Academics acknowledge that students are often unable to link and extend first year, first semester foundation material throughout their undergraduate degree. The use of a pedagogically sound interactive digital game-based learning (DGBL) resource to engage first year biological science students in recalling, linking and applying foundation knowledge and increasing their learning outcomes has been explored. According to the current literature there exists no evidence that DGBL resources have previously been used to address this transfer and linking of knowledge and core skills. Results from our study of student perceptions and student learning outcomes suggest that our creatively designed resource has effectively targeted a mixed cohort of students to retain, link and extend foundation knowledge. Our study also indicates that DGBL resources have a valid role in enabling students, many of whom are classed as “digital natives”, to demonstrate positive learning outcomes by successfully recalling and transferring unit content into new learning domains.
Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning? Educause Review, 41, 32-44. https://www.middlebury.edu/NR/rdonlyres/2C9EFFFC-00B4-46E9-9CE5-32D63A0FE9B5/0/UNBOUND_02_02_Web2.pdf
Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn? A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 612-637. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
Bacon, D. (2003). A comparison of multiple-choice and short—Answer questions in a marketing context. Journal of Marketing Education, 25, 31-36. doi:10.1177/0273475302250570
Bloom, B., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals, by a committee of college and university examiners. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: Longmans.
Britton, S., New, P. B., Sharma, M. D., & Yardley, D. (2005). A case study of the transfer of mathematics skills by university students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 36, 1-13. doi:10.1080/00207390412331271401
Brooks, D., & Shell, D. (2006). Working memory, motivation, and teacher-initiated learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15, 17-30. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0353-0
Cheung, K., Yip, Y., Townsend, J., & Scotch, M. (2008). (HCLS)
Health care and life sciences data mashup using Web 2.0/3.0. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 41, 694-705. doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2008.04.001
Csikszentmihalyi, M., Abuhamdeh, S., & Nakamura, J. (2005). Flow. In A. Elliot, & C. Dweck (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 598-608). New York: Guilford.
Foreman, J. (2003). Next generation: Educational technology versus the lecture. Educause Review, 38, 13-22.
Futurelab (2006). Close to 60% of UK teachers want computer games in the classroom. URL (last checked 11 May 2009). http://www.future.org.uk/about_us/Press_Release184
Geith, C. (2008). Teaching and learning unleashed with web 2.0 and open educational resources. URL (last checked 21 October 2009). http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7202v.pdf
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009). Learning, teaching, scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38, 246-259. doi:10.3102/0013189X09336671
Hansen, E. C. (2006). Successful qualitative health research: A practical introduction. Crows Nest, New South Wales: Allen & Unwin.
Herz, J. (2002). Gaming the system: What higher education can learn from multiplayer online worlds. In M. Devlin, R. Larson, & J. Meyerson (Eds.), The internet and the university: Forum 2001 (pp. 169-191). Boulder, CO: Educause. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffpiu019.pdf
Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2009). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? URL (last checked 21 October 2009). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6VCJ-4XFXSPS-2-4&_cdi=5956&_user=1526876&_pii=S0360131509002620&_orig=search&_coverDate=04%2F30%2F2010&_sk=999459996&view=c&wchp=dGLzVzz-zSkzk&md5=41d1d800d15a15bd2583a5ec3bea8cd6&ie=/sdarticle.pdf
Justice, C., Rice, J., & Warry, W. (2009). Developing useful and transferable skills: Course design to prepare students for a life of learning. International Journal for the scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3, 1-19.
Kennedy, G., Judd, A., Churchward, A., & Gray, K. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24, 108-122.
Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 394-404. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00704.x
Krotoski, A. (2005). Games for learning. URL (last checked 11 May 2009). http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=14
Lobato, J. (2006). Transfer strand: Alternative perspective on the transfer of learning: History, issues, and challenges for future research. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 431-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1504_1 doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1504_1
Macaulay, C., & Cree, V. E. (1999). Transfer of learning: Concept and process. Social Work Education, 18, 183-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02615479911220181 doi:10.1080/02615479911220181
Merrienboer, van J., Clark, R., & Croock, M. (2002). Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology, Re search and Development, 50, 2.
Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Educating the Net Generation. URL (last checked 12 December 2008). www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen
Owston, R. (2009). Digital immersion, teacher learning, and games. Educational Researcher, 38, 270-273. doi:10.3102/0013189X09336673
Paraskeva, F., Mysirlaki, S., & Papagianni, A. (2010). Multiplayer online games as educational tools: Facing new challenges in learning. Computers & Education, 54, 498-505. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.001
Pivec, M., & Kearney, P. (2007). Games for learning and learning from games. Organizacija, 40, 267-272.
Prensky, M. (2001a). Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 96, 7-15.
Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Prensky, M. (2005). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Gifted, 135, 29-31.
Rebello N. S., Cui, L., Bennett, A. G., Zollman, D. A., & Ozimek, D. J. (2007). Transfer of learning in problem solving in the context of mathematics & physics. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Learning to solve complex scientific problems (pp. 223-246). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
Sandford, R., & Williamson, B. (2005). Games and Learning. URL (last checked 21 February 2010). http://steinerweb.org.uk/pdf/games_and_learning.pdf
Scott, J. (2005). Students’ perceptions of skills acquisition in the undergraduate bioscience curriculum. URL (last checked 21 January 2008). http://www.bioscience.heacademy/journal/vol6/beej-6-1.pdf
Selby, J., Blazey, P., & Quilter, M. (2008). The relevance of multiple-choice assessment in large cohort business law units. Australian Law Teachers’ Law Journal, 1, 203-212.
Sweetser, P., & Dennis, S. (2003). Facilitating learning in a real-time strategy computer game. In R. Nakatsu, & J. Hoshino (Eds.), Entertainment computing: Technologies and applications. International Workshop on Entertainment Computing (pp. 49-56). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
Van Eck, R. (2006a). Learning through gaming: Why games in education and the workplace make sense. The annual meeting of the texas association of state systems for computing and communications. Corpus Christi, TX.
Van Eck, R. (2006b). Building artificially intelligent learning games. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning (pp. 1-72). Hershey, PA: Ideas Group. doi:10.4018/978-1-59904-304-3.ch014
Van Eck, R. (2006c). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. Educause Review, 41, 16-30.
Zheng, A., Lawhorn, J., Lumley, T., & Freeman, S. (2008). Application of Bloom’s Taxonomy Debunks the “MCAT Myth”. Science, 319, 414-415. doi:10.1126/science.1147852