An investigation of the approaches for integrating learning materials and digital games: a prior ability perspective

Abstract

Learning materials are integrated into digital games in digital game-based learning (DGBL). There are two types of contexts to present such integration, i.e., tightly coupling context (TCC) and loosely coupling context (LCC). These two types of contexts have different strengths and weaknesses. On the other hand, prior abilities have great effects on DGBL. Accordingly, this study aims to examine the effects of the TCC and LCC on DGBL from a prior ability aspect. Regarding the TCC, low-ability students and high-ability students obtained similar gain scores. On the other hand, the post-test scores of high-ability students were significantly better than their pre-test scores in the TCC while such a significant difference was not found for low-ability students. Regarding the LCC, high-ability students acquired significantly higher gain scores than low-ability students. Furthermore, students’ post-test scores were significantly higher than their pre-test scores in the LCC, regardless of low-ability students or high-ability students. Implications for system design are also discussed.

Full text

Vol.:(0123456789)
1 3
Universal Access in the Information Society (2021) 20:57–68
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-020-00710-1
LONG PAPER
An investigation oftheapproaches forintegrating learning materials
anddigital games: aprior ability perspective
Ben‑GaoHuang1· JieChiYang1· SherryY.Chen1
Published online: 29 January 2020
© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract
Learning materials are integrated into digital games in digital game-based learning (DGBL). There are two types of contexts
to present such integration, i.e., tightly coupling context (TCC) and loosely coupling context (LCC). These two types of
contexts have different strengths and weaknesses. On the other hand, prior abilities have great effects on DGBL. Accordingly,
this study aims to examine the effects of the TCC and LCC on DGBL from a prior ability aspect. Regarding the TCC, low-
ability students and high-ability students obtained similar gain scores. On the other hand, the post-test scores of high-ability
students were significantly better than their pre-test scores in the TCC while such a significant difference was not found for
low-ability students. Regarding the LCC, high-ability students acquired significantly higher gain scores than low-ability
students. Furthermore, students’ post-test scores were significantly higher than their pre-test scores in the LCC, regardless
of low-ability students or high-ability students. Implications for system design are also discussed.
Keywords Digital game-based learning· Prior ability· English learning· Tightly coupling context· Loosely coupling
context
1 Introduction
1.1 Motivation
Digital game-based learning (DGBL) is notably effective
on enhancing learning motivation [13, 51] and improving
learning performance [7, 23]. This is because the DGBL
integrates digital games into learning materials. On the other
hand, integrating learning materials into digital games can
be undertaken by two approaches. One approach belongs to a
tightly coupling context (TCC), where learning materials are
tightly coupled with digital games, while the other approach
pertains to a loosely coupling context (LCC), where learning
materials are loosely coupled with digital games.
More specifically, the learning materials are incorporated
into the core mechanics of the gaming world in the TCC
while the learning materials are not linked with the core
mechanics of the gaming world in the LCC [17, 25, 47].
Both approaches have different strengths and weaknesses.
Regarding the strengths, learners are required to explore the
game world and use their subject knowledge to undertake
game tasks in the TCC. Thus, this approach can promote
active problem-solving and reinforce context-specific learn-
ing goals because learning materials are closely combined
with the core gaming mechanisms [3, 17, 31]. On the other
hand, the LCC is independent from the core mechanics of
the game world so few cognitive resources are required,
which, in turn, learners can concentrate on learning materi-
als [29]. Regarding the weaknesses, the TCC makes learners
pay attention to both playing and learning at the same time,
so many cognitive resources are required [29]. In contrast,
the LCC often uses a same game context to present different
learning materials, so the game context is unrelated with
learning materials. Accordingly, the LCC might be less joy-
ful for learners [18].
Several studies compared the effectiveness of these two
approaches. Habgood and Ainsworth [18] developed a math-
ematics game named as Zombie Division and included TCC
and LCC versions. Their results suggested that children
learned more from the TCC version and showed more will-
ingness to play with the TCC version. Additionally, Vander-
cruysse and Elen [47] designed a mathematics game, which
contained TCC and LCC versions, for at-risk youths. Their
* Sherry Y. Chen
sherry@cl.ncu.edu.tw
1 Graduate Institute ofNetwork Learning Technology,
National Central University, Taoyüan, Taiwan
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.