Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Abstract
In this research, we examine how computer-based programming games and contests
could be used in the information technology education to increase the learning
effectiveness for learners. We conduct a field study in a unique community of software
developers who participated in IBM Robocode game. In our field study, we address the
following research questions: (1) how do computer-based games influence the learner’s
learning outcomes? Did the learner’s programming skills and knowledge improve after
participating in the programming game? (2) Is the programming game appealing to
learner groups with different ages, education backgrounds and skill levels? (3) What do
the learners like most about the programming game? (4) What are the factors that
influence the learner’s motivation to engage in the programming game? (5) What
programming stages are of more intrinsic fun value and how to design the programming
game accordingly? Through our case study, we found that (1) computer-based
programming games and contests could significantly increase the intrinsic motivation of
the learners across all learning levels, ages and education backgrounds. (2) These
programming games could improve the learning effectiveness very efficiently. (3) Different
stages of programming have various intrinsic fun values. Researchers and practitioners
could design programming games and contests accordingly to improve the intrinsic fun
factors.
2
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
3
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
the programming games and the learning Programming games can be used
outcomes without the intervention caused across all age, education and expertise
by different programming languages or level
programming environments.
Participants in our sample come from all
We use the survey on Robocode age groups (See Table 2). The majority of
participants as our main data collection them (75%) are between the age of 18
method. Robocode community has and 34, with about 40% of the participants
maintained a very active online discussion in the 25 to 34 age group, and another
forum for Robocode participants. Our 20% of the participants in the 35 to 49 age
survey sample is randomly drawn from the group. Our results strongly indicate that
forum. We’ve sent out a total of 500 programming games are attractive both to
surveys to the developers and excluding young learners and also to older and often
two invalid responses, we generated 83 more experienced learners. We also did a
valid responses (A response rate of 17%) correlation test between the developer’s
motivation to participate in the game and
4. Data Analyses and Results their age groups and did not find any
significant correlation (see table 3). This
Programming games could effectively result implies that programming games
improve learning outcomes could be applied in the education and
training to learners across all age groups.
We found that Robocode game is a very Notably, our finding are consistent with the
effective tool to promote the self- results of a study by Venkatesh (1999),
motivated learning in the information who examined game-based versus
technology education, especially in the traditional training, and did not find any
software programming education and evidence of a moderating effect of age on
training. Such self-motivated learning is the effects of the training method.
considered by many as the best way to
learn (Lepper & Malone, 1987). In our field The education levels of the
study, we specifically test how effective developers/learners in our sample are
Robocode game could help learners to quite high. In our sample, nearly 48.2% of
learn new programming knowledge and the participants have some graduate
skills. About 80% of the participants report school education or completed graduate
that their programming skills have school. Another 42.2% have some college
increased through participating in the education or completed college school. This
Robocode. Among these participants, more finding implied that programming games
than 20% said that their skills have could not only be used in college level
improved significantly and about 60% technology education and training
report that their skills have increased to programs, but also be applied in graduate
some extent. Only 20% report that their level education and corporate training
skills stayed about the same. (See table programs as well. Again, we conducted a
1). This result strongly suggests that correlation test on the education level and
programming games are effective in the motivation to participate in the game.
promoting self-motivated learning. We did not find any significant correlation
between these two variables (see table 3).
Because our study is designed as an It further confirms our finding that
explanatory case study instead of a programming games could be appealing to
controlled experiment, our results are participants in various education levels.
exclusively based on the participant
survey. In our future research, besides the We also conducted a correlation test on the
participants’ self-reported learning participant’s motivation to engage in the
effectiveness, we plan to include subjects game with their expertise levels. To
in the Robocode game and test their identify the participants’ level of expertise,
learning outcomes using the controlled we take advantage of Robocode’s existing
field experiment method. system to differentiate the participants’
skills. Upon participating in Robocode,
learners would be asked to assign
4
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
themselves into three play leagues based important reason to participate in the
on their programming skills. The beginners programming game. Compared with the
are participants with no Java programming above two intrinsic motivators, extrinsic
experiences before. The intermediate motivators, such as “to win the game”, “to
participants are those with some win the prize in the contest” and “to gain
experiences (less than six months) in Java peer recognition”, are less significant. Only
programming or those who are very about 32.5% of the participants chose the
experienced with another programming “to win the competition” as one of the
language but not Java; the advanced motivations to participate in the
participants are experienced and skilled programming game. Even less participants
Java programmers. Using the same (11.3%) chose “to win the prize” as a
criteria, we asked the participants to rate motivation. “To gain recognition among the
their skill levels in the survey. Our results peers” is not an essential motivation
show that our sample includes developers either. About 16.3% of the participants
from all three levels: approximately 23% chose it as a reason to participate in the
of the developers are beginners, programming game.
approximately 40% are intermediate
developers, and about 37% are advanced Why the programming game is
developers. Our results show that the engaging?
stratified skill levels listed above do not
significantly influence the motivation to We examine further the reasons why the
participate in the game (See table 3). programming game could be fun for the
participants (See table 5). Among the
The above analyses confirm our reasons we list, “To be able to solve
proposition that learners’ motivation to problems on my own” is chosen as the
participate the game-based programming most important factor to contribute to the
training and education is not influenced by enjoyment of programming. 65.4% of the
their expertise, age and educational levels. participants chose it as very important,
(See Table 3) and 22.9% of the participants chose it as
important. “To be able to be creative” is
Motivation factors that influence the chosen as the second important factor to
learner’s effort in programming games influence intrinsic motivations. More than
74% of the respondents chose the
One of our main research questions is to creativity as an important factor - with
study the factors that keep the learners 53.1% of the participants chose it as a
engaged in the software programming very important factor, while 21% chose it
game. A clear understanding of these as an important factor. The above two
factors could help us determine strategies reasons could both be categorized as
to keep participants engaged in the indicators of autonomy. Our results
programming games and improve the conform to the previous theories on
effectiveness of this method. We include a motivation that the more autonomy the
wide range of motivational factors, learner has, the more fun the learning
including simply for the fun of the game, to process will be to the learners, and the
be a winner of the game, to compete for more motivated the learners will be (Deci,
the prize in the contest, to learn new 1975).
programming skills and to gain recognition
among peers (see Table 4). “To be able to put skills in use” has also
been selected as one of the most important
Our results show that the intrinsic fun of reasons why the programming game is fun
the game is the most important motivation to the participant. More than 65.3% of the
factor for the learner to engage in the respondents chose “put skills in use” as
game. 87.5% of the participants in our either very important (28.8%) or
sample chose fun of programming games important (37.5%). This reason is an
as one of their participation motivations. indicator of competence. Another indicator
Another important motivation factor is the is “to be able to learn new skills”. About
fun to learn new programming skills. About 55.7% of the respondents chose “to be
54% of the participants chose that as an able to learn new skills” as a very
5
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
6
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
7
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
Deci, E. L. Intrinsic Motivation. New York: Martocchio, J.J., and Webster, J. Effects of
Plenum Press, 1975. feedback and cognitive playfulness on
Dempsey JV, Rasmussen K, Lucassen B performance in microcomputer
(1994). Instructional gaming: software training. Personnel
implications for instructional Psychology, 45 (1992), 553-578.
technology. Paper presented at the Prensky M (2001). Digital game-based
Annual Meeting of the Association for learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Educational Communications and Randel JM, Morris BA, Wetzel CD, Whitehill
Technology, 16–20 February 1994, BV (1992). The effectiveness of games
Nashville, TN. for educational purposes: a review of
Din FS, Calao J (2001). The effects of recent research. Simulation and
playing educational video games on Gaming, 23(3), 261–276.
kindergarten achievement. Child Study Ricci KE (1994). The use of computer-
Journal, 31(1), 95–102. based videogames in knowledge
Gee JP (2003). What video games have to acquisition and retention. Journal of
teach us about learning and literacy. Interactive Instruction Development,
New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 7(1), 17–22.
Griffiths MD (2002). The educational Ritchie D, Dodge B (1992). Integrating
benefits of videogames. Education and technology usage across the
Health, 20(3), 47–51. curriculum. Paper presented to the
Helliar CV, Michaelson R, Power DM, Annual Conference on Technology and
Sinclair CD (2000). Using a portfolio Teacher Education, 12–15 March 1992,
management game (Finesse) to teach Houston, TX.
finance. Accounting Education, 9(1), Sansone, C.; Sachau, D. A.; and Weir, C.
37–51. Effects of instruction on intrinsic
Hollins P (2003). Playing is the new interest: the importance of context.
learning. E.Learning Age, December– Journal of Personality and Social
January, 16–19. Psychology, 57, 5 (1989), 819-829.
Kirriemuir J (2002). The relevance of video Sedighian K (1994). Playing styles for
games and gaming consoles to the computer and video games. In T
higher and further education learning Ottman and I Tomek (eds) Proceedings
experience. April 2002. Techwatch of the ED-MEDIA 94 World Conference
Report TSW 02.01. At on Educational Multimedia and
www.jisc.ac.uk/index.cfm?name=tech Hypermedia. Panel discussion ‘Can
watch_report_0201 electronic games make a positive
Klawe MM (1994). The educational contribution to the learning of
potential of electronic games and the mathematics and science in the
E-GEMS Project. In T Ottman and I intermediate classroom?’ AACE
Tomek (eds) Proceedings of the ED- (Association for the Advancement of
MEDIA 94 World Conference on Computing in Education), Vancouver,
Educational Multimedia and Canada, 25–30 June 1994.
Hypermedia. Panel discussion ‘Can Squire K, Jenkins H, Holland W, Miller H,
electronic games make a positive O’Driscoll A, Tan KP, Todd K (2003).
contribution to the learning of Design principles of next-generation
mathematics and science in the digital gaming for education.
intermediate classroom?’ AACE Educational Technology, September–
(Association for the Advancement of October, 17–23.
Computing in Education), Vancouver, Venkatesh, V. Creation of favorable user
Canada, 25–30 June 1994. perceptions: exploring the role of
Lepper, M.R., and Malone, T.W. Intrinsic intrinsic motivation. MIS Quarterly, 23,
motivation and instructional 2 (June 1999), 239-261
effectiveness in computer-based Venkatesh, V., and Speier, C. Computer
education. In Snow, R.E., and Farr, technology training in the workplace: a
M.J. (Eds.), Aptitude, Learning and longitudinal investigation of the effect
Instruction, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, of mood. Organizational Behavior and
1987, 255-286. Human Decision Processes, 79, 1
(1999), 1-28.
8
Long Sat, Nov 4, 10:30 - 10:55, Bordeaux
Frequency Percent
<18 4 4.8
18-24 29 34.9
25-34 33 39.8
35-49 16 19.3
>50 1 1.2
Total 83 100.0
Table 2: Age of the Developers