Press START to Teach – Can Simulation Games Close the Theory-Practice Gap?

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Anna Kienitz, Alexander Eitel, Marie-Christin Krebs
{"title":"Press START to Teach – Can Simulation Games Close the Theory-Practice Gap?","authors":"Anna Kienitz, Alexander Eitel, Marie-Christin Krebs","doi":"10.1177/10468781241252521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundStudent teachers commonly struggle to apply theoretical knowledge to their teaching. This theory-practice gap is a serious problem in teacher education. Over the past decade, simulations and serious games have been shown as an effective way to practice the transfer of theoretical knowledge in authentic settings of skill-use. Approximating theory-based teaching practice via repeated use of simulation games, thus, may be able to close the theory-practice gap in teacher education.AimWe aimed to assess whether repeatedly engaging with simulated teaching and theory-based feedback would improve student teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, transfer of theories into teaching situations and their perceived usefulness of theories.MethodN = 86 student teachers learned twice with either a digital simulation game depicting decision-making in the classroom (simulation condition) or with screenshots of the game (control condition). After each phase, student teachers received theory-based feedback about (their) teaching.ResultsAgainst our hypothesis, there were no changes in both conditions regarding student teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, perceived usefulness of theories for practice, or integration of theory-based arguments into practical reasoning. Nonetheless, we found positive effects for learning time and motivation favoring the simulation condition.ConclusionOur results point towards the motivating potential of simulation games that was, however, not sufficient to close the theory-practice gap. It seems that the theory-practice integration within the simulation game needs to be even stronger to reveal the desired effects, which needs to be subject to further research.","PeriodicalId":47521,"journal":{"name":"SIMULATION & GAMING","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SIMULATION & GAMING","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781241252521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundStudent teachers commonly struggle to apply theoretical knowledge to their teaching. This theory-practice gap is a serious problem in teacher education. Over the past decade, simulations and serious games have been shown as an effective way to practice the transfer of theoretical knowledge in authentic settings of skill-use. Approximating theory-based teaching practice via repeated use of simulation games, thus, may be able to close the theory-practice gap in teacher education.AimWe aimed to assess whether repeatedly engaging with simulated teaching and theory-based feedback would improve student teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, transfer of theories into teaching situations and their perceived usefulness of theories.MethodN = 86 student teachers learned twice with either a digital simulation game depicting decision-making in the classroom (simulation condition) or with screenshots of the game (control condition). After each phase, student teachers received theory-based feedback about (their) teaching.ResultsAgainst our hypothesis, there were no changes in both conditions regarding student teachers’ teaching self-efficacy, perceived usefulness of theories for practice, or integration of theory-based arguments into practical reasoning. Nonetheless, we found positive effects for learning time and motivation favoring the simulation condition.ConclusionOur results point towards the motivating potential of simulation games that was, however, not sufficient to close the theory-practice gap. It seems that the theory-practice integration within the simulation game needs to be even stronger to reveal the desired effects, which needs to be subject to further research.
按下 "START "键进行教学--模拟游戏能否缩小理论与实践之间的差距?
背景学生教师通常很难将理论知识应用于教学。这种理论与实践之间的差距是师范教育中的一个严重问题。在过去十年中,模拟和严肃游戏已被证明是在真实的技能使用环境中实践理论知识传授的有效方法。AimWe aimed to assess whether repeated engaging with simulated teaching and theory-based feedback would improve student teachers' teaching self-efficacy, transfer of theories into teaching situations and their perceived usefulness of theories.MethodN=86 student teachers learned twice with either a digital simulation game depicting decision-making in the classroom (simulation condition) or with screenshots of the game (control condition)。结果与我们的假设相反,在两种条件下,学生教师的教学自我效能感、理论对实践的有用性以及将理论论据融入实践推理方面都没有发生变化。尽管如此,我们发现模拟条件对学习时间和学习动机产生了积极影响。看来,模拟游戏中理论与实践的结合需要更加紧密,才能达到预期效果,这还需要进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
SIMULATION & GAMING
SIMULATION & GAMING EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Simulation & Gaming: An International Journal of Theory, Practice and Research contains articles examining academic and applied issues in the expanding fields of simulation, computerized simulation, gaming, modeling, play, role-play, debriefing, game design, experiential learning, and related methodologies. The broad scope and interdisciplinary nature of Simulation & Gaming are demonstrated by the wide variety of interests and disciplines of its readers, contributors, and editorial board members. Areas include: sociology, decision making, psychology, language training, cognition, learning theory, management, educational technologies, negotiation, peace and conflict studies, economics, international studies, research methodology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信