| Abstract: | The purpose of this study was to determine if simulation games can effect cognitive learning outcomes and whether mode of presentation (paper and pencil or computer assisted) or the learning structure (individual or cooperative pair) influences the amount learned. A paper and pencil urban geography simulation game was adapted to the Apple IIe computer. The game consisted of maps of three simulated cities on which the subjects located certain urban land uses. A multiple-choice test was developed to measure the urban geography concepts used in play of the game. This test was extensively piloted and used as both pretest and posttest. The subjects were 53 junior-level education students at Texas A&M University. The subjects worked with one of two simulation modes (paper and pencil or computer assisted) under one of two learning structures (individual or cooperative pair). The subjects were randomly assigned to one of four treatment conditions: Computer - pair, Computer - individual, Paper and pencil - pair, or Paper and pencil - individual. Prior to the study the subjects completed the Group Embedded Figures Test, a vocabulary test, and the urban geography concepts pretest. The treatment consisted of two 2-hour treatment sessions spent working with two simulated cities from an urban geography simulation game ALFUR, BAITER, GAMMER. Following treatment the subjects completed the urban geography concepts posttest and the third simulated city GAMMER. The subjects also listed the urban geography principles learned through work with the simulation game, and indicated which treatment they would prefer if they were to repeat the activity. Analysis of variance yielded significant statistical findings indicating that cooperative classroom structure significantly increased cognitive gains. An interaction was also found between structure and the mode of simulation presentation, with cooperative pairs using the paper and pencil version scoring highest on the cognitive posttest and individuals using the paper and pencil version scoring lowest. Neither the GEFT nor the vocabulary test accounted for any significant variation in the subjects' scores on the posttest. There were no differences in the number of principles generated. The subjects indicated a preference for the computer and pair conditions. |
|---|