Abstract
Twelve introductory counseling classes either played the Counseling Pursuits game or participated in a question-answer review activity to review material for the final examination. Classes in which students played the game obtained higher scores than students in the review session on the essay portion and total score, but not the objective portion, of the final examination. Classes playing the game reported higher engagement in the learning session than classes in the question-answer review condition. Implications for further study of games in professional counseling and counseling psychology classes are discussed.
Like most instructors in higher education, mental health and school counselor educators seek ways to effectively engage students and improve their understanding of course material. It is particularly important for students to be engaged in the counseling foundations class because it provides students with beginning preparation in the range of topics and skills they will encounter at greater depth in subsequent classes. At the same time, this course tends to be among those that students rate as “dry” or “boring” compared to the laboratory and field experience courses that compromise much of the typical counselor education curriculum.
The use of active learning tasks is one means of engaging students in psychology undergraduate and graduate courses. Active learning tasks enable students to obtain direct experience with course constructs and skills (DeVries & Edwards, 1973). These provide motivation, enable sharing of ideas, create a common experience base, and illustrate complex constructs (Heineke, 1997). They also enable students to interact and learn from one another (Chow, Howard, & Lambe, 2008).
The literature on instructional methods in college courses reveals a number of active learning or “hands on” strategies to more successfully engage undergraduate and graduate students in learning course material, preparing for examinations, and applying course constructs to problems in their fields. Over the years, psychology instructors have developed creative activities, such as comparisons of psychology textbooks over time (Zehr, 2000), microlabs (Hulse-Killacky, Killacky, and Dunigian, 2000), and class debates on critical issues (Brooks, 1985). More recently, Abramson and his colleagues have created a number of activities that enable students to directly engage famous psychologists and their accomplishments in history of psychology classes. These activities include creating calendars of important dates in history and trading cards of influential psychologists (Abramson, Burke-Bergmann, Nolf, & Swift, 2009), and making postage stamps of famous psychologists (Abramson & Long, 2012).
Classroom learning games are another type of active learning task used in undergraduate and graduate classes. Several types of game and game-like activities have been created for psychology. A classroom game is defined as a structured activity that enables students to learn, rehearse, or apply course material in the context of a game structure (Echeverria, Garcia-Campo, Nussbaum, Gil, Villalta, Amnestica, et al., 2011). Frequently, classroom games are derivations of well-known games, including Jeopardy (Neef, Cihon, Kettering, Guld, Axe, Itoi, et al., 2007; Lord, Martin, & Abramson, 2007; Thanakorn & Brown, 2010; Shiroma, Massa, & Alarcon, 2011), Trivial Pursuit (Ackil, 1986; Berrenberg & Prosser, 1991), Life (Brinker, Roberts, & Radnidge, 2014), Monopoly (Harvey, 2014), and various forms of the Labyrinth game (Baskin, Cushing, & Abramson, 2013). Abramson, et al. (2009) have adapted numerous games for use in psychology classes including Scattergram, Password, Pictionary, Cranium, Taboo, Tribond, Wheel of Fortune, and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Other games are designed for on-line play by students individually or in small groups (Merwin, 2003; Van Eck, 2006; Fratto, 2011; Sadiq, 2011; Adams, Mayer, MacNamera, Koenig, & Wainess, 2012). These games have been utilized in undergraduate and graduate classes in social sciences, pharmacology, medicine, nursing, and liberal arts, as well as psychology (Echeverria, et al., 2011).
Game development theorists have suggested three ways that games optimize students' learning. First, effective games engage students, i.e., they draw and hold students' interest and investment in the activity (Malone & Lepper, 1987; Nigro, 1994). Second, the game provides an intense experience or challenge (Inbar, 1968; Garris, Ahlers, & Driskell, 2002). Third, the game is interactive, involving groups of students playing against one another or the game itself (Miel, 1952; Barrish, Saunders, & Wolfe, 1969). The combination of challenge and group interaction has been found to be particularly helpful for engaging students in learning tasks (Edwards, DeVries, & Snyder, 1972; DeVries & Edwards, 1973).
Studies of games used in psychology classes have tended to focus on the extent to which games facilitated student engagement. Those studies have yielded mixed results. Some investigators (Merwin, 2003; Abramson, et al., 2009; Fratto, 2011; Shiroma, et al., 2011) have found that students evaluated game activities as more interesting and enjoyable than traditional review activities, while others (Neef, et al., 2007; Neef, Perrin, Haberlin, & Rodrigues, 2011) found no differences between students' enjoyment of games vs. traditional study activities.
Fewer studies have explored games' influence on students' performance on class examinations or assignments. These studies have relied on students' reports on the amount they believed they learned compared to their learning in other study formats, such as lecture-discussion sessions. Some investigators (Andrushchenko & Kislyakov, 1991; Corbeil & Laveault, 2011) observed that students in game conditions earned higher examination scores than control students. However, game participation did not lead to higher examination scores in other studies (Neef, et al., 2011; Sadiq, 2011; Adams, et al., 2012). To date, few studies have compared actual examination performance between a large sample of students who have played a game vs. students participating in traditional study methods; nor have the effects of games on student engagement and achievement in graduate counselor education foundation classes been investigated.
Studies of classroom games have tended to focus on their effectiveness for engaging students in studying course material and increasing their enjoyment of the study activity.
This study evaluated a classroom game to help students study for their final examination in a professional counseling foundations class. This study differs from previous game evaluations in that it includes a large number of classes over a 4-yr. period. The game was created by the author based on the popular board game Trivial Pursuit. Classes either played the game or participated in a question-answer review session prior to the midterm examination. Classes were compared on three outcome variables as follows: (1) engagement in the study session, measured as interest in the activity and subject matter, (2) total scores on the course midterm examination, and (3) scores on the objective and essay portions of the midterm examination.
Method
Participants
Participants were 231 (132 women, 99 men) first year students in a Midwestern urban university's counseling and counselor education program, enrolled in the introductory counseling class from Summer 2008 to Summer 2012. Average age of the students was 28.7 yr. Racial distribution of the students was as follows: White (101), African American (51), Hispanic (53), Asian (14), Native American (4), and biracial/multiracial (8). Racial distributions by class were consistent across classes. A full-time faculty member in the counselor education program taught the class over the 6-yr. period, using the same lecture-discussion format and topics. The instructor conducted a total of 12 classes during this period, with a mean enrollment of 19.2 students in each class. Because students were not assigned randomly to classes, the classes were treated as the experimental units in the evaluation study.
Counseling Pursuits Game
The author adapted this game based on Trivial Pursuit, with some adaptations to enable it to be played in class more easily. Questions used in the game were taken from material in Gladding's (2004, 2008) introductory counseling text (see Appendix for questions). There were two types of questions. One type required teams to recall facts, such names and terms. The other question type required teams to apply text material to a simple problem.
The author created a game board drawn on a clear overhead projector sheet. The board was designed in a manner somewhat similar to a Trivial Pursuit board, consisting of a square track (Trivial Pursuit tracks are circular) with 41 spaces. Each space was in one of seven colors. Six of the colors corresponded to question categories, each category containing questions on material from one chapter (16 to 20) from the Gladding text. Spaces of the seventh color (black) were “free” spaces that allowed a player reaching them to roll the dice again without answering a question. Four spaces along the track were “coin spaces” (similar to “pie” spaces in the original Trivial Pursuit game), and from those spaces were “spokes” of track leading to an “winner's space” in the middle of the board. The game board is presented in Fig. 1.
Counseling Pursuits game board. Numbers indicate chapters from the Gladding test.
To play the game, players were divided into teams of four students. Team members took turns rolling a single die and moving the team's token (tokens were distinguished by different shapes) along the track in either direction the team wished. When token reached a colored space, the team selected a question card from the chapter in the Gladding text associated with that color. There were two types of questions, factual and simple application. An example of a factual question was as follows: “In addition to the ‘traditional family’ with two parents and one or more children, name three other family forms since the 1950s.” An example of a simple application question was as follows: “Nick's school counselor helps him find information on colleges and universities in his area. What type of service has the counselor provided?”
The team was given 30 sec. to discuss the question and communicate an answer to the team member conducting the turn. That member was the only one allowed to state the team's answer. If the team answered the question correctly, they were allowed to take another turn. If the team reached a “coin space” and correctly answered a question from the chapter associated with the space's color, they received a coin of that color and were allowed to take another turn. Once a team had a coin of each of the six question colors, they could elect to move along a spoke to the center space on the board when they reached a coin space. In order to land on the center space, teams were required to roll the exact number of spaces to reach the center space. The first team to reach the center space won the game. The winning team received a “prize” (e.g., counseling books, pens bearing the university logo, coffee mugs, foam balls in the shape of brains).
Procedure
Prior to the start of the semester, the class was assigned randomly to the experimental or control condition. In the Experimental condition, the class played Counseling Pursuits during the class meeting the week prior to the final examination. The entire class meeting (2:40) was devoted to the game. At the conclusion of the class, students completed the engagement survey. In the Control condition, the class participated in a review activity during the class meeting the week prior to the midterm examination. The entire class meeting (2:40) was devoted to the session. Participants were organized into groups of four. The instructor used the questions from the Counseling Pursuits game to conduct the study session, presenting the same questions used in the game session. Questions were presented in random order. Groups were allowed to discuss each question for 30 sec. The instructor then called on one group to answer the question, ensuring that each group was called upon to answer approximately an equal number of questions. When each question was correctly answered, the instructor presented the next question.
Upon conclusion of the game or the study session, the class members completed the engagement survey.
Dependent Variables
Engagement in the task.—Engagement was measured with a five-item scale. Items on this scale were as follows: (1) I enjoyed participating in this session, (2) I was able to understand the course material more easily after participating in this session, (3) I found the session very engaging, (4) The session made the material more meaningful for me, and (5) I was satisfied with this session. Participants responded to each item on a five-point Likert-type scale with anchors 5: Strongly Agree and 1: Strongly Disagree. A pilot study on two classes who either played the game or participated in the review session revealed an internal consistency (Cronbach's α) of 0.88.
Midterm Examination.—The midterm examination included two parts, a 50-question multiple-choice test and a five-question essay test. The essay questions required participants to apply course concepts to a client's problem and were limited to 250 words per question. The essay responses were evaluated and graded by a licensed counselor who was not aware of the experimental condition to which the class had been assigned. This grader was trained to evaluate the responses according to the instructor's grading rubric. The instructor reviewed the graded responses to confirm that the rubric had been followed.
Results
Satisfaction survey responses and midterm examination grades were averaged for each class and mean scores were compared with independent samples t tests. The results of the analyses of those variables are summarized below.
Classes in the game condition obtained a mean Satisfaction score of 5.70 (SD = 0.56), whereas classes in the study activity condition obtained a mean of 4.35 (SD = 0.92). The independent means t test revealed that the game condition mean was significantly higher than the review activity condition mean (t10 = 2.79, p = .02).
Classes in the game condition obtained a mean midterm examination score of 47.17 (SD = 2.56), whereas classes in the review activity condition obtained a mean score of 43.67 (SD = 1.03). The independent means t test revealed that the mean essay examination score was higher in the game condition (t10 = 3.10, p = .02).
Classes in the game condition obtained a mean midterm examination score of 47.50 (SD = 2.88), and classes in the review activity condition obtained a mean score of 45.0 (SD = 1.79). The independent means t test revealed that the difference in mean objective examination scores between the two conditions was not significant (t10 = 1.81, p = .11).
Classes in the game condition obtained a mean midterm examination score of 94.67 (SD = 1.73), whereas classes in the review activity condition obtained a mean score of 88.67 (SD = 2.25). The independent means t test revealed that the game condition classes obtained a higher average overall test score than classes in the review activity condition (t10 = 3.07, p = .01).
Discussion
Consistent with the findings of some earlier investigations (Abramson, et al., 2009; Neef, et al., 2011), students who participated in the Counseling Pursuits game rated their engagement in the study session more favorably than students' ratings of engagement in the review activity. As had been observed in previous investigations, students' informal comments indicated that the game helped them maintain their interest in the material and enabled them to work more closely in their teams to find the answers to the questions. Students also commented that the game seemed to “lighten” the mood in the classroom during the review session. In the traditional review session condition, students tended to be serious, with few expressions of humor, and there was at times a sense of tension in the room. Students in the game condition frequently laughed and exchanged good-natured banter as they collectively attempted to answer questions.
The findings also suggest a positive relationship between participating in a challenging, engaging team game facilitates examination performance. Students in the game condition performed better than those in the review condition on the essay portion of the final examination, and they obtained higher total scores on the examination. In contrast, students in the game and review activity conditions did not differ significantly in their scores on the objective portion of the examination. An advantage of games and similar active learning activities for learning a subject matter is that they enable students to apply course concepts to problems (DeVries, Muse, & Wells, 1971; Edwards, et al., 1972; Echeverria, et al., 2010; Brinker, Roberts, & Radnidge, 2014). The essay questions on the counseling final examination required application of course concepts to problems and the objective portion included primarily items requiring recall of facts. Although students in both conditions discussed application questions, the Counseling Pursuits game may have enabled students to discuss questions in ways that improved their skills for applying counseling concepts to problems in the field. Given that a variety of study methods facilitate recall of facts (Aamodt, 1986), games may be no more effective than other study methods for improving performance on assessments that require information recall.
However, this study should be considered a beginning investigation of the effect of classroom games on learning different types of information in counseling and related subject areas. The Counseling Pursuits game and the learning criteria on which it is based (i.e., engagement, team play, challenging, competitive activity) are rudimentary when compared to many games and simulations that have been developed for classroom use. With the evolution of game technology, their complexity and potential to facilitate learning has increased. In their review, Wilson and her colleagues (Wilson, Bedwell, Lazzara, Salas, Burke, Estock, et al., 2009) identify three types of general learning outcomes (cognitive, skill-based, affective) and 18 game attributes in the current learning game literature. In different combinations, these attributes may facilitate learning different types of subject matter under different conditions. A subsequent study (Bedwell, Pavlas, Heyne, Lazzara, & Salas, 2012) consolidates those attributes from 18 to nine (Action Language, Assessment, Conflict/Challenge, Control, Environment, Game Fiction, Human Interaction, Immersion, and Rules/Goals). Many of these attributes apply specifically to computer games and computer simulations, which have conceptually similar to games but are less competitive and emphasize representation of actual situations (Crawford, 1984; Hays, 2005).
Future research can clarify the affect of games on students' success in learning professional counseling concepts in several ways. First, although several studies have identified attributes of computerized games and simulations, relatively little is known about the attributes of adapted board and television games such as Jeopardy and Trivial Pursuit. Research on the effectiveness of games would be enhanced if investigators could delineate the unique as well as the overlapping attributes of computerized and non-computerized games.
Second, future research productively would investigate the interaction of game, learning environment, and student attributes that optimize mastery of information and ability to apply information to actual problems. Since an increasing number of counseling courses are taught partly or wholly online, students at different locations may play a game as teams without interacting directly with one another.
Another important question for further inquiry is whether particular attributes of the game format facilitate performance on different types of assessments. For example, in some counseling courses, such as skill laboratories and field experience (i.e., practicum and internship) classes, examinations are assessments of actual performance of counseling skills with clients or actor-clients. There have been attempts to create computerized counseling simulations to teach and subsequently assess students' counseling skills (Hummel, Lichtenberg, & Shaffer, 1975; Frame, Flanagan, Fredrick, Gold, & Harris, 1997). Studies of these simulations generally have found that simulations increase engagement in learning counseling skills and improve conceptual grasp of those skills (Frame, et al., 1997; Kamnetz, 2004). Simulations have shown promise in assessing the quality and appropriateness of counselors' active listening skills (Dollinger, 1989; Engen & Dawson, 2002). However, further research is needed to identify the attributes of simulations and games that contribute to successful counseling skill acquisition (Kamnetz, 2004).
As games and game-like simulations have become more sophisticated, their potential to facilitate learning in counseling psychology has evolved. By delineating the relationships between game, information, and learner attributes, games may become a powerful, yet cost-effective and enjoyable tool for counselor educators.