Background. Middle school students’ math anxiety and low engagement have been major issues in math education. In order to reduce their anxiety and support their math learning, game-based learning (GBL) has been implemented. GBL research has underscored the role of social dynamics to facilitate a qualitative understanding of students’ knowledge. Whereas students’ peer interactions have been deemed a social dynamic, the relationships among peer interaction, task efficiency, and learning engagement were not well understood in previous empirical studies.
Method. This mixed-method research implemented E-Rebuild, which is a 3D architecture game designed to promote students’ math problem-solving skills. We collected a total of 102 50-minutes gameplay sessions performed by 32 middle school students. Using video-captured and screen-recorded gameplaying sessions, we implemented behavior observations to measure students’ peer interaction efficiency, task efficiency, and learning engagement. We used association analyses, sequential analysis, and thematic analysis to explain how peer interaction promoted students’ task efficiency and learning engagement.
Results. Students’ peer interactions were negatively related to task efficiency and learning engagement. There were also different gameplay patterns by students’ learning/task-relevant peer-interaction efficiency (PIE) level. Students in the low PIE group tended to progress through game tasks more efficiently than those in the high PIE group. The results of qualitative thematic analysis suggested that the students in the low PIE group showed more reflections on game-based mathematical problem solving, whereas those with high PIE experienced distractions during gameplay.
Discussion. This study confirmed that students’ peer interactions without purposeful and knowledge-constructive collaborations led to their low task efficiency, as well as low learning engagement. The study finding shows further design implications: (1) providing in-game prompts to stimulate students’ math-related discussions and (2) developing collaboration contexts that legitimize students’ interpersonal knowledge exchanges with peers.
Abdul JabbarA. I.FeliciaP. (2015). Gameplay engagement and learning in game-based learning: A systematic review. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 740–779. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315577210
AngC. S.ZaphirisP.MahmoodS. (2007). A model of cognitive loads in massively multiplayer online role playing games. Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2006.08.006
4.
AnnettaL. A.MinogueJ.HolmesS. Y.ChengM. T. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53(1), 74–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.020
5.
ArchambaultI.JanoszM.FalluJ.-S.PaganiL. S. (2009). Student engagement and its relationship with early high school dropout. Journal of Adolescence, 32(3), 651–670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.06.007
6.
BakemanR. (2000). Behavioral observation and coding. In ReisH. T.JuddC. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 138–159). Cambridge University Press.
7.
BakemanR.RobinsonB. F.QueraV. (1996). Testing sequential association: Estimating exact p values using sampled permutations. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.4
8.
BakerR. S.D’MelloS. K.RodrigoM. M. T.GraesserA. C. (2010). Better to be frustrated than bored: The incidence, persistence, and impact of learners’ cognitive–affective states during interactions with three different computer-based learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 68(4), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.12.003
9.
BarzilaiS.BlauI. (2014). Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Computers & Education, 70, 65–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.003
10.
BontchevB.GeorgievaO. (2018). Playing style recognition through an adaptive video game. Computers in Human Behavior, 82, 136–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.040
11.
BoyleE. A.ConnollyT. M.HaineyT.BoyleJ. M. (2012). Engagement in digital entertainment games: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(3), 771–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.020
12.
BraggL. A. (2012). Testing the effectiveness of mathematical games as a pedagogical tool for children’s learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10(6), 1445–1467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9349-9
13.
ChaoT.ChenJ.StarJ. R.DedeC. (2016). Using digital resources for motivation and engagement in learning mathematics: Reflections from teachers and students. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 2(3), 253–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0024-6
14.
ChenC.-H.LawV. (2016). Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1201–1212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.010
15.
ChildressM. D.BraswellR. (2006). Using massively multiplayer online role-playing games for online learning. Distance Education, 27(2), 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587910600789522
DillenbourgP.BetrancourtM. (2006). Collaboration load. In J. Elen & R. E. Clark (Eds.), Advances in learning and instruction series:Handling complexity in learning environments: Research and theory (pp. 141–163). Pergamon.
18.
ErozkanA. (2013). The effect of communication skills and interpersonal problem solving skills on social self-efficacy. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 13(2), 739–745. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017303.pdf
19.
EysenckM. W.CalvoM. G. (1992). Anxiety and performance: The processing efficiency theory. Cognition & Emotion, 6(6), 409–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699939208409696
20.
FormanE. (1989). The role of peer interaction in the social construction of mathematical knowledge. International Journal of Educational Research, 13(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(89)90016-5
21.
FreemanD. (1992). Collaboration: Constructing shared understandings in a second language classroom. In NunanD. (Ed.), Collaborative language learning and teaching (pp. 56–80). Cambridge University Press.
22.
FriardO.GambaM. (2015). BORIS–Behavioral Observation Research Interactive Software: Italy. http://www.boris.unito.it
23.
GeX.LandS. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504515
GhergulescuI.MunteanC. H. (2012). Measurement and analysis of learner’s motivation in game-based e-learning. In IfenthalerD.EseyelD.GeX. (Eds.), Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 355–378). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-3546-4_18?null
26.
HabgoodM. J.AinsworthS. E. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 169–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2010.508029
27.
HamariJ.ShernoffD. J.RoweE.CollerB.Asbell-ClarkeJ.EdwardsT. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow, and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
28.
HoffmanB.SchrawG. (2010). Conceptions of efficiency: Applications in learning and problem solving. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903213618
29.
HouH.-T. (2012). Exploring the behavioral patterns of learners in an educational massively multiple online role-playing game (MMORPG). Computers & Education, 58(4), 1225–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.015
30.
HouH.-T. (2015). Integrating cluster and sequential analysis to explore learners’ flow and behavioral patterns in a simulation game with situated-learning context for science courses: A video-based process exploration. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 424–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.010
31.
HöysniemiJ.HämäläinenP.TurkkiL. (2003). Using peer tutoring in evaluating the usability of a physically interactive computer game with children. Interacting with Computers, 15(2), 203–225. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0953-5438(03)00008-0
32.
HsiaoH. S.ChangC. S.LinC. Y.ChangC. C.ChenJ. C. (2014). The influence of collaborative learning games within different devices on student’s learning performance and behaviours. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(6), 652–669. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.347
33.
HwangG. J.ChenC. H. (2017). Influences of an inquiry-based ubiquitous gaming design on students’ learning achievements, motivation, behavioral patterns, and tendency towards critical thinking and problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 950–971. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12464
34.
HwangG.-J.HsuT.-C.LaiC.-L.HsuehC.-J. (2017). Interaction of problem-based gaming and learning anxiety in language students’ English listening performance and progressive behavioral patterns. Computers & Education, 106, 26–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.11.010
35.
HwangG. J.WuP. H. (2012). Advancements and trends in digital game-based learning research: A review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), E6–E10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01242.x
36.
JanssenJ.KirschnerF.ErkensG.KirschnerP. A.PaasF. (2010). Making the black box of collaborative learning transparent: Combining process-oriented and cognitive load approaches. Educational Psychology Review, 22(2), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9131-x
JongB.-S.LaiC.-H.HsiaY.-T.LinT.-W.LuC.-Y. (2013). Using game-based cooperative learning to improve learning motivation: A study of online game use in an operating systems course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(2), 183–190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TE.2012.2207959
39.
KafaiY. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children’s learning. Lawrence Erlbaum.
KeF. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers & Education, 73, 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.010
42.
KeF.ShuteV.ClarkK. M.ErlebacherG. (2019). Interdisciplinary design of gamebased learning platforms: A phenomenological examination of the integrative design of game, learning, and assessment. Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
43.
KeF.XieK.XieY. (2016). Game-based learning engagement: A theory- and data-driven exploration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(6), 1183–1201. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12314
KingA. (1990). Enhancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4), 664–687. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312027004664
46.
KirschnerF.PaasF.KirschnerP. A. (2009). A cognitive load approach to collaborative learning: United brains for complex tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9095-2
47.
KirschnerP. A.SwellerJ.KirschnerF.ZambranoJ. (2018). From cognitive load theory to collaborative cognitive load theory. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9277-y
48.
KumpulainenK.MutanenM. (1999). The situated dynamics of peer group interaction: An introduction to an analytic framework. Learning and Instruction, 9(5), 449–473. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00038-3
49.
LiuC.-C.TsaiC.-C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50(3), 627–639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.07.002
50.
LohC. S.ShengY. (2014). Maximum Similarity Index (MSI): A metric to differentiate the performance of novices vs. multiple-experts in serious games. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 322–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.022
51.
LohC. S.ShengY.IfenthalerD. (2015). Serious games analytics: Theoretical framework. In C. S. Loh, Y Sheng & D Ifenthaler (Eds.), Serious games analytics (pp. 3–29). Springer International Publishing.
52.
MaloneT. W. (1980). What makes things fun to learn? Heuristics for designing instructional computer games [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSMALL symposium and the first SIGPC symposium on Small systems. https://doi.org/10.1145/800088.802839
53.
MayerB. W.DaleK. M.FraccastoroK. A.MossG. (2011). Improving transfer of learning: Relationship to methods of using business simulation. Simulation & Gaming, 42(1), 64–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878110376795
54.
MillerD.RobertsonD.HudsonA.ShimiJ. (2012). Signature pedagogy in early years education: A role for COTS game-based learning. Computers in the Schools, 29(1–2), 227–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2012.651423
MoonJ.KeF. (2019). In-game actions to promote game-based math learning engagement. Journal of Educational Computing Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119878611
57.
NaikN. (2017). The use of GBL to teach mathematics in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(3), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1108857
58.
NicolD. J.BoyleJ. T. (2003). Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 28(4), 457–473. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507032000122297
59.
NovakE.JohnsonT. E.TenenbaumG.ShuteV. J. (2016). Effects of an instructional gaming characteristic on learning effectiveness, efficiency, and engagement: Using a storyline for teaching basic statistical skills. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.881393
60.
PaasF.TuovinenJ. E.TabbersH.Van GervenP. W. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8
61.
PapamitsiouZ.EconomidesA. A. (2014). Learning analytics and educational data mining in practice: A systematic literature review of empirical evidence. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 49–64. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.17.4.49
62.
PellegriniA. D.BlatchfordP.KatoK.BainesE. (2004). A short-term longitudinal study of children’s playground games in primary school: Implications for adjustment to school and social adjustment in the USA and the UK. Social Development, 13(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.2004.00259.x
PorterA.McMakenJ.HwangJ.YangR. (2011). Common core standards: The new US intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11405038
65.
ReichelK.BahierV.MidouxC.PariseyN.MassonJ.-P.StoeckelS. (2015). Interpretation and approximation tools for big, dense Markov chain transition matrices in population genetics. Algorithms for Molecular Biology, 10(1), Article 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13015-015-0061-5
66.
RomeroM.UsartM.OttM.EarpJ.de FreitasS. (2012). Learning through playing for or against each other? Promoting collaborative learning in digital game based learning. ECIS 2012 Proceeding. https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2012/93
67.
SchunkD. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2501_6
68.
ShuteV. J.WangL.GreiffS.ZhaoW.MooreG. (2016). Measuring problem solving skills via stealth assessment in an engaging video game. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 106–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.047
69.
SlavinR. E. (1987). Developmental and motivational perspectives on cooperative learning: A reconciliation. Child Development, 58, 1161–1167. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1130612
70.
StuderM.RitschardG.GabadinhoA.MüllerN. S. (2011). Discrepancy analysis of state sequences. Sociological Methods & Research, 40(3), 471–510. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124111415372
71.
SungH.-Y.HwangG.-J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.019
72.
TudgeJ.RogoffB. (1999). Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives. In LlyodP.FernyhoughC. (Eds.), Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments: The zone of proximal development (Vol. 3, pp. 32–56). Taylor & Frances/Routledge.
WentzelK. R. (1993). Does being good make the grade? Social behavior and academic competence in middle school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(2), 357–364.
76.
WentzelK. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.90.2.202
77.
WoodE.ZivcakovaL.GentileP.ArcherK.De PasqualeD.NoskoA. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 365–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.029
78.
ZhaoH.SullivanK. P.MelleniusI. (2014). Participation, interaction and social presence: An exploratory study of collaboration in online peer review groups. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 807–819. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12094
