Professional Inquiry Project

Does implementing Game Based Learning or Gamifying your

classroom actually increase engagement and learning?

During the Fall semester I took a class on Game Based Learning and
Gamification in education at the University of Lethbridge. I believe my instructor
mentioned it was the first time the course had been offered or at least the first time they
had instructed it. This course was an example of Gamifying the classroom as we quickly
learned that we were simply just calling assignments quests and receiving XP (or
experience points) instead of grades. However, at the end of the semester we were still
awarded with a letter grade and thus corresponding grad percentage. If you received
over 2000 XP during the semester you got an A+, if you were over 1900 you received
and A, 1800 an A-, and so on. Although the course did not fool us wise university
students there was still much to be taken from it.
During this course, I learned that it is believed that Gaming in Education and
Game Based Learning (GBL) actually increases engagement. This make sense to me
as students of all ages would rather play games than do homework, for the most part.
Plus, once they hit middle/ high-school they are next to impossible to separate from
their cellphones on which they are constantly getting distracted by whether it be through
games, apps, or social media. Therefore, I developed a theory of how it would be
extremely beneficial for educators to tap into gaming and technology in order to use
these tools to increase not only enjoyment but hopefully engagement and therefore
learning too. If a student enjoys something, then they should be more engaged in it than
if they did not enjoy doing it. Common sense.
Although this theory seems like common sense I had concerns over whether it
was worth the effort at first. Does Game Based Learning or Gamifying your classroom
actually increase engagement? When does adding these tools/games become more
detrimental and distracting to the actual learning than it does benefit their learning? Is it
possible to cover everything that the curriculum asks of you in a game styled classroom
or course? These, as well as many other questions came to mind as my studies
continued but my overall outcome of the course was that if it is proven that the students
enjoy being in school and are more engaged in their learning when we implement
gaming in schools than we should at least try it.
Considering my theory and my aforementioned concerning questions I attempted
to find answer in my PSIII practicum. I did not gamify my classroom like the course I
was a student in at the University of Lethbridge but instead I used games as a learning
tool. At first I definitely thought that what they took out of these games was not worth the
time it took for me to set them or for the amount of time it took the students to play
them. However, as the semester progressed and their understanding of the games and
efficiency increased so did their learning.
The goal of the Social Studies curriculum in B.C. is to create informed
contributing members of society. During my planning, I struggled to find a way to do this
that students would actually enjoy until I turned to the idea of using gaming in the
classroom. I found a game called Total War: Medieval II that works perfectly for the B.C.
Grade 8 Social Studies curriculum. The Grade 8 curriculum in B.C. covers the period of
history from 600 to 1750 C.E. whilst still asking students use critical thinking and inquiry.
This game just so happens to cover that exact time period so what I did what divide my
class into teams of 5 or 6 with one computer savvy leader on each team. I used
Medieval II nearly daily and is not the most straightforward game for a 13/14-year-old
students to pick up right away so the division of gamers or computer literate students
evenly was crucial. At first, students did not enjoy playing because it was difficult to
operate. Even though the controls are simply just left and right clicking there are many
components to the game. Each team of 5/6 controlled a civilization that we studied in
the course, these factions were; England, France, The Holy Roman Empire, The
Byzantine Empire, The Turks, Egypt, and The Vikings. Luckily, all these curricula
mandated civilizations were also playable in the game. Medieval II was a turn based
game that I could hook up to the SmartBoard. Only one team would be taking their turn
at any given time while rest of the class was working on their projects. During each turn
the tam of 5/6 would have to discuss between them on how to manage their civilization.
Managing a civilization consisted; of controlling their finances, deciding who to attack or
become allies with, where to explore on a geographically accurate map of the
Mediterranean Sea and surrounding areas, Europe, Northern Africa, the Middle East,
Scandinavia, and Western Russia. Teams would manage finances by building
infrastructure, recruiting soldiers, building siege weapons/ cannons, and controlling tax
rates to maximize income whilst keeping your populations happy. Students would have
the most discussions on who to attack or who to ally with as they my have friends on
different teams or some just wanted to strictly keep the peace or some (mainly the boys)
would want to attack everyone. Mapping is also a huge part of the B.C. Grade 8
curriculum so this game was perfect. As they explore the map they would fill in a
physical hard copy map of the same area that I had handed out in class. If they shared
map information with another civilization in the game, then they were allowed to share
their map with the corresponding team in the classroom. This turned out to be a very
effective tool as the mapping questions on tests and quizzes were very successful.
Although this game was hard to implement once it got going I was very happy to have
struggled through its initiation.
Another game I used in my classroom was Jeopardy. I used Jeopardy to review
before any test or quiz and the results were amazing. Any question that appeared in
both Jeopardy and on a test or quiz had the highest success rates. I would split my
class down the middle and have Left versus Right and used candy as an incentive for
the winners (I ended up giving both sides candy every time). I would then call students
up to the front of the class two at a time, one from team Left and one from team Right.
One student would pick the category and value and face the class while I read out the
question and the first student to buzz in would get first shot at answering. I am still not
sure if it was the candy incentive, the informal learning, or the competition that clearly
increased their engagement and their success but I didnt really care. All I know is that it
worked and I will definitely use it again in the future.
Perhaps the most successful game I used in my internship was my critical
thinking unit which asked students to compete in a catapult competition. We began this
unit by playing a game on their phones called Catapult King. I then asked them what
they needed to know for the competition. They came up with 10s of questions the might
need to consider in order to be successful such as; what would they be using for
ammunition? How far away was the target? What materials would they be using to build
their material? How much time would they have to construct it? Were they shooting
them inside or outside? As well as many others. Again, Im not sure if it was simply the
implementation of competition or the incentive of a prize but the results were amazing.
All students loved this unit the most and every single catapult was successful. One
catapult that was constructed out of 15 wooden stir-sticks, one plastic spoon, 5 elastics,
and 4 feet of masking tape, fired a marble 33 feet and still hit the target.
Even though I am still unsure what component it is that increases student
engagement and learning when using Game Based Learning in the classroom I am now
positive that it is extremely effective when used appropriately and I will definitely be
implementing this tool whenever possible in the future.