Search

Background: Game-Based Learning (GBL) is an innovative pedagogical approach that utilizes digital applications to enhance health sciences higher education. Therefore, analyzing faculty and students' perspectives on GBL can help educational administrators, educators, and researchers tailor GBL to students' needs. Purpose: This study aimed to explore faculty (teachers) and students’ perspectives towards GBL in health sciences higher education. Further to identify barriers affecting the use of GBL as well as recommendations for its use from their perspectives. Methods: A descriptive-qualitative approach was conducted at a Saudi university. A total of 42 semi-structured interviews were completed with a purposive sampling of 22 faculty members and 20 students until data saturation. The data were analyzed using a thematic content analysis approach. Results: Faculty members and students reflected on their personal experiences using GBL, and the data presented seven themes and 30 categories emerged from the content analysis: common digital apps, purpose and uses, effect or benefits of GBL, personal experience with GBL, challenges and barriers affecting the use of digital games, and recommendations for educators on using GBL apps. Conclusion: The experiences of both students and faculty demonstrated that GBL can enhance classroom learning and complement traditional teaching approaches in health sciences higher education. GBL's safe, immersive environment lets students practice many generic skills, boosting interest, motivation, and peer-mediated learning. Faculty and students shared their GBL experiences, responsibilities, and enthusiasm. Health sciences higher education institutions should consider ways to increase flexibility in providing resources and training to educators who want to build and use the GBL approach in their classroom.

Background: The term ‘predatory journals’ initially appeared in PubMed in 2012 and was coined by Professor Jeffrey Beall in a note published in the Nature Journal. It is used to denote fake journals with questionable peer review, fast track publishing processes against monetary payment and a predatory approach to target researchers through spam email. Purpose: This study aimed to explore the experiences of nursing faculty concerning publication in predatory journals. Methods: A simple qualitative design was used. The setting included a college of nursing in Jeddah Saudi Arabia. A purposive sampling technique, with eight faculty members, were included in the study. In-depth interviews were conducted, audio-recorded and analyzed using a simple content analysis approach. Results: Three themes emerged with nine subthemes namely: i) research professional obligations; publishing pressure, research competitiveness, professional enhancement and promotion; ii) fast publications; escaping peer review, paying for quick service; iii) after-effects; emotional turmoil; characteristics of predatory journals. Conclusion: This study showed that publishing in a predatory journal has serious consequences, both professional and personal. The findings also highlighted that anyone in the academic setting could fall prey to these journals. Lastly, despite the increasing knowledge of predatory publishing, there is still a lack of awareness about this dark side of publications. Hence, educational awareness of predatory journals is needed. It is also recommended that research, including other disciplines, be completed.