Project- and Game-Based Learning Environments

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
A Review of Project-Based Learning Literature
A Review of Game-Based Environments Literature
The Connection Between the Two Environments
References

Introduction

The diversity of learning environments (LEs) makes it possible to find and apply a large number of new educational methods and approaches. An LE as a range of settings where students acquire knowledge. In recent literature, the physical and cultural conditions of giving and receiving the knowledge have earned much attention from scholars. Two of the most widely investigated types of LEs are project-based and game-based environments. A suggested literature review will cover these two LEs through analyzing the present state of the research field and identifying the gaps in current work. The paper will overview the literature focused on project-based and game-based LEs, synthesize the connection between them, and outline the benefits suggested by the two environments to educators and researchers.

A Review of Project-Based Learning Literature

Project-based learning (PBL) is an original way of learning that teaches a variety of strategies crucial for present-day students’ success. Learners acquire knowledge through questioning and collaborative work that includes creative and analytical tasks (Bell, 2010). PBL is an advantageous method that teaches students how to deduce practicable skills and solve problems in the process of learning. Larmer and Mergendoller (2010) identify the following essentials of PBL: meaningful content, a need to perceive something, a compelling question, learners’ choice and voice, the skills of the twenty-first century, innovation, and research, response and revision, and a public presentation of the project.

In a review of studies focused on PBL, Thomas (2000) distinguishes the following defining features of this approach: original content, authentic evaluation, teachers’ assistance instead of direction, specific academic goals, cooperative schooling, observation, analysis, and the employment of cognitive skills. PBL is defined as an activity that has the power to engage learners in the decision-making process and entitles them with the possibility to have a great degree of autonomy while working on their projects (Thomas, 2000). Tamim and Grant (2013) analyze the attitudes of teachers towards the implementation of PBL and establish three themes associated with carrying out PBL. The first one is that teachers tend to define PBL through its academic benefits. The second topic is related to a variety of PBL implementation approaches during the process of learning. The third theme is the endorsement of “student-centered approaches” in PBL (Tamim & Grant, 2013, p. 77).

Many scholarly studies are focused on students’ perspectives with PBL and the peculiarities of collaborative work. Research by Grant (2011) identifies the following impacts on the students’ project learning: internal factors (motivation, skills, and the volume of skills required), external factors (instructor, grades, strategy, and time), expectations of the project, instruments necessary for technology-rich situations, and learning results and products. In their analysis of PBL in primary schools, Kaldi, Filippatou, and Govaris (2011) remark that this approach changes pupils’ self-efficacy and establishes a positive manner in the process of communication with peers.

Kaldi et al. (2011) mention that PBL is a highly beneficial way of enhancing the pupils’ content knowledge and evolving their skills of group work. Baş and Beyhan (2010) investigate the impact of PBL supported by multiple intelligences versus the traditional teaching methods on students’ motivation. The findings of the research indicate that the learners who study with the PBL approach demonstrate a higher level of academic success and motivation than those who are taught through conventional methods. An important aspect of PBL is peer evaluation (Lee & Lim, 2012). By means of such an assessment, it becomes easier to encourage students’ active participation in the project-building process. The analysis of peer evaluation indicates that learners consider managerial and organizing skills more essential than cognitive input when evaluating their colleagues (Lee & Lim, 2012).

Some scholars investigate PBL in comparison with other approaches. Panasan and Nuangchalerm (2010) focus their research on PBL and inquiry-based learning. Martínez, Herrero, and de Pablo (2011) analyze PBL and cooperative learning. The findings of these analyses show that PBL has some similarities to other types of learning that may be rather helpful for perceiving scientific knowledge (Panasan & Nuangchalerm, 2010). It is recommended that teachers of science should employ cooperative learning, inquiry-based learning, and PBL in order to help their students reach the best learning outcomes (Martínez et al., 2011; Panasan & Nuangchalerm, 2010).

The questions regarding PBL that still need to be addressed by the research community are:

In what ways can the process of peer evaluation in PBL be enhanced?
How frequently is it necessary to check for the new essentials of PBL? Is the list of them relatively stable?

A Review of Game-Based Environments Literature

Game-based learning (GBL) is another innovative approach to the diversification of instructional methods. Scholars remark that GBL is more productive than the traditional didactics (Pitt, Borman-Shoap, & Eppich, 2015). Tobias, Fletcher, and Wind (2014) note that a crucial issue concerning GBL is finding the possibility to apply the “cognitive and psychomotor” abilities obtained through GBL in “nongame” contexts such as everyday life or school (p. 486). An educational game presupposes the students’ participation in some activities of competitive character that have specific instructions (Pitt et al., 2015). In their article, Pitt et al. (2015) suggest the following tips for reaching the best results of GBL: making memories instead of memorizing, making the challenge not stressful, employing the already existing approaches to create new games, keeping mind on the goals, thinking “outside the trivia box,” allowing more than one correct answer, letting the students perform the teaching, encouraging “positive peer-pressured learning,” using feedback to predict next games, and others (pp. 2-4).

Many studies are focused on teachers’ attitude towards GBL. Bourgonjon et al. (2013) analyze the acceptance of GBL by secondary school teachers. Scholars note that while teachers do not consider computer games as “a waste of time,” many of them do not find such games effective tools of the enhancement of job performance (Bourgonjon et al., 2013, p. 31). The article by Ketelhut and Schifter (2011) also focuses on teachers’ perceptions of GBL. Authors remark that it is frequently difficult for teachers to arrange the necessary conditions for the creation of such games.

Thus, professional development training is considered as a crucial element of the improvement f teachers’ understanding of this methodology (Ketelhut & Schifter, 2011). Wouters and van Oostendorp (2013) also emphasize the role of a teacher in GBL and conclude that students’ success in GBL is much higher if they receive the appropriate instructional support and additional learning prior to engaging in games. The significance of directions is also discussed in a study by Erhel and Jamet (2013) who note that the learning instruction is more effective for students’ understanding than the entertainment instruction. Another finding of this study is that under the conditions of receiving regular feedback on their work, students will find the entertainment instruction quite helpful in learning (Erhel & Jamet, 2013).

Scholars also pay attention to the positive outcomes of GBL for students. Hamari et al. (2016) remark that engagement in the game has a beneficial impact on learning. Hamari et al. (2016) and Sung and Hwang (2013) note that educational games help to promote learning outcomes and enhance students’ self-efficacy. Huang (2011) Foster and Shah (2015) emphasize the positive effect of GBL on motivational and cognitive aspects of learning.

The questions regarding GBL that still requite scholarly attention are:

Can games be used to improve the abilities of children who have difficulty with some skills such as reading or writing?
In what ways can the process of instructing be simplified for teachers?
How can students’ motivation be increased with the help of GBL?

The Connection Between the Two Environments

The two discussed learning environments are connected due to the degree of innovation and the employment of scientific approaches. Both PBL and GBL require much preparation and frequently presuppose consulting with specialists. Also, both of the methodologies provide many opportunities for the development of students’ cognition and creativity. Educators should engage with GBL and PBL because of numerous positive outcomes that they suggest. Researchers might engage with these environments through cooperation with schools and other educational institutions. The reason why teachers and scholars should use PBL and GBL is that they can implement a variety of innovative methods and help students acquire more knowledge in an accessible way. The ideas from the literature base on PBL may be employed to enhance the process of instructing teachers and students in GBL.

References

Baş, G., & Beyhan, Ö. (2010). Effects of multiple intelligences supported project-based learning on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards English lesson. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 2(3), 365-385.

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39-43.

Bourgonjon, J., De Grove, F., De Smet, C., Van Looy, J., Soetaert, R., & Valcke, M. (2013). Acceptance of game-based learning by secondary school teachers. Computers & Education, 67, 21-35.

Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2013). Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 67, 156-167.

Foster, A., & Shah, M. (2015). The ICCE framework: Framing learning experiences afforded by games. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(4), 369-395.

Grant, M. M. (2011). Learning, beliefs, and products: Students’ perspectives with project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 37-69.

Hamari, J., Shernoff, D., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (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.

Huang, W.-H. (2011). Evaluating learners’ motivational and cognitive processing in an online game-based learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 694-704.

Kaldi, S., Filippatou, D., & Govaris, C. (2011). Project-based learning in primary schools: Effects on pupils’ learning and attitudes. Education 3-13, 39(1), 35-47.

Ketelhut, D. J., & Schifter, C. C. (2011). Teachers and game-based learning: Improving understanding of how to increase efficacy of adoption. Computers & Education, 56, 539-546.

Larmer, J., & Mergendoller, J. R. (2010). Eight essentials for project-based learning. Educational Leadership, 68(1), 52-55.

Lee, H.-J., & Lim, C. (2012). Peer evaluation in blended team project-based learning: What do students find important? Educational Technology & Society, 15(4), 214-224.

Martínez, F., Herrero, L. C., & de Pablo, S. (2011). Project-based learning and rubrics in the teaching of power supplies and photovoltaic electricity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 54(1), 87-96.

Panasan, M., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2010). Learning outcomes of project-based and inquiry-based learning. Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 252-255.

Pitt, M. B., Borman-Shoap, E. C., & Eppich, W. J. (2015). Twelve tips for maximizing the effectiveness of game-based learning. Medical Teacher, 37(11), 1-5.

Sung, H.-Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers & Education, 63, 43-51.

Tamim, S., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Definitions and uses: Case study of teachers implementing project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 72-101.

Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Web.

Tobias, S., Fletcher, J. D., & Wind, A. P. (2014). Game-based learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed.) (pp. 485-504). New York, NY: Springer.

Wouters, P., & van Oostendorp, H. (2013). A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 60(1), 412-425.

Click Here To Order Now!