Cultural and Philosophical Understanding of Game-based Learning in STEM Subjects

Several reasons have been linked to the high percentage of failure when it comes to Sciences Technolo-gy, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects for college freshmen. The Higher Learning Commission during its annual conference in 2013 did find out that the leading factor, motivation, seems to play a significant role to inspire students to get involved in the course work. Much research, both in academic journals and mainstream magazines, has been published on how traditional methods of lecturing are neither engaging nor robust enough for STEM learners. In this paper, the author explores the Game-Based Learning method (GBL) as a promising platform to assistance students in their transition from high school to college level STEM courses. Additionally it also looks into the fundamental reasons why biologically, culturally and philosophically, playing has become an essential tool in engaging the real world without having to assume the risk of unwanted consequences.

Introduction In the 21st century, the pedagogy of teaching and learning has transitioned towards self-directed learning, aiming to motivate learners while enhancing the link between theoretical knowledge, and clinical practice skills. Gamification, known as game-based learning, is increasingly emerging as a strategy to complement simulation-based approaches. Proficiency in caring for patients with intercostal drainage is vital for both life-saving and acute care, highlighting the need for effective teaching, and learning methodologies. Objectives This study aimed to examine the effect of game-based learning on knowledge and skills related to caring for patients undergoing thoracic drainage, and satisfaction with game-based learning in nursing students. Design This research employed a one-group pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design, using cognitive constructivism, and game-based learning as the research framework. Method A total of 108 third-year nursing students voluntarily participated in a one-month game-based computer-assisted learning program titled “Fun Games: Awakening ICD Knowledge.” The research instruments included a knowledge questionnaire (CVI =.99, KR-20 =.70), an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) (CVI =.99, Inter-rater reliability = 1.0), and a questionnaire on satisfaction with game-based learning (CVI =.99, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient =.90). Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Paired t-tests. Results After the game-based learning, knowledge scores (M = 7.01, SD = 1.14) were significantly higher than pre-test scores (M = 5.12, SD = 1.77, t=-10.153, p < .001). All nursing students successfully passed the OSCE examination. Overall satisfaction with game-based learning was at a high level (M = 4.37, SD = 0.62). Recommendation Game-based learning facilitates nursing students in acquiring knowledge and skills related to caring for patients with intercostal drainage, and their satisfaction reflects the need for an enhanced strategic pedagogical approach that aligns with current educational trends. It is recommended to further utilize and develop this learning method as an integrated approach to bridge theoretical knowledge with nursing practice courses.

To know the effectiveness of a Game-Based Histopathology learning method. 
 To create a new Image oriented Game Based Histopathology slide reading method. To know the usefulness of the new method. To compare the conventional learning and game-based learning methods. Two groups of undergraduate students were tested with two different learning methods to identify pathology slide sections of four lesions. For each group, sixteen Undergraduate dental students were selected randomly. A game was created by using histopathology images of those four lesions, and circulated among the group one. The conventional method of slide reading was given to the group two. Both the group was tested for diagnosing the four pathology lesions through light microscopy spotter identification. Results were calculated accordingly. A questionnaire survey was done based on the pattern and pathology features oriented diagnostic capacity. Results of the questionnaire survey were also analyzed. Statistically, the results of both the two groups were analyzed. An Independent t-test was done and found out there was no significant difference between the two learning methods. The questionnaire survey revealed that the group learned through game-based pathology slide learning method learned the morphological features better than that of the conventional slide learning method. The image oriented game based pathology slide learning helps the undergraduate students to diagnose the pathology lesions with proper knowledge of morphological features than the conventional slide learning method, which is mainly pattern oriented. Though it is a very complicated procedure, the game based slide learning method is fun, creative and involves a majority of the student’s attention towards morphological features of any pathological lesions.

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of game-based language learning in improving students' speaking skills at the secondary school level. Game-based learning is considered an innovative approach that can enhance student motivation and engagement in language learning. The research employs an experimental design with an experimental group using game-based learning methods and a control group using conventional methods. Data were collected through speaking tests administered before and after the learning period and questionnaires assessing students' perceptions of the applied methods. The results indicate that the experimental group showed significant improvements in speaking skills compared to the control group. Students involved in game-based learning demonstrated progress in fluency, articulation, and confidence in speaking. The study suggests that integrating game-based learning methods more widely into the language curriculum could maximize students' speaking skills potential.

Numerous studies have confirmed that increasing vocabulary size is a critical part of learning English as a foreign language (EFL). In recent years, game-based learning has been identified as a promising means of acquiring and retaining knowledge. The rapid development of mobile technologies has forced instructors to consider the potential of Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (MALL). As a result, this work assesses the effects of two different game-based English vocabulary learning apps with significantly different game design factors on learners performance, sustained attention, relaxation, and vocabulary retention. A total of 36 Grade 12 students from Matsu Senior High School, Taiwan, who participated in this study were randomly divided into two experimental groups, which were balanced for the distribution of gender and pretest scores. The learners in the two experimental groups learned English vocabulary for four weeks using two game-based English vocabulary learning apps with significantly different game design factors. Analytical results reveal that learners who used games with weak game design factors exhibited significantly better vocabulary learning performance, retention, and relaxation than those who used games with strong game design factors, and their level of sustained attention was lower. This work verifies that gender differences existed between the two game-based English vocabulary learning apps with different game design factors. Girls achieved significantly better English vocabulary learning and retention in the game APP with weak game design factors. Additionally, based on an interview with several research participants, matching of the challenge to player skill and feedback were the most important game design factors in game-based English vocabulary learning apps. In summary, a more exciting game does not favor cognitive learning, including English vocabulary learning.

This study was aimed to evaluate the implementation of Game-Based Learning (GBL) method to improve EFL students vocabulary mastery at SMPN Satu Atap 1 Katingan Hilir. The researcher chose class VII students totaling 23 as the subjects, and the informant was one English teacher. The research method employed was qualitative descriptive, enabling the researcher to gain in-depth insights into the effectiveness of GBL in improving the English vocabulary mastery of the students. Data was collected through observation, questionnaires, and interviews with English teachers involved in the teaching process. This data was used to evaluate the implementation of GBL in three phases: pre-teaching, while teaching, and post-teaching. The finding indicated that the implementation of Game-Based Learning (GBL) methods was effective in improving English vocabulary mastery EFL students at SMPN Satu Atap 1 Katingan Hilir. This indicated that a more interactive and enjoyable approach to learning addressed the previous weakness in English vocabulary mastery. The data analysis results demonstrated a substantial improvement in students' vocabulary mastery after they participated in learning sessions using the GBL method. Presenting learning material in the form of engaging games had the capability to improve students' learning interest, thus motivating them to actively participate and interact within the learning environment. Therefore, method GBL could be regarded as an effective alternative in designing enjoyable and efficient teaching strategies to improve EFL students' vocabulary mastery.

Teaching and learning methods give a huge impact on students' understanding and on-goinglearning in the classroom. Currently, some teaching and learning methods have become ateacher's choice and one of them is the Game-Based Learning (GBL). This study aims toidentify the extent to which GBL method has been accepted by Malaysian teachers and toidentify the topics in Form 2 Mathematics which require GBL method. This study used aquestionnaire involving 85 respondents among teachers in Muallim and Batang Padangdistricts in Perak, Malaysia. The data collected was analysed using descriptive statisticsnamely the percentages. The findings showed that 10.6% of the teachers experienced usingkit, while the remaining 89.4% never experienced using the kit in teaching and learning. Thisstudy also found that the topic of Isometric Transformations achieved the highest percentage(17.9%) as the topic of choice for teachers, which indicated that GBL should be integrated inthis topic during the development of the kit. To date, there is no documented kit which isspecifically designed to guide teachers in how to implement a GBL kit in teaching andlearning on the topic of Isometric Transformations. It was concluded there is a need todevelop a GBL kit for Isometric Transformations which would enhance the achievement and motivation among students to enable them to compete globally. The implication is, givingguidance to any party whether teachers, researchers or ministry to develop teaching kits forvarious subjects especially Isometric Transformations.

Game based learning is a new game play mechanism that the players explore various aspects of game play in a learning context designed by the instructor or the game designer. Nevertheless, general acceptance of game based learning as a new learning paradigm was deferred by a lack of well-controlled, large sample efficacy studies. To address the increasing need of cybersecurity workforce, this paper introduces a game based learning method for high school cybersecurity education. Purdue University Northwest launched GenCyber high school summer camps to about 200 high school students in Chicago metropolitan area. The survey conducted after the summer camp indicated that the game based learning for cybersecurity education was very effective in cybersecurity awareness training. Further analysis of survey data revealed that there is a gender difference in raising students’ interests in cybersecurity and computer science education using game based learning method.

Traditionally, there have been two important media of academic publishing: scholarly journals and scholarly books. The first scholarly journal, the Journal des Sçavans, was founded by Denis de Sallo, appeared already in January 1665 in Paris, reappeared after the French Revolution as the Journal des Savants, and still exists as a leading journal in the humanities. Only a few weeks later, Henry Oldenbourg, the first secretary of the Royal Society of London, established a second scholarly journal, the Philosophical Transactions, with a focus on science. The purpose of these journals was to formalize the extensive correspondence between philosophers and scientists.1 In the 18th and the 19th century, more specialized journals gained in importance, most of which were published by learned societies. At the end of the 19th century, university presses too began to publish scholarly journals. Another traditional means of academic publishing are the various types of scholarly books, in particular monographs, edited volumes, reference works (specialist dictionaries, encyclopedias, and specialty reference manuals), and technical handbooks.2 A narrow definition of academic works would exclude textbooks and books for the broader public. Shavell (2010, 337–39) employs four criteria to determine whether a journal or book is academic in nature: (1) the authors and/or the publisher are usually academics; (2) the readers are mainly academics; (3) the content is academic in character; (4) only low royalties are paid, if any. As of today, scholarly journals are the preferred mode of academic publishing in particular in the sciences and some social sciences (e.g., economics), whereas scholarly books still play an important role in the arts, the humanities, and part of the social sciences. Whereas scholarly books are published by a large number of small national publishers in a multitude of languages, the most important scholarly journals are typically in English language and published by a few large commercial publishers. Until the mid-20th century, the most important journals were published by learned societies, before commercial publishers began to enter the academic publishing market in the 1960s and 1970s by launching new titles or acquiring existing ones. This development has led to a significant concentration of (commercial) publishers in the academic journal market.3 It is difficult to say for sure how many scholarly journals are available around the world. Some sources speak of more than 100,000, others of 87,000 or 73,000.4 In August 2018, Ulrich's Web Directory listed 33,119 active scholarly peer-reviewed English-language journals with about 3 million articles a year, complemented by an additional 9,372 journals in other languages. As an important subset, 11,655 journals with 2.2 million articles were included in the Clarivate Analytics' Journal Citation Reports (STM, 2018, 25–26). The Web of Science (WoS) database counted almost 12,500 journals in 2019 (see below, Section 2.2.1). With the mass expansion of academic education and the increasing size of faculty after World War II, publications in peer-reviewed, highly ranked journals have become an important precondition for academic careers in many disciplines, in particular in the sciences, economics, and partly in the other social sciences. In 1964, Eugene Garfield launched the Science Citation Index to calculate the impact factors of journals in science, medicine, and technology. This index was later followed by the Social Sciences Citation Index in 1973, the Arts & Humanities Citation Index in 1978 (Regazzi, 2015, 86–88), and the Emerging Sources Citation Index in 2015. These indices led to the development of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), a metric that serves to rank a scholarly journal based on the number of citations to articles in that journal by articles in other indexed journals within a certain time period. During the same time, commercial publishers have increased their market shares to the detriment of non-for-profit publishers, such as learned societies and universities, becoming the dominant players in the market for scholarly journals. Today, the "big five" commercial academic publishers—Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, and Sage—cover more than half of the market for scholarly journals. Since the 1980s, we have seen a sharp increase not just in the number of journals but in particular also in journal subscription prices, forcing many academic libraries to cancel serials subscriptions and to cut back on new monographs (the so-called serials crisis, cf. Eger & Scheufen, 2018, 23–29). These developments induced an increasing number of scholars, initially in the United States, to promote open access (OA) to scholarly articles as a replacement of or an addendum to the subscription model. After some individual initiatives in the late 1980s, the early 2000s saw the emergence of a global movement by scholars, librarians, and research sponsors, resulting in the "Budapest Open Access Initiative" (February 2002), the "Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing" (June 2003) and the "Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities" (October 2003).7 Two roads to OA can be distinguished8: First, gold OA refers to electronic journals with OA for all readers, often based on creative commons licenses. The publishers' costs are covered not by subscription fees but from other sources, such as article-processing charges (APCs)9 paid by authors, libraries, learned societies, or research sponsors, or subsidies from learned societies and other sources. Hybrid OA journals, whose numbers are rising fast, allow the authors to choose between paying an APC, thereby granting the reader OA, or not paying an APC and requiring the reader to pay for access to the article.10 A special branch of gold OA is mega-journals, the first one of which, PLOS One, was first published in 2006. In these journals, the peer review is restricted to examining only the soundness of the submitted articles but not their broader interest or impact. Also, mega-journals are not oriented towards a specific subject matter. The second road, green OA, refers to authors self-archiving pre-prints or post-prints of their papers on so-called OA repositories, potentially in addition to publication in traditional subscription-based journals. OpenDOAR listed 5,713 repositories in July 2021, of which 5,073 were classified as institutional repositories managed by universities, faculties, or other academic institutions, 364 as disciplinary (subject) repositories which aggregate research papers in specific disciplines (e.g., PubMed Central, arXiv, SSRN, and RepEc), 138 as aggregating repositories (including Academia and Scielo), and 139 as governmental repositories.11 Whereas institutional and disciplinary repositories generally respect the authors' or publishers' copyright, so-called Robin Hood or Pirate OA repositories do not. The most prominent example is Sci-Hub, founded in 2011 by Alexandra Elbakyan, a young scholar from Kazakhstan, which made over 60 million journal articles publicly available. Due to complaints by academic publishers, Sci-Hub had to switch domains several times.12 Recent years have seen the emergence of academic social networks such as Research Gate and Mendeley, as well as a stream of new forms of disseminating scientific content, including blogs, podcasts, and Facebook posts by prominent scholars. Regarding OA books, the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) in June 2021 listed 43,036 academic peer-reviewed books from 621 publishers.13 The number of academic journals, as listed in the WoS database, has been growing steadily over the past two decades, from around 5,000 in 2000 to almost 12,500 in 2019 (Figure 1).14 Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) The academic journal market is dominated by a few large commercial publishers, with the "big five" accounting for more than half of the academic journals listed by the WoS in 2019: Elsevier (1,754 journals), Springer (1,406), Wiley Blackwell (1,242), Taylor & Francis (1,199), and Sage (642).15 However, due to a downturn by Elsevier that began around 2006, this dominance has declined from around 60% in 2000 to around 51.7% in 2019 (Figure 2). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) Coupled with the advent of the internet and the concurrent increasing digitization of academic works, which through the bundling of different journals and/or formats ("big deals") facilitated second-degree price discrimination, this dominance has led to a drastic increase in subscription prices since the early 1990s (Bergstrom, 2013; Eger & Scheufen, 2018; Ramello, 2010). The resulting serials crisis—with academic libraries having to cut their journal portfolio—gave rise to a new publishing regime that offers OA to journal content. The share of pure (i.e., non-hybrid) OA journals as listed by the Directory of Open Access Journals (2021) has been increasing steadily, from around 3% of all WoS-listed journals in 2000 to more than 10% in 2019 (Figure 3). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) and DOAJ (2021) Interestingly, pure OA journals also gained ground in terms of quality. Figure 4 shows boxplots of the impact factors16 of closed access (CA) versus OA journals over time. While CA journals enjoyed an impact factor advantage over OA journals for a long time—all location scales of the impact factor for CA journals being above the ones for OA journals—OA journals are nowadays of the same quality, notwithstanding considerable differences between disciplines (see the contribution by Eger et al. to this issue). In 2019, impact factor distributions of both OA and CA journals are at the same level. Thus, advancing both in quantity and in quality, OA journals are becoming ever more relevant. The literature has identified the following advantages of an OA regime for academic works: (1) OA publications are likely read and therefore (2) cited more widely,17 which in turn (3) raises the incentives for academic authors to publish their research results as citations increase their reputation. These observations led to a broad discussion in academia as to whether the copyright regime may impede the evolution towards a universal OA regime, with very different conclusions being drawn regarding the impact of OA from a social welfare perspective (Scheufen, 2015; Shavell, 2010). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) and DOAJ (2021) The growing relevance of academic OA publishing warrants a closer look at the development of pure OA journals as the gold road towards OA. Figure 5 shows the number of newly launched OA journals from 2002 to 2020. Following relatively slow growth from 2002 to 2014, with fewer than 500 new OA journals per year (except 2013), the number has exceeded 1,000 in every year since, peaking in 2017, when more than 2,000 new OA journals were added to the DOAJ database. Today, the DOAJ database counts more than 16,000 OA journals in many different fields of research, published in 80 languages by publishers from 126 countries.18 Source: Author's calculations based on data from DOAJ (2021) Notwithstanding this impressive development, the relevance of OA journals varies substantially across academic disciplines (Figure 6).19 The research field with the largest attributed number of OA journals is Social Sciences (3,817), followed by Health Sciences (2,785), Technology and Engineering (1,416), and Language and Literature (1,153). By contrast, the natural science fields of Mathematics & Statistics (341), Physics & Astronomy (274), and Chemistry (181) feature only few OA journals.20 Source: Author's calculations based on data from DOAJ (2021) Remarkable differences also exist regarding a variety of OA journal characteristics (Table 1).21 Most (52%) OA journals leave the copyright of published works with the author, whereas the traditional CA regime demands that the exploitation rights are transferred to the publisher. Moreover, only around 28% of all OA journals charge APCs—a remarkable finding, as the OA regime implies the transition from a "reader pays" to an "author pays" model. Other fees (e.g., a submission fee to cover the review process) are charged by only around 2% of all OA journals. Nevertheless, author fees may constitute a significant obstacle for authors to publish in an OA venue, especially for non-tenured researchers seeking to publish in highly ranked journals, which are most likely to charge APCs (Budzinski et al., 2020). This obstacle also applies in particular to many researchers from developing countries, whose institutions rarely cover such costs. Yet 18% of OA journals provide for the possibility to waive such author fees. OA publishing may indeed be considered a form of development aid, for two reasons: First, few institutions in the developing world have so far been able to subscribe to academic journals. The OA regime can thus promote scientific participation and thereby foster the global evolution of science as a "trial and error" process. Free or cheaper access to literature for researchers in the developing world tends to increase both their output (number of publications) and input (number of references) (Mueller-Langer et al., 2020). Second, an OA regime grants access to the latest results in science for groups who were previously excluded because they are not "club" members of a university library. This includes, e.g., corporate researchers, physicians, or farmers. Notwithstanding all the changes discussed above, scholarly journals remain the most important medium of communication in many disciplines. For more than 300 years, they have been fulfilling the four key functions of registration (attribution), certification of articles (peer review), dissemination (distribution, access), and preservation (scholarly memory and permanent archiving). In recent decades, a fifth function must be added: the evaluation of researchers and their institutions.22 The increasing importance of OA articles in scholarly journals has triggered some controversial discussions, in particular regarding the questions as to whether OA negatively affects the quality of journal articles, whether OA improves the dissemination of research results, and how OA affects the competition between academic publishers as well as the distribution between academics and non-academics, between poor and rich universities, and between poor and rich countries. We shall discuss each of these questions and some related points in more detail below. In times when "alternative facts" tend to trump sound research results, academia must provide the public with reliable information. The users of this information should be sufficiently certain that the results are based on proper methods, reflect the state of science in the specific field, and were obtained independently, e.g., of any political or commercial interests.23 For that reason, strict and continuous quality control of research results is a "conditio sine qua non" for academic publishing. Facilitating the communication of content from authors to readers, the academic journal market may be characterized as a two-sided market (Rochet & Tirole, 2003). While readers look for the most important research results in their fields by top authors, the latter are interested in the journal's reputation, in wide readership, and in citations. Thus, journals with high impact factors hold the greatest attraction to both sides. With this in mind, the crucial question arises what effect, if any, OA is likely to have on the quality of academic articles. Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver, is very skeptical regarding the quality of OA articles, especially those that are financed by APCs: "By adding a financial component to the front end of the scholarly publishing process, the open-access movement will ultimately corrupt scholarly publishing and hurt the communication and sharing of novel knowledge" (Beall, 2013, 590). A weak form of "corruption" would to OA publishers' incentives to peer review and to more submitted papers in to increase from However, the commercial publishers' incentives to increase the number of articles to the detriment of the journal's quality at the the quality the APCs that the journal is able to as well as A form of "corruption" refers to the of some OA journal publishers have been to in particular young and who on publications for their or to allow authors to publish articles in OA journals, by articles with or peer academics on their the or of journals, and so In established a of publishers, which was in January in to not only from the publishers but also from OA who that the to to OA. this quality to be a one which exists only in some disciplines (e.g., economics), whereas in other disciplines, such as some OA journals are the ranked journals and there is of a quality researchers their and if academic institutions and research to the APCs for articles by journals, this is to A by is that OA may new and will new and of their will remain (Beall, 2013, 590). However, this is a of the process, of whether the was submitted to a traditional or an OA and many prominent which that articles are generally more likely to the review than and creative but ones. In their contribution to this special & in a two-sided that OA can be a feature of journals. The have seen an increasing both of data on any subject and of that serves to that data almost there has been a of articles in every For such articles, the peer for quality A can be made between pure the same data and the same are as in the and scientific which (1) different data but the same (2) the same data but new methods, or (3) new data and new A to a on (1) the of an or in previously published (2) the impact of the (3) the of and (4) the of to publish Whereas some years when data were on the of mainly of technical copyright and data are the of Regarding the first journals in have already been including an OA journal by University with a focus on Technology and and the Journal for in by Springer the years or a number of in several disciplines have that the results of many when published in highly ranked journals, not be many academics to speak of a The is to the quality of research by access to data so as to be able to results of and or the incentives to the in the first Another important question is whether digitization and the internet have facilitated the quality of of their scholarly and and of their the quality of academic researchers and of is based on which were to provide a metric for journals with each 2019, being a of the citations to all articles in a journal but not of the citations to the individual articles. In a few articles are cited and many articles are not cited at Moreover, an may also many citations for being and citations are 2018, For some journals the authors of submitted papers to related papers that were previously published in the same journal have this by the of several journals this focus on and their to their and the of to these and to with for the quality of research & in with a a to be a (STM, 2018, are induced to the but the The on research which from the on Science and Technology in 2014, is of the existing to research output and to research evaluation in the et al., the question whether the new and the and (OA) of academic publishing to and their Some authors the in OA publishing with a broader of readers and open For of the in the focus on a small number of highly ranked journals, for a all articles that a journal's criteria should be published and made financed by APCs or other This is the of mega-journals such as PLOS a who the 2000 in and & the between of publications in the top journals in and of in a of the top which over the the crucial question is how to articles at low especially in a OA the of available articles to choose journal of costs to some However, the of the as a of quality has been Thus, an important to academic publishing is to provide reliable on the quality of journal articles that are of the journal that published the the internet and for research evaluation also how research results are Regarding scholarly by other researchers, there is an discussion as to whether OA articles more or fewer citations than those with a to that is in the by & and by Eger et al. to this special Regarding by the broader the mainly is being complemented with which on or in the social reference such as and Mendeley, scholarly blogs, and In the transition from traditional subscription journals to OA, the crucial question is how to the between two the one high subscription fees may be with high journal publishers have to their to the or research the other low APCs may not for publishers to cover their and to a to publish journals. The is to competition to journal publishers to articles of quality at and and to the interested public. The of competition not on the and of OA publishing. there were only pure OA journals, publishers would for all authors had to cover the APCs from their the APCs would tend towards a that the publishers to However, in the publishers of pure OA journals, OA journals and CA journals with OA repositories, and APCs may be by or research these different to foster OA will have specific on the of are some (1) green OA is or an to as has been the in since January 2014, publishers of subscription journals difficult to increase their fees. This also the publishers of OA journals from increasing their In any a must be is too will the publishers' to publish the journal in the first if is too the on subscription fees will be A for gold OA by research the of the publishers of OA journals and thereby increase (2) the of new OA journals, this foster competition publishers of OA journals for Yet this the that many years to a and to Until the new journal will have on the fees of the journals. (3) of academic libraries can constitute a to the journal publishers, potentially the of example is the in which so far two between a of most academic libraries in on the one and Wiley and Springer as publishers of scholarly journals in all disciplines on the other is a controversial discussion whether such impede competition on the journal market to the detriment of small publishers or indeed In any such to promote the of traditional CA journals OA OA publishing may several and the from "reader pays" to "author pays" can for researchers, for in developing countries. As we have 18% of OA journals APC for such Second, or to foster OA, such as the above, may to the of researchers who to the detriment of those who do not. Moreover, publishers may be to papers from researchers from that author fees specific e.g., by authors an of gold and/or green OA may due to that from incentives such as the in science or especially for non-tenured researchers, gold OA may their careers in fields OA with and CA example for due to may be the e.g., in the field of In this a green OA publication may with a publication of a in a journal since the that a journal works that have been published In the transition to OA journals implies that authors or their pay for the of readers from all over the world to access the articles. This may be poor authors for rich the global that is available to academic articles is in which the transition to OA may the number of articles The is when many of the readers are of we can that whose faculty publish many articles also for a large share of the readership, in which any between authors and readers their as a of the transition to OA should be A number of and developments since the second half of the have the academic publishing market and triggered about the very of academic publishing. journals, which in most disciplines to be the most important medium of academic are by commercial publishers, with the top publishers more than of all journals. and the advent of the internet have these publishers to in "big with academic libraries, of which the libraries to access a wide of journals at a price per As a journal subscription prices and academic on academic journals have been increasing to the detriment of publishers and on books with these a number of national and initiatives triggered the development towards OA, a new of academic publishing. Today, a growing number of pure and OA journals are financed by subscription fees but by publication fees paid by the authors or their Moreover, institutional and disciplinary OA repositories have been established and the traditional of academic communication have been with social blogs, Another of digitization and the internet has been the facilitated and of research in many disciplines. The of this development is an increasing number of the results of be this would with copyright and and academic authors to in The discussion as to how these developments the quality control of academic journal articles, the evaluation of and their institutions, and the size and of financial means for academic publishing. This special to the discussion a of articles with some of including the evaluation of by indices & welfare of open access & the impact of OA & & access to research data & to OA in and the to OA in & We would to for The authors also open access by

This research aims to analyze the influence of conventional learning methods and game-based methods on students' interest in learning in Entrepreneurship subjects (KWU) at SMAN 4 Pasuruan. Interest in learning is a key indicator of successful learning, so an innovative and relevant approach is needed to improve it. In this research, a qualitative approach was used with in-depth interview methods as the main data collection technique. The research respondents involved students from SMAN 4 Pasuruan. Apart from that, this research also utilizes literature from trusted sources regarding the effectiveness of game-based and conventional learning methods. The research results show that conventional methods, which rely heavily on lectures and assignments, are less able to attract students' attention optimally. This is especially seen in material that requires creativity, emotional involvement, and active participation from students. On the other hand, educational game-based learning methods have significant advantages in creating a learning atmosphere that is more interactive, fun and relevant to students' needs. Educational games are proven to be able to connect theoretical concepts with practice through real-world simulations, which directly increase students' interest in learning. This research concludes that combining conventional methods with game-based learning can be an effective solution in increasing students' interest in learning.

Game-based learning becomes a critical issue in the e-learning field. Many instructors want to make their students can do the studying with fun and their interest activities. For this reason, this paper designs an interactive RFID learning system for improving learners’ motivation and performance by adopting game-based learning. There are several advantages for using this RFID learning system while learners behave well, such as learners will not feel they are engaging in a traditional learning environment when playing the RFID learning system. The purpose of this research was to develop an interactive RFID learning device and competitive learning environment for enhancing students’ learning motivation and number sense in mathematics subject. The research is to investigate whether and how this RFID learning system can be developed to help users learn mathematics with enjoyment. This study considers ideas in game design, motivation issues, and mathematics learning to develop a strategy to engage users with the interactive RFID system. In this research, the learners can do the synchronic learning with other classmates outside of the classroom. Moreover, instructors can evaluate the individual’s learning levels in mathematics in this research by analyzing the database of the game-based RFID learning system.

In the evolving landscape of education, creative ways to improve student engagement and academic performance are being investigated more and more. Because traditional teaching approaches frequently fail to hold students' attention, educators are forced to look for substitutes that can create a more dynamic and engaged learning environment. Amidst this change, there has been an increase in interest in methods that enhance academic performance while also making learning fun. This study looks into the effects of game-based learning on the academic achievement of Grade 8 students in Mathematics at the University of La Salette High School. Employing a Quasi-experimental design, specifically the pretest-posttest control group design was adopted using two intact groups. A total of 79 students, divided into control (38 students) and experimental (41 students) groups, participated in the study. The control group received instruction through traditional teaching methods such as board works, seat works, assignments and weekly quiz, while the experimental group engaged in various teacher-made, non-digital mathematical games such as games such as Probability Trio: A Three-Game Challenge, Case Quest: The Million Peso Challenge derived from deal or no deal gameshow, Card Category Conundrum, a card game activity and more activities. The main instrument used in this research is a 50-item researcher-made Mathematics Achievement Test. The test underwent a series of steps of validation and the reliability coefficient was also determined (KR-20 = 0.9141). Statistical analysis included paired samples t-tests, independent t-tests, and Cohen’s D to determine significant differences in mean scores and the effect size of the game-based strategy. Results indicated that both groups showed progress from their pretest to posttest scores; however, the experimental group demonstrated a significantly higher average gain of 7.1 compared to the control group's gain of 3. This suggests that game-based learning positively impacts students' mathematical achievement. Pretest scores were comparable between groups, but posttest results revealed a substantial difference favoring the experimental group. The findings highlight the effectiveness of game-based learning in improving academic achievement, with a large effect size indicated by Cohen's D. In light of these findings, the study recommends that mathematics educators integrate game-based activities into their instruction to enhance student performance and confidence in Mathematics. Continuous updating of activities, curriculum development that incorporates game-based learning, and professional development for educators are also advised. Engaging parents in supporting game-based learning at home and conducting further research with larger sample sizes to explore digital game effects are suggested for future studies.

Background: Medical education is increasingly adopting student-centered approaches, with Game-Based Learning (GBL) emerging as a cutting-edge method to boost engagement, motivation, and knowledge retention. In the past, teaching and learning methods predominantly emphasized knowledge acquisition over immersive educational experiences. Today, there is a growing embrace of playful approaches, with game-based learning (GBL) seamlessly integrating engagement and education. We implemented game-based applications and traditional learning methods using multiple-choice questions (MCQs) to evaluate their effectiveness in creating an engaging and productive learning experience for medical students.Methods: An interventional study was conducted among 60 Phase 3 Part 1 MBBS students at a Medical College and tertiary care Hospital in Eastern India. A crossover design was used, where two groups comprising 30 students in each group experienced both TL and GBL for different topics. Pre- and post-tests were conducted and student satisfaction was assessed using a Likert scale. Statistical analysis was done using paired, unpaired t-tests and the Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test, p value < 0.05 was considered significant.Results: In our study, post-test scores showed significant improvement within both groups (p < 0.05). The GBL group demonstrated a greater increase in scores compared to the TL group, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). Student satisfaction ratings were notably higher for GBL, indicating a strong preference for this approach (p = 0.0001).Conclusion: GBL is an effective addition to traditional lectures, enhancing knowledge retention and learner satisfaction. While the study supports the use of GBL in medical education, larger studies are needed for broader validation.

BackgroundResearchers debate whether game‐based learning (GBL) affects students' achievement emotions, as past studies yielded mixed results.ObjectivesThis study determines the overall effect of GBL on students' positive achievement emotion and their negative achievement emotions (PAEs, NAEs), along with their moderators.MethodsThis meta‐analysis examined true or quasi‐experimental studies, reported in English or Chinese, and with students (ranging from primary schools to universities) who did not report physiological and/or psychological illnesses.ResultsCompared to traditional instruction, GBL had a positive effect on students' PAEs (g =0.526, k = 39, 95% CI = [0.319, 0.733]) and a negative effect on NAEs (g = −0.517, k = 22, 95% CI = [−0.709, −0.324]). GBL's positive effects on students' PAEs were (a) largest in middle school and otherwise generally larger in higher grades, and (b) largest for competition GBLs (compared to cooperative or individual GBLs). GBL's negative effects on students' NAEs were (a) larger in collectivist cultures than individualistic ones, (b) progressively larger in primary school, middle school, and university, (c) larger for non‐digital games than digital games, (d) smallest for individual games, (e) progressively larger in mathematics, social sciences, language, science, and highest in engineering and technology, and (f) smallest for extremely short or extremely long intervention durations (very short: up to 45 min; very long: over 2 months).Take AwayGBL often increases students' PAEs and decreases their NAEs, though their effect sizes differ across cultural values, grade level, game type, academic subject, or intervention duration. Hence, educators should consider these aspects when designing / selecting education games for their students and instructional contexts.

Background: Although game-based learning (GBL) is effective in STEM, its use in climate change education is still limited. This is critical because current educational efforts for younger generations often emphasize transient, non-experiential approaches, leaving them unaware of how unsustainable practices reinforce climate change factors. Purpose: We address this gap by developing a board game based on experiential learning theory (ELT) that simulates key climate change factors and compares its efficacy to traditional lectures. Method: We employed a mixed-methods approach: focus group interviews with 16 science teachers and a three-week learning assessment study with 32 high school students divided equally into GBL and lecture-based groups. Findings: Teachers confirmed the game's value in teaching climate causes and effects while reporting a lack of practical solution-based learning in the standard curriculum. The GBL group achieved 33% higher knowledge retention, participated in solution debates during 92% of sessions (compared to 12% in lectures), and exhibited iterative strategy changes, demonstrating ELT's ‘active experimentation’ phase. The game's mechanics, such as cause-effect cards and solution coins, effectively translated abstract concepts into tangible understanding. Implications: ELT-integrated GBL significantly outperforms lectures in retention and engagement, offering a viable model for effective climate change education in resource-constrained contexts.