Zastosowanie struktury dwupoziomowej gry do zwiększania efektywności szkolenia (Implementation of a Multilevel Game Structure for Increasing Training Effectiveness)

• Authors: Marcin Wardaszko

Title variants

EN

Implementation of a Multilevel Game Structure for Increasing Training Effectiveness

• Languages of publication: PL

Abstracts

PL

Raport z badań prezentowany w artykule pokazuje wpływ podwójnej struktury gry, wdrożonej do jednego kursu akademickiego. Pierwsza gra to klasyczna kierownicza gra biznesowa, rozgrywana w 4–5-osobowych zespołach. Druga to inwestycyjna gra rozgrywana na poziomie indywidualnym. Gra inwestycyjna czerpie swoje dane z gry grupowej i jej celem jest maksymalizacja wyników inwestycyjnych bazujących na dynamicznym celu opartym na średnich wynikach z rozgrywanej gry kierowniczej. Zadaniem tej struktury gry jest motywowanie studentów do lepszego i pełniejszego analizowania raportów spółek oraz budowania lepszej strategii decyzyjnej. W artykule analizowane są wyniki gry inwestycyjnej na poziomie indywidualnym oraz gry kierowniczej w porównaniu do grupy kontrolnej.

EN

The report on research presented in the article shows the impact of the double–game structure employed in a college course. The first game is a classic managerial business game played in teams consisting of four to five people. The second is an investment–style game played on an individual level. The investment game draws on data from the group game and its objective is the maximizing of investment results based on a dynamic target grounded on average results of the managerial game. The goal of such a game structure is the motivating of students to analyze company reports better and more fully as well as to build better decision–making strategies. The article analyzes the results of the investment game on an individual level as well as of the managerial game as compared with a control group.

Keywords

PL

poważne gry; wielopoziomowa struktura gry; efektywność nauczania; grywalizacja w edukacji; biznesowe gry symulacyjne

EN

serious games; multilevel game structure; effective education; gamification of education; business simulation game

• Publisher: Institute of Labor and Social Studies, Warsaw
• Journal: Zarządzanie Zasobami Ludzkimi
• Year: 2015
• Issue: 2015 2(103) Gamifikacja/Grywalizacja (Gamification)
• Pages: 133-147
• Document type: Research Communiqués

Dates

published

2015-04-15

Contributors

author

Marcin Wardaszko

• Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland

References

• Burns A. C., Gentry J. W. (1996), Motivating Students to Engage in Experiential Learning: A Tension-to-Learn Theory Based on Curiosity and Absorptive Capacity (working paper), University of Nebraska – Lincoln.
• Burns A. C., Gentry J. W. (1998), Motivating Students to Engage in Experiential Learning: A Tension-to-Learn Theory, Simulation & Gaming, nr 29 (2), s. 133–151.
• Cunningham C., Zichermann G. (2011), Gamification by Design, Sebastopol, Canada, O’Reilly Media Inc.
• Gentry J. W., Burns A. C., Putrevu S., Hongyan Yu, Williams L., Bare T., Gentry R.A. (2001), Motivating students: An initial attempt to operationalize the curiosity gap model, Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, nr 28, s. 67–75.
• Gentry J. W. (1980), Group size and attitudes toward the simulation experience, Simulation & Gaming, nr 11, s. 451–460.
• Gonzalez C., Vanyukov P., Martin M. K. (2005), The Use of Microworlds to Study Dynamic Decision Making, Computers in Human Behavior, nr 21 (2), s. 273–286.
• Gonzalez C. (2004), Learning to Make Decisions in Dynamic Environments: Effects of Time Constraints and Cognitive Abilities, Human Factors, nr 46 (3), s. 449–460.
• Koster R. (2005), A theory of fun for game design, Scottsdale, Arizona, Paraglyph Press Inc.
• Pisarek T., Pitura W. (2009), Knowledge of economics as the main success factor in business simulation games, w Bielecki W., Wardaszko M. (red.), Games and Simulation in Business Learning and Teaching, Warsaw, Academic and Professional Press.
• Read J. L., Reeves B. (2009), Total engagement: Using games and virtual worlds to change the way people work and business compete, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The Harvard University Press.
• Scherpereel C. M. (2010), Peer to peer: a new tool for student peer evaluation, Developments in Business Simulations and Experiential Learning, nr 37, s. 238–250.
• Selen K., Zimmerman E. (2004), Rules of Play. Game Design Fundamentals, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press.
• Sterman J. D. (1989), Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment, Management Science, nr 35 (3).
• Sterman J. D. (1994), Learning in and about Complex Systems, Systems Dynamics Review, nr 10, s. 291–330.
• Sutton-Smith B. (2001), The ambiguity of play, Cambridge, Massachusetts, The Harvard University Press.
• Wardaszko M. (2007), Selected problems of using business simulation games in business education in the context of theory, Decision Games in Business Education, Nowy Sącz, Graduate School of Business – National-Louis University.
• Wardaszko M. (2013), Wykorzystanie symulacyjnych gier decyzyjnych w nauczaniu zarządzania, praca doktorska, Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego.
• Yakonich D. A., Cannon H. M., Ternan A. (1997), The energy factor: Building motivation in the simulation gaming environment, Developments in Business Simulations and Experiential Learning, nr 33, s. 31–40.

Identifiers

ISSN

1641-0874