Learning Physics with Digital Game Simulations in Middle School Science

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 22, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 914-926

  Anderson, Janice L ^a   Barnett, Mike ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Electromagnetism; Electrostatics; Middle school science; Supercharged!; Video games

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887624320     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-013-9438-8     Document Type: Article

References (96)

1. American Association of Physics Teachers (2006) Physics first. College Park, MD: AAPT Press.
2. Andre T, Ding P (1991) Student misconceptions, declarative knowledge, stimulus conditions, and problem-solving in basic electricity. Contemp Educ Psychol 16(4): 303-313.
3. Annetta L (2008) Video games in education: why they should be used and how are they being used. Theory Into Pract 47(3): 229-239. doi: 10. 1080/00405840802153940.
4. Keating T, Barnett M, Barab SA, Hay KE (2002) The virtual solar system project: developing conceptual understanding of astronomical concepts through building three-dimensional computational models. J Sci Educ Technol 11(3): 261-275.
5. Anderson J (2010) Games and the development of students' civic engagement and ecological stewardship. In: Zemiansky P, Wilcox D (eds) Design and implication of educational games: theoretical and practical perspectives. IGI Global, New York, pp 189-205.
6. Anderson J, Barnett M (2011) Using video games to support pre-service teachers learning of basic physics principles. J Sci Educ Technol 20(4): 347-362.
7. Bagno E, Eylon BS (1997) From problem solving to a knowledge structure: an example from the domain of electromagnetism. Am J Phys 65(8): 726-736.
8. Barab S, Dodge T, Tuzun H, Job-Sluder K, Jackson C, Arici A, Job-Sluder L, Carteaux R Jr, Gilbertson J, Heiselt C (2007) The quest atlantis project: a socially-responsive play space for learning. In: Shelton BE, Wiley D (eds) The educational design and use of simulation computer games. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam, pp 159-186.
9. Barak M (2007) Transition from traditional ICT-enhanced learning environments in undergraduate chemistry courses. Comput Educ 48(1): 30-43.
10. Barnett M, Keating T, Barab SA, Hay KE (2000) Conceptual change through building three-dimensional models. In: Fishman BJ, O'Connor SF (eds) Proceedings of the international conference of the learning sciences. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp 134-142.
11. Belcher J (2003) From the mind's eye to 3D animation: teaching electromagnetism with learning technology. Last retrieved 1 Aug 2008 from http://www. wcer. wisc. edu/nise/cl1/ilt/solution/belchej2. htm.
12. Belcher J, Murray J, Zahn M (1999) Force field: using animation in teaching electromagnetism. Retrieved from http://web. mit. edu/user/j/b/jbelcher/www/NSF. html. August 2006.
13. Bereiter C, Scardamalia M (2010) Can children really create knowledge? Can J Learn Technol/La revue canadienne de l'apprentissage et de la technologie 36(1).
14. Bivall P, Ainsworth S, Tibell LAE (2011) Do haptic representations help complex molecular learning?. Sci Educ 95: 700-719.
15. Brown A (1992) Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. J Learn Sci 2(2): 141-178.
16. Bruckman A, Resnick M (1995) The MediaMOO project. Convergence Int J Res New Media Technol 1(1): 94-109.
17. Casperson JM, Linn MC (2006) Using visualization to teach electrostatics. Am J Phys 74(4): 316-323.
18. Chambers S, Andre T (1995) Are conceptual change approaches to learning science effective for everyone? Gender, prior subject matter, interest, and learning about electricity. Contemp Educ Psychol 20: 377-391.
19. Chi MTH, Feltovich PJ, Glaser R (1991) Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cogn Sci 5: 121-152.
20. Clark D, Nelson B, Sengupta P, D'Angelo C (2009) Rethinking science learning through digital games and simulations: genres, examples and evidence. Commissioned paper presented at the Learning Science: Computer Games, Simulations and Education Workshop. The Board on Science Education and The National Academies, Washington DC. Downloaded from http://www7. nationalacademies. org/bose/Clark_Gaming_CommissionedPaper. pdf.
21. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc, Hillsdale, NJ.
22. Collar BD, Scott MJ (2009) Effectiveness of using a video game to teach a course in mechanical engineering. Comput Educ 53(3): 900-912.
23. Computing Research Association (2006) Cyber-infrastructure for education and learning for the future: a vision and research agenda.
24. Cooper S, Perez L, Rainey D (2010) K-12 computational learning. Commun ACM 53(11): 27-29.
25. Cordova DI, Lepper MR (1996) Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. J Educ Psychol 88: 715-730.
26. Dede C, Salzman M, Loftin B (1996) ScienceSpace: Virtual realities for learning complex and abstract scientific concepts. Paper presented at the Proceedings of IEEE virtual reality annual international symposium, New York.
27. Dede C, Salzman M, Loftin RB, Sprague D (1999) Multisensory immersion as a modeling environment for learning complex scientific concepts. In: Feurzeig W, Roberts N (eds) Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education. Springer, New York.
28. Dede C, Clarke J, Ketelhut D, Nelson B, Bowman C (2005) Students motivation and learning of science in a multi-user virtual environment. Paper presented at the American educational research association annual conference.
29. diSessa A (2000) Changing minds. MIT Press, Cambridge.
30. Dumbleton T, Kirriemuir J (2006) Digital games and education. In: Rutter J, Bryce J (eds) Understanding digital games. Sage, London.
31. Edelson DC, Gordin DN, Pea RD (1999) Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. J Learn Sci 8(3-4): 391-450.
32. Erickson T (1993) Artificial realities as data visualization environments. In: Wexelblat A (ed) Virtual reality: applications and explorations. Academic Press Professional, New York, pp 1-22.
33. Forbus KD (1997) Using qualitative physics to create articulate educational software. IEEE Expert 12(3): 32-41.
34. Franco J, Ficherman I, Assis G, Zuffo M, Lopes R, Moreno M, Freitas M (2008) Using virtural reality, computer graphics, and web-based technology for developing knowledge and improving K-12 education. Paper presented at IADIS international conference ICT, society and human beings 2008.
35. Furio C, Guisasola J (1998) Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field. Sci Educ 82(4): 511-526.
36. Gee JP (2003a) What videogames have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
37. Gee JP (2003b) High score education: games, not school, are teaching kids to think. Wired. Accessed online May 2009 from http://www. wired. com/wired/archive/11. 05/view_pr. html.
38. Gee JP (2008) Learn and games. In: Salen K (ed) The ecology of games: connecting youth, games and learning The John D and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp 21-40.
39. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory. Aldine Publishing, Chicago, IL.
40. Gobert J, Buckley B (2000) Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. Int J Sci Educ 22(9): 891-894.
41. Gordin DN, Pea RD (1998) Prospects for scientific visualization as an educational technology. J Learn Sci 4(3): 249-279.
42. Guruswamy C, Somers MD, Hussey RG (1997) Students' understanding of the transfer of charge between conductors. Phys Educ 32: 91.
43. Hall R, Stevens R, Torralba T (2002) Disrupting representational infrastructure in conversations across disciplines. Mind Culture Activity 9(3): 179-210.
44. Hauptman H (2010) Enhancement of spatial thinking with virtual spaces 1. 0. Comput Educ 54(1): 123-135.
45. Hestenes D (2010) Modeling theory for math and science education. In: Lesh R, Galbraith P, Haines C, Hurford A (eds) Modeling students' mathematical modeling competencies. Springer Press, New York.
46. Hewitt PG (2002) Conceptual physics with practicing physics workbook. Benjamin Cummings, NY.
47. Hines PJ, Jasny BR, Mervis J (2009) Adding a T to the three R's. Science 323(5910): 53.
48. Jackson J, Dukerich L, Hestenes D (2008) Modeling instruction: an effective model for science education. Sci Educ 17(1): 10-17.
49. Kebritchi M, Hirumi A (2008) Examining the pedagogical foundations of modern computer games. Comput Educ 51(4): 1729-1743.
50. Kettelhut D, Dede C, Clarke J, Nelson B (2006) A multi-user virtual environment for building higher order inquiry skills in science. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
51. Kirriemuir J, McFarlane A (2004) Literature review in games and learning. Futurelab, UK.
52. Korakakis G, Pavlatou EA, Palyvos JA, Spyrellis N (2008) 3D visualization types in multimedia applications for science learning: a case study for 8th grade students in Greece. Comput Educ 52: 390-401.
53. Lehrer R, Schauble L (2006) Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In: Sawyer RK (ed) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 371-388.
54. Lehrer R, Horvath J, Schauble L (1994) Developing model based learning. Interact Learn Environ 4(3): 218-232.
55. Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
56. Lindgren R, Schwartz DL (2009) Spatial learning and computer simulations. Int J Sci Educ 31(3): 419-438.
57. Linn MC, Eylon B (2006) Science education: integrating views of learning and instruction. In: Alexander PA, Winne PH (eds) Handbook of educational psychology, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London.
58. Linn M, Lee HS, Tinker R, Husic F, Chiu J (2006) Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science 313: 1049-1050.
59. MacDonald K, Hannafin R (2003) Using web-based computer games to meet the demands of today's high stakes testing: a mixed methods inquiry. J Res Technol Educ 35(4): 459-472.
60. Maier P, Klinker G, Tönnis M (2009) Augmented reality for teaching spatial relations. Paper presented at the conference of the international journal of arts and sciences, p 200.
61. Masson MEJ, Bub DN, LaLonde CE (2011) Video-game training and naïve reasoning about object motion. Appl Cogn Psychol 25(1): 166-173.
62. Mayo M (2007) Games for science and engineering. Commun ACM 50(7): 31-35.
63. Mayo M (2009) Video games: a route to large scale STEM education? Science 323: 79.
64. McFarlane A, Sparrowhawk A, Heald Y (2002) Report on the educational use of games: an exploration by TEEM of the contribution which games can make to the education process. Cambridge.
65. Miller CS, Lehman JF, Koedinger KR (1999) Goals and learning in microworlds. Cogn Sci 23(3): 305-336.
66. Mohanty SD, Cantu S (2011) Teaching introductory undergraduate physics using commercial video games. Phys Educ 46: 570.
67. Mualem R, Eylon BS (2010) Junior high school physics: using a qualitative strategy for successful problem solving. J Res Sci Teach 47(9): 1098-1115.
68. National Research Council (NRC) (2011) Simulations and games in the classrooms. In: Honey MA, Hilton M (eds) Learning science through computer games and simulations. National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
69. NSF Task Force on Cyber-learning (2008) Fostering learning in the networked world: learning opportunity and challenge, a 21st century agenda for the National Science Foundation. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA.
70. Ochs W (1990) The importance of phase space dimension in the intermittency analysis of multihadron production. Phys Lett 247(1): 101.
71. Passmore C, Stewart J, Cartier J (2009) Model-based inquiry and school science: creating connections. School Sci Math 109(7): 394-402.
72. Penner DE, Lehrer R, Schauble L (1998) From physical models to biomechanics: a design based modeling approach. J Learn Sci 7: 429-449.
73. Psotka J (1996) Immersive training systems: virtual reality and education and training. Instr Sci 23(5-6): 405-423.
74. Redish EF (1993) The implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics. Am J Phys 62(9): 796-803.
75. Rosas R, Nussbaum M, Cumsille P, Marianov V, Correa M, Flores P et al (2003) Beyond nintendo: design and assessment of educational video games for first and second grade students. Comput Educ 40: 71-94.
76. Rosen G, Silverman J, Chauhan A (2009 January) Connecting artistically-inclined K-12 students to physics and math through image processing examples. Digital signal processing workshop and 5th IEEE signal processing education workshop, 2009. DSP/SPE 2009. IEEE 13th, pp 419-424, 4-7. doi: 10. 1109/DSP. 2009. 478596.
77. Sabelli N (1994) On using technology for understandings science. Interact Learn Environ 4(3): 195-198.
78. Scardamalia M (2002) Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In: Smith B (ed) Liberal education in a knowledge society. Open Court, Chicago, IL, pp 67-98.
79. Scardamalia M, Bereiter C (1991) Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: a challenge for the design of new knowledge media. J Learn Sci 1: 37-68.
80. Scardamalia M, Bereiter C, Lamon M (1994) The CSILE project: trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In: McGilley K (ed) Classroom lessons: integrating cognitive theory and classroom practices. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
81. Schoenfeld AH (2006) What doesn't work: the challenge and failure of the what works clearinghouse to conduct meaningful reviews of mathematics curricula. Educ Res 35(2): 13-21.
82. Shen J, Linn M (2011) A technology-enhanced unit of modelling static electricity: integrating scientific explanations and everyday observations. Int J Sci Educ 33(12): 1597-1623.
83. Singh C, Moin L, Schunn C (2010) Introduction to physics teaching for science and engineering undergraduates. J Phys Teach Educ Online 5(3): 3-10.
84. Squire K (2003) Video games in education. Int J Intel Games Simul. [Electronic Version] Retrieved 5 Sep 2006 from http://www. scit. wly. ac. uk/~cm1822/ijkurt. pdf.
85. Squire K (2006) From content to context: videogames as designed experience. Educ Res 35(8): 19-29.
86. Squire K (2008) Video game-based learning: an emerging paradigm for instruction. Perform Improv Quart 21(7): 7-36.
87. Squire K, Barnett M, Grant JM, Higginbotham T (2003) Electromagnetism supercharged! learning physics with digital simulation games. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the international conference of learning sciences, San Diego, CA.
88. Steinkuhler C, Duncan S (2008) Scientific habits of mind. J Sci Educ Technol 17: 530-543.
89. Viennot L (1994) Students' understanding of superposition of electric fields. Am J Phys 62: 1026-1032.
90. Viennot L, Rainson S (1992) Students' reasoning about the superposition of electric fields. Int J Sci Educ 14(4): 475-487.
91. White BY, Frederiksen JR (1998) Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students. Cogn Instr 16(1): 3-118.
92. Willamson B, Facer K (2004) More than just a 'game': the implications for schools of children's computer game communities. Educ Commun Inf 4(2/3): 255-270.
93. Winn W, Windschitl M, Hedley N (2001) Using immersive visualizations to promote understanding of complex natural systems: learning inside virtual Puget Sound. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the national association of research in science teaching.
94. Yair Y, Mintz R, Litvak S (2001) 3D-Virtual reality in science education: an implication for astronomy teaching. J Comput Math Sci Teach 20(3): 293-305.
95. Young M, Slota S, Cutter A, Jalette G, Mullin G, Lai B, Simeoni Z, Tran M, Yukhymenko M (2012) Our princess is in another castle: a review of trends in serious gaming for education. Rev Educ Res 82(1): 61-89.
96. Zahn M (1999) Force field: using animation in teaching electromagnetism. Last retrieved from http://web. mit. edu/user/j/b/jbelcher/www/NSF. html. 1 Aug 2008.