Effects of Game-Based Learning in an Opensim-Supported Virtual Environment on Mathematical Performance
Kim, Heesung; Ke, Fengfeng (2017). Interactive Learning Environments, v25 n4 p543-557. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1137732
-
examining132Students, grade4
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: April 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Game-based fractions practice - Kim and Ke (2017))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because at least one supplemental finding is rated meets WWC standards without reservations but the study does not have main findings.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Math test items based on Common Core State Standards |
Game-based fractions practice - Kim and Ke (2017) vs. Fractions word problem practice - Kim and Ke (2017) |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
13.88 |
10.74 |
Yes |
|
||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 55%
Male: 46% -
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Florida
-
Race Asian 4% Black 58% Native American 2% Other or unknown 2% White 34% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 2% Not Hispanic or Latino 98% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in five northern Florida schools with 132 fourth grade students, ages 9-10.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned 66 students to receive a game-based fractions intervention in a virtual reality environment and 66 students to the comparison group that did not receive the game-based fractions intervention, for a total of 132 students. All students were native English speakers. Approximately 55% of students were female, 4% of students were Asian, 2% of students were Native American, 58% of students were African-American, 34% of students were Caucasian, and about 2% did not report their race. About 2% of students were Hispanic.
Intervention Group
The intervention used a game-based learning approach within an OpenSim-supported virtual reality environment to teach fractions skills. Students completed four fraction problem-solving tasks aligned with the Common Core State Standards in an environment that integrated game-play with the learning content. Students followed a storyline about preparing food for a picnic, completed challenges, and earned immediate virtual rewards. To complete the tasks, students applied fraction concepts, such as fraction equivalence, ordering, and comparison. The intervention lasted approximately 30–40 minutes.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group completed similar fractions activities in the same virtual reality environment, but without the game-based learning elements. Students completed the same four fraction problem-solving tasks as those in the intervention group. Students completed the tasks as web-based word problems, selecting correct answers from provided options. As in the intervention group, the comparison intervention lasted approximately 30–40 minutes.
Support for implementation
The study did not provide information on support for implementation.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).