Exploring how games influence teaching and learning means looking not just at how we classify them but at how their design changes the way teachers and students experience educational technology.
What stood out first was the value and the limit of categorizing. A typology of digital game-based learning (DGBL) outlined five genres: edutainment, serious games, commercial off-the-shelf games (COTS), massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs), and educational game design tools. It provided a foundation for linking diverse types of games to learning theories and gave teachers a way to navigate the growing mix of educational technologies entering classrooms. On one hand, the framework brought order to a scattered set of practices. On the other hand, today’s learning platforms increasingly combine features such as storytelling, analytics, and adaptive feedback, which cross the boundaries of those categories. That overlap matters more to me than the categories themselves. As a professor and a doctoral student, it sparks my interest in studying how genres evolve and interact, especially as adaptive systems and AI-driven personalization continue to shape digital learning environments.
Equally important is how design influences adoption. In the study of a gamified teacher preparation course, confidence and motivation increased not because of who the students were but because of how the course was designed. Quest-based and active learning strategies gave pre-service teachers (students still in training) a chance to see themselves using technology in authentic ways. The crucial point is that adoption does not come from exposure alone; it comes from design. Structure, choice, and feedback all influence whether teachers and students feel ready to integrate new tools.
Together these studies show progression. The typology laid a foundation for thinking about genres in relation to theory, while the gamified course demonstrated how intentional design changes practice and professional identity. As a higher education instructor, that progression makes me realize that I need to think not only about which strategies might fit but also about how the design of those strategies can support adaptive, student-centered learning.
What stands out to me is that technology in education will always be a moving target, but what matters is how we design for people. If I want my students to see learning as an experience, not just a requirement, then I need to focus less on chasing tools and more on building environments where both teachers and learners feel capable and motivated to grow.
References
Wu, M. L. (2018). Making sense of digital game-based learning: A learning theory-based typology useful for teachers. Journal of Studies in Education, 8(4), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v8i4.13022
Wu, M. L., Zhou, Y., & Li, L. (2023). The effects of a gamified online course on pre-service teachers’ confidence, intention, and motivation in integrating technology into teaching. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11727-3
VICTOR SCAVO, AIS Professor 