Digital vs. Hybrid: Comparing Two Versions of a Board Game for Teacher Training

Abstract

This study compares two versions (one digital, one hybrid) of a serious board game for teacher training called the “4Ts game”. Teachers play the game in groups to learn about—and directly engage in—the joint design of collaborative learning activities for their students by choosing the Tasks to be proposed, the Timing of activities, the Technologies to be used, and the Team composition, in an iterative process of decision making. The game comes in three versions: fully tangible, digital, and hybrid. This paper focuses on the interaction design of the digital and hybrid versions. In both cases, teachers pick cards up from four decks, read the prompts provided in the cards, and place them on a board to design a learning activity together. Their decision-making process is scaffolded by the digital or hybrid game versions, which provide feedback and suggestions and guide teachers toward the creation of a coherent design. The user experience is quite different in the two formats. In the hybrid game, teachers physically manipulate tangible cards on a tabletop board, and the board status is replicated on a laptop application that displays automatic feedback and guidance. By contrast, the digital version is played using an Interactive Whiteboard with touch-screen capabilities, thereby allowing teachers to manipulate digital cards on a digital board. The game was used in the context of two training initiatives targeting in-service school teachers (N = 42). Data were collected on acceptance of the model upon which the game is built, acceptance of the game itself, overall user satisfaction, and knowledge gains. Results show that teachers generally liked both versions of the game, especially the opportunity provided for receiving guidance in the design process. Additionally, teachers’ knowledge about learning design and collaborative learning increased significantly between the pre- and post-test for both the digital and the hybrid game groups. However, few significant differences were found between the groups that used the digital and hybrid versions of the game: the digital version was perceived as being slightly easier to use (p < 0.001). Overall, the study suggests that both versions of the game have the potential for teacher training, while the user interface of the hybrid version should be further refined to fully harness the game’s potential.