Aucune remarque pour cette diapositive
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentTurns out students are loosing interest in science – you probably all know that. But it’s even worst in physics
Misconceptions: common sense intuitions based on observations of everyday life. 2 balls with different weight fall – which one hits the floor first?There has been a lot of research in the past 30 years to understand them
Teaching from formulas doesn’t work. Direct instruction doesn’t work. It doesn’t depend on the teacher. We think we’re teaching mechanics, but we’re mostly teaching formulas. Students’ conceptions in mechanics are resilient to change (Brown & Hammer, 2008; diSessa, 1993)
Mon but n’est pas de faire de l’argent, mais de rendre le jeu utileRapide à maîtriser – à ce que je me suis fait dire, vous avez beaucoup de chats à fouetter. Si j’Arrive avec un nouvel outil qui vous prends 10h à maîtriser, c’est pas viableFlexible – ne prescrit pas d’utiliser votre temps d’une façon autoritaire
Ce que vous avez vu de Mécanika à date n’est pas éducatif – simplement un jeu. Voici où ca devient intéressant pour vous.
The idea was to produce something that was actually going to be used in classrooms once the research was over. It has an ending, coherent gameplay mechanics, and it took 2 years to produce 50 levels. It is not something we intend to throw away after the experience is done, and in that sense it is a “real” game, not a “research” game. Levels are linked with misconceptions listed by the test authors. We’re trying to lure students into making mistakes, to bring their intuitions into focus (cognitive conflict).
YvonLapointe,lauréat 2004 du prestigieux Prix Raymond-GervaisYannick Bergeron, lauréat 2009 du Prix Michael Smith, Personnalité de la semaine La Presse
DiSessa did a lot of work in this area, but Hestenes created a test that was widely popular in the early 90s. The ball question misconception is in that testTeachers expect their passing students to perform well on this tests, and they’re flabbergasted when they see them achieving only around 24%. 20% is what you get if you answer randomly.
Goal was to study games where they would be used: in the classroom. If you see an effect in controlled labs conditions, but no effect when teachers use the game, that makes the game useless. Did this for 2 teachers, and a total of 8 groupsWe didn’t assign the game to randomly selected students, because we wanted teachers to do debriefings in the classroomGrandeur de l’effet, d de Cohen = 0.95
Nationwide project in 1995-98Modelers – after the first year. Similar difference between control/exp and modelers/traditional. Could we have pushed it further, for more than a month? What would happen if we gave our teachers 3 weeks of training on top of that?
It can’t be something that the teacher does
Soulever ces conceptions – environ 30 conceptions erronées
Bon potentiel évaluateur des jeux, mais pas pour inférer une longue liste de faits
This shows not only the gain, but the difference in gain from experimental to control. So if Exp got a 15% increase on a question, and the control group had a 5% increase, what you would see here is the difference between the two: 10%. No sign. diff. Not expecting people to increase here
Game design didn’t focus on all misconceptions: Would have been really hard to create a coherent and fun game design that would allow us to bring all misconceptions into focus.