look out for vacancies on The Linguist List https://linguistlist.org/career/search/. If you know which researchers have projects on these topics that you are interested in, write to them to introduce yourself. It's also worth asking your PhD supervisor about this.

Yes, the question is not clear as Edmund stated

Based on my understanding, It should be the same as practicing the ethical and regulatory rules of private and formal courses.

This depends on the nature of games, social situation and child psychology.

Please go to this useful link:

http://www.cnbc.pt/jpmatos/29.%20Bradley.pdf

I have been conducting research in serious games for health for some time now. Our first thought on the subject was that the gamification of rehabilitation programs would make patients forget about their daily situation and focus on enjoying the session through solely playing the game. However, and after a number of clinical trials with patients and discussions with medical experts, we found that creating a link between the game and the rehabilitation of the patient can motivate them even more.

While patients would appreciate forgetting about their preoccupation through a game, clarifying how this game can help translate their effort into reality (i.e. helping them recover their range of motion).

I have read similar results in other research, notably for children with diabetes, who became more motivated when the game was presented as a tool that relates to their real life problem.

A. Fuchslocher, J. Niesenhaus, and N. Krämer, “Serious games for health: An empirical study of the game ‘ Balance’ for teenagers with diabetes mellitus,” Entertain. Comput., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 97–101, 2011.

I invite you to visit my profile if you wish to know more about our research.

Regards,

Halim

This link may benefit you:

Dear Ali,

I appreciate your excellent information and suggestions for additional investigations!

Thanks,

Steve

The recent promotion and adoption of digital game-based learning (DGBL) in primary and secondary education presents compelling opportunities as well as challenges for early childhood educators who seek to critically, equitably and holistically support the learning and play of today's so-called digital natives.   However, with most DGBL initiatives focused on the increasingly standardized ‘accountability’ models found in educational institutions, also in the meantime, in the absence of a common critical and theoretical foundation for DGBL, propose a conceptual framework that challenges what regard to be the institutionally nullified dimensions of autonomy, play, affinity and space that are essential to DGBL.   Contend that these dimensions are ideally situated within the inclusive and play-based curriculum early childhood learning environments, and that the early years constitute a critically significant, yet overlooked, location for more holistic and inclusive thinking on DGBL.

Attached herein.

Actually what Juan Carlos proposes is to use Competition Based Learning, that is the use of competitive environments to foster student motivation. Game theory is used as a design for those competitive environments but not for the learning process.

I used to hear such types of statement from one of my high school mathematics teachers that playing chess helps in developing strong analytical brain. However, I never took is seriously as I find it a boring game because of negligible physical activity. I prefer to a play game in the ground rather than playing any indoor game. However, I have some friends how are really good in playing chess, but I do not find something really interesting among them which may have been because of playing chess.

According to me, playing chess may a brain storming game, but may not be able to develop strong analytical ability in solving some science/engineering problem. Your opinion may differ from mine in this matter as I not a good player of chess.

Regards

MN Alam

Also this one

I have a concern about the question you posed - while multiple intelligence theory is widely popular, it simply lacks empirical support. For that reason, I suspect is has not (nor will in the future) be studied. See, for example, http://www.faculty.mun.ca/cmattatall/Multiple_Intelligences_.pdf but some additional literature searches will yield a lot more about problems with MI.

The famous theory of motivation is Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (PALS).

Read for Carol Midgley; most of her work concentrates on this topic.

In general, the PALS states that the reasons behind striving for doing something (motivation) are:

You can find part of the scale in the following paper.

Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of educational psychology, 89(4), 710.

Thank you so much Mr Andry, Mr Petri and  Mr Stephen for your valuable suggestions.

I was thinking about doing an experiment in teamwork efficiency, and the only thing that came to my mind is jigsaw puzzle solving: how much faster would a team of 2 solve the given 300-piece puzzle against team of 3, or something. You need something that is easy to parallelize, but that would require some interaction. My suspicion is that the good teamwork games would also be the games where individual effort is hard to quantify...

Take a look at these:

Hi Juan,

This is truly a challenge! Children and young adults are very different target groups. Educational games already have the challenge to be appealing for a very broad usergroup. I think asymmetric games could be a solution. Having different roles for different user groups. I am not aware of any work on this for educational games but there is a lot of work on parameterizable games (attached paper) as well as different types of gamers (link to gamasutra). Maybe you can be successful combining both concepts. The idea is that players can customize the game to their play style with some parameters. You can either ask players or make a self adapting game. I hope this was helpful. If not do not hesitate to ask ;-).

Cheers,

 Markus

On creating content for video games, you might take a look at this recent survey: A Survey on Procedural Modeling for Virtual Worlds (at CGForum). 

Specifically regarding dungeon generation: Procedural Generation of Dungeons (at IEEE TCIAIG)

You might as well take a look at the PCG Book in the make: http://pcgbook.com/

For evolutionary and search-based methods, J Togelius is indeed the best starting point.

Hi Dear Benazir

Please see the attached file

Ana, you might take a look at the INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SERIOUS GAMES

http://journal.seriousgamessociety.org/index.php?journal=IJSG

as well as at the activities and publications of the EU-funded GaLA network of Excellence on serious games

http://www.galanoe.eu/

incl. the upcoming GaLA conference (http://www.galaconf.org/).

Not sure if any of these will help.

"Video games in health care" (covers use in specific health e.g., diabetes, anxiety; as well as in training)

"Serious video games for health" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2919172/

"Educational Video Game Design: a review of the Literature" (2007)

"Exergames for Physical Education Courses: physical, social and cognitive benefits"

For some videos etc of health games you could try the "Games for Health Project" http://www.youtube.com/user/gfhproject

I could answer u in a 100 ways. Sry. I am an open minded inter- and transdisciplinary thinker. Sometimes a bit crazy... So: That´s why i am asking you: "Which performance term do u wanna use?"

Just a few more sentences pls about: I just call it "Strategic steps 2 embed thoughts"

First: Call the paradigma, your view bout science and your view to handle the term and yourself by "doing science" (i.e. using the performance term mabye based on a action theory in an anthropological layout using a qualitative metric)

Second: Call the structural properties and "key terms - concepts" (constitutive properties) that contribute to the sciencific community, which shall be related 2 answer your question, the question of other researchers and the non-scientific community (Willimczik could help).. Sry i don´t like research without sense and / or use .

In other words "open the field of research maybe by asking yourself bout the interest of research". Try to triangulate your personal interests about the performance term and your usage of the term and let us know your thoughts and interests."

Or in a more simple way: Just loose a few more words about

2. Research field, Domain, Discipline, Field of Intervention, where to use the implications caused using the term in a systematic manner

3. and your Theoretical Apporach

4. The metrics will follow itself... :)

Sincerely Steve

Short Way:

Steve Funke - TU Chemnitz Germany

Sports- and (Media-)Education scientist, Ergonomics and Human Factors Research, Media Psychology, also Business Studies, Philosoph with Interests in SG Design, Workflow and I am a Player of Bad "Shooter Games" that are made by the US Army (Military SG Games hehe )

Themes:

Learning Performance, Movement / Action / Motor Performance, coordinative performance, "Performance as a term to desrcibe the effectiveness of agents and processes to provoke states" , Instructional Design Performance

Motor Tests, Learning Tests, Usability Tests

d(/^_^)b

One question: Do u use the term SG 4 a computer based digital game or in a more general matter without any technology. Maybe SG as utilized Game, where Learning without recognizing the normativ layer becomes indoctrination or Playing a game becomes work? Games as simulated realities and Playing as Mimesis?

Did u already scrutinise the idea of men that stays in background of using the performance term? Did u ever thought about Cognitive/ Mind Performance? Body Performance? Aesthetic Performance? Performance of Education based on SG - SG Design Approaches.... Producing SG´s and teaching how to think about SG and conduct reseach is, in a strategic way (Seen by the Education policy) it might be cheaper to invest in SG, then i traditionell education settings...

i.e. easier then to make a film, write a book or instruct kids in front of the classroom? Didactic invests and educational efforts.. "The Suitability of the Du Pont System to evaluate educational performance / performance of education management processes?" . "Instructions as Investigations into the human capital ressources / Enhancing abilities 2 work, 2 live, 2 play, 2 learn, 2 computate, 2 communicate etc..."

And which Performance do u want to Improve by utilizing games?

Improving Performance of Thinking, Moving, Acting (i.e. Playing a Role in a theater)?

Second question: What kind of usage do u prefer? Handling performance only as a process or only as a result?

Third question: If u were a teacher in school.. Would u grade or evaluate the performance?