Prediction and explanation as design mechanics in conceptually integrated digital games to help players articulate the tacit understandings they build through game play

Games, Learning, and Society: Learning and Meaning in the Digital Age

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 279-305

  Clark, Douglas B ^a   Martinez Garza, Mario ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880010767     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139031127.023     Document Type: Chapter

References (92)

1. Anderson, J. (2009). Real Conversations in Virtual Worlds: The Impact of Student Conversations on Understanding Science Knowledge in Elementary Classrooms. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, April 13–17, 2009, San Diego, CA.
2. Anderson, J., & Barnett, M. (2011). Using Video Games to Support Pre-Service Elementary Teachers Learning of Basic Physics Principles. Journal of science education and technology, 20 (4), 347–62.
3. Annetta, L. A., Minogue, J., Holmes, S. Y., & Cheng, M.-T. (2009). Investigating the Impact of Video Games on High School Students' Engagement and Learning about Genetics. Computers and Education, 53 (1), 74–85.
4. Atkinson, R. K., Renkl, A., & Merrill, M. M. (2003). Transitioning from Studying Examples to Solving Problems: Effects of Self-Explaining Prompts and Fading Worked-Out Example Steps. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 774–83.
5. Baird, J. R., and Mitchell, I. J. (eds) (1986). Improving the quality of teaching and learning: An Australian case study – The PEEL project. Melbourne, Australia: Monash University Press.
6. Barab, S. A., Gresali, M. S., & Ingram-Goble, A. (forthcoming). Transformational Play: Using Games to Position Person, Content, and Context. Educational Researcher.
7. Barab, S. A., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007a). Relating Narrative, Inquiry, and Inscriptions: A Framework for Socio-Scientific Inquiry. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16 (1), 59–82.
8. Barab, S. A., Scott, B., Siyahhan, S., Goldstone, R., Ingram-Goble, A., Zuiker, S., & Warrant, S. (2009). Transformational Play as a Curricular Scaffold: Using Videogames to Support Science Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 305–20.
9. Barab, S. A., Zuiker, S., Warren, S., Hickey, D., Ingram-Goble, A., Kwon, E-J., et al. (2007b). Situationally Embodied Curriculum: Relating Formalisms and Contexts. Science Education, 91 (5), 750–82.
10. Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in Self-Explanation and Self-Regulation Strategies: Investigating the Effects of Knowledge Acquisition Activities on Problem Solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13 (2), 221–52.
11. Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., & Vye, N. (2005). Learning by Teaching: A New Agent Paradigm for Educational Software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, 363–92.
12. Borges, A. T., Tecnico, C., & Gilbert, J. K. (1998). Models of Magnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 20 (3), 361.
13. Champagne, A. B., Gunstone, R. F., & Klopfer, L. E. (1985). Effecting Changes in Cognitive Structures Among Physics Students. In L. H. T. West and A. L. Pines (eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
14. Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Anderson, J. H. (1980). Factors Influencing the Learning of Classical Mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48 (12), 1074–9.
15. Champagne, A. B., Klopfer, L. E., & Gunstone, R. F. (1982). Cognitive Research and the Design of Science Instruction. Educational Psychologist, 17 (1), 31.
16. Chang, H.-Y. (2009). Use of Critique to Enhance Learning with an Interactive Molecular Visualization of Thermal Conductivity. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), 2009, Garden Grove, CA.
17. Chang, H.-Y., & Linn, M. C. (submitted). Learning from a Molecular Visualization: Observe, Interact or Critique? Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
18. Chang, H.-Y., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. (2010). The Impact of Designing and Evaluating Molecular Animations on How Well Middle School Students Understand the Particulate Nature of Matter. Science Education, 94 (1), 73–94.
19. Chang, H.-Y., & Tsai, K. C. (2010, June). Investigating the Role of Physical and Virtual Experiments in Developing Integrated Understanding of Thermal Conductivity and Equilibrium. Paper presented at the symposium “Using Visualization to Link Abstract Science and Everyday Experience,” International Conference for the Learning Sciences, 2010.
20. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Selfexplanations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems. Cognitive Science, 13 (2), 145–82. DOI: 10.1016/0364-0213(89)90002-5
21. Chi, M. T. H., & VanLehn, K. A. (forthcoming). The Content of Physics Self-Explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences.
22. Clark, D. B. (2006). Longitudinal Conceptual Change in Students' Understanding of Thermal Equilibrium: An Examination of the Process of Conceptual Restructuring. Cognition and Instruction, 24 (4), 467–563.
23. Clark, D. B., D'Angelo, C., & Schleigh S. (forthcoming). Multinational Comparison of Students' Knowledge Structure Coherence. Journal of the Learning Sciences.
24. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., D'Angelo, C. M., & Menekse, M. (2009a). Integrating Critique to Support Learning about Physics in Video Games. Poster presented as part of a structured session at the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST) 2009 Meeting, Garden Grove, CA.
25. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., D'Angelo, C. M., Slack, K., & Martinez-Garza, M. (2010a). SURGE: Integrating Vygotsky's Spontaneous and Instructed Concepts in a Digital Game. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 384–5), Chicago, IL.
26. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., D'Angelo, C. M., Slack, K., & Martinez-Garza, M. (forthcoming). SURGE: Exploration and Inquiry-Related Learning About Mechanics in a Digital Game. Journal of Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning.
27. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., Sengupta, P., & D'Angelo, C. M. (2009b). Rethinking Science Learning Through Digital Games and Simulations: Genres, Examples, and Evidence. Invited topic paper presented at the National Academies Board on Science Education Workshop on Learning Science: Computer Games, Simulations, and Education. Washington, DC.
28. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., D'Angelo, C. M., Slack, K., Martinez-Garza, M., & Menekse, M. (2010b). SURGE: Assessing students' intuitive and formalized understandings about kinematics and Newtonian mechanics through immersive game play. Paper presented as part of a structured poster session at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2010 Meeting, Denver, CO.
29. Clark, D. B., Sampson, V. D., Chang, H., Zhang, H., Tate, E., & Schwendimann, B. (2011). Research on Critique and Argumentation from the Technology Enhanced Learning in Science Center. In M. Khine (ed.) Perspectives on scientific argumentation: Theory, practice and research (pp. 157–200). Amsterdam: Springer.
30. Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2005). Making Learning Meaningful: An Exploratory Study of Using Multi-User Environments (Muves) in Middle School Science. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Montreal, Canada.
31. Cosgrove, M., and Osborne, R. (1985). Lesson Frameworks for Changing Children's Ideas. In R. Osborne & P. Freyberg (eds.), Learning in science: The implications of children's science (pp. 101–111). Boston: Heinemann.
32. D'Angelo, C. M. (2010). Scaffolding vector representations for student learning inside a physics game. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Arizona State University.
33. D'Angelo, C. M., & Clark, D. B. (forthcoming). Scaffolding Vector Representations for Student Learning Inside a Physics Game.
34. D'Angelo, C. M., Clark, D. B., Nelson, B. C., Slack, K., & Menekse, M. (2009). The Effect of Vector Representations on Students' Understanding of Motion. Poster presented at the Physics Education Research Conference (PERC)/American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) 2009 Meeting. Ann Arbor, MI.
35. Dede, C., & Ketelhut, D. J. (2003). Designing for Motivation and Usability in a Museum-Based Multi-User Virtual Environment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference, Chicago, IL.
36. Dieterle, E. (2009). Neomillennial learning styles and River City. Children, Youth and Environments, 19 (1), 245–278.
37. diSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an Epistemology of Physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10 (2 & 3), 105–225.
38. diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N., & Esterly, J. (2004). Coherence versus Fragmentation in the Development of the Concept of Force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843–900.
39. Galas, C. (2006). Why Whyville? Learning and Leading with Technology, 34 (6), 30–3.
40. Gee, J. P. (2003 /2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
41. Grant, P., Johnson, L., & Sanders, Y. (1990). Better links: Teaching strategies in the science classroom. Melbourne, Australia: STAV Publication.
42. Hausmann, R. G. M., & Chi, M. T. H. (2002). Can a Computer Interface Support Self-Explaining? International Journal of Cognitive Technology, 7, 4–14.
43. Hickey, D., Ingram-Goble, A., & Jameson, E. (2009). Designing Assessments and Assessing Designs in Virtual Educational Environments. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18 (2), 187–208. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9143-1
44. Hines, P. J., Jasny, B. R., & Merris, J. (2009). Adding a T to the Three R's. Science, 323, 53.
45. Holbert, N. R., & Wilensky, U. (2010). FormulaT Racing: Combining Gaming Culture and Intuitive Sense of Mechanism for Video Game Design. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2010), Vol. 2: Short papers, symposia, and selected abstracts (pp. 268–9). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
46. Hunt, E., & Minstrell, J. (1994). A Cognitive Approach to the Teaching of Physics. In K. McGilly (ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 51–74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
47. Kearney, M. (2004). Classroom Use of Multimedia-Supported Predict-Observe-Explain Tasks in a Social Constructivist Learning Environment. Research in Science Education, 34 (4), 427–53.
48. Kearney, M., & Treagust, D. (2000). An Investigation of the Classroom Use of Prediction-Observation-Explanation Computer Tasks Designed to Elicit and Promote Discussion of Students' Conceptions of Force and Motion. Presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
49. Ketelhut, D. J., Dede, C., Clarke, J., & Nelson, B. (2006). A Multi-User Virtual Environment for Building and Assessing Higher Order Inquiry Skills in Science.
50. Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., & Salen, K. (2009). Moving learning games forward. The Education Arcade, 1–58.
51. Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1995). A Predict-Observe-Explain Teaching Sequence for Learning about Students' Understanding of Heat and Expansion Liquids. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41.
52. Liew, C. W., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). The Effectiveness of predict-Observe-Explain Tasks in Diagnosing Students' Understanding of Science and in Identifying Their Levels of Achievement. Presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
53. Lin, X. D., & Lehman, J. (1999). Supporting Learning of Variable Control in a Computer-Based Biology Environment: Effects of Prompting College Students to Rel ect on Their Own Thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (7), 837–58.
54. Linn, M. C., Chang, H.-Y., Chiu, J. L., Zhang, Z., & McElhaney, K. (2011). Can Desirable Difficulties Overcome Deceptive Clarity in Scientific Visualizations? In A. S. Benjamin (ed.), Successful remembering and successful forgetting: a Festschrift in honor of Robert A. Bjork (pp. 235–58). New York: Psychology Press.
55. Masson, M. E. J., Bub, D. N., & Lalonde, C. E. (2010). Video-game training and naive reasoning about object motion. Applied Cognitive Psychology. DOI: 10.1002/acp.1658.
56. Mayer, R. E., & Johnson, C. I. (2010). Adding Instructional Features That Promote Learning in a Game-Like Environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42 (3), 241–65.
57. Mazur, E. (1996). Peer Instruction: A User's Manual (Pap/Dskt.). New York: Benjamin Cummings.
58. McQuiggan, S., Rowe, J., & Lester, J. (2008). The Effects of Empathetic Virtual Characters on Presence in Narrative-Centered Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the 2008 SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence, Italy, pp. 1511–20.
59. Moreno, R., & Valdez, A. (2005). Cognitive Load and Learning Effects of Having Students Organize Pictures and Words in Multimedia Environments: The Role of Student Interactivity and Feedback. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53 (3), 35–45.
60. Neulight, N., Kafai, Y. B., Kao, L., Foley, B., and Galas, C. (2007). Children's Participation in a Virtual Epidemic in the Science Classroom: Making Connections to Natural Infectious Diseases. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16 (1), 47–58.
61. Palmer, D. (1995). The POE in the Primary School: An Evaluation. Research in Science Education, 25 (3), 323–32.
62. Parnafes, O. (2007). What Does “Fast” Mean? Understanding the Physical World Through Computational Representations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16 (3) 415–50.
63. Parnafes, O., & diSessa, A. A. (2004). Relations Between Types of Reasoning and Computational Representations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9, 251–80.
64. Piaget, J. (1964). Development and Learning. In R. E. Ripple & V. N. Rockcastle (eds.), Piaget Rediscovered (pp. 7–20). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
65. Ranney, M., & Schank, P. (1998). Toward an Integration of the Social and the Scientific: Observing, Modeling, and Promoting the Explanatory Coherence of Reasoning. In S. Read & L. Miller (eds.), Connectionist models of social reasoning and social behavior (pp. 245–74). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
66. Rickey, D., & Stacy, A. M. (2000). The Role of Metacognition in Learning Chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77 (7), 915.
67. Rosenberg, S., Hammer, D., & Phelan, J. (2006). Multiple Epistemological Coherences in an Eighth-Grade Discussion of the Rock Cycle. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15 (2), 261–92.
68. Roy, M., & Chi, M. T. H. (2005). The Self-Explanation Principle in Multimedia Learning. In R. E. Mayer (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 271–86). New York: Cambridge University Press.
69. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals (illustrated edition). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
70. Scott, P. H., Asoko, H. M., and Driver, R. H. (1991) Teaching for Conceptual Change: A Review of Strategies. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niederer (eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies. Proceedings of an International Workshop, March 1991, IPN 131, ISBN 3-89088-062-2.
71. Searle, P., & Gunstone, R. (1990). Conceptual Change and Physics Instruction: A Longitudinal Study. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.
72. Shepardson, D. P., Moje, E. B., & Kennard-McClelland, A. M. (1994). The Impact of a Science Demonstration on Children's Understandings of Air Pressure. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (3), 243–58.
73. Squire, K. (2005). Toward a Theory of Games Literacy. Telemedium, 52 (1 –2), 9–15.
74. Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
75. Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad City Mystery: Developing Scientific Argumentation Skills with a Place-Based Augmented Reality Game on Handheld Computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16 (1) 5–29.
76. Squire, K., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented Reality Simulations on Handheld Computers. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16 (3), 371–413.
77. Squire, K., Barnett, M., Grant, J. M., & Higginbotham, T. (2004). Electromagnetism Supercharged! Learning Physics with Digital Simulation Games. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 513–20). Los Angeles: UCLA Press.
78. Squire, K., Jenkins, H., Holland, W., Miller, H., O'Driscoll, A., Tan, K. P., & Todd, K. (2003). Design Principles of Next-Generation Digital Gaming for Education. Educational Technology, 43 (5), 17–23.
79. Steinkuehler, C. (2007). Massively Multiplayer Online Gaming as a Constellation of Literacy Practices. eLearning, 4 (3) 297–318.
80. Steinkuehler, C., & Duncan, S. (2009). Scientific Habits of the Mind in Virtual Worlds. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 17 (6), 530–43.
81. Tao, P., & Gunstone, R. F. (1999). The Process of Conceptual Change in Force and Motion During Computer-Supported Physics Instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (7), 859–82.
82. Thagard, P. (1989). Explanatory Coherence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 435–66.
83. Thagard, P. (2005). Coherence, truth, and the development of scientific knowledge. Philosophy of Science, 74 (1), 28–47.
84. Thagard, P., & Verbeurgt, K. (1998). Coherence as Constraint Satisfaction. Cognitive Science, 22, 1–24.
85. Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2009). Why Virtual Worlds Can Matter. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1 (1), 37–49.
86. Turkle, S. (1997). Seeing Through Computers: Education in a Culture of Simulation. The American Prospect, 31 (March–April), 76–82.
87. Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in Pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24 (1), 1–71.
88. White, B. C., and Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, Modeling, and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students. Cognition and Instruction, 16 (1), 3–117.
89. White, B. C., and Frederiksen, J. R. (2000). Technological Tools and Instructional Approaches for Making Scientific Inquiry Accessible to All. In M. J. Jacobson and R. B. Kozma (eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 321–59). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
90. White, R. T. (1988). Learning science. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
91. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. New York: Routledge.
92. Wright, W. (2006). Dream Machines. Wired, 14(4). Available at http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.04/wright.html.