The Effect of Role-Play Simulation Learning on Undergraduate Students' Understanding of Parliamentary Processes in an Introductory Political Science Course
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This research article aimed to: (1) develop role-play simulation lesson plans on parliamentary processes for the SO2102 Introduction to Political Science course that meet established quality criteria; (2) compare undergraduate students' understanding of parliamentary processes before and after the intervention; (3) evaluate post-test understanding against a 70% criterion; and (4) investigate students' satisfaction with the role-play simulation instruction. A quasi-experimental classroom action research design employing a one-group pretest-posttest approach was adopted. The population consisted of all 16 first-year Bachelor of Political Science students enrolled in SO2102 at Mahamakut Buddhist University, Isan Campus, during the first semester of the 2025 academic year. Research instruments included five 3-hour role-play simulation lesson plans based on Shaftel and Shaftel’s nine-phase model, a 30-item multiple-choice test based on Anderson and Krathwohl’s seven cognitive dimensions of understanding, a participation rubric, a satisfaction questionnaire, and reflective journals. Data were analyzed using means (), standard deviations (), dependent samples t-tests, one-sample t-tests, effect size (Hedges' g), and content analysis.
The results revealed that:
1. The five lesson plans achieved an overall appropriateness score at the highest level (). The test items demonstrated content validity (ranging from .60 to 1.00), difficulty indices () from .35 to .75, discrimination indices () from .25 to .60, and Kuder-Richardson 20 () reliability of .82.
2. Mean post-test understanding scores () were significantly higher than pre-test scores (), t(15) = 15.42, p < .001, featuring a very large effect size (Hedges' g = 2.45).
3. Post-test scores significantly exceeded the 70% criterion (t(15) = 6.05, p < .001), with 14 students (87.50%) reaching the standard.
4. Overall satisfaction with the instructional approach was rated at the highest level (). Among the seven cognitive dimensions, inferring yielded the highest percentage gain (50.00%), whereas classifying yielded the lowest (26.00%). Qualitative analysis of reflective journals yielded three core themes: comprehension of legislative mechanics, appreciation of parliamentary standing orders as minority protection devices, and the emergence of political empathy.
Article Details
References
ดวงกมล อุ่นตาดี และกรวิภา สรรพกิจจำนง. (2565). ผลการใช้เทคนิคการสอนบทบาทสมมติเพื่อพัฒนาผลสัมฤทธิ์ทางการเรียนในรายวิชาประวัติศาสตร์สำหรับนักเรียนระดับชั้นมัธยมศึกษา. วารสารวิชาการศึกษาศาสตร์ ศรีนครินทรวิโรฒ. 23(2), 190-201.
นรนิติ เศรษฐบุตร. (2549). กระบวนการนิติบัญญัติของรัฐสภาไทย. พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 2. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาผู้แทนราษฎร.
พัชรพงศ์ อุดมกัน, วัชรี แซงบุญเรือง และพิจิตรา ธงพานิช. (2567). การพัฒนาการตระหนักรู้ทางสังคม โดยใช้กิจกรรมบทบาทสมมติ สำหรับนักเรียนชั้นประถมศึกษาปีที่ 6. วารสารการบริหารการศึกษา มมร วิทยาเขตร้อยเอ็ด. 4(2), 341-352.
รัฐธรรมนูญแห่งราชอาณาจักรไทย พุทธศักราช 2560. (2560, 6 เมษายน). ราชกิจจานุเบกษา. เล่ม 134 ตอนที่ 40 ก. หน้า 1-90.
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.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.
Baranowski, M. (2006). Single session simulations: The effectiveness of short congressional simulations in introductory American government classes. Journal of Political Science Education, 2(1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512160500484135.
Baranowski, M., & Weir, K. (2010). Power and politics in the classroom: The effect of student roles in simulations. Journal of Political Science Education, 6(3), 217-226. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2010.494465.
Bonwell, C. C., & Eison, J. A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
Clemens, J. L., & Hansen, M. A. (2025). Teaching legislative politics through a game: Active learning, assignment co-creation, and assessment across modalities. Journal of Political Science Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2025.2598539.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi.
Duchatelet, D., Gijbels, D., Bursens, P., Donche, V., & Spooren, P. (2019). Looking at role-play simulations of political decision-making in higher education through a contextual lens: A state-of-the-art. Educational Research Review, 27, 126-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.03.002
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, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of teaching (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.
Krain, M., & Lantis, J. S. (2006). Building knowledge? Evaluating the effectiveness of the Global Problems Summit simulation. International Studies Perspectives, 7(4), 395-407. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2006.00261.x
Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 863. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00863.
Levin-Banchik, L. (2018). Assessing knowledge retention, with and without simulations. Journal of Political Science Education, 14(3), 341-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2017.1405355.
Lovell, D., & Khatri, C. (2021). Do early simulations work? Simulations in gateway political science courses at community colleges. Journal of Political Science Education, 17(1), 139-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2019.1705164.
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.
Raymond, C. (2010). Do role-playing simulations generate measurable and meaningful outcomes? A simulation's effect on exam scores and teaching evaluations. International Studies Perspectives, 11(1), 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2009.00392.
Rovinelli, R. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1977). On the use of content specialists in the assessment of criterion-referenced test item validity. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 2, 49-60.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Shaftel, F. R., & Shaftel, G. (1967). Role playing for social values: Decision-making in the social studies. Prentice-Hall.
Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., ... Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476-6483. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1916903117.
Van Ments, M. (1999). The effective use of role-play: Practical techniques for improving learning (2nd ed.). Kogan Page.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
West, L., & Halvorson, D. (2021). Student engagement and deep learning in the first-year international relations classroom: Simulating a UN Security Council debate on the Syrian crisis. Journal of Political Science Education, 17(2), 173-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2019.1616298.