Student-Designed Games: 5th Graders' Social Interactions

This study explored social interactions and leadership styles during a Student-Designed Games (SDG) unit in a fifth-grade physical education (PE) class. The research focused on a class of 27 students (16 girls, 11 boys, aged 10-11), investigating how students collaborated to design, refine, and play their own games. The core research question revolved around understanding students' social interactions within the SDG unit, examining both observations of student engagement during lessons and students' perceptions of their participation. The study aimed to address a gap in existing research, which has shown mixed results regarding the social dynamics of SDG units – some indicating positive collaboration while others reveal negative interactions. This research sought a deeper understanding of these dynamics, particularly in relation to leadership styles and group engagement, using a social competence framework to guide the analysis.

The study employed a five-step SDG methodology, providing the PE teacher with professional development (PD) both before and during the eleven-lesson unit. Pre-study PD consisted of four two-hour sessions delivered via Skype, focusing on the methodology's implementation. During the unit, two-hour weekly PD sessions were held, providing ongoing support and guidance. The initial lessons involved introducing various game categories (net/wall, target, invasion, striking & fielding) to familiarize students with different game structures and build their understanding of game categorization. The subsequent phases moved into the game design process, starting with one specific game category (target games), followed by group creation (based on observed student engagement in the introductory phase), game creation, refinement based on peer feedback, and finally, the creation of a final game playbook. The teacher's role was that of a facilitator, providing support and guidance throughout the process.

Data collection involved field note observations during all eleven 50-minute lessons and post-intervention interviews with each of the six game design groups. The field notes documented student behaviors and conversations, capturing the nuances of social interactions within and between groups. Post-intervention interviews aimed to gather further explanations and insights into observed behaviors, using a semi-structured approach informed by the field notes. Data analysis involved thematic analysis, identifying recurring themes related to leadership and group engagement. To ensure trustworthiness, triangulation and peer debriefing methods were used, involving independent coding and analysis of both the field notes and interview transcripts by the two researchers, allowing for comparison and confirmation of themes.

The analysis revealed two primary leadership styles: autocratic and democratic. Autocratic leadership, characterized by one or two students dominating decision-making, resulted in lower group engagement, especially among boys. In contrast, democratic leadership, where students collaboratively participated in the decision-making process, fostered greater engagement and positive social interactions. A significant finding was the prevalence of girls in leadership roles, a contrast to previous research. The concept of compromising emerged as a key factor influencing group dynamics. Groups that actively engaged in compromise demonstrated significantly higher levels of positive interaction, including listening to others, accepting different opinions, and collaboratively resolving conflicts. This suggests that structured processes for decision-making and conflict resolution are essential for effective cooperative learning and positive social-emotional learning outcomes within SDG units.

The study concludes that while Student-Designed Games offer a promising student-centered approach to physical education, careful consideration of group organization and established processes for decision-making is vital for maximizing student engagement and positive social-emotional learning. The observed prevalence of girls in leadership roles within the democratic groups suggests that SDG may have a unique potential to counteract gendered dynamics commonly seen in traditional PE settings. The study recommends further research into different team organizational structures, potentially using more extensive data collection methods (e.g., video recordings, periodic individual and group interviews) to gain even deeper insights. Future research should also focus on confirming the SDG's potential for stimulating girls to take on leadership roles. The results emphasize the need for structured processes to support effective group cooperation, going beyond simply placing children in groups. The study’s findings support the need for establishing clear guidelines and processes for group decision-making and conflict resolution to ensure positive social interaction and learning outcomes within the SDG framework.

Before the eleven-lesson Student-Designed Games (SDG) unit commenced, the PE teacher participated in four two-hour professional development (PD) sessions delivered via Skype by one of the researchers. This pre-study PD focused on introducing the five-step SDG methodology (Hastie & André, 2012), a crucial element of the research. The researcher conducting the PD had prior experience training PE teachers in SDG implementation. The aim was to equip the teacher with the necessary knowledge and skills to effectively guide the students through the game design process. The sessions covered key aspects of the methodology, providing the teacher with a strong foundation to lead the classroom activities and support the students' learning.

In addition to the pre-study PD, the teacher received ongoing support throughout the eleven-lesson unit. This involved two-hour weekly PD sessions for four weeks, providing ongoing support and addressing any challenges encountered during the implementation of the five-step SDG methodology. A second researcher was present during all training and teaching sessions, providing on-site assistance to ensure that the methodology was implemented correctly and to offer guidance to the teacher. This on-site support likely proved invaluable to the teacher, combining the virtual PD sessions with in-person feedback and practical advice. The ongoing PD allowed for flexibility and responsiveness to the evolving dynamics of the SDG unit, adapting the approach as needed based on real-time observations and the teacher's experience.

The study utilized a five-step SDG methodology (Hastie & André, 2012). The first step introduced various game categories (net/wall, target, invasion, striking & fielding) to build students' understanding of game structures. This initial phase involved playing various games at different stations, followed by a debriefing session. The second step focused on learning about game design, using target games as a specific example, introducing four different target games. Step three involved student group creation (based on observed engagement in earlier lessons), with students working in groups of four to five to design their own target game. Step four involved game refinement, with students receiving peer feedback and modifying their games. Finally, step five culminated in establishing the final version of each game, documented in playbooks for sharing with other classes. This structured approach provided a framework for the entire unit.

The study identified two prominent leadership styles within the student groups engaged in Student-Designed Games (SDG): autocratic and democratic. Autocratic leadership was observed in Groups 1 and 2, where one or two students dominated decision-making, with minimal input from other group members. For example, in Group 1, Joanna consistently took charge, writing rules, drawing diagrams, and explaining ideas without incorporating input from the other students. Similarly, in Group 2, Abby and Danna led discussions and decision making, and other students largely conformed to their decisions. Conversely, democratic leadership was observed in Groups 3, 4, 5, and 6, where leaders involved other group members in decision-making processes, although they often provided the initial ideas. These groups frequently listened to and considered input from all members during game design and presentation, creating a more collaborative environment. This difference in leadership style significantly impacted group dynamics and the overall success of the game design process.

The study found a strong correlation between leadership style and group engagement. Groups exhibiting autocratic leadership showed higher instances of student disengagement, particularly among boys. Students in these groups were less likely to participate actively in the decision-making process or to feel a sense of ownership over the game design. This contrasts sharply with the groups demonstrating democratic leadership, where higher levels of positive social interaction were observed, including actively listening to ideas, sharing responsibilities, and collaboratively generating solutions. Observations suggested that the working environment created within each group had a significant impact on the level of engagement, indicating that leadership style is a critical factor influencing the success of the SDG approach. The differences in engagement levels suggest the importance of fostering democratic leadership styles to maximize participation and positive social outcomes.

The concept of ‘compromising’ emerged as a key factor determining the success of group collaboration. While not initially a structured part of the methodology, the need for compromise arose naturally within the groups due to differing opinions and preferences. The teacher explicitly reinforced the importance of compromise from Lesson 7 onwards, leading to its adoption by several groups. This resulted in increased positive social interactions, such as increased listening, acceptance of others' opinions, and voting on group decisions. Students in groups who actively practiced compromise reported greater satisfaction with the process and a greater sense of cohesion. The findings highlight the importance of not only encouraging student collaboration in the SDG process but also equipping them with the skills and strategies for effective conflict resolution and negotiation through compromise.

One notable theme that emerged was leadership disputes, observed predominantly in Group 5 (an all-girls group). This group experienced conflict due to one member's (Audrey's) desire for autocratic control, which was resisted by other group members. The teacher's intervention attempted to resolve the conflict but had mixed success. Audrey's actions highlight the challenges of managing group dynamics, even with teacher intervention. Interestingly, leadership disputes were largely absent from other groups, including the all-boys group. This study's unexpected finding of girls frequently taking on leadership roles within collaborative groups contrasts with previous research in PE. This suggests that the student-centered approach of SDG may offer a unique environment that encourages leadership in girls, potentially challenging traditional gender dynamics in PE.

The study observed varying levels of group engagement throughout the Student-Designed Games (SDG) unit. Positive engagement was characterized by active participation, collaboration, and positive social interactions such as listening to others' ideas, sharing turns, and accepting diverse viewpoints. These positive interactions were significantly more prevalent in groups demonstrating a democratic leadership style, where students collaboratively participated in the decision-making process. Conversely, negative engagement, or disengagement, manifested as inattention to instructions, disregard for established game rules, and a lack of motivation to participate. Disengagement was more prevalent in groups with autocratic leadership styles, where one or two students dominated decisions, often resulting in other group members feeling excluded and less engaged in the game design process. The observed difference in engagement highlights the strong influence of leadership style and group dynamics on overall student participation and collaborative success.

The importance of 'compromising' emerged organically as a critical factor influencing group engagement. While not explicitly included in the initial instructional design, disagreement and conflict within some groups led to the need for compromise. The teacher's reinforcement of this concept from Lesson 7 onwards positively impacted group dynamics. Groups that actively incorporated compromising demonstrated more consistent positive social interactions, including active listening, acceptance of diverse opinions, voting on decisions, and patiently explaining decisions to all members. The ability to compromise enhanced group cohesion and fostered a sense of shared ownership and responsibility. Student quotes illustrate the positive experience of compromise and its contribution to successful game design. This unexpected emergence of 'compromising' as a key element highlights its importance in fostering effective collaboration within student-led game design projects. The study suggests that incorporating explicit strategies for conflict resolution and negotiation could further improve the collaborative learning experience.

Instances of student disengagement were observed throughout the SDG unit, particularly during the initial lessons where students were randomly assigned to groups. Disengagement manifested in several ways: ignoring instructions, playing individually rather than as a team, and a lack of motivation due to physical or skill-related challenges. The observations revealed that across groups (except single-gender groups), girls tended to take on leadership roles more frequently than boys, and boys displayed higher rates of disengagement than girls. This trend was particularly noticeable in autocratic groups, suggesting a connection between leadership style, gender, and student engagement. The study also noted that the absence of structured processes for group decision-making and conflict resolution likely contributed to disengagement in some instances. Addressing these factors through explicit instruction in group dynamics and providing support for students facing challenges could potentially increase overall engagement and participation.

The findings align with some existing research highlighting the importance of structured group decision-making processes for successful cooperative learning, citing Butler (2013). The study's results, however, also underscore that simply providing equal opportunities may not be sufficient for engaging all students, as noted by Ennis (1999). The study's findings are consistent with previous SDG studies indicating positive intra-group interactions but highlighting challenges during inter-group interactions during game refinement (André & Hastie, 2016). The study, however, found mostly positive inter-group interactions during game refinement. This research highlights the need for developing strategies to address potential disengagement among students, particularly boys in autocratic groups, while further emphasizing the value of fostering democratic leadership styles to enhance overall student engagement and positive social-emotional learning outcomes within the SDG framework.

This study's findings highlight the significant impact of leadership styles and group dynamics on student engagement and social interaction within a Student-Designed Games (SDG) unit. The research revealed two distinct leadership styles: autocratic, characterized by dominance from a few students, and democratic, marked by collaborative decision-making. Autocratic leadership was associated with higher rates of student disengagement, especially among boys, while democratic leadership fostered positive social interactions and a greater sense of group cohesion. The unexpected finding of girls frequently assuming leadership roles challenges prior research in physical education and suggests the potential of SDG to promote more inclusive leadership opportunities. The study also emphasizes the crucial, though unanticipated, role of 'compromising' in enhancing group engagement and positive social interactions, indicating the need for explicit instruction in conflict resolution strategies.

The study's conclusions hold significant implications for physical education pedagogy. The research underscores that simply placing students in groups for cooperative learning is insufficient; creating a structured learning environment and establishing clear processes for group decision-making are crucial for successful implementation of student-designed games. The findings support the use of student-centered approaches, such as SDG, which empowers students and fosters a more collaborative learning environment, but also highlight the need to address potential challenges in group dynamics through explicit instruction in conflict resolution and negotiation. The study's emphasis on the importance of compromise offers valuable insights for teacher professional development programs, suggesting the inclusion of explicit strategies for group decision-making to maximize engagement and positive social-emotional learning. The results suggest that future research should investigate whether different team organizational structures impact students' social interactions and leadership roles, confirming the potential of SDG to stimulate girls to lead groups.

While the study provides valuable insights, it also acknowledges limitations. The authors suggest future research utilize more extensive data collection methods, including periodic individual and group interviews and video and audio recordings of group interactions, to gain a richer understanding of group dynamics. The study's focus on a single-school setting and a specific age group limits the generalizability of the findings. Further investigation is needed to confirm the potential of SDG to consistently stimulate girls to take on leadership roles and to explore the impact of various team organizational structures on social interactions. The authors suggest that integrating strategies from Butler (2013) on group decision-making processes could lead to improved conflict resolution and enhanced social-emotional learning experiences. The findings align with Johnson and Johnson’s (1999) conclusion that placing children in groups doesn't automatically result in cooperation, underscoring the need for further research into optimizing the SDG framework for maximum positive outcomes.