Foundation for problem-based gaming

1. Foundation for problem-based gaming Presenter: Hsiao-lan Lee Professor: Ming-Puu Chen Date: 01 / 19 / 2009 Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394-404.

2. Introduction (1/3) • Higher education often has not managed to develop students’ abilities to apply their knowledge in complex, ill-defined practical situations. • difficulties in applying theoretical subject knowledge in solving ill-defined problems • the lack of contextualising or anchoring the content being learned • Properly designed games can be used to answer these needs. • focus on the game design issues separated from learning • not utilize the powerfulness of games as an interactive context-free media • The field of educational technology lacks research on how to design game environments. • foster knowledge construction • deepen understanding and problem solving

3. Introduction (2/3) • Kiili (2005) developed the experiential gaming model： • founded on the principles of experiential learning (Kolb, 1984) and constructivism (Phillips, 1995) • not provide a clear account for reflective thinking that can be considered as the key factor in problem-based learning • The most important contribution of the experiential gaming model to the educational game design is the design principles of engagement (Kiili & Lainema, 2006). • The aim of this research is to develop an empirically allocated model about problem-based gaming. • provide means to design pedagogically meaningful games • evaluate the proposed model

4. Introduction (3/3) • Problem-based gaming model • PBG = PBL + Game + Experiential Learning + Constructivism • test the strategy and possible hypotheses • observe the consequences of the learner’s actions • base on learner’sprior experiences • form an appropriate playing strategy 1 2 • govern variables in order to generate better playing strategies and solutions to problems • base on only one particular strategy • strengthens only those schemata that are related to this strategy 3 • recapture the experience, • think about it, • mull it over and evaluate it • provide the feedback from a learner’s actions • support reflective thinking and knowledge construction by focusing a player’s attention to relevant information Figure1: Problem-based gaming model describes the learning process with games

5. Method • Participants: • 12 students of Turku School of Economics • age between 20-30 • All had some experiences about other business games before. • Materials: • Realgame business simulation game (Lainema, 2004) • give learners a realistic view of business processes through case-based learning • reflect realistic time-dependent decision making • Measures: • semi-structured interviews • two themes: games in education and problem-based gaming

6. Results and discussion (1/4) • About educational games: • Educational games aroused interest among players. • All players liked the playing experience of Realgame. • The role of the games was seen more like applying previously learned knowledge than studying totally new issues. • Games seem to support the perception of things as a whole.

7. Results and discussion (2/4) • About the main principles of the PBG approach: • Learners saw that authenticity is a very important element in educational games. • Some simplifications needed to be made in simulation games, but did not disturb their playing experiences. • Gaming strategy is based on trial and error.  aware about their incomplete strategy and realize that they could have utilized a more strategic approach • All learners felt that it was fruitful to play the game in teams. • Knowledge sharing during gaming facilitated learning. • Learners felt that games are effective because they involve learning by doing. • involve with the experience • not absorb knowledge by rote learning

8. Results and discussion (3/4) • About the structure of the PBG model: • The results clearly supported the structure of the PBG model. • actively form playing strategies and hypotheses and test them • Some learners were more sensitive for double-loop learning and were willing to even take risks to discover more optimal strategies. • One thing that may lead to single-loop learning is the lack of challenge. • virtual players that are challenging to beat in to the game • motivate the leading human team to perform better

9. Results and discussion (4/4) • About reflection in PBG: • It is important to consider the game elements that triggered reflection. • The demand of products was experienced as a basic trigger of reflection. • The most powerful thing that pushed learners to consider their performance was the conflicts that they faced. • The conflicts in the game should be designed properly. • Factor disturbing reflection: • game design: Too fast playing tempo does not provide a possibility for learners to reflecton the consequences of their actions appropriately. • the complexity of the game:  include new concepts and many changing variables  The user interface requires much cognitive processing. cognitive overload

10. Conclusions • PBG model can help to address the gap between pedagogy and game design. • Reflection that arouses double-loop learning enhances learning because learners tend to aspire to a better understanding of the problem domain by actively testing different strategies. • Conflicts and the performance were found to be the most important triggers of reflection. • Too fast a game tempo and cognitive overload can disturb reflection process. • Collaboration and learning by doing were found to be most important characteristics of effective educational games. • Games were seen as good tools to understand cause and consequence chains.