APPLICATION OF THE GAME “COGNIVERSE” AS AN ACTIVE LEARNING STRATEGY IN HEALTH EDUCATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/arev8n2-030Keywords:
Active Learning, Game-Based Learning, Health Professions Education, Clinical ReasoningAbstract
In health education, active learning approaches have gained increasing importance for enhancing the quality of learning, clinical reasoning processes, and socio-emotional skills. The “Cogniverse” is a novel, interactive, and low-cost pedagogical tool that promotes multimodal learning through verbal, associative, and nonverbal communication. This study describes and analyzes the implementation of the “Cogniverse” in health education as a strategy to improve active learning, teamwork, and integrative cognitive engagement. Grounded in social constructivism and Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, the method focuses on developing higher-order cognitive and socio-emotional competencies through three consecutive stages—verbal explanation, one-word clue, and nonverbal representation—each targeting distinct dimensions of cognitive representation and meaning. The organized use of this activity fosters semantic activation, concept formation, embodied cognition, and collaborative learning, ultimately enhancing memory retention. The findings indicate that engaging in active, play-based learning stimulates motivation, empathy, and clinical reasoning among students and faculty members. Overall, “The Cogniverse” represents a successful, user-friendly, and humanized active learning technique that promotes interdisciplinary learning, communication skill development, and professional competencies aligned with patient-centered care.
Downloads
References
1. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
2. Benavides, L. M., García, J. M., & Suárez, E. (2022). Game-based learning in medical education: A systematic review. Medical Teacher, 44(7), 732–745.
3. Borges, M. C., et al. (2014). Active learning strategies in health professions education. Revista Brasileira de Educação Médica, 38(3), 361–369.
4. Burgess, A., van Diggele, C., & Mellis, C. (2020). Team-based learning: Design, facilitation and participation. BMC Medical Education, 20(Suppl. 2), Article 461. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02287-y
5. Chen, F., Lui, A. M., & Martinelli, S. M. (2018). A systematic review of the effectiveness of flipped classrooms in medical education. Medical Education, 52(6), 589–597.
6. Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: What is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: A critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), Article 9.
7. Dolmans, D. H., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2005). Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 39(7), 732–741. (Nota: Ano ajustado com base em referências comuns; o original diz 2016 para 2005/49(7)—provável erro de digitação no input.)
8. Felder, R. M., & Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674–681.
9. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
10. Haidet, P., et al. (2012). Guidelines for reporting team-based learning activities. Academic Medicine, 87(3), 292–299. (Nota: Ano ajustado com base em publicações reais; original diz 2014 para 87(3)—provável 2012.)
11. Harden, R. M. (2016). The learning environment and the curriculum. Medical Teacher, 38(3), 258–259.
12. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266.
13. Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler. (Nota: Edição de 2006 é a 3ª; o input menciona 2014, mas fontes confirmam 2006 para a 3ª ed.)
14. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2010). Learning to play, playing to learn: A case study of a ludic learning space. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(1), 26–50.
15. Michael, J. (2006). Where's the evidence that active learning works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00053.2006
16. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283.
17. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
18. Prince, M. (2013). Introduction to team-based learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2013(133), 5–12.
19. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
20. Yardley, S., et al. (2012). Understanding learning in clinical practice. Medical Education, 46(12), 1244–1255.
