Playing to learn? Analyzing participants' framing of competition and professional conduct in maritime simulations

IF 2 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Learning Culture and Social Interaction Pub Date : 2024-04-30 DOI:10.1016/j.lcsi.2024.100821
Mari Starup , Charlott Sellberg , A.Camilla Wiig
{"title":"Playing to learn? Analyzing participants' framing of competition and professional conduct in maritime simulations","authors":"Mari Starup ,&nbsp;Charlott Sellberg ,&nbsp;A.Camilla Wiig","doi":"10.1016/j.lcsi.2024.100821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study scrutinizes how a simulated scenario framed as a competition is discussed in a post-simulation debriefing, where students reflect on game-like play in the context of professional education. This study draws on Erwin Goffman's (1974/86) analytical concept of framing. In particular, the analysis focuses on the instructor's and students' authentic conversations during a debriefing session and explores how these conversations open up negotiations of professional and playful learning. The research design is ethnographically informed and based on observations, field notes, and 34 h of video data from a navigation course in which 35 bachelor's students from a Norwegian university participated. Our analytical findings reveal that the activity undergoes continuous negotiation between two framings: professional and competitive. In professional framing, students are held accountable for adhering to professional rules, regulations, and norms of “good seamanship.” In the competition framing, students were competing to win the race. Moreover, as the competition mode intensified, students prioritized winning the race over adhering to the rules and regulations of the profession. Consequently, the findings illustrate how a competition framing within a professional education context has engaged the students, letting them demonstrate their knowledge and skills in a playful manner. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the need for an additional exploration of the opportunities and challenges of competition on professional decision making and ethical conduct in settings where simulation-based learning is utilized for training, particularly in domains that train students in high safety standards.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46850,"journal":{"name":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210656124000291/pdfft?md5=e58d96336b93bd715a58ba5221615f35&pid=1-s2.0-S2210656124000291-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Learning Culture and Social Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210656124000291","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study scrutinizes how a simulated scenario framed as a competition is discussed in a post-simulation debriefing, where students reflect on game-like play in the context of professional education. This study draws on Erwin Goffman's (1974/86) analytical concept of framing. In particular, the analysis focuses on the instructor's and students' authentic conversations during a debriefing session and explores how these conversations open up negotiations of professional and playful learning. The research design is ethnographically informed and based on observations, field notes, and 34 h of video data from a navigation course in which 35 bachelor's students from a Norwegian university participated. Our analytical findings reveal that the activity undergoes continuous negotiation between two framings: professional and competitive. In professional framing, students are held accountable for adhering to professional rules, regulations, and norms of “good seamanship.” In the competition framing, students were competing to win the race. Moreover, as the competition mode intensified, students prioritized winning the race over adhering to the rules and regulations of the profession. Consequently, the findings illustrate how a competition framing within a professional education context has engaged the students, letting them demonstrate their knowledge and skills in a playful manner. Furthermore, the findings emphasize the need for an additional exploration of the opportunities and challenges of competition on professional decision making and ethical conduct in settings where simulation-based learning is utilized for training, particularly in domains that train students in high safety standards.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
玩中学?分析海事模拟中参与者对竞争和职业行为的构想
本研究仔细研究了在模拟后的汇报中,学生如何讨论以竞赛为框架的模拟情景,并对职业教育背景下的游戏式游戏进行反思。本研究借鉴了 Erwin Goffman(1974/86)的框架分析概念。特别是,分析侧重于教师和学生在汇报环节中的真实对话,并探讨这些对话如何开启专业学习和游戏学习的协商。研究设计以人种学为依据,以观察、现场记录和34小时的视频数据为基础,这些数据来自一门有35名挪威大学本科学生参加的导航课程。我们的分析结果表明,这项活动在专业和竞争两种框架之间不断进行协商。在专业框架下,学生要对遵守专业规则、条例和 "良好航海技术 "规范负责。在竞争框架中,学生们为赢得比赛而竞争。此外,随着竞争模式的加剧,学生将赢得比赛置于遵守专业规章制度之上。因此,研究结果说明了专业教育背景下的竞赛框架如何吸引学生,让他们以游戏的方式展示自己的知识和技能。此外,研究结果还强调,在利用模拟学习进行培训的环境中,尤其是在对学生进行高安全标准培训的领域中,有必要进一步探讨竞争给专业决策和道德行为带来的机遇和挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Learning Culture and Social Interaction
Learning Culture and Social Interaction EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
50
期刊最新文献
Negotiating agency in teacher-children triads of collaborative (re)storytelling: Empirical study and methodological implications Improving the quality of mathematical discussions: The impact of small-group scaffolding Voicing infant talk: Infant's agency in Spanish family interactions Editorial Board Teacher collaborative inquiry into practice in school-based learning communities: The role of activity type
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1