Analysis Of The Theory Of Children Game

Game theory has been of importance on many fields of the social sciences since its rise to prominence more than fifty years ago (Lim, 1999). A player is defined by Osborne (2002) as an individual or group of individuals making a decision. Children learn through imaginative play (Bodrova & Leong, 2003; Hirsh-Pasek, Golinkoff, & Eyer, 2003; Zigler, Singer, & Bishop-Josef, 2004). Appropriate scaffolding can be provided in games through the use of levels. Supports are embedded into games such that easier levels are typically played first, advancing on to more complex levels as the player achieves mastery. Researchers de Jong and van Joolingen (1998) concluded that adding appropriate instructional supports and scaffolding to games may help them in discovery learning. Games should allow players to form knowledge that will be useful later (Gee, 2003). Effective game provides clear feedback and immediately respond to the player’s actions” (Rigby & Ryan, 2007, p. 8). Learning does not just end with the game. Post-game discussions and results are crucial to be display.

Children prefer rich graphics (Prensky, 2001). They desire tasks that are active with information supplied in parallel (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004, p. 3). Students are also more engaged when a narrative story is present within the games (Barab, Arici, & Jackson, 2005). Games may contain the pieces of information necessary to engage players and help them enter a state of flow (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Although motivation clearly seems to be important, there is not clear agreement on what makes a game or learning task motivating. Dickey (2005) argued that the three main elements of engaged learning are clear goals and tasks, reinforcing feedback, and increasing challenge. Fladen and Blashki (2005) also listed the three key features of motivating games are interactivity, agency, and engagement. Rigby and Ryan (2007) then created a different set of needs that are satisfied by engaging games through their Player Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS) model: competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Each of these models could be used to evaluate games, player’s motivation, and the impacts on subsequent learning and achievement. They test not only current knowledge and skills, but also preparation for future learning. Games should provide them with appropriate diagnostic feedback that is seamlessly integrated into the learning experience (Rupp, 2010, p. 4). This is what well-designed games do. But games for children must interactive as compulsory and have its flow because we focus on helping them to develop skills in decision-making and understanding (Johnson et al. , 2011).

The main factor for success is to achieve a balance between fun and learning in the model of game design (M. Prensky, 2001). Unfortunately, this is not an easy task. Games or simulations that have a very detailed and realistic visualization and audio effects can lead to memory overload of players. Also, games with multitasking activities, can lead to significant activities of players, but with very little learning. The solution lays in the careful selection of motivational elements in the game in the way that developer supports (M. Prensky, 2001). According to Dickey (2005) the initial strategy of gaming is to use rewards as a medium to players performing the desired tasks to earn rewards. The types of rewards used are like score, achievement badges, or progress bar filling levels. The technique of providing this reward can encourage players to compete.