Education for a Digital World Advice, Guidelines and Effective Practice from Around Globe, 2008a

23 – Computer-Based Games for Learning
Why use computer-based
games for learning?
Several factors have recently converged to propel learning
applications for computer-based games.
POPULARITY AND ACCESS
First, games are widely popular and accessible as entertainment;
the Canadian video game market will increase
from $732 million in 2005 to $1.3 billion in 2010, while
global video game spending is expected to rise from
$27.1 billion in 2005 to $46.5 billion in 2010 (Forest,
2006). A 2002 US survey found that 92 percent of children
and adolescents ages 2 to 17 played video games,
and more than two-thirds of all children ages 2 to 18
lived in a home with a video game system (Kaiser Family
Foundation 2002). As well, 61 percent of Canadian
households and 75 percent of US households used mobile
phones in 2005 (Wright, 2006). Using games for learning
builds on their familiarity and relatively easy access.
PLAYER ENGAGEMENT
Computer games are highly engaging. Today’s games
offer motivating, absorbing, interactive, collaborative
experiences that draw in players and keep them playing
for many hours, often developing complex social networks
in the process.
A growing body of literature analyzes aspects of
games that foster player engagement and motivation.
Asgari and Kaufman (2004) cite three categories of factors
that sustain a game’s intrinsic motivation so that a
player will play for his/ her own interest and enjoyment,
even in the absence of external rewards:
Table 23.1. Intrinsically Motivating Features of Games (Asgari & Kaufman, 2004)
Feature Category
Psychological: those that
meet individual needs
Structural: related to the
inner structure of a game
Implementation: related to
the way a game is implemented
and presented to the
player
Examples
Features that meet needs for competence,
self-determination, interest-excitement,
enjoyment.
Complexity, novelty, unpredictability,
uncertain outcomes, challenge, feedback,
fantasy, curiosity, control, interactivity,
competition
Graphics and sound, having multiple
players, using well-known characters or
settings, high speed, useful interface,
“save game” capability
Prensky (2001a) lists twelve elements that make computer
games engaging:
Table 23.2. Twelve Elements that make Computer Games Engaging (Prensky
(2001a), quoted in Mitchell & Savill-Smith, 2004)
Game Characteristic
Fun
Play
Rules
Goals
Interaction
Outcomes and feedback
Adaptive
Winning
Conflict/competition/
challenge and opposition
Problem solving
Social interaction
Representation and a story
Contribution to Players’ Engagement
Enjoyment and pleasure
Intense and passionate involvement
Structure
Motivation
Doing the activity
Learning
“Flow” state
Ego gratification
Adrenaline
Sparks creativity
Social groups
Emotion
Another analysis of games’ engaging quality focuses
on players’ experience of “flow”, a state of intense concentration
and focus in which they have a balance between
ability level and challenge, a sense of personal
control over the situation, and a sense of intrinsic reward
from the play (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Welldesigned
games do this by, among other things, having
multiple skills levels so that players face new but achievable
challenges as they develop mastery of lower levels.
Gee (2003) explains player engagement in terms of
semiotic domains (worlds of symbols, meanings, practices,
and experiences). He points out that games can be
very challenging and time-consuming, yet young players
who might spend little time on schoolwork become absorbed
in games and learn complex knowledge, responses,
and behaviours in order to win. In his words,
A game like Pikmin recruits from our six-year-old
a complex identity composed of various related
traits. The game encourages him to think of himself
as an active problem solver, one who persists
in trying to solve problems even after making
mistakes; one who, in fact, does not see mistakes as
errors but as opportunities for reflection and
learning. It encourages him to be the sort of problem
solver who, rather than ritualizing the solutions
to problems, leaves himself open to undoing
356 Education for a Digital World