Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Understanding enactivism: a study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study is intended to deepen our understanding of enactivism, an emergent theoretical paradigm, through empirical exploration of teacher undertakings as digital game creators. Specifically, it explores the affordances and constraints, two important enactivism concepts, of practicing teachers’ experiences in designing and developing games for instructional purposes. This paper is guided by the following questions: what were the affordances perceived by the teachers in their design and building experience, and how did they enact to these affordances? What constraints presented challenges to teachers in the process? This is a case study focusing on capturing and interpreting teachers’ experiences and thinking resulting from game creation and sharing. Data are collected from practicing teachers who enrolled in a graduate course. A significant finding of this study is that the game design and building experience afforded opportunities for teachers to re-conceptualize pedagogy and teaching practice. Implications for design and limitations of the study are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akpinar, Y., & Simsek, H. (2007). Preservice teachers’ learning object development: A case study in k-12 setting. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 197–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baerveldt, C., & Verheggen, T. (1999). Enactivism and the experiential reality of culture: Rethinking the epistemological basis of cultural psychology. Culture & Psychology, 5(2), 183–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballentine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baytak, A., & Land, S. (2011). An investigation of the artifacts and process of constructing computers games about environmental science in a fifth grade classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59, 765–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, K. (2007). Digital game-based learning once removed: Teaching teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 478–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J., Stillman, G., & Herbert, S. (2004). Can the notion of affordances be of use in the design of a technology enriched mathematics curriculum? Paper presented at the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Sydney.

  • Clark, A. (1999). An embodied cognitive science? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(9), 345–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colella, V. (2001). Participatory simulations: Building collaborative understanding through immersive dynamic modeling. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 471–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colella, V., Klopfer, E., & Resnick, M. (2001). Adventures in modeling: Exploring complex, dynamic systems with StarLogo. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coles, A. (2007). Mathematics education—A field in disarray? Paper presented at the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics.

  • Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design; choosing among five traditions. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2006). Complexity and education: Inquiries into learning, teaching and research. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, B., Sumara, D., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2008). Engaging minds: Changing teaching in complex times (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Castell, S., & Jenson, J. (2005). The field of educational game studies. Orbit, 25(2), 17–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dede, C. (2005). Planning for Neomillennial learning styles: Implications for investment in technology and faculty. In D. Oblinger & J. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 15.11–15.22). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.

  • Dede, C. (2008). A seismic shift in epistemology. EDUCAUSE Review, 43(3), 80–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garbarini, F., & Adenzato, M. (2004). At the root of embodied cognition: Cognitive science meets neurophysiology. Brain and Cognition, 56, 100–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., Thomas, M., & Greene, B. (2006). Technology-rich ethnography for examining the transition to authentic problem-solving in a high school computer programming class. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(4), 319–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. (1979). An ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gredler, M. (2004). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 571–581). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009). Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. (1994). Gibson’s affordances. Psychological Review, 101, 336–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, J. F. (1994). Case studies in organizational research. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Qualitative methods in organizational research: A practical guide (pp. 208–229). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirose, N. (2002). An ecological approach to embodiment and cognition. Cognitive Systems Research, 3, 289–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton, D. (2010). Embodied cognition and enactivism: Implications for constructivism and conceptual change. Paper presented at the annual meeting of AERA, Denver.

  • Jayakanthan, R. (2002). Application of computer games in the field of education. The Electronic Library, 20(2), 98–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Washington, DC: The John D. and Catherine MacArthur Foundation.

  • Johnson, M. (1989). Personal practical knowledge series: Embodied knowledge. Curriculum Inquiry, 19(4), 361–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. B. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children’s learning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. (2006). Playing and making games for learning: Instructionist and constructionist perspectives for game studies. Games and Culture, 1(1), 36–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kafai, Y. B., Franke, M. L., Shih, J. C., & Ching, C. C. (1998). Game design as an interactive learning environment for fostering students’ and teachers’ mathematical inquiry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3(2), 149–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klopfer, E., Scheintau, H., Huang, W., Wendel, D., & Roque, R. (2009). The simulation cycle—combining games, simulations, engineering and science using StarLogo TNG. E-Learning and Digital Media, 6(1), 71–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2005). What happens when teachers design educational technology? The development of technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(2), 131–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A., Kahne, J., Middaugh, E., Macgill, A., Evans, C., & Vitak, J. (2008). Teens, video games, and civics (Vol. 2008). Washington, DC: PEW Internet & American Life Project.

  • Li, Q. (2010). Digital game building: Learning in a participatory culture. Educational Research, 52(4), 427–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Q., Clark, B., & Winchester, I. (2010). Instructional design and technology grounded in enactivism: A paradigm shift? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 403–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception and other essays. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michie, M. (2004, April). Teaching science to indigenous students: Teachers as culture broker or is it something else? Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada.

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

  • Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: Rethinking school in the age of computers. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1998). Does easy do it? Children, games, and learning. Game Developer, 6, 87–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pea, R. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47–87). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. (1986). Knowledge as design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid, D. (1995). Enactivism. Retrieved November 20, 2006, from http://plato.acadiau.ca/courses/educ/reid/enactivism/EnactivismDef.html.

  • Rieber, L., Smith, L., & Noah, D. (1998). The value of serious play. Educational Technology, 38(6), 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squire, K. (2006). From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educational Researcher, 35(8), 19–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital: How the net generation is changing your world. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, M., Ge, X., & Greene, B. (2011). Fostering 21st century skill development by engaging students in authentic game design projects in a high school computer programming class. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 44(4), 391–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, E. (2006). Sensorimotor subjectivity and the enactive approach to experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 407–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 16–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varela, F. (1999). Ethical know-how: Action, wisdom and cognition. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a standard research grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC, Government of Canada) to the first author. The views and findings expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of SSHRC. The author also wishes to send her heartfelt thanks to the ETRD co-editor, Dr. Michael Hannafin and the anonymous reviewers for their invaluable feedback.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Towson University, Hawkins Hall, Room 107D, 8000 York Road, Towson, MD, 21252, USA

    Qing Li

Authors
  1. Qing Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Qing Li.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Li, Q. Understanding enactivism: a study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Education Tech Research Dev 60, 785–806 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation