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. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3216
  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. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15988
  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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09437-0
  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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-021-00148-4
  5. Cornell, D. (2024). 63 higher-order thinking skills examples. Helpful Professor. https://helpfulprofessor.com/higher-order-thinking-skills-examples/
  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. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11125-024-09709-5
  7. Dowhen, M. (2023). Understanding logical reasoning in everyday contexts. Academ-ic Logic Press. https://www.academiclogicpress.com/understanding-logical-reasoning
  8. Great Learning Team. (2022). Logical reason-ing: Importance and career impact. Great Learning Blog. https://www.mygreatlearning.com/blog/logical-reasoning/
  9. Halpern, D. F. (2022). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (6th ed.). Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Thought-and-Knowledge/9781032131610
  10. Helmenstine, A. M. (2025, June 5). The scien-tific method. Science Notes. https://sciencenotes.org/the-scientific-method/
  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. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.110600
  12. Jimenez, L., & Modaffari, J. (2021). Future of testing in education: Effective and equi-table assessment systems. Center for American Progress. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED617053.pdf
  13. Kent State University. (2023). Paired samples t-test. Kent State University Libraries. https://libguides.library.kent.edu/SPSS/PairedSamplesTTest
  14. Killian, S. (2023). How to use concept mapping in the classroom: A complete guide. Evi-dence-Based Teaching. https://www.evidencebasedteaching.org/concept-mapping-complete-guide
  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. https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.09100
  16. Lutkevich, B. (n.d.). STEM education. Tech-Target. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/STEM-education-science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics
  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. https://ioer-imrj.com/wp-con-tent/uploads/2020/06/Collaborative-Inquiry-Approaches-and-Level-of-Thinking-and-Reasoning-Skills.pdf
  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. https://teaching.uic.edu/cate-teaching-guides/assessment-grading-practices/authentic-assessments
  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. https://doi.org/10.4103/aca.ACA_157_18
  20. Mor, E., & Erşen, R. K. (2023). Implications of current validity frameworks for class-room assessment. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 10(Special Issue), 163–172. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1417534.pdf
  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. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010073
  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. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202531979
  23. Padayichie, K. (2023). Collaborative learning. Structural Learning. https://www.structural-learning.com/post/collaborative-learning
  24. Padayichie, N. D. (2023). The power of collab-orative learning in the classroom. South African Journal of Education, 43(2), 189–202. https://www.structural-learning.com/post/collaborative-learning
  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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09814-5
  26. PM Publisher. (2022). Building smart learners: The value of logical reasoning in educa-tion. https://www.pmpublisher.com/articles/logical-reasoning-education
  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. https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jrme/papers/Vol-5%20Issue-6/Version-1/I05616670.pdf
  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. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/13123
  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). https://scientists.uz/view.php?id=4997
  30. Sharma, N. (2023). 7 key benefits of game-based education in a digital world. Hurix Digital. https://www.hurix.com/blogs/key-benefits-game-based-education
  31. Sharma, R. (2023). Game-based learning in computer science education: A scoping literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 10, Article 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00447-2
  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). https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125955783.pdf
  33. UNESCO. (2019). Framework for the future: Fostering scientific thinking and critical reasoning in schools. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000370275
  34. University of Waterloo. (n.d.). Gamification and game-based learning. Centre for Teaching Excellence. https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/catalogs/tip-sheets/gamification-and-game-based-learning
  35. Whitfield, B. (2025, January 23). An introduc-tion to the Shapiro–Wilk test for normali-ty. Built In. https://builtin.com/data-science/shapiro-wilk-test
  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. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1426687.pdf
  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. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/271b/9462638a384cc16b0d5315117fa945ef4d56.pdf 

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic