Networks: An Online Journal

for Teacher Research

Volume 21 | Issue 1 Article 5

2019

Effects of Game-Based Learning on Attitude and

Achievement in Elementary Mathematics
Kyli White
Wake Forest University, kylimwhite@gmail.com

Leah P. McCoy
Wake Forest University, mccoy@wfu.edu

Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/networks

Part of the Elementary Education and Teaching Commons, and the Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning Commons

Recommended Citation
White, Kyli and McCoy, Leah P. (2019) "Effects of Game-Based Learning on Attitude and Achievement in Elementary Mathematics,"
Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research: Vol. 21: Iss. 1. https://doi.org/10.4148/2470-6353.1259

This Full Article is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Networks: An Online Journal for
Teacher Research by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact cads@k-state.edu.
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Effects of Game-Based Learning on Attitude and Achievement in Elementary Mathematics

Abstract

Games-based learning involves instruction with realistic game experiences (Cicchino, 2015).
This action research study explored game-based learning as fifth grade mathematics students
completed a brief unit on ordered pairs utilizing game-based lessons. Attitude and achievement
data were collected mainly by surveys, content tests, student interviews, and field notes.
Additional information included in the teacher-researcher analysis consisted of classroom
photographs, videos, and student work samples. Results revealed that student attitudes improved
both toward the lessons and toward math in general. Similarly, achievement improved for all
students across the unit. Analysis of the narrative data produced three themes. First, the students
acquired a growth mindset (Boaler, 2016) that fostered a positive work ethic. Second, student
partner work helped them to develop problem solving skills. And third, the games engaged the
students. In summary, students showed significant improvements both in their attitudes about
math and their achievement in ordered pairs.

Many students begin to develop negative attitudes about mathematics during their first

few years in the elementary classroom (Leroy & Bressoux, 2016). By the time these students

reach the fifth grade many of them inherently struggle at math, simply because they do not learn

best through the common process of rote memorization. Rather they would better succeed

through a process that is exploratory, collaborative, and challenging (Kebritchi, Hirumi, & Bai,

2010). Leroy and Bressoux (2016) note that when elementary students struggle, these attitudes

about mathematics can be toxic to a productive atmosphere, fostering low motivation and drive.

Boaler (2016), one of the leading researchers on students’ mathematics motivation, believes “the

difference between those who succeed and those who don’t is not in the brains they were born

with, but their approach to life, the messages they receive about their potential, and the

opportunities they have to learn” (p. 5).

Researchers assert that most students’ dislike for mathematics stems from the way that

the subject is presented in the classroom (Boaler, 2014; Dossel, 2016; Hunt, 1985; Reyes, 1984).

The current presentation of mathematics in many elementary school classrooms relies on the

New Prairie Press, 1

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

sequential description of mathematical concepts, followed by repetitive drill and practice to

master specific content (Olson, 1999). This rigid structure leads students to view math as a chore

that needs to be completed, rather than a puzzle that needs to be figured out.

Many elementary students develop mathematics anxiety, or “a feeling of tension,

apprehension, or fear that interferes with math performance” and begin to dread the time of day

devoted to the subject (Hunt, 1985, p. 32). Students can develop a fixed mindset about

mathematics, believing that they are either inherently successful at it, or they are bad at math

(Boaler, 2016). Moving away from these “fixed” practices can not only help change the way that

students view mathematics, but also the way that they view themselves.

Findings by Linder, Smart, and Cribbs (2015) suggest successful mathematics instruction

is centered on student interests and experiences. Children are naturally inquisitive by nature,

interested in the process of solving puzzles and trying to work things out. Guided discovery-

learning in the classroom entails the teacher’s introduction of a complex problem which the

students are able to work together to solve (Janssen, Westbroek, & Van Driel, 2014). This

process of social scaffolding, helps the students to “become more motivated, develop flexible

knowledge, and learn how knowledge is developed in a specific domain” (Janssen et al., 2014, p.

67). Another classroom activity that promotes student-driven exploration is the use of gaming in

the classroom. Serious games, which are defined as games that were created with the purpose of

education in mind, help to increase student engagement and motivation (Young et al., 2012).

Other researchers (Cicchino, 2015; Habgood & Ainsworth, 2011) have concluded that game-

based learning (GBL) can be very effective for the development of student intrinsic motivation

and critical thinking in the classroom.

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 2
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Serious games target the intrinsic motivation of students, relying on their internal drives

for competition, interaction, and creativity. According to Vygotsky (1978), children are

inherently social beings who learn best through investigation, and interaction with others. GBL is

founded on this principle of social interaction, as serious games give students opportunities to

explore concepts through the form of competitive exploration. Research has examined the effect

of competition on learning. Results from recent studies have found that competition improves

motivation and cooperation, and ultimately learning outcomes (Burguillo, 2010; Cagiltay,

Ozcelik, & Ozcelik, (2015).

In one study, Kebritchi et al. (2010) examined the effects of incorporating serious GBL

into the pre-algebra math classroom. According to the classroom teachers in this study, the use of

serious gaming was effective because the games were experiential in nature, offered a new way

to present and experience learning, gave the students context and motivation to work on the

mathematics concepts at hand, and made math fun.

The purpose of the current action research study was to study the effect of game-based

learning for fifth grade mathematics learners. Given the potential positive effects of game-based

learning instruction as identified by the related literature, the teacher-researcher determined to

implement and examine the use of serious gaming activities in fifth grade mathematics.

Specifically, she studied the topic of ordered pairs and the effect of serious gaming activities on

student attitude and achievement.

Methodology

This action research study was conducted at a public elementary school in the

southeastern United States with a standard-level fifth grade math class. The first author was the

teacher-researcher, and this study was an extension of her normal work in the classroom. The

New Prairie Press, 3

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

class had twenty-seven students, and the study used data from the twenty-four students who

returned signed informed consent and assent forms with permission to participate in the study

and were present each day. The demographics of the sample included Caucasian, Hispanic,

African American, and Asian/Pacific Islander students, and were split evenly among genders

with twelve males and twelve females.

The treatment period for this research study spanned the course of five school days. The

first and last days of the study were used for pre and post assessments and attitude survey

administration. Student interviews were conducted on the final day. Each interview lasted

between five and ten minutes and included questions such as, “How do you feel about math in

the classroom?” “What have you thought about the game-based learning we have been doing?”

and “What has been your favorite/least favorite activity?” These semi-structured interviews were

audio recorded and then transcribed.

The middle three days were designated as instructional days to incorporate principles of

game-based learning into classroom instruction. The periods of math instruction lasted sixty

minutes each. The instructional activities were designed and sequenced by the teacher-

researcher, based on the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. Specifically, this series of

lessons addressed Standard 5.g.2: Represent real world and mathematical problems by graphing

points in the first quadrant of the coordinate plane, and interpret coordinate values of points in

the context of the situation (NCDPI, 2017).

During Day 2 (the first day of the game-based learning instruction) students viewed the

video, Coordinate Plane Song: Ordered Pairs Rap for Kids and clarified the vocabulary that was

presented in the video. Next, after brief instruction, the students played Battleship to reinforce

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 4
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

their understanding of ordered pairs. The goal of this lesson was for students to learn vocabulary

and skills in graphing points in the first quadrant.

On Day 3, the students were asked to identify at least fifteen points on a coordinate grid

and write a creative story using the emojis at those grid points to describe their coordinate path in

their Emojilicious Coordinate Story. The goal of this lesson was for students to apply their

knowledge of ordered pairs in a creative writing context. See Appendix B.

On the final day of instruction, students rotated through a set of five stations including

Dice Game, Mission: Zombies, Connect Four, Finger Twister, and City Planner. Each of the

stations asked students to use their knowledge of ordered pairs to think critically and develop a

strategy for the particular activity. The goal of this lesson was for students to apply their

knowledge of ordered pairs in a problem-solving context.

Data Collection

In order to examine the effect of game-based learning on student attitude and

achievement, data were collected from interviews, video recordings, field notes, surveys, and

pretest, midtest, and posttest assessments.

Measures of Attitude. Data on student attitude toward mathematics were collected through

daily surveys, student interviews, still photographs, and researcher field notes.

Daily Attitude Survey. The daily Attitude Survey was created by the teacher-researcher

and contained three questions to gauge student feelings toward the daily lessons and mathematics

in general. These followed the guidelines for a basic Likert-scale survey (Gay, Mills & Airasian

(2012). These three questions were, (1) Circle the emojis that represent how you feel about

today’s lesson (feel free to circle more than one), (2) Circle the emojis that represent how you

feel about math in general (feel free to circle more than one), and (3) What else would you like to

New Prairie Press, 5

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

tell me about learning math? For the first two questions, students were provided with emojis that

correspond to each of the words: unhappy, worried, bored, surprised, good, happy, and other. For

the final question, the students were given two lines to freely express anything else they wished

to include in the survey. See Appendix A. This first survey was used as an initial baseline of each

individual student’s feelings toward everyday math lessons and math lessons in general. The

teacher-researcher also gave the students ten minutes to respond to the survey after each day of

the action research instruction.

Student Interviews. On the day following the game-based instruction, the researcher

pulled out individual students to interview them about their attitude toward game-based learning

and mathematics. Seven students were purposefully selected based on their daily interactions in

class, responses to the survey, and achievement in ordered pairs. Each interview lasted between

five and ten minutes and included questions such as, “How do you feel about math in the

classroom?”, “What have you thought about the game-based learning we have been doing?”, and

“What has been your favorite/least favorite activity?” These semi-structured interviews were

audio recorded and then transcribed. Finally, the teacher-researcher used open, axial, and

selective coding methods to select major themes on student attitude from all of the interviews.

Still Photographs and Researcher Field Notes. Each day, as the students were

completing the assigned activity, the teacher-researcher circled the room and took photographs

of the students. Following instruction, the teacher-researcher reviewed the various photographs

and compared them to her field notes for that day. She looked specifically for details and trends

that would help her to further understand student attitude toward the lesson, and mathematics in

general. These details include, but are not limited to, the facial expression of students, body

language of students, and number of students actively participating in the activity.

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 6
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Measures of Achievement. Data on student achievement in ordered pairs were collected

through student assessment, student artifacts, video recordings, and researcher field notes.

Student Assessment. Student assessment data were collected through a unit-specific

pretest, midtest, and posttest. The pretest was administered by the teacher-researcher at the start

of the class on the first day of instruction. Based on the state standards, the pretest contained ten

questions. The first five questions asked students to name an ordered pair from a point on a

graph, while the final five asked students to plot a point on a graph using only the name of the

ordered pair. Students were given ten minutes to complete the assessment.

The midtest occurred on day two of instruction and was comprised of a cross-curricular

game-based activity that asked students to identify at least fifteen points on a coordinate grid and

write a creative story using the emojis at those grid points to describe their coordinate path. The

researcher allowed students forty minutes to complete the entire activity. These Emojilicious

Coordinate Worksheets were then graded on the accuracy of the placement of student coordinate

points and the corresponding details that the students described in their coordinate stories.

Twenty-three students with permission to participate in the research were in class and able to

complete the midtest activity. A class average was computed from all of the students’ scores.

The posttest was administered by the teacher-researcher on the day following completion

of the unit. The posttest was identical to the pretest that was given to the students at the start of

the unit. This consistency in the two assessments allowed the researcher to determine how much

growth each student made throughout the unit. Students were given ten minutes to complete the

assessment. Twenty-four students with permission to participate in the research were in class and

able to take the assessment. A class average for the posttest was computed and compared with

the scores on the pretest and midtest.

New Prairie Press, 7

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

Student Artifacts. Student work from all daily activities was collected at the completion

of the class period. These artifacts include, but are not limited to, the Battleship activity sheets,

the Emojilicious Coordinate Stories, the coordinate plane guided notes, the City Planner

worksheet, and the zombie hunting activity. The researcher examined the student work for trends

in achievement among the students. Some of these trends included common student errors,

percent completion, attention to detail, and overall grade for each piece of work.

Video Recordings. During the daily classroom activities, the teacher-researcher walked

around the room with a notepad and made bullet point notes based on student engagement,

student participation, and students’ interesting comments or ideas. Following the data collection

period, the teacher-researcher coded these notes for themes surrounding student achievement.

Additionally, the teacher-researcher positioned a still video camera in the classroom each day to

record teacher instruction and daily activities. As the teacher-researcher reviewed the data, she

examined the videos and made notes on any details or student comments that she missed during

her field notes for that day.

Results and Discussion

Measures of Attitude.

Daily Attitude Surveys.

The questions on the survey were examined for common trends through open, axial, and

selective coding methods. The baseline set of surveys, handed out before game intervention, was

coded separately from the post-intervention set of surveys. Average percentages were calculated

from the twenty-four students who took the survey each day. On these baseline surveys, fifty-

four percent of students mentioned they disliked math, while sixty-seven percent of students

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 8
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

wrote they were bad at math. Only seventeen percent of students who participated in the survey

said they enjoyed math. When examining the Likert-scale questions, eighty-three percent of

students circled unhappy, worried, or bored about their feelings toward math on the baseline

survey. Ninety-two percent of students’ comments and reactions grew more positive each day.

By the final day of instruction, one hundred percent of students indicated they felt either good or

happy about math.

Figure 1. Graph of Survey Data

The results from the survey were overwhelmingly positive. The data revealed that not

only did the students enjoy the game-based learning practices, but they also began to change

their entire attitude about mathematics in general.

Student Interviews. All seven of the students pulled out for individual interviews

commented on how much more they enjoyed math when it was taught in the form of a game.

The three major trends that arose from the interviews were increased growth mindset, problem

New Prairie Press, 9

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

solving skills, and student engagement. In terms of growth mindset, the students made comments

such as, “I am getting so much better at math now,” and “I learned a lot about ordered pairs. I

didn’t know it was possible but I understand so much more now." These comments show that the

students have begun to view their math ability as fluid, or something that could be developed

through hard work and dedication. Many of the students who originally believed they were

simply bad at math claimed in their interview that they now believe they can succeed with more

fun and engaged practice.

Another common theme that arose from the interviews had to do with the problem-

solving skills that were strengthened through partner interaction. When asked if the students

enjoyed working in partners, one claimed, “Yeah, I like working in partners ‘cause I think

differently from a lot of people. So having a partner is great because if I think one way about

something and they think a different way, we can put our ideas together and hopefully get

something right.” Many other students echoed this sentiment with comments such as, “I liked

being able to talk out loud while I was thinking,” and “my partner got confused one time but I

helped her think through her mistake.”

The final common trend from student interviews was increased student engagement

during various classroom activities. Some of the comments that expressed this sentiment were, “I

feel good about using games to get kids to learn math in a fun way,” and “learning math is not

my favorite but this week I loved it! Usually I don’t, but this week was great.” Another student

added, “learning math can sometimes be hard and stressful and I have problems with stressing.

When I get too stressed or worried my asthma gets bad and that scares me.” However, “this week

made math feel like there was no pressure because everyone was having fun while they were

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 10
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

learning”. She mentioned that the game-based style of the math lessons increased her enjoyment

of mathematics and her willingness to try.

Still Photographs and Researcher Field Notes. Each day during instruction, the

researcher circled the room and briefly noted comments about student attitude. While these notes

carried important information with which the researcher could use to look back at each day, they

contained very limited data on whole-class student attitude. On the other hand, the pictures that

were taken daily on the digital camera revealed details about daily student attitude. Of the

seventy-three photographs that were taken by the researcher during the course of the unit, there

are four wide shots of all the students in the room that are very telling in terms of student

engagement and achievement. In each of these photos, every visible student is completely on

task.

Measures of Achievement.

Content Assessment. Data on student achievement in ordered pairs was collected

through student assessment at pretest, midtest, and posttest. See Figures 2 and 3. The average

student score on the pretest assessment was 55.95 percent. This average was calculated from the

scores of the twenty-three students who took the pretest. The scores for the pretest ranged from

fifteen to seventy-five percent.

On the midtest assessment, the average score was 86.38 percent. This score was

calculated from the twenty-three students who were present to complete the midtest assignment.

The scores for this midtest ranged from sixty-five to one hundred percent. Twenty out of twenty-

one students who completed both the pretest and the midtest saw an increase in their score from

one to the next. The average increase from the pretest to the midtest for all individual students

was 29.68 points.

New Prairie Press, 11

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

The average posttest score was 96.14 percent. Twenty-four students were present to take

this posttest in class. The scores for the posttest ranged from seventy-five to one hundred

percent. All students, with the exception of one, saw a large increase in their score from the

pretest to the posttest. The average individual score increase was 39.5 points from the pretest to

the posttest.

Figure 2. Content Assessment Scores

Figure 3. Change in Student Scores

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 12
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Artifacts. The many artifacts consisted of all the written work that was done by the

students throughout the week. These worksheets and assignments were then examined by the

researcher and given a grade both for effort and for accuracy. On the first day of instruction, the

students all played Coordinate Battleship and handed in their worksheets at the end of class. The

class average for the battleship activity was an 84 percent. On the final day of instruction, the

students rotated through five separate stations where they completed various activities and games

dealing with the coordinate plane. The students demonstrated proficient knowledge of ordered

pairs during the various games and worksheets. There were only 11 worksheets out of a total of

122 that contained any errors with the ordered pairs. This would translate to a class average of 91

percent for the day.

Video Recordings. Throughout instruction, the video camera picked up on many

comments and conversations the teacher-researcher would have missed otherwise. The teacher-

researcher classified interesting comments from these video clips as either “aha moments,”

declarations of ease, or peer corrections. The recordings categorized as “aha moments” include

student comments such as, “Ohh, that makes sense now,” “Oops, I did that one wrong,” and

“Good point. I didn’t think of that before!” These comments are clearly indicative of students

thinking through their mathematical understandings. They also show the value of collaborative

work as the conversations with peers result in deeper thinking. Some of the comments from the

declarations of ease category include, “I’m so good at this kind of math,” “Look! We didn’t

make any mistakes,” and “This is so easy." Again, this collaborative context is motivational for

students. Finally, some of the most interesting comments in the peer corrections category

include, “No, three comma four means over three then up four. You had it the other way

New Prairie Press, 13

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

around,” “I think that ordered pair might be backwards,” “Are you sure I didn’t sink your ship

yet?” and “Did you double check number six?” So, competition does not negate collaboration.

Students worked together to clarify their understandings.

Conclusion

In the interviews and surveys, many of the students expressed an initial aversion to math

that was lessened throughout the course of the game-based learning. They spoke of a looming

sense of fear toward daily math instruction. These feelings of math anxiety that students

expressed closely resembled those described by Hunt (1985). The negative attitudes that students

felt toward math on the baseline surveys also went along with the research from Leroy and

Bressoux (2016), who determined that students who struggle with low math self-esteem are the

most likely to have poor achievement in the math classroom.

Data from student interviews revealed attitudes indicating that incorporation of serious

games was successful because the games “make math feel like it’s not math,” and pushed many

students “to work harder than [they] normally would because the work was fun and challenging.”

The game-based learning process allowed the students to work together to tackle complex, real-

world situations. Many of the students commented on how having a partner was very beneficial

to their overall success with ordered pairs.

Students exhibited a clear improvement based on the growth mindset model as described

by Boaler (2016). They were more open and resilient as they developed skills and concepts. The

comments and corrections that students made during their conversations showed they had

developed a fundamental understanding of ordered pairs and the coordinate plane. The students

felt comfortable enough with the material and the collaboration to not only correct their partner

but to also explain why their partner’s thinking was invalid. These various examples, coupled

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 14
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

with the dramatic increase in students’ assessment scores, showed the game-based learning

increased both student attitude and achievement in mathematics.

While the results from this study seem to suggest that there is a strong relationship

between game-based learning and student attitude and achievement in mathematics, there are

important limitations to note. This study was limited in the areas of size, duration, and content.

The results from the study represent the findings from one sample of students during one week of

the year, focused on one unit of the curriculum. In order to gain more significant insight into the

effects of GBL on student attitude and achievement and to control for potential extraneous

variables, more research should be conducted.

The results of this study have many implications for teachers and students in the math

classroom. The participants demonstrated significant improvements both in their attitudes about

math and their achievement in ordered pairs. Thus, this action research study corroborated the

literature surrounding the positive impact of serious games on attitude and achievement. These

results may encourage other researchers and practitioners to continue investigating. The teacher-

researcher author will definitely continue investigating and integrating game-based learning into

instruction on a regular basis.

New Prairie Press, 15

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

References

Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students' potential through creative math,

inspiring messages and innovative teaching. New York, NY: Jossey-Bass.

Boaler, J. (2014). Research suggests that timed tests cause math anxiety. Teaching Children

Mathematics, 20(8), 469-474.

Burguillo, J. C. (2010). Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student

motivation and performance. Computers & Education, 55, 566-575.

Cagiltay, N. E., Ozcelik, E, & Ozcelik, N. S. (2015). The effect of competition on learning in

games. Computers & Education 87, 35-41.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.001

Cicchino, M. I. (2015). Using game-based learning to foster critical thinking in student

discourse. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 9(2).

doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1481

Dossel, S. (2016). Maths anxiety. Australian Mathematics Teacher, 72(3), 40-44.

Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E, & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational Research. Boston: Pearson.

Habgood, M., & Ainsworth, S. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the

value of intrinsic integration in educational games. Journal of the Learning Sciences,

20(2), 169-206.

Hunt, G. E. (1985). Maths anxiety: Where do we go from here? Focus on Learning Problems in

Math, 7(2), 29-40.

Janssen, F., Westbroek, H., & Van Driel, J. (2014). How to make guided discovery learning

practical for student teachers. Instructional Science, 42(1), 67-90.

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 16
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern math computer games on

mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers and Education, 55(2), 427-

443.

Leroy, N., & Bressoux, P. (2016). Does amotivation matter more than motivation in predicting

math learning gains? A longitudinal study of sixth-grade students in France.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 44(1), 41-53.

Linder, S. M., Smart, J. B., & Cribbs, J. (2015). A multi-method investigation of mathematics

motivation for elementary age students. School Science and Mathematics, 115(8), 392-

403.

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) (2017). North Carolina Standard

Course of Study. Retrieved from

http://maccss.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/5th%20Grade%20Standards.

Olson, S. (1999). Videotapes expose classroom faults. Science, 283(5408), 1616-1617.

Reyes, L. H. (1984). Affective variables and mathematics education. The Elementary School

Journal, 84(5), 558-581.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Young, M., Slota, S., Cutter, A. B., Jalette, G., Mullin, G., Lai, B...Yukhymenko, M. (2012).

Our princess is in another castle: A review of trends in serious gaming for education.

Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 61–89.

New Prairie Press, 17

 Networks: An Online Journal for Teacher Research, Vol. 21 [2019], Iss. 1, Art. 5

Appendix A: Attitude Survey (author-created content)

https://newprairiepress.org/networks/vol21/iss1/5 18
DOI: 10.4148/2470-6353.1259
 White and McCoy: Game-Based Learning

Appendix B: Emojilicious Coordinate Story (author-created content)

New Prairie Press, 19