Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering

Ebner, Martin; Holzinger, Andreas

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.026

Cited by 529 publications

(325 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

269

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In our work, the main aspect to check was the learning outcomes. Reviewing previous work, comparing new methods with traditional methods seems to be a common technique (Randel et al, 1992;Rosas et al, 2003;Ebner and Holzinger, 2007;Telner et al, 2010;Yang, 2012;Chen and Tsai, 2012). Following this trend, we compared our proposal with traditional games.…”

Section: New Methods Vs Traditional Methodsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Evaluation of learning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game

Furió

González-Gancedo

Juan

et al. 2013

Computers & Education

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ElsevierFurió Ferri, D.; González Gancedo, S.; Juan, M.; Seguí, I.; Rando, N. (2013). Evaluation of learning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game. Computers and Education. 64:1-23. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12 AbstractIn this paper, we present an initial study to determine the subject preferences for educational computer games for children, in which 150 education professionals participated. From the results of this first study, we have developed an iPhone game for transmitting knowledge as part of multiculturalism, solidarity and tolerance following established learning theories, several design principles, and the objectives and competences of the Spanish law for primary education. We also report on a second study to determine whether the iPhone game has better learning outcomes than a traditional game by analyzing the participation of 84 children ranging in age from 8 to 10 years old. The frequency of playing with consoles or computer games was also taken into account in this second study, and the worldwide trend of previous studies has been corroborated. For learning outcomes, the results did not show significant differences between the two groups. However, 96% of the children indicated that they would like to play with the iPhone game again, and 90% indicated that they preferred the experience with the iPhone game over the traditional one. From these results, we can conclude that the children achieved similar knowledge improvements using both the autonomous game (iPhone game) and the custom, guided game (traditional game). This could facilitate versatility in the learning process since the learning activity could be performed at any place and time without requiring supervision. Therefore, it could be a useful tool in the learning process and help teachers to fulfill students' training needs.

show abstract

Section: New Methods Vs Traditional Methodsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Evaluation of learning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game

Furió

González-Gancedo

Juan

et al. 2013

Computers & Education

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of game technology for learning purposes has been widely used, and its suitability for education has been supported by several previous works. For example, Virvou et al [7] evaluated an Intelligent Tutoring system as a virtual reality educational game, demonstrating that games of this kind can be very motivating while improving the learning effects on students; Mumtaz [8] studied the nature and experiences of children's computer use at home and school, where she found out that 77% of them used computers every day for playing video games; Ebner and Holzinger [9] designed an online game for higher education that is related to the Theory of Structures in Civil Engineering. A playful approach achieves software that is more motivating and engaging.…”

Section: Background 21 Learning Itinerariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Q16 [1][2][3][4][5] 3.62±1.05 Easy Q17 [1][2][3][4][5] 4.39±0.69 Good Q18 [1][2][3][4][5] 4.22±0.85 Easy Q19 [1][2][3][4][5] 4.52±0.74 A lot Q20 [1][2][3][4][5] 3.90±1.29 Enough Q21 [1][2][3][4][5] 4.07±1.07 A lot Q22 [1][2][3][4][5] 4.34±0.94 A lot Q23 [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] 9.14±1.83 Very good To determine if there were statistically significant differences between the two game modes with respect to the satisfaction questions, an unpaired t-test was performed. Table 6 shows the results of the test.…”

Section: Satisfaction and Interaction Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flexible learning itinerary vs. linear learning itinerary

Martín-SanJosé

Juan

Gil-Gómez

et al. 2014

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The latest video game and entertainment technology and other technologies are facilitating the development of new and powerful e-Learning systems. In this paper, we present a computer-based game for learning about five historical ages. The objective of the game is to reinforce the events that mark the transition from one historical age to another and the order of the historical ages. Our game incorporates natural human-computer interaction based on video game technology, Frontal Projection, and personalized learning. For personalized learning, a Flexible Learning Itinerary has been included, where the children can decide how to direct the flow of their own learning process. For comparison, a Linear Learning Itinerary has also been included, where the children follow a determined learning flow. A study to compare the two different learning itineraries was carried out. Twenty nine children from 8 to 9 years old participated in the study. The analysis of the pre-tests and the post-tests determined that children learned the contents of a game about historical ages. The results show that there were no statistically significant differences between the two learning itineraries. Therefore, our study reveals the potential of computer-based learning games as a tool in the learning process for both flexible and linear itineraries.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, many authors point out that there is still too little systematic and conclusive research in this area [1]. One of the positive effects described most often is increasing motivation [16], [6]. Tennyson & Jorczak [18] argue that both cognitive and affective variables are essential for playing games successfully.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactive Game Based Learning: Advantages and Disadvantages

Pohl

Rester

Judmaier

2009

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Interactive Game-Based Learning might be used to raise the awareness of students concerning questions of sustainability. Sustainability is a very complex topic. By interacting with a simulation game, students can get a more detailed and holistic conception of how sustainability can be achieved in everyday purchasing situations. The SuLi (Sustainable Living) game was developed to achieve this goal. In an evaluation study we found evidence that SuLi is an interesting alternative to more traditional approaches to learning. Nevertheless, there are still many open questions, as, e.g., whether one should combine simulation games with other forms of teaching and learning or how to design simulation games so that students really acquire detailed concepts of the domain.

show abstract

Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering

Cited by 529 publications

References 22 publications

Evaluation of learning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game

Evaluation of learning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game

Flexible learning itinerary vs. linear learning itinerary

Interactive Game Based Learning: Advantages and Disadvantages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About