Title page for 945204008


[Back to Results | New Search]

Student Number 945204008
Author Mu-Chieh Wu(吳睦傑)
Author's Email Address No Public.
Statistics This thesis had been viewed 1811 times. Download 274 times.
Department Network Learning Technology
Year 2006
Semester 2
Degree Master
Type of Document Master's Thesis
Language English
Title Design and Experiment on a Rush-in-Answer Learning Game with Uneven Chance Tactic
Date of Defense 2007-07-03
Page Count 60
Keyword
  • competition
  • game-based learning
  • individual ability difference
  • motivation
  • self-efficacy beliefs
  • Uneven Chance Tactic
  • Abstract Individual ability differences are an everlasting phenomenon in a classroom. Competitive learning games that aim at drawing students’ attention and excitement will inevitably hurt the self-esteem of those students with lower capabilities. This work proposes Uneven Chance Tactic to be applied in competitive learning games, as an approach to resolving the individual ability difference problem.
    Along with UCT, AnswerMatching, a digital competitive learning game run on handheld devices for practicing Math multiplication/factor extraction, was also re-designed to evaluate the effects of UCT. AnswerMatching was used to experiment on subjects of a 3rd grade class of an elementary school in Taoyuan County, Taiwan.
    UCT was proven being able to minimize the extrinsic performance indicator (i.e. score) of participants with different capabilities in a competitive learning game, and found to have several effects on the students’ self-efficacy beliefs, and performance perceptions under competitive situations.
    Table of Content I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 1
     A. INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN A CLASSROOM ............................... 1
     B. COMPETITION ......................................................... 1
     C. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE AND QUESTIONS .................................... 2
    II. RELATED RESEARCH ..................................................... 4
     A. LITERATURES ......................................................... 4
       Adaptive Challenge Levels .......................................... 4
       Flow ............................................................... 4
       Self-efficacy ...................................................... 5
     B. RELATED WORKS ....................................................... 6
       Speed Grid Challenge ............................................... 6
       EduBingo ........................................................... 7
       Arcadermic Skill Builders - Meteor Multiplication .................. 8
       Mystery Picture Multiplication/Multiplication Hidden Picture ....... 9
    III. UNEVEN CHANCE TACTIC ............................................... 11
     A. PRINCIPLE OF UCT ................................................... 11
     B. APPROACH OF UCT .................................................... 13
    IV. SYSTEM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION .................................... 15
     A. GAME DESIGN OF ANSWERMATCHING ...................................... 15
     B. RULES OF ANSWERMATCHING ............................................ 16
     C. ACTIVITY FLOW....................................................... 17
     D. UCT FOR ANSWERMATCHING ............................................. 18
       Definitions ....................................................... 19
       Defining the number of competitors in a unit competitive group .... 20
       Assigning competitors for each unit competitive group ............. 21
       Compared with Old UCT (Asymmetric Competition Strategy) ........... 23
     E. SYSTEM SETTING AND ARCHITECTURE .................................... 26
       System Setting .................................................... 26
       System Architecture ............................................... 27
     F. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS ...................................... 28
       Software development .............................................. 28
       Computational power ............................................... 28
       Interface design .................................................. 29
       Input capability of user devices .................................. 33
       Preserved domain independence ..................................... 34
    V. SYSTEM EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION ..................................... 36
     A. SUBJECTS ........................................................... 36
     B. SETTING............................................................. 36
       Pretest............................................................ 36
       Experiment ........................................................ 38
     C. RESULTS ............................................................ 39
       Questionnaire results ............................................. 40
       Score ............................................................. 43
       Score prediction for next rounds .................................. 44
       Accuracy .......................................................... 45
       Efficiency ........................................................ 46
     D. DISCUSSIONS ........................................................ 47
    VI. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORKS ........................................ 49
     A. CONCLUSIONS ........................................................ 49
     B. FUTURE WORKS ....................................................... 49
       Reducing the negative effects ..................................... 50
       More factors on evaluating students capability .................... 50
       Experiment designs with more variations............................ 50
       More flexible design .............................................. 51
    REFERENCES .............................................................. 52
    APPENDIX I. THE QUIZ AND QUESTIONNAIRE TAKEN AT THE PRETEST ............. 54
    APPENDIX II. THE QUIZ TAKEN BEFORE THE EXPERIMENT ....................... 56
    APPENDIX III. QUIZ AND QUESTIONNAIRE AFTER THE EXPERIMENT ............... 57
    APPENDIX IV. INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE .................................... 60
    Reference Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
    Bell, R. G. (1979). Board and Table Games from Many Civilizations (Revised Edition). New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York : Harper & Row.
    Jabber website. Retrieved on October 15th, 2006. http://www.jabber.org/
    Kohn, A. (1992). No contest: the case against competition. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
    Liang, J. K., Liu, T. C., Wang, H. Y., Chang, B., Deng, Y. C., Yang, J. C., Chou, C. Y., Ko, H. W., Yang, S. & Chan, T. W. (2005). A few design perspectives on one-on-one digital classroom environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(3), 181-189.
    Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 5(4), 333-369.
    Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction: Vol. 3. Conative and affective process analysis (pp. 223-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–578.
    Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 193–203.
    Prensky, M. (2000). Digital Game-Based Learning. New York: McGraw Hill.
    Peter S. A. (2004). RFC 3920: XML streams, SASL, TLS, stringprep profiles, stanza semantics.
    Peter S. A. (2004). RFC 3921: Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence.
    Rawls J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
    Wu, W., Cheng, H. , Chiang, M. C., Deng, Y. C., Chou, C. Y., Tsai, C. C., & Chan, T. W. (2007). AnswerMatching: A Competitive Learning Game with Uneven Chance Tactic. The First IEEE International Workshop on Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning (pp.89-96). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
    XEP-0045: Multi-User Chat extension for XMPP. Retrieved on October 15th, 2006. http://www.xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html
    Zimmerman B. J. (2000). Self-Efficacy: An Essential Motive to Learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 82-91.
    江孟真 (民95)。設計與實作一個使用不對等策略之小組數學練習競爭式數位遊戲。國立中央大學資訊工程研究所碩士論文,未出版,桃園縣。
    韓佳玲 (民91)。網路匿名競爭對學習經驗之影響。國立成功大學教育研究所碩士論文,未出版,台南市。
    Advisor
  • Tak-Wai Chan(陳德懷)
  • Files
  • 945204008.pdf
  • approve in 2 years
    Date of Submission 2007-07-09

    [Back to Results | New Search]


    Browse | Search All Available ETDs

    If you have dissertation-related questions, please contact with the NCU library extension service section.
    Our service phone is (03)422-7151 Ext. 57407,E-mail is also welcomed.