Towards a framework for games and simulations in STEM subject assessments

Currently, providing games and simulations to address specific educational objectives in STEM subjects is a craft activity, requiring custom-built applications and hence making difficult-to-share and difficult to-reuse solutions. To address this we propose a framework for the creation of Pedagogically Effective Games & Simulations (PEGS). The framework supports the construction and machine-processable expression of an educational intention which can be turned into a computer deliverable serious game, simulation, or adaptive formative assessment with an element of pedagogical validity.

[1]  Katrin Becker,et al.  Pedagogy in Commercial Video Games , 2006 .

[2]  Gary B. Wills,et al.  Making training more cognitively effective: Making videos interactive , 2009, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[3]  Timothy Miles-Board,et al.  Tool Kits for a Dynamic Review Journal , 2005 .

[4]  John B. Biggs,et al.  Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does , 1999 .

[5]  John D. Bransford,et al.  How Students Learn: Science in the Classroom. , 2005 .

[6]  Wendy Hall,et al.  Multimedia Pedagogues: Interactive Systems for teaching and Learning , 1995, Computer.

[7]  Punya Mishra,et al.  The Claims of Games: A Comprehensive Review and Directions for Future Research , 2007 .

[8]  Katrin Becker.  Pedagogy in Commercial Videos , 2007 .

[9]  B. Bloom.  Taxonomy of educational objectives , 1956 .

[10]  S. Wilson.  What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy , 2006 .

[11]  Lucy Suchman.  Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[12]  Y. Engeström,et al.  Perspectives on activity theory: Play, learning, and instruction , 1999 .

[13]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Conversational Framework for the Effective Use of Learning Technologies. 2nd Edition , 1993 .

[14]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[15]  Jen Harvey,et al.  A toolkit for supporting evaluation , 2001 .

[16]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

[17]  Jean Écalle,et al.  Serious games as new educational tools: how effective are they? A meta-analysis of recent studies , 2013, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[18]  Klaus P. Jantke,et al.  Games that do not exist communication design beyond the current limits , 2006, SIGDOC '06.

[19]  Charles M. Reigeluth,et al.  Instructional Design Theories and Models : An Overview of Their Current Status , 1983 .

[20]  Gráinne Conole,et al.  Assessing and enhancing quality using toolkits , 2000 .

[21]  M. Oliver,et al.  A pedagogical framework for embedding C&IT into the curriculum , 1998 .

[22]  Marc Prensky,et al.  Digital game-based learning , 2000, CIE.

[23]  J. Piaget.  The construction of reality in the child , 1954 .

[24]  K. Squire,et al.  HARNESSING THE POWER OF GAMES IN EDUCATION , 2003 .

[25]  James Paul Gee,et al.  What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy , 2007, CIE.

[26]  Marsha C. Lovett,et al.  How learning works , 2010 .

[27]  O. Dreĭer,et al.  Learning in Doing: Social, Cognitive, and Computational Perspectives , 2007 .

[28]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[29]  Roziana Ibrahim.  A conceptual framework for supporting gender inclusivity in games , 2011 .

[30]  Stephen Swithenby,et al.  A strategy for the integration of IT-led methods into physics - the SToMP approach , 1996, Comput. Educ..

[31]  P. Kommers,et al.  Gender differences and styles in the use of digital games , 2005 .