Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers and Education Open

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/computers-and-education-open

Future-oriented skills and knowledge in game jams, a systematic

literature review
Riikka Aurava a, *, Kati Sormunen b
a
Tampere University, Kalevantie 4, 33100 Tampere, Finland
b
University of Helsinki, Yliopistonkatu 4, 00100 Helsinki, Finland

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Game jams, events for co-creating digital or non-digital games, are connected to learning in several ways: learning
Cooperative / collaborative learning is a common motivation for participation and various learning results have been reported as their outcome. The
Games existing literature on game jam learning consists mostly of descriptive individual case studies, with very inco­
Game jam
hesive and varied research aims, methods, and settings. Thus far, there have been no attempts to further analyze
Interdisciplinary projects
21st-century abilities
and classify the reported results of the previous studies. This article looks at existing research on game jams and
learning, comparing the reported learning results to the future-oriented skills and knowledge. The data set, created
utilizing the PRISMA checklist, consists of 25 original articles published between 2010 and 2022. The results
show that participation in a game jam event will likely increase interdisciplinary, epistemic, and procedural
knowledge. Furthermore, it can increase disciplinary knowledge depending on the theme and other framings of
the event. Participation in a game jam event will likely further cognitive and metacognitive skills as well as social
and emotional skills, provided the jam event is organized to create a safe and inclusive space for learning.
Participation in a game jam will also likely further diverse practical and physical skills, but the adoption of these
skills varies depending on individuals’ tasks inside their team. ICT-related skills are furthered in jam events
concentrating on digital games and can be supported when making non-digital games. Thus, game jams offer a
well-suited method for learning future-oriented skills and knowledge.

1. Introduction parallel movements globally, taking influences from each other. It

should be noted that the global economy and technology companies
Designing games is an important part of game-based pedagogy [1,2], have had their influence in defining skills. For example, the Organiza­
along with playing games (educational or other) and gamification of tion for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has had a
teaching and learning. Game design has been shown to improve several significant impact on determining the future skills of both the United
skills, e.g., coding and other digital competencies [3,4], computational States and European countries. Today the 21st-century skills are incor­
skills (Kafai, [5]; Kafai & Burke, [6,7]), engagement [8], learning about porated in the United States into the Common Core State Standards [15]
learning (Kafai & Burke [7]), problem-solving skills [9,4], creative and in Europe, the Key Competences for Lifelong Learning [16]. All the
thinking [10], and collaboration (Kafai & Burke, 2015; [3,6,7]). The above actors are also striving for social inclusion and active citizenship.
reported learning outcomes have much in common with the future-or­ Regardless of the agendas of economic growth or technology com­
iented knowledge and skills, also referred to as 21st-century knowledge and panies, which we will not address further in this article, education must
skills, (see Trilling & Fadel [11]) that educational systems worldwide are somehow prepare children and youth to meet future challenges. Since
trying to further (see [12,13]). The general aim is to prepare students for the educational guidelines build on each other, we will use in this paper
the future with knowledge and skills that could be harnessed to the most recent framework OECD’s Learning Compass 2030, which was
encounter the changes in society and life in general. launched in 2019 [17]. It was grounded upon previous work on theo­
Anderson-Levitt [14] examined the history of the United States retical and conceptual foundations for future competencies and disci­
movements for future skills. She points out that the development of plinary core ideas and how the teaching that supports this should be
future knowledge and skills has been an intertwined process between organized (e.g., [12]; OECD [18]). The Learning Compass 2030 aims to

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: riikka.aurava@tuni.fi (R. Aurava), kati.sormunen@helsinki.fi (K. Sormunen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100129
Received 30 December 2021; Received in revised form 22 November 2022; Accepted 3 February 2023
Available online 5 February 2023
2666-5573/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

articulate the types of future-oriented competencies, knowledge, skills, epistemic, and procedural knowledge can be identified from game jam
attitudes, and values students need to learn individually and collectively studies?
to be used at multiple levels, from learners to policymakers. However, its Q2: What kind of learning of cognitive and metacognitive, social and
main emphasis is on learning transformative competencies such as emotional, and practical and physical skills can be identified from game
creating new value, reconciling tensions and dilemmas, and taking jam studies?
responsibility.
Transformative competencies can be learned using interdisciplinary 2. Methods and data
learning methods. At school, interdisciplinary learning can be facilitated
by collaborative and process-oriented methods such as collaborative 2.1. Methods
knowledge building and creation [19,20], digital fabrication ([21];
Kafai [22]), and maker-centered learning [23], phenomenon-based We conducted a systematic literature review (see [42–45]) of orig­
learning [24], project-based learning [25] and STEM/STEAM peda­ inal articles describing learning of future-oriented skills in game jams.
gogies [26]. These orientations have been acknowledged as beneficial The review process consists of selecting, identifying, and synthesizing
because students can practice transferring knowledge and skills to the primary research studies (Gough et al., [43]).
similar or different situations, which is often more difficult, especially
for younger students. 2.1.1. Selection and identification of original studies
Similarly, interdisciplinary learning is realized when students are In selecting and identifying the relevant literature, we utilized the
making their own games. Game-based learning connects with such 27-item checklist of PRISMA guidelines and a four-phase flow diagram
pedagogical paradigms as experiential learning [27], learning by doing [46]. The search and selection process of this study is presented in Fig. 1,
[28], situated learning [29], authentic learning [30,31], and con­ below.
structionism [32–34]. However, the game design opportunities are often To be included, the articles needed to fill six criteria.
available only for enthusiastic children and youth in out of school Criteria 1: Study published between 2010 and 2022 in English.
contexts. For example, game jam events are one way of realizing game Criteria 2: Study peer-reviewed and published in an academic jour­
design and game making, and they are defined by teamwork, time limits, nal or conference proceedings.
and shared end results. Criteria 3: Study is empirical (leaving out, e.g., literature reviews and
Game jams are events where people gather to design games together reflections of game jam organizers)
(see [35]). The duration of the events varies, with 24- or 48-hour jams Criteria 4: Study discusses learning outcomes or experiences of
dominating the scene of face-to-face events and online game jams being learning in game jams (leaving out, e.g., learning as a motivation to
typically longer, from a couple of days to a couple of months. Game participate in a game jam)
design in jam events is generally defined by further restrictions, such as a Criteria 5: Study reports data collection and analyzing methods.
common theme or tools. The history of game jamming is relatively short, Criteria 6: Study includes well-articulated results (leaving out, e.g.,
with the first game jam event, Indie Game Jam, recorded in 2002 [35]. preliminary results) and sufficiently described learning outcomes.
The most popular annual jam event, Global Game Jam (GGJ), draws We searched electronic databases Scopus and ERIC with the term
participants from over 100 countries [36] and profoundly affects both “game jam*” since 2010, against article titles, abstracts, and keywords.
game jam practices and research: nearly half of the articles included in The term was selected because it is a specific, established term in the
this study focus on Global Game Jam. Game jams are sometimes used to field of game design studies and game-based education. Searches on
initiate new game developers and students of game design to game Scopus (February 17th, 2021; March 2nd, 2022) produced 139 and 31
making, teamwork, and cooperation. However, they are more often hits, and ERIC (February 18th, 2021; March 2nd, 2022) 5 and 0. The
open events for all interested, and participants are voluntary hobbyists. resulting hits were mainly the same in both databases. Another, sup­
Several studies show that learning is a significant motivation to plementing round of gathering articles was done based on earlier review
attend a game jam (e.g., [37–39]). Game jams have been described as article on game jams and learning [41] and the Proceedings of the In­
fun and engaging but learning gains have also been found (e.g. Reng ternational Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation
et al., [40]). An earlier literature review on game jams and learning [41] Events (ICGJ) from years 2016–2021, and its predecessors: Proceedings
took a broader view to game jam learning than ours, and different in­ of the 2015 Workshop on Game Jams, Hackathons and Game Creation
clusion criteria, including also preliminary results, and other learning Events at, International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games
related issues than just learning results, e.g., learning as a motivation to (FDG) 2015, Second Workshop on the Global Game Jam at FDG 2014,
attend a game jam. The earlier review shows that there are positive yet and The Inaugural Workshop on the Global Game Jam at FDG 2013. The
tentative results on learning outcomes from game jams. In this article, supplementing round returned mostly the same articles as the search of
we are concentrating on the learning areas often coined with 21st cen­ databases, with fourteen additional articles found. After cleaning the
tury competencies, or future-oriented learning, and combining the duplicates, we were left with 163 results.
learning results reported in various original empirical studies to achieve The first author screened the articles, based on titles and abstracts. In
a rigorous understanding of game jam learning. More clearly defined this phase, articles were excluded if they did not discuss learning aspects
and described learning results grounded in empirical studies will help of game jams. 72 included articles were then screened by the first and
educators and policy makers find and choose learning methods relevant second author, after reading the full texts independently and then dis­
to them. cussing the reasons for exclusion. 25 articles were included in the final
In this paper, we examine existing literature on educational game selection. During the process, we exploited the authors’ expertise areas:
jam learning. The purpose of this systematic literature review (see The first author’s expertise in educational game jam research was used
[42–44]) is to identify what kind of future-oriented knowledge and skills in the initial stage. The second author’s expertise in process-oriented
are learned in game jams. We acknowledge that identifying the learning learning methods and future-oriented pedagogies was beneficial from
of specific knowledge and skills has proven difficult in the research and the second phase further.
it is often difficult to measure or separate in practice because they are
interconnected and develop together. Our work provides foundational 2.1.2. Synthesis of original studies
knowledge for researchers, policy-makers, and educators interested in The synthesis of the original articles consists of
integrating game jamming into education. The research is driven by the
following research questions. 1 mapping the attributes of the studies in subchapter 2.2 of this article
Q1: What kind of learning of disciplinary, interdisciplinary, and

2
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Fig. 1. Diagram of the screening process, showing how the studies were selected from the initial database search to the final included studies.

2 comparing the reported learning results against the chosen frame­ only a few (n = 5) focused on adolescents. Some of the articles (n = 6)
work (see Gough et al., 2017; [43]) of future-oriented competencies, had both adults and adolescents in their participants, and in one article
knowledge, skills, and attitudes [17] in chapter 3 of this article. [47] the age of the participants was not mentioned at all. Young children
were not in the main participant groups, as the adolescents in the studies
Apart from mapping the game jam settings and research settings and were mostly elementary or high school students. In one study [48], the
objectives of the original articles, our synthesis is qualitative and participating adults sometimes mentioned having cooperated in the jam
descriptive, as the original research is varied and does not allow for a event with their own children, but the children were not informants of
statistical meta-analysis (see [45]). The synthesis is also interpretative, that study.
as the original studies do not always differentiate between learning re­ Most game jam settings (n = 15) of the studies can be considered
sults, e. g. competencies and skills. Furthermore, there is variety in the informal learning environments: Global Game Jam (GGJ) and other
terms used for future-oriented and 21st-century competencies and skills game jam events, and after school activities organized in summer camps
as well as in the research traditions of the original studies, which were or in youth centers. As the GGJ is the biggest jam event, several studies
published in journals concentrating on e. g. education, information (n = 9) concentrated on GGJ participants, which is likely to grow the
technology, social studies, and game studies. proportion of adult participants (GGJ has age restriction of 18 years),
informal learning environments and 48-hour long jams. Formal learning
environments were scarce: some articles (n = 6) studied learning in high
2.2. Attributes of the studies
school or university level game jam courses for students, and one [49]
concentrated on in-service teacher training. Additionally, four articles
2.2.1. Participants and game jam settings of the studies
studied the effects of several different game jam settings, both formal
Most of the articles concentrated on adults’ learning (n = 13) while

3
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

and informal. Table 1

As the articles studied different game jam events, the duration of the Participants and game jam settings in the selected studies.
jams varied. Most jam events described in the articles lasted from one Authors Participants Learning Duration Game Games
school day to one week (n = 17), although some longer ones had been environment of the jam design tasks created
studied [50]. Some articles (n = 5) discussed the results of several, (formal or (s) (collective (digital
informal) or or non-
mostly unspecified game jams.
individual) digital)
The game design tasks of the jam events are most often collective.
Individual game design tasks were only studied in two articles, Faas [37] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective N/A
week
et al. [48], and Fowler & Khosmood [51], although in the latter the [49] Adults Formal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
participants had also been given some collective tasks. Games created week
and game design tasks included in the jam events of original articles [52] Adolescents Formal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
have either been digital (n = 7) or digital combined with non-digital (n week
[53] Adults and Formal and 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
= 8). Some articles (n = 4) did not mention the type of games and game
adolescents informal week and non-
creation tasks. In our data, there were no mentions of purely non-digital digital
game jams (see Table 1). [54] Adolescents Formal and 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
informal week
2.3.2. Research objectives of the studies and learning aspects discussed [55] Adolescents Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
week and
The two most common research objectives in the 19 articles are individual
studying the effectiveness of game jams as learning experiences (n = 16) [48] Adults Informal N/A Collective Digital
and describing the process of game design in the jams (n = 8). Some and
articles concentrated on describing the demographics of the jam par­ individual
[56] Adults Formal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
ticipants (n = 4) or the overall participation in the GGJ (n = 1). Most of
week
the articles focused on 1–3 aspects related to learning, like motivation [51] Adolescents Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
(n = 5), engagement (n = 3), collaboration (n = 3), self-efficacy (n = 2), week and
self-development (n = 1), development of 21st century skills (n = 1), individual
academic performance of jam participants (n = 1), perceptions of and [57] Adults Informal N/A Collective Digital
and non-
persistence with computer science (n = 1), learning of indigenous lan­
digital
guage and culture (n = 1), confidence and preparedness (n = 1), [58] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
combining game jams and formal education (n = 1), communication (n week and non-
= 1), science literacy and practice (n = 1), design thinking (n = 1), and digital
[59] Adults Formal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
overcoming language barriers (n = 1) (see Table 2). Some articles
week
described the more comprehensive effects of game jamming: Arya, [60] Adults Formal and N/A Collective Digital
Chastine, Preston, and Fowler [37] mapped what skills can be learned informal and non-
during a game jam, while Fowler, Ni, and Preston [57] compared the digital
GPA results of those students who had participated in game jams to [61] Adults and Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
adolescents week
those who had not, and Preston, Chastine, O’Donnell, Tseng, and Mac­
[62] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
Intyre [66] examined if academic performance could be improved by week
participating in a game jam. [63] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
week
[47] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
2.3.3. Research designs of the studies
week
The articles can be roughly divided into two main groups based on [64] Adults Formal 1 day to 1 Collective N/A
their sample sizes and methodologies: first group (n = 13) deals with week
large participant groups and uses surveys and quantitative methods, and [65] Adults Formal and 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
the second group (n = 8) concentrates on smaller groups and uses in­ informal week
[50] Adolescents Informal Longer Collective Digital
terviews, observation, open-ended questionnaires, and qualitative
than 1 and non-
methods, mostly (n = 6) thematic analysis. week digital
In the first group the number of participants runs from 26 [47] to an [66] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
unspecified, large group of university students whose grades Fowler week and non-
digital
et al. [57] studied, with 147 398 distinct student grades analyzed. In the
[67] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
second group there are fewer participants, from Meriläinen’s [63] four week and non-
to Savvani’s [67] 42. Additionally, four articles are essentially mixed digital
methods research, combining surveys and observations in data gath­ [38] Adults Informal 1 day to 1 Collective N/A
ering and qualitative and quantitative analysis as well as game analysis week
[68] Adults Informal I day to 1 Collective Digital
(see Table 2).
week
[69] Adults Formal 1 day to 1 Collective Digital
2.3. Data analysis week

The data was analyzed by comparing the results of the studies using
reread the article together, finding a mutual understanding (see [70]).
the classification from the Learning Compass 2030 [17] to identify the
The results of our data analysis are described further in chapter 3 of this
areas of the future-oriented knowledge and skills which can be sup­
article, and can be found as a table in Appendix A.
ported or enhanced via game jamming. Table 3 summarizes four areas of
We have also utilized keyword co-occurrence analysis [71,72] to
knowledge and three skills recognized in the OECD’s Learning Compass
discern which areas of learning are connected in the data. A visualiza­
2030. The areas are discussed further in the result section.
tion of the most common keywords and their co-occurrence in the
In the analysis process, both authors read and interpreted the results
original articles is in Fig. 2, Chapter 3.2, and it has mostly been used to
individually, classifying them separately. We then discussed our in­
clarify the relations of disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge in
terpretations, and when we had not come to the same conclusions, we

4
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Table 2 Table 2 (continued )

Research objectives and designs of the selected articles and learning-related Authors Research Aspects related to Sample Methods
aspects discussed in them. objectives learning size
Authors Research Aspects related to Sample Methods learning
objectives learning size experiences
[37] Effectiveness of Learning in game 551 Quantitative [47] Effectiveness of Confidence and 26 Quantitative
game jams as jams game jams as preparedness
learning learning
experiences; experiences
Description of [64] Effectiveness of Transcultural skills 531 Quantitative
game design game jams as
process and learning
participants experiences
[49] Effectiveness of Pedagogical and the 10 Qualitative [65] Effectiveness of Engagement; 24 Qualitative
game jams as practical aspects of game jams as Communication;
learning game jamming in learning Collaboration
experiences classrooms experiences;
[52] Effectiveness of Motivations and 34 Qualitative Description of
game jams as learning results of game jam
learning game jam process
experiences participants [50] Effectiveness of Engagement; N/A Qualitative
[53] Effectiveness of Combining game 498 Mixed- game jams as Science literacy and
game jams as jamming and methods learning practice; Design
learning formal education experiences thinking
experiences; [66] Effectiveness of Motivation 151 Quantitative
Practicalities of game jams as
organizing game learning
jams experiences;
[54] Description of Engagement 85 Quantitative Description of
game design game jam
process participants
[55] Effectiveness of Development of 90 Qualitative [67] Emotions Emotions 39 Qualitative
game jams as 21st-century skills experienced connected to
learning during and after learning
experiences; a game jam
Practicalities of event
organizing game [38] Effectiveness of Self-efficacy; Social 50 Quantitative
jams game jams as skills
[48] Effectiveness of Self-development 15 Qualitative learning
game jams as experiences
learning [68] Description of Dependency 395 Quantitative
experiences game design between level of
[56] Effectiveness of Game design as 2 Qualitative process; education and other
game jams as assessment method Description of game jam related
learning for learning; game jam issues
experiences; Chemical participants
Practicalities of engineering [69] Description of Overcoming 39 Mixed-
organizing game game design language barriers methods
jams process
[51] Effectiveness of Perceptions of and 13 Mixed-
game jams as persistence with methods
learning computer science our data. The two-dimensional keyword map (see [73]) has been created
experiences with the help of software called VOSviewer.
[57] Effectiveness of Academic N/A (data Quantitative The analysis is always interpretation, as not all articles report and
game jams as performance of set
learning game jam consisted
name their results according to the framework we used, or the results did
experiences participants of 147,398 not fall neatly into the categories of the framework. The categories
grades) themselves are overlapping: for example, learning game design pro­
[58] Overall GGJ as vehicle for 1749 Quantitative cesses can be interpreted as disciplinary knowledge for game design
participation in education
studies. However, game design is also always interdisciplinary in nature.
GGJ
[59] Description of Collaboration 45 Quantitative It is also epistemic knowledge, because it helps the learner to think like a
game design game design professional, and it is procedural knowledge, as designing
process games is a process. Because of this ambiguity, we had to read the original
[60] Description of Motivation, 6 Qualitative articles closely to realize what was meant by such terms, as often the
game jam Learning in game
participants jams
reported learning results of the articles are also interpretations of the
[61] Description of Motivation; 44 Qualitative original authors.
game jam Learning of
process indigenous
language and
3. Results
culture
[62] Description of Interdisciplinary 378 Mixed- 3.1. Future-oriented skills in game jams
game jam collaboration methods
process
In the original articles, we found evidence that all three areas of
[63] Effectiveness of Motivation; Self- 4 Qualitative
game jams as efficacy future-oriented skills can be furthered by participating in game jams (see
Appendix A for detailed results and Table 4 for a summary). Only two
original articles [57,59] did not show evidence of furthering of

5
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Table 3
The summary of future-oriented knowledge and skills (OECD Learning compass 2030, 2019).
Types of knowledge

Disciplinary Interdisciplinary Epistemic Procedural

Learning of Learning to Learning to Learning to understand
• subject-specific concepts • transfer key concepts across • think and act like a practitioner • how something is done
• discipline-specific detailed disciplines • to connect knowledge to real-life issues • what series of steps or actions have to be taken to
content • identify interconnectedness • recognize the relevance and purpose of accomplish a goal (e.g., design process)
their learning • what strategies to apply for solving the problem
Types of skills
Cognitive and metacognitive Social and emotional Practical and physical
Learning of Learning of Learning to use
• critical thinking • Self-awareness and -control • physical tools, operations and functions
• creative thinking • responsibility • and manipulate materials, tools,
• learning strategies and • collaboration equipment, and artefacts
learning-to-learn • respect of others and empathy • new information
• Self-regulation and -efficacy • communication technology devices
• digital literacy

Fig. 2. Keyword network of game jams and learning. Keywords’ proximity to one another shows their relatedness, whereas the size of the nodes on the map shows
keyword frequency.

future-oriented skills, as they concentrated more on the construction of 3.1.1. Cognitive and metacognitive skills
knowledge. While cognitive and metacognitive skills and social and Cognitive and meta-cognitive skills are essential for learning. Cognitive
emotional skills are furthered by being part of a team, the practical and skills consist of verbal, non-verbal and higher order thinking skills that
physical skills are more closely tied to the tasks every individual is are needed when using language, numbers, and digital technologies, as
taking inside of their teams. Thus, the first two areas are more commonly well as reasoning and acquiring knowledge [17]. However, the ability to
distributed, while the specific technical or artistic skills are more varied. use metacognitive skills, such as critical and creative thinking and
self-regulation, will become even more important in the future.

6
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Table 4 Furthermore, game jams can be a place to learn collaboration with

Learning of future-oriented skills in game jams. people different from self, e.g., international collaboration [65,69],
Future-oriented skills in game jam research collaboration with a visually impaired person [50], or with persons from
different fields of expertise [62,65]. Respect for others and empathy can
Cognitive and Social and emotional Practical and physical
metacognitive be strengthened through game jamming. Savvani [67] identified con­
Learning of Learning of Learning to use tributions to participants’ sense of growth and well-being by sheltering
• giving and receiving • collaboration • game making positive emotional and social experiences. Game jams can also further
feedback • co-operation software / game participants’ understanding of their own or other cultures [61,69].
• acknowledging • communicating ideas to engine
others’ skills others • 2D or 3D design
Emotional skills can also be related to self-efficacy and confidence in
• asking for help • convincing the team • sound, music or audio one’s own skills. Kultima [60] describes jam participants having gained
• co-creation of • carrying on design confidence in their game development skills. Miller et al. [47] measured
knowledge conversations • programming feelings of preparedness during the jam event and showed an increase of
• team problem solving • expressing opinions • game design
confidence and preparedness by the end of the event. Pimentel, Cock­
• understanding others’ • negotiation • writing and scripting
emotions • social inclusion • animation croft, & Andersson [64] reported transcultural self-efficacy and Aurava,
• time management /acknowledging and • online communities Meriläinen, Kankainen and Stenros [53] self-efficacy being positively
• self-regulation praising differences • communicational affected by game jamming. Meriläinen’s article [63] describes gam jam
• finding creative • understanding cultural tools (e.g. Discord) participants’ experiences of competence, relatedness and belonging, the
solutions to practical variation
problems
three basic needs described by Ryan and Deci in their self-determination
• adapting quickly to theory [74,75]. These in turn strongly contribute to the intrinsic moti­
new technologies vation and especially the feeling of competence leads to stronger
• self-efficacy self-efficacy.

3.1.3. Practical and physical skills

Teaching and learning should also emphasize learning-to-learn skills
Both cognitive and social and emotional skills can be promoted with
and support students to recognize their knowledge, skills, attitudes, and
practical and physical skills. Practical skills are a set of skills from craft­
values.
work to mastering the use of educational robotics or smartphones.
Learning cognitive and metacognitive skills in game jams is often­
Practical skills also include capability to manipulate materials, tools and
times tied to the social and collaborative aspects of jamming. When
artifacts in different contexts. Physical skills on the other hand advance
working in teams, participants acquire new learning strategies like
students’ health and wellbeing. Subjects that are learned physically (e.
giving and receiving feedback [48] or understanding the skills of others
g., music, arts, and crafts) can promote cognitive and metacognitive
and asking for help [38]. Critical and creative thinking also ties in with
skills. They are closely related to students’ overall functioning and to the
collaboration [55]. Co-creation of knowledge [49] and team problem
idea that habits that are established in childhood can carry into adult­
solving [54] were mentioned as possible outcomes of attending a school
hood [17].
related game jam, while Savvani [67] approaches co-creation and
The practical skills furthered in game jams are mainly artistic and
collaboration from emotional experiences of the participants.
technical skills needed in making games. The collaborative nature of
Self-regulatory skills like time management (n = 6, see Table 4) are
game jams, where members of the team have different tasks, produces
often enhanced by participation in gam jams. Furthermore, the positive
varying learning in those skills (n = 8, see Appendix A). If all game jam
effect on perceptions and persistence [51] can be interpreted as
participants should acquire the same skill, e.g., using a game making
self-regulation. Fornós and Cermak-Sassenrath [56] also pointed out
software, it is best to have a separate time or a pre-event workshop to
how game design tasks assist in reflecting on learning.
teach the basics of that (see [49]) so as not to interfere with the work­
Game making is a creative endeavor, and jam participation has been
flow of the game jam event itself.
shown to increase creative thinking, like finding creative solutions to
Some of our sources specified several game design related technical
practical problems [55,63] or creative invention and knowledge crea­
or artistic skills like 2D or 3D design; sound, music, or audio design;
tion [54]. Participating in a jam event can also increase interest in other
programming; game design or writing and script, etc. [37,68] while
creative endeavors [52]. Digital skills like algorithmic thinking and
some sources suggested more generally that technical skills had
effective use of abstraction [51] and the skill to quickly adapt to new
improved [67]. Furthermore, Fowler et al. [58], Kultima [60], Pirker
technologies [60] have been improved in game jams.
et al. [65], and Contreras-Espinosa and Eguia-Gomez [55] found that
jam participants had learned to use new tools, like a sound or an ani­
3.1.2. Social and emotional skills
mation tool or a game engine.
Some cognitive skills are closely related to social and emotional skills.
Additionally, participation in a jam can produce technical skills that
For example, respecting others and the ability to be empathetic are the
are not directly related to game making, like participating in online
basis of respectful collaboration with others. Social and emotional skills
communities and using communicational tools like Discord and itch.io
are especially imperative to self-efficacy and when valuing diversity,
[48,65].
equality, and social equity now and in the future ([17]c). Furthering of
social and emotional skills was prevalent in several of the studies in this
review (n = 8, see Appendix A). Collaboration, cooperation, and
communication are essential in game jamming, and strongly tied to the 3.2. Future-oriented knowledge in game jams
rest of the areas of learning (see also [55]).
Smith and Bowers [38] mapped the social and emotional skills tied to According to our analysis, all four areas of future-oriented knowl­
communication and found participants’ skills improved on several edge can be furthered in game jams (see Appendix A for detailed analysis
subareas of communication: communicating ideas to others, ability to and Table 5 for a summary). The most obvious is interdisciplinary
influence the team, carrying on conversations, and expressing opinions knowledge, as game making is essentially interdisciplinary: combining
and negotiating when others disagree. Contreras-Espinosa and several areas of expertise. Disciplinary knowledge can be furthered, if
Eguia-Gomez [55] add that communication goes beyond verbal skills, as the jam setting and instructions are realized to connect disciplinary
jam participants learn to use several communication channels and knowledge and games created. Epistemic and procedural knowledge are
expand communication methods by e.g. using physical materials. both furthered by the working methods of game jams: project- and
problem-based collaboration.

7
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Table 5
Future-oriented knowledge in game jams.
Future-oriented knowledge in game jam research

Interdisciplinary Disciplinary Epistemic Procedural

Game jams are interdisciplinary by Learning of Learning to Learning to understand
nature. • game making process • think and act like a game industry • process of game design
• science professional • time management (budgeting time, workflow, time
• foreign languages • cultural understanding boxing, deadlines)
• chemistry • identify and utilize knowledge and • work organization
• math understanding
• programming concepts
• computing, programming, or
coding
• mental health
• history
• culture
• law
• biology
• neuroscience

3.2.1. Interdisciplinary knowledge overall picture of what disciplines are often connected in educational
Students need interdisciplinary knowledge for connecting learned game jams. The network visualization (Fig. 2, below) depicts that ‘game
knowledge across different disciplines. It can be organized and facili­ jam’ (n = 17) was the most used keyword, as is expected regarding our
tated by using different methods such as phenomenon-based learning or data set. It was strongly connected to other keywords (2 to 4 occurrences
project-based learning [17]. Game making, and thus also game jams, are each) whilst ‘serious games’ (n = 2) had only a connection to ‘game jam’.
interdisciplinary by nature. Several areas of expertise must be combined The following interdisciplinary orientations can be seen in the data:
to produce a game. The articles we studied rarely mention pedagogical ‘games’, ‘game design’, ‘game development’ and learning (in red), are
methods and elaborate on them even less. Project-based learning, in most closely linked with ‘Global Game Jam’ research. When the research
relation with interdisciplinary knowledge, gets mentioned in three concentrates on other game jams, the focus is more on ‘education’,
articles. ‘pedagogy’ and ‘STEM’ or ‘STEAM’ orientations or ‘design’ in general (in
It could be argued that game jam participation produces interdisci­ green). The occurrence of STE(A)M orientation is natural especially in
plinary knowledge. This was also prevalent in the articles we reviewed. compulsory education, as the collaborative and process-oriented
Arya et al. [37] state that "because game development requires a het­ methods are emphasized in the future-oriented frameworks (e.g., [15,
erogeneous set of skills, GGJs are naturally cross-disciplinary and can 17]). However, the co-occurrence analysis revealed that ‘collaborative
enable designers and developers to interact with those of different learning’ and ‘co-creation’ was closely connected to studies dealing with
backgrounds (as they would in industry)", and the teachers surveyed by ‘creativity’ with ‘adolescents’ (in blue).
Aurava et al. [49] recognized game jams as innately interdisciplinary
methods of teaching and learning. They suggest that school related game 3.2.3. Epistemic knowledge
jams would be easiest to organize as special multidisciplinary learning In such thematic learning projects, where students need to apply
modules, as the everyday routines of schools and subject-specific time­ knowledge in different situations in collaboration with others, they
tables often hinder adoption of cross- or multidisciplinary methods. practice epistemic knowledge. Epistemic knowledge is about connecting
Game jam teams can also be described as multidisciplinary, with par­ learning to real life situations where students can practice how to think
ticipants with different sets of skills [55]. and act like a practitioner and at the same time recognize the relevance
and purpose of their learning. In such co-creation events students’
3.2.2. Disciplinary knowledge learning is guided by a problem or task that needs to be solved [17].
Disciplinary knowledge is a fundamental component of understanding. Game jamming, when used in vocational education or in the purpose of
It is also a foundational structure through which students can develop learning game design skills, is essentially teaching epistemic knowledge:
their knowledge further, also to the other types of knowledge [17]. to think and act like a game industry professional (n = 4, see Appendix
Disciplinary knowledge in game jams was most often connected to A).
vocational studies in game design, where learning the process of making Even when the goal of jam participation is not specified, game jams
games is essential (n = 9). can foster epistemic learning. In the Sámi Game Jam, the young par­
Several other kinds of disciplinary knowledge can be enhanced in the ticipants learned to respect their own culture, and their identity
jam event, should the learning content be included in the jam setting. In strengthened, connecting the learning to their everyday issues, and
the articles we reviewed, such learning content was introduced in sci­ making the learning relevant [61]. The first-time game jam participants
ence, foreign languages, chemistry, and math [54]; chemical engineer­ [63] learned to identify and appreciate their own skills, and to utilize
ing [56]; programming concepts [51], computing, programming or their skills in jam activities. The students in international game jam
coding (n = 3); mental health [59]; history and contemporary every-day collaboration connected their jam experiences to the skills they would
lives of Sámi, Sámi languages, local culture and perspectives of locals need in professional careers later [65]. Preston et al. [66] report the
[61]; transcultural self-efficacy [64]; law and biology [65]; and neuro­ experienced game jammers using their existing contacts while game
science [50]. These learning contents were products of the event set­ jamming, thus connecting the game jam learning with their professional
tings, theme restrictions, and specific tasks given to participants. development.
To determine game jams’ learning areas, we looked at the author
keywords that were used in the publications and analyzed how they 3.2.4. Procedural knowledge
occur together in different articles. The conceptual idea is that the To succeed in problem-based tasks, students need to learn about
concepts behind these words are likely closely related. The analysis was different processes and methods which they can solve using learned
based on 93 keywords that appeared at least in 2 documents. Total of 16 knowledge, namely procedural knowledge. Some of it is subject-specific,
keywords met the threshold. Even though the data was small we got an but some can be used in different contexts and situations ([17]b).

8
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

Making games is both process and problem-based learning, and as such, possible, but as societies and with them school systems evolve, learning
all game jam participation can be seen furthering procedural knowledge. of future-oriented skills could - and should - have their own allotted time
In the articles we reviewed, procedural knowledge was often reported as and place in schools.
a learning outcome.
Learning the game design process was mentioned by Arya et al. [37], 4.2. Research on game jam learning
Pollock et al. [50], Preston et al. [66], and Aurava and Meriläinen [52].
Another recurring theme was learning about more general time man­ Research on game jam learning, as on any game-based learning, is
agement: Faas et al. [48] talk about budgeting time, Kultima [60] about multi- and transdisciplinary in nature. It stands between pedagogical
workflow and time boxing, Savvani [67] about handling deadlines, and research and game research, which are both multidisciplinary in
Aurava and Meriläinen [52] about improved organisational skills. themselves. Researchers of game jam learning come from different sci­
Meriläinen [63] mentions organizational skills, which could be inter­ entific traditions, and have varying research goals. Positioning research
preted as e.g., either time management or work division. Learning how on game-based learning is not easy, which shows in the publications
to delegate [60] or learning team management [67] can also be seen as analyzed in this article: it is not always clear where the research should
procedural knowledge. be published in order to reach the relevant audience. Furthermore, the
research field is young, and as far as we know, there are no established
4. Discussion international journals dedicated to game jam learning, and only one to
game based learning in general. For researchers, this means that they
4.1. Learning in game jams need to get their studies published in journals or conference proceedings
that do not specialize in the subject.
The learning or learning experiences discussed in the articles varied, With this in mind, it is perhaps a little surprising that the results of
as did the foci of the articles: while some discussed learning in general, the studies are very much in line. The overall learning results are good,
some focused on one aspect of learning, for example, social skills [38] or and a wide array of future-oriented skills and knowledge are furthered in
computer science and computational thinking [51]. Thus, when inter­ game jams. However, although the articles report learning or learning
preting the results of the articles, we need to clarify that the absence of experiences or ask research questions of learning in game jams, there is
some aspect of skill or knowledge does not mean that the game jam did significant lack of pedagogical methods. Most often the articles mention
not support that aspect - only that it was not reported in the original one or two methods but do not elaborate on them. Sometimes the
article, or in some cases, it was not backed up with data. pedagogical method is not even clarified, instead the authors refer to
Of the areas of future-oriented skills defined in OECD Learning pedagogical theorists like Piaget or Vygotsky. Although the pedagogical
Compass 2030, cognitive and metacognitive skills and social and emotional theories referred to in the articles varied, two main themes could be
skills can be supported by participating in a game jam. However, it needs to identified: 1) game jam learning is social, and 2) game jam learning is
be noted that furthering of social skills does not happen by itself just learning by doing.
because there is a jam event ([38]; see also [76]). Contreras-Espinosa Outside of the 25 articles analyzed in this study, the process of
and Eguia-Gomez [55] recommend using tutors to create a safe and screening and excluding game jam learning related articles from the
free space for participants, and Meriläinen [63] stresses the importance data set gave a detailed look at the research field of game jam learning. It
of creating a comfortable, communal atmosphere, which is essential is dominated by case studies and preliminary results, and most of the
especially for first-time jammers’ social interactions during the jam. The articles are short conference papers. The researchers of game jams and
furthering of the third area of future-oriented skills, practical and physical learning are most often game researchers, and only a few of them have a
skills, depends on the setting of the game jam event and the tools used. These background in educational studies. Thus, the pedagogical theories are
skills are also participant-specific, because the team members practice not used as thoroughly as they could be, and ‘learning’ is often reported
different skills based on their individual roles. but not specified. This observation is in line with previous literature
Of the future-oriented knowledge areas, the interdisciplinary, concerning game-based pedagogy and pedagogical theories [77].
epistemic, and procedural knowledge are supported in game jamming, due to Another research gap in game based pedagogy in general is that
the problem based, collaborative methods innate to game jam events. existing literature has interpreted game-based pedagogy quite narrowly.
Preston et al. [66] found that participation in several game jams im­ The existing literature concentrates on games and their pedagogical
proves activeness and participation and positively affects academic principles as well as educational game design (e.g. [78–80]) or gamifi­
achievements. When searching for interdisciplinary methods for edu­ cation of education (e.g. [81,82]), leaving out game design and game
cation, game jamming could thus offer an engaging framework to making as a learning process.
co-creation and structured peer collaboration.
To get a better understanding of if and how game jams could further 4.3. Generalizability, limitations, and future research directions
subject-specific disciplinary knowledge according to various curricula, we
need more research done in educational settings. Of the original articles in The 25 original articles in this study are extremely varied in their
our data set, less than half (n = 11) had a distinctly educational game approaches to game jams and learning. The jam settings themselves,
jam setting, and not all of these measured disciplinary learning. It is research questions, and methods in collecting and analyzing data, come
plausible that game jams can further also disciplinary learning from different research traditions. This has made our work interesting
depending on the theme and setting of the event, although there is no and has repercussions on the interpretations of the results. On the one
evidence of a game jam setting being more effective than any other hand, the results point to the same direction regardless of research
method of learning subject-specific knowledge (see also [64]). Game methods or game jam settings and demographics of the participants.
jams can be organized to support almost any skill or area of expertise. A This strengthens our impression that the results are very generalizable.
jam event can include several smaller activities, and the overall theme of On the other hand, the variety of methods and tradition poses a
the games could be related to any subject area. As game jam events are limitation to this study. The process of data gathering and screening
defined by restrictions, one restriction could be to use any given might look very mechanical from the outside, but that, as well as the
subject-specific knowledge in the designed games. However, we would analysis of the results, is an interpretation of the researchers. We are in a
like to promote the idea of Contreras-Espinosa and Eguia-Gomez [55], way interpreting interpretations, since the results of the original articles
who see game jams in formal school context as “a new pedagogical are also interpretations of their authors. This has been further compli­
approach destined to promote new skills and practices”. Learning the cated by the multitude of methods in the original articles.
future-oriented skills within the traditional academic disciplines is Another limitation is that in this study we could not compare the

9
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

effectiveness of game jams as a space or method for learning to other methods: Funding
not to other game design approaches nor to more traditional methods.
Most of the original articles did not use control groups. Work of the first author has been funded by Academy of Finland,
In a literature review, it is always possible that some relevant orig­ grant number 312527. The funding source was not involved in the study
inal studies have not been found, or that the authors have discarded design.
some studies as not relevant. Furthermore, when examining studies as
varied as the ones in this review, we might have misinterpreted the re­ Declaration of Competing Interest
sults of original studies. There is always the limitation of bias - both the
possible researcher bias in the original articles and the possible bias of The authors declare the following financial interests/personal re­
the authors of the review. We have tried to address this bias first by lationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:
doing as broad a search as possible and secondly by detailed discussions Riikka Aurava reports financial support was provided by Academy of
of the exclusion criteria and the meaning and interpretation of results of Finland. Riikka Aurava reports administrative support was provided by
original articles. Additionally, although the term ‘game jam’ is estab­ Tampere University.
lished in both game based pedagogy and game design studies, game jams
may have been organized and even studied without defining them as Supplementary materials
game jams.
In the future, we would like to see more educational scientists taking Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in
up the study of game jam learning. The learning results are already the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.caeo.2023.100129.
encouraging, but they need verification and more thorough studying,
tied tighter to pedagogical theories. It would be interesting to find out References1
for example how the setting of game design tasks affects the learning
results: what kind of learning is specific to game jam events, and what [1] Kafai YB. Playing and Making Games for Learning. Instructionist and
Constructionist Perspectives for Game Studies. Games and Culture 2006;1(1):
learning results are similar in game design courses or clubs.
36–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412005281767.
In this research process, we aimed to find studies of educational [2] Nousiainen T, Kangas M, Rikala J, Vesisenaho M. Teacher competencies in game-
game jams that were held in formal learning. What we found was a based pedagogy. Teach Teach Edu 2018;74:85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
research gap that must be filled. We wish that there would be a wide tate.2018.04.012.
[3] Laakso N, Korhonen T, Hakkarainen K. Developing students’ digital competencies
variety of study reports with more detailed case studies to understand through collaborative game design. Comput Educ 2021;174. https://doi.org/
how educators can organize game jams at schools. The field requires 10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104308.
detailed, illustrative and portrayal descriptions of educational game [4] Topalli D, Cagiltay NE. Improving programming skills in engineering education
through problem-based game projects with Scratch. Comput Educ 2018;120.
jams such as Kultima and Laiti’s [61] The Sámi Game Jam article or https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.011.
Contreras-Espinosa and Eguia-Gomez’s [55] article of different phases of [5] Kafai YB. Minds in play. computer game design as a context for children’s learning.
game jam events contributing to 21st century skills. New York: Routledge; 1994. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203052914.
[6] Kafai YB, Burke Q. Constructionist Gaming: understanding the Benefits of Making
Games for Learning. Education Psycholog 2015;50(4):313–34. https://doi.org/
5. Conclusion 10.1080/00461520.2015.1124022.
[7] Kafai YB, Burke Q. Connected Gaming: What Making Video Games Can Teach us
about Learning and Literacy. Mit Press; 2016.
In this article, we have thoroughly mapped the existing research to [8] Hughes-Roberts T, Brown D, Boulton H, Burton A, Shopland N, Martinovs D.
see how the various learning results reported in the research relate to the Examining the potential impact of digital game making in curricula based teaching:
future-oriented skills and knowledge. The research on game jams and initial observations. Comput Educ 2020;158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compedu.2020.103988.
learning is still in its early stages, and this is the first article that goes
[9] Akcaoglu M, Koehler MJ. Cognitive outcomes from the game-design and learning
beyond describing tentative learning results to clarify and classify them. (GDL) after-school program. Comput Educ 2014;75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
In this article, we have shown that game jam participation can and is compedu.2014.02.003.
likely to further future-oriented skills and knowledge. [10] Navarrete CC. Creative thinking in digital game design and development. A case
study. Comput Educ 2013;69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.025.
We have found that game jams are an effective method for learning [11] Trilling B, Fadel C. 21st century skills: learning for life in our times. John Wiley &
future-oriented, or 21st century, skills and knowledge. Of the seven types of Sons; 2009.
knowledge and skills defined in the OECD Learning Compass 2030, five [12] Binkley M, Erstad O, Herman J, Raizen S, Ripley M, Miller-Ricci M, Rumble M.
Defining twentyfirst century skills. In: Griffin P, McGaw B, Care E, editors.
are typically furthered in game jams, and two can be furthered if they Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills. Springer; 2012. p. 17–66.
are taken into account in the planning and organizing of the jam events. [13] Dede C. Comparing frameworks for “21st century skills. In: Bellance J, Brands R,
Participation in a game jam furthers the learning of interdisciplinary, editors. 21st century skills: rethinking how students learn. Solution Tree Press;
2009. p. 51–76.
epistemic, and procedural knowledge. Disciplinary knowledge can with some [14] Anderson-Levitt K. 21st century skills in the United States: a late, partial and silent
restrictions be learned in a game jam (Q1). If the aim is to learn game reform. Comparat Edu 2021;57(1):99–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/
design or game creation processes, disciplinary knowledge is furthered. 03050068.2020.1845059.
[15] National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State
If the disciplinary knowledge is some other subject-specific matter, it School Officers. Common core state standards. Washington, DC: Authors; 2010.
needs to be built into the theme and restrictions of the game jam. [16] European Commission (2019). Key competencies for lifelong learning. Retrieved
Participation in a game jam furthers the learning of cognitive and meta­ December 30, 2021 from https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/291008.
[17] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD]. OECD learning
cognitive as well as social and emotional skills (Q2). However, the game
compass 2030: a series of concept notes. OECD; 2019. https://www.oecd.org/educ
jam setting needs to be consciously organized to support positive ation/2030-project/contact/OECD_Learning_Compass_2030_Concept_Note_Series.
communication and feelings of safety and inclusion - calling an event pdf.
‘game jam’ does not ensure a positive and encouraging space for [18] OECD. Definition and selection of competencies (DeSeCo): executive summary.
OECD Publishing; 2005. Retrieved December 20, 2021, from, https://www.oecd.or
learning. Practical and physical skills are most often furthered by game g/pisa/35070367.pdf.
jamming (Q2), but due to the collaborative nature of game jam team [19] Paavola S, Lipponen L, Hakkarainen K. Modeling innovative knowledge
work, not every participant usually learns the same skills. When jam communities: a knowledge-creation approach to learning. Rev Educ Res 2004;74:
557–76. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074004557.
participants are working in teams, they might all have different roles [20] Scardamalia M, Bereiter C. Knowledge building and knowledge creation: theory,
and tasks, therefore they learn different skills. If a practical or physical pedagogy, and technology. editor. In: Sawyer K, editor. The cambridge handbook
skill is deemed important to learn for all participants, this needs to be
considered in the organization of the jam event.
1
Articles included in the review are indicated by an asterisk (*).

10
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

of the learning sciences. 2nd edition. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2014. [51] *Fowler A, Khosmood F. The Potential of Young Learners Making Games: an
p. 397–417. Exploratory Study. In: 2018 IEEE Games, Entertainment, Media Conference (GEM);
[21] Blikstein P. Digital fabrication and ‘making’ in education: the democratization of 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/GEM.2018.8516486.
invention. In: Büching C, Walter-Herrmann J, editors. FabLab: of machines, makers [52] *Aurava R, Meriläinen M. Expectations and realities: examining adolescent
and inventors. Bielefeld: Transcript; 2013. p. 203–22. students’ game jam experiences. Edu Inform Tech 2021;2021. https://doi.org/
[22] Kafai YB. Playing and making games for learning: instructionist and constructionist 10.1007/s10639-021-10782-y.
perspectives for game studies. Games Cult 2006;1(1):36–40. https://doi.org/ [53] *Aurava R, Meriläinen M, Kankainen V, Stenros J. Game jams in general formal
10.1177/1555412005281767. education. Int J Child Comput Interact 2021;28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[23] Riikonen S, Seitamaa-Hakkarainen P, Hakkarainen K. Bringing maker practices to ijcci.2021.100274.
school: tracing discursive and materially mediated aspects of student teams’ [54] *Boulton H, Spieler B, Petri A, Slany C, Beltran X. The role of game jams in
collaborative making processes. Int J Comp-Support Collab Learn 2020;15:319–49. developing informal learning of computational thinking: a cross-European case
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09330-6. study. EduLearn 2016;2016. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2016.
[24] Lonka K, Makkonen J, Berg M, Talvio M, Maksniemi E, Kruskopf M, [55] *Contreras-Espinosa RS, Eguia-Gomez JL. Game Jams as Valuable Tools for the
Lammassaari H, Hietajärvi L, Westling SK. Phenomenal learning from Finland. Development of 21st-Century Skills. Sustainability 2022;2022:14. https://doi.org/
Helsinki: Edita; 2018. 10.3390/su14042246.
[25] Krajcik JS, Shin N. Project-based learning. editors. In: Sawyer RK, editor. [56] *Fornós S, Cermak-Sassenrath D. Towards an Assessment Framework for Learner-
Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. 2nd edition. New York, NY: Created Game Levels in Chemical Engineering Education. In: Proceedings of the
Cambridge University Press; 2014. p. 275–97. 15th European Conference on Game Based Learning, ECGBL 2021. Reading; 2021.
[26] Margot KC, Kettler T. Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a https://doi.org/10.34190/GBL.21.017.
systematic literature review. Int J STEM Edu 2019;6. https://doi.org/10.1186/ [57] *Fowler A, Xi N, Preston J. The pedagogical potential of game jams. In: SIGITE ’18:
s40594-018-0151-2. Proceedings of the 19th Annual SIG Conference on Information Technology
[27] Dewey J. Democracy and education. an introduction to the philosophy of Education; 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3241815.3241862.
education. Macmillan; 1916. [58] *Fowler A, Khosmood F, Arya A, Lai G. The Global Game Jam for Teaching and
[28] Schank RC, Berman TR, Macpherson KA. Learning by doing. editors. In: Learning. CITRENZ 2013;2013.
Reigeluth CM, Carr-Chellman AA, editors. Instructional-design theories and [59] *Hrehovcsik M, Warmelink H, Valente M. The Game Jam as a Format for Formal
models: a new paradigm of instructional theory. Abingdon: Routledge; 1999. Applied Game Design and Development Education. In: Bottino R, Jeuring J,
p. 161–81. 2(2). Veltkamp R, editors. Games and learning alliance. gala 2016. lecture notes in
[29] Lave J, Wenger E. Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. computer science, vol 10056. Cham: Springer; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991. 3-319-50182-6_23.
[30] Lombardi MM. Authentic Learning for the 21st Century: an Overview. In Oblinger, [60] *Kultima A. Superjammers: motivations and Experiences of Exceptional Game
D. G. (Ed.) Educause Learn Initiat 2007;1:1–12. Jammers in Finland. In: ICGJ’19: Proceedings of the International Conference on
[31] Rule AC. The components of authentic learning. J Authent Learn 2006;41. Game Jams, Hackathons and Game Creation Events 2019; 2019. https://doi.org/
[32] Harel IE, Papert SE. Constructionism. a. Ablex Publishing; 1991. 10.1145/3316287.3316295.
[33] Harel IE, Papert SE. Situating Constructionism. Constructionism 1991;36(2):1–11. [61] *Kultima A, Laiti O. Sami Game Jam – Learning, Exploring, Reflecting and Sharing
[34] b Kafai YB. Constructionism. editor. In: Sawyer K, editor. The cambridge handbook Indigenous Culture through Game Jamming. Proc DiGRA 2019;2019.
of the learning sciences. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 2006. [62] *Kultima A, Piispanen L, Junnila M. Quantum game jam – making games with
p. 35–46. quantum physicists. New York, NY, USA: Academic Mindtrek 2021 (Mindtrek ’21).
[35] Kultima A. Defining game jam. In: Proceedings of the 10th International conference ACM; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1145/3464327.3464349.
on the foundations of digital games (FDG 2015). Academic Press; 2015. [63] *Meriläinen M. First-timer learning experiences in Global Game Jam. Int J Game-
[36] GGJ (2020). Tools Down! GGJ2020 Roundup. Retrieved December 30, 2021 from Based Learn 2019;9(1). https://doi.org/10.4018/IJGBL.2019010103.
https://globalgamejam.org/news/tools-downggj2020-roundup. [64] *Pimentel J, Cockcroft A, Andersson N. Impact of game jam learning about cultural
[37] *Arya A, Chastine J, Fowler A, Preston J. An international study on learning and safety in Colombian medical education: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Med
process choices in the global game jam. Int J Game-Based Learn 2013;3(4). https:// Educ 2021;21:132. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-021-02545-7. 2021.
doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2013100103. [65] *Pirker J, Economou D, Gütl C. Interdisciplinary and International Game Projects
[38] *Smith P, Bowers C. Improving Social Skills through Game Jam Participation. In: for Creative Learning. In: ITiCSE ’16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on
GJH&GC’16: Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education; 2016. https://doi.org/
Hackathons, and Game Creation Events; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 10.1145/2899415.2899448.
2897167.2897172. [66] *Preston JA, Chastine J, O’Donnell C, Tseng T, MacIntyre B. Game Jams:
[39] Wearn N, McDonald B. Ethos of location and its implication to the motivators of community, Motivations, and Learning among Jammers. Int J Game-Based Learn
Global Games Jam participants. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on 2012;2(3). https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2012070104.
Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events. New York, NY: ACM; 2016. [67] *Savvani S. Emotions and challenges during game creation: evidence from the
https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897176. global game jam. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Games Based
[40] Reng L, Schoenau-Fog H, Kofoed LB. The motivational power of game communities Learning; 2020. https://doi.org/10.34190/GBL.20.063.
- engaged through game jamming. In: Proceedings of the 8th International [68] *Torres-Toukoumidis A, Salgado Guerrero JP, Peñalva S, Carrera P. Global Game
Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games; 2013. p. 14–7. Jam in Latin-America, a Collaborative Videogame Learning Experience. Soc Sci
[41] Meriläinen M., Aurava R., Kultima A., Stenros, J. Game jams for learning and 2020;9(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9030028.
teaching: a review. Int J Game-Based Learn (IJGBL) 2020,10(2), 54-71. [69] *White J, Piumarta I, Yamanishi R, Jacobs S, Simkins D. Communication Beyond
[42] Borrego M, Foster MJ, Froyd JE. Systematic Literature Reviews in Engineering Languages Realized by International Game Jams. In: ICGJ’19: Proceedings of the
Education and Other Developing Interdisciplinary Fields. J Eng Edu 2014;103(1): International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons and Game Creation Events
45–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20038. 2019; 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/3316287.3316291.
[43] Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J, editors. An introduction to systematic reviews. 2nd [70] Snyder H. Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and
Edition. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2017. guidelines. J Bus Res 2019;104:333–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[44] Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and jbusres.2019.07.039.
associated methodologies. Health Inform Lib J 2009;26(2):91–108. https://doi. [71] Börner K, Chen C, Boyack KW. Visualizing knowledge domains. Annu Rev Inform
org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. Sci Tech 2003;37(1):179–255.
[45] Petticrew, Roberts. Systematic reviews in the social sciences. Wiley; 2006. https:// [72] Callon M, Courtial J-P, Turner WA, Bauin S. From translations to problematic
doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887. networks: an introduction to co-word analysis. Soc Sci Inform 1983;22(2):
[46] Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. 191–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003.
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic [73] Waltman L, van Eck NJ, Noyons ECM. A unified approach to mapping and
reviews. BMJ 2021;372:71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71. 2021. clustering of bibliometric networks. J Informetr 2010;4(4):629–35. https://doi.
[47] *Miller M, DeLuca J, Khosmood F. Can game jams boost confidence and sense of org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002.
preparedness?. In: ICGJ’19: Proceedings of the International Conference on Game [74] Ryan RM, Deci EL. Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic
Jams, Hackathons and Game Creation Events 2019; 2019. https://doi.org/ Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. Am Psychol 2000;55(1):68–78.
10.1145/3316287.3316296. 10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68.
[48] *Faas T, Liu I-C, Dombrowski L, Miller AD. Jam Today, Jam Tomorrow: learning in [75] Ryan RM, Deci EL. Overview of Self-Determination Theory: an Organismic
online game jams. Proc ACM Hum-Comp Interact 2019. https://doi.org/10.1145/ Dialectical Perspective. editors. In: Deci EL, Ryan RM, editors. Handbook of self-
3361121. determination research. Suffolk: The University of Rochester Press; 2004. p. 3–33.
[49] *Aurava R, Meriläinen M, Stenros J. Teacher views on game jamming in formal [76] Kultima A, Alha K, Nummenmaa T. Building Finnish game jam community through
general education. In: Proceedings of the 14th European Conference on Games positive social facilitation. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Academic
Based Learning; 2020. https://doi.org/10.34190/GBL.20.073. Mindtrek Conference. New York, NY: ACM; 2016. p. 433–40. https://doi.org/
[50] *Pollock I, Murray J, Yeager B. Brain Jam - STEAM learning through Neuroscience- 10.1145/2994310.2994363.
themed game development. In: ICGJ’17: Proceedings of the Second International [77] Wu W-H, Hsiao H-C, Wu P-L, Lin C-H, Huang S-H. Investigating the learning-theory
Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events 2017; 2017. foundations of game-based learning: a meta-analysis. J Comp Assist Learn 2012;28:
https://doi.org/10.1145/3055116.3055122. 265–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00437.x.
[78] Gee JP. What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan; 2003.

11
R. Aurava and K. Sormunen Computers and Education Open 4 (2023) 100129

[79] Kebritchi M, Hirumi A. Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern [81] Hamari J, Koivisto J, Sarsa H. Does Gamification Work? – A Literature Review of
educational computer games. Comput Educ 2008;51(4). https://doi.org/10.1016/ Empirical Studies on Gamification. In: 47th Hawaii International Conference on
j.compedu.2008.05.004. System Sciences; 2014. p. 3025–34. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377.
[80] Nadolny L, Valai A, Jaramillo Cherrez N, Elrick D, Lovett A, Nowatzke M. [82] Sailer M, Homner L. The gamification of learning: a meta-analysis. Educ Psychol
Examining the characteristics of game-based learning. A content analysis and Rev 2020;32:77–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w.
design framework. Comput Educ 2020;156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compedu.2020.103936.

12