Using a digital game as an advance organizer

  • André R. DenhamEmail author
Research Article


The use of digital games as an instructional tool has garnered increasing attention in the education community. Empirical work supported by theory on the learning affordances of digital games allowed the game-based learning community to arrive at the consensus that digital games provide an excellent medium for the acquisition of skills and the exploration of concepts. The field, however, lacks research on how best to teach with games. For example, an unanswered question is whether gameplay should take place before instruction, after instruction, or integrated throughout in order to maximize the effectiveness of the game. To answer this question, a study was conducted with 103 middle school students who either played a digital game designed to teach algebraic concepts before receiving formal instruction, received formal instruction before playing the game, or received formal instruction intermittently during their gameplay session. The results indicate while on average all participants showed improvement in terms of learning, those who played the game before receiving instruction showed significant improvement. These results provide evidence supporting the theory that games are effective when used as an advanced organization tool.


Digital games Game based learning Mathematics Advance organizer 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Admiraal, W., Huizenga, J., Akkerman, S., & Ten Dam, G. (2011). The concept of flow in collaborative game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1185–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Almond, R. G., Kim, Y. J., Velasquez, G., & Shute, V. J. (2014). How task features impact evidence from assessments embedded in simulations and games. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 12(1–2), 1–33.Google Scholar
  3. Arena, D. A., & Schwartz, D. L. (2014). Experience and explanation: Using videogames to prepare students for formal instruction in statistics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(4), 538–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ausubel, D. P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(5), 267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive views. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  6. Ausubel, D. P. (1978). In defense of advance organizers: A reply to the critics. Review of Educational Research, 48(2), 251–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 86–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Becker, K. (2007). Digital game based learning once removed: Teaching teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 478–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blanchard, M. R., LePrevost, C. E., Tolin, A. D., & Gutierrez, K. S. (2016). Investigating technology-enhanced teacher professional development in rural, high-poverty middle schools. Educational Researcher, 45(3), 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.Google Scholar
  11. Cheng, M. T., Su, T., Huang, W. Y., & Chen, J. H. (2014). An educational game for learning human immunology: What do students learn and how do they perceive? British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 820–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clark, R. E. (2007). Learning from serious games? Arguments, evidence, and research suggestions. Educational Technology, 47(3), 56–59.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers and Education, 59(2), 661–686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cranton, P. (2012). Planning instruction for adult learners. Toronto: Wall and Emerson.Google Scholar
  16. Crooks, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2014). Defining and measuring conceptual knowledge in mathematics. Developmental Review, 34(4), 344–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Denham, A. R. (2015). Supporting conceptual understanding of the associative and distributive properties through digital gameplay. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(6), 706–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Denham, A. R. (2016a). Improving the design of a learning game through intrinsic integration and playtesting. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 21(2), 175–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Denham, A. R., Mayben, R., & Boman, T. (2016b). Integrating game-based learning initiative: Increasing the usage of game-based learning within K-12 classrooms through professional learning groups. TechTrends, 60(1), 70–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dewey, J. (2007). Experience and education. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  21. English, R. E., & Reigeluth, C. M. (1996). Formative research on sequencing instruction with the elaboration theory. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Foster, A. N., Shah, M., & Duvall, M. (2015). Game network analysis: For teaching with games. In M. L. Niess & H. Gillow-Wiles (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education in the digital age (pp. 380–411). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frasca, G. (2003). Simulation versus narrative. In The video game theory reader (pp. 221–235). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Gagné, R. M. (1970). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  25. Gagne, R. M. (1974). Instruction and the conditions of learning. Psychology of School Learning: Views of the Learner, 1, 153–175.Google Scholar
  26. Gee, J. P. (2014). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Gerard, L. F., Varma, K., Corliss, S. B., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Professional development for technology-enhanced inquiry science. Review of Educational Research, 81(3), 408–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Habgood, J. (2005). Zombie Division: Intrinsic integration in digital learning games. Cognitive Science Research Paper: University of Sussex, 576, 45.Google Scholar
  29. Habgood, M. J., & Ainsworth, S. E. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 169–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hammer, J., & Black, J. (2009). Games and (preparation for future) learning. Educational Technology, 49(2), 29.Google Scholar
  32. Hickey, D. T., Ingram-Goble, A. A., & Jameson, E. M. (2009a). Designing assessments and assessing designs in virtual educational environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(2), 187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hickey, D. T., Kwon, E. J., & Filsecker, M. (2009b). Designing assessments, assessing designs, and motivating engagement in immersive educational videogames. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  34. Honey, M. A., & Hilton, M. (Eds.). (2010). Learning science through computer games and simulations. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  35. Hunter, M. C. (1982). Mastery teaching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hwang, G. J., Sung, H. Y., Hung, C. M., Yang, L. H., & Huang, I. (2013). A knowledge engineering approach to developing educational computer games for improving students’ differentiating knowledge. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jonassen, D. H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. P. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43(2), 24–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay? Computers and Education, 51(4), 1609–1620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kebritchi, M. (2008). Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern educational computer games. Computers and Education, 51(4), 1729–1743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers and Education, 55(2), 427–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kiili, K. (2005). Content creation challenges and flow experience in educational games: The IT-Emperor case. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(3), 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Laffey, J. M., Espinosa, L., Moore, J., & Lodree, A. (2003). Supporting learning and behavior of at-risk young children: Computers in urban education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(4), 423–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Luiten, J., Ames, W., & Ackerson, G. (1980). A meta-analysis of the effects of advance organizers on learning and retention. American Educational Research Journal, 17(2), 211–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mayer, R. E. (1979a). Can advance organizers influence meaningful learning? Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 371–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Mayer, R. E. (1979b). Twenty years of research on advance organizers: Assimilation theory is still the best predictor of results. Instructional Science, 8(2), 133–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Steven, M., & Kemp, J. E. (2004). Designing effective instruction. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  47. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington, DC: Authors.Google Scholar
  48. National Research Council. (2009). National Research Council workshop on games and simulations, October 6–7, 2009. Washington, DC: National Research Council.Google Scholar
  49. Nesbit, J. C., & Adesope, O. O. (2006). Learning with concept and knowledge maps: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 413–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Posner, G. J., & Strike, K. A. (1976). A categorization scheme for principles of sequencing content. Review of Educational Research, 46(4), 665–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Prensky, M. (2005). Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership, 63(4), 8–13.Google Scholar
  52. Relan, A. (1991). Effectiveness of a visual comparative advance organizer in teaching biology. Research in Science and Technological Education, 9(2), 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers and Education, 58(1), 136–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sánchez, J., & Olivares, R. (2011). Problem solving and collaboration using mobile serious games. Computers and Education, 57(3), 1943–1952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Scanlon, M., Buckingham, D., & Burn, A. (2005). Motivating maths? Digital games and mathematical learning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(1), 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schell, J. (2014). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shah, M., & Foster, A. (2014, March). Game Network Analysis: Developing and assessing teachers’ knowledge of game-based learning. In Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education international conference (pp. 685–692).Google Scholar
  58. Shute, V. J. (2011). Stealth assessment in computer-based games to support learning. Computer Games and Instruction, 55(2), 503–524.Google Scholar
  59. Shute, V. J., & Ke, F. (2012). Games, learning, and assessment. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 43–58). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64, 489–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Squire, K. (2005). Changing the game: What happens when video games enter the classroom. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 1(6).
  62. Stone, C. L. (1983). A meta-analysis of advance organizer studies. The Journal of Experimental Education, 51(4), 194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Takeuchi, L. M., & Vaala, S. (2014). Level up learning: A national survey on teaching with digital games. New York: Joan Ganz Cooney Center.Google Scholar
  64. Thomas, C. N., Hassaram, B., Rieth, H. J., Raghavan, N. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Mulloy, A. M. (2012). The integrated curriculum project: Teacher change and student outcomes within a university–school professional development collaboration. Psychology in the Schools, 49(5), 444–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Tobias, S., Fletcher, J. D., & Wind, A. P. (2014). Game-based learning. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 485–503). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  66. Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 16.Google Scholar
  67. Van Eck, R. (2015). Digital game-based learning: Still restless, after all these years. EDUCAUSE Review, 50(6).
  68. Vogel-Walcutt, J. J., Del Giudice, K., Logan, F., & Nicholson, D. (2013). Using a video game as an advance organizer: Effects on development of procedural and conceptual knowledge, cognitive load, and casual adoption. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(3), 376.Google Scholar
  69. Vogel-Walcutt, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006). Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3), 229–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Webster, J., Trevino, L. K., & Ryan, L. (1994). The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human–computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 9(4), 411–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational Leadership, Policy and Technology StudiesThe University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA

Personalised recommendations