Activity Theory in Digital Game-Based Learning: A Geometry Case Study
Digital Game-Based Learning (DGBL) is a complementary methodology to tra-ditional instruction, yet it often faces conceptual and practical limitations inevolving educational environments. These include the closed nature of gamesand a narrow focus on single competencies. To address these challenges,...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya) |
| Repositorio: | Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:recercat.cat:2445/224960 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/2445/224960 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Aprenentatge basat en el joc Interacció persona-ordinador Disseny de videojocs Jocs seriosos Game-based learning Human-computer interaction Video games design Serious games |
| Sumario: | Digital Game-Based Learning (DGBL) is a complementary methodology to tra-ditional instruction, yet it often faces conceptual and practical limitations inevolving educational environments. These include the closed nature of gamesand a narrow focus on single competencies. To address these challenges, thisstudy explores DGBL through the third generation of Activity Theory (AT)and applies the Expansive Learning framework. Specifically, we investigatethe following research questions: RQ1:”How does Expansive Learning de-signed in a game influence the learning experience in terms of learning out-comes and engagement?”, and RQ2:”How do game challenges created by stu-dents impact their peers’ learning experience?”. To answer these questions,a quasi-experimental study was conducted with secondary students, includinga control group (players) and an experimental group (players+creators), usingGeoBuild, a geometry game based on Expansive Learning principles. Learn-ing outcomes were assessed via pre- and post-tests, motivation and enjoymentthrough questionnaires, and engagement using in-game analytics and qualitativefeedback. Although all students improved their learning outcomes, the controlgroup outscored the experimental group in the final exam. However, they mademore errors in peer-created challenges, which were harder than those set by theteacher. Challenge completion rates were similar, and students found the expe-rience engaging, suggesting promising grounds for further research. |
|---|