1. Dr. Fernando Paniagua Assistant Professor CSIT Department Community College of Baltimore County Engaging students in class activities through games to increase participation

2. Introduction  The idea of using games to engage students in the process of active learning is not new.  Over the past years, educators have been increasingly incorporating various games into their teaching curriculum in an effort to create a fun and engaging learning environment for students.  I have conducted several games with my students as a means to review previously taught material and to prepare for tests.  I have noticed that most of my students tend to enjoy hands-on activities in my courses; however, I wonder sometimes when we play games or do activities if they are grasping the content of the material in the process. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference2

3. Background  MacKenty (2006) states that, “it’s the act of problem solving that makes games so engaging… devoid of challenge or risk of failure, games really aren’t all that much fun” (p. 46).  Tom Schrand (2008) discusses the powerful capabilities of interactive multimedia games (or activities) where students work together as a class to categorize information in charts by moving facts so they rest in the appropriate labeled columns (p.81).  Schaller (2006) states that iteration, or repetition of the process, is critical to “support the learning process by encouraging experimentation, hypothesis testing and synthesis” which are all higher level thinking skills. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference3

4. Background (cont.)  Regardless of the format of the game, students can simultaneously build their problem solving skills while having fun throughout the process if an instructional game is well-designed (MacKenty, 2006, Harris, 2009).  According to Franklin, Peat & Lewis (2003), when students work cooperatively on a gaming activity, “games foster group cooperation and typically create a high level of student involvement that makes them useful tools for effective teaching” (p. 82).  It is important to remember that games are supplement teaching tools and instructors need to be actively involved for games to be truly effective. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference4

5. Background (cont.)  The subjects in this study were students of my CSIT 101 (Introduction to Computers) class. [Fall 2012 and Spring 2013]  CSIT 101 focuses on Lecture sessions  Computer concepts (Lecture sessions). Labs sessions  MS Office 2010 (Labs sessions). 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference5

6. Objectives of the Pedagogical Intervention  To increase students’ participation in the class.  To decrease the percentage of absenteeism.  To motivate and engage students in class.  To create a fun and engaging learning environment for students.  To put students at the center of the learning experience. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference6

7. Hypothesis  Incorporating games in the classroom, will increase student participation and attendance during the lecture sessions of the class providing active learning opportunities and reinforcing topics previously learned in the classroom. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference7

8. Methodology  Pedagogical Intervention  This intervention took place in the lecture sessions.  For each one of the chapters covered in this course, I designed a dynamic activity aimed to:  increase student participation and engage them while in class.  encourage attendance to the lecture sessions. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference8

9. Methodology (cont.)  Curricular Intervention  This intervention took place in the lecture sessions. There was a total of 250 points which was assigned to the dynamic activities designed in the pedagogical intervention. Students could earn those points only if they were present in the classroom and actively participating in the dynamic activity. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference9

10. Some of the Dynamic Activities Used  Family Feud  Mystery Box  Mind Speed  Jeopardy 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference10

11. Data Collection (Male – Female – Total)  Number of students  Percentage of absenteeism  Grade average  Success rate  Pedagogical intervention survey 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference11

12. Data Analysis  No apparent pattern  Average: 21 students SD: 1.5 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference12

13. Data Analysis (cont.)  No apparent pattern decreased  Percentage decreased about 10% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference13

14. Data Analysis (cont.)  Three last semesters: grade average 63% increased  Percentage increased 10% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference14

15. Data Analysis (cont.)  Three last semesters: success rate average 68% increased  Percentage increased 22% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference15

16. Survey Data Analysis (33 responses)  97%  90% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference16

17. Survey Data Analysis (cont.)  88%  100% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference17

18. Survey Data Analysis (cont.)  88% 10%  61% 30% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference18

19. Survey Data Analysis (cont.)  79% 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference19

20. Conclusions  Results reveal that incorporating games into the lecture sessions increased both attendance and participation.  An additional effect that this study brought was an increase of the student success rate.  Students felt that the classroom was a welcoming environment were all could participate and their voice was heard. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference20

21. 2015 Cengage Learning Computing Conference21