A Game-Based Learning Assessment Framework for Learning Ubiquitous Computational Thinking

  • Yoke Seng WongEmail author
  • Mohamad Yatim Maizatul Hayati
  • Wee Hoe Tan
  • Li Chen Yap
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1135)


At present there is no Game-based learning (GBL) assessment framework that could assess the student performance and understanding on Ubiquitous Computational Thinking (UCT) accurately. Therefore this paper aims to discuss the development of a novel assessment framework based on GBL to assess the student understanding toward UCT properly. The model is very crucial to aid in designing UCT learning content to improve the performance and understanding of student. This research is divided into two main stages, which are quasi-experiment and assessment framework modelling. In stage one, systematic literature review of assessment framework for learning UCT will be conduct to identify the research gap for this research. The systematic reviewed result will be adapting GBL approach to develop a computer game as the main assessment tool. To ensure the effectiveness of the developed game, quasi-experiment will be conducted. In stage two, data obtained from stage one will also be further analyzed to establish the assessment framework to access the student understanding towards UCT that adapting GBL approach. The newly constructed assessment framework will then be used to assess student understanding and performance towards UCT. This will involve quasi-experiment where target students will be participated to this research by playing the game while assessing the understanding towards UCT. Moreover the knowledge gained could contribute to determining the important of GBL approach that could construct an appropriate assessment framework for learning UCT.


Game-based learning Assessment framework Learning computational thinking Ubiquitous computational thinking 


  1. 1.
    Hsu, T.C., Chang, S.C., Hung, Y.T.: How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: suggestions based on a review of the literature. Comput. Educ. 126, 296–310 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Topalli, D., Cagiltay, N.E.: Improving programming skills in engineering education through problem-based game projects with Scratch. Comput. Educ. 120, 64–74 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Annetta, L.A.: Video games in education: why they should be used and how they are being used. Theory Pract. 47(3), 229–239 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sharples, M., de Roock, R., Ferguson, R., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Koh, E., Kukulska-Hulme, A., Looi, C.K., McAndrew, P., Rienties, B., Weller, M.: Innovating pedagogy 2016. Open University innovation report 5 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bloom, L.A., Doss, K.: Using technology to foster creative and critical thinking in the classroom. In: Handbook of Research on Promoting Higher-Order Skills and Global Competencies in Life and Work, pp. 70–84. IGI Global (2019)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glăveanu, V.P., Ness, I.J., Wasson, B., Lubart, T.: Sociocultural perspectives on creativity, learning, and technology. In: Creativity Under Duress in Education? pp. 63–82. Springer, Cham (2019)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nousiainen, T., Kangas, M., Rikala, J., Vesisenaho, M.: Teacher competencies in game-based pedagogy. Teach. Teach. Educ. 74, 85–97 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yogman, M., Garner, A., Hutchinson, J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R.M.: Committee on psychosocial aspects of child and family health. The power of play: a pediatric role in enhancing development in young children. Pediatrics 142(3), e20182058 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tassell, J.L., Novak, E., Wu, M.: Video game play, mathematics, spatial skills, and creativity—a study of the impact on teacher candidates. In: Creativity and Technology in Mathematics Education, pp. 303–322. Springer, Cham (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Connolly, T.M., Boyle, E.A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., Boyle, J.M.: A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput. Educ. 59(2), 661–686 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia: Laporan Awal Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013–2025. Diperolehi daripada (2013).
  12. 12.
    dan Kebudayaan, K.P.K.: Industri Kreatif Negara. Diperolehi daripada (2013).
  13. 13.
    García-Peñalvo, F.J., Mendes, A.J.: Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schrier, K.: Using games to solve real-world civic problems: early insights and design principles. J. Community Engag. High. Educ. 10(1) (2018)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dieker, L.A., Rodriguez, J.A., Lignugaris, K., Benjamin, H., Michael, C., Hughes, C.E.: The potential of simulated environments in teacher education: current and future possibilities. Teach. Educ. Spec. Educ. 37(1), 21–33 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    DiSalvo, B., Guzdial, M., Bruckman, A., McKlin, T.: Saving face while geeking out: video game testing as a justification for learning computer science. J. Learn. Sci. 23(3), 272–315 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kazimoglu, C.: Empirical evidence that proves a serious game is an educationally effective tool for learning computer programming constructs at the computational thinking level. University of Greenwich (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ke, F.: A qualitative meta-analysis of computer games as learning tools gaming and simulations: concepts, methodologies, tools and applications, pp. 1619–1665. IGI Global (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    O’Riley, M.E.: The Question of Digital Game Based Learning: An Investigation into the Potential Promises and Perils of Education’s Golden Goose (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wong, Y.S., Hayati, I.M.: Computer game as learning and teaching tool for object oriented programming in higher education institution. Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci. 123, 215–224 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wong, Y.S., Hayati, I.M., Yatim, M., Hoe, T.W.: A propriety game based learning mobile game to learn object-oriented programming—Odyssey of Phoenix. Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE 6th International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (2017)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gardner, M.: Understanding integrated STEM science instruction through the experiences of teachers and students (2017)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gokhale, A.: Guided online group discussion enhances student critical thinking skills. Int. J. E-Learn. 17(2), 157–173 (2018)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ng, P.H., Chiu, M.W.: Where programming skills meet the social needs. In: Service-Learning for Youth Leadership, pp. 165–184. Springer, Singapore (2019)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Peteranetz, M.S., Flanigan, A.E., Shell, D.F., Soh, L.K.: Helping engineering students learn in introductory computer science (CS1) using computational creativity exercises (CCEs). IEEE Trans. Educ. 61(3), 195–203 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tan, P.H., Ting, C.Y., Ling, S.W.: Learning difficulties in programming courses: undergraduates’ perspective and perception. In: 2009 International Conference on Computer Technology and Development, vol. 1, pp. 42–46. IEEE, November 2009Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yoke Seng Wong
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mohamad Yatim Maizatul Hayati
    • 2
  • Wee Hoe Tan
    • 2
  • Li Chen Yap
    • 1
  1. 1.KDU University College, Utropolis GlenmarieShah AlamMalaysia
  2. 2.Sultan Idris Education UniversityTanjong MalimMalaysia

Personalised recommendations