Upload
lucy
View
214
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Thammasat University Libraries]On: 04 October 2014, At: 15:35Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Educational Media InternationalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/remi20
The use of mobile games in formaland informal learning environments: areview of the literatureGeorge Koutromanosa & Lucy Avraamidoub
a Faculty of Primary Education, National and KapodistrianUniversity of Athens, Athens, Greeceb EducationUniversity of Nicosia, Nicosia, CyprusPublished online: 06 Mar 2014.
To cite this article: George Koutromanos & Lucy Avraamidou (2014) The use of mobile gamesin formal and informal learning environments: a review of the literature, Educational MediaInternational, 51:1, 49-65, DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2014.889409
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.889409
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
The use of mobile games in formal and informal learningenvironments: a review of the literature
George Koutromanosa* and Lucy Avraamidoub
aFaculty of Primary Education, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens,Greece; bEducation, University of Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyprus
(Received 21 November 2013; final version received 27 January 2013)
Our purpose in this paper is to review studies that explored the impact of the useof mobile games in both formal and informal learning environments. Through areview of studies on mobile learning that have been published between 2000 and2013, we aim to identify the ways in which researchers used mobile games in avariety of learning environments, and to synthesize current literature about theimpact of the use of mobile games on student achievement and attitudes towardsand learning. We first provide definitions of the constructs “mobile technolo-gies,” “mobile games,” and “informal learning environments.” Following that,we present the outcomes of our analysis by describing the purpose, the contexts,and the findings of each of the studies we reviewed. We then offer generalconclusions that came out of our analysis and we offer some recommendationsfor future research.
Keywords: mobile technologies; games; formal and informal environments
Introduction
Mobile learning has been conceptualized and studied by researchers around theworld, in the past few years, in myriads ways that entail a variety of frameworksand methods. Avraamidou (2013) describes how many researchers have used theterm mobile learning to refer to the learning that takes places through an individual’sinteraction with a mobile device. A few other researchers have used the term “aug-mented” learning to refer to the method where information is made available ondemand and where the environment adapts to the learner. Other researchers haveapplied the term ubiquitous learning to describe some form of simple mobile learn-ing, as for example, a learning environment that can be accessed in various contextsand situations. In this paper, we use the term “mobile learning” to refer to the learn-ing that occurs through interaction with a mobile device. Our purpose in this paperis to review studies that explored the impact of the use of games in mobile devicesin both formal and informal learning environments on student achievement and atti-tudes towards teaching and learning. More narrowly, through a review of studies onmobile learning that have been published between 2000 and 2013, we aim torespond to the following questions: (a) In what ways have researchers used mobilegames in a variety of learning environments to support student learning? (b) What
*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
© 2014 International Council for Educational Media
Educational Media International, 2014Vol. 51, No. 1, 49–65, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2014.889409
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
does research evidence illustrate about the impact of the use of mobile games onstudent achievement and attitudes towards teaching and learning?
In the sections that follow, we first provide definitions of the constructs “mobiletechnologies,” “mobile games,” and “informal learning environments.” Followingthat, we present the methodology we used to conduct the review of the literature.We then present the outcomes of our analysis by describing the purpose, the con-texts, and the findings of each of the studies we reviewed. We then offer generalconclusions that came out of our analysis and we offer some recommendations forfuture research.
Mobile technologies and mobile games
According to a review about the use of mobile technologies in education, done atthe Futurelab (Naismith, Lonsdale, Vavoula, & Sharples, 2005), mobile wirelessdevices can be used by school teachers for managing their schedules, reviewing stu-dent marks, accessing central school data, attendance reporting, and providingcourse material. More recently, mobile technologies, and particularly mobile games,have been used in a variety of settings, both formal and informal, in support of stu-dent learning. As the Latin origins (mobilis) of the term suggests, mobile learningrefers to learning that is able to move freely. The term has its origins on an essentialaspect of mobile technologies: mobility, which refers to continuous use withoutlimitation of time and location. As defined by Quinn (2000), “mobile learning islearning through mobile computational devices.”
Seppala and Alamaki (2003) summarized the distinctive features of mobile learn-ing in that it takes place at any location, and not necessarily in the classroom, andthat it enables learners to enter an information network by using a portable learningdevice and a wireless network. As summarized by Avraamidou (2008), a review ofthe literature indicates that the use of mobile wireless devices has been one of themain trends in education the past few years (Avraamidou, 2013; Kukulska-Hulme,2005; McGhee & Kozma, 2001). Researchers have argued that these technologieshave the potential to improve efficiency and effectiveness in teaching and learning(Dubendorf, 2003) and to challenge the essence of face-to-face teaching and learning(Kukulska-Hulme, 2005). In examining the benefits of mobile wireless technologiesin education, Kim, Mims, and Holmes (2006) summarized those in the following:(a) mobility, which is associated with the advantage of accessing information any-time, anywhere; (b) information management capacity, which is associated with thedigitization of information and electronic-based management; and (c) beaming capa-bility which allows the sharing of files instantly and in real-time.
The advantages of mobile technologies let many researchers, as described next,to examine the use of mobile games within a various learning environments, bothformal and informal. Mobile games can be defined as “embedded, downloaded, ornetworked games conducted in handled devices” (Jeong & Kim, 2009, p. 290) suchas personal digital assistants (PDA), portable media players (e.g. iPods), smart-phones, and Tablet PCs (Jeong & Kim, 2009; Quan-yin, Yin, Chengjie, & Rui,2011). The new mobile devices have a wide range of connectivity features, includ-ing infrared, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and 4G. In recent years, mobile games have gainedincreasing attention compared to other gaming platforms such as console, PC, andarcade games. The reason for the rapid growth of mobile games is the mobility,accessibility, networkability, and simplicity of the mobile devices. These games can
50 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
be played anytime and anywhere (Jeong & Kim, 2009; Soomro, Ahmad, &Sulaiman, 2013).
Mobile games range from basic (e.g. Tetris) to sophisticated (e.g. 3D games).The first mobile game, the Snake, was embedded in Nokia mobile phone in 1997.Augmented reality games are the latest mobile gaming trend. These games combine“a technology in which the user’s view of the real world is enhanced with virtualobjects that appears to coexist in the same space as real objects” (Santos, Romão,Dias, & Centieiro, 2013, p. 382).
An examination of existing literature shows that there have been quite a fewstudies on the use of mobile games in education (e.g. Boyle, Connolly, Hainey, &Boyle, 2012; Connolly, Boyle, MacArthur, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012; Papastergiou,2009), however, missing remains a thorough review of this existing literature thatsummarizes the findings of these studies and offers conclusions about the use ofmobile games within various learning environments. This paper aims to address thisgap as it synthesizes the findings of existing studies about the use of mobile gamesin education and offers recommendations for future research.
Informal learning environments
In recent years, a number of researchers and institutions around the world haveshown interest in the learning that takes place in informal learning environments(e.g. Museums) or out-of-school settings (e.g. science camps), and which operatesacross a broad range of contexts and disciplines and reaches out to people of all ages(e.g. Aubusson, Griffin & Kearney, 2012; Dillon, 2012; Kisiel, 2012; Kong, Dadney& Tai, 2013; Murmann, & Avraamidou, 2014; Rahm, 2010). The policy statementof the National Association for Research in Science Teaching Ad Hoc Committeeon Informal Science Learning (Dierking, Falk, Rennie, Anderson, & Ellenbogen,2003) describes the broad nature of learning to emphasize value of learning that hap-pens in out-of-school settings:
Learning rarely, if ever, occurs and develops from a single experience. Rather, learningin general, and science learning in particular, is cumulative, emerging over timethrough myriad human experiences, including, but not limited to, experiences in muse-ums, schools, while watching television, reading newspapers and books, conversingwith friends and family, and increasingly frequently, through interactions with theInternet. The experiences children and adults have in these various situations dynami-cally interact to influence the ways individuals construct scientific knowledge, attitudes,behaviors and understanding. In this view, learning is an organic, dynamic, never-end-ing, and quite holistic phenomenon of constructing personal meaning. This broad viewof learning recognizes that much of what people come to know about the world,including the world of science content and process, derives from real world experi-ences within a diversity of appropriate physical and social contexts, motivated by anintrinsic desire to learn. (p. 109)
Museums, after-school programs, and everyday life settings such as the commu-nity and the family environment offer unique educational environments and provideexciting opportunities for learning (Avraamidou, 2013; Falk, 2004; Falk & Dierking,2000; Griffin, 1994; Hein, 1998; Rennie, 1994). It is such reasons that led us toexplore in this paper the idea of the use of mobile games within informal learningenvironments in support of student learning.
Educational Media International 51
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Methodology
As stated earlier, the purpose of this paper is to review studies that explored theimpact of the use of games in mobile devices in both formal and informal learningenvironments on student achievement and attitudes. For the purpose of this review,a literature search was conducted in the following international online bibliographicdatabases: (a) ISI Web of Knowledge, (b) Scopus, (c) ERIC, and (d) EdITLib DigitalLibrary for Information Technology and Education. The time period covered in thissearch was January 2000 (based on the assumptions that the use of mobile games isa new idea and hence there would not be literature available prior to 2000) toAugust 2013.
The search terms that were used in searching the literature were the following:“mobile games and formal and informal learning”; “games and mobile devices”;“iPhone OR Tablet PC and games.” These terms were narrowed down further byfocusing on studies that: (a) included empirical evidence relating to the effects ofuse of games in mobile devices in formal and/or informal learning environments; (b)focused in primary and secondary education; (c) were published in refereed aca-demic journals; and (d) the games that used in studies were designed specificallywith a learning objective. Using these four criteria, 11 papers met the criteria forinclusion in the review presented in this paper. These selected papers are presentedin Table 1 in terms of: name of authors; the main aims/objectives of study; the nameof the game(s) and brief description of them; the research design; the sample, thedevice types; and the learning environments and major findings.
Review of studies on mobile games
In our analysis of the studies on the use of mobile games in support of student learn-ing within formal and informal environments, various important findings wererevealed. Researchers have used a variety of mobile games, in a variety of environ-ments, and for a variety of purposes. Some researchers report findings that provideevidence of the impact of the use of mobile games on students’ learning, on thedevelopment of students’ skills, and others on students’ attitudes towards learning.Below, we summarize the findings of these studies, also presented in Table 1.
One of the papers looked at how mobile games can be designed specifically foroutdoors learning. In this study, Facer et al. (2004) investigated whether the combi-nation of different futures of mobile and games technologies could encourage thedevelopment of children’s conceptual understanding of animal behavior and interac-tion with the environment. In this early study, a mobile game was designed, named“Savannah.” Its objective was to enable children to learn about lion behaviorthrough the use of PDAs and global positioning systems (GPSs). The game con-sisted of two related areas of activity. The first, involved the use of GPSs linked toPDAs through which the children “see,” “hear,” and “smell” the world of the Savan-nah as they moved around various zones in the playing field, acting like a pride oflions. The second activity area, the “Den,” was an indoors space where childrencould reflect on how well they had succeeded in the game, develop their strategies,and access resources to support their understanding for surviving as lions in the vir-tual environment. An exploratory study for two days was conducted with twogroups of children of secondary school (five boys and five girls) aged between 11and 12 years. Facer et al. (2004) reported that analyses of their data provided
52 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Table1.
Previousstudiesthat
used
games
inmobile
devicesin
variousenvironm
ents.
Author(s)
Aim
s/objectives
ofstudy
Nam
eof
thegame(s)/
briefdescription
Research
design
Sam
ple
Device
types
Learning
environm
ents
Findings
Furió
etal.
( 2013b)
Todevelopan
iPhone
game;
toexam
inewhether
the
iPhone
gamehas
betterlearning
outcom
esthan
atraditional
game
Not
mentio
ned/An
iPhone
gamethat
combinesAugmented
Realitywith
video
games
Survey;
acomparativ
estudy
Study
1:150
professionalsin
education,
68%
females
and32%
males;
iPhone
Non
form
al(sum
mer
school)
The
child
ren
achieved
similar
know
ledge
improvem
entsusing
both
theiPhone
gameandthe
traditional
game.The
majority
ofthe
child
renwould
like
toplay
with
the
iPhone
gameagain.
Inadditio
n,they
preferredthe
experience
with
the
iPhone
gameover
thetraditional
one
Study
2:84
child
ren
rangingin
agefrom
8to
10yearsold
Furió
etal.
( 2013a)
Tocompare
which
device
(iPhone
orTablet
PC)was
better
suitedforfunand
learning;to
determ
ineifchild
ren
acquired
new
know
ledgeafter
playingthegame
Not
mentio
ned/A
mobile
ARgamefor
learning
aboutthe
water
cycle,water
compositio
n,and
water
pollu
tion.
The
gamewas
developed
foriPhone
andTablet
PCdevices
A comparativ
estudy
79child
renfrom
8to
10yearsold
iPhone
andTablet
PC
Non-formal
(sum
mer
school)
The
differencesof
thedevicesdidnot
influencethe
child
ren’sacquired
know
ledge,
engagement,
satisfaction,
ease
ofuse,or
Augmented
Realityexperience.
How
ever,therewas
only
astatistically
significant
difference
fortheglobal
score
inwhich
theiPhone
was
scored
higher
(Contin
ued)
Educational Media International 53
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Table
1.(Contin
ued).
Author(s)
Aim
s/objectives
ofstudy
Nam
eof
thegame(s)/
briefdescription
Research
design
Sam
ple
Device
types
Learning
environm
ents
Findings
Sánchez
and
Oliv
ares
( 2011)
Toim
plem
enta
series
oflearning
activ
ities
basedon
Mobile
Serious
Gam
esforthe
developm
entof
problem
solvingand
collaborativ
eskillsin
prim
arystudents
Evolutio
n/The
game
consistsof
four
environm
ents,each
relatedto
oneanim
alclass(fishes,
amphibians,reptiles
andbirds),andeach
classhasthree
species:lig
ht,
medium,andheavy
Quasi-
experimental
10eighth-grade
classesfrom
5differentschools
Classmate
mobile
devices
Formal
and
inform
al(m
useum
andzoo)
Studentsin
the
experimentalgroup
achieved
ahigher
perceptio
nof
their
owncollaboratio
nskillsandahigher
scorein
theplan
executiondimension
oftheproblem
solvingcyclethan
didthestudentsin
thenon-equivalent
controlgroup
BuinZ
ooand
Museum/These
are
trivia
games
for
Classmatemobile
devicesthat
guidethe
visitto
azooanda
museum
respectiv
ely,
andwhich
allow
toworkconceptsrelated
tocurricular
content
“Evolutio
nof
species”
Klopfer
etal.
( 2011)
Todesign
and
evaluate
aUbiqG
ame
(casual,mobile
and
educationalgame)
Weatherlin
gs/Itisa
gamedesigned
togo
alongwith
amore
traditional
curriculum
uniton
weather
and
clim
ateto
help
studentsgain
familiarity
with
and
practiceusingskills
relatedto
thosetopics
Survey
20studentsaged
10or
11Mobile
phones
Inform
alStudentswere
engagedby
thegame
andwereinterested
inlearning
more
aboutacadem
iccontenttopics,
specifically
weather
andclim
ate,after
playingthegame
54 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Liaoet
al.
( 2011)
Toexplorethedesign
andthedevelopm
ent
ofahandheld
pet-
nurturinggamewith
alearning
environm
ent;to
exam
inethe
influenceof
thegame
prototype
MyMy-Mini-Pet/Itis
ahandheld
pet-
nurturinggame
environm
ent,in
which
studentslearn
with
ananim
allearning
companion,
theirMy-Mini-Pet
Pre-postand
delaytests,
observations,
interviews
Nine10-year-old
fourth-grade
students
PDA
Formal
The
results
show
edthat
theuseof
the
My-Mini-Pet
inPDA
device
canproduce
positiv
elearning
outcom
esandengage
studentsin
learning
activ
ities.Moreover,
students’attention
was
attractedand
theirdiscussion
betweenpeerswas
highly
stim
ulated
Liu
and
Chu
( 2010)
Toinvestigatehow
ubiquitous
games
influenceEnglish
learning
achievem
ent
andmotivation
throughacontext-
awareubiquitous
learning
environm
ent
HandheldEnglish
LanguageLearning
Organization
(HELLO)/HELLO
helpsstudentsto
engage
inlearning
activ
ities
basedon
theARCSmotivation
theory,involving
variouseducational
strategies,including
ubiquitous
game-
basedlearning,
collaborativ
elearning,andcontext
awarelearning
Quasi-
experimental
64seventhgrade
students,13
or14
yearsof
age,and3
high
school
teachers
PDA
phones
Formal
The
results
show
edthat
theexperimental
groupachieved
better
learning
outcom
esinto
theEnglish
learning
and
motivationthan
the
controlgroup
(Contin
ued)
Educational Media International 55
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Table
1.(Contin
ued).
Author(s)
Aim
s/objectives
ofstudy
Nam
eof
thegame(s)/
briefdescription
Research
design
Sam
ple
Device
types
Learning
environm
ents
Findings
Akkerman
etal.
( 2009)
Amobile
and
multim
edia
game
designed
forHistory
educationwas
analyzed
interm
sof
how
itisdesigned
andhow
itwas
appliedas
anarrative
learning
environm
ent
Frequency
1550/
Thisgamewas
based
inAmsterdam
and
taught
playersthe
historyof
that
particular
area
Observatio
ns,
group
interview,
logs,etc.
216studentsranged
inagefrom
12to
16yearsold
UMTS/
GPS
phones
Inform
alAccording
toAkkerman
etal
( 2009)
“these
types
ofstorificatio
nprocessesdifferently
affected
students’
engagement.
Participatingin
the
storyevoked
high
activ
ityin
thegame
butless
awarenessof
thewhole
story,
whereas
constructin
gthestorytriggered
awarenessof
the
whole
story.
Com
paredto
receivingthestory,
both
thesetypes
positiv
elyaffected
theengagementof
thestudentsbeing
activ
eandmotivated
during
thegame”
(p.
449)
Huizenga
etal.
( 2009)
Toinvestigatethe
effectsof
amobile
city
gamein
term
sof
pupilengagementin
thegame,historical
Frequency
1550/
Thisgamewas
based
inAmsterdam
and
taught
playersthe
Quasi-
experimental
458pupilsranged
inagefrom
12to
16yearsold
UMTS/
GPS
phones
Formal
and
inform
alPupils
who
played
thegamereported
moreengagement
andknow
ledgeabout
medievalAmsterdam
56 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
know
ledge,and
motivationfor
History
ingeneral
andthetopicof
the
MiddleAgesin
particular
historyof
that
particular
area
comparedto
theones
who
received
regular
projectbased
instruction.
Inadditio
n,no
significant
differenceswere
foundbetweenthe
twogroups
with
respectto
motivation
forHistory
orthe
MiddleAges
Lim
and
Wang
( 2005)
Todescribe
the
trialin
gof
anew
form
ofcooperative
learning
strategy,in
theform
ofagame
know
nas
EcoRangers
EcoRangers/Itisa
multi-player
game
designed
torunon
mobile
phones.Itis
designed
tohelp
studentspractice
skillsof
relevanceto
thesocial
studies
syllabusforGrades9
and10
Trial
50Grade
9students
from
Secondary
Schools
Mobile
phones
Formal
and
inform
alStudentsgave
apositiv
efeedback
aboutthe
EcoRangers
game
The
collaboratio
nbetweenstudents
helped
them
learnnot
only
inthe
educationalworld
but
also
social
situations
aswell
Klopfer
etal.
( 2004)
Tocompare
Palm
andwearable
computers
for
participatory
simulations
Virus/An
epidem
iological
simulation
Experim
ental
Twohigh
schools
(one
public
N=71
infour
classes,andone
privateN=117
studentsin
six
classes)
were
selected
forthe
Mobile
phones
Formal
Thisstudyshow
edthat
Participatory
Sim
ulations
onPalms
andTag-based
simulations
managed
toengage
equally
students’
LLAP/A
simulation
ofMendeliangenetic
inheritance
(Contin
ued)
Educational Media International 57
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Table
1.(Contin
ued).
Author(s)
Aim
s/objectives
ofstudy
Nam
eof
thegame(s)/
briefdescription
Research
design
Sam
ple
Device
types
Learning
environm
ents
Findings
LLAP,while
one
(private
N=82
studentsin
five
classes)
middle
school
was
selected
fortheVirus
game.
collaboratio
nin
acomplex
problem-
solvingtask
Facer
etal.
( 2004)
Toexam
inewhether
thecombinatio
nof
differentfeatures
ofmobile
andgames
technologies
could
encouragethe
developm
entof
child
ren’sconceptual
understandingof
anim
albehavior
and
interactionwith
the
environm
ent
Savannah/Itis
designed
toencouragethe
developm
entof
child
ren’sconceptual
understandingof
anim
albehavior
Exploratory
study
10child
renaged
between11
and12
years
GPSs,
PDAs
Formal
Studentsfeltthat
they
wereactually
experiencing
the
game.In
additio
n,they
wereidentifying
with
theirnew
roles
aslio
nswhich
they
foundhighly
engaging
58 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
evidence that suggest that the 10 students felt that they were actually experiencingthe game. In addition, they were identifying with their new roles as lions which theyfound highly engaging.
Other researchers reported findings on studies that used mobiles devices in loca-tion-based games, which are designed to play in public spaces like streets and muse-ums. In the first study, Akkerman, Admiraal, and Huizenga (2009) analyzed amobile and multimedia game for History education called Frequency 1550 in termsof how it is designed and how it was applied as a narrative learning environment.Frequency 1550 is a mobile city game that uses UMTS/GPS phones to let studentsof the secondary schools actively learn about by walking around and playing inAmsterdam’s city center. This game was played for one day in groups by 216 stu-dents. Results indicated that students participated in three types of storification:receiving, constructing, and participating in the story. According to Akkerman et al.(2009)
these types of storification processes differently affected students’ engagement. Partici-pating in the story evoked high activity in the game but less awareness of the wholestory, whereas constructing the story triggered awareness of the whole story. Comparedto receiving the story, both these types positively affected the engagement of the stu-dents being active and motivated during the game. (p. 449)
This finding is important as it points to the implications of the story-line design andhow those impact student engagement.
In the second study, Huizenga, Admiraal, Akkerman, and ten Dam (2009) exam-ined the effects of Frequency 1550 game, on 458 pupil’s engagement in the game,historical knowledge, and motivation for History in general and the topic of theMiddle Ages in particular. This quasi-experimental study used pupils from 20 clas-ses from five schools. The students in 10 of the classes played the Frequency 1550game (Experimental group) with the aid of mobile smart phones, video phones, andGPS technology. The pupils in the other 10 classes received a regular, project-basedlesson series (Control group). This study showed that students who played the gamereported more engagement and knowledge about medieval Amsterdam compared tothe ones who received regular project based instruction.
In a related study, Sánchez and Olivares (2011) investigated the hypothesis thatMobile Serious Games (MSG)-based learning activities can contribute to the devel-opment of problem-solving and collaboration skills, the improvement of perceptionsof science, and increasing the motivation for learning among primary education stu-dents. In their study, three MSG (Evolution, Museum, and BuinZoo) were designedand developed for use in Classmate mobile devices. In addition, a series of MSG-based learning activities were designed. These games and learning activities wererelated to the content of the science curriculum for eighth grade Chilean education.A quasi-experimental design was used. The sample of this study was made up of 10eighth-grade classes from five different schools, with two eighth-grade classes fromeach school. The study lasted for three months where the students in the experimen-tal group carried out multiple MSG-based learning activities in formal and informalenvironment (e.g. Museum). The results showed that using MSG-based learningactivities students could achieve a higher perception of their own collaboration skillsand a higher score in the plan execution dimension of the problem-solving cyclethan non-using gaming method.
Educational Media International 59
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Moreover, a study by Liao, Chen, Cheng, Chen, and Chan (2011) explored thedesign and the development of a handled pet-nurturing learning game entitled theMy-Mini-Pet system. This is a game for PDA devices in which students learn withan animal learning companion, their My-Mini-Pet. The game was developed bythree strategies. These were the pet-nurturing strategy, the pet appearance-changingstrategy, and the pet feedback strategy. These strategies aimed students to learn moreabout their pets and to develop their responsibility. In addition, their study examinedthe effectiveness and experiences of the strategies on allowing the student to under-stand arithmetic practices. Nine 10-year-old fourth-grade students (six males andthree females) participated in a pilot study. It took place in the classroom of an ele-mentary school in Taiwan. The results showed that the use of the My-Mini-Pet inPDA device can produce positive learning outcomes and engage students in learningactivities. Moreover, students’ attention was attracted and their discussion betweenpeers was highly stimulated.
A more recent study by Furió, González-Gancedo, Juan, Seguí, and Rando(2013b) also focused on issues concerned with the development and implementationof game that can be delivered with mobile devices. Furió et al. (2013b) conducted astudy with two phases to determine whether an iPhone game has better learning out-comes than a traditional game. In the first phase, they developed an iPhone gameusing the experiential learning theory of Kolb and Gardner’s theory of multiple intel-ligences. The subject of the game was multiculturalism, tolerance, and solidarity. Inthe second phase, a study, with 84 children ranging in age from 8 to 10 years oldwho attended a summer school, was carried out where the iPhone game wascompared to traditional games. The results showed that children achieved similarknowledge improvements using both the iPhone game and the traditional game.Nevertheless, the results of the study indicated that the majority of children wouldlike to play with the iPhone game again, and preferred its experience over thetraditional one.
Two other studies focused on the differences between devices in students’learning. Most specifically, in 2004, Klopfer, Yoon, and Rivas (2004) compared thelearning outcomes of wearable computers and Palm hand-helds (PDAs) using thesame pedagogical strategy of Participatory Simulations. “Participatory Simulationsuse small wearable or hand-held computers to engage participants in simulations thatenable inquiry and experimentation… allowing students to act out the simulationthemselves” (Klopfer et al., 2004, p. 347). Students from two high schools (one pub-lic and one private) played the LLAP, a genetic Participatory Simulation and stu-dents from a private school played the Virus game, an epidemiological simulation.The ages of both groups were from 14 to 16 years old. Within each school, half ofthe students were randomly to play the games to either the wearable computers orPalms in their classrooms. This study showed that Participatory Simulations onPalms and Tag-based simulations managed to engage equally students’ collaborationin a complex problem-solving task. Students felt that their experiences with themobile devices were highly enjoyable and productive. In addition, students believedthat the technology positively impacted their learning. In general, the findings of thisstudy showed that this Palm technology not only motivated students, but also helpedthem to understand the relationship between science and technology.
More recently, Furió, González-Gancedo, Juan, Seguí, and Costa (2013a)developed an educational game for an iPhone and a Tablet PC. This is a mobileAugmented Reality (AR) game for learning about the water cycle, water
60 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
composition, and water pollution. It combined AR mini-games with non-ARmini-games for better gameplay immersion. One of the objectives of their study wasto determine if children acquired new knowledge after playing the game with thetwo devices. Another objective was to compare the effectiveness of the two devices(i.e. iPhone or Tablet PC) on the children regarding the acquired knowledge, satis-faction, and interaction. The main differences between the iPhone and the Tablet PCwere screen size and weight. A comparative study was carried out in a summerschool of a university of Spain with 79 children from 8 to 10 years. Furió et al.(2013a) found that playing with the game very positively affected the learning out-comes of the children. In addition, they found that the differences of the devices didnot influence the children’s acquired knowledge, engagement, satisfaction, ease ofuse, or AR experience. The scores for the two devices and for all the questions werevery high. However, Furió et al. (2013a) found that there was only a statisticallysignificant difference for the global score in which the device of iPhone was scoredhigher. The researchers concluded that games of this kind could be appropriateeducational games and that the mobile device used may not be a decisive factor.
Another game in which students interacted through their devices is “Weather-lings” (Klopfer, Sheldon, Perry, & Chen, 2011) whose content related to weatherand climate. This is a collectible card battle game designed to run on mobile phonesin which players pit their decks of weather-dependent cards against other players’decks. Weatherlings is a genre of mobile, casual and educational game, which iscalled UbiqGames. UbiqGames are
based on casual design, which enables them to fit more easily into the formal schoolsetting by being played in short, frequent bursts throughout the day. In addition, theirbrowser-based nature enables students to utilize the games not only from a widevariety of mobile devices they may carry with them but also from desktop, laptop, ornetbook computers – making access to the games ubiquitous across time and devices.(Klopfer et al., 2011, p. 1)
Klopfer et al. (2011) used Weatherlings in order to explore how students use outsideof class educational games in light of additional distractions on their devices, andhow game design can make those games appealing, educationally useful, and practi-cal. Twenty volunteers, Singaporean students, aged 10 or 11 participated in thisstudy for four days. During these days, students borrowed mobile phones that pro-vided them with anytime, anywhere access to Weatherlings via the mobile browser.The results of this study showed that students were engaged by the game and wereinterested in learning more about academic content topics, specifically weather andclimate, after playing the game.
A study conducted by Liu and Chu (2010) investigated how ubiquitous gamesinfluence English learning achievement and motivation through a context-awareubiquitous learning environment. This study developed an English curriculum byusing a context-aware ubiquitous learning environment called the Handheld EnglishLanguage Learning Organization (HELLO). HELLO aimed to help “students toengage in learning activities based on the ARCS motivation theory, involving vari-ous educational strategies, including ubiquitous game-based learning, collaborativelearning, and context aware learning” (Liu & Chu, 2010, p. 630). A quasi-experi-mental design was used with 64 seventh-grade students, 13 or 14 years of age. Thestudents in the experimental group employed the HELLO to play ubiquitous gamesin which they used PDA phones whereas the students in the control group used a
Educational Media International 61
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
non-gaming approach. The results showed that the experimental group achievedbetter learning outcomes into the English learning and motivation than the controlgroup.
In a related study, Lim and Wang (2005) trialed of a new form of cooperativelearning strategy in the form of a game called EcoRangers. This game designed formobile phones and its aim is to help students practice skills of relevance to thesocial studies, specifically through the pedagogical strategy in which students debatean open-ended problem from a variety of perspectives. The trialing was done inthree secondary schools among 50, ninth-grade students. The results of this studyshowed that students gave a positive feedback about the EcoRangers game. Forexample, they thought that the game gave them an understanding of topics taught inboth social studies and geography. In addition, it helped them in their understandingof social studies and to improve their debating skills. Also, gave them the opportu-nity to apply geographical and sociological concepts that they had learned.
Concluding, the findings of the above studies offer useful insights and collec-tively provide evidence to support the claim that the use of games in mobile devicesoffers a range of advantages. Perhaps, the most prevalent finding one can draw fromthe above is how the use of game support student engagement in activities andsupports them in developing positive attitudes toward learning. These are furtherdiscussed in the next section.
Conclusions and recommendations
Our purpose in this paper was to contribute toward the establishment of the use ofmobile games as learning tools in the context of a variety of formal and informallearning environments. Our work in reviewing existing literature on the use ofgames in education contributes to the field of mobile technologies and education inthat unlike existing work on digital games (e.g. Boyle, Connolly, Hainey, & Boyle,2012; Connolly, Boyle, MacArthur, Hainey, & Boyle, 2012; Papastergiou, 2009) itfocuses on an examination of the use of games embedded in mobile technologiesand used in a variety of learning environments.
Based on our review of existing literature on the use of mobile games, a fewinteresting findings have been revealed. First, it became evident that the majority ofthese studies have used mobile games embedded on previous generation technolo-gies instead of tablets or smart phones, which seems to be the most recent trend ineducational settings (e.g. Martin et al., 2011; Wu et al., 2012). These advanced tech-nologies offer a range of advantages over the previous generation technologies, interms of graphics, voice recognition, Internet speed, and touch screens. Second, thereview of existing literature showed that a few researchers have examined the use ofmobile games in the context of formal learning environments, and a few otherswithin the context of informal learning environment. However, we found no studiesthat use these two contexts combined. The combination of formal and informallearning environments has been proposed and argued by researchers as an empower-ing approach to providing quality education (e.g. Toh, So, Seow, Chen, & Looi,2013). Third, the review of the literature illustrate that the majority of studies are sit-uated within the secondary education context, leaving a gap of literature when itcomes to younger students. Fourth, our review of existing literature showed that themajority of these studies were conducted in the context of science and history,leaving a gap of knowledge for other subjects.
62 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
As shown in our review of existing literature, there exists a consensus amongresearchers that mobile games offer a range of advantages. These are summarized inthe following:
� They support student learning and engagement in various ways.� They offer unique and contemporary learning opportunities.� They offer opportunities for hands-on activities.� Story-lines provide opportunities for students for role-playing.� They offer opportunities for teaching within informal learning environments.� They promote collaboration and interaction.� They offer opportunities for understanding the relationship between scienceand technology.
� They offer opportunities for developing various skills such as constructingarguments and debating skills.
Given their sociocultural nature and status, mobile games hold a great potentialfor enhancing motivation, interest, interaction, and engagement. Even though theargument for the use of mobile games as a learning tool in both formal and informallearning environment is compelling, as exemplified in this paper, it raises more ques-tions than answers given that this research area remains largely unexplored. Builtupon this view, we recommend that future research be directed in this area, and spe-cifically toward responding to the following questions: What implications the use ofmobile games holds for learning in both formal and informal learning environments?Put differently, how do mobile-games educational designs look like? What kinds ofcharacteristics do they have? What theories of learning inform the design of mobile-games educational designs? How does the context or the learning environmentinform the design of the mobile games and the educational design? What is the roleof the teacher in the learning environment within which mobile games are used? Inthis paper, we offer a few specific examples of the use of mobile games in a varietyof learning environments. More concrete examples about a variety of concepts andwithin a variety of settings and subjects are needed, in order to construct a morecomprehensive understanding about the use of mobile games in formal and informallearning environments.
ReferencesAkkerman, S., Admiraal, W., & Huizenga, J. (2009). Storification in history education: A
mobile game in and about medieval Amsterdam. Computers & Education, 52, 449–459.doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.09.014
Avraamidou, L. (2008). Prospects for the use of mobile technologies in science education.Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education Journal, 14, 178–205.
Avraamidou, L. (2013). The use of mobile technologies in project-based science: A casestudy. Journal of Computers and Mathematics and Science Teaching, 32, 361–379.
Aubusson, P., Griffin, J., & Kearney, M. (2012). Learning beyond the classroom:Implications for school science. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Secondinternational handbook of science education (pp. 1123–1134). Dordrecht: Springer.
Boyle, E. A., Connolly, T. M., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). Engagement in digitalentertainment games: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 771–780.doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.11.020
Educational Media International 63
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A system-atic literature review of the empirical evidence on computer games and serious games.Computers & Education, 59, 661–686. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004
Dierking, L. D., Falk, J. H., Rennie, L., Anderson, D., & Ellenbogen, K. (2003). Policystatement of the ‘informal science education’ ad hoc committee. Journal of Research inScience Teaching, 40, 108–111.
Dillon, J. (2012). Science, the environment and education beyond the classroom. In B. J.Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of scienceeducation (pp. 1081–1095). Dordrecht: Springer.
Dubendorf, V. A. (2003). Wireless data technologies. New York, NY: John Wiley.Facer, K., Joiner, R., Stanton, D., Reidz, J., Hullz, R., & Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: Mobile
gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 399–409. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00105.x
Falk, J. (2004). The director’s cut: Toward an improved understanding of learning frommuseums. Science Education, 88, S83–S96.
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and themaking of meaning. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
Furió, D., González-Gancedo, S., Juan, M. C., Seguí, I., & Costa, M. (2013a). The effects ofthe size and weight of a mobile device on an educational game. Computers & Education,64, 24–41. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.015
Furió, D., González-Gancedo, S., Juan, M. C., Seguí, I., & Rando, N. (2013b). Evaluation oflearning outcomes using an educational iPhone game vs. traditional game. Computers &Education, 64, 1–23. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.001
Griffin, J. (1994). Learning to learn in informal science settings. Research in Science Educa-tion, 24, 1–8. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02356336
Hein, G. (1998). Learning in the museum. London: Routledge.Huizenga, J., Admiraal, W., Akkerman, S., & ten Dam, G. (2009). Mobile game-based learning
in secondary education: Engagement, motivation and learning in a mobile city game. Jour-nal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 332–344. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00316.x
Jeong, E. J., & Kim, D. J. (2009). Definitions, key characteristics, and generations of mobilegames. In D. Taniar (Ed.), Mobile computing: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and appli-cations (pp. 289–295). Hershey: Idea Group.
Kim, S. H., Mims, C., & Holmes, K. P. (2006). An introduction to current trends and benefitsof mobile wireless technology use in higher education. AACE Journal, 14, 77–100.Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/j/AACEJ/v/14/n/1
Kisiel, J. (2012). Introducing science teachers to science beyond the classroom. Journal ofScience Teacher Education, 24, 67–91. doi:10.1007/s10972-012-9288-x
Klopfer, E., Sheldon, J., Perry, J., & Chen, V. H. H. (2011). Ubiquitous games for learning(UbiqGames): Weatherlings, a worked example. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,28, 465–475. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00456.x
Klopfer, E., Yoon, S., & Rivas, L. (2004). Comparative analysis of Palm and wearablecomputers for participatory simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20,347–359. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00094.x
Kong, X., Dadney, K. P., & Tai, R. H. (2013). The association between science summercamps and career interest in science and engineering. International Journal of ScienceEducation, Part B, 1–12. doi: 10.1080/21548455.2012.760856
Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2005). Introduction. In A. Kukulska-Hulme, & J. Traxler (Eds.),Mobile learning: A handbook for educators and trainers (pp. 1–8). London: Routledge.
Liao, C. C. Y., Chen, Z. H., Cheng, H. N. H., Chen, F. C., & Chan, T. W. (2011).My-Mini-Pet: A handheld pet-nurturing game to engage students in arithmetic practices.Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 76–89. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00367.x
Lim, K. Y. T., & Wang, J. Y. Z. (2005). Collaborative handheld gaming in education. Educa-tional Media International, 42, 351–359. doi:10.1080/09523980500237765
Liu, T. Y., & Chu, Y. L. (2010). Using ubiquitous games in an English listening and speakingcourse: Impact on learning outcomes and motivation. Computers & Education, 55,630–643. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.023
64 G. Koutromanos and L. Avraamidou
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Martin, S., Diaz, G., Sancristobal, E., Gil, R., Castro, M., & Peire, J. (2011). New technologytrends in education: Seven years of forecasts and convergence. Computers & Education,57, 1893–1906. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.003
McGhee, R., & Kozma, R. (2001, April). New teacher and student roles in thetechnology-supported classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AmericanEducational Research Association (AERA), Seattle, Washington.
Murmann, M., & Avraamidou, L. (2014). Animals, emperors, senses: Exploring a story-basedlearning design in a museum setting. International Journal of Science Education, 4, 66–91.
Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2005). Literature review in mobiletechnologies and learning. A report for NESTA futurelab. (Report No. 11). Retrieved fromFuturelab: http://www2.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Mobile_Review.pdf
Papastergiou, Μ. (2009). Exploring the potential of computer and video games for health andphysical education: A literature review. Computers & Education, 53, 603–622.doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.04.001
Quan-yin, Z., Yin, J., Chengjie, X., & Rui, G. (2011). A UML model for mobile game onthe Android OS. Procedia Engineering, 24, 313–318. doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2648
Quinn, C. (2000). mLearning: Mobile, wireless, in-your-pocket learning. LiNE Zine.Retrieved from http://www.linezine.com/2.1/features/cqmmwiyp.htm
Rahm, J. (2010). Science in the making at the margin: A multisited ethnography of learningand becoming in an afterschool program, a garden, and a Math and Science UpwardBound Program. Rotterdam: Sense publishers.
Rennie, L. J. (1994). Measuring affective outcomes from a visit to a Science Education Cen-tre. Research in Science Education, 24, 261–269.
Sánchez, J., & Olivares, R. (2011). Problem solving and collaboration using mobile seriousgames. Computers & Education, 57, 1943–1952. doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.012
Santos, B., Romão, T., Dias, A. E., & Centieiro, P. (2013). e-Vision: A mobile game toimprove environmental awareness. In D. Reidsma, H. Katayose, & A. Nijholt (Eds.),ACE 2013, LNCS 8253 (pp. 380–391). Boekelo: Springer.
Seppala, P., & Alamaki, H. (2003). Mobile learning in teacher training. Journal of ComputerAssisted Learning, 19, 330–335.
Soomro, S., Ahmad, W. F. W., & Sulaiman, S. (2013). Evaluation of mobile games usingplayability heuristics. In H. Badioze, P. Robinson, P. Olivier, T. K. Shih, & S. Velastin(Eds.), Proceedings of the Third International Visual Informatics Conference, Selangor.
Toh, Y., So, H. J., Seow, P., Chen, W., & Looi, C. K. (2013). Seamless learning in the mobileage: A theoretical and methodological discussion on using cooperative inquiry to studydigital kids on-the-move. Learning, Media and Technology, 38, 301–318.
Wu, W. H., Wu, Y. C. J., Chen, C. Y., Kao, H. Y., Lin, C. H., & Huang, S. H. (2012).Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers & Educa-tion, 59, 817–827. doi.10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.016
Educational Media International 65
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Tha
mm
asat
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ries
] at
15:
35 0
4 O
ctob
er 2
014