1. POSITIVE SELF-PERCEPTION IDENTITY-- Kayumova et al.
1.1. SENSE OF CONFIDENCE
1.2. SENSE OF RECOGNITION
1.3. SENSE OF PERFORMANCE
1.4. SENSE OF INVESTMENT
2. THEORY
2.1. Social cognitive approach
2.1.1. From this perspective, the ideal game design would include an ongoing feedback loop, a relationship between evolving game and the evolving community learning goal (Steinkuehler & Tsaasan, 2019, p.195)
2.1.2. Learning is situated within authentic social interaction (Steinkuehler & Tsaasan, 2019, p.192).
2.1.2.1. Successful learning outcome is identity change driven by learner interests through social interaction that results in contribution to community (Steinkuehler & Tsaasan, 2019, p.193).
2.1.2.1.1. Successful learning game design is creation of shared cultural space (in digital games, these spaces are virtual) for meaningful and transformative player collaborations across the game and its concomitant community artifacts in ways that player authored and not merely designer driven (Steinkuehler & Tsaasan, 2019, p.193).
2.1.3. From this perspective knowledge is a tool that mediates activity rather than memorized information (Nielsen, 2006, p.199).
2.1.3.1. Learning occurs when a teacher, parent, peer, or tool (FOR ME FEEDBACK AND GAME IS TOOL) guides a student from an actual point of development to a potential point of development- each serves as a mediator for facilitating students' appreciation of a given task (Nielsen, 2006, p.199).
2.1.3.1.1. The video game as an embodied tool extends the action of a given agent and creates both opportunities and limitations for the agent using it. An activity consists of the relation between a subject and an object which is mediated by a tool. Tools can be a variety of artifacts (FOR ME THE FEEDBACK SYSTEM), found in our social and cultural life, that endow us with a diversity of opportunities. Example: When we use languages, we are drawing on a symbolic tool refined through generations. The socio-cultural perspective alerts us to the importance of considering tools and context when thinking about learning and education. Different contexts and tools facilitate a variety of learning experiences (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986; Wertsch, 1991).
2.1.4. Vygotsky (1978) ZPD is the zone of activities that a learner cannot do her own, but can do with help ( Ramirez & Squire, ---). According to the Cicconi (2013), Vygotsky's social development theory includes ZPD that relies on upon the more knowledgeable other (MKO). It is defined as an essential component of the learning process (Vygotsky, 1978).
2.1.4.1. Vygotsky (1978)'s role of the ZPD and MKO (Cicconi, 2013, p.59) is traditionally portrayed as a teacher, sibling, advanced peer etc. However, technology allows for a new definition to be written.
2.1.4.1.1. Web 2.0 created opportunities for learning from more knowledgeable other. In same cases, MKO is a computer adaptive math program that creates individualized responses/tutoring for students based on which correct or incorrect answer that they select (Cicconi, 2013, p.58). So I define MKO or ZPD as a intelligent feedback system in the game design.
3. SELF EFFICACY
3.1. Bandura (1986, 1994, 1997) argues that self-regulated learning arises where strong perceptions of self-efficacy and transparent (formative) feedback co-exist.
3.1.1. For example, Zimmerman and Pons (1986) found that of the high-achievers interviewed, 50% asked for feedback from peers and 35% from adults (teachers and parents). In contrast, the key SRL strategy of social engagement was rarely pursued among low achievers with only 23% seeking assistance from peers and 8% from adults. The message seems clear; classroom environments should be co-constructed in a way which strengthens perceptions of self-efficacy and increases the level of participation.
3.1.1.1. Feedback which informs the student of their current status and how to improve can boost self-efficacy and achievement, even after students experience initial difficulty performing the skill (ARG 1999; Schraw et al. 2006).
3.1.1.1.1. Self-regulated students hold a strong sense of self-efficacy which supports the acquisition of effective study habits: they plan and monitor time; structure a productive work environment; and use social resources (FEEDBACK) effectively (Clark, 2012).
3.2. Self-efficacy is defined as beliefs about capabilities to produce designated levels of performance that exercise influence over meaningful events (Bandura 1994).
4. GAME DESIGN (MATH GAMES)
4.1. FEATURES
4.1.1. Shute and Ke (2012) combined Gee (2009) and Sweetser and Wyeth (2005) for good video games features
4.1.1.1. Interactive Problemsolving
4.1.1.2. Specific rules/goals
4.1.1.3. Ongoing feedback
4.1.1.4. Adaptive Challenges
4.1.1.5. Control
4.1.1.6. Sensory Stimuli
4.1.1.7. Uncertainty
4.1.2. Based on some readings (Hancock, 1992), (Balacheff & Kaput, 1996),(Hoyles, 1993), (Anderson et al. 1990) about technology based learning environments, I highlighted some of the possible design features
4.1.2.1. the quality of the visual feedback (immediate) they provide. (Balacheff & Kaput, 1996)
4.1.2.2. how well they evoke a model of reference for some “reality,” (relation between mathematical and non-mathematical experience) (Hancock, 1992)
4.1.2.3. personalize, live system: own designed characters (pets, toys, etc.) (Hancock, 1992)
4.1.2.4. data structure and choice in knowledge representation play a crucial role as well (Balacheff & Kaput, 1996)
4.1.2.5. having an expected outcome/goal (Hoyles, 1993)
4.1.2.6. intelligent tutoring system (clear hints and help when the learner fails or gets lost) (Anderson et ai. 1990)
4.1.2.7. having a proper learning theory base
5. FEEDBACK
5.1. According to Cohen (1985) feedback "is one of the more instructionally powerful and least understood features in instructional design" (p. 33).
5.2. According to Shute (2008), formative feedback is defined in this review as information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify his or her thinking or behavior for the purpose of improving learning. Shute focuses on the student (or more generally, the "learner") as the primary recipient of formative feedback herein.
5.3. Feedback is important for learning in game-based learning environments ( Mayer, 2014). The purpose of feedback is to help learners evaluate their process and performance, identify knowledge gap, and repair faulty knowledge ( Johnson & Priest, 2014)
5.4. In-game meaningful feedback is key for helping students to achieve the embedded learning goals and also for encouraging students to reflect on misconceptions and transfer learning to new contexts (Swanson et al., 2011).
5.5. Just in time feedback, well ordered problems and ability to learn through failure' hallmarks of good game design' are also important for effective educational interventions (Gee 2003, Squire, 2011).
6. TYPES OF FEEDBACK
6.1. Outcome oriented feedback
6.1.1. Knowledge of result (your answer is correct), knowledge of correct result (write answer is D.) , error flagging (THE LAST PART OF YOUR ANSWER IS INCORRECT), environmental feedback (a student's answer results in a character receiving or award
6.2. Process-oriented feedback
6.2.1. Explanatory information about the process or strategy used to reach to correct answer (informational prompts, hints, topic-specific feedback, error-sensitive feedback -which provides information related to why and answer is correct or incorrect
6.2.1.1. It is purpose to provide the learner with information that can be used to close the gap between his or her current level of understanding or performance required to meet the objective in the game.
6.3. Consequential feedback
6.3.1. Offers students information about their problem solving decisions in the context of the narrative storyline of the game, rather than by indicating which mathematical decisions were correct or not. For example, if a student makes a mathematical error and does not calculate a sufficient amount of fuel needed for a trip, they experience this outcome by having the plane they fly crash to the ground.