Literature Review for the Design Methods of Serious Games

Gao, Lanlangao

doi:10.34190/ecgbl.17.1.1328

Cited by 1 publication

(6 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First of all, our results suggest that using games for teacher training does have potential, a potential that is rather unexplored, as testified by prior systematic literature reviews [11,12,18], revealing a dearth of experiences in which games are used in the context of teacher training, not to speak of hybrid games.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…This study presents a game that was created for and used in the context of teacher training initiatives to develop in-service teachers' learning design skills. The nature of this game is, per se, an innovative feature of this study, given the paucity of research outcomes in the field of games for training teachers (rather than teacher training on serious games), combined with the scarcity of hybrid serious games in general [11,12,18]. From an interaction design perspective, the hybridization of board games is a relatively unexplored area, and the few games produced so far predominantly "seem to simply propose the juxtaposition of devices and applications that move, or at best expand, the gaming experience to the digital context" [4].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, in contrast with the most common approaches described in Meredith [12], where it seems specific games are proposed in teacher training with the sole purpose of having teachers adopt the same games in the classroom, in this study, the game is used exclusively for training teachers and fostering the development of teachers' design skills. In addition, while the majority of studies reported in the three aforementioned literature reviews [11,12,18] target pre-service educators, the 4Ts game targets (and has been tested in) the field of in-service teacher training.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to a recent literature review [11], there is a dearth of research investigating the impact of serious games on teachers' professional development. Indeed, the authors only managed to retrieve a few relevant studies and concluded that not all of them report knowledge development outcomes, while-as far as teachers' attitudes are concernedthey report mostly positive impacts.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another very recent systematic mapping review [18], conducted some years later with respect to [11,12] and focusing on the use of serious games in teacher training, has confirmed this field of research is understudied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

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

Pozzi,

Ceregini,

Ivanov

et al. 2024

Education Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%