dc.description.abstract | Digital game-based learning (DGBL) included various game elements. Among them, competition and goals are frequently considered in DGBL. On the one hand, competition was a manifestation of social comparison and could provide many benefits in DGBL. In addition, there are two types of competition, i.e., real competition, where players compete with real persons and real competition, where players compete with computers but these two different types of competition have their own advantages and disadvantages. On the other hand, the goal was not only the main driver of achievement, but also was concerned with the perceptions of expected future outcomes. Therefore, this research incorporated goals into competition in the context of DGBL, where there are two types of context, i.e., same goal and different goals. In the former, individuals focused on achieving their personal goals. In the latter, individuals could help each other improve performance. When individuals′ goals were the same and mutually exclusive, they would stimulate individuals′ competition. Thus, competition and goals were associated with each other. Thus, this research examines the effects of competition and goals on student learning in the context of DGBL.
More specifically, DGBL was implemented to help learners learn academic English in this research because insufficient training was provided to research students. There is a need to guide them on how to write correct English academic papers so this research developed two academic English competition games to help research students learn academic English. These two games had competition elements and learners must compete with their opponents. In addition, these two games provided some scaffolding hints to help learners solve problems and guide them to learn the knowledge of academic English. By doing so, their frustrations could be reduced while their motivation could be enhanced.
In addition to implementing the aforementioned two games, two studies were conducted to examine the effects of goals and competition in the context of DGBL, including learning performance and learning behavior. The participants were research students who came from a university in the north Taiwan. Study One explored differences between real competition game (RCG) and virtual competition game (VCG) when learners competed for a same goal. The results indicated that the RCG learners had the stronger sense of competition than the VCG learners because the RCG learners needed to compete with real players. However, this strong sense of competition made the RCG learners lack motivation so they relied on the scaffolding hints at the beginning of doing the tasks. On the contrary, the VCG learners had the lower sense of competition so they had higher motivation to use various scaffolding hints to collect additional information. Accordingly, the VCG learners could achieve better learning performance than the RCG learners.
Study Two explored differences between real competition and virtual competition when learners compete for different goals. The results showed that the RCG learners and the VCG learners demonstrated similar learning performance. However, the RCG learners needed to consider a variety of factors so they needed more time to undertake tasks. On the other hand, the VCG learners were less alert when competing with virtual opponents. Thus, they did not send an answer within the limited time and their cards were automatically sent out.
In summary, both Study One and Study Two found the negative effects of real competition, including learning performance or learning behavior. Regarding learning performance, the VCG learners seemed to have better learning performance than the RCG learners, regardless of the Study One or Study Two. However, the VCG learners got higher task scores than the RCG learners in Study One. On the other hand, the VCG learners spent less time for undertaking the tasks than the RCG learners in Study Two. Regarding learning behavior, the RCG learners in Study One did not have high intrinsic motivation to collect more information. Likewise, the RCG learners in Study Two also had less intrinsic motivation because they did not collect sufficient information at the beginning of doing the tasks. In short, the RCG might have a negative impact on learners′ learning performance and learning behavior. This might be due to the fact that competition with real persons increased the sense of competition. Therefore, it is necessary to consider how to improve the design of competition with real persons so that learners can also benefit from real competition.
| en_US |