Digital Assessment Project

Cyndi Threatt

Gaming Performance And Motivation Study

Cyndi Threatt

Introduction

Games have been used as a tool in education to both motivate and promote student

achievement for quite some time. Gaming is regarded as a learning means that can capture student

interest and keep their attention. As a result, many educators have been utilizing digital gaming.

Within my own classroom, gaming has become an integral part of instruction. As an educator, the

goal is to increase student active learning and participation to ensure performance is at an optimum

level. This begs the question; How are students motivated to perform best through digital

gaming? This paper will look at individual versus collaborative gaming, as well as, if tangible rewards

impact student performance. A fourth-grade class of fifteen students was studied for five consecutive

weeks. The platform Quizizz was used both individually and collaboratively during these weeks.

Each week, as students played the game a different way, they were offered a different reward.

Review of Literature -

There is a breadth research that points to the cognitive benefits of using games as a learning

tool in the classroom. Many articles point out how games engage and motivate learners while also

strengthening content knowledge. I set my focus specifically to educational contexts that reviewed

the difference between collaborative and individual implementation of gaming and how it affects

performance and student initiative.

I found that research weighed heavily on the positive impacts of optimizing cooperative

gaming. Immediately I noted that “early work on cooperative learning in the classroom context

suggests that peer collaboration may have positive effects on academic achievement across a variety

of content areas [and] cooperative learning has also been found to increase positive attitudes toward

school generally and mathematics a subject area.” (Plass, O'Keefe, Homer, Case, Hayward, Stein &
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
Perlin, 2013, p. 1051). This study from The Impact of Individual, Competitive, and Collaborative

Mathematics Game Play on Learning, Performance, and Motivation emphasized that for collaboration

to be beneficial and show success, the activity must depend on all team members contributing to the

group and each member being held accountable. Due to this, during student game play within my

own study, I decided to make each student responsible for turning in their own work. This ensured

the responsibility of each player in the partner group and encouraged each individual student to show

understanding of the math, how to work it out, and why.

Another study, The Guilded Classroom: Using Gamification to Engage and Motivate

Undergraduates focused solely on cooperative game play. It noted the complete change of

classroom climate, stating “[a] recurring theme was the positive classroom climate where students

seemed focused on learning and future growth rather than getting caught up on their mistakes.”

(Gresskick & Langston, 2017, p. 120).

Rebecca Burton really dove into the strengths and weakness of collaborative gaming in her

article Playing the Long Game: Some Pros and Cons of Working Collaboratively. Like others, Burton

esteemed the greater possibility of success, “With many different people working together, there is a

greater chance of success in achieving the desired result,” (Burton, 2017, p. 41) and that “capitalizing

on the participants’ strong suits and arranging tasks according to people’s strengths, training, and

interests,” (Butron. 2017, p. 42) also skyrocket success. Burton does bring light to cons of

collaborative gaming as well, noting, gaming “may be slow going”, has the potential for “loss of focus,”

and may overall “increase burnout.” (Burton, 2017, p. 42).

I also was very interested in the impact giving a reward for winning and if it impacted student

motivation. The Role of Information in Bargaining: An Experimental Study explored the impact of

tangible rewards. Much like my case study Roth and Murnighan told their participants “In each game

of that experiment, players bargained over the probability that they would receive a certain monetary

prize.” Although the structure of their study was completely different than mine I was surprised to see
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
they concluded “The first experiment demonstrated an effect of information about the monetary prizes

which could not be accounted for in terms of the preferences of the players over the set of

consequences.” (Roth & Murnighan, 1982, p.1141) Basically, the reward really did not have a huge

impact on results. Originally, I thought working toward a prize would be a huge contributing factor for

my class.

This review of literature legitimately helped me to formulate a hypothesis that I would see the

most success and student stimulus through collaborative game play, regardless of the prize offered. I

felt students would be motivated to work with one another and feed off of each other’s strengths.

Methodology

After extensively reviewing literature on how gaming impacts student motivation, I developed

an outline to implement a case study in which I examined and reviewed how students were motivated

to perform best using the digital game Quizizz. Over the course of five weeks, I worked with a group

of fifteen fourth grade students, in a low-income school, with mixed performance levels. Three days a

week, as an activating strategy to math class, students played a round of Quizizz with ten spiral

review math questions on topics previously taught throughout the year. Quizizz is a digital gaming

tool that allows students to battle for a top spot. It is player paced. Every student gets the exact

same questions, though they may appear in a different order. When you host a Quizizz game, you

are able to see a real-time view of the game's results. Quizizz shows the percent of questions

answered correctly as a class and a progress bars for each player. For the instructor it is a great tool

to see at a quick glance how many questions a player has answered correctly, incorrectly, and what

they have left to answer. Students in the class were familiar with Quizizz prior to the study.

Week 1: Students individually played Quizizz Spiral Math Review. Students were required to

use scratch paper to work out math problems. The top 3 students received a piece of candy at the

end of the game. The top 3 students were also displayed on an ongoing class leaderboard.

Week 2: Students played Quizizz Spiral Math Review in partner groups. Students could
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
choose a partner they preferred to work with. Both partners were responsible for turning in work.

The top 3 groups received a piece of candy at the end of the game. The top 3 groups were also

displayed on an ongoing class leaderboard.

Week 3: Students individually played Quizizz Spiral Math Review. Students were required to

use scratch paper to work out math problems. If the entire class made an 80% or better on the game

then the whole class received a piece of candy. No tangible rewards were given if the class scored

below 80%. Top 3 students were displayed on the leaderboard.

Week 4: Students played Quizizz Spiral Math Review in partner groups. Students could

choose a partner they preferred to work with. Both partners were responsible for turning in work. If

the entire class made an 80% or better on the game then the whole class received a piece of candy.

No tangible rewards were given if the class scored below 80%. Top 3 groups were displayed on the

leaderboard.

Week 5: Students completed a student choice survey where they expressed what modality

they enjoyed playing best and what motivates them. Student questions indicated if they preferred:

-Working individually

-Working with friends

-Getting a tangible prize

-Being displayed on the leaderboard

Analysis

There were several methods used to collect and analyze both quantitative and qualitative data

throughout the weeks of study. During the time students were physically playing the game, I

recorded video of them to reflect on body language, level of engagement, and note any comments

made. Second, Quizizz automatically creates a user report for the teacher. This report was heavily

used to monitor and distinguish student performance. Also, at the end of each game I collected

scratch paper used to work out problems. This paper indicated who was actually and intentionally
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
working out each problem in order to advance in the game. Last, I surveyed students to get a

firsthand understanding of their personal motivations. These components help to definitively answer

how are students motivated to perform best through digital gaming?

Below is a sampling from each data report and the student interest survey.

Quizizz Reports Sample, Week 1

Quizizz Report, Week 2

Quizizz Report, Week 3

Student Survey Responses:

Findings

When reviewing quantitative and qualitative data I focused my findings into two groups;

performance and motivation.

Performance:

As evidenced by the quantitative data above students performed best in collaborative partner

groups. During week 2 as an entire the class the averages of the Quizizz game were 63%, 90% and

89%. Week 4 had similar results with the means being 90%, 64% and 85%. This was a huge

difference from weeks 1 and 3 when students were playing independently. The mean for week 1 was

57%, 43%, 52% and for week 3 was 57%, 66%, 56%. Additionally, student scratch work turned in

supported this evidence. Weeks 2 and 4 had a significant amount more problems worked on a page

then Weeks 1 and 3. This coincided with Burton’s statement “With many different people working

together, there is a greater chance of success in achieving the desired result,” (Burton, 2017, p. 41)

6/15 students consistently worked every problem throughout the 4 weeks and utilized work space

regardless of modality. 1/15 students never showed work and turned in a blank scratch paper every
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
time. 8/15 worked varied problems on weeks 1 and 3 but showed significant amount of increased

work on weeks 2 and 4.

Motivation:

Overall, students were motivated by the gaming alone! 75% of students expressed that they

extremely enjoyed playing Quizizz for math review. This survey result was confirmed through video

evidence. Students immediately were excited upon the start of gaming. “Yes!”, “Quizizz time!”,

“Let’s do this!,” are a few examples of comments recorded as students begin registering for each

game. Video footage also showed a pronounced difference in levels of engagement. Week 1 and 3

while students were working independently, game play was quiet. Students were often heard sighing

when problems were difficult or answered incorrectly. Students could also be heard giving small

“yesses” when they got a question correct. During partner play, weeks 2 and 4, students were

actively engaged across the room. Partner groups were on task, reading problems aloud to each

other and offered encouragement. Some examples of student discussions caught on tape include:

“You’ve got to show your work. Here do your area model like this…,” “You figure out 6x40 and I’ll do

6x7.” Students were often seen checking the board to see who was in the lead and the overall class

score. This mirrored what I had read in research as well. Students were noticeably more positive in

their attitude and demeanor when working collaboratively.

Students were very encouraging to one another during weeks 3 and 4 as they worked for a

whole group prize. Before game play started many students would give motivating statements to the

class, “Ok guys, everyone show your work!,” “Do your best. Don’t just guess answers,” and “Take

your time!” were all statements noted.

Ironically, when surveying how the students most enjoyed playing, I found that it was an even

split between playing individually working for a prize of the top 3 winners and a place on the

leaderboard (week 1) and working in partners with a prize for the top 3 and a place on the
Digital Assessment Project
Cyndi Threatt
leaderboard (week 2). Students did not prefer working to get 80% or better for the entire class to get

a prize regardless of modality.

In terms of winning, quantitatively ¾ of students concluded they enjoyed working for a treat,

while ¼ were motivated by the chance to get a sticker on the class leaderboard. Qualitatively, I

observed that students were motivated and excited for gaming regardless of the stakes of winning.

Even through week 3 when no one earned a tangible prize at all, students remained excited for the

game each day. As the literature I reviewed stated, the actual prize didn’t seem to have a huge

impact on student motivation or performance.

Future Steps

As an educator I want to continue using Quizizz as a valuable tool for motivating student

performance. I am astounded at performance range between individual game play versus

collaborative game play. Moving forward, I will continue to put Quizizz into action within my classroom

but I will incorporate more collaborative play. This modality clearly had an impact on student

performance and motivation. Also, throughout this particular study, students could pick their own

partner groups each time. It would be interesting to see if intentional partnering had any effects on

results. I would also like to incorporate collaborative gaming into other subject areas besides just

math. Last, because of the overwhelming impact and success I saw with collaborative gaming I

would like to explore other gaming platforms that offer students a chance to each have a more

definitive role in the game play.

Works Cited:

Burton, R. (2017). Playing the Long Game: Some Pros and Cons of Working Collaboratively.

Canadian Theatre Review, 170, 40-43.

Gressick, J., & Langston, J. B. (2017). The Guilded Classroom: Using Gamification to Engage and

Motivate Undergraduates. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 17(3), 109-124.

Plass, J. L., O'Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013).

The Impact of Individual, Competitive, and Collaborative Mathematics Game Play on Learning,

Performance, and Motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050-1066. Retrieved

February 5, 2018, from https://www.coastal.edu/library/databases/index.html.

Roth, A. E., & Murnighan, J. K. (1982). The Role of Information in Bargaining: An Experimental Study.

Econometrica, 50(5), 1123-1142. doi:10.2307/1911866