ABSTRACT

Game-based learning has proven to be effective and is widely used in science education, but usually the heterogeneity of the student population is being overlooked. To examine the differential effects of game interventions in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) related subjects on diverse student groups, a meta-analysis has been conducted that included 39 studies that compared game-based learning interventions with traditional classrooms in primary and early secondary education. We found moderate positive effects on cognition (g = .67), motivation (g = .51), and behaviour (g = .93). Additionally, substantial heterogeneity between studies was found. Moderator analyses indicated that primary school students achieve higher learning outcomes and experience game interventions as more motivating than secondary school students, whereas gender did not have any moderating effect. There were too few studies reporting information on the remaining moderators (socioeconomic status, migration background, and special educational needs) to include them in a multiple meta-regression model. Therefore, we assessed their role by separate moderator analyses, but these results need to be interpreted with caution. Additional descriptive analyses suggested that game-based learning may be less beneficial for students with low socioeconomic status compared to students with high socioeconomic status.

摘要

基于游戏的学习已被证明是有效的，并广泛应用于科学教育，但通常会忽视学生群体的异质性。为了研究 STEM（科学、技术、工程和数学）相关学科的游戏干预对不同学生群体的不同影响，进行了一项荟萃分析，其中包括 39 项研究，这些研究将基于游戏的学习干预与小学和中学的传统课堂进行了比较。早期中等教育。我们发现对认知 (g = .67)、动机 (g = .51) 和行为 (g = .93) 有适度的积极影响。此外，还发现研究之间存在很大的异质性。主持人分析表明，小学生取得了更好的学习成果，并且比中学生更能体验游戏干预，而性别没有任何调节作用。报告剩余调节因素（社会经济地位、移民背景和特殊教育需求）信息的研究太少，无法将它们纳入多元元回归模型。因此，我们通过单独的调节剂分析评估了它们的作用，但需要谨慎解释这些结果。额外的描述性分析表明，与社会经济地位高的学生相比，基于游戏的学习对社会经济地位低的学生的益处可能较小。我们通过单独的调节剂分析评估了它们的作用，但需要谨慎解释这些结果。额外的描述性分析表明，与社会经济地位高的学生相比，基于游戏的学习对社会经济地位低的学生的益处可能较小。我们通过单独的调节剂分析评估了它们的作用，但需要谨慎解释这些结果。额外的描述性分析表明，与社会经济地位高的学生相比，基于游戏的学习对社会经济地位低的学生的益处可能较小。