Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Individual Sub-topic: Survey students based on “In stage 4, has the implementation of
games in classrooms been engaging and beneficial? If so, which games and why?”?
Student engagement is known to elevate the level of academic ability. In order to achieve
achieve engagement through the right selection of teaching strategies (Linnenbrink and
Pintrich, 2007). According to the theory composed by Fredrick, Blumenfled & Paris (2004),
approach these multi-dimensional areas (Fredrick et al., 2004). The overarching topic, will
identify how the implementation of game based learning impacts student engagement in
stage 4, with the use of a literature review substantiating the topic. This literature review
will focus on a sub-topic, in regards to game-based learning, how beneficial they are for
ameliorating low ability students, student boredom in the classroom and has shown to
decrease the rates of high school dropouts in urban suburbs (Fredrick et al., 2004). Student
Student Number: 19058216
engagement, can be best achieved through considering learning styles and abilities that
students have within the classroom (Reyes et al., 2012). Reyes et al. (2012), accentuates
how classroom tasks can amplify intellectual engagement, thus engaging pedagogy as a
major driver in student engagement. Academic research highlights the relation between
Dictionary (4th ed.) as being “actively committed” and to “involve oneself” and “participate”,
highlighting an emphasises and connection to behaviour (Fredrick et al., 2004). The three
sections that collaborate in order to reach ultimate student engagement are behavioural,
emotional and cognitive engagement (Fredrick et al., 2004). According to Fredrick et al.
achieved through the involvement of social learning collaborated with academic content,
student motivation in the learning process (Fredrick et al., 2004). Cognitive engagement
their understanding about complex ideas and content (Fredrick et al., 2004).
Through the incorporation and merging of all three components of student engagement,
(Boekarts, Pintrich, & Zeidner, 2000). It is evident that behaviour, emotion and cognition are
all interrelated and are not separate processes, rather they work together as a multi-
dimensional outlook to result in student engagement (Fredrick et al., 2004). Pedagogy can
be defined as the approach that is taken alongside teaching strategies in order to benefit
Student Number: 19058216
student learning (Gobby & Walker, 2017). In accordance with Van Driel & Berry (2012),
content knowledge is developed through the correct use of pedagogical strategies, forming
student interest and engagement. Kleickmann et al. (2013) emphasises that student grades
and the facilitating of deep understanding is best achieved through inquiry-based learning
(IBL). IBL is a student-centred learning approach, that allows students to learn through
hands-on activities by the incorporation of engaging teaching strategies (Van Driel & Berry,
2012). IBL accentuates pedagogies aimed at student interests, in order to heighten the rate
Duncan & Chinn, 2007). Meha & Kulshrestha (2014) accentuates that pedagogy through IBL
enhances and reinforces student motivation to learn and their classroom engagement.
Further, the use of IBL creates a positive and engaging learning environment which in turn
reinforces the building of students personal and social capabilities and information
communications technologies (ICT) awareness complying with the skills outlined within the
Game-based learning being a modern approach, has shown a vast increase in student
incorporates the use of games in the classroom in order to attract engaged learning (Kapp,
2014). The incorporation of game-based learning in pedagogy for stage 4 learners, engages
student’s due to its range of learning components (Kapp, 2014). Game-based learning uses
learning activities (Celik, 2015). This allows for students to grasp an understanding of
complex learning and challenging content, through providing students with activities that
Stage 4 learners, are students aged between 13 and 15 years, being at the peak of their
adolescent growth (Rice & Dolgin, 2005). G. Stanley Hall describes adolescent years as a
“period of storm and stress”, accentuating an understanding for adolescent mood swings
and rebellion (Hines & Paulson, 2006). Coinciding with behavioural issues faced by stage 4
place, identifying that adolescent behaviour depends on contexts, according to Darling &
Steinberg (1993). However, the period of adolescence is a “highly adaptive” period in youth
development, that allows for maturity (Casey, Jones & Hare, 2008). Thus, it is evident that
through the use of game-based learning, stage 4 learners are able to engage, interact and
adapt to modern teaching strategies, allowing for critical thinking and student-centred
learning to take place (Kapp, 2014). Game-based learning works in collaboration with
Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (Shabani, Khatib & Ebadi, 2010). Vygotsky’s zone
adolescents can achieve alone and those that can be achieved with the assistance of an
educator (Shabani et al., 2010). The zone of proximal development, is a social process of
learning and accentuates the importance of scaffolding to assist students, in order to lead
them to independent learning, gradually becoming more competent to complete the task
alone (Shabani et al., 2010). Game-based learning allows for students to gradually develop
their skills and test their pre-existing knowledge, promoting independent learning (Moyer
Research has shown that game-based learning promotes learning through collaborating
auditory, visual and kinaesthetic learning methods (Esplin & Garces-Ozanne, 2009). ICT
Student Number: 19058216
resources in the classroom, increase student engagement and retention rates alongside
strategies in the classroom (Spernjak, 2014). Subsequently, it is shown that through the use
of ICT, digital games stimulate student learning “by doing” (De Grove, Bourgonjon & Looy,
2012). Digital games allow students to acquire skills and intellectual knowledge through
social and emotional development (De Grove et al., 2012). Game-based learning is also a
form of kinaesthetic learning, allowing for students to learn through an active approach,
rather than a non-engaging passive approach (Moyer and Savino, 2015). Active learning,
allows for students to identify their academic weaknesses in content, and motivates them to
learn through discovery (Moyer and Savino, 2015). Higher-order thinking is achieved
through game-based learning, through the essence of engagement, which promotes student
implementation of a pedagogical approach that allows for connection to students and their
learning styles. The pedagogical approach of game-based learning, has allowed for a
higher order thinking and deeper understanding, coinciding with the Australian Professional
Standards. There are many forms of game-based learning deemed effective in relation to
stage 4 learners, signifying multiple methods of technique that could be implemented in the
References
Boekarts, M., Pintrich, P. R., & Zeidner, M. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook ofself-regulation:
Casey, B., Jones, R., & Hare, T. (2008). The Adolescent Brain. Annals of the New York
https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1440.010
Celik, S. (2015). Managing the Classes by using Multiple Intelligence Instruction. Journal of
https://jebs.ibsu.edu.ge/jms/index.php/je/article/viewFile/108/116
De Grove, F., Bourgonjon, J., Looy, J.V. (2012). Digital games in the classroom? A contextual
10.1504/IJART.2013.050690
Esplin, P., & Garces-Ozanne, A. (2009). From Theory to Practice. International Journal Of
http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=11&sid=5973df6b-
f552-49ea-9675-c91b1ac1e504%40sessionmgr4009
Student Number: 19058216
Fredricks, J.A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & A.H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/3516061.pdf?refreqid=excelsior:076004812e02747
40bb7324c64ba23db
Gobby, B., & Walker, Rebecca, (Eds.). (2017). Powers of curriculum: Sociological
Hines, Allyn R., & Paulson, Sharon E. (2006). Parents' and teachers' perceptions of
Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C.A. (2007). Scaffolding and Achievement in
107. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520701263368
Kapp, K. (2014). GAMIFICATION: Separating Fact From Fiction. Chief Learning Officer, 42-
52. http://ww.w.cedma-
europe.org/newsletter%20articles/Clomedia/Gamification%20-
%20Separating%20Fact%20from%20Fiction%20(Mar%2014).pdf
Kleickmann, T., Richter,D., M.,Kunter, J.,Elsner, Besser,M., Krauss, S.,& Baumert.J. (2013).
106. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0022487112460398
https://search.proquest.com/docview/219653569?pq-origsite=gscholar
Moyer, M., & Savino, D. M. (2015). The Role of the Kinesthetic Learning Style and Prompted
104.
http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=109021783&S=R&
D=ehh&EbscoContent=dGJyMNLe80Sep7A4v%2BbwOLCmr1CeprNSsqa4TbGWxWXS
&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGqtk%2B3rLNQuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA
Reyes, M.R., Brackett, M.A., Rivers, S.E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom
http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-05721-001
Rice, F. P., & Dolgin, K. G. (2005). The adolescent: Development, relationships and culture
Student Number: 19058216
Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development:
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1081990
Van Driel, J.H., & Berry, A. (2012). Teacher Professional Development Focusing on
28. http://journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.3102/0013189X11
431010
Student Number: 19058216
Part B: Data Collection Protocol
Student Survey
Date:
Subject of class:
Grade:
Student Number: 19058216
Student Number: 19058216
Student Number: 19058216
Student Number: 19058216
Part C: Data Collection Protocol Explanation
education, with consistently updated information that allows for a review of classroom
pedagogy and the overall environment that students are learning in (Efron & Ravid, 2013).
The research above is prepared along with a data collection protocol to determine the
effect on student engagement. The data collection protocol used to determine the research
is a qualitative method through the use of surveys (Marshall, 2006). In accordance to the
Program Survey Research (2007), written by Harvard University, the survey written above
delivers students with clear and detailed questions and provides students with specific
Participants that will take part in this research, will be stage 4 high school students, who will
fill out and return the survey during class time, in any KLA. The open KLA bracket will
contribute to the remaining group sub-topics, where there are two open KLA studies
alongside one Science specific study and one English specific study. The surveys allow for
specific responses based on learning styles and preference in learning activities to stimulate
engagement, as discussed in the literature review (Reyes et al., 2012). This study focuses on
the responses from students rather than teachers, in order to identify the precise path to
student engagement in classroom pedagogy. The study will be performed across a range of
schools, both private and department schools, and across different socio-economic suburbs.
According to Halawah (2006), this diversity will provide the research with an understanding
Student Number: 19058216
based on influence that socioeconomic class has on a student’s motivation and classroom
engagement. Prior to filling in the survey, consent forms will be sent home for parents to
gather an understanding of the research and to give permission for their child to take part in
the data collection survey. Data will be collected through surveys on an anonymous scale,
allowing for the comfort of the participants that their answers will remain separate from
their identity.
The survey incorporates the Likert scale in order to keep questions closed and creates the
ability to identify similarities and differences between the data. However, some questions
do open up to the participants, where they are asked to state their response beside the
checkbox “other” (Hlebec et al., 2003). This is implemented where questions would be
limited without them, and allows for complete answers from the participants. The
appropriateness in relation to the participants. Long interviews and other protocols would
cause cognitive overload on students, emphasising the suitability of surveys (Joshi, Kale,
Chandel & Pal, 2015). The survey questions are designed to create consistent codes and
Overall the data collection protocol through surveys, was chosen in order to effectively
understand and apply game-based pedagogical methods that best relate to student
engagement, the questions are written in order to create themes that can add to current
Student Number: 19058216
References
Efron, S. E, Ravid, R, ProQuest, & Ebooks Corporation. (2013). Action research in education :
91-99.
Hlebec, V., Manfreda, K., Reja, U., & Vehovar, V. (2003). Open-ended vs. Close-ended
Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Valentina_Hlebec/publication/242672718_Open
-ended_vs_Close-
ended_Questions_in_Web_Questionnaires/links/53f481c10cf2fceacc6e85ee/Open-
ended-vs-Close-ended-Questions-in-Web-Questionnaires.pdf
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. K. (2015). Likert scale: Explored and explained. British
Marshall, M. (2006). Sampling for qualitative research. Family Practice, 13(6), 522-526.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/fampra/13.6.522
https://psr.iq.harvard.edu/book/questionnaire-design-tip-sheet
Student Number: 19058216
Reyes, M.R., Brackett, M.A., Rivers, S.E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom
http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-05721-001