利用严肃游戏进行课堂教学--经验重要吗?

IF 2.1 2区 工程技术 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Manal Kharbouch;Ambrosio Toval;Francisco Garcia-Sanchez;Alberto Garcia Berna;Jose Luis Fernandez Aleman
{"title":"利用严肃游戏进行课堂教学--经验重要吗?","authors":"Manal Kharbouch;Ambrosio Toval;Francisco Garcia-Sanchez;Alberto Garcia Berna;Jose Luis Fernandez Aleman","doi":"10.1109/TE.2024.3416816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Contribution: This article provides evidence on the influence of serious games (SGs) in software engineering (SE) education on students’ scores, exam attendance, and chance of passing. It also highlights the impact of teachers’ experience with the implementation of SGs as a learning approach on the aforementioned metrics.Background: Although there are previous studies validating SGs in SE subjects, examining the effects that SGs and the expertise to implement them can have on students’ academic achievement by means of rigorous scientific methods is lacking.Research Questions: Do students achieve better academic results when SGs are used? Are the exam attendance and chance of passing higher among students enrolled in courses that use SGs compared to those following a traditional approach? Does the teachers’ expertise with SGs have an impact on students’ achievement? Are students satisfied using SGs in SE courses?Methodology: A controlled experiment was conducted on undergraduate students who were enrolled in an SE course during the years 2012/2013-2013/2014 and 2021/2022 to compare the effects of SGs with traditional teaching on students’ achievement in this subject. The students from the academic year 2012/2013 attended traditional lectures only, while the students from the academic years 2013/2014 and 2021/2022 had SGs incorporated within their lectures, led by teachers without and with expertise to deploy SGs, respectively.Findings: Students’ scores are higher when SGs are used compared to traditional teaching. Teachers’ experience and expertise are key factors to improve the chances of attending and passing the final exam when SGs are used.","PeriodicalId":55011,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In-Class Teaching With Serious Games—Does Experience Matter?\",\"authors\":\"Manal Kharbouch;Ambrosio Toval;Francisco Garcia-Sanchez;Alberto Garcia Berna;Jose Luis Fernandez Aleman\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TE.2024.3416816\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Contribution: This article provides evidence on the influence of serious games (SGs) in software engineering (SE) education on students’ scores, exam attendance, and chance of passing. It also highlights the impact of teachers’ experience with the implementation of SGs as a learning approach on the aforementioned metrics.Background: Although there are previous studies validating SGs in SE subjects, examining the effects that SGs and the expertise to implement them can have on students’ academic achievement by means of rigorous scientific methods is lacking.Research Questions: Do students achieve better academic results when SGs are used? Are the exam attendance and chance of passing higher among students enrolled in courses that use SGs compared to those following a traditional approach? Does the teachers’ expertise with SGs have an impact on students’ achievement? Are students satisfied using SGs in SE courses?Methodology: A controlled experiment was conducted on undergraduate students who were enrolled in an SE course during the years 2012/2013-2013/2014 and 2021/2022 to compare the effects of SGs with traditional teaching on students’ achievement in this subject. The students from the academic year 2012/2013 attended traditional lectures only, while the students from the academic years 2013/2014 and 2021/2022 had SGs incorporated within their lectures, led by teachers without and with expertise to deploy SGs, respectively.Findings: Students’ scores are higher when SGs are used compared to traditional teaching. Teachers’ experience and expertise are key factors to improve the chances of attending and passing the final exam when SGs are used.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55011,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Transactions on Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Transactions on Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10592080/\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10592080/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

贡献:本文提供了软件工程(SE)教育中严肃游戏(SGs)对学生分数、考试出勤率和及格率影响的证据。文章还强调了教师将严肃游戏作为一种学习方法的实施经验对上述指标的影响:背景:尽管之前有研究验证了在东南欧学科中采用秘书长官僚制,但缺乏通过严谨的科学方法来研究秘书长官僚制和实施秘书长官僚制的专业知识对学生学业成绩的影响:研究问题: 使用学生自学指导是否能提高学生的学业成绩?与采用传统方法的学生相比,使用 SGs 课程的学生的考试出勤率和及格率是否更高?教师的专业知识对学生的成绩有影响吗?学生对在 SE 课程中使用 SG 是否满意?在2012/2013-2013/2014学年和2021/2022学年,我们对修读SE课程的本科生进行了对照实验,以比较SGs与传统教学对学生在该科目上的成绩的影响。2012/2013学年的学生只参加传统授课,而2013/2014学年和2021/2022学年的学生则在授课中加入了SGs,分别由不具备和具备部署SGs专业知识的教师主讲:与传统教学相比,使用 SG 的学生得分更高。教师的经验和专业知识是使用 SGs 提高学生参加和通过期末考试机会的关键因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In-Class Teaching With Serious Games—Does Experience Matter?
Contribution: This article provides evidence on the influence of serious games (SGs) in software engineering (SE) education on students’ scores, exam attendance, and chance of passing. It also highlights the impact of teachers’ experience with the implementation of SGs as a learning approach on the aforementioned metrics.Background: Although there are previous studies validating SGs in SE subjects, examining the effects that SGs and the expertise to implement them can have on students’ academic achievement by means of rigorous scientific methods is lacking.Research Questions: Do students achieve better academic results when SGs are used? Are the exam attendance and chance of passing higher among students enrolled in courses that use SGs compared to those following a traditional approach? Does the teachers’ expertise with SGs have an impact on students’ achievement? Are students satisfied using SGs in SE courses?Methodology: A controlled experiment was conducted on undergraduate students who were enrolled in an SE course during the years 2012/2013-2013/2014 and 2021/2022 to compare the effects of SGs with traditional teaching on students’ achievement in this subject. The students from the academic year 2012/2013 attended traditional lectures only, while the students from the academic years 2013/2014 and 2021/2022 had SGs incorporated within their lectures, led by teachers without and with expertise to deploy SGs, respectively.Findings: Students’ scores are higher when SGs are used compared to traditional teaching. Teachers’ experience and expertise are key factors to improve the chances of attending and passing the final exam when SGs are used.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
IEEE Transactions on Education
IEEE Transactions on Education 工程技术-工程:电子与电气
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
90
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The IEEE Transactions on Education (ToE) publishes significant and original scholarly contributions to education in electrical and electronics engineering, computer engineering, computer science, and other fields within the scope of interest of IEEE. Contributions must address discovery, integration, and/or application of knowledge in education in these fields. Articles must support contributions and assertions with compelling evidence and provide explicit, transparent descriptions of the processes through which the evidence is collected, analyzed, and interpreted. While characteristics of compelling evidence cannot be described to address every conceivable situation, generally assessment of the work being reported must go beyond student self-report and attitudinal data.
×
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