Potential benefits of a Puzzle Video Game - Cognitive Enrichment Programme for the development of critical thinking among first year BEd students

(1)

Potential benefits of a Puzzle Video Game -

Cognitive Enrichment Programme for the

development of critical thinking among first year

BEd students

BJ Bunt

orcid.org / 0000-0002-2102-4381

Thesis accepted for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in

Learning and Teaching at the North-West University

Promoter:

Prof MM Grosser

Graduation: October 2019

Student number: 20172672

(2)

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to my wife, Laurel Lydia Bunt, who offered me unconditional love and support throughout the course of this study. I also dedicate this work to my parents, Prof John Reginald Bunt and Erna Bunt, who supported me all the way since the beginning of my studies and are an inspiration to further my academic career. And finally, to my son, Arthur Georg Bunt, who inspires me every day to do better. This study is dedicated to you.

(3)

DECLARATION

I, BYRON JOHN BUNT, solemnly declare that this work is original and the result of my own labour. It has never, on any previous occasion, been presented in part or whole to any institution or board for the award of any degree.

I further declare that all information used and quoted has been duly acknowledged by complete reference.

Signature Date

(4)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My sincere thanks and gratitude go to the following people whose advice, guidance, support and motivation have helped me to complete this study.

 The Lord God, Jesus Christ my saviour, who has helped and carried me through my studies with love and grace.

 My promoter, Professor M.M. Grosser, for her leadership, patience, guidance and support throughout the study period.

 Mrs Aldine Oosthuyzen for her assistance with the statistical analysis of data and technical editing of this dissertation.

 Dr Rhelda Krugel for the professional language editing of the dissertation.

 The staff of the Ferdinand Postma Library (Vaal Triangle campus), for helping me to find the literature needed for my research.

 My colleagues at the Faculty of Education for their advice and continued support.  All the students who participated in this research study.

 Grantt Gouws, who acted as the independent person and assisted me with the recruitment of the participants and the observations during the implementation of the intervention programme

 To my parents, Prof John Bunt and Erna Bunt, my brother, Lance, and all my friends for their unconditional love and support.

 A very special word of thanks goes to my wife, Laurel Bunt, for all her patience, love, support and understanding during the completion of this study.

 Open access for the use of Portal images:

https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1FERN_enZA671ZA671&q=Portal+video+ga me+images&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjZrr-gyZ_hAhXRC-wKHUirCJ0Q7Al6BAgIEA8&biw=1349&bih=559

(5)

SUMMARY

The central purpose of this doctoral thesis has been to deepen understanding of the development of critical thinking by using Portal, a puzzle video game.

The study involved embedded mixed method research that employed quantitative experimental research and qualitative, multiple case study research as strategies of inquiry, to investigate the potential benefits of a 13-week Puzzle Video Game-Cognitive Enrichment Programme (PVG-CEP) for the development of critical thinking among a group of first-year BEd students at a university in South Africa. In the context of the study, critical thinking is conceptualised as the integrated development, and application of critical thinking skills (making inferences, recognising assumptions, making deductions, doing interpretations, evaluating arguments), critical thinking dispositions (systematic working ways, accuracy, persistence), and standards for reasoning (logic, clarity, relevancy). The research involved students who were conveniently and purposively sampled, and randomly assigned to an experimental (N = 4) and control (N = 4) group.

Only the experimental group took part in the intervention.

Quantitative test data were collected by administering the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (W-GCTA) prior to, and after the PVG-CEP intervention that involved the application of Portal, a puzzle video game, to assess the development of the participants’ critical thinking. In addition, qualitative descriptive data were collected by conducting observations that were accompanied by anecdotal records and video recordings, and guided by a four-point descriptive scale, during the implementation of the PVG-CEP intervention, to establish growth in relation to the critical thinking skills, dispositions and standards for reasoning. After the intervention, semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with the participants of the experimental group to explore their experiences with the Portal puzzle video game.

None of the participants excelled in the application of critical thinking skills during the pre-test and the post-pre-test, and differential growth in relation to the development of the critical thinking skills was noted among the participants after completing the intervention: Based on the post-test results, participants 1, 2, and 4 demonstrated growth for making inferences, only participant 4 achieved growth for making deductions and doing

(6)

interpretations, and only participant 2 showcased growth for recognising assumptions. Participant 3 demonstrated no growth for any of the critical thinking skills on which the research focused, and the skill to evaluate arguments did not display any growth among any of the particiants. Overall, particpants 1 and 3 seemingly entered the intervention programme at practicing levels of thinking, and remained at practicing levels of thinking at the conclusion of the intervention. Participants 2 and 4 appeared to be at beginning level of thinking, and achieved growth to practicing level during the post-test.

Even though the observations did not frequently support the post-test results, the researcher argues that the intervention possibly contributed to the slight improvement that was noted for some of the critical thinking skills. The skills still appear to be fragile, and require more practice to enable the participants to progress towards becoming advanced and master thinkers. The intervention appeared to have been more beneficial for the growth noted in relation to the dispositions and standards for reasoning on which the study focused. All the participants, except participant 2, managed to achieve growth for all the dispositions and standards for reasoning on which the research focused.

Challenges related to the difficulty of the game, and lack of time were mentioned in relation to the intervention. Although the participants experienced fun and enjoyment during the game play, and noted that the PVG-CEP holds benefits in relation to growth in cognitive and emotional abilities, the findings of the study do not conclusively confirm that the intervention contributed to the growth observed for some of the critical thinking skills, dispositions, and standards for reasoning.

The participants in the control group who did not take part in the intervention, also demonstrated some growth in relation to the critical thinking skills on which the research focused, which could probably be linked to the influence of normal academic teaching.

The study is concluded with guidelines to guide and enhance the future implementation of puzzle video games for developing critical thinking.

Key words: critical thinking, critical thinking dispositions, standards for reasoning, puzzle

(7)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1: The GROW problem solving model (Gorell, 2013, p. 34-37) ... 13

Table 3.1: Strategies to nurture the development of critical thinking dispositions ... 120

Table 3.2: Questioning to develop standards for reasoning ... 121

Table 3.3: History of video games……… 126

Table 4.1: PVG-CEP procedural programme ... 160

Table 5.1: Biographical characteristics of the participants ... 191

Table 6.1: Summary of initial findings: Participant 1 ... 229

Table 6.5: Growth in critical thinking skills: Experimental group ... 281

Table 6.6: Improvement in dispositions and standards for reasoning: Experimental group ... 282

Table 6.7: Improvement in critical thinking: Control group ... 292

Table 6.8: Comparison of differences between pre- and post-test totals: Experimental group ... 296

Table 6.9: Comparison of differences between pre- and post-test totals: Control group ... 298

Table 6.10: Comparison: Pre-test results - experimental and control group ... 301

Table 6.11: Comparison: Post-test results - experimental and control group ... 303

Table 7.1: Example of a checklist to promote accuracy and persistence ... 392

Table 7.2: Example of written feedback in Portal ... 395

(19)

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Model ... 48

Figure 2.2: The researcher’s conceptualisation of critical thinking ... 50

Figure 2.3: Stages of critical thinking development (Paul and Elder, 2005b, p. 19) ... 55

Figure 2.4: A framework for 21st_{century learning ... 69}

Figure 3.1: Teaching methods and strategies ... 119

Figure 3.2: Chell and GLaDOS... 143

Figure 3.3: Flinging in Portal ... 145

Figure 4.1: Handheld portal device ... 169

Figure 4.2: Test chambers ... 170

Figure 4.3: Portal 1 ... 169

Figure 4.4: Portal 2 ... 172

Figure 5.1: Embedded mixed method experimental research (Creswell, 2014) .. 186

Figure 5.2: The quasi-experimental research design ... 187

Figure 5.3: Observation criteria for working systematically ... 203

Figure 6.1: Visual representation of interview data... 323

(20)

LIST OF GRAPHS

Graph 6.1: Participant 1: W-GCTA sub-test scores ... 227

Graph 6.2: Observations: Drawing inferences – Participant 1 ... 228

Graph 6.3: Observations: Recognition of assumptions – Participant 1 ... 231

Graph 6.4: Observations: Making deductions – Participant 1 ... 232

Graph 6.5: Observations: Doing interpretations – Participant 1 ... 232

Graph 6.6: Observations: Evaluating arguments – Participant 1 ... 233

Graph 6.7: Observations: Systematic working ways – Participant 1 ... 236

Graph 6.8: Observations: Persistence – Participant 1 ... 237

Graph 6.9: Observations: Accuracy – Participant 1 ... 238

Graph 6.10: Observations: Logic – Participant 1 ... 239

Graph 6.11: Observations: Clarity – Participant 1 ... 240

Graph 6.12: Observations: Relevancy – Participant 1 ... 241

Graph 6.19: Observations: Systematic working ways: - Participant 2 ... 250

Graph 6.20: Observations: Persistence – Participant 2 ... 251

Graph 6.26: Observations: Drawing inferences: Participant 3 ... 258

(21)

Graph 6.42: Observations: Evaluating arguments – Participants 4 ... 275

Graph 6:44: Observations: Persistence – Participant 4 ... 277

Graph 6:49: Pre- and post-test raw score test totals: Experimental group ... 282

Graph 6.50: Participant 5: Sub-test results ... 288

Graph 6.53 Participant 8: Sub-test results ... 291

Graph 6.54: Pre- and post-test raw score totals: Control group B ... 293

Graph 6.55: Comparison of the average sub-test data between experimental group and control croup – pre-test and post-test ... 300

(22)

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The development of critical thinking has been considered as a crucial outcome and ideal of education ever since the early days of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. This ideal was pursued through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance with the emphasis that was placed on the use of reasoning and critiquing thought processes as central activities to the improvement of critical thinking (Daniel, 1992; Goyak, 2009). Sumner (1906) supports this ideal by highlighting the fact that schools should not aim to create the same type of thinking in students, but rather focus on teaching students how to think. John Dewey (1933:2) extends the aforementioned argument by stating that “the aim of education is to learn and reason.” Beyer (1983) continues, by indicating that thinking should be critical in nature, and assess the authenticity, accuracy and worth of knowledge. In this regard, Norris (1985, p. 40) concludes that critical thinking denotes to “the application of what is known and felt and the assessment of one’s own thinking.” Ennis (1985) conveys the definition that characterises critical thinking most extensively as reasonable, reflective thinking, focused on choosing what to believe. Additionally, the definition of Paul (1988) links critical thinking to the capacity to attain comprehensive conclusions grounded on observations and information. It is evident, that since the 1980s the aforementioned pioneers in the field have provided definitions of critical thinking, which in essence highlight the strong element of thinking that is evaluative in nature (Barnes, 2005; Cheung, Rudowicz, Kwan, & Due, 2002; Facione, 2009; Halx & Reybold, 2005; Halpern, 2007; Pithers & Soden, 2000; Vandermensbrugghe, 2004).

Critical thinking has also been linked to values such as freedom and autonomy (Winch, 2006), and is regarded as a cornerstone for democratic citizenship and economic productivity (Arum & Roksa, 2011), as well as a crucial skill for coping with challenges in the twenty-first century (Halpern, 2014) (cf. 2.6.2). Critical thinking should therefore be regarded as a goal to be achieved across higher education curricula (Dunne, 2015).

(23)

At higher education level, the demands for students to solve problems through critical reasoning and arguing about topics in an academic context are crucial (Barnett, 2015; Bowell, 2017; Erikson & Erikson, 2018; Fahim & Shakouri, 2012; Grosser & Nel, 2013; Pienaar, 2001). According to Barnett (2015), Bowell (2017) and Erikson and Erikson (2018) the purpose of higher education involves among others, the following:

 To prepare students for employment.

 To provide opportunities for personal development.

 To prepare students to become active participants in a democratic society.

All of the aforementioned purposes encapsulate traces of intellectual development and student empowerment that could be expressed as critical thinking (Erikson & Erikson, 2018).

Pienaar (2001) concludes that the following higher-order critical thinking processes are essential for critical reading and understanding, and Grosser and Nel (2013), assert that these processes augur well with the set of critical, generic exit-level outcomes of the teacher-training programme at the university that took part in the study, and are valued at Higher Education level, namely:

 To solve problems.

 To elaborate on an argument and develop its implications.  To understand, analyse and evaluate arguments and opinions.  To support general assertions with details.

 To recognise the central thesis in a work.

Although critical thinking plays an important role in learning and coping with 21st century challenges and uncertainties (Halpern, 2014), escalating evidence points to the reality that higher education students do not improve their critical thinking skills, which among others involve reasoning, argumentation and problem solving (Arum & Roksa, 2011, Bok, 2006; Pascarella, Blaich, Martin, & Hanson, 2011)

Bearing the importance of critical thinking at higher education in mind, it goes without saying that teachers are the key role players in ensuring that students at school become

(24)

thinking skills has therefore been on the agenda of South African education since 1997 (Department of Education, 1997; Department of Education, 2002). The new National Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) Grades R-12 supports not only teaching and learning that nurtures the development of thinking skills, but also intellectual dispositions and universal standards for reasoning that are important for critical thinking. According to the Department of Basic Education (2011, p. 11), students should be capable of:

 identifying and solving problems and making decisions using critical and creative thinking;

 working effectively as individuals and with others as members of a group;

 organising and managing themselves and their activities responsibly and efficiently;  collecting, analysing, organising and critically evaluating information;

 communicating efficiently using visual, symbolic and/or language skills in various modes;

 using science and technology efficiently by critically showing responsibility towards the environment and the health of others; and

 demonstrating an understanding of the world as a set of related systems by recognising that problem solving contexts do not exist in isolation.

Although not explicitly stated, the researcher argues that in order to execute the aforementioned thinking processes that underpin the curriculum objectives effectively, dispositions such as accuracy, persistence, perseverance, open-mindedness, self-confidence in reasoning are also required (cf. 2.3.3). In addition, the execution of all thinking should adhere to universal standards for reasoning, namely logic, clarity, breadth, depth, significance and clarity (cf. 2.3.6).

It is reasonable to assume that teachers first have to be effective at applying critical thinking themselves, before they can teach and develop critical thinking among students. Internationally in the field of higher education, empirical research on critical thinking has focused on the development of critical thinking skills (Arum & Roksa, 2011; Heijltjes, Van Gog, Leppink, & Paas, 2014; King & Kitchener, 2002, 2004). In addition, researchers have also foregrounded the importance of understanding critical thinking as a social

(25)

activity (Kuhn, 2005; Moore, 2004, 2013). Numerous studies conducted internationally report on the fragile and deficient nature of critical thinking skills and dispositions among pre-service teachers (Akyüz & Samsa, 2009; Allamnakrah, 2013; As’ari, Mahmudi, & Nuerlaelah, 2017; Bakir, 2015; Hashim, 2010; Innabi & ElSheikh, 2007; Osana & Seymour, 2004; Qing, Jing & Yan, 2010; Umar & Ahmad, 2010; Turan, 2016; Zascavage, 2010). In contrast to the international studies, the only national studies, to the best knowledge of the researcher, that could be located that point to the fragile development of critical thinking skills among pre-service teachers, were the research studies conducted by Lombard and Grosser (2004), Grosser and Lombard (2008) and Lombard and Grosser (2008).

Various international studies document the effects of specific teaching methods on the development of critical thinking skills of pre-service teachers. The implementation of enquiry-based learning (Qing et al., 2010), philosophy of enquiry (Daniel, 2001), active learning (Burbach, Matkin, & Fritz, 2010), blended learning (Akyüz & Samsa, 2009), cognitive apprenticeship (Osana & Seymour, 2004), discussion-forums (Umar & Ahmad, 2010), enquiry-based learning (Duran & Dökme, 2016; Hadi, Susantini, & Augustini, 2018; Prayogi, Yuanita, & Wasis, 2018), and cooperative learning (Goyak, 2009) have all seemingly delivered advantages and gains in terms of promoting the development of critical thinking skills among pre-service teachers.

A review on critical thinking practices in Higher Education in nine European countries between 2000-2017, revealed that self-study, dialogue, mentoring, peer assessment, experiments, interview, reflective diaries and reflective essay analysis are frequently used as interventions to enhance critical thinking. Moreover, problem-based learning, enquiry and argumentation, as well as argumentation in e-leaning, are teaching methods and strategies that seem to be favoured for the development of critical thinking (Dumitru, Elen, Railiené, & Papathanasiu, 2018). None of the mentioned studies however, documents the merits of puzzle video games (cf. 5.1.2) for developing critical thinking.

Ever since the beginning of the digital era, with the invention of computer technology, educationalists have pondered over the question whether puzzle video games could be used to enhance learning in the classroom. Some of them agree that technology does indeed have a place in education (Gee, 2003b), whilst others are vehemently opposed to

(26)

this notion (Annetta, 2008). With the advent of technology also came the need to further the entertainment industry to catch up with the relentless march of progress (Miller, 2005).

To that end, the start of the video game industry boomed as more and more people gained access to home computing devices and gaming platforms such as Nintendo’s Nintendo Entertainment System (NES). As time progressed, games became more advanced, with graphical, as well as audio enhancements making games more realistic. In addition, the need emerged to produce video games for an adult audience, which led to the creation of games that contained graphical violence and overly sexual content. According to Fellick (2001), these developments have led to a spate of complaints from parents who claimed that these new realistic games were influencing their children negatively, conditioning them to become violent. Concerns mounted as numerous school shootings took place in the United States of America, the most infamous being the Columbine massacre. The two shooters were obsessed with playing violent video games, such as Doom. This led the general population to believe that the shooters became desensitised to violence because they played video games. However, numerous studies over the years have scientifically proven that video games do not lead to increased levels of violence, and that in almost all cases, the social and family life of children were to blame (Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Fling et al., 1992; Konijn, Nije Bijvank, & Bushman, 2007; Sherry, 2001). Interestingly, not much research has been undertaken to look at the positive effects of playing puzzle video games, and ultimately whether or not they can be used effectively to nurture teaching and learning in a classroom (Squire, 2003).

A number of international research studies investigated the merits of video games in general in order to nurture cognitive stimulation with samples of students at school level as well as university level. All of these studies were conducted internationally, and indicated that purposeful efforts to utilise video games in learning contexts were successful in terms of cognitive stimulation (All, Nuñez Casellar, & Van Looy, 2016; Bavelier, Achtman, Mani, & Föcker, 2012; Bavelier et al., 2018; De Araujo et al., 2015; Granic, Lobel, & Engels, 2014; Hwang, Chiu, & Chen, 2015; Hung, Hwang, Lee, & Su, 2012; Lin & Chen, 2016; Kadam, Sahasrabudhe, & Iyer, 2012; Smith & Middleton, 2003; Wouters & Van Oosterndorp, 2017). The researcher however, identified studies that indicated that the use of games mainly advances lower cognitive skills such as perception

(27)

and memory, (Baniqued et al., 2013; Martinovic et al., 2014), as higher order thinking skills for example, critical thinking skills, appear to be difficult to measure (Arias, 2014).

According to Bhalla (2013) there is limited research nationally to establish the ways to use technology in the learning process. Nationally, a number of vaguely related studies relate to the use of technology during teaching and learning, were identified (Du Plessis & Webb, 2008, 2012, Kafui & Cronjé, 2018; Sadeck & Cronjé, 2017, Thinyane, 2010). Between mobile phones, computers and the web, first-year students at South African universities appear to be mainly interested in using mobile phones during studies (Thinyane, 2010). In addition, e-learning, using computers and internet technologies appear to be only at emerging stages in South African schools (Sadek & Cronjé, 2017). A study conducted by Kafui and Cronjé (2018) reveals that the preferences of South African students at Universities of Technology regarding the use of technology include the use of smartphones, laptops, tablets, iPads and e-readers.

The researcher could not identify any national studies that explored the use of video games for the development of critical thinking, and therefore concluded that the identified gap could be worthwhile to explore. Exploring the merits of, in particular, puzzle video games for nurturing critical thinking among students, would therefore contribute to theoretical knowledge in the field of critical thinking development.

In relation to research methodology, completed research on critical thinking mainly applies quantitative multiple-choice tests and questionnaires (Heijltjes et al., 2014; Phan, 2008; Tremblay, Lalancette, & Roseveare, 2012) or qualitative interviews (Kaddoura, 2010; Kember, 2001). More recently, a need has arisen to replace the use of questionnaires with the direct assessment of student performance (Andiliou & Murphy, 2014; Klein, Benjamin, Shavelson, & Bolus, 2007; Shavelson, 2010; Stes, Min-Leliveld, Gijbels, & Van Petegem, 2010), as the researcher envisaged with the present study.

The researcher noticed that many of the cited international and national studies in the sections above, approached the development of critical thinking from either a quantitative or qualitative perspective which only involved the perspectives of teachers, and mainly focused on the development of critical thinking skills, without paying attention to the development of the critical thinking dispositions and the universal standards for

(28)

reasoning, that also comprise effective critical thinking (cf. 2.3.3, 2.3.6). This study wished to extend present research studies by combining a quantitative and qualitative research design that focused on the development of critical thinking, and involved the development of skills, dispositions and standards for reasoning. Moreover, students' perspectives on the merits of the use of the puzzle video games for developing critical thinking, were gauged. The researcher is of the opinion that the methodological approach taken by the study, also addressed a methodological gap within the field, by exploring students’ critical thinking in a problem solving situation in which a multi-method approach for gathering data was applied, in which the qualitative dimension carried the most weight.

Furthermore, many cited studies focused on the benefits that video game play has among others, for sensory motor hand-eye coordination (Griffith, Voloschin, Gibb, & Bailey, 1983;

Rosenberg, Landsittel, & Averch, 2005), perception, spatial cognition, attention, visual

processing and multi-tasking (All et al., 2016; Bavelier et al., 2018; Green & Bavelier,

2012; Uttal et al., 2013). None of the studies focused on the development of critical

thinking whilst playing puzzle video games. It will be the focus of this study to establish whether playing puzzle video games, in particular the puzzle video game Portal (cf. 3.5.4.3), hold potential for nurturing the development of critical thinking among first-year BEd students, thus contributing to the development of theory in relation to the development of critical thinking skills by using puzzle video games.

The ideal to develop critical thinking seemingly has not yet been achieved nationally and internationally. This study could therefore be of significance for all educationists involved in teaching and learning at school, and Higher Education levels, who are grappling with ways to develop critical thinking. Through this study an awareness could be created of the potential and merits that puzzle video games hold to develop critical thinking.

Based on the aforementioned discussion, the researcher wishes to formulate the purpose of this study as follows:

The purpose of this embedded mixed method experimental research design was to illuminate the potential benefits of a Puzzle Video Game - Cognitive Enrichment Programme (PVG-CEP) for the development of critical thinking among first-year BEd

(29)

students, thus offering a practical perspective to a field of study where practical guidance is often limited.

The next section briefly elaborates on the conceptual and theoretical frameworks of the study.

1.2 THEORETICAL

AND

CONCEPTUAL

FRAMEWORKS

The theoretical framework encompasses the broader relationships between the variables that play a role in the field of study as indicated by the literature, and includes the assumptions within which the researcher will be working (Kachchhap & Mishika, 2015; Regoniel, 2010). The conceptual framework comprises the variables that were explored in the study, and their relationships, thus being the mold in which the data were packaged (Regoniel, 2010), namely critical thinking (skills, dispositions and standards for reasoning) and the influence of puzzle video games on the development of critical thinking.

1.2.1 Theoretical framework

A theoretical framework aims to provide clarification for a certain event or elucidates the research phenomenon or research problem (Imenda, 2014).

In the context of the study, the following theories that encompass the broader relationships between critical thinking and ways to develop critical thinking, guided the execution of the study, namely cognitivism (cf. 3.2.3.2), constructivism (cf. 3.2.3.3), transformative learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.4), experiential learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.5), structural cognitive modifiability theory (cf. 3.2.3.6), mediated learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.7), tangential learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.8), and transfer of learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.9). In chapter 4, the researcher clarifies how the theoretical framework guided the execution of the study (cf. 4.3.1).

1.2.2 Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework represents the integrated manner in which the researcher investigated the research problem. The concepts drawn from the theoretical framework on which the study focussed, are critical thinking, the GROW problem solving model, and puzzle video games. In the context of the study, the relationship between the concepts

(30)

implied that the development of critical thinking was nurtured by using a puzzle video game that incorporated the use of the GROW problem solving model.

Critical thinking

Critical thinking is multi-dimensional in nature (Kong & Seng, 2006). Paul and Elder (2006, p. 6) define the multi-dimensional nature of critical thinking as “purposeful, self-regulatory judgement, which results in interpretation, analysis and evaluation of information” and includes “exploration” to justify reasoning. The common elements of the multi-dimensional nature of the construct critical thinking, as well as the numerous definitions in the literature can be best summarised as follows:

Critical thinking, also called critical analysis, is clear, rational thinking involving critique of information (Barnes, 2005, Elder & Paul, 2008a, Facione, 2009). According to Paul and Elder (2006) and Halpern (2007), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgments. Halpern (2007, p. 1) continues to define critical thinking as the “intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully conceptualising, applying, analysing, synthesising, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.” Paul and Elder (2006, p. 16-17) summarise the definitions by highlighting the three elements that critical thinking comprises of, namely cognitive and meta-cognitive skills and strategies, dispositions, and universal standards for reasoning that always have to be applied when one is engaged in reasoning.

In order to become an effective critical thinker, it could be argued that a student needs to possess and apply cognitive and meta-cognitive skills when engaged in reasoning and thinking. During the thinking and reasoning process, dispositions are required to ensure the effectiveness of the thinking process. Moreover, the thinking and reasoning process should adhere to the universal standards for reasoning (cf. 2.3.2 – 2.3.6).

Facione (2009) mentions that interpretation (attachment of meaning to experiences), analysis (identifying relationships among statements, experiences opinions or information), evaluation (assessment of the credibility of statements, experiences, opinions and beliefs), inference (drawing conclusions that reasonably flow from information), explanation (presenting results of one’s thinking in a coherent way) and

(31)

self-regulation (skills involving reflection and self-reflexivity) lie at the core of critical thinking. Self-regulation and explanation are regarded as meta-cognitive strategies, because they involve reflective processes to clarify and justify one’s own thoughts (cf. 2.3.2). In the context of the study, the researcher focused on the following critical thinking skills: Making inferences and deduction, recognising assumptions, doing interpretations and evaluating arguments (cf. 2.3.2).

The development of critical thinking also involves the development of dispositions for effortful thinking (cf. 2.3.3, 2.3.4). Dispositions can be defined as attitudes or habits of mind, such as intellectual curiosity/inquisitiveness, scepticism/seeking the truth, being open minded, analytical, systematic and judicious, and having self-confidence in reasoning (Facione, 2009; Paul & Elder, 2008a). In addition, the habit of being accurate, persistent, analytic, anticipating both the good and the bad potential consequences of a situation, and striving to approach problems in a systematic way, are essential dispositions for critical thinking (Facione, 2009). Intellectual habits that need to be well developed for the effective execution of critical thinking also include intellectual integrity, to remain true to one’s own thinking and to admit inconsistencies in one’s own thoughts and actions. Intellectual courage is important in order to be conscious of the need to face, address, and investigate ideas or beliefs towards which one might have strong emotions fairly (Facione, 2009; Paul & Elder, 2008a). In this study, the researcher focused on the following dispositions: Systematic working ways, persistence and accuracy (cf. 2.3.2).

Paul and Elder (2008a) elucidate that intellectual standards for reasoning are standards which ought to be applied to thinking to guarantee its quality (cf. 2.3.6). These standards ought to be learned and trained openly to students. The aim is for these standards to become instilled in the thinking of students, forming part of their internal voice, and guiding them to reason better (Paul & Elder, 2008a). Standards for reasoning also involve clarity (expressing in another way), precision (accurate detail), relevance (determining whether information is connected), significance (importance of information), breadth (obtaining insight and depth) and logic (ordering thoughts) (Paul & Elder, 2008a). The following standards for reasoning were regarded as important in the study: Logic, clarity and relevance (cf. 2.3.6).

(32)

Whenever we think, our thinking is focused on a number of elements of thought, namely directed by a purpose, guided by a point of view that is based on assumptions that lead to implications and consequences (Elder & Paul, 2008) (cf. 2.3.5). We make use of concepts, ideas and theories to interpret data, facts, and experiences so that we can answer questions, solve problems and resolve issues (Elder & Paul, 2008).

In the context of this study, critical thinking was conceptualised as purposeful thinking for which the application of cognitive and meta-cognitive skills, as well as thinking dispositions and universal standards for reasoning are required to be effective at solving problems. In support of structural cognitive modifiability theory (cf. 3.2.3.6), the researcher argued that the cognitive and meta-cognitive skills, dispositions and universal standards for reasoning that comprise critical thinking, could be developed with the puzzle video game intervention programme, and their application transferred to generic test scenarios.

Critical thinking plays an important role in problem solving. According to Fantin (2014), problem solving consists of using generic or ad hoc methods, in an orderly manner, for finding solutions to problems. Problems can also be categorised as ill-defined and well-defined (Buchner, 1995). Ill-well-defined problems are those that do not have clear goals, solution paths, or expected solutions. Well-defined problems have specific goals, clearly defined solution paths, and clear expected solutions (Schacter, Gilbert, & Wegner, 2009).

Critical thinking is a prerequisite for solving all problems, as problem solving encompasses dealing with pragmatics (logic) and semantics (interpretation of the problem) (Wang & Chiew, 2010). The ability to comprehend what the objective of the problem is and what procedures could be applied represent the key to solving the problem. Sometimes the problem necessitates some abstract thinking and coming up with a creative solution (Wang & Chiew, 2010).

Well-developed critical thinking dispositions are required when solving problems (Anderson, 2010; Costa, 2009). When solving problems, it is for example important to work according to a systematic strategy that requires the critical thinking skill of reflection. Reflection during problem solving refers to managing the problem solving process by planning, monitoring and evaluating it while it is taking place, and constantly adjusting and changing it (Ertmer & Newby, 1996). Moreover, reasoning during problem solving

(33)

has to comply with standards of reasoning in order to guarantee the quality of the problem solving.

The problem solving scenarios presented within the puzzle video game Portal that was used in the context of the study, can be defined as a combination of ill-defined and well-defined problems. Some of the scenarios are very simple and the goals can be found easily. Others are more complex, requiring one to seek out the goal while at the same time trying out novel methods to solve the problem. An example of this within the game would involve the player navigating a puzzle room, gathering information about what objects are present, where the exit is located and what obstacles are in the way to obstruct exit. The player will utilise various critical thinking skills when trying to solve each puzzle room. Players must deduce and interpret what solution paths need to be taken, as well as evaluate their arguments and assumptions if their methods do not solve the puzzle.

In order to be effective at problem solving, one needs to consider a few points (Paul & Elder, 2006), the first of which is to re-articulate your goals, purposes and needs regularly. Problems should be taken up one by one and should be stated as clearly as possible. One should be able to distinguish whether a problem is controllable or uncontrollable. One needs to analyse and interpret information carefully, drawing from it the most reasonable inferences. Actions need to be organised into short-term and long-term actions. Sometimes a strategic approach works the best. Once action is taken, one should be sure to monitor the implications of the action (Paul & Elder, 2006). In the context of the study, the GROW problem solving model was employed to promote a strategic approach to the solving of the puzzle video game problems.

The GROW problem solving model

The GROW model (Table 1.1), is a simple strategy for goal setting and problem solving (Gorell, 2013), that supports cognitive (cf. 3.2.3.2, constructivist (cf. 3.2.3.3) and transformative learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.4). The model was utilised within the intervention programme as a means to assist students to structure or plan problem solving situations, and for the researcher to mediate (cf. 3.2.3.7) and promote the development of the critical thinking skills, dispositions and standards for reasoning on which the study focused.

(34)

Table 1.1: The GROW problem solving model (Gorell, 2013, p. 34-37)

G Goal

The Goal is the end point, where the students want to be. The goal has to be defined in such a way that it is very clear to the students when they have achieved it.

R Reality The current reality is where the student is at present. What are the

issues, the challenges, how far away are they from the goal?

O

Obstacles

There will be obstacles preventing the student getting from where they are now to where the goal is. If there were no obstacles the student would already have achieved their goal.

Options

Once obstacles have been recognised, the student needs to find methods of coping with them if they are to make progress. These are the options they must discover.

W Way Forward

The options then need to be adapted into action steps, which will take the student to their goal. These action steps create the way forward (Passmore, 2015)

Puzzle video games

In support of tangential (cf. 3.2.3.8) and experiential learning theory (cf. 3.2.3.5), one way of making learning more engaging and effective is the use of video games, which offer great potential to facilitate formal and beyond the classroom learning, and encourage problem solving (Arnab et al., 2012). Although entertainment stands central to the use of video games, researchers also emphasise its role in supporting learning (Stone, 2008). Video games support student-centred experiences, where critical thinking and a variety of 21st_{century skills and dispositions can be nurtured, namely active construction rather}

than passive reception of knowledge, opportunities to solve problems, making decisions, inquiring, collaborating and being creative (Arnab et al., 2012). Students will have the opportunity to communicate and reason and, in the process, develop confidence in their reasoning, as well as seek the truth by engaging in probing and searching for the best possible information or solutions to problems.

A video game is an electronic game that includes human interaction with a user interface to produce visual feedback on a video device such as a TV screen or computer monitor (Williams & Smith, 2007). The word “video” in video game usually denoted to a

(35)

raster display device, but it nowadays suggests any kind of display device that can generate two- or three-dimensional images. Although video games are occasionally assumed to be a form of art, this description is controversial (Rabin, 2005).

Several contemporary studies have exposed that video games, whether violent or not, can aid children in the development of intellectual skills (All et al., 2016; Granic et al., 2014; Hwang et al., 2015; Wouters & Van Oostendorp, 2017), emotional skills (Granic et al., 2014; Ventura, Shute, & Zhao, 2013), pro-social behaviour (Ewoldsen et al., 2012; Granic et al., 2014), and problem solving skills (Granic et al., 2014; Prensky, 2012) that support their academic achievement. These findings have alerted teachers all over the world to recognise the numerous benefits of gaming and to include educational video game learning in their curricula.

Puzzle video games is a genre of video games that emphasises puzzle solving (cf. 3.5.4). The kinds of puzzles can test numerous problem solving skills, which could comprise logic, pattern recognition, sequence solving, and word completion (Herman,

Horwitz, Kent, & Miller, 2002). Puzzle games concentrate on logical and conceptual

challenges, while infrequently the games add time-pressure or other action-elements. While many action games and adventure games involve puzzles such as obtaining inaccessible objects, a true puzzle game focuses on puzzle solving as the primary game play activity. Games usually involve shapes, colours, or symbols, and the player must manipulate them, directly or indirectly into a specific pattern (Adams & Rollings, 2006). The puzzle video game is not necessarily designed to educational use (educational games), but Adams and Rollings (2006) argue, that it could have educational value, even if it is primarily used for entertainment and not structured towards school curricula.

Rather than offering an arbitrary assortment of puzzles to solve, puzzle games usually present a sequence of related puzzles that are a variant on a single theme. This theme could comprise pattern recognition, logic, or understanding a process (Thompson, 2007). These games usually have a simple set of rules, where players manipulate game pieces on a grid, network or other interaction space. Players must unravel clues, in order to achieve some victory condition, which will then allow them to advance to the next level. Completing each puzzle will usually lead to a more difficult challenge, although some

(36)

games avoid exhausting the player by offering easier levels between more difficult ones (DeMaria & Wilson, 2003).

According to Adams and Rollings (2006), an action puzzle or arcade puzzle necessitates of the player to operate game pieces in a real-time environment, frequently on a single screen and within a time limit, to resolve the puzzle or clear the level. Puzzle games comprise different sub-sets of games. Firstly, the term contains falling-block puzzles such as Tetris and KLAX. The term also includes games with characters moving through an environment, controlled either directly (Lode Runner) or indirectly (Lemmings). These can cross over with other action genres, for example a "puzzle platformer" which entails a unique mechanic to complete levels, such as controlling time in Braid. Lastly, an action puzzle or arcade puzzle contains action games that require timing and accuracy with pattern-matching or logic skills, such as the first-person Portal, which will be used in the context of the study (Adams & Rollings, 2006).

In the following section, brief definitions of the concepts central to the study are provided.

1.3 CONCEPT

DEFINITIONS

In this study, the following concepts that stand central to the study, namely critical thinking and puzzle video games, are briefly defined as follows.

1.3.1 Critical thinking

In the term critical thinking, the word critical is derived from the word critic and implies the application of skills critique or judge, as well as the ability to discern (Barnes, 2005, Elder & Paul, 2008; Facione, 2009). In addition, the execution of critical thinking also encompasses the application of thinking dispositions and universal standards for reasoning that enhance the quality of thinking (Paul & Elder, 2006).

1.3.2 Puzzle video games

Puzzle video games is a genre of video games that emphasises puzzle solving, is primarily used for entertainment and not structured towards school curricula (Adams & Rollings, 2006).

(37)

Based on the introduction and statement of the problem, this research wishes to formulate the following research questions as presented in section 1.4 that follows.

1.4 PRIMARY

AND

SECONDARY

RESEARCH

QUESTIONS

In line with a mixed-methods study, the primary research question that guided the execution of this research is two-fold.

How sophisticated are first-year BEd students in the application of critical thinking1, and

based on the findings, how can a PVG-CEP, support the development of critical thinking among first-year BEd students?

Within these two primary questions, the following secondary questions arise:  What are the elements of critical thinking?

 Why is critical thinking important for first-year BEd students?  How could critical thinking be developed effectively?

 What role does puzzle video games play in developing critical thinking?  Which puzzle video games would be best suited to develop critical thinking?

 How effective are BEd students at applying critical thinking skills before and after taking part in the PVG-CEP intervention? (Quantitative data)

 How effective are BEd students at applying critical thinking dispositions and standards for reasoning at the onset, and end of the PVG-CEP intervention? (Qualitative data)  What are the student participants' perceptions and experiences regarding the

development of critical thinking through a puzzle video game? (Qualitative data)  What novel guidelines can be proposed for including the use of puzzle video games

during teaching to develop critical thinking among first-year BEd students?

Potential benefits of a Puzzle Video Game - Cognitive Enrichment Programme for the development of critical thinking among first year BEd students