Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 22, Issue 6, pp 877–898 | Cite as

Game-Based Learning in Science Education: A Review of Relevant Research

  • Ming-Chaun LiEmail author
  • Chin-Chung TsaiEmail author


The purpose of this study is to review empirical research articles regarding game-based science learning (GBSL) published from 2000 to 2011. Thirty-one articles were identified through the Web of Science and SCOPUS databases. A qualitative content analysis technique was adopted to analyze the research purposes and designs, game design and implementation, theoretical backgrounds and learning foci of these reviewed studies. The theories and models employed by these studies were classified into four theoretical foundations including cognitivism, constructivism, the socio-cultural perspective, and enactivism. The results indicate that cognitivism and constructivism were the major theoretical foundations employed by the GBSL researchers and that the socio-cultural perspective and enactivism are two emerging theoretical paradigms that have started to draw attention from GBSL researchers in recent years. The analysis of the learning foci showed that most of the digital games were utilized to promote scientific knowledge/concept learning, while less than one-third were implemented to facilitate the students’ problem-solving skills. Only a few studies explored the GBSL outcomes from the aspects of scientific processes, affect, engagement, and socio-contextual learning. Suggestions are made to extend the current GBSL research to address the affective and socio-contextual aspects of science learning. The roles of digital games as tutor, tool, and tutee for science education are discussed, while the potentials of digital games to bridge science learning between real and virtual worlds, to promote collaborative problem-solving, to provide affective learning environments, and to facilitate science learning for younger students are also addressed.


Science education Science learning Game-based learning Digital games 



This research was supported by the projects from the National Science Council, Taiwan, under contract number NSC 98-2511-S-011-005-MY3 and NSC 99-2511-S-011-011-MY3.


References marked with an asterisk indicate the articles analyzed in this paper

  1. Alsop S, Watts M (2003) Science education and affect. Int J Sci Educ 25(9):1043–1047CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. *Anderson J, Barnett M (2011) Using video games to support pre-service elementary teachers learning of basic physics principles. J Sci Educ Technol 20(4):347–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. *Annetta LA, Minogue J, Holmes SY, Cheng MT (2009) Investigating the impact of video games on high school students’ engagement and learning about genetics. Comput Educ 53(1):74–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barab S, Dede C (2007) Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: an emerging type of curricula. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. *Barab S, Zuiker S, Warren S, Hickey D, Ingram-Goble A, Kwon EJ, Herring SC (2007) Situationally embodied curriculum: relating formalisms and contexts. Sci Educ 91(5):750–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. *Barab SA, Scott B, Siyahhan S, Goldstone R, Ingram-Goble A, Zuiker SJ, Warren S (2009) Transformational play as a curricular scaffold: using videogames to support science education. J Sci Educ Technol 18(4):305–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Becker K (2007) Pedagogy in commercial video games. In: Gibson D, Clark A, Prensky M (eds) Games and simulations in online learning: research and development frameworks. Information Science Publishing, Hershey, pp 21–47Google Scholar
  8. *Carr D, Bossomaier T (2011) Relativity in a rock field: a study of physics learning with a computer game. Aus J Educ Technol 27(6):1042–1067Google Scholar
  9. *Cheng MT, Annetta L, Folta E, Holmes SY (2011) Drugs and the brain: learning the impact of methamphetamine abuse on the brain through a virtual brain exhibit in the museum. Int J Sci Educ 33(2):299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. *Clark DB, Nelson BC, Chang HY, Martinez-Garza M, Slack K, D’Angelo CM (2011) Exploring Newtonian mechanisms in a conceptually-integrated digital game: comparison of learning and affective outcomes for students in Taiwan and the United States. Comput Educ 57(3):2178–2195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark DB, Nelson BC, Sengupta P, D’Angelo CM (2009) Rethinking science learning through digital games and simulations: Genres, examples, and evidence. Paper commissioned for The National Research Council Workshop on Gaming and Simulations, Washington.
  12. Connolly TM, Boyle EA, MacArthur E, Hainey T, Boyle JM (2012) A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput Educ 59(2):661–686. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Divjak B, Tomić D (2011) The impact of game-based learning on the achievement of learning goals and motivation for learning mathematics—literature review. J Inf Organiz Sci 35(1):15–30Google Scholar
  14. Ducheneaut N, Moore RJ (2005) More than just ‘XP’: learning social skills in massively multiplayer online games. Int Technol Smart Educ 2(2):89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. *Echeverría A, García-Campo C, Nussbaum M, Gil F, Villalta M, Améstica M, Echeverría S (2011) A framework for the design and integration of collaborative classroom games. Comput Educ 57(1):1127–1136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Egenfeldt-Nielsen S (2006) Overview of research on the educational use of video games. Digital Kompetanse 1(3):184–213Google Scholar
  17. El-Nasr MS, Smith BK (2006) Learning through game modding. Comput Entertain 4(1):45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ertmer PA, Newby TJ (1993) Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Perform Improv Quart 6(4):50–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris AH (2004) School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev Educ Res 74(1):59–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gee JP (2007) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (Revised and updated edition). Palgrave Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Hämäläinen R, Arvaja M (2009) Scripted collaboration and group-based variations in a higher education CSCL context. Scand J Educ Res 53(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. *Hickey DT, Ingram-Goble AA, Jameson EM (2009) Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. J Sci Educ Technol 18(2):187–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Honey MA, Hilton M (eds) (2011) Learning science through computer games and simulations. National Academy of Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  24. *Hsu CY, Tsai CC, Liang JC (2011) Facilitating preschoolers’ scientific knowledge construction via computer games regarding light and shadow: the effect of the Prediction- Observation-Explanation (POE) strategy. J Sci Educ Technol 20(5):482–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hwang GJ, Wu PH (2012) Advancements and trends in digital game-based learning research: a review of publications in selected journals from 2001 to 2010. Br J Educ Technol 43(1):E6–E10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Inal Y, Cagiltay K (2007) Flow experiences of children in an interactive social game environment. Br J Educ Technol 38(3):455–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Janssen J, Erkens G, Kirschner PA, Kanselaar G (2012) Task-related and social regulation during online collaborative learning. Metacogn Learn 7(1):25–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jayakanthan R (2002) Application of computer games in the field of education. Elect Lib 20(2):98–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. *Johnson CI, Mayer RE (2010) Applying the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Comput Hum Behav 26(6):1246–1252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Johnson L, Smith R, Willis H, Levine A, Haywood K (2011) The 2011 Horizon Report. The New Media Consortium, Austin. Retrieved from
  31. *Kali Y (2003) A virtual journey within the rock-cycle: a software kit for the development of systems-thinking in the context of the Earth’s crust. J Geosci Educ 51(2):165–170Google Scholar
  32. *Khalili N, Sheridan K, Williams A, Clark K, Stegman M (2011) Students designing video games about immunology: insights for science learning. Comput Schools 28(3):228–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lee SWY, Tsai CC, Wu YT, Tsai MJ, Liu TC, Hwang FK, Chang CY (2011) Internet-based science learning: a review of journal publications. Int J Sci Educ 33(14):1893–1925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. *Li Q (2010) Digital game building: learning in a participatory culture. Educ Res 52(4):427–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Li Q, Clark B, Winchester I (2010) Instructional design and technology grounded in enactivism: a paradigm shift? Br J Educ Technol 41(3):403–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lim CP (2008) Spirit of the game: empowering students as designers in schools? Br J Educ Technol 39(6):996–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. *Lim CP, Nonis D, Hedberg J (2006) Gaming in a 3D multiuser virtual environment: engaging students in science lessons. Br J Educ Technol 37(2):211–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Maxmen A (2010) Video games and the second life of science class. Cell 141(2):201–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. *Mayer RE, Johnson CI (2010) Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. J Educ Comput Res 42(3):241–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mayo MJ (2007) Games for science and engineering education. Commun ACM 50(7):30–35. doi: 10.1145/1272516.1272536 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. *Miller L, Moreno J, Willcockson I, Smith D, Mayes J (2006) An online, interactive approach to teaching neuroscience to adolescents. CBE Life Sci Educ 5(2):137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. *Miller L, Schweingruber H, Oliver R, Mayes J, Smith D (2002) Teaching neuroscience through Web adventures: adolescents reconstruct the history and science of opioids. Neuroscientist 8(1):16–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. *Moreno R, Mayer RE (2000) Engaging students in active learning: the case for personalized multimedia messages. J Educ Psychol 92(4):724–733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. *Moreno R, Mayer RE (2002) Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: role of methods and media. J Educ Psychol 94(3):598–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. *Moreno R, Mayer RE (2004) Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. J Educ Psychol 96(1):165–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. *Moreno R, Mayer RE (2005) Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agent-based multimedia game. J Educ Psychol 97(1):117–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. *Nilsson EM, Jakobsson A (2011) Simulated sustainable societies: students’ reflections on creating future cities in computer games. J Sci Educ Technol 20(1):33–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Oblinger D (2004) The next generation of educational engagement. J Interact Media Educ 8. Retrieved from
  49. OECD (2003) The PISA 2003 assessment framework: mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills. Retrieved from
  50. O’Loughlin M (1992) Rethinking science education: beyond piagetian constructivism toward a sociocultural model of teaching and learning. J Res Sci Teach 29(8):791–820CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. O’Neil HF, Wainess R, Baker EL (2005) Classification of learning outcomes: evidence from the computer games literature. Curr J 16(4):455–474. doi: 10.1080/09585170500384529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Osborne J, Simon S, Collins S (2003) Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. Int J Sci Educ 25(9):1049–1079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Prensky M (2001) Digital game-based learning. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  54. Prensky M (2008) Students as designers and creators of educational computer games: who else? Br J Educ Technol 39(6):1004–1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Price S, Rogers Y, Scaife M, Stanton D, Neale H (2003) Using ‘tangibles’ to promote novel forms of playful learning. Interact Comput 15(2):169–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rieber LP, Smith L, Noah D (1998) The value of serious play. Educ Technol 38(6):29–37Google Scholar
  57. Roberts TS, McInnerney JM (2007) Seven problems of online group learning (and their solutions). Educ Technol Soc 10(4):257–268Google Scholar
  58. Rosenbaum E, Klopfer E, Perry J (2007) On location learning: authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):31–45. doi: 10.1007/s10956-006-9036-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. *Sánchez J, Olivares R (2011) Problem solving and collaboration using mobile serious games. Comput Educ 57(3):1943–1952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shih JL, Shih BJ, Shih CC, Su HY, Chuang CW (2010) The influence of collaboration styles to children’s cognitive performance in digital problem-solving game “william adventure”: a comparative case study. Comput Educ 55(3):982–993. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. *Spires HA, Rowe JP, Mott BW, Lester JC (2011) Problem solving and game-based learning: effects of middle grade students’ hypothesis testing strategies on learning outcomes. J Educ Comput Res 44(4):453–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. *Squire K, Jan M (2007) Mad city mystery: developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):5–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Squire K, Jenkins H (2003) Harnessing the power of games in education. InSight 3. Retrieved from
  64. *Squire K, Klopfer E (2007) Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. J Learn Sci 16(3):371–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Steinkuehler C, Duncan S (2008) Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. J Sci Educ Technol 17(6):530–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Stone SJ, Glascott K (1997) The affective side of science instruction. Child Educ 74(2):102–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Taylor R (ed) (1980) The computer in the school: tutor, tool, tutee. Teachers College Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  68. *Ting YL (2010) Using mainstream game to teach technology through an interest framework. Educ Technol Soc 13(2):141–152Google Scholar
  69. *Tüysüz C (2009) Effect of the computer based game on pre-service teachers’ achievement, attitudes, metacognition and motivation in chemistry. Sci Res Essays 4(8):780–790Google Scholar
  70. Vogel JJ, Vogel DS, Cannon-Bowers J, Bowers GA, Muse K, Wright M (2006) Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: a meta-analysis. J Educ Comput Res 34(3):229–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wang F, Hannafin M (2005) Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educ Tech Res Dev 53(4):5–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. *Wrzesien M, Raya MA (2010) Learning in serious virtual worlds: evaluation of learning effectiveness and appeal to students in the E-Junior project. Comput Educ 55(1):178–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. *Yien JM, Hung CM, Hwang GJ, Lin YC (2011) A game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning achievements in a nutrition course. Turkish Online J Educ Technol 10(2):1–10Google Scholar
  74. Young MF, Slota S, Cutter AB, Jalette G, Mullin G, Lai B, Yukhymenko M (2012) Our princess is in another castle: a review of trends in serious gaming for education. Rev Educ Res 82(1):61–89. doi: 10.3102/0034654312436980 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zurita G, Nussbaum M (2004) Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Comput Educ 42(3):289–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate Institute of Applied Science and TechnologyNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipei 106Taiwan
  2. 2.Graduate Institute of Digital Learning and EducationNational Taiwan University of Science and TechnologyTaipei 106Taiwan

Personalised recommendations