Abstract

Individualizing learning by quantifying scientific thinking using multichannel data during game-based learning remains a significant challenge for researchers and educators. Not only do empirical studies find that learners do not possess sufficient scientific-thinking skills to deal with the demands of the 21st century, but there is little agreement in how researchers should accurately and dynamically capture scientific thinking with game-based learning environments (GBLEs). Traditionally, in-game actions, collected through log files, are used to define if, when, and for how long learners think scientifically about solving complex problems with GBLEs. But can in-game actions distinguish between learners who are thinking scientifically while solving problems versus those who are not? We argue that collecting multiple channels of data identifies if, when, and for how long learners think scientifically during game-based learning compared to only in-game actions. In this study, we examined relationships between 68 undergraduates’ pre-test scores (i.e., prior knowledge), degree of agency, eye movements, in-game actions related to scientific-thinking actions during game-based learning about microbiology with Crystal Island, and performance outcomes. Results showed significant predictive relationships between eye-gaze, pre-test scores, and in-game actions related to scientific thinking, suggesting that eye movements, pre-test scores, and degree of agency play a crucial role in scientific thinking and performance with GBLEs. Our findings provide insight into using multichannel data to capture scientific thinking and inform game-learning analytics that is individualized to guide instructional decision making. Findings from this study have implications for enhancing our understanding of scientific thinking within GBLEs. We discuss GBLEs designed to guide individualized and adaptive instructional decision making using learners’ multichannel data to optimize scientific-thinking skills and performance.

Highlights

  • Scientific thinking has steered the crusade of discovery and changed the way in which we understand, interact, and exist in the world (Klahr et al, 2019, p. 67)

  • If we do not know how to capture if, when, and for how long learners engage in scientific thinking with game-based learning environments (GBLEs), how do we provide data-driven, individualized instruction to meet learners’ needs? Researchers face additional challenges when capturing scientific thinking with GBLEs because most studies rely on in-game actions, measured solely through log files, to define if, when, and for how long a learner is thinking scientifically about solving problems, such as the amount of time using a scanner to test evidence (Smith et al, 2019, p. 52)

  • Results showed significant predictive relationships between eyegaze, pre-test scores, and interaction data related to scientific reasoning, suggesting that eye-gaze, prior knowledge, and agency play a crucial role in scientific thinking and performance with GBLEs

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Scientific thinking has steered the crusade of discovery and changed the way in which we understand, interact, and exist in the world (Klahr et al, 2019, p. 67). Studies with GBLEs use an approach that generalizes across learners, failing to account for individual characteristics that may impact learners’ ability to think scientifically These issues further compound current problems associated with providing individualized instructions in GBLEs. If we do not know how to capture if, when, and for how long learners engage in scientific thinking with GBLEs, how do we provide data-driven, individualized instruction to meet learners’ needs? We investigated whether eye movements, pre-test scores, degree of agency, ingame actions, and post-test scores identified if, when, and for how long learners were thinking scientifically about solving problems with GBLEs. Our findings provide implications for designing GBLEs to guide individualized and adaptive interventions based on learners’ individual needs using their multichannel data to optimize scientific-thinking skills and performance

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call