Competition, Collaboration, and Learning Mathematics through Games

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.