Self-debriefing or teacher-debriefing on a game for learning IT communication skills?

R.J. Nadolski, G. van Lankveld

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference article in proceedingAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Previous research has shown that games need debriefing to cater for learning, although the research is rather inconclusive towards characteristics of effective debriefing. Teacher-debriefing is relatively costly and due to time constraints reasonably limited for individual debriefs. Self-debriefing is cheap and can be done independently. This study examined with a pre-test post-test design whether self-debriefing can induce similar learning as teacher-debriefing. This study investigated students’ communication performance in four in-classroom usage-scenarios of a single-user game SMI (Space Modules Incorporated) for IT service-desk communication skills (n = 172). Three usage-scenarios used identical debriefing structure after the first game-session, but differed in debriefing format (Teacher-debriefing Learner-specific, Teacher-debriefing Class-specific, Self-debriefing Structured Note-taking). The fourth usage-scenario contained a generic assignment for self-reflection after the first game-session with note-taking (Self-debriefing Unstructured Note-taking). All usage-scenarios requested similar time investment for students in vocational education and the same debriefing-duration. Each usage-scenario contained the same two game-sessions with specific debriefing in-between. All usage-scenarios embedded easy to use debriefing formats, although both self-debriefing formats are cheaper to use than the teacher-debriefing formats. SMI supported in-game measurement of learning progress data, being used for debriefing and for measuring communication performance in both game-sessions (i.e., pre- & post-measurement). A mixed between-within subjects ANOVA showed a significant learning effect for all usage-scenarios, but no significant differences between the debriefing-formats. Less labour-intensive and more flexible exploitation of games via self-debriefing seem plausible as no differences between self-debriefing and teacher-debriefing were found. These findings align with previous research that also did not show any differences between self-debriefing and expert-debriefing. Self-reports revealed moderate motivation within all usage-scenario’s and moderate studyability of all usage-scenarios. This hints at opportunities for improving the usage-scenario’s (game and debriefing). Suggestions for further debriefing-research are given.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of 12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning
EditorsDr. Melanie Ciussi
Place of PublicationSophia Antipolis, France
Pages469-478
Publication statusPublished - 2018
Event12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning: ECGBL 2018 - Sophia Antipolis, France
Duration: 4 Oct 20185 Oct 2018

Conference

Conference12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning
CountryFrance
CitySophia Antipolis
Period4/10/185/10/18

Keywords

  • debriefing
  • self-debriefing
  • teacher-debriefing
  • serious games
  • Communication skills
  • technology-enhanced assessment

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Self-debriefing or teacher-debriefing on a game for learning IT communication skills?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Projects

    Rage: Realising an Applied Gaming Eco-system

    Westera, W., Georgiadis, K., Saveski, G., van Lankveld, G., Bahreini, K., van der Vegt, W., Berkhout, J., Nyamsuren, E., Kluijfhout, E. & Nadolski, R.

    1/02/1531/07/19

    Project: Research

    Activities

    • 1 Oral presentation

    Self-debriefing or Teacher-debriefing on a Game for Learning IT Communication Skills?

    Rob Nadolski (Speaker)
    5 Oct 2018

    Activity: Talk or presentation typesOral presentationAcademic

    Cite this

    Nadolski, R. J., & van Lankveld, G. (2018). Self-debriefing or teacher-debriefing on a game for learning IT communication skills? In D. M. Ciussi (Ed.), Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning (pp. 469-478).