- EFFICA CY AND PERCEIVED BARRIERS TO THE USE OF DIGITAL GAME - BASED LEARNING: A SURVEY STUDY THROUGH THE LENS OF A TYPOLOGY OF EDUCATIONAL DIGITAL GAMES By Min Lun Wu A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Educational Psycholo gy and Educational Technology - Doctor of Philosophy 2015 ABSTRACT - EFFICA CY AND PERCEIVED BARRIERS TO THE USE OF DIGITAL GAME - BASED LEARNING: A SURVEY STUDY THROUGH THE LENS OF A TYPOLOGY OF EDUCATIONAL DIGITAL GAMES By Min Lun Wu In this study 116 pre - service, internship year, and in - service teachers in a large Midwestern university in the USA responded to a survey asking about their current experience, attitudes, self - efficacy, and perceive d challenges and barriers to the implemen tation of digital game - based learning ( DGBL ) in the classroom . The 33 - item survey instrument distinguished four genr es of educational digital games: Edutainment games and educational a pplications , serious g ames, s imulation and multiplayer online games, and educational game d esign t ools. And the design of these four genres of games was associated with four contemporary learning theories /teaching philosophies , behaviorism, cognitive constructiv i sm, social construct i vism, and constructionism . Findings sho w that a majority of teachers were light game players whose gaming activities were mobile - centric. These teachers were overall affirmative about the likelihood of integrat ing games for instruction and they favored the use of Edutainment games and educatio nal a pplications based on pre - existing familiarity, comfortableness and ease of use. Findings also showed that there is a Confirmatory factor analysis was cond ucted to extrapolate a set of five barriers that impede with mismatch between DGBL and standardized curriculum, administrative and parental negative perceptions, lack of technology support and preparation in teacher preparation and professional support, short class periods, and low quality of educational digital ga mes. A typology is proposed as an analytic framework for study ing understanding of educational digital games and for guiding teachers to utilize informed pedagogical practices inco rporating DGBL in the classroom. Future research o n using games fo r education needs to investigate how potentially impact their c hoic e s of game s and affect effective implementation of DGBL. Copyright by MIN LUN WU 2015 v ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S No man is an island and no achievement can be accomplished by the efforts of a single person. I am greatly indebted to my dissertation committee chair and advisor, Dr. Patrick Dickson, for his continuous support and interest in my development as a practit ioner and scholar. I would also like to express my gratitude to my dissertation committee members, Dr. Punya Mishra, for his input on reframing TPACK for digital game - based learning, Dr. Rabindra Ratan, for his idea on creating a typology, and Dr. Chin - Hi s Lin, for his suggestions on conducting statistical analyses. Their insightful feedback and guidance are indispensable to the incubation, execution, and completion of this research project. I would also like to extend my appreciation to the teachers who participated in this study. Without your participation, this research study would not have come to fruition. Many thanks to my beloved family back in Taiwan and my loyal cohort at Mi chigan State University, Guan Ku ng Saw, Chris Shaltry, and Kari Richards who been supportive and valuable people with whom I consulted throughout the years of my doctoral study. I made it to this point because of all of your cheering, caring, and undivided support. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABL ... viii LIST OF FIGU ... . x CHAPTER 1 Rationale of Study . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER 2 . .... .... . . REVIEW OF LITERA TURE . . . . Historical Development of Educational D . . . . . . . ..8 Linkage between the Paradigm Shift of Learning Theories and the Historical Development of Educational Digital Games . . . ... . Teacher Attitudes toward the Use of Di gital Games for Classroom . Articulation of a Conceptual Framework for the Adoption of DGBL . . 2 8 CHAPTER 3 . SURVEY INSTRUMENT Current Gaming Experie Attitud es toward Using Digital Games in the Classroom . . . Self - Efficacy on Adoption of Challenges and Barriers to the Integr 3 9 Attitudes and Self - Efficacy toward Digital Game - Ba s APPENDIX .................................................................................................................... ... ............46 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHO Participants and Setting Research Questions Procedure for Data Collect io CHAPTER 5 . . . ANALYSES & FINDIN GS . . Descriptive Quantitative Data A na . Current Gaming Experience and Orientations ................... ............. .................81 Attitudes toward Using Digital Games in the Classroom ....... ..............................85 Perceived Self - Efficacy on Implementing DGBL ................... ........ ........................91 Perceived Challenges and Barriers to Integration of DGBL .......... ..............................95 Inferential Quantitative Data An . . Qualitative Data Analysis . . . ...107 vii Corr oboration of Quantitative Results in Qualitative . . .... 120 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIO N Returning to Research Questi o Significance of Study Directions for Future Rese ar 3 4 viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. List of Educational Digital Games, Target Learning Objectives and Corresponding Learning Theory in Design . Table 2. Description of Different Knowledge Bases in Current T 79 79 Table 5. Percentage Response 8 0 Table 6. Survey Result on Area of Specialization 8 0 Table 7 . Percentage Table 8 . Percentage Table 9 . f Digital - Table 10 . Table 11. Frequency on Game - Related Activities Table 12. Description on Gaming Orientations Table 1 3 . s of Digital - Table 14 . Table 15 . - Suggested Games for . Table 16 . Percenta ge Response and Teaching Educationa .. .... .. . . . Table 17 . Mean, Standard Deviation, and Ranking for Table 18 . - Efficac Table 19. Times of Using DGBL in this Past Year Table 20. Perceived Barriers toward Integration of DGBL 9 7 ix Table 21 . Comparison of Mean Score on Tea Table 22 . Correlation Matrix for Teaching Philosophies a . . . . 103 Table 23. Principal Component Analysis on External Barriers 106 Table 24 . Chosen Game Genre, Potential Downside, and Proposed Table 25 . Categorization of Consideration, Number of Me ntion, and Example Respons x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Screenshots of Edutainment Games and Edu c ational Applications (Google Images, n.d . )................................................................................................. 10 Figure 2. Screenshots of Serious Games (Google Images, n.d.) ..................................................11 Figure 3. Screenshots of Strategy/Simulation Games and MMORPGs (Google Images, n.d.) . . .13 Figure 4. Screenshots of Educational Game Design Tools 15 Figure 5. Typology of Four Types of Educational Di gital Games and Corresponding Learning Theory , Building on Previous Research of Many Others (See Literature Figure 6. TPACK Framework ( Mishra & Koehler, 2006 . . . . . .... ..29 Figure 7. The Heart of Serious Gam e Design . . Figure 8. Conceptual Framework for Implementation of Fi gure 9. Conceptual Framework for the Implementation of DGBL (Internal and External Context Combined Figure 10. Attitudinal Scale on the Adoption of DGBL ..............................................................47 ...92 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ~ Abraham Maslow The purpose of using technology in education should focus on meeting students where they are in their development; therefore digital games might be a place to start. The Pew Internet and American Life Project (2008) interviewed 1,102 parent - teen pairs and found that 97% of these children from 12 to 17 years old reported playing digital games every week and that about has been growing to include a substantial sect Ludgate, 2013, p. 20). The Entertainment Software Association found that the age demographic of gamers in the United Stat es to be people aged before 18 and 18 - 35 representing more than 60% of all gamers (Entertainment Software Association, 2012). The average gamer is 35 years old and the average age of a video game purchaser is 38 (Entertainment Consumers Association, 201 5). Results of national surveys indicated that children in America play video games over seven hours per week and are inclined to multi - task more than any prior generations (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010). In research, scholars contended that contempora ry digital games and multi - media are changing how students approach the task of learning in that the influx of multi - modal information affluent on the Internet and rich opportunity for communication and collaboration in social media platforms are revamping the width and depth of resource s students 2 can literally access with ease. A mismatch between how students are attuned to learn and how teachers tend to teach in the classroom nowadays hence engenders. Most teachers usually do not have a working knowledge base of games and do not under stand the pedagogical possibilities of educational digital games (Futurelab, 2005). Without pre - existing background in games, understandably teachers are inclined to feel uncertain about what using digital games for teaching in the classroom entails. Thes e studies show that a growing body of adolescent and young adult students entering K - 12 and higher education systems are likely have had prior experience or current engagement in digital gaming. Given the recent advancements in technology and the increasi ngly ubiquitous nature of digital mobile devices (e.g., smartphones and tablet computers), these gaming students might be concurrently fluent technology - users who anticipate teaching styles and content delivery that meet their learning preferences at scho ol. In other words, it is not only the students who are playing digital games. Considering age range and the ESA statistics mentioned earlier, similar habits of gaming can be found in beginning or pre - service teachers. It is safe to assume that a substa ntial proportion of our teacher population could already have personally had experience playing digital games, have experience seeing digital games being used in formal or informal settings to facilitate teaching, or have thought about the possibility of u sing digital games themselves to further educational goals in a classroom. The Horizon Report stated that the time - to - adoption horizon for digital games is t raversed the realm of recreation and has infiltrated the worlds of commerce, productivity, and growth of the gaming industry, research initiatives (e.g., Seriou s Games Initiative, Games for 3 Change), research conventions (e.g., Game Developers Conference, Serious Games Summit, Meaningful Play, Games Learning and Society), and game - based learning schools such as Quest to Learn have added a strong and continued push to integrate new media technologies including (2013) time - to - adoption proposition would likely hold true based on observations of the developing trend in the rising sector of digital game - based learning (DGBL) and game research. This trend poses questions for practicing teachers and teacher educators. First , in two to three years will our teachers be ready to teach while incorpora ting digital games, and sec ond are teacher educators taking note of the educational potential of digital games and preparing our future teachers to teach using digital games? Rationale of Study One goal for teacher education is to prepare pre - service teachers to integrate or repurpo se existing or new media and technologies into tools for delivering educational contents (Ertmer & Ottenbr eit - Leftwich, 2010; Ertmer, Ottenbreit - Leftwich, Sadik, Sendurur, O . & Sendurur P . , 2012; Gronseth , Brush, Ottenbreit - Leftwich, Strycker, Abaci, Easte rling & van Leusen , 2010; Ottenbreit - Leftwich, Glazewski & Newby , 2 010a; Ottenbreit - Leftwich, Glazewski & Newby , 2010b; Tondeur , van Braak, Sang, Voogt, Fisser & Ottenbreit - Leftwich , 2012; Williams , Foulger & Wetzel, 2009). The International Society for standards require teachers to be able to design and develop digital age learning experience and assessments. In congruence with ISTE standards, Michigan Educational Technology Standards also require teachers to teach in a way to help students develop proficiency and productivity in using technology. To achieve these goals, technology training in teacher education programs may include exposure to educational tools or platforms such as Smartboard , course management 4 systems, digital portfolios, classroom website design and social media such as Twitter and Facebook (Hayes & Ohrnberger, 2013). A relatively less explored area lies in training pre - service teachers to use digital games for teaching and learning. DGBL is a teachi ng strategy/approach that involves applications of digital games that entail defined learning outcomes, and is a developing trend in e - learning (Prensky, 2001). There are two rationales supporting the use of DGBL. First, the thinking patterns of learners today have changed considering that they are native speakers and users of the languages of digital multi - media. Second, young people are experiencing innovative forms of computer and video game play and the continuing experience and exposure to these new forms of entertainment has an impact on their perceptions, cognitive abilities, and preference for learning (Prensky, 2001; Susi, Johannesson, & Backlund, 2007). Ultimately, DGBL is about leveraging the mechanisms and effects of digital games to engage u sers for learning. Accompanying the aforementioned rising trend in using digital games for educational purposes, we have observed a surge of interest in the field of game research from stakeholders representing a variety of disciplines. Digital games pres ent a venue through which students can feel engaged in processes of interactive and imme rsive learning (Barab, Gresalfi & Arici, 2009; Franklin & Annetta, 2011; Gee, 2007; Prensky, 2006; Squire, 2011). Nevertheless, to date research investigating pre - ser vice and in - service teacher attitudes towards using digital games in the classroom (Hayes & Ohrnberger, 2013; Hsu & Chiou, 2011, prepare teachers in using dig ital games in formal learning contexts. A recent national survey reported by the Joan Ganz Cooney Center showed that a little more than half of 505 K - 12 teachers sampled nationwide reported using digital games in the classroom (Millstone, 2012). 5 Respondi ng to sources for ongoing learning related to digital games, 66% reported learning from other teachers within their school district, 50% indicated that they were self - taught, while 42% reported learning from seminars, conferences, and conventions. Among o ther findings, Millstone found that 18% of digital game using teachers use digital games every day, with K - 5 teachers reported higher usage (57%) than middle school teachers (38%), partially due to the fact that middle school teachers have a more stringent standard curriculum to adhere to in order to prepare students for standardized testing. The majority of these in - service teachers reported first learning about DGBL from professional development (46%) followed by self - directed study (35%). Only 12% of t hese teachers indicated prior learning about DGBL in their respective teacher preparation. Overall the findings pinpointed to a lack of preparation on using digital games during teacher education and induction. Purpose of Study This study seeks to build toward using digital games and extend the scope by examining potential relationships among - efficacy, and perceived challenges and barr attempts to articulate a conceptual framework that outlines considerations generated from both internal and external contextual factors related to the adoption and inte gration of digital games in schools. Taking into account the historical development in the design of educational digital games and the accompanying paradigm shift of learning theories over the last few decades, a typology of educational digital games is c reated to help teachers understand the importance of matching choice of game genre with appropriate pedagogical practices. 6 The significance of this study is three - fold. First, this study replicates findings regarding pre - using digital games for teaching while examining generalizability of prior research findings across population by simultaneously investigating intern and in - service teachers. Second, this study fills the paucity in the literature in studying the use and inculcation of DGBL in teacher education programs (Franklin & Annetta, 2011). Third, this study seeks to validate and refine the researcher - developed survey instrument to predict when implementing DGBL. In chapter 2, a brief overview of the historical development of educational digital games and concurrent trend in game research will be presented first. Second, a case would be made to illuminate the connections between the evolvi ng design of educational digital games and the paradigm shift of contemporary learning theories. Consequently, a typology of educational digital games would be introduced to help teachers understand the importance of matching instructional strategies with chosen games. Third, extant research on pre - service and in - service for teaching will be discussed to undergird the need for understanding and leveraging thei r pre - existing experiences of using technologies and games to meet varying personal and educational goals. The fourth section will be devoted to the development of a conceptual framework that encompasses the theoretical and pedagogical underpinnings of th e TPACK framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2005; Mishra & Koehler, 2006) and the heart of serious game design (Winn & Heeter, 2007). My aim is to articulate a comprehensive framework for teachers to reference when approaching the implementation of DGBL in class room teaching. 7 Chapter 3 will discuss instrumentation of the attitudinal survey which includes probes - efficacy, and perceived challenges and barriers to the integration of DGBL. In chapter 4, the research design (Creswell, Clark & Hanson , 2003; Campbell, Gregory, Pattern & Bybee, 2012 ; Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2011) used in this mixed method study will be discussed. Results and findings will be presented in chapter 5 and chapter 6 w ill lay out responses to research questions and shed light on directions for future research. 8 CHAPTER 2 RE VIEW OF LITERATURE Historical Development of Educational Digital Games It is important to operationalize a definition of educational digital games and this definition would be used consistently throughout this study. In brief, educational digital games are referred to as electronic games (as opposed to traditional analog, card games, board games, and physical games) designed not only t o provide entertainment but also with the primary purpose to promote learning and education using interactive and multimodal technologies. In addition, participation in digital game play implies one or more players can engage in play simultaneously while being exposed to essential game elements such as game goal, rules, assets, game space, play mechanics, and scoring system. Games and Squire (2011) aptly depicted the historical development of educational digital games in a review that documented the deve loping trends in the early days of edutainment games, instances of successful repurposing of commercial games for learning, and more recently the rise of serious games. Through reviewing research that discussed the development of digital games for educati on (Egenfeldt - Nielsen, 2005; Flynn, Bacon, & Dastbaz, 2010; Games & Squire, 2011), I summarized four main strands of educational game genres with which teachers can consider integrating into instruction. 1. Edutainment Games and Educational Applications for Mobile Devices : Edutainment games are computer or video games created to achieve the purpose of education through entertainment. The primary target group for edutainment games are mainly preschool and young children, with emphasis on areas of mathematics , reading, and science. 9 Edutainment games were popular during the 1990s along with the growing market in multi - media personal computers (Michael & Chen, 2006). Nonetheless, the wave of edutainment software and games was not successful in formal learning settings and in business because a majority of these games were created with incomparable quality to commercially produced counterparts and the surge of interest in the Internet (Michael & Chen, 2006; Squire & Jenkin, 2003; Zyda, 2005). Consequently, edut ainment games became associated with games that were boring and offered not much more than - and - computer games are Math Blaster , Reader Rabbits , Oregon Trail , and Where in the Wo rld is Carmen Sandiego . With the recent technological advancements in mobile technology in the late 2000s, a new wave of short - form and edutainment - like games have found a new home among smartphone and tablet computer users. These games are educational applications designed to r un on mobile technologies often with low hurdles in game play knowledge or skills to attract light game players or young children with limited experience in playing complex digital games. By the same token, educational applications for mobile devices tend to be small in scope and follow the theory of learning edutainment games endorsed, providing players an abundance of repetitious practice to help players learn how to play while accessing the embedded contents via rote learning. Brain Coach , Dinosource , Spell Pop , Monster Physics , and Motion Math Zoom (see Figure 1) are instances of recent popular educational applications running on mobile devices. 10 Figure 1. Screenshots of Edutainment Games and Educational App lications (Google Images, n.d.) 2. Serious Games in 2002, the serious game movement was launched (Susi et al., 2007). The widely used term serious games became popular after the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholar founded the Serious Games Initiative . A generic definition of serious games means digital games created for purposes other than entertainment. Michael and Chen fun as their entertaining or enjoyable but to say that the main purpose of serious games is to facilitate learning, training, or education. Serious games refer to digital games created based on r eal - life models, systems or workable simulations and used on personal computers or video game consoles for purposes of healthcare, public policy, training, science, corporate management, advertising, education, or simulation. Michael and Chen (2006) 11 state d that serious games encompass the same goals as edutainment games but expand beyond teaching memorization and facts to include teaching, training, and informing at all ages to help game players acquire new knowledge or skills. Corti (2006) stated that th e motivational power of serious games is what first made game - based learning appealing to training and developing professionals. However, game - based learning entails more than using fun as a means to entice learners. Compared to commercial video games, Z yda (2005) argued that serious games embodied more than just story, art, and software to include the element of pedagogy which attempts to educate and impart knowledge or skills, whereby making games serious. Examples of serious games are three - dimensiona l aviation or navigation simulators, military campaign simulation , environmental preservation game Wolf Quest , and healthcare awareness games Remission and Quest for the Code (see Figure 2). Figure 2. Screenshots of Serious Games (Google Im ages, n.d.) 12 Serious games reduce the amount of play in the gaming experience, which potentially detracts from the enjoyment of the experience. Nevertheless, serious games are potentially effective tools for learning and education. 3. Commercial Off - The - Sh elf (COTS) Strategy/Simulation Games and Massive Multiplayer Online Role - Playing Games (MMORPGs) : Increasing efforts had been exerted by researchers to examine the educational rendering of digital games in the classroom by using games originally produced for entertainment and commercial purposes (Charsky & Barbour, 2010; Foster & Mishra, 2009; Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2003; Squire, 2004, entertainment - oriented games that ma ny people deem to be particularly appropriate for recreated role play scenario allow players/learners to experience things otherwise too risky, expensive, or physically impossible to achieve in the real world context (Corti, 2006). Squire and Steinkuebler (2005) discussed that playing multiplayer online games is an act of knowledge co - construction, which fosters information literacy and information - seeking skills. Fost er, Katz - Buonincontro, and Shah (2011) used four video games, including a simulation game Rollercoaster Tycoon , and documented the and science skills. These studies were tenable and provided practical instances - based learning activities and teaching strategies to link game play to broader course learning objectives while acknowledging difficulties in such implementations. Examples of com mercial off - the - shelf games are simulation and strategy - based games or MMORPGs such as Age of Empires , SimCity , RollerCoaster 13 Tycoon, Civilization, World of Warcraft, and Zoo Tycoon (see Figure 3). These games are marked by turn - taking, strategizing moves to counteract moves possibly made by enemies, quest - based guild system, and multi - player communication and in - game collaboration. When effective, the repurposing of these commercial games, usually earning in formal curricular contexts given several advantages including potential familiarity to students, well - designed game features, presentation and effects, and the resources readily available in online communities or affinity spaces (Charsky & Mims, 2008; Gee, 2007; Sandford et al., 2006; Squire, 2011). Figure 3. Screenshots of Strategy/Simulation Games and MMORPGs (Google Images, n.d.) Collectively, research involving the use of COTS games in formal learning settings ore detailed examples of classroom use, pointing out that the 14 majority of games used in schools are used by teachers that develop an affinity for the 1). Charsky an overcome frustration and troubleshooting any issues that may arise (during game - based 8). For teachers with less familiarity with digital games, guidance in the form of game - based lesson plans would be necessary. To effectively render COTS games for classroom teaching, the bottom line is that teachers would have to familiarize themselves with the game mechanics and dynamics of the chosen game, and identify in - game features potentially relevant to be used to promote learning of educational content. Consequently the use of COTS represents higher hurdles since these commercial games were not by default designed with the emphasis to explicitly educate as in most educational games. 4. Educational Game Design : The process through which players go through in learning these entry level game design tools align with the underpinnings of current learn ing theory where knowledge is socially - constructed and situated in interactive contexts (Gee, 2003; Prensky, 2001). The learning outcomes induced through design - related activities are usually in the form of virtually constructed worlds, playable digital a rtifacts of functional game environments where core elements such as rules, goals, scoring system, and assets are embedded to create a win state, the end game within a digital game. Research done in the area of educational game design have found that the process of iterative design, play - testing, and game refinement based on peer feedback can lead to - solving, 15 computational thinking, and spatia l reasoning skills (Denner, Werner & Ortiz , 2012; Games & Squire, 2009; Salen, 2007 ; Wu & Richards, 2011). Even though these skills are not directly tied to formal academic subject area knowledge examined in standardized testing, researchers have contended that the skills are critical 21 st century skills necessary information, and technology (Gee, 2007; Wing, 2006, 2008). The adoption of educational game design in classroom settings usually requires that the te acher is familiar with or preferably well - versed in essential game elements and the flow of game play because very often game design starts from a blank slate. This means students will need more design - related guidance and technical support from the teach er, leaving educational game design by comparison a higher hurdle for teachers inexperienced in using games to teach. Examples of entry - level programming tools for teaching about educational game design are Microsoft Kodu , Gamestar Mechanic , Storytelling Alice , and Scratch (see Figure 4). Figure 4. Screenshots of Educational Game Design Tools (Google Images, n.d.) 16 Theories and practices notwithstanding, studies have found that digital games promote conceptual, strategic, and procedural learning rather than textual and rote learning required by school curricula and standardized test - taking. Does the mismatch of lear ning objectives promoted in game - based learning and standard - based learning lead to a fallout? Not necessarily. A s S whether they will be used for learning but for whom a captured the upswing momentum of game - based learning and called for the need for more research focusing on not why but on how games should be used to promote learning at different grade levels in schools (van Ec k, 2006). The following discussion provides a purview on potential connections between the design of educational digital games and the development of learning theories with the aim to link learning to gameplay, and to provide rationale for the integratio n of educational digital games in K - 12 learning contexts. Linkage between the Paradigm Sh ift of Learning Theories and the Historical Development of Educational Digital Games Over the last few decades, the contemporary shift in learning theories in education has paralleled the development of increasingly complicated game design, mechanisms, and effects in digital games (Flynn et al., 2010). Based on the connections between the evolution of educational video games and accompanying paradigm shift in learning theories, Egenfeldt - Nielsen (2005) identified three contemporary generations of educational video games. The first generation of educational games, created beginning during the time frame of the underlying principle that 17 learning is behavioristic. Specifically, controlled input such as repeated drill and practice were embedded in edutainment games to induce direct learning. Edutainment games such as Math Blaster , Reader Rabbits, Oregon Trai l, Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego had been prevalently used in primary school settings to promote directly observable learning. However, most edutainment games were not successful because they were designed with low budgets, overly simplistic rules and effects, and learning objectives that did not support progressive understanding (Michael & Chen, 2006). Edutainment games lost their appeal easily when compared with commercially produced counterparts. Beginning in late 1990s, the second generation of educational games were designed based on cognitive learning (Egenfeldt - Nielsen, 2005). Corresponding to the shift in learning theories, these educational games moved away from the focus on behavior to an overt focus on the learner. T his generation of educational games were designed based on the premise that players/learners are not black boxes and they come to play the game with prior knowledge and schemata. The different knowledge bases learners bring in into game play would interact with the game c ontent to produce differentiated effects on learning. These games were designed based on cognitive constructivism learning concepts such as scaffolding, chunking, perception, and facilitation and they attempted to present information and deliver content i n a cognitively appropriate format to specific learners. Revolution, Immune Attack, Life Preservers, Spore, Environmental Detectives are instances of the second generation of educational games. The third generation of educational games, mostly arising in early 2000s, stressed the importance of the processes of educational use of digital games. In other words, these games focus on the introduction of a social context that promotes meaningful, cre ative, socio - culturally interactive learning activities, collaboration, and problem - solving which were core learning 18 concepts from constructivism and situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991). When adopting these games, the teacher becomes the centra l facilitator adapting digital game experiences to classroom teaching (Gros, 2007) by engaging students in hands - on activities such as group work or field experience in further exploring game contents rather than relying solely on the game to impart knowle dge. Example games in this generation were simulation games such as Civilization , The Sim Series , Age of Empires, RollerCoaster Tycoon 3 . Egenfeldt - Nielsen (2005) noted that most popular educational games included features of adventure, strategy, and sim ulation. He concluded that there was a tendency in the market to produce games based on the second and third generation learning models, i.e., games designed based on learning principles of cognitive constructivism and social constructivism. The fourth an d most recent wave of educational digital games were designed around late 2000s and early 2010s following the constructionist learning approach (Papert & Harel, 1991). These games promote learning that involve the act of construction. In essence, design and creation of game space and artifacts are the main gameplay mechanics. Players engaging in the construction of a game rely on creativity and systematic thinking as they test hypotheses and learn from trial and error in designing a functional game. Ove r time these players would develop a designer language and mindset through dialoguing with the game being designed and game - testers who provi de feedback (Denner et al., 2012 ; Games, 2008, 2010; Hayes & Games, 2008). Game players were encouraged to take on the role of makers, creators, and designers who can participate to varying degrees in the design pr ocess (Salen, 2007; Werner, Denner, Campe & Kawamoto ., 2012). Examples of such educational games are entry - level game design tools such as Gamestar Mechani c , Storytelling Alice and Scratch . 19 In summary, Egenfeldt - Nielsen (2005) and Flynn et al. (2010) described how the shifting main theories of learning had in turn impacted the trends in the design of and gameplay in educational digital games. Flynn et al. video games throughout the past 25 or so years that mirrors the hierarchical nature of theories of parallel ed with the development of learning theories, there exists the need for the development of a classification scheme regarding how well certain games, when used for education, can satisfy certain learning objectives. Building on their work, I have attempte d for the purpose of this research to align the contemporary learning theories with examples of popular educational digital games used both in formal and informal learning contexts (see Figure 5). While some game titles may be categorized under a certain learning theory, it does not mean that they strictly adhere only to the learning principles imparted by that learning theory. Rather, it is acknowledged that all of these games may share commonalities in terms of game features and play mechanics that coul d be categorized under more than one learning theory. Below are four major learning theories that may be used to categorize educational digital games. 1. that human are bi ologically wired to learn and learning can be achieved by reinforcing, substituting, or removing external conditions and stimuli (Phillips & Soltis, 2004). In sum, this theory poses that learning happens best with repeated practices following the pattern of stimulus and response and the evidence of learning are directly observable behaviors. 20 2. proposition of understanding how the brain takes in information and how it processes a nd link that information to pre - existing knowledge to solve problems (Flynn et al., 2010, p. 1551). It poses that learning is about individuals constructing and conceptualizing knowledge, and integrating newly acquired information with existing schema. 3. So learning, posing that knowledge is formed through individual creation but based and maintained by the social group, culture, or context (Flynn et al., 2010, p. 1551). 4. Constructi onist Theory: This theory of learning is connected to experiential learning and poses that teaching is most effective when parts of the learning activity the learner experiences are about constructing a meaningful product (Papert & Harel, 1991). This theo ry places emphasis on learning to think systematically and design a functional game space while faring through tasks related to problem - solving and construction (Games & Squire, 2011; Salen, 2007). 21 Figure 5. Typology of Four Types of Educational Digital Games and Corresponding Learning Theory, Building on Previous Research of Many Others (See Literature Review) The typology along with the pointing arrows suggest that these four types of educational digital games vary in terms of the degree on predetermined game content and structure, content malleability, and the types of learning opportunities afforded in accordance with its respective design principle based on different learning theories. The ladder - lik e spectrum does not imply strict hierarchy of preference or usability but suggests a trajectory through which teachers may progress (from left to right) when they gain more experience and skills in using digital games for teaching. As such, it would be re asonably safe to assume that edutainment games or serious games tend to be more pre - structured in terms of game content and the subject area knowledge they are going to promote for learning when used in a classroom context. These games are usually more te acher - centered and potentially requires less effort on lesson planning or coordination on the part of the teachers because they 22 represent pre - packaged contents readily to be delivered with appropriate game - based instructional practices. On the other end o f the spectrum, educational game design tools or MMO games are less restricted with regard to game structure and allow more flexibility for teachers to tailor teaching strategies to address desired learning objectives. These games are more student - driven because students are encouraged to wield creativity and use problem - solving skills to learn new contents through teacher - scaffolded activities or peer - supported explorations, thereby posing potentially more strenuous and challenging lesson planning, techno logy set - up, and classroom management for teachers. For more concrete pedagogical instances, when a teacher wants to promote creativity, collaborative learning, and problem - solving (learning principles of constructionism) in subject areas such as science o r computer engineering for young adolescents, educational digital games such as Minecraft Edu and Tynker would work best because they are open - ended and the gameplay encourages exploratory and discovery learning. Conversely, when a teacher intends to faci litate drill and memorization (learning principles of behaviorism) among young children, games such as Math Blaster or Reader Rabbits would lend themselves best because these games are more structured and involve repeated practices that foster fundamental sensorimotor skills. Note that some games can share features that can be built on to promote learning objectives in line with multiple learning theories. A game such as Immune Attack or Oregon Trail can be adopted by the teacher to facilitate individual learning in accordance with principles in both cognitive constructivism and behaviorism when scaffolded with appropriate learning activities such as fact worksheets and personal reflections. Similarly, when teachers want to promote both social constructi vist and constructionist learning, they can adopt Gamestar Mechanic and carry out game - based learning by putting students in collaborative groups, 23 allowing for play - testing, encouraging social interaction, entertaining peer feedback, and promoting student learning through building and testing hypotheses via trial and error. classroom adoption should depend on sound pedagogical considerations of in - game subject area co ntent, content appropriateness, student age, target learning objectives, individual or group dynamics, available technology set - up and resources. Similar to any other lesson planning, it is imperative for teachers interested in using game - based lessons to familiarize themselves with the chosen game(s) before real - time classroom implementation. For a reference list of educational digital games designed based on the four contemporary learning theories, target learning opportunities and befitting age g roup, please see Table 1. 24 Table 1. List of Educational Digital Games, Target Learning Objectives and Corresponding Learning Theory in Design Behaviorism Cognitive Constructivism Social Constructivism Constructionism Target Learning Opportunities *Memorization *Drill *Repetition *Individual work *Individual information processing *Individual problem - solving *Group work *Collaboration *Co - constructing and sharing knowledge *Learning by building *Systemic thinking *Creativity *Collaborative problem - solving Target Age Group K - 6 6 - 10 8 - 12 8 - 12 Game Titles *Math Blaster *Jeopardy *Reader Rabbits *Oregon Trail *Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? *Dinosource *Words with Friends *Monster Physics *Motion Math Zoom *Bridge Constructor *Life Preservers *Immune Attack *Re - Mission *Playing History *Spore *Dimension M *Supercharged! *Environmental Detectives *WolfQuest *Quest for the Code *Civilization series *Quest Atlantis *Roller Coaster Tycoon series *SimCity *Age of Empire *World of Warcraft *Everquest 2 *Gamestar Mechanic *Tynker *Minecraft Edu *Microsoft Kodu *Storytelling Alice *Scratch *Code School *Codea Just like any other educational technologies, it is important to bear in mind that DGBL should not be considered a panacea. Plugging a digital game into classroom instruction does not guarantee that students will enjoy the process or that the game will pr oduce satisfying learning outcomes. Depending on desired learning objectives, student age, learning preferences, and technology availability, the context for using DGBL can vary greatly from case to case. 25 Sandford et al. (2006) called for the differentia tion between the types of learning opportunities afforded to teachers by different types of games, and stated that the differentiation would aid the process of coming to a fuller understanding of the potential of using digital games in education (p. 3). I hope this typology of educational digital games can help teachers understand that the four different genres of educational digital games were designed to potentially promote different kinds of learning opportunities for students. Therefore teachers shoul d approach the adoption of each genre of digital games accordingly with a different set of instructional goals, practices and desirable learning outcomes. In the next section, research done in the area of teacher attitudes and beliefs in using technologies including digital games in the classroom would be discussed. Teacher Attitudes toward the Use of Digital Games for Classroom Teaching Attitude matters in terms of how deeply or widely technology is infused by teachers (Angers & Machtmes, 2005; Ertmer , 2005; Hutchison & Reinking, 2011; Lucas & McKee, 2007). in the - [of teachers] felt th at players developed their motor - cognitive skills, while over 60% thought that users would develop their higher order thinking skills and could also acquire topic - specific they had overall positive attitudes toward using digital games in teaching. Some researchers argued that teachers need to familiarize themselves with video game contents so that they can leverage video game content and use video games to deliver or supple ment instruction (Evans & Barbour, 2007a; 2007b; Hsu & Chiou, 2011). 26 Research conducted in the USA showed that pre - experience with digital media and technologies can effectively mediate the use and impact of pre - se rvice teacher preparation (Ertmer et al., 2012; Lambert, Gong, & Cuper, 2008; Tondeur et al., 2012). This finding points to the importance of taking prior knowledge and experience in using technology into account when teacher educators attempt to help tea chers develop a knowledge base and skillset in using technology for teaching. One of the main purposes of this - efficacy of using DGBL. The rationale was that teachers, a t the forefront of the daily activity of teaching, are gatekeepers of technology in the classroom and the possibility and potential of using DGBL is hinged on their prior experience, attitudes towards and self - efficacy on using digital games for teaching. phases of their career, this study aims to inform game research initiatives, improve pedagogical practices using DGBL, and describe potential upsides and pitfalls of using DG BL to different stakeholders in education. In a recent study that examined pre - Hayes and Ohrnberger (2013) compared gaming teachers with non - gaming teachers and found technology affects learning and about the role of technology in future careers can weigh in on their interest in using specific technology for learning. According to van Eck, advocates of game - based learning had got through the message that digital games would be beneficial for education, but continuing to preach the effectiveness It is important to note that not all digital games are created equal and not all digital games can facilitate learning 27 as defined in formal learning contexts. Consequently, research done in the effects of digital games in education need to focus on expl oring why digital games are motivational, engaging, and effective by providing practical guidance or best practices that exemplify how DGBL utilizing age and content - appropriate digital games in education. That said, it is also imperative educational games for teaching and learning in the classroom. Worth noting also is t he issue of student perceptions toward the use of educational digital games in the classroom, Bourgonjon, Valcke, Soetaert, and Schellens (2010) found that young nd in leisure gaming. Contrary to most game research where the focus lies in investigating gamers non - ole - playing game (MMORPG) to learn a target language. They found that these novice players were driven by the motivation component relatedness as they played to practice using English for communicative purposes. These light players were drawn specificall y to the built - in game features of socialization and teamwork as they fared through the initially steep learning curve. Players with varying levels of prior background and experience in leisure gaming could either relish or detest the use of video games in the classroom because familiarity with gaming learning styles and preferences. Despite the high likelihood that almost all children nowadays play digital ga mes at some point in their life, Lenhart et al. (2008) found great variation among the types of digital games they play, the social aspects surrounding their game play (e.g., who 28 they play with and which gaming affinity group they choose to associate with) , and how frequently they engage in game play. Another pivotal stakeholder in the issue of using DGBL in the classroom would be parents. Brand (2007) in a Australian study reported that 73% of parents deemed that games helped their children learn about technology, 68% expressed that games helped children learn math and 64% said games helped children learn about planning. Parents nowadays are acknowledging that digital games can serve more than as entertainment and beginning to understand the potential of their children learning from the mechanisms and effects of educational digital games when adopted for instructional use. Articulation of a Conceptual Framework for the Adoption of DGBL TPACK is a framework used to describe the three areas of know ledge needed for effective technology integration (see F igure 6, Koehler & Mishra, 2005 ; Mishra & Koehler, 2006). Placing the framework in the context of educational game design, it helps to pinpoint crucial aspects in the design of games (Foster & Mishra , 2009) and also illuminate the importance of a combined expertise when it comes to tackling the nuanced issue of integrating technology into teaching content knowledge from content experts, pedagogy from practitioners, and technology skills from game de signers or technology users. In the following, I delineate the structuring of a conceptual framework that merges the TPACK framework and the Heart of Serious Game Design (see Figure 7, Winn & Heeter, 2007) in an effort to help teachers gain a better under standing of the aspects and knowledge involved in the use of DGBL in classroom settings. 29 Figure 6. TPACK Framework ( Mishra & Koehler, 2006 ) Figure 7. The Heart of Serious Game Design (Winn & Heeter, 2007) 30 The attempt to articulate a framework that combines two frameworks is arduous and at the same time risky, meaning that the underpinnings of the framework might be at stakes with the original intentions of each of the framework. My intent in proposing the framework stemmed from the need to bridge pedagogical practice and technical design by foreshadowing educational digital games as one of many viable technology - enhanced options to help teachers at different levels approach the adoption of DGBL. As Kerelui k and Mishra (2012) pointed out, problem can be conceptually invest igated. The conceptual framework posed in this study is not the first attempt to identify the complicated interaction of different areas of knowledge involved in using game - based learning, but it is the first attempt to combine two sets of framework, one based on the knowledge base of educational technology integration, and one centering around sound educational game design, with the aim to provide a common ground on which conversations and solutions surrounding the adoption of game - based learning can be s ystematically approached and examined. Consequently, one important goal is to cast light on how these two frameworks share important commonalities in highlighting the central overlapping component of three different expertise Pedagogical Knowledge (game - using practitioners), Content Knowledge (content or curriculum experts), and Technological Knowledge (digital tool users) resulting in the culminating core knowledge of DGBL TPACK, i.e., educational digital games used by content area teachers in tandem with appropriate pedagogical practices and technology set - up to deliver effective instruction and meet educational goals. Figure 8 outlines the components involved in the internal context (internal to the teacher) of using DGBL in classroom settings. 31 Fig ure 8. Conceptual Framework for Implementa tion of DGBL (Internal Context) In the conceptual framework, there are three overlapping areas of knowledge (apart from the central overlapping DGBL TPACK) in between each pair of the knowledge base TCK, TPK, a nd PCK. To elaborate, TCK asks about how the subject matter is better illuminated by the integration of digital tools used in the classroom teaching context. With PCK, teachers need - based teaching s trategies achieve development of game - based lesson plans, assignments, meth ods of assessment, and resources. PCK is important because it addresses the pragmatics in preparing game - based lessons and also 06, p. 3). When it comes to TPK, teachers need to find answers to 32 promote game - implementatio With TCK, PCK and TPK in place, the convergence among those three areas of mindset, and skillset to effectively leverage educational digital games for learning. Game - using te achers would have to cope with technological set - up and implement DGBL pedagogical practices appropriate for teaching content - specific knowledge. Adapting the results from prior ve technology integration (Angeli & Valanides, 2009; Kereluik, Casperson, & Akcaoglu, 2010; Schimdt, Baran, Thompson, Mishra, & Shin, 2009), Table 2 lists description of the seven knowledge components teachers need to acquire for effective implementation o f DGBL in a classroom. Table 2. Description of Different Knowledge Bases in the DGBL TPACK Framework 33 Since DGBL represents a pedagogical approach, it is to be noted that PK, TPK, and PCK are the prerequisites of DGBL TPACK considering that the presence of pedagogical knowledge and teaching strategies in implementing game - based learning (PK) lays foundation for the subsequent development of knowledge and skills in using game - based learning to deliver subject area content (PCK) and assist the process of te chnology integration in game - based learning environments (TPK). In other words, the challenges for teachers to successfully incorporate DGBL lies mainly in having first and foremost a sound base of knowledge in game - based learning PK, and building on PK t o develop a base of PCK and TPK so that content area knowledge and digital game technology can be blended to work effectively with digital game - based learning pedagogy (DGBL TPACK). In addition to the consideration of the knowledge components in the internal context, it is equally important to take external factors into account when attempting to integrate DGBL in the classroom (see Figure 9). An analogy can be made here with a seesaw where factors from both internal and external context must be acco unted for to reach a balanced state so that effective implementation of DGBL can take place in a classroom setting. Put another way, both internal and external factors play important roles in determining whether DGBL can be successfully implemented in the school. External barriers that may impede with the use of DGBL include factors such as the lack of technology or instructional support, insufficient teacher training, financing of games, and negative perceptions toward games as a play thing incompatible with formal learning. 34 Figure 9. Conceptual Framework for the Implementation of DGBL (Internal and External Context Combined) 35 CHAPTER 3 SURVEY INSTRUMENTATION experience, attitudes, and self - efficacy toward using digital games for teaching, a review of research was conducted but an existing valid instrument seems lacking (Hsu & Chi ou, 2011; Jones et al., 2007). The following section delineates the process and considerations over which a self - efficacy, and perceived challenges and barrier s to the integration of DGBL was developed. Components of the attitudinal survey on DGBL adoption consists of adapted elements from prior research and pilot - tested survey items. There were four main dimensions in the overall structure of the attitudinal survey and each of these four dimensions had been previously studied and provided empirical evidence in its of digital games in educational settings. The four dimensions are current gaming experience (Hayes & Ohrnberger, 2013; , 2010; Jones et al., 2007), attitudes toward using digital gam es in a classroom (Gibson, 2007; Hsu & Chiou, 2011, Lambert et al., 2008; Millstone, 2012), perceived self - efficacy on th e adoption of digital games for teaching (Chatham, 2007; Egenfeldt - Nielsen, 2005; Flynn et al., 2010), and perceived challenges and barriers to the integration of DGBL in the classroom (Baek, 200 8; Becker, 2007 ; Kerbitchi, Kappers, & Henry, 2009; Rice, 200 7). The following discussion foregrounds considerations as to why each of the four dimensions was chosen for this study. 36 Current Gaming Experience A number of scholarly work shared consensus in that when students who grew up playing digital games become teachers, they tend to be more receptive towards using digital games in the classroom (Aguilera & Mendiz, 2003; Rice, 2007). Therefore it is reasonable to conjecture that and potential pre - service teachers (N=42) showed that 81% played their first digital game in junior high or high school. Only 4.8% reported not having played an y digital game. One could assume that prior gaming experience would affect these pre - positive attitudes towa rds games. A better predictor was how frequently they currently play gaming, enjoyment of gaming, choice of gaming platform, frequency in gaming - related practices, and gaming orientations ( , 2010). Attitudes toward Using Digital Games in the Classroom technologies in general to support classroom learning, a relatively less explored area lied in to classroom teaching (Hsu & Chiou, 2011, p. 2135). Jones et al. (2007) studied pre - attitudes toward digital games by using researcher - developed computer gaming inventory. They 37 used exploratory factor analysis to analyze the acquired da ta and found six latent constructs: gaming interference, gaming enjoyment, friendship related to gaming, features in games, gaming as diversion, and attitudes towards digital games. They found that active gamer pre - service exploratory study investigating pre - - supported learning in Taiwan, Hsu and Chiou (2011) administered a four - dimension survey and found that a maj ority of pre - service teachers played digital games and they believed digital games were potential learning tools for students. The four dimensions under examination were digital gaming experience, attitudes toward digital gaming, self - efficacy, and awaren ess of digital game - supported learning. the idea of using digital games for teaching, perception of digital games, perception of educational digital games, belief in themselves using digital games in current or future teaching, perceived usefulness of using digital games for teaching, and whether they would consider using stu dent - suggested game titles for game - based learning (Sandford et al., 2006: Pressey, 2013). Self - Efficacy on Adoption of DGBL eived self - efficacy on the potential adoptions of DGBL in the classroom. What is at stake here is whether attitude breeds action. The concept of self - efficacy had been extensively studied in organizational research. Briefly defined, self - efficacy is the 38 408). Research had been done to investigate the impact of self - effica cy on the process of learning and learning outcomes. Hung (2008) studied the influence of self - efficacy and self - regulation on potential experience of flow during digital game play. Lin (2009) devised an online game self - efficacy and creative self - effica cy scale to examine the impact of the two sorts of self - - efficacy as it relates to potential adoptions of DGBL in the classroom. In this study, nine survey items have been created to address and operationalize the definition of self - efficacy as related to the mobilization of three elements motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of action (Wood & Bandura, 1989). An item related to motivation would eve I am capable of using digital game - based learning to deliver educational content in adopting the four types of educational games for classroom teaching Eduta inment games and educational applications for mobile devices, serious games, simulation or multi - player online games, and educational game design tools. Note that the typology of educational games developed and used in this study was based on a review of literature that illuminated the connections between the paradigm shift of contemporary learning theories and the design/development of education digital games (Egenfeldt - Nielsen, 2005; Flynn et al., 2010; Games & Squire, 2011). The researcher - developed ty pology does not imply that these four types of educational games are mutually exclusive. In fact, these four types of educational games may share commonality in game features, representations, play mechanics and flow of game play. Lastly for example, an item that investigates courses of action would be an open - ended inquiry, 39 considerations would go into your lesson planning Challenges and Barriers to the Integration of DG BL An array of influential factors in the implementation of DGBL includes resources, teacher training, and administrative buy - in (Sandford et al., 2006). Research has been conducted to examine the adverse effects of gaming and the findings represent pot ential challenges or barriers that may deter teachers and other stakeholders from endorsing or utilizing digital games for teaching (Baek, 2008; Becker , 2007 ; Hayes & Ohrnberger, 2 013; Kerbitchi, Hirumi, Kappers & Henry, 2009; Kirrienmuir & McFarlane, 2003 ; Rice, 2007). Research investigating the use of games for learning and examining outcomes of game - based learning has accumulated. In a review of more than 250 claims made by game - based learning studies, F oster and Mishra (2009) reported a categorization scheme coded in two broad themes: psychological effects and physiological effects, both positive and negative. For example, psychological effects engendered from game - based learning included development of cognitive skills and sustained motivation. Physiological effects included aggressiveness, antisocial behavior, coordination, and motor skills. The contribution of their work was to point out game genres to help school teachers identify a range of games appropriate for classroom use and supportive of learning objectives (p. 45). However, game - based learning has also been identified to be incompatible with regular school hours, leading adolescents to violence or social isolation. Mitchell and Savill - Smit h (2004) documented negative impacts of binge game play on gamers: health issues (e.g., fatigue, moodiness, strain injuries), psycho - social issues (e.g., social isolation, substitute for social relationships, depression), and effects of violent digital gam es (e.g., aggression, development of negative personality trait). Positive impacts of gaming 40 included development of spatial reasoning skills, visual selective attention, analytical skills, psychomotor skills, hand - eye coordination, problem recognition an d problem - solving, increased social skills, and improved self - monitoring (Foster & Mishra, 2009; Mitchell & Savill - Smith, 2004; Squire & Barab, 2004). Negative influences induced by gaming such as addiction, deteriorating psychological well - being, aggre ssiveness, and violence have been studied particularly through excessive immersion in MMORPG environments (Rice, 2007). While the body of research focuses on the adverse outcomes of gaming and gaming - related activities (i.e., contents and representations in certain game genres that may lead to negative outcomes of gaming), there exists also internal and external - to - teacher factors that would prevent DGBL from coming into play in school settings. For instance, impeding factors could include lack of working knowledge in digital games, lack of skills in implementing game - based learning, licensing fees, cost for implementation, lack of foundation on technology infrastructure, and anti - gaming political climate in education (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2003; Squire, 2006). In the present study, challenges to the integration of DGBL in the classroom are defined as internal factors generated from within the use and implementation of digital games to deliver educational contents. That is, challenges are the factors th at lie intrinsic to the teachers themselves and these factors can usually be overcome through self - directed or guided study, repeated practice, accumulation of experience, or exertion. Examples of challenges, i.e., internal factors, are the lack of knowle dge in teaching strategies, organization, assessment, and classroom management in implementing DGBL (PK); Lack of skills in using game - based learning strategies to approach teaching of specific subject area content (PCK); Lack of skills in using game - based learning while making justified choices of digital tools (TPK). In the survey 41 challenges in developing sufficient knowledge base or skills in PK, PCK, and TPK t o carry out DGBL, all of which are essential building blocks for the core component of DGBL TPACK. Kerbitchi et al. (2009) used a survey to examine K - 12 teachers who used digital games in teaching. They also reviewed instructional game websites and summar ized literature documenting the use of educational software, including digital games. Their finding indicated that teachers had to cope with the challenge of integrating digital games into school curriculum, suggesting that teachers need to be provided wi th game - based curriculum resources. In addition, teachers cannot be anticipated to embrace digital games as a pedagogical tool for teaching and learning unless they have a sound understanding of the affordances and constraints of DGBL, and are confident i n their emergent ability to leverage digital games effectively to enhance learning and deliver educational objectives. That said, the lack of teacher professional development was also cited as one barrier to the integration of digital games in school curr iculum (Becker, 2007; Kerbitchi et al., 2009). Barriers to the integration of DGBL in the classroom are defined as external factors the practice of DGBL and esse reviewed a number of scholarly work to investigate barriers to the integration of digital games in the classroom. His analysis resulted in six main barriers: negative perceptions towards digital games as educational components, difficulty of providing state of the art graphics in educational games, lack of adequate hardware in the classroom to run advanced digital games, school day divided by short class periods which hindered long - term e ngagement in complex games, lack of real world affordances, and lack of alignment to state standards. Other research - based examples 42 of barriers are insufficient amount of hardware in the classroom, technical and logistical requirements, licensing costs, a nd misalignment with school information tech nology policy ( Kerbitchi et al., 2009). Baek (2008) administered a survey (N=444) on South Korean elementary and secondary teachers regarding their attitudes toward the use of digital games in the classroom. Six inhibiting factors were found in top - down ranking order of inflexibility of the curriculum, negative effects limited budgets. Note here the six factors Ba ek identified are external barriers teachers most likely do not have control over when considering the use of digital games in classroom settings. primary and secondary s chool teaching, McFarlane, Sparrowhawk, and Heald (2002) found that the majority of teachers held a positive view of adventure and simulation games. These teachers acknowledged that digital games contributed to the development of personal strategies such as problem - solving, deductive reasoning, memorizing, and sequence learning. On the group level, these teachers thought that task - based learning and cooperation can be incorporated into the setting of a digital game. Despite their favorable attitudes, the se teachers expressed that it would be difficult to use these simulation games in secondary school teaching because of time constraint in a class period and the need to adhere to coverage of standard curriculum. Another main disadvantage of using digital games in the classroom was the amount of preparation time for both students and the teacher had to spend guiding themselves within the game world. Just as with any kind of new introduction of technology into teaching and learning, the users (both teachers and students) need sufficient time to learn and obtain a feel of the game environment and interface, and master the play mechanics. 43 In reviewing survey results, Kirriemui and McFarlane (2003) examined a survey commissioned in 2002 by the British Education and Technology Agency (BECTA) which investigated how and where digital games were used in schools. Another survey under examination of similar scale was the 2002 Teachers Evaluating Educational Multimedia (TEEM) project that also surveyed the use of digi tal games in UK schools. In terms of obstacles in implementing game - based learning in the classroom, both surveys results overlapped in reporting the most frequently mentioned obstacles: 1. me - based learning 2. Verification that the digital game is suitable for class learning purposes 3. Need for support material for teachers, e.g., game - based lesson plan and student performance evaluation. 4. School inf 5. Contemporary digital games may be costly and require new or expensive classroom hardware upgrades that could be unjustifiable . In result, based on prior research findings a total of 18 potential factors were included in a survey item to capture the scope of potential external barriers that may deter or prevent teachers from using digital games in the classroom. In Kirriemuir and Mc F creative use of digital games in a variety of classroom settings, but concluded with ambivalence good behavior but fail to use them for learning - oriented purposes even where this potential is 44 - Nielsen (2005), we need more cases and experiences in using digital games in educational settings accompanied by soun d pedagogical considerations and practices. Teachers with sparse background in gaming are understandably reluctant to use games in teaching because they would feel unprepared and concerned about the amount of time and resources for preparation, a process usually unaided by school staff. Considering this lack of prior experience, it is strongly recommended that the school technology staff assist during the intervention of DGBL in the classroom (Gros, 2007). Attitudes and Self - Efficacy toward Digital Game - Based Learning Survey Based on the review of prior studies, a new 33 - item survey was developed for the present study. This instrument included four dimensions of attitudinal scale and is purposefully created to investigate the specific impact of teachers digital games, self - efficacy on the implementation of DGBL, and perceived challenges and barriers to the adoption of DGBL in classroom settings. Taken altogether, the four dimensions could be potential p teaching philosophy. By investigating what type of educational digital games teachers are most inclined to adopt for classroom instruction and compare whether their chosen game type matches and their implicit endorsement or beliefs about what teaching and learning entai l. Open - ended comes to integrating digital games in classroom instruction. As a result, the complete 33 - item survey consists of an array of 5 - point Likert scale ( 1 indicating strongly disagree to 5 indicating strongly agree) multiple choice items and open - 45 demographics, gaming experience, attitudes toward using games for teaching, self - efficacy on using DGBL, perceived challenges and barriers, and t e a ching philosophy (see Figure 10 in Appendix ). 46 APPENDIX 47 Figure 10 . Attitudinal Scale on the Adoption of DGBL 48 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 49 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 50 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 51 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 52 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 53 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 54 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 55 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 56 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 57 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 58 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 59 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 60 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 61 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 62 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 63 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 64 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 65 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 66 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 67 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 68 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 69 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 70 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 71 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 72 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 73 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 74 Figure 10 . ( cont d ) 75 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH METHOD Research Design This study is an exploratory case study that employs the quasi - experimental concurrent triangulation mixed method des ign (Campbell et al. , 2012; Creswell et al. , 2003). The mixed - method research design used both quantitati ve and qualitative methods for data collection and analyzed with the purpose of cross - validating multiple sources of findings within a single study. By adopting a mixed - method design, the triangulated findings would achieve more explanatory power. Partici pants and Setting Participants of this study are undergraduate and graduate students who enrolled in educational technology courses in a large Midwestern university. By the time of participation in this study, these students were either pre - service, internship year, or in - service teachers in mainly K - 12 school contexts. Monetary incentive was provided in the form of electronic gift card to one participant selected via a raffle, out of a pool of participants who fully completed the online survey. 76 Research Questions Four main questions with sub - questions were formulated to guide this current study. The technological device such as home gaming console, handhe ld gaming device, tablet computer, guide respondents to the online survey. 1. What are teachers' current gaming experiences as defined by hours spent on digital gaming p er week, enjoyment, platform, frequency in game - related practices, and gaming orientations? 2. What are teachers' attitudes toward implementing DGBL in the classroom? 2.1 Are teachers comfortable with the idea of using digital games for teaching? 2.2 What are teach 2.3 2.4 What do teachers believe is the likelihood of them using digital games in current or future teaching? 2.5 How likely would teachers c onsider using student - suggested game titles for digital game - based learning? 3. - efficacy on integrating DGBL? 3.1 Which type of educational digital game would teachers prefer to use for DGBL? 3.2 hoice align with their teaching philosophy? 3.3 What do teachers believe is their capability of using DGBL in the classroom? 3.4 Have teachers used DGBL in the classroom before? How frequent do they use DGBL? 77 3.5 lesson plan? 4. classroom? Procedure for Data Collection current leisure gaming background, attitudes toward DGBL, self - efficacy on the adoption of digital games for teaching educational content, perceived challenges and barrie rs to the integration of DGBL, and teaching philosophies was administered via SurveyMonkey, an online survey hosting site. By collecting quantitative and qualitative data, the concurrent triangulation design used in this mixed method study helps to examine and achieve validity and reliability of the researcher - constructed attitudinal scale through data triangulation and corroboration of findings. Data Analyses Survey results were entered into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), and analyzed using independent samples t - test, Pearson bivariate correlation analysis and principal component analysis. Construct validity (reliability) of the survey instrument was evaluated. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to seek latent structures under lying the perceived teaching philosophy line up against their chosen genre of educational digital games to be used for DGBL in the classroom. Content analysis (Kripp endoff, 2004) was conducted to assess the qualitative data collected from the open - ended items on the survey. 78 CHAPTER 5 ANALYSES & FINDINGS The survey was administered through an online survey website. Multiple survey requests were sent out periodicall y to encourage participation. An estimated number of 1,000 potential survey respondents was reached and a total of 160 people took the survey (response rate at 16%). Among the 160 survey takers, 116 respondents completed the survey in full (completion ra te 73%). While the response rate of the survey was far from ideal, the completion rate showed encouraging signs considering the survey provided marginal incentive, a chance to win an electronic gift card, for voluntary participation. Descriptive Quantitat ive Data Analysis Delving into survey data, the below discussion succinctly outlines the responses as obtained from each of the 33 survey items. No missing values were recorded since survey respondents were required to complete each item successively to p rogress. However, respondents were allowed to skip item 6, 7, 19, and 20 which were designed to solicit open - ended responses. Below is a discussion of the findings sorted by themes. In terms of demographics, t o increase survey completion rate and prevent survey takers from potentially withdrawing over the concern of releasing personal information, items investigating demographic information were intentionally slotted toward the end of the survey (item 23 to 27). However for the purpose of discussion, dem ographic information will be presented first. sizable 44% of the respondents were pre - service teachers and only 19.8% were internship year 79 teachers. Considering the fact that a majority of the survey respondents were pre - service teachers who do not yet have their own classrooms and could be naïve or overly optimistic users of technology, there should be a more nuanced view of their self - reports here in this study. Table 3. Teaching Status Pre - Service Internship Year In - Service 44 19.8 36.2 N = 116 Results of item 24 that inquired about gender indicated 86.2% of respondents bein g female and 13 .8% being male (s ee Table 4). This result reflects the commonly observed phenomenon in the gender distribution of the teaching force in teacher education programs nationwide. Table 4. Gender Male Female 13.8 86.2 N = 116 Responses to item Table 5. A combined 81.9% of respondents are between the age range of 18 to 26 where they are either in teacher preparation, internship year or at the phase of induction into formal sc hool teaching settings. 80 Table 5. Respondent Age 18 - 22 23 - 26 27 - 32 32 or older 50.9 31.0 6.9 11.2 N = 116 to choose more than one area. A lopsided 64.7% are in English and language arts; 13.8% are in mathematics. T here is a three - way tie among early childhood education unified with special education, secondary language education, and social studies at 9.5%. For a complete rundown of the areas of specializa tion, please refer to Table 6 . The fact that 64.7% of surve y respondents specialized in English and language arts may have skewed the overall survey results but it also opens a window for the introduction/salience of game - based learning tools for that particular subject matter. Table 6 . Survey Result on Area of S pecialization 81 grade level that you would like . Table 7 . Grade Level Preschool Lower Upper Middle High Higher Not Planning Elementary Elementary School School Education to be a Teacher 0. 86 44.8 25 10.3 9.5 4.3 5.2 N = 116 respondents preferred or were already teaching in K - 6 contexts. Current Gaming Experience and Orientations. Turning now from demographics to 3 through 5 focus on do you currently play digital games (including on a gaming console, tablet, cell phone, or on the Internet) per week o . Table 8 . Average Hours Never Less Than 1 Hr 1 - 3 Hrs 3 - 7 Hrs More than 10 Hrs 15.5 37.9 25.9 20.7 0 N = 116 respondents. Overall, the result showed that a great majority of the survey respondents were at 82 best light gamers and some were no n - gamers. Taking this important factor into consideration, a majority of the respondents do not personally play games and hence their attitudes toward DGGL tea cher education program aspiring to prepare teachers to integrate DGBL. There is a need for teachers to acquire foundational experience in gaming as a crucial first step to grapple with the idea of using DGBL in instruction. On the other hand, no survey r On item 2, respondents were asked to rate their enjoyment of games in general on a 5 - oy playing digital Responses are shown in Table 9 . Overall the pattern shows a generally positive response, with 57.8% choosing either strongly agree or agree compared to only 13.8% choosing disagree or strongly disagree. Table 9 . - Enjoyment Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 6.0 7.8 28.4 4 6.6 11.2 N = 116 for playing digital games in this . The most frequent choice was cellular/smart phone at 63.8%. This foregrounds the commonly observable phenomenon, the popularity and ubiquity of smartphones among our survey takers (mostly in their twenties) that may have had in turn boosted activities of mobile device - based social gaming. Coming in 83 overwhelming portion of 82.6% survey respondents cemented the stronghold of mobile device ownership among young technology users and the affinity between themselves and the high penetration rate, when it comes to the choice of platform for the activity for gaming. Table 10 . Platform Gaming Console Personal Tablet Handheld Smartphone Arcade Computer Computer Gaming Device Center 6.0 8.6 19.8 0.9 63.8 0.9 N = 116 Response - related pra cod - board, the rating average for all seven game - related practices are quite low, hovering around 1.07 to 1.54, with one being the minimum score and five the maximum. The more common game - related practices these survey respondents engaged in were visiting game websites, reading reviews, and helping or guiding others when playing. C onsidering that modding and creating mini - games using game creation software tend to be activities habitual or hardcore gamers would take on, the result of this survey item was not surprising given a great majority of our survey respondents are light ga mers at best and quite a few are non - gamers. 84 Table 11. Frequency on Game - Related Activities 85 were compiled in Table 12 . In summary, 89.7% opted for the choice that describes the activity of gaming as one to pass time when bored or while waiting for something else to happen. In other words, for these 104 survey respondents, the activity of gaming serves only to pass time or as something to do during transition to a following activity. The other three available choices which depict different gaming orientations that involve elements of competitive gaming, social gaming, and persistence in gaming received minimum to no adv ocacy. This indicates and reinforces the previously discussed finding that our survey respondents turned out to be in the most part non - gamers or light gamers. Table 12. Description on Gaming Orientations Attitudes toward Using Digital Games in the C lassroom. Survey Item 8 through 11 for teaching educationa shown in Table 13 . 15.5% chose neutral and a combined 6.9% indicated uncomfortableness. On the contrary, 77.6% of survey takers expressed 86 comfortableness in using digital games to supplement classroom instruction. The results also showed that over 3/4s of the 116 participating teachers are comfortable with the idea of using favorable attitude toward digital games concurrently begs the question as to how prepared t hey are to incorporate DGBL in the classroom. Table 13 . - Comfortableness Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 1.7 5.2 15.5 49.1 28.5 N = 116 game - based learning in your current or future teaching? 4 . This question reinforces item 8 in the sense that it taps beyond attitudinal perception to gauge the behavioral possibility of practicing DGBL. Ideally, the result of this question should emulate that of item 8. Table 14 . Likelihood Least Likely Not Likely Neutral Likely Very Likely 0 6.0 16.4 49.1 28.5 N = 116 87 Consequently 87.5% of respondents confirmed the likelihood of their implementing DGBL in current or future teaching. This result appeared reassuring considering that much similar to item 8, almost exactly the same choosing pattern emerged out of the numbe r of item 9 response counts for each of the five choices. In other words, for this particular group of 116 teachers, favorable attitudes toward DGBL are consistent with the likelihood of them incorporating DGBL in the classroom. From the viewpoint of sur vey instrumentation, the investigated concept of attitude in item 8 and likelihood in item 9 may be merged as one index student - suggested he results are shown in Table 15 survey - taking. Table 15 . - Suggested Games for Consideration Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 0 3.4 10.3 63.8 22.5 N = 11 6 Of the respondents, 86.3% either agreed or strongly agreed to the concept of using student - suggested digital games for classroom teaching and learning sends the message that these teachers are open - minded about and could entertain the idea of leveraging - existing 88 background and experience in gaming toward using carefully chosen games for DGBL in the classroom. content for the followin in Table 16 . A total of 16 statements is provided as - on, motivating ing 89 Table 16 . Percenta ge Response and Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Mean Disagree Agree They tend to be fun 0.9 0 4.2 50.9 44.0 4.37 & engaging for students Another platform to engage 0.9 0.9 6.9 50.9 40.4 4.29 students in learning Students attuned to learning 0.9 3.5 6.9 48.2 40.5 4.24 with digital media Enj oy incorporating digital 0.9 1.8 12.9 42.2 42.2 4.23 technologies into teaching They can be used as 0.9 1.7 6.9 56.9 33.6 4.21 supplemental learning materials They promote learning in STEM 0.9 0.9 17.2 48.2 32.8 4.11 They can be used to promote 1.7 0.9 16.4 54.3 26.7 4.03 learning objectives that meet common core standards They promote personalized 0.9 4.2 16.4 49.1 29.3 4.02 learning Used as reward when students 0.9 6.9 11.2 53.5 27.5 4.00 do well in class Digital games bridge the gap 0.9 3.5 18.1 54.2 23.3 3.96 between what students do at home and at school They promote cognit ive and 1.7 5.2 19.0 50.9 23.3 3.89 collaborative learning They give me a step up among 1.7 6.9 29.3 39.7 22.4 3.74 classroom teachers inte rested in using digital techs for teaching Using digital games help relate 3.5 11.2 22.4 37.1 25.9 3.71 to students I myself played games and I 7.8 18.1 19.8 34.5 19.8 3.41 learned through gaming 90 Table 16 Digital games are easy to set 3.5 18.1 30.2 34.5 13.8 3.37 up to facilitate teaching 59.5 25.9 6.9 6.0 1.7 1.65 games can be used as effective learning tools N = 116 15 affirmative statements receive to 56.9%. in term of being chosen percentage - wise, ranging from 19.8% to 42.2%. This finding indicated tha t our survey respondents held an overall positive attitude toward using digital games as tools for instruction. up to facilitate classroom teaching games bridge the gap between what students do at home The mean column indicated the ranked average score for the 16 statements. In terms of rating average, the lowest w do not think digital games are easy to set up or to be obtained in classroom settings. The highest rating - on, motivating and engaging for 91 wledged the pronounced element of fun and motivation induced through using digital games for classroom instruction. As mentioned earlier, the 16 th statement in survey item 11 served as comprehension check and also an outlet to gauge other reasons the researcher may not have tapped into. 59.5% survey responde each statement and were not blindly clicking through them. Perceived Self - Ef ficacy on Implementing DGBL. Survey item 12 to 20 are designed to - efficacy, preference on game genre, and experience in using DGBL when informed o f what each genre generally entails with sample game titles and descriptions of game play. ly through of games for DGBL. stimulating experience to aid individual learning and knowledge construction in math, science, literacy, history, or unconventional topics in healthcare, business, advertisement or training. Here a large proporti 92 - - based strategy and multi - player role - playing games t hat simulate real - life experiences or systems embedded with opportunities for analytic Item 15 them as game creation tools that teach about basic game design and programming where players learn to think systematically and design a functional game space while faring through tasks related to problem - 12 to 15, please see Figure 11 . Figure 11 . Percentage Response to 93 When compared by teaching status and running an independent samples t - test, 51 pre - service teachers chose edutainment and educational applications the most frequently (mean = 4.0). The next most frequently chosen game genre was s erious games, then educational game design, and the least chosen was simulation and MMORPGs. The 23 internship teachers chose edutainment and educational applications the most frequently (mean = 3.8). The next most frequently chosen game genre was seriou s games, then educational game design, and the least chosen was simulation and MMORPGs. The 42 in - service teachers chose edutainment and educational applications the most frequently (mean = 4.1). The next most frequently chosen game genre was serious gam es, then educational game design, and the least chosen was simu lation and MMORPGs (see Table 17 ). Table 17 . Mean, Standard Deviation, and Ranking for the Four Game Genres Genre by Teaching Status M SD Ranking Pre / Int / Ins Pre / Int / Ins Edutainment & Educational Apps 4.0 / 3.8 / 4.1 .95 / .78 / .79 Unanimous 1st Seriou s Games 3.8 / 3.6 / 3.9 .79 / .83 / .83 Unanimous 2nd Educational Game Design Tools 3.4 / 3.1 / 3.3 1.0 / .81 / 1.19 Unanimous 3rd Simulation Games & MMORPGs 3.1 / 2.6 / 2.9 .99 / 1.0 / 1.33 Unanimous 4th Note. Pre = Pre - service, Int = Intern, Ins = In - service. Mean score ranging from 0 to 5. Bringing together the results from item 12 to 15, it became evident that the preference of game genre for DGBL for all three groups of teachers proved to be exactly the same, ranking atop from the most favored edutainment games and educational applications, to serious games, then educational game design tools, and lastly simulation games and MMORPG games. 94 Re educational contents in my self - efficacy to use digital games in teaching. Table 18 . - Efficacy Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree 0.9 5.2 12.9 62.9 18.1 N = 116 Building o n item 16, item 17 asked survey takers about their actual experience of using seemed somewhat counterintuitive to their displayed optimism shown in item 16. In other words, even though 81% of respondents expressed self - efficacy in using DGBL but only 33.6% of respondents have had actual experience using DGBL for educat ional purposes at the point of taking this survey. and learning in a classroom for this many t . As a result, 57.8% already took active interest in using DGBL in the classroom. 95 Table 19. Times of Using DGBL in this Past Year Perceived Challenges and Barriers to Integration of DGBL. Item 21 asked survey - based - items each received relatively similar distribution of response counts. The first sub - ck of knowledge and skills in teaching strategies, organization, assessment, and classroom management in implementing game - designed to denote equivalence of the lack of PK in implementing DGBL and 41.4% chose - ite - based learning - knowledge and skills to implement game - based learning while making justified choices of digital those - items, it is observed that approximately 50% of respondents felt that their lack of PCK, TPK, and PK in implementing DGBL are internal challenges whereas about 30% felt that those knowledg e and skills did not 96 appear to them as challenges . almost 50% of the 116 survey respondents indicated lack of PCK, TPK, and PK as internal challenges in carrying out DGBL in a classroom setti ng. game - based learning in my cl . A total of 18 sub - items was laid ementation of DGBL in - 5 out of the 18 sub - items. Sub - computer or technology support to run digit time to use digital game - - three ranking sub - items agreed upon as the most prominent external barriers to the use of DGBL. This showed that a major ity of the 116 survey takers were first and foremost concerned about the budget of purchasing educational digital games. Will the school administrators be willing to finance for DGBL or do the teachers have to pay for digital games using their own budget? Also of important consideration here is to obtain the right to distribute and the licensing of digital games for classroom instruction. 97 Table 20. Perceived Barriers toward Integration of DGBL 98 The other first - tying sub - item was related to technology infrastructure at schools. When schools lack sufficient technology, staff, and resources, teachers with the intent to use DGBL will not be adequately supported to use digital games for teaching. Depending on the availability of financial resources in different school districts, dif 99 attitudes toward technology - mediated instruction, a teacher in any given school may find him/herself in an environment that may or may not actively promote the use of technology in education. While technology in frastructure is essential to successful implementation of DGBL, it does not mean that teachers in a relatively technology - deprived context cannot start with using to learn content. Another high ranking sub - time to use DGBL in short class periods. In K - 12 context of teaching where a class period typically ranges from 40 to 50 minutes, it could be difficult for teac hers to select an appropriate game title and segment a full length digital game into meaningful units in order to fit into instruction. Nevertheless, teachers can purposively choose and use short - length educational digital games appropriate for teaching c ontent or transitioning into other instructional activities. The sub - items survey takers disagreed with and hence chose the most frequent were, - This showed that the 116 survey takers converged on and disagreed the most with the idea th at playing digital games may bring adverse effects to students. Considering that only 14.7% chose digital gaming, it is safe to say that a combined 50% of survey tak ers did not deem digital gaming as a negative activity for their students. The sub - related to the above - discussed notion of negative influence of digital gaming. A combined 52% 100 not consider the use of technology as distraction in classroom settings. While the statement attitude toward the role of technology use in the classroom. Of the respondents , 35% came to the low quality in gr aphics or audio effects in educational digital games. This implied that 53% of respondents thought that modern day digital games or educational applications may not be sub - par in terms of graphic presentation or audio effects or that low quality education al digital games would not constitute external barriers to their implementation of DGBL. A third - tying sub - item stated that DGBL cannot meet desired learning objectives and 35% of While 27% of respondents maintained neutral, 47% of respondents considered DGBL as a form of technology - enhanced instruction that can lead to student learning. To this point of discussion, the analysis has focused on descriptive statistics. Using a variety of metho ds of statistical analysis, the below section delves more in - depth into the acquired quantitative data. 101 Inferential Quantitative Data Analysis One of the main goals of this study is to develop and evaluate the survey instrument achieve this goal, a variety of analyses of the survey data were conducted to examine the reliability of the researcher - developed attitudinal scales, as well as the interrelationships among the constructs measured by the subscales. After running a reliability analysis on SPSS for 22 items (demographic and open - ended items excluded) , the overall reliability (internal consistency) of the administered survey is strong acceptable in most research conducted in the realm of social and learning scienc es. Survey item 11, which contains 15 sub - items, examined the perceived usefulness of DGBL. A reliability analysis was conducted and the reliability of these 15 sub - items is strong formed to examine whether the 15 sub - items were relevant measures. Findings from the bivariate correlation analysis showed that the 15 sub - items all significantly correlated with each other with low to moderate coefficients ranging from .29 to .74 (p < .0 1, two - tailed). Hence in future iterations of research, the 15 sub - items related to the perceived usefulness of DGBL could potentially be reduced to a set of fewer indices or variables. Survey item 28 through 31 presented respondents with sub - items that c orrespond to four strands of contemporary teaching philosophy behaviorism, cognitive constructivism, social constructivism, and constructionism. Each teaching philosophy was accompanied by three belief in teaching practices. In the attempt to test if the total of 12 sub - 102 bivariate correlation analysis was conducted. The result showed that the three sub - items in each of the four philosop hies are significantly correlated with moderate to high coefficients ranging from .76 to .96 (p < .01, two - tailed). This finding showed that the 12 sub - items are salient measures of their b eliefs in teaching (see Table 19 ) and the three sub - items in each of the four teaching philosophies can potentially be reduced to a single index or variable. In terms of which teaching philosophy these teachers appeared to endorse, a comparison of the mean s core was conducted (see Table 21 ). Constructionism had the high est mean score at 4.17 (out of a max score of 5.00); cognitive constructivism was at 4.14; social constructivism was at 4.06; behaviorism came in at a low score of 2.73. Overall, these teachers seemed to share teaching beliefs the least with behaviorism w hereas the other three teaching philosophies received relatively equal and favorable acknowledgment. Table 21 . Comparison of Mean Score on Teaching Philosophy Teaching Philosophy M SD N of Items Cr Behaviorism 2.73 1.17 3 .98 Cognitive Constructivism 4.14 .62 3 .93 Social C onstructivism 4.06 .60 3 .94 Constructionism 4.17 .60 3 .94 Items were rated on a 5 - point Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, with a higher score indicating agreement with statements reflective of these philosophies. In the attempt to investigate if there is alignment between the teaching philosophies and the game ge nres, several noteworthy findings arose from the bivariate corr elation analysis (see Table 22 ). 103 T able 22 . Correlation Matrix for Teaching Philosophies and Game Genres 104 105 The extraction method, c onfirmatory factor analysis under principal component analysis (PCA), was performed to study the relationship and filter for a latent structure underlying the 18 sub - items representing external barriers in implementing DGBL in survey item 22. As a result of the analysis, a parsimonious set of five components was extracted with 68% cumulative va riance explained (see Table 23 ). Note that an oblique rotation was used taking into account the inherent correlations between these 18 sub - items. The factor loadin gs for the five components were mostly over 0.63 and all five components had Eigenvalues of greater than one. The extra cted five main components were mismatch between DGBL and standardized curriculum, administrative and parental negative perceptions, lack of technology support and preparation in teacher preparation and professional support, short class periods, and low quality of educational digital games. Through confirmatory factor analysis, these five components were found to constitute the main extern al barriers to the implementation of DGBL within the scope of this current study. 106 Table 23. Principal Component Analysis on External Barriers Rotated Component Matrix Component 1 2 3 4 5 Technology is distraction .762 .184 .105 - .205 .174 Playing video game may have negative influences on my students .734 .219 .144 .019 .277 Video games may pose classroom management issues .679 .169 .244 .216 .037 Lack of alignment with curriculum or state standards .576 .158 .161 .522 .099 Digital game - based learning cannot meet desired learning objectives .555 .157 .097 .388 .120 Parents' negative perceptions of video games as educational .154 .844 .146 - .079 .222 Lack of administrative support to use video games for teaching .281 .800 .137 .234 - .071 Administrators' negative perceptions of video games as educational .166 .744 .187 .382 - .051 Most teachers seem skeptical about using video games for education .213 .628 .427 .026 .261 Lack of professional development on using video games for teaching .075 .210 .738 .073 .370 Lack of preparation to use digital game - based learning in teacher education .277 .275 .719 .104 .126 Cost of purchasing games .014 .183 .664 .284 - .076 Inadequate computer or technology support to run digital games in the classroom .298 .186 .552 .261 - .228 Video games require additional lesson planning time .278 - .072 .487 .294 .174 Not enough time to use video games in short class periods .052 .110 .241 .838 .208 Short class period hinders long - term engagement in complex games .047 .134 .316 .790 .088 Low quality in graphics or audio effects in educational digital games .322 .013 .178 .088 .798 Low quality in the design and play mechanics of educational digital games .186 .231 - .003 .419 .696 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 7 iterations. 107 Qualitative Data Analysis For the purpose of gathering the "voices" of the teachers in this study, four open - ended questions were included. Also, each of 14 multiple choice survey items included a text box for survey takers to invite comments. In the following section, a discussion surrounding the analysis of the qualitative data acquired from open ended pr ompts will be presented. Item 5 invited survey respondents to choose among four descriptions that best describe why the played digital games. Nine respondents added an open - ended response. Three responses stated that they do not really play any games. Worthy of notice is one elaborate response that states the following: Not only do I play games for myself, I am interested in what my students and other students are playing. Often, I try out the demos instead of investing cash in a game. I still have game s I play online with my brothers and friends that I invest real money in. *I live overseas and gaming is one environment that I share time bonding with my brothers - i.e. Diablo series, Command & Conquer, StarCraft. Other than those MP (multiplayer) games, I avidly investigate what students at my schools are playing currently. For this particular survey respondent, who identifies as a teacher, the activity of gaming feeds into dual purposes. Firstly, being overseas, gaming has helped the teacher to sociali ze and bond with family members. Secondly, gaming has gone beyond being a personal leisure activity given the teacher is also interested and avidly investigates what games his/her students are playing. Although the teacher did not explicate in greater de tail why he/she is interested in the 108 games students play, it is safe to say that the teacher treats gaming as a possible common ground where he/she can share interests and interact meaningfully with students. Both of these two responses emphasized on teac far and beyond to considering incorporating digital games for purposes of instruction. to item 6 regarding their impressions of digital games: 1. Mobile - centric, simple, short - form and entertaining : Popularly mentioned were gaming applications available on mobile devices such as smartphones and tablet computers. Repeatedly appearing in their responses were titles such as Angry Birds, Temple Run, Plants vs. Zombies, Words with Friends, Bejeweled, Minecraft, and Candy Crush. These gaming applications are marked by the traits of fun, highly addicting, easy to play (simple play mechanics), come - and - go and suitable distraction during short periods of spare time. 2. Preconceived gender association video games over girls. One observation states that girls play puzzle and learning games while boys play graphically intense and action - packed FPSs (first person shooters) and time - absorbing and obsessive RPGs (role - playing games). Some responses embodie d negative connotations such as overindulgence of digital gaming replacing normal social activities, interests, and interactions. 3. Preconceptions toward functionality of gaming : Repeatedly mentioned negative - 109 - - could be categorized into three themes: 1. Tie - in with subject area matters : Many responses took note of the extr a practices afforded by the use of educational digital games in traditional subject areas of literacy, mathematics, and science, and they also provide a venue through which non - conventional skills such as creativity, problem - solving and motor skills can be honed in. 2. Need for teaching young learners in ways that appeal to them : Multiple responses kids educational digital games can be effective tools with which to induce incidental or discovery learning. A question that remains is how valuable are incidental or d iscovery learning and how they can be leveraged in a way to supplement formal learning. 3. Not seriously educational : A number of responses pinpointed that educational digital s 110 provide educational merits such as extra practice and sustained interest in learning. In sum, some survey respondents perceived educational digital games as a form of entertainment, supplementary to formal instruction and cannot replace a teacher - conducted lesson. When asked about their likelihood of incorporating digital game - based learn ing in their teaching (item 10), 92 respondents added an open - ended response regarding why or why not. Content analysis of the textual responses yielded the following main observations. 1. Educational value as premise : The premise for using student - suggested game titles is that they embody educational value. The definition of educational value can be twofold. Firstly, student - suggested games can elicit participation and motivation, and is perhaps best illustrated by the following response. People like games because they are challenging and engaging, not value in a particular game then I would definitely take the time to re view it to consider if it would complement content material in the classroom because the game has potential to enhance the educational experience and deepen learning. Secondly, the appropriate use of DGBL in instruction can potentially bring forth educatio nal value by meeting learning objectives promoted by technology standards in the common core state standards. 2. Kids tend to be more familiar with new technologies before adults are : Youngsters of the new generation take ownership over their learning via pr acticing new literacies 111 and using technologies. Many survey respondents were cognizant of the high penetration of technology in home contexts and mentioned that they believe gaming iven that student - - existing interests to engage and motivate them to learn in an interactive format with re warding challenges. More importantly, teachers can sensitize students to the notion that 3. Student - centered teaching and learning : Several respondents stated that their school or they themselves endorse student - center ed curriculum and pedagogy where DGBL can be potentially useful. In consequence, by adopting student - suggested game titles DGBL and 39 respondents were affirmative. Among th e 39 respondents, 32 left open - ended comments to briefly describe their previous experience in practicing DGBL. In summarizing their usage, most teachers used digital games to review, practice content, or use DGBL as supplement or as a reward. Repeatedly mentioned games that were used by teachers were games such as Reader Rabbits , Math Blaster , Oregon Trail and game applications such as Motion Math and Monster Physics that run on tablet computers. Upon scrutiny, these games were used to mainly promote be havioristic learning in literacy and model concepts in mathematics or science in lower elementary grade classrooms. In sum, many teachers used tablet computer games, 112 interactive web - based games and a few teachers mentioned the use of Smartboard game appli cations. Some of the most valuable responses to open - ended questions were found on item 19, in which respondents were first asked to only choose one out of the four genre to incorporate into a DGBL lesson and then write a justification for their choice. The quest you are to design a DGBL lesson plan by choosing and using ONE type of the four types of respondents, 107 added a response to the open - ended question of why. Table 24 of the game genre and the potential downsides and proposed justifications they offered for their choice of that genre of digital game for DGBL. 113 Table 24 . Chosen Game Genre, Potential Downside, and Proposed Justification Number of Times Chosen (N = 107) Potential Downside Proposed Justification Edutainment Games & Educational Applications 69 *Only for drill practicing and memorization *Familiarity and comfortableness *Fits into content area *Promote positive learning *Engaging *Simple * E asy set - up *Easily used as supplemental materials/rewards for brain - break *Least player instruction needed *Appealing to young students *Age - appropriateness since they t each very young students *Appealing to and motivating for special education students *Greater chance to reaching the CCSS (Common Core State Standards) *Most directly designed to correlate with specific content area knowledge and therefore more relevance * Free and accessible by students *Shorter so they allow time for more students to partake in activity Serious Games 19 *Too advanced for very young students *Cost *Longer and more involved *Not as focused on content *Develop complex thinking and problem - solving *Play over time to generate classroom discussion and comparison of choices *Already experienced in using the three other types *Suitable for teaching greater depth content to older students *Curriculum - fitting *Connecting learning to real l ife situations content *Keep students invested over longer periods of time 114 T able 24 Simulation & MMORPG Games 7 *Interactive games may induce cyber - bullying *Difficult to implement *Too advanced for very young students *Students may not understand the concept of why they are playing *Longer and more involved *Not as focused on content *More hands - on learning *For an ESL course, the narrative aspect in RPGs and simulation games can offer opportunities for students to explore forms of language and use language to accomplish goals. *All students can get involved and learn together *Engage with peers *Promotes cooperative learning skills *Relate what is learned to the real world *Most interactive *Applicable to school tests *Promotes critical thinking Educational Game Design 12 *Too advanced for very young students *Longer and more involved *Not as focused on content *Let students design and create games *Engage students in learning and check their understanding *Opportunity to create and play *Game for application The number of respondents choosing each genre reflects ranking of the four genres of educational digital games happens to be the same as the order of preference ranking gathered from survey item 12 to 15. Here again the game type Edutainment and Educational Applications took a huge lead (69 mentions) over the other three types combined (38 mentions). In terms of ranking order, the same was found with Serious Games coming in at second with 19 mentions, Educational Game Design at third with12 mentions, and Simulation and MMORPGs with 7 genre for implementing DGBL , the results garnered from item 12 - 15 and item 19 are congruent. Parsing through the information presented in the table, the potential downsides and justifications enumerated by survey respondents in choosing a certain genre of educational digital games revolved around the issues of age - appropriateness, ease on set - up procedure, and 115 correlation with subject area matters and testing. While these issues are equally important regardless of which genre of games a teacher chooses to implement into DGBL, eduta inment games and educational applications were by far chosen with the highest frequency. The reason may be the pre - existing familiarity and the comfortableness arising from the familiarity, as it is safe to assume that edutainment games and educational ap plications were heavily favored because survey respondents were far more familiar with this type of games than with other recently emerging genres of serious games and educational game design tools. ical considerations when it comes to adapting a certain genre of educational digital games for teaching. The questio n was tion to design a digital game - based learning lesson plan, what are th e considerations that would go into your lesson planning? For instance, what are your subject - specific l earning objectives, instructional practices, technical implementation, student activities, o utcome assessment, and alignment with standards? A few examples of pedagogical consideration were purposefully inserted into the question to guide thinking and serve as starting points. Similar to item 19, item 20 did not require survey takers to leave an open - ended response but 84 did respond. Table 25 is a summary of the categorizations based on content analysis of these 84 responses. Only those responses which were elaborate, content - specific and salient to pedagogy would be documented below. A single response may contain multiple pedagogical consideratio ns. 116 Table 25 . Categorization of Consideration, Number of Mention, and Example Response Categorization of Consideration Number of Mention Example Response Fitting into content area and learning objectives (PCK) 26 am complementary skill levels are grouped together and have them work through the game as a group activity then reflect on the measurable checkpoints and continuous challenges rather than having them just scaffolds what Teacher demonstration and guidance (PK) 8 game and the goals that the games were tutorial and then practice wi th the game and students figuring out and discussing their Supplemental to whole - group instruction or as a reward (PK) 11 technology in the cl assroom could be to lesson as a review and practice Use the game as a partner/independent (games) to help me teach a standard than 117 Table 25 Outcome assessment and meeting common core state standards (PCK) 27 consideration when assigning which app progress monitoring of the specific tasks mediate feedback performing a quick way of formative Meeting individual student and group needs (PK) 8 social skills within special education because I believe this (game) can help to t these (games) can come into play, whole class or Class time (PK) 8 am teaching in, it might be a situation where students are given a certain amount of time before they have to switch so all students Student interest, ability and age - appropriateness (TPK) 10 118 Table 25 Technology infrastructure, funds and stable access (TPK) 10 available to me and if it would work when all the students tried to get onto the lab. W e have a class set of iPads but they Acquiring parental consent, staff and administrative support 4 can get support from parents and other staff and prove that the game had benefits of using digital games in my lesson, so I would want a very detailed lesson plan to back up my reasoning for using digital Nine strands of considerations were extracted from a compreh ensive analysis of the textual data. Eight of the nine categorizations can be associated with the PK, TPK, and PCK involved in the internal context (of a classroom) for the implementation of DGBL. Acquiring parental consent and securing staff and adminis trative support does not render itself directly to pedagogy since it is primarily dealing with something external to the classroom implementation delineated in the DGBL TPACK framework where DGBL may be practiced and scrutinized by parents and administrators. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) include teacher demonstration and guidance before or during game play; using DGBL as supplement or reward to instr uction; meeting both individual and group needs of learning. Technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) is associated with the consideration of student interest, ability, and age - 119 appropriateness in technology use; infrastructure and access of technology. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) refers to the match between content area and learning objectives and the use of DGBL; focus on outcome assessment through using a game and how DGBL potentially aligns with common core state technology standards. Conside ring the demographic finding that 64.7% of the respondents had expertise in English and language arts, attention needs to be directed specifically to games that gear toward language learning. Also there is the notion that games for language learning would be different in structure and play mechanics from games for teaching mathematics. To summarize, two pedagogical considerations were most prevalently pronounced Fitting into content area and learning objectives, and outcome assessment and meeting standar ds. The fit between a chosen game and target content area knowledge in the context of DGBL is of capable of choosing a game that is appropriate in content and ad dresses learning objectives by incorporating the game into instruction. If choosing a game that matches the curriculum and learning objective is the founding block, then ensuring student learning and performance through in - game or out - of - game outcome asse ssments serves as the solidifying pillar to the construction emphasis on making sure that the use of DGBL can meet technology or state standards. The number of mention for each of the pedagogical consideration does not encompass the worded in a way to orient their thinking toward pedagogy in the context of using DGBL. Nevertheless, these respondent - generated pedagogical considerations could serve as resource helpful to teachers interested in using DGBL. 120 Corroboration of Quantitative Results in Qualitative Responses The analyses of respondents' qualitative responses corroborate the results of the quantitative analyses. These two sources of insights into the respondents' perceptions of the value of digital game - based learning converged in three ways. d educational applications and their lack of familiarity with the other three genres of educational digital games : Both the results of quantitative and qualitative data analysis point to the fact that teachers heavily favored edutainment and educational a pplications over the other three genres. A combination of personal and pedagogical factors may have led to their overall preference. On a personal level teachers may already have established prior experience, familiarity and comfortableness with edutainm ent games and educational applications. On a pedagogical level, these short - form games and applications are ideal for the attention span of younger age students (given that a majority of the survey respondents identified as K - 6 teachers) and they are in g eneral easy to set up. More importantly, edutainment games and educational applications usually come in the form of prepackaged course contents and as compared to the other three genres of educational digital games, they could be a convenient and intuitiv e fit for educational content delivery. 2. applications and their endorsement in non - behavioristic teaching philosophies: A general rule of thumb is that edutainment games and e ducational applications are designed following learning principles of behaviorism because most of these games focus on inducing learning in the form of stimulus and response. While the majority of 121 teachers participating in the research indicated preferenc e for using this genre of games, it would have been natural for the teachers to endorse behaviorism as the teaching philosophy they resonated most with. Instead, behaviorism only received a mean score of 2.73 as these teachers gravitated significantly mor e toward constructionism (M = 4.17), social constructivism (M = 4.06), and cognitive constructivism (M = 4.14). The mismatch between the chosen genre of game and teaching philosophy pointed to two interesting findings. First, teachers may not already be cognizant of the behavioristic learning principles infused in the design of edutainment games and educational applications. Their favorable attitudes toward adopting this genre of games arose mainly from familiarity, comfortableness, and the ease of set - up. Second, considering the noticeable discrepancy between mean scores, the teachers apparently felt more in line with the learning principles in constructionism, cognitive constructivism and social constructivism, but not as prominently in behaviorism. The fact that the teachers favored edutainment games and educational applications but the teaching philosophy they endorsed is not compatible with the chosen genre of educational games leads to a mismatch between teaching material and pedagogy, hence poten tially rendering DGBL less effective. needed to be taught is of critical importance. To achieve this, teachers need to find resources and become educated in the genres of educatio nal digital games and the corresponding learning theories inherent in its design, so that they can better leverage their teaching philosophy, knowledge and skills to teach in tandem with a compatible genre of educational digital game. 122 3. Faring through both internal challenges and external barriers to the implementation of DGBL : Quantitative analysis via the method of confirmatory factor analysis yielded five main external barriers and they include mismatch between DGBL and standardized curriculum, admin istrative and parental negative perceptions, lack of technology support and preparation in teacher preparation and professional support, short class periods, and low quality of educational digital games. Qualitative analysis produced eight key internal cha llenges teachers would have to cope with in the adoption of DGBL. These eight challenges can be associated with the PK, TPK, and PCK involved in the context and implementation of DGBL. Pedagogical knowledge (PK) include teacher demonstration and guidance before or during game play; using DGBL as supplement or reward to instruction; meeting both individual and group needs of learning. Technological pedagogical knowledge (TPK) is associated with the consideration of student interest, ability, and age - appro priateness in technology use; infrastructure and access of technology. Pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) refers to the match between content area and learning objectives and the use of DGBL; focus on outcome assessment through using a game and how DGBL potentially aligns with common core state technology standards. Consolidating both the results of quantitative and qualitative data analyses, a well - rounded picture of the internal challenges and external barriers to the implementation of DGBL in the clas sroom is delineated. 123 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION Discussion What is the role of teachers in the environment of using DGBL? To make DGBL an effective learning process, it is imperative that the teacher takes on the role of a facilitator by provi ding timely elements of support, analysis and reflection (Gros, 2007) that promote contents and learning objectives of the target game. It is expected that teachers at different levels would react differently to the proposition of using DGBL in the classr oom as mediated by their disparity in gaming experiences, attitudes, self - efficacy, and perceived challenges and barriers. Will understanding the complexities involved in the adoption of DGBL sensitize and encourage, or intimidate and prevent teachers fro m practicing and their commitment in using digital games for classroom teaching? Gibson, Halverson and Riedel (2007) studied the differences in the values and attitudes held among gamer and non - gamer pre - service teachers (N = 228). They categorized these teachers based on the age of the respondents considering that children born befor e and after video games became ubiquitous shared stark different perceptions about the world, thinking patterns, ways of evaluating tasks, and interacting with people. They found that gamer teachers were more receptive towards using digital games in teach ing, reinforcing Jones, Copeland, & towards digital games. Gibson et al. also found that gamer teachers valued active learning, individualized and customized t eaching more than their non - gamer counterparts. Put another way, it seems likely that teachers who have prior background in gaming may value, or promote, instructional methods or learning objectives differently from teachers without. Considering that 124 the teachers participating in this study are solely light or non - gamers, their overall favorable attitude and self - confidence toward using DGBL is an encouraging sign and perhaps could be a foundation to build on. learning preferences and styles when teachers think about adopting DGBL. Squire et al. (2005) contended that the critical issue is not whether learning can be based on using digital games. They posed the question as to how could educational technologist s and educators approach a new generation of students, digital natives, who are raised on and immersed in a slew of digital multimedia including interactive digital games who would anticipate similar experiences learning from teachers using educational med ia in the classroom (p. 34). Hence the learning profile of digital natives plays a role in deciding the effectiveness of the use of DGBL in the classroom. Asakawa and Gilbert (2003), Bain and Newton (2003) and Prensky (2005) suggested that the game gene ration has developed a new cognitive learning style marked by multitasked learning which relies on hypothesis - testing, exploration, and discovery, aspects of learning that have been paid less attention to in formal school learning contexts where standardiz ed testing has youth as born communicators, intuitive, and visual, partially due to their spatial and visual aptitudes trained through the practice of video gam es. Shaffer, Squire, Halverson and Gee (2004) stated that the use of video games modified ways young people learn. Online games, according to van Eck (2006), offers our digital natives the chance to exercise inductive reasoning, to access multimodal info rmation, and to strengthen their spatial and visual abilities. Consequently, our digital natives are primed to inspire themselves perhaps more intuitively in a constructivist or constructionist approach through which they form and test hypothesis, 125 experim ent through trial and error, interact with social groups, comprehend and synthesize findings, and generalize and apply what they have learned to new contexts. That said, the cational applications over the other three genres and it is fair to ask what implications we can derive from this finding. Depending on content, context and compatibility, how these four genres of educational digital games can be applied effectively in in structional practices in a given classroom also vary from case to case. Returning to Research Questions Four main research questions were posed in this study. A brief discussion of the findings with respect to these research questions and sub - questions wi ll be presented in the following discussion. by hours spent on digital gaming per week, enjoyment, platform, frequency in game - related practices, and gaming orientations - taking teachers were light gamers or non - gamers who engage in game play less than one to three hours on a weekly basis. 58% of respondents expressed enjoyment on digital gaming and only 16 respondents indicated otherwise. In terms of favored platform for gaming, 84% of respondents chose cellphones and tablet computers as the main interface, indicating the high penetration and utility - for - gaming rate on mobile technologies among this particular age group of teac hers. As for frequency of game - related practices, since the majority of survey takers were light or non - gamers, the most common game - related practices they engaged in do not go beyond visiting game websites, reading reviews, and helping others when playin g. O ther game - related practices such as highly technical modding, using cheat codes and creating mini - games were not chosen 126 because these activities are marks of habitual gamers. For gaming orientations, of the 90% of respondents described the activity o f gaming solely as one to pass time when bored or during transition to an ensuing event. Evidently the other available gaming orientations involving elements of competitive gaming and persistence in gaming do not apply to this group of survey respondents. - inquiries ( below in italics ) . Responses to each of the sub - inquiries based on survey findings will be laid out below. a. Are te achers comfortable with the idea of using digital games for teaching? Survey findings indicate that 78% of participating pre - service, intern, or in - service teachers are comfortable with the idea of using digital games as tools for classroom teaching. b. Wha S the gap between what stu - on, motivating and c. Three main perceptions related to ed ucational digital games emerged out of textual analysis. Educational digital games are perceived as having a tie - in with subject area matter. These games meet the need for teaching young learners in 127 ways that appeal to them, and lastly a counter narrativ e that in some cases these educational digital games are not seriously educational . d. What do teachers believe is the likelihood of them using digital games in current or future teaching? 78% of respondents are affirmative to strongly affirmative about the l ikelihood of their implementing DGBL in current or future teaching. e. How likely would teachers consider using student - suggested game titles for digital game - based learning? 86% of respondents agreed and strongly agreed to the concept of using student - suggested digital games for classroom teaching and learning and this implicates a great likelihood. self - efficacy on integrating - questions and responses based on survey data analysis would be provided to address each question respectively. a. Which type of educational digital game would teachers prefer to use for DGBL? The preferr ed game genre for implementing DGBL for all three groups of teachers proved to be the same, ranking atop from the most favored edutainment games and educational applications, to serious games, then educational game design tools, and lastly simulation and M MORPG games. An overwhelming majority of teachers favored the genre of edutainment games and educational applications for classroom instruction but when asked about the teaching philosophy they endorsed, they generally gravitated toward the three 128 non - behavioristic philosophies. The mismatch is illuminating in two ways. One is that these teach digital games are designed based on varying underlying learning principles may put them in a position where they are not so well - prepared to carry out DGBL. Another point of emphasis and pe rhaps a direction for future research, could be to what extent is the importance for teachers to match a game genre with their teaching philosophy so as to produce optimal teaching effectiveness and learning outcomes. c. What do teachers believe is their capa bility of using DGBL in the classroom? 81% of teachers expressed optimism and belief in their perceived capability to incorporate digital games in their teaching. This means a great majority of the survey respondents believed that they were capable of usi ng DGBL in their current or future classroom teaching. d. Have teachers used DGBL in the classroom before? How frequently do they use DGBL? Only 34% of respondents have had actual experience using DGBL for educational purposes at the point of taking this surv ey. In terms of frequency of the use of DGBL, 9% of respondents indicated one time in this past year, 9% indicated two times, and 16 % indicated five times or more. Despite that 81% of teachers showed self - perceived capability in using DGBL, only 34% of t hem had actual experience in practicing DGBL. However, the number 34% makes sense considering that only 56% of respondents were intern 129 teachers and in - service teachers who may have an established presence and freedom of choice over instructional practices in a classroom. e. Nine strands of considerations were extrapolated. Eight are associated with the PK, TPK, and PCK involved in the internal context of practicing DGBL. PK includes teacher d emonstration and guidance before or during game play; using DGBL as supplement or reward to instruction; meeting both individual and group needs of learning. TPK encompasses the consideration of student interest, ability, and age - appropriateness in techno logy use; infrastructure and access of technology. PCK consists of the match between content area and learning objectives and the use of DGBL; focus on outcome assessment through using a game and how DGBL potentially aligns with common core state technolo gy standards. The ninth strand, acquiring parental consent and securing staff and administrative support, addresses the importance of considering the external context of practicing DGBL. felt that their lack of knowledge and skills in teaching strategies, outcome assessment, and making justifiable choices of digital tools to match subject area matters are internal challenges to the implementation of DGBL. External barriers were boiled down to five main components Mismatch between DGBL and curriculum , administra tive and parental negative perceptions, lack 130 of technology infrastructure and preparation in teacher education and professional development, short class periods, and low quality of educational digital games. Significance of Study 131 game genre order presented in the survey. Order effect and pre - existing familiarity could have confounded how respondents chose which of th e four game genres they would like to adopt for DGBL. growing interests, constructs new areas of technological and knowledge base , and sustains student motivation to learn (Caperton, 2010; Gee, 2007; Papastergiou, 2009; Rankin , McNeal, Shute & Gooch , 2008; Richter & Dawley, 2010; Squire, 2004). Despite a growing number of studies on using educational digital games to support studen t learning in K - 12 subject content areas (Charsky & Barbour, 2009; Connolly, Stansfield & Hainey , 2011; Gros, 2007; Ritzhaupt, Higgins & Alfred, 2010; Squire, 2005), there is still lack of evidence that shows DGBL is effective and compatible with formal le arning contexts in most schools and districts. Adding to the issue of incompatibility, the variety of game genres, different methods for integrating games into instruction, and poor quality of many educational games further complicate the iss ue of adopting DGBL in the classroom (Gee, 2003, 2007; Tobi as & Fletcher, 132 2011; Young, Slota, Cutter, Jalette, Mullin , 2012). The diversity of educational games, the different ways of incorporating games into instruction, and the complexity of measuring game - based learning all add to the challenge of using digital games for perficial understanding of game elements to need more empirical studies documenting the processes and pedagogies of incorporating digital games into K - 12 curricul a. On the other, the field of study in DGBL needs a guiding framework with which we can reference in tackling problems arising from the integration of DGBL in the classroom. 133 134 135 REFERENCES Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological i ssues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT TPC K: Advances in technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education , 52 (1), 154 - 168.Angers, J., & Machtmes, K. (2005). An ethnographic - case stu dy of beliefs, context factors, and practices of teachers integrating technology. T he Qualitative Report , 10 (4), 771 - 794. Asa kawa, T., & Gilbert, N. (2003). Synthesizing Experiences: Lessons to b e Learned from Internet - Mediated Simulation Games. Simulation and Gaming, 34 (1), 10 - 22. Baek, Y. K. (2008). What hinders teachers in using computer and video games in the c lassroom? Exploring factors inhibiting the uptake of computer and video games. CyberPsychology & Behavior , 11 (6), 665 - 671. Bain, C., & Newton, C. (2003). Art Games: Pre - arning Experiences for the Elementary Art Classroom. Art Education, 56 (5), 33 - 40. Barab, S., Gresalfi, M., & Arici, A. (2009). Why educators should care about games. Educational Leadership, 67 (1), 76 - 81. Becker, K. (2007). Digital game based learning once removed: Teaching teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology , 38 (3), 478 - 488. eptions about the use of video games in the classroom. Compute rs & Education , 54 (4), 1145 - 1156. Brand, J. E. (2007). Interactive Australia: Facts about the Computer and Video Game Industry . Eveleigh, NSW: Bond University/Interactive Entertainment Association of Australia. Campbell, R., Gregory, K. A., Patterson, D., & Bybee, D. (2012). Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches: An Example of mixed methods research. In LA. Jason & D. Glenwick (Eds.), Innovative methodological approaches to community - b ased research: Theory and applications (pp. 51 - 68). Washingto n DC: American Psychological Association. Caperton, I. H. (2010). Toward a theory of game - media literacy: Playing and bui lding as reading and writing. International Journal of Gaming and Computer - Med iated Simulations (IJGCMS) , 2 (1), 1 - 16. Charsky, D., & Barbour, M. (2010, March). From Oregon Trail to Peacem aker: Providing a Framework for Effective Integration of Video Games into the Social Studies Classroom. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Educa tion International Conference (Vol. 2010, No. 1, pp. 1853 - 1860). 136 Charsky, D., & Mims, C. (2008). Integrating commercial off - the - shelf video games into schoo l curriculums. TechTrends , 52 (5), 38 - 44. Connolly, T. M., Stansfield, M., & Hainey, T. (2011). An alternate reality game for language learning: Arguing for multilingual motivation. Computers & Education, 57 , 1389 - 1415. Corti , K. (2006). Games - based Learning; a serious business application. Informe de PixelLearning , 34 (6), 1 - 20. Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixe d methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Ted dlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed met hods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209 - 240). Thousand Oaks: CA: Cage. Denner, J., Werner, L., & Ortiz, E. (2012). Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts?. Computers & Education , 58 (1), 240 - 249 . Egenfeldt - Nielsen, S. (2005). Beyond edutainment: Exploring the educational potential of computer games . Lulu. com. Entertainment Consumers Association. (2015). Video Games and violence. Retrieved from http://www.theeca.com/video_games_violence Entertainment Software Association. (2012). Essential facts about the computer and video game industry. Retried from http://www.technologytell.com/gam ing/files/2012/08/ESA_EF_2012.pdf Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our que st for technology integration?. Educational technology research and development , 53 (4), 25 - 39. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit - Leftw ich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 42 (3), 255 - 284. Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit - Leftwich, A. T., Sadik, O., Sendurur , E., & Sendurur, P. (2012). Teacher beliefs and technology integration practices: A critical relationship. Computers & Education , 59 (2), 423 - 435. studies classroom. Proceedings of the World Conference on E - Learn ing in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education (781 - 786). Norfolk, VA: AACE. 137 Evans, M., & Barbour, M. K. (2007 b). Making sense of video games: Pre - service teachers struggle with this new medium. Proceedings of the World Conference on E - Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education (2496 - 2501). Norfo lk, VA: AACE. Flynn, R., Bacon, E., & Dastbaz, M. (2010,). Impact of Learning Paradigms in Games Design: How the Theory of Learning has Influenced the Design of Video Games. In Global Learn Asia Pacific, 2010 (1), 1550 - 1556. Foster, A. N., & Mishra, P. (2009). Games, claims, genres & learning. Handbo ok of research on effective electronic gaming in education , 1 , 33 - 50. Foster, A., Katz - Buonincontro, J., & Shah, M. (2011, March). Designing a g ame - based learning course: K - 12 integration and pedagogical model. In Society for Inform ation Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2011, No. 1, pp. 1477 - 1483). Franklin, T., & Annetta, L. (2011). PREFACE Special Issue: Digital Games and S imulations in Teacher Preparation. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 19 (3), 239 - 242. Futurelab, (2005). Sanford, R., & Williamson, B. (2005). Games and Learning, A handbook from Futurelab. Games, I. A. (2008). Three Dialogs: a framework for the analysis and assessment of twenty - first - century literacy practices, and its use in the context of game design within Gamestar Mechanic. E - Learning and Digital Media , 5 (4), 396 - 417. Games, I. A. (2010). Gamestar Mechanic: learning a designer mindset through communicational competence with the language of games. Learning, Media and Technology , 35 (1), 31 - 52. Games, A., & Squire, K. D. (2011). Searching for the fun in learning: A historical perspective on the evolution of educational video games. Computer games and instruction , 17 - 46. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy. New York: Peter Lang. Gibson, D., Halverson, W., & Riedel, E. (2007). Gamer teachers. Games and simulatio ns in online learning: R esearch and Development Frameworks , 175 - 188. Google Images, (n.d.). In Google Search Engine Online . Gronseth, S., Brush, T., Ottenbreit - Leftwich, A., Strycker, J., Abaci, S., Easterl ing, W... & van Leusen, P. (2010). Equipping the next generation of teachers: Technolo gy preparation and practice. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education , 27 (1), 30 - 36. 138 Gros, B. (2007). Digital Games in Education: The Design of game - based learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 40 (1), 23 - 38. Hayes, E. R., & Games, I. A. (2008). Making Computer Games and Design Thinking A Review of Current Software and Strategies. Games and Culture , 3 (3 - 4), 309 - 332. Hayes, E., & Ohrnberger, M. (2013). The Gamer Generation T eaches Sch ool: The Gaming Practices and Attitudes towards Technology of Pre - Service Teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 21 (2), 154 - 177. Hsu, T. Y., & Chiou, G. F. (2011, March). Preservice Teachers' Awareness of Digital Game - Supported Learning. In Society for Information Technology & Te acher Education International Conference (Vol. 2011, No. 1, pp. 2135 - 2141). Hung, C. Y. (2008). The influence of self - efficacy and self - regulation on fl ow experience in rsity, Hsinchu, T aiwan. information and communication technologies into literacy instruction: A national surv ey in the United States. Reading Research Quarterly , 46 (4), 312 - 333. Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living a nd learning with new media . MIT press. Johnson, L., Adams, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate , H. (2013). The NMC Horizon Report: 2013 Higher Education Edition. Jones, J. G., Copeland, B., & Kalinowski, K. (2007). Pre - service teacher's a ttitudes towards computer games. American Educational Resear ch Association, Chicago . Kerbitchi, H. Kappers, & Henry (2009). Analysis of the supporting website s for the use of instructional games in K - 12 settings. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40 (4), 733 - 754. Kereluik, K., Casperson , G., & Akcaoglu, M. (2010, March). Coding pre - servic e teacher lesson plans for TPACK. In Society for Information Technology & T eacher Education International Conference (Vol. 2010, No. 1, pp. 3889 - 3891). Kereluik, K., & Mishra, P. (2012, March). Getting the digital generation to integrate technology in their learning: A framework for disciplinary learning with technology for adolescents. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Educat ion International Conference , 2012 (1), 2883 - 2892. Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2003, November). Use of Computer and Vid eo Games in the Classroom. In DIGRA Conf . 139 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens w hen teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of educational computing research , 32 (2), 131 - 152. Krippendoff, K. (2004). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology . 2 nd edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lambert, J., Gong, Y., & Cuper, P. (2008). Technology, transfer and teachin g: The impact of a single technology Journal of technology and teacher education , 16 (4), 385 - 410. Lin, M. F. (2009). The influence of online game self - efficacy and creative self - efficacy on creative Hsinchu, Taiwan. Lucas, L. K., & McKee, J. G. (2007). Teacher Perceptions and the Use of Technology in the Classroom: Do Perceptions Impact P - 12 Learning? In annual me eti ng of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Hilton New York, New York . McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A., & Heald, Y. (2002). Report on the educati onal use of games. Retrieved from http://nexus.hsbremerhaven.de/Library.nsf/bf25ab0f47ba5dd785256499006b15a4/be501a19 59414 2bac125736e00588a6d/$FILE/Games_in_Educa_teem_gamesined_full.pdf Michael, D. & Chen, S. (2006). Serious games: Games that educate, train, a nd inform. Boston, MA: Thomson Course Technology. Millstone, J. (2012). National survey and video case s tudies: Teacher attitudes about digital games in the classroom. New York, NY: Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop in collaboration with BrainPOP®. Retrieved from http://www.joanganzcooneycenter.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/jgcc_teacher_survey1.pdf Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical cont ent knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 (6), 1017 - 1054. Mitchell, A., & Savill - Smith, C. (2004). The use of computer and video gam es for learning: A review of the literature. Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward und erstanding the net generation. Educating the net generation , 2 (1 2), 20. 140 Ottenbreit - Leftwich, A., Glazewski, K., & Newby, T. (2010a). Preservice technolo gy integration course revision: A c onceptual guide. Jo urnal of Tech nology and Teacher Education , 18 (1), 5 - 33. Ottenbreit - Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010b). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing profess ional and student needs. Computers & Education , 55 (3), 1321 - 1335. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game - based learning in high school computer science education: I mpact on educational effectiveness and student motivat ion. Journal of Computers & Education, 52, 1 - 12. Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating Constructionism. Constructionism, Ablex Publishing Corpor ation: 193 - 206. Retrieved from http://namodemello.com.br/pdf/tendencias/situatingconstrutivism.pdf Phillips, D. C., & Soltis, J. F. (2004). Perspectives on learning . Teachers College Press. Prensky, M. ( - - Hill: New York. Prensky, M. (2005). Adopt and Adapt. 21 st Century Schools Need 21 st Century Technology . Edutopia, December. Prensky, M. (2006). Don't Bother Me, Mom, I'm Learning!: How Computer and Video Games are Preparing Your Kids for 21st Century Success and how You Can Help! . St. Paul: Paragon House. Rankin, Y., McNeal, M, Shute, M. W., & Gooch, B. (2008). Us er centered game design: Evaluating Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Gam es for Second Language Acquisition. Conference proceedings from Sandbox Symposium , 43 - 49. Rice, J. W. (2007). New media resistance: Barriers to implementation of computer video games in the classroom. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 16 (3), 249 - 261. Richter, J., & Dawley, L. (2010). Creating context for educational res earch in virtual worlds: An invitation to dialogue. International Journal of Gaming and Computer - Mediated Simulations . Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2. Media in the Lives of , 8 . Ritzhaupt , A., Higgins, H., & Allred, B. (2010). Teacher experiences on the integration of modern educational games in the middle school mathematics classroom. Journal of C omputers in Mathematics and Science Teaching , 29 (2), 189 - 216. 141 Ritzhaupt, A., Higgins, H., & Allred, B. (2011). Effects of modern educat ional game play on attitudes towards mathematics, mathematics self - efficac y, and mathematics achievement. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 22 (2), 277 - 297. Salen, K. (2007). Gaming literacies: A game design study in action. Journ al of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 16 (3), 301 - 322. Sandford, R., Uicsak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2006). Teaching with games: Using COTS games in formal education. In JISC Innovating eLearning Conference . Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2004). Video games and the future of learning. University of Wisconsin - Madison and Academic Distr ibuted Learning Co - Laboratory: D ecemb er. Retrieved from www.academiccolab.org/resources/gappspaper1.pdf Squire, K. D., & Barab, S. A. (2004). Replaying history: Learning world histo ry through playing Civilization III . Bloomington: Indiana University. Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2003). Harnessing the power of games in education. Insight , 3 (1), 5 - 33. Squire, K. (2005). Changing the game: What happens when vid eo games enter the cla ssroom. Innovate: Journal of online education , 1 (6). Squire, K., Giovanetto, L., & Devane, B. (2005). From users to designers: Bilding a self - organizing game - based learning environment. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49 (5), 33 - 44. Squire, K. D. (2006). From content to context: Video games as designed experience. Educational Researcher, 35 (8), 19 - 29. Squire, K. D. (2008). Video game based learning: An eme rging paradigm for instruction. Perfo rmance Improvement Quarterly , 21 (2), 7 - 36. Squire, K. (2011). Video Games and Learning: Teaching and Participatory Culture in the Digital Age. Technology, Education -- Connections (the TEC Series) . Teachers College Press. 1234 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY 10027. Susi, T., Johannesson, M., & Backlund, P. (2007). Serious games: An overview. Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research. The Sage handbook of qualitative research , 285. Tobias, S., & Fletcher, J. D. (Eds.). (2011). Computer games and instruction . IAP. 142 Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit - Le ftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre - service teachers to integrate technology in educati on: A synthesis of qualit ative evidence. Computers & Education , 59 (1), 134 - 144. van Eck. R. (2006). Digital Game - al Natives who are Restless . Educause Review, 41 (2). Williams, M. K., Foulger, T. S., & Wetzel, K. (2009). Preparing p reservice teachers for 21st century classrooms: Transforming attitudes and behavior s about innovative technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 17 (3), 393 - 418. Winn, B., & Heeter, C. (2007). Resolving conflicts in educational g ame design through playtesting. Innovate: Journal of Online Education , 3 (2), 2007. Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self - regulatory mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of person ality and social psychology , 56 (3), 407. Werner, L., Denner, J., Campe, S., & Kawamoto, D. C. (2012). The Fairy Performance Assessment: Measuring computational thinking in middle school. In Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 215 - 220). ACM. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49 (3), 33 - 35. Wing, J. M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A , 366, 3717 - 3725. Wu, M. L., & Richards, K. (2011). Facilitating computational thinking th rough game design. In Edutainment Technologies. Educational Games and Virtual Reality /Augmented Reality Applications (pp. 220 - 227). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Young, M. F., Slota, S., Cutter, A. B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B., ... & Yukhymenko, M. (2012). Our Princess Is in Another Castle A Review of Trends in Serious Gaming for Education. Review of Educational Research , 82 (1), 61 - 89. Zyda, M. (2005). From visual simulation to virtual reality to games. Computer, 38 (9), 25 - 32.