You are here:

Teaching Scientific Argumentation through Games: A Design-Based Approach
PROCEEDINGS

, , ALTEC/Center for Research on Learning, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Nashville, Tennessee, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-84-6 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA

Abstract

The paper will address the use of an iterative development process with middle school students and teachers using low production value prototypes to design a science argumentation game with a targeted game format.

Citation

Craig Hare, J. & Ault, M. (2011). Teaching Scientific Argumentation through Games: A Design-Based Approach. In M. Koehler & P. Mishra (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2011--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4082-4087). Nashville, Tennessee, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 27, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 21-24.
  2. Cooper, A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2007). About face 3: The essentials of interaction design. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing, Inc.
  3. Donker, A., & Reitsma, P. (2004). Usability testing with young children. In A. Druin, J.P. Hourcade& S. Kollet (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 conference on interaction design and children: Building a community (pp. 43-48).
  4. Howland, G. (2002). Balancing gameplay hooks. In F.D. Laramee (Ed.), Game design perspectives (pp. 78-84).
  5. Kelly, A.E. (2008, May 14). Design research in education: Cultivating the soil for experimental studies. Presentation at the University of Kansas Center for Learning, Lawrence.
  6. Kuusela, H., & Paul, P. (2000). A comparison of concurrent and retrospective verbal protocol analysis. The American Journal of Psychology, 113(3), 387-404. Lazzaro, N. (2004). Why we play games: Four keys to more emotion without story. Oakland, CA: XeoDesign, ® Inc. Retrieved April 5, 2009 from http://www.xeodesign.com/xeodesign_whyweplaygames.pdf
  7. Lewis, C., & Rieman, J. (1994). Task-centered user interface design: A practical introduction. [Shareware book] Boulder, CO: Author.
  8. Toulmin, S., Rieke, R., & Janik, A. (1984). An introduction to reasoning. Upper Saddle Ridge, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  9. Tullis, T.S., & Stetson, J.N. (2004). A comparison of questionnaires for assessing website. Paper presented at the Usability Professionals' Association, Minneapolis, MN.
  10. Van Kesteren, I.E.H., Bekker, M.M., Vermeeren, A.P.O.S., & Lloyd, P.A. (2003). Assessing usability evaluation methods on their effectiveness to elicit verbal comments from children subjects. In S. MacFarlane, T. Nicol, J. Read& L. Snape (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 conference on interaction design and children (pp. 41-49). New York:
  11. Von Ahn, L. & Dabbish, L. (2004). Labeling Images with a Computer Game. Proc. Conf. Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 04), ACM Press, 2004, pp. 319– 326.
  12. Von Ahn, L. (2006). Games with a purpose. Computer, 29(6), pp. 92– 94.
  13. Von Ahn, L., Kedia, M., & Blum, M. (2006). Verbosity: A Game for Collecting Commonsense Facts. Proc. Conf.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.