Educational Gamified Science Simulations

Abstract

Modern STEM education is mainly grounded in constructivism. It requires instructors to not only recite learning content, but also to teach the concepts and ideas behind abstract formulas. Interactive simulations are one of the most powerful tools for increasing the students’ problem-solving abilities, and enhancing their understanding of conceptual models and formulas, which are hard to visualize without technology-enhanced tools. Creating simulation tools of interest to students has the potential to enhance their understanding of the phenomena and increase their interest in science. However, many simulations are not engaging and students will lose interest in interacting with them after a short time. Hence, it is important to advance in particular the motivational design aspects of such educational tools. One idea for motivating students is the use of computer games. Different studies show the positive impacts of a game-based or gamified approach in the field of STEM education and training. Several theories and frameworks were researched and developed to support the game design and gamification process of various scenarios. However, only a few cover specific design issues and implications of educational and instructional simulations. In this chapter we introduce a gamification model, which is adapted accordingly to the characteristics of constructivist STEM education approaches with focus on the usage of science simulations. Therefore we will introduce a model for the adaption of gamification techniques to design, develop, and adapt educational simulations. Based on a background and literature study, a framework for implementing a gamification approach for different kinds of simulations is introduced and applied to an application scenario of our own research. As a result, both the lessons learned and further recommendations are outlined.

Keywords

STEM Gamified science simulation Engagement 

References

  1. Adams, W. K., Perkins, K. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2006). PhET look and feel. Retrieved August 13, 2013, from http://phet.colorado.edu/web-pages/publications/PhET.
  2. Adams, W. K., Reid, S., LeMaster, R., McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., Dubson, M., et al. (2008a). A study of educational simulations part I: Engagement and learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(3).Google Scholar
  3. Adams, W. K., Reid, S., LeMaster, R., McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., Dubson, M., et al. (2008b). A study of educational simulations part II: Engagement and learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(4).Google Scholar
  4. Aldrich, C. (2009). Learning online with games, simulations, and virtual worlds. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Avedon, E. M., & Sutton-Smith, B. (1981). The study of games. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, K., & Parker, J. R. (2011). The guide to computer simulations and games. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.Google Scholar
  7. Bell, R. L., & Smetana, L. K. (2008). Using computer simulations to enhance science teaching and learning. National Science Teachers Association, 3, 23–32.Google Scholar
  8. Brathweite B. & Schreibe I. (2009) Challenges For Game Designers. Boston: MA. Charles River Media.Google Scholar
  9. Christian, W., (2005). Davidson College WebPhysics server. Retrieved August 13, 2013, from http://webphysics.davidson.edu/Applets/Applets.html.
  10. Cooper, S., Khatib, F., Treuille, A., Barbero, J., Lee, J., Beenen, M., Leaver-Fay, A., Baker, D., Popovi´c, Z., & Foldit Players. (2010) Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game. Nature. 2010/08/05.Google Scholar
  11. Cooper, S., Treuille, A., Barbero, J., Leaver-Fay, A., Tuite, K., Khatib, F., Snyder, A.C., Beenen, M., Salesin, D., Baker, D., Popovic, Z., & 57.000 Foldit players. (2010). The challenge of designing scientific discovery games. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG’10). ACM, New York, pp. 40-47.Google Scholar
  12. Csikiszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  13. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety: Experiencing flow in work and play. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  14. Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Deterding, S., Dixon, D. Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011) From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments (MindTrek’11). ACM, New York, pp. 9-15.Google Scholar
  16. Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate Students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? The Journal of Learning Sciences, 14(2), 243–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foldit Website. (2012). Retrieved August 13, 2013, from http://fold.it
  18. Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Graham, S., & Weiner, B. (1972). Theories and principles of motivation. Oxford, UK: Markham.Google Scholar
  20. Hake, R. (1988). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Howard Hughes Medical Institute. (2010). Protein-folding game taps power of worldwide audience to solve difficult puzzles. Retrieved August 13, 2013, from http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2010-08/hhmi-pgt080310.php
  22. Ibrahim, R., & Jaafar, A. (2009). Educational Games (EG) design framework: Combination of game design, pedagogy and content modeling. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Electrical Engineering and Informations. Selangor, MalaysiaGoogle Scholar
  23. Kawrykow, A., Roumanis, G., Kam, A., Kwak, D., Leung, C., Wu, C., et al. (2012). Phylo: A citizen science approach for improving multiple sequence alignment. PLoS One, 7(3), e31362. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kelly, H., Howell, K., Glinert, E., Holding, L., Swain, C., Burrowbridge, A., et al. (2007). How to build serious games. Communications of the ACM-Creating a Science Of Game, 50(7).Google Scholar
  25. Khatib, F., Dimaio, F., Cooper, S., Kazmierczyk, M., Gilski, M., Krzywda, S., Zabranska, H., Pichova, I., Thompson, J., Popović, Z., Jaskolski, M., & Baker, D. Crystal structure of a monomeric retroviral protease solved by protein folding game players. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. Retrieved September 2011, ISSN 1545-9985. doi:10.1038/nsmb.2119 DOI:10.1038%2Fnsmb.2119 . PMID 21926992.
  26. Koster, R. (2004). A theory of fun for game design. Sebastopol, CA: Paraglyph Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lunce, L. M. (2006). Simulations: Bringing the benefits of situated learning to the traditional classroom. Journal of Applied Educational Technology, 3, 37–45.Google Scholar
  28. Laurel, B. (2008). Design research: Methods and perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Malone, T. W. & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In: Aptitude, learning, and instruction vol 3: Conative and affactive process analyses.Google Scholar
  30. Martens, A., Diener, H., & Malo, S. (2008). Transactions on Edutainment LNCS, 5080, 176–190.Google Scholar
  31. Mayo, M. J. (2007). Games for science and engineering education. Communications of the ACM-Creating a Science of Games, 50(7).Google Scholar
  32. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. London: Penguin Press HC.Google Scholar
  33. OSP. (2003). Retrieved September 1, 2012, from http://www.compadre.org/osp/.
  34. PhET. (2011). Retrieved September 15, 2012, from http://phet.colorado.edu.
  35. PhET Simulation Design Process. (2013). Retrieved September 15, 2012, from http://phet.colorado.edu/publications/phet_design_process.pdf
  36. Pirker, J. (2013). Virtual TEAL World. Master Thesis, Graz University of Technology, Februrary 2013.Google Scholar
  37. Randel, J. M., Morris, B. A., Wezuel, C. D., & Whitehill, B. V. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: A review of recent research. Simulation & Gaming, 23(3).Google Scholar
  38. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and New directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sanders, M. (2009). STEM, STEM education, STEMmania. The Technology Teacher, 68(4), 20–26.Google Scholar
  40. Schell, J. (2008). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Burlington, MA: Elsevier/Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  41. Squire, K., Barnett, M., Grant, J. M., & Higginbotham, T. (2004). Electromagnetism Supercharged!: Learning physics with digital simulation games. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  42. TEALsim Website. (2004). Retrieved August 15, 2013, from http://web.mit.edu/viz/soft/visualizations/TEALsim/index.html
  43. Teed, R. (2012). Game-Based Learning. (Science Education Resource Center Carleton College) Retrieved September 15, 2012, from http://serc.carleton.edu/introgeo/games
  44. Thompson, C. (2011). How Khan Academy is changing the rules of education. Wired Magazine, 126.Google Scholar
  45. Vallerand, R., Pelletier, L., Blais, M., Briere, N., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. (1992). The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 1003–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Eck, R. (2006). Digitial game-based learning. It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. Educause Review, 41, 16–30.Google Scholar
  47. Windschitl, M., & Andre, T. (1998). Using computer simulations to enhance conceptual change: The roles of constructivist instruction and student epistemological beliefs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 145–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wired. (2012), Wired: New videogame lets amateur researchers mess with RNA. Retrieved January 12, 2014, from http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/07/ff_rnagame/
  49. Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Information Systems and New Media (IICM)Graz University of TechnologyGrazAustria
  2. 2.School of Information SystemsCurtin UniversityGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations