What do students learn when collaboratively using a computer game in the study of historical disease epidemics, and why?

Games and Culture

Volumn 6, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 513-537

  Kennedy Clark, Shannon ^a   Thompson, Kate ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

computer supported collaborative learning (CSCL); educational games; historical inquiry; virtual environments; visualization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857858681     PISSN: 15554120     EISSN: 15554139     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1555412011431361     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. Bailenson J. N., Yee N., Blascovich J., Beall A. C., Lundblad N., Jin M. The use of immersive virtual reality in the learning sciences: Digital transformations of teachers, students, and social context. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2008; 17: 102-141
2. Baker M., de Vries E., Lund K., Quignard M.. Paper presented at the Proceedings of EuroCSCL 2001-European Perspectives on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning; 2001 Maastricht; 2001.
3. Banerjee M. B., Capozzoli M., McSweeney L., Sinha D. Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. The Canadian Journal of Statistics. 1999; 27: 3-23
4. Barab S. A., Dodge T., Ingram-Goble A., Volk C., Peppler K., Pettyjohn P., Solomou M. Interactive storytelling. Lurgel I. A. Zagalo N. Petta P., ed. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer Berlin; 2009: 332-335.
5. Barab S. A., Dodge T., Thomas M. K., Jackson C., Tuzun H. Our designs and the social agendas they carry. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2007; 16: 263-305
6. Barab S. A., Hay K. E., Duffy T. M. Grounded constructions and how technology can help. TechTrends. 1998; 43: 15-23
7. Barab S. A., Thomas M., Dodge T., Carteaux R., Tuzun H. Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology, Research and Development. 2005; 53: 86-107
8. Barnett M., Yamagata-Lynch L., Keating T., Barab S. A., Hay K. E. Using virtual reality computer models to support student understanding of astronomical concepts. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching. 2005; 24: 333-356
9. Beatty K., Nunan D. Computer-mediated collaborative learning. System. 2004; 32: 165-183
10. Beavis C., Charles C. Would the 'real' girl gamer please stand up? Gender, LAN cafes and the reformulation of the 'girl' gamer. Gender and Education. 2007; 19: 691-705
11. Birchfield D., Megowan-Romanowicz C. Earth science learning in SMALLab: A design experiment for mixed reality. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. 2009; 4: 403-421
12. Bodemer D., Ploetzner R., Bruchmuller K., Hacker S. Supporting learning with interactive multimedia through active integration of representations. Instructional Science. 2005; 33: 73-95
13. Bodemer D., Ploetzner R., Feuerlein I., Spada H. The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction. 2004; 14: 325-341
14. Brack C., Elliott K., Stapleton D.. Paper presented at the 21st ASCILITE Conference; 2004 Perth, WA; 2004.
15. Byrne M. D., Catrambone R., Stasko J. T. Evaluating animations as student aids in learning computer algorithms. Computers & Education. 1999; 33: 253-278
16. Colburn A. Learning science beyond the classroom. Science Teacher. 2008; 75: 10
17. Dede C., Clarke J., Ketelhut D. J., Nelson B., Bowman C.. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association; 2005; 2005.
18. de Jong T., van Jooligen W. R. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research. 1998; 68: 179-201
19. Gillespie R. Manufacturing knowledge: A history of the hawthorne experiments. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1991:
20. Gillies R. M. Structuring cooperative group work in classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research. 2003; 39: 35-49
21. Hayman L. New and old technologies-the great wall of China. ETHOS. 2007; 15: 24-25
22. Howard B. C., McGee S., Shin N., Shia R. The triarchic theory of intelligence and computer-based inquiry learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development. 2001; 49: 49-69
23. Jacobson M. J., Lee B. K., Hong Lim S., Hua Low S.. Paper presented at the 2008 American Educational Association Conference; 2008 New York; 2008.
24. Jarvela S., Veermans M., Leinonen P. Investigating student engagement in computer-supported inquiry: A process-oriented analysis. Social Psychology in Education. 2008; 11: 299-322
25. Jeong H., Chi M. T. H. Knowledge convergence and collaborative learning. Instructional Science. 2007; 35: 287-315
26. Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. Learning together and alone: Overview and meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. 2002; 22: 95-105
27. Kafai Y. B., Ching C. C. Affordances of collaborative software design planning for elementary students' science talk. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2001; 10: 323-363
28. Kafai Y. B., Quintero M., Feldon D. Investigating the 'Why' in whypox: Casual and systematic explorations of virtual epidemics. Games & Culture. n.d; 5: 116
29. Kapur M., Kinzer C. K. Productive failure in CSCL groups. International Journal of Computer-Supported Learning. 2009; 4: 21-46
30. Kennedy-Clark S.. Paper presented at the Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines 4th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-TEL 2009; 2009 Nice, France; 2009.
31. Kennedy-Clark S., Thompson K.. Paper presented at the Connecting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to Policy and Practice: CSCL2011 Conference Proceedings; 2011 Hong Kong; 2011.
32. Kennedy-Clark S., Thompson K., Richards D.. Paper presented at the Connecting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to Policy and Practice: CSCL2011 Conference Proceedings; 2011 Hong Kong; 2011.
33. Ketelhut D. J., Clarke J., Nelson B. Designs for learning environments of the future. Jacobson M. J. Reimann P., ed. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media; 2010: 89-110.
34. Ketelhut D. J., Dede C., Clarke J., Nelson B.. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association; 2006; 2006.
35. Kim P., Olarciregui C. The effects of a concept map-based information display in an electronic portfolio system on information processing and retention in a fifth-grade science class covering the Earth's atmosphere. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2008; 39: 700-714
36. Kleinermann F., De Troyer O., Creelle C., Pellens B. 13th international conference on virtual systems & multimedia. Wyeld T. G. Kenderline S. Docherty M., ed. Brisbane, Australia: Springer; 2007: 50-62.
37. Kramarski B. Making sense of graphs: Does metacognitive instruction make a difference on students' mathematical conceptions and alternative conceptions?. Learning and Instruction. 2004; 14: 593-619
38. Larkin J. H., Simon H. A. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth 10 000 wrods. Cognitive Sciences. 1987; 11: 65-99
39. Lee J. K. Digital history in the history/social studies classroom. History Teacher. 2002; 35: 503-517
40. Lim B. R. Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the web. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2004; 35: 627-643
41. Lim C. P. Visualisation and animation in a CAL package: Anchors or misconceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2001; 17: 206-216
42. Lowe R. K. Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learning and Instruction. 2003; 13: 157-176
43. Lowe R. K. Interrogation of a dynamic visualisation during learning. Journal of Learning and Instruction. 2004; 14: 257-274
44. Maloney J., Simon S. Mapping children's discussions of evidence in science to assess collaboration and argumentation. International Journal of Science Education. 2006; 28: 1817-1841
45. Mandernach B. J. The evolution of online course development: From basics to bells and back again. Online Classroom, 2. 2005;: 7-8
46. Mayer R. E., Dow G. T., Mayer S. Multimedia learning in an interactive self-explaining environment: What works in the design of agent-based microworlds?. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2003; 95: 806-813
47. Mazur J., Lio C.. Paper presented at the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2004 Vienna, Austria; 2004.
48. Mesch D., Johnson D. W., Johnson R. Impact of positive interdependence and academic group contingencies on achievement. Journal of Social Psychology. 1988; 128: 345-352
49. Muller D. A., Kester J. L., Sharma M. D. Coherence or interest: Which is most important in online multimedia learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology. 2008; 24: 211-221
50. Oliveira A. W., Sadler T. D. Interactive patterns and conceptual convergence during student collaborations in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2008; 45 (5). 634-658
51. Poole M. S., Holmes M. E. Decision development in computer/assisted group decision making. Human Communication Research. 1995; 22: 90-127
52. Puntambekar S., Goldstein J. Effect of visual representation of the conceptual structure of the domain on science learning and navigation in a hypertext environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia. 2007; 16: 429-459
53. Rana S., Dykes J. A framework for augmenting the visualisation of dynamic rastor surfaces. Information Visualisation. 2003; 2: 126-139
54. Reimann P., Thompson K. Model-based approaches to learning: Using systems models and simulations to improve understanding and problem solving in complex domains. Blumschein P. Stroebel J. Hung W. Jonassen D., ed. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense; 2009:
55. Richards D. Is interactivity actually important?. 2006:
56. Rohr M., Reimann P. Learning with multiple representations. van Someren M. W. Reimann P. Boshuizen H. P. A. Jong T. de, ed. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science Ltd; 1998: 41-66.
57. Roschelle J. Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 1992; 2: 235-276
58. Roth W.-M. Art and artifact of children's designing: A situated cognition perspective. The Journal of the Learning Sciences. 1996; 5: 129-166
59. Savelsbergh E. R., de Jong T., Ferguson-Hessler M. G. M. Learning with multiple representations. van Someren M. W. Reimann P. Boshuizen H. P. A. Jong T. de, ed. Oxford, England: Elsevier Science Ltd; 1998: 263-282.
60. Schwartz D. L., Bransford J. D. A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction. 1998; 16: 475-522
61. Shaffer D. W., Gee J. P. Technology-based assessments for 21st century skills: Theoretical and practical implications from modern research. Mayrath M. Robinson D. Clarke-Midura J., ed. Charlotte, NC: Information Age; in press:
62. Squire K. D. From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educational Researcher. 2006; 35: 19-29
63. Squire K. D. Games, learning, and society: Building a field. Educational Technology. 2007; September-October, 4: 51-54
64. Steinberg R. N. Computers in teaching science: To simulate or not to simulate. American Journal of Physics. 2000; 68: S37 - S41
65. Suthers D. D., Hundhausen C. D. An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2003; 12: 183-218
66. Taylor T. L. Multiple pleasures: Women and online gaming. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Technologies. 2003; 9: 21-46
67. Thompson K.. Paper presented at the The 26th international conference of the system dynamics society; 2008a Athens; 2008a.
68. Thompson K. The value of multiple representations for learning about complex systems. 2008b:
69. Thompson K., Kennedy-Clark S., Markauskaite L., Southavilay V.. Paper presented at the Connecting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning to Policy and Practice: CSCL2011 Conference Proceedings; 2011 Hong Kong; 2011.
70. Tversky B., Bauer Morrison J., Betrancourt M. Animation: Can it facilitate?. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 2002; 57: 247-262
71. Veermans M., Lallimo J., Hakkarainen K. Patterns of guidance in inquiry learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research. 2005; 16: 179-194
72. Waight N., Abd-El-Khalick F. From scientific practice to high school science classrooms: Transfer of scientific technologies and realizations of authentic inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2011; 48: 37-70
73. Waller D., Greenauer N. The role of body-based sensory information in the acquisition of enduring spatial representations. Psychological Research. 2007; 71: 322-332
74. Wang X. C., Hinn D. M., Kanfer A. G. Potential of computer-supported collaborative learning for learners with different learning styles. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. 2001; 34: 75-85
75. Watson W. R., Mong C. J., Harris C. A. A case study of the in-class use of a video game for teaching high school history. Computers & Education. 2011; 56: 466-474
76. Zacharia Z., Anderson R. O. The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students' conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics. 2003; 71: 618-629