PERCEIVED EFFECT OF ONLINE GAMES ON THE CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS OF GRADE 9 AND 10 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS OF ST. JOHN'S INSTITUTE, INC.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is grounded in the Theory of Game-Based Learning (GBL) and aims to investigate the perceived effects of online games on the critical thinking skills of Grade 9 and 10 students. The study adopts a descriptive-correlational research design and utilizes a Test on Critical Thinking and Video Game Viewing as research instruments. Data was collected from the students of St. John's Institute, Inc., Infanta, Pangasinan, during the academic year 2022-2023. The findings indicate that, when taken as an entire group, the extent of perceived effect of online gaming was described as "Less Proficient," while the critical thinking skills were described as "Highly Accomplished." When classified by grade level, Grade 9 students exhibited a "Developing" level in the perceived effect of online games and a "Highly Accomplished" level in critical thinking skills. Grade 10 students, on the other hand, showed a "Less Proficient" level in the perceived effect of online games and a "Highly Accomplished" level in critical thinking skills. Furthermore, there is a significant difference in the perceived effects of online games on critical thinking skills when classified by grade level. The study concludes that there is a significant relationship between online gaming and critical thinking skills, although previous research has produced mixed results. Recommendations for further research include conducting similar studies with different student populations, extending the duration of the study, using other online games with appropriate evaluation rubrics, increasing awareness among teachers and parents about the potential benefits of online games in developing critical thinking skills, integrating online games as a teaching strategy, and considering the integration of online games into the curriculum.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".