skip to main content
10.1145/1978942.1979229acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Practical, appropriate, empirically-validated guidelines for designing educational games

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 May 2011Publication History

ABSTRACT

There has recently been a great deal of interest in the potential of computer games to function as innovative educational tools. However, there is very little evidence of games fulfilling that potential. Indeed, the process of merging the disparate goals of education and games design appears problematic, and there are currently no practical guidelines for how to do so in a coherent manner. In this paper, we describe the successful, empirically validated teaching methods developed by behavioural psychologists and point out how they are uniquely suited to take advantage of the benefits that games offer to education. We conclude by proposing some practical steps for designing educational games, based on the techniques of Applied Behaviour Analysis. It is intended that this paper can both focus educational games designers on the features of games that are genuinely useful for education, and also introduce a successful form of teaching that this audience may not yet be familiar with.

References

  1. Admiraal, W., Wubbels, T., and Pilot, A. College teaching in legal education: Teaching method, students' time-on-task, and achievement. Research in Higher Education, 40 (1999), 687--704.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., and Adams, C. The use of computer games as an educational tool: identification of appropriate game types and game elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30 (1999), 311--321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Bay-Hinitz, A. K., Peterson, R. F., and Quilittch, H. R. Cooperative games: a way to modify aggressive and cooperative behaviors in young children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27 (1994), 435--446.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Bell, K. E., Young, K. R., Salzberg, C. L., and West, R. P. High school driver education using peer tutors, direct instruction, and precision teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 24 (1991), 45--51.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., and Primavera, l. Enhancing the educational value of video games. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 7, 2 (2009), Article 23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Bethesda Game Studios (2008). Fallout 3. {PC}, USA: Bethesda Softworks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Björk, S., & Holopainen, J. Patterns in game design. Hingham, MA: Charles River Media, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogost, I. Persuasive Games. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Bruckman, A. Can Educational Be Fun? Game Developer's Conference, (1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Catania, C. A. Learning, (4 ed). Cornwall-on-Hudson, NY: Sloan Publishing, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Christophersen, E. R., & Mortweet, S. L. Treatments that work: Empirically supported strategies for managing child behavior problems. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Clark, R. E. Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 4 (1983), 445--459.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., and Heward, W. L. Applied Behavior Analysis, (2 ed.). NJ: Prentice Hall, 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. De Aguilera, M. and Méndiz, A. Video Games and Education (Education in the Face of a "Parallel School"). ACM Computers in Entertainment, 1, (2003), Article 01. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Dondlinger, M. J. Educational Video Game Design: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Applied Educational Technology, 4 (2007), 21--31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Engelmann, S., Becker, W. C., Carnine, D., and Gersten, R. (1988). The direct instruction follow through model: Design and outcomes. Education and Treatment of Children, 11 (1988), 303--317.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Fisch, S. M. Making Educational Computer Games "Educational". Proceedings of IDC '05, 56--61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Ferster, C. B., Skinner, B. F., Cheney, C. D., Morse, W. H., & Dews, P. B. Schedules of Reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Foxx, R. M., McMorrow, M. J., and Mennemeier, M. Teaching social/vocational skills to retarded adults with a modified table game: an analysis of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17 (1984), 343--352.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Frederick, W. C., and Walberg, H. J. Learning as a function of time. Journal of Educational Research, 73 (1980), 183--194.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Garris, R., Ahlers, R. and Driskell, J. E. Games, motivation, and learning: a research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33 (2002), 441--467.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Gee, J. P. What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Gee, J. P. Learning by Design: Good video games as learning machines. E Learning, 2 (2005), 5--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Gredler, M. E. Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In Jonassen, D. H. (2004) Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 571--583). Mahwah, NJ: IEA Publications., 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Habgood, M. P. J. The Effective Integration Of Digital Games And Learning Content. PhD Thesis, University of Nottingham, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Herrnstein, R. J. Relative and absolute strength of response as a function of frequency of reinforcement. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 267--272, 1961.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Karweit, N. Time-on-task reconsidered: Synthesis of research on time and learning. Educational Leadership, 41 (1984), 32--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Keller, F. S. Good-bye teacher... Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1, (1968), 79--89.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Kiili, K. Educational Game Design: Experiential gaming model revised. Tampere University of Technology, Research report 3, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Koster, R. A theory of fun for game design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Lee, J., Luchini, K., Michael, B., Norris, C. and Soloway, E. More than just fun and games: Assessing the value of educational video games in the classroom. In Proceedings of CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 1375--1378. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Lieberman, D. Management of chronic pediatric diseases with interactive health games: Theory and research findings. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management 24, (2001), 26--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Lindsley, O. R. From Skinner to precision teaching: The child knows best. In J. B. Jordan & L. S. Robbins (Eds.), Let's try doing something else kind of thing, 1--11. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children, 1971.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Lindsley, O. R. Precision teaching: discoveries and effects. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, (1992a), 51--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Lindsley, O. R. Why aren't effective teaching tools widely adopted? Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 259, (1992b), 21--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Loftus, G. R., & Loftus, E. F. Mind at Play: The Psychology of Video Games. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1983. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Lovaas, O. I. Behavioral treatment and normal educational and intellectual functioning in young autistic children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 55 (1987), 3--9.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Malone, T. W. Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 5 (1981), 333--369.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitute, Learning and Instruction: III. Conative and affective process analyses (pp. 223--253). Hilsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Malouf, D. B. The effect of instructional computer games on continuing student motivation. Journal of Special Education, 21, (1987), 27--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Mayo, M. J. Games for science and engineering education. Communications of the ACM, 50 (2007), 31--35. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Medland M. B., and Stachnik, T. J. Good-behavior game: a replication and systematic analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 53 (1972), 45--51, 1979.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. McClean, P., Saini-Eidukat, B., Schwert, D., Slator, B., and White, A. Virtual worlds in large-enrollment science classes significantly improve authentic learning. In J. Chambers, (ed.) Selected Papers from the 12th International Conference on College Teaching and Learning, (2001), 111--118.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Moreno-Ger, P., Burgos, D., Martínez-Ortiz, I., Sierra, J.L., and Fernández-Manjón, B. Educational game design for online education. Computers in Human Behavior, 24 (2008) 2530--2540. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Olympia, D. E., Sheridan, S. M., Jenson, W. R., & Andrews, D. Using student-managed interventions to increase homework completion and accuracy. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27 (1994), 85--99.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. O'Neil, H. F., Wainess, R. and Baker, E. L. Classification of learning outcomes: evidence from the computer games literature. The Curriculum Journal, 16 (2005), 455--474.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Pivec, M., and Kearney, P. Games for Learning and Learning from Games. Informatica, 31 (2007), 419--423.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Prensky, M. Digital Game-Based Learning. McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Rosas, R., Nussbaum, M., Cumsille, P., Marianov, V., Correa, M., Flores, P., Grau, V. Lagos, F., Lopez, X., Lopez, V., Rodriguez, P., Salinas, M. Beyond Nintendo: design and assessment of educational video games for first and second grade students. Computers & Education, 40 (2003) 71--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Ruben, B. D. Simulations, Games, and Experience-Based Learning: The Quest for a New Paradigm for Teaching and Learning. Simulation & Gaming, 30 (1999), 498--505. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Saville, B. K., Zinn, T. E., Neef, N. A., Van Norman, N., and Ferreri, S. J. A comparison of interteaching and lecture in the college classroom. Journal Of Applied Behavior Analysis, 39 (2006), 49--61.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Skinner, B. F. Science and Human Behavior. New York: The Free Press, 1953.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Skinner, B. F. About Behaviorism. New York: Random House, 1974.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Skinner E. A. and Belmont, M. J. Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behaviour and student engagement across the school year, Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, (1993), 571--581.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Swartout, W., and Van Lent, M. Making a game of system design. Communications of the ACM, 46 (2003), 32--39. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Turnbull, M., Lapkin, S., Hart, D., and Swain, M. Time on task and immersion graduates' French proficiency. In S. Lapkin (ed.), French second language education in Canada: Empirical studies (pp. 31--55). Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Practical, appropriate, empirically-validated guidelines for designing educational games
            Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

            Recommendations

            Comments

            Login options

            Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

            Sign in
            • Published in

              cover image ACM Conferences
              CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
              May 2011
              3530 pages
              ISBN:9781450302289
              DOI:10.1145/1978942

              Copyright © 2011 ACM

              Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

              Publisher

              Association for Computing Machinery

              New York, NY, United States

              Publication History

              • Published: 7 May 2011

              Permissions

              Request permissions about this article.

              Request Permissions

              Check for updates

              Qualifiers

              • research-article

              Acceptance Rates

              CHI '11 Paper Acceptance Rate410of1,532submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

            PDF Format

            View or Download as a PDF file.

            PDF

            eReader

            View online with eReader.

            eReader