Jo Wilder and the Capitol Case: A taxonomy of uses for a historical inquiry game in 4th grade Classrooms in Wisconsin

Authors: Peter Wardrip, David Gagnon, James Mathews, Jen Scianna

Paper presented at Meaningful Play 2022. East Lansing, MI

Abstract: In this paper, we study the various ways 3rd-5th grade educators in Wisconsin utilized Jo Wilder and the Capitol Case, a historical inquiry game, as part of their classroom instruction. The 15 educators involved in the study were all grade school teachers in Wisconsin who took part in the "Doing History Fellowship" program, a professional development opportunity offered by the authors, designed to increase their understanding of historical inquiry instruction and game-based learning. As part of the program, the educators planned and implemented the game within their own classroom context and reported their results back to the authors and other educators. Through their reports, surveys and semi-structured interviews we discovered the educators were motivated by five distinct instructional purposes, which influenced how the game was integrated into their curriculum. In this paper, we name and describe these five purposes. We see these findings as useful insights into how educators think about games and how educational video games and corresponding professional development activities may be designed in the future.

Submitted to arXiv on 17 Oct. 2022

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2210.09433v1

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

The summary is not ready yet
Created on 19 Sep. 2023

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

The license of this specific paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing tools will be run using the paper metadata rather than the full article. However, it still does a good job, and you can also try our tools on papers with more open licenses.

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.