Game-Based Learning experiences in primary mathematics
education
Edith Debrenti*
Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Social Science, Partium Christian University, Oradea, Romania
Using game-based learning (GBL), especially digital game-based learning (DGBL), as a teaching and learning environment can be a
pedagogical resource and a good strategy in the classroom to support mathematical learning. Effective manipulatives and games play a
crucial role in promoting mathematical understanding. They support students in building, reinforcing and connecting varied
representations of mathematical concepts. High-quality games are particularly valuable for learners as they provide them with control
and adaptability. These games have properties that are adapted to cognitive and mathematical structures, facilitating the development of
connections between different pieces and forms of knowledge. Digital games can help to achieve the same effects. In this paper, we
conduct a quasi-experiment using games developed for this purpose. Our aim is to investigate whether non-digital games vs. digital games
yield different results. Our results indicate that while students enjoyed themselves and found the task-solving enjoyable during both types
of game-based learning, the use of non-digital games vs. digital games can sometimes lead to different outcomes.
1 Introduction
According to Rosli et al. (2015) prekindergarten, kindergarten, and elementary school teachers use both tangible and virtual
manipulatives as instructional aides to facilitate student understanding of concepts in numbers, operations, geometry, algebra,
measurements, data analysis, and probability. Tangible manipulatives assist students in constructing, reinforcing, and linking diverse
mathematical concepts. From literature, engaging in concrete activities serves as a beneficial mental exercise (Clements, 1989; Kamii,
1989). Clements (1999) found that for teachers to actively engage children's thinking, manipulatives must be integrated into educational
tasks to provide meaningful context and support, alone they are not enough. “Games are effective not because of what they are, but
because of what they embody and what learners are doing as they play a game” (Van Eck, 2006, p. 18). According to Russo and Russo
(2018) and Russo et al. (2023), the six principles of educationally rich mathematical games in the literature are: 1. Students are engaged;
2. There is a balance of skill and luck. 3. Mathematics is central. 4. Flexibility in learning and teaching. 5. Promotes home-school
connections. 6. Games into studies. The educational value of a game depends on the extent to which teachers perceive that a game is
appropriately challenging, engaging, enjoyable, adaptable to support different learners, and adaptable to inquiry or broader mathematical
investigations. Likewise, perceived levels of student enjoyment and engagement, as well as the potential of a game leads to rich
mathematical inquiry, were important features in assessing how likely a teacher would be using a particular game with students in the
future if given the opportunity, as was the game's ability to support mathematical discussion. Research by Bordás (2016) shows that in
order to motivate students and adapt to their individual needs, teachers at both lower and upper secondary level consider it important to
use interactive methods, game-based teaching and the use of the internet and digital tools.
In practice, primary school teachers tend to use non-digital mathematical games to support maths learning (board, dice, and card games).
According to Russo and Russo (2020) and Russo et al. (2021) almost all the primary teachers admitted playing mathematical games in
their classrooms a minimum of once a week, they view games as highly effective for developing all four proficiencies highlighted in the
Mathematics Curriculum: fluency, understanding, problem-solving, and reasoning. According to Dienes (2015), activities, games and
concrete experiences should be the base of learning mathematics, that could be a joyful experience with the use of tools that enhance
efficiency. In primary school, children establish connections between abstract concepts and practical experiences in a more tangible
manner, experiencing them through games. Manipulatives are “objects designed to represent explicitly and concretely mathematical ideas
that are abstract” (Moyer, 2001, p. 176). Rosli et al. (2015) said that manipulatives help students to see the connections between concepts
and improve their knowledge in problem solving and problem posing, even in the case of real-life problems. The incorporation of games
serves as a compelling tool in the process of learning mathematics. Di Sia (2017) found that the association with games stimulates
children's imagination, providing an enjoyable approach to mathematics, that is perceived as a helpful and enjoyable discipline. Students
enjoy the tasks, where they have to invest mental effort in the use of games, didactic materials (Yung and Paas, 2015).
The virtual tool does not seem suitable for this. Öztop (2022) examining the impact of using games in primary school mathematics
education on learning outcomes and comparing effect sizes by game type finds that the effect of digital games is small (0.436) and that of
non-digital games is large (1.032). The results show that non-digital games are much more effective on learning outcomes than digital
games in primary school mathematics education.
According to the literature, there is a contrast between the frequency that teachers prefer to use non-digital games with students vis-a-vis
the tendency in the literature to focus on digital games, where the majority of research focused on game-based learning in mathematics,
specifically tend to explicitly focus on digital games, rather than non-digital games (Hainey et al., 2016; Hussein et al., 2022). The large
scale of quantitative studies involving non-digital games are comparatively rare, with most studies into games occurring within a single
school context, generally involving students from a limited range of specific grade levels.
Guiding the pedagogical practice of teacher trainees as their supervisor, we created our own development games and we implemented
together with the students in classrooms where they teach, and then we examined the experiences and results together. Our question is:
whether non-digital games vs. digital games are different?
2 Digital games, digital game-based learning and achievements in learning of mathematics
According to the literature, numerous studies have identified positive impacts associated with the use of games in learning mathematics
(Suh et al., 2005; Steen et al., 2006; Moyer-Packenham et al., 2008). Such activities are typically interactive, motivating, and practical,
contributing to maintaining students' interest and enhancing their understanding of mathematical concepts. The aim is to integrate
games into the educational environment to enhance students' mathematical learning, expanding the use of games based on higher-order
thinking can diversify the educational benefits of games and serve a wider range of learning objectives. Kailani et al. (2019) found that the
games, by themselves, do not automatically imply positive impact. One must consider the diverse factors that work in tandem with game-
based learning. Such factors include the technical aptitude and attitudes of the people—classroom teachers, faculty members, parents, and
researchers—implementing the technology. Not only should there be an effective implementation plan that is well-executed, but the
content of that execution needs to be well-designed with thorough curricula relevance.
Game-based learning means the use of games for educative purposes and aimed to improve the user knowledge and experience. The main
benefit of these educational games is they focus on improving children's life-essential abilities such as problem solving and critical
thinking. GBL aimed to improve the user's knowledge and experience.
Digital game-based learning (DGBL) is learning by using certain computer games for educational purposes. It is a type of game-
based learning (GBL; Prensky, 2001). Computer games can be used as a “learning tool” (Ke, 2008, p. 1609) that “simulate real-life social
networks” (Neville et al., 2009, p. 410; Ferguson, 2014) and motivational situations such as the use of real-world and computer-generated
data to perform math operations.
The contemporary epistemological and pedagogical viewpoints in mathematical education highlight the importance of incorporating
realistic mathematical practices and sense-making experiences. Problem solving is a major component of “thinking mathematically”
(Schoenfeld, 2020). A DGBL activity engages students in the process of problem solving or knowledge acquisition when facing the
challenges presented by the game (Huang et al., 2010). Literature suggests that DGBL stands out as a promising approach for enhancing
students' learning motivation and achievement in mathematics. The computer games in terms of being interactive, based on a set of
agreed rules and constraints, and directed toward a clear goal and constantly provide feedback, either as a score, toenable players to
monitor their progress toward the goal (Clark et al., 2016) DGBL demonstrates positive impacts on learning across diverse subjects and
for various types of learners. Its motivational aspect significantly engages and captivates learners. Additionally, DGBL actively supports,
reinforces, and expedites the learning process, contributing to the development of higher-order cognitive skills (Hong et al., 2009). “The
game playing process therefore supports the learning process by allowing players to acquire learning experiences in games, encouraging
interactions between learners and the game system, and situating learners in complex learning environments” (Huang, 2011, p.
694). Twigg (2011) emphasized the essential integration of technology into mathematics curriculum, asserting its necessity for student
learning in contemporary society. Accordingly, the utilization of interactive software and computers emerges as crucial tools in facilitating
math learning through practical engagement. Ferguson (2014) found that DGBL can offer students the opportunity to enhance their
current knowledge when teachers provide the right DGBL environment relevant to the curriculum being learned. Hung et al. (2014) stated
that supplying practice opportunities along with immediate feedback through the use of computer and information technologies proves to
be effective in encouraging students to enhance their understanding of mathematics.
Teed (2012) asserts that DGBL or GBL unfolds within a virtual environment enriched with fantasy elements, involving participants in
educational activities through the utilization of technological tools like computers. DGBL specifically employs digital games to instigate
competition, captivate learners, and provide challenges, ultimately serving as a motivational and engaging medium for learning.
Trybus (2015) claims that GBL has many advantages. It offers cost-effectiveness, minimal physical risk or liability to learners,
standardized assessments for facilitating student-to-student comparisons, high levels of engagement, a learning pace customized to
individual student needs, immediate feedback responses to errors, seamless transfer of learning to real-world scenarios, and an overall
engaging experience for the learner.
Gillispie et al. (2010) observed that students exhibited an average increase of 17% in math achievement when 500 middle school students
were examined regarding their achievement and attitudes while using problem-based digital games that incorporated concepts in
prealgebra and algebra. The study found that students were not only receptive to repeating GBL missions but were also willing to engage
in them to enhance their scores on the computer.
In a quantitative study (Roschelle et al., 2010) the aim was to assess whether the utilization of computer software led to increased student
engagement in mathematics class and enhanced learning for fourth-grade students. The results indicated that students in the
experimental group, those exposed to the computer software, achieved higher scores on the post-test compared to students in the control
group. In a mixed-methods study, Sardone and Devlin-Scherer (2010) involving 25 undergraduate students in teacher education to
identify twenty-first-century skills utilized in educational games. The participants evaluated 50 games based on specific criteria such as
motivation, critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration, and communication. The findings revealed that digital games inherently
incorporate many of these twenty-first-century skills. Ke (2008) identified that game design plays a crucial role in shaping students'
interaction with the game.
In their meta-analysis, Li and Ma (2010) explored the impact of computer technology on the learning of mathematics in kindergarten
through 12th grade students. Their findings revealed a generally positive correlation between students' academic achievement and the
utilization of GBL, particularly among special needs students, elementary students, and those in a constructivism classroom setting.
Several studies have examined the effects of GBL teaching method on students' achievements, emphasizing the significance of its effects
on the development of students' affective domain, which is closely linked to the subject and its instruction. A systematic review by Divjak
and Tomic (2011) of 27 studies identified from the years 1995 to 2010, focusing on game-based learning (GBL) in mathematics education.
Their findings indicated that math learning games not only facilitated the achievement of specific learning objectives but also enhanced
students' motivation and fostered positive attitudes toward learning mathematics.
In a one-shot case study (Khan and Chishti, 2011) the objective was to examine the impact of students' active participation on math
achievement. Employing a posttest-only design, the study revealed a significant correlation, indicating that students' active engagement in
math class had a considerable influence on their math achievement. In his study Ferguson (2014) presented statistical significance for the
use of traditional mathematics teaching methods over the use of DGBL in combination with traditional mathematics teaching methods.
Wouters et al. (2013) found that serious games were more effective than conventional instruction in terms of learning and retention, but
found no evidence that they were more motivating.
Clark et al. (2016) suggests that game environments support overall improvements in intrapersonal learning outcomes compared to non-
game educational environments, and that game designers and educational researchers should collaborate on designs to keep game
graphics, environments, and narratives optimally aligned with assessed learning objectives. In an action research study (White and
McCoy, 2019) which explored game-based learning as fifth grade mathematics students utilizing game-based lessons, results revealed that
student attitudes improved both toward the lessons and toward math in general. Indriani et al. (2019) aimed to describe the quality of
problem based learning assisted by Monopoly games on students critical thinking skill for seventh grade students shows that
implementation PBL assisted by Monopoly game improve the students' mathematical critical thinking skills.
The results of a systematic review (Vankúš, 2021) with the use of 57 journals, indicate that 54% of the articles consider the affective
domain in the measurement of the effects of game-based learning in mathematics education. These articles report mostly (84%) the
positive influences of game-based learning on students' motivation, engagement, attitudes, enjoyment, and state of flow.
Manzano-León et al. (2021) in their systematic review in three multidisciplinary databases, on quantitative experimental studies that
explore the impact of educational gamification on student motivation and academic performance in the last 5 years (40 studies), most of
them report gamification as a valid learning strategy and the results support the conclusion that educational games have a potential
impact on the academic performance, commitment, and motivation of students.
Erşen and Ergül (2022) analyzed 80 research studies conducted between 2017 and 2021 on games and mathematical teaching using
qualitative methods. As a result, studies aimed at determining effect gained importance, and in the methodological context, quantitative
studies were frequently preferred and experimental designs were used accordingly. It was also found that secondary school students were
preferred as participants, that the most common type of game used was digital computer games, that the games were mostly associated
with the learning area of “numbers and operations,” and that the research studies had mostly positive results for the use of games in
mathematics education.
According to Pan et al. (2022), in the recent decade, over 20 major literature reviews have explored the effects of learning games on
students' performances, only six of these reviews focused on mathematical education. Mathematics educators generally agree that
teaching and learning mathematics requires different skills compared to other subject matters. As such, games designed and employed for
mathematics education can differ from those for other subject matters.
In a quantitative meta-analysis review of 24 studies, Tokac et al. (2019) investigated the effects of learning video games on mathematics
achievement of PreK-12th grade students compared to traditional classroom methods. Results showed heterogeneity among effect sizes,
both in magnitude and direction and suggested that mathematics video games contributed to higher learning gains as compared to
traditional instructional methods.
Kailani et al. (2019) in a sistematic review of the literature found that in 12 out of the 14 studies had participants from the age group of 6–
14, while two studies had a sample population of undergraduate students between the ages of 17–20. The focus of research on games is
mainly in the early years of primary school, as games are rarely used in secondary school mathematics and with university students.
3 Research methodology
Our aim is to investigate whether non-digital games vs. digital games yield different results. Our research was based on three
mathematical games. Random sampling was used: a group of students used non-digital (card-based) games, the other group used a DGBL
test on computers in the informatics lab. All participants worked an hour and were supervised during the test by us. Participation in the
experiment was voluntary. For the elementary school students, the teacher requested parental consent, and all of them agreed.
3.1 Participants
The data was collected in 2022 and 103 individuals, 9–11-year-old elementary school students participated from three schools in Western
Region of Romania. Distribution of elementary students according to methods: 49 students (47.57%) used DGBL and 54 (52.42%) used
non-digital games.
3.2 Instrument
In the literature we found that majority of teachers prefer arithmetic operations with numbers focused games in their classes. Therefore,
we wanted to choose a less used area (e.g., measurement and logic).
The games designed by us could be classified to different mathematical content areas: 1st problem: focuses on numbers, logic, strategy;
2nd problem: geometry, strategy, and measurement, 3rd problem: propositional logic and reasoning.
The universal online platform that was used for the DGBL test was created within JavaScript, PHP, HTML, and CSS, which made
screenshots of the final solutions. As non-digital games we used different paper cards. For assessment we analyzed the screenshots. The
maximum points the participants could reach was 100 for each problem. Once students clicked the “Completed” button, the solution was
saved in the database as screenshots. Participants also had the option to use the “Start “gain” button.
Our research tool included the following tasks:
1. The hexagon problem (Figure 1). Place the small hexagons into the large shape so that adjacent triangles contain
the same number (triangles are considered adjacent if they share a side). The hexagons cannot be
rotated (Marchis, 2013, p. 64).
2. The cake problem (Figure 2). The figure represents a lattice cake consisting of 20 equal- size squares. Five friends
wish to share the cake in such manner that each of them gets a differently shaped four-square piece. Could
you help them out? (Matlap, 2018a, p. 308).
3. The house problem (Figure 3). There are five houses in five different colors. Each house is inhabited by a person of
a different nationality. Each owner prefers a certain beverage, has a different hobby and keeps a certain pet.
No owner drinks the same beverage, has the same pet, or has the same hobby as their neighbor. What we
know is:
1. The British lives in a red house.
2. The Swedish has a dog.
3. The Danish drinks tea.
4. The German plays the piano.
5. The Norwegian lives in the first house.
6. The green house's owner drinks coffee.
7. The owner who plays golf likes juice.
8. The owner of the yellow house plays football in his free time.
9. The owner who dances has a parrot.
10. The man who lives in the middle house drinks tea.
11. The owner who plays board games lives next to the one that has a cat.
12. The man who has a horse, lives next to the one who plays football.
13. The Norwegian lives next to the blue house.
14. The owner who plays board games is the neighbor of the one who drinks water.
15. The green house is next to the white house, on the left.
