The Impact of Competitive Collaborative Game Play on Achievement and Attitude in Advanced Placement Physics

1. The Impact of Competitive Collaborative Game Play on Achievement and Attitude in Advanced Placement Physics Scott Holloway California State University, Northridge

2. Context • Physics is a serious course with difficult and abstract concepts • Few students continue on into careers in physics or engineering • High schools new methods to create affinity in physics and related careers

3. Importance • Low achievement scores on the TIMSS and PISA studies • Increased STEM funding has not been entirely effective • Increased opportunity for science careers due to advancing technology • US economy will suffer if STEM jobs continue to move overseas

4. Questions • Does playing competitive, collaborative, problem-solving games improve achievement for AP physics students? • Does playing competitive, collaborative, problem-solving games improve attitudes toward physics in AP physics students?

5. Literature Review • Collaboration • Competition • Game play

6. Collaboration • Increased on task behavior (Harris et al., 2008). • Improved problem solving and reduced anxiety (Harskamp and Ding, 2006). • Group heterogeneity not as important as a high quality task (Cheng, Lam, & Chan, 2008). • Improved social gains and subject affinity (Willis, 2007).

7. Competition • Creates rivalry and anxiety for many students (McMahon, Wernsman & Rose, 2009). • Competition is normal and should be included in education (Ediger, 1996). • Student activity in formal competition increases similar post-secondary study (Bishop & Walters, 2007). • AP classes are naturally highly competitive (Deemer, 2004).

8. Game Play • Makes complex theoretical knowledge more approachable (Kiili, 2007). • Students report mixed results with math games (Bragg, 2007). • Engagement and motivation are benefits of the use of games but they are not enough for educational purposes(Gros, 2007).

9. Method • Who – 79 AP C students • Where – Westlake High School • When – Fall 2009, 12 weeks • What - PhysTec • How – • Achievement – test/quiz score • Attitude – Surveys, Questionnaires and interviews

10. PhysTec • Students were broken into groups of 4-5. • Teams attempted to be the quickest to correctly complete problem solving activities and other AP style problems • Points were awarded for correct answers and deducted for incorrect or missing answers.

11. PhysTec • Physics Team Challenge (PhysTec) designed to: • Engage all students in the group • Make students work quickly (under stress) • Rotate student roles within the group

12. PhysTec • Example problem: • Find the acceleration for a 6 kg block on a 20 degree frictionless ramp if the 6 kg block is attached to a suspended 1.5 kg block over a massless, frictionless pulley

13. PhysTec Key Elements • Game designed so: • all teams can score points and “win” • Higher scores earn more extra credit • Extra credit is minimal • 0.5% of overall semester grade. • No penalty for poor performance

14. Data Collection • Achievement was measured using pre- and post- quizzes, and chapter test scores. • Attitude was measured using pre- and post- surveys, questionnaires and student interviews.

15. Results • Achievement results were mixed. • Test data was inconclusive • Quiz data showed an increase in achievement • Data on attitude • suggests the PhysTec game improves and reinforces positive attitudes in physics

16. Achievement PhysTec Introduced for Period 4 PhysTec Introduced for Period 5

17. Achievement

18. Impact on Attitude

19. Attitude Toward Games

20. Impact on Attitude

21. Impact on Attitude

22. Impact on Attitude

23. Reasons PhysTec Changed Attitudes • “It has helped me visualize the problems better.” • “It made me a little more excited about physics, because I was directly applying it.” • “It was more fun and interesting to talk about ways to solve different problems with your fellow classmates.” • “It added a new dimension to my viewpoint of physics. I am more excited in the learning realm of Physics C.”

24. Discussion • Overview • Limitations • Implications • Future Study Possibilities

25. Discussion • Even though their was little extrinsic motivation (minimal extra credit) most students engaged in the game and enjoyed the learning experience. • Some experienced anxiety that comes from competition, but that was not a limiting factor for most.

26. Discussion • Academic achievement results may have been affected by inappropriate test design • Recommendations for future study • Use pre and post tests instead of chapter tests • Compare treatment class to control group

27. Limitations • Students are AP students, most taking more than two AP classes, therefore experienced with competition • Small study group • Only used physics classes

28. Implications • PhysTec adds a dimension of challenge and fun that promotes positive attitudes in physics and may increase the number of students who go on to physics related careers. • Due to the positive student response, I will be expanding the use of the game to encompass the entire year. • Other subjects could design similar games and expect the same results

29. Future Study • Can PhysTec be redesigned to reduce anxiety? • Does PhysTec increase the number of students pursuing STEM majors in college? • Can PhysTec be modified for use in other AP classes?

30. Final Thought • One student summed up an opinion about PhysTec this way: • “Competitive group-work is what makes physics class stand out from my other 6 periods. Other classes have group work but generally no timed competition. When you add the clock, teamwork’s importance is elevated to a new level. You see people specializing as calculator workers, explainers, double-checkers, the hapless writers, and (sometimes) the One that misleads the whole group. When the whiteboard moves around, the dynamic constantly changes. When your friends are counting on you, that’s a powerful motivation to study. Physics is not a math class; it’s a puzzle class.”

31. A Special Thanks to… My family – Vicki, Caden and Jenna, thanks for all your patience and support My colleagues in the cohort – for all your guidance and inspiration My professors – Prof. Rivas, Prof. Herr, Prof. Foley, and Prof. Cheng, thanks making me a better educator My students – for providing me a reason for loving my job