Running head: THE IMPACT OF PLAY

The Impact of Play on Student Learning at the Secondary Level

Josh Rumpsa
Cornerstone University

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

2
Abstract

Research suggests that student engagement issues at the secondary level could be improved with
the integration of games as a method of instruction. The greatest question and/or resistance to
this integration is the assumption that games do not actually enhance learning, but rather are
frivolous tools that detract from the already limited instructional time. It is, therefore, important
to assess the effectiveness of games as a tool for education as well as the practicality of
implementation in schools. This study analyzed the findings of recent literature on the efficacy
and use of games in secondary levels. The types of games that were considered in this review
range from computer games to board games. Overall, it seems that experts are pointing to games
as an effective tool to create ludic learning space. In addition, the literature supports games as
tools that teach a variety of skills beyond content, such as important social skills and decisionmaking development. However, it is unclear whether games produce positive outcomes in
content learning. Much of the variation appears to be based on the type of game, as well as the
aptitude of the teacher to effectively use games to teach. There is an opportunity for schools to
acquire and utilize games for instructional purposes. However, teacher buy-in and training will
be necessary to achieve the best results.

Keywords: ludic learning theory, gaming, board games, computer games, secondary schools,
student engagement, literacy skills

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

The Impact of Play on Student Learning at the Secondary Level

Children are born with an innate sense of curiosity about the world. This is the tool that
inspires people to learn. Early in a childs schooling years, this tool is alive and well. In fact,
children regularly display a genuine love of learning. But, at some point they lose that and
become adults that don't like formal learning. The intent of this study is to explore why "play",
which has dwindled in perceived value and opportunity in schools, can be utilized to refuel the
curiosity and engagement of students at the secondary level. In short, do games motivate and
teach students effectively?
This review will investigate theories related to play as well as case studies involving
specific games currently being used in classroom settings. Games, as it pertains to this review,
will include board games and computer games. Other, more active games, such as sports, are not
included in this study. This was determined as to avoid focus on the physiological benefits of
movement. Therefore, the focus will stay within the confines of games that teach the same
concepts that are taught in class (e.g., history, economics, math), albeit in a non-traditional
manner.
The review starts by analyzing how experts have pointed at play as one of the most
natural processes of learning. In addition, the recently published theory of ludic learning space
will be considered. Next, case studies of certain games being utilized in classroom settings will
be reviewed. With that, findings involving student outcome will be summarized. In addition to
more standard content learning outcomes, other social and educational impacts of game
integration will be appraised. A discussion about the significance of game usage on student
perceptions of learning will follow. Last, consideration of the practical nature will be examined.
Where games could be utilized and promoting teacher buy-in will be the subtopics of this final

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

portion. All in all, this review will cover a variety of studies in order to analyze the effectiveness
of merging game play into secondary education environments.
This review seems to suggest that play, in the form of games, as a natural tool for
learning, is underutilized in schools at the secondary level. Furthermore, while games have the
potential to create active learning environments and inspire positive perceptions of learning,
studies reveal that teachers need to be trained to integrate games effectively in order to better
ensure positive student learning outcomes.
Play = Learning
At the dawn of our current millennium, Alvermann and Heron (2001) noted that people
have fewer opportunities for play. Their assertion was that adults and kids alike have filled their
lives with structure to the extent that there is little room left. Play, in their assessment, involves
openness, freedom, and choice. These elements are lacking, and even frowned upon, in school
environments where the focus is on raising test scores. However, Alvermann and Heron promote
the theory about play promoting higher level thinking, social, and literacy skills. Their findings
seem to criticize the tendency for schools and parents to eliminate opportunities for children to
learn through open play. Instead, they contend that our children are missing out on the essential
skill development the more we undervalue play.
Dr. Peter Gray recently published Free to Learn (2015), which doesnt dive right away
into the question of whether play promotes learning, but rather starts from the baseline of human
existence. As an anthropologist, Gray points to the basic elements that make us human. He
argues that the current structure of school goes against millennia of how humans learned. He
goes as far as equating schools to prisons and connects the lack of play in schools to the
increases in anxiety and unfocused children. So, not only are we missing opportunities for

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

positive growth when we undervalue and/or remove play from schools, but research suggests this
pattern may also be the cause of some negative increases we have witnessed in the past decade
amongst teens. Gray argues that children come into the world yearning to learn and equipped
with curiosity, only to be squelched by the current school model that fails to promote intellectual
growth.
Still, as the U.S. Institute of Medicine recorded in 2004, although many students today
seem disengaged or disinterested, nearly ninety percent of teens claimed that they really want to
learn in school. The Instituted suggested that schools are missing the mark, but did not
concretely nail down which element pedagogy, curriculum, climate, or organization is the
cause of discouraged engagement. Still, the Institutes observations connect well with the
previous assertions about the lack of play in classroom settings. Furthermore, in highlighting
students continued desire to learn, the study suggests schools are missing the mark again when
they blame students for a lack of engagement.
Ludic Learning Theory
Social scientists have only recently begun highlighting the significance of play as it
possibly relates to educational outcome. Play has been described by neuroscientists Leong and
Carlson (2013) as a mechanism that allows our brains to practice flexibility and learn the selfregulatory skills necessary in life and work (Public Information Resources). These comments
about plays ability to develop skills beyond content will be revisited later. However, this
observation does set the stage for considerations about how, and how much, play positively
enhances learning.
Gray, previously mentioned for his anthropological look at learning, first coined the term
ludic learning space as he described his theory of the need for play in human development and

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

learning (2009). This term, now utilized by other experts in the education field, opens the
conversation about the necessity of reintroducing play into schools. Kolb & Kolb (2010)
performed a case study that supported the notion that play in a ludic learning space can promote
deep learning in the intellectual, physical, spiritual, and moral realms. Each of these researchers
is supporting previous assertions that play equals learning and promotes healthy human cognitive
and social-emotional growth (Singer et al., 2006). These social scientists advocate for play as a
necessary tool for growth.
Games that Teach
Schools, as societys organizational structure expected to foster learning and growth, are
the obvious choice for study on integrating play well. Various games have been utilized and
studied for their effectiveness in schools. Simkin (2013) performed a study about the
effectiveness of a classic knowledge game: Jeopardy. He notes that the game, like others,
attempts to convert students from passive observers into active participants in their learning. His
study found limited impact on student learning, but did note a positive impact on student
perceptions of learning. The primary goal of improved student learning outcomes was not met.
This is, perhaps, due to the nature of the game that may not fit the definition being reviewed
here. Jeopardy, which is used to solely for review, should not be considered on an equal basis
with the other case studies. However, the note Simkin made on student perception shift, a
common observation, will be discussed later.
Board games and computer games are both utilized in classrooms currently. Cochran
(2005) reported on whether or not a sports board game can teach statistics students. Empirical
and anecdotal evidence suggested that student comprehension and retention were enhanced by
use of examples constructed from the simple and interesting concepts provided by the game they

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

used. Lee and Probert (2010) utilized Civilization III in an eleventh grade history class. The
study pointed out the potential positives of utilizing the game, suggesting that teachers situate
students' game experiences in rich classroom discussions and specific non-game oriented
activities.
While both studies reported positive learning outcomes, there were notes about the
importance of teachers utilizing the games properly, often suggesting the need for games to be
integrated in coordination with other more common teaching methods and practice. Mayer &
Harris (2009) provide an extensive review of and look at games that have been used for
educational purposes. The list confirms that schools have not abandoned play, but does suggest
that the majority of districts have missed the opportunity to effectively integrate games into their
teaching.
Outcomes Beyond Content
Numerous studies supported outcomes beyond content learning. Barrett (2012), in a
project for Masters of Research into Mathematics Education, highlighted that games could
provide desired learning opportunities such as discussion, cognitive conflict, and scaffolding.
Furthermore, games were said to improve motivation towards mathematics. Again, there will be
more commentary on motivation to come. Crews (2011) additionally noted how games have the
opportunity to accomplish objectives of curriculum frameworks and meet AASL Standards for
the 21st Century Learner. Board games, Crews notes, promote collaboration, inquiry, and critical
thinking. Not only are games able to offer a new type of experience for learners, but the study
projects that schools could also communicate to teachers how to connect gaming to these
standards and help make the AASL standards an integral part of the learning process. Elkind
(2008) argues that play experiences are especially noteworthy in their ability to reinforce the

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

central task of early adolescence: learning to persist in work. In analyzing a business

management class at Purdue University, Sinclair and Marks (1999) remarked about how the
simulation game they observed is used to promote interdisciplinary decision-making and builds
oral communication and teamwork skills.
Each of these findings display an uncanny ability for games to facilitate growth of the
individual, well beyond the limited scope of tests that school administer to supposedly measure
growth. These results suggest that the true benefit of games in the classroom is the benefits
beyond what has been recently measured as learning. Persistence, collaboration, inquiry,
cognitive conflict, and the self-regulatory skills previously highlighted by Leong and Carlson
(2013) are all elements that the experts point to as successes to be found within gaming
experiences and instruction.
Content Learning Discussion
Although various skills can be developed as a result of game play in schools, the question
remains whether or not learning outcome is positively impacted. Crews (2011) explained how
games, in terms of information delivery, could be considered on an equal level to more
traditional teaching. Games, he notes, are avenues for providing stories and information, yet
presented in a new format. A meta-analysis of the efficacy of game use in the classroom found
that across people and situations, games and interactive simulations are more dominant for
cognitive gain outcomes (Vogel, et al., 2006).
However, consideration of specific moderator variables yielded a more complex picture.
One such variable supports the inverse relationship between teacher control over a game and
student-learning outcome. This analysis revealed that when the teacher directed more during the
gaming experience, there was less of a gain. This study insinuates the need for proper teaching

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

training in order to get the most gains out of gaming use in the secondary setting. Still, both
pieces of literature support games as at least an equal, if not improved, method of instruction
when compared to more traditional teaching.
Student Perception Vignette
Tom is a high school junior. He labors from class to class, often entering each room after
the tardy bell. He drops his head on the desk, signaling a different approach from his typical
antics that often cause disruption to the teachers lesson plans, a relief to her. From the schools
perspective, Tom has given up on learning. However, if we were to follow Tom in a different
environment, there may be a different conclusion. At home, Tom spends hours playing
Civilization III, the newest application of his favorite computer game. This game requires
literacy skills that the school and state promotes as goals of education. Yet, this learning is not
taking place within the confines of school. In reality, Tom has not given up on learning. Instead,
he has given up on traditional schooling.
Changing Student Perceptions
This review of the use of games for learning points out the failure motivation in
traditional schooling as theorized in the above vignette. To counter lack of engagement, schools
have regularly employed strategies of extrinsic motivation. However, Kolb and Kolb (2010)
point out that extrinsic rewards can have detrimental effects on a persons creativity and
productivity. Intrinsic motivation, a powerful character trait, can be instilled when play is
authentic enough to allow intrinsic interests to take over.
The studies included in this review seem to suggest that game use in the classroom has
the potential to create such an authentic play experience. For example, the previously mentioned
business management class at Purdue did not reward grades are based on the financial success of

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

10

each company in their simulation, and yet most students were intent on winning anyway
(Sinclair & Marks, 1999). The numerous findings about student perceptions of learning being
improved with the use of games, even when there is no clear content understanding gain,
presents the use of games as being valuable. It would be wise to refer to studies that have
investigated the long-term correlation between student perceptions of learning and their actual
learning outcome in order to see the full picture of the value.
Location, Location, Location
Some studies have suggested that the most logical entry point for games into a secondary
school is in the library. Mayer & Harris (2009) go as far as providing a list of games that would
be great for school libraries while also suggesting how games can foster the development of 21st
century learners. Crews (2011) also provides suggestions to integrate games into school
libraries. By using games that support the curriculum, Crews argues, schools can give students
opportunities to experience play, while at the same time promoting student achievement.
Teacher Buy-in
As with introducing most non-traditional styles of education, teacher buy-in is essential
for success if integrating game play into the classroom. It seems as though teachers who try it
overwhelmingly notice the positive results. Schlosser & Balzano (2014) performed a study
involving a set of teachers and their involvement in the use of play in an after school club
environment. After participating and seeing the positive impact on student learning, nearly all of
the teachers involved agreed on the efficacy of game-based learning as an effective and ageappropriate instructional strategy. Rosewater (2009) concluded in a similar fashion, stating that
teachers who participate in game-based learning report higher levels of student engagement and
sustained interest.

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

11

Although teacher buy-in may seem to be a given, Lee and Probert (2010) are quick to
point to the difficulty of cultivating a proper delivery balance. They note that this kind of
teaching requires a mix of foresight and a willingness to adapt. In order to be effective in their
approach, teachers, Lee and Probert contend, will need to look across the curriculum for
opportunities to reinforce previous learning while also making specific connections to content
being studied outside of the game. This review suggests the need for specific teacher training in
order to ensure the positive results shown in the studies while avoiding games as being frivolous
distractors from education.
Conclusion
This review started by analyzing the assertion that play equals learning. The most recent
and studied variation of this declaration is an anthropological point of view. This view contends
that the play is the natural way that humans have always learned. Creating this natural space for
play has been recently named ludic learning theory. Schools have routinely squelched this
natural tendency by removing the necessary space to play, and thus learn. This is not true
everywhere, as there are numerous accounts of classrooms effectively utilizing games, authentic
avenues of play, within schools. Student outcomes in these instances were similar. Studies
pointed to game play as at least an equal replacement to more traditional forms of teaching.
Although the studies did not reach a conclusion on if games provide an increase in content
knowledge, each study did point out additional positive social and educational impacts of game
integration. Furthermore, multiple studies noted the effects on student perceptions of learning.
Game usage in classrooms improved student perceptions across the board. Seeing the value of
games in education, expert views on the process of integration were considered. Locations were

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

suggested and teacher training was an element of concern. In all, the literature of this review
pointed to the effectiveness of merging game play into secondary education environments.

12

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

13
References

Alvermann, D. E., & Heron, A. H. (2001). Literacy Identity Work: Playing to Learn with Popular
Media. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(2), 118122. Retrieved from http://0www.jstor.org.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/stable/40014717.
Barrett, K. (2012). "Yes! We are playing a game, and its going to be fun!. Mathematics
Teaching, 231(3), 15-16. Retrieved from http://0search.proquest.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/docview/1124521534?accountid=10269.
Cochran, J. J. (2005). Can You Really Learn Basic Probability by Playing a Sports Board
Game?. The American Statistician, 59(3), 266272. Retrieved from http://0www.jstor.org.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/stable/27643676.
Crews, A. (2011). Getting teachers on "board": everybody loves board games. Knowledge Quest,
40(1), 10+. Retrieved from http://0-go.galegroup.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/ps/i.do?
id=GALE
%7CA268220392&sid=summon&v=2.1&u=lom_cornerstc&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asi
d=8dcb882c3f47b816af8f85571abec515.
Elkind, D. (2008). The power of play: How spontaneous, imaginative activities lead to happier,
healthier children. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Lifelong Books.
Gray, P. (2009). Play makes us human I: A ludic theory of human nature. Psychology Today.
Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/freedom-learn/200906/playmakes-us-human-i-ludic-theory-human-nature.
Gray, P. (2015). Free to learn: Why unleashing the instinct to play will make our children
happier, more self-reliant, and better students for life. Philadelphia, PA: Basic Books.

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

14

Institute of Medicine, U.S. (2004). Engaging schools: Fostering high school students' motivation
to learn. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2010). Learning to play, playing to learn. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 23(1), 26-50. Retrieved from http://0dx.doi.org.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/10.1108/09534811011017199.
Lee, J. K., & Probert, J. (2010). Civilization III and whole-class play in high school social
studies. Journal of Social Studies Research, 34(1), 1-28. Retrieved from http://0search.proquest.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/docview/211067858?accountid=10269.
Mayer, B., & Harris, C. (2009). Libraries got game: Aligned learning through modern board
games. Chicago, IL, USA: American Library Association Editions.
Public Information Resources (2013). Executive skills for school success: Enhancing selfregulation, reasoning, and working memory. Learning and the Brain Annual
Conference: Arlington, VA.
Rosewater, A. (2009). Learning to play and playing to learn: Organized sports and educational
outcome. The Education Digest, 75(1), 50-56. Retrieved from http://0search.proquest.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/docview/218184887?accountid=10269.
Schlosser, L. K., & Balzano, B. (2014). Playing to learn: How after-school clubs influence
teachers beliefs about instruction. SAGE, 4(4). Retrieved from
http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/4/4/2158244014558031.
Simkin, M. G. (2013). Playing jeopardy in the classroom: An empirical study. Journal of
Information Systems Education, 24(3), 203+. Retrieved from http://0go.galegroup.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/ps/i.do?id=GALE

THE IMPACT OF PLAY

15

%7CA367075631&sid=summon&v=2.1&u=lom_cornerstc&it=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asi
d=01f057daa00b5c95ff6ec1f55eae2d76.
Sinclair, G., & Marks, J. (1999). Playing to learn. ASEE Prism, 9(1), 43. Retrieved from http://0search.proquest.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/docview/236106759?accountid=10269.
Vogel, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006).
Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of
Educational Computing Research 34: 229-243. Retrieved from http://0jec.sagepub.com.eaglelink.cornerstone.edu/content/34/3/229.short?
rss=1&ssource=mfr#cited-by.