Competition, Collaboration, and Learning Mathematics through Games
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.5641Keywords:
Mathematical games, Competition and collaboration, Mathematical reasoning, Mathematical discourse, Primary mathematics educationAbstract
This study investigates how gameplay format shapes mathematical reasoning and social dynamics in primary classrooms. We compared one-against-one (1v1) and paired (2v2) versions of five non-digital games implemented by five Year 3/4 teachers (≈90 students). A mixed-methods design triangulated teacher interviews, student reflections (n≈40), and video-recorded gameplay from 20 focus students, coded for reasoning (generating, evaluating, justifying, clarifying, predicting, reflecting, prompting/helping, and connecting) and interactional moves (game management, emotional tone, self-talk, and off-topic talk). Across classes, 2v2 play elicited more visible reasoning than 1v1. Frequencies rose for Generating (104 vs. 42), Evaluating (217 vs. 136), and Justifying (68 vs. 30), as students proposed ideas, weighed alternatives, and negotiated shared decisions. Prompting/Helping was also higher, reflecting peer teaching. Importantly, mathematical connections occurred more often in 2v2 (26 vs. 5), with students applying concepts such as primes, factors, and multiples to guide play. Teachers reported richer discussion and conceptual talk during 2v2. However, 2v2 also introduced challenges: Game Management (311 vs. 223), Emotional Tone (70 vs. 37), and Off-Topic Talk (47 vs. 16) all increased, signaling coordination demands and uneven participation. Student reflections preferred 2v2 (≈65%), citing teamwork, while 1v1 supporters valued autonomy. We conclude that 2v2 competition fosters co-constructed reasoning, yet its success depends on intentional facilitation.
References
Abdul Jabbar, A. I., & Felicia, P. (2015). Gameplay Engagement and Learning in Game-Based Learning: A Systematic Review. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 740-779. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315577210
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2025). Australian curriculum: Mathematics v9.0. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/curriculum-information/understand-this-learning-area/mathematics
Bragg, L. A. (2012b). The effect of mathematical games on on-task behaviours in the primary classroom. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(4), 385–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-012-0045-4
Bragg, L. (2007). Students’ conflicting attitudes towards games as a vehicle for learning mathematics: A methodological dilemma. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 19(1), 29-44.
Bragg, L. A. (2006a). The impact of mathematical games on learning, attitudes, and behaviours (Doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University).
Cagiltay, N. E., Ozcelik, E., & Ozcelik, N. S. (2015). The effect of competition on learning in games. Computers & Education, 87, 35-41.
Çelik, H. C. (2020). The effect of modelling, collaborative and game-based learning on the geometry success of third-grade students. Education and Information Technologies, 25(1), 449-469.
Cichy, I., Kaczmarczyk, M., Wawrzyniak, S., Kruszwicka, A., Przybyla, T., Klichowski, M., & Rokita, A. (2020). Participating in physical classes using Eduball stimulates acquisition of mathematical knowledge and skills by primary school students. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2194. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.02194
Clements, D. (1997). (Mis?) Constructing Constructivism. Teaching Children Mathematics. 4. 10.5951/TCM.4.4.0198.
Cramer, J. (2019). Games as a means of motivating more students to participate in argumentation. In Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (No. 10). Freudenthal Group; Freudenthal Institute; ERME.
Delahunty, C., & Roche, A. (2024). Students’ perceptions of their learning from different ways of playing mathematical games. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 29, 4–9.
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by ‘collaborative learning’? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–19). Elsevier. https://telearn.hal.science/hal-00190240v1
Dondio, P., Gusev, V., & Rocha, M. (2023). Do games reduce maths anxiety? A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 194, 104650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104650
Ernest, P. (1986). Games: A rationale for their use in the teaching of mathematics in school. Mathematics in School, 15(1), 2–5. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30216298
Fosnot, C. T. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice, 2(1), 8-33.
Gough, J. (1999). Playing mathematical games: When is a game not a game? Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 4(2), 12–15.
Heshmati, S., Kersting, N., & Sutton, T. (2018). Opportunities and challenges of implementing instructional games in mathematics classrooms: Examining the quality of teacher–student interactions during the Cover-up and Un-cover games. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(4), 777–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9789-8
Kacmaz, G., & Dubé, A. K. (2021). Examining pedagogical approaches and types of mathematics knowledge in educational games: A meta-analysis and critical review. Educational Research Review, 100428.
Ke, F., & Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: cooperative or not? British journal of educational technology, 38(2), 249-259.
Kickmeier-Rust, M., & Niggli, C. (2023). The effects of gamifying mathematics lessons at high school level. European Conference on Games Based Learning, 17(1), 319–326. https://doi.org/10.34190/ecgbl.17.1.1593
Klooger, M., Russo, J., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2026). More than just playing: Investigating teacher–student interactions in game-based mathematics lessons. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2026.2625807
Klooger, M., Russo, J., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2025). An instructional model to support planning and teaching with educationally rich mathematical games. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2025.2530968
Loong, E., Vale, C., Widjaja, W., Herbert, S., Bragg, L. A., & Davidson, A. (2018). Developing a Rubric for Assessing Mathematical Reasoning: A Design-Based Research Study in Primary Classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., Spence, J. C., Poulsen, C., Chambers, B., & d’Apollonia, S. (1996). Within-class grouping: A meta-analysis. Review of educational research, 66(4), 423-458. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170650
McFeetors, J., & Palfy, C. (2018). Educative experiences in a game’s context: Supporting emerging reasoning in elementary school mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 18(4), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-018-0033-9
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. NCTM: Reston, VA.
Nurnberger-Haag, J., Wernet, J. L., & Benjamin, J. I. (2023). Gameplay in perspective: Applications of a conceptual framework to analyze features of mathematics classroom games in consideration of students’ experiences. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 11(1), 267–303. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2328
Oldfield, B. J. (1991). Games in the learning of mathematics—Part 1: Classification. Mathematics in School, 20(1), 41–43.
Onslow, B. (1990). Overcoming conceptual obstacles: The qualified use of a game. School Science and Mathematics, 90(7), 581-92.
Pintér, K. (2010). Creating games from mathematical problems. PRIMUS, 21(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970902889919
Plass, J. L., O’Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050–1066. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032688
Prensky, M. (2001). Fun, play and games: What makes games engaging. Digital game-based learning, 5(1), 5-31.
Putra, Z. H., Putri, R. I. I., & den Hertog, J. (2011). Supporting First Grade Students Learning Number Facts up to 10 Using a Parrot Game. Indonesian Mathematical Society Journal on Mathematics Education, 2(2), 163-172.
Russo, J. (2018). Exploring multiplication: Three-in-a-Row Lucky Numbers. Teaching Children Mathematics, 24(6), 378.
Russo, J. (2016). Doubles Bingo. Teaching children mathematics, 23(1), 56. https://doi.org/10.5951/teacchilmath.23.1.0056
Russo, J., Bragg, L., Russo, T., & Minas, M. (2023). Identifying the Characteristics of Non-Digital Mathematical Games Most Valued by Educators. Education Sciences, 13(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13010030
Russo, J., Klooger, M., & Russo, T. (2022). Let’s play: Roll and allocate games. Prime Number, 37(3), 16-18.
Russo, J., Roche, A., Russo, T., & Kalogeropoulos, P. (2024). Examining primary school educators’ preferences for using digital versus non-digital games to support mathematics instruction. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2361699
Russo, J., & Russo, T. (2025). What’s in a Name? Should we be Calling it a Game? Rethinking Choice, Strategy, and Mathematical Integrity. Mathematics Teacher Education & Development, 27(2), 1-11. Retrieved from https://mted.merga.net.au/index.php/mted/article/view/1341
Russo, J., & Russo, T. (2020). Transforming mathematical games into investigations. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 25(2), 14–19.
Russo, J., Russo, T., & Bragg, L. A. (2021). Why that game? Factors primary school teachers consider when selecting which games to play in their mathematics classrooms. In Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA) Conference Proceedings (pp. 337–344). MERGA.
Skemp, R. R. (1986). The Psychology of Learning Mathematics (Second Edition). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Stacey, K., & MacGregor, M. (2022). As Though the Thinking is Out There on the Table. In D. Tall & M. Thomas (Eds.), Intelligence, Learning and Understanding in Mathematics: A Tribute to Richard Skemp (pp. 219–233).
Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: From research to practice. Mathematics teaching in the middle school, 3(4), 268-275.
Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving mathematics teaching. Educational leadership, 61(5), 12-17.
ter Vrugte, J., de Jong, T., Vandercruysse, S., Wouters, P., van Oostendorp, H., & Elen, J. (2015). How competition and heterogeneous collaboration interact in prevocational game-based mathematics education. Computers & Education, 89, 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.017
Trakulphadetkrai, N. V. (2024, July). Children co-creating mathematical story picture books as a potential strategy to foster mathematical talk: The development of the coding framework. Paper presented at the 15th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-15), Sydney, Australia.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material.
The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in the journal, the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.
Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
