Here are some online resources about this Foo Foo/ Myth…
*** *** *** ***
On Fun…
Fun in Learning vs Engaging Learning
TBD
*** *** *** ***
On Games…
From Ruth Clark:
Review of Research on Games: 2004-2009
• Found 70 high quality studies
• Among those only 5 used random assignment with control
• Important features: feedback, varied difficulty level, memory support
• “Evidence that games lead to more effective learning was not strong”
– Connolly et al, 2012
http://www.elearningguild.com/assets/files/40/dl12_104_clark.pdf
*** *** *** ***
Research:
Connolly et al (2012). A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games.
Computers and Education, 59, 661-686
*** *** *** ***
From Jeanne Farrington:
Seriously, the Game Is Up
*** *** *** ***
From Dick Clark (Richard E. Clark):
Learning From Serious Games?
RE Clark serious games researchet_june07
Media in Teaching
Serious Games Evaluation
Clark_Serious Games Evaluation
On Learning From Serious Games
Recent Neuroscience and Cognitive Research Findings on Cyber Learning
Recent Neuroscience and Cognitive Research
Games for Instruction?
*** *** *** ***
Fight the Foo Foo
*** *** *** ***
*** *** *** ***
Please add other links – to “research” and not just “opinions” – either in agreement or in disagreement – in the comments sections below.
*** *** *** ***
# # #
Pingback: L&D: Have You Done an Internal Myth Audit? | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: L&D – Swing for the Fences, or Lay Down a Bunt? | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: This Week’s L&D Buzz… Evidence Based Practices in Learning | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: There Is Too Much Foo Foo in ID and PI Practices | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: Foo Foo – in Instructional Design and Performance Improvement | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: Persistent Learning & Performance Improvement Myths | EPPIC - Pursuing Performance
Pingback: Avoid the Foo Foo in ISD and PI and (Your Profession Here) | EPPIC – Pursuing Performance