Facilitators: Paul Hollins and Scott Wilson
Contents |
In this session we want to explore the areas of games and synthetic worlds, their impact on ideas about identity, and their potential value in education.
We're interested in any useful experiences that delegates can bring to bear on this topic to help us identify a research and development agenda that has a good chance of delivering some solid benefits.
Below we list some ideas, however these are only tasters and we hope delegates will contribute much more.
We have Ernest Adams attending the session to provide input and informed insight, from a games design perspective, and will discuss the recently completed review of gaming technology commisioned by the JISC.
Some ideas to get started with:
Some things mentioned:
Reviewed the literature and produced case studies on games in learning.
Issue with reviewing literature is the fragmentation of the coverage across different discourses (e.g. media, psychology, sociology) with different terminology.
Key findings:
Case studies:
Motivation?
Some factors:
Pedagogy?
Teachers need a framework for selecting games. Sara outlined four dimensions: Context (e.g. type of access, location), Learner, Representation (immersion, fidelity), and pedagogic approach.
Conclusions
The ethos of games not the technology or funding is a major issue. Game developers have different motivations and work differently to educators. They'll sacrifice anything for fun!
Games use shortcuts in representation, and hide those shortcuts from users. For example, the "smoke and mirrors" models behind aspects of simulations. Sim City is not based on real city planning models!
Games use a "sink or swim" attitude to user development. Learners learn by trial and error - this is OK in the context of the "safe place" for experimentation (e.g. Hazmat training simulation). But is it good pedagogy?
More useful are games that use the gradual disclosure of more complex models. For example, "Balance of Power" exposes military, economic and diplomatic models progressively into the gameplay as users gain experience.
In terms of technical platform, consoles are really hard to develop for, both technically and legally, so its best to stick to PC (or web).
Better to use purpose-designed games rather than COTS. But developing them is very expensive!
Edutainment a dirty word in industry - produced very dull drill-and-practice games.
Assessment is a bit odd in gaming - not concerned with 'understanding' only performance.
Games don't teach, they illustrate.
COTS: Not a high priority. Could be useful in some areas (e.g. Sims for environmental education)
Synthetic Environments: Worth exploring Second Life, SLoodle etc., but more usefully the dynamics of large informal learning communities found in WoW and 2L. Should tap into existing 2L education community (SLED).
Casual Games (flash games, mini games): Best "bang for the buck". Easier to get into VLEs. Should do both production, and exploration of concept of use. Try competency-oriented rather than subject-specific for better reuse? Not just games: toys, sims, illustrations...
Games technology: Not much interest; modding may be better than middleware, and better to discover and use existing game middleware than make new.
Research priorities: We need the strategic mapping of the space to identify research areas with potential for delivering results.
JISC-CETIS: Should run special events on gaming (although maybe not a full SIG as don't want to ghettoize). Show and tell event would be great. Can also do a meeting in 2L.
JISC should invest in casual games area; first fund some development, then identify commonalities (toolkits, middleware, processes) and then enable discovery with portal/repository as last step. JISC island in 2L?
Other: Informal learning - can we look at the interactions around games, e.g. in communities, and in evidencing of learning that takes place in communities (e.g. coaching of other gamers). Also ARGs have some potential.
