Chinese Checkers as a Strategic Thinking Development Tool in Asia-Pacific Political Science Education

Introduction

Strategic thinking represents a fundamental competency in higher education, enabling analysis of complex scenarios and informed decision-making. In political science education, students develop strategic thinking abilities during their undergraduate studies. This research examines whether structured interventions can enhance this development.

This study investigates the effects of integrating Chinese checkers into undergraduate Comparative Politics courses. The implementation involves physical board game sessions during regular classroom meetings over a six to eleven-week period. Two hypotheses guide this research: the engagement with Chinese checkers may improve strategic thinking and negotiation skills, and this integration may increase student engagement in Comparative Politics courses.

The research implications extend to several areas of higher education. Teachers may gain insights into game-based learning implementation. Policymakers could use the evidence to inform curriculum development decisions. Students might develop strategic thinking skills applicable to academic and professional contexts. Educational institutions could adopt new approaches to active learning.

This investigation aims to advance understanding of strategic game integration in higher education, with specific attention to political science education. The implementation occurs in standard classroom settings, where students engage with physical game boards under instructor supervision during scheduled course hours.

The integration of game-based learning in political science education remains relatively unexplored, particularly in the Asia-Pacific context. This study addresses this gap by examining how traditional board games may enhance strategic thinking in undergraduate education. The research design emphasizes practical classroom implementation, focusing on measurable outcomes in student performance and engagement.

The experimental approach explores both quantitative and qualitative dimensions of learning outcomes. While previous studies have examined various pedagogical tools, this research specifically investigates the role of Chinese checkers in developing strategic thinking skills within a structured academic environment. The findings may contribute to the broader discussion of innovative teaching methods in political science education.

Literature review

Strategic thinking in political science education shapes global governance and international relations outcomes. de la Puente Pacheco et al. (2019, 2021, 2024) define strategic thinking as a multidimensional cognitive framework integrating analytical reasoning, pattern recognition, and anticipatory decision-making within political environments. Their research documents how strategic thinking capabilities influence policy implementation, diplomatic outcomes, and crisis resolution in the Asia-Pacific context, where multilateral relations continue to evolve.

The development of strategic thinking capabilities responds to emerging global challenges. Contemporary geopolitical events demonstrate that policy makers with advanced strategic thinking skills navigate international crises with improved outcomes. de la Puente Pacheco’s research documents measurable improvements in policy analysis, crisis simulation performance, and multilateral negotiation scenarios among students who develop strategic thinking capabilities through structured interventions.

Game-based learning functions as a mechanism for developing these capabilities. Guan et al. (2024) demonstrate how gaming mechanisms enhance negotiation abilities and strategic patience in diplomatic contexts. López-Hernández et al. (2023) document how board games create opportunities for developing resource management skills in international relations. The cited literature documents specific mechanisms through which games develop strategic thinking capabilities. Guan et al. (2024) identified four key development pathways: iterative decision-making processes, pattern recognition enhancement, consequence analysis, and adaptive strategy formulation. Their systematic review of 127 game-based learning implementations demonstrated that students who engaged in regular gameplay showed a 42% improvement in strategic decision-making assessments compared to control groups. López-Hernández et al. (2023) documented how board games specifically enhanced resource allocation decision-making through repeated practice cycles, with participants demonstrating a 35% increase in successful negotiation outcomes after structured gaming interventions.

McLaren and Nguyen’s (2023) analysis of digital learning environments established three primary components of strategic thinking development through games: scenario analysis capabilities, stakeholder position mapping, and response strategy formulation. Their longitudinal study of 450 students across eight universities demonstrated that game-based learning improved complex problem-solving abilities by 28% compared to traditional teaching methods. Lu and Zhang (2023) quantified how different learning environments affect strategic skill acquisition, finding that hybrid approaches combining traditional games with digital elements resulted in a 31% higher retention rate of strategic concepts.

Learning environment design affects strategic capability development in political science education. Lu and Zhang’s (2023) analysis of hybrid learning environments documents how interaction mediums influence negotiation strategy development. Peterson’s (2023) framework mapped the progression of strategic thinking development through structured gaming interventions across five stages: basic strategy recognition, pattern identification, response formulation, multi-stakeholder analysis, and complex scenario management. Cai et al.’s (2022) meta-analysis of 89 studies established that scaffolded gaming approaches improved strategic thinking capabilities with an effect size of 0.72 (Cohen’s d), particularly when games incorporated increasing levels of complexity and stakeholder interactions.

The influence of Confucian values on strategic thinking in educational contexts builds upon established research frameworks. Newton (2014) demonstrates how cultural values shape cognitive processes, emphasizing that effective thinking emerges from cultural and emotional contexts. The research shows how Confucian heritage learners exhibit patterns of reflective prudence in decision-making, characterized by relationship consideration and long-term thinking. This foundation explains the observation that students in the experimental group preferred strategic moves balancing individual advancement with group harmony during Chinese checkers gameplay, with 78% of participants demonstrating culturally-mediated strategic thinking patterns.

Ho (2020) advances this understanding through an analysis of Confucian heritage learners in higher education, identifying social-oriented achievement motivation as a distinctive characteristic. The research shows that Confucian heritage learners approach strategic challenges through a collective lens, even in competitive situations. This aligns with the findings, where experimental group participants exhibited similar patterns in their Chinese checkers strategy. Specifically, 72% of participants demonstrated the social-oriented achievement patterns Ho describes, particularly in alliance formation and resource management during gameplay.

The current study extends these frameworks by providing empirical evidence of how cultural influences manifest in strategic thinking development through game-based learning. Where Ho identified social-oriented achievement motivation conceptually, this study demonstrates its practical manifestation in strategic choices, with participants showing a 43% higher tendency to form collaborative alliances compared to competitive strategies. These findings suggest that Confucian cultural values significantly influence not only learning approaches but also concrete strategic decision-making processes in educational settings.

However, the research gap this study addresses extends beyond the general effectiveness of game-based learning to examine specific mechanisms through which Chinese checkers develops strategic thinking in political science education. While previous studies documented broad improvements in strategic capabilities, they did not analyze how traditional board games develop specific diplomatic competencies in the Asia-Pacific context. This study investigates three unexplored dimensions:

These dimensions address limitations in existing research, where Guan et al. (2024) focused primarily on digital implementations, López-Hernández et al. (2023) examined resource management without cultural context, and McLaren and Nguyen (2023) analyzed general problem-solving without specific application to diplomatic scenarios. The study’s examination of Chinese checkers as a pedagogical tool in comparative politics courses fills a methodological gap in understanding how traditional games can be systematically integrated into political science curricula while accounting for regional cultural factors and diplomatic skill requirements.

Traditional and digital approach integration advances comprehensive strategic capabilities. Nurwidodo et al. (2023), Luo et al. (2024), and Wang et al. (2024) document how hybrid learning environments prepare students for diplomatic challenges across physical and virtual spaces. These findings support the use of traditional board games to develop strategic skills in diplomatic contexts.

Power dynamics and equity considerations shape strategic skill development in political science education. Lan et al. (2023) document how game mechanics teach students to navigate power asymmetries in international relations. Wang et al. (2024) identify how perceived usefulness drives strategic learning tool adoption. Pozo-García et al.’s (2020) analysis of gender biases guides the implementation of Chinese checkers as an inclusive tool for strategic skill development.

Game-based learning in political science education creates practical competencies. Students engaging with strategic games develop skills in scenario analysis, stakeholder action anticipation, and strategy formulation - competencies applicable to diplomatic challenges in the Asia-Pacific region. This approach develops analytical and diplomatic skills for modern international relations practice.

Strategic games develop negotiation skills by replicating diplomatic complexities in controlled environments. Through gameplay, students practice balancing competing interests, forming strategic alliances, and navigating diplomatic scenarios, preparing them for roles in international relations and policy making.

Chinese checkers advances strategic thinking and negotiation skills in political science education through its structural requirements. Players must attend to individual objectives while analyzing opponent strategies, developing both competitive and collaborative problem-solving approaches that align with modern international relations dynamics.

The literature indicates a research gap in understanding the systematic integration of traditional board games in political science education for developing strategic thinking and negotiation skills in the Asia-Pacific context. While research establishes game-based learning effectiveness, the application of Chinese checkers as a pedagogical tool in comparative politics courses remains unexplored. This gap holds significance given the Asia-Pacific region’s position in global politics and the need for culturally appropriate educational interventions that develop strategic capabilities for diplomatic challenges.

Methods

The study involved two groups of undergraduate students enrolled in the Asia Pacific Comparative Politics course. The experimental group (n=93) and control group (n=86) shared similar demographic characteristics: age range 21-22 years and predominantly female composition. Both groups demonstrated comparable academic performance with GPAs ranging from 3.7 to 4.3.

The experimental group participated in Chinese checkers gameplay as part of their coursework, while the control group completed the course without this intervention. All participants were pursuing degrees in International Relations with a specialization in Asia Pacific Comparative Politics, ensuring homogeneity in academic background and course objectives.

The study implemented a standardized protocol for measuring subjective components through behavioral anchors and detailed rubrics. For strategic thinking assessment, observers used a structured evaluation matrix with five distinct levels (1-5) where each level had specific, observable indicators. For example, Level 1 strategic thinking was characterized by single-move decisions without consideration of opponent responses, while Level 5 demonstrated multi-step planning with clear anticipation of opponent strategies and contingency planning. Each level included three mandatory observable behaviors that must be present for that rating to be assigned, reducing subjectivity in the assessment process. Inter-rater reliability was established through parallel coding sessions where multiple observers rated the same gameplay interactions, achieving a minimum Cohen’s kappa coefficient of 0.85 before proceeding with independent observations.

Student enthusiasm and engagement were quantified using a behavioral frequency approach rather than subjective ratings. Observers recorded specific, predefined behaviors such as voluntary strategic move attempts, unprompted contributions to strategy discussions, and active participation in post-game analysis sessions. Each behavior was counted using a standardized tally system during 30-minute observation windows, with clear operational definitions for what constituted each behavior. For example, a strategic contribution was defined as any verbal statement that either (a) proposed a specific game move with supporting rationale, (b) analyzed an opponent’s potential responses, or (c) connected game strategy to course concepts. This systematic approach replaced subjective assessments of enthusiasm with concrete behavioral metrics.

The measurement of negotiation skills utilized a competency-based assessment framework with explicit performance indicators. Each negotiation skill component (e.g., coalition building, conflict resolution, resource management) was evaluated using a standardized rubric with five performance levels, each containing specific behavioral descriptors. For instance, coalition-building proficiency was measured through observable actions such as the number of successful alliance formations, the duration of strategic partnerships, and the mutual benefit achieved through cooperative play.

The similarity in demographic composition and academic performance between groups established a foundation for examining the specific effects of Chinese checkers implementation on strategic thinking and negotiation skills development. The Comparative Politics in Asia Pacific course structured learning around geographic and economic foundations, examining physical geography, resource distribution, and spatial economic organization. Students analyzed trade agreements, environmental negotiations, and resource allocation processes within the Asia-Pacific context. The course integrated philosophy and religion as factors shaping regional dynamics, with emphasis on their influence in diplomatic negotiations and policy formation.

Political dimensions of the course encompassed geopolitical landscapes, territorial disputes, and regional development patterns. Students examined political, economic, and social indicators through quantitative and qualitative methods, applying these analyses to understand negotiation dynamics. Case studies of historical and contemporary negotiations supplemented theoretical frameworks, allowing students to analyze diplomatic resolution processes in the Asia-Pacific context. The course examined global interactions through political-economic relationships between Asia-Pacific nations and other regions, including the European Union, United States, Latin America, Africa, and Russia, with particular attention to APEC and ASEAN roles in regional policy formation.

The experimental implementation occurred during weeks 6-11 of the 14-week semester, with a designated professor integrating Chinese checkers into the curriculum. The game implementation aligned with course themes of strategic negotiation, resource management, and diplomatic relations. Game sessions connected directly to course content, providing practical applications of theoretical concepts through structured gameplay scenarios.

The study spanned four academic semesters (2021-2022). Students in the experimental group received an initial briefing on Chinese checkers’ rules and strategic components, connecting game mechanics to course objectives. The research team obtained written consent from participants following EDUCATION FOR ALL ONLINE organization guidelines (Approval Number: IRB-2021-023, Date: January 15, 2021).

The implementation integrated Chinese checkers into the Asia Pacific Comparative Politics curriculum to develop strategic thinking and negotiation skills. The longitudinal design across multiple semesters enabled systematic evaluation of game-based learning effects on international relations education outcomes.

The instructor observed student participation during the six-to-eleven-week implementation period, documenting engagement in course discussions, perspectives on geopolitics, and classroom contributions. This observational data complemented quantitative measurements, combining direct assessment of strategic thinking development with broader academic performance indicators.

The study implemented three complementary statistical methods to analyze the effect of Chinese checkers on academic performance. A Paired-Samples T-Test compared mean academic scores before and after the intervention, measuring within-group changes over time. The analysis showed significant improvements in both experimental (p = 0.017) and control groups (p = 0.023), with the experimental group demonstrating stronger performance gains in strategic thinking assessments.

An Independent-Samples T-Test analyzed post-intervention differences between experimental and control groups, focusing on between-group variations in academic achievement. Results demonstrated significantly higher performance in the experimental group compared to the control group (p = 0.042). This analysis supported the hypothesis that Chinese checkers implementation enhanced strategic thinking and negotiation skills, with experimental group participants showing superior outcomes in decision-making scenarios and diplomatic simulations.

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) examined performance differences across subgroups, providing a broader analytical perspective on the intervention’s effectiveness. The also study employed a mixed-methods assessment approach to measure strategic thinking and negotiation skills. Pre-intervention assessment utilized questionnaires combining Likert-scale items and open-ended questions to establish baseline capabilities. Post-intervention evaluation applied identical instruments to measure skill development, enabling direct comparison of outcomes.

Performance assessment tracked three metrics during Chinese checkers gameplay: move selection patterns, strategic decision-making processes, and adaptation to opponent strategies. Systematic documentation included game outcomes, strategic move sequences, and player response patterns to competitive scenarios.

Strategic thinking measurement operationalized three core competencies: analytical reasoning, anticipatory planning, and adaptive decision-making. Analytical reasoning assessed students’ ability to decompose complex diplomatic scenarios, identify key stakeholders, and evaluate potential outcomes. Anticipatory planning measured capacity to project multiple moves ahead and formulate response strategies. Adaptive decision-making evaluated students’ ability to modify strategies based on changing circumstances and opponent behaviors. These competencies were measured through a composite score combining game performance metrics (30%), scenario analysis tasks (40%), and diplomatic simulation outcomes (30%). Academic performance measurement integrated course-specific assessments and standardized evaluation metrics. Course assessment comprised diplomatic simulation scores (35%), policy analysis papers (30%), strategic case study evaluations (20%), and participation in negotiation exercises (15%). Each component used standardized rubrics measuring strategic thinking dimensions: analytical depth (identification of key variables and stakeholder interests), strategic planning (development of multi-stage response strategies), and adaptive reasoning (modification of approaches based on emerging scenarios). Performance data collection occurred at six points throughout the semester, enabling temporal analysis of skill development progression (Extended data).

Behavioral assessment focused on three strategic dimensions: offensive tactics, defensive positioning, and alliance formation. Observers documented player decisions at 30-second intervals using standardized coding sheets, recording approach patterns (aggressive/conservative), resource management (piece distribution/concentration), and interactive behaviors (collaborative/competitive). This systematic observation generated behavioral frequency data, enabling analysis of strategic thinking development through gameplay patterns. The assessment framework incorporated time-series analysis to track evolution in strategic decision-making, documenting changes in tactical approaches and strategic sophistication levels throughout the intervention period.

The operationalization framework converted qualitative assessments into quantitative metrics using a standardized scoring system. Diplomatic simulation performance measured strategic decision-making through scenario response accuracy (scale 1-5), stakeholder management effectiveness (scale 1-5), and resolution outcome quality (scale 1-5). Policy analysis evaluated strategic thinking through problem decomposition (scale 1-5), solution development (scale 1-5), and implementation planning (scale 1-5). Case study assessments measured analytical capabilities through situation analysis (scale 1-5), strategy formulation (scale 1-5), and outcome prediction (scale 1-5). This systematic approach enabled comparative analysis between experimental and control groups while maintaining measurement consistency across different assessment types.

The questionnaire design followed de la Puente’s et al. (2024) Strategic Competency Framework, which establishes hierarchical levels of strategic thinking development in political science education. The instrument comprised 25 statements across five domains: resource management, stakeholder analysis, temporal planning, risk assessment, and adaptive strategy. Statements addressed strategic behaviors in resource allocation, stakeholder interest identification, diplomatic objective planning, consequence evaluation, and strategic adaptation. Each statement used a 7-point Likert scale with behavioral anchors defining progression from novice to expert performance levels in each competency area.

The instrument captured strategic thinking and negotiation skills through behavioral indicators aligned with professional diplomatic competencies. Strategic thinking indicators included pattern recognition in diplomatic scenarios, causal analysis in international relations, and strategic foresight in policy planning. Negotiation skill indicators encompassed coalition building, interest-based bargaining, and conflict resolution approaches. Validation involved expert review by five international relations scholars and pilot testing with 45 graduate students, achieving internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.89) and construct validity through factor analysis (KMO = 0.84).

Performance analysis showed two key success factors in gameplay: forward movement patterns and precise tactical execution. Students who combined offensive maneuvers with territory expansion achieved higher success rates. Those who demonstrated meticulous planning and systematic decision-making maintained consistent performance advantages throughout the study period.

Students reported applying game-derived strategic thinking to classroom discussions of contemporary geopolitics. Focus group responses indicated evolution in problem-solving approaches, particularly in:

The study implemented semi-structured interviews and focus groups following a systematic protocol designed to capture strategic thinking development and negotiation skill progression. Interview sessions occurred at three points: pre-intervention baseline (week 1), mid-intervention assessment (week 6), and post-intervention evaluation (week 11). Each participant engaged in 45-minute individual interviews conducted by trained research staff using standardized question sequences focusing on strategic decision-making processes, negotiation approaches, and game-based learning experiences.

Focus groups comprised 8-10 participants, balanced for gender and academic performance levels, meeting for 90-minute sessions at four-week intervals. Sessions followed a structured discussion guide addressing five thematic areas: strategic thinking applications, negotiation skill development, gameplay strategy evolution, and perceived changes in diplomatic analysis capabilities. Two trained moderators facilitated each session, with one leading discussions and the other documenting group dynamics and non-verbal communications.

Data collection protocols emphasized systematic documentation through audio recordings, observation notes, and behavioral coding sheets. Moderators employed probing techniques to explore strategic thinking processes, requesting specific examples of strategy application and decision-making rationales. The methodology incorporated member checking, with participants reviewing summary transcripts to verify accurate representation of their perspectives. Interview and focus group data underwent thematic analysis using NVivo software, employing a coding framework developed through initial pilot studies.

Quality control measures included moderator training, standardized prompts, and inter-rater reliability checks. The analysis protocol involved three coding phases: initial open coding, axial coding for pattern identification, and selective coding for theory development. Two independent researchers coded each transcript, achieving 87% inter-rater agreement. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus discussions with a third researcher. This rigorous approach ensured systematic capture of participants’ strategic thinking development and negotiation skill acquisition throughout the intervention period. Academic performance assessment integrated three complementary data sources to evaluate strategic thinking development. Course grades from experimental and control groups established quantitative performance baselines, while gaming metrics documented skill progression through gameplay patterns and success rates. The combination of these measures provided systematic documentation of changes in strategic thinking capabilities throughout the intervention period.

Results

Pre-intervention questionnaire responses indicated baseline strategic thinking capabilities across five domains. Students demonstrated initial competency levels in analytical reasoning (M = 3.2, SD = 0.42), strategic planning (M = 3.4, SD = 0.38), adaptive decision-making (M = 3.1, SD = 0.45), coalition building (M = 3.3, SD = 0.41), and conflict resolution (M = 3.2, SD = 0.39). Post-intervention responses showed significant improvements in the experimental group across all domains, with marked increases in analytical reasoning (M = 4.5, SD = 0.35) and strategic planning (M = 4.6, SD = 0.32).

Focus group interviews revealed three primary themes in strategic thinking development. Students reported enhanced pattern recognition abilities in diplomatic scenarios (mentioned by 82% of participants), improved capacity to anticipate opponent strategies (76% of responses), and increased comfort with multi-stakeholder negotiations (68% of responses).

Qualitative analysis of interview transcripts documented specific improvements in negotiation approaches. Students developed systematic frameworks for analyzing diplomatic scenarios (cited in 78% of interviews), adopted more structured approaches to resource allocation (65% of responses), and demonstrated increased capability in forming strategic alliances (71% of mentions). These behavioral changes aligned with quantitative improvements in strategic thinking assessment scores.

Table 1 presents Paired-Samples T-Test results examining the effects of Chinese checkers integration on student performance in Comparative Politics courses. Statistical analysis measured changes in strategic thinking and negotiation skills through mean scores, standard deviations, t-values, and p-values. Testing of undergraduate students in Asia-Pacific universities demonstrated significant performance improvements in both experimental and control groups (p < 0.05), supporting the hypothesis that Chinese checkers implementation enhances strategic thinking capabilities in political science education.

Statistical analysis supported the hypothesis that Chinese checkers implementation improves academic performance in strategic thinking. The experimental group showed performance increases from pre-test (M1=3.8) through post-test (M2=4.2) to second post-test (M3=4.4), with statistical significance (p=0.017). Control group scores progressed from pre-test (M1=3.3) through post-test (M2=3.7) to second post-test (M3=3.9), with significance at p=0.023.

Independent-samples T-Test analysis compared performance between groups after Chinese checkers implementation. This analysis measured differences in strategic thinking development between experimental and control groups, examining the specific impact of game integration on academic achievement in Comparative Politics courses across Asia-Pacific universities.

The examination of the initial hypothesis, which investigates the effects of introducing Chinese checkers into Independent-Samples T-Test analysis demonstrated significant differences in strategic thinking performance between groups. The experimental group achieved higher academic scores (M = 4.38, SD = 0.18) compared to the control group (M = 3.87, SD = 0.13).

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) provided additional validation of the intervention’s effectiveness. The analysis yielded an F-Value of 3.78 (p = 0.026), indicating significant variation between experimental and control groups in strategic thinking development. These results validate the effectiveness of game-based learning for developing strategic thinking and negotiation skills in political science education.

ANOVA results yielded an F-value of 3.78 (p = 0.026), indicating significant performance differences between experimental and control groups. This analysis demonstrates that Chinese checkers implementation affects strategic thinking development in political science education. The effect size suggests moderate impact, with statistically significant but measured improvements in academic performance. This more modest effect suggests that while Chinese checkers can contribute to strategic thinking development, it should be considered as one component of a broader pedagogical approach rather than a standalone solution.

The practical implications of this modest effect size become apparent when examining real-world educational outcomes. Students in the experimental group showed improvements in strategic thinking capabilities that, while statistically significant, translated to relatively small gains in practical skills. For instance, the improvement in analytical reasoning (from M=3.2 to M=4.5) and strategic planning (from M=3.4 to M=4.6) represents incremental rather than transformative change. This suggests that educators should set realistic expectations about the intervention’s impact and consider implementing Chinese checkers alongside other complementary teaching methods to achieve more substantial improvements in strategic thinking and negotiation skills.

When considering resource allocation and curriculum design, the modest effect size has important implications for implementation decisions. While the intervention shows promise, the relatively small F-value suggests that institutions should carefully weigh the time and resources required for implementation against the expected benefits. A cost-benefit analysis might indicate that Chinese checkers works best as part of a diversified teaching strategy rather than as a primary pedagogical tool. This understanding can help educators and administrators make more informed decisions about how to integrate game-based learning into their curriculum while maintaining realistic expectations about its impact on student learning outcomes.

Discussion

The findings demonstrate specific mechanisms through which Chinese checkers develops strategic thinking capabilities in political science education. Aligning with de la Puente et al.’s (2024) framework of strategic thinking development, the experimental group showed significant improvements in analytical reasoning (effect size = 0.82) and strategic planning (effect size = 0.78). This progression mirrors the structured development pathways identified by Guan et al. (2024), particularly in iterative decision-making processes and pattern recognition enhancement, where participants demonstrated a 42% improvement in strategic assessment outcomes.

The observed improvements in strategic thinking capabilities, while statistically significant, translate to moderate gains in practical skills. For instance, the increase in analytical reasoning scores from M=3.2 to M=4.5 represents an improvement of 1.3 points on a 7-point scale. In real-world terms, this translates to students showing enhanced ability to analyze diplomatic scenarios and develop strategic responses, but the magnitude of improvement may not justify extensive curriculum restructuring or resource allocation. Educational institutions must weigh these modest gains against the implementation costs and time investment required for integrating Chinese checkers into their political science programs.

The first hypothesis, proposing that Chinese checkers implementation enhances strategic thinking capabilities, received strong empirical support through multiple measures. The experimental group’s performance progression (M1=3.8 to M3=4.4, p=0.017) aligns with López-Hernández et al.’s (2023) findings on board game effectiveness in developing resource management skills. The observed improvements in strategic decision-making parallel McLaren and Nguyen’s (2023) documented 28% enhancement in complex problem-solving abilities through game-based learning interventions.

Cultural dimensions of strategic thinking development emerged through systematic observation of gameplay patterns. The findings support Lu and Zhang’s (2023) analysis of learning environment effects on strategy development, with participants demonstrating culturally-specific approaches to alliance formation and resource management. The Asia-Pacific context influenced negotiation strategies, with 78% of participants integrating regional diplomatic considerations into their gameplay approaches, supporting Peterson’s (2023) framework of cultural influence on strategic skill development.

The second hypothesis, examining student engagement enhancement, found validation through both quantitative and qualitative measures. Focus group data revealed 82% of participants developed multi-move strategic sequences by mid-intervention, supporting Cai et al.’s (2022) findings on scaffolded learning effectiveness (effect size = 0.72). This engagement manifested in improved coalition-building metrics (M1=3.3 to M2=4.4), aligning with Wang et al.’s (2024) analysis of student engagement factors in educational innovations.

Student engagement in this study was conceptualized as a multidimensional construct encompassing behavioral, cognitive, and emotional components within the context of Chinese checkers implementation in political science education. Behavioral engagement was defined through observable participation metrics, including attendance at gaming sessions, frequency of strategic move attempts, and active participation in post-game discussions. This dimension was measured through systematic observation using standardized coding sheets that documented specific engagement behaviors at 30-second intervals during gameplay sessions.

The cognitive dimension of engagement focused on students’ investment in learning and strategic thinking development. This was measured through multiple instruments, including analysis of strategic decision-making patterns during gameplay, completion of reflective journals documenting strategic thinking processes, and performance on structured analytical tasks. Specifically, observers documented the complexity of strategic planning (rated on a 1-5 scale), the depth of analytical reasoning demonstrated during gameplay (assessed through standardized rubrics), and the sophistication of diplomatic scenario analyses in course assignments.

Emotional engagement was evaluated through both quantitative and qualitative measures. The study employed a 7-point Likert scale questionnaire assessing students’ emotional connection to the learning process, interest in strategic analysis, and satisfaction with the game-based learning approach. This was complemented by semi-structured interviews conducted at three points during the semester (pre-intervention, mid-intervention, and post-intervention), where students discussed their emotional investment in the learning process and their perceived connection to the course material.

The measurement protocol involved triangulation of multiple data sources to ensure comprehensive assessment of engagement. Quantitative metrics included participation rates (percentage of active involvement in gaming sessions), strategic move frequency (number of deliberate strategic decisions per session), and performance scores on related course assignments. These metrics were recorded using standardized observation sheets and validated through inter-rater reliability checks, with two independent observers achieving 87% agreement in their assessments.

Qualitative data collection focused on capturing the depth and quality of engagement through focus group discussions, individual interviews, and analysis of student reflective journals. The focus groups, conducted at four-week intervals, explored students’ evolving engagement with strategic thinking concepts and their application of game-derived insights to political analysis. Individual interviews provided deeper insights into personal engagement patterns and learning experiences, while reflective journals documented students’ ongoing engagement with strategic thinking development.

The construction of strategic thinking skills from gameplay to academic contexts supports Lan et al.’s (2023) findings on gamification effectiveness. Participants demonstrated enhanced ability to analyze diplomatic scenarios (73% improvement) and develop structured negotiation approaches (71% implementation rate), confirming the development of game-based learning outcomes identified in previous research. These improvements manifested specifically in policy analysis tasks and diplomatic simulations, validating the practical application of game-derived strategic thinking skills.

Power dynamics and equity considerations in strategic skill development emerged as significant factors, supporting Pozo-García et al.’s (2020) analysis of demographic influences on educational outcomes. The study documented equal effectiveness across gender groups in developing strategic capabilities, with balanced improvement rates in both analytical reasoning (effect size = 0.82) and conflict resolution (effect size = 0.70) metrics.

Limitations of this study include the specific regional context and the duration of the intervention period. While the findings demonstrate improvements in strategic thinking capabilities, the relationship between gameplay proficiency and long-term diplomatic skill retention requires further investigation. Additionally, the cultural specificity of strategic approaches observed may limit direct generalization to other regional contexts.

The longitudinal implications of these modest effect sizes deserve particular attention. While the study demonstrated immediate improvements in strategic thinking capabilities, the small effect sizes raise questions about the long-term retention and practical application of these skills. The difference between experimental and control groups, though statistically significant, may not persist over time or translate into meaningful advantages in professional settings. This consideration is crucial for educators and administrators making decisions about curriculum design and pedagogical approaches, suggesting that sustained engagement with multiple strategic thinking development tools might be necessary for more substantial and lasting improvements.

From an institutional resource allocation perspective, the modest effect sizes indicate that while Chinese checkers can contribute to strategic thinking development, it should be integrated as part of a diversified teaching approach rather than serving as a primary pedagogical tool. The real-world educational impact, while positive, suggests that institutions should maintain realistic expectations about the intervention’s outcomes and consider complementary teaching methods to achieve more robust improvements in students’ strategic thinking and negotiation skills.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that Chinese checkers can contribute to the development of strategic thinking capabilities within political science education, though with moderate effects. Statistical analysis shows modest but significant improvements in the experimental group’s performance (M=4.38, SD=0.18, p=0.042), with small to medium effect sizes in analytical reasoning (effect size=0.82) and strategic planning (effect size=0.78). While these improvements were observed across five strategic competency domains, from resource management to diplomatic scenario analysis, their practical significance suggests an incremental rather than transformative impact.

The research identifies potential mechanisms through which game-based learning may influence strategic thinking development in the Asia-Pacific context. Quantitative data indicates gradual progression from basic to complex strategic approaches, with 78% of participants demonstrating advanced multi-move sequences by mid-intervention. However, the relatively modest F-value (3.78, p=0.026) suggests that these improvements, while statistically significant, represent moderate educational gains that should be interpreted cautiously.

The implications for educational practice suggest that Chinese checkers could serve as one component within a broader strategic thinking development framework in political science curricula. While the documented improvements in strategic thinking capabilities support the integration of game-based learning approaches, the moderate effect sizes indicate that this tool should be complemented by other pedagogical methods. Future research should examine long-term retention of these modest gains, investigate the cost-effectiveness of implementation, and explore the intervention’s effectiveness across different regional contexts. This study gives preliminary evidence for the potential of game-based learning in political science education while acknowledging the need for additional complementary approaches to achieve more substantial improvements in strategic thinking capabilities.

Ethical approval and consent

The Institutional Review Board of EDUCATION FOR ALL ONLINE approved the study (IRB-2021-023, January 15, 2021). All participants provided written informed consent and retained the right to withdraw without consequences.

The data is available in the following link 10.6084/m9.figshare.28138928 through Figshare or by requesting it to the corresponding author (mdelapuente@uninorte.edu.co).