Playing In The Sandbox - Virtual Worlds in Maths

Virtual Worlds in MathsPlaying In The SandboxAn exploratory study of using an adaptive virtual ‘game’ world in a secon-dary Maths class

A dissertation submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree ofMaster of Education in the Faculty of Humanities

Jagdish Sohal (BA, PGCE)8042185

Dissertation EDUC71000

2012

Researching Digital Technologies,

Communication and Education

Tutor: Gary Motteram

Playing In The Sandbox:An exploratory study of using an adaptive virtual ‘game’

world in a secondary Maths class.

Abstract Digital game based learning has attracted significant research interest amongst educa-tional researchers, teachers and game designers. Commercial digital games have the po-tential to provide solid learning experiences and cater for linking abstract concepts to ‘real world’ situations.

The aim of this paper is to explore the introduction of an adapted commercial game in a secondary Maths class. The study sets out to examine pupils’ interactions and opinions using a virtual world as a learning tool. Furthermore, teachers’ provided observational feedback and discussed potential gains and barriers in using commercial games that can be adapted to their needs.

The study indicated that: (i) students experienced elevated motivation, collaboration and flair. While only a minority reported better contextual understanding, (ii) Teachers were positive in their outlook, but highlighted technical and pedagogical barriers in using adap-tive commercial games in a school context.

The potential use of highly modifiable video games can be seen as a way for teachers and game designers to come together to make a hybrid model of future game based realisation.

Keywords DGBL, adaptive, virtual game world, MinecraftEdu, maths, low motivation, constructivism, con-textual understanding, modification, commercial games, education technology.

Jagdish Sohal EDUC71000 Dissertation

Virtual Worlds in Maths: Playing In The Sandbox 2

Contents1: INTRODUCTION 6

Definitions 7

The Game 7Minecraft + Education = MinecraftEdu 7

The Study 8Research Questions 8Purpose of the Study 8

Limitations of the Study 8

2: LITERATURE REVIEW 9

Digital Game Based Learning 9

Three Major Factors 9

Pupils as Digital Natives 9Increased Exposure 10Positive Quantitative Research 10

All Work and No Play 11

Educational Games Vs Commercial Games 12

Modification of Commercial Games 13

Virtual Worlds 14

Virtual Worlds In Maths 15Maths 17

Motivation 18Achievement 19Metacognition 19Context-Embedded Learning 20Learning by Doing 21

A Model of Games and Learning 21

Teacher Attitudes 22

Conclusion 23

3: METHODS 25



Research Questions 25

Participants 25

Methodology 25Qualitative Research 26Triangulation 26

Participant Observation 27Pupil Questionnaire 28

Teacher Interview 28Ethics 29

MinecraftEdu Sessions 30Tutorial Session 30

Main Session 30

Technical Issues 31

4: RESEARCH FINDINGS 33

Section 1: Observation 33Before The Session 33

Tutorial Session 33Main Session 33

Section 2: Pupil Questionnaire 36

Section 3: Teacher Interview 42

5: DISCUSSION 47

6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 50

Review of the Methodology 50

Conclusion 50Recommendations for Educators 50Recommendations for Game Designers 50

REFERENCES 51

BIBLIOGRAPHY 55

APPENDICES 56APPENDIX A - Pupil Questionnaire 56

APPENDIX B - Pupil Consent Form 56APPENDIX C - ‘A Model of Games and Learning’ (Garris et al, 2002) 59



Intellectual Property Statement

i. The author of this dissertation (including any appendices and/or schedules to this dis-sertation) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he has given The University of Manchester certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes.

ii. Copies of this dissertation, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has entered into. This page must form part of any such copies made.

iii. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trade marks and other intellec-tual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of copyright works in the dissertation, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be de-scribed in this dissertation, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made avail-able for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellec-tual Property and/or Reproductions.

iv. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and com-mercialisation of this dissertation, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Re-productions described in it may take place is available in the University IP Policy (see http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=487), in any relevant Disserta-tion restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations) and in The University’s Guidance for the Presentation of Dissertations.



http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=487

http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=487

http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations

http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations

1: INTRODUCTIONGames for education have been used in a great variety of contexts and settings as they have the inert ability to motivate people of all ages (Malone, 1981; Saulter, 2007). More re-cently, the potential of commercial games have become the focus of educational research that is starting to come to terms with the current state and aspirations of this rapidly emerging field (McFarlane et al, 2002; Squire, 2003; Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; McFar-

lane, De Freitas, 2006).

There is a growing consensus that many commercial games can offer unique adaptability that permits the user to exploit many game attributes, capabilities and digital worlds. Fur-thermore, commercial games can simulate real-world situations (Winn, 2002) and situate players’ activities within authentic and meaningful contexts (Prensky, 2007: 159; Gee, 2007:

110).

In commercial terms, this digital ‘adaptability’ offers the user (value) added customisation and extends the ‘game life’ beyond the games completion. However, in educational terms, adaptive game based learning environments can provide an exciting opportunity to mod-ify games to educational purposes, addressing learning objectives from within a highly

interactive virtual world.

This fusion between educator and game maker is something that may bear fruit in the fu-ture of digital game based learning (DGBL)

“... as through modifying existing games applications for educational purposes there is great poten-tial for learning with games” (De Freitas, 2006).

The potential use of highly modifiable video games can be seen as a way for teachers and game designers to come together to make a hybrid model of future game based realisation.

However, if adaptive commercial games are to be of use to schools, we must not only un-derstand which games may have potential, but also how they may function, why they might be useful and real examples in practice. We also need to explore teacher attitudes

and pedagogy usage in using such a dynamic digital tool in the future.

In this context, the aim of this paper is to explore the introduction and use of a ‘modified’ commercial game (namely, MinecraftEdu). The study focuses on pupils experiences and interactions within the adapted game during a secondary Maths class. As well as gaining teachers’ observational feedback in light of the game based lesson. Also possible barriers

or gains in using such an adaptable game based environment is discussed.



DefinitionsPerspectives and definitions of games and game based learning differ throughout the lit-erature. Moreover, games used in these studies can be very different but are still referred

simply as “video games” or sometimes “computer games”. Very few studies make a dis-parity between them. However, in this study, they are to be referred to as “digital games” within the realm of digital game based learning (DGBL). The term “commercial game” is used to differentiate games made specifically for education.

The Game Minecraft + Education = MinecraftEduMinecraft (2010) is a popular commercial video game that has 6.8 million users worldwide

(Minecraft, 2012). It emphasises exploration and user creation of content, including struc-tures, towns and complex mechanisms.

Minecraft allows players to build out of textured cubes in a 3D virtual world. Gameplay has two principal modes: Survival, which requires players to acquire resources them-selves; and Creative, where the player has an unlimited supply of resources and the ability

to fly. This flexibility in gameplay can be seen as a both a strength or a weakness. It could be argued that Minecraft is not a game but a ‘virtual 3D playground’ where little ‘competi-tion’ exists. However, this style of gameplay allows the user to choose exactly how they want to play, what they want to create - they are in competition with themselves as only their imagination is their limit. Much like playing in the sandbox.

Minecraft is essentially a ‘sandbox game’ - where players are free to roam a virtual world with various tools to modify the terrain themselves and create how they play.

Seeing its educational poten-tial, Teacher Gaming (2011) was formed by Joel Levin,

Santeri Koivisto, and Aleksi Postari. In partnership with the game’s original creators, Mojang, Teacher Gaming cre-ated a separate modification

(or “mod”) of Minecraft that sought to establish a unique version of the game that is thought to be more conducive to classroom use (MinecraftEdu, 2012). These ‘modded’ envi-ronments have been created for pupils to learn in endless ‘pre made worlds’ (or Maps) as

well as offering a suite of bespoke tools to aid the teacher (see Screenshot 1).



Screenshot 1: Teacher Administrator Console for ‘on the fly’ changes

In contrast to Minecraft, MinecraftEdu includes more customisation and control over the virtual worlds than the original with the added capability to create a bespoke school server for an entire classroom to experience the virtual world collectively.

The StudyThis study aims to explore the introduction and implementation of an adaptive virtual

game environment in a secondary Maths lesson. Data was collected by means of triangula-tion through multiple methods. Observation of pupils engaging in Maths activities within the virtual world were also recorded. Then pupil questionnaires were distributed to allow participants to feed back about the session and to generate quantitative data in the form of background information. Finally, the researcher then conducted a small semi-structured

teacher interview where opinions were explored to create a pedagogical perspective for the study. The qualitative data sought to analyse any educational gains specifically af-forded by the technology in light of student and teacher experiences or opinions.

Research QuestionsThe focus of this study is to explore (1) How do students interact with the introduction of MinecraftEdu in their Maths lesson? (2) What affordances and barriers do adaptable com-mercial entail - Can these games be harnessed by teachers as a dynamic teaching tool in the future.?

Purpose of the StudyThough the study is limited in its general pedagogical applicability, it is unique in its spe-cific use of a ‘modified’ commercial game in Maths, and could be useful for any educators wishing to follow in its particular footsteps. This fusion between educator and game

maker is something that may support future of DGBL realisation.

Limitations of the StudyThe limitations intrinsic to this study should be noted from the outset. This study is con-ducted on a relatively small scale, and should not be interpreted as final justification of the

use of modified virtual game environments as a whole.



2: LITERATURE REVIEWThroughout the literature, there have been a number of key factors that are worth paying particular attention. They are presented below.

Digital Game Based LearningDigital game based learning (DGBL) has gained the interest of both the research and edu-cational community (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; Oblinger, 2004; Sandford & William-son, 2005; Van Eck, 2007; Prensky, 2007, Chen & Chan, 2010).

Connolly and Stansfield (2007) define digital game based learning as:

“the use of a computer games-based approach to deliver, support and enhance teaching, learning, assessment, and evaluation.”

Whereas, Chen and Wang (2009) emphasis the potential to facilitate active formation of knowledge and the motivational aspect by defining digital game based learning as an ef-fective means:

“to enable learners to construct knowledge by playing, maintain higher motivation and apply ac-quired knowledge to solve real-life problems”

Research interest in DGBL can be put down to the fact games are popular because they en-gage and motivate people of all ages (Saulter, 2007). Furthermore, commercial games can simulate real-world situations (Winn, 2002), situate the players activities within authentic

and meaningful contexts (Prensky, 2007: 159; Gee, 2007: 110) and offer tangible learning opportunities by applying trial and error approaches (Oblinger, 2004; Prensky, 2007, Chen & Shen, 2010).

Three Major FactorsThree emerging factors have been identified to attribute the widespread public interest in digital games as viable learning and teaching tools.

1. Pupils as Digital Natives

The first factor involves today’s “digital natives,” (Prensky, 2001) who have become dis-connected with traditional instruction. They require multiple streams of information, pre-fer inductive reasoning, want frequent and quick interactions with content and have ex-ceptional visual literacy skills (Oblinger & Oblinger, 2005). Many commentators agree that these attributes’ can be complemented with those that DGBL can offer (Prensky, 2001, Ob-

linger & Oblinger 2003, 2005, Gee, 2002).

The literature about traditional games for education rarefies in favour of its digital child



(Rebetez, and Bétrancourt, 2007). Moreover, the general consensus in the research finds that video games may have beneficial educational impacts (Prensky, 2005).

However, the research has investigated the effect of video games in two directions: Physio-logical research aims at measuring the effect of playing video games on cognitive abilities. The other body of research makes substantial use of quantitative analysis in measuring

possible learning gains versus traditional classroom learning methods. Very few studies have sought to garner the views and practicalities that teachers may face if wanting to use a game in a specific way.

“If past research determined the potential effects and use of video games we still need understand what can be done to use a game in a given way. If games can change the players this change could

be targeted on serious purposes, like educational ones.” (Rebetez and Bétrancourt, 2007: 1)

Increased Exposure

The second factor is the increased popularity of games. Digital gaming will pull in $74 billion this year alone and projected to rake in a staggering $115 billion a year by 2015 (Gartner Inc. 2011). Unfortunately, in formal education, games are still often seen just as an

unserious activity and the potentials of games for learning stay undiscovered. (Pivec et al. 2003). This data serves to highlights the social, economic, and cultural significance of digital games for many current students (including future and present teachers).

There are a plethora of games genres, platforms and companies now in circulation. This wealth has allowed some game companies to break into the education market.

Positive Quantitative Research

The final factor is the enduring amount of research conducted by the growing GBL advo-cates. Gee (2003) asserts that games can promote problem-solving, goal-related behaviour, engagement and motivation, and virtual social networks by situating players in immersive digital worlds where they can freely move. Another advantageous property of digital

games is that learning is active. That is, a player practices a skill, receives feedback on their performance through the consequences in the game, and then practices the skill again un-til that skill is mastered (Gee, 2003).

Such positive assessments of video games as learning tools are based on the recognition that gaming environments and learning environments already share certain attributes that

can be further enhanced by a collaboration between teachers and game developers/designers.

For example, Young (2004) applies nine principles derived from ecological psychology to describe the educational potential of video games; which include issues of embodied cogni-tion, learning by doing, transfer, and context.



Although Van Eck (2006) acknowledges the positive stream of research in this field, he stresses that we are ill-prepared to provide the needed guidance because so much of the past GBL research, though good, has focused on efficacy (the message that games can be effective) rather than on explanation (why and how they are effective) and prescription (how to actually implement GBL). There seems to be a lack of tangible examples of how teachers can

begin to bring digital games into the classroom. This is echoed by Francis (2006) who states that:

“Educational researchers need to find or else help practitioners develop effective games based pedagogies that work in real world educational settings” (p.11)

We need to change the point of attack to gain a further insight into future game based

learning realisation - from both a pupil and teacher perspective. This alone stresses the prominence for more qualitative data concerning adaptive virtual worlds and games as tangible learning and teaching tools. Secondly, how do we begin to inform our own pedagogies to help the smooth transition of modified commercial games into the school experience?

All Work and No PlayMaking learning fun often assumes that children do not enjoy learning. Yet much research

evidence contradicts this, arguing that children do enjoy learning when they have a sense of their own progression and where the learning is relevant and appropriate for them (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004). It could be argued that we are doing disservice to ‘games’ by calling them ‘games’.

However, Van Eck (2006) contends that we have largely overcome the stigma that games

are “play” and thus the opposite of “work.” Growing majorities of people now believe that games are engaging, that they can be effective, and that they have a place in learning.

Furthermore, there are warning signs that if we continue to preach that only games can be effective, we run the risk of creating the impression that all games are good for all learners and for all learning outcomes, which is categorically not the case (Van Eck, 2006).

As a concerned commentator, Van Eck (2006) recommends what is needed now is .

(1) Research explaining why DGBL is engaging and effective, and

(2) Practical guidance for how (when, with whom, and under what conditions) games can be integrated into the learning process to maximise their learning potential.

Through various studies undertaken throughout the literature, it has shown a bias

towards quantitative analysis within GBL. Although it ascertains that GBL develops



positive outcomes. In many instances, the data serves to reveal very little in the realisms of actually implementing GBL into good practice.

Therefore, the two questions posed by Van Eck (2006) unavoidably played a dominant role in this study. In this way practice can inform theory which in turn might inform practice (Francis, 2006)

Educational Games Vs Commercial GamesEducational video games started to be developed relatively early in the video game his-tory. Quite soon, educational researchers and game developers started to investigate the potential of computer games for education. The approach was to develop games that could teach contents or specific skills.

Not so long after, the so called ‘edutainment’ titles came out based on behaviourist approaches of Skinner (1938) where the ‘player’ is subjugated to a form of ‘operant conditioning’ by ‘learning’ thorough repetitive exercises. Although these genre of games became ever popular, Egenfeldt-Nielsen (2005) argues that this growth was driven by business and market interests rather than by educators and real public need. This trend

soon came to an abrupt halt as new technologies, platforms and learning theories changed.

However, educational researchers remain optimistic about the potential of digital games (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2005; Prensky, 2001). It can be seen that the void of past edutainment titles has left spaces for researchers and educators to speak out DGBL again and explore more thoughtful and innovative approaches to DGBL.

Today, academic interest is evolving and adopting a different approach. Instead of developing specific games for specific learning purposes, they investigate the potential of mainstream games for education (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004).

The motivation and engagement that games can offer, together with their potential to pro-vide solid learning experiences, has attracted significant research interest with regard to

the deployment of commercial games into formal educational settings as well as the de-velopment and use of specially-designed educational games (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; Sandford & Williamson, 2005; Van Eck, 2006). However, there are comparatively fewer studies investigating approaches of incorporating commercial games into class-rooms and teaching practices (e.g. Egenfeldt- Nielsen, 2005; Sandford et al., 2006).

Gee (2003), mainly by analysing mainstream video games, picked out 36 principles of learning which, he argues, are build into good video games. Principles, such as multiple routes to progress or the distribution of knowledge, could inspire education and reinforce contemporary learning theories. But it also serves to highlight quite strongly the complexity of what any digital game can bring to the learner and teacher.



Modification of Commercial Games While the investigation of adaptive commercial games environments is in its infancy, the wider games community has been modifying (or “modding”) existing games for years.

Commercial and learning game worlds have long been distant relatives, However some early crossovers have been achieved, such as Sim City. But mainstream game companies

are trying to make commercial games ‘crossovers’ more common and even more structured.

“However, it is unclear exactly what this trend will offer in term of applicability to the education sector. What is assured is that this approach, does have the interest of the academic community,

across different disciplines” (De Freitas, 2006).

Many commercial games offer unique adaptability to exploit their own game systems in game capabilities. From purposefully detailed level creators (Little Big Planet) to developing an entirely new game based upon a powerful open source game engine (Valve) .

Key findings from De Freitas (2006) – ‘A Review of Game-Based Learning’ discovered the

design of and user of games spaces are becoming closer as gamers start to modify games engines and use software development toolkits to add features and functions.

An example of such a merger is Valve, the maker of cult video games such as Half-Life, promoted an educational version of a successful commercial game. Learn With Portals was an initiative setup in 2011 and went on to release education specific lessons plans and tools

for its Portal and Portal 2 games to help Secondary School Pupils learn Physics in a immersive virtual environment. As highlighted, these games are fully supported by the game companies, and as they grow more resources and ideas will be made available. An example of ‘one game’ with endless amount of usages.

This innovation has the full backing of major government and recently Valve were

involved in the “Digital Promise”, a new education technology initiative set out by the U.S. Department of Education in late 2011 attempting to “transform teaching and learning.” Valve, as other commercial games companies have explicitly catered for educators by allowing manipulation of there original software in order to shape teaching environments to the users needs and requirements.

“Through modifying existing games applications for educational purposes there is great potential for learning with games” (De Freitas, 2006).

However, De Freitas (2006) concedes that one of the problems with modifying games is that the available toolsets are designed predominately as leisure games, which can affect



development of games for educational purposes. Although she ascertains that teachers need:

“clear guidelines, case studies and exemplars from current practice to inform and improve the quality of delivery of games-based learning across the sector and to support better future planning

and resource allocation.” (De Freitas, 2006).

Francis (2006) mentions the benefits of using ‘modded’ software in a case study using the game Revolution. Like Minecraft, Revolution was modified from the commercially available online role playing game Neverwinter Nights.

“This dramatically reduced production costs and allowed for rapid prototyping of an educational game that exhibited the graphical richness, interactive complexity and multiplayer support afforded

by state of the art commercially available role playing games” (Francis, 2006).

The development of successful commercially available games has resulted in the development of patented game engines, complex interface designs, adaptive systems and mechanisms and contextualised feedback through a variety modes (textual, graphical, speech). Not to mention hugely successful game companies looking to branch into the

education sector.

In this context, its argued that the genre of modifiable commercial games, such as Minecraft (Mojang), will emerge as valuable, viable and versatile teaching and learning tools in the future realm of DGBL.

Virtual Worlds A virtual world can be described as an attempt to simulate the ‘real world’ using digital technologies. In the real world, objects are governed by the laws of physics and nature. In a virtual world, virtual objects are governed by computer software, or indeed, game software.

Minecraft is a typical examples of a ‘Virtual World’. Bishop (2009) defines this as:

“a genre of online community that often takes the form of a computer-based simulated environment, through which users can interact with one another and use and create objects” (p. 1).

Alongside Minecraft, other virtual worlds have gained acclaim such as Second Life for making use of virtual classrooms as a learning environment.

The majority of educational studies conducted in virtual game environments have made

use of the Second Life program, with a secondary or higher education target group (Warburton 2009; Coffman and Klinger 2007; Shen and Eder 2009; Eschenbrenner et al, 2008). Second Life is an obvious choice for distance learning programs and lends itself to curricular replacement more so than MinecraftEdu. Therefore, the majority of studies have



focused on assessing the validity of learning tasks in the virtual world compared to learning tasks in the physical world.

This study aims not to replace curriculum, teachers or traditional classroom learning, but to supplement learning and teaching within adaptive virtual worlds to visualise and collaborate.

It is fair to say that MinecraftEdu is aimed towards a generally younger audience than Second Life. Providing pupils access to Second Life can be troublesome as it gives full access to the softwares non-educational content. Much of which is user created and unfiltered therefore could be deemed inappropriate for younger audiences. Eschenbrenner et al (2008) describe these challenges when using Second Life.

“Safety measures may be needed, such as acquiring one’s own island so usage is restricted, so that behaviors can be properly monitored” (p. 9).

Having complete control over the content and server in MinecraftEdu, it can be seen as safer option compared to Second Life, in the case of primary and lower secondary school curriculum.

However, Inoue (1999) suggests that there is bigger problem facing virtual worlds if they are to be accepted:

“it is vital that teachers and students alike adapt to new ideas and technologies and use them to their full potential and become a useful tool in education”.

This suggests that a change of learning and teaching is required. This somewhat alters the

pupil-teacher dynamic allowing pupils more freedom to experiment in contrast to a didactic approach and represents a shift away from the learning by listening model of instruction to one in which students learn by doing (Garris et al, 2002).

In short, virtual worlds allow pupils a safe, dynamic and collaborative learning environment where trial and error is encouraged as a form of constructivist learning.

Virtual Worlds In MathsThere seems to be insufficient emphasis on the practical uses of mathematics in the curriculum. Ashby (2009) contends that maths: is a subject unlike most others, since it

requires a considerable amount of determination in order to succeed.

In this context, the motivation aspect of DGBL fall in line with the shortcomings of Maths. Also, understanding the purpose of Maths should not only help to improve motivation, but could help in the actual formulation of concepts.



“Virtual worlds could supplement education, modeling ideas that are abstract and making them interesting, relevant, and concrete” (Williamson & Facer, 2004).

Within a virtual world, concepts can begin to become contextualised and rationalised as their modality is heightened.

In a conventional classroom, the separation of context and questions means that Maths is

ultimately being tested as a series of fractured skills that the pupil themselves have to place together to make sense. As digital games are a form of multimedia, Mayer’s (2003) principles of ‘cognitive overload’ and ‘erroneous information’ can be applied in this instance. In this context, it could be argued that some teachers are failing to provide meaningful situations for the learning of maths.

Digital games, especially those representative of the ‘real world’ offer multi sensory information’ that can aid schema construction by offering the learner a “ready-made” dynamic representation of a complicated principle or concept.

This provides just the type of ‘external support’ that would be required for the development of an internal mental model. (Gredler, 1996). This external support “reduces

the cognitive load and allows students to use their precious working memory for higher-order tasks.” (Gredler 1996: 597),

Harel and Tall (1991) discussed what they called ‘the necessity principle’, This simple but powerful principle argues that,

“the subject matter has to be presented in such a way that learners can see its necessity. For if

students do not see the rationale for an idea, the idea would seem to them as being evoked arbitrarily; it does not become a concept of the students.” (Harel and Tall, 1991)

To this end, understanding or seeing the practical uses of mathematics in a virtual world could be sufficient to both motivate pupils and allow the necessity principle to be adhered to. However, further research is required on this issue, as its scope may be greater than

previously thought. (Ashby, 2009).

However, one can see the importance of anchoring or “situating” learning in authentic situations (Choi & Hannafin, 1995). One benefit is making learners become engaged by the digital material, thus invoking a state of “mindfulness” in which learners employ effortful and meta cognitively guided processes (Salomon, Perkins, & Globerson, 1991).

“Learning in a mindful way results in knowledge that is considered meaningful and useful, as compared to the inert knowledge that results from decontextualized learning strategies” (Shute

and Ke, 2012: 43).



MathsA characteristic Maths classroom in the UK is fuelled by formal assessment and tight syl-labus coverage; predominately consists of teacher talk as well as drills and practices. As such, pupils often perceive Maths as boring, cold and detached from other subjects (anec-dotal evidence).

Many efforts have been made to make Maths more accessible and motivating for learners. Such efforts like ‘maths in context’ in which the answer to questions is wrapped inside a narrative - such as shopping, bills or tax. This sometimes complicated matters as one had to deduce what needed to be worked out, requiring some degree of linguistic skills. Thus, pupils are in danger of ‘cognitive overload’ (Sweller, 1988) before even getting started with

the mathematical problem at hand.

“Games allow direct knowledge and content learning” (McFarlane et al. 2002)

Likewise, many educational games specifically designed for maths can work well to ce-ment understanding and may give pupils added motivation to test their maths skills in a ‘fun’ environment. Evidence has demonstrated that games can successfully increase moti-

vation to learn academic topics, such as Mathematics (Kebritchi et al., 2010),

However, findings from Scanlon, Buckingham & Burn (2005) in a study exploring the popular educational game Radius of the Lost Arc determine that any gains afforded by this approach may prove superficial and short-lived. While pupils may be highly engaged within the game environment.

“their attitudes to maths as a subject may not have changed significantly because it is the game they are engaging with and not necessarily the maths activity itself” (p. 137).

Furthermore, comparing the production costs of educational games and commercial games highlights the poor ‘comparative’ authenticity between the two.

“If these games are not recognised as authentic by comparison with other games and the cultures in

which they are located, they will have a low modality for players, and hence a low degree of motiva-tion” (Kress & van Leeuwen, 1996).

Ultimately, pupils who know their games, require games with high modality.

These are not real games, the children see through the pretence, they do not engage with them as games” (Scanlon et al, 2005: 137).



MotivationIt can be determined that the motivation aspect of DGBL fall in line with the shortcomings of Maths.

There has been research on the motivations for games playing have been carried out across a number of disciplines. Malone and Lepper (1987) presented an early framework of intrinsic motivation in the design of educational computer games. They suggest that intrinsic motivation is created by four individual factors: challenge, fantasy, curiosity and control.

Digital Game-Based Learning can also play an important role in learning material that is ‘not intrinsically motivating to anyone, but which needs to be learned’(Prensky, 2001).

According to Kirriemuir & McFarlane (2004), presumably the fact that something does happen encourages players to proceed, and the quality of what happens in terms of user engagement is the factor that keeps them playing. Within the realm of adaptable game

based learning environments - this factor is determined by the teacher (a.k.a game designer).

“Motivation refers to reasons that underlie behavior that is characterized by willingness and voli-tion” (Lai, 2011)

This ‘willingness’ can be forms of intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. The obvious extrinsic

reward within any subject is the achievement of success or passing the exam. However, especially amongst Key Stage 3 (KS3) students, this can be perceived as ‘too distant’ a mo-tivation, as many pupils live very much for and in the moment. Intrinsic motivation re-quires pupils to develop a ‘reason’, a connection or some gratification before and during an activity.

Nonetheless, one can accept that motivation levels amongst pupils will vary across sub-jects depending on their particular interests or strengths. Though, evidence suggests that pupil motivation in one subject may feed into other subject areas. For example, Gottfried’s (1990) longitudinal study of children’s motivation and achievement in reading and math found that motivation in reading predicted later motivation in reading, science, and social

studies.

Conversely, Gottfried (1990) found that motivation in Maths appeared to relate more strongly to other math principles than to motivation in other subject areas. This suggests that the motivation to learn maths may be less transferable to and from other subjects. Considering this, it was determined that:

“(The) motivation for learning math was found to be almost uniquely predicted by prior math



achievement and prior math motivation” Gottfried (1990)

To these ends, it is clear to see that pupils need motivation and a sense of achievement within the subject of maths. The research suggests that early positive attitudes and experi-ence in maths can benefit pupils long term.

AchievementDo pupils need to be motivated in order to achieve? Or does achievement motivate pupils? Which-ever way you look at this scenario, it is apparent that there is a close correlation between the two.

Research shows a relatively steadfast relationship between motivation and achievement in reading and math (Broussard & Garrison, 2004; Gottfried, 1990; Lange & Adler, 1997). In addition the relationship between motivation and achievement appears to strengthen with age (Gottfried, 1990; Lai, 2011).

Furthermore, Lange and Adler (1997) found that motivation contributes to the prediction

of achievement over and above the effects of ability. Typically, researchers have used such findings to support the conclusion that motivation leads to achievement.

In answer to the initial question Lai (2011) determines that,

“First, motivation is strongly related to contemporaneous achievement, which is highly predictive of later achievement. Second, early motivation is predictive of later motivation, which is strongly

related to contemporaneous achievement.” (Lai, 2011)

MetacognitionMotivation is also related to metacognition, which is defined most simply as “thinking about thinking.” Other definitions include the following:

“The knowledge and control children have over their own thinking and learning activities” (Cross & Paris, 1988, p. 131)

It is important to highlight the role of ownership of the learning in using metacognition. Hennessey (1999) expands upon this ‘personal journey’ further as the:

“Awareness of one’s own thinking, awareness of the content of one’s conceptions, an active

monitoring of one’s cognitive processes, an attempt to regulate one’s cognitive processes in relationship to further learning” (Hennessey, 1999, p. 3).

It could be viewed that it is often pupils who are ‘regulated’ and ‘monitored‘ by teachers, who impart their knowledge to pupils (for the best intentions) without getting them actively involved with their own learning or offering ‘real life’ situations or context. It



could be argued that cost, space, resources or simple logistics of planning a ‘practical’ learning activity, such as a school trip could be a factor. If so, virtual environments can offer a cheap, safe and adaptable option for any Maths teacher wanting to approach, explain or contextualise a certain topic in a way that involves their pupils.

Many classrooms today still adhere to the ‘drill and practice’ style model of delivery.

However, this approach does little to engage pupils in their own Maths development – especially if they do not see the necessity of it. In this instance, to ‘see’ is mean to ‘visualise’ within the virtual world.

Context-Embedded LearningAs previously mentioned, over the last 30 years there has been a move in mathematics education away from abstract calculations and towards ‘mathematics in context’. Supporters of this approach believed that everyday mathematics would prepare students for the mathematical requirements they would face beyond school. However, it was also

believed that teaching maths in context would prove to be more motivating than traditional, ‘context-free’ approaches.

It was hoped that this abstract image of mathematics would be countered if contexts were used which encouraged students to see mathematics ‘not as an isolated body of knowledge, but as a flexible means with which to interpret reality’ (Boaler, 1994, p. 552).

Many Students, it was argued, perceived Mathematics as a cold, detached, remote body of knowledge, a subject of absolute truths in which there could only be one correct answer. (Asby, 2009; Anderton & Wright, 2012)

Digital games would seem to have considerable potential in terms of teaching Mathematics in context. It is possible, for example, to simulate ‘real’ theories, such as

volume and area.

“With simulated visualization, authentic problem solving, and instant feedback, computer games afford a realistic framework for experimentation and situated understanding, hence can act as rich

primers for active learning” (Shute and Ke, 2012)

It is also acknowledged that these rich virtual environments need to be created at some

point. Either from ‘scratch’ by the teacher using the many tools available to create ideas and lessons; or through exchanging files, ideas and virtual worlds with other users over the internet.

“....Simulations remain the games with the greatest potential to directly teach content, but the learning activities still need to be designed.” (McFarlane et al. 2002)



Learning by DoingVirtual games worlds can be viewed as constructivist in their approach; learning by your mistakes and allowing for trial and error. Call it what you will – but games inherently

want you to fail. Game players do not seem to mind this but almost thrive on their successes whilst moving on from setbacks that much quicker than the dreaded wrong answer in the classroom. Pupils need to construct their own learning to engage their metacognitive abilities.

For example, is a pupil was to build a structure within the MinecraftEdu world that was

calculated or worked out incorrectly, it may look wrong ‘visually’. This visual feedback is instantaneous but not demotivating for the pupil within ‘the game cycle’ - failure is accepted if not encouraged. Thus, making success a personal achievement through perseverance. When describing Maths, Ashby (2009) contends that:

“It is a subject unlike most others, since it requires a considerable amount of perseverance from the

individual in order to succeed.” (p. 1)

This persistence to continue is from a freedom of failure. Within the virtual game world, pupils can begin to experiment and draw upon meta cognitive abilities.

Experimentation would be futile without the ability to fail on a regular basis. Again, this is the polar opposite to many traditional Maths classes where it is expected that the Pupil

‘get it right’ first time as opposed to being right last time.

It can be seen that DGBL allows pupils to construct their own knowledge based on trial and error, visual cues and reasoning. Multiple avenues are explored to find an answer to a question and allows multiple learning styles to be catered for.

A Model of Games and LearningThere are several learning models that have been presented over time to aid teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. The majority of these models were didactic and linear in its

approach due to the nature of ‘traditional’ teaching methods (Prensky, 2001).

Guidelines to deal with digital technology, digital worlds and digital natives are few and far between due to its relatively new occurrence on the learning radar. Nonetheless, Garris et al (2002) put forward ‘A Model of Games and Learning’ (Appendix C) to illustrate how GBL differs from traditional linear models (input/process/output) of learning.

The traditional model of learning emphasises a learner performing a task over a single trial. This is especially true in a subject like Maths in which answers are right or wrong, linear questions usually equal linear answers. Although the Model of Games and Learning adopts the same framework, the key component is the ‘game cycle’ that is triggered by specific game features. It’s true to say that MinecraftEdu game cycle differs from norm of



other digital games. In so much as no ‘levels’ are achieved to progress - but the game cycle is self paced and directed.

It is important to recognise the role of ‘debriefing’ within this game model. Pivec et al (2003) consider this as the link between simulation and the real world. It draws a relationship between the game events and real-world events and connects game

experience and learning. The role of teacher is seen as pivotal to the success’s within DGBL. From initial adaption of the game world to fit in with specific learning objectives - to drawing a relationship between the game events and real-world events, thus linking game experience and learning.

De Freitas (2006) agrees that the learner to be engaged, motivated and supported,

however, the major challenge for effective learning is learning to be undertaken in relation to clear learning outcomes:

“....the skill is to get the correct balance between delightful play and fulfilling specified learning outcomes.” (De Freitas, 2006)

Overall, the ‘Model of Games and Learning’ allows the student to actively build

knowledge from experience. In this sense, this model is consistent with the approaches of John Dewey (1938), one of the founders of constructivism.

Dewey (1938) and others believed that learning is the result of ‘individual mental construction’, whereby the learner establishes meaningful connections, rather than by ingesting mere facts to be regurgitated later on. Pupils are given more scope in becoming

effective problem solvers, identifying and evaluating problems,. The ‘ownership’ of their learning offers freedom of expression and helps promotes both individualism and differentiation, something rarely seen within a school environment.

Teacher AttitudesVirtual games worlds are not only non linear in their approach but are also highly

modifiable game (engines) that have more than one use. This is in direct contrast to past incarnations of drill-and-practice style educational software Math Blaster (Selfe and Hawisher 2004).

However, in order for the pedagogical use of modified video games to become widespread, it seems logical that the perceptions of educators will need to recognize the

full potential of such games as tools for teaching and learning.

Selfe and Hawisher (2004) describe how many ‘tech-savvy’ adults experience games simply as entertainment or as a reward for hard work. Because of these early experiences, Selfe and Hawisher (2004) found that many adults do not consider games as anything more than an incentive for good behavior (e.g. finished work early), a break from the



normal routine or even to subdue certain pupils (last 5 minutes of lesson). If teacher perceptions about game based learning continue to be informed by their personal experiences, the state of games in education is at risk of remaining unchanged.

“This may help explain why some teachers do not either fully actualize or even understand their roles with respect to video game integration” (Zheng, Young, and Gilson 2004).

It is rarely thought to use games as a ‘diagnostic tool’ (Booker, 2000) through observing pupils interactions with the game environment. Very much like assessing a child drawing in primary school, teachers gain a form of visual assessment and can learn a great deal about a pupil.

“Concept development games, rather than practice games tend to provide better opportunity for

making such observations.” (Swan and Marshall, 2007).

In conclusion, Swan and Marshall (2007) found contrasting views that while games are used in the teaching of Maths. They are not viewed as a legitimate or pedagogically sound approach to the teaching Maths , but more ‘palatable practice’.

Although Kirriemuir & McFarlane (2004) found there can be other issues school, such as

existing friction between schools, teacher and governors as to the ‘irrelevant content’, ‘learning benefits’ and ‘teacher unfamiliarity’ with the software. Although Kirriemuir & McFarlane (2004) found that both teachers and parents recognised that games can support valuable skill development, such as strategic thinking, planning and collaboration. These juxtaposed positions need to be aligned before DGBL can be successfully integrated by

teachers within a school environment.

ConclusionUsing adaptive commercial games for educational purposes offers a variation in delivery and creates opportunities to apply the knowledge within a virtual world, thus supporting and facilitating the learning process.

The characteristics of a good game, regardless of genre , should adhere to many principles of a well versed school - Clear rules, guidance, challenges and opportunities for success. Digital games in this sense differ to that of quizzes or flash games that are used as starters or plenaries in many classes to either refresh or test knowledge. Adaptive games provides tools to develop one’s own levels and worlds which can then be shared and played with

the rest of the Internet community.

There are numerous case studies and empirical evidence to support the success DGBL has had over recent time. Though, research that remains focused exclusively on the medium of the game itself can tell us nothing more about the potential of video games for education (Francis, 2006).



Secondly, there is a wealth of positive evidence supporting the notion of learning by doing, something that DGBL does very efficiently (Malone, 1981).

Finally, by paying thoughtful consideration to how pupils make sense of what they do, including the resources they draw on in the process, It can offer educational researchers a more realistic accounts of what DGBL is about, how it might be used by teachers in order

to facilitate engaging and contextual learning in schools.



3: METHODSThis chapter presents the research questions, the research methodology, data used in the study, the criteria used to ensure quality of knowledge and the process of compiling this report.

Research QuestionsPrincipal research questions are as follows:

I. How did students interact with the introduction of MinecraftEdu in their Maths lesson?

II. What affordances/barriers do adaptable commercial games pose for teachers as a potential dynamic teaching tool?

Participants40 participants took part in study and were from an inner city Secondary School in Manchester. Through discussion, the Head of ICT identified two KS3 groups of

contrasting ability as suitable participants for the study - 15 ‘lower ability’ Year 9 pupils and 25 ‘higher ability’ Year 8 pupils. While this study is not primarily looking at ability, it was chosen mainly due to timing issues relating to the sessions. However, this paper presents these two groups together due to the exploratory nature of the study, although some inferences are considered later on in the discussion section.

A Participant Consent Form (see Appendix B) outlining both the purpose and implications of taking part in the study were presented to the participants prior to the study. The sessions comprised of a 70 minute session for each group, split into three parts: Introductory Session (20 minutes), Main Session (40 minutes) and Pupil Questionnaire

(10 minutes).

MethodologyThe study collected data by means of triangulation using multiple methods through

observation of pupils engaging with Maths activities within the virtual world. After the session, pupil questionnaires were distributed to allow participants feedback anonymously about the session and to generate quantitative data in the form of background information. This gave context to the participants and the overall study.

The researcher conducted a small semi-structured teacher interview where opinions were

explored to create a pedagogical perspective for the study. This was in relation to their



own observations of the sessions and adaptable virtual worlds as a potential learning tool and a dynamic pedagogical tool for Maths lessons and the wider curriculum.

As the research methodology involved multiple methods to gather raw qualitative data, Miles and Huberman’s (1984: 21) “processes of data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing” provided the qualitative data analysis base for this project. Though,

quantitative data has been supplied in the pupil questionnaire to gain snapshots and to aid background to the overall study.

However, the participation in the virtual environment for learning purposes needs not only to produce the desired learning outcomes (in the activity) but help the participants construct knowledge whilst engaging ‘hands on’ with Maths (How do you calculate volume,

how do you know this is right? Was it useful or was it just different? Therefore, using MinecraftEdu as a vehicle - the study intended to evaluate pupil-produced content, the processes involved in its production and whether this is valuable or reproducible from a teacher’s perspective.

Qualitative ResearchAs the aim of this study was to investigate the introduction and potential use of adaptive virtual environments in a Maths class. The research question also seeks to find out how this may impinge on teachers pedagogy and future use within the realm of DGBL.

Qualitative research in this context can reveal valuable and significant insights into the learners’ and teacher experiences. This can then be extrapolated to begin to explore the potential of virtual worlds and future realisation of using modifiable games as an extension of the classroom environment.

However, it is noted that qualitative data can be subjective in nature and can be recorded

and interpreted differently on an individual basis. Huberman’s (1984) sees this as a:

“chronic problem of qualitative research. Words are fatter than numbers, and usually have multiple meanings.” Huberman’s (1984: 51).

Words and observations are more ‘loaded’ than numbers and the researcher has to bear this in mind when collecting and translating the data. Although this method can offer

tangible insights that numbers sometimes cannot.

TriangulationIn seeking correlated evidence of the potential effectiveness of an adaptable virtual environment, the researcher needed to look at it from different perspectives by employing

triangulation of methods to gain qualitative data. As a single research tool in isolation is unable to give an overall view of the evidence.



In this study, data was collected in three areas (Fig.1) and methodological triangulation was used as different methods of data were used on the same object of study (Cohen et al, 2010: 196) to compare and contrast emerging themes whilst offering an overall

impression of the study. This research principle involved the careful choice of a range of data gathering techniques, each of which can highlight a different angle on the same issue.

The foremost criteria for choosing a particular data

gathering method is whether it is anticipated that the method will give worthwhile information about the practice under study. What is important is that the researcher understands the limitations of different research methods.

Participant ObservationObservations were made throughout the game playing sessions but also made during the implementation process of the installing and running MinecraftEdu on the schools system.

Burns (1999) describes observation serving as a research tool as:

“Taking regular and conscious notice of actions and occurrences which are particularly relevant to

the issues or topics being investigated” (p. 40).

Due to the qualitative nature of analysis, the study made use of ‘participant observation’ by actively recording information about any issues of interest, interaction or occurrences that may have relevancy to the study. Using participant observation afforded the researcher,

“the advantage of drawing the observer into the phenomenological complexity of the world, where connections, correlations and causes can be witnessed as and how they unfold.”

(Adler and Adler, 1994: 40)

It also enabled the researcher to get closer to pupil behaviour, usage and interactions with the virtual world. The observation in this context provided the researcher a means of

viewing the sessions dynamically and actively seeking out the views of pupil's in relation to the acquirement or refinement of possible learning outcomes.

However, this type of research tool is complex and not without its weaknesses due to the subjective nature of inquiry. Additionally, taking part in the experience itself can impact on



Participant Observation

Pupil QuestionnaireTeacher Interview

Fig 1. Triangulation of research tools

the observation experience as Robson (2002) identifies challenges of: selective attention, selective encoding and selective memory.

These obstacles can lead to bias in the data collection, although the researcher aimed to remain neutral at all times it was challenging due to the close proximity to the participants and the study.

Participant observations gave rise to direct questioning in relation to any non-verbal observations made by the researcher. Simple open questioning in reaction to observation or remark allowed the researcher to add value to their data. This is contrasted with the passive response sometimes given to an interview or a questionnaire that is no longer ‘in the moment’.

Pupil QuestionnaireA small pupil questionnaire (see Appendix A) employing both open and closed questions was devised and distributed by the researcher. Not only to gain representative background

data, but also to connect results with the researchers’ pupil observations.

“A number of closed questions are useful in that you can generate frequencies of response amenable to statistical treatment and analysis.” (Cohen et all, 2011: 382)

On the other hand, using open ended questions allowed participants to write an open account to explain and qualify their responses in their own terms. While a direct and

affective way to gather data, open questions can sometimes become time consuming for participants to complete in full and the researcher to analyse and interpret.

“Open questions can lead to the irrelevant and redundant information; they may be too open-ended for the respondent to know what kind of information is been sort they may require much more time from responding to enter a question response” (Cohen et all, 2011: 382).

However, the overall sample size was small so the less structured, more open and word based the questionnaire may be (Cohen et all, 2011: 383).

Participants were given up to 10 minutes to complete the questionnaire after the session. Once all responses were returned (40), data from the questionnaires were examined in light of observations and gauge pupil opinion and experience.

Teacher InterviewThe teachers’ participating in the study were invited to semi-structured interviews to reflect upon the sessions witnessed and offer any beliefs about the adaptable commercial games as a pedagogical tool. Both the Head of ICT and the Head of Maths teacher were



present and took place immediately after the research session. This a l l o w e d i n s t a n t f e e d b a c k a b o u t

feelings, observations and suggestions as to w h a t h a d j u s t transpired. It is noted that the Head of Maths

was only present at one sess ion during the

whole study, though her input was still essential to the legitimacy of using MinecraftEdu as a potential learning tool in her subject. Conversely, the Head of ICT was present throughout the research process.

During the active sessions, the teachers present were mainly non-participant observers. This allowed teachers a viewpoint from the ‘outside’, which supplemented the participant observations made ‘inside’ by the researcher.

The interviews were recorded and edited down to transcript deemed relevant to the study and then explored through discourse analysis. This was the preferred means for the

explorative study as it helped link pupils and teachers experiences together.

“ The discourse itself is the educational reality and the issue becomes that of examining how teacher and children construct a shared account, a common interpretative framework for what happens in

the classroom.” (Edwards, 1991, cited Cohen et al, 2011: 452)

Only after all the triangulated data had been captured, analysed and compared,

reoccurring themes started to emerge and are presented in the discussion.

EthicsA primary consideration for any research study is to conduct it in an ethical manner. The

researcher informed the school about the purpose and reasons behind the study before it was conducted. Also a participant consent form was administered to parents detailing the study. Another ethical responsibility is to preserve the anonymity of the participants. This has been done through anonymous questionnaires and pupil number descriptors.



Screenshot 2: In built tutorial for pupils to learn basic controls

MinecraftEdu Sessions

Tutorial Session Before the actual research session took place, the pupils were introduced to the

MinecraftEdu software via the in built tutorial available on this adapted version. This allowed participants to get accustomed to controlling the

s o f t w a r e e f f i c i e n t l y . MinecraftEdu allows the teacher to set up a dedicated classroom server that permits pupils into the same virtual environment. Pupils chose avatars and their own names so the researcher (and teachers) could identify pupils on screen.

This tutorial session was set up for both the participants and researchers benefit. For the

sessions to be as effective as possible, pupils needed to gain functionality within the virtual environment while making use of the in built game functions available in MinecraftEdu.

For the researcher, initial observations and questions took place to grasp the ‘first impressions’ of the learning environment. Incidentally, it allowed for any technical issues

(log in details, server connection) to be resolved before the main session.

Main SessionPrior to the study, the researcher created a simple virtual world consisting of flat terrain and pre made structures (i.e. building, shapes). This was used throughout the activities.

Pupils worked individually throughout the sessions although the whole class was on online within the MinecraftEdu server.

The activities were delivered to the participants as a ‘notification’ on screen and could be accessed anytime by pressing the ‘m’ button. Activities 1 and 2 were predominantly done as a class but the researcher allowed time for pupils to work at their own answer while

checking the answers given in class. Below is an overview of the directed activities taken by the researcher in the sessions.

Activity 1. Introduction and Recap

a) Place one block (brick) on the floor in the Minecraft environment. What shape is it? If we know one-side measures 1m, what is its volume, what is its area? How do you know this? How can we find out? (i.e. 1x1=1m(2) squared and 1x1x1=1m(3) cubed)



Screenshot 3: Teacher assignment sent to all pupils via MinecraftEdu

b) Now make a cube 2x2x2 or 3x3x3 and calculate its volume in? How many cubes did you use? Do you notice a pattern?

Activity 2. Thought Exercise

a) Without using Minecraft, (what is the volume) how many blocks will you need to make a cube 10x10x10? Shall we check it? (Allocate the desired amount of bricks to the pupils, i.e. 25 pupils = 40 bricks)

b) I measured the classroom before... it was 10m x 5m x 8m? Was I correct? Why not? (The dimensions are not correct so pupils can clearly see this and make suggestions when are constructing).

Activity 3. Construction and Measurement

Pupils were given two options for the final activity:

a) Accurately construct a building in the virtual environment based upon the floor plan given – Must be with the correct dimensions (including the objects inside).

b) Accurately measure the existing building you see in MinecraftEdu, now fill in the empty floor plan given with the correct dimensions (including the objects inside).

Technical IssuesThis study was not without its fair share of difficulties. Issues such as arranging timetable

time and classroom space in a busy school fell into insignificance compared to actuality of getting the MinecraftEdu program to run successfully on the school system.

These technical issues proved extremely troublesome and nearly put the whole study in jeopardy. This was initially encountered in the pilot study. A complicated batch file (.bat) had to be written in order that the software would ‘self-extract’ onto a pupil’s user drive,

therefore allowing full access to the game and server. Although this was partially resolved in the pilot by writing a complicated script, there was only enough computer RAM for a maximum of 15 pupils in the virtual environment at once. Though, problems still existed with the general usability of the software (i.e., High CPU levels, slow lag, intermittent freezing).

This, in part, was due to how the software is written ‘on-top’ of its original core files. Minecraft, as well as MinecraftEdu, requires constant and administrative access of the schools C:/ drive for it to function correctly in a server setup. As a commercial game and commercial end user, installing this game on a ‘home’ computer is not a problem. Conversely, many schools rarely allow pupil access to this level of computer architecture

due to concerns with misuse, hacking or loss of information. This was something for researchers and teachers to bear in mind for the future, as many schools do not allow open access to the C:/ drive for their pupils.



Though, in this study, the school’s data manager allowed the go ahead and installed MinecraftEdu directly onto the schools C:/ drive – which allowed for a much smoother installation and optimum usability. Overall, the installation, permissions and testing process of getting this software up and fully functional was unforeseen and time consuming. Nevertheless, it is something that was commented on in interview.



4: RESEARCH FINDINGSTo retain the anonymity of the school and the participants, the pupils have been given numerical identifiers (Pupils 1-25, Year 8 - Pupils 26-40 are Year 9). Teachers interviewed are identified as: HoD (Head of ICT) and MT (Maths Teacher). A selection of responses and observations are given here below, though some editing has taken place to narrow down relevant information deemed relevant by the study.

Section 1: Observation

Before The Session Installation and setting of the research software

The school in which this study was conducted, was set in an urban inner city surrounding. Participants were aged 12-14 and of mixed ability and gender. Maths is taught in classrooms, but sometimes have ICT provisions in the week. The installation of the software required ‘good will’ on behalf of the schools data manager, in allowing

MinecraftEdu on the schools system (Data Manager: “We really shouldn't do this”). Once the software was installed on the system, in ran smoothly. A trial run was done by HoD - to check out its functionality and stability before the study.

Tutorial Session Introduction to the MinecraftEdu world

Pupils were visually and verbally excited at the prospect of playing MinecraftEdu in the sessions. There was a short delay between starting the tutorial and logging all the pupils

onto the server (Pupils had to connect directly through the server by manually typing in the correct IP address). Pupils were then given 5-10 minutes to freely explore the tutorial world. Some pupils, notably, female Students found it troublesome to control (using the mouse and keys combination). Help was given with some success. The researcher then made use of the ‘freeze students’ function to change virtual world and introduce the main

activity. (Pupil: “Do we have to do Maths now?”)

Main Session Activities

At this point, ‘creative mode’ was selected for all pupils in the game world. This allowed players infinite blocks, materials and the ability to fly. The activity question (1a, 1b) was placed on their screen via ‘send assignment’ function in the teacher console.

Pupils began answering correctly to the introductory questions - they then quickly began

engaging with the next task, although some pupils had to be reminded to do so. After the opening activities, the class shared answers. It is noted that the researcher had to ‘freeze pupils’ in the virtual world during discussions, as some pupils were distracted by the



game and not listening. Maybe the stop and start nature of the activity structure frustrated some of the more advanced game players or Minecraft players. Conversely, some female participants were still struggling (in both groups), while a few have improved much quicker and are now engaged.

During the activity (2a) a real sense of community in the classroom and virtual world

appeared, simultaneously. Pupils had to work together to achieve the activity and communicated both verbally and via the game chat function. “you do the perimeter” / “let us watch from above and I will tell you if it looks right” / “where is (pupil a) we need his blocks here, come on!”. More able gamers tried to help the less able game players place their blocks within the game world.

Activity 2b was presented - after an initial debate whether it was right or wrong, the pupils set out to explore and find out the correct answer. Some pupils immediately starting approximating the real ‘physical world’’ classroom, then transferring their data into the virtual world. Others soon started to copy. Other pupils starting working together (one measures and the other builds). A conversation revealed how pupils were beginning

to develop basic concepts.

Pupil A: Is the volume inside the building, or the whole thing including the blocks

Teacher: Imagine the air inside the building is (MT) the volume

Pupil A: oh yeah, I see. So I need to make the area around it first - thats the perimeter isn't it.

During the final activity (3) many students were starting to think creatively in tackling the activity. “I need to find some flat space that is at least 20 metres long and wide.” / “If I know

this side is 10 metres then thats 10 metres because its square”/ “its easy because you can work it out (the dimensions) just by comparing them to the ones you know...like a crossword”

It is noted that all male participants chose the ‘construction’ activity, while the majority of females opted

for the measuring activity. Again, some students preferred to work together both physically and online. Some students struggling in the game w o r l d r e s o r t e d t o s k e t c h i n g

constructs on paper for others to help build. Dimensions were added to the



Screenshot 4: Example of students work

Screenshot 5: A pupil creating a flat surface

a sketch making a complete ‘blue print’. Yet again, this showed pupils’ resourcefulness by blending the physically and the digital.

Pupils who had played Minecraft before displayed flair in their creations. Making sure each detail was right but also different looking to other pupils. Some ‘experts’ exhibited their creations - which in turn enthused the other pupils who wanted to know how to

achieve this. Again, lots of good natured collaboration was observed. At this point some pupils began experimenting with the various functions in MinecraftEdu (i.e. mixing or ‘crafting’ items to create new ones, making TNT,). In one session, however, this led to purposeful destruction of other pupils online creations. Although this was mostly taken in humour - this pupil was given less privileges (i.e., no ‘creative mode’) as deterrent to

others who might have retaliated.

As time was short for each session, the researcher was unable to talk to Pupils in any depth about what they have done in the lesson (debrief) and what they might have gained out of the session (learning objectives). It was clear from Pupils’ comments that they enjoyed the lesson and were upset when the session had elapsed. In fact, many Pupils

wanted to continue on with the game or finish their work at a later date. “Can you save it” / “I put loads of work in, I don't want to lose it”. This showed pride and care for something that they had invested their time on.

Engagement was sustained throughout the lesson (60 minutes). The general tone and working environment for both sessions was positive. The two groups, although different

in ability, engaged with the game in many different ways and successes. However, some female Pupils faced the same problems of manipulating the game world - a few became clearly frustrated. This hindered these pupils overall participation in the game world - although some participants found strategies and developed groups with different roles.



Section 2: Pupil QuestionnaireBefore the study, the researcher wanted to ascertain a small amount quantitative data to offer some background to the participants and snapshots of their general opinions.

Age and Gender of Participants

40 participants took part in the session in total. There was an equal gender divide. Game level descriptions by gender are shown below.

Game Level Description: Female Game Level Description: Male

A clear divide in gender and game level description is shown above. 100% of male

0

10

20

30

40

Year 8 Year 9 Total

MaleFemale

10%

80%

10%

70%

30%

None Low Medium High



participants described themselves as medium to high gamers. Conversely, 80% of females described themselves as low gamers.

Question 1. What is your least favourite subject? Why?

Pupil reasoning behind not enjoying particular subject are uncovered. Just over a quarter of pupils did not enjoy Maths (26%). This was joint top with the art disciplines (26%). Below are a selection of pupil accounts in relation to Maths being their least favourite subject.

Pupil 11: I can’t do it

Pupil 13: I’m not good at it.

Pupil 16: Maths because there aren’t many ways to learn Maths in a fun way

13%

21%

26%8%

8%

26%

MathsEnglishScienceSports (PE)Drama, Music, ArtHumanitiesDesign TechnologyLanguagesNo Preference



Question 2. What is you most favourite subject? Why?

Likewise, this was to ascertain pupils motivations towards their favorite subjects. A

majority of the pupils (36%) enjoyed sports (PE) in comparison with only 6% Maths as pupils favourite subject. A majority of the pupils used the word ‘fun’ to describe their

favourite lessons.

Pupil 3: I am good at sports so I enjoy it.

Pupil 19: Games because its fun and interactive

Question 3. Have you ever played Minecraft before?

14%

11%

25%36%

3%6%

6%

MathsEnglishScienceSports (PE)Drama, Music, ArtHumanitiesDesign TechnologyLanguagesNo Preference

60%

40%

YesNo



As Minecraft is a popular game amongst this age group, it is not surprising that almost half the participants (40%) had previous experience of playing the game. A leading

question sought reasons as to why participants play Minecraft, or may play Minecraft in the future

Pupil 14: No - its confusing and boring.

Pupil 19: Yes - Because the games in your control and you can do it at you own pace.Pupil 22: Yes - I didn't like it, but I think its ok now i have played it again.

Pupil 25. No - maybe its an okay game, but i don't really understand it.

Pupil 6: Yes - I like to build houses then show it off to my friends here and online.

Pupil 28: No - I would not play it again, its boring.

Pupil 18: Yes - it’s addictive and you can interact with other people and do in game experiments

Question 4. Do you use games in Maths lessons? Do you enjoy them?

Most of the participants (75%) reported that they do not use games in Maths lessons, while 20% said that they did (namely MyMaths).

Pupil 22: Yes - MyMaths, they are a bit boring.

Pupil 9: Yes - Super maths world - but I don't enjoy it.

Pupil 23: Yes - Knights tour and a maths website - I don’t really enjoy them.

Pupil 2: No - but I would enjoy them because I like Maths.

5%

75%

20%

YesNoNot Sure



Question 5. Do you think computer games should be used in school?

An overwhelming 78% of of the participants reported games should be used in school. 15% were not sure, while 8% of pupil said that they would not like to see computer games used at school.

Question 6. How did you go about solving the problem today?

Pupil 2 : I didn't do very well.

Pupil 11: I tried to recreate the classroom, it was quite tricky as I didn't know what to do.

Pupil 16: It was difficult but it was really fun to try to complete the task.Pupil 19: I have played it before so it was very easy and enjoyable.

Pupil 20: I tried to work it out in my head.

Pupil 26: We measured the room and then figure out how many blocks we would need.

Pupil 39: I worked with a friend and did it together.

Question 7. Minecraft is a virtual environment - What could the benefits of this be?

Pupil 16: It is very useful for Maths and technology because using dimensions in each task.

Pupil 22: You can do things that aren't possible in real life, (e.g. flying).Pupil 23: Make you more imaginative.

Pupil 35: You got powers that you haven't got in real life

Pupil 11: It could be used in any subject to help your ability. Creative art, Maths or IT for computer skills

15%

8%

78%

Yes No Not Sure



Question 8. Did using a virtual environment help you understand the assignment?

Half the participants (50%) were not sure if the virtual environment helped them.

Although 35% said that it did. However, 15% of pupils said that they game did not help.

Pupil 7: Yes - because it was 3 dimensional (3D)

Pupil 1: No - because there was nothing, just empty space.

Pupil 6: Not sure - because I thought it was a bit of fun

Pupil 10: Yes - because its more practical and you can understand it.

Pupil 26: I understood how big the room needed to be and had to find a flat area big enough.

Question 9. Do you have a better understanding of Area and Volume than before the session?

Mixed results, the majority of the pupils (41%) reported they did not have a better understanding of Area and Volume than before the session. However, 34% believed that their understanding had improved. A quarter (24%) were not sure.

50%

15%

35%

Yes No Not Sure



Question 10. Is there anything else you want to

say about today’s session?

Pupil 22: It was different than just doing work

Pupil 12: It should be used in other lessons

Pupil 1: I found it boring and it frustrated me

Pupil 5: Can we play it again and build a city?Pupil 2: I would like to understand the controls better.

Pupil 25: It was fun, but I wouldn't like to go on it at home.

Section 3: Teacher InterviewObservational Feedback

HoD: The class (Year 9) you used today are a really difficult group at the best of times. As a teacher, you try and do something fun, boring or leave them to their own devices - they still don't want to know.

HoD: However, I would say that 95% of the class were on it (MinecraftEdu) for the full hour and actually tried to get involved with what was going on, so i thought it went really well.

MT: Yes, I could see pupils getting creative and absorbed in what they were doing. They were talking using some maths language “my house is 20 by 20 by 20, its massive”. There

is some potential here but worry if it’s just because it’s a game.

24%

41%

34%

Yes No Not Sure



15%5%

80%

YesNoNot Sure

Would you like to use MinecraftEdu again?

Researcher: So, do you think they were just excited by the prospect of playing a game or doing Maths?

MT: Well, I imagine the game but its quite open (the game) with little direction. They seem to have to create their own motivations to play. The activities you did (in the session) structured the game as the game doesn't really have any structure. They liked being able to

see each other on the screen.

HoD: Most of these kids play Minecraft anyway - and you could tell which ones because they made full use of the functions and displayed the most complex buildings when doing the activities.

MT: They also helped a lot of people, showing how do things, that was good - ‘peer

teaching’.

Any Negatives?

HoD: Well, we had problems installing this game on the schools system didn't we? In a ‘normal’ situation, we wouldn’t have been allowed to do this - the pupils having access to important schools files through the c:/ drive is just too risky.

HoD If it is going to be designed for schools, it should be much easier to install. Otherwise

people just aren't going to use it, no matter how good it is.

MT: Well, not all of them managed to do the activities successfully in the virtual world. The girls especially found it difficult to maneuver and place objects. This maybe stopped them learning.

HoD: That could be down to the type of game it is. Bit more of a ‘boy game’ in the sense

you’re are building and constructing things...and destroying things.. Girls tend to play

‘point and click’ style of games with multitasking,- with clear objectives and level ups etc.

Do you use games in Maths?

MT: We usually use MyMaths - if we have the computer room available. Which isn't often. Its good for short tests and activities. The pupils tends to respond well to playing on computers. There have been a number of games we have used, but kids usually get bored of them after a while... so we are always on the lookout for games because as you can see the pupils tend to be engaged.

HoD: Whats good about this ‘style’ of game, is that you can use it again and again.. for different purposes. So I guess its cost effective that way. Reusable.



Is the Curriculum (or School) ready for Games Based Learning?

HoD: Is the industry ready to produce a game(s) that is suitable for schools? There is so much talent in the games industry, but little of it has educational direction behind it - I think the

move needs to be from the industry itself.

HoD If they could offer them (teachers) a game based initiative, they would happily take your ‘hands off’ for it.

HoD: Looking at Gove’s plans (UK Secretary of Education) at programming and games design in the curriculum - if the students were using games to learn they would become

more interested in the process of creating their own games. So maybe another area for game based learning.

When in the teaching cycle (starter, plenary, supplement) can games be used?

HoD: Anywhere. And I think its possible to do it in ‘one go’ as well - right throughout the

lesson. Like in the sessions.

HoD: It depends on the quality of the product but also the quality of the tasks - that’s structured. If you just let them (pupils) go on it (MinecraftEdu) for an hour to do what they wanted, then you’re not really going to get much from the end of it.

HoD: But if you were to plan the lessons. i.e. the first 10 minutes you have to produce x first,

then this task feeds into another task - then there’s no reason why they couldn't spend a whole lesson or a whole series of lessons to see the progress by moving through working towards a bigger objective. So it could fit in anywhere.

MT: Well, I think people would question me if I used this game all the time. It’s good for representing something they can’t see. However, I know some of the younger Maths staff

would and could make better use of it maybe. The idea of creating my own game ‘levels’ seems very time consuming.

Do you think Barriers exist in using Games in Education?

HoD: It’s the kids’ perceptions and other staffs’ perceptions. You have pupils thinking games equal ‘free time’ and not really an ‘legitimate’ educational activity. So when you actually try and do something constructive with them (through games) - they are gonna resent that and kick back against it.

HoD: The other side of it, is other staff and senior leadership in the school. If you say that

your going to start using games in your lessons - then all they hear is the word ‘games’ and don't actually think about any of the constructive things you can do with it.

MT: And cost.



HoD: The cost to bring in commercial games is really expensive, prohibitively so. A lot more expensive than educational software. It’s a balance. You need characters and backgrounds that are familiar to pupils and had that professional quality to them, but also has an educational leaning to them.

What do you think is the Teachers role in using MinecraftEdu?

HoD: I really like the MinecraftEdu administrator console. It gives you control and flexibility as teacher. I can give them tasks to do within the game - are they then rewarded for that task? And I think that’s where the teaching needs to be. The teacher needs to

structure the experience.

MT: Especially if you are doing it as a whole class.

HoD: First, teachers will need to get used to the game and be aware of the possibilities. Then the teacher needs to make tasks that put barriers they (pupils) need to overcome, to remove barriers if they are hindering some of them achieving. The teacher basically needs

to set the agenda to be given the ability to control their own lesson.

Researcher: Which is the same as any other lesson I guess.

MT: Exactly, yes, whether reading a book or working out sums - the teacher needs to structure what they are doing.

Any other uses of MinecraftEdu?

HoD: Social aspects...Pupils working together (online server) in which they can only complete activities working as a team. This fits into ‘working with others’ from P..L.T.S (Personal Learning and Thinking Skills) but even more generally in Citizenship. If pupils are working together collaboratively to produce a common goal, then this is helping.

HoD: You could fit it in to a lot of subjects but you would have to be careful about ‘shoe horning’ it in or doing it simply for the sake of it. This comes back to the previous question about barriers and about using it wisely... choosing the right game for the right situation. Otherwise people just think your just playing games.

Future Improvements

HoD: Simple tasks that trigger a reward automatically. At the moment, I could go round and ask “put your hand up as soon as your done x”. Some pupils can ignore instructions too. Whereas if it ‘pinged’ or rewarded the student - for example setting a task of

collecting 30 wood (virtual wood blocks)) and the teacher console tells me who has achieved those goals, I could then refocus on the students who weren’t following or



needed help. If it was done as a team task, it would ‘pressure’ pupils to engage for the team sakes. But i know these improvements take time.

MT: This school is good at sports and that competitiveness could be transferred to games by setting up scenarios they (pupils) have to tackle. But that might be difficult to set up by somebody like me - I wouldn't know where to start.

Researcher: There is an active MinecraftEdu community. You can freely exchange ‘virtual worlds’ online with other teachers. However, this is a fairly new game modification - there aren't that many pieces to choose from. Although there is a MinecraftEdu Wiki’ with lots of ideas and information for any users.

MT: That’s good. That makes it easier to get started (to make a virtual learning task). So

you can using a it directly or as a template for something else.

HoD: It’s like a virtual lesson plan. I guess people can start selling them as resources and that can increase the quality and quantity.



5: DISCUSSIONThroughout the presentation and analysis, there have been a number of key factors that are worth paying particular reference to and as part of drawing some conclusive evidence. For ease of organisation, each research question will be addressed separately before a final, overall summary is offered.

RQ 1 - How did students interact with the introduction of MinecraftEdu in their Maths lesson?

As evidenced by the analysis of research data, the use of the MinecraftEdu in this educational setting help facilitate pupil cognition through visual, mental and practical exercises in the virtual game world. The majority of pupils (80%) reported they would like

to use it again.

. It is believed once pupils are motivated to learn, learning can become easier. If pupils early attitudes towards Maths are better, than there is more hope they will succeed in the future. At present, the data showed that Maths is the least favourite subject among the pupils (26%). Their reasons were down to their own perceived inability of the subject “I,m

not good at it”. Contrast this with pupils favourite subject (PE, 35%) where pupils believed they were “good at it” so in this instance, they enjoy it. This can be seen as pupil perceptions versus pupil achievement.

A clear correlation between gender and self described game level appeared. A gender bias towards males as high gamers (70%) compared with low gaming females (80%). This had

an impact on some female participates mobility in the game session. Some improved but a few struggled and were left frustrated at times. This triangulated with observations, as males ‘out maneuvered ’ females in the game world.

However, answers to the activity questions for both genders were mostly correct. The research shows that pupils need to be ‘effective’ using the game before any activities are

attempted. If not, some pupils may be set up to fail. Although a tutorial was set out, it is noted that some pupils may need more time. Although, some participants developed strategies - such as forming groups with different roles for pupils. Some students displayed resourcefulness by sketching ‘complete’ constructs on paper for others to help build.

Fears about the game becoming “novelty factor” were discussed. Teachers believed that pupils enjoyed educational games in Maths. Likewise 78% of participants think games should be used in school. Although 75% of pupils reported they did not play games in Maths lessons. Those that did, did not have a high opinion of them, labeling the games the



use as “boring”. Furthermore, all pupils were enthused while using the game throughout the lessons while many (40%) had played Minecraft before.

Some pupils (34%) thought the game had given them a ‘better understanding’ although this is comparable to those who did not (41%). Pupils commented on the ‘visual cues’ and ‘practical understanding’.

The fact that there is past research highlighting that certain educational games can be as effective as traditional ‘non gaming Maths lessons (Ke, 2008). It can be inferred that specially designed (or modified) commercial games can also contribute to the achievement and engagement of Maths. Especially in the context of the KS2/3 curriculum in which “Using and Applying Maths” is a core component. Additionally, modifiable commercial

games, as opposed to educational games, can offer adaptability and longevity.

RQ 2 - What affordances/barriers do adaptable commercial games pose for teachers as a potential dynamic teaching tool?

Previous experience from the pilot study showed that installation of the software was a

problem for a school infrastructure. The game is written in Java and requires access to the core files to function. For any data manager this is a potential disaster if core files become corrupt or deleted. Game companies not used to dealing with education infrastructures need to be aware about these kinds of logistics in their software.

Teacher opinion about their observations were positive. The game admin console was

commented on as a powerful tool. For both behaviour management and pedagogical ap-proaches. Teacher interviews highlighted a number of institutional barriers. Such as pupil perceptions of games as ‘free time’ combined with senior staff attitudes and current un-derstanding in using DGBL effectively.

“The education system is run by leaders who are not comfortable with either the detail or the impli-cations of the technology potential, and those who are comfortable with them are not powerful

enough within the system.” (DfES, 2005b)

The cost of commercial games was deemed too high for school use. Although, the adaptive games model allows for more than one use, a ‘recyclable’ game that become cost effective.

However, teacher opinion focused on the need to structure DGBL lessons with learning objectives. As opposed to unstructured ‘uninterrupted ‘game play. Although this approach did frustrate some of the more able game players in the groups.



Do learning objectives need to stay the same or will there be alternate learning objectives especially for he virtual game world? Schrader et al (2006) suggests that classroom learn-ing objectives need to ‘rebalanced’ to target real world experiential learning. This could provide the foundation for the integration of digital games as an emerging element into a teachers own pedagogy.

Although, as this study showed, by designing and implementing meaningful activities within the game world, it can offer solid learning opportunities for pupils and ultimately help them engage with the subject. The role of debriefing and reflection in the game process has not been discussed, although suggestions have been made by;

“Supporting game-based activities with appropriately designed worksheets provided the necessary structure and allowed for reflection.” (Panoutsopoulos & Sampson. 2012).

Overall, there are also many factors or variables to consider when using a games based approach. The age and genders of the students. The culture and philosophy of the school.

The teacher’s comfort level with the software. The actual objectives of the given lesson. And not forgetting the unpredictable social dynamic of any classroom

Summary

From the research, it can be seen that a combination of classroom based theoretical knowledge complemented with virtual game environments that can be adapted easily. Allows the teacher to manipulate a virtual canvas to fit in with specific learning objectives. Furthermore, it also allows pupils to practice, enhance and refine their own understanding

at their own pace in a creative, reusable, safe environment.



6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Review of the Methodology While mainly observation was used to acquire qualitative data, some form of quantitative may have served well to support the notion of motivation and achievement in the virtual. Some pupil questionnaires were not fully completed. This could have been due to the open nature of the questions that became time consuming for some participants and also

the researcher to analyse and interpret effectively.

ConclusionWhile the research has shown that adaptive commercial games can be used as powerful tools to support learning goals—and while the experience and uses of many pupils with the game has revealed their potential as a versatile engaging medium for learning. This study also indicates that some teachers want to use this adaptable commercial games but

feel there are institutional barriers as well as pedagogical ones. Some teachers (and researchers) have not yet become fully aware of the possible outcomes, content and pedagogical facets of such adaptive commercial games.

Fortunately, a few gaming educational initiatives (Valve), backed by major governments, have made conceited efforts to demonstrate a hybrid model for future game based

realisation.

Although this study is limited in scope, the exploratory data does indicate that pupils engagement and motivation to learn Maths in a adaptive games based setting offers both them and teachers innovative learning opportunities.

Recommendations for Educators • Explore adaptive games to motivate, engage and ‘situate’ context for pupil learning • Create and share game based learning experiences, resources and ideas.• Support game activities with dedicated debriefing • Be aware of infrastructure needs - as well institutional challenges

Recommendations for Game Designers • Add adaptable, functionality and ‘admin’ control to games • Design motivating and engaging games for education that match up with curriculum de-

mand.• Beware of the infrastructure needs of school systems.• Build reflection into gameplay

Recommendations for Further Research• Pupils modification of commercial games / producing games



REFERENCESAshby, B. (2009).Exploring Children’s Attitudes towards Mathematics Joubert, M. (Ed.) Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics 29(1)

Adler, P. and Adler, P (1994) Observational techniques. Chapter 23 (pp. 377-392) In Denzin, K. and Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.

Bishop, J. (2009). Enhancing the understanding of genres of web-based communities: The role of the ecological cognition framework. International Journal of Web-Based Communities, 5(1), 4-17. Accessed August 2012 online

Boaler, J. (1994) When Do Girls Prefer Football to Fashion? An Analysis of Female Under achievement in Relation to ‘Realistic’ Mathematic Contexts, British Educational Research Journal, 20, 551-564.

Broussard, S. C., & Garrison, M. E. B. (2004). The relationship between classroom motivation and academic achievement in elementary school-aged children. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 33(2), 106–120.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education. New York: Routledge.

Connolly, T.M. and Stansfield, M.H. (2007). From eLearning to games-based eLearn ing: Using interactive technologies in teaching an IS course. International Journal of Information Technology Management, 26(2/3/4), 188–20

Chen, M.P. and Wang, L.C. (2009). The effects of types of interactivity in experimental game-based learning. Proceedings of 4th International Conference on eLearning and Games, Edutainment 2009, 273–282.

Chen, Z.H. and Chan, T.W. (2010). Using Game Quests to Incorporate Learning Tasks within a Virtual World. Proceedings of 10th IEEE International Conference on Ad vanced Learning Technologies 2010, Sousse, Tunisia, 750–751.

Chen, M.P. and Shen, C.Y. (2010). Game-play as Knowledge Transformation Process for Learning. Proceedings of 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learn ing Technologies 2010, Sousse, Tunisia, 746–747.8.

Choi, J.I., & Hannafin, M. (1995). Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2), 53-69.

Cross, D. R. & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children’s metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131–142.



http://www.jonathanbishop.com/publications/display.aspx?Item=26

http://www.jonathanbishop.com/publications/display.aspx?Item=26

De Freitas, S. (2006). Using games and simulations for supporting learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 31(4), 343–358.

De Freitas. S (2006). Learning in Immersive worlds: A review of game-based learning. JISC eLearning Innovation. Volume: 3.3

Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2005). Beyond edutainment: exploring the educational potential of computer games. Unpublished PhD thesis, IT-University of Copenhagen.

Francis. R (2006). Towards a Theory of a Games Based Pedagogy. Oxford University Department of Educational Studies. JISC Innovating e-Learning 2006: Transforming Learning Experiences online conference

Garris. R, Ahlers. R and Driskell J.E. (2002). Games, Motivation, and Learning: A Re search and Practice Model. Simulation and Gaming 33, p. 441-46

Gartner Inc. Market Trends: 2011 Gaming Ecosystem,. http://www.gartner.com

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan

Gottfried, A. E. (1990). Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 525–538.

Gredler, M.E. (1996). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Tech nology (pp. 571-603). Association for Educational Communications and Technology.

Harel, G., & Tall, D. (1991). The general, the abstract, and the generic, For the Learning of Mathematics, 11, 38-42.

Hennessey, M. G. (1999). Probing the dimensions of metacognition: Implications for conceptual change teaching-learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.

Inoue. Y (1999) "Effects of virtual reality support compared to video support in a high- school world geography class", Campus-Wide Information Systems, Vol. 16: 3, pp.95 - 104

Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A. & Bai, H., (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 427-443.

Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from game play? Computers and Education, 51(4),1609–1620.

Kirriemuir, J. & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning No. 8). Harbourside: NESTA futurelab

Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (1996) Reading Images: the grammar of visual



http://www.gartner.com

http://www.gartner.com

design.London: Routledge.

Lai E. R. (2011). Motivation: A Literature Review Research Report. Pearson.

Lange, G. W., & Adler, F. (1997, April). Motivation and achievement in elementary children. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Washington, D.C.

Laurillard, Di (2008) Digital technologies and their role in achieving our ambitions for education. Institute of Education Professorial lecture series . Institute of Education, University of London,

Larose, F., Bédard, J., Grenon, V., & Palm, S. B. (2005). The recourse to educational games software in high school educational intervention: an exploratory study. Paper pre sented at the EARLI conference, Cyprus

Levin, J, and Koivisto, S. (2012) MinecraftEdu Computer software. MinecraftEdu.com. Vers. 981. Teacher Gaming, LLC.

Mayer, R. E., Dow, G., T, & Mayer, S. (2003). Multimedia learning in an interactive self explaining environment. Journal of educational psychology, 95(4), 806-813.

McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A., & Heald, Y. (2002). Report on the educational use of games. Cambridge: TEEM.

Miles, M., and Huberman, M., (1994) ‘Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded source book’, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.

Oblinger, D. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1–18.

Oblinger, D. G and Oblinger, J. (2005). Educating the Net Generation. EDUCAUSE On line book. Retrieved on August 2012. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf

Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital Game-Based Learning in high school Computer Science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Comput ers and Education, 52(1), 1–12.

Panoutsopoulos, H., & Sampson, D. G. (2012). A Study on Exploiting Commercial Digital Games into School Context. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (1), 15–27.

Persson, Porser, and Manneh. Minecraft. (2010) Computer software. Minecraft.net. Vers. 1.2.5. Mojang.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill

Prensky, M. (2005). Computer games and learning: digital game-based learning. In J.Raessens & J. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of computer game studies. Cam bridge: MIT Press.

Pivec M., Dziabenko O., Schinnerl I. (2003). Aspects of Game-Based Learning. Proceed



http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pd

http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pd

ings of I-KNOW ’03. Graz, Austria

Rebetez and Bétrancourt (2007). Video game research in cognitive and educational sciences. Romanian Association for Cognitive Science. Volume XI (March), 131-142 http://tecfa.unige.ch/perso/mireille/papers/Rebetez_Betrancourt_Cogn Bra.pdf (accessed August, 2012).

Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Salomon, G., Perkins, D.N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2- 9.

Sandford, R. and Williamson, B. (2005). Games and Learning. Futurelab, Bristol, UK.

Sandford, R. (2006). Teaching with games: Using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education. Futurelab, Bristol, UK.

Saulter, J. (2007). Introduction to video game design and development. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Scanlon, M. Buckingham, D. & Burn. A (2005). Motivating Maths? Digital Games and Mathematical Learning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education

Selfe, C. L., and G. E. Hawisher. (2004). Literate lives in the information age: Narratives on literacy from the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Shen, J., & Eder, L. (2009). Intentions to use virtual worlds for education. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 20(2), 225-233.

Schrader, P. G. (2004). Games in education: Beyond arousal, aggression, and gender. Paper presented at the International Conference on Education and Information Systems Technologies and Applications (EISTA), Orlando, FL, July 23. (accessed August 2012) http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf

Swan, P. and Marshall, L. (2007). Mathematics games as a pedagogical tool. Edith Cowan University

Van Eck. R (2006). Digital Game-Based Learning: It's Not Just the Digital Natives Who Are Restless…. EDUCAUSE Review, vol. 41, no. 2.

V.J. Shute and F. Ke (2012). Assessment in Game-Based Learning: Innovations, and Perspectives.

Young, M. F. (2004). An ecological description of video games in education. Paper presented at (EISTA), Orlando, FL. (accessed August, 2012). http://web.uconn.edu/myoung/EISTA04Proceed.pdf



http://livepage.apple.com/




http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf

http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf

http://web.uconn.edu/myoung/EISTA04Proceed.pdf

http://web.uconn.edu/myoung/EISTA04Proceed.pdf

BIBLIOGRAPHYCoffman, T., & Klinger, M. B. (2007). Utilizing virtual worlds in education: The implications for practice. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 2(1), 29-33.

DfES (2005a) Five Year Strategy for Children and Learners, The Stationery Office.

DfES (2005b) Harnessing Technology: Transforming Learning and Children's Services, The Stationery Office.

Dewey, J. (1938) Experience and Education (New York, Kappa Delta Pi).

Eschenbrenner, B., Nah, F. F., & Siau, K. (2008). 3-D virtual worlds in education: Applications, benefits, issues, and opportunities. Journal of Database Management , 19(4), 91-111.

Kislenko, K. et al. (2005). “Mathematics is important but boring”: Students’ beliefs and attitudes towards mathematics. Retrieved August 2012 from http://prosjekt.uia.no/lcm/papers/Kislenko.pdf

Malone, T.W. (1981). What makes computer games fun? Byte, 6, 258-277.

McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A. & Heald, Y. (2002) Report on the Educational Use of Games. London: Department for Education and Skills.

Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Re trieved 2012 http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-

Schrader, P., D. Zheng, and M. Young. (2006). Teachers' perceptions of video games: MMOGs and the future of preservice teacher education. (accessed August 2012). www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=125

Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behavior of Organisms: An Experimental Analysis. New York: Appleton-Century

Squire, K. (2003). Video Games in Education. International Journal of Intelligent Simulations and Gaming, vol. 2, 49-62.

Twining, P. (2010). Editorial: Virtual worlds and education. Educational Research, 52(2), 117-122.

Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(3), 414-426.

Games cited in study: Minecraft, 2010, Mojang / MinecraftEdu, 2012, Teacher Gaming LLC / Portal, Portal 2, (2007) 2011, Valve / Second Life, 2003, Linden Lab



http://prosjekt.uia.no/lcm/papers/Kislenko.pdf

http://prosjekt.uia.no/lcm/papers/Kislenko.pdf

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-

http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=125

http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=125

APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Pupil Questionnaire

APPENDIX B - Pupil Consent Form



MINECRAFT- QUESTIONNAIRE Thank you for taking part in this session. I hope you enjoyed it. Please take few minutes to answer the questions below. Circle to indicate your answer.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Male/Female Year 8/Year 9 Non/Low/Medium/High Game Player

1. What is your least favorite subject at school? Why?

2. What is your most favorite subject at school? Why?

3. Have you ever played Minecraft before?

YES NO

If YES – Why do you like to play it? If NO – Would you play it again? Why?

4. Do you use games in Math’s lessons? If YES, which ones? Do you enjoy them?

5. Do you think computer games should be used more in school?

YES NO NOT SURE

APPENDIX C - ‘A Model of Games and Learning’ (Garris et al, 2002)

Word Count - 15,186



Playing In The Sandbox - Virtual Worlds in Maths

Documents

Transcript of Playing In The Sandbox - Virtual Worlds in Maths