Game Framework Analysis and Cognitive Learning Theory Providing a Theoretical Foundation for Efficacy in Learning in Educational Gaming

Jason Stratton Davis

Abstract


Several meta-analyses and studies have been undertaken in game-based research, which compare the efficacy of conventional teaching against the introduction of educational games into the classroom. The findings point to educational gaming providing teaching approach that allows for improved efficacy in learning and deeper conceptual understanding. But there is a paucity of research in terms of explaining ‘how’ and ‘why’ students learn from games. The mapping out the students’ experiences of learning, as a result of an economics gaming intervention, was achieved using research methodology called Interactive Qualitative Analysis (IQA). The findings of the IQA process were then further refined and developed into Game Framework Analysis (GAF) model which points to games providing a learning system that allows for deeper conceptualization of concepts and more meaningful application of knowledge. The question that arose was ‘How could this be possible?’ Part of the answer is provided by Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) which was developed by Sweller (1988). CLT examines the management of working memory in learning contexts and the resultant effects on learning. Games were found to have in their DNA, the ability to create complex learning environments that can manage the cognitive load in a way that facilitates an optimal usage of working memory, resulting in effective learning.

https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.7.9


Keywords


Educational Gaming; Cognitive Load Theory; Game Framework Analysis

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ball, S., Eckel, C., & Rojas, C. (2006). Technology improves learning in large principles of Economics classes: Using our WITS. American Economic Review, 96(2), 442–446. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=1843411

Davis, J. S. (2011). Games and Students: Perceptions and Evidence from a DUT Case Study. International Journal of Business and Economic Research (IBER), 10(10). doi:10.19030/iber.v10i10.5975

de Araujo, G. G. T., de Jorge, B., Franci, D., Martins, S. T., Vellutini, S. M. S., Schweller, M., & de Carvalho-Filho, M. A. (2016). Cognitive load and self-determination theories applied to e-learning: Impact on students' participation and academic performance. PLoS ONE, 11(3), Article e0152462. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152462

Emerson, T. L., & Taylor, B. A. (2004). Comparing student achievement across experimental and lecture-oriented sections of a principles of micro-economics course. Southern Economic Journal, 70(3), 672–93.

Gott, S. P., Parker Hall, E., Pokorny, R. A., Dibble, E., & Glaser, R. (1993). A naturalistic study of transfer: Adaptive expertise in technical domains. In D. K. Detterman and R. J. Sternberg (Eds.) Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction, 258-288. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Gremmen, H., & van den Brekel, G. (2013). Do Classroom Experiments Increase Student Motivation? A Pilot Study. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 9(19). doi:10.19044/esj.2013.v9n19p%p

Hays, R. (2005). The Effectiveness of Instructional Games: A Literature Review and Discussion. Orlando. FL.: Technical Report, Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division.

Hawlitschek, A., & Joeckel, S. (2017) Increasing the effectiveness of digital educational games: The effects of a learning instruction on students’ learning, motivation and cognitive load. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 79-86. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.040

Holt, C. A. (1996). Classroom Games: Trading in the Pit. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 10(1), 193–203. doi:10.1257/jep.10.1.193

Klepsch, M., & Seufert, T. (2020). Understanding instructional design effects by differentiated measurement of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Instructional Science, 48, 45–77. doi:10.1007/s11251-020-09502-9

Kruse, J. B., Ozdemir, O., & Thompson, M. A. (2005). Market Forces and Price Ceilings: A Classroom Experiment. International Review of Economics Education, 4(2), 73-86. doi:10.1016/S1477-3880(15)30130-4

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine Ways to Reduce Cognitive Load in Multimedia Learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801

Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing Cognitive Load by Mixing Auditory and Visual Presentation Modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319-334. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.87.2.319

Neral, J. (1993). Widget Production in the Classroom. Classroom Expernomics, 2(1).

Nkonyane, V. A., & Van Wyk, M. M. (2015). Post Graduate Certificate of Education Student Teachers' Views of Economics Games as an Interactive Classroom Technique. International Journal of Education Science, 8(2), 427-434. doi:10.1080/09751122.2015.11890264

Northcutt, N., & McCoy, D. (2004). Interactive Qualitative Analysis: A Systems Method for Qualitative Research. Sage Publications.

Ouellette, M., Breeding, L., & Clark, C. (2019) Using applied cognitive load theory and difficulty analysis for educational game design for understanding and transference of literacy skills in adults. FDG '19: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (pp. 1–11). San Luis Obispo, California. doi:10.1145/3337722.3337725

Paas, F., & van Gog, T. (2006). Optimising worked example instruction: Different ways to increase germane cognitive load. Learning and Instruction, 16, 87-91. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.02.004

Randel, J. M., Morris, B. A., Wetzel, C. D., & Whitehill, B. V. (1992). The Effectiveness of Games for Educational Purposes: A Review of Recent Research. Simulation Gaming, 23(3), 261-276. doi:10.1177/1046878192233001

Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from Worked-Out Examples: A Study on Individual Differences. Cognitive Science, 21(1), 1-29. doi:10.1016/S0364-0213(99)80017-2

Sitzmann, T. (2011). A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Instructional Effectiveness of Computer-based Simulation Games. Personnel Psychology, 64, 489-528. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional Design Consequences of an Analogy between Evolution by Natural Selection and Human Cognitive Architecture. Instructional Science, 32, 9-31. doi:10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021808.72598.4d

Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Late. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261–292. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5

Tsigaris, P. (2008). Is There A Double Dividend From Classroom Experimental Games? American Journal of Business Education (AJBE), 1(1), 23-36. doi:10.19030/ajbe.v1i1.4634

Young J. Q., Van Merrienboer, J., Durning, S., & Ten Cate, O. (2014). Cognitive Load Theory: implications for medical education: AMEE Guide No. 86. Medical Teacher, 36(5), 371-384. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.889290

van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive Load Theory and Complex Learning: Recent Developments and Future Directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. doi:10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0

Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2017) The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 22. doi:10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1

Vogel, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006). Computer Gaming and Interactive Simulations for Learning: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3), 229-243. doi:10.2190/FLHV-K4WA-WPVQ-H0YM

Wouters, P., van Oostendorp, H., van Nimwegen, C., & van der Spek, E. (2013). Meta-analysis of the Cognitive and Motivational Effects of Serious Games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 60(1), 412-425. doi:10.1037/a0031311

Young, J. Q., Van Merrienboer, J., Durning, S., & Ten Cate, O. (2014). Cognitive Load Theory: implications for medical education: AMEE Guide No. 86. Medical Teacher, 36(5), 371-384. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.889290


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 1694-2116

p-ISSN: 1694-2493