糖心原创

Home⇛International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research⇛vol. 6 no. 7 (2025)

Strengthening Higher-Order Thinking in Science Through Collaborative Gameplay: A Quasi-Experimental Study

Enrique E. Balili Jr.

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The K–12 science curriculum emphasizes the development of essential 21st-century skills such as critical problem-solving, environmental literacy, innovation, and effective communication. Despite these curricular priorities, traditional lecture-based instruction often fails to cultivate higher-order thinking—particularly logical reasoning, which is foundational in science learning. This study investigates the effectiveness of Collaborative Game-Based Activities (CGBAs) as an instructional strategy to enhance students’ logical reasoning skills in science. Employing a quasi-experimental research design, the study assessed the quality of CGBA implemen-tation, students’ baseline competency in logical reasoning, their progress across successive CGBA sessions, and overall improvement after the inter-vention. Grade 9 students participated in a series of CGBA sessions, with their logical reasoning abilities evaluated through pre-test and post-test assessments. Teacher rubric-based evaluations of CGBA quality revealed consistently high implementation fidelity, aligning well with instructional objectives. The findings indicated a significant improvement in students’ logical reasoning scores following CGBA exposure, with the majority ad-vancing from “Satisfactory” to “Good” and “Very Good” performance levels. A paired-samples t-test confirmed this difference to be statistically significant (p < .001), supporting the intervention’s impact on academic performance. The study also affirmed that the assumptions required for para-metric testing were met, enhancing the reliability of the findings. Overall, the study underscores the pedagogical value of integrating collaborative and game-based approaches to foster critical thinking, teamwork, and deep engagement with scientific concepts. By transforming passive instruction into active, inquiry-driven learning, CGBA offers a compelling model for strengthening logical reasoning and promoting meaningful sci-ence education.



References:

  1. Antonio, R. P., & Prudente, M. S. (2024). Ef-fects of inquiry-based approaches on stu-dents’ higher-order thinking skills in sci-ence: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Sci-ence, and Technology, 12(1), 251–281. 
  2. Arifin, Z., Sukarmin, S., Saputro, S., & Kamari, A. (2025). The effect of inquiry-based learning on students’ critical thinking skills in science education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(3), em2592. 
  3. Borge, M., Smith, B. K., & Aldemir, T. (2024). Using generative AI as a simulation to support higher-order thinking. Interna-tional Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 19, 479–532. 
  4. Bronkhorst, H., Roorda, G., Suhre, C., & Goedhart, M. (2021). Student develop-ment in logical reasoning: Results of an intervention guiding students through dif-ferent modes of visual and formal repre-sentation. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 21(2), 378–399. 
  5. Cornell, D. (2024). 63 higher-order thinking skills examples. Helpful Professor. 
  6. Di Martino, V., Pellegrini, M., Altomari, N., & Peru, A. (2024). Developing logical rea-soning in primary school: The impact of a cognitive enhancement programme. PROSPECTS, 54, 891–904. 
  7. Dowhen, M. (2023). Understanding logical reasoning in everyday contexts. Academ-ic Logic Press. 
  8. Great Learning Team. (2022). Logical reason-ing: Importance and career impact. Great Learning Blog. 
  9. Halpern, D. F. (2022). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (6th ed.). Routledge. 
  10. Helmenstine, A. M. (2025, June 5). The scien-tific method. Science Notes. 
  11. Huseynova, F. (2023). Assessment of students’ reading comprehension skills in teaching English. In F. G. Paloma (Ed.), Teacher training and practice (pp. 1–20). IntechOpen. 
  12. Jimenez, L., & Modaffari, J. (2021). Future of testing in education: Effective and equi-table assessment systems. Center for American Progress. 
  13. Kent State University. (2023). Paired samples t-test. Kent State University Libraries. 
  14. Killian, S. (2023). How to use concept mapping in the classroom: A complete guide. Evi-dence-Based Teaching. 
  15. Liu, H., Fu, Z., Ding, M., Ning, R., Zhang, C., Liu, X., & Zhang, Y. (2025). Logical reasoning in large language models: A survey. arXiv. 
  16. Lutkevich, B. (n.d.). STEM education. Tech-Target. 
  17. Manalo, F. K. B., & Chua, E. N. (2020). Collabo-rative inquiry approaches and level of thinking and reasoning skills: Basis for sustainable science education. Interna-tional Multidisciplinary Research Journal, 2(1), 1–12. 
  18. Meisser, N. (2022). Authentic assessments and student self-efficacy: Enhancing confi-dence and performance in higher educa-tion. University of Illinois Chicago, Center for the Advancement of Teaching Excel-lence. 
  19. Mishra, P., Pandey, C. M., Singh, U., Gupta, A., Sahu, C., & Keshri, A. (2019). Descriptive statistics and normality tests for statisti-cal data. Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, 22(1), 67–72. 
  20. Mor, E., & Er艧en, R. K. (2023). Implications of current validity frameworks for class-room assessment. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 10(Special Issue), 163–172. 
  21. Morris, D. L. (2025). Rethinking science educa-tion practices: Shifting from investiga-tion-centric to comprehensive inquiry-based instruction. Education Sciences, 15(1), 73. 
  22. Nugroho, A. A., Sajidan, S., Suranto, S., & Masykuri, M. (2025). Enhancing students’ argumentation skills through socio-scientific real-world inquiry: A quasi-experimental study in biological educa-tion. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(1), Article e16212. 
  23. Padayichie, K. (2023). Collaborative learning. Structural Learning. 
  24. Padayichie, N. D. (2023). The power of collab-orative learning in the classroom. South African Journal of Education, 43(2), 189–202. 
  25. Pan, S. C., & Carpenter, S. K. (2023). Preques-tioning and pretesting effects: A review of empirical research, theoretical perspec-tives, and implications for educational practice. Educational Psychology Review, 35, Article 97. 
  26. PM Publisher. (2022). Building smart learners: The value of logical reasoning in educa-tion. 
  27. Ravi, S. (n.d.). Constructivist learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Educa-tion, 5(6), 66–70. 
  28. Shamuratovich, S. (2023). Collaborative learn-ing and skill development for educational growth of artificial intelligence: A sys-tematic review. Contemporary Educa-tional Technology, 15(3), Article ep428. 
  29. Shamuratovich, U. S. (2023). Innovative ap-proaches to the development of logical thinking of students in grades 5–9 of spe-cialized schools. Science and Innovation, 2(7). 
  30. Sharma, N. (2023). 7 key benefits of game-based education in a digital world. Hurix Digital. 
  31. Sharma, R. (2023). Game-based learning in computer science education: A scoping literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10, Article 54. 
  32. Surur, A. M. (2020). Thorndike’s theory for improving madrasah teacher’s creative thinking and publication. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Engi-neering, Technology and Social Science (ICONETOS 2020). 
  33. UNESCO. (2019). Framework for the future: Fostering scientific thinking and critical reasoning in schools. 
  34. University of Waterloo. (n.d.). Gamification and game-based learning. Centre for Teaching Excellence. 
  35. Whitfield, B. (2025, January 23). An introduc-tion to the Shapiro–Wilk test for normali-ty. Built In. 
  36. Williams, A. (2024). Delivering effective stu-dent feedback in higher education: An evaluation of the challenges and best practice. International Journal of Re-search in Education and Science, 10(2), 473–501. 
  37. Yasmin, F., Farooq, M. U., & Shah, S. K. (2023). Impact of exam-oriented education sys-tem on undergraduate students’ cogni-tive, affective and psychomotor compe-tencies. International Journal of Linguis-tics and Culture, 4(1), 1–15.  

Tools


Copyright © 2026  糖心原创 Exclusively distributed by