Martin, Wendy, Silander, Megan, & Rutter, Sarah. (2019). Digital games as sources for science analogies: Learning about energy through play. Computers & education, 130, 1-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.11.002
Martin et al. (2019) conducted a study to determine if students who engage in analogy mapping exercises following digital gameplay demonstrate greater understanding than students who did not. The authors conducted a matched comparison group study with a treatment and comparison group. Both groups received similar instructional sequences that introduced digital games surrounding three topics related to energy transfer, with the exception of two steps. The treatment group reflected on their gameplay experience immediately afterwards, while the comparison group focused on activating prior content knowledge. In the final step, the treatment group engaged in a discussion utilizing analogy-mapping techniques featuring visual support to highlight the connection between gameplay and the target content, while the comparison group engaged in an alternative discussion.
Analysis was conducted over a few months, which would likely make variables such as absences difficult to control. Results indicated that students in the treatment group learned more regarding broad energy concepts and one of the three energy-related topics. Notably, treatment group students with higher pre-test scores, those likely to be more advantaged with less missing data, learned more than those with lower pre-test scores. I assumed intervention would have had a greater impact on struggling students, but perhaps student motivation and absences were a factor.
This study was significant as it highlights the importance of instructional strategies to help learners connect digital games to disciplinary knowledge through “bridging activities” and reflection. Analogy mapping techniques can have a similarly positive impact when including an initial understanding of game mechanics, visual comparisons, and discussion to connect to discipline knowledge. Surprisingly, findings suggested that “analogies tend to be more effective when the source and target come from very different domains, because they demand greater conceptual effort,” highlighting the importance of teacher intervention rather than relying on gameplay alone. (p. 130).
Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujahat, M., & Perera, C. J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30, 100326. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326
Zainuddin et al. (2020) conducted a literature review of gamification in learning and instruction. Utilizing thematic and content analysis, the authors sought to summarize existing approaches, models, and learning outcomes in recent research, as well as propose future research avenues. The scope of the study was limited to peer-reviewed articles containing specific keywords published between 2016 and 2019, resulting in just forty-six articles. Articles were limited to those that were empirical, generalizable, and included descriptions of underlying theory. Only articles written in English were included, but drew from a variety of countries.
Findings revealed that most studies focused on motivation and engagement as related to gamification; although, it is unclear how definitions and measurement may have differed across studies. The authors note that most articles failed to include an underlying theoretical explanation. Only one article consisted of a longitudinal study, with most studies conducted over a span of a few weeks. This is problematic as short-term studies may over-emphasize the positive impact of interventions due to their novelty.
Gamification elements should be informed by learning theories and align with specific learning objectives to increase learner engagement and motivation. Zainuddin et al. argue that extrinsic rewards can be beneficial if present alongside intrinsic motivation, contrary to some existing research that suggests extrinsic motivators may undermine intrinsic motivation. Competitive elements affect learners differently based on their goal orientation. The authors emphasize that gamified learning adheres to constructivist learning, scaffolding, and social interaction, but only briefly discuss gamification’s roots in behaviorism. Despite numerous studies finding minimal impact, the authors conclude that gamification can have a positive effect on learning if implemented correctly, especially if used in formative assessment. More empirical and longitudinal studies are needed to analyze long-term impacts, account for learner differences, and further develop frameworks.