Proposal Synopsis (Proposal ID# 42091315)
Delete this Proposal
|[ view/edit this section ]|
|Category/Subcategory||Research Paper -- Presentation|
|[ view/edit this section ]|
|Session Title||Massively Multiplayer Schools: Do MMORPGs Have a Future in Education?|
|Session Description||Massively-Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games are engaging and motivating. Can they also support context-embedded, inquiry-driven, and socially negotiated learning - while encouraging reflection and metacognition?|
|Theme and Strand||21st-Century Teaching & Learning:Innovative Learning Technologies|
|Keywords||videogame, video game, game, constructivism, Walden|
|Audience Type||Chief Technology Officers
Library Media Specialists
School Board Members
Technology Integration Specialists
|Presider/Reviewer Interest||Research Paper Reviewer
Research Paper Presider
|[ view/edit this section ]|
|Purpose & Objectives||ABSTRACT
Formal K12 education remains much as it did a century ago, but in the era of the Internet, cell phones, and videogames, students have changed. Videogames and simulations show potential as engaging and motivating learning environments. MMORPGs in particular have social and cooperative elements that might be valuable for educational purposes. However, despite a breadth of research about videogames and learning in general, the potential uses of MMORPGs in formal education are poorly understood. Therefore, this study aims to inquire into potential applications for MMORPGs as constructivist learning environments in formal K12 education , and to understand related benefits and drawbacks. Two pillars of theory support this study: constructivist learning theory and digital game-based learning theory. The study will employ a grounded theory paradigm of qualitative research and the Delphi method of inquiry. The expert panel will consist of 12 to 24 adult experts drawn from the field of videogames and learning. Both industry professionals and academics will be represented in the population. The concensus of the panel’s predictions, and any outlying or dissenting perspectives, will be reported in the final paper.
The goal of this study is to identify potential applications of massively multiplayer online role-playing games as constructivist learning environments in the context of formal K12 education. The purpose is to identify the potential benefits and drawbacks of such applications and to recommend courses of action for future research by academics, future game development by industry professionals, and future instructional decisions made by public educators.
The study will be guided by the following two overarching questions:
- What are the potential benefits of using MMORPGs as constructivist learning environments in formal K12 education?
- What are the potential problems related to using MMORPGs as constructivist learning environments in formal K12 education?
Additionally, based on the literature review the following six research questions will be used to focus the study:
- Engagement and motivation: How might MMORPGs be used to motivate and engage students, and what problems might be associated with using MMORPGs for this purpose?
- Context: How might MMORPGs be used to provide a context for student learning, and what problems might be associated with using MMORPGs for this purpose?
- Inquiry: How might MMORPGs be used to provide students with opportunities for inquiry-based learning, and what problems might be associated with using MMORPGs for this purpose?
- Social Negotiation: How might MMORPGs be used to support social negotiation of meaning (including facilitated collaboration, cooperation, and competition), and what problems might be associated with using MMORPGs for this purpose?
- Reflection: How might MMORPGs be used to encourage student reflection and metacognition, and what problems might be associated with using MMORPGs for this purpose?
- Social Change: How might MMORPGs used in formal K12 education be used to effect positive social change?
|Perspective/Theoretical Framework||Two pillars of theory
support this study: constructivist learning theory and digital
game-based learning theory. The primary underlying theory of learning
supporting this study is constructivism, as typified by the works of
Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner. The theories of constructivist
educational technologists such as Papert and Jonassen also contribute
to the constructivist foundation for this inquiry. In particular, six
elements of a constructivist learning environment have been identified:
engagement and motivation, context-embedded learning, inquiry-driven
learning, socially negotiated learning, reflection and metacognition,
and the importance of effecting positive social change.
Existing digital game-based learning theories have also been influential in the development of the research problem. Particularly influential works have including those of Prenksy, Gee, Aldrich, Schaffer, Squire, Steinkuehler, Beck and Wade, Michael and Chen and others. Constructivist themes run throughout these books as they suggest that videogames can offer engagement and motivation, a context for learning, opportunities for student inquiry, a framework for collaborative learning, support for reflection and metacognition, and a medium for effecting positive social change.
|Research Methods||This qualitative
study will employ the Delphi method of inquiry. A panel of experts will
be asked to make predictions in response to multiple iterations of a
questionaire. After each iteration, responses will be coded and
analyzed by the researcher. Following iterations will be modified in
light of these responses. Participants’ responses will also be
anonymously shared with the other participants so they have an
opportunity to alter their predictions prior to the next iteration.
Through this process, the panel will move toward concensus in their
predictions. Outlying or dissenting predictions will be consideration
by the researcher as well.
The research population will be a panel of approximately 12 to 24 adult experts drawn from the field videogames and learning. Both industry professionals and academics will be represented in the population. The researcher will draw upon this population by asking them to complete three iterations of a Delphi questionaire over a period of no more than eight weeks. Each iteration will require one hour or less of their time. The researcher will aim for a panel of at least 12 experts to complete the study. In order to allow for attrition during the study, the researcher will invite as many as 24 experts to participate.
Research data will be collected in the form of participants' written responses to the Delphi study questionnaire. This data will be coded and analyzed by the researcher after each iteration so that results can be presented to the participants and the following iteration of the questionnaire can be composed.
|Results or Expectations||This study is a
doctoral dissertation at Walden University. The oral defense of the
proposal is scheduled for October 10, 2007. Committee approval is
anticipated as is subsequent IRB approval - all necessary documents
have already been submitted and accepted. The data collection is
expected to be complete in December 2007, and the final report should
be completed and defended in early 2008. The researcher expects to
formally complete his degree and graduate at the end of Winter or
Spring quarter. The research will thus be completed well before NECC.
an effort to avoid research bias in the Delphi process, the researcher
is not making any predictions or writing any formal expectations
regarding the outcome of the research at this time.
|Educational and/or Scientific Importance||The goal of this dissertation is to identify potential applications of MMORPGs as constructivist learning environments in the context of formal K12 education. The purpose is to identify the potential benefits and drawbacks of such applications and to make recommendations for future research by academics, future game development by industry professionals, and future instructional decisions by public educators. In this way, the study aims to contribute to reducing the knowledge gap identified in Chapter 2; currently, there is very little written about the use of MMORPGs for learning, particularly in formal educational environments. This study is also significant because it aims to explore a technology that may have the potential to improve (and perhaps revolutionize) education for 21st century students and educators.|
|References||Aldrich, C. (2004). Simulations and the future of learning. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
Aldrich, C. (2005a). Learn by doing: A comprehensive guide to simulations, computer
Aldrich, C. (2005b). Personal Interview.
Baker, J., Lovell, K., & Harris, N. (2006). How expert are the experts? An exploration of the concept of ‘expert’ within Delphi panel techniques. Nurse researcher. 14(1). 59-70.
Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs, Retrieved April 16 2006 from http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm
Bourgeois, J., Pugmire, L., Stevenson, K. Swanson, N., Swanson, B. (n.d.) The Delphi method: a qualitative means to a better future. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from www.freequality.org/sites/www_freequality_org/Documents/knowledge/Delphimethod.pdf
Bowles, N. (1999). The Delphi technique. Nursing standard. 13(45), 32-36. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from http://www.nursing-standard.co.uk/archives/ns/vol13-45/v13w45p3236.pdf
Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of
Bruner, J. S. (1971). The relevance of education. New York: W. W. Norton & Company,
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carstens, A., & Beck, J. (2005). Get ready for the gamer generation. TechTrends. 49(3) 22-25.
Caperton, I. (2005) For Seymour Papert "hard fun" is the essence of good games
Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: the psychology of engagement with everyday life (1st ed.). New York: Basic Books. Retrieved April 24, 2007, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=43132772
Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillenial learning styles: implications for
DeKanter, N. (2005). Gaming redefines interactivity for learning. TechTrends. 49(3)
Dewey, J. (1915). The school and society. (2nd Ed.) Chicago: University of Chicago
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Simon & Shuster.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Simon & Shuster.
Dixon-Krauss, L. (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom: media literacy instruction and
Downes, S. (2005). Places to go: Apolyton. Innovate: journal of online education. 1(6).
Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.) (1992). Constructivism and the technology of
Frasca, G. (2003). Simulation versus narrative: introduction to ludology. In Wolf, M. J. P., & Perron, B. (Eds.). (2003). The video game theory reader. New York: Routledge.
Freeman, D. (2004). Creating emotion in games Berkley, CA: New Riders, an Imprint of Peach Pit, A Division of Pearson Education.
Games for Change. (2006). Games for change. Retrieved June 22, 2007 from http://www.gamesforchange.org
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: multiple intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books. Retrieved March 25, 2007, from Questia database: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=91465967
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New
Gee, J. P. (2004) Situated language and learning: a critique of traditional schooling.
Gee, J. P. (2005a). Learning by design: games as learning machines. The Journal of
Gee, J. P. (2005b). What would a state of the art instructional video game look like?
Gee, J. P. (2005c). Why video games are good for your soul: pleasure and learning.
Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: an introduction. New York:
Grodal, T. (2003). Stories for eye, ear, and muscles: video games, media, and embodied experiences. In Wolf, M. J. P., & Perron, B. (Eds.). (2003). The video game theory reader. New York: Routledge.
Hartman, A. (1981). Reaching consensus using the Delphi technique. Educational Leadership. 38(6), 495-497.
Holland, W., Jenkins, H., Squire, S. (2003). Theory by design. In Wolf, M. J. P., & Perron, B. (Eds.). (2003). The video game theory reader. New York: Routledge.
Iverson, K. M. (2005). E-learning games: interactive learning strategies for digital
Jenkins, H. (2005a). Technology and Education: Games. Webcast. Costa Mesa, CA:
Jenkins, H. (2005b). The MIT games literacy workshop. The journal of media literacy. 52(1-2) 37-40.
Jenkins, H., Klopfer, E., Squire, K., & Tan, P. (2003). Entering the education arcade.
Jenkins, H., & Wright, W. (2005) "Buy these problems because they're fun to solve!"
Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you. New York: Riverhead Books.
Jonassen, D. H. (1992). Evaluating constructivistic learning. In Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (Eds.) (1992). Constructivism and the technology of instruction: a conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: engaging critical thinking.
Joppe, M. (n.d.) The Delphi method. The research process. Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, Canada. Retrieved July, 23, 2004 from www.ryerson.ca/~mjoppe/ResearchProcess/841TheDelphiMethod.htm
Klopfer, E., & Yoon, S. (2005). Deveoping games and simulations for today and
Koster, R. (2005). A theory of fun for game design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press,
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (Eds.) (1975). The Delphi method: techniques and applications. (Electronic version). Retrieved December 17, 2006 from http://www.is.njit.edu/pubs/delphibook/delphibook.pdf
Littleton, F. (2005) Game boys and game girls in higher education. Conference poster presented at the Games+Learning+Society (GLS) Conference, June 23-24, 2005.
Ludwig, B. (1997). Predicting the future: have you considered using the Delphi methodology? Journal of Extension. 35(5). Retrieved July 11, 2007 from http://www.joe.org/joe/1997october/tt2.html
McDivitt, D. (2005). Technology and Education: Games. Webcast. Costa Mesa, CA:
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.
MG Taylor Corporation. (1983). Delphis. The manual. p. 208. Boulder, CO: Taylor Management Centers. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from http://www.mgtaylor.com/mgtaylor/jotm/winter97/delphis.htm
Michael, D., & Chen, S. (2006). Serious games: games that educate, train, and inform.
Mooney, C. G. (2000). An introduction to Dewey, Montessori, Erikson, Piaget, &
Okoli, C. & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool. Information and Management. 42, 15-29. Retrieved December 23, 2006 from the Google cache html version of http://www.image.unipd.it/cossu/VALUTAZIONE%20DI%20IMPATTO%20AMBIENTALE/Working%20Grup/Tema%2001_Metodo%20Delphi/Okoli,%202003.pdf
Papert, S. (n.d.). Hard Fun. Retrieved April 16, 2006 from http://www.papert.org/articles/HardFun.html
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York:
Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer.
Papert, S. (1996). The connected family. Atlanta, Georgia: Longstreet Press.
Piaget, J. (1929). The child's conception of the world. (J. Tomlinson & A. Tomlinson, Trans.) Savage, MD: Littlefield Adams Quality Paperbacks. (Original work published 1929.)
Piaget, J. (1950). The origins of intelligence in children. (Trans.) Guilford, CT: International Universities Press (Republished, 1992.)
Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children (Cook, M., Trans.). New York:
Pillay, H. (2005). An investigation of cognitive processes engaged by recreational
Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw Hill.
Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the horizon. 9(5). NCB
Prensky, M. (2004b). Beyond the lemonade stand: economics and business lessons for a
Prensky, M. (2004a). A lesson for parents: how kids learn to cooperate in video games.
Prensky, M. (2005a). “Engage me or enrage me”: what today’s learners demand.
Prensky, M. (2005b). In educational games, complexity matters: mini-games are trivial –
Prensky, M. (2006). Don’t Bother Me Mom – I’m Learning. St. Paul, MN: Paragon
Quinn, C. N. (2005). Engaging learning: designing e-learning simulation games. San
Rieber, R. W. & Robinson, D. K. (Eds.) (2004). The essential Vygotsky. New York:
Rowe, G. & Wright, G. (1999) The Delphi technique as a forecasting tool: issues and analysis. International journal of forecasting. 15, 353-375. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from http://www-marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast/paperpdf/delphi%20technique%20Rowe%20Wright.pdf
Salen, K. & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals.
Shaffer, D. W. (2004). When computer-supported collaboration means computer-
Shaffer, D. W. (2005). Multisubculturalism: Computers and the end of progressive
Shaffer, D. W. (in press). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers and
Shaffer, D. W., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Before every child is left behind: How epistemic
Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and the
Skulmoski, G. J., Hartman, F. T., Krahn, J. (2007). The Delphi method for graduate research. Journal of Information Technology Education. Volume 6.
Slator, B. M. et al. (2006). Electric worlds in the classroom: teaching and learning with
Squire, K. (2002). Cultural framing of computer/video games. Game studies, 2(1).
Squire, K. (2003). Video games in education. International journal of intelligent
Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2004a). Harnessing the power of games in education. Insight, 3(5), 7-33.
Squire, K. & Steinkuehler, C.A. (2005). Meet the gamers. Library Journal. April 15,
Squire, K. D. & Steinkuehler, C. A. (in press). The genesis of 'CyberCulture': The case of
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2004a). A Discourse analysis of MMOG talk. In J. H. Smith & M.
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2004b). Learning in massively multiplayer online games. In Y. B.
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2005a) Cognition and learning in massively multiplayer online role
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2005b). The new third place: Massively multiplayer online gaming
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006a). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as
Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006b). Why game (culture) studies now? Games and Culture, 1(1),
Steinkuehler, C. A. (in press). Cognition and literacy in massively multiplayer online
Steinkuehler, C. A. & Williams, D. (in review). Where everybody knows your (screen)
Trochim, W. M. K. (2001). The research methods knowledge database. (2nd Ed.).
Tryphon, A. & Voneche, J. (Eds.) (1996). Piaget - Vygotsky. UK: Psychology Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological
Vygotsky, L. (1986) Thought and language. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1997). Educational psychology. Boca Raton, Florida: St. Lucie Press.
Williams, P. L., & Webb, C. (1994). The delphi technique: a methodological discussion. Journal of advanced nursing. 19, p. 180-186.
Williamson, B., & Facer, K, (2004). More than 'just a game': the implications for
Winograd, D. (2005). Chris Dede on emerging technologies that enable distributed-
Wong, C. (2003). How will the e-explosion affect how we do research? A documented briefing prepared for the RAND corporation. Retrieved July 7, 2007 from www.rand.org/pubs/documented_briefings/DB399/DB399.pdf
Yee. N. (2006). The Daedalus project: the psychology of mmorpgs. Retrieved December 17, 2006 from http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/
|[ view/edit this section ]|
|Room Set Information|
|[ view/edit this section ]|