Computer games are fun, exciting and motivational when used as leisure pursuits. But do they have similar attributes when utilized for educational purposes? This article investigates whether learning by computer game can improve student experiences compared with a more formal lecture approach and whether computer games have potential for improving performance. Instruction was split between lectures and computer games, and student experiences were recorded using an Experience Sampling Method to capture real-time experience and feelings of flow. Results indicated that student experiences in the game mode showed increased alertness, increased feelings of being active, increased feelings of involvement and an increased perception of challenge. Flow characteristics revealed boredom during standard lectures but anxiety and flow during game modes. Finally, some evidence of improved attainment was evident. By using contemporary interactive approaches such as computer games, student learning experiences and attainment may be improved. Some practical issues of implementing games are also discussed.
Ballard S., Carroll E. and Stapleton J. ( 2004) Students’ perceptions of course web sites used in face-to-face instruction. Journal of Interactive Learning Research15(3): 197-211.
Bligh D. ( 2000) What’s the Use of Lectures. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Caldwell JE ( 2007) Clickers in the large classroom: Current research and best-practice tips. CBE Life Sciences Education6(1): 9-20.
5.
Case J. and Marshall D. ( 2004) Between deep and surface: Procedural approaches to learning in engineering education contexts. Studies in Higher Education29(6): 605-15.
6.
Cohen J. ( 1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences . New York: Academic Press .
7.
Connolly TM, Hainey T. and Stansfield M. ( 2007) An application of games-based learning within software engineering. British Journal of Educational Technology38(3): 416-28.
8.
Csikszentmihalyi M. ( 1997) Finding Flow: The Psychology of Engagement with Everyday Life. New York: Harper Collins.
9.
Csikszentmihalyi M., Rathunde K. and Whalen S. ( 1993) Talented Teenagers: The Roots of Success and Failure . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
DeHaan JW ( 2005) Acquisition of Japanese as a foreign language through a baseball video game. Foreign Language Annals38(2): 278-82.
11.
Entwistle NJ ( 1991) Approaches to learning and perceptions of the learning environment: Introduction to the special issue. Higher Education22: 201-4.
12.
Gee JP ( 2003) High score education. Wired Magazine , 11 May: http//www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.05/view.html?pg=1 [accessed 5 May 2009].
13.
Hardy SA, Reay D., Thompson RA and Zamboanga B. ( 2003) Student background and course involvement among first-year college students in introduction to psychology: Implications for course design and student achievement. Psychology Learning and Teaching3(1): 6-10.
14.
Hektner JM, Schmidt JA and Csikszentmihalyi M. ( 2007) Experience Sampling Method: Measuring the Quality of Everyday Life. London: SAGE.
15.
Holley D. and Dobson C. ( 2008) Encouraging student engagement in a blended learning environment: The use of contemporary learning spaces. Learning, Media and Technology33(2): 139-50.
16.
Kiili K. ( 2005) Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. Internet and Higher Education8: 13-24.
17.
Kirkpatrick DL ( 1994) Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
18.
Knight JK and Wood WB ( 2005) Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education4: 298-310.
19.
Konings KD, Brand-Gruwel S. and van Merriënboer JJG ( 2005) Towards more powerful learning environments through combining the perspectives of designers, teachers, and students. British Journal of Educational Psychology75(4): 645-60.
20.
Lainema T. and Nurmi S. ( 2006) Applying an authentic, dynamic learning environment in real world business. Computers and Education47: 94-115.
21.
Lepper MR and Chabay RW ( 1985) Intrinsic motivation and instruction: Conflicting views on the role of motivational processes in computer-based education. Educational Psychologist20(4): 217-30.
22.
Malone TW and Lepper MR ( 1987) Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In: Snow RE and Farr MJ (eds) Aptitude, Learning, and Instruction. Volume 3: Cognitive and Affective Process Analyses. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , pp. 223-50.
23.
Nielson KA, Yee D. and Erickson KI ( 2005) Memory enhancement by a semantically unrelated emotional arousal source induced after learning. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory84: 49-56.
24.
O’Leary S., Churley-Strom R., Diepenhorst L. and Magrane D. ( 2005) Educational games in an obstetrics and gynecology core curriculum. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology193(5): 1848-51.
25.
O’Neil HF, Baker EL and Wainess R. ( 2005) Classification of learning outcomes: Evidence from the computer games literature. Curriculum Journal16(4): 455-74.
26.
Oblinger D. ( 2004) The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education8. Special Issue on the Educational Semantic World.
27.
Oblinger DG and Oblinger JL ( 2005) Educating the net generation. Educause : www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/
28.
Ormrod JE ( 2008) Human Learning. Columbus, OH : Pearson.
29.
Prensky M. ( 2001a) Simulations: Are they Games?http//www.marcprensky.com [accessed 2 May 2009].
30.
Prensky M. ( 2001b) Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon9(5): 1-6.
31.
Prensky M. ( 2002a) Not only the lonely: Implications of ‘social’ online activities for higher education. On the Horizon10(4): 1-10.
32.
Prensky M. ( 2002b) Open collaboration: Finding and polishing hidden gems . On the Horizon10(3): 1-7.
33.
Prensky M. ( 2003) New business models for learning: We need them badly . . . and we have to invent them: http//www.marcprensky.com [accessed 2 May 2009].
34.
Revelle W. and Loftus DA ( 1992) The implications of arousal effects for the study of affect and memory. In: Christianson SA (ed.) Handbook of emotion and memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 113-50.
35.
Sander P., Coates D., King M. and Stevenson K. ( 2000) University students’ expectations of teaching . Studies in Higher Education2(3): 309-23.
36.
Struyven K., Dochy F., Gielen S. and Janssens S. ( 2008) Students’ experiences with contrasting learning environments: The added value of students’ perceptions. Learning Environment Research11: 83-109.
37.
Tapscott D. ( 1998) Growing Up Digital. New York : McGraw Hill.
38.
Vogel JJ, Bowers CA, Cannon-Bowers J., Muse K., Vogel DS and Wright M. ( 2006) Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research34(3): 229-43.
39.
Vorderer P. ( 1996) Toward a psychological theory of suspense. In: Vorderer P, Wulff HJ and Friedrichsen M (eds) Suspense: Conceptualizations, Theoretical Analyses, and Empirical Explorations . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum , pp. 233-54.
40.
Woo MA and Kimmick JV ( 2000) Comparison of Internet versus lecture instructional methods for teaching nursing research. Journal of Professional Nursing16(3): 132-9.
