In a large-scale quantitative study that adopted a learning analytics approach, we searched for associations between students' activity in a game-based online mathematics learning environment and their mathematics achievements on a national standardized test. Students were active in the environment throughout the school year, and particularly during an online National Mathematics Olympiad (N = 239 schools). Overall, our findings point to a positive association between online game-based activity during the Olympiad and mathematics test scores. This association remained even after controlling for socioeconomic factors, which are known to contribute to academic achievements. The paper discusses these findings and suggests evidence for causality, in particular cognitive, meta-cognitive, and affective effects of the online activity that may have positively affected test scores.
Ben David-HadarI.ZidermanA. (2011). A new model for equitable and efficient resource allocation to schools: The Israeli case. Education Economics, 19(4), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645291003726467
4.
BeserraV.NussbaumM.OteoM. (2019). On-Task and off-Task behavior in the classroom: A study on mathematics learning with educational video games. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(8), 1361–1383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117744346
5.
ByunJ.JoungE. (2018). Digital game-based learning for K-12 mathematics education: A meta-analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 118(3–4), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12271
6.
Central Bureau of Statistics (2018). Statistical abstract of Israel 2018, No. 69.
7.
CerdaG.RomeraE. M.CasasJ. A.PérezC.RuizR. O. (2017). Influence of cognitive and motivational variables in academic mathematics performance in Chilean students. Educación XX1, 20(2), 113–135. https://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.1
8.
ChangM.EvansM. A.KimS.NortonA.SamurY. (2015). Differential effects of learning games on mathematics proficiency. Educational Media International, 52(1), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2015.1005427
9.
CromptonH. (2015). Pre-service teachers’ developing technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) and beliefs on the use of technology in the k-12 mathematics classroom: A review of the literature. In AngeliC.ValanidesN. (Eds.), Technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring, developing, and assessing TPCK (pp. 239–251). Springer.
10.
De FreitasS. (2018). Are games effective learning tools ? A review of educational games the review: A recent history of game science. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(2), 74–84. www.jstor.org/stable/26388380
11.
De LopeR. P.Medina-MedinaN.PaderewskiP.Gutiérrez-VelaF. L. (2015). Il congreso de La sociedad española Para las ceincias del cideojuego [Design methodology for educational games based on interactive screenplays]. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1394/paper_9.pdf
12.
Dimitriou-HadjichristouC.OgbonnayaU. I. (2015). The effect of using the Lakatosian heuristic method to teach the surface area of a cone on students’ achievement according to bloom’s taxonomy levels. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2015.1049013
13.
EwetanT.EwetanO. (2015). Teachers’ teaching experience and academic performance in mathematics and English language in public secondary schools in Ogun state, Nigeria. International Journal of Humanities, Social Sciences and Education, 2(2), 123–134. http://eprints.covenantuniversity.edu.ng/4325/
14.
FaberJ. M.LuytenH.VisscherA. J. (2017). The effects of a digital formative assessment tool on mathematics achievement and student motivation: Results of a randomized experiment. Computers & Education, 106, 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2016.12.001
15.
GadanidisG.GadanidisJ.SchindlerK. (2003). Factors mediating the use of online applets in the lesson planning of pre-service mathematics teachers. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22(4), 323–344.
16.
GenlottA. A.GrönlundÅ. (2016). Closing the gaps—Improving literacy and mathematics by ict-enhanced collaboration. Computers & Education, 99, 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.004
17.
GrimmK. J. (2008). Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640801982486
18.
HalevaL.HershkovitzA.TabachM. (2021). Students’ activity in an online learning environment for mathematics: The role of thinking levels. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(4), 686–712. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120972057
19.
HeffernanN. T.HeffernanC. L. (2014). The ASSISTments ecosystem: Building a platform that brings scientists and teachers together for minimally invasive research on human learning and teaching. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 470–497. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-014-0024-x
20.
HowardE.MeehanM.ParnellA. (2018). Live lectures or online videos: Students’ resource choices in a first-year university mathematics module. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(4), 530–553. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2017.1387943
21.
HungC.-M.HuangI.HwangG.-J. (2014). Effects of digital game-based learning on students’ self-efficacy, motivation, anxiety, and achievements in learning mathematics. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(2–3), 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0008-8
22.
KayR. H. (2012). Examining factors that influence the effectiveness of learning objects in mathematics classrooms. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 12(4), 350–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2012.732189
23.
KinzieM. B.JosephD. R. D. (2008). Gender differences in game activity preferences of middle school children: Implications for educational game design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(5–6), 643–663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9076-z
24.
KoedingerK. R.McLaughlinE. A.HeffernanN. T. (2010). A quasi-experimental evaluation of an on-line formative assessment and tutoring system. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 43(4), 489–510. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.43.4.d
25.
LamT. T. (2012). The roles of mathematics competition in Singapore mathematics education. In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-12) (pp. 640–656). Springer International Publishing.
26.
LiuY. C.WangW. T.LeeT. L. (2021). An integrated view of information feedback, game quality, and autonomous motivation for evaluating game-based learning effectiveness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 3–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120952044
27.
MillsN. (2018). ALEKS constructs as predictors of high school mathematics achievement for struggling students [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. Walden University. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/5576
Moyer-PackenhamP. S.BolyardJ. J. (2016). Revisiting the definition of a virtual manipulative. In P. S. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–23). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32718-1_1
30.
Moyer-PackenhamP. S.WestenskowA. (2013). Effects of virtual manipulatives on student achievement and mathematics learning. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(3), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.4018/jvple.2013070103
31.
Moyer-PackenhamP.SuhJ. (2012). Learning mathematics with technology: The influence of virtual manipulatives on different achievement groups. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 31(1), 39–59.
32.
MurphyR.RoschelleJ.FengM.MasonC. A. (2020). Investigating efficacy, moderators and mediators for an online mathematics homework intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 13(2), 235–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2019.1710885
33.
NandaP.LiangH.SedigK. (2005). Interaction and interactivity in online mathematical applets: Two sides of the same coin. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 2005, 1284–1290.
34.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection (PISA). OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en
35.
PekrunR. (2006). The control-value theory of achievement emotions: Assumptions, corollaries, and implications for educational research and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 18(4), 315–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9029-9
36.
PekrunR.LichtenfeldS.MarshH. W.MurayamaK.GoetzT. (2017). Achievement emotions and academic performance: Longitudinal models of reciprocal effects. Child Development, 88(5), 1653–1670. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12704
37.
PetkoD.CantieniA.PrasseD. (2017). Perceived quality of educational technology matters: A secondary analysis of students’ ICT use, ICT-related attitudes, and PISA 2012 test scores. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(8), 1070–1091. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633116649373
38.
PutwainD. W.SanderP.LarkinD. (2013). Using the 2 × 2 framework of achievement goals to predict achievement emotions and academic performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 80–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.LINDIF.2013.01.006
39.
QianM.ClarkK. R. (2016). Game-based learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023
40.
RanH.KasliM.SecadaW. G. (2021). A meta-analysis on computer technology intervention effects on mathematics achievement for low-performing students in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(1), 119–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120952063
41.
ReimerK.MoyerP. S. (2005). Third-graders learn about fractions using virtual manipulatives: A classroom study. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(1), 5–25. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/18889/
42.
SaramaJ.LangeA. A.ClementsD. H.WolfeC. B. (2012). The impacts of an early mathematics curriculum on oral language and literacy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(3), 489–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECRESQ.2011.12.002
43.
SirinS. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), 417–453. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075003417
44.
ThienL. M.OngM. Y. (2015). Malaysian and Singaporean students’ affective characteristics and mathematics performance: Evidence from PISA 2012. SpringerPlus, 4(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1358-z
45.
ThienL. M.DarmawanI. G. N.OngM. Y. (2015). Affective characteristics and mathematics performance in Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand: What can PISA 2012 data tell us?Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 3(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-015-0013-z
46.
TownsendM. C. (2012). Computer technology, student achievement, and equity: A multilevel analysis of the relationship between high school students’ use of computers, gender, and mathematics achievement [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. North Carolina State University. https://repository.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.16/7461/etd.pdf?sequence = 2
47.
TrenholmS.HajekB.RobinsonC. L.ChinnappanM.AlbrechtA.AshmanH. (2019). Investigating undergraduate mathematics learners’ cognitive engagement with recorded lecture videos. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1458339
48.
Urrea MonclúsA.PonceC.Vaquero TióE.Navajas HurtadoA. (2018). Effects of a hypermedia tool on the affective-motivational variables related to mathematics. Educación XX1, 21(1), 375–394. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1
WillP.BischofW. F.KingstoneA. (2020). The impact of classroom seating location and computer use on student academic performance. PLoS One, 15(8), e0236131. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0236131
51.
XieK.BradshawA. C. (2008). Using question prompts to support ill-structured problem solving in online peer collaborations. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 148–165. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228901981
52.
YungH. I.PaasF. (2015). Effects of computer-based visual representation on mathematics learning and cognitive load. Educational Technology and Society, 18(4), 70–77.
