Serious Games, Collaborative Learning,

Basic questions in Collaborative Learning
Some answers from the Psychology research,
and new questions for the study of Collaborative Learning in
Serious Games.

Margarida ROMERO, Ph.D.
Associate Director of E-learning. ESADE, Universitat Ramon Llull.
Margarida.Romero@Esade.edu

02/11/2011 ESADE.

1

Margarida Romero, Ph. D.
Collaborative GBL & Group Awareness

INDEX

1. Collaborative Serious Games (C-SG)
2. How do we learn together?
3. Collaborative game dynamics and learning
4. eFinance Game Design (eFG) and Research Objectives


Main question

Can we support
collaborative learning
through the use of
Serious Games ?

Theoretical Background:
0.

Collaborative SG

Collaborative Serious Games  Learning
Game Based Learning (GBL)
through Computer Supported
Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Collaborative
Learning
Serious Games 
Computer- Game Based Collaborative
Supported Games
for Learning Learning (GBL) GBL

Computer
Computer Computer
Supported CSCL GBL /
Supported GBL. Collaborative SG Supported
Learning
Serious Games (SG) Collaborative
Learning (CSCL)


Factors in (collaborative) learning

Contextual factors
(collaboration task and
environment, collaboration
dynamics – game rules-, ...)
Inter-group factors
(identity, competitiveness...)

Inter-psychological
factors (group
awareness, social
competencies, ...)
Intra-psychological factors
(cognitive and metacognitive
potential, development
stage, motivation, ...)


How do we learn together?
3 theoretical approaches :
transmissive,
conductivism,
constructivism,
 knowledge convergence

How do we learn
1.

together ?

Transmisive Approach:
Assumes that learning is mainly dependent on
the teacher.
Learning is through repetition; the learner is a
passive container (tabula rasa), waiting to be filled
with knowledge.

How do we learn
1.

together ?

Conductivism:
Professors should reinforce
students’ correct behaviour and
knowledge.

How do we learn
1.

together ?

Constructivism:
A process where individuals construct new knowledge based on prior
knowledge and/or experience through the social
interaction, discovery, and the personal construction of meaning from
experience (Piaget, 1968, Vygotsky, 1978)
Previous knowledge Individual learning in social contexts
elicitation (Collaborative learning)

How do we learn
1.

together ?

Constructivism  Knowledge convergence
An increase in common knowledge following
collaboration, sharing mutual understanding through
social interaction (Jeong & Chi, 2007).
3 Knowledge Equivalence
1 Knowledge Equivalence + 2 Knowledge Convergence


Collaborative game dynamics and
learning
Positive Interdependence VS
Competition

Collaborative Game
2.

Dynamics and Learning

Collaborative learning depends also on the (learning)
context.
What are the game rules ?

Collaborative Game
2.


In interindividual competitive situations sharing
knowledge with others is counterproductive...

Collaborative Game
2.


Cooperative intragroup positive interdependence
happens when an individual success depends on
the group’s success.

However, the gameplay (“performance oriented
stimulation”, Bateman & Boon, 2005, p. 27) is reduced in these
cooperative situations situations !

Collaborative Game
2.


Playing together against other teams generetes
intragroup positive interdependence and intergroup
competitiveness.

Individual learners collaborating TOGETHER, AGAINST the other small groups
Intragroup sharing Knowledge is a productive strategy

Positive interdependence through common Learners’ (previous) knowledge
performance interest (intragroup cooperation elicitation for facilitating the
and intergroup competition) awareness of the MKO


eFinance Game (eFG) Design and
Research Objectives

eFinance Game Design
Research Objectives

3.

and Research Objectives

The eFinance Game is based
Are students elicitating their
- In the constructivist knowledge
previous knowledge ?
convergence approach
Are students sharing their on-
task knowledge ?
- In the intragroup positive
interdependence and intergroup Are students learning more in
competitiveness. groups than individually ?

3.


1. The students should
declare their previous
Are students elicitating their
knowledge in their profile. previous knowledge ?
task knowledge ?
Are students learning more in
groups than individually ?

Research Question: How affects
knowledge symmetry in the
knowledge convergence process?

3.


In the first individual
phase, the students should
define their answers... and Are students elicitating their
their level of certainty previous knowledge ?
task knowledge ?
groups than individually ?

Research Question: Is the level of
certainty elicitation having a
positive impact on the results ?

3.


The eFinance Game
includes 3 phases :
•Individual Are students elicitating their
•Peer Assessment previous knowledge ?
•Collaborative Are students sharing their on-
task knowledge ?
Results in the three phases
are being compared. groups than individually ?

Research Question: Are students’
learning more in the
individual, peer assessment, or
collaborative phase ?

Your contribution is welcome !

Thank you for your attention

Margarida ROMERO, Ph.D.
Associate Director of E-learning. ESADE Business School.
Margarida.Romero@Esade.edu

21

Serious Games, Collaborative Learning,

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Serious Games, Collaborative Learning,

Similar to Serious Games, Collaborative Learning, (20)

More from Margarida Romero

More from Margarida Romero (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Serious Games, Collaborative Learning,