MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408596884 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n4p270

Gamified Learning: Teaching Coding and Creative Thinking with Minecraft: Education Edition (M:EE) for Thai Students

2025· article· en· W4408596884 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thanapat Sripan, Komgrit Manyam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMathematics educationCoding (social sciences)Creative thinkingPedagogyCritical thinkingCreativitySociologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the challenges and effectiveness of game-based learning (GBL) through Minecraft: Education Edition (M:EE) in teaching coding and fostering creative thinking among fourth-grade students in Thailand. Conducted over eight weeks in 2023 at a laboratory school in Bangkok, the study involved 284 students. Data was gathered using scoring rubrics and reflection questionnaires to assess the impact on students’ coding and creative thinking skills. The results indicated that students reached high levels of performance in both areas, although more complex coding tasks posed challenges. Notably, performance was consistent across genders, but students who struggled with navigating the platform tended to score lower. Several challenges were identified, including limited English proficiency, platform instability, and difficulties in mouse and keyboard usage. Despite these challenges, students expressed high levels of enjoyment, particularly in collaborating on creative projects. They also demonstrated improvements in teamwork, problem-solving, and communication skills. The immersive and interactive nature of M:EE was well-received, fostering engagement and collaboration among the students. While the overall results suggest that M:EE is an effective tool for enhancing coding and creative thinking skills in young learners, the study also highlights areas for improvement. Technical difficulties, such as platform instability, and the need for additional support for students struggling with the platform, were noted as areas requiring attention. Furthermore, the study suggests that future research could explore ways to integrate additional scaffolding and support to address the challenges encountered by students with limited English proficiency and those less familiar with digital tools. Overall, the study affirms the potential of M:EE as a valuable tool in GBL for young learners, with further refinement of pedagogical approaches recommended to enhance its effectiveness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207