Our courts presentation

• 1. An online education project designed to engage students in learning civics It is a legacy project of Justice Sandra Day OConnor (ret.) Includes accompanying lesson plans and materials that are designed to excite and educate students about participating in their own government processes.

2. A formative evaluation of the Balance of Power game and Curriculum was conducted to determine: The extent to which the instructional unit as a whole meets its instructional goals; The extent to which the instructional unit engages the students and increases their interest in the subject matter; 3. The extent to which the instructional program meets the needs of the users; The extent to which the instructional program is usable and marketable to schools and school districts. 4. Students will learn the primary functions of each branch of the federal government Students will learn how well the branches interact with each other Students will learn how citizens can influence the government 5. The data sources for the Balance of Power evaluation included: Program participants (students); Program instructors; Expert judgment of the evaluator. 6. There were approximately 28 student participants: 16 males and 12 females, ranging from 12-15 years old, in an 8th grade social studies course. Participants were already students in the classes in which the teacher agreed to participate in the study. 7. The lesson plan instruction took place in a regular classroom, while the game play took place in a school computer lab where students accessed the Balance of Power game through the Our Courts website: http://www.ourcourts.org/play-games. Prior to day one of the field-test, a 12-item pretest consisting of questions about the Executive, Judicial, and Legislative branches of the government was administered to students. 8. An initial lesson plan was taught on day one. Day two of the field test consisted of students playing the Balance of Power game in the schools computer lab. Day three started with further game play and then a 12-item posttest was administered to students. 9. The follow-up lesson plan was taught on day four and then a second 12-item posttest was administered to students. Interviews were also conducted on day 4. Observations were conducted on all four days. 10. Two interesting survey results: Students would rather learn through games and they felt they had a better understanding of the content after playing the game! 11. The teacher either agreed or strongly agreed to all of the survey questions. The teacher indicated that she felt the students were very engaged, both in the game play and in the idea of playing an educational game. The teacher made specific suggestions regarding the improvement of the Whats for Lunch? pre-game lesson plan 12. The students interviewed indicated that they liked the Balance of Power game and lessons very well. Limited time prevented extensive interviews with students and the interview with the teacher. 13. The Balance of Power game engaged the students and increased their interest in the subject matter, particularly in reference to the issues of kids rights. The student engagement during the Whats for Lunch? lesson plan was very low. 14. The results indicate that the instructional unit as a whole is meeting its stated instructional goals. An increase in test means was evident between the pre-test and the second post- test. 15. The student surveys also indicated that the students felt that they learned new information regarding how the three branches of government worked and the role citizens play in government processes. This instructional program as a whole meets the needs of the users and could be marketable to schools and school districts, given that school or districts ability to meet the technological requirements of game play. 16. Areas of perceived improvement for the instructional package: The improvement of technological problems, which may have resulted from the computers and not the game A revision of the Whats for Lunch? lesson plan to include a specific timeline and to scaffold more into the game play 17. Minor revisions to the game itself including a larger character selection and removal of town hall questions that students perceive to be easy or silly. Game revisions may be necessary to retain student engagement, particularly as students who regularly play games are accustomed to choosing their avatar and personalizing their environment. 18. Determining methods of engaging more of the female students who indicate that they do not regularly play video games. Determining the effects of possible modifications on the Whats for Lunch? lesson plan that give the students more structure and connection to the topic of the three branches of government. 19. This instructional plan could also be tested with a different middle school class with a traditional 55 minute class period to see if the lesson plans and game play results are significantly different than those presented here. This study could also be conducted with a different grade level, to determine if this unit is appropriate for high school students. 20. Improvements to this current study include conducting a higher number of student interviews as well as the teacher interviews and the inclusion of observation protocols. Using a control group to determine content mastery 21. A special thank you to Nikki Gusz and Abby Taylor for their help and guidance during this study. Thank you to Justice Sandra Day OConnor for being the driving force behind this project and of course for the honor of meeting her at the conclusion of the study.