Case+2

A case study of wikis and student-designed games in physical education

Part I – Case Description

Here is a brief summary of the case study that answers the "where" and "who" portion of the case description. I was unable to find out exactly "when" this case study occurred, but I do know the report was written in 2010. (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// This paper reports on the incorporation of wiki technology within physical education. Boys from two classes at a school in the United Kingdom were divided into small teams and given the task of creating a new game in a same genre as football, hockey, netball or rugby. Each team had a wiki on which were recorded all the plans and developments of this game as it was being devised and refined. The teacher, an outside games expert and the school’s librarian also had access to the wikis, which allowed for constant interaction between the participants outside class time. Interviews with the teacher, the librarian and the students revealed that the 24/7 classroom enabled by the ICT, together with an extended community of practice, resulted in a higher quality learning experience in physical education for the participants. Indeed, it was the belief of all concerned that the quality of the end game products would not have been possible without the ICT component." //     "Why" this case study was carried out can be answered by the teacher who participated in it: // (  // Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// My prime requirement for the use of any technology was that it acted as a catalyst and a worthwhile structure around which learning through the physical could occur. My experiences in the past have been of teachers forcing ICT into their lessons to tick boxes and fulfill government expectations, and the experiences have been forgotten as quickly by these teachers as by their pupils. Any ICT I used had to be effective, memorable and a real experience for all those involved." //     As described in the brief summary above, physical education was the subject in which the wiki was used but, more specifically: (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010// )"The aim of the classes was for each of the three student teams to design an ‘invasion game’ (see Almond, 1986) from scratch. Invasion games are those in which the strategic goal is to gain possession of an object (most usually a ball but sometimes for example a Frisbee) and move it to where it can be used to score (most usually by sending it through a goal on to someone in a designated zone). Examples of popular invasion games include soccer, basketball and hockey. As a counter-example, tennis is a net game as it involves separated players and a series of rallies, while softball is a batting and fielding game because it involves two teams taking turn to score runs." //     The wiki was used in this manner: (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// The students in each class were divided into three teams of four or five by the teacher who endeavored to make them as competitively fair as possible. One student from each team was subsequently selected by his peers to be the wiki manager. That student, as well as the teacher, librarian, and professor had the capacity to add or delete material to that team’s wiki. The other team members were able to read the wikis and to contribute through the ‘comments’ section, but were unable to change the textual content of the wiki." //     Specific directions for using the wiki included that all details of the game should be submitted on the web page using these headings: · //  Introduction to the game   // · //  Name of the game   // · //  Number of players per team   // · //  Principles and key tactics   // · //  Equipment needed   // · //  Playing area described with a drawing   // · //  Rules of the game   // //  1. ////  Change of possession   // //  2. ////  Starting the game   // //  3. ////  Boundaries   // //  4. ////  Safety   // //  5. ////  Scoring    // Other instructions: (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// Only one person needs to have this game on their website, but all members of that team must have a link to it from their own personal page. Each team will be given a web page to publish their information about their game. One member of each group will be given the rights to edit the group's page. You DO NOT have the right to edit any other group's page, although you may view it at any time." //     For the most part, results from the case study indicate that it was successful in several regards. These include: ** The extended classroom  **//  -  // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// The most immediate significant impact of the incorporation of the wiki into this program was that the class moved immediately from one 40-minute lesson per week to a 24/7 classroom." //     (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// Indeed, within the first week of the presentation of the wiki, there were a total of 86 interactions/edits to the six websites. The wiki allowed the teacher to provide commentary and feedback to students between weekly classes. This on-going and frequent interaction was not limited to the face-to-face time provided during the scheduled lessons." //    **  Significant teacher commitment to the process  **//  -  // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// The increased engagement by the students had the complementary effect of increasing the teacher’s enthusiasm towards the project. He frequently reviewed the wikis between lessons and he generally felt that it provided him with increasing opportunity to be involved with the learning of the students." //    **  Immediacy of accountability  ** - (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)// "From an independent learning and information literacy perspective, the wiki enabled the teacher to monitor the process beyond regularly scheduled class times. Because he received email alerts of changes to the page, he was able to monitor which teams were really getting on and which teams were getting behind. Consequently, he was able to comment on those teams’ wikis, asking ‘come on guys, what’s happening, let’s get a move on – nothing’s happened on this page’. He did not have to wait until the next physical education lesson to have to do this, but was monitoring the progress as it went." //    ** Better end product (game//)// **// - // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//The combination of increased access to class work by both teacher and students, and the increased interactions between the teacher, the professor and the students, allowed for a better end product. That is, the teacher commented that the games were more sophisticated than had been designed in classes without the wiki, and in particular, the groups showed specific ownership of their games."// ** Idea sharing **// - // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//The other significant component that led to this better end product was the capacity for idea sharing allowed by the wiki. Students were able to look at other groups’ work outside class time in order to get ideas and have internal critique. The wiki allowed a dialogue, in the form of questioning, between the English students to the outside participants. In addition, photographs were uploaded onto the wiki that showed the American students playing the game. Drawings were also included by the wiki managers that helped to explain specific ideas. These outside resources proved helpful mostly when the games designers were at sticking points."// ** Positive interdependence **// - // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//There was a positive interdependence amongst the students and the stakeholders in the process. That is, the students needed one another both inside and outside the classroom in order to achieve success in physical education. A number of groups commented how they met either after school or during lunch and sat down together and made edits to their game."// ** Extended community of practice ** -First, let's discuss what an "extended community of practice" is. //"Wenger (1998) describes a community of practice as a group of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly. He presents three characteristics that must be present for a community of practice to exist. First, a community of practice has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. Second, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other and share information. Third, members are practitioners – that is, they develop a shared repertoire of resources."// How did this project reinforce this "extended community"? (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//In games-making lessons without the ICT component, the community of practice would contain the students, their teacher, and other school-based resource personnel. Through its interactive ability that allowed communication between the students, teachers, and outside expert, the wiki served to extend the community of practice beyond the on-site participants."// ** Empowered non-superstars in physical education **// - // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//One offshoot of this extended community of practice and positive interdependence was the empowerment of students who traditionally are not what we would call the superstars in physical education."// However, some negative aspects of the wiki integration did become evident: ** Too many chiefs **// - // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"//The extended community of practice brought with it the risk of too many chiefs, with numerous people being able to edit work. The teacher, the professor and the librarian, although all potential editors, were careful in the contributions that they made and we have said previously were not there to correct the pupils. However, they were there to enforce the by-laws of the school and maintain the integrity of the school. Despite the potential for pupil mismanagement, all six wiki managers mentioned that they thought it was better that they alone had the editorial rights for their teams."// ** Increased teacher workload  **//  -  // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010// )"Nevertheless, this added interaction with his students did create an increased out-of-class workload for the teacher. While he accepted this as a suitable trade-off for the increased motivation shown by his students, the teacher did comment that he //    //   would ‘only undertake such a project with one or two classes at any one time during a term'." //  **  "Ownership" issues  **//  -  // (Hastie, Casey, & Tarter, 2010)"// While there was a strong sense of collaboration within the wikis, the wiki managers did present a sense of ownership. While not as strong as those comments presented by students in the study of Wheeler, Yeomans, and Wheeler (2008), who noted that students tended to protect their ideas as their own work and were resistant to having their contributions altered or deleted by other group members, the wiki managers in this study still suggested that it was best they and only they had editorial rights. //      Finally, it should be noted that all data was gathered from three sources: the participating teachers reflective log, analysis of the wiki, and finally interviews conducted by the professor of the students, teacher, and librarian involved. Students involved were in grades 10 and 11.      Part II - Case Evaluation This case, from reading the conclusion only, can be deemed a success. In fact, the authors go so far as to say that the assignment could not have been accomplished without the use of the wiki. "…this project saw a rendering of physical education that was not only innovative, but also indeed impossible without the use of ICT." On top of this, there are numerous personal narratives throughout the paper, given by the both the teacher and the librarian involved in the project, that attest to the success, especially in student interest generated, of the incorporation of the wiki into the classroom. "Her comments are validated when we recall that almost 100 iterations of the wikis were completed within the first week of the project." I think there is no doubt that there was increased interest in the project because of the wiki, but I do have other concerns about the validity of the study. Despite the teacher admonishing other teachers who incorporate information and communication technology only to fulfill a requirement, I couldn't help but feel that this was exactly what he did. I do think the use of the wiki raised student interest in the project, but it was difficult to gage exactly how much as I do not think the teacher and librarian involved in the project were free of bias when completing the interviews from which this case study was based. I would even go so far as to suggest that the project was built around the requirement to incorporate ICT into the classroom. I think the teacher was asked to use a wiki in class and then came up with the idea of students building their own games. Actually, I believe the teacher played only the facilitator role in the entire project. From reading the case, I think that one of the authors, Peter Hastie, was the, "professor from an American university with expertise in games-making". I feel perhaps it wasn't he who was invited by the teacher to participate in the project but instead was the idea behind it and he suggested it to the teacher so that he may have a thesis or some other research component fulfilled. I may be completely off base here but that was the feeling I got from reading the study. To top it off, the librarian who was involved in the study also helped write it. I don't know what the ethical norms involved in conducting a case study are, but it seems to me that having a participant also author the study may result in some sort of bias. The authors mentioned the level of collaborative intelligence achieved through the use of the wiki. "The incorporation of the wiki into the games-making experience allowed for a series of conversations to take place among the participants in what Boulos and Wheeler (2007) refer to as collaborative intelligence. By collaborative intelligence, these authors refer specifically to the expectation the participants will engage with a sense of seriousness and permanence. Hadwin, Winne, and Nesbit (2005) further note that such a system only works with users who are serious about collaborating and willing to follow the group conventions and practices." I noticed that this project was done at a school that had 99.4% of its students speaking English as their first language and 1.2% of the students receiving free school meals. I know I am being biased, as I teach in a school with a completely opposite set of numbers, but I can't help but wonder if the reason students were so eager, and actually able to, participate in the project at home was because they had parents who probably provided not only some sort of support for school work but also had the means to own a computer with internet access. I wonder if this "sense of seriousness" and collaboration would be as evident in my classroom or any classroom where students do not grow up in an environment that puts a high priority on education. As far as suggestions for improvement, I don't have any. Again, according to the authors, the project was a rousing success. I am just curious to see if the project would be as successful in different setting or even with students of different ages. References: Almond, L. (1986). Primary and secondary rules in games. In R. Thorpe, D. Bunker, & L. Almond (Eds.), //Rethinking games teaching// (pp. 73–74). Loughborough: University of Technology. Boulos, M.N.K., & Wheeler, S. (2007). The emerging Web 2.0 social software: An enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. //Health Information and// //Libraries Journal, 24,// 2–23. Hadwin, A.F., Winne, P.H., & Nesbit, J.C. (2005). Roles for software technologies in advancing research and theory in educational psychology. //British Journal of Educational// //Psychology, 75,// 1–24. Hastie, P.A., Casey, A., & Tarter, A. (2010). a case study of wikis and student-designed games in physical education. //Technology, Pedagogy and Education//, //19//(1), 79-91. Wenger, E. (1998). //Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity.// Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P., & Wheeler, D. (2008). The good, the bad and the wiki: Evaluating student-generated content for collaborative learning. //British Journal of Educational// //Technology, 39,// 987–995.