MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029879561 · doi:10.1080/17408989.2011.649721

Complexity thinking in PE: game-centred approaches, games as complex adaptive systems, and ecological values

2012· article· en· W2029879561 on OpenAlex
Brian D. Storey, Joy Butler

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Education and Sport Pedagogy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPhysical Education and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaDouglas College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceComplex adaptive systemSystems thinkingComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)Management scienceArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: This article draws on the literature relating to game-centred approaches (GCAs), such as Teaching Games for Understanding, and dynamical systems views of motor learning to demonstrate a convergence of ideas around games as complex adaptive learning systems. This convergence is organized under the title 'complexity thinking' and gives rise to a comprehensive model of game-based learning that addresses theoretical and practitioner considerations relevant to researchers and teachers. Complexity thinking is also partnered with an ecological integration value orientation to reinforce the dominant purposes of game-based learning in physical education. Key concepts: The study of game-based learning from a complexity thinking perspective relies on the foundational alignment of game characteristics with those of complex learning systems. Both complex learning systems and games are (a) comprised of co-dependent agents, (b) self-organizing, (c) open to disturbance, (d) sites of co-emergent learning, (e) open to varying experiences or interpretations of time, and (f) able to evolve their structures in response to feedback. Considering games as learning systems opens the door to consideration of the system being as sustainable and adaptable as it can. Sustainability, adaptation potential, and engagement levels emerge from the 'game as learning system' discussion in order to provide insight into the functioning of the game. High levels of engagement and sustainability are the presented goals for teachers working from a complexity thinking perspective. A number of key concepts from systems literature, such as attractors, affordances, attunement, and disturbances, are discussed as identifiable and manipulatable dimensions of game-based learning. Implications for the PE profession: Physical educators are well positioned to notice learning as it emerges and to construct environments that focus learning without forcing learning. Complexity thinking concepts such as flow, coupling, engagement, attractors, affordances, attunement, and disturbance, in combination with the pedagogical principles advocated by GCAs, provide a robust set of analytical and teaching tools. It is to be hoped that a deepening of understanding of how game forms and game play lead to learning during games will improve the quality of learning experiences in games and foster increasing and prolonged engagement by students. Keywords: physical educationcomplexity thinkingcomplex learning systemsgamessportflowconstraintsteaching games for understanding (TGfU)game-centred approach (GCA)value orientations

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.321
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it