MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794933503 · doi:10.5539/ies.v11n4p15

Educational Game Design as Gateway for Operationalizing Computational Thinking Skills among Middle School Students

2018· article· en· W2794933503 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Min Lun Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational thinkingOperationalizationMindsetGame designMathematics educationSophisticationPsychologyGame design documentComputer sciencePedagogyGame DeveloperMultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative case study reports descriptive findings of digital game-based learning involving 15 Taiwanese middle school students’ use of computational thinking skills elicited through programmed activities in a game design workshop. Situated learning theory is utilized as framework to evaluate novice game designers’ individual advancement in developing a designer language, mindset, and use of computational thinking skills. Three strands of findings were extrapolated from analyzing observational data, participant-generated written responses and artifacts: Understanding games as systems and how components work together in meaningful relationships in game design; Developing growing sophistication in communicating with other novice game designers using language germane to game design; Improving understanding and application of computational thinking skills through game design activities. Extended discussions on three focal cases revealed that using design pedagogy, participants operationalized computational thinking skills in design tasks. Promises and pitfalls of using game design to facilitate computational thinking skills are discussed.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.352
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207