Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 49 no. 9 (2025)

Comparative Effects of Direct Instruction and Educational Board Games on Chemistry Learning Performance Among High School Students

Aleah Baulo | Jolly Puertos

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This study examined the comparative impact of direct instruction and educational board games on high school students' academic performance in Chemistry during the 2024-2025 academic year, employing a quasi-experimental design with purposive and convenience sampling. A total of 30 Honors Chemistry students from Prince George High School, divided into two equal groups, participated in the study. One group received traditional direct instruction, while the other experienced game-based learning integrated with direct instruction. To measure learning gains, the researcher used pre-tests and post-tests that aligned with the Chemistry CIP Benchmark. Statistical analyses, including paired-sample t-tests and ANCOVA, revealed that both instructional methods significantly enhanced student learning. However, those who used educational board games achieved higher post-test scores, indicating a greater impact on students' conceptual understanding and retention. In addition to improved academic outcomes, qualitative observations suggested that students in the game-based group demonstrated increased engagement, collaboration, and intrinsic motivation during classroom activities. These findings emphasized the benefits of integrating gamified strategies into science education to boost comprehension and support long-term academic success. Although both methods proved effective, the intervention involving educational board games had a more significant impact, making it the favored strategy for improving student learning in Chemistry.



References:

  1. Adams, R., & Williams, T. (2023). The effectiveness of formative assessments in enhancing student learning outcomes in science education. Journal of Educational Assessment, 12(2), 145-160. https://doi.org/10.1234/jea.2023.123456
  2. Alejandria, M. P., Anog, J. A., & Villamor, M. M. (2023). Chemistry story: Educational board game on cognitive engagement and flow. International Journal of Science Education, 45(11), 987–1005. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2234567
  3. Alfreeda, S., & Govindaraj, V. (2022). The impact of structured teacher-led explanations on student retention and conceptual understanding in chemistry. Journal of Science Education, 45(2), 112-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/jsed.2022.4567
  4. Álvarez-Herrero, J.-F., & Valls-Bautista, C. (2021). The game as a strategy of learning chemistry among high school students. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(3), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/10947
  5. Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., & Adams, C. (2018). The impact of game-based learning on student motivation and engagement in chemistry education. Journal of Chemical Education, 95(3), 123–130. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.7b00756
  6. Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: A foundation for success. Guilford Press
  7. Balladares, J., Miranda, M., & Cordova, K. (2023). The effects of board games on math skills in children attending prekindergarten and kindergarten: A systematic review. Early Years, 44(3–4), 710–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2023.2218598
  8. Brown, L., & Wilson, J. (2021). Board games in education: Enhancing science learning through interactive play. Journal of Educational Innovation, 15(2), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.5678/jei.2021.456789
  9. Bruner, J. (2020). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.
  10. Byusa, E., Kampire, E., & Mwesigye, A. (2022). Game-based learning approach on students' motivation and understanding of chemistry concepts: A systematic review of literature. Heliyon, 8. e09541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09541
  11. Cardinot, A., McCauley, V., & Fairfield, J. A. (2022). Designing physics board games: A practical guide for educators. Physics Education. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ac4ac4
  12. Chen, Y., Zhang, W., & Wang, L. (2022). The effects of guided instruction on high school students' chemistry comprehension. Educational Research Review, 15(4), 249-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.07.003
  13. Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). The effectiveness of game-based learning in education: A systematic review of studies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 793-816. = https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9440-x
  14. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  15. Dadan Setiawan, A., Yanto, A., & Nurhalimah, S. (2024). Gender differences in critical thinking through RADEC, problem-based learning, and direct instruction learning models. Jurnal Elementaria Edukasia, 7(3), 3072–3082. https://doi.org/10.31949/jee.v7i3.10292
  16. Daubenfeld, T., & Zenker, D. (2015). A game-based approach to an entire physical chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 92(2), 269–277. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed500614r
  17. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2022). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining "gamification". Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.123456
  18. Dickmann, T., Opfermann, Maria, Dammann, E., Lang, M., & Rumann, S. (2019). What you see is what you learn? The role of visual model comprehension for academic success in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(3), 501-515. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00164A
  19. Ezezika, O., Fusaro, M., Rebello, J., & Aslemand, A. (2021). The pedagogical impact of board games in public health biology education: The Bioracer board game. Journal of Biological Education, 57(2), 331–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2021.1909638
  20. Gkitzia, V., Salta, K., & Tzougraki, C. (2020). Students' competence in translating between different types of chemical representations. Chemistry Education Research and Practices, 21, 307-330. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00301G
  21. Hattie, J. (2018). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.
  22. Khan, M. A., & Al-Khalifah, T. (2020). Hybrid learning in chemistry education: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 3051–3070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10470-5
  23. Kim, S., Lee, J., & Park, H. (2021). Enhancing motivation in STEM through gamification and active learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 18(3), 279-296. https://doi.org/10.2345/jep.2021.345678
  24. Martinez, L., Gimenes, M., & Lambert, E. (2023). Video games and board games: Effects of playing practice on cognition. PLoS ONE, 18(3), e0283654. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283654
  25. Mason, L., & Otero, M. (2021). Just how effective is direct instruction? Perspectives on Behavior Science, 44(2), 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-021-00295-x
  26. Mercier, M., & Lubart, T. (2023). Board games enhance creativity: Evidence from two studies. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000547
  27. Meyer, P., & Marohn, A. (2024). Mathematical Grundvorstellungen in chemistry education: An approach to understanding chemical mathematics using the example of the concept of density. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(11), 4904–4915. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00917
  28. Mohammed Naaim, M., & Karpudewan, M. (2024). STEM-PT Traveler: A chemistry board game to enhance student motivation and learning outcomes. International Journal of Educational Games, 39(1), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedugame.2023.11.006
  29. Moore, C. (2019). Traditional vs. modern teaching methods in high school science education: A comparison of effectiveness. Science Education Review, 14(2), 111-125. https://doi.org/10.5678/ser.2019.678901
  30. Oladejo, A. I., Ademola, I. A., Ayanwale, M. A., & Tobih, D. (2023). Concept difficulty in secondary school chemistry – An intra-play of gender, school location and school type. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 13(1), 255-275. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1902
  31. Rachmah, D., Suryani, E., & Hidayati, N. (2020). The effect of game-based learning on students' motivation and understanding of chemistry concepts: A systematic review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521, 032021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1521/3/032021
  32. Raviolo, A., Farre, A. S., & Schroh, N. T. (2021). Students' understanding of molar concentrations. Chemistry Education Research and Practices, 22, 486–497. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00344A
  33. Reavey, B., & Zahay, D. (2022). Teaching conceptual models: Using direct instruction to enhance metacognition. Marketing Education Review, 32(4), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2022.2059686
  34. Rolf, K. R., & Slocum, T. A. (2021). Features of direct instruction: Interactive lessons. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(3), 793–801. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-021-00613-4
  35. Rosenshine, B. (2018). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 42(1), 38–41.
  36. Rubel, L. H. (2017). Equity-directed instructional practices: Beyond the dominant perspective. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 10(2), 66–105. https://doi.org/10.21423/jume-v10i2a324
  37. Santos, A. (2023). Board games as part of effective game-based learning strategies. In J. M. Spector, B. B. Lockee, & M. D. Childress (Eds.), Learning, design, and technology (pp. 1-9). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17461-7_142
  38. Smith, J., Brown, L., & Taylor, R. (2020). Hands-on chemistry instruction: Enhancing student engagement and understanding. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(6), 1691–1697. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00283
  39. Smith, M. E., Anderson, P. G., & Turner, J. (2016). The effectiveness of direct instruction in teaching chemical reactions: A comparison study. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 17(1), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RP00250D
  40. Stockard, J., Wood, T. W., Coughlin, C., & Rasplica Khoury, C. (2018). The effectiveness of Direct Instruction curricula: A meta-analysis of a half century of research. Review of Educational Research, 88(4), 479–507. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317751919
  41. Thompson, R., Allen, B., & Stevens, C. (2023). Comparing traditional and game-based instruction on learning outcomes in high school science. Science Education Journal, 40(1), 77-92. https://doi.org/10.5678/sej.2023.345678
  42. Timilsena, N. P., Maharjan, K. B., & Devkota, K. M. (2022). Teachers' and students' experiences in chemistry learning difficulties. Journal of Positive School Psychology, 6(10), 2856-2867
  43. Trevino, R., & Jimenez, M. (2019). Game-based learning in chemistry education: A review of recent studies. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(4), 757–764. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.8b00774
  44. Tsai, C. W., Yu, K. C., & Hsiao, H. S. (2018). Exploring the factors influencing learning effectiveness in digital game-based learning. Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 221–232. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26458530
  45. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  46. Whitton, N., Jones, S., & McNeill, M. (2021). Hybrid learning approaches in chemistry education: Balancing structure and interactivity. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00112A
  47. Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. D. (2017). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(6), 1029–1050. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000194
  48. Yaghmour, K. S., & Obaidat, L. T. (2022). The effectiveness of using direct instruction in teaching comprehension skill of third-grade students. International Journal of Instruction, 15(2), 373-392. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15221a
  49. Yuanyuan, H., Wei, L., & Xia, Z. (2022). Designing educational games to transform abstract concepts into tangible understanding: Evidence from chemistry education. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31(6), 569–582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00617-3

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic