This chapter draws upon data from an ongoing seven-year study of game-informed and game-based learning in public high school math classes in the northeastern United States. The researcher has worked closely with the same math teacher and his students to develop and refine a cooperative testing approach piloted and integrated into in the teacher's math classes since 2017. For this study, data from students' post-cooperative assessment reflections, along with hundreds of hours of classroom observation and eight student interviews, suggest that the cooperative features inherent in videogaming and esports can support a revised approach to assessing learning, one which honors social responsibility and meaningful learning.
TopWorking Within And Against An Assessment Culture
Meaningful learning is not simply knowing what an answer is, but, rather, understanding how to reach that answer. Problem solving and recognizing possible routes to a solution, therefore, become central to meaning making, in general, and to meaning making in math class, in particular. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) publications continue to highlight the need for students to develop their abilities “to reason and make sense of mathematical situations” (Martin et al., 2009, p. 4), “to be an informed citizen and consumer” (Executive Summary, n.d., p. 4), and to communicate “technical knowledge through oral and written formats” (Lommatsch, 2017, p. 112). Furthermore, NCTM Process Standards emphasize persevering through problem solving; creating, supporting, and critiquing arguments; developing flexible thinking; and applying mathematical thinking to everyday scenarios (Executive Summary, n.d.). Although life-long learning and social responsibility might be embedded in these and related core learning standards, the connection between mathematical thinking and social responsibility needs greater attention.
Traditional forms of assessment—often isolated events wherein a student individually completes a digital or nondigital test—provide a snapshot of what that student knows (or how the student interprets the test) at a particular point in time. Rarely does a traditional exam or summative assessment, which focuses on the final answer, provide thorough insight into how the student derived the answer. Additionally, rarely do traditional assessments involve the “soft failure” found in videogames (Laughlin & Marchuk, 2005, p. 25; Vallet, 2016), wherein players can learn from their mistakes by respawning or restarting the game. Rather, with traditional assessments “whether it is a poor grade or simply a red mark on homework, the failure is an end in itself” (Laughlin & Marchuk, 2005, p. 25). Thus, it comes as no surprise that “assessment via testing/correct answers” and “students work[ing] individually” are factors associated with mathematics anxiety among students (Finlayson, 2014, p. 100), and that the “focus on standardized tests has created a culture of anxiety in many schools” (Lobman, 2014, p. 330).