The study emanated from initial attempts to determine whether two computer simulations used in teaching a college business course delivered a meaningful learning experience. This paper aims to investigate whether students' level of performance in the simulation game was due to the application of skill or largely a matter of “luck”.
Applying a method similar to that of Wellington et al., the study evaluated the consistency of performance across two different rounds of each simulation game. It also compared performance levels across both simulations, and examined the relationship between game performance and academic achievement.
The significant consistency between performance levels suggests that with respect to the simulations used in this study, the game score reflected the player's application of skill rather than reliance on “luck”. However, there is no significant relationship between game performance and academic achievement.
While this study is based on two specific games, other simulation users can use it as a yardstick to ascertain the educational value of the simulations that they use.
