# data[].attributes.body
Easy way to make your own teaching games for free.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Active Learning In Practice- Case Studies

# data[].attributes.body
When I was a TA during my masters in film, I designed a lot of active learning activities. One of my favorites, which could be easily adapted to online learning and other subjects, was: The students were learning about different types of shots and editing choices. I chose a clip from a film that had a wide variety of each in a very short sequence. I did a mini lecture that reviewed some of the lecture content about the different shots. Then, I showed the clip once, telling the students to silently try to notice as much as they could. Then, we re-watched the section, and I had the students call out whatever they saw when they saw it. (This could be done online with labeling tools, for example.)

# data[].attributes.headline
Zoom app marketplace has some great features that can be used in a virtual classroom.

# data[].attributes.subject
Zoom app marketplace has some great features that can be used in a virtual classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The jigsaw classroom is a widely used cooperative learning technique originally developed by Elliot Aronson in 1971 at the University of Texas, Austin as a way to promote cooperation in the classroom by making individuals dependent on each other in pursuit of a common goal. Since that time, the jigsaw technique has been modified and used successfully by educators in a wide variety of classrooms ranging from kindergarten to graduate school.

The basic premise of the jigsaw is that students work in small, interdependent groups with individuals given the responsibility for becoming "expert" in one aspect of a topic that they then teach to their peers in order to accomplish a group goal [1]. In a common version of the jigsaw, students are divided into small groups of 4-5 members with each group responsible for becoming expert on a different aspect of the same problem or topic. Each group discusses the material for which it is responsible until all members of the group understand the material well. The expert groups break up and new groups are formed, with at least one representative from each expert group in each new group. Each individual then teaches his material to the other members of the mixed group so that everyone has a deeper understanding of the different aspects of the problem or topic. Students go on to do a group problem solving task or an activity that synthesizes the material they have learned.

The benefits of cooperative assignments like the jigsaw have been widely documented. Reviews of the research have consistently found that when compared with more traditional competitive or individualistic learning methods, cooperative learning has a positive effect on student achievement, improves student's attitudes towards their subject area, improves relationships between students and increases student retention [2] [3] [4]. The effectiveness of cooperative learning depends on the particular method used. The most successful approaches incorporate two key elements: group goals and individual accountability [5].

Variations on the jigsaw have been implemented effectively in undergraduate courses across a variety of disciplines, including statistics [6], philosophy [7]; biology [8], geology [9], language courses [10], psychology [11] [12], chemistry [13] [14] multi-disciplinary computational science and engineering [15], sociology [16] and interdisciplinary environmental science [17].

Studies of jigsaw use in undergraduate courses report positive effects when jigsaw assignments are structured to incorporate elements central to effective cooperative learning. These key elements include positive interdependence between students, individual accountability, face-to-face interaction, emphasis on interpersonal and small group skills, and group processing [18]. Reported benefits include students taking more responsibility for their own learning, becoming more actively engaged, asking more questions and relying on each other for information rather than the instructor. In gaining practice in self and peer teaching, students deepen their understanding of the material and improve their communication skills. When every student's contribution is essential, every student has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully.

-Bok Center, Harvard University

[1] Aronson, E.; Blaney, N.; Stephin, C.; Sikes, J., & Snapp, M. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage Publishing Company

[2] Johnson, D.W.; Johnson, R.T.; (1999). Making cooperative learning work. Theory into Practice, 38(2), 67-73.

[3] Springer, L; Stanne, M.E.; Donovan, S. (1999) Effects of small group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21-51.

[4] Johnson, D.W.;Johnson, R. T.; Stanne, M. B. (2000). Cooperative learning methods: a meta-analysis. University of Minnesota, 60 Peik Hall, 159 Pillsbury Drive, S.E., Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

[5] Slavin, R., (1991). Synthesis of research on cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.

[6] Perkins, D.W.; Saris, R. (2001). A "jigsaw classroom" technique for undergraduate statistics courses. Teaching of Psychology, 28(2), 110-113.

[7] Faust, J.L.; Paulson, D.R.(1998). Active learning in the college classroom. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 9(2), 3-24.

[8] Colosi, J.C.; Zales, C.R. (1998). Jigsaw cooperative learning improves biology lab Courses. Bioscience, 48(2), 118-141.

[9] Tewksbury, B.J. (1995). Specific strategies for using the "jigsaw" technique for working in groups in non-lecture-based courses. Journal of Geological Education, 43, 322-326.

[10] Qiao, M.; Jin, X., (2010). Jigsaw as a cooperative learning technique: focusing on the language learners. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 113-125.

[11] Krauss, J. (1999). A jigsaw puzzle approach to learning history in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 26(4), 279-280.

[12] Carroll, D.W. (1987). Use of the jigsaw technique in laboratory and discussion classes. Teaching of Psychology, 13(4), 208-210.

[13] Doymus, K. (2008). Teaching chemical bonding through jigsaw cooperative learning. Research in Science and Technological Education, 26(1), 47-57.

[14] Doymus, K.; Karacop, A.; Simsek, U. (2010) Effects of jigsaw and animation techniques on students' understanding of concepts and subjects in electrochemistry. Educational Technology and Research Development, 58, 671-91. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9157-2

[15] Burkhardt, J.; Turner, P.R. (2001). Student Teams and Jigsaw Techniques in an Undergraduate CSE Project Course. 31st Frontiers in Education Conference, 2, F3D-12-17.

[16] Hedeen, T. (2003). The reverse jigsaw: A process of cooperative learning and discussion. Teaching Sociology, 31, 325-32.

[17] Choe, S.W.T.; Drennan, P.M. (2001). Analyzing scientific literature using a jigsaw group activity. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30, 328-30.

[18] Johnson, D.W.; Johnson, R.T.; Smith, K.A. (1991). Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Further Resources:

Fink, L.D., (2004). Beyond small groups: harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In Michaelsen, L.; Knight, A.; Fink, D. (eds), Team-based learning: a transformative use of small groups: Sterling, VA, Stylus Publishing.

Kagan, S. (1992). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Kagan Cooperative Learning, Inc.

Michaelson, L.K.; Fink, L.D.; Knight, A. (1997). Designing effective group activities: lessons for classroom teaching and faculty development. In DeZure, D. (ed), To Improve the Academy: Resources for Faculty, Instructional and Organizational Development, Stillwater OK, New Forums.

Tewksbury. B, (2010). "Jigsaws". On the cutting edge - professional development for geoscience faculty. Retrieved from http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/teaching_methods/jigsaws/index.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The jigsaw classroom is a widely used cooperative learning technique originally developed by Elliot Aronson in 1971 at the University of Texas, Austin as a way to promote cooperation in the classroom by making individuals dependent on each other in pursuit of a common goal.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Games for educational purposes, or "serious games", share the same "creative and enjoyable essence" (Akilli, 2011, p. 152) with games for entertainment, but are aimed to induce learning that meets certain pedagogic objectives. It has been identified as one type of simulation-based learning approaches, along with role-play and computer simulation (Feinstein, Mann & Corsun, 2002), with its distinctive element of "interaction within a predetermined context involving competition, cooperation, conflict or collusion" (Lean, Moizer, Towler & Abbey, 2006, p. 228).

Games were adopted to promote learning as early as around 3,000 B.C., when war game simulations were used in China and India (Keys & Wolfe, 1990). Price (1990) categorizes today's educational games into "academic games" that teach and provide practice, and "life simulation games" that simulate either real-life contexts with strict rules, or open-ended and flexible social science contexts. Simulation games can be drilled-based, exercise-based, or problem-based (Deshpande & Huang, 2011) for students to observe a process or phenomenon, choose and apply the correct techniques, or solve problems by trying learned approaches. Additionally, gameification (or gamification) has been a growing trend, which refers to adding game mechanics or other game-associated elements to educational activities (Landers & Callen, 2011).

The introduction of business simulation games in the late 1950s (Greenlaw & Wyman, 1973) expanded the development and use of games in higher education settings across disciplines including undergraduate economics (Stanley, 2001), chemistry (Russell, 1999), and psychology (Weisskirch, 2003). Technology has boosted the development and use of computerized games in engineering (Coller & Scott, 2009), geology (Mayo, 2007), biology (Amory, Naicker, Vincent & Adams, 1998), landscape planning (Herwig & Paar, 2002), nursing and medicine (Cook, McAloon, O'Neill & Beggs, 2012), statistics (Ramler & Chapman, 2011), media and communications (Delwiche, 2006), and social studies (Gestwicki & Morris, 2012).

Games enable effective situated learning by simulating environments or scenarios that cannot be directly presented in a traditional classroom. They can "mimic real world situations without importing unwanted constraints and risks of the real world" (Westera, Nadolski, Hummel & Wopereis, 2008, p. 420). Games encourage dynamic participation and lessen resistance to innovative ideas and concepts (Petranek, 1994). As drill and repetition are made more enjoyable through play, students show greater retention over time, develop proficiency more steadily, and become more motivated for optional learning tasks (Randel, Morris, Wetzel & Whitehill, 1992; Philpot et al., 2003; Landers & Callan, 2011). With computerized games, graphics and multimedia elements can capture more student attention (Deshpande & Huang, 2011).

Although research is yet to reach a conclusive answer on the effectiveness of educational games as measured by direct learning outcomes, but empirical studies have proved the benefits of the particular games investigated (Randel et al, 1992; Susi, Johannesson & Backlund, 2007). Games have proved to stimulate deeper learning (Coller & Scott, 2009), comprehension of subject complexity (Mayo, 2007) and maximize the transference of academic knowledge to industry (Deshpande & Huang, 2011). Games have also been found to exert positive effects on students' attention, visuospatial skills (Boot, Kramer, Simons, Fabiani & Gratton, 2008; Green & Bavelier, 2003), and team functioning (Deshpande & Huang, 2011).

Along with the multiple benefits come new challenges to instructors. As games enable students to take decisions and manage the process, instructors are required to switch into a facilitator's role, instead of just being an observer (Torres & Macedo, 2000), by revamping the traditional, linear approach of content creation and delivery (Morrison, 2003). It is also worth noting that educational games, or "serious games", differ from leisure games whose main motives are fun, amusement and relaxation; instructors, especially those in higher education, are encouraged to apply the games that require reasoning, reflection, and collaboration, rather than following the approaches for developing and using leisure games (Westera et al., 2008). It is recommended that only the context, approach, and game mechanics suitable to specific learning objectives be selected so as to make learning happen (Landers & Callan, 2011).

Written by Danxi Shen, Ed.M., Harvard Graduate School of Education

References:

Akilli, G. K. (2011). Games and simulations: A new approach in education. Gaming and Simulations: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications, ed. Information Resources Management Association, USA, 150-167.

Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., & Adams, C. (1998). Computer games as a learning resource. In World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, 1, 50-55.

Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., Simons, D. J., Fabiani, M., & Gratton, G. (2008). The effects of video game playing on attention, memory, and executive control. Acta psychologica, 129(3), 387-398.

Coller, B. D., & Scott, M. J. (2009). Effectiveness of using a video game to teach a course in mechanical engineering. Computers & Education, 53(3), 900-912.

Cook, N. F., McAloon, T., O'Neill, P., & Beggs, R. (2012). Impact of a web based interactive simulation game (PULSE) on nursing students' experience and performance in life support training-A pilot study. Nurse education today, 32(6), 714-720.

Delwiche, A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) in the new media classroom. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(3).

Deshpande, A. A., & Huang, S. H. (2011). Simulation games in engineering education: A state‐of‐the‐art review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 19(3), 399-410.

Feinstein, A. H., Mann, S., & Corsun, D. L. (2002). Charting the experiential territory: Clarifying definitions and uses of computer simulation, games, and role play. Journal of Management Development, 21(10), 732-744.

Gestwicki, P., & Morris, R. (2012). Social Studies Education Game Development as an Undergraduate Immersive Learning Experience. In M. Cruz-Cunha (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Serious Games as Educational, Business and Research Tools (pp. 838-858). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0149-9.ch043

Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 423(6939), 534-537.

Greenlaw, P. S., & Wyman, F. P. (1973). The teaching effectiveness of games in collegiate business courses. Simulation & Gaming, 4(3), 259-294.

Herwig, A., & Paar, P. (2002). Game engines: tools for landscape visualization and planning. Trends in GIS and Virtualization in Environmental Planning and Design, 161-172.

Keys, B. & J. Wolfe (1990). The Role of Management Games and Simulations in Education and Research, Journal of Management, 16: 311.

Landers, R. N., & Callan, R. C. (2011). Casual social games as serious games: The psychology of gamification in undergraduate education and employee training. In Serious games and edutainment applications (pp. 399-423). Springer London.

Lean, J., Moizer, J., Towler, M., & Abbey, C. (2006). Simulations and games: Use and barriers in higher education. Active learning in higher education, 7(3), 227-242.

Mayo, M. J. (2007). Games for Science and Engineering Education. Communications of the ACM, 50(7), 31-35.

Morrison, J. L. (2003). Simulations and the learning revolution: An interview with Clark Aldrich. The Technology Source, 35-37.

Petranek, C. Amaturation in experiential learning: Principles of simulation and gaming, Simulation & Gaming, 25(4), 513-523.

Philpot, T. A., Hubing, N., Hall, R. H., Flori, R. E., Oglesby, D. B., & Yellamraju, V. (2003). Games as teaching tools in engineering mechanics courses. In Proceedings of the American Society of Engineering Education.

Price, R.V. (1990). Computer-aided instruction: A guide for authors. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Ramler, I. P., & Chapman, J. L. (2011). Introducing Statistical Research to Undergraduate Mathematical Statistics Students Using the Guitar Hero Video Game Series. Journal of Statistics Education, 19(3), 1-20.

Randel, J. M., Morris, B. A., Wetzel, C. D., & Whitehill, B. V. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: A review of recent research. Simulation & Gaming, 23(3), 261-276.

Russell, J.V. (1999). Using games to teach chemistry: An Annotated Bibliography. Journal of Chemical Education, 76(4), 481.

Stanley, D. L. (2001). Wealth distribution and imperfect factor markets: a classroom experiment. The Journal of Economic Education, 32(4), 344-355.

Susi, T., Johannesson, M., & Backlund, P. (2007). Serious games: An overview. Retrived from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:2416/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

Torres, M., & Macedo, J. (2000). Learning sustainable development with a new simulation game. Simulation & Gaming, 31(1), 119-126.

Weisskirch, R. S. (2003). Dealing with Piaget: Analyzing Card Games for Understanding Concepts. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Psychological Association.

Westera, W., Nadolski, R. J., Hummel, H. G., & Wopereis, I. G. (2008). Serious games for higher education: a framework for reducing design complexity. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(5), 420-432.

Further Resources:

Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., & Adams, C. (1999). The use of computer games as an educational tool: identification of appropriate game types and game elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, 30(4), 311-321.

Amory, A., & Seagram, R. (2003). Educational game models: conceptualization and evaluation: the practice of higher education. South African Journal of Higher Education, 17(2), p-206.

Prensky, M. (2011). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2003). Harnessing the power of games in education. Insight, 3(1), 5-33.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Games for educational purposes, or "serious games", share the same "creative and enjoyable essence" (Akilli, 2011, p. 152) with games for entertainment, but are aimed to induce learning that meets certain pedagogic objectives.

# data[].attributes.body
James Nicklas

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a teaching method in which complex real-world problems are used as the vehicle to promote student learning of concepts and principles as opposed to direct presentation of facts and concepts. In addition to course content, PBL can promote the development of critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills. It can also provide opportunities for working in groups, finding and evaluating research materials, and life-long learning (Duch et al, 2001).

PBL can be incorporated into any learning situation. In the strictest definition of PBL, the approach is used over the entire semester as the primary method of teaching. However, broader definitions and uses range from including PBL in lab and design classes, to using it simply to start a single discussion. PBL can also be used to create assessment items. The main thread connecting these various uses is the real-world problem.

Any subject area can be adapted to PBL with a little creativity. While the core problems will vary among disciplines, there are some characteristics of good PBL problems that transcend fields (Duch, Groh, and Allen, 2001):

The problem must motivate students to seek out a deeper understanding of concepts.

The problem should require students to make reasoned decisions and to defend them.

The problem should incorporate the content objectives in such a way as to connect it to previous courses/knowledge.

If used for a group project, the problem needs a level of complexity to ensure that the students must work together to solve it.

If used for a multistage project, the initial steps of the problem should be open-ended and engaging to draw students into the problem.

The problems can come from a variety of sources: newspapers, magazines, journals, books, textbooks, and television/ movies. Some are in such form that they can be used with little editing; however, others need to be rewritten to be of use. The following guidelines from The Power of Problem-Based Learning (Duch et al, 2001) are written for creating PBL problems for a class centered around the method; however, the general ideas can be applied in simpler uses of PBL:

Choose a central idea, concept, or principle that is always taught in a given course, and then think of a typical end-of-chapter problem, assignment, or homework that is usually assigned to students to help them learn that concept. List the learning objectives that students should meet when they work through the problem.

Think of a real-world context for the concept under consideration. Develop a storytelling aspect to an end-of-chapter problem, or research an actual case that can be adapted, adding some motivation for students to solve the problem. More complex problems will challenge students to go beyond simple plug-and-chug to solve it. Look at magazines, newspapers, and articles for ideas on the story line. Some PBL practitioners talk to professionals in the field, searching for ideas of realistic applications of the concept being taught.

The problem needs to be introduced in stages so that students will be able to identify learning issues that will lead them to research the targeted concepts. The following are some questions that may help guide this process:

What will the first page (or stage) look like? What open-ended questions can be asked? What learning issues will be identified?

How will the problem be structured?

How long will the problem be? How many class periods will it take to complete?

Will students be given information in subsequent pages (or stages) as they work through the problem?

What resources will the students need?

What end product will the students produce at the completion of the problem?

Write a teacher's guide detailing the instructional plans on using the problem in the course. If the course is a medium- to large-size class, a combination of mini-lectures, whole-class discussions, and small group work with regular reporting may be necessary. The teacher's guide can indicate plans or options for cycling through the pages of the problem interspersing the various modes of learning.

The final step is to identify key resources for students. Students need to learn to identify and utilize learning resources on their own, but it can be helpful if the instructor indicates a few good sources to get them started. Many students will want to limit their research to the Internet, so it will be important to guide them toward the library as well.

The method for distributing a PBL problem falls under three closely related teaching techniques: case studies, role-plays, and simulations. Case studies are presented to students in written form. Role-plays have students improvise scenes based on character descriptions given. Today, simulations often involve computer-based programs. Regardless of which technique is used, the heart of the method remains the same: the real-world problem.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Problem-Based Learning (PBL) is a teaching method in which complex real-world problems are used as the vehicle to promote student learning of concepts and principles as opposed to direct presentation of facts and concepts. In addition to course content, PBL can promote the development of critical thinking skills, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Think-pair-share is a collaborative learning strategy where students work together to solve a problem or answer a question about an assigned reading. This strategy requires students to (1) think individually about a topic or answer to a question; and (2) share ideas with classmates. Discussing with…