Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

Research Proposal: Brain Training and its Effects on Motivation in Math Classrooms
Alex Lemon
University of British Columbia

ETEC 500
J. McCracken
April 15, 2013

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

Research Proposal: Brain Training and its Affects on Motivation in Math Classrooms
Using technology to find ways to engage students in active, motivating and
meaningful learning opportunities is becoming a priority for more educators and students
around the world each day. Computer based brain training games are emerging as a tool
that may provide students with just these sorts of opportunities. Brain training games
combine tantalizing aspects of traditional video games with varying levels of educational
content. The most important question that faces computer based brain training is, do the
effects of brain training generalize to other cognitive and social/emotional domains?
As a special educator at the middle school level, it seems clear that a significant
number of students struggle with motivation to engage in math activities in class. For
some students it appears to be related to perceptions of difficulties with underlying math
skills and understanding. For others it could be related to the way in which classroom
activities are structured. Whatever the case, helping to improve student motivation in
math class has to be an important area of focus for educational researchers, school
districts and math teachers alike.
Research into the effects of computer based brain training has focused primarily
on achievement. The work that has been done regarding motivation has been focused on
motivation to engage in more brain training activities or towards the subject of math in
general. The general focus of this research proposal is the effects that computer-based
training games have on levels of motivation in classroom activities.
Keywords: digital game-based learning environments (DGBLEs), brain training games,
mathematics instruction, motivation

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

1. Problem Statement
This research proposal is focused specifically on determining what effects, if any,
computer-based training games have on levels of motivation in middle school math
classes when conducted in math class and outside of math class? Other questions related
to this topic emerge such as: are the motivational gains from computer based-brain
training limited to the tasks themselves? Can low levels of motivation in math students
increase significantly as a result of computer based brain training?
2. Literature Review
Examining the effects of computer-based brain training games in education is
becoming an increasingly popular area of research. A review of the current literature
concerning DGBLEs, brain training games, motivation and mathematics revealed four
major themes that will be discussed in the literature review that follows. These themes
can be described as: DGBLEs increase skills related to the tasks involved, DGBLEs
improve students attitudes towards specific school subjects and activities, DGBLEs
involve learning strategies that can be utilized in the classroom and DGBLEs and the
factors that effect motivation.
Digital Game-Based Learning Environments and Skill Acquisition
A growing body of research supports the idea that digital game-based learning
games, such as brain training games, can improve specific cognitive skill sets (Miller &
Robertson, 2009; Kebritchi, Hirumi, & Bai, 2010; Otta & Tavella, 2010;
Divjak & Tomic, 2011; Hamlen, 2011; Rabipour & Raz, 2012; Tsai, Yu, &
Hsiao, 2012). For example Divjak & Tomic (2011) found that there were
significant gains in achievement compared to those students that did

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

not use computer games during their learning. Mathematical skills

were considerably higher than those students that did not use math
computer games. These effects remained even after a year had
passed. The five-year-old students that took part were found to have
learned even more easily and quickly using computer games.
Evidence suggests that DGBLEs need to have an educational component to their
design process in order to facilitate skill acquisition with students. DGBLEs that had
suspect educational foundations and design elements were not as effective at developing
cognitive and academic improvements. In one study, an experimental group used a
Playstation 3 math game each day for 11 days while the control group learned math in a
traditional classroom setting. The differences in achievement were not significant and
researchers attributed the results to a lack of educational elements in the game (Divjak &
Tomic, 2011).
The doubt that exists regarding DGBLEs and increased achievement usually
centers on improvements in areas of cognition, behaviour or achievement that are not
related to the tasks involved in the computer games. Tsai et al. (2012) suggest that an
increasing number of researchers are becoming skeptical of the effects of DGBL.
Despite evidence to show that improvements can be made in specific areas addressed in
the games, it is unclear whether these gains generalize to other domains or whether
DGBLEs are preferable to traditional classroom or e-learning environments (Tsai et al.
2012). Rabipour & Raz (2012) concur that the gains made during digital
game-based learning may be limited to the games themselves.
Nevertheless achievement in specific areas still tends to be positively

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

affected when educationally sound DGBLEs are used to target specific

cognitive, behavioural or academic skills. The big question that
remains is whether or not these gains will generalize to other
cognitive, behavioural or academic skills.
Digital Game-Based Learning Environments and Student Attitudes
Many students interact with a range of digital gaming technologies on a regular
basis. The interest in developing effective DGBLEs is directly related to the intense
motivation, engagement and enthusiasm that students have for these experiences.
Documented student attitudes towards DGBLEs have been generally positive. Tsai et al.
(2012) state that most researchers now agree that learner engagement is positively
affected by DGBL.
The question is whether or not these experiences improve attitudes towards
specific subjects or academic activities? The answer may lie in early intervention.
Divjak & Tomic (2011) suggest that positive math-related experiences
in primary grades will help students build positive associations with
math as a subject. These math experiences were also found to be
more meaningful for students, further supporting motivation.
Miller & Robertson (2009) stress the importance of helping
students make connections between their performance in a DGBLE and
their performance in math class. Students will not always makes these
connections on their own and as a result may not benefit from a sense
of increased ability that according to research may actually exist. Even
without these connections being made after completing math-based

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

computer games, students nevertheless reported an increased sense

of overall self-esteem (Miller & Robertson, 2009).
Digital Game-Based Learning Environments and Classroom Learning Strategies
Classroom teachers are beginning to wonder whether there are lessons to learn
from the successes of DGBLEs. Examining the elements of successful DGBLEs and
trying to incorporate them into classroom instruction is becoming a growing area of
research. Main & ORourke (2011) discuss maths poor reputation among many students
and teachers. The enthusiasm, engagement and motivation that was witnessed when
students were learning with GBLEs suggested that math no longer needs to be unpopular.
Students in the study even began working together to solve problems instead of only
looking to the teacher for support.
Classroom teachers can directly benefit by incorporating successful elements of
DGBLEs into their classroom instruction. In a 2010 study, Kebritchi et al. (2010)
found that these activities were experience-based, appealed to a range
of learning styles, and provided meaningful context with which to
complete math activities. These elements resulted in reduced student
fears related to math and held students attention for longer periods of
time. Students reported that the activities were fun, challenging and
involved elements of exploration and adventure. The ability to play
with other students was also a highly motivating factor (Kebritchi et al.,
2010).
Another factor that emerged was the effectiveness of combining
classroom instruction with DGBLEs. Kebritchi et al. (2010) found that

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

students benefitted more from playing math computer games and

participating in traditional classroom activities than from only taking
part in classroom activities. Rabipour & Raz (2012) suggest that
traditional academic subjects could be paired with brain training
games over longer periods of time to allow for the most dramatic
results. Hamlen (2011) points to the common aspects of pedagogy
between video game design and classroom instruction. The difference
lies in the ways in which young people learn about video games from
their peers compared to the teacher and parent-centric manner in
which they learn at school.
Digital Game-Based Learning Environments and Factors Affecting Motivation
Many believe that DGBLEs are beginning to have a significant impact on
students motivation to learn. Determining the factors that lead to increased motivation to
learn is the focus of increasing numbers of researchers.
Teachers taking part in a 2010 study believed higher levels of student engagement
and motivation to learn with DGBLEs to the quality of user interface (Otta &
Tavella, 2010). It turned out that the most important factor was the
ability to actually complete the tasks assigned. Students that were
successful on initial tasks were more likely to have higher levels of
motivation for the second task than those that did not do as well (Otta
& Tavella, 2010).
Anxiety regarding math abilities prevents students from engaging in the practice
and exploration that they need to acquire new skills and understanding. DGBLEs provide

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

a tool that is engaging and practical but also improves students self-concept and grasp of
basic mathematical facts (Main & ORourke, 2011). Self-concept and
achievement can become positively intertwined through DGBLEs.
Increased levels of achievement lead to a greater sense of selfconcept. A greater sense of self-concept will lead to increased
achievement (Main & ORourke, 2011). No doubt this positive feedback
loop contributes to an increase in motivation to continue to engage in
meaningful learning activities.
DGBLEs also take advantage of the idea of flow, a term coined
by Csikszentmihalyi that refers to the state in which a person finds themself when they
are completely motivated and engaged in taking part in a specific activity (Hamlen, 2011,
p. 533). Motivation to continue with the task at hand is strong in this state and people can
experience a disconnection with the passage of time (Hamlen, 2011). DGBLEs can
adjust the user experience to an appropriate level of challenge for users allowing them to
take full advantage of being in a state of flow.
Conclusions
Research regarding achievement has been the primary focus of DGBLE studies.
Research has also been conducted on the effects of DGBL on motivation levels (Miller
& Robinson, 2009; Kebritchi et al., 2010; Otta & Tavella, 2010; Divjak &
Tomic, 2011; Hamlen, 2011; Ghergulescu & Muntean, 2012) though
focused on investigating general feelings of motivation and self-esteem
or motivation to continue working with DBGLEs. This study seeks to
explore whether or not motivation to engage in math class is affected

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

by the setting in which brain training takes place. This is a step

towards answering the questions that still exist regarding
generalization of gains from DGBLEs to other contexts (Otta & Tavella,
2010).
3. Research Method
DescriptionofResearchMethods
This study compares the use of the computer based brain training program
Lumosity developed by Lumos Labs and its effects on student motivation in class, with
traditional classroom-based grade 8 math instruction. A specific area of focus is on the
motivational effects that 20-minute brain training sessions have when they are conducted
in the classroom versus outside of the classroom. Hardy & Scanlon (2009) connect the
Lumosity program to the emerging science of neuroplasticity. They point to concepts
such as targeting, adaptivity, novelty, engagement and completeness as the foundation for
an effective brain training program.
This study will take place in three grade eight classrooms over an eight-week
period. The classes will be selected from middle schools in the Greater Victoria area in
similar socio-economic conditions. Motivation in math class will be measured before,
during and after intervention as suggested by Ghergulescu & Muntean (2012).
This study will involve collecting data using the mixed methods approach, in an
attempt to take advantage of the unique strengths of both quantitative and qualitative
research methods (Gay, Mills & Airasian 2012, p. 483).
All three classrooms will complete the quantitative motivational survey
(Appendix A) that was previously used to measure motivation by Kebritchi et al.

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

10

(2010) before, during and after intervention. Students will also take
part in structured interviews (Appendix B) to further assess levels of
motivation before, during and after intervention.
Participants
Ninety students in three middle school grade eight classrooms (ages 13-14) in the
Greater Victoria area, as well as their teachers, will be involved in the study. All three
schools will be selected on the basis of similar socio-economic conditions. Socioeconomic levels can be approximated through comparing official school data relating to
the number of free school lunches provided (Miller & Robertson, 2009). These classes
would be divided into two treatment groups and one control group.
Instruments and Materials
This study will employ quantitative and qualitative methods to gather data
regarding motivation in math class. The quantitative instrument is a 20-question
motivation survey. The questions are straightforward and use language appropriate for
the age of students involved. This survey would be administered to each of the three
groups before the treatment begins, half way through treatment (4 weeks), immediately
after treatment and again 3 months after treatment has been completed.
Structured interviews will also take place at the same time intervals as the
motivational survey. The 7 open-ended interview questions relate directly to motivation
as well as to the questions on the quantitative survey. The purpose of the interview is to
allow students the opportunity to elaborate on several key concepts regarding the
relationship between brain training, motivation and their math class.
Access to technology will also be important for this study. One treatment group

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

11

will need access to computers in their math class for the duration of the 8-week study.
The second treatment group will need access to computers at home or at school to
complete their daily brain training as well.
Procedure
This study will take place at three different middle schools in the Greater Victoria area,
with three separate grade 8 classes. The study would begin with discussions with all
three teachers regarding their roles in the project. The two teachers that would be
working with Lumosity either directly or indirectly would need time to familiarize
themselves with the system before beginning the intervention. Once the intervention was
over, it would be appropriate to allow the control group the opportunity to work with
Lumosity as well. Prior to the study the teacher in the control group would be directed
not to change anything about their daily math instruction throughout the experiment.
The experiment would begin with administration of the motivational survey as
well as the initial structured interviews with each student. Members of the research team
will administer these surveys and conduct these interviews. Once these are completed
then the treatment groups can begin their daily work with Lumosity for the 8-week
period. The first treatment group would use Lumosity each day for 25 minutes in their
math class. The classroom teacher will facilitate this process. The second treatment
group would involve students accessing Lumosity at home to conduct their 25-minute
daily brain training activities. Students that do not have access to a computer at home
can be provided with access at the school outside of the math class. The teacher can
work together with students and parents to ensure that students have an opportunity to
complete their daily training. The control group will continue with their classroom based

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

12

math activities as usual without any brain training.

Half way through the treatment all three groups would fill out the motivational
survey a second time and participate in another round of structured interviews using the
same questions. Once the experiment was completed the students would complete the
surveys and interviews again immediately after and then again three months later.
Research Design and Analysis
Descriptionandjustificationofresearchmethods.The explanatory mixed
methods design used to conduct this study is based on the quan-qual model and was
selected in an attempt to initially gather quantitative data regarding student motivation in
math class that could later be clarified and explored further when analyzed with the
related qualitative findings (Gay et al., 2012, p. 486). This was selected as the
appropriate design as it involved studying how two groups compared on a variable
quantitatively that would be followed by qualitative interviews designed to determine
why differences occurred (Gay et al., 2012).
DataCollectionandAnalysis.Data will be collected regarding motivation
towards math class both on the survey and during the structured interviews. The survey
questions involve a 5-point rating system. Higher scores on 15 of the survey questions
indicate higher levels of motivation toward math class. Lower scores on the other 5
survey questions indicate higher levels of motivation towards math class. Prior to using
this survey during the experiment it would be pilot tested with two grade 8 classrooms
that were not taking part in the study, to make sure the questions used are appropriate
(Gay et al., 2012). Analysis should focus on changes in levels of motivation towards
math class among individual students, before, during and after treatment as compared to

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

13

the levels of the control group. This will provide results that relate directly to the
research focus. There will also likely be interesting data that can be used to help shape
future classroom instruction as well. Examining the data for patterns in students
responses such as frequently high or low scores to specific questions could provide
valuable insight into areas of instruction and student support that need to be addressed or
are working well to meet the needs of students.
The data collected during the structured interviews will be used to provide insight
as to why certain results occurred for students. Results will be examined by the research
team and collectively broken down into a coding system based on themes that emerge
from the responses. A minimum of two researchers will then score the qualitative items
in relation to the coding framework to ensure that the results collected are reliable (Gay
et al., 2012). Once the data has been collected then it will be
categorized by its respective codes. Particularly relevant will be the
responses of students that expressed low and high motivation towards
math class on the survey. These responses may also help provide
insight into areas of instruction and student support that need to be
addressed or are working well.
Figure 1. Treatment and Control Groups Information
Experimental
Groups

Intervention:
8 Weeks

Treatment Group
1

25 minute daily
brain training in
math class
25 minute daily
brain training at
home or at

Treatment Group
2

Quantitative Data
Collection:
Before/During/Afte
r
20-question
Motivational
Survey
20-question
Motivational
Survey

Qualitative Data
Collection:
Before/During /After
Structured interviews
regarding motivation
Structured interviews
regarding motivation

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

Control Group

school (outside
of math class)
No brain
training

20-question
Motivational
Survey

14

Structured interviews
regarding motivation

4.ScheduleofActivities
Prior to the experiment beginning the research team will meet with the teachers
involved to discuss the research, background, procedures and programs that will be used
during the experiment. Parental consent will be obtained and any questions or concerns
raised by parents can be addressed before the experiment begins. At this point the
teachers will have the opportunity to access the programs and prepare for their use at the
school. There will be a period of several weeks during which teachers can become
comfortable using Lumosity, asking any questions they may still have and resolve any
issues that arise during this point in the process. During this period the research team
will conduct the initial surveys and interviews regarding motivation with the students
involved.
Once the experiment begins students will begin to use Lumosity in the manner
prescribed for their treatment group. This will continue until 4 weeks have passed at
which point the second round of motivational surveys and interviews will be conducted
again.
Students will continue using Lumosity for another four weeks until the
experimental period of 8 weeks is complete. At this point the motivational surveys and
interviews will be conducted again. After a period of three months passes since the
intervention has taken place, a final round of motivational surveys and interviews will be
conducted to complete the data collection process of the experiment.

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

15

5.Discussion
SignificanceandPossibleImplicationsoftheStudy
TheuseofDGBLEsseemsmoreandmorelikelyastechnologyismorereadily
adoptedinschoolsandstudentscontinuetoinvestmoreoftheirtimeengagedwith
technology.PreviouslyconductedresearchindicatesthatbraintrainingandDGBLEs
generallyincreaseachievementandfeelingsofselfesteemwithstudents.Thisresearch
proposalattemptstodeterminethemosteffectivesettingforuseofbraintraining
computergamestobuildmotivationformiddleschoolmathstudents.Theimplications
couldbesignificantduetomathswaninglevelsofpopularityamongstudentsand
teachers(Main & ORourke, 2011). If using computer-based brain training programs can
help increase motivation to engage in traditional math class, then brain training can start
to substantiate long suspect claims on generalizability. At that point, further research
would need to take place regarding the extents to which brain training in different settings
can improve cognitive, academic and behavioural capacities.
RelationshipofFindingstoLiterature
Otta&Tavella(2010)statethatfurtherresearchmustbedonetodeterminethe
effectsofDGBLEsinothercontexts/computerbasedlearningenvironments(p.14).
Thisisagoalthatsomeresearchersfeelstronglyhasnotbeenachieved(Rabipour &
Raz, 2012).Kebritchi et al. (2010)foundevidencethatbraintrainingmaybe
locationspecific,asstudentsthatdidtheirtraininginclassandinthecomputerlabhad
higherlevelsofmotivationgenerally,thanthosethatonlydidtheirtraininginthe
computerlabordidnotrainingatall.AsMillerandRobinson(2009)note,studentsare

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

16

notalwaysabletomaketheconnectionsbetweenimprovementstheyhavemadewith
DGBLEsandincreasedconfidenceintheclassroomwhenthegamesarecompletedin
differentcontextsandsettings.Asaresult,motivationaleffectsofbraintrainingmaynot
presentthemselvesunlesscompletedinthesettingwithwhichtheyshouldbeassociated.
Thisstudyseekstoclarifywhetherornotmotivationtoengageinmathclassisaffected
bycompletingtrainingentirelyduringmathclass,entirelyoutsideofmathclassor
withoutdoinganytrainingatall.Itisthehopethatthisresearchcontributestothe
ongoingconversationregardingbraintraining,motivationandgeneralizability.

References
Divjak, B. & Tomic, D. (2011). The impact of game-based learning on
the achievement of learning goals and motivation for learning
mathematics - literature review. Journal of Information and
Organizational Sciences, 35(1), 15-30.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for
analysis and applications (10th ed.). Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Pearson Publishing.

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

17

Ghergulescu, I. & Muntean, C. H. (2012). Measurement and analysis of

learners motivation in game-based e-learning. In D. Ifenthaler, D.
Eseryel & X. Ge (Eds.), Assessment in game-based learning (pp.
355-378). New York, New York: Springer.
Hamlen, K. R. (2011). Childrens choices and strategies in video
games. Computers in Human Behaviour, 27(1), 532-539.

Hardy, J. & Scanlon, M. (2009). The Science Behind Lumosity.

Retrieved from:
http://www.lumosity.com/documents/the_science_behind_lumosity.
pdf

Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010) The effects of modern
mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and
class motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 427-443.

Main, S. & ORourke, J. (2011). New directions for traditional lessons: can
handheld game consoles enhance mental mathematics skills? Australian Journal of
Teacher Education, 36(2), 43-55.

Miller, D.J., & Robertson, D.P. (2009). Using a games console in the
primary classroom:
effects of brain training programme on computation and self-

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

18

esteem. British Journal of Educational Technology. 41(2), 242-255.

Otta, R. & Tavella, M. (2010). Motivation and engagement in computerbased learning tasks: investigating key contributing factors.
World Journal of Educational Technology, 2(1), 1-15.

Rabipour, S. & Raz, A. (2012). Training the brain: fact and fad in
cognitive and behavioural remediation. Brain and Cognition,
79(2), 159-179.

Tsai, F.-H., Yu, K.-C., & Hsiao, H.-S. (2012). Exploring the Factors Influencing Learning
Effectiveness in Digital Game-based Learning. EducationalTechnology&Society,
15(3), 240250.

Appendix A

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

19

(Kebritchi et al., 2010, p. 438)

Appendix B

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

20

Structured Interview Questions:

1. How would you describe your level of motivation in mathematics class?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
2. What specific materials, exercises, illustrations, etc have kept your attention in this
mathematics class?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
3. What areas of mathematics are you motivated to learn more about?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
4. Why do you think you are motivated to learn more about those areas?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
5. How does your mathematics class relate to things you are interested in?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
6. How does your mathematics class relate to things you already know?

Brain Training and Motivation in Math Class

_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
7. How do you think technology should be used in your mathematics class?
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________

Adapted from Motivation Survey (Kebritchi et al., 2010, p. 438)

21