Research and Community Informed Practise Assessment 3 - Reflective Portfolio
As part of my digital and collaborative course through Unitec and Mind Lab, I am developing a reflective portfolio to identify and engage with relevant communities in the formation of specific inquiry questions around gamification in developing authentic learning in New Zealand science education. I will also address the potential impact of the findings.
Research Topic and Inquiry Question(s) with Justification.
The overall research project involved the potential role of gamification in developing authentic learning and assessment in New Zealand science education. The reason I have chosen this particular research area is many fold.
One on one digital devices were introduced to our school in 2011 for year 7 and has moved up one year level each following year. As a school we started to explore strategies to engage students in their daily learning. I observed from my junior students learning behaviors that they were very engaged in playing online games in class.
The research of Rachel Bolstad at the New Zealand Centre of Educational Research has explored the potential of games and for allowing teachers to think differently on how we approach learning.
The research of Rachel Bolstad at the New Zealand Centre of Educational Research has explored the potential of games and for allowing teachers to think differently on how we approach learning.
The commercial development of electronic games which are both engaging and immersive provides a huge opportunity for developing 21st century skills (Bolstad, 2012) within the classroom.
Her research suggests students are immersed in these commercial games through being motivated and engaged through exploration because of:
“Enjoyment is the reason for players to begin, sustain, and repeat exposure to digital games.”
http://elearning.tki.org.nz/Teaching/Pedagogy/Game-based-learning
If these factors could be incorporated in authentic scientific learning environments and narratives, then the possibility of increasing student involvement and success in science education arises.
If these factors could be incorporated in authentic scientific learning environments and narratives, then the possibility of increasing student involvement and success in science education arises.
But is the best approach using gamification or game based learning?
The distinction between the above two concepts is unclear and the difference is important. Medved (2011) gives the following definition:
"Gamification is turning the learning process as a whole into a game, while Games-Based Learning (GBL) is using a game as part of the learning process".
http://blog.capterra.com/gamification-vs-games-based-learning/
This is an important distinction and is the focus of my inquiry question.
Does gamification or game based learning of a scientific concept(s) increase student outcomes and/or engagement?
Incorporation of Kaupapa Maori and Te Noho Kotahitanga.
The development of inquiry questions will use the metaphor of the early life-cycle of the kōwhai tree He Ua Kōwhai, outlined by Hutchings et al (2012) in order to include a kaupapa Māori framework.
My identity, subjectivity, and inquiry goal is at the middle of the framework because it is my individual work that I will critically question in order to meet the aims of the inquiry. Everyone belongs to different communities which express themselves differently. We gain strength and are challenged in the process of “building relationships” through inquiry. My line of inquiry needs to be based on ensuring that my position, within science education is contributing to the well being of various communities.
Hutchings et al (2012) defines "Te Kākano is the the seed germinating in the earth"(p. 6). This requires good soil, light and water conditions for the seed to start growing. My inquiry will be based on previous research. The ideas are grounded within consultation with communities. The inquiry questions are framed in ways that enhance and uphold the communities. The views of the communities are incorporated with the inquiry not being imposed onto them. I am thinking about the multiple ways learning emerges, and how they can play a significant part in my thinking through ways of engaging with communities, and analyzing research issues.
Hutchings et al (2012) also defines "Te Tupu- The roots grow outwards from the seed and growth begins. A central growing stem emerges and then new shoots eventually branch outwards". Flowers drop kākano and await the next cycle of growth"(p. 6). The feedback from communities that ground our inquiry develop the relationships. Creating ways that communities can express their everyday experiences of education, can inform our thinking and work. The inquiry questions are connected to the every-day questions and aspirations that the communities have about education. Te Tupu illustrates the growth of certain educational issues that the communities are concerned about. As I become familiar with these issues, my inquiry is strengthened and I can find ways of ensuring my inquiry speaks to and with the diverse communities we work with.
http://www.nzcer.org.nz/system/files/HeUaKowhai_JHutchings_ABarnes%20NZCER%2023Jan13.pdf
Definitions of Communities involved in the Inquiry.
In this project, I will be engaging with two communities. The first community is the teachers at my school who are involved with junior science. I have chosen this community as they will be directly discussing with them what concepts the learners are struggling with and using their historical knowledge to target scientific concepts at junior level that will incorporate game based learning and gamification. I am focusing on junior science as they have one to one access to digital technology in the form of ipads and can access educational games at school. This allows game based learning to be investigated more readily.
As I am working within the junior science cohort, the other community to be incorporated is the whānau of junior science students at my school. The reasoning behind this choice is that “A knowing whānau is a healthy whānau”. This community “see themselves” in the inquiry and see benefits for being involved. I see the students themselves as being incorporated within this community. As in Te Ao Māori the child and whānau are one in the same. Therefore, the views of the students will also be considered.
Additionally, this junior science cohort is particularly used to using digital technology and games and are familiar as a group with gaming. A large number of the students who are struggling with scientific concepts are described as 'easily distracted' and 'always off task and playing games in class and home'. It is thought, by choosing this community of students they will benefit from such strategies.
Collection of Evidence.
Evidence for this inquiry project will come in many forms, It will involve interviews with junior science teachers, junior science students and whānau. In terms of the teachers this will be in the form of a focus group. The students and whānau will also be surveyed online allowing evidence to be obtained anonymously in order to compare to interview data where students may just want to give the 'right answer' in interviews. Additionally, the use of surveys will reduce whakama for Pasifika and Māori students and whānau.The survey is available online for parents:
http://surveynuts.com/surveys/take?id=38515&c=197813057RFRD
Also for online for students:
http://surveynuts.com/surveys/take?id=38515&c=197813057RFRE
In terms of feedback with regard to outcomes which will measure the success of each approach, this will be carried out with the same diagnostic, summative and formative assessments for all students and analyzing the differences/similarities.
Feedback from Communities
I sought feedback from students, year 9 science teachers and senior management in charge of curriculum in regard to the focus of the inquiry - Is games based learning or gamification more effective in increasing student achievement and/or engagement in science? A selection of the evidence of this feedback is below in the form of interviews.I have decided to engage with members of the chosen communities in terms of assessing the relevance of the project which lead onto refining the research question being asked. The reason I chose to focus on this part of the inquiry cycle was to create a sense of ownership of the project from the communities involved.
Mario - a year 9 science student
James - a year 9 science student
Mr Martin - Deputy Principal in Charge of Curriculum
From the feedback collected from staff and with whānau (including students) it was clear especially with staff and whānau that there was some ambiguity around the terms gamification and game based learning. However, most communities agreed that the project was relevant, especially as digital devices are now embedded into the junior curriculum. Also students especially wanted to help design the games being used for the game based learning aspect. The teachers were concerned in relation to motivation where gamification could demotivate those at the bottom end of the class. Additionally, they were also concerned that game based learning could lead to off task behavior. With this in mind, teachers suggested that it was not engagement that was critical, but that this engagement was connected to concrete learning outcomes.
This feedback proved invaluable, as in terms of the inquiry plan the game based learning was going to initially involve games already designed by others. However, due to feedback from the communities I will now incorporate student design input with teacher guidance in developing the digital games that will be used to develop the game based learning approach. This will allow students to develop further skills around coding, collaboration and game design and also make sure the game is directed to concepts that the teacher wishes to reinforce.
A number of students are familiar with Minecraft, so can act as mentors assisting the teacher(s) and other students in developing a game to teach a certain scientific concept.
The added advantage of using Minecraft is that elements of whanau input can be incorporated to personalize the learning for the class. Therefore, the evidence collection from whanau surveys will be further refined to allow this.
The concerns around competition in gamification are noted and this is one of the reasons the inquiry is being undertaken to see if the benefits of such game elements are outweighed by the negative aspects of such an approach. Also, will such an approach extend those students who are struggling in a present model based on teaching to those students with average ability. So one of the possible spin offs is do either approaches allow differentiation to be improved or at least in the case of competition is this detrimental to those already lacking confidence?
So from the feedback the inquiry question was refined to: Does gamification or game based learning using Mindcraft of a scientific concept(s) increase student outcomes in achieving the learning outcomes for that concept(s)?
Potential Impact of Findings
As the incorporation of games in education increases, more educators,
parents and students in New Zealand will be interested in understanding how
this new approach can make a difference in student learning, and whether it is
worth the effort to implement it. I plan to use this inquiry to inform my practice and help other teachers develop learning around games at my school.
To identify
whether a gamification or game based learning approach is more effective in teaching scientific concepts, I will carry out the investigation in two phases.
In the first phase, an
action research study and structured observation of gamification and game based learning using Minecraft of a scientific concept with two different classes of similar ability will be employed to:
- Critique and reflect on these practices.
- To find patterns and to identify possible factors such as teachers' skills and students' learning behaviors.
In the second phase, the possible factors identified as increasing outcomes will be used as explanatory
variables in a series of controlled studies. For example, if one possible
factor that leads to successful gamification is having levels of difficulty in a topic and you cannot move on till mastery of earlier levels, then
student understanding of a topic will be the independent variable. One level is represented by learning with levels of attainment.
In a randomly assigned group of junior students (Year 8 - 10), students are unable to move to the next topic until the previous one is mastered.
Another level is represented by learning where a topic is taught for a set time and then all students move on. So in another randomly assigned group, all students move from topic to topic whether they have mastered it or not. The dependent variables are formative
assessment scores, diagnostic scores and the differences between them, which are the quantitative measure of the success of
implementing the gamification approach. The qualitative measure of successful
implementation will be student and whanau perceptions, a survey or interview will be
conducted to find out their perceptions on the importance and the effect of
mastery levels on their experiences.
References:
Bolstad, R., Gilbert, J., McDowall, S., Bull, A., Boyd, S., & Hipkins, R.
(2012).Supporting future-oriented learning & teaching: A New Zealand
perspective. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.
Medved, J. P. (2011). Gamification vs Games-Based Learning: What’s the
Difference?. Retrieved August 29, 2015, from
http://blog.capterra.com/gamification-vs-games-based-learning/
New Zealand Council for Educational Research. (2012). Reflexivity
in Kaupapa Māori Research: “He Ua Kōwhai”. Retrieved August 29, 2015,
from
Te Keti Ipurangi. (2014). Game Based Learning. Retrieved
August 29, 2015, from http://elearning.tki.org.nz/Teaching/Pedagogy/Game-based-learning.
Comments
tony