![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
A student-designed games (SDG) teaching unit could be described as the process in which students create, organise, practice and refine their own games within certain limits established by the teacher. This study compared how two different teaching approaches had an impact on students and their teacher. The researcher taught two SDG units to junior high school students. The information and communication technology (ICT) teaching approach provided students with the opportunity to design their games online beyond class time. The non-technological (NT) teaching approach provided a more traditional approach, having students designing their games with face-to-face interactions. Using a case study methodology, four different data collection methods were used: field note observations, Edmodo posts, interviews, and lesson plans. Both teaching approaches presented positive and challenging outcomes, with key differences being found. For teachers, these were: (i) introducing students to new culture; (ii) providing resources to support game design; (iii) teacher direction of student work; and (iv) the degree of linearity in students’ work. For students, the main differences were: (i) students’ overall engagement; (ii) intra-group and inter-group interactions; and (iii) the quality of playbooks. The ICT teaching approach was considered a more difficult teaching methodology that required more experience with SDG, constructivism, and ICT. Nevertheless, the ICT teaching approach also provided more equity among students as they were given more opportunity to share their ideas in online discussions. Future research may consider a hybrid model that focuses on the major benefits that can be derived from each teaching approach.
References
|
Almond, L (1983) Games-making. Bulletin of Physical Education 19(1): 32–35. Google Scholar | |
|
André, MH, Rubio, K (2009) O jogo na escola: Um retrato das aulas de Educação Física de uma 5a série. [The game inside the school: an overview of 5th grade physical education classes]. Motriz 15(2): 284–296. Google Scholar | |
|
Butler, J (2013) Stages for children inventing games. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance 84(4): 48–53. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Butler, J (2016) Playing Fair. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Google Scholar | |
|
Butler, J, Hopper, T (2011) Inventing net/wall games for all students. Active & Healthy Magazine 18(3): 5–9. Google Scholar | |
|
Casey, A, Hastie, PA (2011) Students and teacher responses to a unit of student-designed games. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy 16(3): 295–312. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Casey, A, Hastie, PA, Jump, S (2015) Examining student-designed games through Suits’ theory of games. Sport, Education and Society. Epub ahead of print 2 January. DOI:10.1080/13573322.2014.994174. Google Scholar | |
|
Casey, A, Hastie, PA, Rovegno, I (2011) Student learning during a unit of student-designed games. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy 16(4): 331–350. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Cox, R, Ledingham, D (1988) Games-making: Principles and procedures. Scottish Journal of Physical Education 16(2): 14–16. Google Scholar | |
|
Curtner-Smith, MD (1996) Teaching for understanding: Using games invention with elementary children. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance 67(3): 33–37. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Hasler-Waters, L, Napier, W (2002) Building and supporting student team collaboration in the virtual classroom. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 3(3): 345–352. Google Scholar | |
|
Hastie, PA (2010) Student-Designed Games. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Google Scholar | |
|
Hastie, PA, André, M (2012) Game appreciation through student designed games and game equipment. International Journal of Play 1(2): 165–183. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Hastie, PA, Curtner-Smith, MD (2006) Influence of a hybrid sport education - teaching games for understanding unit on one teacher and his students. Physical Education & Sport Pedagogy 11(1): 1–27. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Hastie, PA, Casey, A, Tarter, A (2010) A case study of wikis and student-designed games in physical education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education 19(1): 79–91. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Holland, C, Muilenburg, L (2011) Supporting student collaboration: Edmodo in the classroom. In: Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference (eds M, Koehler, P, Mishra), Chesapeake, VA, 7 March 2011, Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing Education (AACE), pp.3232–3236. Google Scholar | |
|
Inan, FA, Lowther, DL (2010) Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educational Technology Research & Development 58(2): 137–154. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Kuo, YC, Belland, BR (2016) An exploratory study of adult learners’ perceptions of online learning: Minority students in continuing education. Educational Technology Research and Development 64(4): 661–680. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Lincoln, YS, Guba, E (1985) Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Mauldon, E, Redfern, H (1969) Games Teaching: A New Approach for the Primary School. London: Macdonald and Evans. Google Scholar | |
|
Oliver, KL, Hamzeh, M, Mccaughtry, N (2009) Girly girls can play games/las niñas pueden jugar tambien: Co-creating a curriculum of possibilities with fifth-grade girls. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education 28(1): 90–110. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Rovegno, I, Bandhauer, D (1994) Child-designed games-experience changes teachers’ conceptions. Journal of Physical Education Recreation and Dance 65(6): 60–67. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Rovengno, I, Skonie, R, Charpenel, T. (1995) Learning to teach critical thinking through child-designed games. Teaching Elementary Physical Education 6(1): 1–6. Google Scholar | |
|
Schmidt, DA, Baran, E, Thompson, AD. (2009) Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): The development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 42(2): 123–149. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Smith, MD (1991) Utilizing the games for understanding model at the elementary school level. The Physical Educator 48(4): 184–187. Google Scholar | |
|
Stake, RE (2005) Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin, NK, Lincoln, YS (eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, pp.443–466. Google Scholar | |
|
Thorpe, R, Bunker, D, Almond, L (1984) Four fundamentals for planning a games curriculum. Bulletin of Physical Education 20(1): 24–29. Google Scholar | |
|
Yücel, ÜA, Usluel, YK (2016) Knowledge building and the quantity, content and quality of the interaction and participation of students in an online collaborative learning environment. Computers & Education 97: 31–48. Google Scholar | Crossref |
