Board Games as Educational Vehicles

Terry Hale
December 17, 2016

Abstract:

The purpose of this work was to determine if a board game entitled Growing Up, based on Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs, would be effective in teaching players about the ideas of Maslow, as well as a practical guide to living a fulfilling life. Literature reviewed was conclusive in indicating many instances where board games were shown to be valuable learning vehicles in teaching complex subjects, by making the learning fun and engaging. The instrument inquired as to the players attitudes about Maslow’s ideas as expressed in the board game, as well as the player’s psychological training. Survey data and literature review did not enable the research to be conclusive, and a small sample noted in this work requires further data acquisition from a larger population, however positive trends seem to suggest that the game is being well received by its players.

Introduction

Abraham Maslow defined a list of needs in a chronological order which, if followed, leads to a fulfilling life. The board game developed by the author of this work, entitled Growing Up, was designed to help people of any age understand the ideas which Maslow described, and may benefit anyone who attempts to play, with at least a desire to learn more about the Hierarchy of Needs, and Maslow himself, if not an actual roadmap to live a fulfilled life. The purpose of this work is to determine if the game is well-received by the population of players surveyed during play testing.

Abraham Maslow defined 5 specific tiers of needs and motivations in his first version of the hierarchy, which included the physiological needs; followed by the needs of safety; belonging; esteem; and self-actualization. Near the end of his life, Maslow added a 6th rung to include self-transcendence—which I will discuss further, in another paragraph, to conclude this topic. When we are children, we are mostly required to be dependent on our parents or guardians to fulfill our needs. We need air, water, food, the ability to excrete, and as mammals we need warmth and touch. With the possible exception of air to breath, our parents take care of us in terms of the remaining physiological needs. As we grow and mature, we are taught to take care of these things for ourselves.

As we climb the pyramid of needs, rung by rung, we become more and more self-reliant in obtaining these further needs, as we mature. We are taught some ways to obtain these needs by our parents, and then we are taught other ways by the educational institutions in which we participate. But we are not always aware, while learning these methods, that they are actually part of a system, which if followed, can lead to a better life. A well-rounded, fulfilling life that brings us and the people around us much joy and satisfaction. One of the purposes of this game is to introduce these various elements to players who may not be aware of them, and to show them, as well, that they are all part of complete and closed system, which may be expressed as a lifestyle, or even an art form, in which ones lives his or her life to its greatest achievements.

Board games have been used extensively in education as the following literature review will indicate. Using a board game to present ideas to educate makes the process fun and engaging to many students, and for this reason alone, it should be considered in educational institutions or situations wherein insight into Maslow’s ideas may be gleaned.

Literature Review:

Using board games as educational vehicles or programs has been around for a long time. The purpose of this work is to determine common traits in the use of successful board games as a vehicle for interesting, engaging and interactive learning. It will be shown that effective educational board games share common features. Team work and play within the constructs of board games enable students to participate interactively during active learning board game participation.

In a board game, entitled, Anatomy Adventure, which is used for the understanding in anatomy, showed significantly greater post-test results, than a control group which was also pre-tested and post-tested. The methodology included two groups of students from the same course. The students were divided into two groups including a game group and a non-game group. Each were told to prepare for an examination within a specialized area of anatomy, which included the normal course of study. But the game group had the additional vehicle of the game as a component of study. Both groups were also given a pre-test.

The article indicates that the game is designed to generate a simple way of studying anatomy using a game based strategy and helps to reduce the stress, anxiety and fear associated with studying such a daunting course as medical anatomy. The game promotes the study of the subject with game facets which include discussion, reflection and evaluation.

Playing as a team seemed to be a significant facet in the study of anatomy within the educational game. (Anyanwu, 2014, Pg. 158). 90 percent of the game participants indicated that the game enabled them to identify weak points in their studies, and felt the need to study further after playing the game.

Another game, entitled, Discovering the Cell, which explores details of cell and molecular biology, continues with the premise that enthusiasm is generated when learning occurs in fun and interactive ways, and examines the cell through a non-Monopoly like board game. Students solve cases through interaction, using clue cards and team discussions while moving through the game board and the organelles depicted thereon.

Within the conclusions and results obtained in this study, there was an indication that working in teams is a positive learning experience. Learning is enhanced through team work. (Alves, G., et al, 2008, Pg. 34). The game stimulates curiosity and introduces students to the scientific method. High school students were tested in the study.

In another board game, entitled, Folely-Opoly, presents catheter care concepts to nurses. The spaces on the board represent recommended catheter care practices. The game very much resembles a Monopoly game set up. Team work is significant in promoting nurse-controlled risk reduction for catheter infections (Faselis, C., et al, 2014, Pg. 111). Gaming strategies become educational tools which enhance active learning.

The hypothesis that team work enhances learning while using board games seems evident within the analysis of above studies. In every case, the studies pointed to the importance of teamwork in facilitating learning. Designing a board game with teamwork facets, and other interactive activities within the game, seems to be paramount in educational games.

Action Research Steps:

The purpose of this work is to determine if the game is well-received by the population of players surveyed during play testing. The literature review has cited examples of the effectiveness of using board games as an educational vehicle, especially when team work and community cooperation is established within the confines of the game. It should be pointed out here that the game does in fact simulate a community in which players must cooperate.

A Sampling composed with an integrated Likert scale was utilized to gather measure player’s attitudes about the various subject matter contained in the game. The inherent problem is the small sample of this particular group, but further play testing and sampling will reveal a more accurate data set. Also, within the structure of the Likert scale, the population was surveyed as to their status regarding their academic training in psychology.

Findings:

In order to have a quantitative component to this work, a survey of ten relevant questions was placed on the internet, which sampled responses from 5 individuals in the target population, during an informal gathering of people, in a private residence, as game night gathering. There is an inherent issue with the small sample of only five individuals surveyed for this work, thus far. Future play testing and sampling will indicate a greater, and therefore more accurate data set.

One player surveyed indicated extensive training in psychology, as shown in the cumulative responses to question number 4, which states: Prior to playing Growing Up, have you had any training in psychology? This individual indicated mostly very high responses within the Likert scale, indicating that it may be the case that such highly trained individuals recognize the game’s relevance to the subject matter which is important in their occupation, i.e.: social work, and similar professions. It is also true that most of the players did not have any training in psychology.

Most players thought that the game was effective in learning more about Maslow’s hierarchy, as indicated but the cumulative responses to Question 1, which states: Assess the effectiveness of Growing Up on the player learning more about Maslow’s hierarchy.

Most players surveyed indicated that they think that the game would be beneficial to adults, as indicated in the cumulative responses for Question 7, which states: Do you think that Growing Up is an educational game that would be beneficial to adults?

Most players indicated that they thought that would encourage their children to play, so that they could learn about being adults, as indicated in the cumulative responses for Question 8, which states: If you had children, do you think that you would encourage them to play Growing Up, in order to help them to learn about adulthood?

Nearly all players indicated that they would like to play the game again, as indicated in the cumulative responses for Question 9, which states: Do you think that you would like to play Growing Up again?

Most players indicated that they would suggest playing the game to their friends, as indicated by the cumulative responses to Question 10, which states: Do you think you might suggest playing Growing Up to your friends?

Conclusions:

The purpose of this work is to determine if the game is well-received by the population of players surveyed during play testing. As shown in the data, most players seemed to enjoy the game, would recommend it to children as well as adults, and would enjoy playing the game again. Most thought it was beneficial to adults and to teaching ‘adulating’ skills. However the inherent flaw in this work is the small population surveyed.

Meanings:

Further play testing and sampling will be required for a more accurate data set, but this small sample does seem to indicate positive trends. The data, such as it is, seems to suggest that the game is being well-received by those who play it.

References:

Alves, G., Araujo-Jorge, T., Henriques-Pons, A.,Cardona, T., Luz, M., Melim, L., Spiegel, C. (2008). Discovering the cell: an educational game about cell and molecular biology. Journal of Biological Education, 27-35.

Anyanwu, E. (2014). Anatomy Adventure: A board game for enhancing understanding of anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education, 153-159.

Faselis, C., Liappis, A., Rodriguez, L., Yoon, B. (2014). Using a board game to reinforce learning. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 110-111.

Appendix:

The following survey was used to collect data from the players:

1. Assess the effectiveness of Growing Up on the player learning more about Maslow’s hierarchy:

( ) Not effective
( ) Minimally effective
( ) Effective
( ) Highly effective

2. Do you think that playing this game is enjoyable?

( ) Not enjoyable
( ) Minimally enjoyable
( ) Enjoyable
( ) Highly enjoyable

3. Do you think that Growing Up would be beneficial for 12 year old children to play?

( ) Not beneficial
( ) Minimally beneficial
( ) Beneficial
( ) Highly beneficial

4. Prior to playing Growing Up, have you had any training in psychology?

( ) No psychological training
( ) Minimally—I had one college course in psychology
( ) I had a few psychology courses
( ) Highly trained—I am a psychology/social work professional

5. Do the goals and behaviors modeled in the Growing Up game seem to relate to areas of life accurately?

( ) Not accurate
( ) Minimally accurate
( ) Accurate
( ) Highly accurate

6. Do you think that Growing Up portrays an accurate model of life and its various components, in terms of needs and motivations?

( ) Not accurate
( ) Minimally accurate
( ) Accurate
( ) Highly accurate

7. Do you think that Growing Up is an educational game that would be beneficial to adults?

( ) Not beneficial
( ) Minimally beneficial
( )Beneficial
( ) Highly beneficial

8. If you had children, do you think that you would encourage them to play Growing Up, in order to help them to learn about adulthood?

( ) I would not suggest they play
( ) I might suggest to them to play
( ) I would encourage them to play
( ) I would strongly suggest they play

9. Do you think that you would like to play Growing Up again?

( ) Not at all
( ) I might like it
( ) I would play again
( ) I would play this game again many times

10. Do you think you might suggest playing Growing Up to your friends?

( ) Not at all
( ) I might suggest it
( ) I would certainly suggest it
( ) I would like to form a club to meet and play many times throughout the year

The following are the cumulative responses for each question in the instrument, with a total targeted population of 5 individuals surveyed:

Question 01:

0-Not effective
0-Minimally effective
4-Effective
1-Highly effective

Question 02:

0-Not enjoyable
2-Minimally enjoyable
2-Enjoyable
1-Highly enjoyable

Question 03:

0-Not beneficial
1-Minimally beneficial
3-Beneficial
1-Highly beneficial

Question 04:

3-No psychological training
1-Minimally-I had one college course in psychology
0-I’ve taken several psychology courses
1-Highly trained-I am a psychology/social work professional

Question 05:

0-Not accurate
2-Minimally accurate
2-Accurate
1-Highly accurate

Question 06:

0-Not accurate
1-Minimally accurate
3-Accurate
1-Highly accurate

Question 07:

0-Not beneficial
0-Minimally beneficial
4-Beneficial
1-Highly beneficial

Question 08:

0-I would not suggest they play
2-I might suggest they play
2-I would encourage them to play
1-I would strongly suggest they play

Question 09:

0-Not at all
1-I might like it
2-I would play again
2-I would play this game again, many times

Question 10:

0-Not at all
2-I might suggest it
3-I would certainly suggest it
0-I would to form a club to meet and play many times throughout the year

Electronic Media v. Traditional Board Games in Educational Game Marketing

Terry Hale
April 04, 2016

Abstract:

The purpose of this work was to determine the best marketing strategies and production practices that can be used in marketing an educational game, as well as the model type preferred, be it a computer game or a table-top board game, and to determine which factors of production could be used in creating a game. The research made the assumption that multi-media, that is, computer games would be the preferred model due to their popularity, but the researched showed that board games have merit in their longevity because the do not flood the market like computer games do, and then disappear as they become outdated. Additional questions included, what are the various mediums which would be most effective in terms of production for an educational board game; which types of media provides the richest sensate experience; what are the pros and cons of using a traditional board game format for production of an educational game; and how can the market audience be tested to provide an accurate direction toward initial production? Survey data and literature review did not enable the research to be conclusive, however.

Introduction

Seeking the best model, when producing an educational game, whether it is a computer game or the old fashioned tabletop game board style, will be a cost effective action from the very beginning of the project. Depending on the learning content of the game, different models will yield better results than its counterpart.

The purpose of this work is to determine the most effective marketing techniques for promoting an educational game, whether it be multi-media constructions or traditional board game models.

Multi-media versions of a game will most likely show the most cost effective production model and will exceed demand over the model of a physical board game made of traditional materials, as opposed to a scenario in which the multi-media version of an educational game will provide neither the most nor the least cost effective production strategy and will neither exceed nor lessen demand for a physical board game.

Additional questions include: What are the various mediums which would be most cost effective in terms of production for an educational board game; Which types of media provides the riches sensate experience; What are the pros and cons of using a traditional board game format for production of an educational game; and how can the market audience be tested to provide an accurate direction toward initial production of the game?

A review of relevant studies revealed that the game model required for an educational game, greatly depended upon the content of the learning desired from the game, and that teachers need to be involved in a collaboration with the game designer in order to produce a game that met the objectives of the curriculum as well as making the game interesting for the players.

Much of the literature review focused on computer games as they are quite popular among school aged boys and girls, as well as adults. Data collected included a survey which polled an online community of educators.

Literature Review:

Given the interest generated by computer games, educational technology is involved with computer games that utilize problem solving capability, but an interest in nostalgia and retro-style graphics may bring some students to embrace an old standard, known to many generations: the board game. Board games have staying power, and unlike computer games, which have short life cycles, and flood the market with the presence and slip away into oblivion when a new format or technology emerges. But the model of game should be decided by the designer working with the teacher, implementing the need for learning, and the educational game model, whether it is the board game, or a computer game, should emerge from the lessons required.

The purpose of this work is to determine the most effective marketing techniques for promoting and educational game, whether it be multi-media constructions or traditional board game models.

A review of relevant studies begins with the work of Wim Westera’s work where it overviews the challenges of ever changing technology which both flood the market as well as become outdated quickly. This is significant as it demonstrates that electronic media does in fact manifest and fade quickly in the world of electronic media, and perhaps indicates that the efforts of construction of an educational game would be best suited, initially, as a board game. At its simplest, an educational game operating within the environment of the internet, the model may change abruptly and suddenly and require it be reprogrammed into a new format. “While it previously took hundreds or even thousands years for a new mode of communication to develop, in the last few decades we have seen new information and communication technologies emerge at an unprecedented pace” (Westera, 2015, Pg. 21). This points to a preference in developing the game first as a tactile model within the paradigm of a traditional board game, which may be preserved as long as materials are available for its simple construction. Paper, cardboard, dice and a simple set of player pieces is all that is required to maintain its design.

Many educational games are largely based on solving problems and have a strong similarity to the field of problem-based learning. Often times game producers will package the notion of solving problems into a computer game environment. “These [computer games] are often linked to conquer, chase and save-the-city kinds of objectives that once experiences in Galaga, Pac-Man, or Missile Command” (Shelton & Walker, 2008, Pg. 665). But not all educational games require this scenario, for surely a chase and conquer game may be a good format for electronic media, and an educational game may be designed so as to provide an overall perspective of life, rather than a battle. An educational game that teaches Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs may actually be preferred in a format in which it could be played on a table top, rather than on the internet or an action-packed video game. Perhaps a more intimate model provided by the board game would have a sense of nostalgia in the game model and would be more apt to be played by members of a family, which would be a beneficial environment in which to learn such life lessons.

Electronic media, particularly television, has long been criticized in terms of its negative effects on children, especially as it provides violent content, and we can see this similar effect in such games as Grand Theft Auto, and similar games in which violence is promoted. “Early exposure to age-appropriate programs designed around an educational curriculum is associated with cognitive and academic enhancement, whereas exposure to pure entertainment, and violent content in particular, is associated with poorer cognitive development and lower academic achievement” (Anderson, Kerkorian & Wartella, 2008, Pg. 38). Since television, and similarly, video games may provide for the content of violence in it’s action based format, it might be best to move away from the media-rich environment of the computer game and embrace the quaintness of the board game model.

It is becoming apparent that some types of learning may be best included within the computer game model as well as other types of learning may be enhanced with the board game model. Many board games are based on a Trivial Pursuits type of scheme, in which the dice are rolled and the player piece is moved to an area on the game board which prompts a question to be answered. This provides for a quiz environment in which the student will answer questions. The problem with this scheme is that the student either knows the answer or does not. There is no learning going on in this type of game. “If the goal of using games in the classroom is to allow players to demonstrate previously gained knowledge, then the trivia-game model may be appropriate” (Nicholson, 2011, Pg. 61). Surely there are ways in which a table top board game can be used to teach, rather than answer quiz questions.

A way to teach using the model must be designed into the game. One could use a card game to help music students memorize key signatures is one way we can both move away from the computer game model as well as the quiz environment. Such is the work of Kimberly Hughes, who designed a game to teach music elements to children, entitled Crazy Eighths. This game teaches a language and asks questions simultaneously. “Teachers’ motivation for providing skill-based music education to youngsters seems to be to introduce the children to the language of music, a language to which they have not been exposed” (Amram & Ghere, 2007, Pg. 60). A card game which illustrates the elements of music in which they may be learned independent from the environment of music, then upon returning to that environment, another memory storage tag for the student, is allowed to work within the mind of the student. This is not a major overview of a subject, but rather a focus on details that make up elements of a larger vista.

Attention must be paid to the type of content which students are accessing through game models, regardless of the model, be it computer game or board game. “…we cannot simply throw any kind of content at the students and expect them to learn. There is a need for high quality content, built with solid educational principles.” (Fernandez-Manjon, Martinez-Ortiz & Moreno-Ger, 2009, Pg. 360). Learning musical ideas within a card game does indeed follow sound pedagogy, but stealing cars and running over pimps with automobiles is not a valid study for anyone, really. The curriculum of the class may be a reference when it comes to producing an educational game which has sound pedagogical merit.

Another thing to consider is the learning differences between boys and girls. In as study that used a role playing game to measure improved internet reflective skills it was apparent the girls did not improve, or did not develop reflective internet skills as shown by Wilfried Admiraal, “Boys increased their scores significantly… and girls did not, staying at their high level of the pre-test” (Admiraal, 2009, Pg. 306). It would seem that girls are not as involved with the internet, at least in terms of role playing games which have an educational element. This must certainly be addressed when developing educational games, regardless of the model type.

Another issue with game development is getting teachers involved with using games within the classroom. Teachers tested for understanding design elements of educational games ranked poorly as shown by Melero and Hernández-Leo, “ 8 out of the 11 participants thought that they correctly understood the elements for the design of the game. However, participants have troubles with understanding some of the elements” (Hernández-Leo & Melero, 2014, Pg. 203). It seems that teachers must be educated in the elements of educational game design and this education would help teachers be more likely to use games as a learning tool.

One way to look at teaching is problem solving methods which may be taught to students. Games can indeed be designed to learn problem solving, but designing a game to learn a problem may also help solve the problem. “Teaching a skill (e.g., problem-solving) through game-design requires instructional activities to be informed by the theories in the targeted domain” (Akcaoglu, 2014, Pg. 586). Designing a game in a targeted domain requires the use of problem solving within that domain. The act of designing problem solving within a field actually solves problems within that field. It reflects the cliché: Defining the problem solves the problem.

Teen age students do seem to have some interest in nostalgia and retro style in terms of graphics as demonstrated by feedback: “I had been struck by the enthusiasm and wry understanding many young people brought to “old media” popular culture texts, such as The Simpsons or Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” (Beavis, 2014, Pg. 434). Given this understanding, a board game may seem welcome within the confines of teen age pedagogy. A board game may be a positive change and alternative for young people who are constantly immersed in computer game and video virtual environments.

Gaming in the classroom provides opportunities for students to grow through improved communications skills. As the game progresses, responses of the other team are observed by team players, and are taken into account when progressing through the game: “Trial and error and peer observation let students become aware of improper responses from the other teams and adjust their planning in next round of the game” (Chen, Huang & Wu, 2014, Pg. 218). Learning through experience can be shown to take an active role in classroom games, especially in terms of language based, action or role playing games. A slower paced board game may be more suitable for learning communications skills, rather than other types of problems which require quick responses, rather than though-out responses.

Upon the review of this literature, the null hypothesis seems apparent. The literature seems to point to a positive model in the board game for some learning activities, but not for others. Depending upon the intent of the instructor, the game designer must be able to interpret what the students must learn, as well as find a suitable set of game mechanics in order to deliver such an environment within the game’s structure. Most of the literature reviewed did not embrace the intent of production and marketing, but rather pedagogy was the primary focus with the texts. Still, there seems to be a valid assumption that board games would be welcome by a variety of students. When we consider the rapid life cycle of electronic media, the way they flood the markets and go out of currency, being replaced by new formats or technology, as it moves rapidly through the foundations of learning, the internet, and even television, a board game would be a real asset to many students. There seems to be a desire by many to employ a nostalgic or retro-styling within the game, and the very nature of a board game is nostalgic in itself. A board game will still be present on the shelves of the class rooms and living rooms while programers rapidly scramble to recode computer game for new media and formats.

There is also an appeal to those who learn through tactile sensation, with a board game construction. It is something which students may hold within their hands, as they move their player piece across the board, and responding to the prompts promoted by the game’s mechanics. The students are actively participating, as the move and play the game, and this provides neuromuscular stimulation as well as engaging the cerebral cortex. The difference between the need for a board game or a computer game seems to be in the problem they may be trying to solve, and the speed and activities used to solve those problems. A board game is generally slower-paced than a computer game which requires hand-eye coordination, rather than engaging the cortex for analytical thinking. Language based games seem to be more beneficial to students when they are played in a slower paced environment which the board game provides.

A board game, as an initial investment has a greater lasting power over computer games, if it has been shown to teach the problems solving goals the designer as well as the teacher. The teachers need to be involved in the design process, and work with the game designers, as well as the students to help actualize the right game for the right subjects. There is no reason why a board game could not be adapted for a variety of media, after the board game has shown that it is valuable as a pedagogical method of teaching. It can be provided for many applications such as smart phones, internet or even game stations within the home, but again, these formats tend to have rapid life cycles, and a need for further programming, once the media inevitably changes. The board game seems to be the way to go, for the initial introduction of the learning method, given in an educational game design.

Action Research Steps:

Much of the literature review focused on computer games as they are quite popular among school aged boys and girls, as well as adults.

The purpose of this work is to determine the most effective marketing techniques for promoting and educational game, whether it be multi-media constructions or traditional board game models. Multi-media versions of a game will most likely show the most cost effective production model and will exceed demand over the model of a physical board game made of traditional materials, as opposed to a scenario in which the multi-media version of an educational game will provide neither the most nor the least cost effective production strategy and will neither exceed nor lessen demand for a physical board game. Additional questions include: What are the various mediums which would be most cost effective in terms of production for an educational board game; Which types of media provides the riches sensate experience; What are the pros and cons of using a traditional board game format for production of an educational game; and how can the market audience be tested to provide an accurate direction toward initial production of the game?

Given the content of the lesson, and the fun nature of the educational game, the game itself should emerge within and because of the synergy and cooperation of the game designer and the teacher themselves. It may be the case that a game which teaches hand-eye coordination and a specific set of physical skills, would be shown as superior to the tabletop board game. Perhaps the tabletop board game would be best suited for diplomatic, social and intellectual, educational goals.

Findings:

The purpose of this work is to determine the most effective marketing techniques for promoting an educational game, whether it be multi-media constructions or traditional board game models. Multi-media versions of a game will most likely show the most cost effective production model and will exceed demand over the model of a physical board game made of traditional materials, as opposed to a scenario in which the multi-media version of an educational game will provide neither the most nor the least cost effective production strategy and will neither exceed nor lessen demand for a physical board game. Additional questions include: What are the various mediums which would be most cost effective in terms of production for an educational board game; Which types of media provides the riches sensate experience; What are the pros and cons of using a traditional board game format for production of an educational game; and how can the market audience be tested to provide an accurate direction toward initial production of the game?

In order to have a quantitative component to this work, a survey of ten relevant questions was placed on the internet, which sampled responses from 17 individuals in the target population. No data was gathered about the individuals other than their responses to the survey.

Survey users seemed to be more certain, when it comes to using games for learning concepts, that computer games would be more conducive to learning concepts. This is illustrated by comparing the data of questions 5 and 6. Question 5 states that “Do you think that you could learn more concepts from tabletop board games than computer games?” and question 6 interrogates: “Do you think that you could learn more concepts from computer games than tabletop games?” and the data returned was as follows:
Question 05: yes=3, no=4, not sure=10, Question 06: yes=2, no=4, not sure=10.

Survey users seemed more certain, that in regard to packaging influences purchasing, when it came to table top games, rather than computer games, and this is displayed in the data when comparing questions 3 and 4. Question 3 asks “Do packaging and art for computer games influence you in regard to purchasing one?” and question 4 requests: “Do the box, player pieces and cards for tabletop board games influence you in regard to purchasing one?” The data for those questions is as follows:
Question 3: yes=8, no=7, not sure=2, Question 04: yes=9, no=6, not sure=2.

Survey users seemed slightly more certain that when it comes to graphics making the game more fun, when it comes to table tops games, over computer games. This tendency is measured in Questions 9 and 10. Question 9 inquires: “Does the packaging art for computer games make them more fun to play?”, and Question 10 asks: ”Do the box, player pieces and cards make tabletop games more fun to play?”. The data returned on these questions is as follows:
Question 09: yes=3, no=12, not sure=2, Question 10: yes=4, no=11, not sure=2.

Most of the users seemed uncertain when it came to learning concepts from playing games. This tendency is expressed when comparing Question 5 with Question 6. Question 5 requests: “Do you think that you could learn more concepts from tabletop board games than computer games?” and Question 6: “Do you think that you could learn more concepts from computer games than tabletop games?”, The data set returned for these questions is as follows:
Question 05: yes=3, no=4, not sure=10, Question 06: yes=2, no=4, not sure=10.

Nearly all of the survey users seemed most certain that games help to learn important concepts, which seems contradictory compared to the previous Questions 5 and 6, but it illustrated clearly in the data returned for Question 2, only, which inquires: “Do you think that you can learn important concepts from playing games?”, and the data set for that question is as follows:
Question 02: yes=16, no=1, not sure=0.

Most of the survey users, it seems, like to play games. This tendency is revealed in the data return for Question 1, which asks: “Do you like to play to play games?”, and the data from that question is as follows:
Question 01: yes=15, no=1, not sure=1.

Conclusions:

The only observable near-certainties were gathered by looking at the data for over all trends in the responses. In other words, overwhelming responses either negative, positive or neutral were sought and only two instances were shown to be facets that seemed to merit attention.

The first of these tendencies was indicated by an overwhelming positive response which indicated that nearly everyone surveyed thought that games help to learn important concepts. Again, this is visible in the data set of Question 2. In no way did this survey reflect the findings gained through the literature review where some of the main topics included: The tendency for a computer game to flood the market and then disappear; teachers should be part of the design process for educational game production; there is a need for high quality content with solid educational principles; teen age students do seem to have an interest in retro game graphics; a slower paced game model seems best for cultivation of communications skills; and a board game could outlast a computer game in terms of its lifespan or customer interest.

The second tendency was that nearly everyone taking the survey indicated that they like to play games, and is displayed in the data set for Question 1. The survey was not designed to verify the subjects of the literature review, but rather to augment the data collection with a sampling of a random population.

Meanings:

The survey used to gather data for this paper seemed to be ill-fitted for the project, although the data is valuable as a superficial glance at tendencies in a random population, and may ultimately prove to be helpful in future research. The survey was not designed with the literature review in mind, so instead of helping to prove the veracity of the points made during the literature review, it tends to simply augment the data gathering for this work, with a random population. A more solid survey would have focused specifically on individuals employed in the gaming industries. This is the limitations of real world research. One uses resources as they are available. Polling the general public through the internet will not provide insight as to manufacturer success, but can investigate a superficial set of tendencies in a random group.

References

Admiraal, W. (2015). A role-play game to facilitate the development of students’ reflective internet skills. Educational Technology & Society, 301-308.Akcaoglu, M. (2014). Learning problem-solving through making games at the game design and learning summer program. Education Technology Research Development, 583-600.

Amram, F., Ghere, D. (2007). Inventing music education games. Cambridge University Press, 55-75.

Anderson, D., Kirkorian, H, Wartella, E. (2008). Media and children’s learning. The Future of Children, 39-61.

Bevis, C. (2014). Games as text, Games as Action, video games in the English classroom. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 433-439.

Chen, G., Huang, C., Wu, C. (2014). Using digital board games for genuine communication in EFL classrooms. Education Tech Research Development, 209-226.

Fernandez-Manjonn, B., Martinez-Ortiz, I., Moreno-Ger, T. (2009). Integration and deployment of educational games in e-learning environments: the learning object model meets educational gaming. Educational Technology & Society, 359-371.

Hernández-Leo, D., Melero, J., (2007). A model for the design of puzzle-based games including virtual and physical objects. Educational Technology & Society, 192-207.

Nicolson, S. (2011). Designing educational tabletop games. Knowledge Quest—Educational Gaming, 60-65.

Shelton, B., Walker, A. (2008). Problem-based educational games: connections, prescriptions, and assessment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 663-684.

Westera, W. (2015). Reframing the role of educational media technologies. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 19-32.

Appendix:

The following survey was used to collect data from the internet. The url location for this instrument is: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/7VNJYNL

01. Do you like to play to play games?

02. Do you think that you can learn important concepts from playing games?

03. Do packaging and art for computer games influence you in regard to purchasing one?

04. Do the box, player pieces and cards for tabletop board games influence you in regard to purchasing one?

05. Do you think that you could learn more concepts from tabletop board games than computer games?

06. Do you think that you could learn more concepts from computer games than tabletop games?

07. Do you think that computer games would be the most fun for learning concepts?

08. Do you think that tabletop board games would be the most fun for learning concepts?

09. Does the packaging art for computer games make them more fun to play?

10. Do the box, player pieces and cards make tabletop games more fun to play?

The following are the cumulative responses for each question in the instrument, with a total targeted population of 17 individuals surveyed:

Question 01: yes=15, no=1, not sure=1

Question 02: yes=16, no=1, not sure=0

Question 03: yes=8, no=7, not sure=2

Question 04: yes=9, no=6, not sure=2

Question 05: yes=3, no=4, not sure=10

Question 06: yes=2, no=4, not sure=10

Question 07: yes=5, no=6, not sure=6

Question 08: yes=4, no=8, not sure=5

Question 09: yes=3, no=12, not sure=2

Question 10: yes=4, no=11, not sure=2

Terry Hale Design

Robust Visual and Educational Technology Design

Research

Board Games as Educational Vehicles

Electronic Media v. Traditional Board Games in Educational Game Marketing