Catastrophic co-production: A student-staff partnership for developing an educational game
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v4i2.4120Keywords:
higher education, game-based learningAbstract
We describe the production of an educational game (Catastrophic) for supporting biology learning in higher education (HE) that was developed through a partnership between students and academic staff. We consider the ways in which the development project intersects with the use of game-based learning in HE and with Students as Partners (SaP) practice. We describe the rationale for the project, discussing the use of games in the context of a shift from surface to deep learning during the transition to HE. We then reflect upon the development process and the resulting game, drawing on student and staff perspectives gathered using interviews. Finally, we make recommendations for others embarking on student-staff partnerships for the co-creation of teaching and learning tools.
Downloads
References
Bovill, C. (2019). A co-creation of learning and teaching typology: What kind of co-creation are you planning or doing? International Journal for Students as Partners, 3(2), 91-98. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v3i2.3953
Cook-Sather, A. (2015). Dialogue across differences of position, perspective, and identity:
Reflective practice in/on a student-faculty pedagogical partnership program. Teachers College Record, 117(2), 1-42.http://repository.brynmawr.edu/edu_pubs/32/
Cook-Sather, A. & Luz, A. (2015). Greater engagement in and responsibility for learning: what happens when students cross the threshold of student–faculty partnership. Higher Education Research & Development, 34:6, 1097-1109. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.911263
Davies, W. M. (2009). Groupwork as a form of assessment: common problems and recommended solutions. Higher Education, 58(4), 563-584.
Donnison, S., & Penn-Edwards, S. (2012). Focusing on first year assessment: Surface or deep approaches to learning? The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 3(2), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.5204/intjfyhe.v3i2.127
Dunne, E. & Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as change agents. New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education. Bristol: ESCalate Higher Education Academy Subject Centre for Education/University of Exeter. https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/id/eprint/14767
Entwhistle, N., & Peterson, E.R. (2004). Conceptions of Learning and Knowledge in Higher Education: Relationships with Study Behaviour and Influences of Learning Environment. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(6), 407-428.
Fielding, M. (2011). Patterns of partnership: Student voice, intergenerational learning and democratic fellowship. In Mockler, N and Sachs, J., (Eds). Rethinking Educational Practice Through Reflexive Inquiry. Netherlands: Springer, pp. 61-75.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218
Graneheim, U. H. & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
Hauke, E. (2019). Understanding the world today: the roles of knowledge and knowing in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 24:3, 378-393. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1544122
Healey, M. (2019). Students as partners and change agents in learning and teaching in higher education. Retrieved from: www.mickhealey.c.o.uk/resources
Healey, M., & Healey, R. (2018). ‘It depends’: Exploring the context-dependent nature of students as partners practices and policies. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i1.3472
Holland, E.P., Kirman, B., Knox, K., Czaplinska, R., Murton, R., Shepherd, M., Topham, M., Westbury-Hawkins, K. (2018). https://catastrophic.york.ac.uk
Hussey, T., & Smith, P. (2010). Transitions in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47:2, 155-164. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703291003718893
Kapp, K. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Kolb, D.A., (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Matthews, K. E. (2017). Five Propositions for Genuine Students as Partners Practice. International Journal for Students as Partners 1(2). https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v1i2.3315
Mercer-Mapstone, L., Marquis, E., McConnell, C. (2018) The ‘Partnership Identity’ in Higher Education: Moving From ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ to ‘We’ in Student-Staff Partnership. Student Engagement in Higher Education Journal, 2(1), 12-29.
Mercer-Mapstone, L., & Marie, J. (2019). Practical Guide: Scaling up student-staff partnerships in higher education. Institute for Academic Development: University of Edinburgh. Retrieved from: https://www.ed.ac.uk/institute-academic-development/about-us/latest-news/staff-student-partnerships-guide
Nasir, M., Lyons, K., Leung R., Moradian, A. (2013). Cooperative Games and Their Effect on Group Collaboration. In: Vom Brocke J., Hekkala R., Ram S., Rossi M. (eds) Design Science at the Intersection of Physical and Virtual Design. DESRIST 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7939. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Neary, M. (2010). Student as producer: A pedagogy for the avant-garde? Learning Exchange, 1(1). Retrieved from: http://studentasproducer.lincoln.ac.uk/files/2014/03/15-72-1-pb-1.pd
O'Rourke, E., Haimovitz, K., Ballweber, C., Dweck, C. S., & Popovíc, Z. (2014). Brain points: A growth mindset incentive structure boosts persistence in an educational game. In CHI 2014: One of a CHInd - Conference Proceedings, 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3339-3348). (Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557157
Péladeau, N., Forget, J., & Gagné, F. (2003). Effect of Paced and Unpaced Practice on Skill Application and Retention: How Much Is Enough? American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 769–801.
Peters, J. (2018). The pedagogies of partnership: From Blair to Freire? In A. Melling and R. Pilkington. Paulo Freire and transformative education. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 175-189.
Peters, J., & Mathias, L. (2018). Enacting student partnership as though we really mean it: Some Freirean principles for a pedagogy of partnership. International Journal for Students as Partners, 2(2), 53-70. https://doi.org/10.15173/ijsap.v2i2.3509
Scott, G. W., (2017). Active engagement with assessment and feedback can improve group-work outcomes and boost student confidence, Higher Education Pedagogies, 2:1, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2017.1307692
Stott A, Neustaedter C (2013). Analysis of gamification in education. Surrey, BC, Canada. http://clab.iat.sfu.ca/pubs/Stott-Gamification.pdf
Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2017). The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1
Wingate, U. (2007). A framework for transition: Supporting “learning to learn” in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(3), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2007.00361.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Nicholas Glover, Kerry Knox, Ben Kirman, Matthew Topham, Katilly Westbury-Hawkins, Pen Holland
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process - this applies to the submitted, accepted, and published versions of the manuscript. This can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
