You are here:

Iterative Development Process for the Evidence Game: A scientific argumentation game for middle school students
PROCEEDINGS

, , ALTEC at the Center for Research on Learning, United States ; , , , University of Kansas, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Nashville, Tennessee, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-84-6 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

Evidence Game project will develop a game to increase middle school science students’ thinking related to scientific argumentation. These include: understanding a claim, judging the evidence about a claim, determining the reasoning applied to the claim, considering rebuttals, and making judgments. The game will provide experiences in implementing the specific components of argumentation and will culminate in a collaborative game providing for discourse about scientific reasoning. Recognizing that it may be difficult for middle school students to grasp what is “fun” about engaging in scientific argumentation, this session has to do with whether target game features incorporated into the design will maintain engagement and make the game fun. These features include focused goals, ease of learning, rapid and frequent responding, multiplayer competitive play, various achievement levels for individual players and teams, choice and autonomy, and increasingly challenging tasks.

Citation

Ault, M., Craig Hare, J., Bulgren, J., Scherrer, D. & Adams, D. (2011). Iterative Development Process for the Evidence Game: A scientific argumentation game for middle school students. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2011--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2037-2042). Nashville, Tennessee, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 25, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Bannan, B. (2009). The integrative learning design framework: An illustrated example from the domain of instructional technology. In T. Plomp& N. Nieveen (Eds.) An Introduction to Educational Design Research. SLO Netherlands Institute for Curriculum Development: Enschede, The Netherlands.
  2. Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21-24.
  3. Bulgren, J. & Ellis, J. (2010). Argumentation and Evaluation in Science Classes: Teaching with Toulmin. Center for Research on Learning, University of Kansas.
  4. Burnstein, D., & Kline, D. (1995). Road Warriors. As cited in C. Waters (2005). Evolution of Game genre for educational games. DiGRA 2005 (Long paper) Vancouver, Canada, Retrieved January 2009 from http://users.cs.dal.ca/~watters/publications/GameGenreDigra.docButcher, 2008
  5. Clark, D. (2007). Games, motivation, & Learning. Caspian Learning. United Kingdom: University of Sunderland. Csí kszentmihályi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  6. Faulkner, L. (2003). Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers. 35 (3), 379-383.Federation of American
  7. Scientists. (2006). Harnessing the power of videogames for learning. Retrieved May 29, 2009, from http://www.fas.org/gamesummit/Resources/Summit%20on%20Educational%20Games.pdf
  8. Martin, C.V. (2007). Usability of pictorial toy assembly instructions for young children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.
  9. Virzi, R.A. (1992). Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough? Human Factors, 34(4), 457-468.
  10. Von Ahn, L. & Dabbish, L. (2004). Labeling Images with a Computer Game. Proc. Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 04), ACM Press, pp. 319 – 326.
  11. Von Ahn, L. (2006). Games with a purpose. Computer, 29(6), pp. 92– 94.
  12. Von Ahn, L., Kedia, M., & Blum, M. (2006). Verbosity: A Game for Collecting Commonsense Facts. Proc. Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 06), ACM Press, pp. 75 – 78.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.