Search

Shortage gaming, supply chain competition, and supply rationing are important and timely topics in operations management and supply chain management curricula. We introduce an online instructional game, the Hunger Chain, that provides an action‐based, competitive simulation for engagement of students in experiential learning of these topics. We discuss how instructors can use the game to stimulate students' learning about panic orders and hoarding (shortage gaming), decision dependencies (supply chain competition), and efficient and/or fair allocation of limited supplies (supply rationing). A comparison of test results from students who played the game to those from a control group showed significantly improved learning outcomes. In addition, sentiment analysis of student feedback was overwhelmingly positive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We discuss the design, creation and implementation of an instructional game for use in a high school poetry class following a commitment to an educational game design principle of alignment. We studied groups of instructional designers and an interactive fiction computer game they built. The game was implemented in a 9th grade English classroom to see if the designed alignments were realized in the classroom. Results from observations and collected design artifacts suggest the alignment theory created extra challenges and rewards for the game designers. They encountered tensions between creating an exciting game-like atmosphere with inventive programming techniques while remaining loyal to the narrative structure and instructional goals. Game-play transcripts and interviews with middle school participants offered additional insights into the successes and failures of intentional efforts to bring about educational game alignment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background - A computer-based learning experience was developed using cognitive flexibility theory to overcome the pitfalls often encountered in existing medical education. An earlier study (not published) showed significant pretest-posttest increase in scores, as well as a significant positive correlation between choosing to complete the module individually or in pairs. Method - This experience was presented as part of a second-year course in medical school with randomized assignment for students to complete the program as pairs or individuals. Results - Sixty-six scores of 101 medical students (31 from students working as singles and 35 from 70 working in pairs) were analyzed. Out of 47 possible points, the mean pretest score was 15.1 (SD = 6.4, range 13.7-15.9). The mean posttest score was 22.9 (SD = 5.2, range 21.1-24.2). Posttest scores were statistically significantly higher than pretest scores (p<.001, Cohen's d = 1.17, average gain 7.8 points). Both pairs and singles showed pre-to-post test score gains, but the score gains of pairs and singles were not significantly different. Conclusion - This learning module served as an effective instructional intervention. However, the effect of collaboration, measured by score gains for pairs, was not significantly different from score gains of students completing the assignment individually. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]