Though engineering digital game inclusion in undergraduate classrooms has steadily increased over the last two decades for in-person courses, their use has exponentially
increased in remote and contactless higher education learning environments. Studies exploring student technological acceptance of and content mastery from the use of engineering digital games have provided mixed results in terms of student enjoyment,
engagement, and game effectiveness. The majority of these studies have relied on pre- and post-questionnaires to assess differences in students’ gaming experiences and performance in the game and learning environment. However, quantitative methods such as the measurement of physiological responses during gameplay have been less explored for the exploration of student engagement and education. The goal of this work is to explore how a set of eye - tracking metrics can be related to gamer attention to in-game
stimuli and game interface areas of interest.
more »
« less
The impact of goal assignment in a game‐based learning environment
Goal setting has been established in the literature as a critical component of self‐regulated learning and for effective problem‐solving. Yet, surprisingly little attention has been focused on goal‐directed behaviour in digital game‐based learning environments (GBLEs) despite their expanding use in educational contexts.
The current study examined the impact of goal assignment in a GBLE aligned with curricular objectives and played in a classroom context.
Eighth‐grade students (
Two important results emerged that contribute to the existing literature on goals and GBLEs. First, assignment to the mastery goal condition resulted in significantly higher enjoyment ratings and monitoring judgements but not game performance while considering the influence of pre‐existing goal‐orientation. Second, self‐reported mastery goal orientation and videogame play frequency predicted enjoyment in the game.
The results suggest that enjoyment can be facilitated by orienting students to adopt mastery goals and that developers should consider integrating mastery‐based instructions in their GBLEs. Moreover, instructional goals can influence students regardless of incoming goal orientations.
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10478672
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
- Volume:
- 40
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 0266-4909
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 848-858
- Size(s):
- p. 848-858
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
more » « less
Abstract Background Mindfulness practices enhance executive function skills and academic achievement, spurring interest in integrating mindfulness interventions into education. Embedding mindfulness practice into a digital math game may provide a low‐cost, scalable way to induce mindfulness and boost game‐based learning, yet this approach remains unexplored.
Objectives We investigated the learning benefits of integrating mindfulness exercises in a digital math learning game and examined how students' trait mindfulness might moderate the outcomes.
Methods Two classroom studies were conducted with 404 5th and 6th grade students from six public schools in the U.S. (
n Study 1 = 227,n Study 2 = 177). The two randomized controlled experiments assigned students to one of the three conditions: passive control (playing the digital learning gameDecimal Point ), story‐enriched active control, or mindfulness‐enriched condition. Trait mindfulness, learning gains, and in‐game problem‐solving (including problem‐solving duration, error count and correctness after reminder) were assessed. Study 2 included a manipulation check to better understand the effects of the mindfulness intervention.Results Findings showed no significant differences in learning gains, problem‐solving duration or error count among the conditions. Students' trait mindfulness did not moderate these outcomes. Mindfulness reminders in the mindfulness‐enriched game led to more correct answers after errors than jokes in the story‐enriched game. Study 2 revealed that we failed to induce higher state mindfulness through the mindfulness inductions.
Conclusions Mindfulness prompts could be especially beneficial for students experiencing frustration during gameplay, warranting more exploration for digital game‐based instruction. We highlight barriers and future directions for fostering mindfulness through computer‐based instruction in classrooms.
-
more » « less
Abstract In this study, we investigated the validity of a stealth assessment of physics understanding in an educational game, as well as the effectiveness of different game‐level delivery methods and various in‐game supports on learning. Using a game called
Physics Playground , we randomly assigned 263 ninth‐ to eleventh‐grade students into four groups: adaptive, linear, free choice and no‐treatment control. Each condition had access to the same in‐game learning supports during gameplay. Results showed that: (a) the stealth assessment estimates of physics understanding were valid—significantly correlating with the external physics test scores; (b) there was no significant effect of game‐level delivery method on students' learning; and (c) physics animations were the most effective (among eight supports tested) in predicting both learning outcome and in‐game performance (e.g. number of game levels solved). We included student enjoyment, gender and ethnicity in our analyses as moderators to further investigate the research questions. -
This research paper focuses on comparing engineering students’ beliefs and behaviors related to making process safety judgements. Despite emphasis on process safety education, serious health and safety accidents in the chemical process industry continue to occur. Investigations of major incidents have reported that, in many cases, tension caused by the need to balance several competing criteria was the culprit. While there have been substantial improvements in process safety education, most efforts have focused on preventing incidents through safer design, while few have focused on making process safety judgements in situations that have competing criteria. This pilot study investigates (1) what are engineering students’ beliefs about how they would approach process safety judgements with competing criteria? and (2) how do students react to the process of comparing their beliefs and behaviors in process safety judgements? We interviewed three chemical engineering students to determine their beliefs about making judgements in process safety contexts with competing criteria. Next, the students played through a digital process safety game, Contents Under Pressure (CUP). In CUP, students make process safety judgements in a digital chemical plant setting, and the judgements they encounter include a variety of criteria juxtapositions. Upon completing CUP, students were asked to reflect on their criteria priorities as they believed they played CUP through an online survey. GAP Profiles were generated as a way to directly compare initial beliefs, gameplay, and reflection criteria priorities. Finally, students reconciled differences between their beliefs and behaviors through a semi-structured interview, prompting students to think about the cause of the observed differences. In the initial beliefs interviews, we identified themes tied to prioritization of competing criteria. Some students rationalized their prioritizations by aligning them with their perceived priorities of the company, while others overcomplicated proposed hypotheticals in an attempt to find an optimized outcome. None of the participants could understand the link between process safety judgements and relationships, so they tended to devalue this criterion in their prioritizations. After playing CUP, the students communicated a better awareness of how relationships influence process safety judgements. Following gameplay, all participants stated that in-game feedback was critical to the ways in which they made judgements during CUP. Some participants indicated that their behaviors in CUP were more representative of the way they would approach process safety judgements in real life than their responses in the initial interview. This result may suggest that students have difficulty accurately predicting how they will apply process safety criteria in judgements without practicing these priorities in context. Results of this pilot study indicate that using a game-based approach to practice judgements with competing criteria gives students an opportunity to gain awareness about their approaches to process safety judgements and any differences that exist with their formulated beliefs.more » « less
-
This research paper focuses on comparing engineering students’ beliefs and behaviors related to making process safety judgements. Despite emphasis on process safety education, serious health and safety accidents in the chemical process industry continue to occur. Investigations of major incidents have reported that, in many cases, tension caused by the need to balance several competing criteria was the culprit. While there have been substantial improvements in process safety education, most efforts have focused on preventing incidents through safer design, while few have focused on making process safety judgements in situations that have competing criteria. This pilot study investigates (1) what are engineering students’ beliefs about how they would approach process safety judgements with competing criteria? and (2) what are students’ responses to differences between their beliefs and behaviors in process safety judgements with competing criteria? We interviewed three chemical engineering students to determine their beliefs about making judgements in process safety contexts with competing criteria. Next, the students played through a digital process safety game, Contents Under Pressure (CUP). In CUP, students make process safety judgements in a digital chemical plant setting, and the judgements they encounter include a variety of criteria juxtapositions. Upon completing CUP, students were asked to reflect on their criteria priorities as they believed they played CUP through an online survey. GAP Profiles were generated as a way to directly compare initial beliefs, gameplay, and reflection criteria priorities. Finally, students reconciled differences between their beliefs and behaviors through a semi-structured interview, prompting students to think about the cause of the observed differences. In the initial beliefs interviews, we identified themes tied to prioritization of competing criteria. Some students rationalized their prioritizations by aligning them with their perceived priorities of the company, while others overcomplicated proposed hypotheticals in an attempt to find an optimized outcome. None of the participants could understand the link between process safety judgements and relationships, so they tended to devalue this criterion in their prioritizations. After playing CUP, the students communicated a better awareness of how relationships influence process safety judgements. Following gameplay, all participants stated that in-game feedback was critical to the ways in which they made judgements during CUP. Some participants indicated that their behaviors in CUP were more representative of the way they would approach process safety judgements in real life than their responses in the initial interview. This result may suggest that students have difficulty accurately predicting how they will apply process safety criteria in judgements without practicing these priorities in context. Results of this pilot study indicate that using a game-based approach to practice judgements with competing criteria gives students an opportunity to gain awareness about their approaches to process safety judgements and any differences that exist with their formulated beliefs.more » « less
