{"id":10058,"date":"2020-10-28T15:59:26","date_gmt":"2020-10-28T15:59:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/\/\/"},"modified":"2021-02-18T15:05:24","modified_gmt":"2021-02-18T15:05:24","slug":"developing-mathematics-knowledge-and-computational-thinking-through-game-play-and-design-a-professional-development-program","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/citejournal.org\/volume-20\/issue-4-20\/mathematics\/developing-mathematics-knowledge-and-computational-thinking-through-game-play-and-design-a-professional-development-program","title":{"rendered":"Developing Mathematics Knowledge and Computational Thinking Through Game Play and Design: A Professional Development Program"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Economies and societies are rapidly shifting to capitalize and focus on technology. Within K-12 education, technology has played an important role both as a medium<\/em> to teach a variety of curricular materials and as an end<\/em> in itself, by teaching computer science and engineering concepts, so that students today will be able to make informed decisions about computation and technology issues of global importance in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When considering technology as a medium<\/em>, computer-based games are a good example. Games have been growing in popularity as an avenue for learning STEM, and a growing body of research has shown the effectiveness and impact of playing games as a way to learn and practice curricular content (Habgood & Ainsworth, 2011; Lester et al., 2013; Steinkuehler et al., 2012). Educational games foster engagement and motivation among students while enhancing learning and promoting teamwork (Devlin, 2011). Such evidence suggests that games provide benefits to students above and beyond learning that could serve as effective, alternative activities for learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) classrooms. <\/p>\n\n\n\n When considering technology as an end<\/em>, an important concept at the K-12 level is computational thinking (CT), a set of skills that involves solving problems, designing systems, and understanding human behavior by drawing on the concepts fundamental to computer science (Wing, 2006). CT has been called a universally applicable set of attitudes and skills that everyone, not only computer scientists, would be eager to learn and use and a vital ingredient of STEM learning. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Educators and business leaders have recognized that computational thinking, including problem solving, systems thinking, computational modeling, and data practices (Weintrop et al., 2016), is a new basic skill necessary for economic opportunity and social mobility and is used in most fields. Students should have the opportunity to learn CT in school and be prepared with skills they can apply in almost every discipline (Guzdial, 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The reality is, however, that educators have found changing their practices to incorporate technology as a medium<\/em> to be challenging, <\/em>and it has been even harder for STEM educators to understand how to integrate technology as an end, <\/em>such as integrating CT concepts into their curricula. Teachers lack experience and training to teach CT, which has made it hard to find ways to blend this curriculum in STEM classrooms. A literature review (Lockwood & Mooney, 2017) concluded that more detailed lesson plans and curriculum on CT would benefit teachers by providing guides on how to feasibly incorporate CT in their own classrooms. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Although many differences exist between mathematics and computer science, mathematics teachers are natural candidates for teaching computational thinking. Mathematics teachers are already prepared in problem solving, precision, and the rigor required in a software creation process, and the National Research Council has highlighted how mathematics and computational sciences depend on each other: software engineers apply the mathematical form of scientific theories, while mathematicians and scientists use powerful information technologies created by software engineers. Engineers and mathematicians can thereby accomplish analyses, investigations, and models that might otherwise be out of the question without each other (National Research Council, 2012, p. 65). With the training and experience of mathematics teachers, this relationship between mathematics and computational sciences should also be considered in K-12 classrooms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This project addresses the growing need of teacher professional development in technology integration in the classroom, sitting at the intersection between utilizing technology as a medium<\/em> for mathematics teaching and learning and the development of computational skills as an end<\/em> in itself. The Game Play and Design Framework is a project-based instructional method to engage teachers and students in mathematics content by utilizing mobile technologies as a vehicle for highly active, highly social, collaborative game play and game creation. We utilize the Wearable Learning Cloud Platform (WLCP), a web-based technology tool and game editing platform we created, which enables teachers and students to play, create, and experience technology-augmented learning activities (Micciolo, 2018).<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this article, a 14-week professional development (PD) program is described, in which mathematics and STEM middle school teachers played, designed, tested, and implemented novel mathematics games with their own students. The article reports evidence suggesting that the PD framework is effective as students and teachers engaged, played, and created.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Teachers first played mathematics games (which use mobile devices for each player) and then designed and programmed their own games using the WLCP. Teachers then introduced this process and technology to their classes by having students play the games they created and later designing and programming games of their own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This project introduces a new approach for teaching teachers how to improve both CT and math education. Through the Game Play and Design Framework, teachers and students both play mobile technology-based math games to deepen their knowledge of math concepts and create novel games through a visual programming language to engage with CT concepts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We first describe background research on each of the intersecting areas, the PD framework, and the research study. As part of the results, we share examples of teacher- and student-created games and provide evidence of student learning gains from playing teacher-created games. We conclude with a discussion and interpretations suggesting that we are utilizing the benefits of mobile technologies, easily accessible programming tools, collaborative learning, and mobile technology-based games to develop students\u2019 higher level thinking in STEM classrooms. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In recent years, using game play as an avenue for learning has gained in popularity, and a growing body of research has shown the effectiveness of playing games to learn and practice curricular content (Habgood & Ainsworth, 2011; Lester et al., 2013; Steinkuehler et al., 2012). For instance, educational games foster engagement and motivation among students while enhancing learning and promoting teamwork (Devlin, 2011). Such evidence suggests that games provide benefits to students beyond learning that could serve as effective, alternative activities for learning in STEM classrooms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Engaging math games that are physically active extend learning beyond the seats of student desks as students can ground their content understanding in experiences all around the classroom. Educational games that combine movement with higher order cognition and that integrate learning content aim to engage students and, through object manipulation, make abstract concepts more concrete (Koedinger et al., 2008).<\/p>\n\n\n\n More recently, creating and deploying educational activities through mobile technologies has made using games for classroom instruction and practice more feasible as devices continue to become more compact and even wearable (Howison et al., 2011; Johnson et al., 2013). A growing body of literature has shown the benefits of using technologies for game play and game creation to support learning. For instance, our prior work has shown that playing physically active mathematics games with mobile technologies improved student learning compared to students who were taught the same content through traditional lectures (Arroyo et al., 2017). Such evidence shows the power of mobile technologies to extend learning beyond desks or computers to provide students with the opportunity to learn through active play. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to playing games, creating games can benefit students\u2019 learning. From a theoretical perspective, constructionist theory shares the notion that students learn by making (Papert, 1990). As such, in the process of creating a playable game, students engage in problem solving skills by planning, designing, and overcoming challenges.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In an early study, children created computer-based educational video games to teach fractions to younger elementary school children (Kafai & Resnick, 1996). The researchers reported that students learned not only through design but also about design and that they reached a level of reflection that went beyond traditional school thinking and learning, involving a variety of aspects of what is now considered CT.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other studies report that students practice valuable skills through designing and creating games, such as creativity, critical thinking skills, and problem-solving skills (Dalal et al., 2009; Korte et al., 2007; Overmars, 2004). The game creation process requires students to understand the content of their game and allows them to teach and communicate the content in their own way. This approach encourages students to engage in deeper thinking about the mathematics content in their games, as well as overcoming and learning from the challenges involved with creating a game and working through an engineering design process.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The skills that students learn and refine through game creation make up the foundation of CT, which has been described as formulating problems and realizing solutions that can be implemented with technology (Wing, 2006, 2010). As CT skills, such as abstraction, pattern recognition, problem decomposition and error detection (Grover & Pea, 2013), have recently risen in importance in education (Weintrop et al., 2016), students should develop these skills from an early point in their education. To that effect, researchers and educators must create and deliver activities that challenge students to learn CT and explore problem solving methods.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When conceptualizing CT, we have found that several constructs overlap. The CT process lies at the intersection of several cyclical theoretical frameworks, including the engineering design process (from an engineering perspective; Ertas & Jones, 1996), problem solving (from a mathematics perspective; Polya, 1945), and the iterative design process (from an HCI perspective; Nielson, 1993). All of these constructs involve a kind of targeted thinking during a cyclical process: A problem is defined at a high level of detail with multiple possible solutions that need to be articulated and implemented to some degree, tested, and evaluated according to some criteria of success, and revised and redefined going back to the initial stage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While CT is a critical skill for students to learn in schools, many elementary and middle school teachers are not comfortable teaching these skills. Improving teacher knowledge and training teachers to implement CT into the classroom, requires providing high quality PD opportunities. To that end, extensive research has shown that the relationship between teachers, curriculum resources, and technology are all influential in if, and how, curriculum is implemented in classrooms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The ways in which teachers adopt curriculum are dependent on their own knowledge and goals as well as the curriculum resources provided to them. Mishra and Koehler (2006) emphasized the three-way relationship between teacher knowledge of content, pedagogy, and technology to integrate technology into instruction effectively. Acknowledging that differences in teacher resources may influence their interpretation and use of curriculum resources and technology heightens the importance of supporting teachers and iteratively refining the materials and instruction given to teachers to support their understanding and implementation of new initiatives in their own classrooms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Professional development programs offer a mechanism to provide this knowledge and training to teachers. According to Desimone (2009, 2011), high quality PD programs require a set of core features including (a) an emphasis on core content, (b) active learning, (c) coherence, (d) sustained duration, and (e) collective participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to Desimone\u2019s (2009) conceptual framework, teachers first should experience PD over time that both increases their knowledge and skills and also changes their beliefs. Teachers can then use their new knowledge, skills, and beliefs to alter and improve their approach to instruction in their own classrooms. In theory, these changes should relate to improved student outcomes. At the core, this framework asserts that for students to learn, teachers themselves need to learn and practice first.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Considering the overlap with computational and mathematical thinking, we created the Game Play and Design Framework to address STEM teachers\u2019 lack of experience and training in how to teach CT to younger students by having teachers learn about and practice CT prior to applying this approach in their own classrooms. In the following section, we describe the goals and process of the Game Play and Design Framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Game Play and Design Framework is a series of game play and game creation experiences that allow teachers and students to integrate technology-based game play and game design in their own classrooms (Figure 1). The Framework consists of four stages that involve students and teachers as both game players and game creators. Students and teachers engage in tangible and social activities connected to mathematical content as game players and then become creators of educational games through a cyclical process. In turn, teachers and students reap the benefits of game play, such as collaborative learning and affective engagement with mathematics content, while at the same time obtaining the benefits of game creation, such as a deeper understanding of mathematics content and problem-solving skills. Each of the four stages of the framework are described in the following section.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 1 <\/strong>The Game Play and Design Framework, in Four Stages: Teachers as Players (Stage 1), Teachers as Creators (Stage 2); Students as Players (Stage 3); Students as Creators (Stage 4)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Teachers are first introduced to the Wearable Learning Cloud Platform technology (described in the following section) by playing an existing active technology-based game. While the mathematical content of the game may be simple to teachers, the purpose of this activity is for them to have experience with the technology-based games as their students will do later in the process. As teachers engage with the technology and physically move through their environment, interacting with game props, they develop a context for understanding how the games are played and created, as well as a sense for how to incorporate mathematics content in a way that utilizes mobile technologies and physical movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Following the experience of playing a game that incorporates mathematics, teachers then create and design their own math game in teams. During this process, teachers are expected to deepen their computational knowledge and develop more positive attitudes toward using games to develop computational and mathematical problem solving.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Once the teacher-created game is a functional product, teachers bring their games to their own classrooms. While teachers move into the role of game deployers and managers, students become game players within the context of the game that their teacher developed. As students play the technology-based game, they answer questions and solve problems related to class content by interacting with their peers, their environment, and the technology involved through active game play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n After playing the games, students become creators as they design and program a math game of their own. Once the games are built, students run and debug the games before showcasing and playing their games with their classmates. During this process, students are expected deepen their mathematical knowledge, improve mathematical problem solving and creation, and develop positive attitudes toward CT.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ultimately, the Game Play and Design Framework provides a novel approach for teachers and students to play and create instructional games augmented by mobile technologies to deepen student learning and promote computational and mathematical thinking skill development in STEM classrooms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The WLCP (wearablelearning.org<\/a>; Arroyo et al., 2017; Micciolo, 2018) is a web-based technology tool that allows users both to create<\/em> and play<\/em> original, active games for STEM learning with mobile devices. Users create accounts and access the WLCP in three different roles to explore both game play and game creation: Game Players, Game Editors, and Game Managers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The WLCP was designed as a platform to play and create games for teachers and students. To that effect, rather than necessitating that schools download their own instance of the platform, users can log into the WLCP for free on any web browser on most devices, including desktop computers and smartphones. This accessibility is consistent with the mission of the WLCP to provide all students with opportunities to learn through game creation and game play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Students and teachers can use the WLCP to play existing games in their classrooms (Figure 2). The WLCP hosts a small library of existing games that users can play when they log in as Game Players. The platform provides a means of playing existing games and testing created games by serving them to smartphones. When users login as Game Players, they are able to access public games and games that they or their classmates have created. Students can also play games assigned by their teacher as class-wide activities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 2 <\/strong> The WLCP Serves Games, Smartphones and Wearable Devices, Allowing Students to Play Active Games in Their Own Classrooms<\/p>\n\n\n\n When users log into the WLCP as Game Editors, they have full access to the user-friendly, visual drag-and-drop game editor to create and refine games to be played on mobile devices (Figure 3). The WLCP is designed for programming novices so that middle and high school students can effectively use the game editing platform to create games with a wide variety of content, multiple levels, and players.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Teachers and students first plan out and design the behavior of their mobile devices as finite state machines on paper, then transfer them into our novel visual programming language, which assumes no prior programming knowledge. The first \u201cstate\u201d in their design corresponds to the first message that their device displays when it is turned on. As students program their games, they specify states by choosing every behavior of the mobile device, including the text to be displayed on the screen (a question, hint, or welcome message) as well as lights, colors, buzzers, images, sounds and vibrations of each phone\/smartwatch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Middle school students (and their teachers) design and enter what their mobile devices will do when specific objects are scanned, what will happen when they click specific buttons, how the devices announce that the game is over, who has won, and so forth. As users move through the game creation process, they can also test-run and debug the game with immediate feedback from the WLCP through the run and debug<\/em> feature of the editor, which simulates game play, to help ensure game functionality. Students use and implement finite state machines and advanced language, vocabulary, and understanding that is typically reserved for undergraduate students in computer science courses. Students observe the results of testing their mobile devices in the context of their games and make adjustments accordingly. Once the games have been created in the WLCP, multiple users can log in as Game Players to play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 3 <\/strong>The WLCP Platform Is Designed for Students to Program Games Through Finite State Machine Structures With Drag-and-Drop Game Elements in the Game Editor<\/p>\n\n\n\n The WLCP allows teachers and students to act as Game Managers to facilitate game play in addition to acting in the roles of Game Editor and Game Player. As Game Managers, users activate games on the WLCP for a specific group of users to play (Figure 4). This function also allows multiple, simultaneous plays of the same game so that a teacher could allow 10 students or 30 students to play one game at the same time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Figure 4 <\/strong> Left: Game Manager Select a WLCP Game for Their Students to Play. Right: Game Managers Can View Games That Are in Progress by Their Students<\/p>\n\n\n\n While the WLCP has been used in prior work with students and teachers and we have seen positive effects of playing and creating games through the WLCP in lab-based settings and in classrooms (Arroyo et al., 2017), a majority of this previous work involved our team of researchers directly delivering instruction for the WLCP to students. Less emphasis has been placed on how to train teachers to integrate this platform effectively and feasibly into their own curriculum. To remove researchers from this process and keep teachers in the role of facilitators, the goal of the current project was to examine the feasibility of training teachers to (a) create their own games, (b) effectively have their students play their developed games, and (c) have students create their own games through the WLCP in the classroom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Through this project, we aimed to answer the following research questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Twelve middle school STEM and math teachers completed the 14-week PD program. Of the 12 teachers, nine were middle school math teachers (one fifth grade, two sixth grade, three seventh grade, and one eighth grade), three were middle school STEM teachers (fifth-eighth grade), and one was an afterschool STEM activities coordinator. Together, roughly 400 students were exposed to the WLCP and Game Play and Design framework in their classes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To implement the Game Play and Design Framework in Figure 1, we developed a 14-week teacher PD program to introduce STEM educators to the WLCP and explore the benefits of active game play and creation with their own students and curriculum, following the four stages of the framework.The program encompassed all aspects of the Game Play and Design Framework involving both the playing and designing of multiplayer educational games for mathematics. The timeline of the implementation is described in detail in Table 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Table 1 <\/strong>Game Play and Design Professional Development Program Plan and Timeline<\/p>\n\n\n\nLiterature Review<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Intersection of Technology, Games, CT, and Mathematics Education<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Computer-Based Games<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Computational and Mathematical Thinking<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Professional Development in Computational Thinking and Problem Solving<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Our Approach: The Game Play and Design Framework<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
The Professional Development Model<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Stage 1: Teachers as Players<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Stage 2: Teachers as Creators<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Stage 3: Students as Players<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Stage 4: Students as Creators<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Our Testbed Technology: The WLCP<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Game Players<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Game Editors<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Game Managers<\/em><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Research Questions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Methodology<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Participants<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Procedure<\/h3>\n\n\n\n