You are here:

Here We Are, Now Entertain Us! A Comparison of Educational and Non-Educational Board Games
PROCEEDING

, , , Michigan State University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Savannah, GA, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-13-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

One key promise of educational games is that they can tap into learning in a way that is fun and motivating to learners. In this paper, we explore the reality of these claims by examining existing data on 9343 games from BoardGameGeek.com. We compare educational and traditional games based on player ratings and key features of the games, such as average time to play the game, number of players, groupings they belong to, and suggested age. We found educational games to be slightly less enjoyable than traditional games (p<.05). We examine how differences in key features of these two types of games may lead to this observed difference in enjoyability.

Citation

Koehler, M.J., Greenhalgh, S.P. & Boltz, L.O. (2016). Here We Are, Now Entertain Us! A Comparison of Educational and Non-Educational Board Games. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 567-572). Savannah, GA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved December 9, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Abt, C.C. (1970). Serious games. New York: The Viking Press, Inc.
  2. Clark, D.B., Tanner-Smith, E.E., & Killingsworth, S.S. (2015). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. Online First. .
  3. Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev. Ed). New York: Academic Press
  4. Foster, A.N., & Mishra, P. (2009). Games, claims, genres& Learning. In R.E. Ferdig (Ed.), Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education (pp. 33–50). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
  5. Gee, J.P. (2007). Good videogames+ good learning: Collected essays on videogames, learning, and literacy. New York, NY: Peter Lang International Academic Publishers
  6. Greenhalgh, S.P., Boltz, L.O., & Koehler, M.J. (2014, October). What’s in an (educational) game? Ub3r mechanics and l337 motifs! Paper presented at the Meaningful Play conference, East Lansing, MI.
  7. Koster, R. (2010). A theory of fun for game design Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press.
  8. Mayer, B., & Harris, C. (2010). Libraries got game: Aligned learning through modern board games. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.
  9. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. London: Penguin.
  10. Nicholson, S. (2011). Making gameplay matter: Designing modern educational tabletop games. Knowledge Quest, 40(1), 60-65.
  11. Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. ACM Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 1-4.
  12. Roeder, O. (2014, December 31). Designing the best board game on the planet. FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved from https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/designing-the-best-board-game-on-the-planet/ Schulzke, M. (2011). Reflective play and morality: Videogames as thought experiments. In K. Poels & S. Malliet (Eds.), Vice city virtue: Moral issues in digital gameplay (pp. 51-68). Leuven, Belgium: Acco
  13. Van Eck, R. (2008). Building artificially intelligent learning games. In V. Sugumaran (Ed.), Intelligent information technologies: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 793-825). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
  14. Whedon, J. (2002). Firefly. Los Angeles: Twentieth Century Fox.
  15. Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & Vander Spek, E.D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249-265.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

View References & Citations Map

Cited By

  1. Back to the Gaming Board: Understanding Games and Education through Board Game Reviews

    Bret Staudt Willet, Sukanya Moudgalya, Liz Boltz, Spencer Greenhalgh & Matthew Koehler, Michigan State University, United States

    Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2018 (Mar 26, 2018) pp. 495–503

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.