Learner Engagement in a Business Simulation Game: Impact on Higher-Order Thinking Skills

Abstract

Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) are reliable predictors of success in school and the workplace. A typical technique for encouraging higher-order thinking is to use instructional design interventions that engage learners in simple cognitive activities. Business simulation game (BSG) is one of the types of interactive learning environments that can increase HOTS. In addition, student engagement and attitude toward technology use are considered strong influences on HOTS. The study explored the effect of using a BSG on HOTS and student engagement. It examined the influence of attitude toward the use of a BSG on HOTS and student engagement. The results of the t-test analysis showed that learning activities using BSG had a positive effect on HOTS and student engagement. Additionally, PLS-SEM analysis results indicated that immersion, interaction, and intention to use the game influence student engagement. Furthermore, student engagement significantly influenced HOTS. The findings indicate that students must demonstrate that they are engaging actively in a course to improve HOTS and that a BSG can be a valuable and effective tool for promoting engagement. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic caused limitations in sampling and representativeness of respondents. Future research should involve a bigger sample size and students who have attended related courses.

Keywords

higher-order thinking skills simulation game student engagement teaching-learning strategy

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abosalem

(2016). Assessment techniques and students’ higher-order thinking skills. International Journal of Secondary Education, 4(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijsedu.20160401.11

Agyei

D. D.

Voogt

J. M.

(2011). Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56(1), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.017

Alsowat

(2016). An EFL flipped classroom teaching model: Effects on English language higher-order thinking skills, student engagement and satisfaction. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 108–121. www.iiste.org

Bond

Bedenlier

(2019). Facilitating student engagement through educational technology: Towards a conceptual framework. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.528

Bond

Buntins

Bedenlier

Zawacki-Richter

Kerres

(2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0176-8

Buil

Catalán

Martínez

(2020). Engagement in business simulation games: A self‐system model of motivational development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(1), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12762

Caroux

Isbister

le Bigot

Vibert

(2015). Player–video game interaction: A systematic review of current concepts. Computers in Human Behavior, 48(C), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.066

Coates

(2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education, 11(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320500074915

Coates

(2006). Student engagement in campus-based and online education: University connections. In Student engagement in campus-based and online education. University Connections. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203969465

10.

Connolly

T. M.

Boyle

E. A.

MacArthur

Hainey

Boyle

J. M.

(2012). A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 59(2), 661–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004

11.

Dewey

(1986). Experience and education. The Educational Forum, 50(3), 241–252. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131728609335764

12.

Danxia

Chun

(2019). The effects of learner factors on higher-order thinking in the smart classroom environment. Journal of Computers in Education, 6(4), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-019-00146-4

13.

Doyle

Brown

F. W.

(2000). Using a business simulation to teach applied skills – the benefits and the challenges of using student teams from multiple countries. Journal of European Industrial Training, 24(6), 330–336. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090590010373316

14.

Elfeky

A. I. M.

(2019). The effect of personal learning environments on participants’ higher order thinking skills and satisfaction. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(4), 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1534601

15.

Faria

A. J.

(2001). The changing nature of business simulation/gaming research: A brief history. Simulation and Gaming, 32(1), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/104687810103200108

16.

Fornell

Larcker

D. F.

(1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312

17.

Fox

Pittaway

Uzuegbunam

(2018). Simulations in entrepreneurship education: Serious games and learning through play. Entrepreneurship Education and Pedagogy, 1(1), 61–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515127417737285

18.

Fredricks

J. A.

Blumenfeld

P. C.

Paris

A. H.

(2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

19.

Fredricks

J. A.

Filsecker

Lawson

M. A.

(2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43(4), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.002

20.

Hair

J. F.

Black

W. C.

Babin

B. J.

Anderson

R. E.

(2014). Multivariate data analysis. In Vectors (7th ed.). Pearson Education Limited.

21.

Huang

Hew

K. F.

C. K.

(2019). Investigating the effects of gamification-enhanced flipped learning on undergraduate students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1106–1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653

22.

Huang

H.-M.

Rauch

Liaw

S.-S.

(2010). Investigating learners’ attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1171–1182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.014

23.

Huang

Y.-M.

Silitonga

L. M.

T.-T.

(2022). Applying a business simulation game in a flipped classroom to enhance engagement, learning achievement, and higher-order thinking skills. Computers & Education, 183(July), Article 104494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104494

24.

Hwang

G.-J.

Lai

C.-L.

Liang

J.-C.

Chu

H.-C.

Tsai

C.-C.

(2018). A long-term experiment to investigate the relationships between high school students’ perceptions of mobile learning and peer interaction and higher-order thinking tendencies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(1), 75–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9540-3

25.

Karagiorgas

D. N.

Niemann

(2017). Gamification and game-based learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 45(4), 499–519. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239516665105

26.

Kiili

(2005). Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.12.001

27.

Kim

H. J.

Hong

J. I.

(2020). Students’ academic use of mobile technology and higher-order thinking skills: The role of active engagement. Education Sciences, 10(3), 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030047

28.

Krause

K. L.

Coates

(2008). Students’ engagement in first‐year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(5), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930701698892

29.

Law

Niederhauser

D. S.

Christensen

Shear

(2016). A multilevel system of quality technology-enhanced learning and teaching indicators published by : International forum of educational technology & society A multilevel system of quality technology-en. Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 72–83. https://doi.org/10.2307/jeductechsoci.19.3.72

30.

Lee

Choi

(2017). What affects learner’s higher-order thinking in technology-enhanced learning environments? The effects of learner factors. Computers & Education, 115(Dec), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.015

31.

Z.-Z.

Cheng

Y.-B.

Liu

C.-C.

(2013). A constructionism framework for designing game-like learning systems: Its effect on different learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 208-224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01305.x

32.

Yang

H. H.

Shi

Wang

(2021). Examining the key influencing factors on college students’ higher-order thinking skills in the smart classroom environment. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00238-7

33.

Matute

Melero

(2016). Game-based learning: Using business simulators [aprender jugando: La utilización de simuladores empresariales en el aula universitaria]. Universia Business Review, 13(3), 72–91. https://doi.org/10.3232/UBR.2016.V13.N3.03

34.

Mawhirter

D. A.

Garofalo

P. F.

(2016). Expect the unexpected: Simulation games as a teaching strategy. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 12(4), 132–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.12.009

35.

Mohamad

S. N. M.

Sazali

N. S. S.

Salleh

M. A. M.

(2018). Gamification approach in education to increase learning engagement. International Journal of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, 4(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.20469/ijhss.4.10003-1

36.

Ojeda

C. M. S.

(1968). The game : An exploration of the concept of immersion in video-games and its usage in game design. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses_hons/1298

37.

Pasin

Giroux

(2011). The impact of a simulation game on operations management education. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1240–1254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.12.006

38.

Piaget

(1973). To Understand is to invent: The future of education. In Piaget, Jean. UNESCO.

39.

Rashid

Asghar

H. M.

(2016). Technology use, self-directed learning, student engagement and academic performance: Examining the interrelations. Computers in Human Behavior, 63(Oct), 604–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.084

40.

Reeve

Tseng

C.-M.

(2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002

41.

Rogmans

Abaza

(2019). The impact of international business strategy simulation games on student engagement. Simulation & Gaming, 50(3), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878119848138

42.

Schindler

L. A.

Burkholder

G. J.

Morad

O. A.

Marsh

(2017). Computer-based technology and student engagement: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0063-0

43.

Siewiorek

Saarinen

Lainema

Lehtinen

(2012). Learning leadership skills in a simulated business environment. Computers & Education, 58(1), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.016

44.

Skinner

E. A.

(2016). Engagement and Disaffection as central to process of motivational resilience and development. In Wentzel

K. R.

Miele

D. B.

(Eds.), Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 157–180). Routledge.

45.

Springer

C. W.

Borthick

A. F.

(2004). Business simulation to stage critical thinking in introductory accounting: Rationale, design, and implementation. Issues in Accounting Education, 19(3), 277–303. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace.2004.19.3.277

46.

Squire

K. D.

(2002). Cultural framing of computer/video games. Game Studies, 2(1), 1–13. Available at http://gamestudies.org/0102/squire/.

47.

Squire

K. D.

(2008). Video games and education: Designing learning systems for an interactive age. Educational Technology Magazine: The Magazine for Managers of Change in Education, 48(2), 17–26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44429558

48.

Steinkuehler

Squire

Barab

(2012). Games, learning, and society. In Steinkuehler

Squire

Barab

(Eds.), Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139031127

49.

Teng

Wang

(2021). The effect of two educational technology tools on student engagement in Chinese EFL courses. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00263-0

50.

Tiwari

S. R.

Nafees

Krishnan

(2014). Simulation as a pedagogical tool: Measurement of impact on perceived effective learning. The International Journal of Management Education, 12(3), 260–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2014.06.006

51.

Vidergor

H. E.

(2018). Effectiveness of the multidimensional curriculum model in developing higher‐order thinking skills in elementary and secondary students. The Curriculum Journal, 29(1), 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2017.1318771

52.

Vygotsky

L. S.

(1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

53.

Williams

R. B.

(2003). Higher order thinking skills: Challenging all students to achieve. Skyhorse Publishing.

54.

W.-H.

Hsiao

H.-C.

P.-L.

Lin

C.-H.

Huang

S.-H.

(2012). Investigating the learning-theory foundations of game-based learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(3), 265–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00437.x

55.

Yang

Y.-T. C.

(2015). Virtual CEOs: A blended approach to digital gaming for enhancing higher order thinking and academic achievement among vocational high school students. Computers & Education, 81(Feb), 281–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.10.004

56.

Zulfiqar

Sarwar

Aziz

Ejaz Chandia

Khan

M. K.

(2019). An analysis of influence of business simulation games on business school students’ attitude and intention toward entrepreneurial activities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(1), 106–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117746746