Advertisement

Improving Student Interest Through Games in Architecture History Using Constructivism

  • Mayamin Yuhaniz
  • Ismail Samsuddin
Conference paper

Abstract

In order to improve students’ interest in history classes, a pilot experimental module of producing and playing board games was conducted on 52 fourth-semester architecture students. This paper outlines students’ perceptions of the experimental module. The arguments are based on the learning theory of constructivism, which had been discussed to develop collaboration, promote engagement in class, and create critical thinking process. Investigation of the module’s perception from students was made through observations, questionnaire surveys, and in-depth interviews. The results showed that students create and appreciate collaborations between their peers. Students are seen more active and engaged in the subject even in their free time, and they had developed a creative synthesis in their task by applying the course content in their board game productions. The study hopes research can be extended to other levels of semesters and conduct the experimental module to other subjects than history.

Keywords

Architecture student History Constructivism Board game 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is partially supported by Universiti Teknologi MARA in allowing demonstration of the module and research. The authors also gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments and suggestions of the reviewers, which have improved the presentation.

References

  1. Anyanwu, E. G. (2014). Anatomy adventure: A board game for enhancing understanding of anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education, 7(2), 153–160.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bear, J. B., & Woolley, A. W. (2011). The role of gender in team collaboration and performance. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 36(2), 146–153.  https://doi.org/10.1179/030801811x13013181961473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bi, T., & Yang, W. (2011). Modern learning theory and u-learning studies. In Proceeding of the international conference on e-education entertainment and e-management, ICEEE 2011 (pp. 239–242).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICeEEM.2011.6137795.
  4. Bryant, L. C., Vincent, R., Shaqlaih, A., & Moss, G. (2013). Behaviorism and behavioral learning theory. In The handbook of educational theories (pp. 91–103). Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=psyh&AN=2013-11995-008&site=ehost-live%5Cnhttp://glenda.moss@unt.edu.Google Scholar
  5. Critical thinking. (2014, August 26). In S. Abbott (Ed.), The glossary of education reform. Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/critical-thinking.
  6. Dagar, V., & Yadav, A. (2016). Constructivism: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Arts and Social Sciences Journal, 7(4), 4.  https://doi.org/10.4172/2151-6200.1000200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Head, G. (2003). Effective collaboration: Deep collaboration as an essential element of the learning process. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 4, 47–62.Google Scholar
  8. Jones, M. G., & Araje, L. B. (2002). The impact of constructivism in education. Discourse and Maeaning. American Communication Journal, 5(3), 1–10 Retrieved from http://ac-journal.org/journal/vol5/iss3/special/jones.pdf.Google Scholar
  9. Koster, R. (2005). Theory of fun for game design. A theory of fun for game design 256.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2.
  10. Lee, E., Moreau, K., & Lochnan, H. (2015). A customised board game enhances learning about obesity. Medical Education.  https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li, L., & Guo, R. (2015). A student-centered guest lecturing: A constructivism approach to promote student engagement. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 15, 1–7 Retrieved from http://www.aabri.com/copyright.html.Google Scholar
  12. Mastor, K. A., Jin, P., & Cooper, M. (2000). Malay culture and personality: A big five perspective. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(1), 95–111.  https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640021956116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McLeod, S. (2012). Jean Piaget cognitive theory simply psychology. Simply psychology. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html.
  14. Siemens, G. (2014). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1, 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1.1.87.3793.Google Scholar
  15. Sjøberg, S. (2010). Constructivism and learning. In International encyclopedia of education (pp. 485–490).  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00467-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Student engagement. (2014). In S. Abbott (Ed.), The glossary of education reform. Retrieved from http://edglossary.org/student-engagement.
  17. Taber, K. S. (2006). Beyond constructivism: The progressive research programme into learning science. Studies in Science Education, 42, 125–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Takeda, S., & Homberg, F. (2014). The effects of gender on group work process and achievement: An analysis through self- and peer-assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 373–396.  https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Watson, J. B. (2013). Behaviorism. Worcestershire: Read Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  20. Watts, M., Jofili, Z., & Bezerra, R. (1997). Research in Science Education, 27, 309.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Yoon, B., Rodriguez, L., Faselis, C. J., & Liappis, A. P. (2014). Using a board game to reinforce learning. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 45(3), 110–111.  https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20140224-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mayamin Yuhaniz
    • 1
  • Ismail Samsuddin
    • 1
  1. 1.Architecture Department, FSPUUniversiti Teknologi MARA Cawangan PerakSeri IskandarMalaysia

Personalised recommendations