Based upon the reading of this module and the evaluation rubrics introduced in Modules 6 and 7, what are the top 6 evaluation dimensions that are important and appropriate in your subject discipline and grade level? Identify these evaluation dimensions and elaborate/justify them in details by citing sources introduced in this course.
The grade level that I am basing my evaluation rubric on is fifth grade and the subject is science. The six dimensions are all equally important and are discussed in no particular order.
Dimension One: Rigor
This dimension “measures the thinking skills an app requires of learners as they engage it” (Cherner & Lee, 2015, p. 26). Rigor is important because I support learning taking place at the higher-order levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Why should students play a game if it is not pushing them to reach a higher-order skill linked with a learning objective? Teachers are able to justify the use of games in the classroom if they align with Webb’s DOK.
Dimension Two: Feedback to Teacher - Teacher Interface
It is imperative to know how students are progressing when using game-based learning. To take on the role of facilitator, teachers need to know “the content their learners studied and mistakes they have made” so they can modify instruction and track learners’ progress (Lee & Cherner, 2015, p. 28). This dimension would be supported by Federoff’s article in terms of relating to Nielsen’s heuristic of visibility of system status, although in a teacher’s context.
Dimension Three: Ease of Use
This dimension is part of the design domain and assesses if “an app is intuitive and user-friendly” (Lee & Cherner, 2015, p. 31). This dimension is imperative because if players find a game easy to use, it heightens engagement levels and lowers frustration levels. Laitinen would support this because it would promote her definition of usability by maximizing effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction for users (Laitinen, 2005). This also relates to Cornetts and Jorgensen’s research regarding usability and gaming!
Dimension Four: Pace
Pace is the third new dimension in Lee and Cherner’s evaluation rubric. It explores if the players have control over the rate in which they move through the app's content. When students can control the “rate at which the content is presented to them, the added control would likely be a motivating factor” (Lee & Cherner, 2015, p. 34). Federoff established pace as a game play heuristic and defines it as “one of two defining characteristics of game play” (Federoff, 2002, p. 30).
Dimension Five: Level of Learning Material
I strongly support developmentally appropriate education, as many educators do. This dimension evaluates if an “app’s material is appropriate for its target group” and ensures that it is within a learner’s zone of proximal development (Lee & Cherner, 2015, p. 28). The players level of ability and the learning material must match to avoid boredom or frustration. Cornett suggests providing “context sensitive help” in an application when players encounter terminology that they do not yet understand (Cornett, 2004, p. 707).
Dimension Six: Value of Errors
Failure often has a negative connotation. Games provide an atmosphere where failure is normalized as a part of learning. According to Lee and Cherner, “constructive feedback and individualized instruction have long been recognized as key characteristics for effective teaching” (Lee & Cherner, 2015, p. 27) This is supported by Nielsen’s gaming heuristic: help users recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors. It is also supported by various authors we have heard from in this course such as Zichermann, Hammer & Lee, Anderson, and Ellis.