Columbia University Game Based Learning and 21st Century Skills Discussion On the discussion board: Tell us why you chose the article. From your reading,

Columbia University Game Based Learning and 21st Century Skills Discussion On the discussion board:

Tell us why you chose the article.

From your reading, should the Blended X Mooc have more GBL(gane based learning)? Why or Why not?

With reference in the end. Write 500 words in total

Grading:50% for a thoughtful response to the DB question or stimulus.50% for a direct quote of the provideed text,with page number. that is relevant to your response. Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 50e58
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
Full length article
Game-based Learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent
research
Meihua Qian*, Karen R. Clark
Eugene T. Moore School of Education, Clemson University, United States
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 18 January 2016
Received in revised form
29 April 2016
Accepted 8 May 2016
Available online 14 May 2016
Game-based learning and 21st century skills have been gaining an enormous amount of attention from
researchers and practitioners. Given numerous studies support the positive effects of games on learning,
a growing number of researchers are committed to developing educational games to promote students’
21st century skill development in schools. However, little is known regarding how games may in?uence
student acquisition of 21st century skills. This paper examines the most recent literature in regard to
game-based learning and identi?ed 29 studies which targeted 21st century skills as outcomes. The range
of game genres and game design elements as well as learning theories used in these studies are discussed, together with the range of indicators, measures and outcomes for impacts on 21st century skills.
The ?ndings suggest that a game-based learning approach might be effective in facilitating students’ 21st
century skill development. The paper also provides valuable insights for researchers, game designers,
and educators in issues related to educational game design and implementation in general.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Game-based learning
21st century skills
Learning theory
Game design
Effect size
1. Introduction
Trends in educational research indicate an increasing interest in
how games may in?uence learning (e.g., Ke, 2009; Kebritchi,
Hirumi, & Bai, 2008; Wu, Chiou, Kao, Hu, & Huang, 2012b). To
date, a number of literature reviews have been conducted regarding
the effectiveness of game-based learning in various domains such
as business, math, statistics, computer science, biology, and psychology (e.g., Boyle et al., 2014; Connolly, Boyle, MacArthur, Hainey,
& Boyle, 2012; Dempsey, Rasmussen, & Lucassen, 1994; Emes, 1997;
Randel, Morris, Wetzel, & Whitehill, 1992; Vogel et al., 2006; Wolfe,
1997; Wu et al., 2012b). However, no consensus has been reached in
respect to the positive effect of game-based learning. For example,
some studies (e.g., Boyle et al., 2014; Dempsey et al., 1994; Randel
et al., 1992; Vogel et al., 2006) pointed out that game-based
learning might be superior to traditional classroom instruction as
it could increase students’ motivation for learning and provide
them with opportunities to explore and acquire new knowledge
and skills, but others (e.g., Emes, 1997) did not ?nd strong evidence
which supports the association between game-based learning and
* Corresponding author. Eugene T. Moore School of Education, Clemson University, 410 Tillman Hall, Clemson, SC 29634, United States.
E-mail address: mqian@clemson.edu (M. Qian).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023
0747-5632/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
students’ high academic achievements or psychological
development.
Furthermore, most of the previous literature reviews (e.g.,
Connolly et al., 2012; Emes, 1997; Ke, 2009; Randel et al., 1992;
Wolfe, 1997; Wu et al., 2012b) focused on the statistical signi?cance of empirical studies and rarely emphasized their practical
signi?cance (i.e., effect size), though the latter is much more
informative than the former. Speci?cally, any test with a large
sample size tends to be statistically signi?cant, yet it might not be
practically meaningful. Hence, game-based learning may not be
more effective than conventional classroom lectures if the comparison appears statistically signi?cant but the corresponding effect size is tiny.
Most importantly, a few studies have indicated that a growing
number of researchers are committed to developing educational
games to support the teaching of essential 21st century skills (e.g.,
Boyle et al., 2014; Dondlinger, 2007). However, little is known
regarding how game-based learning may in?uence students’ 21st
century skill development (Ebner & Holzinger, 2007; Ke, 2009;
Kim, Park, & Baek, 2009; Papastergiou, 2009; Van Eck &
Dempsey, 2002). The 21st century skills refer to a wide range of
skills such as learning and innovation skills (i.e., critical thinking,
creativity, collaboration, and communication) and information,
media and technology skills (Binkley et al., 2014), and have been
gaining more and more attention from researchers and
M. Qian, K.R. Clark / Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 50e58
practitioners (e.g., Chan & Yuen, 2014; Gee, 2007). For instance, the
current school curriculum in Hong Kong clearly emphasizes the
importance of students’ creativity development, and as a result,
teachers are encouraged to develop or adopt innovative teaching
methods to foster students’ creativity in the classroom (Chan &
Yuen, 2014). But at this point, no model exists as to how to best
teach the core 21st century skills in schools.
Game design and play require people to be familiar with media
and technology, and it also requires people to be creative and
critical thinkers, so it has great potential to facilitate students’ 21st
century skill development. Given the lack of consistent empirical
evidence with respect to the effectiveness of game-based learning,
this review aims to examine the most recent literature regarding
game-based learning and seeks to further understand the in?uence
of games on learning, with a major focus on students’ 21st century
skill development.
2. Literature review
2.1. De?nition of game-based learning
Game-based learning (GBL) describes an environment where
game content and game play enhance knowledge and skills
acquisition, and where game activities involve problem solving
spaces and challenges that provide players/learners with a sense of
achievement (e.g., Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; McFarlane,
Sparrowhawk, & Heald, 2002; Prensky, 2001).
2.2. Evidence of impact and outcomes for games in education
Previous reviews indicate that the most frequent outcome
investigated in educational game studies was knowledge acquisition (Connolly et al., 2012; Li & Tsai, 2013) with less than one-third
of the studies investigating problem solving skills (Li & Tsai, 2013),
and affective and motivational outcomes were examined more
frequently in entertainment game studies (Connolly et al., 2012).
Although educational game studies reveal varying degrees of success dependent upon academic topic, learner preferences and
participant age (Hays, 2005; Young et al., 2012), GBL tends to
positively in?uence attitudes and cognitive gains (Connolly et al.,
2012; Dempsey et al., 1994; Hays, 2005; Vogel et al., 2006; Wolfe,
1997; Young et al., 2012). But there is a dearth of high quality
empirical evidence concerning how games in the classroom might
impact the development of 21st century skills.
Skills relevant to the 21st century are dramatically different
from skills the educational system currently values (Squire, 2005).
The 21st century learning and innovative skill set is de?ned as
critical thinking, creativity, collaboration and communication
(Binkley et al., 2014). Critical thinking skills include scienti?c
reasoning, systems thinking, computational thinking, decision
making and problem solving (Binkley et al., 2014). Creativity includes divergent thinking, innovative thinking, originality, inventiveness and the ability to view failure as an opportunity to improve
(Binkley et al., 2014). Collaboration pertains to the ability to work
effectively and respectfully with diverse teams, exercise ?exibility
and willingness to make compromises to accomplish goals, and
assume shared responsibility (Binkley et al., 2014). Communication
refers to the ability to articulate thoughts and ideas in a variety of
forms, communicate for a range of purposes and in diverse environments, and use multiple media and technologies (Binkley et al.,
2014). Traditional educational practices often hinder creativity by
emphasizing only one correct answer, imposing high-stakes failure,
and favoring conformity and standardization (e.g., Plucker & Makel,
2010). Additionally, 21st century skills are dif?cult to evaluate using
traditional assessment practices such as the popular standardized
51
testing (Binkley et al., 2014). Games, on the other hand, necessitates
the development of 21st century skills which are valued in the new
digital economy (Gee, 2008; Squire, 2011; Van Eck, 2012) and
provide a means of assessing these hard to evaluate skills (Shute,
2011). Speci?cally, effective learning is situated, active, and
problem-based and requires immediate feedback (e.g., Boyle,
Connolly, & Hainey, 2011). Well-designed educational games such
as Quest Atlantis (Barab et al., 2009) and The Radix Endeavor (MIT,
2014) provide complex holistic problem-based environments that
can support active and situated learning, require authentic collaboration, and offer challenge and immediate feedback (Gee, 2007;
Squire, 2011). However, a systematic review of the impact of
games on 21st century skill development is needed.
2.3. Designing games for education
2.3.1. Game design elements and meaningful learning
Very little is known as to what degree of design complexity is
required for meaningful learning to occur (Hays, 2005; Young et al.,
2012). Many educational games are simple designs that are
narrowly focused on academic content, target low level literacy,
provide drill and practice methods similar to worksheets, and stress
memorization of facts (Squire, 2003; Villalta et al., 2011; Young
et al., 2012). These game designs fail to engage students (Lester
et al., 2014; Squire, 2003).
Meanwhile, research has showed that entertainment games are
able to promote meaningful learning through providing players
with adaptive challenge, curiosity, self-expression, discovery, immediate feedback, clear goals, player control, immersion, collaboration, competition, variable rewards, and low-stakes failure (e.g.,
Anderson, 2011; Gee, 2007; Squire, 2011). All these game design
elements align well with established learning theories such as social constructivism and ?ow theory. Therefore, these types of
games can provide situated learning, promote social interactions,
increase motivation and engagement, and provide opportunities to
develop valued 21st century skills (e.g., collaboration, creativity,
communication,
critical
thinking)
(Anderson,
2011;
Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Gee, 2007; Shute, 2011; Squire, 2011).
However, designing games for speci?c educational purposes presents an interdisciplinary challenge as it requires a deep understanding of game design theory, knowledge of the academic topic,
and a foundation in relevant learning theories (e.g., Boyle et al.,
2011).
2.3.2. Learning theories and successful game designs
Meaningful learning will not take place without learners’ investment of time and effort. Popular entertainment games maintain players’ engagement by employing “every single worthwhile
learning theory in existence” (Becker, 2007, p.23). Yet, GBL studies
often fail to use theoretical foundations (e.g., Li & Tsai, 2013; Wu,
Hsiao, Wu, Lin, & Huang, 2012a; Wu et al., 2012b). For example,
Wu et al. (2012b) reviewed 567 published studies and found that
GBL tended to yield positive outcomes when learning theories were
incorporated into the design, but surprisingly most studies did not
address learning theories. According to Young et al. (2012), successful GBL is not simply providing students with a game and
expecting increased motivation and knowledge acquisition,
“Rather, educational games need to be designed and researched
with careful attention to contemporary learning theories” (Young
et al., 2012, p.68).
The sociocultural theory of learning (Vygotsky, 1978) and ?ow
theory (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990) align well with successful game
designs and learning outcomes. Vygotsky (1978) states that
learning takes place when it is social, active and situated. Also, play
is conducive to learning (Vygotsky, 1978). Gamers interact in role
52
M. Qian, K.R. Clark / Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 50e58
playing environments that allow them to explore social roles (inside and outside of the game), form hypotheses, test new ideas, and
develop skills by playing (Gee, 2005; Squire, 2005; Tennyson &
Breuer, 2002). Twining (2009, 2010) has outlined a modern pedagogy that includes dimensions of ‘learning by being told’, ‘learning
by doing’, ‘learning through role play’, and ultimately ‘learning by
becoming’. Many successful entertainment games provide incredibly realistic and immersive environments where gamers can learn
through role play experiences. These games can provide a successful design model for digital GBL.
Also, ?ow theory is a natural foundation for motivation in games
and learning. Flow causes the player to lose time and goal-directed
activity is driven by pure pleasure rather than external rewards
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Entertainment game designers balance
the game’s challenge level with the player’s skill level to create and
maintain ?ow. However, many educational games interrupt the
state of ?ow by inserting content and content assessment via
quizzes and tests (Shute, 2011). Successful game designers utilize
internal analytics to collect data on the gamers, adapt challenges to
maintain ?ow, and provide timely feedback. Educational games can
implement this model so that learning via game play can continue
?uidly while assessments are conducted inconspicuously and so
that ?ow is maintained (Shute, 2011).
According to Li and Tsai (2013), constructivism (e.g., the sociocultural theory of learning) is one of the major theoretical foundations employed by GBL researchers in science education. The
present study will examine the learning theories that are utilized in
GBL related to the 21st century skill development.
2.4. Research questions
Despite a growing interest in games for learning, rigorous
empirical evidence is needed to evaluate the potential of GBL with
respect to 21st century skills. Additionally, empirical research on
GBL is fragmented by many variables such as learner variables,
game design variables, research purpose and methodology (Hays,
2005; Ke, 2009). This lack of cohesion presents a barrier to
designing good educational games and understanding how games
can be used most effectively in the classroom (Connolly et al., 2012).
The aim of this paper is to determine what empirical evidence
exists concerning the effects of GBL on 21st century skills and to
identify successful game design elements that align well with
established learning theories. The ?ndings will provide valuable
guidance for future educational game designs which are intended
to support 21st century skill development.
3. Method
3.1. Search terms and database searched
A keyword search was conducted using Academic Search
Complete which is the most comprehensive scholarly, multidisciplinary database in the world and covers all subject areas
from 1965 to present. Since technology advances at a rapid pace
and this review aims to examine the most recent literature
regarding game-based learning, the date range was restricted from
January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014, and the following keywords
were used: (“serious game*”) OR (“game-based learning”) OR
(“design-based learning”) OR (“educational game*”) OR (“video
game*”) OR (“augmented reality”) OR (entertainment game*) OR
(“mobile game*”) OR (“ubiquitous learning”) OR (“massively multiplayer online role playing games”) AND (“learning”) OR (“education”) OR (“behavior”) OR (“skills”) OR (“21st century skills”). This
search resulted in 3118 articles.
3.2. Selection of papers for inclusion in the review
Articles from the following six journals were chosen as a
representative sample of recent research on GBL: Computers &
Education; Computers in Human Behavior; Information Sciences;
Journal of the Learning Sciences; Learning and Instruction; and British
Journal of Education Technology. The resulting 397 articles were
analyzed by two raters to identify appropriate papers for this review, and 137 studies met our inclusion criteria.
To be included in this review, papers had to (a) include evidence
related to digital technology enhanced learning environments; (b)
include quantitative statistics with effect size being or not being
reported; and (c) date from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014.
The Cohen’s Kappa statistic was used to examine the interrater
reliability. According to Cohen (1960) and McHugh (2012), our
interrater reliability was high (? ¼ 0.82), and we resolved all disagreements to consensus through discussion.
3.3. Data analysis
The 137 papers meeting the initial inclusion criteria were
analyzed to explore potential in?uences of digital games on
learning, especially on student acquisition of 21st century skills.
3.3.1. Categorization of games
Categories were de?ned based on the primary purpose of the
game. Educational games and serious games are games developed
speci?cally for educational purposes. Commercial off the shelf,
console games (video games), and online games (massively multiplayer online role playing games) are categorized as entertainment
games. Games-based learning is a common term with broad interpretations and can include educational games, edutainment, or
entertainment games. Therefore, papers whose research design
speci?ed games-based learning were further categorized based on
the speci?c game or instrument used in the study (education,
entertainment, or non-game). Design-based-learning studies utilized games with a design focus rather than playing the game.
These studies may have students designing a digital product such
as digital story telling or using visual coding tools to design games.
It was decided to make design-based games a category since the
premise of the game is unique. Although this literature review
aimed to investigate games for learning, our search returned a
number of studies which focused on mobile tools. These mobile
tools are considered games, or not, based on the speci?c design of
that tool. Mobile tools designated as a mobile game and mobile
augmented reality/context aware were categorized as mobile (AR).
3.3.2. Categorization of outcomes
Outcomes were categorized as 21st century skills (critical
thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration), cognitive
(retention, transfer, cognitive load, and knowledge acquisition),
skills (motor, spatial, and visual skills) or behavioral (behaviors and
attitudes).
3.3.3. Categorization of ages
Age groups were determined based on the American education
system, with elementary school including K-5 (5e11 years old),
middle school as grades 6e8 (12e14 years old), high school being
grades 9e12 (15e18 years old), and higher education including
community college and university (undergraduate and graduate
levels). Adults refer to participants who are no longer in school such
as employees in a company.
3.3.4. Categorization of effect sizes
The conventional criteria were used to categorize the effect sizes
M. Qian, K.R. Clark / Computers in Human Behavior 63 (2016) 50e58
53
reported in the primary studies, which included correlation measure r, Cohen’s d, and partial eta-squared (h2p). Speci?cally, according to Cohen (1988), a correlation coef?cient of 0.10 is small,
0.30 is medium, and 0.50 is large. The corresponding thresholds for
standardized mean difference (i.e., Cohen’s d) are 0.20, 0.50 and
0.80 (Cohen, 1988). For partial eta-squared, the threshold…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment