Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using Epistemic Network Analysis to Examine Discourse and Scientific Practice During a Collaborative Game

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

According to the National Research Council, the ability to collaboratively solve problems is of the utmost importance in scientific careers, yet students are not exposed to learning experiences that promote such expertise. Recent studies have found that interdependent roles used within collaborative mobile games are an effective way to scaffold collaborative problem solving. School Scene Investigators: The Case of the Mystery Powder, a collaborative mobile game, incorporated interdependent roles in order to foster collaborative problem solving and promote scientific practice. Using epistemic network analysis (ENA), this study examined the conversational discourse of game teams to determine what connections exist between communication responses, language style, and scientific practice. Data included audio transcripts of three teams that played through the game. Transcripts were qualitatively coded for five types of scientific practice aligned to the National Research Council framework for K-12 science education, three types of communication responses (accept/discuss/reject), and an emergent language style (communal). ENA revealed that students developed scientific practices during gameplay. ENA also identified engaged communication responses and communal language style as two types of collaborative discourse used within School Scene Investigators: The Case of the Mystery Powder that fostered key linkages to effective data analysis and interpretation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ARIS. (2018). ARIS—Create location-based games and stories. Retrieved March 2, 2018, from https://fielddaylab.org/make/aris/

  • Aronson, E. (1978). The jigsaw classroom. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bressler, D. (2014a). Better than business-as-usual: Improving scientific practices during discourse and writing by playing a collaborative mystery game. Double Helix: A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing, 2, 1–13.

  • Bressler, D. (2014b). Is it all in the game? Flow experience and scientific practices during an INPLACE mobile game. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Bethlehem: Lehigh University.

  • Bressler, D., & Bodzin, A. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students’ flow experiences during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505–517.

  • Bressler, D., & Bodzin, A. (2016). Investigating flow experience and scientific practices during a mobile Serious Educational Game. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(5), 795–805.

  • Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Employment projections—2014–24. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecopro.pdf.

  • Chang, S.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. (2017). Development of an effective educational computer game based on a mission synchronization-based peer-assistance approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(5), 667–681. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1172241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S., Mohanty, A., & Bhattacharya, B. (2011). Peer collaboration, facilitator intervention, and learning styles in computer game-based learning: Initial findings from an empirical study. In Proceedings of the European conference on games based learning (pp. 683–690).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-H., & Law, V. (2016). Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1201–1212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, K.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 449–462.

  • Chiang, T. H. C., Yang, S. J. H., & Hwang, G.-J. (2014). Students' online interactive patterns in augmented reality-based inquiry activities. Computers in Education, 78(0), 97–108.

  • Demetriadis, S., Tsiatsos, T., & Karakostas, A. (2012). Scripted collaboration to guide the pedagogy and architecture of digital learning games. In Proceedings of the European conference on games based learning (pp. 148–154).

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Blas, N., & Paolini, P. (2014). Multi-user virtual environments fostering collaboration in formal education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 54–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by “collaborative learning”? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam: Pergamon, Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, A., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., and Hall Giesinger, C. (2017). NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2017 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

  • Hainey, T., Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., Wilson, A., & Razak, A. (2016). A systematic literature review of games-based learning empirical evidence in primary education. Computers in Education, 102, 202–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom (4th ed.). Edina, Minnesota: Interaction Book Company.

  • Khatib, F., DiMaio, F., Cooper, S., Kazmierczyk, M., Gilski, M., Krzywda, S., . . . Baker, D. (2011). Crystal structure of a monomeric retroviral protease solved by protein folding game players. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 18(10), 1175–1177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mansour, S. S., & El-Said, M. (2009). Multi-players role-playing educational serious games: A link between fun and learning. International Journal of Learning, 15(11), 229–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyake, N., & Kirschner, P. (2014). The social and interactive dimensions of collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 418–438). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, cross-cutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nebel, S., Schneider, S., Beege, M., Kolda, F., Mackiewicz, V., & Rey, G. (2017). You cannot do this alone! Increasing task interdependence in cooperative educational videogames to encourage collaboration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(4), 993–1014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-017-9511-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oksanen, K., & Hämäläinen, R. (2013). Perceived sociability and social presence in a collaborative serious game. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 3(1), 34–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2018). Framework for 21 st century learning [web page]. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/about-us/p21-framework.

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peppler, K., Danish, J. A., & Phelps, D. (2013). Collaborative gaming: Teaching children about complex systems and collective behavior. Simulation and Gaming, 44(5), 683–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ravitch, D. (2016). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sánchez, J., & Olivares, R. (2011). Problem solving and collaboration using mobile serious games. Computers in Education, 57(3), 1943–1952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers in Education, 46(3), 223–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, D. W. (2017) Quantitative ethnography. Madison, Wisconsin: Cathcart Press.

  • Shaffer, D. W., Hatfield, D., Svarovsky, G., Nash, P., Nulty, A., Bagley, E. A., Franke, K., et al. (2009). Epistemic network analysis: A prototype for 21st century assessment of learning. The International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(1), 1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, D. W., Collier, W., & Ruis, A. R. (2016). A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(3), 9–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharritt, M. J. (2008). Forms of learning in collaborative video game play. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 3(2), 97–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siebert-Evenstone, A.L., Arastoopour, G., Collier, W., Swiecki, Z, Ruis, A.R., & Shaffer, D.W. (2016). In search of conversational grain size: Modeling semantic structure using moving stanza windows. In C.K. Looi, J.L. Polman, U. Cress, & P. Reimann (Eds.) Transforming learning, empowering learners: The international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) 2016, Volume 1 (pp. 631–638), Singapore: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

  • Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad city mystery: Developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squire, K., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 371–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–425). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuehler, C., & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 530–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, R. J., & Slavin, R. E. (1995). The cooperative elementary school: Effects on students' achievement, attitudes, and social relations. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 321–351.

  • Sung, H.-Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2013). A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students’ learning performance in science courses. Computers in Education, 63, 43–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tai, R. H., Liu, C. Q., Maltese, A. V., & Fan, X. (2006). Planning early for careers in science. Science, 312(5777), 1143–1144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takeda, S., & Homberg, F. (2014). The effects of gender on group work process and achievement: An analysis through self- and peer-assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Penguin Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trespalacios, J., Chamberlin, B., & Gallagher, R. (2011). Collaboration, engagement & fun: How youth preferences in video gaming can inform 21st century education. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve. Learning, 55(6), 49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasalou, A., Khaled, R., Holmes, W., & Gooch, D. (2017). Digital games-based learning for children with dyslexia: A social constructivist perspective on engagement and learning during group game-play. Computers in Education, 114, 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.06.009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Woolley, A. W., Chabris, C. F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., & Malone, T. W. (2010). Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science, 330(6004), 686–688. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The study utilized the epistemic network analysis (ENA) method which was funded in part by the National Science Foundation (DRL-0918409, DRL-0946372, DRL-1247262, DRL-1418288, DRL-1661036, DRL-1713110, DUE-0919347, DUE-1225885, EEC-1232656, EEC-1340402, REC-0347000), the MacArthur Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, and the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Education at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The opinions, findings, and conclusions do not reflect the views of the funding agencies, cooperating institutions, or other individuals.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Education, University of Pennsylvania, 3700 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA

    Denise M. Bressler

  2. Lehigh University, 111 Research Drive, Bethlehem, PA, 18015, USA

    Alec M. Bodzin

  3. Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, University of Wisconsin–Madison, 499 Educational Sciences Bldg. 1025 W. Johnson St., Madison, WI, 53706, USA

    Brendan Eagan & Sara Tabatabai

Authors
  1. Denise M. Bressler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alec M. Bodzin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Brendan Eagan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sara Tabatabai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Denise M. Bressler.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. All procedures performed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bressler, D.M., Bodzin, A.M., Eagan, B. et al. Using Epistemic Network Analysis to Examine Discourse and Scientific Practice During a Collaborative Game. J Sci Educ Technol 28, 553–566 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09786-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09786-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation