Submitted:
20 February 2024
Posted:
21 February 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. Game-Based Learning and STEM Education: A Brief Overview
1.2. Methodological and Theoretical Considerations in GBL Research
2. Methodology
- Main Research Trends. What are the main research trends in the use of game-based educational approaches for learning and teaching STEM in secondary schools in recent years? This question aims to map the landscape of research in this field, identifying key areas of focus and innovative practices.
- Evolution Over the Past Decade. What changes can be identified in the application of game-based educational approaches in secondary STEM education over the past decade? This question aims to explore how approaches and research interests have evolved in the scholarly community, including with respect to changes in educational priorities and technological advances.
2.1. Study Selection
2.2. Data Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Mora, C. Science and Technology Teaching Strategies. In Contemporary Issues in Science and Technology Education; Springer Nature Switzerland: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 209–220. [Google Scholar]
- Trilling, B.; Fadel, C. 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, C. Reaching a New Generation of Innovators: Taking Action in Project Invent. Childhood Educ. 2019, 95, 10–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacDonald, A.; Danaia, L.; Murphy, S. STEM Education Across the Learning Continuum; Springer: Singapore, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- OECD. PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- English, L.D. STEM Education K-12: Perspectives on Integration. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2016, 3, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cavalcanti, M.; Mohr-Schroeder, M.J. STEM Literacy: Where Are We Now? In STEM Education 2.0; Brill, 2019; pp. 3–21. [Google Scholar]
- Siarova, H.; Sternadel, D.; Szőnyi, E. Research for CULT Committee–Science and Scientific Literacy as an Educational Challenge. 2019.
- Ortiz-Revilla, J.; Adúriz-Bravo, A.; Greca, I.M. A Framework for Epistemological Discussion on Integrated STEM Education. Sci. Educ. 2020, 29, 857–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fajrina, S.; Lufri, L.; Ahda, Y. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) as a Learning Approach to Improve 21st Century Skills: A Review. Int. J. Online Biomed. Eng. 2020, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tytler, R. STEM Education for the Twenty-First Century. In Integrated Approaches to STEM Education: An International Perspective; 2020; pp. 21–43.
- Xie, Y.; Fang, M.; Shauman, K. STEM Education. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2015, 41, 331–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sithole, A.; Chiyaka, E.T.; McCarthy, P.; Mupinga, D.M.; Bucklein, B.K.; Kibirige, J. Student Attraction, Persistence and Retention in STEM Programs: Successes and Continuing Challenges. High. Educ. Stud. 2017, 7, 46–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kennedy, M.J.; Wexler, J. Helping Students Succeed Within Secondary-Level STEM Content: Using the “T” in STEM to Improve Literacy Skills. Teach. Except. Child. 2013, 45, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayuso, A.; Merayo, N.; Ruiz, I.; Fernández, P. Challenges of STEM Vocations in Secondary Education. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2022, 65, 713–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sáinz, M.; Fàbregues, S.; Romano, M.J.; López, B.S. Interventions to Increase Young People’s Interest in STEM: A Scoping Review. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 954996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hazari, Z.; Potvin, G.; Cribbs, J.D.; Godwin, A.; Scott, T.D.; Klotz, L. Interest in STEM Is Contagious for Students in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics Classes. Sci. Adv. 2017, 3, e1700046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gamse, B.C.; Martinez, A.; Bozzi, L. Calling STEM Experts: How Can Experts Contribute to Students’ Increased STEM Engagement? Int. J. Sci. Educ. Part B 2017, 7, 31–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arztmann, M.; Hornstra, L.; Jeuring, J.; Kester, L. Effects of Games in STEM Education: A Meta-Analysis on the Moderating Role of Student Background Characteristics. Stud. Sci. Educ. 2023, 59, 109–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, N.S.; Hwang, G.J. Transforming the Classrooms: Innovative Digital Game-Based Learning Designs and Applications. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2014, 62, 125–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deubel, P. Game On! The Journal 2006, 33. [Google Scholar]
- Wouters, P.; Van Nimwegen, C.; Van Oostendorp, H.; Van Der Spek, E.D. A Meta-Analysis of the Cognitive and Motivational Effects of Serious Games. J. Educ. Psychol. 2013, 105, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clark, D.B.; Tanner-Smith, E.E.; Killingsworth, S.S. Digital Games, Design, and Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 2016, 86, 79–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al Fatta, H.; Maksom, Z.; Zakaria, M.H. Game-Based Learning and Gamification: Searching for Definitions. Int. J. Simul. Syst. Sci. Technol. 2018, 19, 41–1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plass, J.L.; Homer, B.D.; Kinzer, C.K. Foundations of Game-Based Learning. Educ. Psychol. 2015, 50, 258–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaffer, D.W.; Squire, K.R.; Halverson, R.; Gee, J.P. Video Games and the Future of Learning. Phi Delta Kappan 2005, 87, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deterding, S.; Dixon, D.; Khaled, R.; Nacke, L. From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, September 2011; pp. 9–15. [Google Scholar]
- Hamari, J.; Koivisto, J.; Sarsa, H. Does Gamification Work?--A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification. In Proceedings of the 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, IEEE; 2014; pp. 3025–3034. [Google Scholar]
- Cowan, B.; Kapralos, B. An Overview of Serious Game Engines and Frameworks. In Recent Advances in Technologies for Inclusive Well-Being; 2017; pp. 15–38.
- Susi, T.; Johannesson, M.; Backlund, P. Serious Games: An Overview. 2007.
- Prensky, M. The Games Generations: How Learners Have Changed. Digit. Game-Based Learn. 2001, 1, 1–26. [Google Scholar]
- Naik, N. A Comparative Evaluation of Game-Based Learning: Digital or Non-Digital Games? In Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, Vol. 2; Academic Conferences International Limited, 2014; p. 437. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, M.; Tutwiler, S.; Kamarainen, A.; Metcalf, S.; Grotzer, T.; Dede, C. Examining Middle School Students’ Pathways Through Experimentation via a Virtual Simulation; National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST): Baltimore, MD, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Triona, L.M.; Klahr, D. Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students’ Ability to Design Experiments. Cogn. Instr. 2003, 21, 149–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanematsu, H.; Barry, D.M. The Importance of STEM for Modern Education. In STEM and ICT Education in Intelligent Environments; 2016; pp. 25–30.
- Sung, H.Y.; Hwang, G.J. A Collaborative Game-Based Learning Approach to Improving Students’ Learning Performance in Science Courses. Comput. Educ. 2013, 63, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hussein, M.H.; Ow, S.H.; Cheong, L.S.; Thong, M.K.; Ebrahim, N.A. Effects of Digital Game-Based Learning on Elementary Science Learning: A Systematic Review. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 62465–62478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.H.; Chen, B.; Hwang, G.J.; Guan, J.Q.; Wang, Y.Q. Effects of Digital Game-Based STEM Education on Students’ Learning Achievement: A Meta-Analysis. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2022, 9, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gui, Y.; Cai, Z.; Yang, Y.; Kong, L.; Fan, X.; Tai, R.H. Effectiveness of Digital Educational Game and Game Design in STEM Learning: A Meta-Analytic Review. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2023, 10, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Klopfer, E.; Thompson, M. Game-Based Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. In Handbook of Game-Based Learning; 2020; p 387.
- Qian, M.; Clark, K.R. Game-Based Learning and 21st Century Skills: A Review of Recent Research. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 63, 50–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hallinen, N.; Walker, E.; Wylie, R.; Ogan, A.; Jones, C. I Was Playing When I Learned: A Narrative Game for French Aspectual Distinctions. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Intelligent Educational Games at the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Berlin, Springer; 2009; pp. 117–120. [Google Scholar]
- Mayer, R.E.; Johnson, C.I. Adding Instructional Features that Promote Learning in a Game-Like Environment. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2010, 42, 241–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liao, C.W.; Chen, C.H.; Shih, S.J. The Interactivity of Video and Collaboration for Learning Achievement, Intrinsic Motivation, Cognitive Load, and Behavior Patterns in a Digital Game-Based Learning Environment. Comput. Educ. 2019, 133, 43–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korakakis, G.; Pavlatou, E.A.; Palyvos, J.A.; Spyrellis, N. 3D Visualization Types in Multimedia Applications for Science Learning: A Case Study for 8th Grade Students in Greece. Comput. Educ. 2009, 52, 390–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schrader, C.; Bastiaens, T. Learning in Educational Computer Games for Novices: The Impact of Support Provision Types on Virtual Presence, Cognitive Load, and Learning Outcomes. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2012, 13, 206–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hawlitschek, A.; Joeckel, S. Increasing the Effectiveness of Digital Educational Games: The Effects of a Learning Instruction on Students’ Learning, Motivation and Cognitive Load. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 72, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paas, F.; van Merriënboer, J.J. Cognitive-Load Theory: Methods to Manage Working Memory Load in the Learning of Complex Tasks. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 2020, 29, 394–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cowley, B.; Fantato, M.; Jennett, C.; Ruskov, M.; Ravaja, N. Learning When Serious: Psychophysiological Evaluation of a Technology-Enhanced Learning Game. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2014, 17, 3–16. [Google Scholar]
- Freire, M.; Serrano-Laguna, Á.; Manero, B.; Martínez-Ortiz, I.; Moreno-Ger, P.; Fernández-Manjón, B. Game Learning Analytics: Learning Analytics for Serious Games. In Learning, Design, and Technology; Springer Nature: Switzerland, 2016; pp. 1–29. [Google Scholar]
- Tadesse, S.; Muluye, W. The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Education System in Developing Countries: A Review. Open J. Soc. Sci. 2020, 8, 159–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguilera, E.; de Roock, R. Digital Game-Based Learning: Foundations, Applications, and Critical Issues. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education; 2022.
- Manganello, F.; Ravicchio, F.; Fante, C. Game-Based STEM Education Trends: 2013-2023 Dataset Analysis. figshare, 2023. [CrossRef]
- Lancia, F. Strumenti per l’Analisi dei Testi. Introduzione all’Uso di T-LAB; 2004.
- Mawasi, A.; Nagy, P.; Wylie, R. Systematic Literature Review on Narrative-Based Learning in Educational Technology Learning Environments (2007-2017). Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2020, 68, 1275–1302. [Google Scholar]
- Novak, E.; Tassell, J. Using Video Game Play to Improve Education-Majors’ Mathematical Performance: An Experimental Study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 53, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ross, K.M.; Pye, R.E.; Randell, J. Reading Touch Screen Storybooks with Mothers Negatively Affects 7-Year-Old Readers’ Comprehension but Enriches Emotional Engagement. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 1728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pilegard, C.; Mayer, R.E. Improving Academic Learning from Computer-Based Narrative Games. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 2016, 44, 12–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction. Cogn. Instr. 1991, 8, 293–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pellas, N.; Vosinakis, S. Learning to Think and Practice Computationally via a 3D Simulation Game. In Interactive Mobile Communication, Technologies and Learning; Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2017; pp. 550–562. [Google Scholar]
- Pardo, A.M.S. Computational Thinking Between Philosophy and STEM—Programming Decision Making Applied to the Behavior of “Moral Machines” in Ethical Values Classroom. IEEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprendiz. 2018, 13, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dochshanov, A.M. Computational Thinking and Coding for Student Creativity and Innovation Capability. In The Future of Education 2019 Conference Proceedings; 2019.


| OVER USED | UNDER USED |
|---|---|
| 2013- 2016 | |
| Robot (25,06); Game (23,92), robotic (17,81); game_construction (15,44); risk (15,26); peer (15,27); simulation (15,05); computing (12,89); Europe (12,73); climate (11,81); mechanism (10,54); meaningful_learning (10,27); competition (9,59); child (8,35); software (7,74); curriculum (7,47); successful (7,24); quiz (6,69); serious_game (6,49) | Activity (-6,94); periodic_table (-6,93); teaching (-6,21); Covid- 19 (-5,89); coding (-5,19); student_engagment (-5,19); STEM (-5,19; post_test (-4,5); Game_Based_Learning (-4,38); satisfaction (-4,17); pre-test (-4,15); narrative (-4,15); Earth (-4,15); teacher (-4,02) |
| 2017- 2019 | |
| Student_engagement (24,01); Game_Base_Learning (17,17); argumentation (13,31); discipline (13,31), competence (11,47); subject (11,16); art (10,95); computational thinking (10,34); creativity (9,23); inquiry_based (8,99); web (8,98); workshop (8,91); classroom (8,1); laboratory (7,82); STEAM (7,36) |
Soil (-9,6); learner (-8,88); Covid_ 19 (-8,6); platform (-7,87); robotic (-7,59); center (-7,59); emotion (-7,34); social (-7,03); flow (-6,58); genetic (-6,39); qualitative (-5,23); theory (-5,1); self- efficacy (-5,06); mental (-5,06); disability (-5,06); learning_efectiveness (-4,89) |
| 2020- 2023 | |
| escape_room (25, 02); emotion (20,16); flow (16,67); genetic (10,45); theory (9,62); narrative (9,06); factor (9,04); need (9,05); session (7,12); educational (6,46); validity (6,31); board_game (6,06); gamification (5,66); experience (5,42); in_game (4,69; intervention (4,64); virtual_reality (4,64) | simulation (-27, 49); energy (-22, 84); project (-19,46); competition (-10,13); argumentation (-8,24); peer (-8,24); framework (-7,63); green_chemistry (-7,55); mobile (-7,49); student_engagement (-7,19); computational thinking (-7,17); game_costruction (-6,86); robot (-5,75); creativity (-5,02); Game_Based_Learning (- 4,5); web (-4,04); ICT (-3,91) |
| TYPICAL LEXICAL UNITS | ELEMENTARY CONTEXTS (CE) |
|---|---|
| experience (77,65); topic (57,12); mental (43,42); DGBL (39,05); flow (32,94); measure (32,58); game (26, 24); motivation (23,98); feeling (22,31); frustration (22,3); intention_to_play (22,3); outcome_expectancy (22,3); post_test (22,19); knowledge (21,95); pre_test (21,6) |
Flow experience and in-game performance significantly impacted students’ post test scores (…) We measured their science self- efficacy, science outcome-expectancy beliefs, flow experience, feelings of frustration, and conceptual_understanding before and after playing_the_game (…) This study examined the effects of reality-based interaction and VR on measures of student motivation and mental workload, in a mental arithmetic game (… |
| application (36,2); methodology (29,36); COVID- 19 (28,55); pandemic (20,17); usability (20,17); active (18,1); disability (17,8); teaching_and_learning (16,89); strategy (16,65); efficienty (14,48); KAHOOT (14,24); Augmented_reality (14,18); traditional (12,54) |
This phenomenological research aims to explore physics teacher strategies in conducting traditional game_based_learning in senior_high_schools during the Covid-19 pandemic (…). The proposed application has used the techniques in augmented_reality and game_based_learning (…). (…) studying with KAHOOT is believed to improve the outcomes of teaching-learning processes for instructors and students. In this study, a mobile_application was presented (…) for learners_with_intellectual disabilities by applying augmented_reality. (…) Wordwall is rarely used in learning media because there has not been socialization and application in the teaching_and_learning process for teachers. |
|
model (80,26); theory (57,6); validity (56,25); inquiry (44,71); validation (28,77); control_group (25,61); combined_with_ edutainment (23,01); traditional_games (22,99); experimental_group (22,53); expert (17,67); achievement (17,51); learning_effectiveness (14,43) |
This study_examined (…) by exploring the connections between the expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation and flow theory. Three experts in the field assessed the validity of the kit. Also, the achievements of the students from the experimental_group are compared with achievements of students (….). Based on the result, the guided inquiry_learning_model combined_with_edutainment affects increasing student learning interest compared to guided inquiry and conventional model. Some studies that have used a hybrid pedagogical model are recorded, combining gamification with other pedagogical models. |
| Emotion (51,23); educational (48,85); game (38,8); achivers (38,44); digital (36,48); opportunity (29,36); exercise (28,79); design (27,83); practice (25,43); link (18,08); scenario (17,93); collaborative (16,28); inclusive (15,36); positive_emotion (15,36); help_students (14,42) |
This study showed that conventional exercises were detrimental to middle and high achievers’ learning emotions, although their concepts improved (…). Science teachers may try innovative activities such as collaborative games to maintain students’ positive emotions (…) (…) high achievers decreased their positive emotion, and middle to high achievers increased their negative emotion. This study explores how players engage in problem solving during a cross-platform collaborative learning game about cellular biology (…) |
|
programme (73, 91); program (65,38); class (60,89); questionnaire (41,58); sample (30,15); student (25,76); achievement (24,25); survey (23,83); interest (21,73); personality (20,02); Scratch (18,81); schools (18,11); learning_process (14,05); participation (11,59); playful (11,59); digital games (11,26) |
This paper describes research introducing_students to programming concepts using a Scratch programming language (…) Students’learning interest questionnaire contains statements done by students before and after the learning_process. There are many programming environments and teaching approaches that address the learning needs of students (…) Results show different gender preferences for the three programming tools and, in some cases, different personalities (…) Moreover, all programming environments had different emotional effects on the students. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).