Debriefing in Moodle: Written feedback on trust and knowledge sharing in a social dilemma game

Abstract

This article describes a new approach to debriefing that uses the discussion forum feature of the Moodle open source course management system to debrief a simulation game with undergraduate business students. The simulation game allowed the students to experience the fragility of trust when sharing knowledge in a global virtual project team. I found using the Moodle forum for gathering written feedback on the task to be an improvement over verbal feedback sessions used with previous classes. The Moodle forum provides spontaneous and simultaneous rich feedback from a larger number of students and increases their awareness of the complexity of the task. It became clear to the students that there was no blueprint for success in the game but that participants each had to make sense of the experience in their own way.

Keywords

business students cross-cultural debriefing feedback Moodle simulation game social dilemma trust

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Collins, A. , Brown, J.S. , & Newman, S.E. ( 1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

de Freitas, S. , & Oliver, M. ( 2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46(3), 249-264.

Dougiamas, M. , & Taylor, P.C. ( 2003, April). Moodle: Using learning communities to create an open source course management system. Retrieved June 25, 2008 , from http://dougiamas.com/writing/edmedia2003/

Garris, R. , Ahlers, R. , & Driskell, J.E. (2002). Games motivation, and learning. A research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441-467.

Griffiths, T. , & Guile, D. ( 2003). A connective model of learning: The implications for work process knowledge. European Educational Research Journal , 2(1), 56-73.

Hay, K.E. , & Barab, S.A. ( 2001). Constructivism in practice: A comparison and contrast of apprenticeship and constructionist learning environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(3), 281-322.

Jarvenpaa, S.L. , & Leidner, D.E. ( 1998). Communication and trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(4). Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/jarvenpaa.html

Kennedy, G. ( 2002). Negotiation. Harlow, Essex, UK: Pearson Education.

Kolb, D.A. , & Fry, R. ( 1975). Toward an applied theory of experiential learning. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of group process (pp. 33-57). London: John Wiley .

10.

Lederman, L.C. ( 1992). Debriefing: Towards a systematic assessment of theory and practice. Simulation & Gaming, 23(2), 145-160.

11.

Levin, D.Z. , Cross, R. , Abrams, L.C. , & Lesser, E.L. ( 2002). Trust and knowledge sharing: A critical combination. New York: IBM Corporation. Retrieved June 25, 2008, from http:// www-1.ibm.com/services/au/index.wss/ibvstudy/igs/a1006365?cntxt=a1005069

12.

Oertig, M. , & Buergi, T. ( 2006). The challenges of managing cross-cultural virtual project teams. Team Performance Management, 12(1-2), 23-30.

13.

Peters, V. , & Vissers, G. ( 2004). A simple classification model for debriefing simulation games. Simulation & Gaming, 35(1), 70-84.

14.

Petranek, C.F. ( 2000). Written debriefing: The next vital step in learning with simulations. Simulation & Gaming, 31(1), 108-118.

15.

Steinwachs, B. ( 1992). How to facilitate a debriefing. Simulation & Gaming, 23(2), 186-195.

16.

Thompson, L. ( 2005). The mind and the heart of the negotiator. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.