Implementation of a Curriculum-Integrated Computer Game for Introducing Scientific Argumentation

Abstract

Argumentation has been emphasized in recent U.S. science education reform efforts (NGSS Lead States 2013; NRC 2012), and while existing studies have investigated approaches to introducing and supporting argumentation (e.g., McNeill & Krajcik 2008; Kang, Thompson &Windschitl 2014), few studies have investigated how game-based approaches may be used to introduce argumentation to students. In this paper, we report findings from a design-based study of a teacher's use of a computer game intended to introduce the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) framework (McNeill &Krajcik 2012) for scientific argumentation. We studied the implementation of the game over two iterations of development in a high school biology teacher's classes. The results of this study include aspects of enactment of the activities and student argument scores. We found the teacher used the game in aspects of explicit instruction of argumentation during both iterations, although the ways in which the game was used differed. Also, students' scores in the second iteration were significantly higher than the first iteration. These findings support the notion that students can learn argumentation through a game, especially when used in conjunction with explicit instruction and support in student materials. These findings also highlight the importance of analyzing classroom implementation in studies of game-based learning.

A systematic review on the impacts of game-based learning on argumentation skills

“…Welldesigned GBL environments pose various challenges that encourage collaborative problem solving [72]; thereby giving individuals opportunities to develop 21st-century skills. This issue shows that interaction between students in small groups and social relationships is important for the quality of argumentation skills in various subjects [99]. Of course, with quantifying game elements, one must consider that some of the game elements might naturally occur more than other game elements in GBL environments.…”

“…Wallon et al [99] Place-based learning 1 An theory to learning that takes advantage of geography to create authentic, meaningful and engaging personalized learning for students.…”

“…We also explored instructional support of GBL for argumentation. Modeling [4,3,23,55,73,85,84,91,94,99,103], feedback [51], interactivity [17,85,84], and reflection [8,30,50,66,63,100] were the most commonly reported instructional supports of the GBL for argumentation. This is reflected in the analysis of different types of instructional supports.…”

“…This implies that such GBL environments in future research should indicate their learning theories so that people know what learning theories can be matched with what aspects of games and also what learning theories can be used in the design of GBL environments to facilitate specific aspects of the learning outcomes. Furthermore, most reviewed publications referred to game genres such as simulation, role-play, strategic and the least used game genre was adventure (see [4,3,8,17,23,30,31,47,55,66,85,84,99]). The finding of the reviewed articles showed that GBL lead leaners to have a positive attitude towards argumentation skills and learn argumentation and reasoning.…”

Analogies Between Logic Programming and Linguistics For Developing Students' Understanding of Argumentation Texts

“…This is reflected, for example, with the emphasis given in recent US science education reform efforts (National Research Council [NRC], 2012;NGSS Lead States, 2013;. Respectively, in the field of science teaching education emphasis is given to the need to promote students' ability to present arguments; for example, the development of computer games (Wallon, Jasti, Lauren, & Hug, 2017) and web-based argumentation systems (Tsai, Jack, Huang, & Yang, 2012) to support students in acquiring this skill. Moreover, it is accepted as a required skill in all disciplines, for example in Medicine, when doctors are required to argue orally and in writing, to justify their conclusions (e.g.…”