4 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2016
    1. Wenzler and Cartier (1999) make an effective case for the use of games in organizational learning by asserting that “Games and simulations help organizations develop symbolic thinking and gestalt understanding; help them create memories of the future; enable shared experiences and the building of shared intelligence; and, possibly most important, develop their members' motivation and confidence to act,” (p. 375). A number of books and manuals (e.g., Pike & Busse, 1995; Stolovich & Keeps, 2002; Thiagarajan, 2003) advocate this kind of learner or trainee involvement

      Really nice quote and several sources on the utility of games in corporate training. I don't see why these same principles couldn't be applied in higher ed setting.

    2. Cruickshank, D. R., & Telfer, R. (2001). Classroom games and simulations. Theory into Practice, 19(1), 75-80.

      I should get a copy of this

    3. Games promote transfer because they require student participation and active involvement with the material within a rich context (Cruickshank & Telfer, 2001).

      Games promote transfer is an assertion rather than evidence based argument. I hope Cruickshank and Telfer provide the evidence.

    4. In the second part of the study, five faculty members were mentored to change traditional lectures to interactive games. A review of their perceptions of success and difficulty in using such activities in the college classroom, their students’ perceptions of the exercise, and student performance identified both benefits and costs. Suggestions are made for strategies to successfully implement games in the college classroom, based on consideration of these benefits and costs and the survey results.

      It sounds like there was some PD on game based teaching and then an evaluation of how well the faculty applied games in their classrooms.