Designing Engaging Educational Games and Assessing Engagement in Game-Based Learning

Introduction

Over the past two decades game-based learning has grown increasingly into a popular instructional approach due to its power to motivate and engage students in complex learning, such as problem solving, decision making, and metacognitive thinking (Kim, Park, & Baek, 2009). There has been a lot of effort to design and develop educational digital games or to use existing commercial entertaining games to create a game-based learning environment (Susi, Johanesson, & Backlund, 2007). Despite some ongoing debates over positive or negative impact of digital games, there is sufficient empirical evidence to support the benefits of digital games (including video and computer games) for learners in several aspects, such as cognitive aspect (Amory et al., 1999; Eseryel, Ge, Ifenthaler, & Law, 2011; Navarrete, 2013; Shaffer, 2006), motivational aspect (Navarrete, 2013; Johnson, 2010), emotional aspect (Virvou, Katsionis, & Manos, 2005), and social aspect (Granic, Lobel, & Engels, 2014). Researchers studying the impact of games, including the impact of massive multiple player online games (MMOG), have observed that if designed well, games could afford rich opportunities for, communication, collaboration, fantasy engagement, problem solving, hypothesis generation, identity development, and reflective thinking (Barab, Ingram-Goble, & Warren, 2008; Squire, 2008). Games also help to understand complex systems, create expressions with digital tools, and enhance social interactions (Oksanen & Hämäläinen, 2014; Squire, 2008).

Why are digital games becoming one of the popular instructional tools? The answer is simple: Games are fun and engaging. Since games have such capability and power to motivate and benefit leaners’ cognitive thinking, educational researchers have attempted to capture the fun, challenges and engagement of game playing experience and apply it to support learning and instruction (e.g., Amory et al., 1999). However, evidence shows that not all games are interesting or motivating, especially when it comes to educational games, which do not necessarily engage students or sustain their engagement over a period of time (Eseryel, Ifenthaler, & Ge, 2011). Educational games are also categorized as “serious games”, which are defined as electronic/computer-access games that are not designed primarily for commercial or entertainment purposes but rather for training users on a specific skill set for educational or training purpose (Annetta, 2010; Djaouti, Alvarez and Jessel, 2011; Michael & Chen, 2006; Susi, Johanesson, & Backlund, 2007). This type of games merges a non-entertaining purpose with a game structure (Djaouti, Alvarez, & Jessel, 2011).