Summary+of+Math+Leaning

Masha, 1st draft, still in the process:

Using video games for mathematics achievement and motivation of students

A study by Harris, Yuill, and Luckin (2008) revealed that video games may be used effectively for instructing math classes. The research team from the United Kingdom conducted a study with 34 primary school students of 8 to 10 years, studying the influence of mastery and performance goals on the nature of children's collaborative participation during video gaming. The students were matched based on their goal orientation, specifically, performance-oriented or master-oriented. Matched according to their achievement goals and paired by two, students played The Logical Journey of Zoombinis, a video game oriented towards teaching logic, for 20 minutes with a partner. Harris et al. observed that students with different goal orientations interacted in different ways while solving mathematical problems. The authors concluded that g oal-focused instructions can be used to influence the nature and quality of children's paired interactions. Additionally, i nstructing children towards mastery goals appears to promote a more collaborative style of interaction.

In the dissertation, Kebritchi (2002) examined the effects of a few mathematics video games on students’ motivation and mathematics achievement. A total of 10 mathematics teachers were assigned to treatment or control group. A total of 193 high school students, depending on their group membership (i.e., control vs. experimental) were playing the instructional games DimensionMᵀᴹ. The results indicated that students were played the video games showed significant improvement with regard to mathematics achievement as compared to their peers who did not play. No significant improvements were found in relation to students’ motivation between both groups. Despite non-significant results, Kebritchi still suggested integrating mathematics games with classroom activities. Surprisingly, prior mathematics knowledge, computer skills, and English skills were not significant contributors to students’ motivation and mathematics achievement. Finally, the researcher listed a number suggestions regarding designing and implementing the video games in classroom settings, including among others: (a) training programs should be administered to teachers and students; (b) issues related to availability of computers and allotted for video gaming time should be addressed; (c) school administrators and teachers should be educated about the effectiveness of using video games in teaching mathematics.

Mayo (2009) stated that although not many educators are open to the idea of using video games in their classrooms, “sophisticated video game content already exists in topics ranging from immunology to numerical methods” (p.79). The researcher suggested that using video games in classrooms over a lecture program increases educational outcomes over increasing positive learning for 7 to 40% including such topics, among others, as high school algebra and college level numerical methods. Specifically, the learning outcomes of video games compared to lecture on the same material increased by 7.2% when students played Dimenxian/Evolver learning algebra (n=193). When students played NIU Torcs they were more likely to spend more time (i.e., two times and more) doing homework and they were able to create much more detailed concept maps than students exposed solely to lecture methods of instructions. There are several advantages of using video games when teaching mathematics. First, video games allow presentation of information in multiple visual and auditory modes. According to dual coding theory (Paivio, 1986), there is equal weight to verbal and non-verbal events. The two cognitive subsystems are equally important when human cognition processes information//.// In many multiplayer video games, both verbal and nonverbal components are used. Second,using video games provides educators with an opportunity to deliver math education to millions of users, simultaneously. _

__Cutter, cont'd:__

__Ke, 2007, Gameplaying for maths learning cooperative or not__ Ke used ASTRA EAGLE, a mathematics gaming package designed by the Centre for Advanced Technologies, as the gaming and educational medium. The ASTRA EAGLE games, "designed to reinforce academic standards for mathematics required by the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment" (p. 252). MANCOVA results, "showed that maths gameplaying did promote test-based cognitive learning achievement. Additionally, gameplaying context (Teams-Games-Tournament, cooperative, or interpersonal competitive) played a significant role in moderating the effect of educational gaming on affective learning outcome," and, overall, positive outcomes were seen in mathematics achievement when compared to no-gaming traditional education (p. 256). Low SES students also showed an affective gain over other students. In summary, gaming here was successful, but only when put in the framework of a social experience. The most positive effect was seen from cooperative gaming because, it is hypothesized in the paper, it offers an, "appropriately difficult challenge," through peer tutoring, and also is supported by fantasy and contextual relevance.

__Ke, 2008, A case study of computer gaming for math engaged learning from gamplay__ Ke asserts that it there is an orthogonal divide between gaming and learning in learner's minds, and when these two combine it would often appear to combine the wost aspects of both. Ke goes on to discuss the qualitative ramifications of mixing gaming with mathematics education, including the following qualities: Learning outside of the gameplay versus learning within the gameplay (learning situated within authentic gaming tasks); Wandering mouse – Random clicking (simply working the system with random and semi-random guesses, instead of trying to solve problems to completion); Learning situated within the gameplay (seamless integration of learning into game tasks showed better engagement); Gaming without reﬂection (without elaborate feedback, student play against the game, instead of learning through it); Play-based communication (most communications in this setting were not relevant to learning tasks); Peer scaffolding is not naturalistic (thoughtful elaboration of problem solving processes does not come naturally to learners, and make peer scaffolding difficult); Boys versus girls (boys tended to focus on game-related conversations, whereas girls used communication more generally); Quiet achiever (not all students view gaming as a social opportunity); Ofﬂine learning tools (utilization of outside materials such as calculators, paper and pencil, instructor; noted that the lack of paper and pencil could lead to less mapping and deep learning) (pp. 5-10). Despite the difficulties present, the gaming groups showed significant gains using the Astra Eagle software package. Ke then proposes some suggestions for future researchers and designers: Integrating goals of gameplay and learning (think situated); Instructional support features in educational computer gaming (reflecting upon learning experiences); Game-based instructional strategies (instructors participating in learning) (pp. 10-11).

__Ke, 2008, Alternative goal structures for computer game-based learning__ "Results indicated that even though there was not a significant effect of classroom goal structure in reinforcing computer gaming for math test performance, gamebased learning in cooperative goal structure was most effective in promoting positive math attitudes." A review of the literature lends support to the claim that some knowledge domains are particularly suited to computer gaming, such as math (Randel et al. 1992; Hays 2005) (p. 430). "McFarlane et al. (2002) noted that education gaming yields best results when coupled with suitable off-computer activities" (p.439). Significant findings were found in learning via video game versus traditional teaching methods, but with low reliability and power. "A speculation is that educationalists may be able to enhance the games’ effects by either embedding adaptive, informative feedback within the games or creating an external context for informative feedback, such as a cooperative learning situation for elaborations exchanged between peers" (p.440). Largely a replication study of the 2007 article, showing the same results with the same experimental design: Gaming groups performed significantly better than non-gaming groups on GSAT test achievement; again, only the cooperative group showed a significant increase in affect (ATMI); low-SES students achieved better GSAT scores with competitive and cooperative gaming, but not individualistic -- similarly low-SES students saw affective gains with only cooperative gaming.

__Ke, 2008, Computer games application within alternative classroom goal structures cognitive metacog and affective eval.____ Ke's analysis shows that computer games may not develop better achievement scores, but gaming can make the educational experience more pleasant for students... potentially looking at longer-term gains. Ke states that, "...not all games encouraged cognitive engagement, which explained why quantitatively computer games did not signiﬁcantly surpass paper-and-pencil drills in promoting cognitive math test performance" (p.13), highlighting a prominent difficulty with educational gaming, as a whole: putting education in an electronic, game-based package does not necessarily create better learning. Often learners were more engaged with winning the game, or the game-like features, than with the learning of mathematics skills. Additionally, the multiple-choice structured games lead to students strategizing how to work the system (narrowing it down to a few possibilities), and working through as many problems as possible, rather than trying to reach the correct answers for each problem. This demonstrated that students were attempting to maximize their performance within the game, and not necessarily maximize their learning through the game. A special note here for Campbell's Law may be warranted.

Additionally: Campbell's Law