1

The Power of Positivity:

Analysis and Critique of a Qualitative Study on the Use of Digital Games in the Classroom

Shawna Jensen

Master of Educational Technology, University of British Columbia

ETEC 500 64A: Research Methodology in Education

Dr. Kisha McPherson

December 15, 2020

 2

Study Overview

In this study by ​Colleen Stieler-Hunt and Christian M. Jones, the researchers used

qualitative methods to find out what teachers’ ​attitudes were to the use of digital game-play

(DGP) in their classroom. Digital games are classified in this category as video games that can

be played on "home and handheld consoles, PC games, web-games, mobile phone games and

games such as alternate reality games that blend the analogue and digital worlds'' (​Stieler-Hunt

and Jones, 2015, sec. 1​). Many teachers avoid using DGP as they do not see how they can be

used to engage their students in the core competencies and content. But a fair number of

teachers, whether it is through being a gamer themselves or seeing the impacts they have on their

children, see potential in using DGP in the classroom to achieve learning goals. The purpose of

the study is to answer the question, what are the reasons that teachers choose to incorporate

digital game-play in their classrooms?

The most significant studies linked to this research are Becker (2007) and Bourgonjon et

al. (2013). Becker (2007) discusses game-based learning and how all games can be used to teach,

but also identifies where using games can be difficult to use in the classroom. Bourgonjon et al.

(2013) conducted a study much like this one, identifying the acceptance of games in the

classroom by teachers but it was done so on a larger scale and only with secondary teachers. A

compelling idea is that digital games could be the next best learning tool if adopted effectively

and accepted by teachers using them. This study was greatly building on the findings of

Bourgonjon et al. (2013), which only focuses on secondary school teachers, by interviewing

educators from different learning environments. They consider their work to be a response to the

“​call for qualitative research” ​(​Stieler-Hunt & Jones, 2015, sec. 1)​ for a study previously

carried out by ​Bourgonjon et al. (2013).

 3

Research Design

The most significant construct for this study (and also discussed by previous research

studies) was positivity towards the use of technology, that was built on by the use of DGP.

Positivity towards the use of technology includes, but is not limited to, being able to find

meaningful links between class content and DGP, having had a positive experience with DGP, or

having personal interest in DGP outside of classroom use. The study was qualitative as all data

gathered was through 1-2 hour interviews with teachers who had experience with using DGP in

the classroom. This was also non-interventional as all information was collected without

“intervention or experimental manipulation” (Suter, 2012, p. 317). The research is

problem-based, leaning towards action research, because of its attempt to improve learning and

engagement by considering the impressions of teachers who have used DGP in their own

practice.

Based on Suter’s (2012) definition in ​Introduction to Educational Research: A Critical

Thinking Approach, ​t​his study is correlational research because the participants interviewed are

looked at individually and then similar connections are drawn based on their experiences (p.

324). It would also be classified as group research since it does not focus on one particular

subject or age range in education. This research would also be classified as descriptive because it

describes the characteristics of a group but there is no generalizing or testing involved (Suter,

2012, p. 331). The control procedure put in place by the researchers was ​computer-assisted

qualitative data analysis software. ​Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and then

analysed all using ​nVivo. This eliminates the chance of human error transcribing during an

interview.
 4

The research sample was created using theoretical sampling “​with the intent to answer

questions we had about concepts emerging from analysis of the existing data​” (​Stieler-Hunt &

Jones, 2015, sec. 2). The sample size was relatively small, with only 13 participants being chosen

and interviewed. Participants were at different points in their careers and from a variety of

educational settings, but all based in Queensland, Australia. Since they were largely building on

the research done by another study (​Bourgonjon et al., 2013), and by the nature of using

Theoretical Sampling (Corbin and Strauss, 2008, as cited in ​Stieler-Hunt and Jones, 2015,

sec. 2​) to guide them, they were able to complete their research with a smaller sample size.

With this being qualitative study, we have to determine the trustworthiness of the study

based on transferability, dependability, confirmability, and credibility. Firstly, transferability is

achieved through a very detailed analysis of their findings and its application to its potential use

in the classroom given that teachers show an interest in incorporating DGP. The findings in this

study could be used to help convince people that DGP can provide for a very useful learning

tool. Second, the researchers make this study dependable with their ​nVivo Computer-

Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software to attribute numerous types of coding to analyse

the data in the interviews. The study also seeks to produce an unbiased interpretation by

collecting data from their participants about their colleagues’s responses to their use of DGP

in the classroom. By providing this contrast, the researchers are making sure to note that

DGP will not work in all classrooms as there are many educators who do not believe that it

would be useful or, most likely the case, fit into their teaching styles. These three parts, as

well as simple and clear models to display their findings to draw their conclusion, work to

make this study credible based on Miles and Huberman (1994, pp. 11–12) on qualitative
 5

analysis. Having met several requirements and being very detailed in their analysis, this

would be considered a trustworthy study.

An alternative hypothesis that could arise by this study is that only teachers who are in a

school environment with plenty of resources and support can effectively incorporate DGP in the

classroom no matter their enthusiasm for the use of DGP. The study made sure to incorporate

teachers from all socio-economic backgrounds to contribute, including one teacher who was

from a certain group of schools known for their “​low socio-economic status and lower literacy

and numeracy levels,” ​(​Stieler-Hunt & Jones, 2015, sec. 3.1) ​based on Australian Government

statistics from 2014. The study also makes note that resources related to DGP are not

abundant and can be very difficult to get a hold of, therefore insisting that all teachers can

run into issues incorporating DGP in the classroom. It could also be argued that they were

biased towards teachers who have used DGP and had a positive experience with it since they

did not include those who have used it and had a negative experience with DGP. It is

suggested that these teachers need to be given the opportunity to experience DGP in the

classroom more successfully and positively. But since the idea is so broad and includes many

other factors, such as creating connections to content and troubleshooting technology, they

did not elaborate extensively aside from saying the main area for focused improvement

would be teacher attitude towards DGP.

Data Analysis and Major Findings

The data, acquired through interviews, was collected using ​nVivo and used a wide

variety of coding to produce resulting patterns that were then analysed further by the

researchers. Through the interviews and analysis of that data, they came to the conclusion
 6

that the teachers who use DGP in the classroom could be classified as ​believers​.​ The study

defines a ​believer ​as “​a person who is persuaded that using DGP in the classroom can be

beneficial for learning​” (​Stieler-Hunt & Jones, 2015, sec. 3).​ ​Key themes and relationships were

drawn up by the researchers and displayed in a web map to more easily depict the process of

becoming a​ believer.​ The process is unique to all individuals and so there are many branches that

eventually lead to being a ​believer.​ Each area of the web is then discussed using experiences of

the participants interviewed via randomly generated ​pseudonym​s to maintain ​anonymity.

The big ideas in this relate greatly to creating meaningful connections and the value of

games, but one of the large pieces is personal experience with games. Teachers who classified

themselves as gamers provided a good understanding of game mechanics and being able to

create professional connections because of their personal experience. Similarly, teacher-parents

who watch and take part in their childrens’ gaming experiences are able to see the benefit of

DGP in learning and do their best to try and make those connections in the classroom as well.

This would be considered a major finding as it plays a large part in why teachers attempt to use

DGP in the classroom.

In the body of the discussion of the study, there are several important parts highlighting

what they found from their interviews. A lot of the discussion is in relation to success, value and

enjoyment from using DGP in the classroom for both students and the educator, whether the

learning experience is created by the teacher themselves or from having another teacher invite

them to try their DGP experience. Much like what is discussed previously, there are also links to

having personal experience with DGP which sways attitudes towards using it, but using this

means of teaching creates a divide between DGP educators and their non-DGP colleagues. They
 7

also use ​Rogers’ (2003) Diffusion of Innovations theory to briefly highlight the potential for

adoption of DGP in the classroom based on their findings.

E.M. Rogers’​ ​Diffusion of Innovations​ theory is a theoretical theory that this study

discusses in some detail​. The theory explains how an idea or product can gain momentum

over time and eventually spread, or diffuse, through a system. The theory consists of five

adopter categories, which are all impacted by five factors for adoption. The five adopter

categories are innovators, early adaptors, early majority, late majority and laggards. The five

factors are relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability and observability

(​LaMorte, 2009). ​The study does not specify which stage that it believes DGP to be in at this

point for diffusion into classrooms, but it does address the five factors and the obstacles in

the way of these factors contributing to adaption by the general education community. This is

a very fitting theme to consider since the goal is to find out how they can encourage more

people that DGP can have a significantly positive impact on how students learn in the

classroom.

The conclusion focuses greatly on the attitude of the teachers towards DGP and that

being the greatest piece to making DGP more mainstream in education. ​This study greatly

backs the idea that the use of DGP occurs when the teacher/educator has had a lot of positive

experience with it, but it also comes to question whether having DGP is useful in general

practice or if it is only for those who want to use it. In other words, can DGP be effective in the

classroom even if the teacher is not a “believer”? While they did not interview anyone who

would have fit into the criteria of “non-believer”, they did speculate that there are ways to

encourage DGP through positive experience and providing a meaningful learning experience.

The study also includes that not all teachers need to be ​believers​ to incorporate DGP in the
 8

classroom, though it does make it easier since ​believers​ often seek out the technology and

resources more actively.

Overall, this study has been thorough in their analysis of their data and were careful to

cover many of the areas where they could have been criticized. At the end of their study they

also do address the limitations to their study, which are sample size and limited location of

research. That said, they were still able to achieve the purpose of the study, ​which was to

discover the reasons that teachers choose to incorporate digital game-play in their classrooms.

While there are surely more reasons for why teachers adopt DGP in the classroom, they were

satisfied by what they discovered to look forward to the direction that further research and

professional development can go on the road to seeing DGP more commonly incorporated in the

classroom.
 9

Summary of my Peer Review Feedback

Kendall’s feedback was very helpful as it went over a lot of the small places (that are

very big problems to have, like in referencing) which I had overlooked or did not consider

well enough. It directed my attention to fix those right away to tighten up my analysis.

Jennie discussed places that she felt were confusing in the analysis, where an

additional definition would be helpful to explain an area that was less clear. This was really

helpful for me to go back to clarify those areas with additional information or add a reference

to go for further explanation.

 10

Study Analysed

Stieler-Hunt, C., & Jones, C. M. (2015). Educators who believe: Understanding the enthusiasm

of teachers who use digital games in the classroom. ​Research in Learning Technology,​ ​23.​

https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26155

References

Becker, K. (2017). ​Digital game-based learning: Learning with games. In: ​Choosing and using

digital games in the classroom (pp 25-61).​ Springer.

https://doi-org.ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/10.1007/978-3-319-12223-6_2

Bourgonjon, J., et al. (2013). Acceptance of game-based learning by secondary school teachers.

Computers & Education,​ 67, 21-35. ​https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.010

LaMorte, W. W. (2009, September 9). Diffusion of innovation theory. ​Boston University School

of Public Health.

https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/Behavioral

ChangeTheories4.html

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). ​Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook

(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). ​Diffusion of innovations​ (5th ed.). The Free Press, New York, NY.

Suter, W. N. (2012). ​Introduction to educational research: A critical thinking approach.​ SAGE

Publications Inc. ​https://doi.org/​10.4135/9781483384443