Conference PaperPDF Available

Reflective, Creative and Computational Thinking Strategies Used When Students Learn Through Making Games

Authors:
  • Digital and Creative Learning Lab

Abstract and Figures

Since the 1980s, scholars have had visions about how computers can change how we think and learn and may support more engaging learning processes. Recently many countries have extended their formal school systems to teach students about computational thinking, with the aim to support children in mastering digital materials, becoming digital producers, and using technology to develop the ability to use their creativity and develop problem-based digital projects. One of the questions in this new area of formal educational is whether acquiring computational thinking (CT) skills should be a goal in itself—that is, a new subject matter in the curriculum—or whether CT should become part of cross-disciplinary projects in school. The basis for the current experiment is a longitudinal (four years), design-based research experiment, where CT was used as one of the means to reach learning goals in cross-disciplinary academic subjects. In the current part of the experiment, adult high school students (K–11) created digital learning games using the game design tool Scratch. The purpose was to teach their classmates about specific learning goals in geography, chemistry, biology, and social studies within their digital learnings games while they themselves learned about these subject matters through the learning game creation process. The findings were that game design and CT could be used as means to reach learning goals and spark reflections about cross-disciplinary academic subject matter and that the learning game construction process involved the students’ considerations about four central areas and processes within these areas. Also, as the students transformed their games from a vision to a concept and into a concrete digital object, they were challenged to become innovative and creative and were supported in their thinking and learning processes, developing knowledge about problem-based work and CT competencies.
Experience and experiments creating knowledge in everyday life (based on Dewey, 1910) The problem-based learning (PBL) pedagogical approach is a "learner-centered approach that empowers learners to conduct research, integrate theory and practice, and apply knowledge and skills to develop a viable solution to a defined problem" (Savery, 2015, p. 5). PBL is strongly inspired by the elements in Dewey's reflective process. In PBL, the students find, or are introduced to, ill-structured, complex (yet meaningful), realworld problems. These complex problems often do not have a single correct answer, but students can learn from developing solutions for them. The problems are the essential elements and the driving force for inquiry. The students work in collaborative groups to identify what knowledge is needed to solve the problem. This process helps them become self-directed and self-assessed learners and engaged problem-solvers who use critical thinking and reflection to identify the root problem and the conditions needed for a qualified solution (Savery, 2015). The teacher acts as a facilitator of learning through the design of learning activities and has a major role in supporting the development of the metacognitive thinking associated with the problem-solving process. 1.2 Learning through creating learning games A frequently used PBL approach involves the use of games for learning. There is a growing body of research on extending game-based learning-be it the use of simulations, virtual worlds, or games developed with the purpose of learning-to the creation of games for learning (Kafai & Burke, 2015), enabling the student to have a more active role as a game designer instead of a less active role as a game player. Using a learning-throughgame-design approach involves the development of CT skills. 1.3 Computational thinking processes The CT concept has gained attention and has been researched by an increasing number of educators and researchers since the early 1980s (Grover & Pea, 2013). The concept has been defined in various ways (Voogt et al., 2015). Jeanette Wing, for example, defined computational thinking as "the thought processes involved in formulating problems and their solutions so that the solutions are represented in a form that can be effectively carried out by an information-processing agent" (2011, p.1). But it is not an entirely new concept. Papert, for example, argued the need for procedural thinking (1980), and diSessa recommended computational literacy (2000). These scholars had visions about changing how we think and learn and how computers could support more engaging and committed learning processes. Many scholars as well as practitioners break CT into subcategories (Voogt et al., 2015; Wing, 2008), and it has been defined as a broad and comprehensive concept involving thinking and learning processes not very different from PBL processes. But it has also been defined as a narrower concept related to consideration or thinking acts that we need to
… 
Example of feedback in the game The students chose to create interactions in the form of meaningful choices with meaningful consequences in their games. For example, in the CO2 game about sustainable farming, the player had several offers to choose between various opportunities. With the information she had been given in advance in the game, she should be able to choose the most sustainable energy source. This gave the player/learner agency to make her own choice and gave her experience with the subject matter presented in the game. 3.5 Computational thinking in action-transformation into digital learning games The students were inexperienced in using the digital game design tool (Scratch), and some students hesitated when approaching the technology. Previous research showed it is important to guide the students by introducing them to small tutorials for the tool (Weitze, 2017). This part of the process required the students to transform the specifications for the learning game concept into a functioning digital game. The students used their story boards (Figure 3) illustrating the learning environments, communities of practice, learning activities, and learning paths as a basis for discussions about how to create their digital games. In this process, the students were presented with many dilemmas. Sometimes part of their concepts proved difficult, or perhaps even impossible, to transform into digital procedures-they had to learn to think computationally. The ideas and solutions did not always work out as planned. Sometimes this was because the affordances of the game design tool were too limited, or the students did not know the tool well enough to find an appropriate solution. But sometimes the "conversations" with the game design technology (Schön, 1992) sparked other solutions that better met the students' intentions with the learning games. In these boundary areas, the learning game was transformed from a vision with specific learning goals into a concept for a specified learning game design and then the transformation into a functioning digital game-an operative image (Löwgren & Stolterman, 2007). These boundary areas often represented dilemmas and processes where a "creative leap" took place. Here the learning game designers exceeded the limits of the present, and by handling these dilemmas the students were forced to learn, be innovative, and create new concepts. 3.6 Computational learning elements in the students' games The analysis of the current experiment showed that the abstract learning design elements the students designed for in their games to some extent were significant and could be decomposed into specific patterns that could be performed by procedures or algorithms. This should of course be seen in light of the learning games being quite simple games, given that the students were novices in game design and the short amount of time they were given to develop their games. These computational learning elements have, however, proved efficient as inspiring examples for students in their digital learning game design in later experiments. The following are examples of the computational learning elements in the students' games. Again, these were connected to the previously mentioned abstract learning design areas. The students created:
… 
Content may be subject to copyright.
!
ECGBL!2017:!11th!European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
Reflective,* Creative* and* Computational* Thinking* Strategies* Used* When* Students* Learn* Through* Making*
Games*
!
Charlotte!Lærke!Weitze,!PhD,!Assistant!professor!!
learnT,!center!for!learning!technology,!DTU-Compute,!Technical!University!of!Denmark,!Kgs.!Lyngby,!Denmark!
chwei@dtu.dk!!
!
Abstract:!Since!the!1980s,!scholars!have!had!visions!about!how!computers!can!change!how!we!think!and!learn!
and! may! support! more! engaging! learning! processes.! Recently! many! countries! have! extended! their! formal!
school!systems!to!teach!students!about!computational+thinking,!with!the!aim!to!support!children!in!mastering!
digital!materials,!becoming!digital!producers,!and!using!technology!to!develop!the!ability!to!use!their!creativity!
and! develop! problem-based! digital! projects.! One! of!the! questions! in! this! new! area! of! formal! educational! is!
whether!acquiring!computational!thinking!(CT)!skills!should!be!a!goal!in!itselfthat!is,!a!new!subject!matter!in!
the!curriculum—or! whether!CT!should!become! part!of!cross-disciplinary!projects! in! school.! The! basis! for! the!
current!experiment!is!a!longitudinal!(four!years),!design-based!research!experiment,!where!CT!was!used!as!one!
of! the! means! to! reach! learning! goals! in! cross-disciplinary! academic! subjects.! In! the! current! part! of! the!
experiment,! adult! high! school! students!(K11)!created! digital! learning! games! using! the! game! design! tool!
Scratch.! The! purpose! was! to! teach! their! classmates! about! specific! learning! goals! in! geography,! chemistry,!
biology,! and! social! studies! within! their! digital! learnings! games! while! they! themselves! learned!about! these!
subject!matters!through!the!learning!game!creation!process.!The!findings!were!that!game!design!and!CT!could!
be! used! as! means! to! reach! learning! goals! and! spark! reflections! about! cross-disciplinary! academic! subject!
matter! and! that! the! learning! game! construction! process! involved! the! students’! considerations! about! four!
central!areas!and!processes!within!these!areas.!Also,!as!the!students!transformed!their!games!from!a!vision!to!
a!concept!and!into!a!concrete!digital!object,!they!were!challenged!to!become!innovative!and!creative!and!were!
supported!in! their! thinking!and!learning!processes,!developing!knowledge!about! problem-based!work! and!CT!
competencies.!
!
Key* words:!Computational! Thinking,! Learning! Game! Design,! Students! as! Learning! Game! Designers,!
Constructionism,!Scratch.!!
*
1.*Introduction**
A!major!concern!for!educational!institutions!is!how!to!design!learning!for!students!to!help!them!develop!skills!
that!match!21st-century!requirements.!This!demands!that!we!know!what!skills!should! be! developed,!how!we!
should!teach!and!support!the!students’! learning!processes,! and!what!learning!technologies! could! support! the!
development! of! relevant! individual! and! collaborative! competencies.! The! strategy! that! many! educational!
scholars!suggest! is! to!educate! the! students! so!that!they! become!strong! in! problem-solving,!critical! thinking,!
innovation,!and!creativity,!since!this!will!give!them!the!competencies!to!embrace!and!overcome!the!unknown!
future!challenges!they!will!face.!But!how!do!we!teach!these!21st-century!skills?!!
!
1.1*The*benefits*of*active*learning!
The!philosopher!and!educational!reformer!John!Dewey!suggested!the!development!of!reflective!thinking!skills!
as!the! main! goal! of! education.! Thinking! is! the! method! of! intelligent! learning! and! is! developed! through!
experience:!“trying!to!do!something!and!having! the!thing! perceptibly!do!something!to! one!in!return”!(Dewey,!
1956).!This!learning+ by+ doing!approach! correlates! strongly! with!the!constructionist!pedagogical!approach.!In!
constructionism,!a!fundamental!idea!is!that!there!is!a!strong!connection!between!design!and!learning!and!that!
activity! involving!making,! building,! or! programming! provides! a! rich! context! for! learning! and! building!
knowledge! (Harel! &! Papert,! 1991;! Kafai! &! Resnick,! 1996).! Piaget’s! constructivism,! which! focuses! on! the!
students’! construction! of! meaning! as! a! condition! for! learning,! is! taken! further! by! Papert’s! constructionism!
theory,! which! emphasizes!that! meaning! in! particular! c an! be! constructed! by! the! creation! of! artefacts,! often !
with!the!help! of! different! types! of!digital!media! (Harel! & ! Papert,! 1991).! The! construction! of! these! artefacts!
enables! reflection! and! new! ways! of! thinking! based! on! the! tools! the! students! use! alone! as! well! as!
collaboratively,!empowering!the!students!to!take!charge!of!their!own!education!(Harel!&!Papert,!1991;!Kafai!&!
Resnick,!1996).!Learning!and!creative!development!happens!when!the!material!talks!back”!to!the!students!in!
unexpected! ways! during! the! development! process!(Schön,! 1992).! But! what! elements!do!the!thinking!and!
learning!processes!require?!!
!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
2!
According!to!John!Dewey’s!pragmatic!world! view,!there!is!a!close!relation! between! the! following! elements! in!
students’! ongoing! reflective! process;! they!1)! experience! and! perceive! a! difficulty!or! problem;! 2)! localize,!
analyze,!and!define! the! problem;! 3)!use!spontaneous!and!innovative! ideas! as! hypotheses!for!solutions!to!the!
problem;!4)! reflect!and!elaborate! ideas! and! consideration!of! facts! around! the! problem;! and! 5)! employ!tests!
and!interventions!followed!by!evaluation!of!the!suggested!ideas,!concepts,!or!solutions!to!the!problem.!If!this!
leads! to! a! satisfying! result! and! th ereby! valuable! new! knowledge,! the! process! ends;! otherwise ,!th e! student!
starts! again,! armed! with! his! or! her!new! insight! (Figure! 1).! These! linked! processes! of! reflection! and!
experimentation!are!common!ways!to!approach!and!solve!problems!in!everyday!life!(Dewey,!1910,!p.!72).!But!
how!is!this!turned!into!a!pedagogical!approach?!!
!
Figure*1:!Experience!and!experiments!creating!knowledge!in!everyday!life!(based!on!Dewey,!1910)!
!
The! problem-based! learning! (PBL)! pedagogical! approach! is!a! learner-centered!approach! that! empowers!
learners!to!conduct!research,!integrate!theory!and!practice,!and!apply!knowledge!and!skills!to!develop!a!viable!
solution! to! a! defined! problem”! (Savery,! 2015,! p.! 5).! PBL! is! strongly! inspired! by! the! elements! in! Dewey’s!
reflective!process.!In!PBL,!the!students!find,!or!are!introduced!to,!ill-structured,!complex!(yet!meaningful),!real-
world!problems.! These!complex!problems!often! do! not! have! a! single!correct!answer,! but! students!can!learn!
from!developing!solutions!for!them.!The!problems!are!the!essential!elements!and!the!driving!force!for!inquiry.!
The!students! work! in!collaborative! groups! to! identify!what! knowledge! is! needed! to! solve!the! problem.! This!
process! helps! them! become! self-directed! and! self-assessed!learners! and! engaged! problem-solvers ! who! use!
critical!thinking!and!reflection!to!identify!the!root!problem!and!the! conditions!needed!for!a! qualified!solution!
(Savery,!2015).! The! teacher! acts! as!a!facilitator!of!learning!through!the!design!of!learning! activities!and!has! a!
major!role!in!supporting!the! development!of!the!metacognitive!thinking!associated!with!the! problem-solving!
process.!
!
1.2*Learning*through*creating*learning*games**
A!frequently!used!PBL!approach!involves!the!use!of!games!for!learning.!There!is!a!growing!body!of!research!on!
extending! game-based! learningbe! it! the! use! of! simulations,! virtual! worlds,! or! games! developed! with! the!
purpose!of!learningto!the!creation!of!games!for!learning!(Kafai!&!Burke,!2015),!enabling!the!student!to!have!
a!more!active!role!as!a!game!designer!instead!of!a!less!active!role!as!a!game!player.!Using!a!learning-through-
game-design!approach!involves!the!development!of!CT!skills.!!
!
1.3*Computational*thinking*processes**
The! CT!concept! has! gained! attention! and! has! been! researched!by! an! increasing! number! of! educators! and!
researchers!since! the!early!1980s!(Grover!&!Pea,!2013).! The!concept!has!been!defined!in!various!ways!(Voogt!
et!al.,! 2015).!Jeanette!Wing,!for!example,!defined!computational!thinking!as!the!thought!processes!involved!
in! formulating! problems! and! their! solutions! so! that! the! solutions! are! represented! in! a! form! that! can! be!
effectively!carried!out!by!an!information-processing!agent”!(2011,!p.1).!But! it!is!not!an! entirely!new!concept.!
Papert,! for! example,! argued!the! need! for! procedural! thinking! (1980),! and! diSessa! recommended!
computational! literacy! (2000).! These! scholars! had! visions! about! changing! how! we! think! and! learn! and! how!
computers! could! support! more! engaging! and! committed! learning! processes.! Many! scholars! as! well! as!
practitioners!break!CT!into!subcategories! (Voogt!et!al.,!2015;!Wing,! 2008),!and!it!has!been!defined!as!a!broad!
and!comprehensive!concept! involving! thinking! and! learning!processes!not!very!different!from! PBL!processes.!
But!it! has! also!been!defined!as! a! narrower! concept! related! to! consideration!or!thinking!acts!that!we!need!to!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
3!
learn!to!be!able!to!program!computers!to!perform!procedures.!Many!of!the!narrow!CT!definitions!involve!four!
core!conceptsdecomposition,!pattern!recognition,!abstraction,!and!algorithmsas!well!as! evaluation!of!the!
successfulness!of!going!through! these!four!steps!to!solve!the!problem!(Voogt!et!al.,!2015;!Wing,!2008).!These!
concepts!are! natural! stages!for! solving! a!complex! problem! with!the!help! of! a! computer! and! encompass! the!
kind!of! conceptual! understanding!needed! for! a! computer! programmer! to! create!interactive! digital! problem-
solving!of!various!tasks.!!
!
In!this!experiment,!CT!is!used!to!reach!students’!subject-specific!learning!goals.!But!what!kind!of!CT!conceptual!
understanding!is!needed! when! the!assignment!is! to! learn!about!curricular!subject! matter! by!creating! digital!
learning!games?!!
!
1.4*Area*of*investigation*
This! article! investigates:! How+ can+ students+ learn+ specific+ subject+ matter+ by+ designing+ and+ creating+ digital+
games?+Can+the+acquisition+of+CT+skills+support+this+learning+process?+What+learning+game+design+processes+do+
students+go+through+when+they+create+digital+learning+games?!And!finally,!are+there+elements+that+connect+the+
various+layers+of+the+game+design+process+in+a+meaningful+way+that+at+the+same+time+supports+the+development+
of+students’+thinking+and+learning+processes?!!
*
2.*Methodology*and*research*design**
*
2.1*Approach,*data*collection*and*analysis*
*This!investigation!was!conducted!as!a!design-based!research!(DBR)!study!in!which!teachers!and!students!were!
important! co-designers! in! the! development! and! testing! process.! The! study! used! mixed! methods.! The! data!
included! field! notes,! audio-! and! videotaped! actions! and! utteran ces,!o bservations! from! the! workshop!in!Fall!
2016,! semi-structured! interviews! with! both! teachers!and!students,! informal! meetings,! videos! of! students’!
games!being! discussed! and! play-tested,!the! student-created! digital!games,! evaluation! documents!written!by!
students,! and! questionnaires.! The! analysis! was! performed! by! analyzing!teachers’! and! students’! actions,!
utterances,!and! the! digital! games! and! by! coding! the! transcribed! data! using!the!qualitative!research!software!
Dedoose! employing!an! informed! grounded! theory! approach! (Thornberg,! 2012).! The! analysis! used! concept-
driven!coding!(using!concepts!from!the!theory!and!previous!empirical!data!to!find!themes!in!the!data)!as! well!
as! data-driven! coding! (reading! the! data! and! searching! for! new! phenomena! not! known! from! previous!
preconceptions!of!the!subject)!(Kvale!&!Brinkman,!2009;!Charmaz,!2006).!!
!
2.2*Participants*and*setting!
The!participants!in!the!experiment!were!students!from!a!high!school!class!at!VUC!Storstrøm,!an!adult!learning!
center!in! Denmark.! The!students! participated! in! a! full-time! education! program! lasting! two! years,! building!
games!supporting!learning!the!curriculum.!Five!teachers!participated!in!the!game!design!process.!
!
2.3*Workshops!
All!the!students!and!four!teachers!were!new!to!game!design.! The!20!students! in!this!experiment!formed!four!
teams! and! created! four! games! involving! variations! over! the!theme! climate+ change.! The! students!developed!
their! learning-game! concepts! by! following! the! instructions! in! an! overall! learning! design! in! a! three-day!
workshop.!The!pedagogical!approach!was!PBL,!and!the!only!knowledge!the!students!had!about!climate!change!
in!advance!came!from!watching!a!film!about!the!subject;!they! had!access!to!relevant!texts!as!well.!The!aim!of!
the!overall!learning!design!was!to!let!the!students! integrate! aspects! of! relevant! academic!subjects!into!small!
analogue!game!concepts!that!were!then!transformed!into!digital!games.!The!intention!was!for!the!students!to!
become!reflective!about!the!academic!knowledge;!and!as!a!result,!they!would!become!academically!proficient.!
CT!was!not!the!goal!but!one!of! the! means! to!reach!the!overall!learning!goals.! The! students! used!the!digital!
game!design!tool!Scratch!(Scratch,!2017)!to!create!their!digital!games.!The!purpose!was!for!students!to!direct!
their!own!learning! path! and! create!learning!games! that! could! be! played!by!their!fellow! students.! This! would!
enable!the!students! to! become! the! designers!of!their!own! learning! through! collaboration,!and! by!discussing!
ideas! and! possible! solutions.! The! students! created! the! learning! and! game! designs! in! iterative! processes.!
Therefore,!the!learning!goals! and! process! were!addressed!and! questioned! in! many!ways.! The! learning! goals!
were! further! addressed! in! the! collaborative! peer!review/playtests! that! each! student! team!carried! out! with!
other!teams.!!
!
*
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
4!
3.*Analysis*of*thinking*and*learning*processes*in*creating*learning*games*
The! following! is! an! analysis! of! the! thinking! and! thereby! learning! processes! that! took! place! as! the! stu dents!
learned!by!creating!digital!learning!games.!The!overall!problem!or!question!for!the!students!was:!How+can+we+
create+a+ learning+game+teaching+ about+ climate+change?! The!learning!game! construction!process!involved!the!
students’!considerations!about!the!following!four!processes:!1)!development!of!learning!goals!for!their!specific!
game!for!the!cross-disciplinary!subject!matter,!2)!learning!design,!3)!game!design,!and!4)!transformation!into!a!
digital! game.! These! four! central! processes,!leading!to!the!creation! of! the! learning! games,! were! deeply!
connected!and!interdependent,!and!the!students!engaged!them!iteratively.!By!separating!them!in!this!analysis,!
it!is!possible!to!investigate!the!characteristic!of!each!knowledge!and!learning!area!and!process.!
*
3.1*Learning*about*subject*matter*and*learning*goals**
The!teachers!chose!climate+change!as!the!overall!subject!and!had!elaborated!the!learning!goals!for! the!cross-
disciplinary!subject!matter!as!well!as!methodological!and! social!learning!goals.!Since! climate! change! involves!
and!influences! social,!geographical,!chemical,! and!biological!matters,!creating! a! project! about! climate! change!
demanded!that!the!students!developed!knowledge!about!all!four! involved! subject! matters.!The! teachers!had!
crucial!roles! as!guides! and! discipline! experts,! they! supported! the! teams,! and! discussed! the! content/subject!
matter!of!the!games!with!the!teams.!!
!
The!students!started!the!project!by!studying!the!learning!goals!and!discussing!climate!change!in!the!context!of!
the! cross-disciplinary! subjects.! They! discussed!what!they! already! knew! about! the! subject!and!where! to! find!
more!knowledge!and!brainstormed!what!educational!content!the!narrative!of!the!learning!game!could!involve!
in! a! meaningful! way.! Two! o f! the! overall! learning! goals! were! “Analyze! and! discuss! what! effect! greenhouse!
gases!have!on!the!atmosphere”! and! “Analyze!the!global!effects!of!the!greenhouse!effect!using!a!self-chosen!
example.”! The! teachers! advised!the! students! to! generate!ideas!based! on!the! leaning! g oals!and! to! connect!
them!into! a! narrative! in! a! meaningful! way.! They!suggested!that! the! students! chose! an! everyday!learning!
situation!as!the!narrative!for!their!game!and!then! gradually!constructed!more!ideas!for!how!to!involve!all!the!
learning!goals.!This!demanded!that!the! students! thought!about!how!to!move!between!the!choice!of! relevant!
and!meaningful! content! and! the! design!of!relevant!learning!situations!in! the! game,!which!would!enable! the!
future!learner/player!of!the!game!to!reach!the!game’s!intended!learning!goals.!!
!
The! students! had! educating! conversations! about! what! to! teach! within! the! game,! becoming! self-directed!
learners!in! this! process,! but! the! teachers! also! had!vital!roles.! Two!of! the! teachers,! for! example,! supervised!
each! team,! asking! them! to! explain!how! the! various! learning! goals! were! met! in! their!game.! If! the! studen ts!
found!it!difficult! to! address! a!learning!goal,!the!teachers!pointed!them!to! a!relevant!article!about!the! subject!
matter.! Then! the!teachers!discussed! the! learning! goal!with! the! team!and! co-ideated! on! how! they! could!
implement!this!goal!in!the!game.!
!
!
Figure*2:*Examples!of!choices!offered!after!educating!episodes!in!two!games!
*
Some! of! the! affordances! learning! games! have,! as! media,! are! possibilities! for! designing! interactions,! giving!
choices!and!connections,! and! showing! cause! and! effects! as! well! as! consequences! in! the! game.! The! analysis!
suggests!that!this! affected! the! students’! choice!of!content! as! well! as! narrative!for!the! games.! Several! of! the!
teams!chose!to!design!games!that!in!various!ways!let!the!learner/player!choose!between!options!in!the!game,!
similar! to! the! cause-and-effect! systems! grounded! in! the! subject! matter.! For! example,!by! offering! complex!
choices! between! the! cheapest! product! or! service! or! the! greenest! solution! (Figure! 2)such! as! when! the!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
5!
offered!sun-energy!solution! that! seemed! to! be! the! most! climate-friendly! possibility! actually! turned!out!to!be!
the! opposite! when! taking! the! production ! process! of! the! solar! cells! into! account.! The! students! had! to! think!
about!how!to!design! these!various!systems! of!choices,!causal!connections,!and!opportunities! for!interactions,!
and,! according! to! the! teachers,! this! led! the! students! to! develop! new! knowledge! about! the! same! relevant!
systems!within!their!subject!matter.!!
*
3.2*Learning*design*process*for*the*learning*games**
The! students! were! asked! to! create! a! game! that! both! taught! and! evaluated!the! future! learner/player!of! the!
game!about! climate!change.!Problem! identification!for! the!learning!design!phase!involved! questions!like!How+
can+ we+ create+ a+ learning+ design+ within+ a+ learning+ game?!This! involved! understanding!principles! of! what!a!
learning! game! is! and! what! learning! processes! are.! The! creation! of! a! learning! design! traditionally! involves!
considerations!about! who! the!participants!are,!what! learning!environment!the! learning! takes!place! in,! what!
the!learning!goals!are,!what!content!should!be!introduced!for!the!students!to!achieve!these!learning!goals,!and!
what!learning!activities!and!evaluation!processes!the!students!should! experience!for!them!to!go!through! the!
intended! learning! processes! and! reach! the! learning! goals.! From! previous! research,! we! learned! that! the!
abstract! learning! design! elements! are! not! obvious! to! high! school! students.! Therefore,! the! students! were!
introduced!to!a!simple!learning!game!example!in!Scratch!(2017)!that!taught!the!students!about!learning!design!
elements!in!a!learning!game!(Weitze,!2017).!The!students!could!use!this!example!as!a!vision!and!thinking+tool,!
which!made!it!easier!for!them!to!imagine!how!they!could!create!their!own!learning!design!for!a!learning!game.!!
!
3.3*Creation*of*common*learning*design*“systems”*when*creating*learning*games*
As!the! students! started! conceptualizing!their!learning! games! with!paper!and!cardboard,!the!analysis! showed!
that!the!students!deconstructed!the!learning! design!for!the!games!into!the!following!learning!design!areas:!a)!
learning! environments,! b)! communities! of! practice,! c)! learning! activities,! and! d)! learning! paths! for! their!
learning!game!concepts.! The! construction!process! was! categorized! by! the!students!into!the! four!areas!in!the!
following!ways:!
!
a)* Learning* environments—situated* learning* experiences:* When! designing! a! learning! game! the!
students!needed! to! think!about! how! to!create! learning! situations!within!the! games.! These! learning!
situations! or! scenes! in! the! game! could! involve! relevant! learning! elements,! such! as!backgrounds!
illustrating! climate! change!or!its! consequences! or! objects,!for!example,!giving! the! player! the! choice!
between! solar! panels! or! wind! mills!as! energy! sources! in! the! game.! These! learning! environments!
contributed!to!the!players/learners’!learning!processes!as!they!played!the!game.!!
!
b)* Communities* of* practice:* In! traditional! learning! situations,! the! learning! community! of! practice!
involves!peer-relations!as!well!as!studentteacher!conversations!and!interactions.!The!same!occurred!
in!the! learning! games.! The!teams!formed! small!communities! of!learning! within! the! game!concepts.!
Some!games! also! invited!the!playeroutside!the! gameto! listen! and! learn.! The! in-game-characters!
in! these! game-communities! had! various! roles,! including!teacher,! helper,! apprentice,! the! good!
(climate)! guy,! and!the! bad! (climate)!guy.!These! characters! enabled! educating!conversations!to! take!
place!during!the!game-play.!!
*
c)* Learning* activities:!Depending! on!pedagogical! approach! (for! example,! instructional! or! social!
learning! approaches),! learning! interactions! between! agents! participating! in! a! learning! situation!
generally!take!place!as!instruction,!demonstration,!imitation,!dialogue,!discussion,!or!co-construction.!
Examples!of!previous!learning!activities!in!students’!learning!games!include!inviting!the!learner/player!
to!be! an! apprentice,!learning! by! experience,!learning! from! direct! information,! learning! from! just-in-
time!additional! knowledge,! learning!from!authentic!hints,! learning!by!consequence,!learning!through!
stealth!assessment,!and!learning!and!assessing!by!doing!in!the!game!(Weitze,!2017).!One!of!the!main!
strategies! in! the! design! of! learning! activities,! used! in! this! experiment,! was! to! create! educating!
dialogues! between! two! in-game-characters! or! letting!several! game-characters! first!teach! and! then!
invite! the! learner/player! to!act! by! choosing! between! various! opportunities! in! the! game! (stealth!
assessment)!and!thus!learn!from!the!consequences!of!these!choices.!That!is,!if!the!learner/player!had!
been!listening!and!thereby!learning,!she!would!know!what!to!choose.!
!!
d)*Learning*pathsnarratives*and*interactions:*The!challenge!for!the!students!was!to!then!combine!
and! weave! the! above! three! learning! design! areas! into! meaningful! n arratives! in! the! climate! change!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
6!
learning!games.!The!students!did!this!by!creating!learning!paths!(Figure!3)—inventing!a!narrative!with!
game-characters! that! took! part! in! relevant! learning! activities! in! various! procedures! over! time.! This!
demanded! procedural! thinking! of! the! students! as! well! as! the! building! of! hypotheses,! arguments,!
connections,!and!causal!explanations!about!the!subject!matter!within! and!around!the!digital!learning!
games.!!
!
!
Figure*3:*Student!storyboards:*Creating!learning!paths!in!the!learning!game!concepts*
!
The! analysis! showed! that! the! students! learned! and! approached! their! learning! goals!through! collaborative!
discussions!and!work!processes!and!reflected!on!the!problem!of!creating!a!learning!design!while!ideating!and!
constructing!their!game!concepts!in!iterative!processes.!!
!
3.4*The*students’*game*design*reflections**
Though!the! game!design!and! learning!design!were! deeply!intertwined,!the!following!is! an! attempt! to!analyze!
relevant!game!design!elements!in!the!students’!constructed!learning!games.!When!setting!learning!“into!play,”!
traditional!game!elements!are!action+space+ and+ narrative,+choice,+challenge,+ rules,+feedback,+and+game+goals!
(Weitze,! 2016b).! Some! of! these! elements! were! directly!connected! to!the! common! learning! design! elements!
that!the!students! used.! Turning! learning! design!elements!into!game!design!elements!can!be!regarded!as!the!
students’! further! development! of! their!vision! for! a! learning! game! with! specific! learning! goals!into! a! more!
specified!and!conceptualized!learning! game! design.! In! their!creative! and! innovative! work,! the! student! game!
designers!kept!moving!between!the!abstract!learning!goals!and!the!specifications!for!a!concrete!learning!game!
design!as! well! as! between!the! whole! and! the!details! of! the! learning!game!concept!though! their!continuous!
reflections!(Löwgren!&!Stolterman,!2007).!!
!
Action* space,* narrative,* and* game* goals:!An! example! of! connections! between! learning! design! and! game!
design!elements!was!that!the!game! design!element!action+ space!in!the!students’!games!corresponded! to! the!
learning+ environment.! Also,!the! game! design! element! narrative!corresponded! with!the! learning+ path!the!
students!used!to! connect! the! relevant! learning!goals!and!content! in! their! learning! games.!The!narrative! also!
presented! the! game! goal! by! creating! a! story!with! a! direction! that! was!meaningful! and! connected! to! the!
learning! goals!in! a!relevant! way.!One! team!explained:! Our+ climate-polar-bear+ game+involves+various+scenes+
with+ horrible+ pictures+ of+ what+ climate+ changes+ will+ do+ to+ the+ earth+ if+ we+ continue+ living+ like+ we+ do+ at+ the+
moment.+Our+ idea+ is+ to+ make+a+ game+where+ you+ can+ save+the+ planet+ by+ pursuing+various+ climate-connected+
challenges+to+save+the+world,+and+if+you+fail,+the+earth+ends+up+being+destroyed.”!This!game!involved!a!learning!
environment! and! narrative! that! were! connected! to! the! learning! goals,! and! the! game! goal! was! evident:! the!
player/learner!had!to!save!the!world.!!
!
Choices,*challenges,* rules,* and* feedback:!The!content! (subject!matter)! was! presented! through!the! narrative!
(in! monologues! and! dialogues)! and! in ! the! learning! activities! in! the! students’! games.! The! learning! activities!
were!formed!as!choices,+challenges,+rules,+and+feedbackopportunities!for!educating!interactions!in!the!game.!
The! choices!in! several!of! the! teams’! learning! games! were! created! so! the! player/learner! had! to! create! a!
hypothesis! about! how! to! answer! from! the! knowledge! that! was! provided! earlier! in! the! game.! One!team!
discussed! the! interactions! in! their!game:! “In+ our+ CO2+ game+ the+ player,+ for+ example,+ is+ challenged+ on+ his+
knowledge+ and+ has+ to+ choose+ between+ two+ green+ energy+ sources.+ He+ has+ to+ listen+ carefully+ to+ our+ game-
characters,+since+it+is+not+the+obvious+choice+he+should+take.+So,+in+this+way+the+rules+of+the+game+are+decided+by+
authentic+facts.+ If+ the+ player+ tries+ to+ save+ the+ environment,+ he+ will+ collect+ money+ for+ building+ a+ fantastic+
sustainable+farm,+and+the+level+of+CO2+will+go+down.+We+have+discussed+if+we+should+create+a+game-rule,+being:+
if+the+player+gives+the+wrong+answers+three+times,+then+he+should+be+told:+‘You+are+terrible+to+the+environment,+
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
7!
and+you+know+nothing,’+and+then+it+is+the+end+of+the+world!”!These!students!had!used!rules!that!were!based!in!
facts!from! the! subject!matter!(you!will!not!survive!if! you!make!unsustainable!choices),!and!the!consequences!
were!inspired!by!real-world!consequences.!The!player/learner!received!feedback!instantly!about! whether!he!
had!understood! the!learning!intentions!(Figure!4).!All!games! used!traditional! game! design! elements! as! a! way!
to!set+the+learning+into+play.!!
!
Figure*4:!Example!of!feedback!in!the!game!
!
The!students!chose!to!create!interactions!in! the!form!of!meaningful!choices!with!meaningful!consequences!in!
their!games.!For!example,!in!the!CO2!game!about!sustainable!farming,!the!player!had!several!offers!to!choose!
between!various!opportunities.!With!the!information!she! had!been!given!in!advance!in! the!game,!she!should!
be!able! to!choose!the!most!sustainable!energy!source.!This! gave!the!player/learner!agency! to! make!her! own!
choice!and!gave!her!experience!with!the!subject!matter!presented!in!the!game.!
*
3.5*Computational*thinking*in*actiontransformation*into*digital*learning*games**
The!students!were!inexperienced!in! using!the! digital!game!design!tool!(Scratch),!and!some!students!hesitated!
when! approaching! the! technology.! Previous! research! showed! it! is! important! to! guide! the! students! by!
introducing!them!to!small!tutorials!for! the! tool!(Weitze,!2017).!This!part!of! the!process!required!the!students!
to! transform! the! specifications! for! the! learning! game! concept! into! a! functioning! digital! game.! The! students!
used! their! story! boards! (Figure! 3)! illustrating!the! learning! environments,! communities! of! practice,! learning!
activities,!and!learning!paths!as!a!basis!for!discussions!about!how!to!create!their!digital!games.!In!this!process,!
the! students! were! presented! with! many! dilemmas.! Sometimes! part! of! their! concepts! proved! difficult,! or!
perhaps!even!impossible,!to!transform!into!digital!proceduresthey!had!to!learn!to!think!computationally.!!
!
The!ideas! and! solutions!did!not!always!work! out! as!planned.!Sometimes! this! was! because!the!affordances!of!
the! game! design! tool! were! too! limited,! or! the! students! did! not! know! the! tool! well! enough! to! find! an!
appropriate! solution.! But! sometimes! the! “conversations”! with! the! game! design! technology!(Schön,! 1992)!
sparked!other!solutions!that!better!met! the! students’! intentions! with! the! learning! games.!In!these!boundary!
areas,! the! learning! game! was!transformed! from! a! vision! with! specific! learning! goals! into! a! concept! for! a!
specified! learning! game! design!and! then! the! transformation! into! a! functioning! digital! gamean! operative!
image!(Löwgren!&!Stolterman,!2007).!These!boundary!areas!often!represented!dilemmas!and!processes!where!
a! “creative! leap”! took! place.! Here!the! learning! game! designers! exceeded!the! limits! of! the! present,! an d! by!
handling!these!dilemmas!the!students!were!forced!to!learn,!be!innovative,!and!create!new!concepts.!!
!
3.6*Computational*learning*elements*in*the*students’*games**
The! analysis! of! the! current! experiment! showed! that! the! abstract! learning! design! elements! the! students!
designed!for! in! their! games! to! some! extent! were! significant!and!could!be!decomposed!into!specific!patterns!
that!could! be! performed! by! procedures! or! algorithms.!This! should!of! course! be!seen! in! light!of! the! learning!
games!being! quite!simple!games,!given! that!the!students!were! novices! in!game!design!and!the! short!amount!
of! time! they! were! given!to! develop! their!games.! These! computational! learning! elements! have,! however,!
proved!efficient!as!inspiring!examples!for!students!in!their!digital!learning!game!design!in!later!experiments.!!
!
The!following!are!examples!of!the!computational!learning!elements!in!the!students’!games.!Again,!these!were!
connected!to!the!previously!mentioned!abstract!learning!design!areas.!The!students!created:!
!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
8!
Learning* environment* and* learning* objects:! This! demanded! that! the! students! imported!backgrounds! and!
objects!into!the!digital!game.!
Communities*of* practice:* This! demanded! that! the! students! imported!or!created!various!relevant!characters,!
teachers,!and!learners!in!their!games!as!well!as!showed!and!hided!these!characters.*
Learning*activities:*There!were!many!examples!of!computational!learning!elements!for!learning!activities!and!
interactions,!illustrating!the!benefits!of!using!games!to!teach!as!opposed!to!e.g.!books.!Activity!examples!were:!!
1) Dialogues* in* the* game,* con versations* with* one* or* more* characters:! This! demanded! that! the! students!
broadcasted!messages!between!the!characters,!enabling!one!character!to!react!to!what!another!character!
sends,!creating!dialogues,!other!actions,!and!interactions!in!this!process.!
2) Methods*for*advancing*in*the*game*and*receiving*feedback*on*whether*the*leaners/player*choices*were*
correct:!This!demanded!that! the! students! created! various!levels! and!scenes! in! the!game.! This! was! done!
e.g.!by!broadcasting!messages!to!change!backgrounds!and!objects.!
3) A*way*to*explore*the*environment:!This!was!e.g.!done!by!programing!the!arrow!keys.!
4) Evaluation*in*the*game:!This!could!be!programmed!in!various!ways.!For!example,!by!using!the!CT!concept,!
events!describing!one! thing! cause! another!thing!to!happen!(Brennan!&! Resnick,!2012)—e.g.,! letting!two!
choices!lead! to! different!consequences,! giving!different!feedback!depending!on!what!the!correct! answer!
was.!
*
Creating*learning*paths*in*the*game:*This!took!place!when!the!students!mentally!decomposed!all!the!various!
activities!into!small!entities!and!then!turned!them!into!procedures!in!the!game—for!example,!by!combining!an!
informative!dialogue! with!a!possibility!to! explore! the!learning!environment!followed! by! an! opportunity!to!be!
evaluated!in! the!game.!The!students!looked! for! patterns!when!they!repeated! various! identical!procedures!or!
algorithms! in! the! game,! altering!the! dialogues! or! background! when! they! wanted! to! create! serial! learning!
situations.!!
!
That! students! were! sometimes! frustrated! if! they! did! not! have! time! to! finish! their! digital! games!proved! the!
importance! of! teachers!continuously! conducting!meta-conversations!with! the! students! discussing! and!
confirming!how!and!what!they!learned!while!creating!their!games.!That!said,!we!saw!proud!students!showing!
their!games!to!fellow!students!at!the!final!exhibition.!
!
4.*Discussion*and*conclusion*
This! article! investigated! how! students! could! learn! specific! subject! matter! by! designing! and! creating! digital!
games! and! whether!the! acquisition! of! CT!skills! could! support! this! learning! process.! It! also! explored! what!
learning!game!design! processes! students! carried!out!when!creating!digital!learning!games!and!what!elements!
were! found! to! connect!the! various! layers! of! the! game! design! process! in! a! meaningful! way,! supporting!the!
development!of!students’!thinking!and!learning!processes.!!
!
The!analysis! found! that! the!learning! game! construction! process!involved!the! students’! considerations! about!
four!central!areas!and!processes!within!these!areas!that!were!deeply!connected!and!interdependent:!1)!game-
specific! learning! goals! for! cross-disciplinary! subject! matter,! 2)! learning! design,! 3)! game! design,! and! 4)!
transformation!into!a!digital!game!(Figure!5).!!
!
As! the! students! started! conceptualizing! their! learning! games! in! analogue! materials,! they! typically!
deconstructed! the! learning! design! for! the! games! into! the! following! learning! design! areas:! learning!
environments,! communities! of! practice,! learning! content,! learning! activities,! and!learning! paths! for! their!
learning!game!concepts.!
!
When!they!moved!on! to! set!the!learning! design! “into!play,”!the!applied!game!design!element!in!many! ways!
corresponded! with! the! learning! design! elements.! For! example,! the! game! design! element! narrative!
corresponded!with!the! learning! design! element! learning+ path!that!was!used!to!connect!the!relevant!learning!
goals,!content,!learning!activities!and!evaluation!processes!in!their!learning!games.!!
!
Finally,!when!the!students!transformed!the!abstract!learning!design!elements!into!a!digital!game,!they!needed!
CT!skills.!CT!was!used!to!decompose!the!tasks,!simplify!the!process!by!looking!for!similar!patterns,!and!create!
algorithmic! procedures! performed! in! the! game! design!tool.! In! this ! part! of! the! process! the! students! created!
learning! paths! in! the! computational! systems,! which!allowed! the! learner/player! to! experience! in-game!
conversations!and!explore,!get!feedback,!and!be!evaluated!in!the!games.!!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
9!
!
The!analysis!suggests!that!the!use!of!learning!game!design!as!a!learning!approachwith!possibilities!to!design!
interactions,! choices,! connections,!consequences,! and! cause!and!effects!in!the!gameaffected!the!students’!
choice!of!content!as!well!as!narrative!for!the!games!and!thereby!what!and!how!they!learned.!
*
Figure*5:*Central!conceptual!areas!and!elements!the!students!reflected!on!and!created!in!the!learning!game!
construction!process*
The!materials!in!this!experiment!were!used!as!“discussion!partners”!by!the!students.!They!learned!by!thinking,!
doing,!thinking!and!doing!again,!working!through!the!various!layers!of!processes!in!an!iterative!process!(Figure!
6).! As! the! students! designed! narratives,! built! hypotheses,! created! arguments! and! choices! with! different!
consequences,!and!demonstrated!connections!and!causal!explanations! about!the!subject!matter! in!the!game,!
deep!thought!processes!were!demanded!of!the!students.!According!to!the!analysis!of!the!interviews!with! the!
teachers! and! observations! from!the! experiment,! this! appeared! to! give! the! students! opportunities!to!learn!
about!1)!the! cross-disciplinary! subject! matter,!2)!learning! to! learn,! and! 3)! CT.! According! to! the! teachers,!
working!with!designing!learning!games!led! the!students!to! develop!new!knowledge!about!relevant!rules!and!
cause-and-effect!systems!within!their!respective!subject!matter!areas.!!
!
!
!
Figure*6:!The!creative!processes!in!the!boundary!areas!between!vision!and!concept!and!concrete!object!
!
To!summarize,!the!students!experienced!how!to!work!from!a!PBL!approach!as!they!started!to!create!ideas!and!
visions!for! the! specific! subject! matter! they!wanted!to!teach!for!their!future!players!to! reach! specific! learning!
goals.!They! then! turned!these!visions!into! learning!game!concepts!involving!learning! design! and!game!design!
elements.! Finally,! they! then! transformed! the! learning! game! concept! into! a! functioning! digital! gamea!
concrete! digital! object.! Despite!being! areas! of! dilemma,! frustration,! and! hard! work,! the! boundary! areas!
C.!L.!Weitze!-!Reflective,!Creative!and!Computational!Thinking!Strategies!Used!When!Students!Learn!Through!Making!Games.!
!
!
!
European!Conference!on!Games!Based!Learning,!ACPI.!FH!JOANNEUM!University!of!Applied!Science,!Graz,!Austria,!5-6!October!2017!(pp.!744-753).!
!
between!vision,! concept,! and! concrete! object!sparked! the! students’!creativity! and! innovative! solutions,! and!
the!students’!thinking!and!learning!processes!that!were!demanded!empowered!them!to!create!ideas!and!solve!
problems!when!learning!through!the!design!of!digital!learning!games.!!
*
5.*References**
Brennan,!K.!&!Resnick,!M.!(2012)!New!frameworks!for!studying!and!assessing!the!development!of!
computational!thinking,!Proceedings+of+the+2012+annual+meeting+of+the+American+Educational+Research+
Association,!Vancouver,!Canada.!!
Charmaz,!K.!(2006)!Constructing+grounded+theory:+A+practical+guide+through+qualitative+research.!Sage!
Publications!Ltd.,!London.!
Dewey,!J.!(1956)!“Thinking!in!education.!Chapter!12”!in!Democracy+and+education:+An+introduction+to+the+
philosophy+of+education.Free!Press,!New!York!
Dewey,!J.!(1910).!How+we+think.!D.C.Heath!&!Co.!Publishers,!Boston.!
diSessa,!A.!A.!(2000)!Changing+minds:+Computers,+learning,+and+literacy.!MIT!Press,!Cambridge.!
Grover,!S.,!&!Pea,!R.!(2013)!Computational!Thinking”!in!K–12+A+Review+of+the+State+of+the+Field.+Educational+
Researcher,!42(1),!pp!38-43.!
Harel,!I.!E.,!&!Papert,!S.!E.!(1991)!Constructionism.!Ablex!Publishing,!New!York.!
Kafai,!Y.!B.,!&!Resnick,!M.!(1996)!Constructionism+in+practice:+Designing,+thinking,+and+learning+in+a+digital+
world.!Routledge,!New!York,!NY.!!
Kafai,!Y.!B.,!&!Burke,!Q.!(2015)!Constructionist!gaming:!Understanding!the!benefits!of!making!games!for!
learning.”!Educational+Psychologist,!50(4),!pp!313-334.!
Kvale,!S.!&!Brinkmann,!S.!(2009)!Interview,+Introduktion+til+et+håndværk.!Hans!Reitzels!Forlag,!Copenhagen.!
Löwgren,!J.!and!Stolterman,!E.!(2007)!Thoughtful+Interaction+Design:+A+Design+Perspective+on+Information+
Technology,!The!MIT!Press,!Cambridge.!
Papert,!S.!(1980)!Mindstorms:+Children,+computers,+and+powerful+ideas.!Basic!Books,!New!York.!
Savery,!J.!R.!(2015)!Overview!of!problem-based!learning:!Definitions!and!distinctions.!In!Walker,!A.,!Leary,!H.,!
Hmelo-Silver,!C.!E.,!&!Ertmer,!P.!(Eds.).!Essential+Readings+in+Problem-Based+Learning:+Exploring+and+
Extending+the+Legacy+of+Howard+S.+Barrows.!(pp!5-15).!Purdue!University!Press,!Lafayette.!
Scratch![Computer!software]!(2017)!Retrieved!from!https://scratch.mit.edu!
Schön,!D.A.!(1992)!“Designing!as!Reflective!Conversation!with!the!Materials!of!a!Design!Situation”,!Knowledge-
Based+Systems,!Vol.!5,!No.!1,!pp!314.!
Thornberg,!R.!(2012)!Informed!grounded!theory.!Scandinavian+Journal+of+Educational+Research,!56!(3),!pp!
243–!259.!
Voogt,!J.,!Fisser,!P.,!Good,!J.,!Mishra,!P.,!&!Yadav,!A.!(2015)!Computational!thinking!in!compulsory!education:!
Towards!an!agenda!for!research!and!practice.”!Education+and+Information+Technologies,!20(4),!715-728.!
Weitze,!C.!L.!(2016/7)!“How!Student!Game!Designers!Design!Learning!into!Games.”!In!GLS+12+conference+
proceedings+Carnegie+Mellon+University+Press.!
Weitze,!C.!L.!(2016a)!“Student!Learning-Game!Designs:!Emerging!Learning!Trajectories.”!Connolly,!T.!&!Boyle!L.!!
(Eds.),!Proceedings+of+the+10th+European+Conference+on+Games+Based+Learning:+ECGBL+2016!(1!ed.,!Vol.!1,!
pp!756-764).!The!University!of!the!West!of!Scotland!Paisley!Scotland:!ACPI.!
Weitze,!C.!L.!(2016b)!“Designing!for!Learning!and!Play!-!The!Smiley!Model!as!Framework.”!Interaction+Design+
and+Architecture(s),!(29),!pp!52-75.!
Wing,!J.!M.!(2008)!Computational! thinking!and!thinking!about!computing.”!Philosophical+transactions+of+the+
royal+society+of+London+A:+mathematical,+physical+and+engineering+sciences,!366(1881),!pp!3717-3725.*
Wing,!J.!(2011)!Research!notebook:!Computational!thinkingWhat!and!why?”!The+Link+Magazine,+Spring.!
Carnegie!Mellon!University,!Pittsburgh.!Retrieved!from!
https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~CompThink/resources/TheLinkWing.pdf!
!
!
*
... Moreover, the most common and generic quantifiable measures process displays (UI/HUDs) are scores, user rewards, time, progress portfolios and visual breadcrumbs (Henriksen & Lainema, 2010;King, 2015;Martin et al., 2011;Rahmani et al., 2013;Van Lippevelde et al., 2016;Wu et al., 2018). Besides, a few studies specifically designed reflective process displays, i.e., 1) reflective information (Orji et al., 2013), 2) advantages/disadvantages of options, 3) learning concepts (O'Neil et al., 2014;Weitze, 2017), and 4) guidance instructions (ChengChiang Chen & Kent, 2020;Foster et al., 2019;Hautopp & Ejsing-Duun, 2020;Hwang et al., 2015;King, 2015;Misfeldt & Gjedde, 2015;Sinensis et al., 2019). ...
... We identified two types of reflective process prompts: 1) based on generic games such as level completion windows, the notification pop-ups, and game win/lose prompts, and 2) based on reflective design to improve learning in games such as prompts for user action feedback with information, instruction scaffolding, and active task-based instructions. We noted that a standard self-explanatory process prompts to encourage users to perform a given task (ChengChiang Chen & Kent, 2020;Fessl et al., 2014;Misfeldt & Gjedde, 2015;Sinensis et al., 2019;Van Lippevelde et al., 2016;Weitze, 2017). In addition, a few studies have incorporated users' action feedback prompts with relevant information (Henriksen & Lainema, 2010;Martin et al., 2011;Orji et al., 2013). ...
... Based on our observation, a most common process model is learning objective outcomes or goal-setting (Foster & Shah, 2011;Foster et al., 2019;Magen-Nagar et al., 2019;Majgaard & Weitze, 2020;Misfeldt & Gjedde, 2015;O'Neil et al., 2014;Rüth & Kaspar, 2021;Sinensis et al., 2019;Weitze, 2017) with domainspecific knowledge (Hwang et al., 2015;Martin et al., 2011). On the other hand, we found only one study (Van Lippevelde et al., 2016), which follows the reflective design paradigm, namely, "self-efficacy" to set a goal as a process model. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Reflective learning forms knowledge from revisiting and reassessing previous experience intentionally and knowingly to modify experience positively. It helps increase self-awareness, which is a critical component of emotional intelligence, creative thinking skills, and a better understanding of an active engagement. Digital games are an appropriate medium for triggering and supporting reflection by providing a safe and immersive environment of stealth learning with the freedom to explore, identify, fail, and retry. Therefore, reflective design in game-based learning aims to trigger critical reflective learning in players, particularly given what game actions may mean in a larger learning context. However, although reflective learning can improve teaching and learning experiences in a new form, work dedicated to reflective design in game- based learning remains limited. This review aims to provide deeper insight into the characteristics of reflective design used in game-based learning to facilitate player reflection via digital games. In this systematic review, after screening against set criteria, a total of 20 studies published between 2010 and January 2021 in indexed scientific journals and conference proceedings were identified. We analysed the main features of the reflective design in technology and how they are currently incorporated in game-based learning (GBL). In addition, we explored the impact of reflection-in-action and reflection-on- action on players’ learning process during and after gameplay. The outcome of this analysis indicated that most of the reviews studies had incorporated reflective design features in GBL to improve the learning process, i.e., improve understanding, enhance user experience among players with active engagement, improve critical thinking, self-reflection, strategy development, reasoning problem-solving, and retention rate. This systematic review aimed to provide an exploratory study for educators, researchers, and game designers by providing valuable information on the main characteristics of reflective design in game-based learning and current limitations with future work.
... Furthermore, it provides students with the opportunity to work creatively with teaching and learning inside the games, for example, through the creation of teaching and learning activities about complex real-life problems via digital design processes. Thus, the design of educational games may be used to help students to reach specific academic learning goals (Earp, 2015;Oygardslia, 2015;Weitze, 2015Weitze, , 2016Weitze, , 2017. ...
... 2) The 'Process model for students' design of games for learning' comprises the phases, conceptual areas, and elements students reflect on and create when designing a digital game for learning ( Figure 1; Weitze, 2017). Students begin by framing the game idea. ...
... The sub-goals that were not met are shown in grey and in parentheses. The analysis indicated that the students, by engaging in introductory exercises for the VR game tool CoSpaces, and by undertaking assignments based on two game-based learning design models (Weitze, 2017(Weitze, , 2016, attained 14 of the 17 sub-skills and knowledge areas from the new digital literacy curriculum (Table 1) through their game design phases. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Digital literacy is becoming accepted as part of the necessary 21st century skills for students in many countries all over the world. Although there is consensus about the necessary 21st century competences, there is a need to operationalize and examine how students may reach these competences. This design-based research study investigated how the design of digital games for learning could support students in developing specific digital literacy competences. Based on the hypothesis that students can become digitally competent by developing educational games, this project examined a new curriculum for digital literacy proposed by the Ministry of Education in Denmark. In the present project, K7-K9 students used a game-based learning design to create educational VR games using the CoSpaces Edu (2020) tool, which is an interactive 3D application. The students were guided through iterative design phases and discussions as they created educational games for their peers with the help of two game-based learning design frameworks. Next, an analysis was conducted on the elements in the students' digital game design processes that contributed to them reaching specific learning goals of the new digital literacy curriculum. The findings of the analysis indicated that by going through the various design and development phases of creating digital games for learning, the students were able to develop 14 out of the 17 learning goals of the new digital literacy curriculum.
... This paper presents an exploratory study intended to improve understanding of how game making can be used to support the attainment of Danish language learning goals in a second grade primary school in Denmark. To this end, the study field tests a learning design (Weitze, 2017a(Weitze, , 2017b for improving academic competence by involving the students in developing educational games to be used by their peers. ...
... At the start of the project, the Danish teacher and the researcher thus discussed which sub-learning goals from Danish SCGs we could imagine would be appropriate to work with in this game-based learning design. Before the workshops were designed and implemented the learning goals proposed by the teachers were compared and adjusted according to previous research findings concerning what the same cohort as well as other students had previously learned through the development of games for learning (Weitze, 2016b(Weitze, , 2017a(Weitze, , 2017b. ...
... A good learning game not only facilitates learning but also foresees an evaluation process inside or around the game. Therefore, if one is to learn by playing and/or developing a learning game, the game must incorporate learning situations that present learning content/knowledge, and also include an evaluation process that tests the player's grasp of that knowledge (Weitze, 2017b). This resembles the recommendations from the Smiley Model (Weitze, 2016a). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study presents an exploratory investigation of how learning through game development can contribute to students' academic learning and how applying game making for learning as a teaching method can be linked to subject-specific learning goals. The paper describes a project where twenty-two second grade Danish students worked with problem-based assignments that supported them in developing digital games for learning with the Scratch tool. The students succeeded in creating digital games for learning and in embedding learning situations, learning activities and evaluation opportunities into their games. Analysis of the learning dynamics suggests that the students were involved in interactive communication and production processes and used the Danish language as a tool inside their small digital games when engaging in this problem-based and constructionist learning approach. According to the analysis, the students managed to work with specific academic learning goals and enjoyed learning through the development of games for learning. The Italian Journal of Educational Technology (IJET)
... Inicialmente, foi realizado um estudo da literatura complementado por achados de recursos disponíveis em outros repositórios, tais como plataformas e lojas de jogos digitais. Os trabalhos encontrados evidenciaram plataformas e ferramentas como Scratch 3 , Blocly Games 4 entre outras, através das quais foi promovido o desenvolvimento de competências ligadas ao PC [15,20,28,37]. ...
Conference Paper
Computational Thinking (CT) is a reasoning process focused on solving problems, promoting the development of cognitive skills. Serious games can contribute to exercise these skills, as they are playful and adaptable tools for different audiences. This paper presents the design and evaluation of a medium-fidelity serious digital game prototype designed to help improve the cognitive skills of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), based on the fundamental principles of PC. The first phase of the game design was completed and evaluated by Special Education professionals from a partner institution. The observations and feedback collected are being discussed with the development and research teams to implement the functional version of the game.
... The framework of abstraction to help learners develop abstract concepts from concrete experiences while learning CT has been studied (Cetin & Dubinsky, 2017). On the other hand, the framework of reflective creative computational thinking to guide learners in balancing different modes of thinking during game development have been studied as well (Weitze, 2017). Knowledge construction in PBL and abstraction in PBL knowledge construction have been researched . ...
Article
Problem Based Learning has extended its scope from the medical domain to every other domain, bringing out the learning benefits and connecting with real world applications. Reflections are one of the components of problem based learning that help to achieve self-directed learning and critical thinking. There are several ways to solve a problem in problem based learning, and one way to enhance the process is to use computational thinking. The abstraction can help in knowledge construction and writing reflections that can connect beyond the systems of study. This study proposes to design case studies for reflections with and without abstraction. The data of 37 students was analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively to understand the nature of the reflections. Model problems were used as case studies. A qualitative study was carried out using descriptive, in vivo, and focused coding methods, arriving at themes, and ttest performed on two sets of quantitative results. The work brings out some intriguing results that are presented in this paper. Abstraction in reflections can positively contribute to generalizing the system and connecting to the real-world applications beyond the case study that is under consideration. Abstractions help in knowledge construction and application extension. Keywords—Abstraction; Computational Thinking; Problem Based learning; Reflections.
... Most of the studies have incorporated in-action social discourse by playing a game in a collaborative environment among participants (Foster et al., 2019;Hautopp & Ejsing-Duun, 2020;Henriksen & Lainema, 2010;Martin et al., 2011;Misfeldt & Gjedde, 2015;Rüth & Kaspar, 2021;Sinensis et al., 2019;Van Lippevelde et al., 2016;Weitze, 2017). Network-based technology enables users to participate in a multiplayer environment; Orji et al. (2013) have developed role-playing multiplayer games to enable shared learning experience, collaboration and social reflection. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Reflective practice is the ability to revisit and reassess one's previous actions to engage intentionally in the process of learning. The concept of reflection leads from unconscious aspects of learning or experience to mindful awareness, giving an individual the power to absorb everyday experiences to make appropriate conscious choices. Digital games in game-based learning (GBL) offer interactive learning with authentic practice and a high retention rate. Digital games are also considered an immersive and safe medium of stealth learning with the freedom to identify, explore, fail, and then retry. Main game elements such as feedback in a user interface (UI), head-up displays (HUDs), maps, prompt messages, and social discourse are reflective in nature; therefore, by default, games are reflection machines and appropriate mediums for triggering and supporting reflective learning. However, despite reflective learning having the ability to improve teaching and learning experiences in a practical form, work dedicated to reflective design in GBL is still limited. Previous studies have incorporated reflective practices into a learning environment to improve the learning rate. These practices may vary over domains and yield different outcomes that are not converged yet. While current game design comprises all features that facilitate reflection "as a whole set", it misses individual reflection differences. However, getting maximum usage of the reflective nature of games with authentic learning content while maintaining the fun criteria can be challenging. Hence, a sound design methodology and guidelines are needed to assist the game designer in aiding effective learning with reflective practices. In this paper, our primary purpose is to align reflective learning practices with existing GBL approaches and then provide a framework to incorporate reflective learning practices into designing GBL. The intention is that this framework will help designers, educators, and researchers to design game-based learning experiences following reflective design practices.
... That is, the process where students implement academic content into games to learn about specific subject matters, while the players of these games also have an opportunity to reach specific learning goals. (Weitze, 2016(Weitze, , 2017. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This study investigated how the creation of games for learning with specific learning goals could contribute to the development of students lower- and higher-order thinking skills. The results confirmed the hypothesis that the depth and complexity of the students’ learning and game design processes when developing games for learning influenced how deep learning processes the student-game designers experienced as they implemented academic knowledge and learning opportunities into their analogue games.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
The use of digital games for learning encompasses a range of pedagogical approaches and practices. Game-making as a learning strategy has gained interest. This approach, inspired from the work of Piaget (1951) and Papert (1980), uses game design as a means for students to “externalize thinking and problematize focusing on the product” (Kafai & Burke, 2015). However, existing evidence is mostly descriptive (Denner et al., 2019), and there is a lack of comparative studies (Vos et al., 2011) and evidence-based frameworks. The aim of this article is to review and discuss current evidence and frameworks.
Chapter
Prior studies have demonstrated that game-based learning plays a role in enhancing student learning and increasing student motivation. Game design tools are available today (for free or for sale) and user-friendly even by people without any technical skills. However, these game design tools are plentiful. This complicates choosing a game design tool. This article introduces and compares existing game design tools to help people to choose the one that best suits their needs. We started by identifying nine key criteria that characterize game design tools. We then performed a systematic literature search using the PRISMA method. Of 302 identified studies across five databases (IEEE Xplore, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Springer, Web of Science) and 8 game design tools advised by a digital learning manager, 11 game design tools are explained, compared and discussed. Finally, we used the results of this systematic review to select a game design tool for an experimentation in a nursing school. This research work is dedicated to the Technology Enhanced Learning and Educational community, especially game designers, digital learning managers, teachers, and researchers who are struggling to choose the game design tool that best suits their needs.KeywordsGame design toolSystematic literature reviewPRISMAExperimentation
Preprint
Low international EAP test scores of technology lecturers as EFL learners were due to barriers preventing them to continue their study for professional development. The study specifically explored a learning framework consisting of EAP learning methods employed by 48 active lecturers as EFL learners to reach international EAP test score to at least CEFR level B2. An open questionnaire and semi structured interviews were used to collect the data. The data were analyzed using content analysis. The main finding shows Personalized Learning in a Communication Teaching Language (CLT) way integrated with Web 2.0. technology based on Heutagogy approach is to be the appropriate learning framework for the learners. This study may contribute to the production of an effective learning framework helping EFL learners to increase their EAP test score to at least CEFR level B2.
Article
Full-text available
This paper presents a framework for designing engaging learning experiences in games – the Smiley Model. In this Design-Based Research project, student-game-designers were learning inside a gamified learning design - while designing and implementing learning goals from curriculum into the small digital games. The Smiley Model inspired and provided a scaffold or a heuristic for the overall gamified learning design –- as well as for the students’ learning game design processes when creating small games turning the learning situation into an engaging experience. The audience for the experiments was adult upper secondary general students as well as 7th grade primary school students. The intention with this article is to inspire future learning designers that would like to experiment with integrating learning and play.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This article presents how students implemented learning into digital learning games as a means of learning. It was investigated how students could learn by creating learning trajectories for specific learning goals inside digital games. Previous findings were that the students learned by building these games in the design process. But this article investigates what specific features in the two used game tools afforded creation of learning trajectories in various ways. The tools therefore also enabled deep learning processes for the players of the games with lesser or greater ease. Further research is needed concerning how to scaffold the students in the game design processes with the digital tools to support deep and motivating learning processes. The design-based research project used co-design processes and took place in workshops with teachers and adult students from full-time upper secondary general education at VUC Storstrøm through two iterations. The study used learning theory, learning design theory and theoretical concepts about educational technology to analyse the empirical data. The purpose of the study was to formulate empirical and user-driven theories relating to the students design of learning games. The study used qualitative methods; this included audio and videotaped utterances and observations of the teachers and students as well as analysis of the students’ paper prototype and digital learning games.
Article
Full-text available
There has been considerable interest in examining the educational potential of playing video games. One crucial element, however, has traditionally been left out of these discussions—namely, children's learning through making their own games. In this article, we review and synthesize 55 studies from the last decade on making games and learning. We found that the majority of studies focused on teaching coding and academic content through game making, and that few studies explicitly examined the roles of collaboration and identity in the game making process. We argue that future discussions of serious gaming ought to be more inclusive of constructionist approaches to realize the full potential of serious gaming. Making games, we contend, not only more genuinely introduces children to a range of technical skills but also better connects them to each other, addressing the persistent issues of access and diversity present in traditional digital gaming cultures. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2015.1124022
Article
Full-text available
Computational Thinking is considered a universal competence, which should be added to every child’s analytical ability as a vital ingredient of their school learning. In this article we further elaborate on what Computational Thinking is and present examples of what needs to be taught and how. First we position Computational Thinking in Papert’s work with LOGO. We then discuss challenges in defining Computational Thinking and discuss the core and peripheral aspects of a definition. After that we offer examples of how Computational Thinking can be addressed in both formal and informal educational settings. In the conclusion and discussion section an agenda for research and practice is presented.
Article
Full-text available
Jeannette Wing’s influential article on computational thinking 6 years ago argued for adding this new competency to every child’s analytical ability as a vital ingredient of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) learning. What is computational thinking? Why did this article resonate with so many and serve as a rallying cry for educators, education researchers, and policy makers? How have they interpreted Wing’s definition, and what advances have been made since Wing’s article was published? This article frames the current state of discourse on computational thinking in K–12 education by examining mostly recently published academic literature that uses Wing’s article as a springboard, identifies gaps in research, and articulates priorities for future inquiries.
Article
Full-text available
There is a widespread idea that in grounded theory (GT) research, the researcher has to delay the literature review until the end of the analysis to avoid contamination – a dictum that might turn educational researchers away from GT. Nevertheless, in this article the author (a) problematizes the dictum of delaying a literature review in classic grounded theory, (b) presents arguments for using extant literature in the substantive field within a constructivist grounded theory, and (c) suggests data sensitizing principles in using literature, which are: theoretical agnosticism, theoretical pluralism, theoretical sampling of literature, staying grounded, theoretical playfulness, memoing extant knowledge associations, and constant reflexivity.
Book
The authors of Thoughtful Interaction Design go beyond the usual technical concerns of usability and usefulness to consider interaction design from a design perspective. The shaping of digital artifacts is a design process that influences the form and functions of workplaces, schools, communication, and culture; the successful interaction designer must use both ethical and aesthetic judgment to create designs that are appropriate to a given environment. This book is not a how-to manual, but a collection of tools for thought about interaction design. Working with information technology—called by the authors "the material without qualities"—interaction designers create not a static object but a dynamic pattern of interactivity. The design vision is closely linked to context and not simply focused on the technology. The authors' action-oriented and context-dependent design theory, drawing on design theorist Donald Schön's concept of the reflective practitioner, helps designers deal with complex design challenges created by new technology and new knowledge. Their approach, based on a foundation of thoughtfulness that acknowledges the designer's responsibility not only for the functional qualities of the design product but for the ethical and aesthetic qualities as well, fills the need for a theory of interaction design that can increase and nurture design knowledge. From this perspective they address the fundamental question of what kind of knowledge an aspiring designer needs, discussing the process of design, the designer, design methods and techniques, the design product and its qualities, and conditions for interaction design.