Research Article

Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education

Volume: 9 Number: 6 November 1, 2022
EN

Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education

Abstract

Games, which are fun activities, have some benefits for learning environments when used educationally; they play an essential role in children’s physical, mental, social, emotional, and language development. Similarly, mind and intelligence games can improve the cognitive abilities of individuals by improving their basic reasoning and problem-solving skills. This qualitative case study examines preservice teachers' views on the use of mind and intelligence games in education and their effects on individuals. Researchers collected the data using a semi-structured interview guide they developed, through focus group interviews with twenty-seven preservice teachers who were enrolled in and completed an elective course offered at the faculty of education in the fall of 2021. According to the findings, preservice teachers mentioned the advantages and disadvantages of mind and intelligence games according to the type of media. The findings showed that mathematics is a more appropriate course for using the mind and intelligence games, followed by primary school courses, psychological counseling, and social sciences courses. The preservice teachers found mind and intelligence games eligible to support primarily cognitive skills involved in remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. Furthermore, co-operation and sociability are the skills that were more frequently referred to by preservice teachers, along with other skills, including persistence, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy.

Keywords

games, mind and intelligence games, preservice teachers’ views

Supporting Institution

Kırıkkale University Scientific Research Projects Coordinator

Project Number

2021/008

References

  1. Ahmad, F., Zongwei, L., Ahmed, Z., & Muneeb, S. (2020). Behavioral profiling: a generationwide study of players’ experiences during brain games play. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1827440
  2. Akcaoglu, M., Jensen, L. J., & Gonzalez, D. (2021). Understanding children’s problem-solving strategies in solving game-based logic problems. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 5(2), 245-257. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.98
  3. Akçelik, D., & Eyüp, B. (2021). The Effect of Intelligence Games on the Vocabulary Knowledge of Refugee Students Learning Turkish as the Second Language. Education Quarterly Reviews, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.04.02.264
  4. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman,.
  5. Ayperi, D. S. (2016). An investigation on the effectiveness of chess training on creativity and theory of mind development at early childhood. Educational Research and Reviews, 11(11), 1056–1063. https://doi.org/10.5897/err2016.2676
  6. Bartolucci, M., Mattioli, F., & Batini, F. (2019). Do board games make people smarter? Two initial exploratory studies. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 9(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJGBL.2019100101
  7. Bas, O., Kuzu, O., & Gök, B. (2020). The Effects of Mind Games on Higher Level Thinking Skills in Gifted Students. Journal of Education and Future, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.506669
  8. Battelle for Kids. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning. Partnership For 21st Century Learning. Retrieved from http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21/frameworks-resources
  9. Bircan, M. A. (2019). Stem eğitimi etkinliklerinin ilkokul dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin STEM’e yönelik tutumlarına, 21. yüzyıl becerilerine ve matematik başarılarına etkisi [The effect of stem education activities on attitudes towards stem, 21st century skills and mathematics achievements of fourth grade students]. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Ondokuz Mayıs University, Türkiye.
  10. Bloom, B.S. (Ed.). Engelhart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc.
APA
Yukselturk, E., İlhan, F., & Altıok, S. (2022). Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education. Participatory Educational Research, 9(6), 398-417. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.145.9.6
AMA
1.Yukselturk E, İlhan F, Altıok S. Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education. PER. 2022;9(6):398-417. doi:10.17275/per.22.145.9.6
Chicago
Yukselturk, Erman, Fatih İlhan, and Serhat Altıok. 2022. “Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education”. Participatory Educational Research 9 (6): 398-417. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.145.9.6.
EndNote
Yukselturk E, İlhan F, Altıok S (November 1, 2022) Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education. Participatory Educational Research 9 6 398–417.
IEEE
[1]E. Yukselturk, F. İlhan, and S. Altıok, “Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education”, PER, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 398–417, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.17275/per.22.145.9.6.
ISNAD
Yukselturk, Erman - İlhan, Fatih - Altıok, Serhat. “Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education”. Participatory Educational Research 9/6 (November 1, 2022): 398-417. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.145.9.6.
JAMA
1.Yukselturk E, İlhan F, Altıok S. Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education. PER. 2022;9:398–417.
MLA
Yukselturk, Erman, et al. “Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education”. Participatory Educational Research, vol. 9, no. 6, Nov. 2022, pp. 398-17, doi:10.17275/per.22.145.9.6.
Vancouver
1.Erman Yukselturk, Fatih İlhan, Serhat Altıok. Preservice Teachers’ Views about the Use of Mind and Intelligence Games in Education. PER. 2022 Nov. 1;9(6):398-417. doi:10.17275/per.22.145.9.6