What kind of article is this?

How is the article structured?

The structure of the article is different than the regular structure of a
scientific paper. There is an abstract, but the abstract does not contain
a clear hypothesis. It seems that the authors are attempting to
describe their product.
The paper continues into an introduction which begins with some
pretty drastic claims, video games are the only way that educators
can adequately engage the video game generation(p. 86),
(c)hildren today have fewer means for expressing agency, and even
fewer opportunities for engaging in play, then they have had in the
past. (p.86) The introduction continues (p86-91) on to a promotion of
the game Quest Altantis (QA).
On p. 91 the methods section begins, or at least that is what the titles
says, but they fail to describe their methods in any detail. They do not
describe the results of their study, or what data they used to create the
game.
Pages 93-91 seem like an instruction manual for operating the game
Pages 102-104 is the discussion.
Overall, the paper did not follow the standard format for a scientific
paper (abstract, introduction, methods, data and conclusion), and it did
not follow the scientific method: recognition and definition of a
problem; formulation of a hypothesis; collection of data; analysis of
data and statement of conclusions regarding the confirmation and
disconfirmation of the hypothesis (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012, p. 5)
What is the Authors intent? Who is the audience?
The authors seem to be the developers of the game. They state that
their goal was to, develop a technology-rich game without guns that
teaches and informs(p. 87). Their intention is to describe their game
and the process involved in making it. Most of the paper is a promotion
of their game. They do a lot of explaining about the game, but never
really describe the data that they supposedly used. The audience
would be anyone interested in using or buying the game, not
professionals in the field.
What Authority do the Authors have to make their claim?

The authors claim that they have developed a technology-rich game

without guns that teaches and informs (p.87) and that students who
used QA demonstrated statistically significant learning over time in
the areas of science, social studies, and a sense of academic efficacy
(p.87), but they do not explain what that means. Is it statistically
significant improved learning? What were the parameters? I looked up
the study that claimed success and that it was authored by 2 of the
same people who wrote this paper. This suggests a high level of bias.
Their other claim for success is that 48 teachers (4 dozen) around the
world have used their program. This does not seem like a significantly
large enough number to make such a claim. The only authority for this
article that I can see is that it was published in a scholarly journal. The
journal seems legitimate from a quick Internet search of scientific
journal rankings.
How would you characterize (label or describe) the article?
Why? (What criteria did you use?
This paper is an advertisement and description of a video game,
disguised as a legitimate peer reviewed paper. They try to give it
legitimacy by mentioning an ethnographic study conducted over 18
months, (a)s we talked with children, parents, and others in our
community, our interest expanded (p.87), but, they do not describe
the ethnographic studys methods or results.
Would you use this article in a review of research literature?
Why?
I would not use this article in a review of research literature for several
reasons:
1) The authors did not state a clear hypothesis at the beginning of their
paper.
2) They do not seem to use any concrete data.
3) The article is wordy and unstructured.
4) The authors make many unfounded claims eg: play, challenge,
curiosity, and control are absent from text books and school-based
activities (p. 102).

5) There is a high level of bias because they seem to be selling their

product, and many of the sources they base their claims on originate
from their own previous papers.
References
Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005).
Making learning fun: Quest atlantis, a game without guns. Educational
Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 86-107.
doi:10.1007/BF02504859
Gay, L.R., Mills, G.E., & Airasian, P.W. (2012). Educational research:
competencies for
analysis and application (10th ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.