Quiz Show for Test Kids:

A study of the effects of a computer

based game review tool on the
engagement and retention of middle
school history students.

By
Joshua Harris

May 31, 2009

Touro University
EDU 795 Rick Vaccaro

1
Hypothesis:
If students review chapters or sections of an 8th grade US History text using a

cooperative/collaborative competitive computer-based game (CBG), they will achieve higher

scores, in general, than their peers whose instruction was identical in each facet except for the

CBG review. This will be achieved not only through reinforcement of the text through review,

but also through a lowering of the affective filter and an improvement in attitude about the

subject and testing due to the fun associated with playing a competitive team-based game as

preparation for assessments in this subject.

Theoretical Basis:
In the field studies concerning use of computer-based games/gaming (CBG) and recreational

instruction in actual practice, mostly what researchers study are the engagement factor, and

the students or players attitudes toward the subject mater, or affective filter in regards to that

subject, rather than the effectiveness of the game in terms of learning or retention. Though the

literature never addresses this research gap, learning or retention, there seem to be some

underlying ideas about these two areas.

One of these underpinnings seems to be that if the level of engagement is high and the

affective filter is low, meaning the learner has a positive attitude towards the subject matter,

standing and accepted pedagogical theory and research obviates that learning, understanding

and retention will take place at a correlative level. The basis for what is essentially a research-

based assumption is actually strong. The research studies done on the correlations of

engagement or affective filter and learning, and those done on engagement or affective filter

2
and retention are strong enough to posit without restudying using this novel tool, CBG and

computer based learning. Basically, it is accepted by many that if a student is highly engaged in

a subject, and has a good feeling about it, barring a learning disability of some sort, that student

will learn and retain that subject better than if they are bored by the subject and feel like a

failure in that academic area. Further, another reason for not venturing into attempting to

measure learning and retention is that it can become very difficult to disaggregate what was

learned solely in the CBG environment and not the social learning that takes place in many CBG

but which may not be the direct result of the CBG itself, but by the modality of the CBG.

The common successful facet in field studies of CBG in education was that nearly

universally, they engaged students in not only the game, but the subject matter as well, and

they produced a positive attitude on the part of the student towards the subject matter. This

effect was largely achieved in successful CBG through the use of fun, socially interactive games

that used a kind of emergent problem solving.

3
Revised, 28 May 2009

Digital Game Use in Education:

A Literature Review

Introduction
The use of computers in education has failed to yield a great increase in any measurable

achievement the way their use did in industry because to date, on a widespread level, nothing

truly innovative has been done with computers in education. Use of properly designed

computer based games (CBG) has the potential to finally deliver a new kind of pedagogy, one

that will catch up to students of the 21st century.

Since their popular dissemination among the people of the United States, computers

have been hailed as the technological marvel that would finally cure all the ills of modern life in

general and education in particular. Early computer technology failed utterly to produce on

such promises. Later, with the advent and widespread use of the internet, especially at the

collegiate level, there was once again a hue and a cry, almost a faith-like belief that not only

could computerspaired with this new networking technology and information super-

highway, solve the woes of modern public education, but that to not put this technology into

the classroom with all possible speed would in fact be injurious to those without, that these

children would somehow be left behind.

4
 This fear was somehow confirmed when educational researchers began to compile

demographic information on the ownership and usage of computers and internet and

correlated it to socio-economics and school achievementthe so-called digital divide. When

this was reported in the popular media, it took on a specious causal relationship which

completely failed to take into account the similarity in the achievement disparity of those same

socio-economic levels before the widespread use of digital and network technology. Following

this, school districts across the nation, with all the expense, speed and coordination of a cattle

stampede put computer technology into schools, whether the human or physical infrastructure

existed to support it or not. The results were the same as a decade before, no widespread

effect, positive or negative, could be detected.

The lack of substantive effect in public education by use of computers should not have

taken anyone by surprise. The reasons lie in the way the implementation was done. In any

industry, if new tools are brought in but those employed in the field are not thoroughly trained

then the new tools are of little use to anyone involved. Numerous studies and a large volume

of anecdotal evidence point to the reality of educators having computer equipment nearly flung

into their work lives with little or no pre-training or in-service education and support.

This was related in large part to finances. School districts had little funds, but felt the

pressure to be doing something to equip their students for the digital future and so dribbled

the hardware into schools, with what spare funding they had, leaving virtually nothing for

training, instead relying on individual expertise. In other cases, schools received one-time

monies which are at the heart of how anyone must try to implement any sort of innovation in

5
public education and the funds were spent acquiring hardware which would be obsolete in 3

years, or else the training could only be offered at a level which was not exhaustive leaving

large gaps in the teacher skill base across a district, state, and nation. After a while, when

hardware and networking were more ubiquitous in schools, the one-time funding remained a

problem. The choice currently is between: training those with the variety of skill levels among

teachers to a common minimum, providing enough hardware and software at a student level to

make common use possible, regular maintenance, replacement and upgrade costs, or the

combinatory choice of upgrading hardware, software, and teacher training to be able to really

implement truly innovative educational practices.

It is this last category, teacher training towards true innovation, that paradoxically is

least funded or understood, yet is most likely to produce the highest return on investment

when it comes to student engagement and achievement. In addition to financial obstacles,

which can lead to a lack of the results promised by the digitization of education, is the lack of

widespread use of real originality in digital educational practices. In the business model, the

computer sped up tasks that had been done manually or mechanically, (theoretically)

increasing efficiency, communication, output and productionthis occurred by its mere

application to many workplaces. The software industry continues to improve upon these initial

digital products: word processing, digital spreadsheets and inventory control, email and

communications, media design, virtual meetings, and presentations. The simple digitization of

tasks in business made a positive impact.

6
 When the same application of digitization happened in education, the results were not

congruous. The major effect was that teacher-oriented tasksadministrative record keeping,

teacher created curricular content, parsing and distributing publisher created content, and

administrative and collaborative communication became easier for those with the skills to use

the new technology. However, there was little impact on instruction or learning. This is for

several reasons. To begin with, students werent trusted to handle expensive equipment with

care (an expectation that they consistently live up [or down] to in the authors experience), and

then when the costs of the equipment came down, the teaching of the basic skills to students

for use of these new tools was not as omnipresent as needed. As with teacher expertise this

was, on some level assumedthey were born in the 90s, they must know how to use this stuff.

In addition, most of the applications brought into the education world initially were taken

whole-cloth from their business origins. They were not designed as teaching tools but as

production tools. For example, Microsofts highly developed word processing software, Word,

is not designed to teaching writing skills, nor even typing skills, but to facilitate those that

already exist; similarly, one cannot learn accountancy nor data analysis from Excel. In fact in

the case of the use of word processing applications, student learning arguably took a step back

in editingif I make a mistake, spell-check will get it.

So, while teacher tasks were digitized and made easier, no real innovation had come in

at the curricular or student activity end. There are many cases in which the mere addition of

computers and internet to a pedagogical setting did produce an initial increase in engagement

but not always correlatively in achievement; often as soon as the novelty of the technology

7
wears off of the students the engagement returns to previous levels. Using computers to do

digitally what was done in a pen-and-paper way previously is not ever going to be an effective

solution in and of itself. Computers need to be employed in a way that cannot be done without

their use. True digital pedagogical innovation will not be easily reproducible without the use of

computers.

Using computer games and computer simulation as a pedagogical tool possibly

represents a novel methodology which cannot be duplicated in a pen-and-paper setting.

Empirical research can show if this new methodology is really as effective as is theorized by

enthusiasts of gaming technology and its use in education. The questions then become, if there

is promise in the use of games and simulation, with whom will this approach work, what

designs workswhat increases engagement, understanding, and retention, what are the

peripheral issues for all involved?

In an effort to address these questions, the research on computer games has been

conducted in 3 main areas:

Demography: Who, in reality, plays computer (video) games? What kind do they play,
for how long, and why?
Design: What are the hallmarks of good game design vis--vis educational and
pedagogical theory?
Demonstration: What happens when game use is studied in the field in terms of
engagement, efficacy, and actual learningdoes it work, or just create new
problemsor both?

8
Demography
Several recent notable studies have, in an effort to establish a few starting places for

design and determine some actualities about video game usage, studied the demographics of

people who play computer-based games (CBG) of all sorts. Gaining understanding into the

people who play computer-based games (gamers), for how long and for what reasons, can be

invaluable when it comes to the design of the most effective and engaging types of games and

how to utilize those design theories for the creation of Educational games.

Karakus (A descriptive study of Turkish high school students game-playing

characteristics and their considerations, 2008) and Chou (Gender differences in Taiwan high

school students' computer game playing, 2007) conducted similar studies in very different parts

of the world that produced overlapping results when attempting to describe demographically

the population of gamers, their motivations, their expectations, and their habits. Predictably,

both studies found similarities and difference between genders. What is remarkable is how

similar the results of studies conducted in Turkey and Taiwan appeared to be.

The conventional thought has been that gamers are almost exclusively male, young, and

prone to games of violence played in isolation. In a study, Griffiths (Online computer gaming: a

comparison of adolescent and adult gamers, 2004) found that not only were there both males

and females playing the very popular Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game

(MMORPG) Everquesta medieval-type fantasy setting comprised of fighting monsters and

completing quests, but that there were a variety of ages in the game and that what was valued

about the game depended on age, gender, and education. For example, Griffiths(2004) found

9
that among the adult players of this game, over 70% hade a college to postgraduate education,

and as high as 20.4% were female. This differed from among adolescents, the majority of those

who played this game were males with high school educationsresultant from the limitations

on them by their age. The results seem to suggest that starting in late adolescence players

valued the social and cooperative aspects of the game more than the action or fighting

aspects of it. Further, Griffiths (2004) found that among those surveyed, regardless of age the

player, mean of number of months playing Everquest were all in the 24.8 - 28.6 range and that

the mean number of hours played per week was in the 23.4 - 29.1 range.

But Griffiths study only looked at players of one game, which does present a wide and

deep view of that games players, however, Chou (2007) and Karakus (2008) both cast a much

broader net and their results are easier to globalize. Though the studies were conducted in

different parts of the world, they both focused on high school age students and both had a

sample of 1000 or more respondents to their survey tool. Despite about a one year difference

in date of research, and the obvious cultural difference, there was significant overlap in the

findings.

According to both studies, while it is true that more males play CBG than females, and

for more hours, the numbers arent as lop-sided as the Griffith study might suggest. Both males

and females most heavily indicated that they play in the 1-5 hour range most, with males

tending to go more into the 6-10 range than females, but both were present. On game-type

preference, the two studies both show males having a strong preference for Role-playing

(Ultima series, Might and Magic, World of Warcraft), strategy (SimCity 3000, Civilization,

10
Starcraft), racing (Need for Speed, Mario Kart), and sports related games (FIFA Soccer series,

Madden NFL series). Females in both studies show a strong predilection for puzzle/board game

(Bejeweled, Tetris, mahjong, Monopoly, etc.), Action-adventure (Sonic the Hedgehog, Super

Mario Bros.), role-playing, and racing games.

Even when they played the same games, males and females seem to play them for

different reasons and expect different things out of them. Certainly both genders play CBG for

entertainment and relaxation as their paramount motivatorthe social aspect of MMORPG

type games (World of WarcraftWoW, Everquest, etc.) also seems to be of growing

importance as VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocoltalking with game-mates over the internet

while playing) is more available to the players. Females play more often than males for the

social aspect of games, they care more about the narrative aspect of games more, and they

seem to pick puzzle and board games for the idea of sharpening mental skills. Males on the

other hand play more often than females for the complexity and problem-solving challenge that

CBG can present.

These studies do help educators to understand what is really going on with our students

and their CBG related habits, motivations, etc., however, the segment to whom this sort of

demographic information is most useful is the educational CBG designer. One of the bases for

solid CBG design in the educational arena, much like that in the commercial arena, is designing

a game that students will actually want to play, because at the center of any good game,

educational or other wise, is the concept of fun. Utilizing the demographic data CBG designers

need to include the aspects discovered in these surveys to be most effective. The first and best

11
strength of any CBG is engagement. However, there is more to building an effective

educational game than just building an entertaining one.

Design
First and foremost, like good teaching, good game design has a few key components. It

is easier to discuss these in generalities than specifics because there is no single way to

accomplish these attributes. In 2008 Rebekah Shultz Colby wrote, A pedagogy of play

emphasizes active participation, [leading to the production of rhetorical texts for a gamespace

community] (A Pedagogy of Play: Integrating Computer Games into the Writing Classroom,

2008). By their very nature CBG disallow passive participationplaying a game you're not

playing just isnt fun. The research indicates that games are productive in helping students

apply, synthesize, and think critically about what they learn through active and social

participation.

There is more to building an effective educational game than just building an

entertaining one. Among the critical attributes of good educational CBG design is the idea of

games being rooted in solid pedagogical theory and foundations. There are some things that

computer based technology can facilitate better than a non-digital classroom, especially in

immersive simulated environments.

The theory Shultz put forth is that of something called emergent gaming (2008) and

pairs it with emergent pedagogy. Gaming, Shultz argues, allows the classroom to go from

workspace to gamespace and allows pedagogy to be informed by computer game theory. Two

such theories are emergent and progression gaming. In a progression game, the player follows

12
a series of challenges that appear in a fixed, linear fashion. In emergent games players face

challenges which constantly change, and change from game session to session within the

context of play; a game like chess is an emergence gameno two chess games ever happen in

the same way or order.

This is then applied to pedagogy. In a classroom based on a pedagogy of progression,

one assignment or reading leads to the next with little variety or exploration (Colby, 2008).

This is pretty standard in classes like writing/composition, and history courses. It offers little

immersion or ownership for the student. With emergent pedagogy, teachers introduce

principles and strategies in order to open up a studio-like space for students to work through

those strategies on their own, providing more ownership and immersion into the task. In

Shultz case, she used the MMOPRG World of Warcraft (WoW) in a writing class to create a

cooperative, recursive situation for her students, who then had to do technical and process

orientated writing for the game (Colby, 2008). This writing was then going to be published in

the format of the widespread and active WoW blog community. So there was a real purpose to

their writing and a genuine audience. According to Shultz, Because students are immersed in

an actual game community, their play within that community results in textual artifacts that the

community will use, further deconstructing the real world/virtual world, work/play

dichotomies, (2008)

WoW is one of many embodied simulation games. These sorts of game by definition are

emergent games and while WoW is unto itself not a pedagogical game, Colby utilizes it very

well, and through her utilization, illustrates a kind of task digitization which is novel to

13
computers. It is through the use of computer specific designs and processes that other sound

pedagogical theories can be implemented in a way which is unique to computers.

Kebritchi and Hirumi (Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern educational

computer games, 2008) conducted a through investigation into the description and correlation

of use of these principles in CBGamong them heuristics (also know as discovery/inquiry based

learning) and experiential learning.

In experiential learning, teachers engage learners in direct experience and direct their

focus on learning reflection to increase their knowledge, skills, and values. Experience occurs

as a result of interaction between human beings and the environment in forms of thinking,

seeing, feeling, handling, and doing (Kebritchi, 2008). This is the kind of task that lends itself to

true innovation vis--vis computer use in the classroom. Experiential learning, according to

Kebritchi is based on four main proposals: (1) learning involves participation in the real-world,

(2) there are intimate relations between experience and education, (3) understandings are

derived from and modified through experience, and (4) meaningful learning consists of action

and reflection Experiential learning/teaching can then be further broken down into five more

specific types in how they were incorporated into game design in Kebritchis investigation: (a)

learning by doing, (b) experiential, (c) guided experiential learning (GEL), (d) case-method

teaching, and (e) combination of experiential and inquiry-based learning (Kebritchi, 2008).

The primary goal of Learning by Doing is to foster skills by learning factual information in

the context of how it will be used. Experiential learning, which is simply defined as using

14
learner experiences to facilitate learning; GEL arose because in some contexts, student-

centered instructional strategies such as discovery learning, problem-based solving, experiential

learning, and inquiry-based strategies did not work effectively unless additional guidance was

provided for learners of all levels. Case-method teaching techniques develop fictional case

studies (hypothetical situations) and they are a form of simulation in which the student either

reacts to the hypothetical, or learns by observing another person's performance in the context

of the fictional case. The notion behind the combinatory experiential and inquiry-based

learning game design style is that learners learn through active participation in the real world

activities.

A good mix of pedagogical and game/task theory upon which games should be designed

and built is the experiential learning theory and flow theory. Such a model is presented by Ke in

2008 (A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay?, 2008)

Where she describes how games can mesh these game and educational theories. In use of

experiential games, Ke stresses the importance of designing balanced challenges to optimize

the learning experience. Flow describes a state of complete absorption or engagement in an

activity and refers to the optimal experience, which has a positive impact on learning (Ke,

2008).

The process of flow, in a game setting, can be described using a 3-step model:

antecedents, experience, and consequences. In the antecedents phase, what is required to be

in the flow state are playfulness, clear goals, feedback, control, focused attention and skills (Ke,

2008)these are also noted hallmarks of a good pedagogy. Once these are in place the person

15
experiences a taskthe challenge. The challenge is met with the both the antecedents in the

flow model but also with the artifacts or tools to meet the challenge, in the case of CBG this

would be characteristics of the game environment. During the flow experience, optimally, the

player will loose track of time and self-consciousness, their actions and awareness will merge

and their concentration will increase (Ke). It is important to remember that this can only

happen if the antecedents are in place, but also that the task is challenging enough to hold

attention and require higher order thinking, but not so difficult and esoteric as to cause

frustration. In the final step, Flow Consequences, if the task has been designed in a balanced

and proper way, the player can experience increased learning, changes of attitude, increased

intellectual curiosity, and likely perceived behavioral control.

Regardless of the game theory or educational theory involved in the design, there were

some common threads in game design which were evident. Good game design defines goals,

they create a way for the learner/player to enter a setting or mission, they tend to use social

learning by being collaborative or cooperative, they use a narrative or cover story to create

context and schema or scaffolding, they allow students to negotiate scenarios (problem-

solving) using provided resources, and they also provide immediate feedback. These are all the

theoretical indicators of good educational CBG design, grounded in accepted pedagogical

theory and research. This then leads one to see if these theories bear out in the execution of

use by students in the classroom.

16
Demonstration
In the field studies concerning use of CBG and recreational instruction in actual practice,

mostly what researchers study are the engagement factor, and the students or players

attitudes toward the subject mater, or affective filter in regards to that subject, rather than the

effectiveness of the game in terms of learning or retention. Though the literature never

addresses this research gap, learning or retention, there seem to be some underlying ideas

about these two areas.

One of these underpinnings seems to be that if the level of engagement is high and the

affective filter is low, meaning the learner has a positive attitude towards the subject matter,

standing and accepted pedagogical theory and research obviates that learning, understanding

and retention will take place at a correlative level. The basis for what is essentially a research-

based assumption is actually strong. The research done on the correlations of engagement or

affective filter and learning, and engagement or affective filter and retention are strong enough

to posit without restudying using this novel tool, CBG and computer based learning; basically it

is accepted by many that if a student is highly engaged in a subject, and has a good feeling

about it, barring a learning disability of some sort, that student will learn and retain that subject

better than if they are bored by the subject and feel like a failure in that academic area.

Further, another reason for not venturing into attempting to measure learning and retention is

that it can become very difficult to disaggregate what was learned solely in the CBG

environment and not the social learning that takes place in many CBG but which may not be the

direct result of the CBG itself, but by the modality of the CBG.

17
 In the reviewed studies, varied approaches and game styles are presented. The

common thread through the field studies reviewed here is that there is a computer-based

technology as a principal component in the instruction and student experience. In one study, a

narrative immersive 3D adventure type game was used as a tool for teaching elementary

students physical and political geography (Tzn, 2009).

In a study from Amsterdam, students were divided into task based teams (Akkerman,

2009). Half of these teams operating in a headquarters using computers with internet

technology, GPS maps to track their field teams, and presentation software. The field times

used GPS and video phones to trace a story from 1550 CE Amsterdam to learn about the

historical context of Renaissance Holland. In another case study out of Pennsylvania, 4th and 5th

graders were enrolled in a summer math gaming course which utilized a series of web-based

games developed using Macromedia Flash (Ke, 2008). A different study in the area of

mathematics took place in a Mexican high school where a collaborative and cooperative

electronic learning environment was utilized to allow students to digitally work on non-trivial

mathematics problem-solving tasks (Lopez-Morteo, 2007); because of the networkability of the

learning environment, they were able to manipulate the resources and apply them

cooperatively from different computers. Computer games were also used in a Greek study to

teach the standards of the Computer Science course itself (Papastergiou, 2009).

The common successful facet in all of these studies, whether the game used was indoors

or out, the area of math and science or the humanities, was that nearly universally, they

engaged students in not only the game, but the subject matter as well, and they produced a

18
positive attitude on the part of the student towards the subject matter even if the student

disliked the subject prior to using the game. For example, one study found that:

This study informed that computer math drill games, even through being
more simplistic than commercial role-playing games in terms of visual,
activity, and interaction design, still significantly enhance students positive
attitudes toward math learning. In addition, participants have performed
committed and effortful on-task learning when playing certain games where
math drills were integral to the gameplay and appropriately challenging
(Ke, 2008, p. 1619).

Conclusion
There is promise in the use of computer technology in education. That promise had lain

unfulfilled since the creation of computers and since educators sought to use what is, even to

this day, still comparatively new technology. The reason that promise has gone unfulfilled is

because there has been no real innovation in the field of educational computing.

The use of computer based games in education represents the first sally in what is finally

a real innovation in the digitized classroom. Since, with games, computers are finally put to a

task that is not simply a faster version on an old pen-and-paper task, it is one of the instances in

which the unique abilities of the computer are finally harnessed. It is through gameplay that

computers can produce the high levels of engagements and the low levels of affective filter

which create a flow state and follow in the footsteps of prior pedagogical theory to produce

better learning. It seems that our technology has finally enabled us to learn the way all other

mammals do, through play, observation, simulation and emulation. But simply throwing games

into the classroom would be completely inane and probably produce negative effects.

19
 While the field studies show that CBG can repeatedly and reliably produce the benefit

suggested in the design research, the case studies also show the vital necessity to choose

software that meets the criteria of good design and follows established, accepted pedagogical

hallmarks and theories. And yet, this would still not be enough.

In most of the research the groups of students being studied are in small controlled

groups. I didnt encounter a study that attempted to teach a lesson or unit using games in a

typical regular education setting. Further research needs to be done on this, but also to see if

the produced engagement and positive subject attitude remains with regular use of games over

the course of a school year, or if the novelty of gameplay will wear off. Further, there are a

comparatively infinitesimal number of teachers working in the profession today who have been

adequately trained to manage a computer-based game classroom, nor to monitor activity

across a network. If the pedagogy of CBG can really deliver on its promises, schools and

teachers will require extensive retooling.

Finally, the current state of this art would still require dependence on

privately/publisher developed game content. As long as this remains true, games will never be

fully under the teachers commandthere will never be teacher ownership, similar to the

textbook industry today. The technology doesnt exist right now (2009-10) for a fully

customizable, 3D, immersive, emergent-play game engine for teachers to use to create games

(lessons), though items like it are in nascent development in the game industry right now. NC

Soft, makers of the MMORPG City of Heroes (an online simulation in which players create comic

book style super heroes and operate in the City either in emergent gameplay or in progress-

20
based missions) and City of Villains, are currently developing an expansion for their game,

called Mission Architect. Mission Architect would allow players to create game content in the

City of Heroes context. This content is then uploaded to the City of Heroes servers and all of

the players on the network can play those missions just as though they were publisher created.

A Proposition
In the teacher tool I posit, Game Engine, teachers would have a framework,

customizable to any conceivable educational situation, for embodied simulation.

For example: An 8th grade history teacher would take and constantly modify Game

Engine (GE), which would be a skeletal 3D world-creator/governor to whatever they were

teaching at the time. For the first part of the year, he could throw on the American Revolution

in Boston skindefined here as an overlay which has all the required information about the

simulation of a certain teaching context which could be loaded into GE over the framework of

the world.

When this happens, the student could then play a colonist or Redcoat in the

Massachusetts area at the time of the beginning of the Revolutionary War. GE would know,

since the information came with the skin (this is the part of the content publishers would be

responsible for), that when the game calendar hits the specific date and time, Paul Revere and

Israel Bissell would embark for their famous ridesfor which only Revere gets credit though his

ride was far shorter and he got arrestedthe student could be at the north church and follow

Revere along his course, or go to where British troops are disembarking for their march to

Concord, but he wouldnt have to be there to witness them, he or she could be anywhere they

21
wanted at the time, GE would make sure the events happen on time regardless. In addition to

being able to interact in a simulation with these events and people, the teacher has also gone

into GE and set up several tasks which involve analysis and interaction with the event(s) and

people of the era, further, three of those tasks require that students work together to

accomplish them. Thus a game fully specific to class and course lesson is created.

Later in the year, the teacher, again using GE, inserts the US Civil war skin and the

students can participate in the events surrounding life on plantations, or the battle of

Gettysburg, or the surrender at Appomattox, or whatever they wish, while again accomplishing

the assignment, teacher-created meaningful cooperative problem-solving tasks.

With a significant leap in the power of the technology, and some very dedicated

programming, students could eventually not be limited to a theatre of events, like Boston or

Gettysburg. Students could decide to join in when Washington crosses the Delaware River on

December 26, 1776 to fight the Battle of Trenton, or go over to London and walk into a session

of Parliament to see what was happening in England at the time.

In other examples: In virtual genetics labs, students could play with mixing the DNA

alleles of rats and fish to produce bio-luminescent rodents. In the physical geography skin,

students could manipulate tectonic plates in a manner correlative to geologic time to witness

and manipulate the phenomena of sea-floor spreading, polarity reversals, and how they

interact, or observe weather patterns and their contributing factors. They could then

manipulate those factors and witness the change in outcome. In the geometry skin, students

22
could step through, in and around the shapes and models of their 3D problems, or better yet,

take what they have learned and apply it to architecture, building virtual buildings that remain

erect or collapse based on their successful application of geometric principles, whatever the

teacher had designed in GE. In an interdisciplinary cross-over game, they could create buildings

with their geometry lessons, and then apply environmental stresses like earthquakes (which the

student created by adjusting the movement of a plate along a fault line) to their designs and

see how their designs fared, and what could be done to improve them.

These things would and should all be designed around the same Game Engine to

minimize the amount of different kinds of training needed for both students and teachers.

Also, through standardization and universality all software creators or publishers would have to

write to only one platform. At the school site end, universality of a single platform means that

each department or district wouldnt need a different publishers base-material and that

students would be fully familiar with the game controlsat least the standard ones

omnipresent in all versions of GE user interface, these too would be customizable by the

teacher depending on context. The greatness of the computer is that since it is all just 1s and

0s, none of these places, sets, materials, vehicles, tools, historical figures, etc. have to be

builtjust programmed. Though the initial cost would likely be high, what a properly trained

teacher, with some creativity could do with this kind of technology would certainly go beyond

the mere digitization of pen-and-paper tasks to finally deliver on the promise of the computer

revolution in education.

23
Post Review Addition: May 28, 2009
After further research and discussion with computer industry professionals, another

aspect to this proposition has been added. The idea of an avatar or toon (the embodiment of

the player in the simulated digital environment) is common in MMORPGs. In fact, in most

MMORPGs one of the many goals is to improve the abilities and equipment of ones avatar. In

discussing the idea of Game Engine (GE) with an IT industry professional after the initial writing

of this literature review, an additional facet has been added to the overall concept of GE. In the

initial formulation of GE I had not considered the idea of a regular persistent avatar owned by

the student. In an interview with JP Andrews (Andrews, 2009) that very characteristic was

brought up, discussed, and ultimately added to this postulation.

A persistent avatar lends itself not only to gameplay, but would assist the teachers of an

individual student, and give the student a sense of ownership in the GE setting. The avatar

would be customizable and age appropriate to an extent that is useful at the time of creation,

probably second or third grade. Upon first being introduced to GE as an instructional tool, the

students, with some teacher supervision, would create their avatars. Given the age range at

the time of creation, anthropomorphic creatures would be available. Certain aspects of

appearance would be available for customizationthis is often seen as the fun of avatar

creation. This avatar would be maintained by the district and would be available to the student

across grade levels and school sites, much the same way that a students network partition

storage area (commonly referred to as the H-drive in FSUSD) is accessible to a student no

matter where they are if they login to the districts network.

24
 The creation of this avatar would mean that in cooperative and collaborative situations,

the students could easily recognize each other. In certain situations, for instance a social

studies environment where all the students played the part of historical figures, this would

assist them in picking out their classmates from the computer controlled characters. Further,

this would give them a sense of identity and individuality in what might otherwise be a uniform,

formulaic, and undifferentiated digital world. As the student grows older, and their aesthetics

mature, they could update their avatars appearance. If for example when Jane Q. Student got

to middle school, and was tired of her bright green tiger wearing a tiara as an avatar created in

3rd grade, she could update it to an the anim-style tween-ager girl avatar now available in

the middle school avatar package, keeping the tiara for sentimental reasons.

Of benefit to both the teacher and the student would be a system of visible

accomplishment recognition, or badges. Since GE, as a platform is universal across a district in

this theory, certain tasks could be set by teachers in a district for a grade and subject. When

that task is successfully achieved, either collectively or individually by a student, this

achievement could be represented in GE as a decoration or piece of equipment on the

students avatar. These could also be differentiated so as to note level of accomplishment. If

for example, a student achieved a 70-79% on their 4th grade math benchmark test, the 4th grade

math badge would hover close to their avatar with a bronze hue. If they achieve 80-89% it

would be silver, 90-100% or over would be gold, etc. If the avatar aspect of GE were available

for home access to students and parents, the badge system could also help parents to see what

their child is and isnt accomplishing in school. If the GE system were available for home-use, a

25
message system could also be built in with automatic alerts for students and parents letting

them know what tasks remain outstanding for completion, as well as personal messages from

teacher to students and parents, and vice-versa. This communication system would be

especially useful for parent and teacher communications if teacher messages could be linked to

parents cell phones via the SMS (texting) system.

After the 4th grade, those badges would no longer be actively displayed, but kept in a

storage area accessible to both student and teacher, to show what he or she had accomplished

in GE. These badges could even be directly related to state standards. Once this system was

regularized across a district, it would be especially helpful if a student switched teachers or

schools. The teacher would have a much easier way to figure out what the student had and

hadnt mastered. Further, if the badge system was directly correlated to state standards, and

if, as I posit, this system were used universally by all school districts, then when a child changed

districts, as is increasingly common in this era, the digital information of the childs avatar and

accomplishment could be electronically sent directly to the new district and school site, giving

that teacher instant information, beyond the vagaries of grades, as to what that child had and

hadn't mastered in school. This would be especially useful in mid-year inter-district transfers,

where in some cases the childs cumulative records are lost in transit or held by the prior

district.

Finally, mostly of benefit to the teacher, the avatar could become a place of central

access to student records. With certain teacher-only controls, teachers would access a variety

of relevant information, from contact info to dates and times of login to the GE system. In

26
addition to the badge system, the students state test score for the last few years could be

attached to the avatar making that metric of ability constantly available to the teacher. If the

student has special education, 504-plan, or GATE modifications, reminders and a summary of

these could also be attached to the avatar through these teacher-only controls. In addition,

there could be district, site, and teacher special information sections for teachers to add notes

into. All these would give a more holistic view of the student as a learner, further it would

make this information accessible and portable in a way never seen in education to date.

27
Bibliography
Akkerman, S. a. (2009). Storification in History education:A mobile game in and about medieval
Amsterdam. Computers & Education 52 , 449459.

Andrews, J. (2009, May 15). Network and System Analyst/Engineer. (J. D. Harris, Interviewer)

Chou, C. a.-J. (2007). Gender differences in Taiwan high school students' computer game playing.
Computers in Human Behavior 23 , 812-824.

Colby, R. S. (2008). A Pedagogy of Play: Integrating Computer Games into the Writing Classroom.
Computers and Composition 25 , 300-312.

Griffiths, M. a. (2004). Online computer gaming: a comparison of adolescent and adult gamers. Journal
of Adolescence 27 , 87-96.

Karakus, T. a. (2008). A descriptive study of Turkish high school students game-playing characteristics
and their considerations. Computers in Human Behavior 24 , 2520-2529.

Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay? Computers
& Education 51 , 16091620.

Kebritchi, M. a. (2008). Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern educational computer games.
Computers & Education 51 , 17291743.

Kiili, K. (2005). Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. Internet and Higher
Education 8 , 13-24.

Lopez-Morteo, G. G. (2007). Computer support for learning mathematics: A learning environment based
on recreational learning objects. Computers & Education 48 , 618641.

M.D. Griffiths, M. N. (2004). Online computer gaming: a comparison of adolescent and. Journal of
Adolescence 27 , 87-96.

Moreno-Ger, P. a.-O.-M. (2008). Educational game design for online education. Computers in Human
Behavior 24 , 25302540.

Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital Game-Based Learning in high school Computer Science

education:Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education , 52, 1-
12.

Tzn, H. a.-S. (2009). The effects of computer games on primary school students achievement and
motivation in geography learning. Computers & Education 52 , 6877.

28
Study Design:
This was a quantitative comparative study with qualitative notes taken by the teacher

who also ran the study. The qualitative notes were taken with the experimental group only.

The teacher had three sections of 8th grade US History. Two of These sections were the control

groups. The third section was the test group which received the variable. The population of

both the control and the experimental groups are all a racially mixed, fairly gender-balanced

sample of the population of most urban/sub-urban schools. No ethnic group made up a black

of more than 38%; the majority of the ethnography was, by largest to smallest groups: African

American, Caucasian, Latino and Asian/Pacifica Islander (Philipino).

The variable consisted of biweekly review game sessions over a ten week period

(however the data points used for results analysis were only collected from an eight week

period within that time) using the Quiz Show game software that came with the textbook

adoption. The textbook was the California Edition of United States History Independence to

1914 (Holt, 2006). Using the prepackaged software had several advantages, since it is tied to

the textbook, the examiner was relatively certain that the students had fairly consistent access

to the tested material. Further, it was also largely assured that the material conforms to the

California state standards for 8th grade US History.

The software is Quiz Show software that allows for up to 3 participants. These

participants were made of teams. I organized the class into three teams. The teams were

fluidcaptains and team members varied from session to session to achieve certain

homogeneity of effect. The way the game was implemented took advantage of competition,

29
collaboration and cooperation, emergent game play, and hopefully was fun for studentsthey

seemed to enjoy it.

The instruction was virtually the same for all of the classes. The instruction could not be

exactly identical between classes since the children, their abilities and questions varied from

class to class. Other variables included things beyond teacher control, such as, but not limited

to, environmental distractions, administrative interruptions of instruction, student absences,

and other human variations. The variable was introduced to the experimental group only in the

form biweekly review sessions using the Quiz Show game. The control groups received a

regular notes-based review.

The experiment took place for the instruction of three chapters. There were two

quizzes and a comprehensive chapter test that were recorded and compared. The same

quizzes and tests were administered to all sections on the same day of each other to correct for

information leakage between sections. As the experiment went on, every attempt will was

made to isolate the variable, so that a positive casual relationship could be clearly delineated.

At the end of the experimental period, the data was tabulated and examined. The

results were broken down by test/quiz as well as overall results the, qualitative notes and

results were interleaved into the data analysis.

The benefits of this study will be more than the general increase in the retention and

learning of 8th grade students. If successful and generally applied, this can help to increase

standardized test scores in the so-called content areas (science and history) which, moral and

30
pedagogical arguments notwithstanding, are how schools, teachers, and students are judged

and sanctioned in the post NCLB era.

Study Method:
As discussed in the design phase, this study introduced a computer-based game (CBG)

as a review tool into the instruction of 8th grade US History. This CBG was the variable. There

was one test group and two control groups.

Regular Instruction:
The basic structure of regular instruction during the course of this study would go as follows:

1. A new section of a chapter is introduced using either a narrative reading prompt

with questions that asks the student how they would react in similar situations

or use of a KWL chart as a pre-reading activity. Both of these would be followed

by brief class discussion.

2. Students will complete a Vocabulary Grid for the new focus terms of the section.

In a vocabulary grid, the student writes the term, uses the context or the

glossary to find and write the meaning, and finally creates a picture of graphic to

demonstrate meaning.

3. Using an audio book program the whole class reads the section of the chapter

currently being taught. Typically the teacher pauses after key points to check for

understanding, clarify points that may still be murky, expand on what is stated in

the text, or draw connections to prior learning.

31
4. After reading, students work on publisher-created Vocabulary Builder handouts.

These handouts are designed to reinforce academic vocabulary while revisiting

the narrative of the section. Upon the majority of students completing the

handout, there is a random-selection share out and review of answers.

5. With partners or on their own (student choice), students work on the publisher

created Section Assessment Questions located at the end of each section with in

the chapters. Usually when this is uncompleted it is assigned as homework.

Upon completion of the majority of students, the answer to the Section

Assessment Question are reviewed and discussed either as class discussion or as

teacher-focus lecture (depending on time).

6. Any publisher created biographical material is covered in whole class

reading/discussion format. Additionally, any publisher created Primary Source

content would be assigned for homework, to be discussed and turned in at the

due date.

7. At the end of a section, as a review before a section quiz, students would be

assigned the task (sometimes for homework) of going back through a section

and outlining the important information in their History Journal notebook. At

the conclusion of an entire chapter, students, in preparation for a

comprehensive chapter test, would work on the Standards Review questions at

the end of each chapter in the textbook.

32
 In the experimental group, for section quizzes, the Variable was used instead of

outlining; for comprehensive chapter tests, the variable was used in addition to

the Standards Review.

The Variable:
Quiz Show is a piece of commercially available software that is part of the textbook

adoption that comes with the Holt, Rinehart, and Winston 8th grade US History book, United

States History Independence to 1914 CA Edition (Holt, 2006). The game has several modes

but the 3-team competitive mode was the version that was used. The questions come from the

publishers Exam View Pro test generator question banks. Since these questions are text-based,

the instruction phase had a high fidelity to the text to make sure that this was a true review

experience, not a learning experience. The point of the variable was to create cooperation and

fun in the review of previously taught information in preparation for an objective test, not the

introduction of new information.

The basic structure of the game in the team mode is as follows. The game prompts

three team captains to choose team names and mascots. Once this task is completed, the

game launches. The game has a host who declares right and wrong answers, and playfully

cheers correct answers or disparages incorrect ones. The host does not read the questions. In

addition, at the top of the screen each teams score is displayed next to the mascot. When a

correct answer is registered, one of three celebratory animations is played and the total goes

up, usually by 100 points (the last three questions are usually 500 points to allow for last

33
chances to win). When an incorrect answer is registered, one of two slightly sarcastic

animations is played and 25 or 50 points are deducted from the teams score. Teams scores

may fall into negative totals.

Teams are assigned a buzzer key on the keyboard when the game starts. Once teams

buzz in there is a countdown timer of ten seconds for them to enter the correct answer. Since

questions are all in multiple-choice format, the player must buzz-in and then press the key of

the correct answer. Should the answer be wrong, the other players are offered a chance to

answer or steal the question. If a team buzzes in and fails to answer at all, they forfeit their

turn, lose the points, and the other teams have a chance to answer.

Implementation:
To make the play of the game more equitable, and accessible, the following rules,

procedures and modifications were implemented by the teacher.

The teacher kept control of the keyboard and buzzed-in and answered for the

teams.

Students were allowed to use their books and History Notebook Journals as

references.

When a question first appeared, the teacher read the question aloud to the class

along with each answer choice. No answer was accepted until the teacher was

done reading all the parts of the question and answers aloud. The team whose

turn it was had about 30 seconds from the end of the teacher reading to buzz in.

34
 If they failed to, they would be buzzed-in by the teacher automatically. This

ensured near equal access to the information and kept game play flowing.

Each team was allowed first chance to answer on their turn. Only after that

team made a mistake were the other teams allowed to buzz-in and steal.

As long as each team stayed in their designated part of the classroom,

eavesdropping was allowed. The reason for this is simple. 13 and 14 year old

children get excitable, and loud. Trying to keep them from shouting over each

other and making accusations was nearly impossible. After the rule allowing

eavesdropping was implemented, several benefits were realized. First, teams

self-monitored the volume level of their discussions. Second, accusations of

cheating ceased. Third, at least one member of opposing teams made sure to

pay attention to what their opponents answered, to make sure wrong answers

werent duplicated.

Teams were composed of Captains, Speakers, and players. Team captains were

not prohibited from being speakers as well. The first time the game was played,

the teacher chose the captains and players. Each time thereafter the teacher

chose captains, however, after the first time, captains were sometimes

permitted to choose players. If the selection process was too slow, or otherwise

unduly disruptive, the teacher always reserved the right to set teams. Records of

teams were kept and occasionally referenced to re-form teams along prior lines.

35
In the first part of the study, a strong amount of social engineering on the part of

the teacher occurred to distribute academic and social abilities evenly.

o Team Captain the role of the captain was to lead and manage his or her

team. She or he had final say on who was going to be Team Speaker and

could change Speakers in the middle of a game with teacher approval.

The captain had to adjudicate answer disputes on their own teams. The

captain could also assign specific tasks to individual players, i.e. make

them responsible for research or even specific areas of research, or to act

as spies. The best team captains had a plan for each person on their

team, some times these were unconventional.

The particular team captain who invented the job of spy (the student

called it ear-hustler) was initially criticized by his opponents. This did

not, however, stop them from later emulating his practice. Tight

whisper-filled huddles became the defense to this strategy.

o Team Speaker The Speaker was essentially the human buzzer for the

team. Since the teacher had control of the buzzer, the Speaker had to

say, or sometimes shout, the teams mascot to buzz in, further, to

eliminate confusion, the only acceptable spoken answer from a team had

to come from the Speaker. It didnt take long for the students to figure

out that the Speaker should always be the loudest member of the team,

not necessarily the most studious.

36
 o Players were assigned various tasks by the captains, and for the most

part contributed a form of expertise. Some were human databases;

others reread the relevant parts of the text. In only one incident did a

player act defiantly toward a captain. The captain asked if that person

could be put on time-out (like penalty minutes in hockey). After the

teacher approved, and the student sat out for 2 rounds, the recalcitrant

student rejoined his team without incident. To be sure, some of these

roles or tasks were suggested by the teacher; however, the students

learned to specialize their tasks in order to make their teams as

functional as possible.

The winners of each game were not rewarded with anything extrinsic. The bragging

rights alone seemed to be worth it to them. The simple act of competition seemed to motivate

the students simply to not lose to their friends and classmates so as to avoid the trash-

talking. Additionally noteworthy, is that some of the more introverted students who were

normally high-performing became valuable commodities beyond typical interactions.

37
Study Results:
The data was collected from the results of 3 different objective assessments which were

all written and provided by the textbook publisher. In the tables below these are referred to as

Test A, Test B, and Test C. Two of these assessments were section quizzes of approximately ten

questions (Test A and C). The remaining was a comprehensive chapter test comprised of about

forty questions. The section quizzes were fill-in-the-blank, matching, multiple-choice or a

mixture thereof. The chapter text was multiple-choice exclusively.

If students in a control class were absent on the day of an assessment, they were given

the assessment as soon as they returned, if they didnt feel able to take it on the day of their

return, their score was not counted in the control group score. This was done because of the

tendency of students to share test items with their peers who missed it. If a student in the

experimental group was absent for the all of the review game, their score was not counted in

the study result; if a student was absent for part of a review game (i.e. a one-day absence in the

case of two days worth of gameplay) their score was included in the study results.

A note on timing: Test A was the second assessment given after the introduction of the

variable. Test B was given about at the midpoint of the study. Test C was the last assessment

given under the study and was also done shortly after the end of state testing. It was one of

the shorter assessments. Also in the area of timing, it maybe noteworthy, that the

Experimental Class was at the middle of the day, the class right before lunch; Control Class 1

was right after lunch a time that can be a bit more chaotic; and Control Class 2 was the last

period of the day.

38
 The objectivity of the assessments, i.e. their lack of a written response portion was to

allow for data analysis to be as clear and objective on the part of the instructor as possible. All

assessments were scored by the teacher and then double check by a TA for accuracy.

(See results tables next page)

39
Tables:

Table 1
Experimental Class (EC) Test A Test B Test C
Average Score (%) 69.4 61.4 92.7
Std. Dev. 15.7 17.7 10.8
Highest Score (%) 90 90.4 100
Lowest Score (%) 25 28.6 60

Table 2
Control Class 1 (C1) Test A Test B Test C
Avg Score (%) 65.7 46 34
Std. Dev. 16.2 18 15.3
Highest Score (%) 85 100 70
Lowest Score (%) 20 4.8 0

Table 3
Control Class 2 (C2) Test A Test B Test C
Avg Score (%) 57.1 38.9 40.4
Std. Dev. 16.2 13.4 24.9
Highest Score (%) 80 62 70
Lowest Score (%) 30 14.3 0

Table 4
All scores are % Test A Test B Test C
EC Average Score 69.4 61.4 92.7
C1 Average Score 65.7 46 34
C2 Average Score 57.1 38.9 40.4
C1, C2 Avg 61.4 42.45 37.2
EC and C1-2
+8 +18.95 +55.5
Avg

40
Conclusions and Discussion:
The data for Test A show that in the case of the early part of the study, there was an

average 8% increase in achievement of the experimental group over the control groups. At that

point in the study, the EC was still figuring out the procedures of the game and was not yet

really employing gaming strategies like those discussed in the method section. They were

familiar with the general principles of winning the game and the idea of familiarity with the

material in order to succeed but none of the meta-game strategies were in place. Additionally,

there was a certain lack of discipline around adherence to the role of the Team Speaker. This

occasionally caused confusion and answer-input errors. One team in particular had difficulty in

mastering this discipline and it led to significant bickering. After the Test A assessment, there

was a class discussion to remind students of procedures but also to air and iron out frustrations

between students.

The data for Text B show a greater difference in the level of achievement in the EC and

C1 and C2. There appears to be a cumulative effect on benefit as use of the game continues.

Also noteworthy is that the review game for this assessment went a full 2 class periods,

meaning captains were chosen and teams picked at the end of a Tuesday class, and the game

was played for two entire class hours on the following Wednesday and Thursday, the test taken

on a Friday. This provided an extra 15 to 20 minutes of review time over the course of the two

days.

However, also noteworthy is that there was an overall drop in scores across all classes

for this assessment. The average in the EC was at nearly 70%, for Test A, and 61% for the

41
Control Classes. For Test B, the EC dropped in average by 8%, C1 dropped an average of 19.7%,

and C2 dropped an average of 18.2%. C1 and C2 dropped a statistically similar amount, while

the ECs drop was less than half of this average. The data suggests that the use of the review

game mitigated the drop in retention and test scores by and average of 10.95% - meaning that

while all the scores did fall across all of the sections, the Experimental Class had a far smaller

average drop in retention and score.

Factors that may have contributed to the overall drop in retention were numerous. First

and foremost, this was a much longer assessment that the other in the results. The publisher

provided assessments tend to vary wildly in what is tested. In the short section assessments

(Test A and C) the questions tend to stay in the lower order thinking skills (knowledge

comprehension and application) where the longer cumulative chapter assessments (Test B) not

only cover about 4 times as much material, they tend to contain many more questions that

involve analysis and synthesis. In fact, it was often the case that the teacher found the success

on the publisher-created section quizzes was NOT a good indicator of success on the longer

publisher-created chapter tests. Despite this disparity, for the purposes of the study, and

instructional fidelity previously stated, the teacher maintained this regular practice. Secondly,

the selected tests for the metric of study results were all approximately 4 weeks apart. While it

was true that Tests B and C were four school weeks apart, Test B was only 2 weeks before State

Testing, a time of high general anxiety for both students and teacher. State Testing takes place

over two weeks; so while B and C were four weeks apart, these were not regular instructional

weeks. Indeed even the lead up to Test B was atypical in terms of focus and methodology.

42
Since it was uniformly atypical across all sections, the results of Test B were still considered

valid. In fact, that these results continue to show a positive effect of the variable even during

atypical conditions strengthens their support of the hypothesis.

Test C can be interpreted as being a data point that was an outlier because of the

dramatic difference in scores and achievement. However, when a qualitative note is added,

this supposition is mitigated. As noted before, Test C took place shortly after the conclusion of

state testing. California state testing for 8th graders includes two more test than it does for

other middle school studentsa history test (tested only in 5th, 8th, and 11th grades and

covers the intervening content of the non-tested years) and science. It is safe to say that by

that time (when Test C was administered), the students in the study, whether control or

experimental where at a point of test fatigue.

However, teaching cannot cease due to the occurrence of state tests. When faced with

the prospect of taking another test, even one as short as this section quiz, most of the students

were unenthusiastic. The experimental group, however, had a change in attitude when they

realized that once again for this review they would be playing Quiz Show; the review for History

STAR was more traditional and they seemed to think that more of it was in store for them.

Once Captains were selected and so forth, the affective filter in this class went way down and

they once again became receptive to the idea of assessment again. The results of Test C should

be interpreted, therefore, more in terms of what the variables effect on the affective filter and

attitude toward the task was as much as its effect on retention and test score. In essence, use

43
of the review game was almost a gimmick to get the students to buy into learning the material

again, not for the sake of learning, but to play and compete effectively in the game again.

The results certainly seem to show a positive correlative result between the use of the

review game and the results of student achievement on the assessments. From these data, one

can surmise that the review game has a causal relationship on learning, and more specifically

because of the nature of the CBG used in this case, on retention. Further, it seems from the

data that there was a kind of cumulative effect and that the longer the game was in use the

more of an improvement there was in the test scores of the experimental group as compared

with the control groups. This may be due in part to the attitude which developed in the

experimental class toward the approach of tests. As the year progressed, they continued to

look forward to the prep game. There was a low amount of monotony in the game, not only

because of the changing nature of the game content, but also because the teams make-ups

were fluid, changing from game to game. It is also worth mentioning here that if the control

groups were not going to finish their pen-and-paper reviews in a single class hour and needed

and additional one, the experimental group got a 2nd day of review game, always with the

same teams as the prior day.

After this study, I am of the firm belief that even in this rudimentary fashion all the

aspects of good game design were present. The game was social; it was collaborative and

cooperative; there was emergent game play, and they seemed to have fun. The quantitative

data also points to this.

44
 In future, were this to be run again in a similar situation, and with sufficient time which

was not present for this study, a rotation of the experimental group among the sections would

lead to more conclusive data. After the first quarter, when the rituals and routines, and

discipline have been established, the study could begin. In quarter two Section A could be the

experimental group and be quantitatively compared to B, and C. Then in quarter three, Section

B could take on the variable as it leaves Section A, etc. While I am sure that similar results

would be found I believe they would be more conclusive and assured in the establishment of

the causal relationship.

45