The effect of using games in teaching conservation

被引:3
作者
Tan, Cedric Kai Wei [1 ]
Lee, Jiin Woei [2 ]
Hii, Adeline [3 ]
Loo, Yen Yi [4 ]
Campos-Arceiz, Ahimsa [3 ,5 ]
Macdonald, David W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oxford, Dept Zool, Wildlife Conservat Res Unit, Recanati Kaplan Ctr, Tubney, Oxon, England
[2] Univ Nottingham, Grad Sch, Malaysia Campus, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Selangor, Malaysia
[3] Univ Nottingham, Sch Environm & Geog Sci, Malaysia Campus, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Selangor, Malaysia
[4] Manchester Metropolitan Univ, Sch Sci & Environm, Div Biol & Conservat Ecol, Manchester, Lancs, England
[5] Univ Nottingham, Mindset Interdisciplinary Ctr Trop Environm Studi, Malaysia Campus, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Selangor, Malaysia
关键词
Conservation education; Conservation games; Personality; Intrinsic motivation; Learning style; INTRINSIC MOTIVATION; LEARNING STYLES; CLASSROOM; STUDENTS; PREFERENCES; PERSONALITY; PERFORMANCE; INVENTORY; EDUCATION; VALIDITY;
D O I
10.7717/peerj.4509
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Games are an increasingly popular approach for conservation teaching. However, we know little about the effectiveness of the games on students' experiences and knowledge acquisition. Many current games are supplemental games (SG) that have no meaningful interaction with the subject matter. We adapted the experiential gaming (EG) model where students were immersed in goal-orientated tasks found in real-life situations, and they tackled questions to complete actions for their main task. Classroom-based games were created for eight different conservation topics for an annual Wildlife Conservation Course and an annual Diploma in International Wildlife Conservation Practice. Data were collected over two cycles, a total sample size of 55 multinational students. We used a combination of repeated-measures design and counterbalanced measures design; each student was subjected at least twice to each of the EG and didactic instruction (DI) treatments, and at least once to the SG approach. We compared students' perception, learning and behavioural responses to the treatments, including measures of student personality types and learning styles as explanatory variables. Findings revealed multiple benefits of the classroom EG compared to the DI approach, such as increased attention retention, increased engagement and added intrinsic motivation. The improved level of intrinsic motivation was mainly facilitated by increased social bonding between participants. Further, we show that this EG approach appeals to a wide range of learning styles and personalities. The performance of SG was generally intermediate between that of EG and DI. We propose EG as a beneficial complement to traditional classroom teaching and current gamified classes for conservation education.
引用
收藏
页数:28
相关论文
共 77 条
[11]   Computers in the classroom: How information technology can improve conservation education [J].
Brewer, C .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2003, 17 (03) :657-660
[12]  
Bromley G., 2000, SCH SCI REV, V82, P39
[13]  
Busato VV, 1999, PERS INDIV DIFFER, V26, P129
[14]   Learning styles: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study in higher education [J].
Busato, VV ;
Prins, FJ ;
Elshout, JJ ;
Hamaker, C .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1998, 68 :427-441
[15]  
Cassidy S., 2004, EDUC PSYCHOL-UK, V24, P419, DOI DOI 10.1080/0144341042000228834
[16]   Birds of a feather: Students' preferences for lecturers' personalities as predicted by their own personality and learning approaches [J].
Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas ;
Furnham, Adrian ;
Christopher, Andrew N. ;
Garwood, Jeanette ;
Martin, G. Neil .
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2008, 44 (04) :965-976
[17]   Personality and approaches to learning predict preference for different teaching methods [J].
Chamorro-Premuzic, Tomas ;
Furnham, Adrian ;
Lewis, Martin .
LEARNING AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2007, 17 (03) :241-250
[18]  
Coffield F., 2004, Learning Styles and Pedagogy in Post-16 Learning
[19]  
Costa PT., 1992, Personality & Individual Differences, V13, P653, DOI [DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I, 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I, 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-1, DOI 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-1]
[20]  
DeBello T.C., 1990, J READING WRITING LE, V6, P203, DOI DOI 10.1080/0748763900060302