Advertisement

Teaching systems thinking through game design

  • Mete AkcaogluEmail author
  • Lucy Santos Green
Research Article

Abstract

In this mixed-methods study, we examined if students benefitted from a game design course offered during an enrichment hour in terms of gains in their system analysis and design skills. Students at a rural middle school in Southeast US (n = 19) attended a 1-hour game design course offered weekly during an academic enrichment class period, for the duration of a school year, learning basics of digital game-design and practicing system design skills such as making flowcharts. The results of quasi-experimental data indicated that the treatment group’s pretest–posttest system analysis and design skills, compared to the control group, which did not receive any training, further improved, F(1,33) = 16.516, p < 0.001. Results from the interviews showed that the participants were able to verbalize how they applied system analysis and design skills developed during the course to problem-solving in different contexts. We discussed the instructional aspects of learning game-design that align with systems thinking. We also explored the possible influence of initial cognitive skills on student learning outcomes from such interventions.

Keywords

Game design Problem solving Systems thinking System design Design 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to extend our sincerest gratitude to Dr. Tarcin for sharing his pearls of wisdom and unwavering support with us during the course of this research.

Compliance with ethical standard

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Akcaoglu, M. (2014). Learning problem-solving through making games. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(5), 583–600.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9347-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akcaoglu, M. (2016). Design and implementation of the game-design and learning program. TechTrends, 60(2), 114–123.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0022-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Akcaoglu, M., Gutierrez, A. P., Sonnleitner, P., & Hodges, C. B. (2016). Game design as a complex problem solving process. In R. Zheng & M. Gardner (Eds.), Handbook of research on serious games for educational applications (pp. 217–233). Hershey: IGN Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Akcaoglu, M., & Koehler, M. J. (2014). Cognitive outcomes from the Game-Design and Learning (GDL) after-school program. Computers and Education, 75, 72–81.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. An, Y. J. (2016). A case study of educational computer game design by middle school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 555–571.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9428-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Assaraf, O. B. Z., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 518–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baytak, A., & Land, S. M. (2010). A case study of educational game design by kids and for kids. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5242–5246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.853.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baytak, A., & Land, S. M. (2011). An investigation of the artifacts and process of constructing computers games about environmental science in a fifth grade classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 765–782.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-010-9184-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cabrera, D., Cabrera, L., & Powers, E. (2015). A unifying theory of systems thinking with psychosocial applications. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 32(5), 534–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cohen, P., Cohen, J., Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1999). The problem of units and the circumstance for POMP. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34(3), 315–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crawford, C. (1984). The art of computer game design. Berkeley: McGraw-Hill/Osborne Media.Google Scholar
  13. Crawford, C. (2003). Chris Crawford on game design. Indiana: New Riders.Google Scholar
  14. de Vries, E. (2006). Students’ construction of external representations in design-based learning situations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Denner, J., Werner, L., & Ortiz, E. (2012). Computer games created by middle school girls: Can they be used to measure understanding of computer science concepts? Computers and Education, 58(1), 240–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dym, C. L., Agogino, A. M., Eris, O., Frey, D. D., & Leifer, L. J. (2005). Engineering design thinking, teaching, and learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fullerton, T. (2008). Game design workshop. Boston: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goodman, M., & Stroh, D. P. (2008). Importance of systems thinking. http://www.appliedsystemsthinking.com/.
  19. Honey, M., & Kanter, D. E. (Eds.). (2013). Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hung, W. (2008). Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modelling. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), 1099–1120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hwang, G.-J., Hung, C.-M., & Chen, N.-S. (2013). Improving learning achievements, motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based game development approach. Educational Technology Research and Development.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-013-9320-7.Google Scholar
  23. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Design, 45, 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Design, 48, 63–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2015). Constructionist gaming: Understanding the benefits of making games for learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 313–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. S. (2003). Effect of knowledge integration activities on students’ perception of the Earth’s crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 545–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ke, F. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers and Education, 73, 26–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mayer, R. E. (2016). What should be the role of computer games in education? Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 20–26.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732215621311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 287–303). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  30. Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research.  https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089.Google Scholar
  31. Nelson, W. A. (2003). Problem solving through design. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 95, 39–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Norman, C. D. (2013). Teaching systems thinking and complexity theory in health sciences. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 19(6), 1087–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. OECD. (2003). PISA 2003 Assessment framework: Mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowledge and skills. Paris: OECD. https://www.oecd.org.
  34. OECD. (2005). PISA 2003 technical report. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Öllinger, M., Hammon, S., von Grundherr, M., & Funke, J. (2015). Does visualization enhance complex problem solving? The effect of causal mapping on performance in the computer-based microworld Tailorshop. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 621–637.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it. Garden City: Doubleday/Anchor.Google Scholar
  37. Salen, K., Torres, R., Wolozin, L., Rufo-Tepper, R., & Shapiro, A. (2011). Quest to Learn: Developing the School for Digital Kids. Digital Media. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning.Google Scholar
  38. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  40. Stolee, K. T., & Fristoe, T. (2011). Expressing computer science concepts through Kodu game lab. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 99–104). ACM.Google Scholar
  41. Sweeney, L. B., & Sterman, J. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: Initial results of a systems thinking inventory. System Dynamics Review, 16(4), 249–286.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Werner, L., Denner, J., & Campe, S. (2014). Children programming games: A strategy for measuring computational learning. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 14(4), 24:1–24:22.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2677091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhang, J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179–217.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2102_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Georgia Southern UniversityStatesboroUSA
  2. 2.University of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations