Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education Set of 3

Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education Richard E. Ferdig University of Florida, USA

Volume I

InformatIon scIence reference Hershey • New York

Director of Editorial Content: Managing Development Editor: Senior Managing Editor: Managing Editor: Assistant Managing Editor: Copy Editor: Typesetter: Cover Design: Printed at:

Kristin Klinger Kristin M. Roth Jennifer Neidig Jamie Snavely Carole Coulson Maria Boyer, Amanda Appicello Carole Coulson Lisa Tosheff Yurchak Printing Inc.

Published in the United States of America by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Suite 200 Hershey PA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com and in the United Kingdom by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 3 Henrietta Street Covent Garden London WC2E 8LU Tel: 44 20 7240 0856 Fax: 44 20 7379 0609 Web site: http://www.eurospanbookstore.com Copyright © 2009 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education / Richard E. Ferdig, editor. p. cm. Summary: "This book presents a framework for understanding games for educational purposes while providing a broader sense of current related research. This creative and advanced title is a must-have for those interested in expanding their knowledge of this exciting field of electronic gaming"--Provided by publisher. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-59904-808-6 (hardcover) -- ISBN 978-1-59904-811-6 (e-book) 1. Simulation games in education--Handbooks, manuals, etc. 2. Electronic games--Handbooks, manuals, etc. I. Ferdig, Richard E. (Richard Eugene) LB1029.S53H36 2008 371.39'7--dc22 2007052787

British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book set is original material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher. If a library purchased a print copy of this publication, please go to http://www.igi-global.com/agreement for information on activating the library's complimentary electronic access to this publication.

Editorial Advisory Board

Clark Aldrich SimuLearn, USA Sasha A. Barab Indiana University, USA Sara de Freitas University of Coventry, UK David Gibson CurveShift, Inc., USA Nichole Pinkard University of Chicago, USA Katie Salen Parsons The New School for Design, USA David Shaffer University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Kurt Squire University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Constance Steinkuehler University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Richard VanEck University of North Dakota, USA

Dedication

To Owen Christian Ferdig

List of Contributors

Aldrich, Clark / SimuLearn, USA.................................................................................................................1333 Anderson, Craig A. / Iowa State University, USA...........................................................................................876 Ang, Chee Siang / City University, UK.........................................................................................................1372 Asgari, Mahboubeh / Simon Fraser University, Canada............................................................................. 1166 Baek, Youngkyun / Korea National University of Education, Republic of Korea........................................1025 Barab, Sasha A. / Indiana University School of Education, USA...................................................................989 Beck, Dennis / Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA..............................................................146 Becker, Katrin / University of Calgary, Canada.............................................................................................636 Belanich, James / U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA...................1088 BinSubaih, Ahmed / University of Sheffield, UK............................................................................................451 Black, Erik W. / University of Florida, USA...................................................................................................606 Bowers, Clint / University of Central Florida, USA........................................................................................702 Breiter, Andreas / Institute for Information Management, University of Bremen, Germany..........................163 Buraphadeja, Vasa / University of Florida, USA............................................................................................862 Cannon-Bowers, Jan / University of Central Florida, USA...........................................................................702 Carr, Diane / University of London, UK.......................................................................................................... 911 Cavanaugh, Cathy / University of Florida, USA..............................................................................................83 Champion, Erik Malcolm / Auckland School of Design, Massey University, New Zealand.........................219 Chechetka, Anton / Carnegie Mellon University, USA.................................................................................1777 Chee, Yam San / Nanyang Technological University, Singapore....................................................................808 Chu, Sauman / University of Minnesota, USA................................................................................................478 Code, Jillianne / Simon Fraser University, Canada........................................................................................738 Cole, Richard T. / Michigan State University, USA........................................................................................358 Davis, Joan M. / The University of Washington, USA...................................................................................1234 Dawson, Kara / University of Florida, USA....................................................................................................862 de Byl, Penny / University of Southern Queensland, Australia.....................................................................1068 de Freitas, Sara / University of Coventry, UK...................................................................................................51 DeMaria, Rusel / DeMaria Studio, USA.......................................................................................................1303 Devlin-Scherer, Roberta / Seton Hall University, USA................................................................................1427 DiPietro, Joseph C. / University of Florida, USA...........................................................................................606 DiPietro, Meredith / University of Florida, USA............................................................................................776 Dondlinger, Mary Jo / University of North Texas, USA................................................................................ 1183 Dubbels, Brock / University of Minnesota, USA.............................................................................................251

Durga, Shree / University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA................................................................................200 Edgerton, Erin / Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA..............................................................370 Evans, Michael A. / Virginia Tech, USA............................................................................................................96 Fanning, Elizabeth / The University of Virginia, USA..................................................................................1390 Feldmesser, Kim / University of Brighton, UK...............................................................................................422 Felicia, Patrick / University College Cork, Ireland.........................................................................................893 Ferry, Brian / University of Wollongong, Australia........................................................................................315 Fishwick, Paul A. / University of Florida, USA..............................................................................................546 Foster, Aroutis N. / Michigan State University, USA........................................................................................33 Friedman, Adam / Wake Forest University, USA............................................................................................235 Fromme, Johannes / University of Magdeburg, Germany..............................................................................757 Gaither, Diane L. / Southwest Research Institute, USA..................................................................................277 Galarneau, Lisa / University of Waikato, New Zealand................................................................................1400 Garcia-Murillo, Martha / Syracuse University, USA.....................................................................................489 Gazit, Elhanan / H.I.T.-Holon Institute of Technology, Israel........................................................................127 Gentile, Douglas A. / Iowa State University, USA...........................................................................................876 Gibson, David / CurveShift, Inc., USA............................................................................................................702 Grant, Michael M. / The University of Memphis, USA.................................................................................1234 Griffiths, Mark / Nottingham Trent University, UK..........................................................................................51 Harms, Chad M. / Iowa State University, USA.............................................................................................1318 Hartshorne, Richard / University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA.......................................................235 Heeter, Carrie / Michigan State University, USA............................................................................................826 Hobbs, Renee / Temple University, USA........................................................................................................1440 Horn, Daniel B. / U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA....................1088 Huang, Wenhao David / University of Illinois, USA.................................................................................... 1143 Ingram-Goble, Adam / Center for Research on Learning and Technology, USA..........................................989 James, Christopher L. / Russellville City Schools, USA................................................................................295 Jegers, Kalle / Umeå University, Sweden......................................................................................................1449 Johnson, Tristan / Florida State University, USA......................................................................................... 1143 Jones, Robert / New York University, USA......................................................................................................970 Jörissen, Benjamin / University of Magdeburg, Germany..............................................................................757 Kalyuga, Slava / University of New South Wales, Australia...........................................................................719 Kaplan Akilli, Göknur / Pennsylvania State University, USA......................................................................1354 Kaufman, David / Simon Fraser University, Canada................................................................................... 1166 Ke, Fengfeng / University of New Mexico, USA..................................................................................................1 Kervin, Lisa / University of Wollongong, Australia........................................................................................315 Kilic, Eylem / Middle East Technical University, Turkey................................................................................331 Kolo, Castulus / Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany.........................................163 Lai, Chun / Michigan State University, USA...................................................................................................402 Lawless, Kimberly A. / University of Illinois, Chicago, USA.........................................................................791 Leonard, David J. / Washington State University, USA..................................................................................938 Lewis, Melissa L. / Michigan State University, USA.......................................................................................593 Lim, Kenneth Yang Teck / Nanyang Technological University, Singapore...................................................808 Liu, Ming / Michigan State University, USA...................................................................................................388 Luckhardt Redfield, Carol / St. Mary’s University, USA...............................................................................277 Ma, Yuxin / University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA....................................................................... 1127, 1218 MacInnes, Ian / Syracuse University, USA......................................................................................................489 Maddock, Steve / University of Sheffield, UK.................................................................................................451 Madill, Leanna / University of Victoria, Canada..................................................................................345, 1257

Magerko, Brian / Georgia Institute of Technology, USA..............................................................................1274 Martinelli, Joseph / Seton Hall University, USA...........................................................................................1427 Martinson, Barbara / University of Minnesota, USA.....................................................................................478 Matzko, Michael J. / Independent Consultant, USA.....................................................................................1234 McCreery, Michael / University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA.........................................................................791 Mishra, Punya / Michigan State University, USA.............................................................................................33 Moline, Teddy / University of Alberta, Canada...............................................................................................652 Mou, Yi / Cambridge, MA, USA.......................................................................................................................922 Notargiacomo Mustaro, Pollyana / Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil....................................525 Oliver, Martin / London Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education, UK............................................................847 Oliverio, James / Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA..........................................................146 Orvis, Karin A. / Old Dominion University, USA.........................................................................................1088 Papargyris, Anthony / Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece...........................................1204 Parisi, David / New York University, USA....................................................................................................... 111 Park, Yuna A. / University of Florida, USA....................................................................................................546 Parker, James R. / University of Calgary, Canada.........................................................................................636 Payne, Matthew Thomas / University of Texas at Austin, USA......................................................................621 Pelletier, Caroline / University of London, UK............................................................................................... 911 Peng, Wei / Michigan State University, USA...........................................................................................388, 922 Pitt, Ian / University College Cork, Ireland.....................................................................................................893 Plass, Jan L. / New York University, USA........................................................................................................719 Prejean, Louise / University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA.............................................................. 1127, 1219 Qian, Yufeng / St. Thomas University, USA.......................................................................................................67 Qiu, Wei / Michigan State University, USA...................................................................................................1041 Quilliam, Elizabeth Taylor / Michigan State University, USA.......................................................................358 Redfield, Neil M. / John Jay Science and Engineering Academy, USA...........................................................277 Reese, Debbie Denise / Center for Educational Technologies®, Wheeling Jesuit University, USA............. 1104 Richard, Charles / University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA........................................................... 1127, 1219 Rieber, Lloyd P. / The University of Georgia, Athens, USA..........................................................................1234 Romano, Daniela / University of Sheffield, UK...............................................................................................451 Rowe, Jonelle / Department of Health and Human Services, USA...............................................................1440 Sanford, Kathy / University of Victoria, Canada..................................................................................345, 1257 Sardone, Nancy B. / Seton Hall University, USA..........................................................................................1427 Scerri, Paul / Carnegie Mellon University, USA...........................................................................................1477 Schrader, P. G. / University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA................................................................................791 Schrier, Karen / MIT, USA............................................................................................................................1460 Silva, Luciano / Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil.....................................................................525 Silveira, Ismar Frango / Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil......................................................525 Smith, Peter A. / University of Central Florida, USA.....................................................................................702 Solberg, Jennifer L. / U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA.............1088 Squire, Kurt / University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA......................................................................200, 1289 Swain, Colleen / University of Florida, USA...................................................................................................956 Swing, Edward L. / Iowa State University, USA.............................................................................................876 Sycara, Katia / Carnegie Mellon University, USA........................................................................................1477 Taylor, Laurie N. / University of Florida, USA.............................................................................................1057 Unger, Alexander / University of Magdeburg, Germany................................................................................757 Van Eck, Richard / University of North Dakota, USA....................................................................................179 van Ryneveld, Linda / Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa.......................................................560 VanFossen, Phillip J. / Purdue University, USA.............................................................................................235

Warren, Scott J. / University of North Texas, USA....................................................................................... 1183 Weber, René / University of California Santa Barbara, USA.........................................................................593 Wiberg, Charlotte / Umeå University, Sweden.............................................................................................1449 Williams, Douglas / University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA......................................................... 1127, 1218 Williamson Shaffer, David / University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA.........................................................577 Winn, Brian M. / Michigan State University, USA.......................................................................................1010 Wright, Vivian H. / University of Alabama, USA...........................................................................................295 Xu, Chong-wei / Kennesaw State University, USA..........................................................................................508 Yildirim, Zahide / Middle East Technical University, Turkey.........................................................................331 Zaharias, Panagiotis / University of the Aegean, Greece & Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens, Greece...........................................................................................................................1204 Zap, Nick / Simon Fraser University, Canada................................................................................................738 Zaphiris, Panayiotis / City University, UK...................................................................................................1372 Zhao, Yong / Michigan State University, USA.......................................................................................402, 1041 Zibit, Melanie / Boston College, USA...........................................................................................................1400

Table of Contents

Foreword............................................................................................................................................xlvii Preface . ............................................................................................................................................ xlvix Volume I Section I A Review of Research on Educational Gaming

Chapter I A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools ................................................... 1 Fengfeng Ke, University of New Mexico, USA Chapter II Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning ................................................................................................. 33 Aroutis N. Foster, Michigan State University, USA Punya Mishra, Michigan State University, USA Chapter III Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning ............................................................ 51 Sara de Freitas, University of Coventry, UK Mark Griffiths, Nottingham Trent University, UK Chapter IV An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games ...................................................................... 67 Yufeng Qian, St. Thomas University, USA Chapter V Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning......................................................... 83 Cathy Cavanaugh, University of Florida, USA Chapter VI Mobility, Games, and Education . ......................................................................................................... 96 Michael A. Evans, Virginia Tech, USA

Chapter VII Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques................................................................................................ 111 David Parisi, New York University, USA Chapter VIII A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings ............................................................ 127 Elhanan Gazit, H.I.T.-Holon Institute of Technology, Israel Chapter IX Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments......................................................................... 146 James Oliverio, Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA Dennis Beck, Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA Chapter X Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education............................................................... 163 Andreas Breiter, Institute for Information Management, University of Bremen, Germany Castulus Kolo, Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany Section II Educational Gaming in K-12 or Teacher Education Contexts Chapter XI A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom ............................................................... 179 Richard Van Eck, University of North Dakota, USA Chapter XII Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play...................................................... 200 Shree Durga, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Kurt Squire, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Chapter XIII Game-Based Historical Learning . ...................................................................................................... 219 Erik Malcolm Champion, Auckland School of Design, Massey University, New Zealand Chapter XIV The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education......................................................................... 235 Phillip J. VanFossen, Purdue University, USA Adam Friedman, Wake Forest University, USA Richard Hartshorne, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA Chapter XV Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension . ............................................................... 251 Brock Dubbles, University of Minnesota, USA

Chapter XVI COTS Computer Game Effectiveness................................................................................................. 277 Carol Luckhardt Redfield, St. Mary’s University, USA Diane L. Gaither, Southwest Research Institute, USA Neil M. Redfield, John Jay Science and Engineering Academy, USA Chapter XVII Teacher Gamers vs. Teacher Non-Gamers........................................................................................... 295 Christopher L. James, Russellville City Schools, USA Vivan H. Wright, University of Alabama, USA Chapter XVIII Using Online Simulation to Engage Users in an Authentic Learning Environment............................ 315 Brian Ferry, University of Wollongong, Australia Lisa Kervin, University of Wollongong, Australia Chapter XIX Pre-Service Computer Teachers as 3D Educational Game Designers................................................. 331 Zahide Yildirim, Middle East Technical University, Turkey Eylem Kilic, Middle East Technical University, Turkey Chapter XX Adolescents Teaching Video-Game Making—Who is the Expert Here?............................................ 345 Kathy Sanford, University of Victoria, Canada Leanna Madill, University of Victoria, Canada Section III Educational Gaming in Other Learning Contexts Chapter XXI Online Games as Powerful Food Advertising to Children ................................................................. 358 Richard T. Cole, Michigan State University, USA Elizabeth Taylor Quilliam, Michigan State University, USA Chapter XXII Changing Health Behavior Through Games . ..................................................................................... 370 Erin Edgerton, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA Chapter XXIII An Overview of Using Electronic Games for Health Purposes . ........................................................ 388 Wei Peng, Michigan State University, USA Ming Liu, Michigan State University, USA

Chapter XXIV MMORPGs and Foreign Language Education.................................................................................... 402 Yong Zhao, Michigan State University, USA Chun Lai, Michigan State University, USA Chapter XXV A Videogame, a Chinese Otaku, and Her Deep Learning of a Language............................................ 422 Kim Feldmesser, University of Brighton, UK Chapter XXVI Developing a Serious Game for Police Training................................................................................. 451 Ahmed BinSubaih, University of Sheffield, UK Steve Maddock, University of Sheffield, UK Daniela Romano, University of Sheffield, UK Chapter XXVII Game-Based Learning in Design History............................................................................................ 478 Barbara Martinson, University of Minnesota, USA Sauman Chu, University of Minnesota, USA Volume II Chapter XXVIII A Policy Game in a Virtual World....................................................................................................... 489 Martha Garcia-Murillo, Syracuse University, USA Ian MacInnes, Syracuse University, USA Chapter XXIX Teaching OOP and COP Technologies via Gaming............................................................................. 508 Chong-wei Xu, Kennesaw State University, USA Chapter XXX Using Games to Teach Design Patterns and Computer Graphics........................................................ 525 Pollyana Notargiacomo Mustaro, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil Luciano Silva, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil Ismar Frango Silveira, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil Chapter XXXI A 3D Environment for Exploring Algebraic Structure and Behavior.................................................. 546 Paul A. Fishwick, University of Florida, USA Yuna A. Park, University of Florida, USA

Chapter XXXII Surviving the Game............................................................................................................................. 560 Linda van Ryneveld, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa Section IV Educational Gaming Research Tools and Methods Chapter XXXIII Wag the Kennel: Games, Frames, and the Problem of Assessment.................................................... 577 David William Shaffer, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Chapter XXXIV Character Attachment in Games as Moderator for Learning .............................................................. 593 Melissa L. Lewis, Michigan State University, USA René Weber, University of California Santa Barbara, USA Chapter XXXV Visual Analysis of Avatars in Gaming Environments.......................................................................... 606 Joseph C. DiPietro, University of Florida, USA Erik W. Black, University of Florida, USA Chapter XXXVI Interpreting Game-Play Through Existential Ludology...................................................................... 621 Matthew Thomas Payne, University of Texas at Austin, USA Chapter XXXVII On Choosing Games and What Counts as a “Good” Game................................................................ 636 Katrin Becker, University of Calgary, Canada James R. Parker, University of Calgary, Canada Chapter XXXVIII Descriptors of Quality Teachers and Quality Digital Games............................................................... 652 Teddy Moline, University of Alberta, Canada Section V The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 1): Cognition, Learning, Play, and Identity Chapter XXXIX Designing a Computational Model of Learning.................................................................................. 671 David Gibson, CurveShift, Inc., USA

Chapter XL Social Psychology and Massively Multiplayer Online Learning Games ........................................... 702 Clint Bowers, University of Central Florida, USA Peter A. Smith, University of Central Florida, USA Jan Cannon-Bowers, University of Central Florida, USA Chapter XLI Evaluating and Managing Cognitive Load in Games.......................................................................... 719 Slava Kalyuga, University of New South Wales, Australia Jan L. Plass, New York University, USA Chapter XLII Self-Regulated Learning in Video Game Environments...................................................................... 738 Nick Zap, Simon Fraser University, Canada Jillianne Code, Simon Fraser University, Canada Chapter XLIII (Self-) Educational Effects of Computer Gaming Cultures ................................................................ 757 Johannes Fromme, University of Magdeburg, Germany Benjamin Jörissen, University of Magdeburg, Germany Alexander Unger, University of Magdeburg, Germany Chapter XLIV Experience, Cognition and video Game Play ..................................................................................... 776 Meredith DiPietro, University of Florida, USA Chapter XLV Intertextuality in Massively Multi-Player Online Games . ................................................................. 791 P. G. Schrader, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA Kimberly A. Lawless, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA Michael McCreery, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA Chapter XLVI Development, Identity, and Game-Based Learning............................................................................. 808 Yam San Chee, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Kenneth Y. T. Lim, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Chapter XLVII Play Styles and Learning..................................................................................................................... 826 Carrie Heeter, Michigan State University, USA

Chapter XLVIII Playing Roles in the MMORPG Kingdom of Loathing...................................................................... 847 Martin Oliver, London Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education, UK Chapter XLIX Exploring Personal Myths from The Sims ......................................................................................... 862 Vasa Buraphadeja, University of Florida, USA Kara Dawson, University of Florida, USA Section VI The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 2): Violence, Emotion, Race, Gender, and Culture Chapter L Learning Processes and Violent Video Games ................................................................................... 876 Edward L. Swing, Iowa State University, USA Douglas A. Gentile, Iowa State University, USA Craig A. Anderson, Iowa State University, USA . Chapter LI Harnessing the Emotional Potential of Video Games.......................................................................... 893 Patrick Felicia, University College Cork, Ireland Ian Pitt, University College Cork, Ireland . Chapter LII Gamers, Gender, and Representation................................................................................................... 911 Diane Carr, University of London, UK Caroline Pelletier, University of London, UK . Chapter LIII Gender and Racial Stereotypes in Popular Video Games.................................................................... 922 Yi Mou, Cambridge, MA, USA Wei Peng, Michigan State University, USA . Chapter LIV Can the Subaltern Play and Speak or Just be Played With?................................................................ 938 David J. Leonard, Washington State University, USA . Chapter LV Culturally Responsive Games and Simulations................................................................................... 956 Colleen Swain, University of Florida, USA . Chapter LVI Saving Worlds with Video Game Activism ........................................................................................ 970 Robert Jones, New York University, USA

Volume III Section VII Educational Game Design

. Chapter LVII Conceptual Play Spaces....................................................................................................................... 989 Sasha A. Barab, Indiana University School of Education, USA Adam Ingram-Goble, Center for Research on Learning and Technology, USA Scott Warren, University of North Texas, USA . Chapter LVIII The Design, Play, and Experience Framework.................................................................................. 1010 Brian M. Winn, Michigan State University, USA . Chapter LIX Revealing New Hidden Curriculum and Pedagogy of Digital Games ............................................. 1025 Youngkyun Baek, Korea National University of Education, Republic of Korea . Chapter LX Game Design as a Compelling Experience........................................................................................ 1041 Wei Qiu, Michigan State University, USA Yong Zhao, Michigan State University, USA . Chapter LXI Gaming Ethics, Rules, Etiquette, and Learning................................................................................. 1057 Laurie N. Taylor, University of Florida, USA . Chapter LXII Designing Games-Based Embedded Authentic Learning Experiences............................................. 1068 Penny de Byl, University of Southern Queensland, Australia . Chapter LXIII Bridging Game Development and Instructional Design.................................................................... 1088 James Belanich, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA Karin A. Orvis, Old Dominion University, USA Daniel B. Horn, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA Jennifer L. Solberg, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA .

Chapter LXIV GaME Design for Intuitive Concept Knowledge............................................................................... 1104 Debbie Denise Resse, Center for Educational Technologies®, Wheeling Jesuit University, USA . Chapter LXV Leveraging the Affordances of an Electronic Game to Meet Instructional Goals............................. 1127 Yuxin Ma, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Douglas Williams, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Charles Richard, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Louise Prejean, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Chapter LXVI Instructional Game Design Using Cognitive Load Theory............................................................... 1143 Wenhao David Huang, University of Illinois, USA Tristan Johnson, Florida State University, USA Chapter LXVII Motivation, Learning, and Game Design........................................................................................... 1166 Mahboubeh Asgari, Simon Fraser University, Canada David Kaufman, Simon Fraser University, Canada Chapter LXVIII Designing Games for Learning.......................................................................................................... 1183 Scott J. Warren, University of North Texas, USA Mary Jo Dondlinger, University of North Texas, USA Chapter LXIX Interaction with MMOGs and Implications for E-Learning Design.................................................. 1204 Panagiotis Zaharias, University of the Aegean, Greece & Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens, Greece Anthony Papargyris, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece Chapter LXX Narrative Development and Instructional Design.............................................................................. 1218 Douglas Williams, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Yuxin Ma, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Charles Richard, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Louise Prejean, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA

Chapter LXXI Children as Critics of Educational Computer Games Designed by Other Children.......................... 1234 Lloyd P. Rieber, The University of Georgia, USA Joan M. Davis, The University of Washington, USA Michael J. Matzko, Independent Consultant, USA Michael M. Grant, The University of Memphis, USA Chapter LXXII Video-Game Creation as a Learning Experience for Teachers and Students.................................... 1257 Leanna Madill, University of Victoria, Canada Kathy Sanford, University of Victoria, Canada Section VIII The Future of Educational Gaming Chapter LXXIII The Future of Digital Game-Based Learning ................................................................................... 1274 Brian Magerko, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA Chapter LXXIV Artists in the Medium ....................................................................................................................... 1289 Kurt Squire, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Chapter LXXV The Positive Impact Model in Commercial Games........................................................................... 1303 Rusel DeMaria, DeMaria Studio, USA Chapter LXXVI Education and Exploitation Off the Virtual Train to Oregon............................................................. 1318 Chad M. Harms, Iowa State University, USA Section IX Appendix: Glossary of Terms Appendix A An Overview of Gaming Terminology: Chapters I-LXXVI.............................................................. 1333 Clark Aldrich, SimuLearn, USA Joseph C. DiPietro, University of Florida, USA

Section X Appendix: Selected Readings Appendix B, Selected Readings Games and Simulations: A New Approach in Education?................................................................ 1354 Göknur Kaplan Akilli, Pennsylvania State University, USA Appendix C, Selected Readings Developing Enjoyable Second Language Learning Software Tools: A Computer Game Paradigm.................................................................................................................................. 1372 Chee Siang Ang, City University, UK Panayiotis Zaphiris, City University, UK Appendix D, Selected Readings Game Mods: Customizable Learning in a K16 Setting..................................................................... 1390 Elizabeth Fanning, The University of Virginia, USA Appendix E, Selected Readings Online Games for 21st Century Skills................................................................................................. 1400 Lisa Galarneau, University of Waikato, New Zealand Melanie Zibit, Boston College, USA Appendix F, Selected Readings Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom.............................................................................. 1427 Nancy Sardone, Seton Hall University, USA Roberta Devlin-Scherer, Seton Hall University, USA Joseph Martinelli, Seton Hall University, USA Appendix G, Selected Readings Creative Remixing and Digital Learning: Developing an Online Media Literacy Learning Tool for Girls...................................................................................................................... 1440 Renee Hobbs, Temple University, USA Jonelle Rowe, Department of Health and Human Services, USA Appendix H, Selected Readings Learning While Playing: Design Implications for Edutainment Games.......................................... 1449 Kalle Jegers, Umeå University, Sweden Carlotte Wiberg, Umeå University, Sweden

Appendix I, Selected Readings Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”: Designing Augmented Reality Games to Teach the Critical Thinking of History ............................................................................. 1460 Karen Schrier, MIT, USA Appendix J, Selected Readings Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games . ............................................ 1477 Katia Sycara, Carnegie Mellon University, USA Paul Scerri, Carnegie Mellon University, USA Anton Chechetka, Carnegie Mellon University, USA

Detailed Table of Contents

Foreword............................................................................................................................................xlvii Preface . ............................................................................................................................................ xlvix Volume I Section I A Review of Research on Educational Gaming Chapter I A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools ................................................... 1 Fengfeng Ke, University of New Mexico, USA Drawing on the grounded theory approach and a qualitative meta-analysis, this chapter systematically reviews and synthesizes the theories, methods, and findings of both qualitative and quantitative inquiries on computer-based instructional games. A major purpose of this literature review and metaanalysis is to inform policy and practice based on existing studies. Four major recurring themes concerning the effectiveness of computer-based instructional games emerged from a comparative analysis of 89 instructional gaming studies and are discussed with the support of exemplar research.. Chapter II Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning ................................................................................................. 33 Aroutis N. Foster, Michigan State University, USA Punya Mishra, Michigan State University, USA The authors offer a framework for conducting research on games for learning. Building on a survey of the literature on games, they suggest a categorization scheme (physiological and psychological) of the range of claims made for games. They also argue that assessment on learning from games needs to consider the specific claims of games, as they interact with genre and content knowledge. The chapter includes an introduction to an ongoing study that utilizes this approach.. Chapter III Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning ............................................................ 51 Sara de Freitas, University of Coventry, UK Mark Griffiths, Nottingham Trent University, UK

This chapter explores whether massively multi-player online role-play games (MMORPGs) can be used effectively to support learning and training communities. The chapter proposes that cross-disciplinary approaches to the study of game-based learning are needed to support better synthesis of our current understanding of the effectiveness of learning with games. This chapter indicates future directions for cross-disciplinary research approaches in this field and considers how collaborative learning could best be supported through this approach. Chapter IV An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games ...................................................................... 67 Yufeng Qian, St. Thomas University, USA To reflect the preferences and meet the needs of this generation of learners, myriad of online games for educational purposes are made available—the sheer number of existing educational games is overwhelming. The purpose of this chapter was to investigate the current state of educational games on the Internet targeting K-12 learners in the United States. Major game providers and salient design features were identified, and future directions of game development for educational purposes were discussed.. Chapter V Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning......................................................... 83 Cathy Cavanaugh, University of Florida, USA Educational game developers design augmented reality games (AR) to maximize transfer of learning through close approximation of the game-scaffolded skills and the game environment to real skills and contexts. The games immerse players in electronic and actual learning situations using features that make them effective learning experiences for fostering meaningful learning. This chapter provides evidence of the strengths and areas for continued development in the application of augmented reality games for childhood and adult learning in formal and informal settings.. Chapter VI Mobility, Games, and Education . ......................................................................................................... 96 Michael A. Evans, Virginia Tech, USA This chapter proposes that the convergence of mobile devices and digital game-based learning may have profound implications for educational transformation. Key issues to be addressed in the chapter are these: (1) the pervasiveness of mobile and shared technologies; (2) contemporary accounts of learning theory in terms of mobility; (3) unique qualities of mobile learning and technologies; (4) successful applications for mobile learning; and (5) implications for future research and practice. It is critical to examine trends in mobile technology and digital game adoption and use to develop creative strategies and applications, and effective policies that lead to innovative instructional and learning environments.. Chapter VII Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques................................................................................................ 111 David Parisi, New York University, USA This chapter discusses the way that new video game interfaces are being used to invoke the whole body as a participant in the game text. As such, new video games involve more than cognitive education, by

imparting a set of body habits to the player. This chapter proposes a new vocabulary for understanding these devices, referring to them as bodily interfaces. It also discusses three aspects of bodily interfaces: mode of capture, haptics, and button remapping. Finally, it concludes by pointing to theoretical literature on the relationship between the physical and mental aspects of the learning process that may be useful in rethinking electronic games. Chapter VIII A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings ............................................................ 127 Elhanan Gazit, H.I.T.-Holon Institute of Technology, Israel This chapter presents an analysis of the dynamics of the children’s digital games interactions, which take place in their home surroundings. Since digital games have become one of the main building blocks in the children’s world, there is a need to examine the impact of the widespread use of digital games in children’s everyday life. The study’s framework served as a window for close observation of the ways young children spontaneously play digital games and interact with each other. Theoretical implications for digital game research and the pedagogical implications regarding the design and implementation of interactive learning environments are discussed.. Chapter IX Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments......................................................................... 146 James Oliverio, Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA Dennis Beck, Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA This chapter introduces the term mixed social environments as a strategic learning construct to augment student interaction when utilizing virtual world environments such as Second Life in the classroom. While an increasing number of institutions are investigating the use of virtual world environments for enhanced learning, at present there are at least three major areas that are underdeveloped: interdisciplinary research, documentation of best practices, and exploration of the use of mixed social environments. The authors present an overview of a course in hopes of helping to inform best practices, expand interdisciplinary research, and assist in the design of future mixed social environments for enhanced learning. Chapter X Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education............................................................... 163 Andreas Breiter, Institute for Information Management, University of Bremen, Germany Castulus Kolo, Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany Electronic gaming in education remains a theoretical or at best marginal issue as long as it is not adopted in general educational settings. After introducing an analytical framework for structuring such processes of the diffusion of innovations, the authors present empirical evidence from the adoption process of electronic gaming in Germany. The results are discussed focusing on the role of several influencing factors on the scope and the speed of innovations. The chapter concludes with possible generalizations departing from the specific situation and the tradition of education in Germany.

Section II Educational Gaming in K-12 or Teacher Education Contexts Chapter XI A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom ............................................................... 179 Richard Van Eck, University of North Dakota, USA Many of the educational outcomes we seek to promote in public education, such as problem solving and critical thinking, are difficult to achieve given the constraints of the real-world classroom. Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) games make excellent tools for addressing both content-based and higher order learning outcomes, and many educators are exploring their use in the classroom. The first part of this chapter will examine the theories that underlie the successful integration of commercial games in the classroom. These theories and the model are discussed in the second part of this chapter in the context of actually designing COTS game-based learning (GBL).. Chapter XII Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play...................................................... 200 Shree Durga, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Kurt Squire, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA This chapter examines the potential of video games as a learning tool given their productive capacity for content creation and dissemination. Based on the findings from a longitudinal study, this paper argues that historical model construction is a compelling way to mediate one’s understandings about history. Participants in this game-based learning program developed new identities as producers as well as consumers of historical simulations. Chapter XIII Game-Based Historical Learning . ...................................................................................................... 219 Erik Malcolm Champion, Auckland School of Design, Massey University, New Zealand Game-based historical learning aims to provide ways in which the technology, interactivity, or cultural conventions of computer gaming can help afford the cultural understanding of the self, of the past, or of others with mindsets quite different to our own. This chapter will outline the major technological, pedagogical, and evaluation issues pertinent to game-based historical learning, provide working definitions of virtual learning that may lend themselves to evaluations, and endeavor to explain how specific issues of game-based historical learning may be addressed. It will also forecast trends and suggest approaches to help focus this diverse field.. Chapter XIV The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education......................................................................... 235 Phillip J. VanFossen, Purdue University, USA Adam Friedman, Wake Forest University, USA Richard Hartshorne, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA In this chapter, the authors provide evidence for the potential of MMORPGs for social studies education by providing a detailed review of relevant literature from the fields of games studies, educational

technology, and the social networking universe. This evidence includes game scholars’ efforts to develop classroom applications of MMORPGs in the social sciences and related disciplines and also provide examples of “citizenship education” already occurring with MMORPGs. The authors also provide an overview of perceived costs and benefits associated with classroom MMORPG use, including logistical hurdles that need to be overcome. Chapter XV Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension . ............................................................... 251 Brock Dubbles, University of Minnesota, USA In this qualitative study, literacy practices of “struggling” seventh and eighth graders were recorded on videotape as they engaged in both traditional and new literacy practices in an after school video games club. These recordings were analyzed in the context of building comprehension skills with video games. Playing video games is viewed here as a literate practice, and was seen to be more engaging than traditional activities (such as reading school text, writing journals, etc.). The conclusion of this observation makes connections to current research in comprehension and provides a basis for teachers to use games to develop comprehension and learning.. Chapter XVI COTS Computer Game Effectiveness................................................................................................. 277 Carol Luckhardt Redfield, St. Mary’s University, USA Diane L. Gaither, Southwest Research Institute, USA Neil M. Redfield, John Jay Science and Engineering Academy, USA This chapter looks at effectiveness of commercially-available educational computer games. Two effectiveness studies conducted at John Jay High School and the results of the studies are presented on the educational computer game Math Blaster Algebra. One of the studies showed a positive learning increase from using Math Blaster Algebra. Both studies showed no negative impacts on scores and grades with more time playing the game. With lessons learned from game theory, intelligent computer-based training field, and these effectiveness studies, educational computer gaming can continue to grow, be effective, and be accepted into educational systems.. Chapter XVII Teacher Gamers vs. Teacher Non-Gamers........................................................................................... 295 Christopher L. James, Russellville City Schools, USA Vivan H. Wright, University of Alabama, USA The purpose of this study was to identify secondary teachers with video game play experience and determine if perceived levels of comfort in regard to completing job-related technology tasks, amounts of instructional technology usage, and amounts of participation in innovative teaching strategies are affected by experience or lack of experience with video games. Although significant differences were not found between teachers identified as gamers and those as non-gamers, researchers may choose to investigate specific areas where mean differences were found. This study can be used as a reference point for future research into teachers and video game play in regard to teaching practices and job-related tasks..

Chapter XVIII Using Online Simulation to Engage Users in an Authentic Learning Environment............................ 315 Brian Ferry, University of Wollongong, Australia Lisa Kervin, University of Wollongong, Australia This chapter describes how an authentic learning framework was used to inform the design of an online simulation that included gaming features specifically designed to enhance learner engagement. It describes an analysis of user responses to the simulation focusing particularly on learner engagement and what they learned from using the software. The research revealed that users initially approached the software from a gaming framework, however with extended interaction with the software, moved toward treating the virtual experience as an authentic environment, even to the point of empathising with some of the virtual characters and downloading some of the support material that they might use in real classrooms.. Chapter XIX Pre-Service Computer Teachers as 3D Educational Game Designers................................................. 331 Zahide Yildirim, Middle East Technical University, Turkey Eylem Kilic, Middle East Technical University, Turkey This chapter explores prospective computer teachers’ perceptions of and experiences in goal-based scenario (GBS) centered 3-D educational game development process. Twenty-six pre-service computer teachers who enrolled in an undergraduate course formed the sample of this case study. The findings indicated that the pre-service teachers preferred GBS-centered educational game to traditional educational game. They declared that the most important feature of educational game was its contribution to motivation, attention, and retention. Chapter XX Adolescents Teaching Video-Game Making—Who is the Expert Here?............................................ 345 Kathy Sanford, University of Victoria, Canada Leanna Madill, University of Victoria, Canada This chapter describes a study conducted with nine adolescents hired to instruct week-long video game making camps over the course of one summer and the subsequent fall, working with younger children aged 9-12. Data was collected through participant observation, repeated interviews, and focus groups with the participant adolescent teachers. By engaging in teaching as well as playing, these youths have had greater opportunities to critically reflect on their learning, assessing the value of the technical and ideological approaches to videogames. Several themes emerged related to knowledge of content, issues of management of learning environments, and learning how to teach.. Section III Educational Gaming in Other Learning Contexts Chapter XXI Online Games as Powerful Food Advertising to Children ................................................................. 358 Richard T. Cole, Michigan State University, USA Elizabeth Taylor Quilliam, Michigan State University, USA

As Internet marketing has evolved, customized online games created to promote specific brands or products have been embraced by food marketers. At the same time that these advergames, a hybrid of entertainment and advertising, have emerged, childhood obesity in the United States has reached what some consider epidemic proportions. Advertising to children is frequently implicated as contributing to children’s poor dietary choices and ultimately to childhood obesity and its attendant medical risks. This chapter describes the nature of advergames, considers their effectiveness as teaching tools and advertisements, and suggests public policy issues related to the continued use of advergames to promote non-nutritious foods to children. Chapter XXII Changing Health Behavior Through Games . ..................................................................................... 370 Erin Edgerton, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA This chapter discusses how proven health communication theories can be used in electronic games to affect behavior change. After discussing the need for effective health communication and reviewing the current trends in online health seeking behavior, it argues that games provide a unique opportunity for users to interact with health information, practice health behaviors, and become immersed in meaningful content. Through exploration of the elaboration likelihood model, social cognitive theory, and stages of change theory, this chapter will discuss how games can be used to change perceptions, attitudes, and actions relating to health behaviors. . Chapter XXIII An Overview of Using Electronic Games for Health Purposes . ........................................................ 388 Wei Peng, Michigan State University, USA Ming Liu, Michigan State University, USA This chapter aims to provide an overall picture of the applications of electronic games for various healthrelated purposes, particularly for health education, health risk prevention, behavioral intervention, and disease self-management. It summarizes the electronic games for health that have been empirically tested by researchers in the past 20 years. Games that have not yet been evaluated but are promising and noteworthy are also included. It also synthesizes the key features of electronic games that make them promising to be used for health-related purposes. Finally, implications of using electronic games for health-related purposes and future direction for research in this area are discussed. Chapter XXIV MMORPGs and Foreign Language Education.................................................................................... 402 Yong Zhao, Michigan State University, USA Chun Lai, Michigan State University, USA This chapter provides an overview of the potential of massively multi-player role playing games (MMORPGs) for foreign language education and discusses how MMORPGs can be better designed to support foreign language education. It reviews current conceptualizations on ideal language learning environments, discusses the potentials of MMORPGs for foreign language education, and elaborates on how to design MMORPGs to facilitate foreign language learning. The authors hope that this discussion will help foreign language educators realize and capitalize on the values of MMORPGs in foreign language education, and will guide the design of MMORPGs for foreign language learning.

Chapter XXV A Videogame, a Chinese Otaku, and Her Deep Learning of a Language............................................ 422 Kim Feldmesser, University of Brighton, UK Learning additional languages rapidly has been the goal of immersion schools and their approaches are effective in many respects because they make use of situated learning experiences in communities of practice. Such experiences present their own challenges however, as living in the country of the chosen language for a considerable period of time may not be possible. This chapter will outline the relevant theories for second language learning, describe how they operate in games, and present guidelines for research and development of serious games and second language acquisition.. Chapter XXVI Developing a Serious Game for Police Training................................................................................. 451 Ahmed BinSubaih, University of Sheffield, UK Steve Maddock, University of Sheffield, UK Daniela Romano, University of Sheffield, UK The design of serious games based on sound learning and instructional principles is important to ensure learning is integrated in the “gameplay”. However, the process of achieving this is not yet fully understood, and research is hampered by the lack of practical demonstrations of how effective instructional design is when used alongside game design. This chapter provides an example of a successful application of instructional design to the development process of a serious game for traffic accident investigators in the Dubai police force. Chapter XXVII Game-Based Learning in Design History............................................................................................ 478 Barbara Martinson, University of Minnesota, USA Sauman Chu, University of Minnesota, USA Games are increasingly being used to teach content in a variety of courses from elementary to graduate education. This study investigates the effectiveness of using a game to learning design history content and examines students’ preferred learning activities based on learning styles. This study does indicate that games can be used as tools to teach various types of information within a college course. Games added variety to the design history course and made learning facts more fun. The concrete nature of the game was appropriate for this particular group of students, most of whom had concrete learning styles. Finally, the recycling of a previously-designed learning object made the project affordable in terms of time and money.. Volume II Chapter XXVIII A Policy Game in a Virtual World....................................................................................................... 489 Martha Garcia-Murillo, Syracuse University, USA Ian MacInnes, Syracuse University, USA

In this chapter, we present a policy game to be used in a virtual world. The benefits of this tool are examined using Gee’s learning principles. From this analysis, we find that games in virtual worlds enable reflective exploration that helps participants to learn from their mistakes. Learning takes place from the content conveyed through the game and through the multimedia immersion that allows students to learn the nuances of these virtual contexts. Because there are no real world consequences, participants can take risks, provide or receive help from other students, and, most importantly, apply this knowledge to a real-world situation.. Chapter XXIX Teaching OOP and COP Technologies via Gaming............................................................................. 508 Chong-wei Xu, Kennesaw State University, USA This chapter introduces an innovative pedagogical method for teaching object-oriented programming (OOP) and component-oriented programming (COP) via gaming. Going through the evolution of the three-layer gaming framework, we clearly illustrate that gaming covers almost all core features of OOP and COP technologies. Teaching OOP and COP technologies via game development not only engages students efforts but also opens an opportunity for involving students with industry level projects and enhancing students’ ability to brain-storm and solve real-world problems. Furthermore, gaming may play an important role in developing other applications especially those that feature visualization and animation. Chapter XXX Using Games to Teach Design Patterns and Computer Graphics........................................................ 525 Pollyana Notargiacomo Mustaro, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil Luciano Silva, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil Ismar Frango Silveira, Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie, Brazil This chapter discusses some possibilities of using computer games to effectively reach didactic goals in undergraduate teaching. Two case studies were conducted. One of them focuses design pattern contents in a computer science course and the other spotlights computer graphic topics in an information technology course. The results gained in these processes demonstrate the students’ involvement in the proposed activities and the capacity to apply the lessons learned in diverse situations.. Chapter XXXI A 3D Environment for Exploring Algebraic Structure and Behavior.................................................. 546 Paul A. Fishwick, University of Florida, USA Yuna A. Park, University of Florida, USA In this chapter, the authors leveraged the inherent multi-user collaborative building capabilities within Second Life to explore how simple algebra manipulations can be accomplished. Results suggest that while the current technology presents some key human interface challenges inherent to 3-D user interfaces, multi-user environments can be successfully used to construct algebraic expressions in ways not possible with prior technologies. Specifically, these environments provide real-time distance communication, the ability for multiple users to collaborate spatially toward creating and positioning algebraic components, sensory and cognitive immersion, and the possibility of personalizing representations in ways not easily accomplished with two-dimensional environments..

Chapter XXXII Surviving the Game............................................................................................................................. 560 Linda van Ryneveld, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa Relatively few studies have looked at the potential of technology to support traditional face-to-face games in an online educational environment. While some traditional games such as Tic-tac-toe, Hangman, Monopoly, and Chess have been ported over to an electronic medium, relatively little thought has been given to porting games where human-to-human interaction is a central component. This chapter reports on the use of a game in an online learning module that was presented to adult learners. It sets out to explore the complexities involved in teaching and learning in an adult online learning community. Section IV Educational Gaming Research Tools and Methods Chapter XXXIII Wag the Kennel: Games, Frames, and the Problem of Assessment.................................................... 577 David William Shaffer, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA This chapter examines the relationship between games and assessment—and more broadly at what that tells us about the relationship between educational reform and technological change. Research already shows that with their ability to provide rich, complex, and compelling virtual worlds, well-designed computer games can teach players innovative and creative ways of thinking, deep understanding of complex academic content, and valuable forms of real-world skills. But, in the end, even effective games can only take students as far as the tests will let them go. If we want to use games to prepare young people for life in a changing world, we need to change how we think about assessment first. The author examines one way to think about assessing the development of innovative and creative thinking through game play.. Chapter XXXIV Character Attachment in Games as Moderator for Learning .............................................................. 593 Melissa L. Lewis, Michigan State University, USA René Weber, University of California Santa Barbara, USA The Entertainment Education Paradigm (EEP) offers a new way to think about education by blending entertaining with educational experiences. Video games provide an excellent format for entertainment education because of both the prevalence and enjoyment of playing video games and the ways in which individuals of today learn. Role-playing games are one of the better game genres for entertainment education. They provide both high levels of entertainment and a strong connection between player and game characters (models) which lead to an increase in learning. Based on the theories of parasocial interaction, identification, and social learning, this chapter offers a measurement for character attachment and introduces this new construct as a moderator for learning in role-playing video games.. Chapter XXXV Visual Analysis of Avatars in Gaming Environments.......................................................................... 606 Joseph C. DiPietro, University of Florida, USA Erik W. Black, University of Florida, USA

A better understanding of virtual character avatars is needed in order to explore the underlying psychology that the avatar represents to the user. In addition to providing an overview and introduction to massive multi-player online role playing games (MMORPGs), this chapter provides an introduction to visual ethnographic analysis of character avatars in video game environments. The chapter details an example of mixed methodology for conducting visual analysis research specific to Linden Lab’s Second Life and details some of the methodological challenges that researchers will encounter when engaged in this type of investigation.. Chapter XXXVI Interpreting Game-Play Through Existential Ludology...................................................................... 621 Matthew Thomas Payne, University of Texas at Austin, USA This chapter introduces and operationalizes an innovative interpretive strategy called “existential ludology” to explain how the game-play mechanics of two tactical shooter video games educate gamers on how to play militarily. By employing existential ludology as an interpretive tool, we can understand these military-backed games from an experiential, player-centric perspective, while also recognizing how their seemingly innocuous game-play is located within, and linked to, larger networks of power. Moreover, existential ludology’s flexibility as an interpretive instrument encourages educators to recognize the educational affordances of popular video games so that they might adopt these popular media artifacts for their own pedagogical ends.. Chapter XXXVII On Choosing Games and What Counts as a “Good” Game................................................................ 636 Katrin Becker, University of Calgary, Canada James R. Parker, University of Calgary, Canada This chapter discusses the growing importance of applying considered rationales to which games are chosen for study, whether it be for ethnography, classroom use, or anything else. A brief overview of how games are currently chosen for study is presented through a meta analysis of studies with games that were published between 2003 and 2006 in order to demonstrate that most published games studies do not include a supported rationale for the games chosen. The chapter will then present various ways that game choices can be justified, and propose and explain a data fusion technique that can be applied to game reviews and other lists in order to facilitate representative and defensible game choices.. Chapter XXXVIII Descriptors of Quality Teachers and Quality Digital Games............................................................... 652 Teddy Moline, University of Alberta, Canada Quality teachers and quality digital games (video and computer) are dynamic resources that experience ongoing changes based primarily on their interactions with learners. Characteristics of these resources have been, and will continue to be researched and identified in order to discover ways to improve student learning. This chapter uses the descriptors of one of these resources, quality teachers, to illustrate how the same characteristics are integral to effective digital games. By using the descriptors of quality teachers to evaluate digital games, educators will gain a better understanding of why digital games are effective learning tools.

Section V The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 1): Cognition, Learning, Play, and Identity Chapter XXXIX Designing a Computational Model of Learning.................................................................................. 671 David Gibson, CurveShift, Inc., USA This chapter uses a four-part framework of knowledge, learner, assessment and community to discuss design considerations for building a computational model of learning. A teaching simulation—simSchool—helps illustrate selected psychological, physical, and cognitive models and how intelligence can be represented in software agents. The design discussion includes evolutionary perspectives on artificial intelligence and the role of the conceptual assessment framework for automating feedback to the simulation user. The purpose of the chapter is to integrate a number of theories into a design framework for a computational model of learning.. Chapter XL Social Psychology and Massively Multiplayer Online Learning Games ........................................... 702 Clint Bowers, University of Central Florida, USA Peter A. Smith, University of Central Florida, USA Jan Cannon-Bowers, University of Central Florida, USA The use of computer games and especially online games for educational purposes is growing in popularity. This chapter summarizes findings from the area of social psychology as a basis to form propositions, guidelines, and research questions that will help develop effective multi-player environments for learning. The authors are particularly interested in how to foster collaborative learning in multi-player environments by exploiting the naturally occurring structures and features of popular massively multi-player games. They offer examples of how these features can be used to support learning and highlight areas in need of future research.. Chapter XLI Evaluating and Managing Cognitive Load in Games.......................................................................... 719 Slava Kalyuga, University of New South Wales, Australia Jan L. Plass, New York University, USA The chapter describes different types and sources of cognitive load and the specific demands of games on cognitive resources. It outlines information presentation design methods for dealing with potential cognitive overload, and presents some techniques (subjective rating scales, dual-task techniques, and concurrent verbal protocols) that could be used for evaluating cognitive load in electronic gaming in education.. Chapter XLII Self-Regulated Learning in Video Game Environments...................................................................... 738 Nick Zap, Simon Fraser University, Canada Jillianne Code, Simon Fraser University, Canada The psychological factors that produce self-regulated learning are explored as they relate to a player’s intentionality, interest, aptitude, motivation, goal-setting, and affect while playing games. A discus-

sion of video games as authentic learning environments looks at the roles of student-initiated learning in authentic contexts and specific design strategies are outlined. Practical learning strategies that promote SRL are presented to facilitate the use of conscious self-regulatory skills that students can implement in these authentic learning environments. This chapter opens the discussion of the role of self-regulated learning in video game environments and its impact in the field of educational gaming.. Chapter XLIII (Self-) Educational Effects of Computer Gaming Cultures ................................................................ 757 Johannes Fromme, University of Magdeburg, Germany Benjamin Jörissen, University of Magdeburg, Germany Alexander Unger, University of Magdeburg, Germany The goal of this chapter is to emphasize a certain notion of self-induced education, to discuss it in the context of digital games and to provide the means for assessing digital games as well as to give hints on their educational use. In the first section, the concept of “self-education” is introduced and distinguished against less complex learning phenomena. The second section discusses and analyzes the different layers of “educational space” inherent to gaming software, providing the analytical means for the further sections. The third section presents and analyzes educational aspects of singleplayer games, while the fourth section adds the socio-cultural impacts implied in multi-player communities. In conclusion, a synopsis is given, which sums up the main educational dimensions and connects them to aspects and analytical criteria, allowing a pedagogical assessment of digital games.. Chapter XLIV Experience, Cognition and Video Game Play .................................................................................... 776 Meredith DiPietro, University of Florida, USA Drawing support from the field of expertise, the research presented in this chapter looks at and compares the processes used by video game players based on their level of experience. Results from this study add to the understanding of the relationship between experience, cognition, and learning from video game play. The results of this research also have implications for educational game design and the pedagogical techniques used to make effective learning opportunities available to all learners.. Chapter XLV Intertextuality in Massively Multi-Player Online Games . ................................................................. 791 P. G. Schrader, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA Kimberly A. Lawless, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA Michael McCreery, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA This chapter describes the manner in which gamers engage in multiple text comprehension and intertextual practices within the context of the World of Warcraft (WOW). It describes the nature of and issues associated with multiple text comprehension in a knowledge-based society, intertextuality as it relates to massively multi-player online games, and grounds this discussion in survey results from 745 WOW players. The authors hope that the chapter will provide valuable insights into the development and application of the 21st century skills and help direct the design of future games and the implementation of games in education..

Chapter XLVI Development, Identity, and Game-Based Learning............................................................................. 808 Yam San Chee, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Kenneth Y. T. Lim, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore This chapter considers the use of computer games to help students construct their personal identity and develop dispositions that become active and responsible citizenship. It argues that the construction of identity requires both performative and narrative components and that these elements can be realized in a learning environment that affords students the opportunity to engage in a dialectic interplay between role playing in a game world and dialogic interaction outside of the game world. Research findings from an initial data set showing how students’ project their identities onto in-game characters are shared. The findings suggest that role playing in computer games can be effective in fostering attitudes, values, and beliefs desired of citizenship education.. Chapter XLVII Play Styles and Learning..................................................................................................................... 826 Carrie Heeter, Michigan State University, USA This chapter reviews player types found in commercial MMOs and educational games and a palette of play styles and learning is proposed from which game designers and educators can more easily imagine (or perhaps “paint”) their target audience. Two studies show how the palette might be applied. Study 1 examines the impact of different in-game reward schemas on player types. Study 2 compares classroom play with one child per computer versus paired play of the same educational game. Learning styles relevant to educational game design and classroom use are described, including intrinsic and extrinsic achievement orientation, motivation, individual traits, and competition and other social factors.. Chapter XLVIII Playing Roles in the MMORPG Kingdom of Loathing...................................................................... 847 Martin Oliver, London Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education, UK This chapter explores the roles players created, and how these structured their online relationships, in an online massively multi-player role-playing game, Kingdom of Loathing—a low-tech browser-based game with a satirical, humorous style. This exploration shows that classifications of players are an over-simplification. Instead, the classification should apply to examples of play—not least because the game itself was not “fixed” but was constantly re-designed in response to play. This has implications for research methodology, but also for the (ongoing) design of games.. Chapter XLIX Exploring Personal Myths from The Sims ......................................................................................... 862 Vasa Buraphadeja, University of Florida, USA Kara Dawson, University of Florida, USA This study hypothesized that narratives told by game players may be similar to narratives told in real life and explores 66 Sims narratives. Results suggest that most people who play The Sims do not naturally adhere to the criteria of a good myth when developing their narrative, however, over half the narratives met some of the criteria. Our results suggest that The Sims has the potential to serve as a narrative studio

for personal myth development but that some kind of intervention or scaffolding may need to be provided. The concept of psychosocial moratorium is suggested as one possible strategy professionals in multiple disciplines may use to promote The Sims as a narrative studio for myth development. Section VI The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 2): Violence, Emotion, Race, Gender, and Culture Chapter L Learning Processes and Violent Video Games ................................................................................... 876 Edward L. Swing, Iowa State University, USA Douglas A. Gentile, Iowa State University, USA Craig A. Anderson, Iowa State University, USA Though video games can produce desirable learning outcomes, such as improved performance in school subjects, they also can produce undesirable outcomes, such as increased aggression. Some of the basic learning principles that make video games (particularly violent video games) effective at teaching are discussed in this chapter. A general learning model is presented to explain how video games can produce a variety of effects in their users. This model explains both the immediate, short-term effects and cumulative, long-term effects of video games. Implications of these principles are discussed in relation to education. The issue of addressing violent video games’ effects on aggression is also examined.. . Chapter LI Harnessing the Emotional Potential of Video Games.......................................................................... 893 Patrick Felicia, University College Cork, Ireland Ian Pitt, University College Cork, Ireland This chapter explains the importance of acknowledging users’ personalities, learning styles, and emotions in the design of educational games. It argues that the application of educational theories combined with knowledge of subjects’ personality traits and an increased emotional depth offer a substantive approach to understand and improve the nature of learning in educational games. The authors hope that understanding the underlying motivation and behaviors of learners through the use of personality profiles will not only inform researchers of a better design of educational games, but also assist in understanding the intricate relationship between game design, instructional design, and users’ personality at both cognitive and emotional levels.. . Chapter LII Gamers, Gender, and Representation................................................................................................... 911 Diane Carr, University of London, UK Caroline Pelletier, University of London, UK The issue of gender reoccurs in debates about the introduction of computer games into formal learning contexts. There is a fear that girls will be alienated rather than engaged by games in the classroom. There is also concern over sexist imagery, and thus about representational aspects of computer games. In this chapter, particular aspects of these issues are addressed in turn. The authors explore the issue of gender

and gendered game preferences, in relation to the cultural framing of the gaming audience. Attention is then directed at the issue of representation, with a consideration of the tensions between representation, meaning, and playability. These issues are considered primarily through perspectives drawn from media studies, and with reference to recent work from the emerging field of computer game studies.. . Chapter LIII Gender and Racial Stereotypes in Popular Video Games.................................................................... 922 Yi Mou, Cambridge, MA, USA Wei Peng, Michigan State University, USA While the violent content of video games has caused wide concern among scholars, gender and racial stereotypes in video games are still an understudied area. The purpose of this chapter is to provide a better understanding of the stereotypical phenomenon in video games. The book chapter first provides a comprehensive review of previous studies conducted upon gender-role and racial portrayals in video games. Then a small-scale content analysis on a sample of official trailers, introductory sequences, and covers of 19 most popular video games is introduced. Finally, the implications of stereotype in video games and the possible social and psychological impacts on players, especially adolescent players, are discussed.. . Chapter LIV Can the Subaltern Play and Speak or Just be Played With?................................................................ 938 David J. Leonard, Washington State University, USA This chapter examines and responds to the silencing, resistance to any intrusion of questions about race and racism, and overall erasure of race from the debates and broader discourse concerning video game culture. It not only provides insight into the nature and logics guiding claims of colorblindness, but also connects the ideologies and culture of denial to the broader racial discourse of post-civil rights America. Hoping to inspire debate and transformative knowledge sharing, this chapter additionally offers a textually-based racial analysis of Outlaw Volleyball as an example of the type of critical examination required to move beyond a culture that often reduces bodies and voices of people of color to objects of gaze, ridicule, and consumption while denying any sort of criticism and questions regarding the racial meaning and texts evident within much of today’s gaming.. . Chapter LV Culturally Responsive Games and Simulations................................................................................... 956 Colleen Swain, University of Florida, USA Electronic games and simulations are powerful learning tools for many learners; yet, the learning environments in these games and simulations frequently represent knowledge and experiences from a single dominant culture perspective—a white, middle- to upper-class perspective. This chapter introduces the reader to the connection between culture and learning and using culturally responsive teaching strategies as a method of expanding the effectiveness of electronic games and simulations to all learners. Readers are exposed to major tenets of culturally responsive instruction and how specific instructional strategies that embrace these principles can effectively be incorporated into educational games and simulations.. .

Chapter LVI Saving Worlds with Videogame Activism .......................................................................................... 970 Robert Jones, New York University, USA To demonstrate precisely how procedural rhetoric works through video game technologies, this chapter presents a definition for video game activism as well as three distinct modes: original design, engine appropriation, and machinima. Using three recent case studies, the chapter suggests some of the implications for educators and why they should take video games seriously as means of political expression when teaching students about civic duty. Volume III Section VII Educational Game Design

. Chapter LVII Conceptual Play Spaces....................................................................................................................... 989 Sasha A. Barab, Indiana University School of Education, USA Adam Ingram-Goble, Center for Research on Learning and Technology, USA Scott Warren, University of North Texas, USA This chapter provides a framework for designing play spaces to support learning academic content. The authors provide four elements that one must balance when designing a conceptual play space to support the learning of disciplinary content; more specifically, ensuring the learning of academic content and supporting legitimate participation while, concurrently ensuring interaction with gaming rules and engagement with the framing narratives through which the play takes on meaning. The goal of this work is to communicate the potential value of play spaces and to provide an illuminative set of cases for others.. . Chapter LVIII The Design, Play, and Experience Framework.................................................................................. 1010 Brian M. Winn, Michigan State University, USA This chapter introduces a framework for the design of serious games for learning, called the design, play, and experience framework. The author argues that the great potential of serious games will not be realized without a formal design approach. To that end, the author presents and thoroughly explains the design, play, and experience framework which provides a formal approach to designing the learning, storytelling, game play, user experience, and technology components of a serious game. The author concludes by detailing how the framework provides a common language to discuss serious game design, a methodology to analyze a design, and a process to design a serious game for learning. . Chapter LIX Revealing New Hidden Curriculum and Pedagogy of Digital Games ............................................. 1025 Youngkyun Baek, Korea National University of Education, Republic of Korea

This chapter examines hidden curricula and pedagogy of digital games in order to clarify their educational meaning and importance. The experiences which players get from the inherent ideology of digital games was categorized into four areas: fantasy, immersion, representation, and identification, and making sense of the game’s system or model. These hidden curricula are important for learning-game designers to consider in that they are internalized subconsciously. Also these hidden aspects of games are important for teachers to help motivate players for learning, to facilitate self-directed playing and learning, to improve gender sensitivity, and to help with the transfer of knowledge from games to real life.. . Chapter LX Game Design as a Compelling Experience........................................................................................ 1041 Wei Qiu, Michigan State University, USA Yong Zhao, Michigan State University, USA This study explored the nature and design of a compelling experience: game design. Thirty-six college juniors in the software engineering major participated in a semester-long project to design games for Chinese language learning. The project was designed to help engineering students understand educational and other issues in designing educational games. Results show that game design expanded students’ perceptive capacity; enhanced their subject-matter understanding, problem-solving skills, meta-learning ability and motivation; and facilitated students’ reflection on themselves as well as their environments. Factors are discussed to make a game design learning experience compelling.. . Chapter LXI Gaming Ethics, Rules, Etiquette, and Learning................................................................................. 1057 Laurie N. Taylor, University of Florida, USA This chapter explains the significance of informal and unwritten rules in order to show the connections among formal rules of play, formalized learning, informal and unwritten rules, and collateral learning. It argues that computer gaming’s rules of play include the formal rules by which games are played and the informal and unwritten rules within the magic circle of play where the games are played. Too often games are reduced to their formal rules of play and the collateral learning fostered by the realm of play is neglected. By examining unwritten rules, this chapter also connects to and informs other areas that rely primarily on formal rules, including educational gaming. . Chapter LXII Designing Games-Based Embedded Authentic Learning Experiences............................................. 1068 Penny de Byl, University of Southern Queensland, Australia This chapter presents the embedded authentic serious game-based learning experiences (EASLE) architecture which has been developed to assist in the definition of game-based applications. The motivation behind the design of EASLE is to keep game specifications as simple and focused as possible for educators attempting to create serious games as current available game design methodologies and templates are complex and extensive. Furthermore, it is argued that games created with EASLE reduce the amount of game development work to be done by the educator allowing for deeper collaboration between students. Towards the end of this chapter a game developed with EASLE which took two weeks to complete is presented.. .

Chapter LXIII Bridging Game Development and Instructional Design.................................................................... 1088 James Belanich, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA Karin A. Orvis, Old Dominion University, USA Daniel B. Horn, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA Jennifer L. Solberg, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, USA Instructional video game development is occurring in both the commercial game development and the instructional design/development communities, but regularly in isolation from one another. This chapter elucidates the commonalities and differences in the development goals and approaches of these communities and discusses how best practices of each community should be blended for optimal instructional videogame design. This chapter also includes relevant experiences from an instructional PC-video game development project, illustrating challenges faced and new opportunities afforded via a collaborative development effort. . Chapter LXIV GaME Design for Intuitive Concept Knowledge............................................................................... 1104 Debbie Denise Resse, Center for Educational Technologies®, Wheeling Jesuit University, USA Reviewing relevant game design, cognitive science, and learning science theories, the author argues: (a) the need for GaME design; (b) that game worlds, complex concepts, and mental models are analogous systems; (c) how game-based technologies can provide a pragmatic and embodied context for making complex, introductory concepts intuitive; and (d) that the pragmatic, physical, and procedural aspects of games make them powerful learning tools that must be carefully designed. The author illustrates GaME design using Selene: A Lunar Creation GaME. Rigorous methods for design of instructional games will enhance control over learning outcomes. . Chapter LXV Leveraging the Affordances of an Electronic Game to Meet Instructional Goals............................. 1127 Yuxin Ma, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Douglas Williams, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Charles Richard, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Louise Prejean, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA This chapter is an effort to start to accumulate knowledge to guide the design of electronic educational games. The authors present a case study describing how the unique components of electronic games enabled the design of Conquest of Coastlands, a learning environment delivered as an electronic game. They describe how their team synthesized two sets of design principles from the literature on electronic games, instructional design, and intrinsic motivation and how these principles informed the design of Conquest of Coastlands. The principles and the related case study may inform the design of future electronic educational games and generate research questions to be investigated in empirical research..

Chapter LXVI Instructional Game Design Using Cognitive Load Theory............................................................... 1143 Wenhao David Huang, University of Illinois, USA Tristan Johnson, Florida State University, USA This chapter introduces design guidelines to attain specific game characteristics by prioritizing the design components in 4C/ID-model. Each game characteristic consists of three levels of design emphasis: preliminary, secondary, and tertiary. The ultimate goal of this chapter is to initiate series of dialogue between cognitive learning outcome, systematic instructional design, and instructional game design thereby seeking to improve the overall game design and instructional efficiency.. Chapter LXVII Motivation, Learning, and Game Design........................................................................................... 1166 Mahboubeh Asgari, Simon Fraser University, Canada David Kaufman, Simon Fraser University, Canada While there are thousands of educational computer and video games in the market today, few are as engaging and compelling as entertainment games. Some entertainment games have also been used in classrooms and have proven to produce incidental learning (e.g., Civilization III, SimCity). The authors of this chapter argue that there are a number of elements used in entertainment games that motivate players, and using these elements in the design process for educational games based on learning objectives would create motivational and engaging educational games. This chapter outlines the elements needed to develop such games.. Chapter LXVIII Designing Games for Learning.......................................................................................................... 1183 Scott J. Warren, University of North Texas, USA Mary Jo Dondlinger, University of North Texas, USA This chapter discusses two games that were designed to target learning as well as implications for the design of future games intended for this purpose. It illustrates how the ADDIE model of instructional design can be leveraged to produce digital game spaces as well as the limitations that designers face based on the goals of the project, the chosen technology, and the audience chosen for the digital intervention. The goal of this chapter is to use real-world examples of learning game design processes in order to prepare instructional designers for the complexity of using game and instructional design principles as a means of improving student motivation, learning, and other psychological factors that prepare them for engaging meaningfully in the educational experience.. Chapter LXIX Interaction with MMOGs and Implications for E-Learning Design.................................................. 1204 Panagiotis Zaharias, University of the Aegean, Greece & Athens University of Economics and Business, Athens, Greece Anthony Papargyris, Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece E-learning is emerging as one of the fastest organizational uses of the Internet as a supplementary or alternative mode for corporate training. In this chapter it is argued that many useful lessons for e-learning designers can be

learned from game design and especially from the design of massive multi-player online games (MMOGs). A review on instructional quality of games and design elements of MMOGs is conducted under the perspective of adult learning, in order to identify, adapt, and propose design implications for e-learning design. . Chapter LXX Narrative Development and Instructional Design.............................................................................. 1218 Douglas Williams, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Yuxin Ma, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Charles Richard, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Louise Prejean, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA This chapter explores the challenge of balancing narrative development and instructional design in the creation of an electronic game-based learning environment. Narrative is a key factor in successful commercial games. The hero’s journey is explained and proposed as a model narrative structure for developing educational role-playing games and informing instructional design. Opportunities to embed various instructional strategies within the hero’s journey structure are presented.. Chapter LXXI Children as Critics of Educational Computer Games Designed by Other Children.......................... 1234 Lloyd P. Rieber, The University of Georgia, USA Joan M. Davis, The University of Washington, USA Michael J. Matzko, Independent Consultant, USA Michael M. Grant, The University of Memphis, USA The authors of this chapter gave a classroom of middle school students the opportunity to play educational games created by other middle school students. These students’ opinions of the games were studied and compared to their actual play behavior. This study also explored the reasons behind the children’s play behaviors and critiques through interviews. Important game characteristics identified by the children included the following: (1) storyline or context; (2) challenge; and (3) competitive affordances, especially those that promoted social interaction. Interestingly, two game characteristics touted in the literature were not found to be important to these children: (1) integration of a game’s storyline and educational content; and (2) a game’s production values.. Chapter LXXII Video-Game Creation as a Learning Experience for Teachers and Students.................................... 1257 Leanna Madill, University of Victoria, Canada Kathy Sanford, University of Victoria, Canada This chapter explores changing conceptions of learning brought about by technological changes and opportunities and examines more closely the understanding of video game creation as a learning experience. Based on the first year of a three-year ethnographic research study of the educative value and potential of video games within a school setting, this chapter examines the powerful learning and teaching practices in classes of information technology and programming in which video game creation has been used as entry points into learning programming skills.

Section VIII The Future of Educational Gaming Chapter LXXIII The Future of Digital Game-Based Learning ................................................................................... 1274 Brian Magerko, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA This chapter discusses the potential future of games for learning through the lens of current advantages of real-world education that are thus far lacking in educational games. It focuses on four main facets of the real-world educational experience: adapting content to an individual student, the rigorous evaluation of educational media, the ease of modification of educational games, and the application of games to new domains and teaching techniques. The chapter then suggests how we as designers and developers can make strides towards incorporating these lacking elements into how we build and use educational games. The author hopes that this discussion can be used to foster discussion about where the field could be and should be going in the near future. Chapter LXXIV Artists in the Medium ....................................................................................................................... 1289 Kurt Squire, University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA This chapter discusses emerging trends in games and learning. It argues for an approach that examines games as a new medium. With the increased attention being given to games, critiques about the instructional efficacy of games will emerge, and that educators must truly take advantage of the unique capacities of the medium, as well as keep in mind the new forms of learning supported by games. It continues to outline key trends, such as emerging game genres, new forms of productive play, and embedded game assessments. By targeting what kinds of design advances occur in contemporary entertainment games, perhaps games can be designed that will become integrated into educational systems. Chapter LXXV The Positive Impact Model in Commercial Games........................................................................... 1303 Rusel DeMaria, DeMaria Studio, USA What is the future of video games? Is it more realism? More violence? Better physics? Artificially intelligent characters? More social networking games? Free to play and advertising supported? Games for non-gamers? More controversy, political scapegoating, and legal challenges? It’s probably all of the these, and more. In fact, while we may expect to see more of the same from the commercial video game industry, there is always the potential for surprises, both pleasant and not-so pleasant. One area of the future of games is less often discussed, but represents one of the most powerful and positive directions the industry could take. The author calls it the “positive impact model,” and uses this chapter to discuss what that phrase is meant to convey. Chapter LXXVI Education and Exploitation Off the Virtual Train to Oregon............................................................. 1318 Chad M. Harms, Iowa State University, USA

By retracing the tracks of the popular educational game, the Oregon Trail, this chapter presents both positive and negative realities of the incorporation of computer-based education that will necessitate students venturing away from safe closed systems to access information in the open frontier of the Internet. Information presentation is increasingly multimodal. The fidelity of that information is not always clear. Access to information, though often assumed, is not always available. Individuals’ selectivity to the variety of information can influence how it is internalized. Exposure to violent and sexual content can result in desensitization. Bias opens opportunity for fragmentation. And our connections to others, though overwhelmingly positive, also make us vulnerable to aggression and exploitation. Certain research and news stories presented here detail the most disturbing acts of humankind; those that children must be safeguarded against. Section IX Appendix: Glossary of Terms Appendix A An Overview of Gaming Terminology: Chapters I-LXXVI.............................................................. 1333 Clark Aldrich, SimuLearn, USA Joseph C. DiPietro, University of Florida, USA This appendix introduces and defines commonly used terms and phrases from the world of video gaming. It seeks to bridge the gaps between researchers, gamers, and educators so that a more thoughtful and productive conversation may be had. The authors hope that this appendix adds to the understanding of and appreciation for both consumer-based and educational video games, furthers academic research within this field, and serves as a valuable tool for anyone interested in learning more about video games and related terminology. Fifty-two entries are discussed within this appendix serving as a solid, yet not all-encompassing, foundation for future inquiry and discussion. Section X Appendix: Selected Readings Appendix B, Selected Readings Games and Simulations: A New Approach in Education?................................................................ 1354 Göknur Kaplan Akilli, Pennsylvania State University, USA Computer games and simulations are considered powerful tools for learning with an untapped potential for formal educational use. However, the lack of available well-designed research studies about their integration into teaching and learning leaves unanswered questions, despite their more than 30 years of existence in the instructional design movement. Beginning with these issues, this chapter aims to shed light on the definition of games and simulations, their educational use, and some of their effects on learning. Criticisms and new trends in the field of instructional design/development in relation to educational use of games and simulations are briefly reviewed. The chapter intends to provide a brief theoretical framework and a fresh starting point for practitioners in the field who are interested in educational use of games and simulations and their integration into learning environments.

Appendix C, Selected Readings Developing Enjoyable Second Language Learning Software Tools: A Computer Game Paradigm.................................................................................................................................. 1372 Chee Siang Ang, City University, UK Panayiotis Zaphiris, City University, UK This chapter attempts to examine computer game theories—ludology and narratology—that explain computer games as play activities and storytelling media. Founded on this theoretical explanation, a game model that incorporates gameplay and narratives is presented. From the model, two aspects of learning in the game environment are identified: gameplay-oriented and narrative-oriented. It is believed that playing computer games involves at least one of these types of learning; thus, this game’s nature can be used in designing engaging educational software. In addition, based on Malone’s theoretical framework on motivational heuristics, there are two methods of applying computer games in language learning: extrinsic and intrinsic, depending on the integration of game designs and learning materials. Then, two cases of language-learning games are scrutinized, using the game model, in order to demonstrate the use of computer games in language learning. Appendix D, Selected Readings Game Mods: Customizable Learning in a K16 Setting..................................................................... 1390 Elizabeth Fanning, The University of Virginia, USA A game mod describes a modification within an existing commercial, computer-based game that has been created by a user. By game modding, a user can participate in the creative process by taking the setting of their favorite game and customizing it for entertainment purposes or to convey information. For years, commercial computer-based game developers committed considerable resources towards preventing users from “hacking” into or “hijacking” their games. Now several computer-based game developers provide editors with their products to encourage users to create content, and to allow educators, for instance, to take advantage of the benefits and production quality of commercial computer games to create customized instruction. This chapter focuses on mainstream, accessible games with straightforward modding tools that can be easily integrated into a learning environment. Appendix E, Selected Readings Online Games for 21st Century Skills................................................................................................. 1400 Lisa Galarneau, University of Waikato, New Zealand Melanie Zibit, Boston College, USA 20th century visionaries foresaw that mastery of the dynamic processes underpinning the acquisition and manipulation of knowledge would be critical in the 21st century. Formal educational systems have not changed to facilitate the development of these necessary capabilities, and so people of all ages are developing them through a variety of digitally mediated mechanisms. Online games offer one area in which to examine patterns of spontaneously occurring phenomena that represent the natural development of such capabilities. This chapter reviews the character of, and need for, 21st century skills. It also illuminates existing digital domains in which these skills develop organically. Peering through the window of the present into the future, we see that envisioning change in education means taking a long look at what activity produces those skills, regardless of whether that activity is taking place in a formal setting or within entertainment-based worlds where the skills are learned incidentally through play.

Appendix F, Selected Readings Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom.............................................................................. 1427 Nancy Sardone, Seton Hall University, USA Roberta Devlin-Scherer, Seton Hall University, USA Joseph Martinelli, Seton Hall University, USA The last 20 years have brought in increase of computers into educational and home environments, generating an explosion of available educational software products. As a result, students bring a wealth of technology experiences to the college classroom. The use of games as an instructional strategy in the higher education setting is fairly new. This chapter examines the effects of game-based instruction on learning outcomes of college students studying basic computer concepts. With the growing trend toward the use of games to support learning, research is needed to examine learning outcomes. Perhaps faculty will be willing to move to more empirically tested game-based learning strategies, even though initial curriculum development time may be increased. Appendix G, Selected Readings Creative Remixing and Digital Learning: Developing an Online Media Literacy Learning Tool for Girls...................................................................................................................... 1440 Renee Hobbs, Temple University, USA Jonelle Rowe, Department of Health and Human Services, USA This chapter explores how media literacy education may continue to be responsive and relevant to the continually changing nature of popular culture through the development of innovative online multimedia educational programs. Because pre-adolescent and adolescent girls are actively involved in the consumption of popular music, competitive performance television programs like American Idol as well as online social networks, it is important to examine the constructed nature of these new types of messages and experiences. My Pop Studio (www.mypopstudio.com), a creative play experience for girls ages 9 to 14, was developed by the authors to address the need for media literacy skills among this group. We present a model for assessing the impact of the program on learning that incorporates the dimensions of pleasure, a sense of mastery, participation in the online community, media literacy skills, and other outcomes. Online games that use creative remixing techniques may promote metacognition, reflection, and critical analysis skills. Girls need opportunities to strengthen critical thinking skills about mass media and popular culture and the use of online learning environments may support the development of adolescents’ media literacy skills. Appendix H, Selected Readings Learning While Playing: Design Implications for Edutainment Games.......................................... 1449 Kalle Jegers, Umeå University, Sweden Carlotte Wiberg, Umeå University, Sweden This chapter reports on the initial results of a study conducted in the project FunTain. The main purpose was to identify general guidelines/implications for edutainment games, in order to guide designers of such games as they often lack in design guidelines. Usability evaluations were conducted on an edutainment game in order to find usability problems. These findings were analyzed and used as input in focus group meetings, held with joint teams of game designers and HCI experts. The outcome of the focus groups was a proposal of a list of ten general design guidelines. Findings indicate that users had problems in

understanding the underlying model for the game as well as identifying the knowledge related content. Experts, further, gave comments about feedback problems and different types of consistencies. Some of the implications from the findings are guidelines for earning and losing points, scoring and performance feedback and game object characteristics. Appendix I, Selected Readings Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”: Designing Augmented Reality Games to Teach the Critical Thinking of History ............................................................................. 1460 Karen Schrier, MIT, USA Students need to learn the critical thinking of history, yet they rarely have the opportunities to authentically simulate historic inquiry. Research has suggested the pedagogical potential for using augmented reality (AR) games—location-based games that use wireless handheld devices such as PDAs to provide virtual game information in a physical environment. The novel AR game, Reliving the Revolution (RtR), was created as a model for studying how AR games can engage students in interpretive, collaborative, and problem-solving activities. In this chapter, the game is introduce, and main results of the initial iterative tests are discussed, including what went wrong and how the game was redesigned to better support deeper engagement and historical thinking and learning. Appendix J, Selected Readings Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games . ............................................ 1477 Katia Sycara, Carnegie Mellon University, USA Paul Scerri, Carnegie Mellon University, USA Anton Chechetka, Carnegie Mellon University, USA This chapter explores the use of evolutionary game theory (EGT) to model the dynamics of adaptive opponent strategies for a large population of players. In particular, it explores effects of information propagation through social networks in evolutionary games. The key underlying phenomenon that the information diffusion aims to capture is that reasoning about the experiences of acquaintances can dramatically impact the dynamics of a society. Experimental results from agent-based simulations are presented that show the impact of diffusion through social networks on the player strategies of an evolutionary game and the sensitivity of the dynamics to features of the social network.

xlvii

Foreword

Considering all the different media (including books, photographs, audio recordings, film, and video) that have been used in education, it seems strange to think that there would be any resistance to using video games as an educational tool. Those who object that video games are only for play or for fun seem to presume that learning cannot be playful or fun. Or that video games cannot be mentally taxing; some games are now complicated enough to have learning curves steep enough to require a good amount of effort to learn. Other games contain puzzles and problem-solving more difficult than any school-based lesson is likely to be. In any event, the video game (which itself can contain text, audio, and video within it) is extremely well-suited for educational purposes, as the Handbook of Research on Effective Electronic Gaming in Education demonstrates. There have been other books on the subject, to be sure, but not to this extent, covering so many topics and angles, and with such a variety of views and approaches to the subject. While asking how video games can be used in education, we might also ask in what ways are teaching and learning game-like? One shared aspect of teaching and learning and video games is interaction (an advantage video games have over older media). But there are many other shared concepts: animation, simulation, speculation, repetition, variation, imitation, emulation, and integration. Video games can animate, or bring to life, subjects the way a good teacher can, making them engaging in a very literal way. Simulation put theory into action, and lets players try out a system to see how it works, and perhaps as importantly, how it does not work. Through trial and error, players use repetition, variation, and even speculation to figure out how to work with a system, whether they are running a simulated city or world civilization, or trying to make their lemonade stand more profitable. They may learn by imitation and emulation, and be forced to integrate their knowledge into larger schemata. Scoring is also present in both video games and academia, and it is interesting to note the difference in attitude the same student may have toward attaining high scores in each of them. Naturally, some educators will still want to wait until research supports the use of video games in education. And that’s another way this book is a valuable addition to the education field as well as that of video game studies. The breadth of topics and range of applications discussed should quell the qualms of the most wary educator, dispelling any doubts as to the value of video games as an educational tool, and even as a tool for researchers. With education in mind as the goal, designers of educational video games will inevitably break new ground in both education and game design, as their potential is explored. The medium of the video game is still a young medium, and even now we have yet to see all it can do. Computers have certainly spread into areas that people 40 years ago would never have expected them to go; and wherever computers go, video games can follow. And this book attempts to map out some of those possibilities. As the importance of education and the popularity of video games continue to grow, this book only increases in relevance. As more of the world moves online, and new worlds appear online, and computer-

xlviii

driven screens mediate so much of what we do, it is imperative that we reach a better understanding of the effects of these technologies, and then use that knowledge to consciously aim them toward good and useful ends. While it may sound somewhat grandiose stated in this fashion, what we think of as video games is to some degree quickly becoming the model for all mediated interactivity, and the research appearing in this book may well have even a broader application than what we can envision today. Future researchers, educators, and game designers will be able to make use of, and build upon, what is presented here. The firmer the foundation, the higher you can build upon it; and this book provides us with a very firm foundation indeed.

Mark J. P. Wolf Concordia University Wisconsin, USA May 2008

xlix

Preface

IntroductIon It was late in the evening one November night in 1995. I was in Kraków, Poland, on a teaching assignment. My responsibilities also included setting up and maintaining their computer lab. So, naturally, I had recruited a group of students, teachers, and friends to come to the lab for an all-night Duke Nukem and Doom festival. Fast forward a few years. This time I was in a computer lab in East Lansing, Michigan, engaged in multi-player Outlaws. The time is now present, just a few weeks ago, and I am sitting at home playing Star Wars Legos with a friend on the Xbox 360. Although all three situations were unique, I had an eerily familiar conversation with a colleague after each session. Why do you waste your time playing computer games? If you ask me, it’s brain rot. There is nothing much good that can come out of such activities. The reason we have violence in the schools is because of kids playing games like that. For those of us interested in electronic gaming, we have probably been presented with that mindset our entire lives. However, there has been a foundation of research building recently that has suggested that gaming might not be so bad after all. Kafai (1998) began writing about children designing games. Gee (2003) wrote about games in relation to literacy and language learning. Squire (2006) published in ER about games as designed experiences. Schaffer (2007) and others began publishing books on how kids learn with video games. And Rosser, Lynch, Cuddihy et al. (2007) promoted the idea that video games could make better surgeons. Educators began paying attention to the idea that electronic games could be useful for teaching and learning. Conferences, public forum and initiatives (e.g., Serious Games), journals, and even open source game development tools began surfacing. A Pew Internet Study found that 70% of college students play video, computer, or online games (http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=93). MMOGChart (http://mmorpgchart.com/) reports over 12,000,000 active subscribers to massive-multi-player online role-playing games (MMORPG). The resulting notion is that if electronic gaming is becoming a natural and ubiquitous part of everyday life, can we and shouldn’t we investigate how it is and could be used for learning and teaching? The simple answer is yes; simple answers, however, lead into very complex questions. Although there are a handful of very good books and research articles on the subject (some aforementioned), we do not yet have a strong research foundation on the affordances or constraints of educational gaming. At the core of the matter, that is the purpose of this handbook. The first goal was to publish a collection of articles that would strengthen and build the foundation of research that exists on educational gaming.

l

the need for a Stronger reSearch foundatIon I believe there are a number of reasons why such a handbook is only now emerging and why educational gaming lacks a strong research foundation. First, educational gaming is relatively new. When I told a retired academic about the research being completed in our gaming lab, he remarked: “you should review the work we did on that same subject 30 or 40 years ago.” Understandably gaming has been around for a very long time; it has quite an established history within educational discourse. More research needs to be done that examine the relationship between what we know about non-electronic and electronic educational gaming. However, the fact of the matter is that research is lacking because we are a relatively young field. Not only is electronic gaming different than non-electronic gaming, but electronic gaming itself has advanced tremendously since the creation of Pong. My guess is that in five years, a revised version of this handbook would be filled with even more empirical research. A second reason I believe educational gaming research lacks a stronger research foundation is because educational research is an arduous undertaking. Randomized, control-experimental grouping is difficult if not unethical in certain educational situations. And, educational gaming research does not make the research equation any easier. It is very difficult to monitor everything that is going on while a person is playing a game. Educational gaming research will require new methods, methodologies, and instruments to measure learning and teaching with gaming. We will get there; we just are not fully there yet. A third, and by no means final, reason I believe educational gaming research is only in its infancy is because of its interdisciplinary nature. If you took a single university, you could probably imagine multiple departments where gaming might reside. Computer science, education, journalism, English, psychology, literature, anthropology, sociology, communication, advertising, and health are just some of the many disciplines represented in this handbook. One does not necessarily need to become an expert in all of these areas in order to understand educational gaming. However, it is clear that experts from many fields are working on various parts of the same animal. There is an old story of a group of blind men who go and visit an elephant. Each touches a different part of the elephant to find out what it is like. Each leaves with a different perspective, thinking the elephant is a tree trunk, a snake, a spear, etc. Wikipedia has a short history of the tale and its debated origins (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Men_and_an_Elephant). There are many morals to the story; one is that none alone would be able to fully describe an elephant. Only by working together could the group begin to get a more complete picture of an elephant. The story of the elephant reminds us that this research effort will be strengthened by the degree to which we are able to interact with others. It is true that computer scientists have different interests in gaming for teaching and learning than media literacy researchers; cognitive psychologists may have a different approach than journalists. However, a continuous, cross-disciplinary conversation will provide shoulders by which to stand on, footing to further our research, practice, and policy efforts. In order to promote continued cross-discipline conversation, the call for proposals for this book defined education very broadly. Education does refer to content area learning in K-12 education. It also refers to post-secondary education. However, education also means learning and teaching writ large. Police-training, foreign language education, health education, learning violence and addiction through gaming, game design, and developing an identity can all be found in the pages of this handbook. The purpose was not to try to encapsulate everything related to gaming; the second goal of this book was to help readers see the connections between multiple disciplines and fields of study interested in gaming.

li

The Organization of This Book The chapters in this book have been divided into eight key areas. A Review of Research on Educational Gaming. This first section of the book includes chapters that have attempted to provide an overview or synthesis on gaming for learning and teaching. This includes meta-analyses as well as explorations into specific types and delivery mechanisms. 2. Educational Gaming in K-12 or Teacher Education Contexts. This section of the book focuses on chapters that are directly related to teaching and learning K-12 subject matter. It also includes chapters that are focused on in-service or pre-service teacher education. 3. Educational Gaming in Other Learning Contexts. Chapters in this section also focus on content area learning, but in non-K-12 or non-teacher education areas. Those areas include other post-secondary subjects, business and training with games, and health and human performance. 4. Educational Gaming Research Tools and Methods. Chapters in this section of the book focus on research studies or syntheses that provide discussion and direction related to the methods, methodologies, and tools used to study gaming in multiple contexts. 5. The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 1): Cognition, Learning, Play, and Identity. Chapters in this section of the book focus on the psychological studies of gaming and game use. This first of two sections on psychological aspects focuses directly on concepts like cognition, learning, play, and identity. 6. The Psychological Impact of Educational Gaming (Part 2): Violence, Emotion, Race, Gender, and Culture. Chapters in this section of the book focus on the psychological studies of gaming and game use. This second of two sections on psychological aspects focuses on issues like violence, emotion, race, gender, and culture. 7. Educational Game Design. Chapters in this largest section of the book focus on game design. Authors in this section describe research studies and theoretical inquiries into the most productive ways to design gaming or environments for successful gaming. 8. The Future of Educational Gaming. In this final section of the book, I invited four authors to directly address the question of “what’s next?” This section of the book contains insight into what might be the short-term and long-term future of educational gaming. 9. Appendix A: Glossary of Terms. Each of the chapters in this book contains 7-10 key terms that have been defined by the authors of that chapter. Those key terms help readers with new concepts or to understand how the author(s) operationally defined terms key to their research. This first appendix focuses on gaming terminology. Many of these terms have also been operationally defined throughout this book. This glossary is not meant to be all encompassing, but rather to provide a start to the shared conversation about the jargon used in educational gaming research, policy, and practice. 10. Appendix B: Selected Readings. Many handbooks of research contain a section with additional chapters related to seminal readings in the field. It is obviously difficult to provide such a section for this handbook due to the relative recency of the work in Electronic Educational Gaming. However, this section contains readings of work in electronic gaming that have been published within the last few years. The purpose in including these chapters is to document part of our autobiographical past; it is to help readers see where we have come within the last few years of research in the field. 1.

lii

Each of the chapters in this book contains 7-10 key terms that have been defined by the authors of that chapter. Those key terms help readers with new concepts or to understand how the author(s) operationally defined terms key to their research. The book concludes with an appendix of terminology. Many of these terms have also been operationally defined throughout this book. This final glossary is not meant to be all encompassing, but rather to provide a start to the shared conversation about the jargon used in educational gaming research, policy, and practice.

concluSIon Educational gaming research continues to be funded nationally and internationally. In addition to the interdisciplinary nature of this handbook, perhaps its strongest attribute is its international representation by reviewers and authors. Researchers who are doing work in this area will be intrigued and enlightened by the international and interdisciplinary nature of the collection. Students new to educational gaming will find research shoulders to stand on as well as questions to guide their future work. Teachers and practitioners will learn how the research can impact their classroom practice, regardless of whether classroom means K-12 or a corporate setting. Finally, policymakers and funding agencies will be able to learn more about how to help move educational gaming to the next level. Respectfully, Richard Eugene Ferdig University of Florida, USA May 2008

referenceS Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave/ St. Martin’s. Kafai, Y. (1998). Video game designs by children: Consistency and variability of gender differences. In J. Cassell & H. Jenkins (Eds.), From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and computer games. Boston, MA: MIT Press. Rosser, J. C., Lynch, P. J., Cuddihy, L., et al. (2007) The impact of video games on training surgeons in the 21st century. Archives of Surgery, 142, 181-186. Shaffer, D. W. (2007). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave. Squire, K. D. (2006). From content to context: Videogames as designed experiences. Educational Researcher, 35(8), 19-29.

liii

About the Editor

Richard E. Ferdig, PhD, is an associate professor of educational technology at the University of Florida’s College of Education. His research interests focus on educational gaming, the uses of innovative media for teaching and learning, virtual and online education, and what he calls a “deeper psychology of technology.” He graduated from Calvin College with a BA in psychology and from Michigan State University with an MA in educational psychology. He received his PhD from Michigan State University in educational psychology. At UF, he co-directs the face-to-face and online graduate programs in educational technology. He is also a University of Florida Research Foundation professor.

liv

Acknowledgment

As true academia consists of standing on the shoulders of giants, it becomes very difficult to thank all of the friends, family, and colleagues who made this work possible. Like some television award winner, I fear mentioning names means I will inevitably leave someone off by mistake. I do need to particularly mention four groups of people. First, the idea for this work originated in conversations with my University of Florida graduate students who were interested in gaming. What started as a gaming class led to a gaming lab, research articles, a special issue of a journal, and then this proposal. You will continue to see their work for years to come. Second, I ran a very tight ship. I want to thank the authors for their willingness to abide by my very strict requirements and deadlines. Third, there is no way one person can accomplish this task alone. I have edited for many journals, and I am convinced this was one of the strongest peer review processes I have ever seen. The reviewers (listed next) and editorial board members put time, effort, and energy into providing critiques and insight. In the end, the strength of this book is due, in large part, to their efforts. Finally, I want to thank the staff at IGI Global for taking on this project. I owe special thanks to Kristin Roth who was at my side throughout the duration of this project. E-mails and phone calls kept the ship cruising in the right direction; she was great at putting out fires along the way and providing emotional and spiritual encouragement to keep paddling. In closing, I wish to thank my family for their support of my professional efforts, allowing me to give up personal time to complete this task. Once again I am reminded of Philippians 4:11-13. Richard E. Ferdig University of Florida, USA

lv

Reviewer Acknowledgment

This book would not have been possible without the careful and thoughtful critiques of the following reviewers. Their timely and critical work has made this a much stronger book. I thank them wholeheartedly. Adcock, Amy, Old Dominion University, USA Arlien, Karen, Bismarck State College, USA Asgari, Mahboubeh, Simon Fraser University, Canada Baek, Youngkyun, Korea National University of Education, Korea Barbour, Michael K., Wayne State University, USA Beal, James W., Somonauk CUSD, USA Beck, Dennis, University of Florida, USA Becker, Katrin, University of Calgary, Canada Beemt, Antoine van den, Fontys University of Applied Sciences, The Netherlands Biddix, J. Patrick, Valdosta State University, USA BinSubaih, Ahmed, University of Sheffield, England Black, Erik, University of Florida, USA Bopp, Matthias, University of Bremen, Germany Bowers, Clint, University of Central Florida, USA Boyer, Jeff, University of Florida, USA Breiter, Andreas, Institute for Information Management, University of Bremen, Germany Bunce, Steve, Northumberland County Council, England Buraphadeja, Vasa, University of Florida, USA Busch, John, Queens University Belfast, Ireland Cantamesse, Matteo, Università Cattolica di Milano, Italy Carbonara, David, Duquesne University, USA Cavanaugh, Cathy, University of Florida, USA Champion, Erik, University of New South Wales, Australia Chee, Yam San, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Chu, Sauman, University of Minnesota, USA Chung, Yin-Wah, Nanyang Polytechnic, Singapore Cole, Richard, Michigan State University, USA Columbus, Yolanda Debose, Texas A&M University, USA Coutts, Jade, University of Florida, USA Craig, Johanna Bromberg, University of Virginia, USA Crawford, Caroline, University of Houston-Clear Lake, USA Crawford, Christine, University of North Dakota, USA Cromack, Jamie, Microsoft Research, USA Curry, Sabrina, Lifestyle Family Fitness, USA Davenport, Rick, University of Central Florida, USA Dawson, Kara, University of Florida, USA de Beer, Jeremy, Consultant, Cape Town, South Africa

lvi

de Byl, Penny, University of Southern Queensland, Australia de Chiara, Rosario, Università degli Studi di Salerno, Italy DeFrias, Kara, Instructional Design Consultant, USA DiPietro, Meredith, University of Florida, USA Dubbels, Brock, University of Minnesota, USA Edgerton, Erin M., CDC/CCHIS/NCHM, USA Evans, Michael A., Virginia Tech, USA Evans, Mark, University of Georgia, USA Ferry, Brian, University of Wollongong, Australia Foko, Thato, The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, South Africa Foster, Aroutis, Michigan State University, USA Francis, John, Independent Consultant, USA Friedman, Adam, Wake Forest University, USA Gazit, Elhanan, Holon Institute of Technology, Israel Goettel, Timo, University of Hamburg, Germany Gonzalez, Sebastian, Wanako Games, Chile Graves, Ingrid, Indiana University, USA Hagle, John, Texas State Technical College, USA Hatfield, David, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA Heeter, Carrie, Michigan State University, USA Houssian, Aaron, Indiana University School of Informatics, USA Hudspeth, DeLayne, University of Texas-Austin, USA Inal, Yavuz, Middle East Technical University, Turkey James, Christopher, Russellville City Schools, USA Johnson, Tristan, Florida State University, USA Jones, Robert, New York University, USA Ke, Fengfeng, University of New Mexico, USA Kolo, Castulus, Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Germany Lai, Feng-Qi, Indiana State University, USA Lai, Guolin, Georgia State University, USA Leonard, David, Washington State University, USA Lok, Benjamin C., University of Florida, USA Ma, Yuxin, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Mackenzie, Euan, 3MRT Limited, Scotland Madill, Leanna, University of Victoria, British Columbia Canada Maltempi, Marcus Vinicius, State University of Sao Paulo at Rio Claro, Brazil Mehta, Ruchi, University at Albany, State University of New York, USA Memarzia, Kam, PlayGen, England Mulkey, Kim, Independent Consultant, USA Nash, Padraig, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA Nordlinger, John, Microsoft Research, USA Nunaley, Mary, Volunteer State Community College, USA Nyburg, Adrienne, University of North Dakota, USA Oliver, Martin, Institute of Education, University of London, England Parisi, David P., New York University, USA Parker, JR, University of Calgary, Canada Payne, Denise, University of Florida, USA Peng, Wei, Michigan State University, USA Phelps, Cynthia L., The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, USA Pulman, Andy, Bournemouth University, England Qian, Yufeng, St. Thomas University, USA Randall, Pauline, Elmwood College, Scotland Richmond, Paul, University of Sheffield, England Romano. Daniela M., University of Sheffield, England

lvii

Routledge, Helen, Independent Consultant, Scotland Ruffino, Paolo, University of Bologna, Italy Ruschin, Leonardo, Educational/Media Consultant, Germany Sanford, Kathy, University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada Schrader, PG, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA Sessums, Christopher, University of Florida, USA Srinivasan, Vinod, Texas A&M University, USA Svarovsky, Gina Navoa, University of Wisconsin, USA Taylor, Laurie, University of Florida, USA Terry, Krista P., Radford University, USA Thomas, Deborah, SillyMonkey LLC, USA Traquair, Lilian, Red Deer Catholic Regional Division in Alberta, Canada Van Eck, Richard, University of North Dakota, USA van Ryneveld, Linda, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa Waelchli, Paul, University of Dubuque, USA Warren, Scott, University of North Texas, USA Wazdatskey, Philip, Fielding Graduate University, USA Williams, Douglas, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, USA Winn, Brian, Michigan State University, USA Yildirim, Zahide, Middle East Technical University, Turkey Ziaeehezarjeribi, Yadi, Indiana University, USA

Section I

A Review of Research on Educational Gaming

Chapters in this section of the book focus broadly on a review of the research related to educational gaming. Ke describes a qualitative meta-analysis of computer games as learning tools. Foster & Mishra also address the claim of games; they develop a categorization scheme as a framework for understanding and conducting research. de Freitas and Griffiths explore whether MMORPGs can be used to support learning. Finally, Qian investigates the current state of educational games on the Internet for K-12 learners. This section of the book also addresses research on gaming within specific and unique contexts. For instance, Cavanaugh addresses augmented reality gaming. Evans explores mobile gaming in his chapter. Parisi looks at gaming interfaces and the body. Gazit looks at gaming and home contexts while Oliverio and Beck address gaming and interaction in mixed social environments. Finally, Breiter and Kolo look at gaming adoption as innovation for Germany. The purpose of this section is to provide readers with an overview and synthesis of research on educational gaming (with varied methods of design and delivery).



Chapter I

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools Fengfeng Ke University of New Mexico, USA

AbstrAct Drawing on grounded theory approach and a qualitative meta-analysis, this chapter intends to systematically review and synthesize the theories, methods, and findings of both qualitative and quantitative inquiries on computer-based instructional games. A major purpose of this literature review and meta-analysis is to inform policy and practice based on existing studies. Four major recurring themes concerning the effectiveness of computer-based instructional games have emerged from a comparative analysis with 89 instructional gaming studies and are discussed with the support of exemplar research. The chapter will assist practitioners and policymakers in understanding the “best practices” and key factors of a computer game-based learning program.

INtrODUctION Recently computer games have been anticipated as a potential learning tool with great motivational appeal and represent an interesting development in the field of education. The literature surrounding computer games and education is vast. For more than two decades, educationalists (e.g., Betz, 1996; Gee, 2003; Gredler, 1996; Kafai, 1995; Malone, 1981; Prensky, 2001; Rieber, 1996; Squire, 2003) have been investigating the potential that exists for the application of computer games to learning.

Given the broad nature of computer games, a substantial question exists as to what basic insights the literature provides on the design and application of computer-based games for learning. As a recent search shows, there are currently more than 600 research/report articles within the category of computer games in the literature. These articles fall into generalized categories with a great deal of variance within the categories. These categories include theoretical speculation (e.g., Garris, Ahlers, & Driskell, 2002; Gee, 2003), experimental or descriptive clinical study (e.g.,

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Ke, 2007; Barab, Sadler, Heiselt, Hickey, & Zuiker, 2007; Squire, 2003), and review of existing research (e.g., Dempsey, Rasmussen, & Lucassen, 1996; Randel, Morris, Wetzel, & Whitehill, 1992). Even within the same general category, games studies vary in theoretical framework, research purpose, methodology of data collection and analysis, and game genre adopted. Further, the findings of these games studies are conflicting (Dempsey et al., 1996; Emes, 1997; Randel et al., 1992). Given this multi-vocal data pool, a systematic review with rigorous qualitative meta-analysis is warranted to generate a clearer profile of computer games. The review should indicate what meta conjectures or recurring themes we can form from the huge quantity of often disassociated studies on the learning effectiveness of computer games. It should also illustrate what are the best models or best practices of designing and applying computer games for education. This proposed chapter is an attempt to systematically review and synthesize the literature on the subject of computer-based instructional games. Specifically, the chapter addresses the following questions: (1) What is the cumulative qualitative and quantitative evidence for using computer games for learning, and (2) What are the factors, if any, that weigh in an effective application of instructional gaming?

bAcKGrOUND Definition of Terms Computer Game Scholars (Dempsey et al., 1996; Malone, 1981) defined a game as “usually a contest of physical or mental skills and strengths, requiring the participant(s) to follow a specific set of rules in order to attain a goal” (Hogle, 1996, p. 5). More specifically, Prensky (2001) defined a game as



organized play including six key structural elements: rules, goals and objectives, outcomes and feedback, conflict/competition/challenge/opposition, interaction, and representation or story. There is a wide category of games under Prensky’s game conceptualization. For the purpose of this research, a computer game is: • • •

Operated on a variety of personal computer platforms Developed for formal learning or adapted for informal learning Comprising rules, goals and objectives, outcomes and feedback, conflict/competition/challenge/opposition, interaction, and representation or story (Prensky, 2001)

In addition, a game is defined as being separate from a simulation in that a game involves competition. According to Dempsey et al. (1996), a competitive format does not necessarily require two or more participants. If a simulation enables a learner to compete against him or herself by comparing scores over successive attempts at the simulation, or has a game structure imposed on the system, it is regarded as a game mode. If the focus of a simulation involves the completion of an event only, the simulation will not be considered a game. Multiple categories of computer games have been identified in this review, including but not limited to adventure games, simulation games, board games, puzzle games, business simulation games, action games, and strategy games.

Learning In this study, learning is conceptualized as a multidimensional construct comprising all three components: “skill, metaskill, and will,” or in other terms, cognitive learning achievement, metacognition, and motivation (Mayer, 1998, p. 51). Gagne (1985) defined cognitive learning achievements as comprising declarative, proce-

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

dural, and strategic knowledge. Metacognition in this study refers to knowledge or awareness of cognitive processes and the ability to use self-regulatory mechanisms to control these processes (Eggen & Kauchak, 1997). This study adopts an expectancy-value model of motivation. Specifically, the model proposes that there are three motivational components: (a) an expectancy (or perceived competence) component, which includes students’ beliefs about their ability to accomplish certain tasks; (b) a value component, which includes students’ goals and beliefs about the importance and interest of the task; and (c) an affective component, which includes students’ emotional reactions to the task (Pintrich & De Groot, 1990, p. 33).

Computer Games for Learning Theoretical Perspectives on Computer Games for Learning Several theoretical perspectives, such as Piaget’s Theory of Intellectual Development, Situated Learning, and Information Processing Theory, may underlie the surging interest in deploying computer games for learning. Piaget (1951) considered play and imitation as two crucial functions in a child’s intellectual development process: play as an assimilation strategy and imitation as an accommodation strategy. Extensive research on play with children and adults in anthropology, psychology, and education indicates that play is an important mediator for learning and socialization throughout life (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Provost, 1990). Given the natural role that play and simulation serve to intellectual development, computer games as a vehicle for both play and simulation are not just a diversion to children, but an integral part of their learning and social lives. Researchers have stressed the importance of anchoring or “situating” learning in authentic situations (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Choi & Hannafin, 1995; Cognition and Technology

Group at Vanderbilt, 1990). One benefit is making learners become engaged by the material, thus invoking a state of “mindfulness” in which learners employ effortful and metacognitively guided processes (Salomon, Perkins, & Globerson, 1991). Learning in a mindful way results in knowledge that is considered meaningful and useful, as compared to the inert knowledge that results from decontextualized learning strategies (such as traditional classroom worksheets). With simulated visualization, authentic problem solving, and instant feedback, computer games afford a realistic framework for experimentation and situated understanding, hence can act as rich primers for active learning (Laurel, 1991; Gee, 2003). Information processing theory (Miller, 1956), along with aspects of dual coding theory (Clark & Paivio, 1991) and cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988), also sheds light on computer games’ potential to facilitate learning. Information processing theory states that novel information must be processed in working memory in order to construct schemata in long-term memory. Multi-sensory information representation in a computer game will facilitate schema construction by offering a learner a “ready-made” explicit representation of the complicated concept, providing just the type of external support that would be required for the construction of a internal mental model. This external support, as stated by Gredler (1996, p. 597), “reduces the cognitive load and allows students to use their precious working memory for higher-order tasks.” Furthermore, the multisensory representation in computer games also helps the schema indexed in memory in multiple formats, thus making the schema accessible in more than one way.

Findings of Previous Gaming Reviews/ Meta-Analysis A discussion of previous gaming reviews offers an overview of the literature. It also highlights



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

the limitations of previous reviews and illuminates how this current review will expand the previous research using a grounded meta-analysis method. According to Garris et al. (2002), the following are tangible reasons for using computer games for learning purposes: • •

Computer games can invoke an intensity of engagement in learners. There are empirical studies in the literature showing that computer-based instructional games have a wide spectrum of utility for learning (Dempsey et al., 1996; Randel et al., 1992). The learning outcomes measured include attitudes, cognitive strategies, problem solving, rules, and corporate concepts. Computer games have been applied in diverse environments from school education to training in military, healthcare, and management.

Six recent literature reviews (Dempsey et al., 1996; Emes, 1997; Hays, 2005; Randel et al., 1992; Vogel et al., 2006b; Wolfe, 1996b) were identified as being undertaken in areas associated with the use of computer games for learning purpose. The following section summarizes the results of these review articles. Other review reports (e.g., VanSickle, 1986; Hogel, 1996; Leemkuil, de Jong, & Ootes, 2000) have not been summarized but used to locate original computer game articles. Recently, Vogel et al. (2006b) conducted a quantitative meta-analysis with 32 studies on computer games and interactive simulation. They reported strong, positive effect sizes of interactive simulations and games vs. traditional teaching methods for both cognitive gains and attitude. Their analysis also indicated that the effects of games and interactive simulations sustained across people (in terms of gender and age) and situations (in terms of learner control, level of realism, and individual/group usage). However, Vogel et al. (2006b) noted that the effect size analysis of



computer games, different from that of interactive simulations, yielded a low reliability and hence should be considered with caution. Randel et al.’s (1992) review on video games, examining 68 early studies up to 1991, compared the effect of games and simulations with that of traditional classroom instruction on student performance. It produced the following results: of the 68 studies, 38 (56% of the studies) found no difference, 22 (32%) found differences favoring simulations/games in student performance, 7% favored simulations/games but their controls were questionable, and 5% found differences favoring conventional instruction. The authors concluded that the beneficial effects of games were most likely to be found when specific content was targeted and objectives precisely defined. In many studies students reported more interest in game activities than in conventional classroom instruction. Business games were not included in Randel et al.’s review. Wolfe (1997), conversely, reviewed only studies regarding computer-based business games used in strategic management coursework. These studies all used comparative design with at least one treatment and one control group. He found evidence for the effectiveness of business games. In every study citied in the article, game application produced significant knowledge-level increases and was superior to conventional casebased teaching in producing knowledge gains. Dempsey et al. (1996) examined 99 studies for common threads in the instructional game literature. They found the preponderance of games intending to promote higher-level intellectual skills and attitudes learning as opposed to verbal knowledge outcomes. They also found that games served many functions such as tutoring, amusing, helping to explore new skills, promoting self-esteem, practicing existing skills, drilling existing skills, automatizing, and seeking to change an attitude. Practicing existing skills (n = 22) was the highest frequency, and learning new skills (n = 21) was a close second. From

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

the studies reviewed, they delineated a list of assertions for using and designing instructional games, such as using intrinsically motivating games, employing instructional support features (e.g., debriefing, flexible scoring, progression of complexity), and selecting game genres based on learning objectives. Another review on instructional games (Emes, 1997) examined games’ use with children and found no clear causal relationship between academic performance and the use of computer games. Although Emes’ (1997) finding was based on three studies, his conclusion was confirmed by Hays (2005), who examined 105 instructional gaming articles. Hays’ review (2005) reported:

•

There is no evidence to indicate that games are the preferred instructional method in all situations” and “although some games can provide effective learning for a variety of learning for several different tasks (e.g., math, attitudes, electronics, and economics), this does not tell us whether to use a game for our specific instructional task. (p. 6)

•

These past analyses/reviews highlighted six major themes: •

•

The literature base is sparse. Although many articles discussed the use of instructional computer games, most of the literature was based on the authors’ opinions on the potential of instructional games or propositions on how games would be developed to be instructionally sound. Far fewer articles documented the empirical data on the effectiveness of instructional games (Hays, 2005; Dempsey, et al. 1996). Empirical studies’ findings conf lict (Dempsey et al., 1996; Randel et al., 1992; Vogel et al., 2006b). It appears that few firm conclusions can be drawn from the studies and there is no evidence that games can provide effective learning in all situations.

•

•

The empirical research on instructional games is fragmented. Prior studies focused on different clusters of factors when evaluating the effects of an instructional game - administrative variables (game environment), learner variables (e.g., gender or academic ability), procedural variables (game-based activity, such as game-facilitated cooperative learning), and game variables (e.g., game genre and media) (Dempsey et al., 1996; Williams, 1980). Much of the work on the evaluation of games has been anecdotal, descriptive, or judgmental (Dempsey et al., 1996). Longitudinal studies are needed (Emes, 1997). A breakdown of the available studies by subject matter reveals that some knowledge domains are particularly suited to gaming, such as math, physics, and language arts (Randel et al., 1992; Hays, 2005).

On the other hand, the prior reviews of instructional computer games had the following limitations: •

•

•

Some existing reviews excluded qualitative studies. For example, Vogel et al. (2006b), Randel et al. (1992), Wolfe (1997), and VanSickle (1986) examined all quantitative studies in their reviews. Most of the existing reviews (e.g., Dempsey et al., 1996; Hays, 2005; Hogel, 1996; Leemkuil et al., 2000) were narrative literature reviews that did not reveal the decision rules used to synthesize findings from various studies, hence a lack of analytic rigor and objectivity (Hossler & Scalese-Love, 1989). Some existing reviews included low-quality studies or non-empirical reports that plagued the analysis result (Slavin, 1986).



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Method Drawing on grounded theory approach, the author conducted a qualitative meta-analysis to synthesize the theories, methods, and findings of both qualitative and quantitative inquiries of computer-based instructional games. Qualitative meta-analysis basically followed the same, replicable procedure of a quantitative meta-analysis, but was more interpretative than aggregative. Instead of a statistical data analysis, the researcher analyzed textual reports, creating new interpretations in the analysis process. This study has utilized qualitative rather than quantitative meta-analysis, not because numbers are non-existent. The qualitative variant has been used specifically because it is an approach towards formulating a complete depiction of the subject and because a quantitative meta-analysis will exclude qualitative evaluation that is a major grouping in the literature. As Michelsen, Zaff, and Hair (2002) have stated, “…not every intervention strategy lends itself to an experimental evaluation.” This statement is especially true in the case of instructional games research. In the current review, descriptive and case studies comprised almost 50% of the literature. In agreement with this discovery, Dempsey et al. (1996) have argued that although experimental studies have an important place in the instructional games literature, “there is a budding movement” to look at incidental learning using process-oriented inquiry. Because the instructional games literature itself comprises both qualitative and quantitative data, the integration of both qualitative and quantitative information is essential for a thorough synthesis of the literature for a complete state-of-the-art understanding of the domain. Although some researchers regarded qualitative review methods as appropriate for interpreting qualitative data only, others (e.g., Noblitt & Hare, 1988; Light & Pillemer, 1982) proposed



the possibility of qualitatively synthesizing both qualitative and quantitative information. Specifically, Hossler and Scalese-Love (1989) developed the grounded meta-analysis using Glaser and Strauss’s grounded theory approach. Following their example, the study adopted qualitative meta-analysis and a thematic synthesis approach associated with grounded theory. Trustworthiness of findings was achieved by using multiple coders for peer examination (Creswell, 1994). The actual procedure of research synthesis abided by the proposition of Hossler and Scalese-Love (1989) and is presented in the following sections.

Data Collection A set of criteria was specified to select appropriate research for this study (Slavin, 1986). Preliminary criteria included: •

• •

Content relevance - research focused on the design or application of computer-based games for learning purpose. Year of publication was 1985-2007 English-language publications

The data search was systematic and exhaustive within the data pool consisting of computerized bibliographic databases (i.e., ERIC, PsycInfo, Educational Research Complete, Dissertation Abstracts, ACM), major education and technology journals, conference proceedings, and the reference lists of several reviews. A total of 256 studies were reviewed in the course of this analysis.

Data Coding and Analysis When conducting the literature search, the author paid special attention to the studies that established components to be used in creating frameworks for analysis. An initial open-ended coding matrix was developed to delineate each study’s stated purpose, method, intervention, learner, sample

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

size, investigated factor, timeframe, learning settings, learning task and environment, outcome and measurement, game information, findings, specified/inferred implications and recommendations, and overall quality of the study. This coding matrix was constantly refined as synthesis proceeded. Both quantitative and qualitative information was coded using the same coding matrix to permit comparison of findings across studies. It was an overlapping process of collecting studies, coding information, and analyzing data. Specifically, constant comparative method (Slavin, 1986) was employed. The author and peer investigators constantly compared the data collected/coded to revise the coding categories, reanalyze studies, and gain new insights. Both quantitative data (sample size, methodology, etc.) and qualitative information (learning context, conclusion, etc.) from each study were recorded in coding sheets for further analysis and eventual summarization. A research team of three peer coders was used to assure the consistency and rigorousness of analysis and results (Hossler & Scalese-Love, 1989). During data analysis, low-quality studies were excluded from the synthesis. In the current analysis, a quantitative study was labeled low quality if it did not explain its methodological design features (such as sample size and study procedure). A qualitative study was excluded when it failed to provide a rich description of the learning context and outcomes or it appeared to be written based on the author’s bias rather than field observation. For example, quite a few articles announced the effectiveness of a specific game based on purely design assumptions rather than empirical data from field testing.

•

Results

Discussion

A total of 256 documents on the design, use, and evaluation of computer-based games were reviewed. Of these, 167 could not be included in the analysis:

Four major recurring themes concerning the effectiveness and key influence factors of computer-based instructional gaming have emerged from a comparative analysis with 89 computer

•

•

•

• • •

20 articles focused on the effects of games on non-learning-oriented outcomes, such as the effect of an action game on children’s aggression and violent behaviors, and the effect of computer video game on body movements of children with ADHD. 13 articles were computer-based instruction studies where gaming was only a contextual element but not the research focus. 45 were either development articles that described the design and development of a specific instructional game, or discussion articles that described opinions on an instructional game without empirical or systematically presented evidence (Dempsey et al., 1996). 45 articles presented only theoretical proposition or conceptual analysis on instructional game design principles or potential gamebased learning processes. 18 articles were research reviews - synthesis of articles concerning games in general. 6 articles presented only propositions on future game application and research. 20 articles documented studies that were labeled as low quality.

Eighty-nine research articles that provided empirical data on the application and effectiveness of computer-based instructional games were included in the current analysis. Qualitative outlines of empirical studies coded were synthesized and are presented in Table 1. The table also revealed the coding rules used to synthesize findings from various studies and illuminated the potential factors that might weigh in an effective application of instructional gaming.





Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Barab, Sadler, Heiselt, Hickey, & Zuiker (2007)

Barker, Brinkman, & Deardorff (1995)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased learning activity

Bahr & Rieth (1989)

Ben-Zvi (2007)

Explore gamebased learning activity

Anderson (2005)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased cognitive process

Alkan & Cagiltay (2007)

Bartholomew et al. (2000)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore game-based learning activity/ pedagogy

Purpose

Abbey (1993)

Study

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (experimental)

Mixed-method (quasi-experimental with qualitative interviewing)

Mixed-method (quasi-experimental & case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (correlational causal)

Mixed-method

Quantitative (experimental)

Method

90

171

26

28

46

172

15

86

Sample Size

1 semester

40-minute gaming session

1 lab session

10 days

4 weeks (with 10 minutes per day and 3 days per week)

4 weeks

1 lab session

1 lab session

Timeframe

Business simulation game

Adventure game

Role-playing/ simulation game

Massive multiplayer online game

Other (drilland-practice game)

Business simulation game

Puzzle game

Simulation game (as stand-alone or complementary pedagogical instrument)

Game Used

Graduate students

Children with asthma, ages 7-17

Pair of a child (mean age 14) and a biological parent (mean age 44) who had not been divorced for more than 3 years

4th graders (gifted students)

Mildly handicapped junior high students

College students

College students

College students

Learner

Business functions

Asthma selfmanagement skills

Divorce adjustment

Science education

Math

Business management

Non-contentrelated problem solving

Non-contentrelated problemsolving strategy

Learning Task

Higher education course work

Health education

Informal learning

School education course work

School education course work

Higher education course work

Informal learning

General learning

Learning Environment

Student affect toward gamebased learning

Descriptive knowledge and behavior change

Rule learning and selfreported behavior change

Conceptual knowledge and problem solving

Test-based cognitive learning achievement

Student affect toward gamebased learning

Cognitive strategy

Cognitive strategy near and far transfer

Learning Outcome

Gaming increased knowledge for older children and for those who scored higher at pre-test, and gaming intervention was associated with less hospitalizations. Affective reaction was favorable.

There was no significant improvement in knowledge, but subjects reported positive behavior change for divorce adjustment.

Statistically significant gains in near-transfer performance test but not in far-transfer standards-based academic achievement.

Students gained math learning achievement during gaming, but there was no significant effect of goal conditions (cooperative, competitive, and individualistic condition).

Team dynamics (e.g., cohesiveness and heterogeneity) influenced students’ game playing performance and their affect toward game.

Trial-and-error strategies were mostly used.

Gaming promoted far transfer significantly more than the conventional instruction, but not near transfer; there was no difference between the two gaming groups; and conventional instruction group solved significantly more levels.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. A summary of empirical studies reviewed

continued on following page

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and the influence of learner’s cognitive style, and explore instructional game design

Explore gamebased cognitive process

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and the influence of learner characteristics

Explore instructional game design

Explore the interaction between learner characteristics and instructional game

Cameron & Dwyer (2005)

CauzinilleMarmeche & Mathieu (1989)

Chang, Yang, Chan, & Yu (2003)

Chen, Shen, Ou, & Liu (1998)

Christensen & Gerber (1990)

Conati & Zhao (2004 )

De Jean, Upitis, Koch, & Young (1999)

Purpose

Cahill (1994)

Study

Qualitative (case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Mixed-method (case study)

Qualitative (cognitive task analysis)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Method

104

20

60

n/a (6 classes)

78

120

422

3,829

Sample Size

6 months

One 20-minute gaming session

n/a

One 2-hour lab session

1 lab session

1 lab session

45-minute gaming session

n/a

Timeframe

Massive multiplayer online game

Puzzle game

Arcade drilland-practice game

Multi-user game

Board games

Puzzle game

Other (drilland-practice game)

Simulation game

Game Used

Students ages 12-13

7th graders

Elementarylevel students (learningdisabled and non-disabled)

College students

College students

Children ages 7-15

Math

Math

Math

Web navigation skills

Multiple subject topics

Non-contentrelated problem solving

Knowledge about heart

AIDS education

5-8th graders

College students

Learning Task

Learner

School education course work

School education course work

School education course work

Online learning

Higher education course work

General learning

Higher education course work

Informal health education

Learning Environment

Game-based learning experience

Conceptual knowledge

Factual/ descriptive knowledge

Motivation

Student affect toward gamebased learning

Cognitive strategy

Descriptive and conceptual knowledge

Game-based learning process/ experience

Learning Outcome

Most girls lacked awareness of math content embedded in the game.

Game (with pedagogical agent) promoted more learning (marginally significant) than game only. Students learned little from game without any external guidance.

Straightforward drill was more effective than the game format for learning-disabled students.

Game promoted student motivation (esp. low achievement students) to learning.

Affective reaction was favorable.

A deductive model was used predominantly by 11- through 15-year-olds, a rule-based model was used predominantly by the youngest subjects, a development trend was observed from rule-based model to deductive model.

Simple gaming was not more effective than the conventional instruction in promoting achievement; gaming with questions and elaborative feedback was significantly more effective than the simple gaming and conventional instruction; there was no significant intervention between learners’ cognitive style (FD/FI) and gaming.

Learning experience was enhanced, and positive attitudes toward subject were developed.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page



0

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Grabe & Dosmann (1988)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Goodman, Bradley, Paras, Williamson, & Bizzochi (2006)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Quantitative (experimental)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Goldsworthy, Barab, & Goldsworthy (2000)

Gopher, Weil, & Bareket (1994)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Foss & Eikaas (2006)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Explore instructional game design and the influence of learner characteristics (gender)

Forsyth (1986)

70

58

169

59

1,200

120

30

Mixed-method (case study)

Evaluate effectiveness of game

Doyle & Brown (2000)

40

Sample Size

Qualitative

Method

Explore instructional game design

Purpose

Dempsey, Haynes, Lucassen, & Casey (2002)

Study

n/a

10 1-hour sessions

One 3-minute gaming session

Twice (30-50 minutes each session) a week for 4 weeks

n/a

40-minute gaming session

6 weeks

1 lab session

Timeframe

Adventure game

Flight simulation game

Puzzle game

Simulation game

Simulation game

Adventure game

Business simulation game

A variety of game genres for educational purposes

Game Used

Flight training

Reading

6th graders

Health education

Non-contentrelated social problem solving

Engineering

Place location learning

Business management

Multiple subject topics

Learning Task

Cadets ages 18-20

Hockey players ages 11-17

Adolescents ages 10-16 with ADHD

College students

4th and 5th graders

College students

Adults ages 18-52

Learner

School education course work

Flight training for cadets

Informal learning

Informal learning

Higher education course work

School education course work

Higher education course work

General learning

Learning Environment

Cognitive textprocessing and metacognitive skill

Problem solving and motor skills in actual flight performance

Conceptual knowledge

Social problem solving, social behavioral rating, and level of engagement

Affect toward game-based learning

Cognitive recall and retention, and affect toward gamebased learning

Game-based learning experience

Affect toward game-based learning

Learning Outcome

There was evidence for game’s effect on text-processing and metacognitive skill development.

Game group was significantly better in flight performance than the control group.

Game improved learning gains and increased the speed of test performance.

The group using game performed significantly better than the control group and comparably to a therapistdirected group on measures of problem solving and engagement, but there was no significant effect of game on (far transfer) social behavioral rating scale.

Affective feedback to game use was favorable.

Game-with-map groups outperformed the no-map group in instant recall test; labels-with-game groups outperformed the other groups; all groups showed high level of retention of knowledge after 2 weeks; there was no influence of gender on learning or attitude.

80% surveyees had positive simulation-based learning experience.

All game genres had potential for educational use and different learning outcomes.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Henderson, Klemes, & Eshet (2000)

Horn, Jones, & Hamlett (1991)

Evaluate the interaction between gender and game

Mixed-method

Explore the interaction between learner characteristics and game, and instructional game design

Haynes (2000)

Inal & Cagiltay (2007)

Mixed-method (quasi-experimental and qualitative interviewing)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Halttunen & Sormunen (2000)

Mixed-method (case study)

Qualitative (case study)

Qualitative (case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Gremmen & Potters (1997)

Quantitative (correlational-causal)

Method

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Purpose

Greenfield, Camaioni, Ercolani, & Weiss (1994)

Study

33

3

1 hour per week for 6 weeks

n/a

45-minute session daily for 6 weeks

1 lab session

5 classes

20

1 tutoring session

1 semester

n/a

Timeframe

n/a (1 class)

47

200

Sample Size

A variety of game genres

Action game

Microworld simulation game

n/a (educational game)

Simulation/ modeling game

Economic simulation game

Entertaining action game

Game Used

Science education

2nd graders

Children ages 7-9

Social skill development

Basic motor skills

Math

9th graders

Non-vocal students (ages 5-8) with severe physical handicaps

Information search strategy

Economic education

Scientifictechnical discovery

Learning Task

College students

College students

College students

Learner

General learning

Special education

School education course work

School education course work

General learning

Higher education course work

Informal education

Learning Environment

Game-based experience

Scanning and selection motor skills

Descriptive knowledge, conceptual knowledge, problem solving, and transfer

Test-based cognitive learning achievement, attitude (value) toward subject

Rule learning

Conceptual knowledge

Cognitive strategy

Learning Outcome

Gender and challenge level in game influenced students’ flow experiences and game-playing behaviors. Girls had more tendency playing mind games, boys enjoyed the game playing and forming group more than girls; ludology had more effect than the narratology of games on flow of boys, while girls were the opposite.

Subjects demonstrated substantial skill development and maintenance.

Game facilitated the improvement in multiple cognitive outcomes, from basic recall to higher-level thinking (classification and inference), as well as in usage of scientific language. Transfer was not significant.

There was no effect of gender on game-based math learning achievement, but females gave more evidence of using metacognitive, cognitive, and cooperative strategies. Females showed higher motivation through relevance, while males were more motivated by challenge in terms of selfesteem.

Game enhanced learning.

Game was more effective (than lectures) in promoting post-test performance.

Knowledge of the game was developed as a result of inductive discovery process and subjects’ gaming performance correlated with their test performance with scientific-technical discovery.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page





Explore gamebased learning activity and the influence of learner characteristics

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore instructional game design

Evaluate the effectiveness of game (as construction kit)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and the influence of learner characteristics

Explore gamebased learning activity and the influence of learner characteristics

Explore instructional game design

Johnson (1993)

Ju & Wagner (1997 )

Kafai & Ching (1996 )

Kambouri, Thomas, & Mellar (2006)

Kashibuchi & Sakamoto (2001)

Ke & Grabowski (2007)

Kiili (2005)

Purpose

Inkpen, Booth, Klawe, & Upitis (1995)

Study

Mixed-method (case study)

Quantitative (quasiexperimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Qualitative (case study)

Qualitative (case study)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Mixed-method (experimental and qualitative observation)

Method

18

125

279

n/a (3 UK learning centers)

4

12

446

435

Sample Size

n/a

Twice a week (40 minutes each session) for 4 weeks

50-minute gaming session

n/a

1 hour a day for 3 days

1-hour gaming session

6-minute gaming session

40-minute gaming session

Timeframe

Role-playing/ simulation game

Puzzle games

Simulation and board games

Adventure game

Game design

Adventure games

Puzzle game

Puzzle game

Game Used

General motivation

Math

5th graders

College students

Sex education

Literacy learning

Informal learning

School education course work

School education course work

Formal adult education

After-school learning

Training

General cognitive outcomes

Math

Informal learning

Informal learning

Learning Environment

Health education

Non-contentrelated problem solving

Learning Task

2nd- and 3rd-year high school students in Japan, ages 16-18

Young adults

5th graders

College students (from senior to PhD level), most were female

General public: from preadolescent to senior citizen

School children ages 6-12

Learner

Motivation (flow)

Cognitive learning achievement and attitude toward subject

Conceptual knowledge and motivation

Literacy gains

Conceptual knowledge

Cognitive problem solving, conceptual knowledge, and affect toward game

Descriptive knowledge gain and motivation

Cognitive problemsolving tasks and motivation

Learning Outcome

Content creation was the main activity causing flow; bad usability and low gameness were cited as obstacles.

All gaming groups outperformed control group in cognitive learning achievement. Cooperative gaming group outperformed all other groups (competitive and control) in attitudes scale. SES-disadvantaged students benefited from cooperative gaming most. There was no effect of gender.

Gaming with a reversal roleplaying facilitated conceptual knowledge most, and there were no effects of experimental situations on attitudes/ motivation.

The game was engaging and learners made significant literacy gains beyond expectation.

There was evidence of improved learning.

Games endeared least information retention and problem solving and most conceptual knowledge. Ludology, role-playing, appropriate complexity level made a game appealing.

Game promoted statistically significant gain in knowledge and self-efficacy.

Playing configuration (playing together or not) had a significant effect on motivation; grouping children around one computer did not negatively affect performance and in the case of female/ female groupings, it had a positive effect.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore instructional game design

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Leger (2006)

Leutner (1993)

Lim, Nonis, & Hedberg (2006)

Malouf (1987)

Explore instructional game design, evaluate game effectiveness and the influence of learner characteristics

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Ko (2002)

Mandinch (1987)

Explore instructional game design

Purpose

Kiili (2007)

Study

Quantitative (correlational-causal)

Quantitative (experimental)

Mixed-method (case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Mixed-method (case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Qualitative

Method

48

25

8

182

87

12

Sample Size

n/a

20-minute gaming session

Longitudinal

n/a (1 lab session)

7 weeks

1 lab session

5-hour gaming session

Timeframe

Strategy game

Puzzle game

Massive multiuser game

Simulation game

Business simulation game

Board game

Business simulation game

Game Used

7th and 8th graders

6-8th graders identified as learning disabled

Non-contentrelated strategic planning skill

Vocabulary skill

Science education

Economic education

7th and 8th graders and college students

4th graders

Business functions

Basic cognitive skill development

Business functions

Learning Task

College students

Children ages 6-10

College students ages 20-30, all male

Learner

School education

School education course work

School education course work

School and higher education

Higher education course work

General learning

Higher education course work

Learning Environment

Cognitive problem solving

Motivation and descriptive knowledge

Engagement level and conceptual knowledge

Conceptual knowledge

Conceptual knowledge, technical skills, and affect toward gamebased learning

Cognitive skill development (decision making, choice behavior, and use of logical reasoning); affect toward game-based learning

Game-based learning experience

Learning Outcome

Students with successful game performance performed better on problem-solving transfer tasks than unsuccessful students; low-ability students appeared to perform better at gaming with instructional support.

Game produced significantly higher continuing motivation and quicker question response, but there was no difference in descriptive knowledge learning in comparison to computer program (with no game feature).

There was a significant knowledge gain but the level of engagement of students was low.

Learners without instructional support in game learned to play game rather than domainspecific concepts; the opposite occurred with the learners given advice. Instructional support is essential for instructional games.

Affective feedback on using game was favorable.

Children’s developed cognitive skills over the practice of games; children reported high satisfaction and joy; there was no difference between computer game and traditional game on learning.

Authenticity, group dynamic, and learning by doing were found to be most effective elements for effective instructional game application.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page





Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore instructional game design

Explore instructional game design

Explore instructional game design

McMullen (1987)

Miller, Lehman, & Koedinger (1999)

Moreno & Mayer (2002)

Moreno (2004)

Explore instructional game design

Explore the intervention between learner characteristics and gaming

Martens, Gulikers, & Bastiaens (2004)

Moreno & Mayer (2004)

Purpose

Study

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Method

48

104

164

24

37

33

Sample Size

1 lab session

1 lab session

1 lab session

30-minute gaming session

1 lab session

Maximum was 3 hours

Timeframe

Simulation game

Simulation game

Simulation game

Microworld simulation game

n/a

Simulation game

Game Used

Physics: electrical interaction

College students

College students

College students (with a mean age of 18) who are novice in subject knowledge

Natural science

Natural science

Natural science

Science education

6th graders

College students

Game content learning

Learning Task

College students (20 years old)

Learner

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

School education

Higher education

Learning Environment

Descriptive knowledge, problem solving, and affect toward learning materials

Descriptive knowledge, problem solving, and affect toward learning materials

Descriptive knowledge, problem solving, and affect toward learning materials

Conceptual knowledge

Cognitive learning achievement, retention, and attitude toward learning materials

Descriptive knowledge

Learning Outcome

Students learned more deeply from games when agent speaks in personalized speech rather than a non-personalized style. Presentation via head-mounted display (high immersion) did not lead to better performance on descriptive knowledge or problem solving than presentation via desktop computer (low immersion).

Agent-based elaborative feedback in the game facilitated learning achievements more than agentbased corrective feedback in the game, due to reductions in cognitive load.

Students scored higher on retention, transfer, and program rating in narration condition than in text conditions. The mediadesktop displays or head-mounted displaysdid not affect performance on measures retention, transfer, or program rating.

Students in the standard-goal gaming condition learned less qualitative physics than did those in the two alternative conditions (no-goal and specific-path).

There was no significant effect of gaming on instant or delayed learning achievement test; gaming promoted significantly more positive attitudes than the other groups (CAI and conventional instruction).

Students with high intrinsic motivation did not do more but demonstrated more explorative study behavior; however the learning outcomes of students with high intrinsic motivation were not better.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Okolo (1990)

Okolo (1992)

Ota & DuPaul (2002)

Oyen & Bebko (1996)

Padgett, Strickland, & Coles (2006)

Pannese & Carlesi (2007)

Purpose

Noble, Best, Sidwell, & Strang (2000)

Study

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (pre/post-case series design)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimentalmultiple baseline design)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Mixed-method (case study)

Method

n/a

5

120

3

41

18

101

Sample Size

n/a

1 lab session

1 lab session

60-80 minutes in total (4 times a week)

4 gaming sessions

7-hour gaming session

1 lab session

Timeframe

Business simulation game

Massive multiuser game

Puzzle game (with endogenous or exogenous gaming element)

n/a (educational game)

Other (drilland-practice game)

Other (drilland-practice game)

Arcade-style motorcycle action/racing game

Game Used

College students and company employees

Children diagnosed with fetal alcohol syndrome, ages 4-7, low or average intellectual functioning

Children ages 4-7

Higher education course work and workforce training

Informal learning and special education

Fire safety skill

Business functions

Memory rehearsal strategy and recall performance

Preschool education Memoryenhancing strategy

Affect toward game-based learning

Procedural knowledge gain and retention

Cognitive math performance and task engagement

Descriptive knowledge and continuing motivation

Basic motor skills, attitudes toward subject, and continuing motivation

Expectancy and value

Learning Outcome

Special education

Math

4-6th graders with ADHD

Special education

Special education

Keyboarding motor skill

Math

School education

Learning Environment

Drug education

Learning Task

Intermediatelevel students with learning disabilities

Learningdisabled high school students

Children ages 10-11

Learner

Affective feedback to game use was very high.

Game helped all participants develop procedural knowledge gain and helped knowledge retention (in one-week follow up test).

Games increased overt rehearsal strategy use, yet no greater memory recall (in comparison to traditional), and there is no effect of game type.

Gaming led to increases in active engaged time and decreases in off-task behaviors in all subjects; all subjects also showed some improvement in math performance, but improvement was modest in comparison to conventional instruction condition.

There were no significant differential effects between drill-and-practice and game on knowledge acquisition, but the game had a facilitative effect on continuing motivation of students with low initial attitudes toward math.

There were no significant differential effects between drill-and-practice and game on skill acquisition and attitudes, but the game format had a detrimental effect on continuing motivation.

Game increased students’ awareness toward illegal drug and their self-efficacy.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page





Evaluate the effectiveness of game and the influence of learner characteristics

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased cognitive process

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game (as construction kit)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Perzov & Kozminsky (1989)

Pillay (2002)

Pillay, Brownlee, & Wilss (1999)

Piper, O’Brien, Morris, & Winograd (2006 )

Rai, Wong, & Cole (2006 )

Ravenscroft & Matheson (2002)

Purpose

Paperny & Starn (1989)

Study

Quantitative (experimental)

Qualitative

Qualitative (case study)

Qualitative (cognitive task analysis)

Mixed-method (quasi-experimental & qualitative cognitive task analysis)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Method

36

n/a

8

21

36

68

718

Sample Size

20- to 30minute gaming session

1 semester

5 gaming episodes

n/a

15-minute gaming session

110 minutes total (10 minutes/day for 11 days)

30- to 40minute session

Timeframe

Other (dialogue games)

Game design

Board game

Puzzle and strategy entertainment games

2D puzzle recreational game and 3D strategy recreational game

A variety of games with or without elements requiring visual perception

Action games

Game Used

Secondary school students ages 15-16

College students

Children from social cognitive therapy class

High school students ages 14-18

Physics

Computer science (programming)

Social skill development

General problem solving

Environmental education

Non-contentrelated visual perception skill

Kindergarten children in Israel age 5

School children ages 14-16

Health education

Learning Task

High school students ages 13-18

Learner

School education course work

Higher education course work

Informal learning

General learning

School education course work

Preschool education

Informal learning

Learning Environment

Conceptual knowledge

Affect to gamebased learning

Social skill development

Cognitive strategies

Time on task, cognitive task performance, and cognitive/ meta-cognitive process

Basic motor skill

Descriptive, conceptual knowledge, and attitude (value)

Learning Outcome

Games promoted significant improvement in conceptual knowledge gain and retention (in comparison to conventional learning).

Game construction promoted active engagement with the content and increased enthusiasm level.

The game provided an engaging experience for participants to work with others.

Game players demonstrated complex cognitive processes (e.g., general search heuristics, use of game tools, and a combined approach, metacognitive monitoring, maintaining temporal information for multitasking).

3D game promoted successful subsequent performance on 3D computer-based instructional tasks (as opposed to 2D game), suggesting the extent of recreational game influence depends on how closely the game type matches the design of the tasks in the educational software.

No significant effect of games (with or without elements requiring visual perception) was found.

Games produced significant knowledge gain and attitude change (as opposed to traditional instruction); students with low SES enjoyed and learned from games especially.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Santos (2002)

Simms (1998)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased learning activity/design

Sandford, Ulicsak, Facer, & Rudd (2007)

Squire & Barab (2004 )

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Rosas et al. (2003)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Ricci, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers (1996)

Spivey (1985)

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore instructional game design

Purpose

Renaud & Suissa (1989)

Study

Qualitative (case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Qualitative

Quantitative (descriptive)

Survey research

Mixed-method (experimental and case study)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Method

18

29

4

41

924

1,274

60 (most are male)

136

Sample Size

6 weeks (3 times per week, 45 minutes per session)

20 days

5 weekly lessons

3 weeks

n/a

30 hours over a 3-month period

45-minute gaming session

One 3-hour gaming session

Timeframe

Massive multi-user entertainment game

Puzzle games

Other (educational game)

Business simulation game

n/a

n/a

Puzzle game

Simulation games (with or without attitudetriggering elements)

Game Used

High school students who were academically disadvantaged

1st graders

College piano students with motivation problem

College students

History, geography, and political science

School education course work

School education course work

Game-based learning experience

Cognitive math learning achievement

Motivation

Musical education Musical skills (note identification and note playing) Math

Affect toward game-based learning

General school learning

Cognitive learning achievement and motivation to learn

Descriptive knowledge gain and retention, and attitude (value) toward subject

Attitude (value), behavior change, and transfer of learning

Learning Outcome

Higher education course work

School education course work

School education course work

Military training

Preschool/ general education

Learning Environment

Business education

n/a

Reading, math, and spelling

1st and 2nd graders from socio-economic disadvantaged schools in Chile

Primary and secondary school teacher

Military rules

Traffic safety education

Learning Task

Military students with a median age of 20

5-year-old children in school

Learner

Failure to understand basic facts drove students to learn; the game can be a powerful tool for engaging learners.

No significant effects of the game (with conventional teaching) on math learning (in comparison to conventional teaching only) was found.

There was evidence of motivational effects of game.

Students’ affective feedback toward game use was favorable.

Teacher played important role in effective use of instructional games in classroom.

Game use had positive impact on motivation and classroom dynamics. There was significant difference between gaming group and internal control group in relation to the external control group, but no significant difference between gaming and internal control groups on cognitive learning achievement.

Gaming promoted knowledge gain and retention significantly more than text situation, but not different from test situation; participants in gaming demonstrated significantly higher attitudes than the other two situations.

All gaming interventions promoted three learning achievements more than the control condition; attitudetriggering elements (roleplaying and group) was necessary and sufficient to modify behavior.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page





Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased learning activity

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Explore gamebased motivation process

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore game-based learning activity design

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore instructional game design

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Strommen (1993)

Stone (1995)

Taylor (1987)

Thomas & Cahill (1997)

Tuzun (2004)

Tuzun (2007)

Van Eck (2006)

Vogel, GreenwoodEricksen, Cannon-Bowers, & Bowers (2006)

Purpose

Squire, Barnett, Grant, & Higginbotham (2004)

Study

Quantitative (quasiexperimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Qualitative (case study)

Qualitative (ethnography)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (experimental)

Mixed-method (experimental & case study)

Method

44

123

77

20

211

194

248

56

96

Sample Size

2 weeks with 10 minutes per day

50-minute gaming session

1 week

Longitudinal

1 lab session

1 lab session

n/a

n/a

n/a

Timeframe

Other (virtual reality game)

Simulation/ modeling game (with pedagogical advice or competition scheme)

Massive multiuser game

Massive multiuser game

Adventure game

Simulation game

Business strategy game

Other (educational game)

3D simulation game

Game Used

Children ages 7-12 (some were hearingimpaired)

7th and 8th graders ages 1215 in Catholic school

4th and 5th graders, 9th graders, and college students

School children

High-risk adolescents (ages 12-22)

College students

School/higher education course work

School education coursework

School education course work

Math

Math and language arts

General learning

School education

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

School education

School education course work

Learning Environment

Science education

Science education

Health education

Political science

Business management

General learning

4th graders

College students

Electromagnetic

Learning Task

8th graders

Learner

Descriptive and conceptual knowledge

Attitude (value) toward subject

Game-based learning experience

Motivation

Self-efficacy

Cognitive academic achievement and attitudes toward subject

Affect toward game-based learning

Game task performance

Conceptual knowledge

Learning Outcome

Game did not promote learning, neither more than conventional CAI, deaf children improved learning in conventional tradition more than in gaming.

The game with no competition but contextual advisement promoted most positive attitude; and there was no significant difference between gaming and the control condition.

Potential of using game in classroom setting and relative issues: school infrastructure, role of teacher, classroom culture, distraction in games.

Thirteen categories of motivational elements to play the game emerged: identity presentation, social relations, playing, learning, achievement, rewards, immersive, context, fantasy, uniqueness, creativity, curiosity, control, and ownership.

There was significant effect of the game on self-efficacy improvement.

There was no significant effect of game with lecture in comparison to lecture only.

Affective feedback toward game use was favorable.

Cooperative environment resulted in better game-based learning performance than the competitive environment.

Gaming group outperformed the conventional instruction.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued

continued on following page

Explore the interaction between learner characteristics and game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Evaluate the effectiveness of game and explore instructional game design

Evaluate the effectiveness of game

Washbush & Gosen (2001)

Wellington, Faria, & Nulsen (1996)

Wiebe & Martin (1994)

Wildman & Reeves (1996)

Whitehill & McDonald (1993)

Yip & Kwan (2006)

Purpose

Walters & Others (1997)

Study

Quantitative (quasiexperimental)

Quantitative (experimental)

Quantitative (descriptive)

Quantitative (experimental)

100

557

109

130

474

Quantitative (correlational-causal)

Quantitative (experimental)

80

Sample Size

Quantitative (descriptive and correlational-causal)

Method

9 weeks

1 lab session

n/a

1 lab session

A semester

1992-1997

Half semester

Timeframe

Other (online educational game)

Simulation game

Simulation game

Adventure game

Business simulation game

Business enterprise simulation game

Strategy simulation game

Game Used

Engineering students

Military personnel

Nursing students

5th and 6th graders

College students

College students

College students

Learner

English vocabulary

Electric repairs

Nursing education

Geography

Business marketing

Business management

Business functions

Learning Task

Higher education

Military training

Higher education course work

School education course work

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

Higher education course work

Learning Environment

Descriptive knowledge and affect toward game-based learning

Problem solving and persistence

Game-based learning experience

Descriptive knowledge and attitudes toward subject

Cognitive process/strategy

Cognitive learning achievement

Affect toward game-based learning

Learning Outcome

There was significant effect of games with lecture in comparison to lecture only, and the affective feedback was favorable.

There was no significant effect of gaming, but game with variable payoff resulted in increased persistence.

Affective feedback was favorable and games encouraged teamwork.

No significant effect of computer games in comparison to non-computer games.

Simulation play results primarily in behavioral learning, with cognitive learning playing a secondary role.

Learning took place as a result of simulation participation, but there was no relationship between learning and simulation performance.

Students whose psychological profiles exhibited significant deviation from that required to function effectively in a team were less satisfied with game use.

Findings

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Table 1. continued



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

game studies and are discussed with the support of exemplar studies.

Game Research Purpose and Methodology The empirical studies coded can be classified into five major research purposes1: (1) evaluating the effects of computer-based game on learning (65 out of 89 studies), (2) exploring effective instructional game design (17 out of 89), (3) exploring game-based learning activity or pedagogy (9 out of 89), (4) evaluating the influence of learner characteristics on game-based learning process (10 out of 89), and (5) investigating cognitive or motivational processes during game playing (4 out of 89).

Studies on the Effects of Instructional Gaming Studies that evaluated the effectiveness of computer-based games for learning purposes are predominant. Among these studies, 69% used quantitative design-experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational-causal, or descriptive. For example, Gopher, Weil, and Bareket (1994) investigated the effect of a flight simulation game on cadets’ flight performance by randomly assigning 58 participants into two experimental conditions (gaming vs. conventional instruction). The experiment lasted 10 hours (one hour each session) and the results favored simulation game. Vogel, Greenwood-Ericksen, Cannon-Bowers, and Bowers (2006a) examined the difference between virtual reality games and conventional computer-assisted instruction in promoting math and language arts learning. They assigned 44 primary school students (in intact class unit) to two experimental conditions (lasting two weeks with 10 minute/day) and reported that there was no significant effect of games. Greenfield, Camaioni, Ercolani, and Weiss (1994) used onegroup design in their game study and discovered

0

that there was no significant correlation between college students’ successful game performance and their achievement in scientific-technical discovery. Johnson (1993) surveyed 446 instructional game players after a six-minute gaming session and reported that game promoted significant self-efficacy. Among the studies examining the effects of games, about 15% employed mixed-method design and another 15% were qualitative ethnography or case study. For example, Barab et al. (2007) evaluated the effects of a massive multiplayer online game on 28 fourth graders with both quantitative pre- and post-tests and qualitative in-field observation. Conversely, Piper, O’Brien, Morris, and Winograd (2006) reported a positive effect of a cooperative tabletop computer game for social skills development only with a thick, qualitative description. In terms of results, 34 out of the 65 game effectiveness studies reported significant positive effects of computer-based game, 17 reported mixed results (instructional games facilitated certain learning outcomes but not the others), 12 reported no difference between computer games and conventional instruction, and only one study (Christensen & Gerber, 1990) reported conventional instruction as more effective than computer games. It should be noted that in these 65 studies, computer games were compared with conventional instructions either as a stand-alone pedagogical instrument (e.g., Abbey, 1993; Bahr & Rieth, 1989; Cameron & Dwyer, 2005; Goldsworthy, Barab, & Goldsworthy, 2000) or as a drilling tool complementing the conventional instruction (e.g., Taylor, 1987; Gremmen & Potters, 1997; Yip & Kwan, 2006). In addition, less than 50% of the game evaluation studies were longitudinal; most of them lasted no more than two hours. This finding is in agreement with the claim by Emes (1997) that more longitudinal studies were still needed for game effectiveness evaluation. Another notable pattern is that qualitative studies tend to report

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

positive effects of instructional games; few of them describe games’ negative aspects.

Studies on Instructional Game Design Among the 17 studies on game design, 10 are quantitative, three are qualitative, and the remainder are mixed-method. The examined game design features include pedagogical agent within a game, game playing group dynamics, games’ goal condition (having specified goal or not), games’ interface format (verbal narration, text, personalized speech or not), feedback type (elaborative or not), alignment of game-play and learning task, attitudes-triggering elements (grouping and competition), reward mechanism (at fixed or variable interval), complexity and authenticity level, richness of storyline, and the sort. Most game design studies indicate significant results. A common finding extracted from these design studies is that instructional support features are a necessary part of instructional computer games. The studies generally conclude that learners without instructional support in game will learn to play the game rather than learn domain-specific knowledge embedded in the game (Leutner, 1993; Mandinch, 1987).

Studies on Game-Based Pedagogy In this category of game studies, the researchers generally explore how game-based learning activities should be organized or administered, or how a game-based external learning environment should be constructed. For instance, Anderson (2005) examined how team dynamics, such as cohesiveness and heterogeneity, influenced team playing in a business enterprise simulation game and hence individuals’ performance and attitudes toward game use. Bahr and Reith (1989), Ke and Grabowski (2006), and Strommen (1993) investigated whether the game-based learning goal structures-cooperative, competitive, and individu-

alistic-influenced learning outcomes. Sandford, Ulicsak, Facer, and Rudd (2007) reported that teachers’ facilitation played an important role in an effective use of instructional games in the classroom. These studies assert that the investigation on computer games for learning should focus on how games can be carefully aligned with sound pedagogical strategies or learning conditions to be beneficial.

Studies on Learner Characteristics Only 10 out of 89 game studies examine the variable of learner characteristics; this confirms the finding by Dempsey et al. (1996) that studies on the interaction of learner characteristics and instructional game usage are limited. Among the studies reviewed, gender is the most examined learner characteristic. Some research (e.g., De Jean, Upitis, Koch, & Young, 1999; Inal & Cagiltay, 2007) has reported gender difference in terms of game-based learning performance and game design preference, while other research (e.g., Forsyth, 1986; Haynes, 2000; Ke & Grabowski, 2007) has not. Interestingly, the studies reporting gender difference are qualitative in nature, while those failing to find gender difference are mostly experimental and comparative in nature. A potential proposition extracted may be that gender influences game-play and learning processes more than learning outcomes. Learner psychological profile or cognitive style (Walters et al., 1997; Cameron & Dwyer, 2005) is another examined characteristic variable. Generally, prior studies have reported that individuals’ cognitive styles influence their performance in game-based team playing, yet failed to indicate the effect of cognitive styles on game-based individual learning. In addition, learners with a lower socio-economic status and lower ability have been reported as enjoying games most (Papernv & Starn, 1989; Ke & Grabowski, 2007). Conversely, there is



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

evidence suggesting learners with lower ability have difficulty extracting target knowledge from games (Mandinch, 1987).

Studies on Game-Based Cognitive or Motivation Processes In the four studies that examined game-based cognitive processes (Alkan & Cagiltay, 2007; Cauzinille-Marmeche & Mathieu, 1989; Pillay, Brownlee, & Wilss, 1999; Pillay, 2002), gamebased cognition is a graduate development from random trial-and-error strategy, general deductive reasoning, rule-based learning, purposeful tools usage, to a combined approach. There is also a record of game-based metacognitive self-planning and regulation processes, yet the evidence is descriptive and anecdotal. Tuzun (2004) explored game-based motivation process and found 13 core components of game-facilitated motivation: identity presentation, social relations, playing, learning, achievement, rewards, immersive, context, fantasy, uniqueness, creativity, curiosity, control, and ownership. Although the games used in these types of studies are not necessarily instructional in nature, the results on game-based cognitive or motivational processes address the question as to whether games are a potential anchor to activate learners’ cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational processes.

Learning As the analysis results indicate, game studies involve a variety of learning settings: informal learning, kindergarten/preschool education, elementary education, secondary education, adult education, business management, military, and healthcare. Business management education seems to be the one associated with the most prevalent positive outcomes. Learning subject areas in game studies comprise science education, math, language arts, reading, physics, health, natural science, science,



and non-content-related social skill and general problem-solving skill development. Although Randel et al. (1992) suggested that a breakdown of the available studies by subject matter reveals that some knowledge domains (i.e., math, physics, and language arts) are particularly suited to games, this pattern is not evident in the current analysis. Cognitive learning outcomes in those reviewed studies consist of basic motor skill (e.g., Horn, Jones, & Hamlett, 1991), descriptive knowledge (e.g., Bartholomew et al., 2000), conceptual knowledge (e.g., Conati & Zhao, 2004), problem solving (e.g., Moreno, 2004), and general cognitive strategies (e.g., Cauzinille-Marmeche & Mathieu, 1989). An interesting pattern is that games seem to foster higher-order thinking (e.g., planning and reasoning) more than factual or verbal knowledge acquisition, which sustains the finding of Dempsey et al. (1996). Importantly, it should be noted that few game studies directly measured metacognitive process or outcome. Affective learning outcomes, involving selfefficacy, value (or attitudes toward subject content learning), affective feedback toward game use, and continuing motivation (or persistence), are present in many game studies. Generally, instructional computer games seem to facilitate motivation across different learner groups and learning situations. This finding is in agreement with Vogel et al.’s (2006) quantitative meta-analysis conclusion that the effect size of games vs. traditional teaching methods is highly reliable for attitude outcomes.

Learners In this analysis, school children and college students are predominant among the targeted learner groups. Fewer studies focus on adult learners, especially the elderly. Studies regarding games for learners with disabilities typically report significant positive effects of computer games on their learning performance (e.g., Horn et al.,

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

1991; Inal & Cagiltay, 2007; Ota & DuPaul, 2002; Padgett, Strickland, & Coles, 2006). This finding suggests that computer games can be a powerful instructional intervention in special education.

Intervention: Game Genre and Features Games used in these studies demonstrate a high heterogeneity and can be classified as simulations, puzzles, adventures, board games, action games, strategy games, and business simulation games. These games are different in terms of game genre, media format (2D or 3D), timeframe, game-play design, and instructional support features. Since all of these game features can potentially influence the effectiveness of a game for learning purposes, it is difficult to quantify and synthesize the impact of games across different studies to create a standard effect size, especially when certain gaming studies failed to clearly describe their gaming treatments.

FUTURE TRENDS This grounded meta-analysis implicates a list of propositions on the future practice and research of instructional gaming. These propositions, with the support of synthesis findings, are discussed below.

Implications on Future Instructional Gaming Policy and Practice As the analysis indicates, the learning outcomes achieved through computer games depend largely on how educationalists align learning (i.e., learning subject areas and learning purposes), learner characteristics, and game-based pedagogy with the design of an instructional game. Out of the 89 coded gaming studies, 36 (40%) have investigated the influential role of learning purposes, learner characteristics, game-based pedagogy, and

instructional game features; they generally assert the significant effects of these mediating factors on game-based learning outcomes. Additionally, there is a trend that instructional gaming may serve certain levels of learning objectives (e.g., higherorder thinking and affective outcomes) better than the others (e.g., factual knowledge acquisition) or serve certain learners (e.g., learners with disabilities) better than others. Therefore, educationalists should more frequently ask how (as opposed to whether) games can be incorporated into learning environments. Rather than using games in a oneshot and decontextualized manner, educationalists should take a comprehensive diagnostic approach to identify and measure multiple influential factors in a game-based learning environment, thus deciding how to use games effectively or when to use games. The analysis results also implicate a careful design of external and internal instructional support features for gaming application, especially when the games are used for factual knowledge development or learners who have lower prior ability and have difficulty extracting target knowledge from games. External instructional support can be provided using teacher facilitation, good team dynamics, or structured cooperative learning/playing (Anderson, 2005; Bahr & Reith, 1989; Ke & Grabowski, 2006; Sandford et al., 2007). Internal instructional support features, as the prior studies suggest, are a necessary part of instructional games and should be embedded within a game through elaborative feedback, pedagogical agent, and multimodal information presentation (Cameron & Dwyer, 2005; Conati & Zhao, 2004; Forsyth, 1986; Moreno & Mayer, 2002; Moreno, 2004). The current analysis demonstrates that instructional gaming can be used in multiple educational settings that range from informal, community learning to school education. There is no evidence to suggest that gaming is favorable for certain educational settings but not others. Therefore, educational policymakers are encouraged to con-



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

sider using games as a learning tool in situations both within and beyond the classroom.

Implications on Future Gaming Research Consistent with the finding of previous gaming reviews, this analysis indicates that the empirical research on instructional gaming is fragmented by research variables (i.e., research purpose and methodology), administrative variables (i.e., learning setting), learner variables, procedural variables (i.e., game-based pedagogy), and game variables (e.g., game genre and media). It is proposed that instead of adopting one-shot, incoherent experiments, future gaming research should take a systematic, comprehensive approach to examine dynamics governing the relations among multiple influential variables in a game-based learning system. In addition, it is found that the empirical research on instructional gaming tends to focus on traditional learner groups while ignoring adult learners, especially the elderly. Hence more evaluation studies should be conducted to measure the effects of games in adult education. Finally, instructional gaming researchers should provide clear descriptions on games used and game application contexts when reporting their game evaluation results. Without knowing the specifics of every game application, the literature reviewers will have difficulty synthesizing the impact of games across different studies using explicit decision rules.

CONCLUSION This chapter reports a grounded meta-analysis with 89 empirical studies on instructional gaming. Research features and findings of these empirical studies are synthesized qualitatively under standard coding rules. The four recurring themes (gaming research purpose and methodology,



learning, learner, and instructional game intervention) have been extracted from the analysis to outline the four clusters of influential factors that weigh in the evaluation of instructional gaming. It is argued that the best models or best practices of designing and applying instructional gaming would form by carefully aligning and integrating the three clusters of key variables-learning, learner, and instructional game design.

NOTE A single study may serve multiple research purposes.

REFERENCES Abbey, B.G. (1993, February). The impact of computer instruction on the near transfer and far transfer of a general problem solving strategy. Dissertation, University of North Texas, USA. Alkan, S., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Studying computer game learning experience through eye tracking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 538-542. Anderson, J.R. (2005). The relationship between student perceptions of team dynamics and simulation game outcomes: An individual-level analysis. Journal of Education for Business, 81(2), 85-90. Bahr, C.M., & Rieth, H.J. (1989). The effects of instructional computer games and drill and practice software on learning disabled students’ mathematics achievement. Computers in School, 6(3-4), 87-101. Barab, S., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 16(1), 59-82.

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Barker, J., Brinkman, L., & Deardorff, M. (1995). Computer intervention for adolescent children of divorce. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 23(3), 197-213. Bartholomew, L.K., Gold, R.S., Parcel, G.S., Czyzewski, D.I., Sockrider, M.M., Fernandez, M. et al. (2000). Watch, discover, think, and act: Evaluation of computer-assisted instruction to improve asthma self-management in inner-city children. Patient Education and Counseling, 39(2-3), 269-280. Ben-Zvi, T. (2007). Using business games in teaching DSS. Journal of Information Systems Education, 18(1), 113-124. Betz, J.A. (1996). Computer games: Increase learning in an interactive multidisciplinary environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 24(2), 195-205. Bottino, R.M., & Ott, M. (2006). Mind games, reasoning skills, and the primary school curriculum. Learning, Media, & Technology, 31(4), 359-375. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.

system. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 40(1), 16-26. Chen, G.-D., Shen, G.-Y., Ou, K.-L., & Liu, B.-J. (1998). Promoting motivation and eliminating disorientation for Web based courses by a multiuser game. Childress, M.D., & Braswell, R. (2006). Using massively multiplayer online role-playing games for online learning. Distance Education, 27(2), 187-196. Choi, J.I., & Hannafin, M. (1995). Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2), 53-69. Christensen, C.A., & Gerber, M.M. (1990). Effectiveness of computerized drill and practice games in teaching basic math facts. Exceptionality, 1(3), 149-165. Clark, J., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education (Educational Psychology Review, Historical Archive). Plenum.

Bright, G.W. (1988). Time-on-task in computer and non-computer estimation games. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 7(4), 41-46.

Conati, C., & Zhao, X. (2004). Building and evaluating an intelligent pedagogical agent to improve the effectiveness of an educational game. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (pp. 6-13), Funchal, Madeira, Portugal. Retrieved from http://doi.acm. org/10.1145/964442.964446

Cahill, J.M. (1994). Health works: Interactive AIDS education videogames. Computers in Human Services, 11(1), 159-176.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

Cameron, B., & Dwyer, F. (2005). The effect of online gaming, cognition and feedback type in facilitating delayed achievement of different learning objectives. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 16(3), 243-258.

De Jean, J., Upitis, R., Koch, C., & Young, J. (1999). The story of “phoenix quest”: How girls respond to a prototype language and mathematics computer game. Gender and Education, 11(2), 207-223.

Chang, L.-J., Yang, J.-C., Chan, T.-W., & Yu, F.-Y. (2003). Development and evaluation of multiple competitive activities in a synchronous quiz game

Dempsey, J.V., Rasmussen, K., & Lucassen, B. (1996). Instructional gaming: Implications for instructional technology. Proceedings of the Annual



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Nashville, TN. Dempsey, J.V., Haynes, L.L., Lucassen, B.A., & Casey, M.S. (2002). Forty simple computer games and what they could mean to educators. 33(2), 157-168.

and empirical considerations for clinical decision-making. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30(4), 363-370. Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Doyle, D., & Brown, F.W. (2000). Using a business simulation to teach applied skills: The benefits and the challenges of using student teams from multiple countries. Journal of European Industrial Training, 24(6/7), 330-336.

Goldsworthy, R.C., Barab, S.A., & Goldsworthy, E.L. (2000). The STAR project: Enhancing adolescents’ social understanding through videobased, multimedia scenarios. Journal of Special Education Technology, 15(2), 13-26.

Eggen, D., & Kauchak, D. (1996). Strategies for teachers: Teaching content and thinking skills. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Goodman, D., Bradley, N.L., Paras, B., Williamson, I.J., & Bizzochi, J. (2006). Video gaming promotes concussion knowledge acquisition in youth hockey players. Journal of Adolescence, 29(3), 351-360.

Emes, C.E. (1997). Is Mr. Pac Man eating our children? A review of the effect of video games on children. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 42(4), 409-414. Facer, K., Joiner, R., Stanton, D., Reid, J., Hull, R., & Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: Mobile gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 399-409. Forsyth, A.S. Jr. (1986, April 16-20). Applications of microcomputer search-type adventure games in research on spatial orientation, place location, and memory for places. Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA. Foss, B.A., & Eikaas, T.I. (2006). Game play in engineering education-concept and experimental results. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(5), 1043-1052. Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J.E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441. Gillam, R.B. (1999). Treatment for temporal processing deficits: Computer-assisted language intervention using Fast ForWord®: Theoretical



Gopher, D., Weil, M., & Bareket, T. (1994). Transfer of skill from a computer game trainer to flight. Human Factors, 36(3), 387-405. Grabe, M., & Dosmann, M. (1988). The potential of adventure games for the development of reading and study skills. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15(2), 72-77. Gredler, M.E. (1996). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 571-603). Association for Educational Communications and Technology. Greenfield, P.M., Camaioni, L., Ercolani, P., & Weiss, L. (1994). Cognitive socialization by computer games in two cultures: Inductive discovery or mastery of an iconic code? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(1), 59-85. Gremmen, H., & Potters, J. (1997). Assessing the efficacy of gaming in economic education. Journal of Economic Education, 28(4), 291-303. Halttunen, K., & Sormunen, E. (2000). Learning information retrieval through an educational

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

game. Is gaming sufficient for learning? Education for Information, 18(4), 289. Haynes, L.C. (2000). Gender differences in the use of a computer-based mathematics game: Strategies, motivation, and beliefs about mathematics and computers. ProQuest Information & Learning, 60(9), 3328-3624. Hays, R.T. (2005). The effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion. Retrieved May 10, 2006, from http://adlcommunity.net/file.php/23/GrooveFiles/Instr_Game_Review_Tr_2005.pdf Henderson, L., Klemes, J., & Eshet, Y. (2000). Just playing a game? Educational Simulation Software and Cognitive Outcomes, 22(1), 105-129. Hogle, J.G. (1996). Considering games as cognitive tools: In search of effective “edutainment.” Retrieved January 12, 2005, from ERIC ED 425737. Horn, E., Jones, H.A., & Hamlett, C. (1991). An investigation of the feasibility of a video game system for developing scanning and selection skills. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 16(2), 108-115. Hossler, D., & Scalese-Love, P. (1989). Grounded meta-analysis: A guide for research synthesis. Review of Higher Education, 13(1), 1-28. Inal, Y., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of children in an interactive social game environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 455-464. Johnson, C.W. (1993). Effectiveness of a computerbased AIDS education game: BlockAIDS. Retrieved April 10, 2007, from ERIC ED 363277. Ju, E., & Wagner, C. (1997 ). Personal computer adventure games: Their structure, principles, and applicability for training. SIGMIS Database, 28(2), 78-92. Retrieved from http://doi.acm. org/10.1145/264701.264707

Kafai, Y.B., & Ching, C.C. (1996 ). Meaningful contexts for mathematical learning: The potential of game making activities Proceedings of the 1996 International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 164-171). Kambouri, M., Thomas, S.N., & Mellar, H. (2006). Playing the literacy game: A case study in adult education. Learning, Media, & Technology, 31(4), 395-410. Kashibuchi, M., & Sakamoto, A. (2001). The educational effectiveness of a simulation/game in sex education. Simulation & Gaming, 32(3), 331-343. Ke, F., & Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: Cooperative or not? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 249-259. Kenkel, P., & Others, A. (1996). Designing an international joint venture negotiation game. Simulation & Gaming, 27(3), 316-331. Kiili, K. (2005). Content creation challenges and flow experience in educational games: The IT-Emperor case. Internet & Higher Education, 8(3), 183-198. Kiili, K. (2007). Foundation for problem-based gaming. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 394-404. Ko, S. (2002). An empirical analysis of children’s thinking and learning in a computer game context. Educational Psychology, 22(2), 219-233. Kutnick, P. (1997). Computer-based problem-solving: The effects of group composition and social skills on a cognitive, joint action task. Educational Research, 39(2), 135-147. Laurel, B. (1991). Computers as theatre. Boston: Addison-Wesley Longman. Leemkuil, H., de Jong, T., & Ootes, S. (2000). Review of educational use of games and simulations. Knowledge Management Interactive Training System Project No. IST-1999-13078,



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

University of Twente, The Netherlands. Retrieved August 1, 2006, from http://kits.edte.utwente. nl/documents/D1.pdf

Mayer, R.E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects of problem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 49-63.

Leger, P.-M. (2006). Using a simulation game approach to teach enterprise resource planning concepts. Journal of Information Systems Education, 17(4), 441-447.

McMullen, D.W. (1987). Drills vs. games—any differences? A pilot study.

Leutner, D. (1993). Guided discovery learning with computer-based simulation games: Effects of adaptive and non-adaptive instructional support. 3(2), 113-132. Light, R.J., & Pillemer, D.B. (1982). Numbers and narrative: Combining their strengths in research reviews. Harvard Educational Review, 52(1), 1-26. Lim, C.P., Nonis, D., & Hedberg, J. (2006). Gaming in a 3D multi-user virtual environment: Engaging students in science lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 211-231. Malone, T.W. (1981). What makes computer games fun? Byte, 6, 258-277. Malouf, D.B. (1987). The effect of instructional computer games on continuing student motivation. Journal of Special Education, 21(4), 27-38. Malouf, D.B. (1988). The effect of instructional computer games on continuing student motivation. 21(4), 27-38. Mandinach, E.B., & Corno, L. (1985). Cognitive engagement variations among students of different ability level and sex in a computer problem solving game. Sex Roles, 13(3-4), 241-251. Mandinach, E.B. (1987). Clarifying the ‘A’ in CAI for learners of different abilities. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 3(1), 113-128. Martens, R., Gulikers, J., & Bastiaens, T. (2004). The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(5), 368-376.



Michelsen, E., Zaff, J.F., & Hair, E.C. (2002). Civic engagement programs and youth development: A synthesis. Washington, DC: Child Trends. Miller, C.S., Lehman, J.F., & Koedinger, K.R. (1999). Goals and learning in microworlds. Cognitive Science: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 23(3), 305-336. Moreno, R. (2004). Decreasing cognitive load for novice students: Effects of explanatory versus corrective feedback in discovery-based multimedia. Instructional Science, 32(1/2), 99-113. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2002). Learning science in virtual reality multimedia environments: Role of methods and media. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 598-610. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(1), 165-173. Noble, A., Best, D., Sidwell, C., & Strang, J. (2000). Is an arcade-style computer game an effective medium for providing drug education to schoolchildren? Education for Health: Change in Learning & Practice, 13(3), 404-406. Noblitt, G.W., & Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. London: Sage. Okolo, C.M., & Others, A. (1990). Learning disabled students’ acquisition of keyboarding skills and continuing motivation under drill-and-practice and game conditions. Learning Disabilities Research, 5(2), 100-109. Okolo, C.M. (1992). The effect of computer-assisted instruction format and initial attitude on

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

the arithmetic facts proficiency and continuing motivation of students with learning disabilities. Exceptionality: A Research Journal, 3(4), 195-211. Ota, K.R., & DuPaul, G.J. (2002). Task engagement and mathematics performance in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects of supplemental computer instruction. School Psychology Quarterly, 17(3), 242-257. Oyen, A.-S., & Bebko, J.M. (1996). The effects of computer games and lesson contexts on children’s mnemonic strategies. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 62(2), 173-189. Padgett, L.S., Strickland, D., & Coles, C.D. (2006). Case study: Using a virtual reality computer game to teach fire safety skills to children diagnosed with fetal alcohol syndrome. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 31(1), 65-70. Pannese, L., & Carlesi, M. (2007). Games and learning come together to maximize effectiveness: The challenge of bridging the gap. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 438-454. Paperny, D.M., & Starn, J.R. (1989). Adolescent pregnancy prevention by health education computer games: Computer-assisted instruction of knowledge and attitudes. Pediatrics, 83(5), 742. Perzov, A., & Kozminsky, E. (1989). The effect of computer games practice on the development of visual perception skills in kindergarten children. Computers in the Schools, 6(3-4), 113-122. Pillay, H. (2002). An investigation of cognitive processes engaged in by recreational computer game players: Implications for skills of the future. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(3), 336-350. Pillay, H., Brownlee, J., & Wilss, L. (1999). Cognition and recreational computer games: Implications for educational technology. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 203.

Piper, A.M., O’Brien, E., Morris, M.R., & Winograd, T. (2006). SIDES: A cooperative tabletop computer game for social skills development. Proceedings of the 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 1-10), Banff, Alberta, Canada. Retrieved from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1180875.1180877 Pintrich, P.R., & De Groot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33-40. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Provost, J.A. (1990). Work, play, and type: Achieving balance in your life. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press. Rai, S., Wong, K.W., & Cole, P. (2006 ). Game construction as a learning tool. Proceedings of the 2006 International Conference on Game Research and Development (pp. 231-236), Perth, Australia. Randel, J.M., Morris, B., Wetzel, C., & Whitehill, B. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: A review of recent research. Simulation & Gaming, 23(3), 261. Ravenscroft, A., & Matheson, M.P. (2002). Developing and evaluating dialogue games for collaborative e-learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 93-101. Renaud, L., & Suissa, S. (1989). Evaluation of the efficacy of simulation games in traffic safety education of kindergarten children. American Journal of Public Health, 79(3), 307-309. Rieber, L.P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology, Research, and Development, 44(1), 43-58.



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Ricci, K.E., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J.A. (1996). Do computer-based games facilitate knowledge acquisition and retention? Military Psychology, 8(4), 295-307. Robertson, J., & Good, J. (2005). Children’s narrative development through computer game authoring. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49(5), 43-59. Salomon, G., Perkins, D.N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2-9. Sandford, R., Ulicsak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2007). Teaching with games. Learning, Media & Technology, 32(1), 101-105. Santos, J. (2002). Developing and implementing an Internet-based financial system simulation game. Journal of Economic Education, 33(1), 31-40. Shaffer, D.W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & Education, 46(3), 223-234. Simms, B.E. (1998). The effects of an educational computer game on motivation to learn basic musical skills: A qualitative study. ProQuest Information & Learning, 59(3-A), 766. Slavin, R.E. (1986). Best-evidence synthesis: An alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educational Researchers, 15(9), 5-11. Spivey, P.M. (1985). The effects of computerassisted instruction on student achievement in addition and subtraction at first-grade level. Squire, K., & Barab, S. (2004). Replaying history: Engaging urban underserved students in learning world history through computer simulation games. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 505-512). Santa Monica, CA: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

0

Squire, K., Barnett, M., Grant, J.M., & Higginbotham, T. (2004). Electromagnetism supercharged! Learning physics with digital simulation games. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 513-520). Santa Monica, CA: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Stone, R.A. (1995). The business strategy game: Faculty experiences and student perceptions. Journal of Management Education, 19(2), 281290. Strommen, E.F. (1993). “Does yours eat leaves?” Cooperative learning in an educational software task. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 4(1), 45-56. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285. Taylor, M. (1987). The implementation and evaluation of a computer simulation game in a university course. Journal of Experimental Education, 55(2), 108-115. Thomas, R., & Cahill, J. (1997). Using an interactive computer game to increase skill and self-efficacy regarding safer sex. Health Education & Behavior, 24(1), 71-86. Tuzun, H. (2007). Blending video games with learning: Issues and challenges with classroom implementations in the Turkish context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 465-477. Tzeng, S.-C. (2000). Optimizing challenges and skills in the design of an educational computer game and exploring adolescents’ gaming beliefs. ProQuest Information & Learning, 60(11), 3894. Van Eck, R. (2006). The effect of contextual pedagogical advisement and competition on middleschool students’ attitude toward mathematics and

A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

mathematics instruction using a computer-based simulation game. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 25(2), 165-195. Vogel, J.J., Greenwood-Ericksen, A., CannonBowers, J., & Bowers, C.A. (2006a). Using virtual reality with and without gaming attributes for academic achievement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(1), 105-118.

tration nurse education. Nurse Education Today, 16(5), 334-339. Wolfe, J. (1997). The effectiveness of business games in strategic management course work. Simulation & Gaming, 28(4), 360-376. Yip, F.W.M., & Kwan, A.C.M. (2006). Online vocabulary games as a tool for teaching and learning English vocabulary. Educational Media International, 43(3), 233-249.

Vogel, J.F., Vogel, D.S., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bowers, C.A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006b). Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3), 229-243.

KEY TERMS

Walters, B.A., & Others, A. (1997). Simulation games in business policy courses: Is there value for students? 72(3), 170-174.

Effect Size: A name given to a family of indices that measure the magnitude of a treatment effect.

Washbush, J., & Gosen, J. (2001). An exploration of game-derived learning in total enterprise simulations. Simulation & Gaming, 32(3), 281.

Game Genre: Computer games are categorized into genres based on their game-play. Due to a general lack of commonly agreed-upon criteria for the definition of genres, classification of games is not always consistent.

Wegerif, R., Littleton, K., & Jones, A. (2003). Stand-alone computers supporting learning dialogues in primary classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 39(8), 851-860. Wellington, W., Faria, A.J., & Nulsen, R.O. Jr. (1996). An empirical investigation into the nature of the learning process in a computer-based simulation game. Marketing Education Review, 6(3), 15-36. Whitehill, B.V., & McDonald, B.A. (1993). Improving learning persistence of military personnel by enhancing motivation in a technical training program. Simulation & Gaming, 24(3), 294-313. Wiebe, J.H., & Martin, N.J. (1994). The impact of computer-based adventure game achievement and attitudes in geography. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 5(1), 61-71. Wildman, S., & Reeves, M. (1996). The utilization and evaluation of a simulation game in pre-regis-

Game Play: In computer game terminology, used to describe the overall experience of playing the game. It refers to “what player does.” Grounded Theory: A qualitative research method that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived theory about a phenomenon. The primary objective of grounded theory is to expand upon an explanation of a phenomenon by identifying the key elements of that phenomenon, and then categorizing the relationships of those elements to the context and process of the experiment. Instructional Support Features: Instructional support, or “instructional overlay,” is the component that serves to optimize learning and motivation within a multimedia learning environment, such as a simulation or game.



A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Computer Games as Learning Tools

Simulation: A computer simulation is a computer program that attempts to simulate an abstract model of a particular system.



Simulation Game: A game that contains a mixture of skill, chance, and strategy to simulate an aspect of reality, or a simulation that has a game structure imposed on the system.



Chapter II

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning Aroutis N. Foster Michigan State University, USA Punya Mishra Michigan State University, USA

AbstrAct We offer a framework for conducting research on games for learning. Building on a survey of the literature on games, we suggest a categorization scheme (physiological and psychological) of the range of claims made for games. Our survey identifies three critical issues in the current scholarship. They are: a lack of authentic, situated research studies; a lack of sensitivity to the pedagogical affordances of different game genres; and a lack of emphasis on the importance of acquiring disciplinary knowledge (i.e., content). We offer the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework as a way to address these concerns and guide future research in this area. We argue that assessment on learning from games needs to consider the specific claims of games, as they interact with genre and content knowledge. Finally, we introduce an ongoing study that utilizes this approach.

INtrODUctION The nature of technology and the way we socialize ourselves has changed over time (Johnson, 2005) and the effects of these changes are reflected in the myriad of arguments about technology integration in schools (Cuban, 1986). Electronics games form a large part of the media environment of today’s

children. In 2006, 30% of the most frequent computer game players and 40% of console game players were under 18 years old (Entertainment Software Association, 2006). Further, American children between 8 and 18 years old play video games for an average of seven hours per week (National Institute on Media and the Family, 2005). It is evident that games capture children’s

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

attention and engage them in important ways. Clearly, designers, educators, and researchers need to develop a better understanding of how to integrate electronic games in classroom teaching. This requires knowing that the value of electronic games for learning comes not from merely inserting games into the curriculum, but rather on how different game genres reflect underlying pedagogical strategies that allow for learning in different content areas. This advent of games in everyday life comes at a time of perceived crisis in education. For instance the President of the Federation of American Scientists, Henry Kelly, says that education in the United States is facing a critical problem in that it must educate students to face the challenges of the 21st century (Federation of American Scientists, 2005; Kelly, 2005). International studies, such as Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), and national assessments such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that U.S. students are not performing up to standard in mathematics, science, or literacy (Gonzales et al., 2004; Hampden-Thompson, Johnston, & American Institutes for Research, 2006). The report by the Federation of American Scientists argues that video games may be a powerful way of helping students learn what they need in order to succeed in a globalized world. Video games capture children’s attention and imagination because they challenge, present fantasy, and generate curiosity through interactivity and intelligent design of game-play (Malone, 1981). Thus, it is not surprising to hear that games present a unique opportunity to educators to use the interests of children as a way to educate them. The use of video games for learning is argued by many to arise from the affordances of video gamesin particular, video games allow learners to immerse themselves in highly interactive and engaging experiences. Such experiences can lead to contextual learning of complex activities



and the development of understanding, skills, and innovativeness (Fabricatore, 2000; Greenfield et al., 1994; Subrahmanyan, Greenfield, Kraut, & Gross, 2001). Based on increased possibilities for learning from video games, it is not surprising that a great deal of attention is being paid to the role of video games in education (Foreman, 2003; Kelly, 2005; Shaffer, Squire, Halverson, & Gee, 2005). There are a wide range of claims made about games, both positive and negative. On one side are positive claims, such as a recognition of the power games have to motivate learners, while on the other are negative claims, such as the idea that playing violent video games can lead to increased aggressive behavior. The wide diversity of these claims makes it difficult to engage in a rational discussion about the effects of games because different groups can have wildly divergent conceptualizations of the kinds of games (and their effects) they are talking about. It is clear that we need to develop a way of classifying or categorizing these claims in order to develop a shared frame from within which to discuss these issues. In the section below, we discuss and elaborate on the various types of claims made by people designing, using, and studying video games, with the goal of developing such a categorization scheme.

The Claims of Games Proponents of games say that we should be preparing students to be innovative, creative, and adaptable in order to deal with the demands of learning in domains that are ill structured (Federation of American Scientists, 2006; Gee, 2003, 2005a, 2005b, 2007a). They (e.g., Gee, 2003; Prensky, 2001) go on to argue that games provide many of the essential affordances that are needed for learning in these contexts (Foreman, 2004). Games, according to these scholars, are a medium in which students are intrinsically motivated to be competent, autonomous, cognitively flexible risk takers (without serious consequences of taking

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

these risks). Further, playing games differs from interaction with other media because “one literally learns by playing” and usually does not sit down to read a manual first (Sandford & Williamson, 2005). Thus, it is argued that games present an opportunity to use the interests of children as a way to educate them in a situated and embodied manner for the kinds of skills increasingly required for surviving and thriving in a globalized world (Barab, Bransford, Greeno, & Gee, 2007; Barab, Dodge, & Ingram-Goble, 2007; Gee, 2007b). Opponents to the use of games for learning argue that games are just another technological fad (akin to predictions made about cinema and television in years past). They argue that video games may be a waste of time and possibly cause increased violence and aggression, and decrease prosocial behaviors in players (Walsh, 1998). Moreover, they argue that playing games has negative consequences such as inactivity and obesity, and emphasizes the superficial as opposed to the deep ideas and ways of thinking that characterize disciplinary learning. What is interesting is that both groups, while seemingly disagreeing with each other, actually agree with each other at a more fundamental level. What both groups share is a deterministic stance towards technology—that this new technology of video games will lead to specific effects on users of the technology. In other words, what both sides agree on is that children can learn from games or that games can lead to changes in behavior. What they disagree on is whether this learning is beneficial or harmful. Irrespective of which camp one agrees with, we believe that it is important for us, as scholars and researchers, to carefully study the kinds of claims being made for games and to what extent these claims are based on armchair theorizing and wishful thinking rather than sound research. For this purpose we conducted a comprehensive survey of claims about games for learning (Mishra & Foster, 2007). We surveyed over 60 different sources of information. We cast a wide

net, including in our search online magazines, empirical and conceptual articles, newspaper articles, Weblogs, Web journals (electronic and paper), game Web sites, books, university Web sites, and conference proceedings. Through this process we ended up with more than 250 distinct claims that we transcribed either written verbatim or paraphrased (see examples in Table 1). Using a grounded theory analysis, the claims were then systematically and thematically assigned a code relating to game effects or learning such as “expertise development” or “logical thinking.” After assigning the claims to themes, the themes were then coded and assigned to two emergent broad groups of “psychological” and “physiological” effects. Further, coding the list of claims within the psychological effects group led to identifying four sub-categories. These sub-categories within the psychological group include: practical skills, cognitive skills, motivation, and social skills. Within the physiological effects group, there were fewer claims than in the psychological effects group, which resulted in seven specific but comprehensive categories of effect (see Figure 1). Within both the psychological and physiological claims, there were both positive and negative effects. One clear distinction between the two major categories (the physiological and psychological) was that the physiological scheme focused on claims that are more developmental or behavioral. In contrast, the psychological scheme focused on claims that are cognitively and socially oriented. We must add the caveat that there is no clear or sharp distinction between these categories and there is (as should be expected) some degree of overlap between themthat is, there are some psychological claims that one could say cause physiological effects and vice versa. Our analysis indicates that these claimed effects are related to learning and development in four ways, by shaping attitudes, affecting behavior, influencing understanding, and affecting spatial and motor abilities. In the sections below we describe each



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Table 1. Examples of the claims of games for learning “Game users are no more likely than non-game users to be involved in risk-taking behavior.” (Bosworth, 1994) Proficiency at game may afford players a temporary sense of mastery, control, and achievement that was previously found lacking. (Mitchell & Savill-Smith, 2004, p. 8) Violent video games increase aggressive cognition, physiological arousal, and aggressive behavior, and affect and decrease prosocial behavior (Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Carnagey & Anderson, 2004) Frequent gaming orients one to a computer society. (Greenfield et al., 1994) Simulator games can help in the development of all intellectual abilities and a mind for machines. (De Aguilera & Mendiz, 2003, p. 11) Video game playing empowers players in a way that translates into real-world activism (civic activism). (Williams, 2004) “Heavy use of computer games is associated with negative rather than positive outcomes in terms of academic achievement, self-esteem and sociability.” (Roe & Muijs, 1998, p. 1) “Computer games and simulators enhance learning through visualization, experimentation, and creativity of play. Increased learning occurs by problem solving in a complex interactive multidisciplinary environment and by ‘seeing’ causal relationships between individual actions and whole systems.” (Betz, 1996)

of these categories (and sub-categories) in greater detail.

Physiological Scheme Within the physiological scheme, there were seven specific effects of how games relate to learning and development. These include aggressiveness, violence, antisocial behavior, introversion, motor skills, coordination, and obesity. An example of these claims is, “violent video games increase aggressive cognition, physiological arousal and aggressive behavior and affect and decrease prosocial behavior” (Carnagey & Anderson, 2004).

Psychological Scheme The psychological scheme could further be broken down into four sub-categories about how games relate to learning and development. These include practical skills, cognitive skills, motivation, and social skills, as shown in the continuum of psychological claims in Figure 1. Social skills also encompass identity formation, which also has sub-themes relating to it such as valuing roles and role-playing (see Figure 1). 

Practical Skills Practical skills refer to learning in games that contribute directly to the development of skills that are applicable to the real world or authentic settings. It is argued that game playing can lead to learning on how to use technology, as well as expertise development, innovativeness, and creativity. It is worth noting that these are skills that have been identified as being critical for success in the 21st century (Greenfield et al., 1994; Shaffer & Gee, 2005).

Cognitive Skills Another set of claims about games was related to the acquisition of cognitive skills. It was argued that games, through linking knowledge and doing, support the idea of learning by doing (Barab, Hay, Barnett, & Squire, 2001; Shaffer et al., 2005). People who make these claims argue that players learn by engaging in some activity and develop firsthand experience of that activity or system. Based on arguments about affordances of electronic games for immediate feedback, so-

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Figure 1. Emergent themes from the claims of games

cialization and collaboration, cognitive supports, problem solving, and transfer, to name a few, proponents make claims about what is possible for learning based on research in the cognitive sciences. For instance, two such claims are: “The instant feedback and risk-free environment invite exploration and experimentation, stimulating curiosity, discovery learning and perseverance” (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004), and “Virtual worlds of games are powerful because playing games means developing a set of effective social practices” (Shaffer et al., 2005).

Motivation A third sub-category of claims in the psychological domain has to do with the motivational power of

games. For instance, these sets of claims emphasize the affordances of game environments to intrinsically motivate students to learn (Cordova & Lepper, 1996). These claims are based on motivational principles for empowering learners, including the ability to grant power, autonomy, and challenge at a player’s level and implications for learners’ identity. For instance, the fact that certain electronic games allow you to take on an identity different from your own leads to the claim that, “People learn most deeply when they take on a new identity that they really want” (Foreman, 2004). Similar claims are made based on the fact that games provide challenges adjusted to the player’s ability, provide the player with clear and immediate feedback, and give players choice and control over their actions (Games-To Teach Research Project, 2006).



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Social Skills The fourth sub-category in the psychological category has to do with the development of social skills. In this context, social skills are related to when players collaborate with other players or when players learn about working with others in gaming situations. It is argued that playing games allows players to develop interpersonal skills, learn to work with others, and develop identities that could be good or bad depending on the type of game and player’s personality. An example of these claims is that video games allow “social and collaborative practices to emerge” among players (Sandford & Williamson, 2005).

The Claims of Games: Identifying Problems One first benefit of this survey and categorization of the claims for games is that it provides us (as scholars and researchers) a way to systematically talk about games and what benefits (or harms) they can bring to the learning process. By breaking these claims down into different categories (somewhat independent categories, and sub-categories), we can make some sense of the varied arguments being made, both for and against the use of games for learning. Additionally, categorizing these claims allows us to study which of these claims are supported by research and which are reasoned arguments based on the affordances provided by games. In brief, our survey revealed that there is much that we still need to know about the relationship between games and learning. In particular we identify three key problems in these claims being made for learning games: (a) the kind of support (research or theoretical) that underlies many of these claims; (b) treating games as being a monolithic entity (i.e., ignoring game genres and their differential potential for learning; and (c) the content-neutral nature of many of these claims. We consider each of these in turn.



Research and Theoretical Support for the Claims for Games In their recent review of the games literature, Mitchell and Savill-Smith (2004) said that the literature base relating to the use of computer games for learning appears to remain small. In a similar vein, Williams (2004) found that research in game-based learning continues to use inappropriate samples, conflated variables, and failed to acknowledge game genre which limits their claims. Thus, the claims of games we present above seem to have emerged mainly from lab studies and continue to be echoed by researchers without verification. Most of these claims are based on logical arguments and some from small-scale lab studies; most have not been confirmed in studies. In fact, these reviews (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; Mitchell & Savill-Smith, 2004; Randel, Morris, Wetzel, & Whitehill, 1992) all found that there are no firm conclusions about learning, although most students reported an interest in using games to learn rather than using conventional classroom instructions. It is worth noting that these studies were not longitudinal, hence longterm game effects could not be validated. Two recent dissertations (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2005; Squire, 2004) that were more realistic (situated in classrooms) revealed that students learned “superficial informationnot enough to satisfy students’ educational needs, but enough for them to grasp on it.” In Squire’s (2004) dissertation, which examined students playing Civilization III, one of his conclusions was that there was an incompatibility between the game content and what was required for the school curriculum. However, both Squire (2004) and Egenfeldt-Nielsen (2005) concluded that students developed a more holistic understanding and interest in historical information. Our review showed the strengths and weaknesses of current research practice. Generally the strengths are that there is a trend in studies moving away from lab environments such as Beckett

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

and Shaffer (2005), Williams (2004), EgenfeldtNielsen (2005), and Squire (2004). Further studies such as Beckett and Shaffer are seeking to augment game playing with reality-based support to try and get children to develop epistemic frames (Shaffer, 2006; Shaffer & Gee, 2005). In conclusion, most of the claims of games are not supported by research or the research support is from small studies, which puts into question the generalizability of the results to different contexts and populations.

Games as Monolithic Entity (i.e., Ignoring Game Genres) There are many different kinds of games (which we consider being different genres) and it is clear that these claims of learning (we list and categorize above) do not apply equally to all games. Clearly, playing Guitar Hero has very different learning consequences (both physiological and psychological) than playing World of Warcraft or Space Invaders. Too often, arguments about learning from games have treated games as a monolithic entity, leading people to assume that the pedagogical value of one game is the same as that of another. Such thinking is problematic. Mixing the strengths and weaknesses across genres of games with others misrepresents the varied potential that different genres of games can offer. We argue that it is important to look carefully at game genre because each game genre reflects a certain design stance taken towards any given domain. In other words, the design of a game, the kinds of choices regarding game-play, structure, the nature of progress through a game, the nature of representation and so on, are all the results of conscious (and maybe subconscious) decisions made by game designers. This design stance, from an educational point of view, can be seen to be an implicit pedagogical approach—with implicit theories of learning, behavior, and epistemology. Electronic game genres influence game-play mechanics, which then influence what can be done

and learned through playing electronic games. Similar to how movie genres shape the design stance behind a movie that is created, video game genres shape the mechanism and design stance in games. Organizing video games by genres is not a new idea. However, our goal is not merely to classify various game genres, but rather to try and connect these genres to the claims of games in order to develop a systematic approach for the study of games and assessment of kinds of learning that can occur through playing different genres of games. A survey of the game genre literature indicates that there is little agreement on how game genres are created or classified. This has led to multiple classification schemes, based on existing categorizations and conceptualizations, such as according to existing movie genres, and visual representation and aesthetics (Apperley, 2006; Caldwell, 2004; Wolf, 2001). These approaches include Apperley’s (2006) idea of using interactivity or non-representational characteristics to examine genres, Wolf’s (2001) classification of genres based on the Library of Congress Moving Imagery Genre-Form Guide, and King and Krzywinska’s (2002) four levels of classification according to platform, genre, mode, and milieu. Apperley (2006) synthesizes these approaches and asserts that the key aspects of video games are their interactivity characteristics, the way the games are played (or experienced). In contrast to the visual aesthetics (or iconography) of games, which can vary greatly, Apperley (2006) argues that it is these interactivity characteristics that are common to all games. This typology would allow us to focus on the non-representational, specifically interactive characteristics of video games in order to create a “more nuanced, meaningful, and critical vocabulary for discussing video games” (p. 7). This view is similar to Wolf’s (2001) classification of video game genres developed by the Library of Congress Moving Imagery GenreForm Guide.1



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Figure 2. How the claims of games for learning and game genres should connect in research

A ction / Shooter

Both Apperley (2006) and Wolf (2001) argue that video game genres should be classified via interactivitythat is, video game genres should be classified by the way people experience or proceed in them because other classification strategies (such as classification by iconography) ignore the differences and similarities found in a player’s experience of a game. We believe that classifying games on the basis of interactivity makes sense when we think of educational games as well. We adopt Apperley’s (2006) and Wolf’s (2001) use of interactivity to classify game genres due to its flexibility for educational purposes. Contemporary learning theories argue that learning is not a simple process of transfer of information, but rather is developed through the learner’s active engagement with subject matter, situated within specific contexts. Espen Arseth’s notion of ergodicity, defined as non-trivial effort used to traverse text, can be fruitfully applied here. Thus we can view interactivity as the non-trivial effort or actions taken in playing video games. It is this effort to traverse the “text” of the video game that sets this medium apart. Video games

40

R PG

Platform

Simulation

Sports

Strategy

Adventure

Claims of Games

Fighting

Parlour

R hythm / Dance

Video Game Genres

have specific objectives (akin to learning goals) that a player tries to complete through specific interactions with the system. Game mode, milieu, and platform also affect the spaces and social relations created by the game, and thus the interactive, ergodic process of playing the game. Our analysis indicates that there are approximately 10 main game genres (see Figure 2). They include: action/shooter, fighting, roleplaying, simulation, strategy, rhythm/dance, parlor, adventure, sports, and platform games. These 10 are by no means meant to be exhaustive (particularly given the rapid rate of evolution of games and game genres), but merely represent one scheme that covers most of the other sub-genres. For instance, in our content analysis we saw that most of the games covered under shooter were also action, so we combined those genres into one. Further, many games can fall into more than one genre. Finally, we must accept the fact that game genres will change with time, through the advent of new technologies and new techniques of game-play.

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

The relationship between game genres and the claims of games is two-way. A given genre may be connected to many different claims about learning from games, and a given claim may be connected to multiple genres. For instance, roleplaying games (RPG) may afford more opportunities for developing identities because one plays through a surrogate character. They may, through the insertion of quests and puzzles, also help in the development of physiological skills. That said, we argue that focusing on the connection between game genres and the claims of games can be a key unit for assessment in game-based learning. What we have argued so far provides a premise for the practical, cognitive, social, and motivational affordances for a particular game. The genres provide a situated or contextual place for examining these affordances within particular domains. The claims of games for learning are hypotheses to be examined within game genre, while the genres describe the nature of interaction within an electronic game as well as the expected pedagogical and epistemological stance. The genres provide a lens to address video games as a semiotic domain via the interactivity characteristics or the way the game is experienced/played within each genre. This enables the assessment of the internal or content aspects of games and the external aspects or the ways of seeing, believing, acting, interacting, and thinking within the domain (Gee, 1999, 2003).

The Content-Neutral Nature of Many of These Claims Gardner (2006) has argued that the most important invention of the past 2,000 years has been “the scholarly disciplines.” These disciplines, he writes, “represent the most advanced and best ways to think about issues consequential to human beings.” He continues that “the sort of discipline involved in scholarly modes of thinking is far from intuitive [and] is difficult to attain.” This is because “we have not evolved to carry out his-

torical studies, compute trigonometric functions, compose a fugue, pursue a set of experimental investigations in biology, chemistry, or physics, let alone to create testable theories in these spheres” (Gardner, 2006, pp. 137-138). In other words, acquiring disciplinary knowledge is difficult and requires the devotion of years of education in the big ideas and nuances of the disciplines. If games are to be successful for pedagogical purposes, they need to consider ways in which disciplinary knowledge can be thoughtfully integrated with game-play. In other words, it is critical that games embody in them ways of thinking and working with information that is particular to a given subject matter. It is important to realize that disciplinary knowledge varies greatly from one discipline to another and needs to be reflected in both the design and research into games for learning. Most current research in learning from electronic games does not address this issue of disciplinary knowledge—restricting itself, for the most part, to generic bromides about learning. Game designers and researchers contend that games embody a theory of learning that is reflected by the best research in the cognitive sciences (Foreman, 2003, 2004). However, ignoring the unique aspects of disciplinary knowledge for a given content area indicates that these learning theories, though useful in principle, may not be as much so for actual application. It is no surprise that, while games for entertainment are good at embodying pedagogy for learning the rules of those games in order to win, games for learning are often characterized as “chocolate covered broccoli” (Laurel, 2003). We argue that this interplay between games, pedagogy, and content needs to be understood better, if the claims of games are to hold true. The problem is related to the kind of pedagogy employed by commercial games vs. those employed by educational games. Educational game designers are faced with the conundrum of trying to use game pedagogies that worked in entertainment settings to educational settings. To clarify,



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

we are not arguing that simulation strategy games like Civilization or The SIMS do not allow students to participate in discourses such as history, economics, and so forth at a level where they develop critical understanding of the process of learning and understanding semiotic domains (Gee, 2003; Squire, 2004), but rather that this lack of emphasis on disciplinary knowledge can become a significant stumbling block as games increasingly become part of the learning environment (particularly when attempting to integrate with school settings). In Squire’s (2004) dissertation examining the commercial simulation strategy game Civilization III integration in classrooms, he found that the game content was incompatible with the school curricula and hence school goals, though students learned general things about history and engaged in critical dialog about the historical content. However, some researchers and historians contend that Civilization has design limitations (such as a mismatch between content and game-play dynamics) that end up promoting naïve understandings of history (such as a belief that history has a definite goal) (Caldwell, 2004; Friedman, 1999). A good example of how the pedagogical constraints of schools can restrict how technology is designed and used relates to the use of educational computer games. A study comparing commercial games to educational games found that commercial games often were more demanding than educational games in terms of cognitive effort as well as in time required for mastery (Heeter et al., 2003). Educational games were easier to install, easier to learn, less complex, shorter, less challenging to play, and required less social interaction than commercial games. Heeter et al. (2003) asserted that these qualities resulted mainly from the need to fit game playing into standard school schedule 45- to 50-minute timeslots. What was clear from the study was that the constraints of working within a school setting led to game-design solutions that constrained playability, particularly related to the length and



complexity of game-play, and thus limited what students could learn from the game. The authors argue that constraining games to a format that is playable in classroom settings may pose a bigger challenge to designers interested in creating fun, educational games than the need to integrate curriculum-based subject matter. This emphasis on pedagogy through play leads Heeter et al. (2003) to argue that educational games are schizophrenic, in that they continually try to serve two masters, content learning and fun. Clearly game designers and scholars need to think of some manner in which to talk about this gap. We argue that the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) framework (Mishra & Koehler, 2006) is one way of making this connection.

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge and Games for Learning TPCK is a framework used to describe teacher knowledge for technology integration (Mishra & Koehler, 2006)2 (see Figure 3). Within the context of game design (or game design research), the TPCK framework can help us identify some important aspects in the design of an education game. The framework can help point to critical components that need to be considered in any assessment of learning from educational gaming. We describe below some of the critical components of the TPCK framework. Readers seeking a more detailed description should visit http://www.tpck.org. The TPCK framework builds on Shulman’s (1986) idea of pedagogical content knowledge—the crafting of content for pedagogical purposesand argues that any technology solution to a pedagogical problem needs to consider the role-play by three components: content (C), pedagogy (P), and technology (T). The intersection of P and C is what Shulman would call pedagogical content knowledge (PCK).

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Figure 3. Technological pedagogical content knowledge

From the point of view of educational games, we can see the intersection between T and P as technological pedagogical content knowledge. The TPCK wiki describes TPK as follows: Technological Pedagogical Knowledge is knowledge of the existence, components, and capabilities of various technologies as they are used in teaching and learning settings, and conversely, knowing how teaching might change as the result of using particular technologies. This might include an understanding that a range of tools exists for a particular task, the ability to choose a tool based on its fitness, strategies for using the tool’s affordances, and knowledge of pedagogical strategies and the ability to apply those strategies for use of technologies. What is interesting from the point of view of learning games is the strong family resemblances (Wittgenstein, 1953) TPK has to the classification of game genres we discussed earlier. The TPCK framework provides for a focused analysis on how technology integrates with content and pedagogy. Game genres, especially when seen through the lens of interactivity, are just a shorthand way

of describing how a particular game integrates pedagogy and technology. If a good educational game should seamlessly integrate all three aspects of TPCKnamely T, P, and Cour analysis of game genres shows that two of the three components of TPCK are already present (i.e., T and P). Clearly what is missing from the discussion is any discussion of C (content). Thus the goal of educational game designers is to think about how this third circle can be brought into the framework. The inclusion of the TPCK approach provides us with a framework for analyzing the content of games and how they integrate with game genres, and through that provide us insight into how learning could occur and how that learning could be assessed. In the next section we provide an example of how the TPCK framework can be fruitfully used in the design of a research study on learning from games. This is from an ongoing project currently being developed by the first author.



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Games and Learning Assessment Framework: An Example The focus of this study is on the kinds of learning that students can get from playing an economic simulation strategy game RollerCoaster Tycoon 3: Platinum (RCT3). RCT3 is one of the games from the RollerCoaster Tycoon series of games first developed by Chris Sawyer in 1999. The aim of the game is to build the best amusement park and generate as much profit as possible while managing other resources. The design and building of the theme park is directly related to how much profit is made in terms of cost-benefit, opportunity cost, or balancing constraints and affordances in the amusement park. The game, like others in the genre, allows players to control a whole theme park from managing resources, training and disciplining workers, building rides, and trying to maintain a beautiful and clean park, while also entertaining visitors and VIPs. Players can design their own theme park, rollercoaster, and other rides, or they can modify existing parks and purchase the rides. Players must also meet the needs of patrons visiting their park by building facilities such as food stalls, drink stands, ATMs, information booths, bathrooms, benches, and many more amenities. Central to the game is that players must manage their resources and balance their budgets in expenses and income. Players must also consider the affordances of their designs of rides with respect to the game needs as dictated by terrain and available money, their needshow they want their park to lookand the visitors’

needs for a certain excitement level and intensity of rides. RCT3 allows for the development of practical skills related to expertise development, cognitive skills related to systemic thinking and critical thinking, motivational affordances such as valuing, and social skills related to identity/possible selves and communication skills. The genre also helps in establishing what questions to ask because it gives the researcher an idea of the pedagogical stances in the games and also the epistemological stance. For instance, the following are some characteristics within the simulation strategy genre that provide a good place to start: 1.

2. 3. 4.

The focus within the genre is on planning and skill resource management to achieve victory RCT3 is production-economic focus Expertise development in skills related in the game The game is activity based around observation and intervention

The complexity of games (given the claims and genres) indicates that learning from games is a complex process. We believe that this argues for learning assessments and evaluations that utilize mixed-methods that combine the control of labbased studies with the richness of description of more qualitative approaches. A mixed-method combining both quantitative and qualitative methodological frameworks has the potential for game-based studies to be both authentic and

Table 2. Example of approach to research plan Game

Claims

Genres

Content

RollerCoaster

Practical Skills

Simulation

Economics

Tycoon 3: Platinum

Cognitive Skills Motivation Social Skills



Mathematics Strategy

Social Studies Information and Technological Literacy

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

generalizable beyond their settings, sample, or within game genres depending on a researcher’s focus. The proposed games and learning assessment framework adopts a mixed-method approach to better understand games and their relations to learning.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS There are two key sets of implications of our work. The first has to do with how our framework can influence decision makers about selecting games for learning. For instance, school teachers can use our framework (claims, games, and genres) to help identify which games would be most appropriate for their classroom and that match their learning objectives. Additionally, parents could develop a better understanding on the types of games to get for their children and how to talk about games with their children. For policymakers, decisions on use of games in school based on game genres, pedagogy, and disciplinary affordances is crucial in an era where games are being used without much empirical support. The second set of implications has to do with developing guidelines for future research and development in the area of games for learning. One key implication, in this regard, is that our work on listing the claims of games could be the basis of future research in this area. It is clear that the current claims about games for learning need to be verified empirically and with appropriate research designs or assessments. The claims of games survey revealed that the claimed effects are related to four broad psychological effects—motivation, cognitive, practical, and social. However, the physiological and the psychological effects are related to learning and development in four ways: by shaping attitudes, affecting behavior, influencing understanding, and affecting spatial and motor abilities. As the field of game design and its relationship to learning matures as a dis-

cipline, we should become more nuanced about what games can (and cannot) do. We suggest that these ideas should be used as a guide, not the endpoint for what games afford, because: (a) games are continually evolving, and (b) most of these claims are unsubstantiated by research. This of course should be seen as an opportunity to scrutinize these claims and consider them as the basis for future research. Thus, each of these claims can be considered as being a hypothesis worthy of further study and investigation, thereby allowing these claims to be validated. Another key implication of our work is that designers and researchers need to think more deeply about how content (disciplinary knowledge) can be fruitfully integrated within the design of games and then how different game genres can impact learning. One of the themes that emerged from our survey is that the claims about games for learning are usually presented as being content-neutral. They often do not distinguish what is learned, such as what subject matter is most important for particular game-genres. What is learned from Tetris or Pac-man may be useful for senior citizens who need to maintain hand-eye coordination and not younger children who will develop that ability. Simulations can teach subject matter, but may be less successful in being integrated within the typical lecturedemonstration model that characterizes most school curriculum. We argue that research should carefully consider the pedagogical affordances of specific game genres (e.g., adventure, fighting, role-playing, simulations, action, sports, and strategy games, as well as their hybrids). Each game genre represents a different pedagogy and each pedagogical stance represents a different epistemological stance. Thus, research should elucidate which genre is better for what content. Research in game-based learning should connect claims to genres, rather than discuss games as if all games afford the same learning and skills



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

development with respect to disciplinary knowledge/subject matter knowledge. More broadly, we would like to see research on games and learning that better describes how subject matter knowledge integrates with the game-play. This to us is the single most important challenge facing us as scholars and researchers. Games, if they are to be successful in changing student learning, need to go beyond being “chocolate covered broccoli,” but rather move towards approaches that develop creative and powerful ways for learners to engage with the essential qualities of subject matter. Thus game designers need to start with key concepts in the domain in question, identify what is good learning in this area, and build the game around it. This will clearly require a greater level of collaboration between game designers and content experts, a collaboration that depends on an acknowledgment that neither group can do this alone. A better understanding of the fact that content, pedagogy, and technology interact with varying levels of success is needed. Teaching with technology is a difficult thing to do well. Until game-based learning and design deals with the interaction of content, pedagogy, and technology (what has been called Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) (Mishra & Koehler, 2006), it is unlikely that there will be significant progress in this domain’s research program. The TPCK framework suggests that content, pedagogy, and technology have roles to play individually and together. Teaching successfully with games requires continually creating, maintaining, and re-establishing a dynamic equilibrium between each of these three components. In a recent editorial in the journal Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, Bull et al. (2007), speaking of the challenge of using technology effectively for student learning, described this challenge as being a “wicked” problem (Rittel & Webber, 1973) and argued that the design of best practices for technology integration has to deal with:



…incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements characterized by complex interdependencies among a large number of contextually bound variables. The wicked problems of technology integration require us to develop innovative and creative ways of confronting this complexity. Research indicates that such innovation occurs best at the intersection of disciplines and that ‘the more diverse the problem-solving population, the more likely a problem is to be solved’. (Lakhani & Lars, 2007) It is only by respecting the “wicked nature” of the problem and recognizing the value of collaborative work across fields, accurate representations through a greater sensitivity to the kinds of claims being made, and better descriptions of the research, that the true potential for games as an agent for learning can be achieved.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors would like to thank Andrea Ploucher Francis, Sue Barratt, three anonymous readers, and the editor for their help. This research has been partially funded by a Spencer Research Training Grant and a Mellon Mays Pre-Dissertation Fellowship to the first author.

REFERENCES Anderson, C.A., & Bushman, B.J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12(5), 353-359. Apperley, T.H. (2006). Genre and game studies: Toward a critical approach to video game genres. Simulation Gaming, 37(1), 6-23.

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Barab, S.A., Bransford, J.D., Greeno, J.G., & Gee, J.P. (2007). Embodied cognition: A more meaningful ontological unit. Proceedings of the 2007 AERA Annual Meeting. Barab, S.A., Dodge, T., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2007). Reflexive play spaces: A 21st century pedagogy. Proceedings of the 2007 AERA Annual Meeting.

Cordova, D.I., & Lepper, M.R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715-730. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.

Barab, S.A., Hay, K.E., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices. Cognition and Instruction, 19(1), 47-94.

De Aguilera, M., & Mendiz, A. (2003). Video games and education (Education in the face of a “parallel school”). ACM Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 1-14.

Beckett, K.L., & Shaffer, D.W. (2005). Augmented by reality: The pedagogical praxis of urban planning as a pathway to ecological thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(1), 31-52.

Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2005). Beyond edutainment: Exploring the educational potential of computer games. Unpublished Dissertation, ITUniversity of Copenhagen, Denmark.

Betz, J.A. (1996). Computer games: Increase learning in an interactive multidisciplinary environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 24(2), 195-205.

Entertainment Software Association. (2006, May 10). 2006 sales, demographic and usage data: Essential facts about the computer and video game industry. Retrieved from http://www.theesa.com/ archives/files/Essential%20Facts%202006.pdf

Bosworth, K. (1994). Computer games and simulation tools to reach and engage adolescents in health promotion activities. Computers in Human Services, 11(1), 109-119.

Fabricatore, C. (2000, September 26). Learning and videogames: An unexploited synergy. Retrieved September 27, 2006, from http://www. learndev.org/FabricatoreAECT2000.pdf

Bull, G., Park, J., Searson, M., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. et al. (2007). Editorial: Developing technology policies for effective classroom practice. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 7. Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol7/iss3/editorial/article1.cfm

Federation of American Scientists. (2005). National summit on educational games: Fact sheet. Washington, DC: Author.

Caldwell, N. (2004). Theoretical analysis of turnbased computer. Media International Australia, (110), 42-51. Carnagey, N.L., & Anderson, C.A. (2004). Violent video game exposure and aggression: A literature review. MINERVA PSICHIATR, 45, 1-18.

Federation of American Scientists. (2006). Summit of educational games: Harnessing the power of video games for learning. Washington, DC: Author. Foreman, J. (2003, September 26). Next generation educational technology versus the lecture. EDUCAUSE Review. Retrieved September 27, 2006, from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/ pdf/erm0340.pdf



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Foreman, J. (2004). Game-based learning: How to delight and instruct in the 21st century. EDUCAUSE Review, 50-66. Friedman, T. (1999). Civilization and its discontents: Simulation, subjectivity, and space. From discovering discs: Transforming space and genre. Retrieved April 23, 2007, from http://www.duke. edu/~tlove/civ.htm Games-To Teach Research Project. (2006, March). Vision. Retrieved March 24, 2006, from http://cms. mit.edu/games/education/vision6.html Gardner, H. (2006). Changing minds: The art and science of changing our own and other people’s minds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Gee, J.P. (1999). What is literacy? In C. Mitchell & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3-11). Westport, CT: Bergin and Gavin. Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Gee, J.P. (2005a). Learning by design: Good video games as learning machines. E-Learning, 2(1), 5-16. Gee, J.P. (2005b). What should a state of the art instructional video game look like? Innovate, 1(6). Gee, J.P. (2007a). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy. New York: Peter Lang. Gee, J.P. (2007b). Video games and embodiment. Proceedings of the 2007 AERA Annual Meeting. Gonzales, P., Guzman, J.C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastberg, D. et al. (2004). Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003 (NCES 2005-005). Washington, DC: U.S. Government



Printing Office, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Greenfield, P.M., Camaioni, L., Ercolani, P., Weiss, L., Lauber, B.A., & Perucchini, P. (1994). Cognitive socialization by computers games in two cultures: Inductive discovery or mastery of an iconic code? Applied Developmental Psychology, 15(1), 59-85. Hampden-Thompson, G., Johnston, J., & American Institutes for Research. (2006). Variation in the relationship between nonschool factors and student achievement on international assessments. No. NCES 2006-014, Institute for Education Sciences, NCES, Department of Education, USA. Heeter, C., Chu, C., Maniar, A., Winn, B., Mishra, P., Egidio, R. et al. (2003). Comparing 14 plus 2 forms of fun (and learning and gender) in commercial versus educational space exploration digital games. Proceedings of the International Digital Games Research Conference. Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you: How today’s popular culture is actually making us smarter. New York: Penguin Group. Kelly, H. (2005). Games, cookies, and the future of education. Issues in Science and Technology. Retrieved October 18, 2006, from http://www.fas. org/resource/07152005161632.pdf King, G., & Krzywinska, T. (Eds.). (2002). Screenplay: Cinema/videogames/interfaces. London: Wallflower Press. Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning (no. 8). Bristol, Canada: Nesta Futurelab. Lakhani, K.R., & Lars, B.J. (2007). Getting unusual suspects to solve R&D puzzles. Harvard Business Review, May, 30-32. Laurel, B. (Ed.). (2003). Design research methods and perspectives. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

Malone, T.W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 5(4), 333-369.

Sandford, R., & Williamson, B. (2005). Games and learning: A handbook from Futurelab. Bristol, UK: Futurelab.

Mishra, P., & Foster, A. (2007). The claims of games: A comprehensive review and directions for future research. In R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber, & D.A. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, San Antonio, TX.

Shaffer, D.W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. Mitchell, A., & Savill-Smith, C. (2004). The use of computer and video games for learning. London: Learning and Skills Development Agency. Myers, D. (2003). The nature of computer games: Play as semiosis. New York: Peter Lang. National Institute on Media and the Family. (2005, April 22). Effects of video game playing on children. Retrieved October 21, 2005, from http://www.mediafamily.org/facts/facts_effect. shtml Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Randel, J., Morris, B., Wetzel, C., & Whitehill, B. (1992). The effectiveness of games for educational purposes: A reviews of recent research. Simulation and Gaming, 23(3), 261-276. Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155-169. Roe, K., & Muijs, D. (1998). Children and computer games: A profile of the heavy user. European Journal of Communication, 13(2), 181-200.

Shaffer, D.W., & Gee, J.P. (2005). Before every child is left behind: How epistemic games can solve the coming crisis in education. Shaffer, D.W., Squire, K., Halverson, R., & Gee, J.P. (2005). Video games and the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(2), 104-111. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Squire, K. (2004). Replaying history: Learning world history through playing civilization III. Unpublished Dissertation, Indiana University, USA. Subrahmanyan, K., Greenfield, P., Kraut, R., & Gross, E. (2001). The impact of computer use on children’s and adolescents’ development. Applied Developmental Psychology, 22(1), 7-30. Walsh, D. (1998, December 1). 1998 video and computer game report card. Retrieved October 29, 2005, from http://www.mediafamily.org/research/report_vgrc_1998-1.shtml#1998 Williams, D.C. (2004). Trouble in river city: The social life of video games. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Michigan, USA. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan. Wolf, M.J.P. (2001). Genre and the video game. In M.J.P. Wolf (Ed.), The medium of the video game (1st ed., p. 232). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.



Games, Claims, Genres, and Learning

KEY TERMS Claims of Games: Broad claims made about what games (video and computer–digital) offer for learning. They usually fall within two schemes: psychological or physiological.

ENDNOTES 1

Game Interactivity: The way games are experienced or the non-trivial effort or actions taken in playing video games. Game Mode: Mode in which the game is experienced. It may affect players’ movement as tightly structured or multidirectional or multilinear. Games: Refers to types of electronic games: arcade, video, and computer games. Milieu: Visual genre of the game, for example, science fiction or horror. Physiological Scheme of Claims: Seven specific developmental behavioral claims. Platform: The hardware system on which the game is played, for example, PDA, GBA, and cell phone. Psychological Scheme of Claims: Claims that are cognitively practically, motivational, and socially oriented. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK): A framework for integrating content into technology (games) and analyzing games. Also see TPCK.org for more information.

0

2

However, Wolf’s (2001) view of genres based on a movie model does not recognize and transforms with advancement in technology. Movie genres remain static and rarely change even with technological advancement. Apperley (2006) argues that the collapse of the video game industry in the 1980s was partially due to static genres that became too formulaic for game players. Game players prefer genres that advance and exploit the current technology, even though they may breakdown at the fringes or blur with other genres. This is important because it shows the fluid nature of game genres. Myers (2003) contends that game genres develop as a result of the technological contexts and are therefore not lasting or fundamental as are movie genres. More importantly, however, is Wolf’s (2001) idea of using interactivity over iconography or thematic analysis to examine game genres, which is similar to Apperley’s (2006) notion of using non-representational characteristics of game, specifically the interactive ones. A range of scholars have made arguments regarding TPCK (or variants thereof). A relatively comprehensive list of references to TPCK in the research literature can be found at http://www.tpck.org/.



Chapter III

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning Sara de Freitas University of Coventry, UK Mark Griffiths Nottingham Trent University, UK

AbstrAct This chapter explores whether massively multiplayer online role-play games (MMORPGs) can be used effectively to support learning and training communities. The chapter aims to propose that cross-disciplinary approaches to the study of game-based learning are needed to support better synthesis of our current understanding of the effectiveness of learning with games. The chapter therefore includes a brief literature review of online gaming research to date, taken from psychological and educational research perspectives. The chapter explores the main types of online games and highlights the main themes of research undertaken through a consideration of the use of online gaming in current learning and training contexts where online gaming is being used to support experiential and discovery learning approaches. This chapter indicates future directions for cross-disciplinary research approaches in this field and considers how collaborative learning could best be supported through this approach.

INtrODUctION By way of an introduction to the subject of online gaming, the chapter will explore the main types of online games and highlight the main themes of research undertaken through a consideration of the use of online gaming in current learning and training contexts where online gaming is being used to support experiential and discovery

learning approaches. This chapter will indicate future directions for cross-disciplinary research approaches in this field and consider how collaborative learning could best be supported through this approach. The use of MMORPGs in educational contexts is a relatively new research area; indeed the first online games have only become established in the last five to ten years, and for these reasons there are specific problems in terms of data collection and

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

validation (Wood, Griffiths, & Eatough, 2004). In addition, it has been noted that the field requires analytical techniques and frameworks for evaluation, some of which are being developed (de Freitas & Oliver, 2005, 2006). However, it is envisaged that this field of inquiry is set to expand, and as such, applications of multiplayer online gaming may become more numerous over the next five years, producing a wider evidence-base of research and allowing for more effective evaluation and validation (Pelletier & Oliver, 2006). While the numbers of online games used for training and education purposes are limited at present, many of those that are available tend to center on military contexts and requirements, due to the large associated development costs. However, beyond the growing number of military applications of online gaming for training, there are an increasing number of small-scale researchbased experimental projects that also fall into this area of study (Lee, Eustace, Fellows, Bytheway, & Irving, 2005; McLaughlin, Kirkpatrick, Hirsch, & Maier, 2001; Jones et al., 2004). Although online gaming is a relatively new area of activity, its success at engaging large groups of remotely located users has meant that early research projects and military training organizations have already begun to use multiplayer online role-play gaming approaches as a means for engaging and retaining large remotely located learner groups, and for supporting collaborative learning objectives and ‘communities of practice’ (Wenger, 1998). While there are clearly central issues emerging in the review of existing literature, particular challenges lie in the fact that single disciplinary perspectives have often precluded more interdisciplinary, cross-thematic approaches that lend better to opportunities for synthesis. This chapter brings together a review that combines literature from psychology and educational theory, and practice disciplinary perspectives in an attempt to problematize key issues emerging with respect to using online gaming in educational contexts. The second section of the chapter therefore provides



a general review of what online gaming is, the third section provides a review of psychological perspectives on the literature of online gaming, and the fourth section introduces examples where online gaming is currently being used in educational and training contexts. The conclusions bring together the main themes and problems raised in the chapter. The chapter aims to propose that cross-disciplinary approaches to the study of a game-based learning approach are needed to support better synthesis of our current understanding of the effectiveness of learning with games. The chapter will include a brief literature review of online gaming research taken from psychological and educational research perspectives. The chapter will explore a range of terms including the following: online gaming, standalone games, local and wide area games, massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG), and flow.

WHAT IS ONLINE GAMING? Due to the rise of computer games as a leisure phenomenon, there has been increasing research into this area over the last few years (e.g., Bonk & Dennen, 2005; de Freitas, 2005; Dickey, 2003; Sandford, Ulicsak, Facer, & Rudd, 2005). Prior to 2003, a majority of the research had concentrated on adolescent players, and on the more negative aspects such as excessive play and addiction, the effects of playing aggressive games, and the medical and psychosocial consequences (Griffiths, 2005). However, there have been a few psychologically based studies on personality and computer game-play (e.g., Douse & McManus, 1993). As the 1990s came to a close, a new generation of machines with increasingly sophisticated processing power began to replace the early 1990s’ consoles. However, an even more revolutionary development was also occurring involving the Internet as a gaming forum. New games emerged that enabled people to link up online to game

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

together, allowing greater potential for collaborative learning and working. The games varied in their mode of operation. Griffiths, Davies, and Chappell (2003) outlined the three main types of social virtual gaming over the Internet: standalone games, local and wide network (LAWN) games, and massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs).

Standalone Games Standalone games are single-player-orientated games for the PC with the option to go online to seek a human opponent. Until recently, the main use of standalone games was to pitch player vs. computer (e.g., Black & White, Dungeon Keeper II, and Diablo II). If played online, these games (by definition) do not immerse a player into a virtual, narrative-enriched world. Where players choose to represent themselves as a single character, they are usually fixed in the view offered (e.g., over the shoulder), and rarely do players engage in grouping behavior. Player communication is possible, but the depth of the social immersion in the game is restrained by the lack of a clear game narrative.

Local and Wide Network (LAWN) Games LAWN games arose from the desire to link players together in support of tournaments (e.g., Quake III and Counterstrike). The main style of play involved in these games is tactical combat. These games have a limited game narrative and character development, with an emphasis on tactical play. This style of gaming has given rise to grouping in ‘clans’. For example, in Counterstrike their identity is akin to an army’s special operation forces or terrorist group. The clans then meet in cyberspace to compete in deadly combat. The aim of these clans is to kill or destroy opponents. The kill is usually denoted by the term ‘frag’ and the view is first person. The clans may also have a

real existence (i.e., people living together in the real world) or may be a virtual grouping. This form of gaming has grown in popularity to such an extent that ‘LAN parties’ are now regularly held where hundreds to thousands of individuals meet and link up transported PCs to compete over a weekend. A further development has been professional games’ tournaments and the emergence of professional gamers.

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPG) MMORPGs are the latest Internet-only gaming experience. These are typically represented by large, sophisticated, detailed, and evolving worlds based in different narrative environments. Examples of such games are Everquest (heroic fantasy), Anarchy Online (futurist science fiction), and Motor City Online (classic car racing). In these games the non-player characters (NPCs) are designed with advanced AI that offers a rich and unpredictable milieu for players to experience a virtual world through their own ‘player character’. The nature of these games is to offer a rich three-dimensional world that is populated by thousands of players. This game form is a fully developed multiplayer universe with an advanced and detailed world (both visual and auditory). Popular MMORPGs include games such as Everquest and World of Warcraft. Although computer gaming is becoming an integral part of mainstream cultural pastimes, very little is known about the psychology of the more recent phenomenon of online gaming. There is very little data even on the basics. For example, the relationship between personality and amount of time spent gaming (or the type of gaming pursued) has received little attention. What data there is suggests that gaming in general, particularly online fantasy gaming, is associated with introversion and lower empathic concern (Douse & McManus, 1993). There has been very little research into these online gaming communities,



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

although a number of disciplines are beginning to generate research from different perspectives including the psychological, the sociological, and the economic.

ONLINE GAMING: A BRIEF OVERVIEW Bartle (1996) studied multi-user virtual environments (MUDs) and classified players into four different subgroups (i.e., achievers, explorers, killers, and socializers), formulated from the inter-relationship of two dimensions of playing style: action vs. interaction and world-oriented vs. player-oriented. He concluded that each of these four subgroups views the playing of MUDs differently. More specifically, MUDs were games (like chess, tennis, etc.) to achievers, pastimes (like reading, gardening, etc.) to explorers, sports (like hunting, shooting, fishing, etc.) to killers, and entertainment (like television, going to nightclubs, etc.) to socializers. Using Bartle’s (1996) classification of MUD players, Andreasen (2003) surveyed players from all major online gaming communities. Among the 4,380 Everquest players polled (3,672 males, 618 females), 34% were explorers, 25% were achievers, 23% were socializers, and 15% were killers. As reported, over a third of all Everquest players (34%) were explorers in the game. One of the main criticisms is that a player has to do all of these actions (exploring, killing, socializing, etc.) if they want to advance in the game. In a number of unpublished studies on his Web site, Yee (2003) has collected demographic data about Everquest players (with sample sizes ranging from 1,240 to 2,470). The main findings he reported were that 84-88% of players are male, the average age of players is 25.6 years old, 30% of players are students and 36% work in the IT business, players spend an average of 22.4 hours playing the game a week, and 25% play the game with their partner.



In an attempt to establish some benchmark data, Griffiths et al. (2003) collated data from two online gaming fan sites for Everquest players— Everlore (www.everlore.com) and Allakhazam (everquest.allakhazam.com). Each of these sites conducts a regular poll where one question is asked. Griffiths et al. (2003) examined every poll question on both fan sites from their inception (in 1999) up until June 2002. Socio-demographic data showed that the majority of players were male (approximately 85%). Over 60% of players were older than 19 years. The vast majority of the players were North American (73% American and 8% Canadian) and players had a wide variety of education. Thirty-three percent of the sample was still at an educational establishment including those currently in middle school (3%), high school (14%), college (14%), and graduate school (2%). Of those who were in employment, 23% had a high school diploma, 33% had an undergraduate diploma, 7% had a master’s degree, and 2% had a doctoral degree. The data provided evidence that the game clientele was very much an adult profile and suggested a different picture to the stereotypical image of an adolescent online gamer. Griffiths et al. (2003) acknowledged that the major weakness of their research was its reliance on secondary data. Each individual question from the poll sites had a different sample. Therefore, in a follow-up study, Griffiths et al. (2004) collected some primary data and compared it to the secondary data collected in the previous study (see Table 1). Using an online questionnaire survey, they examined basic demographic factors (i.e., gender, age, marital status, nationality, education level, occupation, etc.) of online computer game players who played the most popular online game Everquest. The survey also examined playing frequency (i.e., amount of time spent playing the game a week), playing history (i.e., how long they had been playing the game, who they played the game with, whether they had ever gender swapped

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

Table 1. Comparison of online gamers between primary (Griffiths et al., 2004) and secondary (Griffiths et al., 2003) data Griffiths et al. (2003)

Griffiths et al. (2004)

Game played

Everquest









Everquest

Year data collected

1999-2002









2002

Sample sizes range: 2,536-15,788 Gender Male (85%) Female (15%)





540

Male Female



(81%) (19%)

Age



(8%) (59%) (22%) (11%)







Variable studied



Less than 13 years 10 to 30 years 31 to 40 years Over 40 years

(1%) (71%) (20%) (8%)



12 to 17 years 18 to 30 years 31 to 40 years Over 40 years

North America United Kingdom Germany Sweden France Australia All other countries

(81%) (4%) (2%) (2%) (2%) (2%) (7%)



North America United Kingdom Germany Sweden France Australia All other countries

(76.7%) (12%) (1.7%) (1.3%) (0.7%) (2.2%) (5.4%)



(17%) (14%) (23%) (33%) (11%) (2%)



Primary Secondary Further Higher Postgraduate Other

(13.9%) (19.8%) (23.5%) (29.3%) (12.8%) (0.7%)

Play frequency (hours per week) Up to 9 hours 10 to 20 hours 21 to 30 hours 31 to 40 hours 41 to 50 hours Over 50 hours

(8%) (25%) (25%) (18%) (9%) (15%)



Up to 10 hrs 11 to 20 hours 21 to 30 hours 31 to 40 hours 41 to 50 hours Over 50 hours

Nationality

Education level Primary Secondary Further Higher Postgraduate Other



(16%) (36%) (24%) (14%) (5%) (5%)

continued on following page

55

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

Table 1. continued Gender swapping*

Yes No (main character)

(15.5%) (84.4%)

Yes No (any character)

(60%) (40%)

Favorite aspects of play Social contact/grouping (23%) Social contact/grouping (35%) Solo play (26%) Solo play (6.5%) Guild membership (10%) Guild membership (10%) Role-playing (5%) Role-playing (5%) Player vs. player (2%) Player vs. player (3%) Combat/killing (2%) Combat/killing (5.5%) Other aspects (32%) Other aspects (35%) Least favorite aspects of play** Slow advance for (14%) Slow advance for (13%) casual players casual players Difficult to play solo (11%) Difficult to play solo (4%) Death penalty (13%) Death penalty (6%) Too much camping (11%) Too much camping (15%) Helping inexperienced (4%) Helping inexperienced (2%) Other aspects (47%) Other aspects (60%) * These questions were not the same. One asked whether the player had ever swapped the gender of their main character. The other asked if they had ever swapped gender at all ** The two studies used different ‘forced choice’ boxes, therefore many of the answers were different.

their game character), the favorite and least favorite aspects of playing the game, and what they sacrifice (if anything) to play the game. Results showed that 81% of online game players were male, and that the mean age of players was 27.9 years of age. For many players, the social aspects of the game were the most important factor in playing. A small minority of players appears to play excessively (over 80 hours a week), and results suggest that a small minority sacrifice important activities in order to play (e.g., sleep, time with family and/or partner, work, or schooling). Their results confirmed most of the findings from their survey of secondary data (see Table 1). Everquest, Asheron’s Call, and Ultima Online are just a few of the MMORPGs that are available.

56

However, with more sophisticated and advanced technology, and with increased Internet speeds, MMORPGs are certain to become a very popular gaming format. There is clearly much research needed in this area of the gaming world, as there is little research even on the most basic aspects of online gaming. There has also been some other psychological research examining other psychological characteristics of online gamers who play MUDs (multi-user dungeons, or multi-user dimensions), particularly in the area of ‘flow’ experiences. This research is based on the work of Csikszentmihalyi (2000), who describes these experiences as “flowing from one moment to the next, in which he is in control of his actions, and in which there is little distinction between self and

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

environment, between stimulus and responses, between past, present, and future” (p. 34). Csikszentmihalyi (2000) has argued that flow may accompany almost every type of human behavior. The major characteristics of flow are: • • • •

•

Temporary loss of self-consciousness and a sense of time; High concentration on the task and a high level of control over it; Objectives become clear and distinct, and actions merge awareness; Experience brings full satisfaction and seems worth doing for its own sake (i.e., intrinsic motivation); and Immediate feedback.

What is especially important is that the flow rests upon the matching between the available skills and the task challenges. Research by McKenna and Lee (2005) showed that MUDding fits the flow model and that the social interaction while playing MUDs is inseparable from the flow experience. Subsequent empirical research has also shown that online gamers undergo flow experiences, and that these experiences are critical in forming long-term attachments to some games (Choi & Kim, 2004). Research by Voiskounsky, Mitina, and Avetisova (2005) examined ‘flow’ experiences in Russian gamers (n = 347) who play MUDs. Using a specially designed online questionnaire, they reported that online gaming environments help facilitate ‘flow’ experiences. Their research also showed that there were three-dimensional subsets to flow while MUDding. There was a universal subset (dimensions describing flow experience irrespective of any particular type of activity), a gaming subset (describing flow experienced while playing computer/video/online games), and a MUDs-related subset of dimensions specifying flow experienced while MUDding. This overview of recent research implies that the use of MMORPGs may support collaborative

learning approaches effectively by supporting ‘flow’ between separate learning experiences; this could both support new opportunities for developing learning content and create opportunities for group work (Inal & Cagiltay, 2007). The following section reviews some examples of how MMORPGs are currently being used in experiential practice in order to explore what the potential for learning with these collaborative games might be in learning and training contexts.

EXAMPLES OF HOW MMORPGS ARE CURRENTLY BEING USED TO SUPPORT LEARNING AND trAINING The following section will explore some examples of these early applications and pilots in training and learning contexts. MMORPGs are currently being used in training and learning contexts often to support collaborative experience-based and exploratory learning approaches (Kolb, 1984), and to support learning through real-time experiences.

Multiplayer Online Games for School Education While the use of ‘off-line’ games (including standalone and single-player over local and wide area networks) in school contexts is growing in popularity with tutors and learners (de Freitas, 2004; de Freitas & Levene, 2004; Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004), development of the use of MMORPGs to support learning for school children is clearly in its earliest stages. Snyder (2007) has used Second Life to help teach mathematics and science concepts. In Second Life (or any other metaverse), the real advantage is using the platform to do innovative things that could not otherwise be done in a classroom that reach into the pupil’s imaginations. This could include such



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

examples as shrinking down and walking through the human body, becoming another gender or race, or manipulating financial markets and observing the outcome. One research project undertaken by a Research Team at Charles Sturt University in Australia involving a pilot study (called Rochester Castle) at Swan View Senior High School in Perth, Western Australia, demonstrates potential for supporting collaborative learning processes, such as those associated with problem- and experience-based learning (Lee et al., 2005). The Rochester Castle project is original not only because it uses a MMORPG to support learning in a school, but also in that the learners designed and developed the game themselves (Lee et al., 2005). The teachers and research team initially created the virtual environment for Society and Environment students to explore the history of Rochester Castle (1087-1100AD) in England in a more interactive way. The role-play online game was based upon a Multi-User Domain Object-Orientated (MOO) and was used to support English and History students. The learners designed and developed the game based upon a scenario presented by their teacher. The researchers conducted an interim analysis of online gamer behavior and found that 53 student online gamers were using Rochester Castle for a total of 223 student hours, which averaged 5.2 hours per student. Interestingly, the average time spent by teachers supporting the game was nine hours (about typical teacher preparation time). The project was successful in engaging the school children in a more interactive approach to learning, which also supported collaborative and team-building skills—skills that could then be applied to real life. Students using the MMORPG found that they had gained new skills in learning collaboratively online, while teachers found that they had developed new ICT skills and enhanced teaching practices (Lee et al., 2005). The MMORPG piloted here indicates important implications for producing collaborative learning



content through content authoring interactive environments that gaming offers teachers and learners. The project also indicates the potential of gaming for supporting collaborative learning approaches that support ‘flow’ between learning groups and throughout the learning experience, helping to engage learner cohorts but also contributing to skills development.

Online Multiplayer Role-Play Games for Post-16 Learning Although the potential for MMORPGs to be used in higher education is clearly significant, it is notable that there were few examples of this approach found in the literature searches carried out for this chapter. While simulations have been taken up fairly widely in higher education, particularly in business education and medical training, the use of games has remained largely limited to smaller flash-based games—or for self-directed learning rather than for supporting specifically collaborative learning (Mitchell & Savill-Smith, 2004). The greater use of simulations over games, particularly in learning contexts, has led to simulations becoming an accepted aspect of the teaching toolkits, particularly for simulating reallife experiences in low-cost, low-impact training situations. The wider use of games—and games engines for authoring immersive and interactive three-dimensional environments—has led to the development of serious gaming (or edugaming) promoting the sensible use of games, often for engaging learners and keeping motivation levels high. However, there has been a perceived convergence between games and simulations, or ‘gamesims’, that combines elements of both forms together, for example, the scenario-based role-play of simulations with the rule-based elements of gaming, ideally providing the intrinsic motivation of gaming with the proven instructional outcomes of well-designed simulations (de Freitas, 2004; de Freitas & Levene, 2004).

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

This convergence may be due to the overlap of functionality as perceived by educationalists. However, it may also be attributable to the fact that simulations provide a tried-and-tested pedagogic method, while games in education have yet to be fully embedded and tested in empirical studies (Egenfeldt-Nielsen. 2005). For these reasons, as well as the significant cost associated with games development, the instances of online gaming for learning in post-16 contexts, apart from those associated with military training, have tended to center upon simulation-based rather than gamesbased approaches. The following example of this trend (Mekong e-Sim) highlights this more simulation-based approach.

Described as a ‘role-play simulation’, Mekong e-Sim (electronic simulation) was developed to support the learning requirements of geography and engineering undergraduate university students. The role-play is set in the Mekong area of South East Asia and involves “decision-making and conflict resolution regarding natural resource development” (McLaughlin et al., 2001; Kirkpatrick, McLaughlin, Maier, & Hirsch, 2002). Interestingly, the game was developed as a tool to aid students from different disciplines, including geography, technological engineering, and environmental engineering, to work collaboratively to learn about environmental decision making. Based upon earlier work (McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick,

Figure 1. Learning design of Mekong Sim (McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick, 2004)



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

2001), Mekong e-Sim attempted to integrate shared online role-play with established teaching practices, using collaborative approaches to teaching. As the authors themselves noted: We wanted to develop a learning activity in which students would work collaboratively to develop mastery of fundamental discipline-based knowledge while developing transferable skills such as negotiation, decision-making and an understanding of the range of perspectives that could be taken with regard to complex situations. (McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick, 2004, p. 479) Mekong e-Sim was designed to bring together students from different disciplines to allow them to understand the different perspectives involved in engineering, and to help them understand the complex relationships involved in real-life engineering situations, using collaborative strategies to ensure that learners would work effectively together (e.g., Johnson & Johnson, 1996; Goodsell, Mather, & Tinto, 1992). The simulation accounted for 35% to 50% of the total course marks. The design of the simulation role-play “was guided by principles of collaborative peer learning and experiential learning” (McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick, 2004, p. 480). Like simulations, Mekong e-Sim relied on debriefing to provide an opportunity for critical reflection. Five key stages of the simulation include: briefing, role adoption, e-mail interaction, forum interaction, and debriefing (see Table 1). The simulation used a blended learning model, bringing together faceto-face sessions (for briefing and debriefing) with online sessions. Students appreciated the approach: 91% agreed that the simulation developed an awareness of multiple dimensions to natural resource decision making, four-fifths of the students said it benefited their team-building skills (80%), and more than two-thirds (71%) of the students said it supported their electronic communication skills. The simulation was also found to improve their learning

0

about the discipline and about the complexities of environmental decision making (McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick, 2004).

MMORPGs for Military Training Multiplayer online role-play games are currently being used to support military training in a number of areas. Online games such as America’s Army, Full Spectrum Command, and StrikeCOM provide a powerful model for how online collaborative communities can be supported through specially designed task-related activities (Kyda, 2005; Swartout & Van Lent, 2003; Twitchell, Wiers, Adkins, Burgoon, & Nunamaker, 2005). These online games are examined in more detail in the following sections. StrikeCOM is a multiplayer online strategy game developed by the Center for the Management of Information (CMI) at the University of Arizona as a research tool ((Twitchell et al., 2005). The game was designed to research and teach group interactions, dynamics, and processes. The game was developed in order to investigate deception detection within large groups of people (Biros et al., 2005), by examining group performance and perceptions of deception in face-to-face communications and real-time text chat (Biros et al., 2005). The two forms of communication are manipulated to make participants more suspicious of one another, according to scenarios taken from practice and developed through StrikeCOM. StrikeCOM imitates military-based Command, Control, Communication, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C3ISR) scenarios and information gathering in collaborative activities. For example, the system has been used by the U.S. Department of Defense for teaching Network Centric Warfare to Battle Commanders. In addition, the tool has been used to research leadership and deception in collaborative group decision making. Not only is the game designed to examine the development of shared awareness and communication in distributed groups (Twitchell

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

et al., 2005), the system also allows trainees to develop more critical stances and to become more reflective about deceptive strategies that might be used against them in real-life situations. However, although StrikeCOM has been used with business and military students, the game lacks the immersive 3D quality that most learners who are familiar with leisure gaming expect, and is based more upon scenario-based approaches to learning than engaging with truly interactive and immersive experiences, as have been developed more recently. Full Spectrum Command is an online game, which in common with America’s Army (reviewed elsewhere–see de Freitas, Savill-Smith, & Attewell, 2006) is a more immersive style of MMORPG. The University of Southern California’s Institute of Creative Technologies and Quicksilver Software developed Full Spectrum Command as an educational tool for the U.S. Army (Swartout & Van Lent, 2003). Drawing upon the real-time strategy game genre, Full Spectrum Command aims to teach cognitive skills, such as leadership and decision-making skills to infantry company commanders. As with America’s Army and other real-time strategy games, the format centers upon training in the form of a series of missions, each of which have a designated training objective. In common with training simulations, these missions are instructor designed. However, rather differently, these missions include extensive background stories, including a detailed history of the current situation and enemy personalities (with fictional images and profiles). As the learner advances through the missions, the stories become more complex with greater surprises and twists designed to put the student under greater pressure, thereby testing their abilities to keep calm under increasing pressure (Swartout & Van Lent, 2003). Interestingly, work is currently underway to convert Full Spectrum Command into a VR environment for treating victims of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), indicating the broad range

of potential uses of online gaming for therapeutic purposes: A prototype of a ‘Wizard of Oz’ type clinical interface has also been created. This interface is a key element for the application in that it will provide the clinician with the capacity to monitor a patient’s behavior and customize the therapy experience to their individual needs by placing them in VE locations that resemble the setting in which the traumatic events initially occurred. The interface also allows for the gradual introduction and control of ‘trigger’ stimuli in the VE in real time that is required to foster the anxiety modulation needed for therapeutic habituation. (Rizzo et al., 2004, p. 2)

MMORPGs for Leadership Training O’Driscoll (2006) has been researching the potential applications of synthetic worlds and MMORPGs to real-world corporate applications. He has investigated avatar-mediated 3D environments on a number of fronts. He believes the immersion and interactivity that the ‘metaverse’ provides creates a medium for true experiential learning. For instance, a Level 60 guild leader in World of Warcraft has to spend about 500 hours in-world. In this time the leader will be strategizing, calculating risks, recruiting guild members, planning and executing raids, allocating winnings, and so forth. In essence, the process of becoming a World of Warcraft guild master amounts to a total immersion course in leadership. Yee (2007) also reports that MMORPGs can be used by individuals to learn leadership skills, and he highlights the possibility of “emergent learning” where the pedagogy is not dictated as in traditional training software, but emergent in the sense that it occurs because of the rich system mechanics. Yee (2007) claims that MMORPGs allow provocative scenarios. For instance, in MMORPGS, job candidates can be asked to join a group and persuade the group to move to a differ-



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

ent hunting spot to gauge a candidate’s persuasion skills. In another situation an individual could be asked to join a group and then attempt to take over the leadership role while gaining the loyalty of the existing group members. Yee (2007) contends that the power of MMORPGs is the ability to place individuals in different ad-hoc groups every time they play; it makes sense to explore whether people are able to learn complex social skills from their experiences. Yee’s (2007) research demonstrates that MMORPGs can and should be thought of as potential educational mediums for complex social skills including leadership.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS These and other case studies of practice indicate that multiplayer online games are being piloted in a range of learning and training areas (de Freitas, 2006; McLaughlin & Kirkpatrick, 2004; Sandford et al., 2006). Although the use of MMORPGs is clearly more established in military training contexts, new research projects and collaborative examples from learner communities indicate that experimental take-up of online gaming is being explored in wider learning and training contexts. Although there is evidence that these online games are being used in practice, the need for the development of tools for evaluation and validation of the use of serious games to support learning outcomes is ongoing and experimental (de Freitas & Jarvis, 2007). If serious gaming follows the same route as the use of simulations, its employment may be characterized by usage in pockets of learning and training contexts, rather than as a generic tool used across different disciplines and learning contexts. Clearly, further research is needed that will both explore the psychological benefits of using games to support collaborative learning, but also to build up an evidence-base that can be used by researchers from a range of different disciplines, including psychology and sociology. In order



for serious gaming to benefit the wider learning communities, they will be an important next step to establish whether effective learning outcomes are supported by the use of serious games; work such as that conducted on the Serious Games Engaging Training Solutions (de Freitas & Jarvis, 2007) aims to start this analysis. Should this be established, then learning design will need to encompass experience design approaches, where ‘simulated’ shared experiences become the basis for learning objectives and outcomes, and this may well have profound implications for learning (and game) design (Dickey, 2005), with substantial challenges for tutors (de Freitas, 2006). While the use of MMORPGs for military training are rather more embedded into training practice, their use in the wider educational contexts are at the pilot and trialing stages; due to small pilot numbers and with the varied approaches to data collection, it is too early to state with any certainty how effectively these communities are being supported by the use of multiplayer online games, or whether the stated learning outcomes are being effectively addressed. However, as these early case studies indicate, the potential for supporting effective collaborative learning does merit further experimentation and study, and early indications suggest that this form of gaming could provide a rich vein of potential for training and learning in groups, particularly where they build upon the tried and tested methods associated with simulation-based learning approaches. Furthermore, there is more than anecdotal evidence that gaming can support intrinsic motivation and so help to engage learners and collaborative processes (de Freitas et al., 2006). In addition to the need to improve the evidence-base for the field of inquiry, there is also the need for developing methods, and frameworks for analyzing these complex interrelations between game players are just being developed. It is envisaged that in these two areas (i.e., improved evidence-base and development of analytical

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

tools for evaluation), significant work will be undertaken by the authors and other researchers to support what promises to be an important and rich field of cross-disciplinary enquiry (de Freitas & Oliver, 2005, 2006). The need to provide better synthesis across different single disciplinary perspectives with regards to online gaming is demonstrated in this chapter. The key issues emerging from the practice case studies reveal that motivation and flow from the use of games demonstrate the real potential for using games with learners, particularly those that may be underserved using traditional means, or that are aiming to support particular communities of practice, or professional development where hands-on experiential learning would be best suited. Further attempts to support more synthesized approaches to the study of game-based learning may need to utilize literature findings from other related disciplines. The implications of these new forms upon general formal education are difficult to assess at this stage. The widespread use of games to support learning, as evidenced in this chapter, indicate that games can be used to support exploratory learning, peer interactions, and higher cognition, but clearly have challenges for standard pedagogic practices and for how institutions are organized. The wider use of multiplayer games and immersive world applications make also have an impact upon the physical organization and use of the university campus, with the emergence of ‘cybercampuses’ (or virtual representations of campuses) where seminars and lectures in virtual spaces are becoming part of the wider learning activities (Prasolova-Førland, Sourin, & Sourina, 2006).

REFERENCES Andreasen, E. (2003). Measuring Bartle-quotient. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www. andreasen.org/bartle/stats.cgi

Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www.brandeis.edu/pubs/jove/ HTML/v1/bartle.html Biros, D.P., Hass, M.C., Wiers, K., Twitchell, D., Adkins, M., Burgoon, J.K. & Nunamaker, J.F. Jr. (2005). Task performance under deceptive conditions: Using military scenarios in deception detection research. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’05) (track 1, p. 22b). Bonk, C.J., & Dennen, V.P. (2005). Massive multiplayer online gaming: A research framework for military training and education. Retrieved August 9, 2006, from http://www.strategicleader. us/ExperientalLearningPapers/GameReport_ Bonk_ final.pdf Choi, D., & Kim, J. (2004). Why people continue to play online games: In search of critical design factors to increase customer loyalty to online contents. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 11-24. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety: Experiencing flow in work and play. New York: Harper and Row. de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds. Retrieved July 4, 2007, from http://www. jisc.ac.uk/eli_outcomes_html de Freitas, S., & Jarvis, S. (2007). Serious games—engaging training solutions: A research and development project for supporting training needs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 523-525. de Freitas, S., & Levene, M. (2004, December). An investigation of the use of simulations and video gaming for supporting exploratory learning and developing higher-order cognitive skills. Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference in Cognition and Exploratory Learning in the Digital Age, Lisbon, Portugal.



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

de Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2005, April). A fourdimensional framework for the evaluation and assessment of educational games. Proceedings of the Computer Assisted Learning Conference, Bristol, UK. de Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers and Education, 46, 249-264. de Freitas, S., Savill-Smith, C., & Attewell, J. (2006). Computer games and simulations for adult learning: Case studies from practice. London: Learning and Skills Research Centre. Dickey, M.D. (2003). An investigation of computer games strategies for engaged learning. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Griffiths, M.D., Davies, M.N.O., & Chappell, D. (2003). Breaking the stereotype: The case of online gaming. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 6, 81-91. Griffiths, M.D., Davies, M.N.O., & Chappell, D. (2004). Demographic factors and playing variables in online computer gaming. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 479-487. Inal, Y., & Cagiltay, K. (2007). Flow experiences of children in an interactive social game environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 455-464. Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1996). Cooperative and competition: Theory and practice. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.

Dickey, M.D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Education Training Research and Development, 53(2), 67-83.

Kirkpatrick, D., McLaughlin, R.G., Maier, H.R., & Hirsch, P. (2002). Developing scholarship through collaboration in an online role-play simulation: Mekong eSim, a case study. Proceedings of the Conference on Scholarly Inquiry in Flexible Science Teaching and Learning (pp. 13-18). Sydney: University of Sydney.

Douse, N.A., & McManus, I.C. (1993). The personality of fantasy game players. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 505-509.

Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning (report 8). Bristol: Nesta Futurelab.

Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2005). Beyond edutainment. Exploring the educational potential of computer games. PhD Thesis, IT-University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Retrieved June 21, 2007, from http://www.it-it-c.dk/people/sen/egenfeldt. pdf

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Goodsell, A., Mather, M., & Tinto, V. (1992). Collaborative learning: A sourcebook for higher education. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University. Griffiths, M.D. (1997). Video games and children’s behaviour. In T. Charlton & K. David (Eds.), Elusive links: Television, video games, cinema and children’s behaviour (pp. 66-93). Gloucester: GCED/Park.



Lee, M.J.W., Eustace, K., Fellows, G., Bytheway, A., & Irving, L. (2005). Rochester Castle MMORPG: Instructional gaming and collaborative learning at a Western Australian school. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(4), 446-469. McKenna, K., & Lee, S. (1995). A love affair with MUDs: Flow and social interaction in multi-user dungeons. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www.uni-koeln.de/~am040/muds/ipages/ mud.htm

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

McLaughlin, R., Kirkpatrick, D., Hirsch, P., & Maier, H.R. (2001, October). Using online roleplay/simulations for creating learning experiences. Retrieved November 29, 2005, from http://science.uniserve.edu.au/pubs/callab/vol7/ mclaugh.html McLaughlin, R.G., & Kirkpatrick, D. (2001). Peer learning using computer supported role play simulations. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & J. Sampson (Eds.), Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other (pp. 141-155). London: Kogan Page. McLaughlin, R.G., & Kirkpatrick, D. (2004). Online roleplay: Design for active learning. European Journal of Engineering Education, 29, 477-490. Mitchell, A., & Savill-Smith, C. (2004). The use of computer and video games for learning. A review of the literature. London. Learning and Skills Development Agency. O’Driscoll, T. (2006). Game based learning for employees? Retrieved September 11, 2007, from http://www.checkpoint-elearning.com/article/3252.html Pelletier, C., & Oliver, M. (2006). Learning to play in digital games. Learning, Media and Technology, 31(4), 329-342. Prasolova-FØrland, E., Sourin, A., & Sourina, O. (2006). Cybercampuses: Design issues and future directions. Visual Computing, 22(12), 1015-1028. Rizzo, A.A., Pair, J., McNerney, P.J., Eastlund, E., Manson, B., Gratch, J., Hill, R., & Swartout, B. (2004). An immersive virtual reality therapy application for Iraq War veterans with PTSD: From training to toy to treatment. Proceedings of the 24th Army Science Conference. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www.asc2004. com/Manuscripts/sessionI/I.html

Sandford, R., Ulicsak, M., Facer, K., & Rudd, T. (2006). Teaching with games: Using commercial off-the-shelf computer games in formal education. Bristol: Nesta Futurelab. Snyder, G. (2007). Retrieved September 11, 2007, from http://karlkapp.blogspot.com/2007/01/gadgets-games-and-gizmos-mmorpg-in-ict.html Swartout, W., & Van Lent, M. (2003). Making a game of system design. Communications of the ACM, 46(7), 32-39. Twitchell, D.P., Wiers, K., Adkins, M., Burgoon, J.K., & Nunamaker, J.F. Jr. (2005). StrikeCOM: A multi-player online strategy game for researching and teaching group dynamics. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’05) (track 1, p. 45b). Voiskounsky, A.E., Mitina, O.V., & Avetisova, A.A. (2005). Communicative patterns and flow experience of MUD players. International Journal of Advanced Media and Communication, 1, 5-25. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. Wood, R.T.A., Griffiths, M.D., & Eatough, V. (2004). Online data collection from videogame players: Methodological issues. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7, 511-518. Yee. N. (2003). The Norrathian scrolls: A study of Everquest (version 2.5). Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www.nickyee.com/eqt/report.html Yee, N. (2007). Learning leadership skills. The Daedalus Project, 5(2). Retrieved September 11, 2007, from http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/archives/000338.php Zyda, M. (2005). From visual simulation to virtual reality to games. Retrieved November 29, 2006, from http://www.isi.edu/GamePipe/pubs/ GamePipeV8.7.pdf 

Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Games for Learning

KEY TERMS Exploratory Learning: Learning through exploring environments, reality, and lived and virtual experiences with tutorial and peer-based support. This notion of learning is based upon the idea that learning patterns can be helpfully transferred to dissimilar situations through metareflection. Unlike Kolb’s experimental learning, this process is not always circular (although it may be) and does not rely upon lived experience. Rather the approach acknowledges the cognitive process that helps individuals to use their imagination and creativity to draw out lessons from interactions, as well as extracting meaning from data. This process can be complicated and happen on different levels of understanding. That is, learning can be supported through different media, and through multimedia, interactions, and textual engagement. Guild: A collection of players share a common principle or outlook. A guild is a specialized group. Guilds are popular among the variety of MMORPGs available. Often guilds will have a deity alignment (good, evil, neutral) and carry out actions consistent with that alignment. However any players that are caught behaving badly or against the policies of the guild will be dealt with appropriately, such as being expelled from the guild. Immersive World Applications: Simulations, games, and other interactive, often 3D virtual spaces or crossover spaces (e.g., between virtual and real).



Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Play Game (MMORPG): Typically represented by large, sophisticated, detailed, and evolving worlds based in different narrative environments. Examples of such games are Everquest (heroic fantasy), Anarchy Online (futurist science fiction), and Motor City Online (classic car racing). The nature of these games is to offer a rich threedimensional world where typically players have some sort of a mission or goal. For example, in World of WarCraft one of the quests is to battle Ragnoros—a type of fire god. In MMORPGs, all the characters are fictional, rather than actual persons. Metaverse: An online virtual world in which there are no specific goals or objectives. A virtual world in which a user creates an avatar and then explores the world as that avatar. Users are able to chat with others in the world and interact with the avatars. Typically an inhabitant can create buildings, clothes, habitats, or any other items they can imagine. Metaverses do not typically have nonplayer characters (characters that are computer generated). In a metaverse all the characters are tied directly to an actual person. Serious Games: Games that integrate gaming elements with learning or training objectives. The name also refers to a movement of researchers and developers who are working towards developing games specifically aimed at educational audiences. Simulations: Non-linear synthetic training environments that allow learners to rehearse different scenarios, tasks, problems, or activities in advance of real-life interactions or to update skills.



Chapter IV

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games Yufeng Qian St. Thomas University, USA

AbstrAct Electronic games are becoming an important part of many American children’s life today. Electronic educational gaming, as a new instructional technique and media, holds great potential for the new millennium of learners. To reflect the preferences and meet the needs of this generation of learners, many various online games for educational purposes are made availablethe sheer number of existing educational games is overwhelming. The purpose of this chapter is to investigate the current state of educational games on the Internet, targeting K-12 learners in the United States. Major game providers and salient design features are identified, and future directions of game development for educational purposes are discussed.

INtrODUctION Digital games have emerged as one of the largest forms of entertainment in pop culture, and playing video and computer games is an important part of many children’s leisure life in the United States (Entertainment Software Association, 2007). Gaming is ranked among the top applications of the Internet (Pew Internet and American Life, 2005); kids between 2 and 18 years of age spend 20-33 minutes a day playing digital games (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2002). As a multi-billion-dol-

lar industry rivaling with Hollywood’s cultural influence, playing digital games is a dominant play culture and is increasingly affecting the way kids grow and their informal learning outside school. Digital games’ popularity and influence have aroused an intense interest in exploring their educational uses and benefits. Prensky (2001), Gee (2003), Aldrich (2005), and Squire (2005a) are among the early pioneers who have attempted to understand the inherent lure of games, as well as to uncover the power of digital game-based learn-

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

ing. Meanwhile, a number of research centers and initiatives dedicated to game study have emerged, including the Media Lab at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and its Games-to-Teach Project, the Games and Professional Practice Simulations (GAPPS) Group at the University of WisconsinMadison, the Virtual Human Interaction Lab at Stanford University, the Entertainment Technology Center at Carnegie Mellon University, and the Digital Games Research Center at North Carolina State University. Digital game-based learning is said to be the next generation’s educational media that holds great potential for meeting the needs and learning styles of the millennial generation of learners (Aldrich, 2005; Gee, 2003; Oblinger, 2004; Prensky, 2001). To reflect and cater to the needs and preferences of the millennials, myriad educational games are constantly being developed and made available on the Internet. A Google search of “online educational games” returned about 14.5 millions hits. Companies, organizations, or services targeting children compete to offer free online games intended to help children learn while playing. Some educational organizations and agencies have categorized or recognized top educational game Web sites monthly or annually. For example, EduHound (affiliated with T.H.E. Journal) identifies and updates its listing of “Fun & Games” Web sites for kids (http://www.eduhound.com/cat. cfm?subj=Kid%20Sites); Exploratorium, on the other hand, recommends “Ten Cool Sites” featuring fun games monthly (http://apps.exploratorium. edu/10cool/index.php). Undoubtedly, the sheer number of existing online games designed for educational purposes can be overwhelming for educators who want to incorporate gaming into their curriculum. In fact, one of the major obstacles for teachers is that it is difficult to identify quickly the accuracy and appropriateness of the content within a particular game and how the game is relevant to some components of the statutory curriculum (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004; Rice, 2007). Moreover, research



on the use of electronic gaming in education is relatively new (DiPietro, Ferdig, Boyer, & Black, 2007). While a number of studies have emerged to investigate video games (Squire, 2005b), as well as 3D massively multiplayer online games (Barab, Thomas, Dodge, Carteaux, & Tuzun, 2005b; Dede, 2003), there appears to be a lack of studies looking into the huge collection of various online games that may hold great potential in supporting learning in the K-12 classroom. The purpose of this chapter is to examine the current state of online educational games. Specific research questions include: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Who are the major providers of existing online educational games? What are the major types of existing online educational games? What are the salient design features among existing online educational games? What are the implications of the current state of online educational games for future development?

LITERATURE REVIEW Online educational games refer to a hybrid type of game genre that is played on the Internet through a Web browser, utilizes game formats (e.g., arcade, adventure, puzzle, massively multiplayer online game, etc.), and incorporates some type of learning objectives, the goal of which is to promote student learning in a fun, engaging, and interactive way (Okan, 2003). Different from mainstream games whose design focus is purely entertainment, online educational games target students, teachers, and parents, and as such their design focuses on subject matter and cognition (Gros, 2003). To identify the major types of existing online educational games, a brief overview of existing game taxonomies is in order. In addition, what the literature has suggested about core elements

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

of true games may help uncover the salient design features among the games. In this section, therefore, game taxonomy systems and characteristics of true games will be discussed.

Game Taxonomies Several studies have already proposed game taxonomies, including Caillois’ (1958) four types of pre-computer games (competition, chance, simulation, and movement), Crawford’s (1982) two broad categories of computer games (skilland-action and strategy), and Prensky’s (2001) eight genres of digital games. In his book Digital Game-Based Learning, Prensky (2001) classifies the emerging digital games into eight genres, basing the division primarily upon what a game is about: •

•

•

•

•

•

•

Action games: Examples of action games include shoot-them-up, car races, chases, and maze games. Adventure games: Among the earliest of computer games, adventure games involve people in an unknown world, where they need to find a way out. Fighting games: As the name suggests, fighting games have two characters battle each other until one is wiped out. Puzzle games: Probably one of the most traditional games, puzzle games ask players to solve puzzle problems. Role-playing games: In these games, players take a role to achieve a set goal; such games are often played in networks with thousands of players. Simulation games: Simulation games are about driving, flying, controlling machines, or managing companies. Sports games: As a specific type of action games, sports games allow players to play sports on the screen.

•

Strategy games: Probably one of the most sophisticated games, strategy games put players in charge of something big, which involves strategic planning and higher-order thinking strategies.

From the perspective of games’ complexity, Prensky (2005) further distinguishes between mini and complex games. Mini games have little complexity, providing one single type of challenge; complex games on the other hand provide mixed challenges that demand learning a wide variety of new skills and strategies, which often are acquired through outside research and collaboration with others while playing.

Core Elements of True Games To be considered a true game, a game must contain a particular set of components. Malone and Lepper (1987) identify five elements that motivate and engage players: challenge, curiosity, control, fantasy, and interpersonal activity. Similarly, Prensky (2001) proposes six key structural elements that make a game a true game; these are rules, goals and objectives, outcomes and feedback, conflict/ competition/challenge/opposition, interaction, and representation or story. Obviously, there is an overlap between what Malone and Lepper (1987) and Prensky (2001) have suggested on games’ characteristics. Combining both views, this study considers eight core elements that distinguish true games, discussed in detail below. The first element, challenge, is the most basic component of a game that the player is supposed to encounter and resolve. The challenge can come in varied formats: it could be a problema math problem, a social ethic dilemma; it could be a goal/objective/outcometo be a millionaire, to get the highest score, to reach the end, to capture the enemy, and so on. In a game, resolving the problem or achieving the goal is a big piece of



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

what usually motivates the gamer. The second element is rule. All games come with a set of fixed rules specific to a particular game. Rules are what differentiate games from other kinds of play (Prensky, 2001). The third is feedback. One of the most satisfactory factors of games is the immediate, frequent, and unambiguous feedback players receive that informs their progress against the goals. Fourth is the player’s experience of control, which Malone and Lepper (1987) describe as critical. When individuals face choices that produce powerful effects, their sense of personal control is increased. The fifth element is the role of interaction that facilitates intrinsic motivation. Play promotes the foundation of social grouping (Prensky, 2001). The sixth is curiosity, which plays a large role in the attraction of games and exists in two different formssensory curiosity and cognitive curiosityboth of which pique players’ desire to find the unknown and “fix” the incompleteness and inconsistency (Malone & Lepper, 1987). The seventh involves the elements of fantasy that increase intrinsic motivation. These fantasy elements encompass both the emotions and thinking process of the learner and should have an integral relationship to the learning material. The eighth and last element is representation. Representation means that the game is about something, which can include a narrative or storyline involving real events or fantasy. Since stories (narratives) usually have a strong emotional impact on people, they are an integral part of an engaging game (Prensky, 2001).

MAJOR PROVIDERS OF CURRENT ONLINE EDUCATIONAL GAMES From language to math to geography, from shooting-them-up to crossword puzzle to Sudoku, there exist a myriad of free games on the Internet for children to play and learn. The researcher acquired a list of Web sites under the directory “Kids and Teens > Games > Online” from Google’s

0

directory service. The games from the list were filtered to identify those that have education components and are browser based (i.e., can be played online through a Web browser). In addition, educational games and game Web sites referenced in education magazines and journals targeting K-12 educators, administrators, and librarians were added to the list. Such publications include Technology & Learning, T.H.E. Journal, eSchool News Online, Teacher Librarian, and Scholastic Instructor. As a result, 40 game Web sites that contain approximately 1,800 games were identified as online educational games and included in the study. (See Appendix A for a complete list of the Web sites.) While there exist well-established educational publishers (e.g., Scholastic) and educational media review services (e.g., Education-World.com) that help educators choose relevant and reliable texts and software programs, no similar services yet focus on online educational games, given that online gaming is such a new field. By examining existing online educational games acquired from a variety of sources (Google’s directory service, K-12 education journals and magazines), this study has identified six major types of game providers.

Category 1: Educational Media Companies The first and most obvious category is educational media companies. A number of major kids’ learning software companiesincluding BrainPop, Arcademic Skill Builder, LittleFingers, and UpToTenhave developed accompanying Web sites that contain free online learning games. The games developed by these companies, available free for public service, have strong educational content and are usually grouped by subject areas or academic skills. For example, the 53 games from BrainPop are categorized by topics, such as allergies games, bones games, or Internet safety games.

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

Some other media companies provide only subscription-based online educational services. CleverIsland.com, for example, is such an educational game Web site for children, comprising more than 100 continuously updated games and activities. KidsCom.com, a similar online educational service with over 500,000 site users each month, provides monthly updated learning and character-trait building games. Time4Learning. com is another similar company developing interactive online home education programs that feature fun learning games.

Category 2: Educational Publishers Beginning in the late 1990s, the nation’s major publishers of children’s educational materials, such as Pearson Education, Scholastic, and Houghton Mifflin, started to launch learning games relevant to the publishers’ products and themes. FunBrain. com by Pearson Education is an educational game site, featuring a large array of math and word games. Houghton Mifflin, focusing on reading products, has dedicated two standalone game sites on language and math to childrenEducation Place and Game Goo. Scholastic, a publisher and distributor of children’s titles, has also devoted a section to reading games on its Web site. Likewise, emerging children’s publishers, such as ALFY, founded in 1998, and Magination Press, created in 1987, have dedicated standalone game sites to serving children and their parents. Alfy. com, striving to be a virtual destination for children, offers hundreds of online games on various topics. KidsPsych.org, by Magination Press that focuses on children’s mental health, is a learning game site that helps kids with cognitive thinking skills and deductive reasoning.

Category 3: Professional Organizations

their missions as well as to teach children. These organizations include Nobel Prize, NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund), and AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). The Nobel Prize’s Web site contains a section of games and simulations, based on Nobel Prize-awarded achievements, teaching knowledge in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature, peace, and economics. UNICEF provides two arcade games“World Heroes” and “Halloween Coin Toss”to teach children about UNICEF’s relief missions and fundraising. NASA Kids’ Game page consists of 80 games for young students to explore important skills and concepts in math, science, and technology. Kinetic City: Mission to Vearth, a science game from AAAS, addresses a diverse and comprehensive array of science topics.

Category 4: Academic Research Organizations The popularity and potential of gaming in education has piqued growing interest in academia, resulting in the emerging of a number of research initiatives and research centers, as discussed previously. Alongside the massive research interest are several educational projects involving 3D virtual world technology. The River City project at the Graduate School of Education of Harvard University is a 3D multi-user virtual environment for learning scientific inquiry. Quest Atlantis, housed at the Center for Research on Learning and Technology at Indiana University, is a similar project built on strategies from online role-playing games. These two research-based titles represent the newest form of educational games so far3D massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) environments.

Some professional organizations have also developed standalone educational Web sites to promote



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

Category 5: Non-Profit Educational Groups This category of online game providers includes groups, families, individuals, and educational foundations that are committed to K-12 education and put together free online games for learning purposes. This group can be further divided into two sub-groups. The first consists of individuals or non-profit educational foundations that aim to help kids learn. Examples of this group include StarFall.com, HAGames.org, PrimaryGames. com, theproblemsite.com, and iKnowthat.com. Games in this group have a strong educational intent, with most of the games sorted into subjects and grade levels. Instead of focused subjects, the second subgroup provides a broader collection of online games ranging from word puzzles to brain teasers. Examples of this group include SparkTop.org, 4kids.org, Kidzpage.com, PlayKidsGames.com, Prongo.com, and FunIsland.com. This group of game sites has both education and entertainment components. Their games are usually categorized by types as well as by subject areas.

Category 6: Broadcasting Networks National broadcasting networks, especially those that have children and educational components, also rush to offer browser-based games on their Web sites, including pbskidsgo.org (by PBS), cartoonnetwork.com (by Cartoon Network), abckids. com (by ABC), and kids.nationalgeorgraphic. com (by National Geographic Channel), all of which have a section of online games related to their programming. Disney’s Blast Games (http:// games.disneysblast.com/) is probably the largest game site of its kind with hundreds of educational games featuring all Disney characters. The games on these network Web sites are targeted specifically to their viewing audiencechildrenand supplement their TV programming by promoting their TV characters



and shows via games. Featured games are presented on the section index page, and visitors can navigate through the game menu to see all the titles. Instead of a strong educational content, games on these sites actually train children in some non-academic skills, such as hand-eye coordination, concentration, memorization, social and emotional skills, and even detective work. Different from the games in the above discussed categories, the educational goal of these games is indirect rather than direct. It should also be noted that a number of valuable educational games portals on the Internet compile and catalog free online games. One of the most comprehensive portals is probably Gamequarium (http://www.gamequarium.com/), a portal to thousands of interactive learning games for kids, categorized by grade levels and subject areas. Since the categorization system has included only game developers, the game portal sites are thus excluded from this study. Nonetheless, these game portal sites are useful resources for educators and researchers interested in online educational games.

CURRENT STATE OF ONLINE EDUCATIONAL GAMES Game sites are different in a variety of ways. Some sites contain hundreds of games, such as Disney’s Blast Games and the game section of Cartoon Network that covers almost all game genres from arcade to puzzle; some sites are much more focused, including only a small number of games on some very specific skills, such as Arcademic Skill Building’s seven arcade games on basic math and vocabulary and Magination Press’ 14 puzzle and maze games aimed to develop young children’s developmental and cognitive thinking skills. For the purpose of this chapter, this section will describe the major commonalities manifest among the game Web sites regarding targeted grade levels, subject areas, cognitive skills, game

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

genres, and finally, game types and the main features of each type.

Grade Levels, Subject Areas, and Cognitive Skills The vast majority of current educational game sites (80%, or 32 out of 40) are aimed at PreK to 7th graders who are children ages 5-12. Two Web sites of educational publishers claim to serve all ages of children from K to12, including FunBrain.com of Pearson Education and scholastic. com/kids/games.htm of Scholastic publishing. Web sites from broadcasting networks do not specify targeted age groups and appear to serve children of all ages; such game sites include Cartoon Network, ABC, Disney’s Blast Games, and National Geographic. Only four game sites (10%, or 4 out of 40) target middle and high school students, including two virtual world learning environment projects, Whyville and River City of Harvard University, which specifically target middle school students, and two Flash-based game sites, NobelPrize.org and HAGames.org, targeting high school students ages 16-18. The curriculum subjects addressed among the game sites include language, math, science, and social studies, with 45% (18 out of 40) of the game sites containing language games (reading, vocabulary), 30% (12 out of 40) including math games, 15% (6 out of 40) addressing science, and another 15% (6 out of 40) having social studies games. In addition to subject content, 40% (16 out of 40) of the game sites cover a variety of important developmental and cognitive skills, such as visual/auditory short-term memorization, concentration, visual search, hand-eye coordination, spatial orientation, logic/analytical thinking, reasoning, and problem solving. Obviously, there are more games on language and math than on other subject areas, which could be partially explained by the finding that the vast majority of the game sites are aimed at young children at the primary level where arithmetic and

vocabulary are core curriculum content. Another reason may be that those popular traditional game typessuch as hangman, crossword puzzle, number puzzle, and the like, which depend largely on a knowledge of words and mathare still the dominant educational game types on the Internet. Due to the small fraction of games on subjects other than language and math, it is worthwhile to mention the small number of game sites dedicated to science and social studies; they are BrainPop, Nobel Prize, National Geographic, Kineticcity, and iKnowthat, which provide a number of games on earth science, life science, geography, physics, chemistry, economics, medicine, and so on. While one-fourth of the game sites do not address curriculum content, their games have been designed to practice and improve children’s developmental and cognitive skills. Without academic content in mind, games offered by broadcasting network companies such as Disney, PBS, and Cartoon Network are mainly fast-paced action games with up-tempo background music and animated sound. Such games focusing on speed and physical drama may help to improve players’ time estimation, reflexes, and coordination skills. KidsPsych.com is another game site dedicated to helping young children with cognitive thinking and deductive reasoning skills. Divided into two age groupsages 1-5 and ages 6-9each thinking game is designed to boost visual, cognitive, and attention skills of children at a certain age.

Game Genres As discussed earlier, games are traditionally categorized into eight genres: action, adventure, fighting, puzzle, role-playing, simulation, sports, and strategy (Prensky, 2001). Nearly 60% (23 out of 40) of the game sites contain action games. Action games typically feature challenges performed under a time limit, in which the player must complete a task quickly or otherwise lose a life or fail the level. Such games do not allow much time for thinking but demand a high degree



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

of physical reaction speed, hand-eye coordination, and mental dexterity (Wikipedia, n.d.). Game titles from Arcademic Skill Builder are exemplars of action games designed for learning purposes. Demolition Division is an example of a fast-paced math fluency exercise where tanks with division problems move toward the blaster, and learners need to fire the blaster with the correct answer at the tank with the correct problem before a tank shoots down the wall and destroys the blaster. Playing such games is an effective and motivating method of increasing fluency of basic math operation. Puzzle is the second game genre that is widely used, with 30% (12 out of the 40) of the game sites containing puzzle games in different forms, including crossword puzzles, jigsaw puzzles, Sudoku, or logic puzzles (also called brain teasers). Many puzzles are discipline specific that require knowledge and skills in a specific subject. For example, a word puzzle requires a kid’s spelling and vocabulary skills, while a math puzzle practices mental number operations. Some non-content puzzles require use of visual skills, logical thinking, and problem solving. A jigsaw puzzle may help improve children’s ability to visualize the spatial placement and movement of objects, while a Sudoku puzzle requires players to use logic and deduction skills. Puzzles are usually listed as a separate category among the game sites and are not assigned a grade level appropriateness. Simulation, role-playing, and strategy are three genres that are seldom found among the game sites except in three virtual world games, Whyville, River City, and Quest Atlantis. Whyville, for example, is designed to engage children in real-life activities. Children are encouraged to earn money for writing for the Whyville Times, stocking up the cafeteria, or playing challenging games so that they can buy parts for their faces, bricks for their houses, and furniture for their rooms. Kids can even purchase and drive a cool car through a virtual loan, which forces them to learn about the details of financing, leasing, interest rates,



and credit that they will later apply in the real world. It is encouraging to see some children’s game sites that have recently started to launch a new type of game environment that goes beyond dominating mini game types (such as action and puzzle games). Disney Game Kingdom Online is a new destination where kids can create their own online worlds, adopt pets, decorate their own houses, and customize their kingdoms. Similarly, Cartoon Network recently launched a gigantic new game, Big Fat Awesome House Party, a virtual world where kids cannot only play cool mini games but go on adventures with Bloo, which gives children an opportunity to find out what it is like to have an imaginary friend at Foster’s.

Game Types and Characteristics In addition to categorization based on traditional genres, the games were also examined based on their length and complexity. The games examined in this study can be categorized into three general groupsmini, complex, and persistent. Games in the first group are simple, short, and focused on very specific topics or skills, mostly arithmetic, spelling, simple problem solving, and other basic skills, that usually take a couple of minutes to completeeither win or lose. The vast majority of online games for educational purposesgames from educational media companies (e.g., BrainPop.com), educational publishing (e.g., Pearson Education), broadcasting networks (e.g., PBS), and non-profit educational groups (StarFall. com)typically fall into this group. Examples of mini games include BrainPop Jr.’s topic-based games, FunBrain’s arcade-type arithmetic practice games, KidsPsych’s animated thinking skills games, and UNICEF’s action games for practicing speed of reaction and hand-eye coordination. The focus of mini games is on the player giving the right response to a given stimulus represented as a challenge or a problem. Mini games, usually in the arcade style, allow children to practice a

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

specific content or skill through repetition while receiving rewards after each proper response. The rules in mini games are simple and straightforward, involving the use of the left, right, up, and down arrow keys, the spacebar, or simply mouse-clicking, and the feedback is instant with animated sound. The interaction is simple and limited between a single player and the computer or the preprogrammed player. It is noted that some game sites have started to allow a player to select and invite a live opponent from a list of players who happen to be online; this could potentially enhance players’ enjoyment and engagement with mini games (see SparkTop.org for example). In contrast, the games in the second group are complex and thoughtful, requiring deeper learning and thinking that usually takes a couple of hours or even days to complete. Games that are developed by professional organizations and academic research organizations and that target middle and high school students fall into this type. The science content games from kineticcity.com (from AAAS) and the “Thinking Games” from iKnowthat.com are such games that promote exploratory playchildren learn new knowledge and acquire thinking skills through experimentation and discovery. Complex games are focused on inquiry and discovery, involving learners in an active and meaningful interaction with the game where exploration and learning are intrinsically motivated. Widgets, a thinking game from iKnowthat.com, is an example of complex online games in which players design and assemble a virtual machine using a variety of widgets. They could design a contraption with a frog kicking balls into a target; or build a perpetual motion machine with balls moving through a tubular maze. Players exercise their creativity, imagination, and problem-solving skills through playing with the widgets; their motivation comes from the activity itself instead of an extrinsic reward as in mini games. Similar to mini games, though, feedback in complex games is immediate, and the interaction is limited to a

single player and the computer or another player (either the preprogrammed player or a live player); different from mini games, rules in complex games are more complicated and usually take quite a while to acquire. The third type of online games, probably the most sophisticated, is a persistent world which supports hundreds or thousands of players simultaneously; gaming continues to develop even while some of the players are not playing their characters. Sometimes referred to as MMOGs or MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online role-playing games), or “virtual worlds” at other times, persistent world games engage children in “persistent social and material worlds, loosely structured by open-ended (fantasy) narratives, where players are largely free to do as they please” (Steinkuehler, 2004, p. 521). Quest Atlantis, for example, is a 3D virtual world learning environment consisting of 11 worlds. Each world features three villages that address different aspects of the world’s theme, such as urban ecology, water quality, astronomy, and weather. Its legend is that the people of “Atlantis” face an impending disaster in that their world is slowly being destroyed through environmental, moral, and social decay. The challenge of the game is to save Atlantis, which requires players’ skills in self- and guided-exploration, reflection, communication, and collaboration. Persistent virtual worlds are focused on social and participatory skills. Quest Atlantis, for example, is a globally distributed community with over 4,500 participants (Barab, Arici, & Jackson, 2005a). It provides a “context of participation” where children have the opportunity to interact with users from around the world, as well as with the mentors, in a protected virtual environment. Children collaborate through co-questing, bulletin boards, blogs, and other group activities, in which they work together to solve the challenge and learn how to interact (socializing, discussing, and negotiating) with other avatars. Just as in mini and complex games, persistent virtual world games come with challenges and



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

interaction; however, solving challenges usually requires collaboration and coordination among multiple players, and thus the interaction has more social aspects than in mini and complex games. Furthermore, persistent games embody more elements of true games, such as fantasy, curiosity, and representation, which have been seldom seen in mini and complex games. For example, Quest Atlantis has used a storyline to represent a sophisticated game context. Presented through a variety of media, including videos, novellas, comic books, and movie-style posters, the storyline provides children with an integrated, memorable, and immersive learning and playing experience (Barab et al., 2005a).

IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS The current state of online educational games, as discussed above, points to some future directions to better design and easier integration of this new but promising online resource into K-12 education. The findings from this exploratory investigation of existing games also inform some productive future directions of research in the field of online educational games. First and foremost, there is a need for more complex and persistent educational games available on the Internet to serve older children in middle and high schools by providing exploratory play and learning that involve a higher level of subject content and cognitive skills. American teens and pre-teens, ages 12-19, spend an average of three to four hours playing online games (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2005), making up one of the leading groups of consumers of mainstream games. Unfortunately, however, the vast majority of current online educational games is not aimed at this group; instead they target young children at the primary level and focus on low-level topics of simple literacy and numeracy using arcade-type mini games. The essential structural elements



and compelling drive and passion reserved for the popular commercial games are seldom invoked by the current dominating arcade and puzzle games. In fact many of today’s popular commercial games that have taken most of older children’s leisure time involve simulation, strategy, and role-playing, especially role-playing in the MMORPG form. MMORPGs, representing the newest development in the history of game technology, are visually immersive 3D online environments where individuals—represented by avatars (cartoonishlooking characters)—meet, socialize, and interact with each other, with computer-based agents, digital artifacts, and the environments in real time, just as they might in the real world (Clarke & Dede, 2005). Over the last few years, there has been a surge of interest in introducing MMORPGs into education. A variety of 3D online learning environments has rapidly burst into the limelight in education, including Second Life, Active Worlds, There, River City, Quest Atlantis, and Whyville. Second Life, in particular, has attracted millions of residents, and a number of virtual campuses based in Second Life have been built and used (Second Life, 2007). Obviously, MMORPGs point to a new direction for educational game design and development. Empirical studies are needed to explore whether and how MMORPG environments could engage and support middle and high school students’ learning and cognitive development. Second, online educational games may need to be designed to align to curriculum standards if they are to make a greater impact and reach their full potential in education. As discussed previously, most educational games do address specific subject content focused on a certain grade level, such as multiplication, reading skills, or word order in sentences; however, the targeted content and grade levels have not been articulated and made available to educators. Arcademic Skill Builders, Game Goo, iKnowthat, River City, and Quest Atlantis are among the few that

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

have made available the curriculum standards to which the games have been aligned on their Web sites. Inconsistent alignment of educational software (including electronic games) with the curriculum has been one of the most frequently mentioned obstacles to technology integration in the K-12 setting (Gros, 2007; Williams, Boone, & Kingsley, 2004). Educators seek educational games that can meet demands for increased accountability and test scores; bringing in games that do not promise to fit the set curriculum is just too risky. It is important that the content of games be tied to curriculum standards. If this does not happen, the game will have a very limited chance in a teacher’s lesson plan. Likewise, current game genre taxonomies, such as the one suggested by Prensky (2001), may serve commercial games well, but they do not appear to facilitate the integration of games into the curriculum. An ideal game categorization system for educational purposes is needed to better reflect the correlation between the curriculum standards and embedded knowledge and skills in games. Third, parallel to the curriculum alignment issue discussed above is a need to explore other potentially feasible ways of making use of the enormous collection of free online games, to which educators and children have easy access with a few finger clicks. While previous research shows no compelling evidence that games produced significantly more learning or motivation than other instructional platforms (Gredler, 2003; Hayes, 2005; Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004), we might still want to consider how games could be used to help students’ learning outside of school, given that games are apparently a preferred form of after-school activity. Instead of the traditional paper-based drillskill practice, the existing online games could be used as a supplemental device to engage students in intensive reinforcement practice outside of

school and to strengthen what they have learned in class. FunBrain.com of Pearson Education, for example, is an ideal after-school online program, where teachers at all grade levels can find relevant games on the core academic disciplines of reading, math, science, and social studies, as the games are grouped by title, subject, and grade level. Kinetic City: Mission to Vearth of the AAAS is a similar Web-based after-school program focusing on standards-based science for children in grades three through five. The curriculum guide helps teachers identify how the game is relevant to the components of the curriculum. Fourth, apparently current design and development of online educational games lag behind that of their counterparts in entertainment. Further studies are needed to identify the core elements embedded in mainstream commercial games to which children have devoted time and energy. Meanwhile, it is not quite clear what type of current free online educational games works better for which subject area or grade level. Further studies are needed to explore children’s preferences and experiences in using these free online games, as well as their impact on children’s cognition and academic achievement. Similarly, little is known about teachers’ perspectives on and experiences with using online educational games. Further studies are needed to investigate the design and curriculum integration issues. Furthermore, using the findings of this chapter as a starting point, future studies could explore issues outlined in this chapter on a deeper level. Studies of online games focusing on a specific subject (e.g., social studies, science, or digital literacy), a cognitive skill (e.g., thinking skill or virtual social skill), an age group (e.g., young children or adolescents), or a type (e.g., mini, complex, or persistent), and how each factor interacts with other factors, would greatly contribute to the knowledge base of educational online gaming.



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

CONCLUSION Despite the fast growth of free online games for educational purposes, research on this gaming platform is still limited. This chapter was an attempt to provide a general picture of the current state of online educational games in terms of grade levels, subject areas, cognitive skills, game genres, and major types of games and their general characteristics. The current six major providers of online educational games, as well as the collection of existing major educational game Web sites, may help educators in tracking down relevant and reliable resources of games to support students’ learning in and outside of school. Like any other learning technologies, games and gaming for educational purposes is an evolving entity. With the advance of gaming technology and the development of more educational games and game Web sites, the field of online educational games may evolve and change rapidly. American K-12 education needs a balanced representation of all types of games to be available on the Internet, addressing various grade levels and subject areas, and making optimal use of this valuable technology to truly engage and improve students’ learning, and meet the needs and preferences of the current and next generation of learners. Collaboration and coordination among game developers, educators, administrators, and researchers are needed to make this happen.

REFERENCES Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing: A comprehensive guide to simulations, computer games, and pedagogy in e-learning and other educational experiences. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. Barab, S.A., Arici, A., & Jackson, C. (2005a). Eat your vegetables and do your homework: A design-based investigation of enjoyment and



meaning in learning. Educational Technology, 65(1), 15-21. Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005b). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 86-107. Caillois, R. (1961). Man, play, and games. Meyer Barash, IL: University of Illinois Press. Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2005, April). Making learning meaningful: An exploratory study of using multi-user environment (MUVs) in middle school science. Montreal, Canada: American Educational Research Association. Crawford, C. (1982). The art of computer game design. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit. Dede, C. (2003). Multi-user virtual environments. EDUCAUSE Review, 38(3), 60-61. DiPietro, M., Ferdig, R., Boyer, J., & Black, E. (2007). Towards a framework for understanding electronic educational gaming. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 225-248. EduHound. (n.d.). Kid sites: Fun and games. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from http://www. eduhound.com/cat.cfm?subj=Kid%20Sites E nt e r t a i n me nt Sof t wa r e A s s o c iat io n . (2007). Game player data. Retrieved July 1, 2007, from http://www.eduhound.com/cat. cfm?subj=Kid%20Sites Exploratorium. (n.d.). Ten cool sites: Bringing you the coolest since 1995. Retrieved February 1, 2007, from http://www.exploratorium.edu/learning_studio/cool/kids.html Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

Gredler, M.E. (2003). Games and simulations: A technology in search of paradigm. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 521-540). Washington, DC: Association for Educational Communication and Technology. Gros, B. (2003). The impact of digital games in education. First Monday: Pre Previewed Journal on the Internet. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http:// www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue8_7/xyzgros Gros, B. (2007). Digital games in education: The design of games-based learning environments. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(1), 23-38. Hayes, R.T. (2005, November). Effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion. Orlando, FL: Naval Warfare Center, Training Systems Division. Kaiser Family Foundation. (2002). Key facts: Children and video games. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/3271index.cfm Kaiser Family Foundation. (2005). Generation M: Media in the lives of 8-18 year-olds. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.kff.org/entmedia/ entmedia030905pkg.cfm

Oblinger, D. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8, 1-18. Okan, Z. (2003). Edutainment: Is learning at risk? British Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), 255-264. Pew Internet and American Life. (2005). Teens and technology. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.center-school.org/pko/documents/ PIP_Teens_Tech_July2005web.pdf Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Prensky, M. (2005). In educational games, complexity matters. Retrieved May 15, 2007, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/PrenskyComplexity_Matters.pdf Rice, J. (2007). New media resistance: Barriers to implementation of computer video games in the classroom. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 16(3), 249-261. Second Life. (2007). What is Second Life? Retrieved March 27, 2007, from http://secondlife. com/whatis/ Squire, K.D. (2005a). Toward a theory of games literacy. Telemedium, 52(1-2), 9-15.

Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature review in games and learning. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://www.futurelab.org. uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Games_Review.pdf

Squire, K.D. (2005b). Changing the game: What happens when video games enter the classroom? Innovate, 1(6). Retrieved May 15, 2007, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index. php?view=article&id=82

Malone, T.W., & Lepper, M.R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomic model of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R.E. Snow & M.J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction: III. Cognitive and affective process analysis (pp. 223-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Action game. Retrieved March 15, 2007, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_game Williams, D.L., Boone, R., & Kingsley, K.V. (2004). Teacher beliefs about educational software: A Delphi study. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(3), 213-229.



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

KEY TERMS Complex Games: Focused on inquiry and discovery that require deeper learning and thinking, such games involve learners in an active and meaningful interaction with the game, where learning is intrinsically motivated. Game Genre: Refers to a particular type or style of a game. The most widely used game classifying system categorizes games into eight genres: action, adventure, fighting, puzzle, roleplaying, simulation, sports, and strategy. Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (MMORPG): A visually immersive three-dimensional (3D) online environment where individualsrepresented by avatars (cartoonish-looking characters)meet, socialize, and interact with each other, with computer-based agents, digital artifacts, and the environment in real time, just as they might in the real world. Also referred to as MMOGs (massively multiplayer online games).

0

Mini Games: Simple, short games focused on very specific topics or skills, such as arithmetic, spelling, hand-eye coordination, or visual skills. Usually in arcade style, mini games are an effective and motivating method of increasing fluency of a specific content or skill. Online Educational Games: A hybrid type of game genre that is played on the Internet through a Web browser, utilizes game formats, and incorporates some type of learning objectives, the goal of which is to promote student learning in a fun, engaging, and interactive way. Persistent Games: A persistent online world that supports hundreds or thousands of players simultaneously; gaming continues to develop even when some of the players are not playing their characters. Persistent virtual worlds are focused on social and participatory skills. True Games: A game must contain a particular set of components to be considered a true game. The most widely recognized elements include challenge, rule, feedback, control, interaction, curiosity, fantasy, and representation.

An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

APPENDIX A: LIST OF MAJOR EDUCATIONAL GAME WEB SITES Category 1: Educational Media Companies

Arcademic Skill Builders (http://arcademic.altec.org/games.htm) BrainPOP Jr. (http://www.brainpopjr.com/games/) KidsCom (http://www.kidscom.com/games/games.html) LittleFingers (http://www.little-g.com/shockwave/loading.html) Time4learning (http://www.time4learning.com/) UpToTen (http://www.kidsgames.org/)

Category 2: Educational Publishers

ALFY.com (http://www.alfy.com/games/learning/index.aspx) Education Place (http://www.eduplace.com/kids/games.jsp) FE Kids (http://www.fekids.com/kln/games/) FunBrain (http://www.funbrain.com/index.html) Game Goo (http://www.earobics.com/gamegoo/gooeyhome.html) Magination Press (http://www.kidspsych.org/index1.html) Scholastic.com (http://www.scholastic.com/kids/games.htm)

Category 3: Professional Organizations

American Association for the Advancement of Science (http://www.kineticcity.com/) Getty Games (http://www.getty.edu/gettygames) NASA (http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forkids/games/index.html) National Gallery of Arts (http://www.nga.gov/kids/zone/zone.htm) National Museum of Dentistry (http://www.mouthpower.org/mouthpower.cfm) National Pest Management Association (http://www.pestworldforkids.org/index.asp) Nobel Prize (http://nobelprize.org/educational_games/) UNICEF (http://www.unicefgames.org/)

Category 4: Academic Research Organizations

Quest Atlantis (http://atlantis.crlt.indiana.edu/) River City (http://muve.gse.harvard.edu/rivercityproject/index.html)

Category 5: Non-Profit Educational Groups

FunIsland.com (http://www.funIsland.com) HAGames (http://www.hagames.org/ha_story.aspx) iKnowthat.com (http://www.iknowthat.com/com/L3?Area=L2_Engineering) Kaboose (http://resources.kaboose.com/games/) Kidzpage.com (http://www.thekidzpage.com/learninggames/learningonline.htm) Playkidsgames.com (http://www.playkidsgames.com/about.htm) Primary Games (http://www.primarygames.com/) Prongo.com (http://www.prongo.com/games/) Starfall (http://www.starfall.com) continued on following page



An Investigation of Current Online Educational Games

APPENDIX A CONTINUED Category 5: continued

Spark Top (http://www.sparktop.org/games/games.html) The Problem Site (http://www.theproblemsite.com/games.asp) Whyville (http://www.virtualworldsreview.com/whyville/)

Category 6: Broadcasting Networks

ABC (http://tv.disney.go.com/abckids) Cartoon Network (http://www.cartoonnetwork.com/games/index.html) Disney’s Blast Games (http://games.disneysblast.com/) National Geographic (http://kids.nationalgeographic.com/Games/) PBS (http://pbskids.org/go/allgames.html)





Chapter V

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning Cathy Cavanaugh University of Florida, USA

AbstrAct In augmented reality games, game experiences combining electronic game content take the form of narrative materials and game-play elements exchanged through a wide range of communication media that are used in a related physical setting. Educational game developers design these games to maximize transfer of learning through close approximation of the game-scaffolded skills and the game environment to real skills and contexts. The games immerse players in electronic and actual learning situations using features that make them effective learning experiences for fostering meaningful learning. The situated learning experienced by augmented reality game players transfers to deep learning, often in social contexts. Research into the uses of these games as educational platforms has focused on developing the technologies for the games and on studies of games for learning. Results demonstrate the strengths and areas for continued development in the application of augmented reality games for childhood and adult learning in formal and informal settings.

INtrODUctION As portable media platforms, social networking, and context-aware devices approach ubiquity, the potential expands for game content to be delivered and used anywhere in real time. Augmented reality (AR) games are innovative digital games framed by the real world that enable players to interact simultaneously with both a fictional world and the real world. Augmented reality games im-

merse players in a game scenario through visual augmentation such as head-mounted displays or others forms of digital augmentation in the form of e-mail, text messaging, or the World Wide Web. In AR games, the electronic game content is a combination of designed media intended to enhance an experience in an authentic setting. “Unlike virtual reality, augmented reality does not create a simulated reality. Instead, it takes a real object or space and uses technologies to add

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

contextual data to deepen students’ understanding of it” (EDUCAUSE, 2005, p. 1). Research into the uses of AR games as educational platforms has focused on developing the technologies for the games and on studies of games for learning applications. This chapter reviews the literature on the effectiveness of AR games for learning and describes implications and recommendations for research, design, and implementation at primary and secondary levels.

bAcKGrOUND Augmented reality games have been used in military and corporate environments for a semirealistic form of simulation training, and they recently began to find a K-12 audience. AR games are very well suited for educating people in the new Conceptual Age, an era identified by Pink (2005) as a period in which strengths in creativity, synthesis, and contextualization are in increasing demand to solve complex new problems. The education community has recognized that Agricultural, Industrial, and even Information Age models are no longer the most effective paths to facilitation of meaningful learning (Pink, 2005). In the Conceptual Age the analytical and logical abilities valued for the Information Age will be joined by inventive and empathic abilities, which will enable global citizens to serve emerging social needs, become independent lifelong learners, and excel in the new professional marketplace. A curriculum centered on a single approach to solving problems will not effectively prepare students in the Conceptual Age, but must evolve into a learning ecology that more accurately reflects the demands of working with multiple data sources to address problems (Siemens, 2006). The flexible, socially interactive, globally connected capabilities afforded by AR games make them among the best designs for understanding the complex challenges facing us (Dede, Dieterle, Clarke, & Ketelhut, 2007).



For a learner’s perception to transform to conceptual learning, the learner must actively interpret messages and scenarios (Goldstone & Wilensky, 2007) and must experience learning that is meaningful (Jonassen, 2002). Recent brain research draws attention to the ways that students’ neural networks function as they make determinations of the meaning of their learning and thereby foster engagement and commitment to the learning process (Rose & Meyer, 2002). Meaningful learning refers to learning that is active, constructive, intentional, and authentic. It “includes reciprocal intention—action—reflection activities,” as proposed in Jonassen’s (2000, p. v) views of activity theory, and occurs when learners make meaning in the context of solving novel problems (Rose & Meyer, 2002). Among the strengths, then, of AR games is their built-in capacity for posing problems to players that are continually novel as a function of the actions and interactions of the players. AR games have features that make them effective learning experiences for fostering meaningful learning: AR games depend on players actively solving problems, they provide information that builds on the players’ prior knowledge, they require players to intentionally act in order to succeed in game tasks, and they are set within authentic contexts. Active learning engages learners in cognitive effort, facilitated by instructional transactions (Merrill, 1992) designed to guide the learner toward acquisition of specific knowledge and skills. It occurs within an interpersonal, collaborative, learning community and depends on learner interactions with learning materials and with other learners within the context of a meaningful task. When playing an AR game, a group of students uses the guidance provided via media by the game to solve problems, often in collaborative groups. For example, in FutureLab’s Astroversity game, groups of students ages 12-14 worked in teams with instructions from a “tutor” to rescue a “casualty” during a space mission (Ulicsak, 2004). Each team member received different informa-

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

tion electronically and needed to collaborate to accomplish the mission. Constructive learning requires the development of new knowledge and skill into existing conceptions through both reflection and metacognition for application to other contexts (Jonassen, Howland, Moore, & Marra, 2003). The results are new conceptual models. The role of the AR game is to accelerate that process through immersion and to develop in learners transferable problemsolving and group process strategies that can be applied to subsequent conceptual learning. In the FutureLab MobiMission project, teenagers with mobile phones encountered “missions” created for them by other participants (Thomas, 2007). Many missions required reflection, such as the one asking players to send a photo that “sums up your childhood.” The field trial for MobiMission revealed that players were most interested in how others built on the missions they created. In intentional learning, the goal is to support learners who will purposely choose and persist in learning experiences. Lifelong learners acquire a level of self-regulation that enables them to identify learning goals and to plan experiences to fulfill those goals. Instructional processes, such as engaging problems, can help learners articulate an intentional learning purpose (Jonassen, 2000). The play orientation, social tools, and fictional scenarios in AR games foster the motivation that students need to connect learning to their personal interests. FutureLab’s Newtoon is a mobile phone and Web experience designed to teach the laws of physics through mobile gaming that students play, create, and share (Pykett, 2007). Because the learning happens with active, engaging media and within a learning community, students are more likely to decide to use their phones as learning devices. Authentic learning principles are based on the recognition that deep transferable academic learning can be a complex endeavor requiring practice in meaningful, real-world situations. AR games immerse players in a variety of electronic

and actual learning situations. The IPerG project, Epidemic Menace, places players in the roles of medical experts tasked with saving their campus and surrounding areas from a virus (Lindt, Ohlenberg, Pankoke-Babatz, & Ghellal, 2007). Players use location-aware mobile devices to comb the campus for data, which they pooled in order to make decisions. Learners engage in meaningful learning experiences in AR games because of the active, constructive, intentional, and authentic aspects of the games. Electronic game developers design educational games to maximize transfer of learning through close approximation of the game-scaffolded skills and the game environment to real skills and contexts. AR games should reduce this burden on the game design by setting the game-play directly in reality, thereby developing schema of the players directly in the performance context (Morrison, Ross, & Kemp, 2007). According to early research, the situated learning (Lave, 1991) experienced by AR game players is likely to transfer to deep learning, in part due the collaborative play in social contexts and the built-in complexity of the games (Dede et al., 2007). Many massively collaborative AR games are designed such that elements cannot be solved by individuals. Broader potential social benefits of AR games should derive from the potential for the games to deliver messages about important world issues, such as in the World without Oil game presented by the Independent Television Service. This serious game is open to any participants. A teacher’s guide assists teachers in using the game in a class. Augmented reality games provide cognitive challenge by posing a novel and realistic problem for players to solve. In solving the problem posed by an educational AR game, students apply their prior academic knowledge while constructing new knowledge that they acquire by applying information provided through the game technology and by working in groups. The AR game is set in a physical setting that represents the game



Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

context, for example a lab, a vehicle, a campus, or a community. The technology that students use provides them with text and other media by which they exercise inquiry methods in developing and trying solutions. These features of AR games make them important educational resources. However, obstacles to integrating AR games in classrooms range from philosophical opposition to the use of games for learning to technological barriers resulting from the security measures employed in school networks. Growth in the use of AR games in schools will depend on greater understanding of their benefits in the education community. Increased understanding is likely to result from the stories of innovative schools where AR games are used successfully.

REVIEW OF AUGMENTED REALITY GAMES FOR LEARNING All educational AR games situate the learning in a blend of real and virtual environments and immerse learners in a problem-solving scenario, often involving role-play. Table 1 summarizes educational AR games that have been developed in recent years, their learning goals, and contexts. The following review of the descriptive research in AR games for education examines the range of early AR game design and implementation. The predominant educational problem that this group of AR games has undertaken to address is the cognitive load associated with learning about complex interactive natural systems or processes. Of the 16 educational AR games described in Table 1, 75% were designed to teach concepts in scientific systems, and the remaining AR games focus on the difficult-to-master, illdefined domains of communication, managing data collected in the field, problem solving, and understanding cultural and historic foundations of a region. Nearly half of the AR games (7 of 16) aim at teaching biological concepts in rich authentic settings.



Savannah Among the educational AR games developed and pilot tested to teach environmental science principles to children is Savannah (Benford et al., 2004). Children ages 11-12 played the game in the role of lions navigating their schoolyard savannah with the help of GPS-enabled handheld computers. Because their locations were plotted during play, the students were able to review their movements on a whiteboard in the “den” after play concluded. The combination of technology afforded the students the ability to participate in the intention–action–reflection cycle believed to contribute to constructive learning (Jonassen, 2002). Constructivist theory states that new learning builds on prior knowledge (Duffy & Jonassen, 1996). Based on observations of students during play and their reflections on the experience, the students playing Savannah were observed to be emotionally engaged in the game and referred to themselves in the first person as lions (Facer et al., 2004). Students also demonstrated their understanding of the animal-ecosystem interaction by quantifying risk and generalizing their conception of the savannah. A limitation of the AR game experience was the disconnect between the immersive simulation and the classroom setting where reflection took place. The researchers recommended allowing expert gamers to use metacognition in the process of mentoring novice gamers.

Environmental Detective Environmental Detective (Dieterle & Dede, 2006) placed players in the role of environmental consultant to respond to a campus health problem. The players used location-aware handheld devices to collect data in the field, consult virtual experts, and compile data with peers. In trials, players expressed a feeling of investment and motivation to solve the problem. Based on student reactions, the problem scenario proved to be

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

Table 1. Summary of educational AR games, learning goals, and contexts Title (Developers)

Learning Goal, Player/

Context, Platform Collaboration

Astroversity

Collaborative and scientific

Students work in teams on networked

http://www.futurelab.org.

(FutureLab)

inquiry skills for students ages

computers and using physical materials in a

uk/projects/astroversity

12-14

space rescue scenario

Ulicask, 2004

Big Fish Little Fish

Concepts including predator-

Groups of students use handheld devices

http://education.mit.edu/pda/

(Massachusetts

prey dynamics, over fishing,

while physically interacting with each other

ifish.htm

Institute of

biodiversity, evolution for

to simulate fish feeding behavior

Technology)

school-age children

Challenger Learning

Application of mathematics,

Teams of students take on the roles of a space

http://www.challenger.org/

Centers Mission

science, reading, and

crew and mission control using networked

clc/simulations.cfm

Simulations

communications skills to

computers in a facility that simulates NASA

(Challenger Center

complete a space mission, for

vehicles and facilities to solve authentic

for Space Science

school-age students

problems

Debating the

Collaboration and awareness of

Pairs of students analyze data in realistic

http://www.futurelab.org.

Evidence

the roles of risk and uncertainty

scenarios, draw conclusions, and compare

uk/projects/debating_the_

(FutureLab)

in science for students ages

recommendations using networked computers

evidence

11-14

and additional resources

Facer, Ulicsak, & Howard-

Learner Age

Game URL and Literature Citation (where applicable)

Education)

Jones, 2005 Eduventure Middle

Learning the cultural history

Learners alternate between problem solving

http://www.eduventure.de/

Rhine

of the Middle Rhine Valley for

using video of the castle setting and problem

Ferdinand, Müller, Ritschel,

(Institute for

adults

exploration using mobile devices in the real

& Wechselberger, 2005

castle

Knowledge Media) Environmental

Collaborative understanding of

Participants role-play as teams of scientists

http://education.mit.edu/ar/

Detectives

scientific and social aspects of

investigating contaminated water using

ed.html

(Massachusetts

threats to the environment and

networked handheld devices in a field setting

Klopfer & Squire, 2005

Institute of

public health for adults

Technology) Epidemic Menace

Collaborative problem solving

Teams assume the roles of medical experts

http://iperg.fit.fraunhofer.de/

(Fraunhofer

and experiences with learning

to battle a threatening virus using gaming

Lindt et al., 2007

Institute)

arts for adults

and communication devices in a room and outdoors

HandLeR

Support for field-based learning

Groups of children respond to scenarios in

http://www.eee.bham.ac.uk/

(University of

of children ages 9-11

the field using a portable data collection and

handler/references.asp

communication device

Sharples, Corlett, &

Birmingham)

Westmancott, 2002

continued on following page



Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

Table 1.continued Live Long and

Concepts including genetics and

Groups of students use handheld devices

http://education.mit.edu/pda/

Prosper

experimental design for school-

while physically interacting with each

igenetics.htm

(Massachusetts

age children

other to simulate the genetic actions of

Klopfer, Yoon, & Rivas,

reproduction

2004

Institute of Technology) Mobi Mission

Communication and reflection

Groups of students write verbal missions and

http://www.futurelab.org.

(FutureLab)

activities for teenagers

respond to the missions of others using cell

uk/projects/mobimissions

phones

Thomas, 2007

Mystery

Collaborative thinking skills for

Groups of participants use mobile technology

N/A

(Interactive

adults

in an art gallery to solve a crime

Santiago, Romero, &

Newtoon

Physics principles for

Students use mobile phones and Web

http://www.futurelab.org.

(FutureLab)

adolescents

sites to play, create, and share games that

uk/projects/newtoon

demonstrate physics principles

Pykett, 2007

Correia, 2003

Multimedia Group)

Outbreak

Experience with the

Players create and control diseases within a

http://www.

(Angel Inokon and

complexities of responding to

simulation and share results outside of the

outbreakthegame.com/

Jeff Bowman)

an avian flu outbreak, for young

game

Inokon & Bowman, 2007

adults Savannah

The science of living things

Children, acting as lions, navigate the

http://www.futurelab.org.

(FutureLab)

interacting within an ecosystem,

savannah using mobile handheld devices

uk/projects/savannah

for ages 11-12

Facer et al., 2004

Sugar and Spice

Concepts including population

Groups of students use handheld devices

http://education.mit.edu/pda/

(Massachusetts

economics and mathematics for

while physically interacting with each other

isugar.htm

Institute of

school-age children

to simulate interactions between populations and resources

Technology) Virus

Concepts including epidemics,

Groups of students use handheld devices

http://education.mit.edu/pda/

(Massachusetts

scientific method, population

while physically interacting with each other

ivirus.htm

Institute of

growth for school-age children

to simulate the spread of disease

Dieterle & Dede, 2006

Technology)

sufficiently challenging, in that while solutions did not come quickly or easily, players wanted to continue playing. Different players had access to different information needed to solve the problem, and were instructed during play to meet together to share information, as would happen in an actual health crisis. An additional design



element that introduced authenticity was a limit on the resources players could use to dig wells and conduct other sampling. Klopfer and Squire’s (2005) studies of the Environmental Detectives field trial compared problem-solving approaches implemented by players and found that femaledominated groups favored interviews while

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

male-dominated groups favored drilling for data. Teams that used a balanced approach were most successful in solving the problem. Players were able to access information through Web searches outside of the game environment, making “the entire world the gameboard” (Klopfer & Squire, 2005, p. 23). Adult players succeeded in an openended game design that allowed investigation of the problem through multiple means. Children in a similar game focused on interviews as clues to solutions and bypassed the strategy of collecting data, demonstrating a need for ability-leveled scaffolding to help players understand the roles of data and collaboration.

Virus The Virus game, developed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (Dieterle & Dede, 2006), built in collaboration as an element of game-play. In the game, players interacted using handheld devices that spread virtual viruses that infect all players during the game. Play episodes were alternated with metacognitive periods in which players proposed hypotheses to explain the spread of the infection. Subsequent play tested the hypotheses. According to the student reactions collected in the study, “participatory simulation allowed participants to focus on large ideas while socially constructing deep understandings” (Dieterle & Dede, 2006, p. 12). Both Virus and Live Long and Prosper were designed as constructivist games requiring students to discover the biological mechanisms responsible for the behaviors that were observed during play (Klopfer et al., 2004). Student self-assessment of learning and attitude data showed that students felt motivated and engaged while learning about science and experimental design through the game’s mix of beaming, discussion, and manipulation of data.

Outbreak Moving beyond formal academic applications of AR games for science learning, Outbreak situated learning about a pandemic in the general public, asking players to participate online as players and as problem solvers for a situation that was potentially real (Inokon & Bowman, 2007). Outbreak’s designers applied a cognitive approach to play in which players would build a framework for understanding how pandemics spread and then share prevention recommendations online. The long-term goal of the game was that players transfer the knowledge gained from up to 100 motivating and engaging “mini games” in the event that they were faced with a life-threatening pandemic. Interviews with players have guided continued development of the game.

Newtoon and Mission Simulators Learning and application of physical science principles were the goals of two AR games for adolescents, both of which set game-play in networked devices. Newtoon used mobile phones as game-playing and sharing platforms (Pykett, 2007), enabling students to acquire physics concepts through trial-and-error practice with games and then to apply the concepts as game designers. Descriptive evaluation indicated that the act of sharing and critiquing of designed games placed students in a deliberative role, thereby fostering scientific habits of mind. Learning to act as scientists is also the goal of the Challenger Learning Centers’ Mission Simulators, which brings groups of students to a life-size simulated space vehicle and mission control facility. Students use networked computers to receive, evaluate, and respond to mission data. The students solve authentic problems by working together, thinking scientifically, and applying a range of academic skills.



Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

Astroversity and Debating the Evidence

steps to ensure that games can adapt to players’ maturing abilities during play.

FutureLab designers have developed and studied two AR games to teach scientific thinking that can be applied across the science disciplines. These games for adolescents, Astroversity and Debating the Evidence, combined team play on networked computers with physical materials that are needed to solve problems in science. Astroversity developed scientific inquiry skills in a challenging scenario that required the cooperation of three players (Ulicsak, 2004). The scenario was a space rescue mission in which each student had access to different data. Students needed to share their theories, request assistance from “robotic tutors,” and use multiple methods of representation of information in order to complete the mission. The study collected observations of play, comments of players, and data on skill improvement and attitude change to find that students needed structure to develop scientific skills that did not come instinctively to them, and students were motivated to persist in the game until they solved the problem. For designers of educational games, Ulicsak (2007) cautioned that “structured reflection has no impact when it is not embedded within authentic tasks” (p. 44), indicating that students focused on the elements that were most engaging while spending little time reading and writing. Debating the Evidence took scientific thinking to a higher level by teaching about the uncertainty in scientific reasoning (Facer et al., 2005). To play the game, students worked in pairs to analyze data from a Web site and based conclusions on the data. After play, based on the number of explanations of the phenomenon that students were able to generate before and after play, the students were better able to critically examine evidence, revise theories, and improve strategies. The study authors affirmed Gee’s notion that virtual risktaking is a prime motivator in games (Gee, 2003), and therefore recommended that designers take

HandLeR and Mobimissions

0

For teaching general thinking skills, two AR games played on mobile devices have been developed and studied through observation of play. HandLeR uses a specially designed device to support student data collection and communication in the field (Sharples, Corlett, & Westmancott, 2002). During authentic field-based learning experiences, students have a need to make sense of and to share a wide range of information pertaining to their learning objective. The HandLeR developers used a socio-cognitive engineering approach to design a child-friendly organizer, assistant, and communicator to support socially constructed situated learning. After finding that the majority of children preferred to receive help from a peer, the developers made communication the central tool in the device and also created a personality for device to enable it to act as a virtual peer. The game involved a guided mission in which children explored a city’s canals. The device was used successfully in a series of tasks. Communication was central to the skills learned in FutureLab’s MobiMissions (Thomas, 2007), in which students create text-based missions for each other to “find” when they enter the vicinity with their mobile phones. Engagement resulted from the surprise at finding missions, responding to them, and receiving feedback on missions. The most engaging aspect of the game was the shared reflection on the activity, an exercise in social metacognition.

Middle Rhine Eduventure In informal adult arenas, two AR game concepts have been deployed and pilot tested. The Middle Rhine Eduventure placed learners in a virtual castle as an orienting experience and then placed them

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

in the real castle with a problem to solve with the aid of a handheld device (Ferdinand et al., 2005). The Mystery game placed players in an art gallery to solve a virtual crime by combining information acquired from real objects and virtual characters viewed in a head-mounted display connected to a GIS-equipped computer (Santiago et al., 2003). These games represent an experimental stage at the juncture of participation in art and learning and offer novel examples of the juxtaposition of the real and the virtual. While a fully electronic game immerses players in a virtual world or a simulation of a real world, AR games overlay elements of simulation on a real world. To do so, the AR game designer selects elements of reality to simulate, thus making value judgments about reality and ways to enhance it. AR game players, in keeping with the media theories of Bauldrillard (1983), replace reality with the simulation and view it as more valuable. Each of the AR games rests along a continuum between virtual and real experience, and each uses its particular blend of the real and virtual to augment learning by situating it in an authentic and engaging context. The games add scaffolds, such as tools (hard scaffolds) and connections to co-learners (soft scaffolds), to the experience in ways that enhance learning and transfer of knowledge (Brush & Saye, 2002). The types of hard, or statically embedded, scaffolds implemented in AR games are reference databases like glossaries, recorded interviews with “experts” that answer questions that a typical player would have, maps and other location details, and tools to assist with calculation. The purpose of each scaffold is to support the player in solving the complex and authentic problem encountered in the AR game scenario. A scaffold that helps students in comprehending the information needed to develop an approach to solving a complex problem is the feature in Outbreak that allows players to share their recommendations about how to address the problem,

which is global in scale. Other scaffolds are intended to help students to consider alternative perspectives. An example is the ability that players have in Environmental Detectives to consult experts. Scaffolds are also designed into games in order to help students handle the various cognitive demands of the game. Astroversity’s robotic tutors and HandLeR’s tools that allow students to get help from a peer are examples of this type of scaffolding. There is no longer a reason to limit learning to an accessible place with the people who happen to be there at the same time. With AR games and other learning technology, learning can be the infinitely flexible, socially interactive, and globally connected enterprise that Conceptual Age humans need.

IMPLICATIONS OF AR GAMES FOR EDUCATION AR games are in a state of flux from their original psychomotor training purposes toward more artistically and socially relevant purposes. Active participation in art, education, and other social activities ought to be a democratic experience available to all, but geography has been a limiting factor for people who could not physically attend a school or art display. The Internet allows people to access art and education from anywhere that a networked device can function, and now AR games provide frameworks for engagement in art and education from anywhere. AR games may be more efficient for learning than other forms of electronic games due to their more “platformless” nature. Future AR games will capitalize on ubiquitous communications technology to connect larger and more diverse groups of learners in situated learning, like Outbreak is doing. Tools like Google Earth and Amazon Mechanical Turk will augment learning experiences by alerting people when they



Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

enter a location in which an AR game is operating and by offering people novel situations in which to apply their knowledge and skills. Democratic involvement in AR games will extend to game development as toolkits become available. The toolkits will enable designers to focus more on the content and context of the games as they spend less time on the technology behind the games. The burden for AR game designers will be to create motivation through challenge because a physical teacher will be less involved in the learning. In the AR game design process, holistic models will be needed that guide early prototypes, strong relationships with subject-matter experts (SMEs) will be needed to ensure realism and authenticity, and integration of visual design into instructional tasks will be needed to capitalize on the graphic features of the game. A design method like IBM’s Object, View, and Interaction Design (OVID) has potential for streamlining and focusing AR game design (Berry, Isensee, Mullaly, & Roberts, 1998). OVID is a framework for rapid iterative interface-oriented design that supports an evolving form of game. Research into the learning effects of AR games becomes complicated by the wide distribution of learners who may resist experimental manipulation and for whom identities may not be known. New methods of sampling or population definition will be needed. However, a benefit of AR games for education institutions is that vast amounts of performance data can be collected within an AR game system, allowing for largescale comparisons and analysis of learning to be made. In addition, new game development tools and a broad range of game technology streamline the prospect of educators and students creating their own AR games. AR games offer a rich opportunity for design, learning, and study because of their scope and portability. Each generation of AR games brings greater diversity in the content and the concepts that are addressed. In order for the benefits of AR games to reach a wide educational audience, policies toward both



game-based learning and networked technology in schools will require revision. Visionary students and educators need support throughout the education system to try these promising approaches. At the systemic level, definitions of “educational materials” needs to be broader to include games and other technology that have the potential to engage and educate effectively. Teachers who engage in action research at the K-12 level and in the scholarship of teaching at the post-secondary level can be the leaders who pave the way for others.

CONCLUSION It is difficult to imagine a more active, constructive, intentional, and authentic platform for learning with the potential to reach and connect more people through a range of devices than an augmented reality game. There are solutions to the obstacles faced in education institutions. Partnerships between educators and instructional designers will result in games that are relevant to current educational needs, including games that may reach the most challenged learners or that may teach the most complex domains. We may be seeing the dawn of the day when the potential for educational technology experiences a quantum leap forward because of ubiquitous networked computing and open source game development tools. This is certainly a day for expansion of the notion of literacy: The persistent responsiveness developed by players to potential ludic interaction represents a new kind of critical gaming literacy. The gamers grow to read the real world as rich with ludic opportunity, carefully testing everyday media, objects, sites, and social situations for the positive and negative consequences of inscribing each within the magic circle of play. (McGonigal, 2004)

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

REFERENCES Bauldrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. New York: Semiotext(e). Benford, S., Rowland, D., Flintham, M., Hull, R., Reid, J., Morrison, J., Facer, K., & Clayton, B. (2004). Savannah: Designing a location-based game simulating lion behavior. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, Singapore. Berry, R., Isensee, S., Mullaly, J., & Roberts, D. (1998). OVID: An overview. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from http://www-03.ibm.com/easy/ page/104 Brush, T.A., & Saye, J.W. (2002). A summary of research exploring hard and soft scaffolding for teachers and students using a multimedia supported learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2). Retrieved October 3, 2007, from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/showissue. cfm?volID=1&IssueID=3 Dede, C., Dieterle, E., Clarke, J., & Ketelhut, D. (2007). Media-based learning styles. In M. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Dieterle, E., & Clarke, J. (in press). Multi-user virtual environments for teaching and learning. In M. Pagani (Ed.), Encyclopedia of multimedia technology and networking (2nd ed.). Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Dieterle, E., & Dede, C. (2006). Building university faculty and student capacity to use wireless handheld devices for learning. In M. van‘t Hooft & K. Swan (Eds.), Ubiquitous computing in education: Invisible technology, visible input (pp. 303-328). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Duffy, T.D., & Jonassen, D.H. (1991). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technology? Educational Technology, 31(5), 7-12.

EDUCAUSE. (2005). Seven things you should know about augmented reality. Retrieved October 3, 2007, from http://connect.educause.edu/library/ abstract/7ThingsYouShouldKnow/39384 Facer, K., Joiner, D., Stanton, D., Reid, J., Hull, R., & Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: Mobile gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 399-409. Facer, K., Ulicsak, M., & Howard-Jones, P. (2005). Debating the evidence: A FutureLab prototype research report. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/debating_the_evidence Ferdinand, P., Müller, S., Ritschel, T., & Wechselberger, U. (2005, September). The eduventurea new approach of digital game based learning combining virtual and mobile augmented reality games episodes. Proceedings of the Pre-Conference Workshop, Game Based Learning, of DeLFI 2005 and GMW 2005, Rostock, Germany. Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Goldstone, R., & Wilensky, U. (2007). Promoting transfer through complex systems principles. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://cognitrn.psych. indiana.edu/rgoldsto/pdfs/groundtransport05. pdf Gosney, J. (2005). Beyond reality: A guide to alternate reality gaming. Boston: Thomson Course Technology. Inokon, A., & Bowman, J. (2007). Outbreak development wiki. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from http://outbreak.wetpaint.com Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student centered learning environments. In D.H. Jonassen & S.M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 89-121). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.



Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

Jonassen, D.H. (2002). Learning as activity. Educational Technology, (March-April). Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Klopfer, E., & Squire, K. (2005). Environmental detectives: The development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from http://isites.harvard. edu/fs/docs/icb.topic40337.files/ETRD-handheld_Final_.pdf Klopfer, E., Yoon, S., & Rivas, L. (2004). Comparative analysis of palm and wearable computers for participatory simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(25), 347-359. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lindt, I., Ohlenberg, J., Pankoke-Babatz, U., & Ghellal, S. (2007). A report on the crossmedia game epidemic menace. Computers in Entertainment, 5(1), 8. McGonigal, J. (2004). This might be a game: Ubiquitous play and performance at the turn of the 21st century. Unpublished Dissertation, University of California-Berkeley, USA. Merrill, D. (1992). Constructivism and instructional design. In T. Duffy & D. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Morrison, G., Ross, S., & Kemp, J. (2007). Designing effective instruction. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Pink, D. (2005). A whole new mind: Moving from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age. New York: Riverhead Books.



Pykett, J. (2007). Newtoon. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/newtoon Rose, D., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age. Baltimore, MD: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Santiago, J., Romero, L., & Correia, N. (2003, May 8-10). A mixed reality mystery game. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Entertainment Computing (ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, vol. 38, pp. 1-8), Pittsburgh, PA. Shaffer, D., Squire, K., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. (2005). Video games and the future of learning. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison. Shrier, K. (2006). Reliving history with ‘reliving the revolution’: Designing augmented reality games to teach the critical thinking of history. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning. Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. Morrisville, NC: Lulu. Squire, K. (2005). Game based learning. Retrieved July 12, 2007, from http://www.masie. com/xlearn/Game-Based_Learning.pdf Thomas, K. (2007). A mobile with a mission. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.futurelab. org.uk/resources/publications_reports_articles/ web_articles/Web_Article264 Ulicask, M. (2004). Astroversity: A FutureLab prototype research report. Retrieved July 7, 2007, from http://www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/astroversity/research

Augmented Reality Gaming in Education for Engaged Learning

KEY TERMS Augmented Reality Game: A game that augments natural feedback to the player with simulated information. Authentic Learning: Learning that occurs within a realistic context in which the new knowledge, skills, and attitudes will be used. Blended Learning: A coherent learning experience using a combination of electronically mediated and face-to-face activities.

Constructive Learning: Learning that requires the integration of new knowledge and skill into existing conceptions. Meaningful Learning: Learning that is active, constructive, intentional, and authentic. Mobile Game: A game that is distributed to the customer using a mobile operator’s network. Situated Learning: A theory of learning that emphasizes the importance of the context and culture in which learning occurs.

Cognitive Load: The amount of information processing activity imposed on working memory.





Chapter VI

Mobility, Games, and Education Michael A. Evans Virginia Tech, USA

AbstrAct This chapter proposes that the convergence of mobile devices and digital game-based learning may have profound implications for educational transformation. Key issues to be addressed in the chapter are: (1) the pervasiveness of mobile and shared technologies, (2) contemporary accounts of learning theory in terms of mobility, (3) unique qualities of mobile learning and technologies, (4) successful applications for mobile learning, and (5) implications for future research and practice. Commuters play Sudoku on smart phones on the subway. High school freshman swap downloaded music across digital media devices in the parking lot. Elementary students debate strategies and “cheats” for handheld consoles on the bus ride home. For educational researchers, practitioners, and administrators, it is critical to examine these identified trends in mobile technology and digital game adoption and use to develop creative strategies and applications, and effective policies that lead to innovative instructional and learning environments.

INtrODUctION Currently, mobile learning and digital game-based learning are occupying the minds of educational policymakers, administrators, teachers, and scholars. Mobile learning, which can be categorized as a subset of distance learning or e-learning, is defined as instruction and learning delivered and conducted via highly portable (preferably wire-

less) technologies including laptop computers, tablet PCs, handheld computers, game consoles, and cellular telephones (New Media Consortium, 2007; Sharples, 2006). Digital game-based learning is defined as instruction and learning derived from methodologies and design features of computer and console video games (Alessi & Trollop, 2000; Squire, 2006). Although these trends have recently garnered much attention in

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Mobility, Games, and Education

the popular and academic press independently, the intersection of the two has been essentially overlooked. In this chapter I present a line of reasoning that argues for the convergence of these trends to induce transformation in formal and informal educational settings. The potential for mobile, digital game-based learning could have unprecedented influence on instruction and learning in the 21st century. Mobile learning has received much attention of late for several reasons. First, mostly in primary and middle school settings, mobile learning is being used to emphasize “learning by doing” (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and “knowledge building” (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994) pedagogies, encouraging students to collaborate in settings in and outside the classroom by using mobile devices for data collection, analysis, and distribution. The learning theory and pedagogy invoked draws from a substantial line of literature representing everyday cognition (Lave, 1988) and communities of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). One example might have middle school students use GPS-enabled handheld computers to collect audio, video, and positioning records of migratory birds in a natural science course. A second example would have elementary students monitoring a community garden using a Webenabled smart phone to collect and share text, photographs, and video with an agriculturalist to receive expert guidance and feedback. Second, in corporate, healthcare, and military settings, where a significant number of employees are “in the field,” mobile technologies are used to deliver location- and time-based information, realtime updates, and job aids. One example in the healthcare field is the use of tablet PCs by nurses on rounds to update patient data and records. In military settings, electronics technicians on ships at sea are receiving updates to technical manuals and conducting real-time chat with shore-side experts via ruggedized pocket PCs. Finally, mobile learning is taking hold in developing countries where access to desktop and laptop computers is

severely limited, and electricity is intermittent and necessitates a reliance on mobile phones. Thus, in a country such as Kenya, cell phones are used as an ubiquitous platform for education, research, journalism, and commerce. A project undertaken currently by the author, and science education and human-computer interaction colleagues (the Mobile Malawi Project) involves using smart phones in Malawi, Africa, to connect geographically dispersed community elders, teacher educators, and classroom teachers in a participatory revision of existing curriculum on sustainable agriculture. Overall, mobile learning is infiltrating a broad spectrum of learners in education, training and development, and commerce that has caught the attention of teachers, researchers, administrators, policymakers, and mobile, wireless device manufacturers. Digital game-based learning (DGBL)—though I maintain development somewhat distinct from mobile learning in the scope of instruction and learning literature—is gaining equally fervent attention from educators and researchers. Perhaps inspired in part by the work of James Paul Gee, particularly What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy (Gee, 2003), educational researchers and practitioners are incorporating off-the-shelf titles, and developing education- and content-specific games, for use in primary and middle schools. In higher education, there is an increasing interest and focus to train students in programs from computer science, human-computer interaction, and instructional design and technology in digital game design and development. DGBL can take the form of standalone instructional multimedia accessible on a desktop computer or game console, to massive-multiplayer environments and synthetic worlds entered via the Internet. Another significant trend is the serious game, which focuses on management and leadership skills, health issues, and social change endeavors (cf., Serious Games Initiative, http://www.seriousgames.org/), often balancing quite well elements of play and critical



Mobility, Games, and Education

thinking. For example, The Redistricting Game, created by the University of Southern California Game Innovation Lab, encourages players to explore how the redistricting system in the United States works, focusing especially on the potential of abuse to unfairly influence elections and thus the representation of citizens. The game not only facilitates critical analysis, but also advocates for social action by players to promote positive change to the system. Thus, proponents of DGBL might claim that instruction and learning mediated by these advanced instructional technologies permit students to become deeply engaged with authentic material and tasks at hand. Instruction and learning that takes place in these contexts fulfills the pedagogical principles of “learning by doing,” “thinking critically,” and “building knowledge in collaboration” (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Suthers, 2006). The fundamental theory undergirding the idea behind educational pedagogies and instructional prescriptions to include cognitive tools and authentic learning environments is Vygotsky’s notion of “tool-mediated activity” (Barab, Evans, & Baek, 2004), whereby psychological and instrumental tools mediate higher-level thinking. The potential for DGBL in the classroom and elsewhere resonates so clearly with many significant stakeholders that game publishers, including Microsoft and Electronic Arts, now work in close collaboration with educators and researchers to discover ways to make game development (a notoriously expensive and precipitous enterprise) manageable at the classroom level. Given these noted trends, it would appear that the next logical step is to advocate the convergence of the two, connecting mobile learning with digital game-based learning to promote nextgeneration instruction and learning. To provide an example of what this might entail in terms of changes to professional knowledge and skills in instructional design, my graduate students at Virginia Tech have adopted and used a reduced DGBL methodology (incorporating a tutorial, fantasy elements, role-playing, strategic thinking,



incentives, and levels of difficulty) to develop for handheld computers (see Figure 1 for sample screenshots from the storyboard phase of project). The instructional prototypes were designed for second graders, to teach them basic concepts and principles in planar geometry following national and state standards for mathematics teaching (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000), encompassing characteristics of shapes, area of shapes, similarity of shapes, construction of shapes, sizes of shapes, and right angles. Working with a mathematics educator, students developed prototypes that extended the Everyday Mathematics curriculum to allow for remedial practice using handheld devices (Dell Axim v51) and DGBL (Evans et al., 2007). Drawing from a growing line of research on mobile learning and DGBL (Sharples, 2006; Squire, 2006), and from informal field observations in classrooms and in public spaces, our design scenario built off patterns of use of mobile devices and digital games by second graders. For example, in our scenario we used the observation that the school bus driver allows students to play games on handheld devices (such as community-donated Nintendo Game Boy systems) on the ride home from school. Also, the city bus system in Blacksburg, Virginia (home to Virginia Tech), has extensive free wireless connectivity, thus permitting access to Web-based materials on properly equipped mobile, wireless devices. Given the success of first-round proofsof-concept and prototypes, the next iteration of the development cycle will involve investigating the Nintendo DS Lite game console, which has wireless capability and now an Internet browser available for download. The browser, the Opera Mobile (http://www.opera.com/products/mobile/), can be used on a range of mobile devices including portable game consoles, handheld computers, and smart phones. Though our work is in an early phase, we are hopeful of the potential of developing Web-based instructional multimedia guided by DGBL methodologies and accessible on mobile devices with browser capabilities.

Mobility, Games, and Education

Figure 1. Screen captures from storyboard phase of mobile game development for learning of geometric shapes (Evans, Diaz, Liao, Wang, Wu, Eschenmann, Snediker, & Fan, 2007)

With these trends and issues in mind, the objectives of this chapter are as follows: • •

• •

•

Identify trends in consumer mobile digital technologies, products, and services Situate trends in learner adoption and use of digital mobile and game technologies and games Provide contemporary accounts of learning theory in terms of mobility Present successful uses of mobile games in the classroom, especially for math and science Address policy, strategy, and development challenges for educators, particularly instructional designers and technologists• List implications for educational research and practice

EDUCATING DIGITAL NATIVES AND NOMADs Let me begin by sharing a personal account: My son, Walter, began first grade in Fall 2006. This major milestone was complicated by a recent move from the Midwest. Naturally, his parents asked on

his return from the first day of school how things went and whether he had met any new friends. Walter’s response, to paraphrase, was this: I met two new friendsSteve and Kyleon the bus. Steve and I are good friends because we both own a Nintendo Game Cube! Kyle and I are good friends because we own a Nintendo DS Lite! Kyle also told me about a new ‘cheat’ in New Super Mario Brothers and I’m going to try it tonight. He told me to talk to him tomorrow about whether it worked or not. Dad, can Kyle come over this weekend to play Pokémon Coliseum on the DS, please? The above scenario might sound familiar to parents and relatives of primary and middle school-age children, encountered either directly or secondhand. Additionally, the sight of children, adolescents, and young adults engaged with games on portable devices can be found in just about any public space-transportation terminals, recreation and leisure facilities, airline flights, sporting events, churches, synagogues, mosques, and more. The point of all this is that the current generation of primary and middle school students is growing up digital. That is, from a very



Mobility, Games, and Education

early age the current crop of rising elementary, secondary, and college-level students have had significant exposure to and use of digital media and associated technologies. Prensky (2001) refers to this generation of students as digital natives. Contrasting this demographic with teachers and parents, who are referred to as digital immigrants, Prensky’s (and my) point is that educators are working with a class of students who have far greater experience, expertise, and comfort levels with mobile, wireless technologies and new digital media. These digital natives engage in generative learning sessions around games in informal settings as depicted in the anecdote above. Unfortunately, this type of learning may not be deemed legitimate because it occurred around a non-sanctioned activity and in locations outside the classroom. Despite calls for connecting schools to neighborhoods and communities, the place of mobile devices and games in this message is unclear and quite precipitous. While my personal account describes an increasingly common episode in the lives of elementary students, a recent report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project (2005) provides an even more substantial picture of the digital nomadic lives of digital teenagers: • • • • •

84% (~18 million) teenagers report owning at least one portable media device 81% (~17 million) Internet users play games online, up 52% since 2000 76% (~16 million) get news online, up 38% since 2000; 45% (~10 million) own a cell phone 33% (~7 million) have used a cell phone to send a text message

This phenomenon cuts across cultures and, very often, socioeconomic boundaries. For example, the country with the highest saturation of broadband technology is South Korea. Evidence of the influence and sophistication of digital technology adoption in South Korea, especially

00

in the online gaming sector, is demonstrated by the hosting of the Blizzard Entertainment 2007 Worldwide Invitational. It is safe to claim that in developed countries around the world, the phenomena of digital natives, immigrants, and nomads can be found. In terms of socioeconomic status and technology adoption and use, the digital divide is a serious challenge—one that requires continued attention, understanding, and most importantly social action. In essence, the position is that socioeconomic factors, not technological factors, drive and influence the adoption, diffusion, and use of digital technologies and media. An incorrect assumption by educators and game developers would be that equity exists across populations in terms of access to technology. Nevertheless, the portrayed picture of haves and have-nots portrayed mainly in the popular press and news media outlets may actually be more nuanced for the current generation of digital natives. As Curry and Kenney (2006) point out, in some cases digital development is taking place among nations that have broad socioeconomic challenges. In the case of Mexico, there is evidence that significant digital development is occurring in government and education. Citizens are demanding, and the government is responding to, demands for access to information and communication technologies for the betterment of standards of living. Thomas Friedman (2007), the New York Times columnist, recently provided another example describing the creative ways by which lower socioeconomic status individuals adopt scarce technology resources. In the case of 15 women who raise and trade goats in Ngutani, east of Nairobi, a single mobile phone was purchased to avoid swindling by middleman, “which they now share to check the market prices in Nairobi for goats before they sell” (Friedman, 2007). The takeaway is that digital natives and nomads are arising in different generations, in different countries, from different cultures, from different socioeconomic backgrounds that could significantly influence attitudes towards sanc-

Mobility, Games, and Education

tioned and acceptable instruction and learning technologies. Although overcoming the digital divide should remain a priority for teachers, administrators, and educational researchers, it must be recognized that what traditionally has been identified as a necessary technology (a desktop computer originally, more recently a laptop computer) may no longer be accurate. Following the line of argument developed in this chapter, mobile, wireless devices such as smart phones and portable game consoles should also be recognized and accounted for, as these are the preferred tools of digital natives and nomads.

TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, PEDAGOGY, AND LEARNING The recently released Horizon Report (New Media Consortium, 2007) predicts radical changes in instruction and learning within the next five years as a host of emerging mobile technologies and digital media are adopted and diffused in pre-kindergarten through higher education classrooms. Two trends identified in the report relevant to this chapter are the increasing role of mobile technologies in education and the changing expectations of learners when it comes to information and knowledge. The argument is that these trends are, in part, founded on specific changes in how learners create and consume knowledge, and use emerging technologies (New Media Consortium, 2007). Notably, these predictions coincide and corroborate movements in learning theory and pedagogy for new metaphors of learning defined as participation, process, and practice, where emphasis is placed on innovation, dynamic knowledge creation, and social interaction (Paavola, Lipponen, & Hakkarainen, 2004).

Dynamic Knowledge Creation and Social Computing Dynamic knowledge creation is becoming a default for digital natives as social computing becomes more widespread: in the case of wikis and blogs, individuals and groups are congregating to build knowledge in myriad disciplines and topic areas. Although the term Web 2.0 does understandably connote a “buzz word” to some, I will use it cautiously to denote those Internet technologies that permit contribution of and distribution to a wide spectrum of users, where the information and communication technology network is viewed as the platform of business, and core competencies include “harnessing the collective intelligence,” “services, not software,” and “architecture of participation” (Evans & Powell, 2007; O’Reilly, 2005). A representative example of Web 2.0 sites and technologies would include Flikr (photo file sharing) and de.licio.us (tagging), eBay reputation and Amazon reviews (user/consumer as contributor), Wikipedia (trust), and blogs (participation). In education, what should draw attention are the parallels of Web 2.0 technologies and the tenets of a constructionist pedagogy, one that advocates the externalization of cognition into a public sphere in the service of mastery and development (Koschmann, Hall, & Miyake, 2005). In higher education, we are seeing the adoption of these technologies in the latest versions of course management systems; on the Virginia Tech campus, the open source project known as Sakai uses functions including wikis, blogs, and podcasting. In the MobilEd Initiative (http://mobiled.uiah.fi/), work is being done to port these functions to mobile telephones so that nomadic, digital natives in southern Africa can “build knowledge” among peers, teachers, and elders in the community. In terms of games, both entertainment and education varieties, social computing technologies are an integral tool for collaborative efforts and success. For example, World of Warcraft, a massive multiplayer online

0

Mobility, Games, and Education

game, has a suite of Web 2.0 technologies used by players to support missions and extend the knowledge base for innovations. It is this next phase of dynamic knowledge creation and social computing that appears most relevant to the needs of the current and future generations, which leads to the next point.

Mobile and Personal Technologies as Primary Platforms for Delivery Mobile and personal technologies are increasingly viewed as a primary platform for delivery: learners view mobile media devices, tablet PCs, handhelds, and smart phones as a first point of reference for information access. Learners view mobile media devices—specifically tablet PCs, handheld computers, and mobile phones—as a first point of reference for information access. If I may, I will use the Virginia Tech campus, in Blacksburg, Virginia, USA, as an example of the pervasiveness and influence of mobile technologies in higher education, both inside and outside the classroom. Within the classroom, tablet PCs and handheld computers are becoming standard supplies for entering college freshmen. Beginning in the fall of 2006, every freshman entering the College of Engineering at Virginia Tech is required to buy a tablet PC, Fujitsu LifeBook® T4000 Series, for program-related work. The devices serve as design sketchpads and lab notebooks, and as means to interact with instructors via surveys and student response systems. Educational researchers investigate handheld computers for information and educational uses. For example, on the Virginia Tech campus, mobile phones now play a vital role on campus. If one can find a positive outcome from the tragic events that occurred on our campus on April 16, 2006, it is that the university has established an emergency alert system, VT Alerts, that can be received via mobile devices.

0

Individualized Experiences, Open Access Learners are expecting individualized services, tools and experiences, and open access to media, knowledge, and information: in contrast to the standardized, controlled models of information dissemination, the current generation of consumers demand customized services. The newly installed VT Alerts system highlights well the expectation of students to have open, individualized access to knowledge and information. When signing up for VT alerts, a user has several options, including the order in which different contact methods should be accessed and how that information should be delivered. For example, one user may select to have text messages sent to their mobile phone as a first order, and a voice message sent to their home phone as a second order. Another student may select to have instant messages sent to their mobile phone number as a first order, and e-mail sent to their campus account. Though these services and information may be used infrequently, it is the individualized, open access now available that students demand. On a more broadly applicable scale, Virginia Tech has subscribed to iTunes U, a podcasting distribution service offered by Apple, Inc. This service permits faculty to upload audio-video broadcasts of lectures to the iTunes store for download onto portable digital devices. In a case for the 2006 spring semester, I produced weekly 10-minute episodes that explored more specifically topics in instructional development, multimedia production, interface design, usability, and evaluation. The convergence of pedagogy that emphasizes “knowledge building” (Paavola et al., 2004; Suthers, 2006) with this next generation of internet technologies along with mobile devices presents an intriguing space in which to explore the design and use of mobile games for instruction and learn-

Mobility, Games, and Education

ing. Attention to and thoughtful investigation of these trends is paramount. In contrast to closing classroom doors to games and mobile technologies, a more intelligent approach is to understand and assess the development and implementation of digital games on mobile devices to impact teaching and learning (Squire, 2006).

ISSUES OF POLICY, STRATEGY, AND DEVELOPMENT Although I have made a case for the intersection of mobile devices and video game methodologies in education, there are obvious obstacles to fruition of these ideas. These issues touch on school policy, strategic use of technology, and development of games on mobile devices.

Policy Issues Perhaps the greatest obstacle to the adoption and diffusion of mobile games for education are the perceived social and health risks. As Barab, Thomas, Dodge, Carteaux, and Tuzun (2005) detail, video games are often to blame for aberrations in human behavior: In 1999, two high school students went on a murderous rampage at Columbine High School in Colorado, leaving 12 students and a teacher dead and wounding 23 others before taking their own lives. This atrocity triggered unprecedented media attention, with many observers blaming gratuitous violence in video games as the underlying problem, and others suggesting bad parenting, insensitive schools, and the moral decay of our time. (p. 86) If one were to assume that times have changed in the last eight years, then the massacre at Virginia Tech in 2007 makes clear that video games are often brought before the cameras as the catalyst for violent behavior. In this case, a game called

“Counterstrike,” an online game involving counterterrorism missions, was identified as the culprit. Moreover, the search of Cho’s residence hall had an explicit agenda to search for video games. In the end, none were found in his room. As for health risks and video games, a very recent debate has been covered in the news as to whether spending time on video games is detrimental to other developmentally appropriate activities. As is common when video games are a topic, speculation was that video games were inevitably harmful. On the contrary, and as a final note on the mid-summer debate, an investigation by pediatric scholars (Cummings & Vandewater, 2007) came to the following conclusion: Video game play is often assumed to be endemic to adolescent life. Our results do not support this notion. It does appear that game play is an important part of life for a limited number of adolescents and that many more of these adolescents are boys than girls. Understanding the role video game play has in their lives and its implications for academic and social outcomes will be an important area of further inquiry. (pp. 688-689)

Strategic Issues Strategic issues deal with how an organization, at the administrative level, plans for and executes a roll out of digital media and technologies. If one is to take a socio-technical perspective on mobile devices and digital games, it is imperative that the effect of these devices and games on organizational structure and culture be taken into account. Perhaps one of the greatest influences of new technologies on organizational structure is that channels of communication and lines of command are often circumvented. In the case of a classroom scenario, students may use mobile phones to chat or cheat unbeknown to the teacher. Again, if I might cautiously use the Virginia Tech incident, the university has been severely criticized for trying to maintain control of information when

0

Mobility, Games, and Education

students, staff, and faculty were clamoring for access. In regards to organizational culture, there certainly can be claimed a “generational gap” between students, and faculty and administrators, particularly in the K-20 sector. Although there are occasional reports of innovate use of mobile devices and games in educational settings, more often than not these devices and media are either banned from classrooms or placed in a location such as a computer lab that is locked and only accessible when a teacher or administrator permits. If mobile devices and games are to gain a foothold in the classroom, then it is critical that informed strategic decisions be made that take into account organizational structure and culture.

Instructional Development Issues At the ground level, the design of instruction based on game methodologies (Alessi & Trollip, 2000) delivered via mobile devices can be quite challenging. To illustrate, I provide an example from a course taught in the spring of 2007. Principles of Media Product Design, offered in the spring semester, is a graduate-level course designed to provide opportunities to design, develop, and evaluate instructional multimedia for wireless and mobile devices. The model of design and development is taken from Alessi and Trollip’s (2000) Multimedia for Learning: Methods and Development (3rd edition). Based on identification of clear trends in media and technology consumption and use, the standard course of development is augmented by focus on mobile learning environments (Sharples, 2006). In addition, the multimedia development platform is focused on the Adobe product, Flash 8. This platform was chosen as it is becoming an industry standard for delivering multimedia over the Web and to a range of devices including tablets, handhelds, and smart phones. While multimedia and technology are important components of the course, it is equally, if not more important, that students learn to think

0

and act as designers in these settings. The goal is that it cannot only improve their practice with the field of instructional design, but also provide a mindset and vernacular to engage with designers from cognate fields, including interaction design, industrial design, and graphic design that are employed in the mobile device and video game industries. This mindset being prescribed is best captured by Löwgren and Stolterman (2004, p. 45), who state that design broadly requires the following knowledge and skills: • • • • • • •

Creating and shaping demands creative and analytical ability Deciding demands critical judgment Working with a client demands rationality and ability to communicate Design of structural qualities demands knowledge of technology and material Design of functional qualities demands knowledge of technology use Design of ethical qualities demands knowledge of relevant values and ideals Design of aesthetic qualities demands an ability to appreciate and compose

With this position and these values in mind, students and instructors engaged in a range of design studies to produce mobile learning product prototypes, including instructional materials for pre-service history teachers, support materials for an undergraduate dance appreciate class, and virtual manipulatives for elementary students.

IMPLICATIONS The convergence of mobile learning and digital game-based learning could have profound implications affecting many areas in and outside education. Below, I present a detailed list of the most salient, summarized in Table 1. From a holistic interaction perspective, principles from behaviorism and cognitivism

Mobility, Games, and Education

under specify and under analyze the learning experiences of digital natives. Consequently, educational researchers must incorporate a new class of learning theories that emphasize activity and knowledge building within a sociocultural context. Sharples, Taylor, and Vavoula (2006) propose a theory of mobile learning that draws distinctly from the work of Vygotsky and other activity theory scholars. Counter to research and development guided by behaviorism and cognitivism, a post-cognitive perspective places emphasis on the group and the social interactions and tools that mediate learning. If advances are to be achieved, researchers, educators, and practitioners must explore alternative theories of learning that emphasize activity, interaction, and sociocultural context. Relying solely on past perspectives will bind creativity and hamper innovation. The development of meaningful, effective mobile games for education is hampered by misalignment across disciplines and sectors. Educationists, computer scientists, and industry game developers are currently working at crosspurposes. In the current model of development on many campuses of higher education in the United States, instructional design and technology faculty and students work independent of colleagues in computer science and human-computer interaction. These efforts are further wasted by lack of concerted effort to collaborate with gaming industry engineers and developers. Although there exist pockets of innovation and success in places like Raleigh, North Carolina, Bloomington, Indiana, and Madison, Wisconsin, higher education faculty and students should continue to build mutually beneficial relationships with game industry engineers and developers. Developments and trends closely tracked and well reported by industry personnel are ignored or unnoticed by educators and academics. Educators and academics should come to terms with the entertainment and game industry practice and popular literature. There is an identified dismissal by educators and academics of literature published

and conferences sponsored by commercial game developers. The work of well-known contributors to this field, for example Koster (2005) and his work on a Theory of Fun, may provide insights to instructional designers. A case in point is a statement made by an instructional design colleague who, in a dissertation committee meeting, made a statement to the effect that “Prensky is not an academic,” and so his work should not be referenced in scholarly work. Although there may be legitimate concerns about the academic rigor of work published for a popular audience, across-theboard dismissal is unfounded. Communication across sectors is needed. Thus, conferences such as Games+Learning+Society (http://glsconference. org/2007/) should be encouraged and replicated across campuses in higher education and game industry settings. Adoption and diffusion of mobile games in the classroom are unlikely, given past efforts and outcomes. Currently, mobile technologies such as portable media devices and smart phones are severely restricted in terms of use. Policy in classrooms from first grade to graduate school is that these devices must be turned off and stored away. Instead of making an effort to critically examine the use of mobile devices for learning, the preferred position is banishment. Moreover, teachers, administrators, and parents are rightly wary of the claimed efficacy of mobile games for learning. On the surface, digital games may be haphazardly dismissed as merely a form of entertainment having nothing to do with rigorous training of primary and middle school students. More seriously, digital games are portrayed negatively in news and popular media outlets leading to close-minded misperceptions (Barab et al., 2005). Educational researchers investigating mobile learning and digital game-based learning must present convincing arguments and evidence to persuade weary school officials and parents of their efficacy. The knowledge and skills of instructional design and technology professionals will potentially

0

Mobility, Games, and Education

be absent from the next generation of mobile games. The class of instructional designers being trained in undergraduate and graduate programs in the United States lack prerequisite skills to develop sophisticated mobile games. Although this group of students may have sophisticated experience with and use of mobile devices and digital games, no formal inclusion of course work exists broadly in training programs. The result is that the knowledge of learning theory and skills in development and evaluation are not significantly contributing to the next generation of mobile game design. This is unfortunate as it is clear game developers (cf. Koster, 2005) are finding it necessary to delve (only somewhat successfully) into education and psychology literature to provide grounding for their work. Instructional designers are positioned to contribute to mobile game design, should curricula and degrees provide opportunities for this type training and internship. Educators of the next generation of instructional designers must incorporate perspectives and practices from the broader development community. Instructional design and technology programs should learn from and collaborate with engineers and developers in computer science and industry. Instructional design professionals face unprecedented challenges to designing games, particularly on mobile devices where screen real estate is precious. Design of instructional multimedia, delivered on mobile platforms and drawing from digital game methodologies, must incorporate knowledge. Though developing for mobile devices and using methodologies from digital games is initially exciting for novice instructional designers, it soon becomes apparent that careful attention must be paid to issues in terms of cognitive load. That is, the ability to be mobile while interacting with digital content presented on a reduced screen can impose cognitive demands that interfere with interaction and learning. Along these lines, my students and I have drawn from the literature on cognitive load theory (see Pass, Renkl, & Sweller, 2003) to help guide design decisions. In our most

0

recent effort (Evans et al., 2007), we drew on the following principles of cognitive load and multimedia learning theories: •

•

•

Split attention effect: Reduce extraneous cognitive load by temporal-spatially integrating disparate sources of information, so reducing need for mental integration. Modality effects: Facilitate working load capacity by presenting information visually and aurally. Redundancy effect: Multiple sources of information are self-contained and can be used without reference to each other.

Learning that takes place in informal settings and with unsanctioned topics is overlooked or dismissed by educators. In the current educational milieu (particularly in the United States), a focus on standards and accountability leaves little room for innovation and experimentation. The canonical position is that learning can take place only in the classroom under formal conditions with sanctioned methods and materials. Therefore, settings outside the classroom—including museums, public transportation hubs, and other public spaces—are off limits, though they may have the potential to significantly alter educational practice. The burden placed on educational researchers and game developers is to specify clearly the benefits of informal learning on methods and materials outside the “codified knowledge domain.” As it stands, current understanding of learning in mobile game environments is insufficient, and thus more work in this area must be conducted beyond anecdotal evidence and restricted case studies. The “Interaction Age,” which fosters interaction with and around digital content, is poorly understood in education. Mobile learning and digital-game based learning are based on a subset of a larger class of emerging technologies that foster “interaction with, and around” digital content to include augmented reality, ubiquitous

Mobility, Games, and Education

Table 1. Summary of implications, issues, and actions regarding mobile games for education Implications

Issues

Actions

Learning theories from behaviorism and

Emerging technologies and current

Educational researchers and practitioners

cognitivism under specify and under analyze

learning theories are incommensurable.

explore alternative theories of learning

learning of digital natives.

that emphasize activity, interaction, and sociocultural context.

The development of meaningful, effective

Educationists, computer scientists, and

Educationists, computer scientists, and

mobile games for education is hampered by

game developers are at cross purposes.

industry developers work together on this

misalignment.

complex problem.

Developments and trends closely tracked

Educators and academics dismiss

Conferences such as

and well-reported by industry personnel

entertainment and game industry experts.

Games+Learning+Society (http:// glsconference.org/2007/) are encouraged

are ignored or unnoticed by educators and academics.

and replicated across campuses.

Adoption and diffusion of mobile games in the

Teachers, administrators, and parents are

Educational researchers and developers

classroom are unlikely.

unconvinced of efficacy of mobile games

present convincing arguments and

for learning.

evidence of the efficacy of mobile games.

The knowledge and skills of instructional

The current class of instructional designers

Instructional design and technology

design and technology professionals will be

lack prerequisite skills to develop

programs learn from and collaborate with

absent from the next generation of mobile

sophisticated mobile games.

engineers and developers in computer

games.

science and industry.

Instructional designers and developers face

The development of mobile games

Curricula for instructional design and

unprecedented challenges to designing games,

requires knowledge of design and

technology include principles from

particularly on mobile devices where screen

cognitive psychology principles.

multimedia learning and cognitive load

Learning that takes place in informal settings

Learning can only take place in the

Educational researchers and developers

and with unsanctioned topics is dismissed or

classroom under formal conditions.

specify the benefits of informal

real estate is precious.

theories.

overlooked by educators.

learning of topics outside the “codified curriculum.”

The “Interaction Age,” which fosters

Mobile games represent only a subset

A new class of emerging technologies,

interaction with and around digital content, is

of emerging technologies to potentially

including augmented reality and

poorly understood in education.

disrupt the status quo in the classroom.

ubiquitous computing, investigated and understood the impact on education.

0

Mobility, Games, and Education

learning, and virtual environments (New Media Consortium, 2007). Though much work remains to research and develop mobile and digital gamebased learning, it would be wise for educators to take a broader and more long-range view of generational changes. Currently, theory and practice are poorly positioned to take account of the interaction age and the potentially profound influence it may have on education specifically and society at large. This chapter, and the handbook as a whole, may be seen as a first step toward this endeavor.

CONCLUSION In this chapter the following objects were addressed: (1) identify trends in consumer mobile digital technologies, products, and services; (2) situate trends in learner adoption and use of digital mobile and game technologies and games; (3) provide contemporary accounts of learning theory in terms of mobility; (4) present successful uses of mobile games in the classroom, especially for math and science; and (5) address policy, strategy, and development challenges for educators, particularly instructional designers and technologists. Though several issues remain outstanding, particularly the challenges of socioeconomic factors to technology adoption and use, and development hurdles for instructional designers unfamiliar with the complexity of game design, I still see value in pursuing this agenda along theoretical and practical lines. My position is not that the scenario put forth is absent unanticipated challenges and unintended consequences. Though scant rigorous, empirical work has demonstrated negative effects of new use trends on learners, parents, teachers, and administrators are wary of bringing games into the classroom (Sternheimer, 2007). This should provide even greater impetus to educators to critically examine and explore these trends and issues to determine how best to adopt and de-

0

velop for future learning environments. This is the proper mindset and position of an educator and instructional designer seeking to create innovative instructional artifacts for digital natives and nomads.

REFERENCES Alessi, S., & Trollip, S. (2000). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (3rd ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon. Barab, S.A., Evans, M.A., & Baek, E. (2004). Activity theory as a lens for characterizing the participatory unit. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 199-214). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 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. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. Brown, J.S., & Dugui, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40-57. Cummings, H.M., & Vandewater, E.A. (2007). Relation of adolescent video game play to time spent in other activities. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 161(7), 684-689. Curry, J., & Kenney, M. (2006). Digital divide or digital development. First Monday, 11(3). Retrieved July 1, 2007, from http://www.firstmonday. org/issues/issue11_3/curry/index.html Evans, M.A., & Powell, A. (2007). Conceptual and practical issues related to the design for and

Mobility, Games, and Education

sustainability of communities of practice: The case of e-portfolio use in preservice teacher training. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(2), 199-214. Evans, M.A., Diaz, T., Liao, Y.-C., Wang, F.-H., Wu, Y., Eschenmann, T., Snediker, T., & Li, F. (2007, October 23-27). Developing prototypes for mobile learning: Design studies in geometry. Proceedings of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology International Conference, Anaheim, CA. Friedman, T.L. (2007). Cellphones, maxi-pads, and other life-changing tools. New York Times, (April 6). Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Koschmann, T., Hall, R.P., & Miyake, N. (2005). CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Koster, R. (2005). A theory of fun for game design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2004). Thoughtful interaction design: A design perspective on information technology. Boston: MIT Press. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. New Media Consortium. (2007). The Horizon report. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from http:// www.nmc.org/pdf/2007_Horizon_Report.pdf O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next gen-

eration of software. Retrieved July 1, 2007, from http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/ news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557-576. Pass, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2005). Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Retrieved November 26, 2006, from http://www.pewinternet. org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Tech_ July2005web.pdf Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265283. Sharples, M. (2006). Big issues in mobile learning: Report of a workshop by the Kaleidescope Network of Excellence mobile learning initiative. Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Nottingham, UK. Retrieved February 6, 2007, from http://telearn.noe-kaleidoscope.org/ Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2006). A theory of learning for the mobile age. Retrieved February 6, 2007, from http://telearn.noe-kaleidoscope.org/warehouse/SHARPLES-MIKE2007.pdf Squire, K. (2006). From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educational Researcher, 35(8), 19-29. Sternheimer, K. (2007). Do video games kill? Contexts, 6(1), 13-17.

0

Mobility, Games, and Education

Suthers, D.D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315-337.

KEY TERMS Digital Game-Based Learning: Instruction and learning derived from methodologies and design features of computer and console video games. Knowledge Building: A constructionist pedagogy that emphasizes the externalization of individual cognition, the creation and maintenance of public artifacts, and service to the broader community. Mobile Devices: Communication and computational technologies that are highly portable, including handheld computers, portable game consoles, and smart phones.

0

Mobile Learning: A form of instruction and learning that is delivered and conducted via mobile devices; a sub-area of distance learning. Social Computing: A suite of technologies and services that specify networking among individuals and groups; examples include Facebook.com and MySpace.com. Tool-Mediated Activity: A concept derived primarily from the work of Vygotsky that emphasizes the social origin of cognition, where individual thought is mediated by instrumental and psychological tools. Web 2.0 Technologies: A suite of Web- and client-based technologies and services that specify contribution of users to generate and reuse information; examples include wikis, blogs, and personal broadcasting.



Chapter VII

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques David Parisi New York University, USA

AbstrAct This chapter discusses the way that new video game interfaces such as those employed by Guitar Hero™, Dance Dance Revolution, and the Nintendo Wii™ are being used to invoke the whole body as a participant in the game text. As such, new video games involve more than cognitive education; they impart a set of body habits to the player. Drawing on Marcel Mauss’s concept of “bodily technique,” I propose a new vocabulary for understanding these devices, referring to them as bodily interfaces. Next, I discuss three aspects of bodily interfaces: mode of capture, haptics, and button remapping. In order to help educators take advantage of these developments, I conclude by pointing to theoretical literature on the relationship between the physical and mental aspects of the learning process that may be useful in rethinking electronic games.

INtrODUctION Electronic gaming involves learning new habits of interfacing with game texts. Each new medium brings with it a particular set of what sociologist Marcel Mauss (1973) termed “techniques of the body,” where the body is conditioned to interact with the physical medium according to a set of cultural codes associated with it. In this chapter, I will explore the techniques of the body that emerge in our interactions with electronic games

and examine the ways that they are transforming the user’s bodily experience of the medium. It is my argument that electronic gaming trains our bodies to navigate texts in a new and significant way, in some instances electronically reproducing or mimicking the non-electronic (as is the case with games such as Guitar Hero and Dance Dance Revolution), and in others creating a new set of bodily habits. My focus on the interface as something encountered physically is intended to orient the reader away from visual and audio aspects of information display and toward the materiality of

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

the gaming experience. Underlying this focus is the assumption that learning does not happen only through the eyes and ears, but also in the fingers, hands, legs, and feet, and in the skin, muscles and joints.1 So my focus in this chapter on the interface is designed to spark educators’ thinking about electronic games as they are encountered physically by the player, and the new possibilities for learning that this conceptualization provides.2 The gaming body is no longer static and disengaged; it is now hailed as a participant in the game text. As such, playing electronic games becomes a play of the body, invoking what Gardner (1993) in his theory of multiple intelligences referred to as bodily/kinesthetic intelligence, no longer confined to the hands. This paradigm shift in thinking about games is not simply a theoretical one. In the drive to innovate within an extremely competitive marketplace, some game designers and developers have turned away from the pursuit of increasingly realistic images and sounds to instead pursue new forms of interface mechanics. Nintendo has been the most explicit about this in its development of the Wii and Dual Screen (DS™) gaming systems, with the former system eschewing high-definition graphics (the Wii’s maximum resolution is 480 horizontal lines compared to 1,080 for the PlayStation® 3 and 720 for the Xbox 360™) and instead focusing on the motion-capture controller (the Wii Remote or as it is cutely nicknamed “Wiimote”) as the system’s primary selling point.3 The DS featured its touch-screen interface, a first for a portable gaming system, prominently in the “Touching is Good” ad campaign produced for the product’s November 2004 launch (Parisi, 2008). This strategy has been extremely successful, with the DS selling 35 million units worldwide in just over two years (Mitchell, 2007), and the Wii eclipsing sales of other next-generation consoles in every month since its November 2006 release. Nintendo’s success was somewhat unheralded and can be read as emblematic of a new paradigm in gaming, further evidenced by controllers



developed for specific games, such as the floor mat controller for Dance Dance Revolution, the guitar controller for Guitar Hero I and II, and PlayStation’s Eye Toy. Each of these interfaces solicits greater bodily involvement in the gaming experience. The SIXAXIS™ controller for the PlayStation 3 tracks the controller’s tilt and uses it to direct the onscreen action, with the intent of creating a more “intuitive” and “natural” gaming experience (“SIXAXIS Wireless Controller”).4 In June of 2007, Novint Technologies released an interface called the Falcon that renders threedimensional objects to the user’s hand through the use of vibrational feedback. Through the deployment of haptic technology, this allows users to feel the weight, texture, and shape of onscreen objects.5 This chapter will trace the current deployment of what I refer to as bodily interfaces. We can define the bodily interface as the physical aspects of the computer interface, where the interface involves and depends on the body to come into contact with it. Recognizing that all input devices in the human-computer interface (HCI) involve the use of the body in some capacity, this term is somewhat redundant. I use it to orient the reader away from thinking about the graphical user interface (GUI) toward thinking about the interface as something material that is encountered by the body. Bodily interface has a material connotation that HCI does not, and as such, I feel it is a useful term for thinking about this most recent generation of game interfaces. I will discuss three interconnected aspects of these interfaces that are used to reorganize the body in relation to the game. The first aspect, capture, involves the interface’s ability to “read” the user. All human-computer interfaces depend on the computer’s ability to legibly interpret inputs from the user. A keyboard or a voice-recognition program interprets information provided by the user. Despite their similar function, these two interfaces involve the body in radically different ways. So in discussing this first aspect, it is

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

important that we pay close attention to the mode of capture employed by an interface. The most emblematic example is the Wii Remote, which depends on a sensing apparatus in the remote to track its movement through space relative to the light-emitting diodes (LEDs) in the sensor bar. Information about the remote’s position is transmitted to the computer, which then makes calculations based on this information to produce events that are displayed for the user visually on the screen. The haptic aspect of interfaces invokes the user’s sense of touch. Although the term haptics is often used to refer specifically to interface devices that employ some sort of force feedback or force reflection,6 following Loomis and Lederman (1986, pp.31-33) I use it here to indicate the involvement of both the cutaneous (skin) and kinesthetic senses. Kinesthesis refers to the body’s ability to sense the limb positioning and movement, relying “on specialized sensory receptors located in muscles, tendons, and joints, but also on skin receptors in the hands” (Robles-De-La-Torre, 2006, p. 27). All interfaces that require physical contact produce haptic sensations; typing involves carrying out a set of actions in the hands, arms, and fingers, and also depends on the sensation provided by pressing the keys to let us know that a key has been struck successfully. Providing information for the game to capture produces haptic sensations through what is known as active touch. Where vibrational feedback is used, the interface acts on the user, often using vibrating motors within the controller to indicate the occurrence of a game event.7 So we can distinguish between haptic sensations that are produced by the user as a byproduct of carrying out game commands and those sensations that are generated by the physical interface itself as a form of feedback for the user. Feedback generated by the motors in the PlayStation’s Dual Shock controller is one example of this second type, while the sensation produced by tilting the SIXAXIS controller for the PlayStation 3 is an example of the first.

The third aspect of interfacing, remapping, uses the same mechanisms as a traditional controller or gamepad, but places the buttons in such a way that they demand a new bodily configuration of the user, typically designed to make the user’s motions correspond to the action mimicked in the game. One example of this is the popular Dance Dance Revolution (DDR), which maps the buttons usually manipulated by the thumbs onto a larger space where they can only be effectively activated using the feet. Another example is Guitar Hero, which employs a guitar interface (the Guitar Hero SG controller, based on the Gibson SG, scaled down to three-quarter size) where users press buttons on the fret bar rather than holding down strings. Cued by a series of scrolling notes and chords on the screen, players press combinations of buttons on the fret bar while flicking the strum bar. By remapping five of the buttons on a standard controller to the fret bar and using a sixth button as a stand-in for plucking strings, Guitar Hero manages to approximate the act of playing guitar, mimetically reproducing body routines involved in the original act. It is important to note that I will not be undertaking a genealogical analysis of video game controllers in this chapter, having opted instead to focus on developing a functional vocabulary for understanding the recent wave of new interfaces. I do not mean to suggest that these aspects of interfacing apply exclusively to new interfaces, nor do I mean to suggest that the technology used in this most recent set of interfaces represents a radical break with past interface technologies. What is significant about the current moment is not the technology itself, but rather the paradigm shift that its commercial success signals.

bAcKGrOUND Techniques of the Body One of the first obstacles that a new gamer must overcome is the controller’s awkward physicality. 

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

The act of performing finger movements that are second nature for the experienced gamer (having been inscribed through years of training into his or her muscles) appears to the new gamer as a discouraging and frustrating barrier to the world of gaming. Compared to the first Atari joystick, which moved in four directions and had one button, contemporary video game controllers, with two analog sticks and 16 buttons, can be fumblingly complex in the hands of new gamers. To help us think about this dimension of gaming, we can apply French anthropologist Marcel Mauss’s idea of “bodily technique.” Mauss was prompted to think about this subject after years of reflecting on aspects of life that anthropologists and sociologists had relegated to the abhorrent category of “the miscellaneous.” Mauss wondered why it was that his generation swam differently than the previous one, why Polynesians swam differently than the French, why English soldiers could not dig with French spades. What he realized and articulated in a 1934 lecture titled Les Techniques du Corps (Techniques of the Body) was that each culture and epoch has a set of often unarticulated bodily habits that are imparted to its members through a system of cultural education. Acquiring these bodily techniques involves learning, often mimetically, particular modes of bodily movement and positioning. For example, Mauss discusses the positioning of the arms and hands while walking, claiming that this positioning forms a “social idiosyncrasy” and cannot be assumed to be “simply a product of some purely individual, almost completely psychical arrangements and mechanisms” (p. 72). This is not to assert that biology and individual psychology play no role, but rather that these are only constitutive elements mixed “indissolubly” together with the third, social element, which he describes in the following passage: In all these elements of the art of using the human body, the facts of education were dominant. The notion of education could be superimposed on



that of imitation. For there are particular children with very strong imitative faculties, others with very weak ones, but all of them go through the same education, such that we can understand the continuity of the concatenations. What takes place is a prestigious imitation. The child, the adult, imitates actions which have succeeded and which he has seen successfully performed by people in whom he has confidence and who have authority over him. The action is imposed from without, from above, even if it is an exclusively biological action, involving his body. The individual borrows the series of movements which constitute it from the action executed in front of him or with him by others. (p. 74) To summarize, bodily technique consists of three elements: the biological, the physiological, and the social. Both the biological and psychological can also be understood as emerging from the social. In other words, the social is the place where the biological and psychological are produced. The production of these categories has of course been given significant attention, most notably by Michel Foucault (1988). Mauss’s point of intervention was this social element. The social element involves the assimilation of the techniques of the “ordered, authorized, tested action” in what Mauss terms the “imitative act” (pp. 73-74). Social sanctioning may be mobilized to enforce conformity to the technique in question. This last point is particularly important in considering the ability of electronic games to impart techniques of the body to players. Even played alone, games are actions performed for the software, which evaluates the player’s performance and makes a judgment based on it. When the game interface invokes the body, it asks the body to perform a set of actions that it can perceive as legible. The body’s actions then must be conceptualized and arranged in such a way that they can successfully perform the required movements. The body must be mastered as an instrument, and it must perform a code of actions:

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

The constant adaptation to a physical, mechanical or chemical aim (e.g., when we drink) is pursued in a series of assembled actions, and assembled for the individual not by himself alone but by all his education, by the whole society to which he belongs, in the place he occupies in it. (p. 76) What Mauss does quite effectively and quite stealthily here is eliminate material or biological determinism from techniques of the body, carving out a space for the role that socialization and education play in producing a diverse set of techniques, even when the techniques in question are intended to carry out a similar function. The value of this approach for understanding video game interfaces should be clear; it means that we cannot consider only the materiality and design of the game interface, but also the setting in which that game interface is deployed, and the circumstances that surround its deployment. The bodily techniques displayed in advertisements for the interface supply “the ordered, authorized, tested action” for the imitative act.

Conceptualizing Electronic Games Despite the wealth of scholarly literature that has been devoted to electronic gaming recently, there has been very little discussion of the game interface’s physicality. Where “the interface” is discussed, it typically refers to a game’s on-screen elements, such as the positioning of the camera, navigation menus, heads-up display, and other elements of the graphical user interface. While these elements vary greatly from game to game, the way that the graphical interface is navigated by the user’s hands had remained fairly static through several generations of game consoles up until the release of the Wii and the SIXAXIS. Where the physical human-computer interface has been discussed, Barr, Noble, and Biddle (2006) point out that it is not differentiated from other, non-game forms of HCI. In media theory, the historical lineage of the computer interface has been

linked primarily to the cinematic apparatus, with attention to other non-visual modes of sensory interaction eschewed in favor of an emphasis on the continuity of visual presentation from cinema to computers. Manovich (2001) describes the HCI as a form of “cultural interface” that allows the user to interact not just with the computer, but with a whole nexus of cultural traditions, practices, and conventions (p. 70). Alternatively, Aarseth (1997) opts to focus on the continuity between (cognitively) navigating new media (cyber-) texts and older modes of textual narrative. In order to direct our discussion to where it will be most productive, we can use Galloway’s (2006) definition of the video game is an “action-based medium,” characterized by a set of material processes that occur at two levels, the “operator” level and the “machine” level (p. 3). It is this action, the operator acting on the machine and the machine acting back on the operator, that Galloway claims sets video games apart from other media: If photographs are images, and films are moving images, then video games are actions…Without action, games remain only in the pages of an abstract rule book. Without the active participation of players and machines, video games exist only as static computer code. Video games come into being when the machine is powered up and the software is executed; they exist when enacted. (p. 3) For Galloway (2006), the mode of operator action sets games apart from other forms of media; we see “an interesting upheaval in the area of mass culture” as “what used to be primarily the domain of the eyes and looking is now more likely that of the muscles and doing, thumbs” (p. 3). Our focus here will be primarily on the material processes that take place at the “operator level” of what Galloway terms “gamic action.” Much like bodily techniques, games are defined by action; until they are executed, they exist only as static codes waiting to be executed. Deploying



Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

Philip Agre’s idea of “grammars of action,” which describes “how human activities are encoded for machinic parsing using linguistic and structural metaphors,” Galloway goes on to claim that video games produce complex grammars of action both for machine and operator, at both the physical level (what Galloway calls “gestural grammars”) and “higher-level actions” (p. 4). Combining this vocabulary with Mauss’s, we can proceed to interrogate the interface’s physicality and the physical configurations it imparts to the operator.

MAIN FOCUS Bodily Interfaces The first images that load on the Web site for the Wii (http://us.wii.com/) are a series of stills that link to short videos, shot from the television screen’s point of view, of people playing the Wii. This is a curious move; no screenshots or flashy game-play trailers, only video after video of people sitting togetherfamilies, friends, couplesWiimote in hand, focused on the screen. Loading the Wii Sports page shows similar images: bodies active, standing and kinetic. This image, the body of gamer from the perspective of the machine, is the image I hope to conjure by using the term bodily interface. I adopt this term to shift attention away from the way that information is presented on the screen and direct our focus to the physicality of the game interface. The term is problematic because all human-computer interfaces are bodily ones; that is, all HCIs require the body to function as an input device.8 The term is useful, however, because it forces us to think of the different ways that the body is deployed in its interactions with the machine. Each bodily interface summons a different history of bodily technique or, recalling our earlier discussion, a different paradigm of bodily education. Remember Mauss’s initial motivation for exploring bodily technique was to give form to patterns of behavior that were previously catego

rized as “miscellaneous” (pp. 6-7). The way that we interact physically with video games was, up until the present paradigm shift called attention to it, treated in the same manner. So while the word “bodily” in the phrase “bodily interface” may be somewhat redundant, it does carve out a space within which we may raise fruitful questions about the way this interfacing is carried out. The term is both descriptive and proscriptive. For educators, thinking of video game interfaces as bodily things should open up new possibilities in the way that they are deployed. Recognizing that cognition does not take place in a disembodied mind but rather is distributed throughout the body in the muscles and nerves, bodily interfaces are capable of invoking and cultivating more than just rudimentary hand-eye coordination. Having explained and detailed the significance of bodily interfaces, we can proceed to explore the different aspects of these interfaces. In this analysis, I am assuming that the standard controller is norm, and the types of interfaces we are examining in this chapter are significant precisely because they deviate from this norm. The interfaces I will be analyzing are as follows (with the month and date of the interface’s commercial release in the U.S. listed for reference): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Wii Remote and Wii Nunchuk for the Nintendo Wii™ (November 2006) SIXAXIS™ controller for the PlayStation® 3 (November 2006) Guitar Hero™ SG Controller for PlayStation® 2 (November 2006) Dance Dance Revolution Game Pad (released for U.S. consoles in 20019) EyeToy® for the PlayStation® 2 (2003)

Aspects of Bodily Interfaces Mode of Capture “A computer,” according to Agre, “can only compute with what it can capture” (2003, p.

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

749). In Agre’s model of capture, “human activity is…treated as a kind of language itself, for which a good representation scheme provides an accurate grammar. This grammar specifies a set of unitary actionsthe ‘words’ or ‘lexical items’ of action” (Agre, 2003, p.746). The process of capture requires the establishment of “grammars of action” (p. 746). Agre goes on to give several examples of these grammars; the most pertinent for our purposes comes in his discussion of computer interfaces: The user interfaces of many (if not all) computers are readily understood as supplying their users with grammars of action. The permissible unitary actions are ASCII keystrokes, menu selections, shell commands and so forth. (p. 746)

What is important to keep in mind here is that the body carries out these actions. Interfacing thus requires the acquisition of grammars of bodily action, what Galloway (2006) refers to as gestural grammars. Here, it is helpful to think about the lexical items, which we will understand as requiring bodily action, present to the user on a standard video game controller such as Sony’s Dual Shock 2 controller.10 In addition to the two analog sticks, the controller has 17 buttons, most of which are pressure sensitive, with up to 255 levels of sensitivity. The buttons are diagrammed in Figure 1. The action of pressing any one of the buttons can be understood as a discrete lexical item (the following terms can be understood as synonymous: lexical item, word, action). Pressing

Figure 1. Map of a Sony DUALSHOCK® 2 Analog Controller for PlayStation® (Copyright Sony Entertainment Corporation)



Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

multiple buttons at once can also be understood as a lexical item. The different combination of buttons that can be pressed is almost limitless, but the ability to press different buttons at once is limited by the user’s ability to do so. There is much more to this process than can be detailed here; my point in raising the issue is to show that the mode of capture structures the mode of bodily interaction with the interface. This process is as much material as it is social; what is encountered by the user is a whole nexus of anthropological assumptions that are written into the physical design of the interface, including the discourse of ergonomics that is manifested in the material design of the interface.11 So as much as the grammars of action involved in playing a particular game will differ, the lexical items of action that make up these grammars will remain constant as long as the player interacts with the same interface device. Across platforms, the mode of capture for the X-Box and X-Box 360™ is fairly similar to the Dual Shock controller described above (again, our interests here are not genealogical, so tracing origins of this design are not important at the moment). The Wii Remote and Wii Nunchuk both operate by tracking the controller’s movement through three different axes. Depending on the game, the Wii Remote can be used on its own. Tennis and baseball for Wii Sports, for example, only use the Wii Remote. For more complex motions, the Wii Nunchuk can be attached to the Wii Remote, making another set of lexical items available to the player. Boxing requires the use of both the Remote and the Nunhcuk, as each captures the separate motion of the fists to punch one’s opponent. Through repeated experimentation moving the controllers, the player learns what body motions produce the desired onscreen actions, such as a jab or a dodge. Moving the controllers sideways simultaneously will make the player bob to the side. Similarly, the SIXAXIS tracks the tilt of the controller, which means that the player must



learn the sensitivity of the tilt sensing and tailor her hand movements to it. The motions become part of the player’s gestural language, acquired through repeated interaction with the interface device. The EyeToy is an example of a similar practice of capture. It employs a camera aimed at the player that captures his or her image and displays it on the screen. The player’s image on the screen is overlaid with game objects, which the player interacts with by gesturing. The game interprets the player’s gestures and then determines if a successful interaction with a game object has occurred. Through this process, the player learns what physical actions are legible to the interface, then remembers them through repeated performance in front of the camera. In this case, a grammar of bodily action is acquired through repeated interaction with the game, but this grammar is not supplied by the ergonomics of the interface itself. So where the physicality of Dance Dance Revolution’s dance mat or the Wii Remote both lend themselves to interaction with particular body parts, the EyeToy supplies no such physical vocabulary to the player until the interface is performed for the camera. EyeToy: Kinetic (SEEC. 2005), for example, leads the player through a series of exercises by making he or she dodge oncoming objects. The game teaches the player a workout routine by judging the player’s body motion as right or wrong. If the player managed to dodge the incoming object, he or she positioned his or her body correctly. If not, then he or she must position his or her body differently. The impacts of capture on the body will be more fully articulated as we discuss the other aspects of interfacing. So far we have established that all interfaces employ capture, and that a change in the mode of capture used by the game changes the user’s bodily experience and bodily encounter with the game.

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

Haptics Just as all human-computer interfaces use capture, so too do they all involve felt sensations of interfacing; this felt experience will differ from interface to interface. Even when not specifically hailed by the game interface, the sense of touch is never “off”; with a standard game interface, the player feels12 the controller’s contours with his or her hands, and searches for buttons with his or her fingers and thumbs. All the while, the rest of the body must be managed in relationship to the controller; whatever position the player assumes, the hands must remain attached to the controller, closing the operator/machine circuit. The game’s primary felt experience resides in the hands, which Kant (1989, p. 28) once referred to as “man’s outer brain.” Where vibrational feedback is not present, the act of manipulating the controller produces haptic experience for the hands, but also for the rest of the body, as a byproduct of game-play. In gaming with a standard controller, the felt experience of the game is produced by fixing the body so that it is only the hands that are moving. The Wii Remote spreads the portions of the body directly required to interface with the game upward from the hands. Wii Boxing, by requiring the player to hold both the Wii Remote and the Wii Nunchuk, involves both arms, the torso, and the head. The Dance Dance Revolution dance mat, in using the legs to activate the interface, involves the whole body; the haptic experience of DDR or Wii Boxing is substantially different, therefore, from playing a first-person shooter on the Xbox 360 or PlayStation. The felt experience of these games closely resembles the felt experience of the act the game is reproducing. This presents us with a new type of realism, one that we may understand as a sort of sensory realism, a bodily realism. Realism here is not an absolute category, but rather an aim in the game design. So with Wii Bowling, bodily realism is achieved by making the body’s haptic experience playing the electronic game achieve

a fidelity to the body’s experience with the nonelectronic version. To further illustrate this point, let us revisit the EyeToy interface. Because the body’s motions are captured by the EyeToy’s camera, the player actually has no physical contact with the interface. But the player does have a robust haptic experience with the game, moving wildly about in order to accomplish the game’s objectives. Recalling Marshall McLuhan’s famous formulation, “the user is the content” of the medium, the player’s felt experience of game-play becomes the game’s content (Molinaro, McLuhan, & Toye, 1987, p. 436). EyeToy: KineticCombat involves martial arts moves through successful imitation of the character on the screen; in EyeToy: Play3, the player gestures to style the hair of an onscreen character, moves his or her arms to mimic playing the trumpet, and imitates an onscreen soldier saluting his or her superior. The player’s felt haptic experience has a fidelity to the onscreen events. The entire body is hailed as an educational subject; feelings are learned by and inscribed in the muscles and joints. The content of the game text is the user’s physical performance of the game code, her adherence and conformity to the bodily motions demanded by the text. The use of vibrational (or haptic) feedback13 adds another dimension to the player’s haptic experience with the game. When game events trigger small motors that reside in the controller’s handle, the player feels vibrations corresponding to onscreen events. Though this sort of “rumble” feedback has been in game controllers for over 10 years, using it in conjunction with the forms of action described above gives it increased importance. Perhaps the best example of this is in Wii Baseball, where the Wii Remote (held like a baseball bat in the player’s hands) vibrates when the player’s onscreen avatar makes contact with the visual representation of the ball in an attempt to simulate the feel of hitting. This process educates the user’s sense of touch, producing a sort of tactile semiotics, where the felt sensations of



Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

the game world that act on the user are linked to information from other sensory modes. The vibration from firing a particular gun is linked to the sound and image of the weapon firing; just as the different guns have different sounds and images, so too do they have different vibration patterns and intensities. With higher-end devices, more robust forms of vibrational feedback are possible, allowing for the simulation of weight, pressure, and motion. This serves to add tactile information to onscreen objects, folding the sense of touch into the game’s sensory epistemology.14

Remapping When a computer receives a command, it does not care about the physical location that command comes from. In other words, when the computer gets the command from button A, it does not matter where the A button is located: whether the A button is five feet wide and can only be pressed by driving a truck onto it, or placed comfortably on the top of the Wii Remote, the computer interprets the input the same. But those two different buttons would have a large impact on the player’s experience with the game. “Good” button placement can make a console system successful, while “bad” button placement can doom a console from birth. Because the computer is indifferent to where it gets its inputs, one can play DDR with a standard controller by using the direction pad on a standard PlayStation 2 controller (see Figure 1, buttons Left, Right, Up, Down). The dance mat, by enlarging the direction pad and placing it on the floor, fundamentally changes the experience of the game text. Guitar Hero too can be played with a standard controller, but the interface would be clumsy and difficult to maneuver. So remapping the mode of capture impacts the player’s haptic experience with the game. In the case of Guitar Hero, the congruence between the interface and the guitar allows the player to feel like he or she is playing a “real” guitar because of the way the buttons are mapped out. Because of its haptic

0

dimension, this approximation of the simulated activity through remapping is a crucial step toward achieving bodily realism. But like visual realism, bodily realism remains a category that will be perpetually out of reach because the controller only approximates the simulated activity, and only approximates the relationship between the body’s action and its material effect.

IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE TRENDS The implications of the new trend in bodily interfaces are best illustrated by the controversy over Rockstar Games Manhunt 2. The first Manhunt (Rockstar Games: 2003), which predates the Wii, asked players to assume the perspective of a death row convict, performing brutal executions. The more brutal the execution, the more points awarded to the player. The first game earned a Mature rating from the Electronic Software Ratings Board (ESRB). On initial review, the ESRB gave the sequel an Adults Only rating,15 with some speculating that the realism of the Wii’s interface is partially responsible for the more restrictive rating (Game Informer, 2007). In The Godfather: Blackhand Edition (Electronic Arts, 2007) for the Wii, players act out grabbing, shaking, throwing, and punching their enemies using the Wii Remote and the Nunchuk. With Manhunt 2, the fear is that rather than training gamers to press buttons that make their characters perform actions, the game trains players to actually perform those actions. This is a fear over grammars of (undesirable) bodily action being added to one’s gestural language. My point here is not to give credence to the perpetually overblown fears about the relationship between video games and violence, but rather to flag the way that this new mode of capture has already changed the way of thinking about the mode of education that video games engage us in.

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

Designing educational applications for these new interfaces would allow a type of bodily education not possible with older generations of game consoles. By adding new lexical items to the range of grammars of bodily actions possible in electronic games, these interfaces make it possible to engage learners in dynamic and exciting ways. By adding the narrative and incentive structure of games to the physical activities carried out in the games, the time a learner will devote to what may otherwise be considered a tedious activity increases. However, it is important to bear in mind that the actions one learns through these commercial bodily interfaces are only approximations. There has yet to be a virtuoso guitarist who learned exclusively by playing Guitar Hero, and conversely, while an amateur bowler might think Wii Bowling is surprisingly realistic, a professional bowler might find that without the weight of the ball on her arm, her bowling motion changes considerably. What underlies the concept of bodily interfaces is the idea that cognition and learning do not take place only in the brain, that education is a process distributed throughout the body. Recent work in cognitive science (Calvert, Spence, & Stein, 2004)16 has attempted to provide experimental grounding for what was suggested in significant discourses that the interested reader may want to follow up on. The first is in Maria Montessori’s description of her method of sensory education, which includes techniques of education specific to each individual sense, with touch featuring prominently (Montessori, 1912, pp. 185-187, 198). Bringing this set of pedagogical strategies to bear on electronic games can help move electronic game-based learning beyond the abstract realm. By introducing a digitalized physicality to users’ experience with electronic games, conversations on the materiality of educational objects take on a new relevance. Educators may also want to consider the body of work dedicated to exploring the importance of touch in emotional and cognitive development, in particular Montagu’s (1971)

pioneering work and the more recent study by Field (2003). Also, Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences posits a “bodily/kinesthetic intelligence” that is certainly cued by all game interfaces, but to an even greater extent by the bodily interfaces described above (1993, pp. 205-209). Because of gamers’ widespread adoption of these interfaces, we can assume they will be refined in subsequent generations. As other game designers try to clone the commercial success of the interfaces discussed here, more resources will be invested in development of new and more complex modes of bodily interaction. It is crucial that we have at our disposal a vocabulary for understanding how it is these interfaces involve the body. What I have attempted to sketch out here is hopefully a useful framework for helping educators to think about the new paradigm in gaming. Understanding gaming as a process of educating the body should shift the attention of researchers as they attempt to track the impacts of gaming on the broader culture it exists within. What was readily obvious for Mauss (1973), that different cultures have different bodily techniques, certainly applies to cultures of gamers. Microcultural research into different gaming cultures may help to uncover the way that charismatic individuals within the culture exert a hegemonic influence on the bodily habits of their fellow gamers, what Mauss called the “prestigious imitation” (1973, p. 74). Game interfaces can also be used to teach the player about the bodily habits of those in other cultures. By forcing the player to assume and learn a particular bodily motion, these interfaces allow players to enter into a mimetic relationship with a facsimile of another culture’s bodily habits. To synthesize Manovich (2001), Mauss (1973), and Galloway (2006), the game act becomes an ordered, authorized, and tested action, implicating the body in an interface not just between operator and machine, but between operator and culture. Bodily techniques are transmuted and transmitted through computer code, and the player becomes a willing and active participant in this process of cultural education. 

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

REFERENCES Aarseth, E. (1997). Cybertext: Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Agre, P.E. (2003). Surveillance and capture: Two models of privacy. In N. Wardrip-Fruin and N. Montfort (Eds.), The new media reader (pp. 740-760). Cambridge: MIT Press. (Original work published in 1994). Barr, P., Noble, J., & Biddle, R. (2007). Video game values: Human-computer interaction and games. Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 180195. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://sciencedirect.com Brightman, J. (2006, May 31). Harrison: Sony did not steal Nintendo’s idea. Retrieved March 4, 2007, from http://biz.gamedaily.com/industry/ feature/?id=12824 Calvert, G., Spence, C., & Stein, B. (Eds.). (2004). The handbook of multisensory processes. Cambridge: MIT Press. Foucault, M. (1988). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason (R. Howard, trans.). New York: Vintage-Random House. Field, T. (2003). Touch. Cambridge: MIT Press. Galloway, A.R. (2006). Gaming: Essays on algorithmic culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Game Informer. (2007, August). Changing the game: The aftershocks of Manhunt’s AO rating. Game Informer, 172, 34. Gardner, H. (1993). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences (10th anniversary ed.). New York: Basic Books. Gibson, J.J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.



Heller-Roazen, D. (2007). The inner touch: Archeology of a sensation. Brooklyn: Zone Books. Katz, D. (1989). The world of touch (L.E. Krueger, trans.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. (Original work published in 1925). Lukes, S. (2000). Different cultures, different rationalities? History of the Human Sciences, 13(1), 3-18. Loomis, J.M., & Lederman, S.J. (1984, November). What utility is there in distinguishing between active and passive touch? Proceedings of the Psychonomic Society Meeting, San Antonio, TX. Retrieved from http://www.psych.ucsb. edu/~loomis/loomis%20lederman%2084.pdf Loomis, J.M., & Lederman, S.J. (1986). Tactual perception. In K. Boff,, L. Kaufman, & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance, volume II (chapter 31). Mauss, M. (1973). Techniques of the body. Economy and Society, 2(1), 70-87. (Original work published in 1934). Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. Cambridge: MIT Press. Mitchell, D. (2007, February 27). The rise of the handhelds. Retrieved February 28, 2007, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6387551. stm Molinaro, C., McLuhan, M., & Toye, W. (Eds.). (1987). The letters of Marshall McLuhan. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Montagu, A. (1971). Touching: The human significance of the skin. New York: Columbia University Press. Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori method. New York: Frederick A. Stoles. Nintendo. (2006a). Wii Remote. Retrieved February 27, 2007, from http://wii.nintendo.com/controller.jsp

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

Nintendo. (2006b). Wii Sports. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://uk.wii.com/software/02/ Parisi, D. (2008). Fingerbombing or “touching is good”: The cultural construction of technologized touch. The Senses and Society, 3(3). Parisi, D. (in press). Tactile modernity: On the rationalization of touch in the nineteenth century. In C. Colliga & M. Liney (Eds.), Image, sound and touch in the nineteenth century. Paterson, M. (2006). Feel the presence: Technologies of touch and distance. Environment and Planning, 24(5), 691-708. Robles-De-La-Torre, G. (2006). The importance of the sense of touch in virtual and real environments. IEEE Multimedia Special Issue on Haptic User Interfaces for Multimedia Systems, 13(3), 24-30. Robles-De-La-Torre, G. (n.d.) What is haptics? Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.isfh. org/haptics.html Schiesel, S. (2007, April 30). P.E. classes turn to video game that works legs, not thumbs. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.nytimes. com/2007/04/30/health/30exer.html?ex=1184904 000&en=8ecee806510b095c&ei=5070 Sony Entertainment Corporation. (2006). SIXAXIS wireless controller. Retrieved July 16, 2007, from http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/About/ WirelessController Weber, E.H. (1996). E.H. Weber on the tactile senses (H.E. Ross & D.J. Murray, trans.). London: Psychology Press. (Original works published in 1825 and 1846.) Weber, R.N. (1997). Manufacturing gender in commercial and military cockpit design. Science Technology Human Values, 22(2), 235-253. Retrieved July 18, 2007, from http://online. sagepub.com

Wikipedia. (2007, July 12). Dance Dance Revolution. Retrieved July 21, 2007, from http:// en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dance_ Dance_Revolution&oldid=144279629 Winner, L. (1980, December 1). Do artifacts have politics? The whale and the reactor: A search for limits in an age of high technology (pp. 19-39). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Wolpaw, J.R., & McFarland, D.J. (2004, December). Control of a two-dimensional movement signal by a noninvasive brain-computer interface in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101 (pp. 17849-17854).

KEY TERMS Bodily Interface: The physical aspects of the computer interface, where the interface involves and depends on the body to come into contact with it. Recognizing that all input devices in the human-computer interface (HCI) involve the use of the body in some capacity, this term is somewhat redundant. I use it to orient the reader away from thinking about the graphical user interface (GUI) toward thinking about the interface as something material that is encountered by the body. Bodily interface has a material connotation that HCI does not, and I feel it is a useful term for thinking about this most recent generation of game interfaces. Bodily Realism: As opposed to visual realism, bodily realism refers to the subject’s felt experiences of the game interface. Like visual realism, bodily realism is not an absolute category; that is to say, bodily realism is not something that is either achieved or not achieved, but rather something sought for in the design process. One example of this is bowling for Wii Sports, which attempts to replicate the bodily feeling of bowling through the use of motion capture in the Wii Remote.



Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

The player has to go through the motion of “real” bowling, thus producing physical sensations that approximate those of real bowling. Bodily Technique: A term used by Marcel Mauss (1973) to describe the bodily habits of different cultures. Dissatisfied with the language that anthropologists and sociologists had at their disposal to understand the way that people used their bodies, in a 1934 lecture Mauss posited that bodily techniques are composed of three elements: the biological, psychological, and cultural-mixed “indissolubly” together. Cultural Interface: Taken from Manovich (2001), who describes media as cultural interfaces, the term refers to the way that the compositional elements of media are arranged. This arrangement will reflect the preferences, values, and conventions of the culture it emerges out of. Cultural interfaces, such as cinema and the printed word, each have their own particular history of form and technique that we need to be attentive to in approaching them. Haptics (or Haptic): From the Greek haptikos or haptesthai, meaning to grasp or take hold of, haptic refers to the sense of touch. The word haptics has come to refer to the science of touch, a field of study that has its roots in German psychophysics, and also serves as shorthand for the field of haptic interface design, which attempts to technologically reproduce the sense of touch. Loomis and Lederman (1984, 1986) define the haptic as consisting of the cutaneous (skin) and kinesthetic (movement) senses, which is the meaning we will use in this chapter. Mode of Capture: The means employed by the machine to take in input from the user/operator. A central point in this chapter concerns changes in the mode of capture; the use of optical tracking by the EyeToy for PlayStation 2 is one mode of capture, and this differs significantly from standard controller, imparting a new configuration of



the user in order for his or her actions to be made legible to the machine. Remapping: One technique being used in new game interfaces such as the SG2 Guitar Controller for Guitar Hero and the dance mat for Dance Dance Revolution, remapping involves redesigning video game controllers and placing the buttons in places that demand new bodily configurations of the user. The dance mat takes the directional pad of the Dual Shock controller and maps it onto a larger space, so that the player can only press the buttons using their feet.

ENDNOTES 1

2

3

I wish to avoid confronting the problem of Cartesian dualism here, although it will remain in the background of this discussion. As with any technological development, there is a more pernicious side to the bodily interfaces I will be discussing. But in order to demonstrate their potential as learning tools, I have opted to put aside concerns that these interfaces raise about privacy, the authoritarian enforcement of body routines and body maintenance, and scores of other issues. This is not to diminish these issues, but rather to help clearly explain what has been an under-examined set of developments in gaming. Nintendo signals this shift in marketing in their description of the controller: “To make gaming as accessible to people of all ages and all abilities, Nintendo wanted to create a controller that was as inviting as it was sophisticated. The outcome is the Wii Remote. Nintendo fused the familiarity of a remote control with the sophistication of motion-sensing technology to come up with an input device for the ages!” (Nintendo 2006a).

Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

4

5

6

7

8

Sony’s use of the terms “intuitive” and “natural” to describe the player’s interaction with the game is certainly problematic, but these concerns will be put aside for now. What is important for our purposes is their attempt to address “unnatural” interaction by adding a system that captures the movement of the body, as recorded by the controller, in addition to the manipulation of buttons and sticks. Although devices of this kind have been around for more than a decade, the Falcon is the first with a price point low enough to be marketable as mainstream game peripheral, with a preorder price of $189. For more details on the Falcon’s release, see Novint’s homepage at http://www.novint. com. Although higher-end haptic devices with similar but improved functionality have been around for over a decade, they remain prohibitively expensive even for serious gamers. For example, SensAble’s Phantom® Omni retails for $2,795. The word haptic is often used as an umbrella term to include all the different senses of touch. Recently haptics has become shorthand for the practice and field of haptic interface design. For a concise discussion on this subject, see Robles-De-La-Torres (2006) and also the International Society for Haptics (http://www.isfh.org). The division of touch into “active” and “passive” originates in E.H. Weber’s pioneering work on touch in the 1830s and was later taken up by David Katz (1925) and J.J. Gibson (1966). This division is not without controversy; see Loomis and Lederman (1984). The one notable exception to this is the brain-computer interface (BCI), which allows the control and manipulation of the computer through the use of focused mental activity. However, this process too requires conditioning the brain to produce electro-

9

10

11

encephalographic activity that is legible to the computer. For more detailed coverage see Wolpaw and McFarland (2004). Dance Dance Revolution was popular in Japanese arcades prior to being ported to the PlayStation in 1999 (Wikipedia, 2007). This raises one point that I have not yet mentioned: very often, arcades are the birthplace of new interfaces, but it is rare that the interface present in an arcade game survives in anything looking like its original form when the game is ported to a console. One of the difficulties in porting successful arcade games to consoles is in reducing the diverse and often robust interface allowed in the arcade to the homogenous space of a standard console controller. I have opted to use the Dual Shock to illustrate my point because its design has enjoyed a good deal of longevity. The basic button and stick layout has remained the same since the first iteration of the controller, the Dual Analog, was released in 1997. Though some features have been added (such as button sensitivity and most recently tilt sensing) and others added and then removed (the DualShock® for the PS 1 and PS 2 incorporated vibrational feedback, but was absent in the PS 3’s SIXAXIS due to a recently resolved patent lawsuit brought by Immersion Corporation in 2002), the physical structure has remained constant. According to a recent (admittedly suspect) estimate from Sony president Phil Harrison, 400 million Dual Shock controllers have been sold worldwide (Brightman, 2006). I am putting aside here the whole discussion of materially coding assumptions about the user into design, but there is a wealth of literature on the subject. For example, the embedding of gender in cockpit design is taken up Weber (1997). Also see Winner’s (1980) germinal “Do Artifacts Have Politics?”



Game Interfaces as Bodily Techniques

12

13

14



There is an ambiguity in the meaning of the word ‘feeling’. I use it here to refer to physical sensation, instead of affect and emotion, though the two meanings are certainly related. For a thorough historical analysis on the subject, see Heller-Roazen (2007). This type of feedback is often referred to as “rumble” in order to set it apart from more robust uses of haptic technology. In console games, rumble has been around since the Rumble Pak was released for the Nintendo 64 in 1997. The term ‘sensory epistemology’ refers to the way that knowledge is conceptualized in relationship to the senses. Anthropologists use the term to refer to the sensory preferences of one culture or another; I use it here

15

16

to refer to the sensory modes available to us to know the computer-generated worlds. For one discussion of the term, see Lukes (2000). From a commercial standpoint, an AO rating is basically the kiss of death for a video game, similar to an NC-17 rating for a film. See http://www.esrb.org/index-js.jsp for more information. In the case of Manhunt 2, both Nintendo and Sony have both indicated that they would ban the game from their systems if the publishers are not able to get the AO rating reduced to Mature. There are several pertinent chapters in this volume revolving mainly around the interaction of sensory modes in forming our conceptions of the external world.



Chapter VIII

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings Elhanan Gazit H.I.T.-Holon Institute of Technology, Israel

AbstrAct This chapter presents an analysis of the dynamics of children’s digital games interactions, which take place in their home surroundings, based on empirical case study. Since digital games have become one of the main building blocks in children’s world, there is a need to examine the impact of the widespread use of digital games in children’s everyday life. The study’s framework served as a window for close observation of the ways young children spontaneously play digital games and interact with each other. Theoretical implications for digital games research and the pedagogical implications regarding the design and implementation of interactive learning environments are discussed. In addition, there are methodological challenges of finding new pathways for studying the complex relationships between digital games and real-world learning interactions. The study’s findings and their implications could serve as a small step in perusing these challenges.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Like other popular media, digital games have become the building blocks of our children’s world. Ellis (1983) argues that children usually play in groups, and when they do not, they share their experiences socially. Hence, playing digital games cannot be properly understood as simply a human-machine interaction, but it should be examined in social and cultural spheres that are

perhaps more important than the game itself. Gee (2003) argues that through informal game playing, children learn how to participate in what he calls “meaningful spaces,” which are shaped by children’s interaction with virtual agents and with each other. Nijholt (2001) also claims that since learners have become more accustomed to interacting with virtual agents during their digital games experiences, learning environments should include smart artificial intelligent agents

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

for scaffolding the learning process. Moreover, there are many indications that digital learning environments such as digital games and virtual reality environments may provide the cognitive bridge between concrete experiences and scientific concepts (Dede, Clarke, Ketelhut, Nelson, & Bowman, 2003). A bridge of this sort is crucial in enabling students to cope with complex problem solving and other high-level thinking skills that are at the core of scientific and technological issues. Dede et al. (2005) designed a multi-user virtual environment (MUVE) called River City, in which the learner plays a researcher in a 19th century city. In order to cure the epidemic that already spread in the city and to solve any other ecological problems, the learner is forced to collaborate with his peers. The learner uses his avatar to search for clues and interact with smart avatars while performing scientific inquiry tasks. Dede et al. (2005) found that incorporating game-based scenarios increased the high school students’ motivation and engagement in learning activities, improved students’ attendance, and decreased students’ disruptive behavior. Furthermore, both minorities and women performed successfully in River City. Despite the positive outcomes of the River City project, only a few studies systematically examined learning in virtual environments (VEs), which incorporate games mechanisms (Barab, Thomas, Dodge, Carteaux, & Tuzun, 2002; Keating et al., 2002), and fewer studies have described the learning by digital games which takes place in informal home surroundings (Mitchell, 1985). Over the past five years since the creation of the MUVE River City, innovations in 3D game engines, artificial intelligence technology, and high-band communications have paved the way to the widespread distribution of massive multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs), such as World of World Craft, RuneScape, and Maple Story, to name a few. Thomas and Brown (2007) argue that the ability to play one’s imagination and to see and experience from many different



vantage points in MMORPGs provides a new set of tools for imaginative and innovative thinking. For that reason, studying MMORPGs empirically would enhance our understanding regarding their educational potential to become: …spaces where work and play, convergence and divergence, and reality and imagination intertwine in a dance where students grow to understand the importance of communities of practice and learn how to be the things they imagine. (p. 169) The need for conducting empirical studies is also one of the main conclusions stated in de Freitas’ report (2007) on game-based learning and their potential use in education: More research needed to provide empirical evidence for how game-based learning can be used most effectively. Need for more rigorous baseline studies that can quantify how much and in which ways games and simulations are currently being used most effectively to support learning. (p. 60) Additionally, de Frietas (2007) emphasized the need for embedded games into practice to ensure effective learning, and that the use of both commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) games and proprietary games should be embedded for effective practice based on sound pedagogic principles and design. Hence, it would be interesting to examine what children do while playing digital games and what kind of effective teaching and cheating pedagogies they perform, while playing with their friends. De Freitas (2007) concluded that gamebased learning may provide new opportunities for reconsideration of how people learn and for supporting the development of new immersive spaces where learners may produce their own materials, share learning experiences, and practice skills of the ‘real world’. This may have enormous implications in coming years, as:

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

…the ‘digital natives’who may be more interested in active ‘street gaming’ than watching television become the teachers, managers and policy makers of 2020. (de Frietas, 2007, p. 59) According to a latest analyst report by the IDC, a leading global market intelligence firm, many digital games playing takes place in informal and home settings (Pidgeon, 2006). Yet, only a few studies have examined the interactions and learning that take place in these settings (Barab et al., 2005; Squire, 2005). Although notable contributions were made by both Consalvo and Dutton (2006) and Manninen (2003) in building a framework for game interactions analysis, there is no one coherent theoretical model that describes the interactions and learning that take place in digital games. Digital game-play occurs in different space and time scales, therefore systematic and long-term observations are needed. There is also a need to develop innovative methodologies for studying the characteristics of children’s real-time interactions while they play different digital games at their homes. In other words, there is a theoretical and a methodological challenge of highlighting the complexity of children’s learning interactions while they play, and their conceptual understanding development regarding the complex spaces represented in digital games.

THE MAIN GOAL AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS The main goal of this study is to describe and analyze the digital games interactions and learning dynamics of five children (ages 9-10) while they play digital games at their home, their everyday natural surroundings. The main research questions are: 1.

What are the characteristics of children’s real-time interactions while they play dif-

2.

ferent digital games at their home surroundings? What are the characteristics of children’s learning interactions while they play digital games in their home environment, and how does their conceptual understanding develop over time regarding the complex environments represented in digital games?

METHODOLOGY The case study presented in this chapter is based on two theoretical pillars: skill theory and active theory. Both afford a systematic examination of the qualitative and quantitative changes of the interaction goals and choices made by the children in real time. Skill theory focuses on the ways people develop their skills and the ways they learn in various domains (Fischer, 1980). The approach for studying learning is called “microdevelopment,” which is defined as “a process of change in abilities, knowledge, and understanding occurring in short time spans” (Granott & Parziale, 2002, p. 1). Analysis of microdevelopment is instrumental for illuminating processes of change in development and can illuminate the process of learning. By making continuous or nearly continuous observations, researchers obtain data that can capture developmental transitions and give direct access to the actual process of change and highlight its key attributes. Active theory offers a framework for describing and examining the relations of the participants and objects as mediated by the primary components (tools, community, rules, and division of labor) that constitute an activity system (Engeström, 1999). The study’s methodology framework was used to examine the phenomena from three different and complementary perspectives: a. b.

Children’s individual real-time playing interactions Small-group real-time playing dynamics



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

c.

Micro-culture (norms and informal/formal roles) of the children’s homes. This multidimensional conceptual framework for analyzing digital games interactions is currently under development.

Data Collection Five children (four boys, one girl, ages 9-11) participated in the study. They were selected based on their good verbal communication skills, high self-expression skills, and the fact that they all play digital games on a regular basis. They were classmates that usually meet after school on a regular basis. Table 1 summarizes some of their characteristics. Table 1 shows that three children had their computers in their rooms, while the other two had their computers in the living room, due to their parents’ wishes to have some kind of control. Gil’s father (age 36) said: “If you don’t care about him doing his homework, or him meeting with friends in the real world and not just in front of the screen, let him play computer games, in his room, behind close doors.” Other parents did not bother about the computer’s location in the house, but had some unwritten

rules regarding the amount of time their children should play digital games. For example, Shey’s mother (age 37) stated that she allowed him to play “every day, after he comes from school till four o’clock. After that, it’s homework time and other quality time activities without the computer.” In reality, this rule was found to be more flexible than stated, due to the fact that Shey’s mother was working late most of the week, without having real supervision. Three children had their parents’ encouragement and support to play MMORPGs. They paid a small monthly fee, which afforded their children a “membership” status in RuneScape and in Maple Story. Or’s father (age 35) elaborated on the agreement he made with his son: I agree to pay the RuneScape membership fee, because I think it could improve Or’s English skills. I told Or that he doesn’t have to pay it from his weekly pocket money, but if he wants me to pay every month he has to read a book. How it works?…well, for every three hours of playing RuneScape, he has to read a book of his choice for an hour. I think this is a good deal [smiles].

Table 1. Participants’ characteristics and favorite games and hobbies Name

Play Digital Games

Favorite Games

(weekly hours) Gil

19

PC Location and Other

26

Hobbies

Second born,

Sports, bicycle

Consoles Need for speed

Living room

NAB2001 Shey

Family Status

RuneScape

two sisters Child’s room, PS

First born, one

Scouts

sister Or

16

Penguin Club

Ron

19

Need for Speed

Child’s room,

First born, one

Reading,

PS in another room

sister

comics

Living room

First born, one

Soccer

FIFA2006 Tami

18

RuneScape The Waitress

0

sister Child’s room

Second born, twin sister

Scouts

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

This agreement is a good example of a “give and take resolution” between the child and his parents, decreasing possible tension about the proper ratio of time spent on reading and playing digital games. All the children were allowed to play no longer than two hours a day, but it was found that two children (Shey and Ron) played more than three hours a day. During weekends, two children played three to four hours a day. All the parents reported having disputes with their children over the amount of time “spent” playing digital games. An ethnographical approach was taken to record the children’s parents’ informal dispositions towards computers in general, the physical positioning of the computer in the house, and the explicit and implicit rules they made regarding the use of computers by their children as reported above (Pink, 2001). Conducting a case study in the children’s home surroundings has many restrictions, since informal learning by definition is an unofficial and unscheduled activity (Cross, 2006). One of the main differences between well-planned lab studies and this current study is that the choice of which digital game to play, how long to play it, and whom to play it with was the children’s decision. The games vary from free casual Internet games to commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) computer games, such as EA Sports games (FIFA and NBA), Zoo Tycoon , Sims2, TrackMania, and RuneScape, which is an multiplayer online role-player game. The outcome of this methodological choice was a collection of game-play sessions that vary from several perspectives: 1. 2.

3.

The session duration: From a 10-minute session up to a three-hour session. The number of games played during one session: From one to four different games. The ad-hoc social gathering: An individual game-play, pair game-play resulting from

4.

5.

6.

7.

an invitation made at school or by phone, or a small-group game-play of three to four children from an invitation made my one child to other children. The use of different communication tools: ○ Face-to-face interactions, in which two or three children sit in front of the computer’s screen, and each of them uses a different kind of interface, such as a Joystick, a computer mouse, or a keyboard. ○ Online, small-group, real-time communication, in which one child plays at his house and contacts by phone, Microsoft’s Messenger ICQ, or Skype to communicate with another child who simultaneously plays the same game while being in a different physical location. The child’s family status: Being a first born or second born, a single child or having additional brothers and sisters (see Table 1 above). The child’s social position in the real world: From well accepted to less socially accepted. How many close friends the child has. Level of English: English is a second language for all five children. The level of parental support and mentoring with respect to English literacy skills for playing the games varied from a “manage your own English comprehensions difficulties” to a “guide on the side” attitudes.

Due to the children’s complex diversity describe above, gaining an understanding of the data collected and finding repeated patterns and new pathways comprise a considerable methodological challenge, as well as studying the complex relationships between digital games and real-world learning interactions.



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Despite the restrictions described above, more than 30 hours of digital game-play were collected so far, by direct observation, video recording, note taking, followed by sporadic semi-structured interviews. In one of the children’s living rooms, a low-cost capturing device (Averkey300 TM PC-to-TV convector) was installed and used to capture the real-time digital game-play as seen on the screen. The game-play was captured and recorded, together with what the children have said. The video records were used for instant recall technique as well. Another video camera was placed behind the players to capture their body language and hand gestures.

Data Analysis Computerized tools and cutting-edge methodological tools, such as sequential analysis and social networks (SNW) analysis, are being used to examine how children interact while playing digital games. The coding scheme, currently under development, is used to examine children’s individual knowledge construction and for mapping and describing the individual-group interactions, the cognitive-affective dynamics, and the children’s role-taking dynamics, as well as the development of their problem-solving skills.

MAIN FINDINGS The main findings presented in this chapter are based on two complementary perspectives: individual game-play interactions and small-group game-play interactions. Individual game-play involved observing the single-player actions and figuring out his or her individual progress patterns in a given game. Small-group game-play interactions involved observing the dynamics of peers playing games in the virtual space of the game, while they share the same physical location (child’s room, living room), or while they are in



different physical locations (each child located in his or her house).

Individual Digital Game Skills Acquisition This section presents individual game skills acquisition in racing games and EA Sports games. Need for Speed, TrackMania, NBA, and FIFA were the most frequent games played by four children in this specific case study, except for Shey, whose favorite game was RuneScape, a MMORPG. A close observation of the children playing these games revealed that skill acquisition patterns are composed of repeated transitions between difficulty levels. Figure 1 shows Or (a boy, age 9) playing FIFA Would Cup Germany 2006 in practice mode. Playing in low-difficulty levels for a relatively long time served as a “safe experiment space” for gaining control while experiencing few frustration events. The FIFA game skill acquisition pattern was found to be a mix of active interactions and passive observations. The passive observations duration was 23% of the total game-play sessions time, with players using the embedded replay feature in the FIFA game. This preliminary finding gives a rise to the following question: What are the dynamics of the active and passive game-play, and how might this interplay contribute to game skills acquisition? From both theoretical and pedagogical perspectives, one of the trends worth following is: What are the optimal ways of embedding replay features within dynamic learning environments? Analyzing the actions that the children make and what they actually learn from using the replay mode feature in different games is currently being done by using computerized tools embedded within the INTERACTTM software, which contains time stamping. These systematic observations might result in new insights regarding this question.

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Figure 1. A nine-year-old child building his skills in FIFA by using the practice mode

Three children developed an interdisciplinary conceptual understanding. For example, while playing EA’s FIFA Would Cup Germany 2006, Or performed a geographical inquiry by using the embedded globe dynamic map to identify the different national teams’ geographical locations. He used an Atlas to compare the different nations’ population and size. In addition, three children stated that their quick gaming skills progress was due to interactions with their peers. For example, Or explained his fast progress to the professional level in FIFA: I watched my friend play on this level, so now it’s easy. In another episode, Gil (a boy, age 9½) played Tony Hawk Pro Skater2. He turned to Ron, who was sitting next to him, and said: You need to know where the secret playgrounds are hidden to get more points. My big brother showed me. These examples show that digital game-play in informal settings is much more than just individual play, and that there is a need to gain better understanding of the individual–small-group

game-play dynamics, as well as the interactions and the real-time learning processes.

Small-Group Interactions in Digital Games This section presents preliminary results in regard to small-group digital game interactions. The findings suggest the following. 1. Small-group game-play interactions are a dynamic blend of different stages, ranging from teaching (in which the children’s main aim is to collaborative in order to minimize the knowledge gap between them) to cheating (in which the children’s main aim is to win by maximizing the knowledge gap between them). For example, in an episode, two children, Gil (boy, age 9½) and Ron (a boy, age 10) played a PC racing race game called “Town Madness” for 50 minutes. During the episode, the two children took turns, each playing as the “driver” and as a passive “observer.” Gil used the keyboard while Ron played using his PC joystick controls. We join them after 15 minutes of play, while Gil is the driver and Ron observing this play: [Abbreviation: Gil-G, Ron-R] G: Now I’ve stacked them [the chasing police cars]. I’m good at stoking them.



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

R: But now you’re busted. G: OK. I do not want this mode, I want free drive mode. [Gill changes the play mode.] You know I can drive on two wheels? It’s so cool I have to show you how! I need to find a good place…here’s something I like, the fast freeway, see? [Gil makes a two-wheel car drive by, jumping it on the road lanes barrier.] R: You know, there is a code that changes all cars to airplanes. G: There’s another code which afford to jump the car above a lorry. R: Which one? G: I can’t tell you, it took me a lot to get it. R: Let me play, just for a second. G: This is great! I love doing this [drives the car on its two wheels]. There’s another cool code, which turns the car into a blue van! R: What are you doing? G: See that traffic jam?! I like to make them. This is something you don’t know how to do! Let’s return to the highway…See? Now I’m driving on the opposite direction of traffic…. R: Watch out for the police cars! G: I’ve ignored many driving rules…but how do they [the police cars] know that? I like to hide here. [He backs up an alley and waits for the police cars to pass him by.] R: This is Chicago, there are a million alleys here. Do you know there is a basketball court some were near here? G: Let’s go there. R: You know, once the police car exploded. Let’s shift, it’s my turn now. [The children shift positions, Ron takes the driver role, Gill become the observer on the side.] G: OK, hey, watch out from the police cars! Ron: Now I’ll drive to the baseball field. Gil: OK, great, you’ve jammed the two police cars into the bus, cool! Okay, try to drive the car on two wheels. R: I don’t want to. G: You don’t know how to, right? R: Leave me. Forget it.



G: Drive against the traffic, to go on top of the barrier. Drive fast and then go on top. R: Stop telling me.…[after four minutes]. G: Ok, let’s do something else. R: Do you want something to eat? G: Yep, do you have something? R: OK…let’s go to the kitchen. —End of Episode— In addition to the dynamic blend of a different stage of mentoring and cheating, this episode demonstrates that game spaces contain additional unwritten rules such as: “Cheating by using codes and breaking the game rules is cool,” “Everything can be done within the game,” and “ Trial-and-error is almost always the best plan.” These underlying rules are part of what can be broadly defined as the “Gaming culture”the culture that all gamers accept and enjoy. This “gaming culture” is in contrast to the culture and the governing rules of the formal educational system. 2. Dynamic states of collaboration, com-

petition, negotiation, and mentoring were detected during game-play of peers. Several game-plays were accompanied by ad-hoc conflicts. This dynamic state is evident in the following example, in which two children, Gil (a boy, aged 9½) and Ron (a boy, age 10) played together a two-dimensional PC game called Jumper, which is game-play similar to the Nintendo’s famous Mario game, in which each player controls his own small avatar: [Abbreviation: Gil-G, Ron-R] G: Well, when it’s my turn? You’re playing too long! Well? R: I told you, let’s play together, let’s go! R: OK. Let’s play. R: I’m the green one (avatar) you are the blue one. G: Huff, I fell to the water, it is not convenient to play on the left keyboard. R: OK you can play on the right side, let’s switch.

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

G: OK…wait a second. R: It takes you ages! G: Do you know why I want you to wait for me? It was not convenient to me to play on the left side. Now it’s OK. I want us to be together. R: It is such an enjoinment…Great! I’ve got another life! [Two children’s avatars move on the same frame, Ron’s avatar moves faster, since Ron is more skilled than Gil.] G: Huff, you took the heart, it’s so annoying! R: What do you want? It’s fast…I forgot we’re going together. G: This is not fair, you’re snitching my stuff…let’s make us move tighter. R: I’m waiting you to catch up with me…Take this, and this. [Ron skips the heart and diamonds which appear on the game map, leaving it for Gil’s avatar.] G: WOW, I’m saved. [Laugh out load. The two children laugh tougher.] R: Great! G: Huff, I’m stuck here. No! No! See I can’t move! R: I’m coming to help you, wait…I’m pulling you. G: How many lives do we have? R: If I see a heart, I take it…. G: Wait for me. [The two children move to the next level.] G: Great! We passed to level 4. R: Here is the heart, take it. —End of Episode— Another episode demonstrated the dynamics of mentoring a new player by using instant feedbacks and constant encouragements. Or was invited by Ron to play at his house. On this episode, Ron played NBA 2001 game and invited Or to join him. This episode lasted 15 minutes. Ron played at the professional level and is considered to be an expert at this game, with over 120 hours of play time. Or did not own the PC game, and this was his third time playing the game. Ron suggested playing the team vs. team game mode. They start

playing and Ron made three baskets in a row. The frustration on Or’s face was evident as he nodded his head from side to side. We join the episode when Ron made a surprising move. Instead of shooting the ball with his avatar, he left the ball on the floor, and turned to Or. [Abbreviation: Or-O, Ron-R] R: Now I’ve passed my turn to shoot from here… come on, come on, and take the ball. [Or moves his player avatar and takes the ball. He tries to make a jump shoot but it’s too short.] R: You need to press [the shift bottom] longer to make the shot. [Or follows Ron’s mentoring and makes the shoot.] R: Very nice! How did you make it? [in astonishment]. [After five minutes they moved to player vs. player in team mode, while Ron keeps on mentoring Or.] R: Enough with these turn-outs, move forward…Now, you need to know that you have to leave this zone within 3 seconds otherwise it’s a turn over. [Or tries to shoot and misses. He moves back with his avatar to the defense zone and regains control of the ball.] R: Cool! You control the ball well! [Or moves to offense and crosses the half-court line with his avatar.] R: You have to shoot within 20 sec, do you see the clock? O: Here’s my shoot! R: Wow, I can’t stop you!…Look how you can throw the ball from here and shoot into the basket. O: I hate when I’m miss the basket. R: Me too, look I’m not scoring too…It happened because you kept pushing the Enter key to much. O: I keep missing the shoot. R: Yes, I almost made it; made the shot…Try to shoot from here, it is easier. O: I’ve almost… R: Let’s try once more.



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

O: I did it! Yes! I can’t believe I did it. R: Great. Let’s try from here. —End of Episode— 3. Players spontaneously take different roles as leaders, managers, bankers, engineers, observers, and reporters, to name a few. For example, while playing TrackMania, an online extreme racing game, two children, Or and Ron, switched between themselves the roles of planners, builders, and racing drivers. They took turns in the roles of active players and consultants. Both of them liked to use the “construct your extreme track,” a built-in game feature, over 40% of the session, which lasted more than one hour. They jointly built a racing track that was named after testing “the most boring track in the world.” The two children explained: We built this to confuse anyone who would like to race. This racing track goes forever. You can’t finish the race, since you can’t find the finish

line. The track makes you feel like a small ant wandering around. Another small-group collaborative interaction occurred in RuneScape, a MMOG (see Figure 2). While playing, Shey mentored Ron who was setting next to him. Amir (a boy, age 10), one of Shey’s classmates and a member of Shey’s SNW in RuneScape, which was not included in the current study, played online using a “follow me” strategy. Shey and Amir used a regular phone as an additional communication tool. The game evolved during the 50-minute session including exchanging goods, making joint alliances, and performing joint attacks on other online avatars and artificial bots. One of the future research trends worth following would be examine the relations between the children’s online MMOG interactions and the children’s real-world social interaction patterns, and how they evolve over time.

Figure 2. Building leadership and business skills in RuneScape (Copyright 2007 Jagex Ltd. Used with permission)



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

4. “No pain no gain” playing a MMORPG and the importance of a strong social network in the game world as well as in real-life. A follow-up interview about RuneScape with Shey revealed additional information in regard to the “hard work” involved in playing a MMORPG and the importance of having a strong social network within in the game world as well as in real life. Here is a portion of that interview (see Appendix A for the complete interview with Shey): [R-Researcher, S-Shey] R: Hi Shey, what is your level in the game? S: I’m level 84. R: How many friends do you have within the game? S: About…seventy. R: WOW, seventy! That’s a lot! Can you draw a map of your friends? S: I can draw only fifty-two friends which I remember. R: Great. Make a circle for each friend you remember. Do you have classmates you play with in the game? S: Yes, I have. I have additional friends from the school as well. This friend is from another class, this is my friend’s friend. Both of them are good friends of mine. [Shey draws two more circles.]

R: What do you mean a good friend? S: A good friend is someone that I meet in the game to play with and to chat with. R: You can chat with other players as well, right? S: Yes, but with my best friends, I can coordinate in advance to play together. They can call me during the game-play to set a joint meeting and more. R: What do you mean by “more”? S: We arrange to play together at the same places. Sometimes they can ask me to get them stuff. R: What do you mean by “getting them stuff”? S: Stuff, things of the game. Once, Tami [a girl, age 10] asked me to take care of her plants, so I entered and watered her plants to avoid withering. In another instance, Tami requested me to get her an armor and magic potions. [Armor and magic potions are part of game’s resources that the player uses to advance in the game’s levels.] R: So what is the difference between a good friend and other friends? S: With a good friend I’m connected in real life as well. With other friends I can’t meet face to face, because they live in different countries. [Smile.]

Figure 3. A part of Shey’s (a boy, aged 10) drawing of his RuneScape's social network



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Figure 3 represents part of Shey’s RuneScape social network. Each circle represents a member of his net, the number represents the player level within the game. The five dotted-line circles represent his classmates, and the circles marked with a star represent members that shared their login password with Shey. This interview was followed by an interview with Shey’s mother, two days later. Shey’s mother was asked to describe and draw Shey’s real-world social network. Her description and drawing confirmed that Shey’s real-life social network was reflected in his RuneScape social network. The part of the network that consisted of his six classmate friends served to establish and confirm his leadership status within the game. In return, Shey served as an anchor to his friends, assisting and even replacing their presence at several cases, in order to achieve the goal of climbing up the game ladder. Four months later, Shey was asked to draw his RuneScape SNW again (see Figure 4). Figure 4 shows Shey’s drawing of his RuneScape SNW map, representing only seven friends. In a follow-up interview, Shey described his departure from the game in his own words:

It was too demanding and time consuming. I had to resolve many conflicts among my friends time after time. It is just too annoying. It’s not fun anymore, I gave most of my stuff to my friends and I spend little time playing this game now. Capturing and analyzing the long-time changes of the children’s favorite games is another challenge worth perusing, since it has theoretical, pedagogical, and commercial implications. 6. During sports games sessions, certain artificial agents’ behaviors were perceived by the children as artificial stupidity (A.S.). These events made the children laugh, and served for breaking tensions and conflicts between the players. For example, an episode of two children, Or and Ron, playing a PC sport game, FIFA 2006, for 15 minutes will be presented. Both children liked to play PC sports games very much. They met on a regular basis twice a week. In the episode, they played the game by using a single keyboard. Ron used the left keyboardthe “W” “A” “D” “S” keyswhile Or used the default keyboard keys. Ron was playing the game for seven weeks and mastered the game at a professional level, while Or started to play the game at the amateur level.

Figure 4. Shey’s (a boy, aged 10) drawing of his RuneSape’s social network after four months



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

During the episode, the two children played against each other at an amateur level. [Abbreviation: Or-O, Ron-R] Or: Now I’ve got the ball…ask for a time-out. These teams are very strong. It’s hard to play against them. R: Hey, there isn’t one. This is soccer, not basketball…GOAL! O: Hey, this is not fair. What are you doing?! [Ron uses the replay mode to watch the goal he has just scored. While watching the sequence of events, he changes the camera’s vantage point and zooms in on the goal keeper.] R: There are many tricks I can do with this camera, see? See how he moved? O: What? [Ron zooms out and zooms in again using the replay control; he notices something unusual.] O: Yeep, this is very funny! [Both of the children laugh out loud, as the goal keeper almost bumped into one of his defense players and misses the ball in a clumsy manner.] R: Let’s see it again [laugh out loud]. I have to see it! It is so funny! [Ron is actively using the replay mode controls to observe the sequence of his game moves, which ended with the goal, several times more, focusing his point of view on the goalie every time. Both children laugh out loud.] O: Let’s play together against the computer. R: Okay. O: Let’s play as the strongest team against the weakest team. I’ll be the TV broadcaster. [Ron selects the teams. The two children start playing. Ron is the player and Or takes a new role as a TV broadcaster, describing the game events that occur in real time in a funny accent. After 10 seconds of play, Ron’s player tackles a PC avatar.] O: This is so funny to see him fall. R: We received yellow card, but its fun. O: Tackle the redhead! It’s such a fun to tackle them! It’s great! we have replay to watch

again…Why don’t you tackle him? I want to see the replay. R: Yes, it’s a lot of fun. [After 30 seconds of gameplay, Ron scores a goal.] O: Goal! Great…hey, SpongeBob has started, let’s watch TV. R: OK, let’s go. —End of Episode— This short episode demonstrates how the two children bridged effectively over Or’s defeat and feelings of frustration, due to his lower level of game skill abilities. Both children find the “artificial stupidity” of the goal keeper very funny. The tension between them at the beginning of the episode was replaced by pure joy and laughter. Moreover, in the process Ron gave Or a semistructured tutorial of how to use the replay mode control buttons, and what additional information regarding the players’ moves one could get from changing the vantage points and the frame of reference of the replay mode. Or’s suggestion to play against the computer’s weakest team demonstrates the use of the flexible built-in affordances in digital games. This flexibility of changing the difficulty level of the artificial agents cannot happen in the real world, when playing against real players. The end of this short episode demonstrates a glimpse of the “battle on children’s’ attention and time” which exists in home settings. Children can switch from active game players to passive TV observers whenever they like. In addition, frequent events of breaking the game rules spontaneously to create a new game with a new time-space framework occurred. For example, while playing a racing game called Wacky Races, Or said: “It’s more fun to play bump-up cars in the river, so let’s go! I’ll show you the way.” While the artificial avatars kept racing on their course, the two children left for a joyful new adventure that had no time limit, bumping-up their cars in the “river’s” waters, laughing.



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Another example was the use of the built-in replay and camera motion control as a tool for making what the children called “the funniest NBA clip.” The children “switched” the original competitive goals with a holistic goal by making a creative and cool clip.

CONCLUSION, FUTURE TRENDS, AND IMPLICATIONS This section summarizes and discusses the future trends suggested in the previous sections above, as well as future research opportunities within the domain of studying digital games interactions in informal surroundings from four different perspectives.

The Social Interactions Perspective How do children manage their large MMORPGs’ social networks? How do children build their management and leadership skills in MMORPGs? How do gamer leaders rise and change over time? Another research trend involves studying the complexity of virtual/real-world interactions and mechanisms. For example, it would be interesting to know in what ways these skills serve the children in their real-life social network interactions? Shey’s interview about his SNW in the RuneScape game and the changes that followed four months later illuminated the complexity of the virtual/real-world interactions.

The Instructional Design and the Educational Perspective The digital games space is a special space. If one accepts Mechluan’s (1968) “the medium is the message” paradigm, one has to rethink and adjust the terms “learning” and “teaching” when examining learning and teaching in digital games.

0

How do we evaluate peer learning and mentoring? What can instructional technology experts and teachers learn from observing children mentoring their peers during digital game-play? The high level of mentoring and constant feedback found in this study support the theoretical assumptions that teaching is a natural cognitive disposition that involves intent, and understanding and learning the other player’s mind. In that sense, mentoring is a special case of teaching which was frequently found in games interactions. Digital games are spaces of experiences (Salin & Zimmerman, 2003). The gamer directly experiences difficulties and joy. This might be one of the reasons why one can mentor and help other fellow gamers. Teachers who do not experience the medium on their own would not fully understand its message, its special affordances, like children who play these games do. One of the challenges worth perusing is to find the right bridges between formal teaching and informal mentoring. Moreover, the study’s findings highlighted the “gaming culture” and some of its underlying rules, which are part of many children’s lives these days. This “gaming culture” has been ignored by the formal curriculum designers, education administrators, and policymakers. The author of this chapter argues that learning with games is a basic human disposition enhanced by current gaming technologies. Digital games are powerful learning environments since they afford individual freedom and peers collaboration within very strict roles. From a global perspective, education administrators and policymakers are advised to take into consideration the digital games medium when designing new learning and instructional programs. In addition, given the dynamic nature of the learning and peer mentoring in digital games, applying alternative assessment tools and methodologies for assessing the educational process and outcomes should be implemented on top of standard tools (Birenbaum, 2003). Another research trend worth following is mapping all the game events that make the

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

children laugh, and seeing how these events are connected to other children, such as learning the game rules, building a conceptual understanding of the system, and developing professional game-play skills.

The Game Design Perspective for People with Special Needs How do children manage and resolve digital game conflicts with their peers? What kind of mechanisms do they use while managing their emotions? These possible research trends might have meaningful implications for the design of effective digital games for children and adults with special needs. A good example is the Story-MultiTouch Table Game’s design, with its embedded interactions design, which enforced communication and collaboration among children with Asperger’s (Gal et al., 2005).

The Methodological Perspective The obstacles and limitations of conducting a study with formal settings described above emphasize the need to develop new methods and coherent tools for evaluating the informal learning, which takes place during digital games play. Thus, it is very important to design the appropriate timeframes and the appropriate unit of analysis, congruent to the study’s main goals. The regular time scale used in laboratory studies might not be sufficient if one wishes to study long-term changes. In conclusion, this chapter provides empirical evidence about digital games that are played by children. Analyzing digital games interactions affords a fascinating way of examining the complexity that our young generation experiences on screen and off screen on a daily basis. Selecting an approach for a case study has its well-known limitations, but highlighting the children’s’ authentic voices during digital gameplay outnumbers the limitations. That is one of

the small contributions this chapter brings to the field of game-based learning. New insights were gained from observing how children play digital games and interact with their peers in their natural home surroundings. These insights have theoretical, pedagogical, and design implications with respect to game-based learning. Moreover, today we face a major methodological challenge of finding new pathways for studying the complex relationships between digital games interactions in the virtual worlds, and the interactions and learning in real-world situations. The future trends suggested above can serve as small steps in pursuing these worthy challenges.

REFERENCES Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by Doing: A Comprehensive Guide to Simulations, Computer Games, and Pedagogy in e-Learning and Other Educational Experiences. Pfeiffer Publication. USA. 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. Birenbaum, M. (2003). New insights into learning and teaching and their implications for Assessment. In: M. Segers, F. Dochy, & E. Cascallar, (Eds.), Optimising New Modes of Assessment: In Search of Qualities and Standards, Vol 1, (pp.13-36). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Consalvo, M., & Dutton, N. (2006). Game analysis: Developing a methodological toolkit for the qualitative study of games, Game Studies, 6 (1). Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://gamestudies. org/0601/articles/consalvo_dutton



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Cross, J. (2006). Informal Learning: Rediscovering the Natural Pathways That Inspire Innovation and Performance. Wiley, John & Sons Publishers. de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in Immersive Worlds: a review of game based Learning. JISC Review report. Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/eli_outcomes.html Dede, C., Clarke, J., Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B., & Bowman, C. (2005). Students’ motivation and learning of Science in a Multi-User Virtual Environment. Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting (AERA), (April 2005), (pp.11-15), Montreal, Canada. Ellis, G. J. (1983). Youth in the electronic environment: An introduction. Youth and report for the NSF of workshops. The impact of three dimensional immersive VE on modern pedagogy. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki, (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory, (pp.19–38).Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Fischer, K. W. (1980). A Theory of Cognitive development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Gal, E., Goren-Bar, D., Gazit, E., Bauminger, N. Cappelletti, A., Pianesi, F.,Stock, O., Zancanaro, M. & Weiss, P.L. Enhancing social communication through story-telling among high-functioning children with autism. Intelligent Technologies for interactive entertainment (Intetain 2005), Madonna diCampiglio, Italy, November, 2005, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Volume 3814 (pp. 320-323), SpringerVerlag. Retrived July 2, 2007 from http://cat.inist. fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=17413691 Gee, J. P. (2003). What Video Games Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.



Granott, N., & Parziale, J. (2002). Microdevelopment approach. The MIT Press, Cambridge. Habgood, J., & Overmars, M. (2006). The Game Maker’s Apprentice: Game Development for Beginners. APRESS Publisher. Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2006). Pedagogical agents as learning companions: The role of agent competency and type of interaction, Educational Technology Research & Development, 54 (3), 223-243. Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Literature Review in Games and Learning. Bristol: Futurelab. Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://www.futurelab. org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Games_ Review.pdf Manninen, T. (2003). Interaction Forms and Communicative Actions in Multiplayer Games, Game studies, 3 (1). Retrieved July 5, 2007, from http://www.gamestudies.org/0301/manninen/ McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Mitchell, E. (1985). The dynamics of family interaction around home video games. Special Issue: Personal computers and the family. Marriage and Family Review, 8, 121-135. Nijholt, A. (2001). Agents, Believability and Embodiment in Advanced Learning Environments. In: T. Okamto, R. Hartley, Kinshuk & J.P. Klus (Eds.), Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies: Issues, Achievements, and Challenges (ICALT 2001), (pp. 457-459). Madison, Wisconsin, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA. Pidgeon, B. (2006). The IDC 2006 Videogamer Survey: Can Old Gamers Learn New Tricks?, IDC Survey Report Doc #204872. Retrieved Jun 30, 2007, from http://www.idc.com/getdoc. jsp?containerId=204872

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

Pink, S. (2001). Doing visual ethnography. London: SAGE. Prensky, M. (2000). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Resnick, M. (2002). Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age. In: G. Kirkman& D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed.), (pp.571-581). New York, Simon and Schuster Macmillan. Salin, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Squire, K. (2003). Gameplay in Context: Learning Through Participation in Communities of Civilization III Players. Unpublished PhD thesis. Instructional Systems Technology Department, Indiana University. Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2007). The Play of Imagination: Extending the Literary Mind. Games and Culture, 2(2), 149-172.

KEY TERMS Artificial Stupidity: Specific smart agents’ behavior with objects or other smart agents within the game which are perceived by the gamer as stupid compared to “human behavior standards.” These events are usually accompanied by the player’s joyful expressions. Digital Game: A computer game is a software program in which one or more players make decisions by controlling game objects and resources, in the pursuit of its goal (Overmars, 2004).

are related to the game world. Gaming Culture: A blend of actions, attitudes, and implicit rules that all gamers accept and enjoy. The “gaming culture” is not congruent to the culture and the rules that govern the formal educational system. Informal Learning: The unofficial, unscheduled, impromptu way that most of the people who learn to do their jobs go through (Cross, 2006). Massive Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game (MMORPG): A special kind of online game that millions of different players who assume digital personalities, known as avatars, can play simultaneously. Each MMORPG has its own different rules and goals, affording different kinds of interactions in which the players carry out complex and collaborative missions. In order to succeed in the game, one needs to form relationships, join guilds, and have in-game corporations with fellow players. Microdevelopment: A process of change in abilities, knowledge, and understanding that occur in short time spans. Multi-User Virtual Environment (MUVE): Designed for the learning complex phenomena and can incorporate game-based learning scenarios. Player’s Social Network: A social network is a network of friends that a player builds within the game space and in the real world, usually in MMORPGs. Smart Agents: Computer-generated avatars that make high-level, independent, intelligent decisions, based on interactions with other objects and avatars in the virtual world.

Digital Game Interactions: All types of communications between the players of the game and range of actions–feedback loop preformed by player-player, player-objects, player-smart agent within the game world and in the real world which



A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

APPENDIX A: AN INTERVIEW WITH SHEY ABOUT PLAYING RUNESCAPE The interview with Shey (a boy, age 10) took place after observing him playing the game. Shey’s computer’s position is in his room. In addition he has a PlayStation 2, two joysticks, and a TV set. [R-Researcher, S-Shey] R: Hi Shey, what is your level in the game? S: I’m level 84. R: How many friends do you have within the game? S: About…seventy. R: WOW, seventy! That’s a lot! Can you draw a map of your friends? S: I can draw only fifty-two friends which I remember. R: Great. Make a circle for each friend you remember. Do you have classmates you play with in the game? S: Yes, I have. I have additional friends from the school as well. This friend is from another class, this is my friend’s friend. Both of them are good friends of mine. [Shey draws two more circles.] R: What do you mean a good friend? S: A good friend is someone that I meet in the game to play with and to chat with. R: You can chat with other players as well, right? S: Yes, but with my best friends, I can coordinate in advance to play together. They can call me during the game-play to set a joint meeting and more. R: What do you mean by “more”? S: We arrange to play together at the same places. Sometimes they can ask me to get them stuff. R: What do you mean by “getting them stuff”? S: Stuff, things of the game. Once, Tami [a girl, age 10] asked me to take care of her plants, so I entered and watered her plants to avoid withering. In another instance, Tami requested me to get her an armor and magic potions. [Armor and magic potions are part of a game’s resources, which the player uses to advance in the game’s levels.] R: So what is the difference between a good friend and other friends? S: With a good friend I’m connected in real life as well. With other friends I can’t meet face to face, because they live in different countries. [Smile.] R: OK, add small circles which represent your best friends, and add strong lines to your circle and between them, if you know for sure that they are connected in the game as well. S: My best friends are these four classmates. I have an additional…three, four friends in real life that played the game, but quit playing after three weeks or so. R: Ok. Add their circle as well…what are the numbers you’re writing next to each circle? S: That’s their level in the game. [Each number represents the player’s level in the game. A high number represents a player with overall good game skills.] R: Do you know their level?! WOW, how do you remember all of them? S: I don’t remember all of them. [Smiles.] R: Usually, your good friends have the same level as you? Or close to your level? S: They don’t have to. I have a good friend from abroad, which I don’t know in real life. R: You can make an English letter on his circle and on the ones from abroad. How did the two become friends? continued on following page 

A Window on Digital Games Interactions in Home Settings

APPENDIX A. CONTINUED S: We met by pure chance and we started to fight against each other. Since, we are strong we didn’t succeed to kill each other [by decreasing the points and number of lives]. R: So how did you become friends? S: After we didn’t succeed to kill each other, I notified him that I’m willing to stop fighting and he accepted. We went on together to kill others. R: How many friends from other countries you have? S: mm…about fifteen, but I don’t remember the level of each and every one of them. It’s a little difficult to chat with them. Here it is 1:00 p.m., when I start playing after coming back from school every day, but abroad it is the middle of the night. At about 5:00 p.m. local time, I can play with them. R: So, the difference between a good friend and a regular friend is? S: With a close and best friend you plan in advance to play the game, and I know their passwords as well. [A password is needed for entering and playing the game.] R: WOW, how can it be? Do you know their passwords? [Knowing the player’s password allows changing the player’s avatar, and even trading and exchanging their personal-virtual in game resources.] S: Yes, I play as them and get them stuff. That’s the way I’m helping them. R: How many passwords do you know? S: About five. R: Please mark on the map little stars on the friends you know their password. So what do you actually do? S: I get in [the game] and help. I can get them stuff but not sell their stuff, unless they allow me to. R: Do they know your password as well? S: NO, I don’t share it with anyone. Once I’ve discovered that my avatar was stolen. [Stealing your avatar means that all the resources attached to the avatar were taken, and the game account and password were changed, much like an identity-stealing crime in real life.] R: How many hours do you play the game per day? S: Two to three hours per day. During the weekends it can be more, something like four to five hours. R: Do you own a house in the game? S: Yes, but I can’t get inside right now. R: Why? S: I sold it for 2,000 shekels. [Shey used the term “shekel,” which is the Israeli currency’s real-life term.] R: Why? S: You can enter your house, only if you have the book. R: So why did you sell it? S: I bought it for 1,000 shekels and I sold it for 20,00. I did it because I wanted to get a special gown that gives you special powers, and I’m still saving money in order to get it. R: How do you save money? S: I’m collecting stuff, killing creatures like these rats, see? And also by cutting stones, making swords, and selling them. I’m selling them to other children or to the bank. Most of my trades and exchanges are made there in the bank. R: Thank you for your participation and for sharing with us your experience.





Chapter IX

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments James Oliverio Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA Dennis Beck Digital Worlds Institute, University of Florida, USA

AbstrAct We introduce the term ‘mixed social environments’ as a strategic learning construct to augment student interaction when utilizing virtual world environments such as Second Life in the classroom. While an increasing number of institutions are investigating the use of virtual world environments for enhanced learning, at present there are at least three major areas that are underdeveloped: interdisciplinary research, documentation of best practices, and exploration of the use of mixed social environments. In the spring of 2007, a new interdisciplinary research seminar addressing these aspects was offered at a large American university. We present an overview of the resultant learning artifacts, outcomes, and research questions in hopes of helping to inform best practices, expand interdisciplinary research, and assist in the design of future mixed social environments for enhanced learning.

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT For the purposes of this chapter, games and other interactive graphical scenarios that consist of multiple environments (compared with a singlefocus virtual reality simulation such as flight training in a virtual cockpit or emergency room training inside a simulated hospital) are referred to as virtual world environments (VWEs) due to the large “world-like” scale of the virtual reality

they create. Games are broadly defined in the literature and may cover a wide range of educational purposes. User-driven VWEs (pronounced “vyoo-eez”) can often be considered games and have great potential for teaching and learning (Foreman, 2003). As a VWE, Second Life (SL) affords a sense of social interaction, visual indication of level of participation, and 3D models for instruction or simulationall factors that can be utilized for enhanced learning environments.

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

This potential flows across various academic disciplines. In spring 2007, a new course utilizing SL entitled Interdisciplinary Research Seminar was offered as a collaborative effort between a professor of biomedical engineering and a professor of digital media at the University of Florida’s Digital Worlds Institute. This chapter frames a context for the course from the gaming, virtual reality, and simulation literature; provides an overview of the learning artifacts produced and research developed in the course; and suggests potential future directions for researchers and practitioners who are interested in exploring mixed social environments (MSEs) as a means of merging traditional and virtual classroom spaces. We define a MSE (pronounced “mis-ee”) as a physical space wherein multiple scales of screen display and simultaneous points of view of a shared VWE can be seen, heard, experienced, and collaborated upon by persons physically present in the space, in addition to remote participants. Both personal and group displays are integrated into the space in such a way as to allow simultaneous social interaction among those in the physical space of the room and multi-perspective displays of the participants’ virtual interaction in the VWE.

GAMES IN EDUCATION A succession of theorists and philosophers have found ‘games’ and ‘play’ difficult concepts to define (Huizinga, 1980; Salen & Zimmerman, 2004; Wittgenstein, 1972). Equally challenging is the understanding of the processes that assist game-play. Games in general can be defined in surprisingly numerous ways, often changing the way games are used and perceived (Wittgenstein, 1958). Some popular definitions define games as a series of choices or as rule-based play. To refer to different types of games, current terminology utilizes terms such as: computer games, video games, serious games, game-based learning, massively multiplayer online role-play games (MMORPGs), massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs), persistent games, massively multiplayer online first-person shooter (MMOFPS), educational games, game-based learning, instructional games, sim games, gamesims, electronic simulations, virtual reality systems, training simulations, or simulators. Gaming environments now utilize diverse resources, including streaming video and audio, multiple-user interactivity, simulations of real-world circumstances, and immersive non-linear exploratory environments (Aldrich, 2004, 2006).

Table 1. Uses of games for learning (de Freitas, 2006) Selected Uses of Games

References

To motivate and engage learners, e.g., underserved learner groups

Amory et al., 1999; de Freitas et al.,

(e.g., with low literacy/language levels)

2006; Garris et al., 2002; Gee, 2003; Mitchell & Savill-Smith, 2005

For skill or part-task rehearsal and practice, e.g., literacy and

de Freitas et al., 2006; Delanghe, 2001

numeracy skills To provide therapy for pain relief and cognitive difficulties

Pelletier, 2005c

To role-play particular jobs and professions in advance of real-life

Aldrich, 2004, 2006; Maharg, 2006

practice To empower learners as authors and producers of multimedia,

Pelletier, 2005b; Druin, 2002; Dickey,

mixed media, and game-based content

2005



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

Since we are primarily interested in the uses of electronic games in education, we will use a definition that focuses on learning: “applications that can use the characteristics of video and computer games to create engaging and immersive learning experiences for delivering specified learning goals, outcomes and experiences” (de Freitas, 2006, p. 15). These uses tend to cluster around the activities highlighted in Table 1. There are many aspects of gaming that can be educationally sound. Games are supportive and safe, a quality that supports higher-level learning (Diamantes & Williams, 1999). They also include a strong aspect of play, which is important in the development of “flow,” which is “the mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990, p. 21). Promotion of flow and play in childhood is important because their absence can have a negative impact upon social development and socialization (de Freitas et al., 2006). Games also encourage multiple opportunities for practice, which is important because the reinforcement of practiced tasks and activities has been found to accelerate learning (Delanghe, 2001). They can also be highly motivational, which is a key aspect of effective learning (Garris et al., 2002). Multiplayer games enhance computer literacy (Benedict, 1990), visual attention (Bavelier & Green, 1993), and reaction time (Orosy-Fildes & Allan, 1989), and give multiple opportunities for making mistakes, which is an important aspect of learning (Jones, 1997). They also teach players to become problem solvers through role-playing (Gee, 2003; Johnson, 2005). Games based on historical events or stories that explore real-world social issues allow learners to step out of the immediacy of the present and imagine what it might be like to be someone else who may have lived at a different time, place, or under different social or historical circumstances (Francis, 2006).



VIRTUAL WORLD ENVIRONMENTS AND GAME-LIKE CHARACTERISTICS Under the definition and scope defined above, VWEs can often be considered games. Such games are deeply immersive and highly scalable threedimensional systems. In the VWE called Second Life, people enter the virtual world through the use of an avatar, a character that embodies their presence and intent. Many popular VWEs allow for multiple users to be in the same virtual space and interrelate with each other at the same time (New Media Consortium, 2007a). Even in their nascent state, virtual worlds allow for the development of real-life cultures through the use of individuated dialects, political configurations, multifaceted social customs, social networks, social capital, and common history (Steinkuehler, 2004; Jakobsson & Taylor, 2003). VWEs combine social networking, seamless sharing of rich media, and a feeling of presence in a generalized, persistent non-contextual environment that is applicable to almost all disciplines (Castronova, 2001). Virtual worlds also offer an opportunity for people to interact in a way that conveys a sense of presence lacking in other media (Castronova, 2001; New Media Consortium, 2007a). This aspect lends itself to role-playing and situation construction, freeing up learners to assume the responsibilities of a physicist, artist, physician, or architect without the real-world training (or the real-world consequences). The effect is twofold, providing an environment free of the limiting “thought boxes” that often accompany deep single-disciplinary training, while allowing for risk-free experimentation (Delwiche, 2006) and thinking outside the proverbial “box.” This can lead to expanded understanding of cultural and societal experiences, as well as broad experimentation with new forms of human expression and endeavor.

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

VWEs have significant and largely untapped educational potential. Foreman (2003) predicts that shared graphical worlds are “the learning environments of the future” (p. 14). Steinkuehler (2004, 2006) and Gee (2003) argue that the educational promise of VWEs can only be fulfilled through a social constructivist approach to learning. VWEs hold considerable potential for the development of complex social practices such as leadership, collaboration, and relationships. These worlds are complex rational groups distinguished by their social practices (Steinkuehler, 2004). When novices enter a virtual world, they can be progressively initiated into intricate social scaffolding by means of the support of other group members. Virtual worlds are compelling because social relations, collaboration, and information sharing are essential ingredients, and they encourage collaboration both within and beyond game parameters (Delwiche, 2006). According to Yee, Bailenson, Urbanek, Chang, and Merget (2003), more than half of those involved in virtual worlds have gained proficiency in mediation and leadership, such as solving conflict in groups. Although also present in many types of electronic games, the concept of flow can positively enhance the educational experience in virtual worlds. Hoffman and Novak (1996) and Csikszentmihalyi (1990) explain that the flow state is characterized by factors including user confidence, exploratory behaviors, enjoyment, distorted time perception, and greater learning. Peng (2004) notes that people learn in a flow condition when they are not passive receivers of information, but are actively participating in and owning the learning activity and reaching a personally derived goal. In a recent study of 30,000 VWE users, Yee et al. (2006) found that 70% had spent at least 10 continuous hours in a virtual world at one sitting. If the amount of continuous time spent is any indication of interest and immersion in the activity, this is evidence of a compelling and flow-oriented environment that can enhance learning.

Virtual environments can also facilitate enhanced exploration of and experimentation with various social roles. Although many electronic games provide such role exploration and experimentation, student use of VWEs provides a period during which the emerging adult is free to delay taking on adult commitments. The student can explore new social roles in an authentic situation while interacting with other individuals, a situation that has been shown to have significant psychological and learning advantages (Turkle, 1995). Virtual worlds have been shown to promote role-playing behaviors (Delwiche, 2006), which have been shown to help students escape the grip of contemporary norms and beliefs (Luff, 2000), affect attitudes and behavior (Bell, 2001), and can have significant therapeutic benefits (Douse & McManus, 1993; Hughes, 1998). Yellowlees (2006) documents the use of Second Life to help students experience the role of the patient. Students learn about the subjective experience of psychosis as they navigate through a virtual psychiatric ward. “In this environment, users can literally see and hear hallucinations as a patient might, as they walk through the halls of the virtual hospital” (Yellowlees, 2006, p. 441). This application of SL enables students to explore and experiment with the role of the patient, thus gaining important insights into particular psychoses and developing a deeper empathy than through more traditional means.

SECOND LIFE AS A VIRTUAL WORLD ENVIRONMENT As a well-known and widely distributed VWE, Second Life possesses significant potential for innovations in learning. For example, Dave Taylor, knowledge transfer leader at the National Physical Laboratory, says that the use of SL opens up “new opportunities for collaboration across disciplines and geographies that would not otherwise occur” (Edwards, 2006, p. 32). The development of



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

complex social practices such as collaboration is enhanced by two major benefits: social context and visual context (Harris & Lowendahl, 2007). In a learning experience, students are more likely to develop as leaders, collaborators, and relators; experience flow; and deeply experience alternative roles when there is a social and visual context. The emergent benefits of VWEs include: 1. 2. 3.

An enhanced sense of social interaction Visual indication of level of participation Ability to see conceptually and spatially through the use of 3D models for instruction or simulation.

The VWE Second Life (created by Linden Labs) currently boasts more than 6.6 million residents worldwide, and more than US$7 million are spent in a given month. The top 80% of residents hail from more developed nations, but a significant portion also log on from places like Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America. The typical resident is male, between 25 and 34 years old, and among the top 5% of the world’s wealthiest individuals.

Second Life is reality based in its economic and legal system in order to maximize the quality and quantity of user-created content. This approach is quite different than conventional massively multiplayer online games. Most companies that own and operate online games: (a) own all of the content in their world, (b) own any content generated by the player, and (c) specifically deny residents the right to earn real-world incomes while using the online game (see Table 2). For example, Sony (Koster, 2002) and Turbine (Castronova, 2004a) have banned the sale of digital items and currency on eBay. Additionally, while basic membership in SL is a free service, most other MMOGs are subscription services, requiring ongoing monthly fees from players in order to stay in the games. As mentioned above, SL has a somewhat unique approach to intellectual property (Herman, Coombe, & Kaye, 2006). Linden Labs acknowledged the value of the creative contributions that game players made to the virtual worlds that they otherwise controlled by granting their players intellectual property rights in their creations both within the game and in reality. This allowance has resulted in an entrepreneurial spirit that has made SL one of the fastest growing online games (SimTeach, 2007).

Table 2. Comparison of virtual world environments Characteristics

Second Life

World of Warcraft

SimCity

Base

Based in reality

Based in fantasy

Based in reality

Intellectual Property

Belongs to the user

Belongs to the company

Belongs to the company

Purpose or Goal

User-defined

Pre-ordainedquest oriented

Pre-ordainedprocreation/ population

Open or Closed System

Opentrajectory determined by

Closedtrajectory determined by

Closedtrajectory

the will of the user

computer algorithm

determined by computer

Supports a wide variety of tasks,

Outcomes limited by

Outcomes limited by

social interactions, contextual

preprogrammed algorithm

preprogrammed algorithm

Closedproprietary

Closedproprietary

algorithm Educational Capabilities

situations, and technical affordances Access to Software Code

0

Open source

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

Another unique quality of SL concerns the game’s purpose, or in this case, lack of purpose (Edwards, 2006). Unlike the popular online game World of Warcraft (Blizzard Entertainment, 2007), in which users interact in a closed, quest-oriented system, everything in the SL universe is user created and user driven. There are no overarching quests or game-created goals handed down by the game developers. Much like real life, there are only individual and group goals such as business, education, or personal quests. Users are not required to advance through levels in the way they must in a controlled game. All activity in the VWE is actually created by the users themselves. This user-created purpose leads to another unique characteristic of SLfreewill. Unlike the popular game SimCity (Electronic Arts, 2007), which uses a computer algorithm to simulate how a city will evolve, activities in SL are governed by real people with the ability to act individually. Giving users the ability to freely determine their fate has opened up a wide variety of tasks, social and linguistic interactions, and technical affordances that may not otherwise have been available (Peterson, 2006). A significant number of universities, colleges, schools, organizations, and businesses are exploring the educational potential of Second Life. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education (Foster, 2007), as of September 21, 2007, more than 150 colleges in the United States and in 13 other countries have a presence in SL. Additionally, according to the Second Life Wiki (SimTeach, 2007), 17 educational organizations, four libraries, and four museums are currently active in SL. Second Life education-related Web sites number more than 200. The purposes of these groups’ involvement in SL are as varied as their creators (see Table 3). Second Life and other virtual worlds also possess great potential for research. According to Yee et al. (2007) and Blascovich et al. (2002), social norms of gender, interpersonal distance,

and eye gaze transfer into virtual environments even though the modality of movement is entirely different (i.e., via keyboard and mouse as opposed to eyes and legs). As a result, these online environments are also being explored as unique research platforms for the social sciences and clinical therapy. These environments can be customized through the use of in-world 3D construction tools. Settings can be created to pertain to any subject or area of study, locations and artifacts can be as realistic and detailed or as generic and undefined as desired. Even objects of large or micro scale can be easily portrayed. The combined effect of recorded interactions and customizable environments provides the ideal conditions for future interdisciplinary research. For all of its potential and current uses, there are still three major educational aspects that are underdeveloped in VWEs such as SL: interdisciplinary research, development of best practices (Delwiche, 2006; Keesey, 2007), and exploration of the use of a mixed social environment. The New Media Consortium (2007b) is attempting to work toward interdisciplinary research in the social sciences, but the inclusion of other academic disciplines could provide great benefit. Much could be learned by including biology, chemistry, physics, and other disciplines not typically included in social science research. Whereas the 2007 Second Life Best Practices in Education Conference (http://slbestpractices2007. wikispaces.com) was a major step forward in developing best practices in education, it served to highlight the need to move beyond simple recreation of the classroom experience to more of an emphasis on creative practices when using VWEs (Keesey, 2007). Given the current state of interest in usage of VWEs in education, there are other emergent parameters that can and ought to be cultivated within the template of a mixed social environment. These parameters are discussed in the context of the course presented below.



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

Table 3. Various selected educational uses of Second Life Institution

Purpose

Location

Idaho State University

Bioterrorism preparedness program

http://irhbt.typepad.com/play2train

Dartmouth College

Simulation for distribution of medical supplies in

http://iml.dartmouth.edu/index.html

crisis. National Oceanic

Interactive educational simulations about the ocean

and Atmospheric

and weather

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/

Administration Global Kids Island

Place for teen residents to learn about social and

Kids Connect Island

Youth collaborate via performing, storytelling, and

http://holymeatballs.org/

world issues http://zoomlab.org/kc/

collaboration http://tinyurl.com/y3wlat

Social Simulation

Library with papers, Web sites, homepages, and

Research Lab

references of interest to social scientists

BrainTalk Communities

A place for autistic and cerebral palsy patients to

http://braintalk.blogs.com/brigadoon

interact socially

http://braintalk.blogs.com/live2give/

Walkathon raised more money in a short time than

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/GI/content/GI_1_

what the society would make in real life over many

8_Second_Life_Relay.asp

American Cancer Society

months Seattle University

Property law course applies issues of law to virtual

http://fizzysecondlife.blogspot.com

environments University of Houston

Design Economics course helps students to try their

http://www.arch.uh.edu

entrepreneurial skills against an entire market New Media Consortium

Virtual laboratory constructed to provide dozens of

http://sl.nmc.org/wiki/Main_Page

settings for experiments in social interaction

WELCOME TO OUR ISLAND: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS The University of Florida’s Digital Worlds Institute is a transdisciplinary research and academic entity that provides strategic integration of arts, technology, and culture across traditional academic boundaries. Digital Worlds (DW) planned to offer a new Interdisciplinary Research Seminar (IRS) in Spring 2007 as a collaborative effort between a professor of biomedical engineering and a professor of digital media. Second Life was to



be used as the VWE within which the onscreen interaction would take place. Prior to the beginning of the spring semester 2007, an island was acquired and two staff members at DW created three initial buildings on the barren landscape in preparation for the first cohort of students. First, the university’s iconic Century Tower was re-created. This tower was built in the physical world in 1953 to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the university and was dedicated to University of Florida students who perished in World Wars I and II. Included in

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

the virtual tower’s features were replicas of the unusual cast-bells carillon that mark the time of day and often play musical interludes during class breaks. Second, a multi-level virtual representation of the Digital Worlds Research, Education and Visualization Environment (REVE) was built. The structure itself was modeled on the metaphor of ascending levels of achievement, a common construct in quest-based video games. In this case the ascending levels of the free-floating building structures themselves formed virtual platforms that marked levels of interaction and achievement in interdisciplinary research (i.e., brainstorming, laboratory, invention, and prototype). Finally, a biomedical engineering building was added, based on architectural plans of a structure that has not yet been built in real life. On the first day of class, students had these three structures, which provided landmarks and functional space in which to meet and interact, but the rest of the island remained undeveloped. Students from a wide variety of disciplines enrolled in the class, which was offered as a means of investigating the use of VWEs in collaborative team-based research. The physical class sessions were held in the Digital Worlds’ REVE [pronounced “rev” as in Rêve, the French word for “dream”]. The REVE was designed as a multipurpose social and learning space, and featured a 52-foot wide immersive display screen, allowing local participants the opportunity to engage the VWE at near-life-size scales. This MSE afforded students and faculty a multiplicity of perspectives that proved integral to a groundswell of creativity and interdisciplinary achievement within the class. The goal of the research seminar was to investigate if the VWE (dubbed “Gator Nation Island”) could provide a compelling non-traditional framework for rapid prototyping, interdisciplinary collaboration, and invention.

RAPID PROTOTYPING IN A MIXED SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT Wilson, Jonassen, and Cole (1993) define rapid prototyping as follows: “In a design process, early development of a small-scale prototype used to test out certain key features of the design. Most useful for large-scale or projects” (p. 21.1). The REVE provided an effective rapid prototyping environment because it readily offered a facility in which the students could meet physically, virtually, or in a hybrid MSE. This immersive environment encouraged the initial development of system sketches and virtual mock-ups, followed by user evaluation, concept refinement, and implementation of refined requirements in a spiral cycle. The rapid prototyping environment was enhanced by the multiplicity of perspectives simultaneously provided to students and instructors on the REVE’s large-scale projection surfaces. While each person had their individuated laptop perspective, everyone in the room could also simultaneously share the common space from the perspective of other individuals’ diverse points of view during each phase of the design process. This MSE provided an enormous amount of visual information to inform design choices, allowing students and instructors alike to see the results of their ideas early on, detect errors in judgment and accuracy, and apply creative solutions through real-time feedback. The MSE also encouraged active student participation and enhanced collaboration throughout the design process. The “enhanced” aspect of this process emerged from several affordances not typically offered in traditional classroom settings. These include the ability of each of the students to interact either proximally in the REVE classroom, virtually within the VWE displayed on the REVE immersive displays and on their own laptops, or in any mixture of the two social environments deemed appropriate to the activities at hand. Additionally, the persistence of the virtual environment and the artifacts being created over the course



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

of the semester, coupled with their accessibility both during and outside of class time, provided another mechanism not available when students collaboratively create “real” objects and prototypes in the physical world. Using SL as the platform for the VWE, the IRS professors established interdisciplinary student teams and assigned an ambitious number of projects. Over the course of the semester, each of the students participated in several team-based projects. Each of their tasks involved creating a process or artifact in SL that did not currently exist in the physical world. At the end of the semester, a significant number of diverse student projects had come to fruition as a result of the rapid-prototyping process. These included: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.



3.

A suite of MIDI-based musical instruments A dance/music entertainment complex and a Visual Arts Gallery The Protein Pavilion A large Welcome Center for the island Numerous media clips and playback interfaces for island visitors.

Within these original designs, structures, and conceptual developments, a number of interdisciplinary concepts and potentials were embedded: 1.

2.

The Protein Pavilion provided a 3D environment for learners to visualize protein folding, the physical process by which a polypeptide folds into its characteristic three-dimensional structure. While students from humanities and arts backgrounds had never encountered the concept of protein folding in their standard courses of study, being able to visualize this ongoing physical process provided a compelling introduction to biomechanics. The outdoor structure resembles a large veranda in which three

4.

5.

large screens can be user activated to reveal animated 3D visualizations of various processes at the sub-molecular level. The Visual Arts Gallery featured the work of an internationally renowned photojournalist from the university’s College of Journalism and Communications. Students who typically would not have visited an art gallery in real life explored this virtual space as part of their IRS experience, viewing two exhibitions of the photographer’s work in the process. The NoteMaker’s Lounge is a large, complex structure featuring a dance floor, multi-level social spaces, and recording studios containing novel musical instruments designed in the class. Guests could either walk in on the ground floor or fly into upper-level public rooms. One of the computer engineers in the class designed a secure entry system that permitted only paying customers or pre-determined VIPs to pass through a force-field structure to gain admittance to exclusive upper levels. When guests entered the music studio portions of the NoteMaker’s Lounge, a variety of non-traditional instruments acted as a catalyst for the development of original music compositions created when visitors interacted with the virtual devices. The multi-level Welcome Center was designed and constructed by students with no previous experience in computer coding or architecture. The students took it upon themselves to learn how to create automated glass doors and numerous teleport jumps directly to many of the island’s facilities, each accompanied by a detailed pictorial and narrative description of the intended site to be visited. An ultra-modern Experimental Media Space combined 3D computer graphics with live and pre-recorded video capabilities. Numerous interactive media artifacts were designed

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

6.

and built by students with little or no previous experience with computer graphics or programming. The class also experimented with creating its own currency and banking system, and created a series of interactive video billboards and kiosks where visitors could obtain useful information about their surroundings.

SOCIAL INTERACTION AND ENTROPY: A NOVEL FORM OF RAPID PROTOTYPING A number of events were planned to be included in the Open House, ranging from guided tours to musical performances. The first 45 minutes of the Open House proceeded according to plan. But after that, a number of surprising developments occurred. While the majority of the online

interactions during the semester were modeled after the usual and customary modes of generally accepted social practice, three-quarters of an hour after the Open House began, entropydefined as “inevitable and steady deterioration of a system or society” (American Heritage, 2000)broke out. Previously courteous student interaction rapidly gave way to blasts from laser guns, unicorn riding through the shared space, driving vehicles up walls, and so forth. While end-of-semester enthusiasm and excitement about the culmination of students’ projects is understandable, there is also another potential explanation: a rapidly emergent social entropy. Whether a social construct or artifact seems to be contributing to the development or deterioration of a society or system is a socially constructed assessment, rather than an intrinsic property of the artifact (Bijker, 1995). As a result, we should consider the observation of one of the

Figure 1. Visitors perform on the new MIDI musical instruments (center screen) in the REVE’s Mixed Social Environment



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

Figure 2. The Protein Pavilion (center screen) shows visualizations of complex sub-molecular protein structure and folding

Figure 3. Faculty and Students on Gator Nation Island at the REVE. Images courtesy of the UF Digital Worlds Institute.



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

social scientists in the IRS class, who noted that this seemingly entropic development could be a manner of rapid prototyping of social constructs and artifacts in the VWE (Black, Beck, Dawson, Jinks, & DiPietro, 2007). These results should not automatically be discounted as a negative or simple anarchy, but instead should be explored. The use of the VWE to explore this novel type of social construct rapid prototyping should be investigated in future work. One potential application for this type of transdisciplinary research might be in the collaborative design and population testing of new urban environments or large-scale public facilities (stadiums, shopping complexes). Said structures could be placed within VWEs to assess traffic and user patterns created by live virtual users (as opposed to pre-programmed simulation algorithms) before finalizing the municipal approval of the building plans.

IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE WOrK From the developments during one short semester using SL as the VWE in a research and education setting, a number of observations come to light that lead us to the following recommendations: 1.

2.

Observation: Students worked effectively across disciplines as diverse as biomedical engineering, economics, fine arts, journalism, law, and computer science both in class and online in the VWE. Recommendation: Encourage partnerships with other departments and programs within your institution in to facilitate collaborative learning. An interdisciplinary partnership between departments or programs sponsoring the course will result in a greater breadth of cultural, academic, and social diversity among students and faculty. Observation: Students and instructors appeared to be in a state of flow (Csikszent-

3.

mihalyi, 1990) during most of the course. The flow state provided greater confidence, exploratory behaviors, enjoyment, distorted time perception, and greater learning than had occurred in past experiences with rapid prototyping by both instructors and students. Specifically, the added immersion provided by the REVE’s MSE appeared to enhance enthusiasm for the tasks at hand and fruitful collaboration by the interdisciplinary student teams. Access to the VWE and projectsin-process from outside of the classroom provided another collaborative potential. In addition to the proximal interaction in the REVE, students frequently met online in the VWE on their own time during evenings and weekends from their own personal spaces. Recommendation: Encourage gaming and involvement in other MMOGs by students and faculty. Instructors should consider hosting a hands-on seminar on using VWEs such as SL for education for other faculty and graduate students to attend. This exposure will help students to be more comfortable with various gaming interfaces and make it easier for them to enter the flow state in and out of class. Observation: Students exhibited significant enthusiasm for creating their own architectural models and invention prototypes. This is resonant with the current trend towards user-generated content in the broader online world (Bruns, 2007). Recommendation: Instructors should allow as much latitude as possible for students to create their own content- and concept-driven prototypes. Instructors should also build on the enthusiasm generated with customized content that will aid each student in his or her development. Also, in light of what occurred at the open house, students should be given opportunities to socially construct their own models and prototypes in groups and not just individually.



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

4.

5.

Observation: With the assistance of two designated teaching assistants (a graphic artist and a digital media specialist), students were able to overcome their lack of background in design and technical areas (i.e., computer programming, 3D graphics, architecture, etc.) and create significant results despite lack of formal training in these areas. Recommendation: Instructors should consider avoiding disciplinary limitations on students in such a course and allow open enrollment from across disciplines and academic levels. This will also result in greater diversity and a multiplicity of academic perspectives as students enter the course from a wider variety of educational backgrounds. Instructors should also consider scaffolding their students by providing additional resources for those interested in pursuing independent studies in the areas of computer programming, 3D graphics, architecture, and so forth. Observation: Rapid prototyping of social constructs and artifacts within VWEs is an intriguing area that needs further exploration. Recommendation: Faculty and students need to overcome personal value judgments and biases against particular social constructs and artifacts. Researchers need to explore the potential for social construct rapid prototyping within VWEs for the insights it may provide into the relationship between artifact creation and population behavior in the “real” world, and how potential crossover effects between real and virtual worlds may lead to new understanding of system dynamics.

A number of challenges for interdisciplinary research within SL and other VWEs also emerged from this seminar: 1.



Challenge: Current technological constraints (i.e., limitations on the importing

2.

and exporting of objects and processes created within the VME, lack of interoperability standards with other business applications such as learning management systems (LMSs) and HR management systems (HRMSs), system access and security, etc.). Recommendation: Integration with other software applications may not seem necessary, but it could greatly affect the adoption of the VWE innovation into your learning community (Black et al., 2007). Unfortunately, the technical inefficiencies of some business applications, such as LMSs, utilized by most higher education institutions have hindered integration, as vendors provide little in the way of easy, plug-andplay systems that can be implemented with little effort (Egan, 2002). While current generation VWEs such as SL hold enormous potential for learners, getting them to work efficiently with easy interaction with LMSs can be time consuming, frustrating, and expensive. By spending the extra resources necessary to achieve integration with your LMS and other software systems, an institution will be paving the way for an easier adoption process. Challenge: Access to appropriately designed class and lab space for group interaction. Recommendation: Provide both individuated and group display to create an effective mixed social environment. The larger and more immersive the common display, the more conducive it will be to shared group interaction. Hertz (2002) observes that “the interaction that happens through and around games as players critique, rebuild, and add on to them, teaching each other in the process. Players learn through active engagement not only with the software but with each other” (p. 173). These kinds of environments do not have to be prohibitively expensive (Oliverio et al., 2004).

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

3.

4.

5.

Challenge: Clear guidelines on ownership of intellectual property created in classroom VWE. Recommendation: In keeping with your institution’s intellectual property guidelines, encourage faculty and administration to give ownership of intellectual property (IP) created within the VWE to the person or team that created it. The increased production of authentic learning objects and innovative research concepts is a desirable outcome (SimTeach, 2007). Continued use of original IP in subsequent classes can then easily be arranged by simple permission from the creator/owner of the desired IP. Challenge: Overhead in setting up and maintaining the VWE. Recommendation: Seek out partnerships with other programs and departments within and outside your university in order to spread the overhead cost. Your course will not only benefit from lessened financial constraints, but will also benefit from an increased diversity in students and faculty. Challenge: Acceptance within established academic traditions and cultures. Recommendation: The chalkboard, filmstrip, and overhead projector are all examples of technologies that enabled increased interaction and shared experience in the classroom. VWEs are an inevitable and evolutionary step in the same direction, but they also must face some of the same hindrances as their predecessors. Development of quality best practices for using VWEs in education will equip teachers to overcome these hindrances and utilize them more fully.

It is apparent that network-based interaction in VWEs has much to offer in terms of contemporary learning and research applications. In our work we are particularly interested in facilitating effective MSEs by designing scalable physical classroom spaces whose affordances can maximize the effec-

tiveness of interdisciplinary activities in research and education (Oliverio & Pagano, 2004). Future studies should focus on in-class social interaction in mixed reality settings and the cultural and technical potential for rapid prototyping of objects, inventions, social constructs, and dynamic interaction systems.

REFERENCES Aldrich, C. (2004). Simulations and the future of learning. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons. Aldrich, C. (2005). Learning by doing. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. American Heritage. (2000). American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (4th ed). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Bijker, W.E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites and bulbs. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Black, E.W., Beck, D., Dawson, K., Jinks, S., & DiPietro, M. (2007). The other side of the LMS: Considering implementation and use in the adoption of an LMS in online and blended learning environments. Techtrends, 51(2). Blascovich, J., Loomis, J., Beall, A., et al. (2002). Immersive virtual environment technology as a methodological tool for social psychology. Psychological Inquiry, 13(2), 103-124. Blizzard Entertainment. (2007). World of Warcraft. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www. worldofwarcraft.com Bruns, A. (2007) Produsage: Towards a broader framework for user-led content creation. Proceedings of Creativity & Cognition 6, Washington, DC. Callois, R. (1961). Man, play and games. New York. The Free Press.



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row. de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game-based learning. Proceedings of the Joint Information Systems Committee E-Learning Program. Delwiche, A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) in the new media classroom. Educational Technology & Society, 9(3), 160-172. Edwards, C. (2006). Another world. Engineering & Technology, 1(9), 28-32. Egan, D. (2002). LMS and e-learning content vendors: Can’t we all just get along? T+D, 56(9), 62-64. Electronic Arts. (2007). SimCity. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://simcity.ea.com Foreman, J. (2003). Next-generation: Educational technology versus the lecture. EDUCAUSE Review, (July/August), 12-22. Foster, A. (2007). Professor Avatar: In the digital universe of Second Life, classroom instruction also takes on a new personality. Chronicle of Higher Education, (September 21). Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/weekly/v54/i04/04a02401. htm Francis, R. (2006). Revolution: Learning about history through situated role play in a virtual environment. Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association Conference, San Francisco. Harris, M., & Lowendahl, J. (2007, March). Second Life university classes for real-life credit. Retrieved May 9, 2007, from http://www.gartner. com Herman, A., Coombe, R.J., & Kaye, L. (2006). Your second life? Goodwill and the performativity of intellectual property in online digital gaming. Cultural Studies 20(2), 184-210.

0

Hertz, J.C. (2002). Gaming the system: What higher education can learn from multiplayer online worlds. In M. Devlin, R. Larson, & J. Meyerson (Eds.), Internet and the University: 2001 Forum (pp. 169-191), Cambridge, MA. Hoffman, D.L., & Novak, T.P. (1996). Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments: Conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing, 60(3), 50-68. Huizinga, J. (1980). Homo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture. London. Routledge and Kegan. Keesey, C. (2007, June 5). The path less traveled: Thinking asynchronous for learning in Second Life. Proceedings of the Innovate-Live Seminar Series. Michael, D., & Chen, S. (2006). Serious games: Games that educate, train and inform. Boston: Thomson Course Technology. NCCS. (2007). Interdisciplinary research. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from nccs2.urban.org/nteecc/v.htm New Media Consortium. (2007a). The Horizon Report. A collaboration between the New Media Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning initiative. Austin, TX: Author. New Media Consortium. (2007b). The New Media Consortium. Retrieved October 8, 2007, from http://www.nmc.org/ Oliverio, J., & Pagano, P. (2004). Design and implementation of accessible digital media classrooms and studios: Facilitating both interpersonal and intercontinental collaborations. International Digital Media and Arts Journal, 1(2), 5-19. Ondrejka, C.R. (n.d.). Aviators, moguls, fashionistas and barons: Economics and ownership in Second Life. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=614663

Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

SimTeach. (2007). Second Life education wiki. Retrieved October 8, 2007, http://www.simteach. com/wiki/index.php?title=Second_Life_Education_Wiki Steinkuehler, C.A. (2004). Learning in massively multiplayer online games. In Y.B. Kafai, W.A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A.S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 521-528). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster. Wikipedia. (2007a). Flow. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology) Wikipedia. (2007b). Massively multiplayer online games. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_games Wikipedia. (2007c). Second Life. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life Wikipedia. (2007d). SimCity. Retrieved July 15, 2007 from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimCity Wikipedia. (2007e). Virtual world. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_world Wikipedia. (2007f). World of Warcraft. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_ of _Warcraft Wilson, B.G., Jonassen, D.H., & Cole, P. (1993). Cognitive approaches to instructional design. In G.M. Piskurich (Ed.), The ASTD handbook of instructional technology (pp. 21.1-21.22). New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved July 13, 2007, from http://www.cudenver.edu/~bwilson/training.html Wittgenstein, L. (1972). The blue and brown books: Preliminary studies for the ‘philosophical investigations’. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Yee, N., Bailenson, J.N., Urbanek, M., Chang, F., & Merget, D. (2007). The unbearable likeness of being digital: The persistence of nonverbal social norms in online virtual environments. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10(1). Yellowlees, P. (2006). Pedagogy and educational technologies of the future. Academic Psychiatry, 30(6).

KEY TERMS Best Practices: Processes and activities that have been shown in practice to be the most effective (Delwiche, 2006; Keesey, 2007). Flow: Concept developed by Csikszentmihalyi (1990). “The mental state of operation in which the person is fully immersed in what he or she is doing.” Flow is the feeling of complete and energized focus in an activity, with a high level of enjoyment and fulfillment. (Wikipedia, 2007a) Interdisciplinary Research: Research efforts that bring together the humanities, physical sciences, and social sciences to develop and enhance a broad understanding of particular populations, cultures, or other related areas of research. (NCCS, 2007) Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG): A type of computer game that enables hundreds or thousands of players to simultaneously interact in a game world they are connected to via the Internet. Typically this kind of game is played in an online, multiplayer-only persistent world. Some MMOGs are played on a mobile device (usually a phone) and are thus mobile MMOGs or MMMOGs or 3MOGs. (Wikipedia, 2007b) Mixed Social Environments: Meeting places, such as the Polymodal Immersive Theatre (PIT) in the Digital Worlds Institute’s REVE, that allow both proximal social interaction typical of



Enhanced Interaction in Mixed Social Environments

traditional classroom or auditorium settings and simultaneous shared display of virtual world environments in which the physically present persons can also interact virtually. Research, Education and Visualization Environment (REVE): A multi-purpose social and learning space that features a 52-foot-wide immersive display screen, allowing local participants the opportunity to engage a VWE at near-life-size scales. The REVE allows students and faculty a multiplicity of perspectives that promote creativity and interdisciplinary achievement within the classroom. Second Life: An open-ended virtual world created by San Francisco-based Linden Lab. Its foci are socialization, economic activity, and non-profit interactions. The creation of former RealNetworks CTO Philip Rosedale, Second Life gives its users (referred to as residents) tools to shape its world. (Wikipedia, 2007c) SimCity: A real-time strategy/simulation computer game created by game developer Maxis. There are four versions: the original SimCity (1989, later renamed SimCity Classic), SimCity



2000 (1993), SimCity 3000 (1999), and SimCity 4 (2003). All of the games were re-released with various add-ons including extra scenarios. In addition, SimCity Classic is available for a palmconnected organizer and on the SimCity.com Web site as Classic Live. (Wikipedia, 2007d) Virtual World Environments: A virtual world is a computer-simulated environment intended for its users to inhabit and interact with via avatars. This habitation usually is represented in the form of two- or three-dimensional graphical representations of humanoids (or other graphical or text-based avatars). Some, but not all, virtual worlds allow for multiple users. (Wikipedia, 2007e) World of Warcraft: A class-based massively multiplayer online role-playing game developed by Blizzard Entertainment. It is the fifth Blizzard game and is set in the Warcraft Universe, a fantasy setting introduced by Warcraft: Orcs & Humans in 1994. World of Warcraft is set four years after the events at the conclusion of Blizzard’s previous release. (Wikipedia, 2007f)



Chapter X

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education Andreas Breiter Institute for Information Management, University of Bremen, Germany Castulus Kolo Macromedia University of Applied Sciences, Munich, Germany

AbstrAct Electronic gaming in education remains a theoretical or at best marginal issue as long as it is not adopted in general educational settings. The latter, however, not only depends on the intrinsic values or advantages discussed in other contributions to this volume. Rather, electronic gaming in education provides an interesting example for a complex adoption process where individual choices, organizational frameworks, and educational policies, as well as attitudes in the society at-large, interfere in the diffusion of gaming devices and the adoption of gaming for learning processes. After introducing an analytical framework for structuring such processes of the diffusion of innovations, the authors present empirical evidence from the adoption process of electronic gaming in Germany. The results are discussed focusing on the role of several influencing factors on the scope and the speed of innovations. The chapter concludes with possible generalizations departing from the specific situation and the tradition of education in Germany.

INtrODUctION Today, electronic games have a history of more than 25 years and include, besides the original PC-based games, a variety ranging from online

games for one, for two, or for thousands of simultaneous players to games played on mobile devices (like Game Boys or mobile phones) and even combinations thereof (e.g., Kolo & Baur, 2004). Technological improvements, specific and intense

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

marketing activities by the game industry, as well as an increasingly widespread access to electronic devices and competence in computer usage, have led to the fact that from the early ‘90s, electronic games became a matter-of-course in the everyday life of young people, including children in most industrialized countries (e.g., Fromme, 2003). This cultural and social significance of electronic games (e.g., Livingstone & Bovill, 2001; Singer & Singer, 2002) is also pedagogically relevant for at least three reasons: 1.

2.

3.

Efforts by public institutions like schools at increasing ICT skills or media competence are generally preceded by children growing up (among others) within their “computer gaming culture.” As a time-consuming leisure activity, gaming plays an important role in the psychology of childhood development and in the ways social networks are knit among children but also among (young) adults. This in turn moulds—at least partly—formal and informal learning processes. Games and gaming are eventually also seen as a new means for teaching and learning in a variety of subjects to support individualized learning processes.

This chapter is focused particularly on the latter of these three aspects of electronic games in the context of education. However, the public discourse on the first and second aspects strongly influences the pick-up of electronic games as an educational innovation. Effects of electronic games on childhood development are generally seen as very critical with few exceptions (e.g., Greenfield, 1984, 1996, as one of the earliest and persistent examples discussing also possible positive effects). Though the empirical evidence is ambivalent, even children and young people who are very engaged, in terms of frequency and general interest in playing electronic games, apparently do not give up other activities or become



socially isolated (Fromme, 2003; Kolo & Baur, 2004). The discussion in Germany is mainly led by critics who regard electronic games as motors for social isolation, aggressive behavior, decreased school performance, and gender divide (e.g., Aarsand, 2007; Dittler & Hoyer, 2006; Schindler & Wiemken, 1996; Spitzer, 2005). Unfortunately, no empirical evidence is documented in English. In media and political debates, gaming activities of children and young people are rather associated with violence and crime. A link to teaching and learning is rarely found, neither in research nor in practice. We follow the theory of mediatization (Hepp, Krotz, Moores, & Winter, 2007; Krotz, 2001), which assumes that “new” media do not replace traditional media, but enrich the media ensemble that is used. In management training, simulation games are increasingly common, though far from being widespread in Germany. There is strong evidence that gaming applications in this sphere are supporting learning processes in an efficient and effective way (e.g., Dörner, 2003). Other examples for the successful integration of simulation or gaming applications to support learning come from higher education (e.g., Ebner & Holzinger, 2007). However, success stories from neighboring fields, promising concepts as well as concrete examples for applications as given in other contributions to this volume, are neither necessary nor sufficient preconditions for the adoption of electronic gaming in education on a larger scale—not to speak of its widespread use on the basis of general educational settings. In the following we will therefore introduce electronic gaming in education as a case in point for a complex adoption process where individual choices, organizational frameworks, and educational policies, as well as attitudes in the society at-large formed in public discourse, interfere in the diffusion of gaming devices and the adoption of gaming as an activity for educational purposes. After developing an analytical framework on structuring such

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

processes of the diffusion of innovations and its interdependencies, we will discuss the empirical evidence of the role of several influencing factors on the amount and the speed of innovation, and we conclude this chapter with possible generalizations departing from this specific situation in Germany.

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK Research on the diffusion on innovations began with the investigation of individual decision makers and was extended only later to organizational contexts or systems at-large like education. In order to structure the pick-up of electronic gaming as an innovation in education, the innovation process must be regarded on all of these levels. This is due to the fact that the penetration of gaming devices and the role of electronic gaming in private households is linked to the role of electronic gaming and PC usage in general in schools and other educational institutions. Both roles, as well as their interrelation, depend strongly on the public perception of the positive and negative effects of electronic games. For the perspective on the innovation process from private households and the individual, we will draw on Rogers’ (2003) model of the diffusion of innovations and the respective adopter categories, as well as the factors shaping the process. Much research has been undertaken into the dynamics of the diffusion of innovations, and a concurrent scheme is the S-shaped curve in the number of adopters vs. time. This particular shape arises when a small number of early adopters is followed by the majority of adopters. Those are followed again by a small number of ‘laggards’ (Rogers, 2003). This behavior across time arises from differences in the adoption process. The adoption process may thereby be assumed as consisting of five phases: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. In the knowledge phase, an individual is exposed

to an innovation for the first time. Persuasion occurs when an individual forms a favorable or unfavorable attitude towards the innovation. Decision takes place when an individual engages in activities that lead to a choice to adopt or reject the innovation. Implementation occurs when the innovation is put to use, and confirmation when the decision is reinforced after the innovation has been assessed positively, in light of possibly conflicting information concerning its utility. When, in at least one of the steps, a normal distribution of the respective behavioral trait is present, we will observe an S-shaped curve in the number of adopters vs. time. This may already be the case in the knowledge phase when only a few users appear to notice the existence of the innovation from the very beginning—for example, the existence of a gaming application—followed by the majority, and finally by those people with less frequent access to information on market developments in this sphere. For most diffusion processes, this is indeed the shape that is observed (Henrich, 2001). For PC-based games in private households, we indeed saw a slow pick-up dating back into the ’80s, followed by an S-shaped rise in the adoption rate, which finally reached a saturation effect (PWC, 2006). Online games on the other hand are still in their infancy concerning their distribution—at least when the distribution across time up to now is regarded. According to the latest measurements with a worldwide perspective (Comscore, 2006), they currently go through the phase when the majority starts to be attracted by this kind of media provisions. In our case, the knowledge phase and the persuasion phase—which precede the actual decision—deserve some further elaboration, as by the factors determining these phases, the individual innovation decision is linked to society at-large as well as to the organizational context under consideration here—the education system. Ajzen (1985) formulated the theory of reasoned action to derive the factors leading to a person’s behavior. According to this, a person’s behavior is



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

determined by his or her intention to perform the behavior. This intention in turn is determined by three factors: attitude toward the specific behavior, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. While the latter refers to people’s perceptions of their ability to perform a given behavior and is therefore a rather individual trait, the two former factors are strongly shaped by the social context of the individual. The theory of planned behavior holds that only specific attitudes toward the behavior in question can be expected to predict that behavior. In addition to measuring attitudes toward the behavior, one also needs to measure people’s subjective norms—their beliefs about how people they care about will view the behavior in question. To predict someone’s intentions, knowing these beliefs can be as important as knowing the person’s attitudes. As a general rule, the more favorable the attitude and the subjective norm, and the greater the perceived control, the stronger should be the person’s intention to perform the behavior in question (Ajzen, 1985). In an organization understood as a stable system of individuals who work together to achieve common goals through a hierarchy of ranks and a division of labor, innovations are usually bound to collective and authority innovation decisions. In such cases an individual cannot adopt a new idea unless the organization has previously adopted it. Compared to the innovation decision process by individuals, the innovation process in organizations is much more complex. This is particularly the case in the implementation phase, which typically involves a number of individuals—both opponents and champions of the new idea. Further, implementation amounts to mutual adaptation in which both the innovation and the organization change in important ways. For the organizational perspective, one of the most influential models in this context is Nolan’s (1973, 1979) separating “six stages of growth.” Nolan claimed that the innovation diffusion process follows a similar pattern in different organizations and can also be described as an S-shaped logisti-



cal curve. Nolan tried to use empirical evidence from innovation processes in large corporate institutions to explain these patterns. Repeating his research in the 1990s, he showed that these stages are repeated in the next innovation phase (era), leading to organizational learning (Nolan, 1993). The experiences made in the era of central data processing could only be partly used in the era of microcomputers, as this was accompanied by an organizational change from centralization to decentralization (see also Applegate, Austin, & McFarlan, 2003). The following era of networks led to a re-centralization and new forms of controlling, and it can be expected that we encounter a new era of social software and Web-based technologies. Although heavily disputed among empirical researchers in innovation research and evolutionary economics (Dosi, Freeman, Nelson, Silverberg, & Soete, 1988; Freeman, 1992), Nolan’s model is used here in a modified way to highlight the organizational embedding of technological innovations in educational institutions. •

•

•

•

Stage 1 (Initialization): Technologies are introduced into the organization for performing simple administrative functions. Stage 2 (Contagion): Computers are adopted only in some areas. The learning curve moves up sharply and the use is more widespread. Top management encourages the adoption. Stage 3 (Control): The organization reacts to uncontrolled expenditures on computers. The deliveries of projects are late, and there are unsatisfied needs. IT support is weak, and users get frustrated. Stage 4 (Integration): Acceptance and turning point. Users start to accept the technological systems, and realize and articulate their needs. There is a need for better control to provide more effective systems and technical support.

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

Figure 1. Stages of organizational growth (adopted from Nolan, 1993)

In the final stage of “maturity,” the organization begins to trust the technological systems. A translation into the context of IT in education can be found in Breiter (2001). If we extend this approach to electronic games in education, we can identify similar process steps. In the phase of initiation, only a few members of the educational community are working with games as didactical tools. The organizational support is limited and they are regarded as outsiders (or, more positively, as “early adopters”). Others regard these activities with mistrust and have no interest in joining the group. The core question of innovation research is: When do organizations change to widely adopt the introduced technology? In the case of games, the phase of contagion is crucial, as the interest of other teachers might increase if positive outcomes of their use can be identified. As we are currently still in between these phases, the next steps are hard to predict from an organizational perspective. Hence, both perspectives, the individual and the organizational, must be integrated in a general analytical framework providing a structure for the

discussion of the empirical evidence in Germany. Additionally, the diffusion of electronic gaming as a technological innovation must be linked to the diffusion of organizational innovations in education, an issue that has been treated more systematically only in the recent innovation literature (e.g., Wollons, 2000; Fullan, 2001). The extensive and expensive initiatives on federal, state, and district levels to bring computers, local area networks, and high-speed Internet connections into schools, and the increasing number of instructional software and online resources for students and teachers have significant organizational impacts on the school system. The technology is partially shaping how and where teaching and learning is taking place, questioning the traditional roles of teachers and learners (Brunner & Tally, 1999; DiSessa, 2000; Kozma, 2003). The major impact of educational policies on schools as social organizations is through education reform. But as we know from educational research, change processes in schools are slow and the system is effective in absorbing innovations without any change (Cuban, 1986; Dalin, 1978;



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

Figure 2. Analytical framework for the factors influencing the adoption of electronic gaming in education

Fullan, 2001; Tyack & Cuban, 1995). Innovation research on the German educational system is less developed. But the few existing publications point in the same direction (e.g., Breiter, 2001; Schulz-Zander, Büchter, & Dalmer, 2002). Technology-oriented reform efforts, which were naively driven by the idea that information and communication technologies might change the way teaching and learning happens in institutions, such as schools, are becoming less dominant. The focus is now changing from specific technology plans to whole-school reform and comprehensive education plans including technology, following the suggestion of RAND consultants already in 1996: “Technology without reform is likely to have little value; widespread reform without technology is probably impossible” (Glennan & Melmed, 1996). The new approaches include new forms of collaborative teaching and student-centered learning in authentic and virtual environments (‘blended learning’), digital content production,



and quality control embedded in a stronger framework of accountability (e.g., Behn, 2003; OECD, 2001b). Our analytical framework can be modeled as a four-tier network of interdependencies between the different layers (see Figure 2).

EMPIRICAL SITUATION As there are no explicit numbers on the use of electronic games in the German educational system, we will try to draw a picture of it indirectly. Starting with the current IT infrastructure in schools in an international perspective, we extend it to the differences between the usage of ICT at home and in schools. As the next step, we discuss the diffusion of electronic games in households. Using these three steps, we get at least nearer to the current situation of electronic gaming in schools (see Figure 3).

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

Figure 3. Scheme for the indirect derivation of the status of electronic gaming in schools

Figure 4. Number of students per computer, based on school principals’ reports in PISA 2003 (OECD 2006)

In the longer term, the use of electronic gaming in schools may of course also have a bearing on decisions concerning investments in the ICT infrastructure, leading to a feedback loop possibly including the home-school use of ICT as well (see dotted lines in Figure 3). We will not consider this possibility in further detail here, as gaming in schools is in its infancy and such secondary effects shall be assumed to be negligible. ICT diffusion in schools varies significantly between different countries. Among the top

countries in world’s economy, Germany is lacking behind (OECD, 2004). In 2003, the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), a cross-national study of student performance at the age of 15 (OECD, 2001a, 2004), also analyzed the access to technology and the use of technology in the classroom (see Figure 4). When we compare the status of the ICT infrastructure in schools with the PC penetration in private households, we observe a significant correlation (see Figure 5), which is exemplarily



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

PCs per 100 Students

Figure 5. Penetration of PC usage in classrooms (OECD, 2006) vs. PC usage in private households (own compilation of data from different sources for 2004, cited in TNS Infratest, 2006) p (re g ressio n )< 0 ,0 0 1 ( h ig h ly sig n ifica n t)

35

2

R = 0 ,4787 30

USA

S o u th K o re a

25 H u n g a ry

20

F in la n d

15 10

G e rm a n y

P o la n d

5

T h a ila n d

0 0

10

20

30

40

documented by the situation in Thailand or Poland via the situation in Finland to the one in the U.S. However, from these numbers alone it cannot be derived whether a high number of PCs per students leads to an improved computer literacy and in turn to an increased household penetration, or whether it is rather the other way round, that a widespread distribution of PCs in private households influences the agenda of infrastructure investments at schools. A closer look to the exceptions Germany on the one hand and Hungary and South Korea on the other hand gives some hints where this partial decoupling comes from. According to the results, German students mainly have access to computers at home, and are using PCs and the Internet on a non-regular basis in school. This discrepancy is one of the highest in all OECD countries. In countries with high results in high-stakes tests,

0

50

60

70 80 90 PCs per 100 Citizens

access to computers in schools exceeds access at home. In Germany, it is the other way around. This leads to an increasing “digital divide” (for more details, see Warschauer, 2003) and leads the PISA consortium to a specific conclusion that the social gradient between access, use, and literacy is one of the highest in Germany (OECD, 2006a). Taking this into consideration, it becomes obvious that gaming in education, especially in K-12 schools in Germany, is still in its infancy. In Hungary and South Korea, we find the opposite situation as in Germany. In both countries, PC distribution in private households is preceded by political initiatives to install PCs in schools in order to promote the latter. According to Nolan’s model the diffusion process of information technology in German schools in general is currently in the stage between control and integration. We can still find

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

a majority of educators who see digital media as additional time-consuming gadgets in their classrooms. Electronic games are even further away from being used in schools. Among German researchers, the impacts of computer games on learning are discussed. Aufenanger (1997) sees the positive impacts of computer games on learning—for example, to develop new abilities in respect to logical thinking and fact-based learning in schools. Also Wesener (2006) points out the educational opportunities that can be related to computer games; this is also supported by the empirical findings of Kraam (2004). Nevertheless, it is common to many German educational researchers to point out strongly the dangers of gaming. This can be linked back to the extensive discussion on television and its impact on children. This was only tackled by the sociological discussions of Baacke (1973), who coined the term “Medienkompetenz” (media competence), which is unique to the German language. In his

ground-breaking book, Baacke introduced a critical perspective on media use, and offered creative and reflective thinking on media (television) at the same time. For Baacke, media competence can be analyzed in four dimensions: (1) knowing about different media and how to use them, (2) reflecting the role of media in society, (3) designing media, and (4) critical thinking. His model was later extended by other researchers (e.g., Aufenanger, Schulz-Zander, & Spanhel, 2001; Groeben & Hurrelmann, 2002). It now serves as a basis for most empirical research in use of educational media. In education research, only a few scholars have analyzed computer games and their role in classrooms (e.g., Aufenanger, 1997; Fritz, 2005; Fromme, 2003; Fromme, Meder, & Vollmer, 2000; Fromme & Meder, 2001). On the other hand, Spitzer, a famous neuroscientist, wants to keep away from schools any technological tools (Spitzer, 2005). In his highly debated book, Vorsicht Bildschirm! (Be Careful

Figure 6. Private computer usage for gaming and education among Germans from 14 to 64 years old (results from the representative study ACTA, 2006)

in percent

Private computer usage for gaming and eduction among Germans (14-64) 80

P C u ser

70 O nline u ser

60 50

U sage o f P C s for gam ing

40 30

U sage o f P C s for learning and educa tion

20

U sage o f online g am es

10 0 2000

2006



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

with Monitors!), he argues that television and computer would lead to mental deficiencies and should be avoided in children’s development phases. Spitzer (2005) reflects a deeply rooted technophobia in Germany’s educational sphere, which has not changed a lot since the 1970s. If computer games are addressed in German classrooms, it is usually in relation to questions about youth protection. A brief content analysis of the curricula in three German states highlighted that the keywords “digital media” can only be found in combination with “violence” or “youth protection.” Hence, the current use is mainly restricted to the afternoon when kids play at home. This is partly due to the organizational settings in the German education system: traditionally, schools are open until 1:00 or 2:00 p.m. After that, parents or other caregivers take over the responsibility for the learning process. With the introduction of a federal program on “full-day schools” in 2003, the role of after-school programs and pedagogical offerings in the afternoon is increasing. As already mentioned with respect to PCs, the situation in schools strongly contrasts with the widespread use of PCs in German private households. The latter was still on the rise during past years (see Figure 6, where the percentages differ from those given in Figure 5, as the basis of reference is here restricted to persons ages 14 to 64 and not the total population). With regard to the use of PC-based games, we also observe an increase in percentage points, though not as much as the PC usage would imply. However, driven by the strong growth in the number of online users, online games jumped from less than 5% penetration to almost 20% within five years. Like PC usage, the adoption of gaming (in particular online gaming) differs widely across world regions, but also on a smaller scale like in the European Union. We concentrate our discussion on online games because this is the growing segment. Unfortunately, different measurements (referring to monthly use, weekly use, or the use on an average day) are applied. However, when



set into relation with e-mail usage, a comparison seems feasible. In Asian countries, online games are enormously popular, ranging from 26% in China to 72% in South Korea, to give but two examples. In other countries of the OECD, like the U.S. with 17% or the EU with 19%, usage of online games in relation to e-mail usage of such online activities are relatively less popular. Germany here again constitutes an exception with only 14% (own compilation of data from different sources for 2005, cited in TNS Infratest, 2006).

DISCUSSION OF POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS According to our empirical evidence, Germany is a very special case with a strong tradition in its educational institutions against any (technological) reforms. Taking Nolan’s model, schools in Germany are not even at the stage of contagion, as many German teachers regard games (and even more dramatically electronic and online games) as useless educational tools. Software applications such as simulation systems, game-oriented learning tools, or complex interactive learning environments are used only by a limited number of educators. If we look at diffusion rates, the adoption of electronic gaming in private households is very fast. This leads to the crucial question on how to bridge the gap between school and home use, as this reflects a social imbalance between media-rich and media-poor households. The gradient between socio-economic background and educational performance in Germany is one of the highest in the world. Hence, educators must learn to take into account the real-life adoption of digital media for children. Given the theoretical framework of the process of innovation in education, we can also identify the influencing factors on the speed of innovation observed for Germany. The results show that the innovation dynamics on the level of the private households and on the level of organizations differ significantly,

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

which supports our assumptions. The different levels have different innovation speeds, which have to be taken into account when designing policies. Obviously, top-down approaches are nearly impossible. Change can only be induced indirectly via the individual media competence of teachers and students, for example through teacher training including teacher preparation. If new forms of communication and interaction from youth culture are rather accepted and integrated into the curriculum and classroom practices than characterized as ‘evil’, electronic games will have a place in the media repertoire of teachers. It is necessary for organizational framework conditions to be established and that the individual choice is met. In order to change those framework conditions, educational policies set reforms in order to integrate a new technology. This is done in curricula, with state programs and large-scale training schemes. Nevertheless, the sustainable integration and ubiquitous access to technological innovations such as electronic games in education is mainly led by expectations (i.e., norms perceived by the individual) and attitudes developed by social interaction in the society at-large. This has a strong impact on the individual choice as well as on the educational policies. Policymakers have a high responsibility in supporting schools to provide enriching learning approaches in the afternoon. As a baseline for any educational services, administrators need to know how to maintain the infrastructure, to learn how to plan, implement, and control a complex IT infrastructure (Breiter, 2001, 2003).

OUTLOOK AND FURTHER RESEARCH With the help of our analytical framework, we tried to identify four interdependent layers that influence the diffusion of electronic gaming in education. While the adoption is very much impacted by individual choice, the embedding in

an institutional formal learning process is highly dependent on the organizational learning process and the implementation of adequate supportive structures. Schools, particularly in Germany, are still in the very early stage of initiation dominated by early adopters and accompanied by strong critics. As long as electronic games are regarded in a broad public and supported by media as dangerous for child development, leading to aggression and crime, the pedagogical use in school settings will be limited to individual teachers. More research is needed on the impacts of electronic games in institutional learning processes as well as in learner-centered environments. Standardized tests are not reliable to measure the impacts of gaming in education. In this chapter we have primarily focused on the diffusion process, its interdependence from individual choice, organization learning, policies, as well as social and cultural development. It is still open to further research on how to implement successfully electronic gaming in teaching and learning, and to change traditional approaches as well as how learning experiences from other environments can be transferred to the schools and how this is influenced by cultural differences. In any case, it is important to take into account that regardless of the intrinsic quality of the learning application of electronic gaming, its spread to a substantial user base depends also on a large number of other factors—some of them difficult to influence, others enfolding their effects very slowly. Hence, the diffusion of electronic gaming in German educational institutions will be a long-term process.

REFERENCES Aarsand, P.A. (2007). Boys’ use of computer games in school. Computer gaming as a resource in identity work. medien + erziehung, 51(2), 37-43.



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

ACTA. (2006). Allensbacher Computer- und Technikanalyse (ACTA). Retrieved January 2007 from http://www.acta-online.de Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11-39). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag. Applegate, L.M., Austin, R.D., & McFarlan, F.W. (2003). Corporate information strategy and management: The challenges of managing in a network economy (6th ed.). Reading, MA: McGraw-Hill. Aufenanger, S. (1997). Computerspiele als herausforderung für die politische Bildungsarbeit. In J. Fritz & W. Fehr (Eds.), Handbuch medien: Computerspiele (pp. 309-313). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung. Aufenanger, S., Schulz-Zander, R., & Spanhel, D. (Eds.). (2001). Jahrbuch medienpädagogik 1. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Baacke, D. (1973). Kommunikation und kompetenz. München: Juventus. Behn, R.D. (2003). Rethinking accountability in education. How should who hold whom accountable for what? International Public Management Journal, 6(1), 43-73. Breiter, A. (2001). IT-management in Schulen. Pädagogische Hintergründe, Planung, Finanzierung und Betreuung des Informationstechnikeinsatzes. Neuwied: Luchterhand. Breiter, A. (2001). Digitale medien im schulsystem: Organisatorische einbettung in Deutschland, den USA und Großbritannien. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 4(4), 625-639. Breiter, A. (2003). Public Internet usage points in schools for the local community. Concept, implementation and evaluation of a project in Bremen, Germany. Education and Information Technologies, 8(2), 109-125.



Brunner, C., & Tally, W. (1999). The new media literacy handbook. An educator’s guide to bringing new media into the classroom. New York: Anchor Books. Comscore. (2007). Worldwide online gaming community reaches 217 million people. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://www.comscore.com/press Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines. The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press. Dalin, P. (1978). Limits of educational change. London: Macmillan. DiSessa, A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Dittler, U., & Hoyer, M. (2006). Machen computer kinder dumm? Wirkung interaktiver, digitaler medien auf kinder und jugendliche aus medienpsychologischer und mediendidaktischer sicht. München: Kopaed. Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R.R., Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (1988). Technical change and economic theory. London: Pinter. D ö r n e r, D. (2 0 0 3) . D i e l o g i k d e s mißlingensstrategisches denken in komplexen situationen (5th ed.). Reinbeck: Rowohlt. Ebner, M., & Holzinger, A. (2007). Successful implementation of user-centered game based learning in higher education—an example from civil engineering. Computers & Education, 49(3), 873-890. Freeman, C. (1992). The economics of hope: Essays on technical change, economic growth and the environment. London: Pinter. Fritz, J. (2005). Computerspiele. In J. Hüther & B. Schorb (Eds.), Grundbegriffe medienpädagogik (4th ed., pp. 62-69). München: Kopaed.

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

Fromme, J. (2003). Computer games as a part of children’s culture. Game Studies, 3(1). Fromme, J., & Meder, N. (Eds.). (2001). Bildung und computerspiele. Zum kreativen umgang mit elektronischen bildschirmspielen. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Fromme, J., Meder, N., & Vollmer, N. (2000). Computerspiele in der kinderkultur. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Fullan, M.G. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. Glennan, T.K., & Melmed, A.A. (1996). Fostering the use of educational technology: Elements of a national strategy. Santa Monica, CA: Rand. Greenfield, P.M. (1984). Mind and media: The effects of television, video games and computers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Greenfield, P.M. et al. (1996). Action video games and informal education: Effects on strategies for dividing visual attention. In P.M. Greenfield & R.R. Cocking (Eds.), Interacting with video (pp. 187-205). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Groeben, N., & Hurrelmann, B. (Eds.). (2002). Medienkompetenz: Voraussetzungen, dimensionen, funktionen. Weinheim: Juventus. Henrich, J. (2001). Cultural transmission and the diffusion of innovations. American Anthropologist, 103(4), 992-1013. Hepp, A., Krotz, F., Moores, S., & Winter, C. (Eds.). (2007). Connectivities, networks, flows. An introduction. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. Kolo, C., & Baur, T. (2004). Living a virtual life: Playing patterns and social dynamics in online games. Game Studies, 4(1). Kozma, R.H. (Ed.). (2003). Technology, innovation, and educational change. A global perspective. Washington, DC: ISTE.

Kraam, N. (2004). Kompetenzfördernde aspekte von computerspielen. medien + erziehung, 48(3), 12-17. Krotz, F. (2001). Die mediatisierung kommunikativen handelns. Wie sich alltag und soziale beziehungen, kultur und gesellschaft durch die medien wandeln. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Livingstone, S., & Bovill M. (Eds.). (2001). Children and their changing media environment. A European comparative study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Nolan, R.L. (1973). Managing the computer resource: A stage hypothesis. Communications of the ACM, 16(7), 399-405. Nolan, R.L. (1979). Managing the crisis in data processing. Harvard Business Review, 57(2), 115-126. Nolan, R.L. (1993). The stages theory: A framework for IT adoption and organizational learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press. OECD. (2001a). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD. (2001b). What works in innovation in education: New school management approaches. Paris: Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. OECD. (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s worldfirst results from PISA 2003. Paris: OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovations. OECD. (2006). Are students ready for a technology-rich world? What PISA studies tell us. Paris: Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development. PWC. (2005). German entertainment and media outlook: 2005-2009. Frankfurt/Main: PriceWaterhouseCoopers.



Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press. Schulz-Zander, R., Büchter, A., & Dalmer, R. (2002). The role of ICT as a promoter of students’ cooperation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(4), 438-448. Schindler, F., & Wiemken, J. (1996). Wer hat angst vor Super Mario? Computerspiele und pädagogische praxis. In W. Faulstich (Ed.), Medien in der schule: Anregungen und projekte für die unterrichtspraxis in der sekundarstufe I und II (pp. 245-262). München: Schöningh. Singer, D.G., & Singer, J.L. (2002). Handbook of children and the media. Newberry Park, CA: Sage. Spitzer, M. (2005). Vorsicht bildschirm! Elektronische medien, gehirnentwicklung, gesundheit und gesellschaft. Stuttgart: Klett. TNS Infratest. (2006). Monitoring informationswirtschaft. 9. Faktenbericht 2006. Retrieved July 30, 2007, from http://www.tns-infratest.com/06_ bi/bmwa/infrasearchreg/reg9.asp?dfile=TB6_ Chartversion_de.pdf Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia. A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wesener, S. (2006). Spielen in virtuellen welten: Übertragung von inhalten und handlungsmustern aus bildschirmspielen. medienpaedagogik online, 6(2). Retrieved September 30, 2007, from http:// www.medienpaed.com/06-2/wesener1.pdf Wollons, R. (2000). Introduction: On the international diffusion, politics and transformation of the kindergarten. In R. Wollons (Ed.), Kindergartens and cultures (pp. 1-15). London: Yale University Press.



KEY TERMS Adopter Categories: According to their innovativeness, members of a social system may be classified into adopter categories: innovators, early adopters, early and late majority, and laggards. Adoption of an Innovation: The decision to make full use of an innovation as the best course of action available. Members of a social system typically draw this decision at different points in time according to varying levels of their knowledge about the innovation and their general attitude towards new ideas (innovativeness). Attitude: A hypothetical construct that represents an individual’s like or dislike for an item. Attitudes are positive, negative, or neutral views of an “attitude object.” Most attitudes in individuals are a result of observational learning from their environment. In that respect, they are shaped by interactions within the social system. Diffusion of Innovation: Denotes the process in which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. German Educat ion System: St ates (Bundeslaender) are responsible; 16 different educational systems, federal government with little influence, three tracks: 9/10 years (Hauptschule), 10 years (Realschule), 12/13 years (Gymnasium). Innovation Decision Process (of Individuals): The process through which an individual passes from first knowledge of an innovation to forming an attitude towards the innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation and use of the new idea, and to the confirmation of this decision. Innovation Stages Theory: Developed by Nolan on empirical evidence in corporate institutions, organizational adoption of IT follows an

Electronic Gaming in Germany as Innovation in Education

S-shaped curve, from initialization and contagion to limited control and finally integration. Innovation: An idea, practice, or object is regarded as an innovation when it is perceived as new by an individual or another unit of adoption. This is in contrast to an invention, which denotes the process by which a new idea, practice, or object is discovered or created, but without being adopted yet. Innovations in Organizations: In an organization, understood as a stable system of individuals who work together to achieve common goals through a hierarchy of ranks and a division of labor, innovations are usually bound to collective and authority innovation decisions. In such cases an individual cannot adopt a new idea unless the organization has previously adopted it. Compared to the innovation decision process by individuals, the innovation process in organizations is much more complex. This is particularly the case in the implementation phase, which typically involves a number of individuals–both opponents and

champions of the new idea. Further, implementation amounts to mutual adaptation in which both the innovation and the organization change in important ways. Innovativeness: The degree to which an individual or other unit of adoption is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than the other members of a system. Media Competence: Term coined by German sociologist Baacke; can be analyzed in four dimensions: (1) knowing about different media and how to use them, (2) reflecting the role of media in society, (3) designing media, and (4) critical thinking. PISA: OECD Programme of International Student Assessment; regular standardized tests on student performance (15 years old) in 32 OECD countries. The test focus is on literacy, math, and science, taking social and organizational framework conditions (school form, school climate, infrastructure, socio-economical factors) into account.



Section II

Educational Gaming in K-12 or Teacher Education Contexts

Chapters in this section of the book focus directly on research related to educational gaming within K-12 learning content areas or on studies related to teacher education. Van Eck begins the first part of this section with an examination of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) games in the classroom through the empirically-based NTeQ model. Durga & Squire write about their continued analyses of the Civilization software series for history. Champion also writes about history, specifically highlighting technological, pedagogical, and evaluation issues pertinent to game-based historical learning. VanFossen, Friedman, & Hartshorne provide evidence through a literature review of the potential of gaming for social studies education. Dubbels addresses how games might be used for reading and comprehension. Finally, Redfield, Gaither, & Redfield explore the effectiveness of math-based COTS games. The second part of this section switches directly to focus on teachers and teacher education. James & Wright discuss a study comparing teacher gamers vs. non-gamers. Ferry & Kervin present an online simulation used for educating pre-service teachers. Yildirim & Kilic also explore games with pre-service teachers; however, their focus is on prospective computer teachers. Finally, Sanford & Madill explore the notion of adolescents teaching teachers through videogame making. The purpose of this section is to provide readers with research directly related to the use of gaming for teaching K-12 content area knowledge or the pre-service and in-service teachers who teach or will teach that content.



Chapter XI

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom Richard Van Eck University of North Dakota, USA

AbstrAct Many of the educational outcomes we seek to promote in public education, such as problem solving and critical thinking, are difficult to achieve given the constraints of the real-world classroom. Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) games make excellent tools for addressing both content-based and higher-order learning outcomes, and many educators are exploring their use in the classroom. But making effective use of commercial games in the classroom requires that we understand how games function in relation to the typical instructional strategies and practices of the classroom. The first part of this chapter will examine the theories that underlie the successful integration of commercial games in the classroom and look at an empirically based model, the NTeQ (iNtegrating Technology through inQuiry), for designing lessons that integrate COTS games. This will lay the groundwork for the second part of the chapter in which these theories and the model are discussed in the context of actually designing COTS game-based learning (GBL).

PART I: THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR DESIGNING COTS GBL Introduction Despite the growing interest in using games as learning tools in public education, very few games are designed for the classroom. Those that are

(e.g., the Leapster and Learning Company products) often tend more toward learning tutorials than learning games, and are thus difficult to integrate within the existing curriculum except as additional practice in subject areas. Such software can play a valuable role in learning, and students no doubt enjoy them more than they enjoy reading a textbook, but this does not capture the true power of games to engage (in the cognitive and

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

entertainment sense of the word). There are many reasons for the dearth of truly engaging games for the classroom, of course, including school infrastructure and policies that lock down labs and networks for security reasons, the difficulty of designing games without the resources of a large development company, and the attitudes of the parents and administrators who view games with a healthy dose of skepticism.1 But one of the main reasons we do not see more educational games that look and feel like commercial games is that many designers do not understand how games integrate learning and content seamlessly throughout the game. From the outside, it seems as if games have no content because all we see is play. But it quickly becomes apparent to any who sit down to play them that many games are extremely difficult to play, requiring hours of practice to master. And yet it is through interaction with the game rather than texts, videos, or other media that this learning is achieved. Clearly, games themselves serve an instructional role, and they must be effective or the titles would not sell and the players would not spend upwards of 50 to 100 hours playing them without being forced to. Unless we are willing to accept that game developers have somehow stumbled on new learning and instructional theory, it stands to reason that the things we do know about effective instruction and learning are present in these games, if in modified form. Why should we care? Because it turns out the in the same way that ignoring the theories behind how games teach has led to poor examples of learning games, so too will doing so lead to poor examples of COTS GBL.

The Use of Commercial Games It should be noted up front that the games I am most interested in here are those that address higher-order intellectual skills like problem solving. While a great many games address problem solving in one fashion or another, adventure games

0

(e.g., Myst), strategy games (e.g., Civilization), simulation games (e.g., Sim City), and modern action and first-person shooter games (e.g., Halo) tend to be extremely complex and require upwards of 50 to 100 hours to solve. While other games like card games and board games (e.g., Scrabble) have value in educational settings, they are much easier to adapt to learning environments and do not require much in the way of guidance. Many are looking to commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) games for their potential integration within existing curriculum (Googling “COTS games in the classroom” yields nearly 200,000 hits on this topic).2 The assumption behind this approach is that COTS games are developed by companies who know how to build effective, engaging, entertaining games; using them relieves teachers of the need to become game developers and programmers in order to use games in the classroom. Games that involve existing curriculum areas like math (e.g., the Sim and Tycoon titles), or history (e.g., Civilization), or science and physics (e.g., Contraptions), having already been vetted in the marketplace, will be good games. These things are true, as far as they go, but we must also understand that it is not just the content that makes GBL a good idea in classrooms; it is what learners are doing with that content as they interact with the rest of the game. It turns out that the content is secondary to the critical reasoning, problem solving, and ways of processing information and negotiating, meaning they are integral features of many COTS games. And this is not just true of games; expert teachers know that you cannot teach problem solving as a set of abstract principles (e.g., Anderson, 1995), but must instead embed them within existing domains and professional ways of knowing (e.g., Shaeffer, 2006) and expose learners to many examples over long periods of time (e.g., Gick & Holyoak, 1980; Osgood, 1949; Rogoff & Gardner, 1984). As much as we might wish it were so, it is not possible to take full advantage of the power of games by simply “adding extra content” to a

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

game. Developing lesson plans that truly take advantage of what games can do requires that we understand how games embed instructional strategies, objectives, assessment, and the other instructional elements that all effective instruction uses. We must understand how these theories and instructional elements work in games if we are to extend their use to the classroom. Designing effective COTS GBL is not a simple process, any more than designing any truly effective learning is easy. In the next section, we will examine some of the most relevant theoretical and instructional principles that games employ and which govern the integration of games in the classroom. We will also examine how an established K-12 technology integration model, the NTeQ Model (Morrison & Lowther, 2005), can serve as a bridge between designing practical, effective lesson plans for the real-world classroom and the theories of learning and instruction as they exist within games. This model and process are the subject of the second half of this chapter, in which we examine the practical application of the NTeQ model to the analysis, design, and implementation of COTS lesson plans in the classroom.

Theoretical Background There are three theories and instructional principles that are key to understanding both learning as it is supported by COTS games and the use of the NTeQ model for the development of lesson plans that integrate games: situated cognition and learning, intrinsic motivation, and objectives and assessment. These will be relied on later in this chapter as we examine the NTeQ model in more detail.

Situated Learning and Cognition What It Is The first theory that guides learning in games, and which must therefore also guide COTS GBL, is situated learning. This theory arises out of a movement in cognitive studies in the 1970s that began to study human cognition in the contexts in which they naturally occur (Cohen & Siegel, 1991; Graesser & Magliano, 1991; Meacham & Emont, 1989). Research has shown that knowledge and transfer are strongly tied to context and domain (e.g., Bransford, Franks, Vye, & Sherwood, 1989; Bransford, Sherwood, Vye, & Rieser, 1986; Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Perkins & Salomon, 1989) and that learning is effective to the degree that it is embedded in a meaningful context (e.g., Choi, 1995; Choi & Hannafin, 1995).

What It Means for COTS GBL There is nothing more important to COTS GBL than a conceptual understanding of this theory. Games convey the knowledge needed to meet the goal of the game and the many challenges along the way, not through direct instruction, but by embedding (situating) knowledge, feedback, guidance, and other instructional events within the context of the game. The fact that the game context may vary in its representation of “reality,” from the fantastic to the real, does nothing to undercut the efficacy of this approach. This means that the game world and context are the “real” world, not the classroom or even the professional environment in which the knowledge being generated will eventually be applied. All instructional events and content must be subservient to the game world to the extent that doing so is possible and does not violate the facts, concepts, and rules being learned. This theory is also important to understanding intrinsic motivation.



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

Intrinsic Motivation

Objectives and Assessment

What It Is

These instructional elements are familiar to us, but are present in games differently than in more “typical” instruction. Just as was the case with intrinsic motivation, situated learning helps explain how objectives and assessment occur in games. It is good instructional practice to communicate objectives to the learner in order to support metacognitive processes and to activate or establish relevant schemas. In typical instruction, it is not uncommon to present the objectives verbally at the beginning of the instruction, and to administer a pre-test and post-test to assess learning. This, however, is antithetical to the nature of objectives and assessment in games. The purpose of a course is to learn; the purpose of a game is to play. Learners in the classroom are prepared (and expect) objectives and tests as part of accomplishing their learning goals; game players have different expectations, however.

Malone (1981) and, later, Malone and Lepper (1987) proposed a theory of what they called intrinsic motivation (motivation that stems from internal events such as goals or affective responses rather than from external events such as rewards). Intrinsically motivated learning, then, is “learning that occurs in a situation in which the most narrowly defined activity from which the learning occurs would be done without any external reward or punishment” (Malone & Lepper, 1987, p. 229). All successful games are intrinsically motivating, meaning the player wants to play them for their own sake. The four factors they proposedchallenge, curiosity, control, and fantasycan be used to explain which games are intrinsically motivating. While all of these factors are important, the concept of fantasy is particularly crucial. Intrinsically motivating games align the content of the game (learning what is needed to solve the puzzles and challenges) with the fantasy (the game-play, context, and narrative of the game), which Malone and Lepper (1987) refer to as endogenous fantasy.

What It Means for COTS GBL This is not much different, conceptually, from the idea of situated learning, and is key COTS GBL; all instructional activities (some of which must occur outside of the game itself, as we will see) must strive to extend the context of the game world (the fantasy) to the content that occurs outside the game itself (Rieber, 1996; Van Eck, 2006b). Content that is not tightly integrated with the fantasy context of the game will result in COTS GBL that is not intrinsically motivating.



What They Look Like in Games Just as everything a player learns within a game is situated within the game context, the objectives and their performance (assessment) are also situated within the game context. Objectives are presented in a variety of ways: as part of the materials that accompany the game (the game box, manual, etc.), via characters in the game who communicate with the player at different points, and through cut-scenes (cinematic episodes at strategic points in the games such as between levels). But they are also communicated through other, non-verbal actions within the game, such as when the player enters a room in the game and is immediately attacked; although the player is not told what the objective is, it becomes clear that they must defeat whatever is attacking them. Indirect communication (situation) of objectives is the most common method of establishing objectives in a game.

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

Given the ways in which objectives are communicated in authentic, situated, embedded ways in games, it follows that assessment will mirror this process. This means that assessment is continual throughout the game (temporally and conceptually contiguous with the objectives) rather than occurring at the end,3 and that the nature of the assessment always reflects both the fantasy of the game itself and the problem-based nature of learning in games (since all skills in games are learned in relation to solving the challenges, or problems, in the game).

What They Have to Do with COTS GBL So when we design learning activities to extend the learning in the game, we must ensure that any additional objectives and the assessment we develop adheres to the same principles as they do within games. Just as our extension activities should be authentic and problem based, and tied to the narrative context of the game (to reflect both situated learning principles and the idea of endogenous fantasy from intrinsic motivation), so must our objectives and assessment reflect that context as well. For example, we do not want to use a multiple-choice test to assess objectives that are part of the narrative context of problem-based learning in our extension activities and/or the game. This also means the instructor must think about assessment as a continual process broken up into smaller units than the typical “test.” In addition, effective instruction builds in opportunities for application of what is being learned, accompanied by feedback, to help the learner monitor his or her own learning. We call these practice rather than assessment, since they serve a different instructional role (information processing rather than assessment). Practice in typical instruction may occur infrequently, but is a continual process in games. Practice and assessment in games often look the same and occur in close proximity to one another, being differentiated only by the presence of feedback

and opportunities to reflect on that feedback. In regards to objectives, assessment, and practice, then, the instructor must think both about how they are communicated in additional instructional activities, and how they are organized by problem and challenge, not discrete steps that must be mastered one at a time.

The NTeQ Model These theories and instructional elements are important to the design of COTS GBL. We need to keep all of them in mind as we integrate COTS games into our classrooms. As it happens, there are models for integrating technology into the classroom, and one of them, the NTeQ model, is also well suited to COTS GBL. The NTeQ model is an established model with empirical support for its efficacy, and templates and heuristics for its implementation. Because there are many examples of NTeQ lessons available, it is mature enough to provide good support for the practical application of the ideas and theories relevant to COTS GBL. This is a model that I have worked with for the last eight years in my technology integration courses and my instructional simulations and games courses. I have seen teachers at all levels and subject areas develop dozens of lesson plans that are practical, standards driven, effective, and yet also compatible with games in the ways discussed so far (see http://idt.und. edu/gbl). Examples include using American Farmer to teach agriculture, Contraption to teach physics, I Spy to teach second grade reading and writing, and SimCity to teach geography and civil engineering. This model, which takes into account the limitations and realities of the classroom, including local and national standards, objectives, access to computers, and time constraints, is founded on five philosophical premises (Morrison & Lowther, 2005):



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

The teacher is technologically competent and assumes the roles of designer, manager, and facilitator. The student actively engages in the learning process, assumes the role of researcher, and becomes technologically competent. The computer is used as a tool, as it is in the workplace, to enhance learning through the use of real-world data to solve problems. The lesson is student centered, problem based, and authentic, and technology is an integral component. The environment incorporates multiple resource-rich activities.

Premise 1. The teacher is technologically competent and assumes the roles of designer, manager, and facilitator. One of the keys to successful COTS GBL is that the designer and the instructor be familiar (“technologically competent”) both with games in general and with the game they have chosen to use in particular. In the former case, this is critical because it is not possible to design game-based learning that is rich enough in activities, content, and problem solving without understanding how games manage these things themselves. Otherwise, the activities and lesson will almost inevitably violate the principles of situated learning and endogenous fantasy, as described earlier. It is important to know the game you have chosen very well. Because games are complex worlds that rely on exploration and variable outcomes based on the player’s interactions with the game, they are likely to exceed the breadth and scope of the intended lesson. This means that while only part of the game may be used/relevant to the lesson, there may be more than one way to get to and through the relevant portions of the game. You can be sure that students will, as a class, eventually encounter all variations during game-play. Aside from potentially exposing them to undesirable content or language, this presents



the possibility of exposing them to ideas and strategies that may not support the content or learning outcomes as designed in the lesson. Even when this is not the case, when learners end up in parts of the game world that are not tied to the content or lesson (and some of this is inevitable and even desired), the instructor must know how to get them re-focused and/or how to incorporate such explorations into the lesson. The second part of this premise, that the teacher assumes the role of designer, manager, and facilitator, is also important to COTS GBL for several reasons. It requires a shift in approach from instructivist to constructivist or constructionist learning environments. The mode of game-play is player centered and interactive; instructivist modes of learning are more teacher centered. The game and classroom modes must be aligned for COTS GBL to work without violating the endogenous fantasy principle. This NTeQ principle is aligned with this learner-centered approach to games. Second, whether the teacher is wearing the hat of both designer and instructor or whether those hats are worn by different people, it is critical that the distinction between the two be made. Too often, the teacher acts as designer with the knowledge that they will also be the instructor, which makes it possible to rely on their own problem-solving ability in the classroom to make design changes and modifications on-the-fly. But games are far more complex and allow for more learning autonomy than many instructors are prepared for, and because they address higherorder learning outcomes (when used properly), such adjustments are much harder to make. As a result, the design must happen in more detail up front than is sometimes assumed. So we have to be more mindful of this design process, and the NTeQ model emphasizes this. Premise 2. The student actively engages in the learning process, assumes the role of researcher, and becomes technologically competent.

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

The key to COTS GBL in this premise lies in the assertion that the student will be actively engaged in the learning process and assumes the role of the researcher. Games, through a variety of strategies and approaches such as problem-based learning, cognitive disequilibrium, scaffolding, and question asking (Van Eck, 2006a), require active engagement; one cannot play a game passively. Educational environments typically do not support active engagement on the part of the student in this sense, however; elementary students spend more than 90% of their time in independent seat work or whole-group instruction (Pianta, Belsky, Houts, Morrison, & NICHD, 2007). The engagement inherent in games must be extended to the classroom for any instructional activities, and the NTeQ model provides the scaffolding for generating student engagement. One of the ways it does this is by placing the student in the role of a researcher. In the NTeQ model, rather than processing information that has already been distilled down into verbal information and concepts (e.g., a textbook), the student must conduct research in order to solve problems (see Premise 4, below). This reflects the natural structure of most games as well. A goal is presented which requires the successful resolution of many challenges throughout the game. This structure then places the learner in the role of researcher; the learner must explore the environment and its challenges (gather information), devise strategies for solving the challenges (formulate hypotheses), and test and refine those hypotheses. This is the scientific method, and is at its heart what all research is. In the NTeQ model, the nature of the problem being solved determines the researcher’s role and the tools he or she uses. In the case of COTS GBL, this is determined by the problems encountered within the game rather than the “real world,” but is nonetheless an example of the same phenomenon. Accordingly, COTS GBL must adopt the same researcher perspective and problems from the game to the content and

learning outcomes addressed outside the game, in the classroom. Premise 3. The computer is used as a tool, as it is in the workplace, to enhance learning through the use of real-world data to solve problems. The connection between this premise of the model and COTS GBL is perhaps the least obvious. The essence of this premise is that we do not use technology for technology’s sake, but rather as a tool to solve problems the way we would in the real world and in different professions. Thus, an efficiency expert hired to improve productivity at a processing plant (an example of an NTeQtype problem) might use a spreadsheet to collect data and to look for patterns and trends relevant to the problem. The teacher then would require the students, in that role, to use a spreadsheet in a similar fashion. In the case of games, the problems and the roles and tools required to solve them help determine the roles and tools the designer then might require the learners to employ during classroom-based activities. So we have to pay attention to the roles that are or could be part of the game world, not the “real” world. The second idea worth considering is that there are many roles and problems that are consistent with a game, even when they are not ostensibly part of the game. A lawyer sent over to close a deal with a toy company in Europe (the premise of the award-winning game Syberia) may not have to do expense reports or write legal briefs as part of the game, yet that character might very well be expected to do that in “real” life. This makes the inclusion of technology tools and tasks for problem solving feasible in COTS GBL even when they are not part of the game. Premise 4. The lesson is student centered, problem based, and authentic, and technology is an integral component.



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

All NTeQ lessons are problem based, just as all games are problem based. Problem-based learning (PBL) is an effective and engaging instructional modality, which is perhaps one reason that games are so effective at teaching and engaging (they are themselves examples of PBL). Some might suggest that when designing activities outside the game, it is enough to simply ask the learners to look up what is right and what is wrong (that is research, right?). But doing so substitutes rote work for problem solving, which is likely to undercut engagement if not learning, and in addition ignores the richness and complexity of real research, which is always done in solution of a problem. All NTeQ lesson problems are also authentic, meaning they center on actual problems faced by professionals in different domains that often require the integration of several strategies and tools (e.g., our efficiency expert from above would not only use a spreadsheet, but also write reports, do presentations, generate simulations, and interact with others). One need look no further than a math workbook for an example of non-authentic problems that do not engage learners (“Train A leaves Boston for Chicago going 45 mph. Train B leaves Chicago going 65 mph…”). While it may seem odd to suggest that problem solving in games is authentic, they are in the sense that they are authentic to the world (geographical, social, emotional) they are embedded in, just as problems set in the “real” world are authentic to this world. COTS GBL requires, therefore, that activities generated to address instructional gaps in a game must also be problem based (either new problems or extensions of game problems) and authentic to the game world, not the “real” world. In cases where the game world shares verisimilitude with the real world, this is a simple process. But even in cases where this is not true, the skills and strategies employed in games to solve problems are quite often the same as those used in the real



world, even if the problems themselves are of a fantastic nature. World of Warcraft requires you to take on identities of creatures like elves and dwarves to go off on quests as a group. Yet while the workplace is devoid of elves and dwarves, it is full of training sessions on how to appreciate diversity, negotiate goals and solve problems as a group, and establish leadership and communication skills, all of which are what MMOGs like World of Warcraft require. Problems can easily be generated to address these skills while still remaining “authentic” to the game world and the problems valued therein. Premise 5. The environment incorporates multiple resource-rich activities. One of the strengths of games is that they provide a wide variety of resources and modalities within the game. This includes, of course, media such as graphics, video, animation, sound, and text. But this also includes less obvious examples such as the social context of character conversations, the distributed nature of the necessary information (players must gather resources and information from multiple sources and locations), and the overall narrative (game story) generated by the interaction of player and game. What is key to this concept in the NTeQ model, in games, and in COTS GBL is the manner in which these resources are encountered and the role that they play in solving a problem. Both the NTeQ model and COTS GBL require the integration of many resources into the lesson, but mere presence is not sufficient. Resources must be required to solve the problem at the center of the lesson in an authentic way. It is critical to focus on the strategies and skills that are relevant to your learning outcomes rather than being sidetracked by the fantasy narrative context of the game (e.g., the World of Warcraft example earlier). This will ensure that you find ways to incorporate resources into the activities you

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

design to extend the game environment that are authentic to both the problems and context of the game you have chosen, and to the natural way in which such activities are organized by the problem at hand during game-play. Every activity should incorporate multiple resources authentic to the game and problem context, which are encountered by the learner in the same fashion as they are in the game, through the exploration, information gathering, and hypothesis testing required to solve the problem, despite their occurring outside the game (i.e., in the classroom).

Final Thoughts on COTS GBL and NteQ

such, it can be likened to endogenous fantasy; it is conceptually related (integral) to the learning process itself as a tool used in the solution of real-world problems. COTS GBL is technology integration, not use. If you think of the game as something you will have learners do in addition to learning in your classroom, you will have lost before you begin. In everything you do, you must strive to make the content, classroom activities, and game world seamless and integrated into a meaningful whole. This is not entirely possible of course, but it should guide your design from the start.

Problem-Based Learning

These premises are key to both the NTeQ model and COTS GBL. Keeping them in mind (and studying more about the NTeQ model) will help ensure that we adopt the right mindset for designing our own COTS GBL. Even so, experience has shown that there are a few concepts that get lost in the translation for many first-time COTS GBL designers. As we begin to shift from this theoretical discussion to a more practical discussion of how you can begin to design your own COTS GBL, here are some final thoughts on issues that many find difficult when starting out.

The best way to ensure you are integrating rather than using the game for learning is to focus on the solution of complex problems that address your outcomes. This ensures both that you are adhering to the dominant learning modality in games, and that activities inside and out of the game are conceptually related. A good problem will suggest tasks and projects necessary for its solution, which will in turn suggest technologies that are integral to those tasks and projects.

Integration vs. Use

As you design your problems, keep them authentic to both the game world and your learning outcomes. There is not always perfect alignment between the two, but compromises can almost always be found that address both. Authenticity to the game narrative should take priority whenever possible (and when it is not, you may be looking at a poor candidate game for COTS GBL).

There is a difference between integrating technology and using technology. Technology use is akin to exogenous fantasy; it is not conceptually related to the learning process or content. Using technology in the classroom means only that the teacher and/or students employ technology, most often as a tool to perform tasks related to assessment rather than problem solving (e.g., writing a research paper or book report). Integrating technology means that technology is used to support the learning process itself, most often in terms of authentic problem solving. As

Authentic Learning

Collaborative Learning Regardless of how you structure other learning activities in your classroom, COTS GBL usually requires that you have learners working together.



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

Aside from reflecting the nature of practice in the real world and being an effective learning model in all grades and domains, collaboration places more responsibility for the learning process on the students. This ensures that you can spend more of your time facilitating learning (e.g., providing guidance, remediation, and enhancing transfer) rather than addressing technology and process problems that crop up. Students are able to solve a wide variety of such problems on their own if the learning is designed for groups rather than individuals.

Projects and Roles What you have students do and how you have them do it while solving problems is also important. Just as we spend a large part of our time in the world solving problems, we also work on projects that are related to those problems. You should design projects that are conceptually related to both the nature of the problem being solved and the outcomes for your instruction, rather than relying solely on discrete tasks in a piecemeal fashion. Just as importantly, those projects should be authentic to the problem and the game-space, and the learners should take on the roles and characters who would ostensibly be involved in those projects in the game and real world.

PART II: PUTTING THEORY INTO PRACTICE Theoretical frameworks and educational theory are a critical part of any endeavor to make use of new technologies to improve learning, including COTS GBL. But providing such theory without practical guidance as well is an intellectual exercise at best. Whether you use the NTeQ model to design your COTS GBL or simply rely on its premises to guide you through the process, the first part of this chapter should help ensure that you attend to the most critical aspects of COTS



GBL. The balance of this chapter will outline the design process from analysis through evaluation. While not a complete step-by-step template, this process is described in enough detail to scaffold the design of COTS GBL for any topic using any (appropriate) game. The NTeQ model itself is the subject of an entire textbook, so it is not possible to cover the development of NTeQ lesson plans and their many components while also describing the process as it relates to COTS GBL. However, the NTeQ model is quite well documented in text (Morrison & Lowther, 2005) and on the Web (www.nteq.com), and templates and example lesson plans for that model exist that can help you use this model in general. What follows are the areas that I have found are both critical and often overlooked or misapplied when applying the NTeQ model to game-based learning.

Know Your Audience Many people skip this step, assuming that they know their learners well enough to make decisions about the learning process. This is rarely true, but we get away with it because students are pretty resilient when it comes to poorly adapted instruction. With COTS GBL, the temptation is to assume that all learners, by virtue of being “digital natives,” are well versed in games and enjoy them all equally. Many are surprised to learn how many of their learners actually do not play games much or at all. This does not preclude the use of COTS GBL (after all, many of our students do not enjoy textbooks or reading, either), but it does have design implications. You should begin with a formal survey of your students to find out who plays games, what kinds of games they play and enjoy, how often they play them, and why they like them to begin with. The answers to these questions will determine things like which students will need more help learning to use a game (so you can create ability-based groups), and what kinds of games to

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

consider and what kind of activities to design (to reflect the things they like in games, even if the game chosen may not appeal to all equally). We found that boys and girls like adventure games, strategy games, and simulations equally, for instance, but that they like different things about them (Van Eck & AIM Lab at the University of Memphis, 2006).

Know Your Environment The place that your learning will take place is also important to analyze up front. Will your learners work during class in the classroom or in a computer lab, on their own in a computer lab or at home?4 Obviously, there are technology issues to be solved depending upon the answers to these questions. How will you ensure that they can pick up where they left off if they will play on different computers? (Saved game files can often be transferred, but who will do this?) Do the computers available have the requisite sound and video cards, and are the networks open for collaborative game-play if needed? Knowing your environment also includes knowing the culture and whether you are likely to encounter resistance (you probably are) on the part of students, parents, colleagues, and administrators. Following a process like the NTeQ model ensures that you have documentation about the standards, objectives, and outcomes addressed, but you should also be prepared to discuss (in a non-confrontational way) the rationale for your approach.

Finding a Game All this is, of course, before you even find a game to use, which is usually the first step people think of. Aside from looking for examples from others who have designed COTS GBL (e.g., http://idt. und.edu/gbl or http://brainmeld.org/), the best way I have found is to browse game titles at a local electronics store like Best Buy or online at Amazon.com. Both methods allow you to view

hundreds of games in a short amount of time. Walking the aisles of a computer game section is more convenient than browsing online, since you can pick the boxes up and read the materials quickly. Browsing online provides access to more titles and information about those titles in the form of links to other relevant games, editorial reviews, and customer ratings and opinions. These latter features provide a rich resource for learning more about the game, its strategies and content, and the quality of the game itself. Another good source of ideas for games that can be used for learning is CNN, or children, nieces, and nephews. Game players are the best source for finding out about new games and games that are popular, and they make a better resource than even online browsing since you can ask them in-depth questions about the game’s specific content and strategies. You can even get them to demonstrate the games for you, which not only lets you learn more about the games, but also speeds up the process since any game player will be better and faster at game-play than any non-gamer. So what are you looking for during this process? Obviously, titles are your first clue about whether a game might be applicable to your curriculum. Game titles like Civilization, 1701 A.D., and Zoo Tycoon all convey enough information about their content to make them candidates for further evaluation to teach history or biology. One of the reasons some suspect that COTS GBL has limited application to the classroom is that most game titles do not bear these kinds of obvious links to content. But the content is not always visible from the title and marketing material. While some might assume that Zoo Tycoon might have application for biology, zoology, and ecology from the title alone, many would be surprised to learn that some of the other primary content areas for this game are economics, business, marketing, and mathematics.5 That is because a game’s potential for teaching in different domains is not visible until one experiences the game (through research or playing it). Zoo Tycoon requires that



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

one manage the business of the park, attending to outputs from a fairly sophisticated simulation of the zoo’s financial health. Factors like costs, customer satisfaction, and animal health are influenced by (and require adjustments from the player) the number of animals, cost of their appropriate habitats and food, the number of food stands, money spent on maintenance and sanitation, and the prices of admission and services. The skills required to adequately manage a zoo (or any business) far exceed the limited domains implied by the titles of such games, but this is not immediately visible to the casual browser. Another example may help make this point here. A physics or engineering faculty who dismisses Roller Coaster Tycoon (RTC) as unrelated to physics without researching it further will be missing one of the more significant potential aspects of the game. Roller coasters, in the real world, are built by engineers who must know a lot about physics and mathematics. While the game itself does not require this knowledge, it is reasonable (and authentic!) to expect that building roller coasters in the game world would be done by engineers using these skills, and thus be subjected to the same constraints as in the real world (e.g., safety inspections, design document and blueprints, computer simulations). This opens up RTC to teaching physics, mathematics, and engineering as well. And the same game can be used to teach these areas at different grade levels. Middle school and high school students might write simple reports and design documents about one part of a specific roller coaster using Newton’s laws and basic computations of energy, mass, and acceleration as project outcomes, while undergraduate and graduate students could generate detailed design specifications and reports that focus on higherlevel calculus, vectors, conceptual physics, and stress tolerances for an entire roller coaster, or even build simulations to test existing designs. Middle-schoolers might write reports (as zoo managers) about the financial health of the zoo

0

or proposals(as exhibit designers) about a new animal acquisition and habitat, while graduate business majors write detailed analyses of the underlying economic model of the zoo simulation and predict its behavior if it were based on a different economic model. By focusing on the strategies required during game-play rather than just the surface content of the game, one finds that there are many games out there with the potential to teach a wide variety of topics at several grade levels.

Evaluating a Game Once you have chosen a game for your curriculum, you have to begin the real evaluation process. A good place to start is by reading reviews and ratings of the games on sites devoted to games. There are numerous sites that do this, but rather than rely on any one site, my approach is always to use Google to find those relevant to the game being evaluated. Typing “[game name] cheat, walkthrough, guide, FAQ” as keywords usually results in several relevant hits, and you can generally find reviews one link or less removed from the pages generated. In particular, the walkthroughs, which are documents written by game players to literally walk you through the game solution from start to finish, are invaluable. First, they let you experience nearly the full scope of the game in a matter of a couple hours. This often tells you all you need to know about whether the game has potential or not. Second, if reading them convinces you that the game has potential, they can be used to get yourself through the game very quickly. This is important because some games take experienced players 50 hours to complete. You do not have that kind of time to spend for the purpose of evaluation, yet you do have to play through the full game for reasons outlined earlier. Before you do so, however, there are a couple of things you will need to do up front, some of which you will revisit later when preparing for

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

implementation. First, many games are released with bugs that require patches (software programs that repair the problems). These can be found at the game company’s Web site, which is a good place to go prior to loading and playing the game yourself. In addition, many of the software programs, operating systems, and hardware drivers on your particular platform will have changed between the time the game was released and the time you install it. Once again, there may be several updates and fixes for these to install on your machine. You want to get your machine and software up to date before beginning play, both so that you do not run into problems later that cannot be fixed without reinstalling the game (and losing your progress to date) and so that you are aware of what it will take to do this on the machines your learners will be using. Next, before you get too far into your game, you will want to test out how the saved games work and whether you can transfer them to other computers. This is because you may find during your evaluation of the game that your learners will have to play through significant portions of the game in order for them to acquire the information and context necessary for your learning outcomes. This is desirable, of course, both for maximizing engagement and learning, and for offsetting the amount of effort and planning that goes into successful COTS GBL. In some cases, however, the time required may not be justified or possible, given the constraints of the environment. In extreme cases where the learning outcomes are not a large enough part of the curriculum to justify the time spent, you should reconsider the use of this game (or perhaps any game at all). However, you may be able to “bridge” between the portions of the game that are relevant to your lesson. This can be done by saving the game at strategic points and having students play only the portions that are relevant. Many games generate separate files each time you save a game, and rely on these to track where the player was when it was last saved. Copying these files to other machines

(in the same location and without changing their names) often allows you to load those games on the new machine so that your learners have access to them as well. To find out if and how this is possible with your game, you should save a game and, if the game allows you, name the saved game (some do not) and keep track of the name. Once you have saved the game, do a search of your computer for the title you gave it. If the game does not allow named files or if you are not able to locate the file, try searching for files by time and date, and look for files created close to the time you saved the game (remember to use your computer clock in case it is not set correctly). You can also look inside the game program folder (under Program Files on Windows, or under Applications on Macintosh) and watch for any new files that show up after you save a game. Once you find these files, you should test them to see if copying them to the same location on another computer allows that game to be loaded (in my experience, this is possible more than 50% of the time). Try doing so on one of the typical machines you think you will run the game on. Knowing whether and how this is possible not only helps you determine if the game will be useful for your lesson, but also prepares you for the implementation phase, which will require you to do the game loading and patching prior to beginning the lesson.

Design the Lesson Because commercial games were not designed to teach content, none will be sufficient on its own as a teaching tool. As the designer, you will need to identify where there are gaps and inaccuracies in the game content, and where the strategies the game supports for solving the challenges do not align with your learning outcomes (e.g., trial and error vs. reasoned thinking) or may lead to misconceptions or an incomplete picture of the content and skills. These are the places where you



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

will need to design extension activities to extend the learning. Your goal here is not to provide “the answers” for these things, but to create learning activities that support the learner as they generate the knowledge necessary. As you do so, you should think in terms of designing problems, roles, and projects that are authentic to the game environment and which serve your learning outcomes as described earlier. These activities should extend the game world in such as way as to minimize the differences between the game and classroom activities. So while it is possible to generate a problem that addresses the gaps in the learning outcomes supported by the game, doing so will not produce the desired results unless we: (1) tie the problem to the problems in the game, (2) tie the roles of the learners to the roles in the game and to the people who would be involved in solving such problems, and (3) tie those roles to the kind of project that such people would work on in order to solve those problems. So when designing these activities, think more in terms of problems and projects like generating legal briefs, expense reports, diaries, and feasibility studies than in terms of a research paper or workbook addressing the same content. Likewise, you should avoid thinking in terms of one problem or one activity, instead designing periods of extended game-play interspersed by short projects over a longer period of time (days at least, and even weeks depending on the scope of your lesson). This keeps the game in the forefront and your learners engaged as much as possible. No learners are going to find these activities as engaging as the game, but their willingness to work within them will be higher to the extent that you achieve a good balance and keep those problems and activities authentic to the game. Consider also that it is possible to use a game as an orientation activity prior to or during study of new material, as a means of practicing or assessing prior knowledge, or as a hybrid of both. In the first case, the game establishes relevance, context, and interest in the material; in the second



case, the game provides practice and feedback; in the third case, the game and the activities serve as an anchoring environment that encapsulates the full learning cycle, which is ideal. If you determine that you need to use saved games to ensure that all learners get through the game at the same pace and/or to help bridge the game-play between important sections of the game, you will also want to be cognizant of these saved games during the design process and specify where and when to load each game. Because this process of stopping game-play and loading a new game at key points in the lesson interrupts the game narrative, you should generate textual descriptions (in the form of a journal or diary of the main characters to preserve authenticity) of what occurs during the game portions students do not play. Some learners may elect to play the game outside of class rather than read these sections, and in fact this is no different than homework and reading assignments we give students all the time. But for those who are not able to complete that process, the diaries will assure that everyone has the same information needed to proceed with the game and instruction. A final note about documentation during the lesson design process: Remember that you are designing not just the instructional materials and activities, but also all the documentation that will be needed by the learners. This means instructions for installing patches, getting help, loading saved games (and when and where to do so), FAQs, tips and tricks, shortcuts, and a whole variety of handouts that help scaffold the instructional process. Failing to do so means you will spend significant amounts of time in and out of class addressing these issues on a case-by-case basis, which is not the best role for COTS GBL or any other kind of instruction. Your role in the NTeQ model and COTS GBL is learning facilitator, not technician. These kinds of documents are not tied to the game contextthey are simply help documents. But the other documents you generate as part of the instructional materials should be tied

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

to the game context. This can be done by doing things like generating letterhead for companies within the game world (even if these are fictional and not part of the game itself) and creating false e-mail accounts and/or printouts of e-mail messages and faxes as a means of communicating additional tasks and information about the instructional activities that extend the game. These little touches go a long way toward preserving the spirit of the game within your instruction.

Preparing for Implementation Once you have designed your lesson (game and learner analysis, number of class sessions, objectives, standards, activities, assessments), there are several steps necessary for successful implementation as well, some of which you will have encountered during the evaluation process. You will need to test the platforms your learners will use to see what patches and updates need to be installed, just as you did for your machine when evaluating the gameremember that something as minor as your learner systems having a different video card or version of QuickTime or DirectX can mean the difference between a game that works and one that will not start. You do not want to encounter these problems during the instruction, so you will need to check each computer to make sure it is ready to go up front. And do not assume in a lab of computers that all have the same versions of software and hardwareequipment manufacturers use “equivalent” hardware and software within single orders of equipment, resulting in different video cards, drivers, and even OS versions. Finally, if your learners will be using the game outside of the environment you have control over, you will need to provide documentation about what the minimum requirements are, how to check for them, and a disk of relevant updates and patches (if possible) for them to use. Of course, you can require them to solve these issues as well if technology literacy is one of your goals, but this

can significantly impact the timeframe for your lesson, so choose carefully. Once you have updated all of the software needed for the game to run successfully, you will want to copy over any saved game files necessary for game-play so that each installation has access to the relevant game files.

Evaluate the Lesson This form of instruction, more than any other, requires that you collect evaluation data. This is critical both for revision of the lesson (which rarely works perfectly the first, or even second or third time), but also for documenting the benefits of the approach. Evaluation outcomes should, of course, include assessment of learning. But remember that much of the value in COTS GBL lies in addressing higher-order learning outcomes, so do not simply use measures of verbal information and concepts for assessing your content learning outcomes. Also use things like measures of problem solving, fluency in the domain, retention over time (i.e., not just immediate recall), and automaticity (speed of access to relevant knowledge). Having this data on hand is helpful not only for making the case for COTS GBL to our administrators and colleagues, but also to our students, many of whom surprisingly are suspicious that they are not learning when playing a game. Finally, you should also include other measures: attitude toward the content area, interest in pursuing careers in the field of study, differences by different demographic categories, and ability to transfer knowledge to other situations are all good candidates for COTS GBL outcomes. As you implement the lesson, keep a notebook handy to jot down ideas about things that worked well or did not, about unanticipated outcomes (good and bad), and about ideas for revision of the lesson later. It is tempting to think you will remember all of these things the next time, but COTS GBL is a rich, complex process, and your chances of recalling any of these things later are



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

very low if you do not take good notes along the way. Once you have collected this data, do not keep it all to yourself! Share your lesson and results with your peers and supervisors, and make your lesson materials available (with copyright retention, of course) to others. You will benefit from the feedback you get from others who implement and extend your lesson, and we will all benefit from more good examples of COTS GBL when designing our own lessons.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE TRENDS Certainly, it is possible to use games without going through every aspect of the process detailed here, but results will be less than optimal. Given that COTS GBL is extremely time intensive (just the game-play and support issues, even if not for the design implied by the process I have outlined here), and given the political climate toward games in the classroom, I am not sure many of us can afford ineffective implementations of COTS GBL. Part I of this chapter described how some theories (situated learning and cognition, intrinsic motivation) and instructional elements (objectives and assessment) are related to both commercial games and to the design of COTS GBL. It also examined how an empirically based model for developing effective technology integration lessons that incorporate authentic learning, collaboration, and problem-based learning is both effective and compatible with these theories and elements as they relate to learning in games and in COTS GBL. The future certainly holds great promise for effective, engaging games that are designed to support specific learning goals and outcomes. As design tools and theory progress (hand in hand, I hope), it will become easier to develop such games from the ground up and we will begin to see an abundance of such games. Part II extended this discussion to the practice



COTS GBL using the NTeQ model, including analysis, design, development, and evaluation. The ideas in Part I were applied to each of these phases according to the unique characteristics of COTS GBL and the areas that are most commonly overlooked or misunderstood. Progress in GBL theory and practice will proceed independently for the most part in the next few years, but will need to become more interdependent and informed by each other. Neither can truly succeed in the long term without the other. I expect to see research in several areas, which are described in much more detail elsewhere (Van Eck, 2006a, 2007). It is all well and good to describe some of the theories and principles that operate in games (as I have done here), and this is indeed sufficient for the design of COTS GBL. But this piecemeal approach will eventually need to be replaced by integrated models of gamebased learning. Models that define interactivity and engagement through game design features as well as cognitive elements such as cognitive load, cognitive disequilibrium, and the scientific method to problem solving, for example, will be key to game-based learning of all kinds. Understanding how different game ontologies and genres (e.g., adventure, arcade, simulation, jeopardy-style frame games) support different learning outcomes (e.g., problem solving, verbal information) will require significant research. We might also expect to see a synergy between game technology such as MMOGs and persistent worlds, other instructional modalities such as pedagogical agents, intelligent tutoring systems, and authoring tools, and models of learning that focus on social networking and distributed cognition and knowledge such as connectivism. And studies of individual differences, cognitive load, cultural differences in play and game design will all need to be conducted in order for us to truly understand the theories that underlie this new art/medium/tool. Ultimately, this may all lead to a new perspective on learning and educa-

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

tion that may put the emphasis back (finally) on experiential learning that is situated, authentic, and interactive as it was before the onset of the industrial revolution and the emphasis on decontextualized, mass production of learners. In terms of practice of both COTS GBL and DGBL in general, I see several trends that are likely to continue over the next three to five years. The serious games movement is, indeed, quite serious, and there are now hundreds of good examples of serious games (games designed for purposes other than pure entertainment). These will not only become a good resource for use in our classrooms, but will also expose us all to a variety of approaches and ideas that will certainly help us design better COTS GBL as well. It will be critical to disseminate research and practice around the design of COTS GBL. Databases of lesson plans that are vetted and revised according to their application with different populations, ages, and content areas could be very helpful in this regard, especially if they also include performance and evaluative data. Professional development around this area is and will remain important as well, with perhaps development days as well as tracks at conferences devoted to this. Infrastructure and support will be key in making this happen as well. Right now, only those innovators and early adopters will take the time to develop COTS GBL effectivelywe will need support tools like authoring tools for lesson plans that scaffold the development of COTS GBL lesson plans specifically, and perhaps even instructional designers and curriculum specialists who understand these processes and can work with teachers to help develop COTS GBL. This model already exists in the form of technology partners and facilitators in the schools, and it is likely to evolve naturally as more and more technology facilitators and teachers are exposed to the theory and practice of GBL in pre-service and graduate school programs. Other issues such as lab structure, school policies, and funding streams and educational licensing assistance for games to be

used in the classroom are also needed (see Van Eck, 2006b, for more on these issues). As we build this body of DGBL (serious games, student game design, and COTS GBL), we will see more acceptance of games in the curriculum as well. This, in turn, will add to the growing recognition on the part of the game industry that education is a viable market worth exploring, and I believe developers will begin to make more concessions to learning outcomes in the design of their games. This is not to say they will begin developing educational titles (at least not right away), but I do believe that they will consider allowing educators access to games during design so that, where doing so does not require sacrificing game-play, the veracity of game content and the alignment of game and learning outcome strategies can be improved. Educators could easily co-develop lesson plans and activities that extend the game (and perhaps influence in small ways the design of the games accordingly) that could then be released with the launch of the game so educators would have a running start at using these games in the classroom. Game developers have sophisticated tracking models for player behavior in their games so that they can evaluate their games prior to release (this is what beta versions are for, after all). The trails learners take through games (see Loh, 2006, for more on this idea) can be rich sources of data for assessment, and it would take little for game developers to make these available, even with modifications to reflect particular assessment needs. I also see the field of serious games moving toward the development of what I call intelligent learning games (ILGs)games that incorporate existing artificial intelligence technologies like intelligent tutoring systems (ITSs) to bring content and learning into games in a powerful and scalable way (Van Eck, 2006a). Such games will leverage the power of games and these tutoring systems (which have been found to be nearly as effective as human tutors) to help solve the



A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

content integration problem we face in serious game development. Similarly, both as an outgrowth of ILGs and in recognition of the need to be able to adapt other games to different learners and domains, I see the development of authoring tools as a significant likelihood for serious games and commercial games. Currently, any game-based learning works for only the learners and domain for which it was designed. If we want to extend the use of such games to other domains and learners, we must redesign the lesson or build a new game. Authoring toolsexpert systems that serve as an interface between subject matter experts, and sophisticated technologies (like ITSs) so that new content can be generated by anyone with expertise in the domainwill address this problem. In this manner, we can create tools that allow teachers to generate new learning quickly and easily, as has already been done for ITSs (e.g., Susarla, Adcock, Van Eck, Moreno, & Graesser, 2003; Susarla, Adcock, Van Eck, & Moreno, 2003; Van Eck, Adcock, Susarla, & the TRG at Memphis, 2005). While we are waiting for all these advancements, however, COTS GBL remains one of the most accessible and effective means of integrating games into the classroom, and this chapter has provided the means for you to get started with COTS GBL in your classroom.

Bransford, J., Sherwood, R., Vye, N., & Rieser, J. (1986). Teaching thinking and problem solving. American Psychologist, 41(10), 1078-1089.

REFERENCES

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Anderson, J.R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and its implications (4th ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman. Bransford, J.D., Franks, J.J., Vye, N.J., & Sherwood, R.D. (1989). New approaches to instruction: Because wisdom can’t be told. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortany (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 470-497). New York: Cambridge University Press.



Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42. Choi, J.I. (1995). The effects of contextualization and complexity of situation on mathematics problem-solving and attitudes (Doctoral Dissertation, Florida State University, USA). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(10), 3884A (UMI Microform No. 9605031). Choi, J.I., & Hannafin, M. (1995). Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2), 53-69. Cohen, R., & Siegel, A.W. (1991). A context for context: Toward an analysis of context and development. In R. Cohen & A.W. Siegel (Eds.), Context and development (pp. 3-23). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355. Graesser, A.C., & Magliano, J.P. (1991). Context and cognition. In R. Cohen & A.W. Siegel (Eds.), Context and development (pp. 57-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Loh, S. (2006). Designing online games assessment as “information trails.” In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning research & development frameworks. Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Malone, T.W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 4, 333-369.

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

Malone, T.W., & Lepper, M.R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R.E. Snow & M.J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning and instruction: III. Conative and affective process analyses (pp. 223-253). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Meacham, J.A., & Emont, N.C. (1989). The interpersonal basis of everyday problem solving. In J.D. Sinott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and application (pp. 7-23). New York: Praeger. Morrison, G., & Lowther, D. (2005). Integrating computer technology into the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. NESTA FutureLab. (2006). Close to 60% of UK teachers want computer games in the classroom. Retrieved July 13, 2006, from http://www.nestafuturelab.org/about_us/press_releases/pr11.htm Osgood, C.E. (1949). The similarity paradox in human learning: A resolution. Psychological Review, 56, 132-143. Perkins, D.N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16-25. Pianta, R.C., Belsky, J., Houts, R., Morrison, F., & NICHD (Early Child Care Research Network). (2007). Opportunities to learn in America’s elementary classrooms. Science, (March 30), 1795-1796. Rieber, L.P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 43-58. Rogoff, B., & Gardner, W. (1984). Adult guidance of cognitive development. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 95-116). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Williamson Shaffer, D. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Susarla, S.C., Adcock, A.B., Van Eck, R.N. & Moreno, K.N. (2003, November). Authoring for AutoTutor: Adding a new dimension to an intelligent tutoring system. Proceedings of the 2003 World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government & Higher Education, Phoenix, AZ. Susarla, S., Adcock, A., Van Eck, R., Moreno, K., & Graesser, A.C. (2003). Development and evaluation of a lesson authoring tool for AutoTutor. In V. Aleven, U. Hoppe, J. Kay, R. Mizoguchi, H. Pain, F. Verdejo, & K. Yacef (Eds.), AIED2003 Supplemental Proceedings (pp. 378-387). Sydney, Australia: University of Sydney School of Information Technologies. Van Eck, R. (September, 2006a). Building intelligent learning games. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning research & development frameworks. Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Van Eck, R. (2006b). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2). Van Eck, R. (2007). Six ideas in search of a discipline. In M. Spector, N. Seel, & K. Morgan (Eds.), The educational design and use of computer simulation games. Van Eck, R., & AIM Lab at the University of Memphis. (2006). Using games to promote girls’ positive attitudes toward technology. Innovate Journal, 2(3). Van Eck, R., Adcock, A., Susarla, S., & the TRG at Memphis. (2005, March 11-13). Embedded design: How authoring tools can ensure that instructional design is present when we can’t be there. Proceedings of the Southeastern Conference in Instructional Design & Technology: Challenges of eLearning & IDT, Mobile, AL. 

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

KEY TERMS Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS): Refers to commercially available digital (computer or console) games that are designed for entertainment rather than educational purposes. Digital Game-Based Learning (DGBL): Refers to any form of use or integration of game into a learning environment in which the game plays a central role and is itself a digital (computer or console) game. May refer to serious games, curriculum in which the students design their own game, or COTS GBL. Edutainment: A popular term from the 1980s derived from the merging of the words “education” and “entertainment.” Generally refers to computer or console software titles that are designed to teach content and which incorporate game-like features. More like tutorials than games, per se. Game-Based Learning (GBL): Refers to any learning environments or activities in which a game plays a central role. May refer to all forms of games, but most commonly paired with the word “digital,” as in digital game-based learning, first coined by Marc Prensky in 2000 in his book by the same title. Intrinsic Motivation: As it relates specifically to games, this theory was first proposed by Thomas Malone, and later extended by Thomas Malone and Mark Lepper in 1987. In general, intrinsic motivation is motivation that stems from internal events such as goals or affective responses rather than from external events such as rewards. In regards to games, there are four factors: challenge, curiosity, control, and fantasy. In particular, the concept of endogenous (internal, tightly integrated content and narrative/game contexts) vs. exogenous (external, disconnected content and narrative/game contexts) fantasy is key to developing instructional materials to support GBL.



NTeQ Model: A technology integration model (see below) that is problem based, student centered, authentic, collaborative, and in which students take on authentic roles and use technology in authentic ways to solve real-word problems as professionals in different disciplines. Problem-Based Learning: Learning environments and activities that place a problem at the center of the process. Learners adopt the roles of researchers and often work collaboratively to solve problems. In most cases, the problems are authentic, that is, they reflect real problems faced in the world by different professions, and require the same kinds of solution strategies. Problems serve to “anchor” learning within the problemsolving process rather than serving as assessment activities at the end of more traditional, didactic, instructivist learning. Serious Games: Games designed for purposes other than entertainment, according to Serious Games founder Ben Sawyer (personal communication, Serious Games ListServ). Distinguished from COTS because these are not purely for entertainment, and from edutainment because the learning is much more tightly integrated with the game environments than traditional edutainment titles. Situated Learning and Cognition: This theory arises out of a movement in cognitive studies in the 1970s that began to study human cognition in the contexts in which they naturally occur (Cohen & Siegel, 1991; Graesser & Magliano, 1991; Meacham & Emont, 1989). Research has shown that knowledge and transfer are strongly tied to context and domain (e.g., Bransford et al., 1986, 1989; Brown et al., 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Perkins & Salomon, 1989) and that learning is effective to the degree that it is embedded in a meaningful context (e.g., Choi, 1995; Choi & Hannafin, 1995).

A Guide to Integrating COTS Games into Your Classroom

Technology Integration: The process by which technology serves to support learning, rather than as a tool for creating or dissemination materials; distinguished from technology use, which would include things like using Word to write a research paper. Generally reflects problem-based learning in collaborative, authentic learning environments.

3

ENDNOTES 1

2

Surprisingly to many, teachers are not among this group. A survey of educators in the UK found that nearly 60% of teachers were willing to consider the use of games in the classroom (NESTA FutureLab, 2006). COTS games, as I will be using the term here, are generally defined as games that are commercially available and intended for purely entertainment purposes. As such, they are distinct from titles such as those

4

5

described earlier from Leapster and The Learning Company, which are more typically referred to as educational software or “edutainment.” Many games do include the equivalent of pre- and post-tests in the form of a tutorial one must complete in the beginning of the game to establish the basic skills needed to interact throughout the rest of the game, and in the form of level challenges where the player must beat the “boss” (a kind of super-bad guy) before moving on in the game. I am assuming that computers are the most likely platform since most schools have them, but you should consider console games as possibilities. In particular, the Nintendo DS Lite and Sony PSP are portable, relatively inexpensive, and have WiFi browsing, communication, and game-sharing capabilities. In fact, these are staples of nearly every “Tycoon” game.



00

Chapter XII

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play Shree Durga University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA Kurt Squire University of Wisconsin – Madison, USA

AbstrAct This chapter examines the potential of video games as a learning tool given their productive capacity for content creation and dissemination. Based on the findings from a longitudinal, twoyear design-based research study investigating the potential of learning communities constructed around using Civilization III (a turn-based historical simulation-strategy game), the chapter argues that historical model construction is a compelling way to mediate one’s understandings about history. Participants in this game- based learning program developed new identities as producers as well as consumers of historical simulations. Two distinct trajectories of expertise were found to be emerging: one that developed around expert, systemic gaming (orienting toward the experience as a game system), and another that we call historical gaming, orienting to the game experience as a form of “replaying history.” Both forms have value, emphasizing different aspects of the game system. We believe that a community tying these two forms of gaming together (and other ones, as they emerge) is key for building robust learning environments. Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

INtrODUctION Recent years have witnessed unforeseen leaps in technology, which many have argued are ushering in a new media paradigm (Galarneau, 2005). Video games are an excellent site to examine in order to understand this new medium, because games are natively digital. Video games are emblematic of the current popular culture we live in that has a distinctive zeitgeist. Examining games, we see three overriding themes that demarcate the modern media landscape: 1.

2.

3.

Video games are built around logic of simulation: One that is about possible worlds, rather than inspiring oratory, coherent linear arguments, or purely visual imagery. Games are worlds we explore, and learn within, through interaction and performance. Video games are participatory: Players have the opportunity to shape the medium itself through: (a) production within game worlds (many of which are filmed and published on the Internet), (b) production with game tools (such as modding), and (c) gaining membership in affinity groups, such as gaming clans, guilds, clubs, and so on, to support one’s gaming. Video games provide an aesthetic experience: Video games offer us opportunities to do new things and take on identities that are unavailable in the real world. As Galarneau (2005) writes, their potential impact in education may be best thought of as producing transformative experience.

A mature theory of game-based learning, we argue, will take into account the underlying principles by which they work as learning environments “naturalistically,” or “in the wild,” to borrow Hutchins’ (1995) term. Modern video games, with their myriad of toolkits for modding and interface editing, have increasingly evolved from being

compelling mediums that merely engage users passively, into spaces (and communities) that empower users to willfully create and disseminate content (Jenkins & Squire 2003; Steinkuehler & Johnson, this volume). As such, video games are not only a pervasive popular culture media, but also form some of the central discourses around 21st century pedagogical practices and what it means to teach or learn in a globalized future. The growing body of literature around video games and learning suggests that games are powerful models for teaching and can potentially affect how people can and ought to learn in the ever-changing landscape of knowledge (Shaffer & Gee, 2006). A key challenge that remains for educators is how to produce pedagogical models that leverage the strengths of the medium, yet meet educationally valued goals. Restated, we know that players learn through participation in MMOs such as World of Warcraft (Steinkuehler, 2005, Nardi, Ly, & Harris, forthcoming; Galarneau & Zibit 2006), and that educational interventions that use game technologies (such as networked 3D worlds) can be effective. But how might we harness the simulation, participatory, and aesthetic dimensions of games for intentional learning? This chapter will examine the potential of video games as a learning tool given their productive capacity for content creation and dissemination. Using the Civilization III game engine (a turnbased historical simulation-strategy game), we explore whether a group of disadvantaged kids playing a series of historically themed scenarios can become the kind of “producers” of media and knowledge described by Squire and Giovanetto (in press). We seek to build on the participatory nature of gaming communities (most often virtual) which function for many players as “third spaces”spaces that emerge out of coherent and shared history of information and tend to perpetuate game practices beyond virtual game worlds and foster social interactions beyond homes and workplaces (Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006). As of this writing, our community is primarily face

0

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

to face, although we are exploring ways to extend the community into virtual spaces as well.

SIMULATION IN WORLD HISTORY When it comes to history teaching in schools, there has remained a persistent tradition to present history as a body of facts about people and events in the past extracted and isolated from the larger contexts in which they existed, laying importance on getting the right facts from textbooks rather than how and why they should care about these facts. Research on how students learn history through reading textbooks reveals some of the limitations of this approach. For example, Beck, McKeown, and Gromoll (1989) found that students lacked sufficient background understanding to make much sense of text as presented in textbooks, and as a result produced (sometimes fascinating) hybridized historical interpretations, such as 17th century colonists arriving to the Americas on ocean liners. Students lack situated experience of historical events and eras to draw any meaningful interpretation of the past. The challenges for world history educators are even greater. World history, the study of global cultures and civilizations, seeks to capture and communicate over 6,000 years of recorded human history, across all six inhabited continents. Whereas much of history has been organized around political units, world history is organized around natural resources (such as salt), social institutions (such as slavery), or historical questions (such as, Why have major civilizations collapsed?). Teaching world history to students is no small task, particularly when a majority of students fail even to correctly place major civilizations on a map. Dunn (1996) argues that in order to avoid this “names and dates” problem, educators might seek to teach “patterns of change,” broad historical patterns and trends that can be used as frameworks for understanding human history.

0

Historical simulations are one way to provide students a framework to think about history that stresses not facts, but how historical forces operate and interact (Staley, 2003). Simulations and models simplify the infinitely complex past into a form that enables students to make insights into basic relationships. Simulations offer useful simplifications of complex situations and are often “imperfect replica” of the real. Learning through modeling is an iterative process of modeling the past, drawing inferences based on them, comparing them to the historical record, and modifying the model as necessary. This iterative cycle of abduction shares very little with how history is normally taught in schools, but shares quite a bit with how players learn through video games. Learning through video game-based simulations and virtual modeling destabilizes traditional categories and relations. Because video games enable us to learn through having agency within a system, they demand us to shift perspectives in approaching history, enabling designers to make historiographic choices about how systems are represented, and what sorts of alternate hypotheses and interpretations of the past are made available (Staley, 2003). This pedagogical approach decenters the standard text (or teachers’ notes) from the center of the knowledge network, and places students’ questions, hypotheses, and fantasies at the center. From a model-based learning environment perspective, learning entails more than mastering one long narrative of facts; learning is about developing the ability to ask good questions, draw inferences from the model, identify points in the model that can or need to be modified, and then marshal resources to refine the model. From a socially situated perspective, the goal here is not to learn “all there is to know about one true model,” or even to “develop one true model,” but rather to engage in modeling practices within a knowledge-building community where knowledge is contested, constructed, and defended.

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

Modding with Civ3 The commercial computer game Civilization III (or Civ3) is an interesting artifact by which one can begin testing these ideas. In Civ3, players lead a civilization (the standard game goes from 4000 B.C. to the present), making choices about how to use land resources (such as where to build cities), where to invest resources (such as in “guns vs. butter”), what kinds of infrastructure to build, and how to manage one’s military. Unlike many strategy games, which are generally just about identifying resources and then building war units, Civ3 does reasonably good (albeit simplified) approximations of economic systems, political systems, domestic systems, and military systems. The game can be won through diplomatic, scientific, cultural, or military means. Although the game is (obviously) a simplification of reality, the model does contain tens of thousands of variables and takes months, if not years to master. Civilization comes with an editing toolkit, CivEdit, that allows players to create historical scenarios. Through the editing toolkit, players can modify game rules or define new ones that can simulate specific historical events or patterns in the past. Typically, a game in Civilization III starts with an equitable distribution of power among civilizationsmeaning different attributes (such as militaristic, commercial, industrious, expansionist, religious, or scientific) of a civilization make it strong or weak in its own way. A scenario in Civilization III is a depiction of events or an era (that can either as hypothetical or historically accurate as one wishes it to be), spanning over the scale of time. For example, using the game toolkit, players may create a scenario for growth or decline of the Roman civilization, or a scenario depicting European conquests in South Africa. Players can modify almost every attribute of the game, such as a civilization’s economic growth, population growth, cost of building new infrastructure, cultural expansion, and so on. Thus, the concept of a strong or weak civilization is

not an in-built feature in the game, but viewed as a consequence that emerges from manipulating certain variables and conditions, such as cost of wonders or pace of technological research that affect different attributes of a civilization. In other words, simulating historical patterns or events is about choosing the relevant variables to manipulate, hypothesizing about effects of manipulating each rule and describing (or setting) them in CivEditin a nutshell, speaking the language of CivEdit to control the behavior of a scenario in Civ3. Past research on Civ3, conducted mostly in school contexts, has emphasized, when used in the context of classroom, that playing Civ3 can lead to game practices that foster systemic model-based understandings about history (Squire, 2003, 2004). Not only do players learn specific terminology (names, places, and dates), but they also develop understanding about how the model itself works as a means for representing history. Some players turned the game into a colonial simulation tool, using it as a context for asking under what conditions might have Native Americans held European colonists. Others were interested in playing as Egypt, and seeing if they could fend off the Greeks, Persians, and Romans. Still others played competitively, seeking to play the civilization most advantageous for world domination, given their play style (some prefer cultural expansion, as opposed to military expansion, for example). Most obviously, social studies became a meaningful subject for students, as the game invited their participation into manipulating history as a system. More advanced players developed models to think about history with, and used it as a tool for thinking through contemporary issues. Open-ended games such as Civilization III provide rich contexts for learning through recruiting players’ identities, providing a context for creative expression, and supporting the development of collective intelligence (Gee, 2004; Steinkuehler, 2005); however, bringing games into classrooms and settings poses structural and pedagogical

0

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

challenges, especially in terms of managing instructional time, integrating learning activities into the curriculum, and covering state-mandated content. Games’ complexity can at times lead to frustration and resistance among kids in the process of appropriation (Squire & Barab, 2004). Studies of learning outside of school contexts emphasize the importance of novice-expert collaborations in joint problem-solving activity as a means of managing this complexity. Steinkuehler (2006) shows how advanced players make many of the same instructional moves as advanced teacher-mentors (regardless of age): they identify salient parts of a problem situation, model expert practice, provide just-in-time feedback, gradually shift control to learners, and transmit particular values or ways of seeing the world to novices. Such examples suggest that games can be an effective medium for learning, but are hard pressed to leverage many of the instructional affordances of the medium within classroom contexts (Squire, 2004; Squire & Barab, 2004). Might after-school programs be created around alternative value systems, leveraging aspects of gamer discourse in order to enable players to develop productive identities as historical simulation game players? Can these practices result in both “traditional” academic learning (names, places, and dates), as well as the productive knowledge-generation skills indigenous to game communities and increasingly valued by educators (see 21st Century Thinking Skills, n.d.)? What might the pay-off of these activities be for participation in other settings?

Connecting Indigenous and Designed Gaming Practices This chapter is part of a longitudinal, two-year design-based research study investigating the potential of learning communities constructed around Civ3 to help disadvantaged students develop new identities as producers as well a consumers of historical simulation games. It seeks to design a game-based learning environment that,

0

from a physical and organizational standpoint, can function as a third space for learning outside of the school (Squire, DeVane, & Durga, in press). It then seeks to understand what learning occurs, and identity trajectories of learning as a result. First, it seeks to unpack the practice of historical modding with Civ3 by interviewing expert Civ3 modders to understand how they use the tool for historical modding, what skills go into successfully creating a Civ3 mod, and to better elucidate the relationship between game-play and game production in expert players. Next, the chapter turns to World Civilizations, an after-school club designed for the explicit purpose of helping disadvantaged students develop identities (knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, and value systems) as world history gamers.

Expert Use of Civilization III for Creating Historical Simulations Although the existence of gamers using Civ3 as a modding tool has been noted and even supported by the developers of Civilization (Soren Johnson, lead designer of Civ IV has an academic background in historical simulations), there has been no academic study of this practice. Historical game simulation, while presumably similar to historical simulation creation, adds the wrinkle of designing scenarios that are interesting as gameshistorical situations that illuminate historical forces and issues, lead to interesting sets of decisions, and enable players to experience salient aspects of historical eras. To date, no research has been conducted on what kinds of cognitive work go into historical game production, how this unique practice emerges in players, nor its potential as a model for expert game-play/production tied to academically valued practices. To begin answering these questions, we studied expert Civ3 mod developers (Squire et al., in press). Specifically, we observed as they built mods, conducted think-aloud studies while they edited mods, interviewed them about their

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

practice, and analyzed historical scenarios they created. Findings from this study suggested that the language recruited by Civ3 mod creation recruits specific forms of thinking about factual knowledge in history that might be more meaningful than mere memorization of facts. Players used game mechanics and language, such as the role of military alliances, building city improvements or great wonders, gaining power through conquests or through cultural invasion as tools for thinking through historical events. Within the context of modding, these tools deeply remediated their experience and analysis of history. Implications to history teaching is that it ought to focus on curriculums that nurture designers who get the opportunity to make sense of history through creating and willfully regulating simulations of historical events. The analysis of expert modding revealed three particular game practices core to modding, each of which suggests an interesting form of “academic play” worth exploring (and perhaps replicating) in intentional learning environments: a.

Expert players modified game scenarios to make them more historically relevant through repurposing and manipulating existing game units and features to compensate for features absent in the “stock” game. In discussing their play, these players/designers referred to facts (or events from real scenarios) and used them to describe (and sometimes redefine) game attributes. For example, in creating a scenario based on the world map, one of the participants remarked, “Triggering barbarian uprising simulates [quite accurately] the Mongolian presence around China in 4000 B.C. Mongolians invaded China frequently to systematically devastate Chinese empire.” He repurposes barbarian uprising to simulate Mongolian oppression in China around the 4000 B.C.

b.

c.

Players used Civ3 as a recursive design/ play space where they iteratively play and redesign. These players’ interest in scenario design stems from identifying limitations in the core game and then creating their own game scenarios to result in an “idealized” version of the game. These players use game-play as a space for refining their idealized game and testing their ongoing hypotheses over extended periods of time. For example, when asked why one would want to use the game-editing toolkit, the participant said: “I use it (Civ3) as a history simulator. I would come up with a wish list of stuff I want to change while I play the game. Scenario creation is not about accurately or inaccurately simulating history, but [constantly] modifying the scenario to bridge the gap between my hypotheses and the way Civilization III played them out.” Game-play, for expert players, consists of seeking to create emergent historical phenomena through manipulating underlying variables. These players create hypotheses about what historical events will emerge when global forces are altered in particular ways. This manipulation of events is (necessarily) mediated in terms of the game’s pre-existing commands and variables. For example, in a scenario about European colonization of Africa in the 1400s, a participant describes his design processes, out aloud, “before the European conquest of Africa the Bantu tribes were either pastoral or agricultural and usually pacific. What if I made Bantus numerous [by starting them out with a lot of cities] and give them high culture points (as a way to model the influence of a less nomadic people on historical development)?” He hypothesizes that a higher native African population that is less nomadic (with well established and inter-connected cities) and culturally wide-

0

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

spread could have posed a greater challenge to Europeans in their conquests of Africa (and be interesting to play). These examples suggest how game affordances and players’ subjective interests interactively create a form of game-play based around historiographic choices. In creating or modifying a scenario, players view historical facts as modifiable variables in the scenarios they create in order to instantiate specific historical simulation. Scenario editing entails knowledge about the right kinds of rules to modify in game and the kinds of variables to access in order to do so. Thus, in many ways, developing the skill to design historically relevant scenarios relies heavily on the ability to identify in-game factors such as rates of cultural expansion, as well as a thorough understanding of how factors like economic interdependence and organized religion play into civilization conquests. In doing so, the game demands specific forms of thinking about historical concepts facts; it recruits specific forms of thinking and hypothesizing about factual knowledge in history. Thus, in expert Civ3 players, model-based understanding is manifest in their ability to understand the underlying architecture of the game system and model the key features in ways to instantiate the scenario as hypothesized.

DESIGNING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS FOR HISTORIOGRAPHIC GAMING These examples illuminate the nature of “productive” gaming, suggesting how expert “productive,” mod-making practices include appropriating the game to create a more accurate modeling tool, iteratively playing and designing game scenarios to create a customized, “ideal” version of Civ3, and using Civ3 as a representational model for interrogating history or for creating an idealized, customized form of Civ3. How might we design

0

learning environments that give players access to such high-end, productive gaming practicesin other words, historiographic gaming? To investigate this question, researchers are iteratively researching and designing an afterschool game-based learning program. Participants enter as novices, and through time learn to make their own game mods. The core learning activity involves playing a series of multiplayer game scenarios played in one- to one-and-a-half-hour time periods. Research methods were drawn from a design-based methodological framework, by deliberately and appropriately not controlling variables and using research methodologies to fit the morphing intervention, leading to considerable evolution of the treatment over time (Dede, 2004). The design goal was to engineer effective learning conditions while theorizing the models that worked out to be successful in this setting (Bannan-Ritland, 2003). In other words, interventions were drawn from participant expertise in the game scenarios (such as introductory or advanced) and their involvement with the game (such as wanting to play a multiplayer or singleplayer game). This approach to user-centered design seeks to develop “personas” of different users, including models of who the gamers are and what they want to accomplish, as opposed to one “standardized, homogeneous” model of the user (Cooper, 1999). Thus, the particular activities of various sessions were individualized to meet the group needs. This methodology can be broken down into four parts: 1.

2.

3.

The specific games were designed to accommodate varying difficulty levels and play styles. During and after gaming sessions, facilitators led briefings in response to observations made during play. To drill down on specific phenomena, researchers conducted structured and semistructured interviews.

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

4.

Researchers designed driving events, events such as game competitions and modding challenges that were designed to: (a) serve as instruments to capture snapshots of players progression on well-specified tasks, (b) bolster enthusiasm for the program, and (c) enable players to see how they have progressed over time.

Players were encouraged to start out in pairs. During the game session, at least one facilitator played with the participants. The facilitator also created reflection activities for the end of each game to coalesce understandings. All of the sessions were video recorded and entered into an online database of videos, imported into the software program Transana. Researchers met in weekly meetings to identify themes and plan future events. During analysis, composite cases of particular students were identified, themes were expanded, modified, and refined. Next, the database was interrogated for additional confirming or disconfirming evidence. Key passages elucidating particular themes were identified and transcribed. This chapter organizes these findings around key themes that seek to elucidate the relationship between historiographic game-play and learning, and to suggest features for how similar environments might be designed in the future.

Expertise in Socially Contextualized Gaming A notable feature of Civ Camp, as a learning environment, was the variety of activities simultaneously occurring within it. Activities ranged from multiplayer games, to single-player games, to “simultaneous” single-player games (everyone playing the same single-player game at the same time). Nevertheless, the activity revolved around playing various versions of Civ3, and as such, the shared space of the computer lab enabled the creation of a common discourse.

Making Knowledge Public One typical practice was that individuals, after achieving a noteworthy accomplishment, would announce their progress to the group. Each time a new discovery (such as writing) was made, players would herald this to the entire group. This practice achieved several functions. For some players, it redefined the “game” being played in terms of their own goals: players with a large number of “Great Wonders” could, for example, reframe the game from being about military conquest to being about constructing wonders. Other times, it advertised one’s technological (and hence military) superiority. From a learning perspective, a key effect of this practice was that it advertised to other players what forms of accomplishment were available (new players were exposed to new terminology, concepts, and strategies this way), and it propelled others to compete with their peers. For example, soon after Mike acquired map-making, he built a galley and declared, “I made a boat.” Another participant responded, “I’ve got to have the stuff the other guys have,” and he proceeded to set about developing this capacity. Other times, vocal narrations of game-play became a part of the game-play itself. In the same game, as Rome (played by Jason) is at war with Carthage (played by Levi, facilitator), Russia (played by Marvin) is recruiting allies to war against Rome-Jason, seeking to capitalize on the fact that this protracted war has weakened RomeJason, and left them vulnerable. Russia-Marvin begins recruiting the Phoenicians (played by Deontey) to attack Rome-Jason. Russia-Marvin writes (in the chat space, which is public), “Romans are in my territory…they don’t have the right of passage. How about a military alliance? I think we should team up against Jason…Levi is strong and already up against Jason.” First, this example suggests how terminology such as “Romans,” “right of passage,” and “military alliance” were taken up by players as tools for communication. In this example, as in earlier

0

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

studies (cf. Squire, Giovanetto, Devane, & Durga, 2005), such language naturally arose in players as they needed tools to communicate with. Second, this example illustrates how the multiplayer game became an object for public scrutiny, and how negotiating interpretations of events and potential moves became a core component of game-play. In this example, Marvin begins with an observation that Rome is in his territory and an interpretation that this is an aggressive, hostile act. He notes that Romans are at war, and that Jason’s chief adversary, Levi, is strong. This statement is designed to put political pressure on Rome-Jason, which in other games has resulted in the offender removing units from enemy territory, tithing to avoid a war, or a public reinterpretation of events. This kind of public analysis of the game model and subsequent political negotiation around it was core to the game-play, something not observed in single-player games. Much of the game-play became this sort of argumentation, with those who can expertly dissect the system gaining the most social capital. It is noteworthy that almost no direct instruction on how to play the game occurred in this camp, but rather, players learned the rules (and subsequent terminology) through constant strategizing and action within the game world. These sorts of negotiations and ways of playing the game form particular game discourses, or “ways of being in world”within the game community, suggesting the fundamentally social nature of gaming expertise (Steinkuehler, 2006).

Collaborative Troubleshooting as Exploration of Game Concepts Multiplayer games functioned as joint problemsolving contexts. Similar to how learning occurs in massively multiplayer games (see Steinkuehler, 2006), learning through game-play featured players collaborating to dissect and understand the game system. Interpretations of the game system flowed freely among participants. Social value was placed on public displays of knowledge (usually

0

performed as a sort of political negotiation) rather than on pure “success.” In the following example, Jason, Sid, and Marvin discuss military units such as scouts, warriors, and horsemen in exploring, again, as a part of a broader political negotiation: Sid: There is a Russian scout in my territory! Marvin: Scouts can’t attack or take over cities…right? (looks for confirmation from Levi). Sid opens the exchange with an observation that a Russian Scout is in his territory, which as illustrated above, is often interpreted within this community (as in many) as a pre-cursor to war. Marvin interjects, noting (in the form of a question) that scouts cannot take over cities. This question is designed to result in Levi, the expert, answering “no,” which Marvin hopes will result in his move not being interpreted as aggressive. Sid: What’s the point in bringing a scout if they can’t attack? You can just take your warriors instead. Marvin: Scouts travel faster than warriors. Jason (overhearing the conversation): Once you get your horsemen, send them on to explore…and pillage and stuff and then send swordsmen to follow them. In this example, Sid (who is eight years old and a novice by comparison) “buys” the interpretation that the scout is only exploring, but then asks what the point of bringing scouts into enemy territory is, since they cannot attack (and warriors can). Marvin responds with a factual explanation (scouts move faster), although, notably, he does not share why strategically this is a desirable move. Sid will have to figure that out on his own. (The primary reason scouts are desirable is that they enable the player to locate strategic resources such as horses or iron in advance and design a civilization so as to maximize access to these resources.) After this game session, as on most days, players recapitulated what happened. This practice enabled players to brag about their accom-

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

plishments while also collectively dissecting the game system to better learn from actions. This kind of debriefing, which is considered key in the literature around gaming (cf. Thiagarajan, 1998), flowed naturally in this game space. Participants exhibited a natural desire to discuss their specific game moves and strategies, the result of which were general heuristics that became “taken-asshared” meanings within the community. This particular game was marked by very quick losses by several players due to excessive warring early in the game. Jason explains what he learned: Jason: No war till you have spearman defending your cities. I’d say build one warrior as soon as you build the city, because barbarians stole gold from my city. Becky: I declared peace with every Civ. Mitzi (who did not like losing her cities): My strategy was building cities and attacking other people to get our cities back. Thus, the learning process through play was deeply iterative. Similar to Peirce’s “abductive” reasoning process, it followed a pattern of players developing and holding a model of the game system (such as build units and attack civilizations to obtain their resources), then suffering from expected losses and a quagmire of uncertainty about the model (and personal conflict) which led players to refine their understanding of the model (Driscoll, 1994). Jason develops a relatively simple algorithm for maintaining a defense. Becky reports a different strategy altogether, which here is a proto-strategy (play peacefully), which in later games she developed into a mature strategy of rapid growth, exploration, and building, so that she had an infrastructure vastly superior to the other, more military-focused players. Mitzi’s strategy was similar to Becky’s, albeit more defensive.

Creating a Playful, Lucid Mood Conversations as a core gaming activity not only mediated problem solving, and group and individual play, but also set up the general mood for the spacean interesting parallel between third spaces in MMOs and in this sort of faceto-face gaming community (Steinkuehler, 2005; Steinkuehler & Williams, 2006). Steinkuehler (2005), in her portrayal of MMOs as third spaces, describes old-timers as “regulars” who give MMOs its character by setting up the general mood for the space. Similarly, conversations in Civ Camp transcend game-mechanics and produced a social context specific to Civ Camp. The nature of this space, which might be described as a playfully competitive environment, was one that researchers (as designers) frequently struggled to negotiate. On the one hand, the space had to be “the kids’ own space” and reflect their needs and desires to game in particular ways, but at some times, this emergent ethic contradicted our own sensitivity and values. For example, the following excerpt between Monroe (an old-timer), Sid (old-timer), and Sadira (newcomer) illustrates the playful, but direct competitiveness and even “hazing” that often emerged: Monroe: You’re going to get killed as soon as I spot you. Sadira (seeking a facilitator’s assistance): Ask Monroe to stop. Monroe: I am the champion. Sid: I want to kill Sadira too. Facilitator: Why would you do that? Sid: Because I like killing easy people. That’s what everybody does when you’re new. As was often the case, the facilitator proceeded to form an alliance with Sadira in order to usher her into the game space in a safe way. Interactions such as these established the spirit of the environment and made it their own. Many displayed a desire to repetitively play and replay

0

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

old games until they perfected particular strategies or approaches. This mastery occurred through a sort of self-initiated drill-and-practice routine, albeit augmented by the game’s many forms of evaluative feedback. In summary, participants partook in discourse practices prototypical to the social space of Civ Camp, through: a.

b.

c.

Participation in conversations in game vocabulary (such as building military alliances, negotiating trade, etc.); Displaying membership in a collective (competing to be in the “everyone” group by getting the same technologies and units that others have); and Enculturation in the social practices of the shared space (e.g.; setting up the general mood, bragging; and “smack-talking” during the game).

From Newcomer to Expert Participation Research on expert cognition details five stages that people go through in transitioning from novice to experts in which they develop qualitative differences in how they understand phenomena. A pervasive finding is that experts attend to deep structures in a problem, whereby novices focus on surface structures (see Chi, Feltovich, & Glaser, 1981). Within Civ Camp, we see evidence for players’ awareness of structure reflected in the kinds of questions they asked during game-play. Surface Features—Military Overkill, Discovering Resources, and Dealing with Civil Disorders In early single-player games, participants’ questions focus on questions about the basic game rules (e.g., “Can barbarians take over my city?”), relatively simple strategic questions reflecting a lack of goals in the game or awareness of how to accomplish them (e.g., “I have a settler; what

0

should I build next?”), or questions stemming from a lack of comprehension of game events, such as civil disorder, which is triggered when the number of discontented citizens crosses a threshold (e.g., “My city is burning, how do I fix this?”). Typically, these questions would elicit a simple explanation from a more advanced player (often, but not always a facilitator). For example, Jason asks the facilitator, “What do spices give me?”, to which the facilitator responds, “Spices are luxury that make your people happy. Basically, if you build road to it, you can get access to it.” Another common early misunderstanding in defense was military overkill. In Civ3 the early forms of governments can only support a limited number of military units, after which point players must pay one gold piece for every excess unit (which simulates the cost of maintaining a military). Marvin, unaware of the game’s implicit model, stacks up dozens of warriors and spearmen and complains, “How come I’m getting no gold?” Much of the first dozen or so hours of play involves learning these basic features of the game model and mastering the “basics.” Deep Structures—Building Fewer, Yet More Manageable Cities and Strategic Placement of Cities to Take Advantage of Resources, Natural Barriers In later games, players displayed understanding of the game model (deep structure) of the game through choices and decisions. This example occurs roughly a year into the program. Players are given a challenge: pick seven early technologies and place three cities on the map. Jason (playing as Celts) places his cities in close proximity to resources, with each city having access to either horses or iron. Jason had reverse-engineered the scoring system in Civ3 and focuses on accumulating points for the sake of a high score by planning faster expansion through a large number of cities. Conversely, in the multiplayer game challenge (based on the 100 Years’ War scenario), Monroe,

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

playing as the English, shares his frustration on too many settlers: “Argh! Settler, I’ll disband him.” When prompted by the facilitator to build one more city, he responds: “I’d rather have fewer stronger cities.” As a matter of fact, Monroe had just spelled out an underlying game mechanica large number of ineffective cities are too expensive to maintain and more so during a period of unending war with the French, something that would be inconsequential in a short, single-player game where the goal was to amass points quickly, but would matter in a longer multiplayer game, where players would need to build an economic infrastructure. These examples demonstrate that Jason and Monroe are able to unpack the game architecture and also make decisions based upon situational references (victory points in single-player games, building an economic infrastructure in multiplayer games). Both Jason and Monroe see the literal game features (like war, population growth, number of cities, or access to resources), while identifying the foundational principles of each game. Their strategies, are loaded with solution schemes that they apply flexibly, as opposed to mere attempts to find specific unknowns or single solution answers (as was the case in earlier games).

Developing Multiple Trajectories of Expertise The preceding example elucidated expertise from a more traditionally cognitive perspective; we can also examine expertise from a socio-cultural learning perspective as participation in social practice. Three elements key to this model are: (a) social acceptance of newcomers to the community of practice; (b) progression of newcomers from peripheral or smaller roles, to more and more important roles in the community; and (c) knowledge acquisition though participation, because knowledge is not a static commodity one receives, but a dynamic process of participation that one does (Lave & Wenger, 1990).

Unlike Lave and Wenger’s account of participation, which emphasized relatively uniform notions of “central” practice, in Civ Camp (much like in the affinity groups described by Gee, 2005), there were multiple models of expert practice. In openended spaces like Civ Camp that accommodate varying competencies, the notion of expert gaming is a relatively fluid concept (see Squire et al., in press), consisting of mutually overlapping forms of game-play, such as game modding, expert military play, or play as historical inquiry. At least two distinct trajectories of expertise development were evidenced in the long term in Civ Camp participants: 1. 2.

Systemic, game-design approach to gaming (embodied by Jason), and Gaming as historical inquiry (embodied by Monroe).

These two forms of gaming overlapped, and at times participants could engage in each, but fundamentally they reflect two different orientations toward the game experience.

Systemic Approaches to Gaming Over the course of one year in the program, Jason developed a design orientation to Civ. For Jason, Civ3 was very much a gamea game with inputs (action), outputs (scores or various victory states), and an underlying model that governed how they work. The first player in the group to learn Civ3’s victory scoring system, Jason enthusiastically shared his understanding in the single-player challenge: “My score goes up if I build more cities.” Jason’s interest was in exploring and manipulating the boundaries of the game system. Jason constantly monitored his game statistics and self-evaluated his progress, comparing different in-game victory parameters such as culture points, score, and power. In the multiplayer challenge game, playing as the French, Jason takes pride for a high culture point: “…let me



Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

show you something, power wise, Sid is better than me, but I’m still doing so well on culture.” At times, this sort of “reframing the game along different parameters” could be seen as simply a way of maintaining status in the community while “losing.” However, as we shall see next, for some players (indeed many) the scores are more or less irrelevant, as compared to their own particular gaming goalswinning in their own particular way. Jason’s approach to mentoring peers also reflected this orientation toward Civ3 as a game with more or less “optimal” ways to “game the system.” For example, when the group started the “Age of Discovery Scenario,” which was designed to align with what they were studying in school, Jason oriented a newcomer as follows: “Pay attention to the Civs, like where they would start out on the map, because your cities can grow and expand faster.” Reflecting after the game, Jason advises, “I’d say build a warrior as soon as you build a city.” Jason shares a military strategy with another player: “Once you get your horsemen, send them of to explore…and pillage and stuff and then send [initiate attack with] swordsmen to follow them.” Jason’s strategic advice (which he gave frequently and freely) was oriented around specific strategies to “win,” emphasizing strategies that optimally “gamed the system,” a strategy that we have seen elsewhere (cf. Squire, 2004) and have called the “min-max” approach.

Historical Inquiry in Game-Play Monroe’s predisposition to history was manifest in his orientation to game-play. As Monroe acquired systemic understanding about the game (also discussed under the development of systemic expertise), he began using the game as a model guiding his historical inquiry. Playing Civ3 elicited Monroe’s prior knowledge and piqued his interest in history. Monroe commonly related his game-play to actual events in history, and frequently sought to play the scenarios as they



were in history. For example, when discussing the newly introduced concept, the “Golden Age,” Monroe responds: “I know what a golden age is, your civilization becomes wealthier and you have great discoveries and build great wonders.” Monroe describes Golden Age as the game concept that triggers increased production and trade as a historical metaphor often ascribed to periods of great endeavors in history when a Civilization is at its peek. He does not mention any particular game outputs (in fact, wonders and discoveries are results of player actions). Unlike Jason, who frames advice and game discussion of units in terms of strategies, Monroe relates it back to historical concepts. Similarly, when participating in the singleplayer challenge (where Jason “min-maxed the system to gain points via building cities), Jason took a different approach, seeking to pursue technologies, build wonders, and build a robust civilization that could last until the middle ages. He explains, “I’m going to go for mathematics to get the Statue of Zeus” (a wonder that can be built after discovering Mathematics). When a civilization offered to trade a city, he responded, “I don’t want your city. I need technology. I’m almost to the Middle Ages!” Compared to Jason, Monroe is much more interested in using historical concepts, pursuing strategies that fulfill his goal of “replaying history,” and exploring new ways to win through technological and economic development. At no point does Monroe mention points or “winning.” For Monroe, the pleasure is more in the process of playing through scenarios. Later in the camp, in an Age of Discovery scenario, a facilitator noted that Monroe was playing as the Portuguese. His ship was sailing around the North Americas, looking for a place to land. The facilitator asks him, “Why aren’t there French settlements in North America?” Monroe’s response blends game events and history, and his response is, “The French were more interested in trading instead of settling. They mostly made agreements with the Indians instead of attacking

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

them.” For Monroe, this sort of historical fantasy was core to his game-play. Monroe on occasion would bring his history book to camp to look up information as well.

Mod-Making Unlike previous educational interventions with Civ3 that were designed around learning through playing scenarios, participants in the Civ Camp developed a level of expertise deep enough for them to begin transitioning into producers of game scenarios as well. When it came to mod making, both Jason and Monroe used Civ3 as a history simulation tool, albeit with different emphases. For the scenario challenge competition, Jason constructed an ancient Rome scenario designed to “replay” ancient history and examine under what conditions Rome may have not succeeded Greece as a dominant European empire. Jason comments, “In real-life Rome won Greece, but in the scenario I’ve made no one has any advantage

over the other, Greece has a strong defense…the hoplites and Rome has Legions. I played as both to test.” This scenario focuses primarily on relative military strengths, and seeks to rebalance game dynamics to make a more “equal” and fun game, as well as to explore this historical hypothetical. After building this mod, Jason expressed interest in building a “Star Wars” mod with the Civ3 toolkit. Without any encouragement from the researchers (and indeed unbeknownst to us until weeks into the project), he began keeping a notebook of design ideas, which he carried to school. This notebook contained approximately 20 pages of notes on unit types, methods for implementing features, and so on. When we learned of this endeavor, we sat down with Jason and showed him several similar total conversion mods, such as a “Lord of the Rings” mod. Jason explained to us that he wanted to be a game designer when he grew up. Monroe, in contrast, modeled the current geopolitical conditions surrounding the U.S.–Iraq

Figure 1. Trajectories of expertise



Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

Figure 2. Trajectories of expertise development over the course of two years

War (see Figure 2). Monroe’s goal was to see if the Civ editor could be used to model the modern world. Monroe spent a significant amount of time (both he and his sister estimated it at 30–40 hours) researching and referencing different sources for information, from encyclopedias to the Internet. This research included changing names and boundaries to reflect today’s conditions, as he used the editor to rename civilization leaders to reflect current leader names. He created, moved, and renamed cities. Monroe used the permanent alliance feature to model the U.S. and UK alliance against Iraq. Much of the work for Monroe involved reciprocally building maps, identifying features that needed to be included, and then sifting through the editors of thousands of settings to find the best way to model chosen phenomena. By the end of this unit, Monroe had new interests with modding. Monroe struggled with how to model religion in Civ3 (something obviously important to contemporary political conflict, but not introduced to the Civ series until Civ4).



At the end of the school year, Monroe’s teacher requested him to list 10 things he wanted to learn the following year, and number one was how to use the Civ3 editor to model religious conflict in Civ3. Perhaps to the teacher’s surprise, all 10 items related to learning with Civilization. Included in this list was a short proposal to learn American history through building a Revolutionary War mod. Monroe spent about 25 hours doing background research and playing with various maps to get this started, and he suggested that he could build it over the summer and then write a paper to accompany it. When comparing with expert modding practices, scenario editing is still at its nascent stages. Participants mostly focused on surface features (e.g., leader names, permanent alliances) and only began to adapt and change features, such as adding resources or manipulating core game variables. Both exhibit a readiness to transition to a deeper sort of modding practice. For Jason, the interest was fundamentally in game systems and game

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

design. Monroe’s interest was primarily in using the game as a tool for modeling contemporary and historical events. In both examples, we see an interest in understanding how the language of the Civ3 editing toolkit might be used as a tool for expressing ideas. Future implications might be to take a closer look at cognitive effects of game-modding for developing model-based historical reasoning and developing curriculum that is specifically structured around game modding in Civ3.

DISCUSSION: HISTORIOGRAPHIC GAMING Multiplayer games hosted in shared space functioned like sandboxes, which enable multiple forms of creative, expressive play. The learning process for these players was fundamentally social; knowledge about game rules and literal game features is acquired as players are apprenticed into conversations around multiplayer games and discourses typical to Civ Camp as a whole. Findings from the research indicate that through deliberate scaffolding and structured facilitation of activities over time, players develop systemic understandings about the game. Both games and the game environment were designed in particular ways to produce mastery. Learning occurred through what might be called “semistructured” tasks (e.g., single-player challenge); tasks that situatedgradually developing their understandings of game mechanics, while also encouragingwere not only able to situate in their understandings about the mechanisms of the game, but also were able to imbue skills that are indigenous to expert gaming practice, such as apprenticeship in discourses, situated understanding, and model-based understanding. These examples argue for a new (admittedly nascent) genre of games for learning, which we have called historiographic gaming. This pedagogical approach is based on indigenous forms

of gaming practices that have generated interesting forms of learning with games that embody key attributes of games (based on simulation, participatory in nature, and designed around aesthetics of experience). This program has sought to transition novices players into producers of game scenarios, with some success. The depth of learning required to truly become expert modders is substantial. Within this timeframe there is evidence that some participants were becoming expert gamers and novice modderswith hints of movement toward more expert. We observed two distinct trajectories of expertise emerging: one that developed around expert, systemic gaming (orienting toward the experience as a game system), and another that we call historical gaming, orienting to the game experience as a form of “replaying history.” Both forms have value, emphasizing different aspects of the game system. We believe that a community tying these two forms of gaming together (and other ones, as they emerge) is key for building robust learning environments. Within this context, games functioned as places for joint collaboration, allowing these forms of play to come together. More explicit comparisons across game types could add to deeper learning, encouraging players to investigate various aspects of the system. When it comes to reform or change in an existing system or practice, it is not merely about making changes in the surface structures, but about questioning the ways people function (or expected to function) and how those structures are constructed. While schools have successfully identified the “categories” of learners (e.g., the problem-solving kind or the collaborating kind), these categories seem rather abstract and lack functionality. A rather profound effect of schooling seems to lie in acquiring these abstract categories. The after-school game, Civ Camp, on the other hand functions as embryonic communities (Dewey, 1938), where realization of social motives and construction of meaning through actions enacted out in specific ways makes up



Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

specific kinds of learners and gives them identities in and outside of the game. While schools tend to view new technologies as multiple elements and multiple literacies, and that learning entails acquisition of all those skills, games are about multiplicities in worldnot the “one” that is said in many ways, but rather the multiple that is “folded in many ways,” in print, talk, image, gesture, or art (Gee, 2003). In this sense, learning is not unities or totalities, but multiplicities that are exemplified in the interplay of multiple identities. There are multiplicities in games and spaces designed around games, like Civ camps that operate in a system and eventually raise the question about what value we place on the things that our kids learn from technologies and to what extent our experiences from games can be intentionally leveraged as we create, use, and adapt to new paradigms of learning.

REFERENCES Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design framework. Educational Researcher. Barab, S.A, Hay, K.E, Barnett, M., & Keating, T. (2000). Virtual solar system project: Building understanding through model building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 719-756. Beck, I.L, McKeown, M.G., & Gromoll, E.W. (1989). Learning from social studies texts. Cognition and Instruction, 6(2), 96-158. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments. Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating interventions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. Brown, A., & Campione, J. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schable & R.Glaser (Eds.), Innovations learning: New environments for education (pp.



289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Cervetti, G., Damico, J., & Pearson, D. (2006). Multiple literacies, New literacies, and teacher education. Theory into Practice, 45(4), 378-386. Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152. Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates are running the asylum. New York: Macmillan. David, J.D. (2003). Computers, visualization, and historyhow new technology will transform our understanding of the past. Dede. (2004). If design-based research is the answer, what is the question? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 105-114. Driscoll, J. (1994). Reflective practice for practice. Senior Nurse, 13(7), 47-50. Dunn, R.E. (1996). Rethinking world history: Essays on Europe, Islam, and world history (review). Journal of World History, 7(1), 131-133. Galarneau, L. (2005). The power of perspective: Games and simulations for transformative learning. Proceedings of the Games, Learning & Society Conference, Madison, WI. Galarneau, L., & Zibit, M. (2006). Online games for 21st century skills. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks. Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Gee, J.P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/London: Routledge.

Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1990). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lesh, R., & Yoon, C. (2005). What is distinctive about models & modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching? In W. Blum (Ed.), ICMI applications and modeling in mathematics education. Germany: Universität Dortmund. Nardi, B.A, Ly, S., & Harris, J. (forthcoming). Learning conversations in World of Warcraft. Proceedings of HICSS 2007. O’Connor, M.C., & Millers, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Child discourse and social learning (pp. 63-102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Papert, S.A. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. Shaffer, D.W., & Gee, J.P. (2005). Before every child is left behind: How epistemic games can solve the coming crisis in education. Under review by Educational Researcher. Squire, K.D (2004). Replaying history: Learning world history through playing Civilization III. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Indiana, USA. Retrieved from website.education. wisc.edu/kdsquire/REPLAYING HISTORY.doc Squire, K., & Barab, S. (2004). Replaying history: Engaging urban underserved students in learning world history through computer simulation games. Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference of the Learning Science. Squire, K., DeVane, B., & Durga, S. (in press). Designing centers of expertise for academic learning through video games. To appear in Theory into Practice.

Squire, K., Giovanetto, L., Devane, B., & Durga, S. (2005). From users to designers: Building a self-organizing game-based learning environment. TechTrends, 49(5), 34-42, 74. Steinkuehler, C.A. (2005). The new third place: Massively multiplayer online gaming in American youth culture. Tidskrift Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 3, 17-32. Steinkuehler, C.A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participation in a Discourse. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 13(1), 38-52. Steinkuehler, C., & Williams, D. (2006). Where everybody knows your (screen) name: Online games as “third places.” Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 11(4). Thiagarajan, S. (1998). The myths and realities of simulations in performance technology. Educational Technology, 38(5), 35-41. 21st Century Thinking skills. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php?Itemid=114&id=204&option=com_ content&task=view

KEY TERMS CivEdit: A game editing toolkit that comes with the game. Players can create historical scenarios, can modify game rules, or define new ones using this editor Civilization III: A turn-based history strategy game in which players lead a civilization making choices about how to use land resources, where to invest resources, what kinds of infrastructure to build, and how to manage one’s military. Historical Simulation: Historical models that depict a certain time period in history with some reasonable amount of historical accuracy and relevance.



Productive Gaming and the Case for Historiographic Game-Play

Mod (Modding): Short for modifications made in a game. Mods can either be add-ons or tools that can work as additional interfaces for a game, or new graphics and content for the game. In Civilization III, players can mod scenarios, for example, a player can build the Rise of Rome scenario. Sandboxes: Spaces designed in and outside of video games that allow room for experimentation without much serious consequence (see Gee, 2003).



Scenario: A scenario in Civilization III is a depiction of events or an era (that can be either as hypothetical or historically accurate as one wishes it to be), spanning the scale of time. Simulations: Offer useful simplifications of complex situations and are often “imperfect replica” of the real. Video games are increasingly becoming powerful tools for creating simulations. Civ3 is one such example that helps create and play through historical simulations.



Chapter XIII

Game-Based Historical Learning Erik Malcolm Champion Auckland School of Design, Massey University, New Zealand

AbstrAct Serious games research typically uses modified computer games as virtual learning environments. Virtual heritage projects typically aim to provide three-dimensional interactive digital environments that aid the understanding of new cultures and languages, rather than merely transfer learning terms and strategies from static prescriptive media such as books. As an intersection between the two fields, game-based historical learning aims to provide ways in which the technology, interactivity, or cultural conventions of computer gaming can help afford the cultural understanding of the self, of the past, or of others with mindsets quite different to our own. This chapter will outline the major technological, pedagogical, and evaluation issues pertinent to game-based historical learning, provide working definitions of virtual learning that may lend themselves to evaluations, and endeavor to explain how specific issues of gamebased historical learning may be addressed. It will also forecast trends and suggest approaches to help focus this diverse field.

INtrODUctION Virtual heritage is not merely a theoretical endeavor for domain specialists. Apart from the issue of how to theoretically determine, create, and achieve both social and cultural presence, there is the added logistic issue of how best to convey these subjective experiences through interactive media in a way that is amenable to how individuals learn. In addition is the issue of how to evaluate

not just how they learned, but exactly what they learned and why they learned it. As to what learning means, unlike virtual learning environments or serious games, we do not want to only measure effectiveness, efficiency, and user satisfaction, but also the awareness, understanding, and sense of newfound ownership or appreciation of cultural diversity, authenticity, and significance. Once we understand how to preserve and communicate social and cultural significance,

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Game-Based Historical Learning

we also need to communicate it to a wider audience and create a platform in which shareholders (descendents or visitors) can maintain, improve, and collaborate. Ideally, the shareholders will then learn more about what has been simulated and why it is (or was) culturally significant.

bAcKGrOUND Definitions In virtual heritage projects, the aim is typically to ‘recreate’ or ‘reconstruct’ the past through threedimensional modeling, animation, and panorama photographs. Historical reconstructions have been a common reason for creating environments using virtual reality technology. Moreover, many of these virtual environments have aimed for realism rather than for meaningful interaction. Yet this may not be the most effective means of educating and engaging the public (Champion, 2006), for virtual heritage is a ‘visualization’ or ‘recreation’ of culture (UNESCO, 2003, 2007). The point of virtual heritage is thus to visualize the significant and revealing aspects of a culture through its artifacts and the records it leaves behind. For example, the ICOMOS (1999) Burra Charter argues: Cultural significance means aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the Place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups. Currently virtual heritage models fail most if not all the criteria for collection and dissemination of culturally significant information to various groups of people, for they are typically expensive, fixed in place, do not allow personalization, and

0

require expert assistance. Yet heritage is not just that which physically remains, but also that which can be passed on, or conversely, something that is intangible. Conveying the intangible is also an issue for digital history (which can be described as the visualization of historical resources using digital technology). Interactive history is a subset of digital heritage, the development of digital resources that teaches historical learning through interactive media, particularly by using the interactive and multimodal features found in computer games. Game-based historical learning could be defined as the use of the in-game editors to modify (‘mod’) existing game levels in order to enhance learning about historical content. However, it has a wider scope than the use of game editors alone. Game-based historical learning could be more comprehensively defined as the focused use of real-time rendering engines, game editors, game platforms, game peripherals, and/or game-style interaction metaphors to help the public enhance their awareness of historical issues and heritage sites. Hence, game-based historical learning is an intersection of digital history and serious games (games designed to aid learning).

Viewpoint As computer games are both highly popular and highly interactive, they may appear to be an ideal fit for virtual heritage projects in terms of presentation and education. Such use of technology as a focused pedagogical tool may help scientists communicate, collaborate with each other, or otherwise evaluate various hypotheses on the validity, construction, significance, use, maintenance, or disappearance of historic- and heritage-based sites, artifacts, and cultural beliefs. However, the use of games may popularize archaeology and heritage at a superficial level. Much like the Indiana Jones and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider films, game-style interaction does not necessarily teach

Game-Based Historical Learning

respect for other cultural beliefs and for the careful preservation and contextually appropriate use of cultural artifacts. So there are still important issues to be resolved in the selection of game-based technology, interaction metaphors, depicted content, and evaluation of the effectiveness of virtual heritage and interactive history projects that use game-based features. This chapter will examine these issues and suggest ways in which they can be resolved.

GAME-BASED HISTORICAL LEARNING Academics in virtual heritage appear to have accepted game engines as viable ways of allowing more people to enter the field (Anderson, 2003; Stone 2005; Addison, Refsland, & Stone, 2006). Game engines allow cheap modeling packages that include editors, are accessible and engaging for students, contain built-in scripts and resources, are optimized for personal computers (and also for consoles), with powerful physics engines. The graphics can include a surprisingly high amount of detail, import from professional or free 3D modelers, and show a large amount of terrain (Germanchis, Cartwright, & Pettit, 2007) and sometimes even dynamic weather or lighting. They can also allow modification of the graphical user interface, include avatars with triggered and re-scriptable behaviors and path finding, or incorporate maps that demonstrate location, orientation, or the social attitude of non-playing characters in relation to the player. However, games are not typically designed for historical learning or to commemorate culturally significant artifacts. It may take a large amount of time modifying a game so that it is a suitable learning environment, a game may offer powerful features but be difficult to script, it may contain content that is not historically suitable, or it may be controlled by an online licensing software that

makes collaborative classroom work difficult or intellectual ownership of mods and 3D assets unclear.

Types of Games I suggest there are many types of games that could potentially afford some level of historical or cultural understanding (see Table 1). Such games challenge us to explore, unravel puzzles, allocate resources, recreate and relive historic events, become immersed in a character, control others, socially engineer conflict, or create aesthetically engaging or dramatically immersive narratives. Tourist games allow players to view distant locales, inspired by their exotic nature, but the interaction does not necessarily probe beyond the visual spectacle. They challenge the explorer within us to find specific places or to traverse the entire region, and reward the player through either personalizing the environment, collecting items, or filling in a related map. Through play individual landmarks and the general lie of the land are learned, but exactly how the virtual inhabitants behave and believe as situated agents is probably not developed. Unlike tourists in the real world, travelers in virtual worlds typically must solve logistic challenges to get from one place to another. In a sense, real-world traveling involves not just a long-term purpose, but also the resourcefulness to solve the challenges in getting from A to B. So travelers are in a way also puzzle-solvers. Puzzle games also allow people to guess the origins of current scenes or decipher clues to retrieve vital information or to escape traps. The challenge is of course to complete the puzzle (and avoid dying or running out of time). The reward is to escape, to find more puzzles, or to gain an understanding of an entire narrative. Through puzzle games (such as Qin: Tomb of the Magic Kingdom, where an archaeologist is trapped in a tomb by an earthquake and must solve puzzles in order to escape), we could learn about spe-



Game-Based Historical Learning

cific artifacts. Through solving intricate thematic puzzles, we may even begin to understand or at least recognize specific beliefs, designs, or intentions of the puzzle designers. Resource management games challenge in terms of foreign forces or to harness dwindling supplies or to quell internal riots. So the rewards can also vary from harmony to conquering others and staying in control, or perhaps merely to see the outcomes of one’s actions. The most famous example is probably Civilization III and Civilization IV; their game-based learning potential is explored by Squire and Barab (2004). However, it is important to note the game-play cannot be relied on for historical accuracy. Some historically accurate information may be learned, and basic elements of town planning may be acquired, but generally the growth mechanisms are hypothetical, and society and resources alter in relation to player choice, not to actual history. Historical battle games are similarthe soldiers and army equipment are typically mere resources to be managed. However, battle games may provide more historical accuracy if players need to learn actual features of historical events, strategies, and resources in order to win. Control games typically allow the player to control, obliterate, or indirectly affect the temperament, morality, or other inclinations of non-playing characters. Typically these games are destructive or unstructured, however it may be possible to harness these games to teach players about different cultural and social values. Black and White is one notable exception to standard control games, as it has a moral dimension affected by player choice. Social mash-up games are similar to control games, but the emphasis is not so much on how the player controls the characters as much as how the player choreographs situations and motivations of the non-playing characters in order to create interesting social encounters between non-playing characters. One example is the game The Sims.



The Sims, At the Movies, Halo, and Unreal are also used for machinima, for the creation of films using the in-game camera. Some players may be the actors (following a script or improvising); others act as the camera crew. The use of game engines to create machinima pieces could also be developed for, say, history classes, where students re-enact historical events, record them, and evaluate them as historical documentaries. A finished machinima is pre-rendered and thus not interactive, but the actual staging of machinima is in-game and hence real-time, therefore players collaborating to create machinima can be seen as participating in game-based learning. So the above game types may help us learn the layout of a historic place; basic strategies to avoid certain problems or puzzles; a modicum of historic facts, strategies, and elements of town planning; or to identify certain symbols. Unfortunately, most only help a counterfactual sense of history, they do not accurately retell history directly. None of the above really immerses us authentically and accurately inside historic figures and social roles.

Selection Issues Game-based historical learning has advantages over traditional virtual reality techniques to present cultural heritage, especially in terms of accessibility, cost, and popular acceptance. So it may be tempting to purchase a popular game with an inbuilt editor, and mod (modify) it for classroom teaching or for online distribution. However, selecting an appropriately popular game is not straightforward, as the popularity of games is not always easy to determine. Very popular games may be pirated or be popular on account of their free demo versions. Conversely, commercially successful games may actually be played only once. There is no doubt that the gaming industry is large and profitable. There are impressive

Game-Based Historical Learning

Table 1. Games with the potential to afford some level of historical or cultural understanding Type of Game Tourist Game: These games aim to enjoy life of a site from a safe and comfortable distance. Puzzle Games: Puzzle detection games aim to find what happened by examining material remains, material changes, epigraphy, and so forth, while minimizing damage to local artifacts. On the other hand, puzzle escape games aim to complete tasks using local affordances and artifacts.

Closest Examples in Available Games The new travel game genre, like Weekend in Capri. Archaeologist learning about a past culture, for example, ArcDig. Perhaps murder mysteries or interactive fiction comes closest. The information is prescriptive, but the way in which information is synthesized is like creative detective work. An example of a puzzle escape game is Qin: Tomb of the Magic Kingdom, where one has to escape the Forbidden City by solving puzzles. Another is a 3D adventure game like Heretic II. In these games the explorer must reach the objective by ‘reading’ the site, without personal health being adversely damaged. Neverwinter Nights 1 could be used in this way.

Resource Management Games: These games aim to understand the beliefs roles and relationships of inhabitants and their surrounds (ideally,

Civilization, Age of Empires, Tribal Trouble, Pharaoh, Caesar IV.

without damaging local customs). Historical Battle Games: The goals are to avoid being killed, to take over territory, and to learn

The Total War Series, Battalion IV, Starcraft.

military strategies. Role-Playing Games (although computer roleplaying games are arguably less able to create character immersion than non-digital roleplaying games). Control Games: These games aim to control or overcome inhabitants.

Games like Oblivion allow people to take on their own character and profession with its related attributes, and to choose suitable quests. Often has a medieval and mystical or mythological setting (for example, Lord of the Rings). Shadow of the Colossus, Darwin, Black and White.

Social Mashup Games: These games aim to create interesting encounters between semi-

The Sims, Spore (at time of writing, this is yet to be released).

controlled characters. Games that allow classroom role-playing of history through in-game camera capture

Halo, Unreal, Sims, The Movies.

(machinima).

statistics on the size and spending power of the gaming audience (Graft, 2006), but the statistics can be misleading (Smith, 2006) and the games unsuitable for specific types of learning such as for heritage and history. Some of the more extensive market research is often done by the companies themselves, and there is confusion over the distinction between hardcore gamers and casual gamers, and how to design for both.

Learning Issues Using powerful game engines may help us prototype digital representations of virtual heritage environments in a medium accessible to a generation less appreciative of books, but these games carry ‘genre baggage.’ Even first-year archaeology students are keen to find out what they can destroy in these virtual environments designed



Game-Based Historical Learning

to show them past artifacts in use. They are accustomed to games and may attempt to do the same destructive things in game-based historical environments. This problem of using a toy as a tool is something the author (Champion, 2005) has previously described as the “Indiana Jones dilemma.” This dilemma worsens the more we have actual user-accessible interactive content to model, something not shared with traditional, flythrough, and instructor-controlled virtual environments. The more interactive the content, the more visitors will want to manipulate or even sabotage it. In the author’s own evaluations of archaeology students and visualization experts, in 2004 the author found that given game genres are both a blessing and a curse. When told a virtual environment is a game, participants of all ages and both genders seem much more at ease and aware of potential affordances. However, they tend to look for interaction and personalization while disregarding the actual content, and they conflate fact, conjecture, and fiction (Kensek Dodd & Cipolla, 2002). Many scholars see the possibilities of games as learning platforms. For example, Johnson (2005) and Gee (2003) argue that interactive media are changing the way people think, while Squire and Barab (2004) argue that history can be taught via games, and geographers are also now using game engines for visualization (Germanchis et al., 2007). Seen as a learning application, games allow students to learn by trial and error and at their own pace. However, games often involve simplistic interaction (such as testing hand-eye coordination) and do not engage the brain to reflect on fact and controversy. For example, America’s Army is a free, downloadable simulation engine that is actually a marketing tool designed to train and recruit players as potential soldiers. As Zyda (2006) remarks, players are “twice as likely to consider a career in the U.S. Army as those who didn’t play



the game.” While Zyda calls the game “the most widely used and successful serious game to date [in the world],” America’s Army teaches players how to shoot and to react, not necessarily how to think. According to Davis et al. (2004, p. 12), “Basic teaches you to think Army-style (forget shooting your drill instructor)” so it is possible the lack of emphasis on reflective thinking may have been intentional. Education is also hard to combine with entertainment; using a game in a classroom does not mean the students have effectively learned something (De Souza & Delacruz, 2006, p. 240). Wideman et al. (2007) note that evaluation of the effectiveness rather than just engagement of these games also needs to be implemented more accurately, with standardized measures. Writings by the proponents of games as learning platforms, such as Prensky (2001), Gee (2003), and Johnson (2005), have not conclusively shown that games are the best form of learning, or even that time spent playing games does not impede skill-based learning in other activities. This last point is more serious than many non-gamers realize: Yee (2006) has stated that online gamers play on average 20 hours a week and there has been recent debate over whether computer game playing can be considered potentially addictive (Rauth, 2006). Excessive playing of computer games may be deleterious to physical health, desensitize players to graphic acts of violence, or affect learning and engagement in other (academic) subjects. Would using interactive game techniques and technologies create a more engaging user experience or would it merely derail reflectivity (Coyne, 2003)? If we can animate the past in this way, will the entertainment factor help or impede learning, and how will we know how effective the interactivity is? Unlike many games and virtual learning environments in general, virtual heritage environments also have specific issues. For example, they typically have a set narrative to tell, or they

Game-Based Historical Learning

are based on extrapolated data or over-arching hypotheses. How do we allow the freedom of interaction and personalization but also provide linear or multi-threaded narratives, or allow users to choose from and discern between varying archaeological interpretations and hypotheses? Dangers arising from using games as cultural learning experiences could involve confusing fact with fiction, developing violent or behaviorally undesired attitudes, or trivializing local customs and beliefs. Can we utilize the creative experiences afforded by games so people can experience factual, counterfactual, and hypothetical reconstructions of history? After all, games are quite happy to allow users to ‘muddy’ historical settings. One could counter that virtual heritage has much to learn from online games that call themselves ‘worlds’ (featuring persistence, social communication, and role-playing). Yet socialization is typically via voice-chat rather than inside the game, and the social roles and changing context are dictated and administered by the game company rather than by the users. As more than just visualization devices to showcase 3D content, practitioners need to develop ways of using game engines that: (1) explore, challenge, and foster social conventions, and help build awareness of social similarities or perhaps even differences; and (2) help educate people on the cultural significance of heritage sites and cultural practices. Richer forms of interaction and more sophisticated display technology may lead to further problems. There is perhaps some truth in thinking that in the past the limited capacity of many traditional virtual reality environments to represent social processes and ‘intangible’ heritage means that their virtual heritage environments can imply a certainty of knowledge that we actually do not possess. On the other hand, the dynamic and aesthetic features of modern game engines could impress us artistically, but impede or distort the scientific message that was meant to be conveyed.

Evaluation Issues The complexities of environmental design, uncertain audience needs, the vagueness of ‘cultural learning’, and the technological constraints of graphical rendering, processing, and networking ensure that applying contextual interaction from entertainment media to accessible virtual heritage environments complicates evaluation strategies. The first major problem for evaluating virtual heritage is thus to determine exactly what we are trying to improve through the testing of virtual heritage environments. How can we evaluate the success or failure of an attempt to recreate digitally a past culture? How do we know whether the designer’s goal is achieved in terms of the audience? It is not clear what the experimental goal is. Even if we have a definition of culture, what are the outcomes of tailoring virtual environments to communicate a sense of cultural presence or cultural significance? Is the objective to increase the participant’s knowledge or ability to extrapolate socially contextual principles of behavior? There is still the problem of defining cultural learning, and ensuring that this definition could produce clear and verifiable outcomes. Even if there are clear outcomes that can be tested with small statistical samples, evaluators must ensure that the testing is as close as possible to real-world use. Yet here in this emerging field the research literature is sparse, and comparisons with equivalent products and media are problematic. In conventional virtual environment research, biosensors offer up a range of interesting possibilities for evaluation and contextual interaction, and low-cost biosensors are even included with commercial games (such as Wild Divine). Unfortunately, there are specific issues with evaluating cultural presence that are not addressed by physiological testing. It is not clear how awareness of cultural presence in a virtual environment can be indirectly ascertained. Changes in brain state, heart beat, or skin temperatures do not necessarily



Game-Based Historical Learning

mean the participant is either increasingly aware of cultural presence, or increasingly knowledgeable or skillful about a new cultural perspective. Secondly, there is also the issue of time; people have had years to build up knowledge of film and television, and even computer games. They may also take a long time to build up experience of virtual environments. We could use ethnographic methods or ask people in online communities to compare new interaction modes or new interfaces. Unfortunately, we do not know if they represent the complete spectrum of the target audience, while their knowledge is typically very specific and accumulated through potentially unhealthy amounts of time spent online (Yee, 2006). How much time is enough to evaluate the cultural understanding gained in the virtual environment? Thirdly, there is also the issue of which evaluation method to use. For cross-media comparisons, questionnaires are typically used, but they can be problematic. People may answer how they feel they are expected to respond, or may misinterpret the question, or simply lose interest. Many evaluations also ask people to answer Likert questionnaires and then aggregate the results, unaware that “strongly agree” is not easily reducible to a number. Fourthly, it is difficult to run comparisons of virtual environments against traditional media (to ask for cross-media audience preferences), because the form of interaction and the technology is so different and in some cases alien to the test subjects (Riihiaho, 2000, pp. 101-103). To argue that the content in a film and a game based on that film are comparablethis is to conflate narrative with self-directed interaction, ignore the atmosphere of a cinema, and equate high-tech surround systems with a desktop monitor. This is not just an issue of how to compare across technology, but also across different forms of media. If we are evaluating whether a control group using a standard interaction mode performs or understands a culture better or worse than a treatment group that is using a new mode of in-



teraction, we must make sure that the two modes of interaction do not differ greatly in cognitive loading. We must also ensure that the second group is not getting the same information twice. For example, Kavakli, Akca, and Thorne (2004) forgot to mention this effect in their interesting paper comparing learning history when playing a computer game to reading a text. Finally, we may wish to compare different types of interactivity to a virtual heritage environment, but different contexts in the same environment may require different forms of interactivity. An evaluation of virtual heritage projects by Mosaker (2001) indicates interactivity and personalization may be more important than realism. However, different forms of learning and different traditional ways of navigating environments or manipulating artifacts may require particular forms of interaction. For example, interaction appropriate to the cultural learning of a monk in a monastery may not apply to the learning in the farms that feed the monastery. In the former, one learns by instruction, while in the latter one may learn by trial and error, or by observation. The environment may thus dictate a specific type of interaction, or a specific combination of degrees or even kinds of interaction. Yet virtual heritage projects do not typically involve carefully modulated and monitored levels of interactivity. So we do not know which method of interactivity is most appropriate, for varying audiences, mediums, or recreated objects. Hence it is very hard to determine which features most aid cultural understanding, as it is so contextual. Unfortunately, academia has diverged rather than converged in attempting to solve the above issues. The general academic approach to dissemination is to deliver papers at conferences; however, heritage experts have gone on record as saying that there are too many conferences discussing this area, but not enough conferences moving the issues forward (Addison, 2006). This problem is exacerbated for game-based historical learning research. As both virtual heritage and

Game-Based Historical Learning

serious games cover a wide range of technology (learning objectives, target audiences, and academic fields), it is difficult to gain both an extensive understanding of the field and a focused body of research targeting specific issues.

Controversies The capture and presentation of data is a contentious issue in virtual heritage and interactive history. Various scholars have attacked projects for providing an overly unified and homogenous view of disparate or uncertain archaeological sources (Frischer, Niccolucci, Ryan, & Barcelò, 2000). However, the dilemma in presenting conflicting or dubious sources while educating and not confusing the audience is not easily solved. For example, a major issue of contention is whether intangible heritage should be incorporated with reconstructions, with recent organizations and heritage charters advocating they be included (ICOMOS, 2007, p. 8). Yet, researchers concerned with material remains may ignore or avoid mentioning this topic. For example, Frischer and Stinson (2007, pp. 52-53) suggest virtual reconstructions are “a tool that can be used, by experts, to generate new discoveries and insights and, by the general public, to understand a site more quickly and effectively.” Yet intangible heritage is not mentioned in this chapter, and the value of helping the public understand the significance of a cultural site from the viewpoint of the original inhabitants does not seem to them to be a primary aim of virtual heritage. Secondly, if there is agreement on the authenticity of the data captured and transferred into digital form, there is still debate over what exactly virtual heritage is and where it is best employed. It is also possible that the interactive possibilities of interacting with historical visualizations may increase the public’s confusion between what is fact and what is fiction, as well as possibly tarnish the symbolic and spiritual authenticity of cultural artifacts and processes.

Thirdly, as discussed in this chapter, the best way for audiences to interact with historical and heritage-based content is still uncertain. Partly this is due to the highly context-dependent nature of the subject; partly it is due to the lack of extensive evaluations in the area; and partly it is perhaps due to the previously static and intuitionally fixed nature of virtual heritage with its previously limited means of interaction. Cheaper technology (such as improved gaming platforms and graphic cards, head-mounted displays, augmented reality, biofeedback devices, and other peripherals) promise to improve interaction richness, customization possibilities, immersivity, and engagement for the end user, but will make evaluations more difficult as more and more virtual heritage projects are experienced outside of the usability laboratory or test site and as peripherals and display settings are customized by end users. Finally, the issue of who are the experts and custodians of cultural heritage is also a matter of debate. For example, Frischer and Stinson (2007, pp. 54-55) note, “Often in the history of CVR, the analysis and authorship has been entrusted to the hands of computer experts, not of art historians, archaeologists, etc.”; yet, they do not mention indigenous people or other shareholders. Perhaps this is because many virtual heritage projects are of ancient and classical history, or because virtual heritage research has not been underpinned by a great amount of evaluation, so the custodial issue of who needs to update and maintain the virtual heritage project to improve its usability, accuracy, and effectiveness has not yet become such an issue. Still, it is not yet clear exactly who can be entrusted with the preservation and representation of history. History is not a static and immutable object, but a dynamic mass of interpretations, actions, intentions, and beliefs. Every group of people has its own viewpoints, issues, and outlook on the world. Without understanding this specific cultural agency, there is a danger that we may see the virtual heritage site only in terms of our own



Game-Based Historical Learning

cultural perspective. Some critics such as Sardar (1996) and Suzuki (1997) have even described cyberspace and virtual reality as a ‘museumization’ of the world, and a way of subsuming anything non-western into a digital form. A limited ability to represent social processes and ‘intangible’ heritage can create another danger: the static and apparently immutable aspect of digital reconstruction can imply a certainty of knowledge that we actually do not possess.

Future Trends Viable technology for heritage and history will be more accessible and affordable for end users (Stone & Ojika, 2000); and as virtual heritage environments rely more and more on game technology (Addison et al., 2006), the above issues are likely to increase in significance. Such a development is likely to change significantly not just how virtual heritage projects are developed, learned, evaluated, and distributed, but also how history and cultural learning is taught and understood. I suggest there are two major trends of direct relevance to game-based historical learning. Firstly, we are entering a new era of digital convergence and collaboration. The increasing collaborative work on open-source (Jacobsen, Rendard, Lugrin, & Cavazza, 2005) and crossplatform technologies should also see the release of 3D models (Jacobson, & Holden, 2005) and augmented reality systems that will allow people to work on the interaction techniques, not just on modeling. Recent tools available inside the game engines will allow players to modify and share aspects of their game experience. The opening up of game consoles to home ‘modders’ and to hobbyist programmers, along with the explosion in thematic gaming peripherals, will increase the accessibility and imaginative possibilities of game-based historical learning. As more homes take up broadband and as streaming and compression technologies improve, we are also likely to see



far more textured and dynamic environments. Secondly, the traditional mouse and keyboard interfaces are giving way to more advanced, reconfigurable, and physically sensitive interface devices. We now have the possibility of adopting biosensors and physical computing devices (that are already appearing in commercial games) for virtual heritage environments. For example, while there have been interactive virtual environments with biofeedback mechanisms for over a decade (Davies, 1998), only in the last few years have we seen portable consumer devices (such as the Nintendo DS game Nintendogs) that rely on breath to control the interface. Such devices may allow us to monitor users’ performance, and preferences without disturbing their engagement in the experience could be usefully included in virtual heritage environments. For example, in games, data are gathered by innate interactive mechanisms (chat logs, health points, fully exploring and surviving a level, or acquiring a full inventory of artifacts). Such data could be compared against results from a pre-experience and post-experience user evaluation questionnaire to determine if we can gain user feedback on cultural immersion in virtual heritage environments, without users’ enjoyment being curtailed and without users being forced to participate in laboratory interviews or complete survey forms.

Solutions and Recommendations More powerful technology combined with more accessible scripting increases the potential of suitable interaction metaphors. For example, tangible computing and devices like biofeedback could dynamically update, overlay, or even erode the virtual environment with player sensations and experiences so that objects develop an ‘aura’ for future players. GPSs could even be used to show the weathering of the actual site as caused by tourists. The game engine’s shaders could change

Game-Based Historical Learning

the display settings (such as color, hue, or field of view) according to time, season, participant performance, or cultural perspectives. The virtual heritage environment could also be annotated or allow player-created or experientially defined maps to be shared among players. Maps can also be developed and learned to encourage appreciation of culturally thematic symbolic notation and description of social status and ritual importance. Game engines are not neutral and objective vehicles for displaying real-time interactive content; they are behavioral ‘skinner’ boxes, and they carry cultural genre baggage, and rely on perceptual affordances. There are many recent developments in psychology that we need to apply to social and collaborative virtual environmentsfor example, exploring how third-person views may encourage desired social behavior more than a first-person viewpoint. As a communal tool, virtual heritage may help social and community-based ownership through allowing ownership of digital resources, presentation, or networking or hosting; through linking the heritage project to online or off-line mapped or contactable community resources and providers; to updateable or taggable information via feeds, comments, user tagging or ratings, and blogs. Player communication could be filtered so that only by developing in-situ or collaborative communication can they explore or advance. This would encourage ways of appreciating difference rather than relying on conventional cultural assumptions. Avatar representation, interaction, and ability could vary according to social role, social importance, or cultural significance.

Implications for Designers, Teachers, and Researchers It may appear that entertainment and archaeology are strange bedfellows. Yet just as Hollywood and other film industries have contracted domain experts to help them create authenticity, game

companies could also consider hiring archaeologists, ethnographers, epigraphers, and historians to both help them with the setting and historical background, and advise them on how the game engine or editor could be adapted and developed to tap into the educational market. Sometimes, game companies even buy virtual heritage companies (French, 2007). And there exist already archaeologists who consider virtual environments and related digital media not as a rival to books or to conferences, but as a communication tool that can also gather feedback information from the general public, and disseminate the processes and not just findings of archaeological research (Gillings, 1996; Gillings & Goodrick, 2003; Anderson, 2003). These two groups need to agree on how both their interests could be best served. Game designers appreciate having the chance to market their games and game creation tools to a young and creative audience. Teachers and other academics have the chance to modify and evaluate sophisticated virtual environments and toolkits at a fraction of the cost of commercial virtual reality equipment. Further, industry-related prizes and media releases for new and useful interaction, and for finding content previously hidden, ignored, or misunderstood, could help fledging content producers from poorer countries access internships or training in visualization, virtual reality, and virtual heritage research centers. Information on free game engines such as Apocalpex, irrlicht, Blender 3D, Baja, Ogre 3D, and Crystal Space could be collated with virtual heritage templates and scripts available for download to speed production and improve content production. More collation on free or low-priced hardwareperhaps the MIT US$100 computer running Linux or a stripped PC running a free operating systemcould be provided to schools along with free versions of animation or modeling packages (such as SketchUp, Blender 3D, or the free version of Houdini, Softimage XSI, or game editors such as Unreal Runtime).



Game-Based Historical Learning

Improved technology coupled with intelligent guides and mentors require improved evaluation methods to ensure that virtual heritage environments are more likely to be developed for home use (not just for learning in the classroom), and hence non-intrusive innate evaluation (rather than evaluation in lab conditions) needs to be developed. These devices will probably originate with commercial game development, but they can also be taken up and shared by the academic community. There are also commendable attempts by researchers to standardize evaluations. For example, scholars in the related field of presence research have recently attempted to standardize their methods (Doron, Andrea, Angus, & Slater, 2005) and share their data, so that experiments can be corroborated and the field extended through shared knowledge. However, educationalists are needed to reevaluate how historical and cultural learning is best served by interactive digital media, and to help scientists appropriately choose contextual interaction that best suits the learning capabilities and interests of the audience, without simplifying or degrading the cultural content of the culture portrayed. To help standardize the use of games for virtual heritage, the many conferences that have virtual heritage as a section should consider specializing in aspects of virtual heritage and serious gaming in order to focus on specific issues, rather than duplicate an endless sea of academic papers that proclaim they use game-based technology, gameplay, or metaphors, without explaining how they have solved specific problems, catered to specific audiences, or advanced the field. While serious games-type conferences offer many advantages to history and heritage scholars entering the field, specialist panels on game-based learning in history and heritage conferences and workshops may provide more appropriate subject-orientated debate and discussion.

0

CONCLUSION Despite the implementation and evaluation issues, this is an exciting area to be in, especially for those of us who wonder whether the book is always the best medium to convey differing types of lived and conjectured knowledge. As Gillings (2002) notes, the issue is not how virtual reality can appear to be reality (i.e., be identical to the place that it recreates), but how virtual reality can augment the experience in a new and different way to reality. This also applies to the use of game-based historical learning. The advantages of using computer games are compelling, but we also need to improve the evaluation mechanisms by which these projects are judged so that the learning content rather than the technology continues to impress and continues to perform the role for which it was designed.

REFERENCES Addison, A.C. (2006, March). The vanishing virtual: Safeguarding heritage’s endangered digital record. In T. Kvan & Y. Kalay (Eds.), New Heritage: Beyond Verisimilitude. Proceedings of the New Heritage Conference on Cultural Heritage & New Media (pp. 36-48), Hong Kong. Addison, A.C., Refsland, S., & Stone, R. (2006). Special issue: Virtual heritage guest editors’ introduction. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 15(3), iii-iv. Anderson, M. (2003, April). Computer games & archaeological reconstruction: The low cost VR, enter the past. Proceedings of CAA 2003, the Enter the Past + Workshop 8: Archäologie und Computer Conference, Vienna, Austria. Champion, E. (2005). Indiana Jones and the joystick of doom: Understanding the past via computer games. Traffic, A Vision Splendid, (5), 47-65.

Game-Based Historical Learning

Champion, E. (2006). Evaluating cultural learning in an online virtual environment. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life-Long Learning, 16(3/4), 173-182.

on Authenticity, Intellectual Integrity and Sustainable Development of the Public Presentation of Archaeological and Historical Sites and Landscapes. Ghent, East-Flanders.

Coyne, R. (2003). Mindless repetition: Learning from computer games. Design Studies, 24(3), 199-212.

Frischer, B., Niccolucci, F., Ryan, N., & Barcelò, J. (2000, November). From CVR to CVRO: The past, present, and future of cultural virtual reality. Proceedings of the Virtual Archaeology between Scientific Research and Territorial (VAST) Marketing Euroconference, Arezzo, Italy.

Davies, C. (1998). Osmose: Notes on being in immersive virtual space. Digital Creativity, 9(2), 6574. Preliminary version published in Proceedings of the ISEA 6th (1995) International Symposium on Electronic Arts Montreal. Retrieved October 17, 2005, from http://www.immersence.com/publications/char/DigitalCreativity-F.html Davis, M., Shilling, R., Mayberry, A., Bossant, P., McCree, J., Dossett, S., Buhl, C., Chang, C., Champlin, E., Wiglesworth, T., & Zyda, M. (2004). Making America’s Army. In M. Davis (Ed.), America’s Army PC game vision (pp. 9-15). Monterey, CA: Wecker Group. De Souza, A.E., & Delacruz, G.C. (2006). Hybrid reality games reframed. Potential uses in educational contexts. Games and Culture, 1(3), 231-251. French, M. (2007). Blitz buys virtual experience company. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from http://www.developmag.com/news/26606/Blitzbuys-Virtual-Experience-Company Friedman, D., Brogni, A., Antley, A., Guger, C., & Slater, M. (2005, September). Sharing and analysing presence experiments data. Proceedings of Presence 2005, the 8th Annual International Workshop on Presence, London. Frischer, B., & Philip, S. (2007, September). The importance of scientific authentication and a formal visual language in virtual models of archaeological sites: The case of the house Of Augustus and villa of the mysteries. Proceedings of the Interpreting The Past: Heritage, New Technologies and Local Development Conference

Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Germanchis, T., Cartwright, W., & Pettit, C. (2007). Virtual Queenscliff: A computer game approach for depicting geography. In W. Cartwright, M.P. Peterson, & G. Gartner (Eds.), Multimedia cartography (2nd ed., pp. 359-368). Berlin/New York: Springer-Verlag. Gillings, M. (2002). Virtual archaeologies and the hyper-real. In P. Fisher & D. Unwin (Eds.), Virtual reality in geography (vol. 17-32). London/New York: Taylor & Francis. Gillings, M., & Goodrick, G. (1996). Sensuous and reflexive GIS exploring visualisation and VRML. Retrieved October 17, 2005, from http://intarch. ac.uk/journal/issue1/ Graft, K. (2006). Game industry shipments to hit $12.5 bln in ’06. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_ content&task=view&id=3640&Itemid=2 ICOMOS. (1999). Burra Charter. The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural significance. Retrieved October 11, 2007, from http:// www.icomos.org/australia/burra.html ICOMOS. (2007, April 10). The ICOMOS charter for the interpretation and presentation of cultural heritage sites (proposed final draft). Retrieved October 26, 2007, from http://www.enamechar-



Game-Based Historical Learning

ter.org/downloads/ICOMOS_ Ename_Charter_ENG_10-04-07.pdf Jacobson, J. (2007). planetjeff. Retrieved March 29, 2007, from http://planetjeff.net/horus/Screenshots.html Jacobson, J., & Holden, L. (2005, September). The virtual Egyptian temple. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Media, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA), Norfolk, VA. Jacobson, J., Le Rendard, M., Lugrin, J., & Cavazza, M. (2005, June). The CaveUT system: Immersive entertainment based on a game engine. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (ACE 2005), Valencia, Spain. Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you: How popular culture is making us smarter. London: Allen Lane. Kavakli, M., Akca, B., & Thorne, J. (2004, February). The role of computer games in the education of history. Proceedings of the IE2004 Australian Workshop on Interactive Entertainment, Sydney, Australia. Kensek, K., & Cipolla, N. (2002, October). Fantastic reconstructions or reconstructions of the fantastic? Tracking and presenting ambiguity, alternatives, and documentation in virtual worlds. Proceedings of the ACADIA 2002 Thresholds between Physical and Virtual Conference, Pomona, CA. Mosaker, L. (2001). Visualizing historical knowledge using VR technology. Digital Creativity, 12(1), 15-26. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Pujol Tost, L., & Economou, M. (2006). Evaluating the social context of ICT applications in museum



exhibitions. Proceedings of the 7th VAST International Symposium on Virtual Reality, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, Cyprus. Rauh, S. (2006). Detox for video game addiction? Experts say gaming can be a compulsion as strong as gambling. Retrieved July 11, 2007, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/03/ health/webmd/main1773956.shtml Riihiaho, S. (2000). Experiences with usability evaluation methods. Unpublished Licentiate’s Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland. Roussou, M. (2004). Learning by doing and learning through play: An exploration of interactivity in virtual environments for children. Computer Entertainment, 2(1), 1-10. Roussou, M., & Drettakis, G. (2003, November). Photorealism and non-photorealism in virtual heritage representation. Proceedings of the 1st Eurographics Workshop on Graphics and Cultural Heritage, Brighton, UK. Sardar, Z. (1996). alt.civilizations.faq: Cyberspace as the darker side of the west. In Z. Sardar & J. Ravetz (Eds.), Cyberfutures: Culture and politics on the information superhighway (pp. 14-41). London: Pluto Press. Smith, L. (2006). Gamefest 2006: Microsoft has 100M monthly gamers. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.1up.com/do/ newsStory?cId=3152853 St one, R . J. (20 05, Oct ob e r). Se r iou s gamingvirtual reality’s saviour? Proceedings of the VSMM 2005 Conference, Belgium. Stone, R., & Ojika, T. (2000). Virtual heritage: What next? Multimedia, 7(2), 73-74. Suzuki, H. (1997). Introduction. In S. Ken & H. Suzuki (Eds.), The virtual architecture: the difference between the possible and the impossible. Japan: Kenchiku Hakubutsukan.

Game-Based Historical Learning

UNESCO. (2003). Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0013/001325/132540e.pdf UNESCO. (2007). Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. Retrieved July 15, 2007, from http://whc. unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ Wideman, H.H., Owston, R.D., Brown, C., Kushniruk, A., Ho, F., & Pitts, K.C. (2007). Unpacking the potential of educational gaming: A new tool for gaming research. Simulation & Gaming, 38(1), 10-30. Yee, N. (2006). The labor of fun: How video games blur the boundaries of work and play. Games and Culture, 1, 68-71.

KEY TERMS Cultural Presence: A visitor’s subjective impression when visiting a virtual environment that people with a different cultural perspective occupy or have occupied that virtual environment as a ‘place’. Such a definition suggests cultural presence is not just a feeling of ‘being there’ but of being in a ‘there and then’, not the cultural rules of the ‘here and now’. Cultural Significance: The ICOMOS (1999, p. 7) Burra Charter defines this as the “aesthetic, historic, scientific, social or spiritual value for past, present or future generations. Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting, use, associations, meanings, records, related places and related objects. Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups.” Digital History: Can be described as the visualization of historical resources using digital technology.

Game-Based Historical Learning: The focused use of real-time rendering engines, game editors, game platforms, game peripherals, and/or game-style interaction metaphors to help the public enhance their awareness of historical issues and heritage sites. Generally, the term implies the virtual environment experience is best achieved by playing, but that what is learned through such game-play is designed to be perceived as being culturally or scientifically significant and authentic. This technology may also help scientists communicate, collaborate with each other, or otherwise evaluate various hypotheses on the validity, construction, significance, use, maintenance, or disappearance of historic- and heritage-based sites, artifacts, and cultural beliefs. Intangible Heritage: UNESCO (2003) defines this as “the practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skillsas well as the instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewiththat communities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage.” Interactive History: A shortened form of the more unwieldy phrase ‘interactive digital history’, it can be seen as the development of digital resources that teaches historical learning through interactive media. Mod: Many computer games now come with editors that allow users to modify the game or import their own ‘levels’, 3D assets, characters, or scripts. These new or modified game levels are called mods. Serious Games: Related terms are gamebased learning, edutainment, and eduventures.The “Indiana Jones” dilemma: popular media such as Indiana Jones and Lara Croft: Tomb Raider have popularized archaeology, but they are actually violent action films and do not promote careful and deferential approaches to archaeological relics and heritage sites. This raises a dilemma:



Game-Based Historical Learning

how should archaeology best make use of this popularization while distancing themselves from the vandalism, sensationalism, violence, and shoddy scholarship? Virtual Heritage: Aimed at visualizing the significant and revealing aspects of a culture through its artifacts and the records it leaves behind. Virtual heritage is thus a ‘visualization’, ‘restoration’, ‘recreation’, or ‘reconstruction’ of objects, events, beliefs, and places of cultural significance.





Chapter XIV

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education Phillip J. VanFossen Purdue University, USA Adam Friedman Wake Forest University, USA Richard Hartshorne University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA

AbstrAct In this chapter, the authors will report evidence for the potential of MMORPGs for social studies education by providing a detailed review of relevant literature from the fields of game studies, educational technology, and the social networking universe. This evidence will include game scholars’ efforts to develop classroom applications of MMORPGs in the social sciences and related disciplines, and also provide examples of ‘citizenship education’ already occurring with MMORPGs. The authors will also provide an overview of perceived costs and benefits associated with classroom MMORPG use, including logistical hurdles that need to be overcome. They will also share a list of recommendations to the field for classroom use of MMORPGs, as well as implications for policy changes and future study.

INtrODUctION World of Warcraft. Ultima Online. Everquest. Second Life. Star Wars Galaxies. Asheron’s Call. While these titles may sound like the latest ‘straight-to-DVD’ titles at your neighborhood

video store, they are not. What do these have in common? They are some of the most popular MMORPGs (massively multiplayer online roleplaying games; pronounced ‘mor-pegs’) in the world today. With the proliferation of broadband Internet access, MMORPGs, and the number of

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

players who play them, have exploded over the past five years. Indeed, there are currently more than 13 million active MMORPG players around the world (Woodcock, 2005). These MMORPGs are not our parents’ (or, for that matter, our own) video games. Rather a MMORPG is a form of online computer role-playing game in which a very large number of players (in some games, upward of 100,000) interact with one another in a synthetic world (Castronova, 2005). Within the MMORPG, a player takes on a fictional character (an in-game representation known as an avatar) and is responsible for nearly all of that character’s actions within the synthetic world: from earning a living, to buying food and clothing, to—most importantly—interacting with fellow players. Many MMORPG players spend much of their waking free-time playing their ‘game.’ For many MMORPGs this might mean joining a guild, learning a trade, building a house, trading with fellow players, or starting a shop. These players take on a persona in these synthetic worlds and interact with thousands of other players role-playing similar characters. What lessons do they—or can they—learn about how to participate in a society, how to earn a living, and how to protect their rights? In short, what do these players learn about how to develop and hone their skills as citizens in society? Gee (2004) goes so far as to state that “computer and video games are going to become the predominate form of popular culture interaction in our society” (p. 2). Mitch Kapur, CEO of Linden Labs (creator of Second Life), believes that MMORPGs have “the potential to fundamentally change how humans interact” and that MMORPGs may even “accelerate the social evolution of humanity” (The Week, 2007, p. 11). What might these online games and gaming (specifically MMORPGs) have to do with social studies and citizenship education?



In this chapter, the authors will report evidence for the potential of MMORPGs for social studies education by providing a rich and detailed review of the relevant literature from the fields of games studies, educational technology, and the social networking universe. This evidence will include game scholars’ efforts to develop classroom applications of MMORPGs in the social sciences and related disciplines (Prensky, 2001a; Castronova, 2005) and also provide examples of ‘citizenship education’ already occurring in MMORPGs (Arnseth, 2006; Jenkins, 2006). Indeed, we are just now at the cusp of researching the potential of MMORPGs to improve the teaching and learning of citizenship education, and so this chapter is a call to investigate the efficacy of their use in social studies and citizenship education today and in the future. The authors will also provide an overview— from the literature—of perceived costs and benefits associated with classroom MMORPG use, including logistical hurdles that need to be overcome. They will also share a list of recommendations to the field for classroom use of MMORPGs and for future study by social studies educators which includes the following: •

•

•

Developing MMORPG-based instructional environments that include specific, obtainable, and measurable objectives; Developing teaching and assessment methodologies that utilize MMORPGs in ways that enhance student learning that otherwise would not be available, as Mason et al. (2000) advocate; and Addressing curricular issues and implications for policy changes related to the effective and appropriate integration of MMORPGs into the social studies curriculum.

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

THE SOCIAL STUDIES AS EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRATIC CITIZENSHIP As the Center for Civic Education (1995) reported, “Democracy is not a ‘machine that will go of itself’, but must be consciously reproduced, one generation instructing the next in the knowledge and skills, as well as the civic character and commitment needed for its sustenance” (p. 3). In other words, if a democracy wishes to continue, then it must actively socialize its future citizens in the necessary requirements for democratic citizenship. Many believe, along with noted political scientist Benjamin Barber (1992), that “education and democracy are inextricably linked and that in a free society the link is severed at our own peril” (p. 9). Moreover, the American public school system evolved, at least in part, to ensure the education of young citizens into our democratic society. In the American case, the primary curricular home for that citizenship education has been the social studies. In fact, the widely held mission of the social studies, according to the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS, 1994), has been to help “students develop a core of basic knowledge and ways of thinking drawn from many academic disciplines, learn how to analyze their own and others’ opinions on important issues, and become motivated to participate in civic and community life as active, informed citizens” (p. vii). More explicitly, the NCSS (1994) defined the social studies as: …the integrated study of the social sciences and humanities to promote civic competence. Within the school program, social studies provides coordinated, systematic study drawing upon such disciplines as anthropology, archaeology, economics, geography, history, law, philosophy, political science, psychology, religion, and sociology, as well as appropriate content from the humanities,

mathematics, and natural sciences. The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world. (p. 3, emphasis added) If the primary mission of social studies education is preparation for democratic citizenship, then what does such a citizen know and what can she do? Engle and Ochoa (1988) stressed that basic civic knowledge was essential, of course, but that an ‘ideal’ citizen also possesses a reasoned commitment to democratic principles “and an understanding of how these principles apply in every aspect of life from the most local of social groups to the peoples of the entire world” (p. 17). They went on to note that the strength of a democracy lies in the “broad and intelligent participation of citizens,” and that decision-making skills and “all of the knowledge and attitudes that go into making intelligent decisions are at the heart of democratic citizenship” (p. 18). Thus, the ‘ideal’ citizen—for Engle and Ochoa (1988)—possesses the following: (1) basic civic and general knowledge, (2) dispositions that support democratic principles, (3) participation skills including political skills, and (4) intellectual skills including decision-making skills (pp. 18-26).

Basic Knowledge Engle and Ochoa (1988) believed that basic ‘civic’ knowledge consists of knowing what institutions—governmental, economic, etc.—exist in society and how each of these institutions work. In addition, they stressed that democratic citizens needed to understand cultural differences, understand the historical antecedents to current society, and be aware of “the major problems that confront society and be knowledgeable about them” (p. 23).



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Dispositions that Support Democracy What dispositions or character traits are essential to democratic citizens? The Curriculum Standards for Social Studies of the NCSS (1994) stated that certain values are essential for democratic citizens and that these included valuing “fundamental rights as the right to life, liberty, individual dignity, equality of opportunity, justice, privacy, security, and ownership of private property. They include as well the basic freedoms of worship, thought, conscience, expression, inquiry, assembly, and participation in the political process” (p. 8). Parker and Jarilomek (1997) noted that “without certain dispositions, self-governance and civic life would be impossible” (p. 11). Their list of such dispositions included such character traits as “a reasoned commitment to the public values of this society…knowing the basic rights guaranteed all citizens [and] treating oneself and others with respect” (p. 12). Engle and Ochoa (1988) expressed similar goals. They noted that students “should come to have a more reasoned understanding of democracy, including such ideas as freedom of choice, openness to new ideas…the protection of minority rights and opinions; freedom of the press, freedom of religion, freedom to speak one’s mind and academic freedom” (p. 23).

Democratic Participation Skills The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Civics Consensus Project (1996) concluded that if citizens are “to exercise their rights and discharge their responsibilities as members of self-governing communities,” they need “to acquire relevant intellectual and participatory skills” (p. 24). The Center for Civic Education (1995) described these skills as follows: To be able to think critically about a political issue, for example, one must have an understanding of the issue, its history, its relevance, as well as



command of a set of intellectual tools or considerations useful in dealing with such an issue. Thus equipped, a citizen is better able to evaluate, take and defend positions on issues. (p. 5) Engle and Ochoa (1988) stressed that such skills must go beyond the ability to retrieve and remember information, and that “the skills needed by citizens of a democracy are more complex in nature and focused on the utilization of knowledge in making decisions” (p. 25). Among these skills were: the ability to make reasoned judgments in light of conflicting evidence, being able to see a problem in its broadest possible context, and being able to select and apply the most relevant information for a particular problem.

BEYOND DIRECT CIVIC INSTRUCTION: MMORPGS AND THE SOCIAL STUDIES Thus the ‘ideal’ democratic citizen requires a wide array of knowledge, skills, and dispositions. Some of these are not necessarily best taught using direct instruction, as they require types of engagement that involve higher-order thinking skills. Moreover, the next generation of citizens is what Prensky (2001b) refers to as “digital natives.” These are young people, born after 1984, for whom digital technology has become ubiquitous. Indeed, Prensky (2001b) estimates that high school students today have spent twice as many hours engaged in video game-play as reading books. Thus, educating these digital natives, coupled with the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2005 estimation that 41.9% of 18- to 24-year-olds participated in the November 2004 election (as compared with 58.3% of the total population over 18 years old) presents unique challenges to social studies and citizenship education. One approach that holds potential for educating citizens to reach Engle and Ochoa’s (1988) vision is through the use of MMORPGs. Interactions in

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

these virtual, synthetic worlds can mirror those in the ‘real’ world and outside society in terms of rules, laws, economic interaction, and civic engagement, thus providing a potential teaching tool by which to develop citizens in the manner Engle and Ochoa (1988) envisioned. One vehicle through which this may occur could be the popular MMORPG Second Life (commonly referred to as SL), which has more than 6.8 million ‘real-world’ members from every continent that inhabit its ‘virtual world’ (Second Life, 2007a). As Engle and Ochoa (1988) noted, however, in order for a society or community to prosper, it is necessary for there to be a set of rules and/or laws that its members adhere to, and simultaneously a mechanism by which these may be enforced. Furthermore, John Locke, in his Second Treatise (1689/2005), stressed that this is the only reason for a society to bond together in the social contract: that the main purpose of establishing government is to protect the “life, liberty, and estates” of all members of society. Locke also stressed that a civil government does not have the right to arbitrarily take away the life, liberty, or property of any individual. Three centuries later, compare these ideas with the ‘civil government’ in MMORPGs such as Second Life. Put simply, the civil government in a MMORPG environment is the site administrator, and the laws (or rules of the game) can be enforced by warnings and, ultimately, suspension from the game for a specified period of time. In effect, by agreeing to the “End User Licensing Agreement” (EULA) or “Terms of Service” (which is required in order to register for an account), a user is agreeing to a type of ‘social contract’ within this virtual government—one that has far-reaching and autocratic powers. For example, a portion of Second Life’s (2007b) Terms of Service states that “Linden Lab may suspend or terminate your account at any time, without refund or obligation to you.” In addition, Second Life has “Community Standards,” whereby violation may “result in suspension or, with repeated

violations, expulsion from the Second Life Community” (Second Life, 2007c). Further, perhaps in an effort to bring attention to the offenders, certain MMORPGs contain a ‘police blotter’ in which recent wrongdoers and their offenses can be viewed (Dibbell, 2006). Some legal scholars have examined the importance of such ‘social contracts’ for online communities. Fairfield (2007) argued for the need for contracts (beyond the EULA) that secure the necessary legal relationships required for such online communities to thrive. According to Fairfield, such contracts would ensure simple default rules such as definition and enforcement of private property, “freedom from force and fraud, reliable enforcement against criminal acts, and some basic constitutional protections, including the ability to speak and convey necessary information to the market” (p. 3). This social structure presents an opportunity to examine the importance of citizenship education concepts such as power of the government, property rights, and consent of the governed, and to compare these with the Lockian ideal. The individual user is at the complete discretion of the game operator. This form of authoritarian rule is not without opponents, however, as virtual citizens’ rights groups have begun to develop. For example, the Virtual Citizenship Association (http://www.virtualcitizenship.org/) is a worldwide organization dedicated to protecting the rights of MMORPG users and developed a social contract underscoring the basic tenets and rights to which they subscribe, particularly the notion that individuals own the avatars that they create (Virtual Citizenship Association, 2007). In a separate effort to represent individual MMORPG users, the Second Life Liberation Army (SLLA) has been created, with an overarching mission to “achieve political rights for avatars within Second Life” (Second Life, 2007). In terms of teaching and learning social studies, both of these examples present an opportunity for students to learn about dissent and civic action in a number



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

of contexts, as students may compare the similarities and differences between the SLLA and other forms of protest and civil disobedience, such as the civil rights movements in the United States or Mahatma Gandhi’s leading India’s struggle for independence, as well as the underlying principles of the U.S. Constitution.

Civic Participation on a Global Scale The use of MMORPGs is not limited to the United States, as this is a worldwide phenomenon. In fact, a recent study estimates that over 20 million people in China have participated in MMORPGs (BBC News, 2005). At first glance this might be an interesting topic by which to study contemporary Chinese culture, as it might be a representation of other aspects of early 21st century China such as Internet connectivity, industrialization, and the world’s burgeoning interconnectedness, as espoused in Friedman’s (2005) The World is Flat. However, deeper currents run through this statistic. Because the Chinese notion of citizenship and governmental control differs from the United States, it is interesting to note how participants under the auspices of different ‘real’ governments act within virtual ones. An example of this took place in China in July 2006; a user who had been playing the MMORPG Fantasy Westward Journey (FWJ) for over two years was placed in jail (in the virtual world) because his username (“Kill the little Japs”) was deemed offensive to Japanese players. When the player refused to change it, he was removed from the game and his in-game property was confiscated (Jenkins, 2006). This triggered an online protest ‘march’, with more than 80,000 individuals logged on to the game’s server to register their displeasure at the FWJ ‘government’ decision (Jenkins, 2006). This case study of FWJ presents several ‘teachable moments’; not only is the history of Chinese-Japanese relations important, but this can also demonstrate the benefits of protest and self-determination in the context of government.

0

At the same time, it is also a lesson in the importance of providing and enforcing private property rights. It is significant to note that this player had spent roughly 30,000 RM (about US$2,750) to acquire property within FWJ, yet the property was stripped from him without ‘due process.’ As such, an interesting discussion topic might be who has the right to control an individual’s avatars, the property an avatar acquires, and how this might be compared with property rights in the real world. Most importantly, perhaps, this ‘synthetic world’ example has important parallels to the evolution of ‘real-world’ democratic societies. Comparing the reaction of FWJ ‘citizens’ to those of the British Colonies in America or India has the potential to illuminate the role of citizens in moving society toward self-government, a key tenet of Engle and Ochoa’s (1988) ‘ideal’ citizen.

Economic Education One aspect of being an effective citizen is economic wherewithal (NCSS, 1994), and because MMORPGs often mirror the ‘real-world’ economy, they lend themselves to teaching economic principles, particularly concepts such as supply and demand, intrinsic value, as well as currency exchange. MMORPGs can be used as teaching tools in this regard, whether a teacher or class decides to join it or not. As an activity, a class could navigate to the Second Life Web site (http://secondlife.com/) and from there a variety of economics concepts can be taught. For example, the homepage contains statistics such as the total number of residents (over 6.8 million) and how much money has been spent in the past 24 hours in both U.S. currency (over $1.5 million) as well as LindenDollars currency. In fact, SL recently opened an official, online currency market called LindeX (http://secondlife.com/whatis/economy-market.php). Students could compute descriptive statistics such as per capita in-game spending, as well as prevailing rates for currency exchange and real estate prices for land in SL.

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Reuter’s has a SL News Center (http://secondlife. reuters.com/) that regularly reports on breaking economic news from within the SL world, including exchange rates and real estate prices. Using these data, principles of currency markets and exchange rates could be taught, with questions posed as to what might serve to increase or decrease the value of Linden currency. Students could also calculate inflation in SL by using these data to create a SL consumer price index. The Second Life Web site could also be used to teach the concepts of supply and demand, intrinsic value, and investments in real estate. As of this writing, an island in Second Life costs US$1,675 for about 16 acres. Students could be asked what factors this price might be a function of, and in answering this fundamental question, they might better understand principles of supply and demand. Certainly, $1,675 for 16 acres of land is a price many times cheaper than can be found in the ‘real’ United States. However, Second Life has a distinct advantage in the real estate market relative to the real United States: while the real United States has a limited quantity of land for a growing population (thereby bidding up real estate prices), Second Life can simply add another server to its Web site in order to support expansion. As students are learning these principles, they can also learn the economic concept of the value theory of price—that is, virtual land is only worth what people will pay for it. Land in Second Life in and of itself is clearly a much more abstract notion than owning a piece of property; however, it may be a better investment from an economic point of view. First off, the start-up costs are much lower (US$1,675 for 16 acres would be impossible to find in the ‘real’ United States) and therefore much less of a monetary risk for the investor. Because of this lower price, it is less likely that an investor would need to borrow money from a lender in order to finance this purchase, and it is possible that the return on investment might be higher than if an individual purchased ‘real’ real estate.

It is also possible for users to earn a real profit from synthetic goods and services. In 2005, journalist Julian Dibbell spent a year trying to earn a real living in the synthetic world of UltimaOnline™ (http://www.uoherald.com/). Dibbell did what thousands have done in the synthetic world: he created ‘virtual’ goods (gold pieces, spells, clothing, weapons, etc.) and tried to sell them in the real world economy to players who—whatever the reason—wished to purchase these goods rather than spend the time accumulating them within the game. Most of these real money transactions (or RMTs) were facilitated through eBay auctions, but in 2006 Sony Corporation went so far as to open up an RMT exchange within its game EverQuest II. Economists have estimated the size of the RMT economy at close to $1 billion (Dibbell, 2006). That is $1 billion in real currency spent on ‘synthetic’ goods and services within ‘synthetic’ worlds. Dibbell reported on more than his success in RMTs, however. While attending a conference on serious gaming, he described what many believe to be the unrealized potential of MMORPGs—the opportunity to teach those who participate in them about democracy, property rights, and markets: A tingling and vaguely political excitement was the dominant mood—a sense that distributing control more equally among the stakeholders of an online world was good not just for business, but for society…a famous legal scholar in attendance made the case that Western democracy itselfwith its free markets, universal suffrage, and bill of rightshad succeeded mainly because it was the most efficient and least costly way to manage massively multicitizen societies. Why should it be any different for the massively multiuser collectives emerging online? (pp. 192-193) It is interesting to note Dibbell’s analogy to Western democracy, as recent events in China demonstrate that RMT can be subject to government regulation. In its March 2007 blog, the



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Virtual Economy Research Network reported online that the Chinese government, in an effort to dissuade trading and profit earning in virtual economies, will impose “strict limits on the volumes of virtual currencies issued by operators and the amounts purchased by consumers.” However, it should be noted that at the time of the blog posting, the authors noted that no action had been taken. Nevertheless, this too presents an interesting concept to teach within the context of citizenship education, as the definition and rights of citizens and their economic interactions in different parts of the world may be compared and contrasted. Perhaps nowhere is the potential of MMORPGs for teaching about key civic and economic ideas greater than in the study of property rights. Both free markets and free societies are predicated on clearly defined and enforced property rights. Indeed, without guarantees that property rights are both exclusive and transferable, individuals within a society have little incentive to improve their economic station. Certainly these are important concepts for future citizens and consumers to grapple with, and, to some degree, Prensky’s (2001b) “digital natives” have already addressed issues of intellectual property during the Napster/ file-sharing debate from the late 1990s. Moreover, Lastowka and Hunter (2004) argued that, just as in the ‘real’ world, private property systems must evolve if the virtual worlds are to remain commercially viable, and MMORPGs present innumerable opportunities to discuss what happens in societies without such property rights. Consider the case of intellectual property rights in Second Life. SL members create nearly anything they can imagine—clothing, buildings, music, restaurants, furniture, islands, etc.—and members own the intellectual property rights to what they create. This means that anyone who wishes to wear a piece of clothing designed by another member must pay the owner for the privilege. Until recently, this approach to intellectual property rights was unusual in that most



MMORPGs required players to transfer all copyrights in any and every expressive act the players might engage in, including their avatars, to the MMORPG owner. A recent example from Second Life illustrated the potential for exploring property rights. In November 2006, SL faced a threat to its virtual economy when some players discovered other players using a program called CopyBot to copy objects in SL. This program allowed players to make multiple copies of any item and thus ‘steal’ virtual property from its owners. One resident noted the “essence of creativity in (SL) is largely because of creators and their work being protected…” and that “this tool defeats all protection” (Terdiman, 2006, p. 2). Further, as CNET News reported, it was not clear what Linden Labs (SL’s owners) “can do to stop people from using the bot” (Terdiman, 2006, p. 1). What happens when a player’s in-game property rights are violated? Lastowka and Hunter (2004) as well as Dibbell (2006) have noted that some communities in synthetic worlds will turn offenders into toads, may empower informal police forces to identify violators, and may even hunt down offenders and kill them (in the game, of course). Dibbell reported the emergence of a de facto police force in Ultima Online made up of game masters whose job it was to combat ‘black hat’ hackers who operated in-game robots to mine gold, thus disadvantaging other players. This police force ensured the rules of the game were followed by all. Why this extreme enforcement? In part, because synthetic worlds have rarely had formal legal mechanisms for defining and enforcing property rights. In some sense, this makes the potential for study all the greater, as some synthetic worlds might be likened to pre-Magna Carta England, prior to the evolution of civil law addressing property. Thus, students could examine the case of a MMORPG that does not have existing institutions for defining and enforcing property rights, and then contemplate the consequences.

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Participation Skills MMORPGs have other potential advantages as well. Because MMORPGs are a worldwide phenomenon, it is not uncommon for a user to interact with participants who live in other countries and are members of other cultures and religions (Alvarez, 2006). It is hoped that the relationships that are fostered through MMORPGs will lead to an increase in understanding and tolerance of others, which is a fundamental goal of citizenship education. Finally, another benefit (although perhaps less measurable) of MMORPGs is that they can lead to an increased ability of individuals to engage in teamwork. The skills of being able to work and get along with others, as espoused in Fulghum’s (1988) All I Really Needed to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, are invaluable as they transcend social studies and school in general, and can have an impact on future relationships and careers. However, developing online relationships comes with a word of caution: it should be noted that teachers, students, and parents should be offered cybersafety training as a method of “protecting young people from embarrassment or harm” (Berson & Berson, 2006, p. 127).

Decision-Making Skills Yet another advantage of MMORPGs is the promotion of the development of decision-making skills. The dynamic and complex environments present in MMORPGs provide various scenarios, each with multiple variables and sources of information. These scenarios afford participants opportunities to continually analyze information, interpret variables and information, and make decisions related to both their short- and long-term goals (Galarneau & Zibit, 2007; Johnson, 2005). As opposed to most classroom environments, decision-making opportunities are presented in rapid succession and through multiple formats in an effort to provide as much relevant information as possible. Interacting with this information

requires complex decision-making skills. Hence, MMORPG environments not only offer numerous opportunities to practice decision making, but also more dynamic and complex scenarios and sources of information resulting in a richer and deeper decision making. Additionally, unlike many classrooms, participants in MMORPG environments are provided immediate feedback regarding their decisions. Thus, consequences are immediate, but without ‘real-world’ implications (Prensky, 2005).

IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL STUDIES RESEARCH AND PRACTICE Games and play have been a subject of serious scholars and academics for more than a century. Such work has tended to emerge from the field of sociology, and many of the well-known scholars who have written about games and play have been noted sociologists (e.g., Max Weber, Johan Huizinga, etc.). The study of the games that were developed for use on early computers tended to fall to computer scientists. Recently, however, a new group of scholars has focused on the study of computer and video games. These scholars have attempted to understand not just video and computer games, but the players who play them and the interactions between them. Two organizations are representative of much of the work in this new field: The Serious Games Initiative (http://www.seriousgames.org/index2. html) and Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research, an online journal. The Serious Games Initiative “was founded at the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington, DC.” and is focused on the study of games “for use in exploring management and leadership challenges facing the public sector. Part of its overall charter is to help forge productive links between the electronic game industry and projects involving the use of games



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

in education, training, health, and public policy” (Serious Games Initiative, 2007). Game Studies is a “crossdisciplinary journal dedicated to games research, Web-published several times a year at www.gamestudies.org.” The primary focus of this journal is “aesthetic, cultural and communicative aspects of computer games,” and the journal provides “scholars a peer-reviewed forum for their ideas and theories; to provide an academic channel for the ongoing discussions on games and gaming” (Arnseth, 2007). Among the questions explored by both groups is the role of computer gaming in education and learning. Indeed, the explosion in popularity of computer games and “developments in information and computer technologies more generally have resulted in a renewed awareness of the potentials of simulations and games among researchers interested in learning and cognition” (Arnseth, 2006). Scholars in games studies have also begun to investigate how players learn to play video and computer games, and to what degree game-play might constitute a particularly effective way of organizing learning activities (Aldrich, 2005; Gee, 2003; Prensky, 2001b). Most importantly, scholars and policymakers have become “concerned with whether games might become more integrated with official school curricula” (Arnseth, 2006). Have game studies scholars investigated the possible citizenship education applications of games and gaming? Indirectly, yes. Squire (2002), writing about the potential role of educational and social science research in digital gaming noted: Still, little is known about what players are learning through playing SimCity? Is it deepening their appreciation for geography, helping them develop more robust understandings about their environment, or perhaps promoting misconceptions about civic planning? How does a game such as Civilization III work as a cultural simulation? Does it impact players’ conceptions of politics or diplomacy? Is there any way to reappropriate Civilization for use in history classes? Given the



immense influence of SimCity and Civilization in present game design, what innovations might be sparked by games built around science, engineering, literature or architecture subjects? How might these innovations have an impact on the rest of game design? (paragraph 10) Although there are a number of potential instructional benefits to MMORPGs, various logistical considerations must be taken into place before they will be able to be adopted into the K-12 environment. These range from evaluating student performance, to negotiating firewalls, to meeting districts’ acceptable use policies. First and foremost, in the standards-driven model of schools today, it is imperative that every student be evaluated; therefore, a clear method of assessment must be developed for each student and the learning outcomes that they produce by participating in a MMORPG. As noted earlier, because MMORPGs are not ‘games’ in the traditional sense with clear winners and losers, designing assessment of student participation might prove especially challenging. Another consideration is how MMORPGs relate to the ‘reality’ of school curriculum today, particularly that of the social studies. Traditionally, social studies teaching has involved teacher-centered, fact-driven instruction (Goodlad, 1984), and Cuban (2001) points out that despite the influx of computer hardware in the K-12 environment and their potential to transform teaching and learning, they have not made as appreciable an impact as their advocates had claimed. More recent research reveals that standardized testing has reinforced this type of pedagogy, particularly in the social studies, as instruction is often provided at the lowest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy often little more than “glorified information gathering” (Friedman, 2006; VanFossen, 1999/2000, p. 104). A question of logistics is also paramount. First and foremost, in order for students to actively engage with a MMORPG, there would need to

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

be significant classroom access to computers, as students could work alone or in pairs. To use a MMORPG, a school does not need a software license per se as they would other software, but it would cost money to buy land or space in a particular MMORPG, and for some MMORPGs, additional costs such as a one-time registration fee or a recurring monthly user fee exist. Also, because these sites have been developed for adults, it would be necessary to ensure that their use would meet a district’s Acceptable Use Policy (AUP), as well as pass through firewalls. In regards to this, it should be noted however that Second Life has a teen (under 18) version, which can be found at http://teen.secondlife.com/, and was created in order for teenagers from around the world (ages 13-17) to interact with one another in a safe environment, with “Linden Liaisons” monitoring interactions (Second Life, 2007b). Additionally, students would need to have computer access on a regular basis. A final consideration is moving beyond past generations’ perceptions of games as trivial endeavors. As previously mentioned, MMORPGs are not our parents’ (or even our own) video games. There are few parallels with popular MMORPGs of today (World of Warcraft, Ultima Online, and Second Life) and the popular games of past generations (Trivial Pursuit, Dungeons and Dragons, and Monopoly). Because of this incongruency and lack of experience with MMORPGs, today’s adults have little understanding of the complex nature (and learning benefits) of the games of today’s children. Additionally, they have difficulty moving beyond their view of games as trivial pursuits (Prensky, 2001a, 2005). In order for MMORPGs to become more prominent in social studies and citizenship education, it is critical that today’s adults are afforded opportunities to look beyond their past experiences with the ‘games’ of their generation and explore the ‘games’ of the digital native’s generation and their potential benefits for teaching and learning.

CONCLUSION These concerns and costs are very real. Do they outweigh the admittedly vast potential MMORPGs seem to hold for social studies and citizenship education? Where do we go from here? Indeed, while it may not be feasible (nor necessarily a good idea) at this point in time for K-12 social studies students to participate in a MMORPG, the potential benefits of their use as a learning tool are too great to ignore. Therefore we have developed a list of recommendations that should be in place for MMORPGs to be used effectively, which includes the following: • •

•

Develop lessons that include specific, obtainable, and measurable objectives; Create a teaching methodology that utilizes MMORPGs in a manner that enhances student learning that otherwise would not be available, as Mason et al. (2000) advocate; Establish an individualized evaluation alongside a rubric to ensure that each student attained the objective. At first, this might be accomplished by using and referring to a MMORPG site within a lesson, similar to the economic examples from Second Life described above.

In order for this vision to become a reality however, it is our contention that there needs to be some structure for teachers to take the first step, and simultaneously, teachers need to feel comfortable within the MMORPG environment. Therefore, it might initially be helpful to work with teachers who are experienced MMORPG users, as they might better be able to envision how MMORPGs could be used in the classroom. In so doing, there is an abundance of potential. For example, in the name of academic study, several islands could be purchased with different government and economic systems. Not only could these differing systems be compared, contrasted, and analyzed, but over the course of weeks and



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

months, concepts in history could be studied as well, as decisions made in the past will impact the present. Castronova (2005) has proposed using large MMORPGs as just such ‘Petri dishes’ for experiments in economics. In addition, interactive learning environments for MMORPGs are being created; for example Sloodle (Second Life Object-Oriented Distributed Learning Environment) combines Second Life with Moodle, which is an online course development system. This hybrid system highlights the pedagogical benefits of both SL and Moodle, while muting the pedagogical drawbacks of each. Benefits of SLsuch as simplicity of content modification, ability to facilitate collaboration, three-dimensionality, and the integration of multimedia—are combined with benefits of Moodle—including limited hardware demands, integration with communicative technologies, management of learning activities, and organization and access of instructional materials—to afford teachers opportunities to create immersive, three-dimensional instructional settings (Kemp & Livingston, 2006). We are just now on the cusp of researching the potential of MMORPGs to improve the teaching and learning of citizenship education. One specific example of implications for social studies research can be seen in deKanter’s (2007) preliminary study of leadership traits and MMORPGs. deKanter wanted to determine: 1.

2. 3.

How do leadership characteristics in an online community compare to those in the ‘real’ world? Do leadership experiences from the virtual world transfer to the ‘real’ world? Does participation in a virtual community encourage or limit civic participation in the ‘real’ world?

In order to answer these questions, deKanter (2007) used a modification of Flanagan, Sy-



vertsen, and Stout’s (2007) civic engagement measure to survey guild leaders in several popular MMORPGs (World of Warcraft, Runescape, etc.). deKanter (2007) determined that the guild leaders developed key communication skills and exhibited more civic agency than non-leader players. In addition, although his sample was very small (n=47), deKanter found some transfer to ‘real-life’ civic engagement in that two-thirds of the sample were registered voters, 100% of whom had voted in the last local election. As MMORPGs continue to integrate into mainstream society, this chapter is a call for investigation of the efficacy of their use among young people today as they prepare to become the citizens of tomorrow. While voter participation in general is lower in the United States than in other industrialized nations, this apathy is particularly acute among 18- to 24-year-olds. While there are a number of reasons why this might be the case, this aspect of the social studies’ goal of developing “active, informed citizens” has not, for the most part, come to fruition. While MMORPGs are not necessarily a panacea to this problem, their use within the social studies classroom may be an impetus to move social studies instruction and learning from the teacher-centered environment described by Goodlad (1984) to more of an active subject in which students, particularly the “digital natives” described by Prensky (2001b), are prepared to assume the office of citizen (p. 1).

REFERENCES Aarseth, E. (2007). Game studies: The international journal of computer game research. Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http://gamestudies. org/0601/ Alvarez, M. (2006). Second Life and school: The use of virtual worlds in high school education. Retrieved February 16, 2007, from http://www. trinity.edu/adelwich/worlds/students.html

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Arnseth, H. (2006). Learning to play or playing to learn: A critical account of the models of communication informing educational research on computer gameplay. Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 6(1). Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http:// gamestudies.org/0601/articles/arnseth BBC News. (2005, August 25). China imposes online gaming curbs. Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4183340. stm Barber, B. (1992). An aristocracy of everyone: The politics of education and the future of America. New York: Oxford Press. Berson, I.R., & Berson, M.J. (2006). Privileges, privacy, and protection of youth bloggers in the social studies classroom. Social Education, 70(3), 124-128. Bogost, I. (2006). Water cooler gameslive from the serious games summit (day 1). Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://www.watercoolergames. org/archives/000658.shtml#swain Castronova, E. (2004). Game development and social science. Journal of Game Development, 1(1), 91-94. Castronova, E. (2005). On the research value of large games: Natural experiments in Norrath and Camelot. CESifo Working Paper Series No. 1621. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=875571 Clegg, A. (1991). Games and simulations in social studies education. In O. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of teaching and learning in the social studies. New York: Macmillan. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Dibbell, J. (2006). Play money: Or, how I quit my day job and made millions trading virtual loot. New York: Basic Books. deKanter, N. (2007, July 23-26). A guild-ed future: Lessons in leadership from massively multiplayer on-line games. Proceedings of the 2nd James F. Ackerman Colloquium on Technology and Citizenship Education, W. Lafayette, IN. Retrieved from http://www.edci.purdue.edu/ackerman/colloquium/2007/PPT_ files/Ackerman07nk.ppt Engle, S., & Ochoa, A. (1988). Education for democratic citizenship: Decision making in the social studies. New York: Teachers College Press. Fairfield, J. (2007). Anti-social contracts: The contractual governance of online communities. Retrieved September 4, 2007, from http://ssrn. com/abstract=1002997 Flanagan, C.A., Syvertsen, A., & Stout, M.D. (2007). Civic measurement models: Tapping adolescents’ civic engagement. Retrieved from http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/WorkingPapers/WP55Flannagan.pdf Friedman, A.M. (2006). State standards and digital primary sources: A divergence. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 6(3). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal. org/vol6/iss3/socialstudies/article1.cfm Friedman, T.L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. Fulghum, R. (1988). All I really needed to know I learned in kindergarten: Uncommon thoughts on common things. New York: Villard Books. Galarneau, L., & Zibit, M. (2007). Online games for 21st century skills. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks (pp. 59-88). Arlington, VA: Information Science.



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

Goodlad, J.I. (1984). A place called school: Prospects for the future. New York: McGraw-Hill. Huizinga J. (1944/1971). Homo ludens. London: Beacon Press. Jenkins, H. (2006). Confessions of an ACA/fan: The official Weblog of Henry Jenkins. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://www.henryjenkins. org/2006/08/national_ politics_within_virtu_ 1.html Johnson, S. (2005). Everything bad is good for you. New York: Penguin. Kemp, J., & Livingstone, D. (2006, August). Putting a Second Life “metaverse” skin on learning management systems. In D. Livingstone & J. Kemp (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Life Education Workshop at the Second Life Community Convention (pp. 13-18). Paisley, UK: University of Paisley. Lagorio, C. (2007). The ultimate distance learning. The New York Times, (January 7). Retrieved January 14, 2007, from http://www.nytimes. com/2007/01/07/education/edlife/07innovation. html Lastowka, G., & Hunter, D. (2006). The laws of virtual worlds. California Law Review, 92(1). Locke, J. (1689/2005). Two treatises of government and a letter concerning toleration. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mason, C., Berson, M., Diem, R., Hicks, D., Lee, J., & Dralle, T. (2000). Guidelines for using technology to prepare social studies teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/socialstudies/article1.htm NCSS (National Council for the Social Studies). (1994). Expectations for excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies. Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.



NCSS. (2001). Creating effective citizens. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.socialstudies.org/positions/effectivecitizens/ Parker, W.C., & Jarolimek, J. (1997). Social studies in elementary education (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. Prensky, M. (2005). In educational games, complexity matters: Mini-games are trivial—but “complex” games are not: An important way for teachers, parents, and others to look at educational computer and video games. Educational Technology, 45(4), 22-28. Regan, T. (2006). What if civics class were an online game? Christian Science Monitor, (June 14). Retrieved February 12, 2007, from http://www. csmonitor.com/2006/0614/p17s01-cogn.html Second Life. (2007a). What is second life? Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http://secondlife. com/whatis/ Second Life. (2007b). What is teen second life? Retrieved February 21, 2007, from http://teen. secondlife.com/whatis?PHPSESSID=fd2f0483f a59dbc38997d0b606402f09 Second Life. (2007c). Terms of service. Retrieved May 23, 2007, from https://secure-web9.secondlife.com/corporate/tos.php Second Life Liberation Army. (2007). Second Life Liberation Army. Retrieved June 7, 2007, from http://slla.blogspot.com/ Squire, K. (2002). Cultural framing of computer/ video games. Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 2(1). Retrieved February 15, 2007, from http://www. gamestudies.org/0102/squire/

The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

The Week. (2007). Living in a virtual world. The Week: The Best of the U.S. and International Media, (February 16). U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). Voting and registration in the election of November 2004. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/voting/cps2004.html VanFossen, P.J. (1999/2000). An analysis of the use of the Internet and World Wide Web by secondary social studies teachers in Indiana. International Journal of Social Education, 14(2), 87-109. Virtual Citizenship Association. (2007). The social contract. Retrieved June 11, 2007, from http://www.virtualcitizenship.org/page/project_socialcontract Virtual Economy Research Network. (2007). Government rumbles, Chinese virtual money markets stable for now. Retrieved May 24, 2007, from http://virtual-economy.org/blog/government_rumbles_chinese_vir Woodcock, B. (2005). MMOG chart. Retrieved March 14, 2007, from http://www.mmogchart. com

KEY TERMS ‘Active’ and ‘Effective’ Citizenry: Active, democratic citizenship is a broad definition, which the National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS) posits can take “diverse forms.” This can range from individual citizens “becoming informed about issues and voting in elections” to participating in political and social movements (NCSS, 1994, p. vii). Examples of this include, but are not limited to, writing a letter to an editor, participating in a letter-writing campaign, participating in a political Weblog, and contacting an elected official. NCSS (2001) defines an effective citizen as one who has the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to assume the “‘office of citizen’ in our

democratic republic.”. NCSS defines an effective citizen as one who: • • •

•

•

•

•

•

• •

Embraces core democratic values and strives to live by them; Accepts responsibility for the well-being of oneself, one’s family, and the community; Has knowledge of the people, history, and traditions that have shaped our local communities, our nation, and the world; Has knowledge of our nation’s founding documents, civic institutions, and political processes; Is aware of issues and events that have an impact on people at local, state, national, and global levels; Seeks information from varied sources and perspectives to develop informed opinions and creative solutions; Asks meaningful questions and is able to analyze and evaluate information and ideas; Uses effective decision-making and problem-solving skills in public and private life; Has the ability to collaborate effectively as a member of a group; and Actively participates in civic and community life.

Citizenship Education: The young people of today may learn effective citizenship skills in a variety of courses. For example, students may learn about individuals involved in the development of the U.S. Constitution in a history course, but the application of laws and amendments in a civics or government class. NCSS (2001) states that: To accomplish this goal [of effective citizens], every student must participate in citizenship education activities each year. These activities should expand civic knowledge, develop participation skills, and support the belief that, in a democracy,



The Role of MMORPGs in Social Studies Education

the actions of each person make a difference. Throughout the curriculum and at every grade level, students should have opportunities to apply their civic knowledge, skills, and values as they work to solve real problems in their school, the community, our nation, and the world. Digital Immigrants: Prensky (2001b) defines “digital immigrants” as “those of us who were not born into the digital world but have, at some later point in our lives, become fascinated by and adopted many or most aspects of the new technology” (pp. 1-2). Digital Natives: Prensky (2001b) defines “digital natives” as the first generation of students to “have spent their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, video cams, cell phones, and all the other toys and tools of the digital age” (p. 1). Social Studies: “The integrated study of the social sciences and humanities to promote civic competence. Within the school program, social studies provides coordinated, systematic study drawing upon such disciplines as anthropology, archaeology, economics, geography, history, law,

0

philosophy, political science, psychology, religion, and sociology, as well as appropriate content from the humanities, mathematics, and natural sciences. The primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the public good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world” (NCSS, 1994, p. 3). Further, “In social studies, students develop a core of basic knowledge and ways of thinking drawn from many academic disciplines, learn how to analyze their own and others’ opinions on important issues, and become motivated to participate in civic and community life as active, informed citizens” (NCSS, 1994, p. vii). The National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS, 2001) also states that “the core mission of social studies education is to help students develop the knowledge, skills, and values that will enable them to become effective citizens.” Generally speaking, at the secondary level, a wide variety of courses falls under the umbrella of social studies. These include United States and world history, civics, government, economics, geography, sociology, psychology, and anthropology.



Chapter XV

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension Brock Dubbels University of Minnesota, USA

AbstrAct In this qualitative study, literacy practices of “struggling” seventh and eighth graders were recorded on videotape as they engaged in both traditional and new literacies practices in an after-school video games club. These recordings were analyzed in the context of building comprehension skills with video games. The students struggled with reading and are characterized as unmotivated and disengaged by the school, which may be at the root of their inability to use comprehension strategies. Playing video games is viewed here as a literate practice, and was seen to be more engaging than traditional activities (such as reading school text, writing journals, etc.). The conclusion of this observation makes connections to current research in comprehension and provides a basis for teachers to use games to develop comprehension and learning.

INtrODUctION Games are designed to be accessible and can be used to develop print-based comprehension in reluctant and struggling readers. The goal of this chapter was to help make those connections clear, and demonstrate the need for this approach through observations of an after-school video game club where game-play was examined from a theory of comprehension and then examined in a non-laboratory context from the perspective

of cultural cognition, often known as cognitive ethnography (Hutchins, 1995). The after-school games club was created for the enrichment of students who had been pulled from mainstream classroom instruction to help them become more successful readers with comprehension strategies. Two videotaped sessions of the games club were analyzed in the context of games being new narratives that depend upon comprehension processes.

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Comprehension is transmedial. It is not dependent upon a specific medium. It is a cognitive process that is an artifact of cultural and sociallymediated cognition. School and academia have their own cultures of cognition, and when we look at school, we need to remember that not everyone uses academic language or has experience with academic cultural values at home. Academic culture at school is another culture with a different language and different values for many people. Comprehension translates across cultural boundaries based upon the way we share information. In its most basic sense, comprehension is pattern recognition, and this can be found in games, texts, dance, and whatever composed cultural communication and expression. The socio-cultural implications of the way these students approached games may be of assistance in helping educators to build upon informal learning to develop traditional academic learning. With an understanding of this, we can begin to teach for transfer and recruit prior experiences, and perhaps become strategic in our use of games for developing comprehension.

Comprehension in the Wild vs. Comprehension in School—the Problem Defined Often we assume that once students enter the classroom, they are ready to learn and perform whatever we give them. This approach ignores the possibility that these students may have rich lives outside of classroom culture, where they solve problems and have their own cultural models that frame and develop cognitive competencies (Lee, 2007). In order to engage students, we may need to learn about their cultural activities and their values to make connections and create transfer. When it comes to learning, connecting to prior knowledge is essential. Many young people do not know what they want in 10 years, but they know what they are interested in now. What this chapter has begun



to explore is how an after-school reading remediation program was modified into a games club curriculum that aligned with student interest to make reading instruction more like an activity the club members might engage in if they chose the activity. In this case, they did choose the activity, and we worked to create connections and transfer. This choice empowered the students rather than alienating them with threats that they would never go to college if they did not pass a reading test. So we encouraged them to play video games since that is what they wanted to do. We decided that games could provide a connection to the types of literate activities that kids might be participating away from the classroom environment. The foundation of the approach in the “Games Club” was to tap into activities that he kids wanted to participate in and make connections, and build upon their strengths and interests. This connection to the life of students outside of school, or in the wild, might begin to make school more relevant and possibly aid in our attempt to connect them to traditional academic culture, while also acknowledging that what they do outside of school is valuable too. According to O’Brien and Dubbels (submitted, page 3): Reading is more unlike the reading students are doing outside of school than at any point in the recent history of secondary schools, and high stakes, print-based assessments are tapping skills and strategies that are increasingly unlike those that adolescents use from day to day. The connection could build a portal to showing how school learning could help the students in their interest areas. What we wanted to move away from was strategies instruction or direct instruction about how to read. Many students have shown themselves to be tenacious in their reluctance to participate in this kind of instruction. And for good reason, strategies instruction may condition students to look outside of themselves for answers, rather than using the knowledge

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

they have in a methodical way—the key is in helping the readers to become strategic, rather than consumers of strategies. The strategies that we traditionally have used do not meet the needs of all readers in all reading conditions. According to researchers (Narvaez, van den Broek, & Ruiz, 1999), strategies that are often taught to students are not equally applicable to every text that they read. Some texts are fictional, some expository, and some are detailed, some of multiple plot lines, and some organized a single character’s experience. Research has shown that asking readers to use different strategies can lead them to make different inferences using those different strategies, even with the same piece of text (Narvaez et al., 1999). Strategies just will not do it all. People who have a hard time reading need to be provided the incentive and opportunity to experience a variety of literate experiences—preferably ones that scaffold the reader to integrate a variety of strategies where they build a repertoire of tools for interpreting and organizing texts into a coherent model in their minds of what is happening in the text. Students need to be able to recognize when a text will be organized in certain ways for conveying information in different ways. This genre level approach to reading utilizes the reader’s prior knowledge to build expectations of the text built from prior knowledge of organization, themes, and plot characteristics. So it is crucial that our readers be strategic, not consumers of strategies. To become strategic with comprehension, it is important that students read a variety of texts (Allington, 2006), and these texts do not need to be print, just a composed message. It is important that educators not ignore new literate practices like video games in favor of spending more time to practice test-taking, strategies instruction, and reading traditional texts. Although these traditional genres and assessments are important, they assess interactions with the world in ways that are disconnected from the new skills, knowledge,

and abilities necessary for being successful today, found through engaging and producing in today’s culture. What we did not want to do was to turn the kids completely away from academic reading and learning. This was an attempt to coax them into reading and building comprehension with media more to their liking. This approach is an important approach, not only from my experience in the classroom, but from the research literature. Adolescents’ perceptions of their competence may be a more important predictor of whether they will engage with difficult texts across the disciplines than their past reading performance (Alvermann, 2001; Guthrie & Wigfield, 2000). Thus, support in high-interest and quick-success activities may reward trial and effort, and lead to the possibility that students who have disengaged and lost confidence will make renewed attempts at the work of building traditional academic skills. This belief can build courage and resilience, and most importantly, tenacity. Tenacity is often the trait that works against educators. Students who have disengaged are often tenacious when it comes to avoiding what they do not want to do. With reading, this is especially true. Guthrie and Wigfield (2000) and Alvermann (2001) make a case that struggling adolescent readers have disengaged from reading and are unlikely to re-engage when offered strategies instruction alone. For this reason, using high-interest literate practices in the classroom may provide a gateway activity for connecting with more traditional forms of literacy. New media literacies can be used as a method for convincing students that they are capable of complex reading and comprehension. The first step is for educators to acknowledge that the world of media that students participate in is valuable. Recruiting these new skills for classroom instruction, learning about students’ experiences with new media, and helping students build confidence and competency might convince them that they can have this same success in participating in more



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

traditional literacies like standardized tests and literary analysis. Students can build upon what they know, using their problem-solving abilities to learn and make connections for transfer between different academic domains. The second step is having educators who are capable of finding and connecting the literate activities so that they can be recruited with confidence to support the students’ attempts to become more competent readers. This can be done if we understand that comprehension is transmedial—that is, comprehension is not print dependent, and that many of the key processes in comprehending print are also used in a variety of other composed communication and media. I believe we can teach just about anything and relate it to the traditional content areas taught in school if the learner is willing to engage with us and try to make the connection. Video games provide this opportunity to engage reluctant learners and also provide a bridge for print-based competency. With video games as the big picture, the students from the games club were willing to tolerate our talk about reading and our asking them about their learning. Perhaps it is needless to say here, but the kids were excited about playing video games at school. It was pretty amazing working with these students and having the influence to persuade them to slow down and reflect on their literate practices and watch them develop as readers and comprehenders; but this does not begin to resemble what we normally assume as a traditional reading intervention. Typically, students are separated out from successful readers for remediation, which often resembles drill and practice.

Traditional Views on Literacy There is great depth in our literary traditions and the culture of inquiry across disciplines. What I would like to see is the opportunity for young people to learn experientially, and games



can provide this hands-on reflective experience in the right context. I am not suggesting that we abandon Chaucer in favor of taking kids on graffiti field trips for tagging buildings and creating gangster rap—although this would make for an interesting Canterbury Tale—but if the instructor is able to make connections between high-interest activities that are not hurtful or illegal, we may be able to show the value of traditional academic content and traditions in relation to what is interesting to students today. This is called teaching for transfer. Traditional views on reading comprehension such as those put forward by the National Reading Panel (2002) state that slowing reading down, helping students to monitor their comprehension, and making relationships between objects in the text and the students’ prior experience is important for building comprehension—and comprehension is reading. But this is not the whole picture. The key is getting the students to connect and participate, and to act on what they have read. When they can demonstrate and embody the information in performance, we can look at their comprehension as a demonstrable knowledge act. Although this government report has received much attention, there has also been much criticism of the NRP’s round-up of research. Snow (cited in Paris & Stahl, 2006) emphasized that we should begin to examine comprehension from the perspective of theories and empirical research on reading comprehension, rather than from constructions of comprehension found in standardized tests. According to Snow, we need to work from a theory of comprehension and localize our assessments, making this process part of what we teach in the classroom, rather than use a standardized test, which is a one-way transaction constructed for the convenience of the evaluators—and this requires teachers who have some idea of what comprehension is, and how those teachers can help students develop comprehension skills.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Reading and Comprehension in Schools Today Often teachers are not preparing their students for the change in the purpose of why they read in later grades. Around fourth grade, many students are asked to read and comprehend. They are reading to learn, rather than learning to read. They are no longer asked to show that they can just decode with fluency (Chall, 1983), but to take what they read and act upon the information in the text and apply it in a knowledge act. They are asked to read independently and comprehend to participate in discussions and inform their projects like book reports and research for the science fair. Interestingly, this time of reading to learn is when many young people begin to struggle. When readers do not get the help they need, they may find that their struggles escalate, as texts become more difficult and provide less contextual support. Two major phenomena in schools that may be the result of this are called the “fourth-grade slump” and the “eighth-grade cliff,” where the reading expectations are raised and reading scores drop. This difficulty for young readers seems to be compounded by the fact that many upper-elementary-grade and secondary school teachers do not know how to teach reading (Kamil, cited in Grosso de Leon, 2002, p. 1). The “fourth-grade slump” and the “eighth-grade cliff” can be avoided with a strong foundation of skills that support comprehension and vocabulary development in the primary grades, and continued maintenance and development of these abilities throughout a child’s school career. Unfortunately, these students are often put in situations where their instruction takes the form of remediation, and they are often given texts that are easy to decode, but immature in content. This content is often a source of discomfort for readers who already know about being a child, when what they are really hungry for is to learn more about what it is like to be older.

Unfortunately, these students are often in environments where the teacher does not know this and does not have the skills or the time to work individually with struggling readers. This often escalates to where students become frustrated and become known as behavior problems, acting out to avoid the discomfort of reading, and eventually they are tracked, labeled, and acquired by a learning disability (McDermott & Varenne, 1995), sent away to rooms sequestered from students who can read and perform in the mainstream.

Why Games? Games represent a high-interest, accessible medium to build comprehension, and in using games we can continue to engage in topics that are complex, provocative and motivating, and not often found in texts designed to be simplified for the sake of decoding. Games will also help to get these students to reconnect with reading and learning, and create a basis for developing and using comprehension strategies. With this in mind, this knowledge and experience of theory can provide an opportunity for educators to bootstrap traditional print-based literacy and engage students in comprehension development. Regardless of whether we are talking about comprehension in novels, articles, sculpture, or dance, comprehension comes from dialogue and interaction, where the learner gathers information and must act upon it in some way—feedback and reflection are essential. Feedback and interaction were central to the work of Lev Vygotsky, as depicted in Figure 1 (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988, p. 35). In this model called the Zone of Proximal Development, the external dialogue created by interaction in stage 1 eventually becomes internalized, and through this internalization individuals go through a process where they learn to selfmonitor, learn to observe, learn to practice, learn to receive feedback, and ultimately they learn to refine the process of comprehension through



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Figure 1. The zone of proximal development

questioning and verifying what they know in what can be called a knowledge act. Vygotsky (1978) maintained that children imitate what they see adults do, and this gradually develops into the ability to do certain tasks without help or assistance. We need to start with where the student is at with their ability to solve problems, and then under the guidance of a more experienced problem solver, their ability is extended—this is called the Zone of Proximal Development. Games can provide the interaction, relevant feedback, and demand mastery in the same way a competent instructor can scaffold a learner through the Zone of Proximal Development. In a classroom situation, where a teacher has 30 or more students, and 55 minutes to work with them, it is unlikely that teacher will be able to work one-onone with each student in a meaningful way every day. But it is possible that games can provide the kind of accessibility, interaction, and instruction to develop comprehension that young people who struggle to decode might benefit from, but more importantly, games may give incentive to reengage in developing essential reading skills.



What Teachers Need to Know The big idea here is that games are built upon many of the same comprehension elements that are incorporated in reading printed text. There is a tradition of consideration of video games as new narratives; Laurel (1993), Murray (1997), Aarseth (1997), Frasca (2003), and Crawford (2005) agree that there are narrative elements, but that games are also designed to be interactive in the way that they tell stories. As Frasca (2003) describes, the aspects of simulation and problem-solving components of the game are also very compelling, and are what he called the ludic aspects of the game: the elements that instigate play—see also Salen and Zimmerman (2004). These elements create the feedback and demand knowledge acts, where the player must gather information, decide what is useful, and use it to act to get through a puzzle. This process of game-play demands that the player acquire and act upon the information they gather. This view of games, play, and learning presents a highly flexible and powerful form of comprehension, and it is generally instinctual, but often needs mentoring, modeling, and practice to develop.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Learning and Play Are Inseparable Play can be seen as an evolutionary adaptation (Sutton-Smith, 1997) useful in transferring culture, knowledge, and developing proficiency in tool use, as well as the creation of knowledge, culture, and tools, (Mumford, 1945). Above all, play represents an opportunity for exploration and inquiry in a context where the cost of failure is the opportunity to learn from a mistake. In play, knowledge is gathered and acted upon, a very powerful process to develop experience and comprehension. Play is visible evidence of comprehension. It is an expression of and toward comprehension. It is a knowledge act. Play is one of the building blocks of comprehension. With play, children and adults seek and explore through observation, manipulation, and imitation. When we play, we take our prior knowledge and attempt to create order and demonstrate competence. With toys, children are interacting with a representation of something that adults use. My own son likes to play with cars. He makes engine sounds and drives them around with screeching tires. He also likes to take on roles

and imitate with toys that are representations of the tools we use for productivity. At right we see him in his own office with the same tools mom and dad use. What he was doing was building a repertoire of how things work and what they are used for in his memory. From an evolutionary perspective, he is using his imagination to prepare for a time when he will drive and also to share, communicate, and produce culture through knowledge of cultural artifacts like cars and computers. This process of visualization, belief systems, and cultural roles are important aspects of learning. Shaffer (2006), in his description of epistemic games, provides depth and detail on how these elements work in games (and this is exemplified and contextualized later in Figure 2). Games are a structured form of play, and what teachers need to understand is that play is learning, and by structuring play, we can create a higher degree of engagement and effort. Games allow for the kind of learning that encourages mastery, builds resilience and tenacity, innovation and creativity, as well as practice solving problems. Play creates comprehension through knowledge acts, whether the learner is performing or investigating.

Exhibit 1.



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Games, Play, and Learning are Inseparable As children develop and grow, their play becomes more complex, and we begin to see imaginative play, with language and visualization, use of complex ideas, actions, tools, and language, and interaction and shared play with others. If you look at a game, it generally is composed of a number of elements that are structured to create the interaction and experience that children and adults enact in play (Figure 2) such as imagination, role-playing and identities, rules, branching, and choice, as well as incorporating the use of probability and chance. Games are tools for learning, but what is important for educators to know is how to use games that structure and extend play and create reflection. Often tools are useful in helping individuals to learn complex problem solving and pass along cultural knowledge, but what we often fail to account for is that tools are not as powerful until used in an activity with intention. Kids may have grown up in a digital age, but this does not make them digital natives. They may just be strangers in a strange land that they want to know more about—we can provide the passport.

Figure 2. Elements of games and play



We need to consider play as the foundation in an approach to using video games, and we need to recognize that games may represent an activity that is complex and relevant enough to engage students in learning and developing comprehension skills. But games are not enough. In education, we often talk about the tools, because the tools are often the measure of what we take to be progress in education. Often the tools we use such as tests and software are thought to be capable of definitive assessment. And if the software helps improve test performance, it must be improving learning over all. This is not always the case, and more often than not it is the way the tool is used that is important. We are foolish to think we can just give out the tools and easily replicate this (Cuban, 1986). It is important to understand that tools are only as powerful as the way they are employed. The central role of the tool may be one of the major obstacles educators will need to overcome in the classroom if schools and teachers are going to remain relevant for preparation of young people for the new global labor force. Games should not be seen as a panacea, but they may be used as powerful tools.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Play and the way that we learn to use tools should be the focus. Play changes the discourse around learning. It implies making mistakes, trying new things, and creativity and innovation— traits necessary for knowledge workers. It also takes the pressure off of children who are already under tremendous pressure to perform in school settings that regularly insist on going faster and covering more ground because we are all so far behind. Play can bring some more humanity into our classroom teaching, and it is also a proven method for learning and developing cultural competency—and games represent more formalized and structured approaches to this cultural learning often found in informal learning environments often known as the wilds away from school.

The Take-Home Message Play is how we share and transfer physical and intellectual tools to our young and other community members. Huizinga (1938), the author

of Homo Ludens, stated that play is the basis of culture. According to Mumford (1954), it was imitation, role-play, the creation of miniature environments, and the symbolic fields of play where every function of life was modeled as a game to develop competency and advance what was known and will be known. Perhaps play and representation is the factory of our conceptual abilities, and if play involves the creation of abstractions and models of the world, then sharing play necessitates complex communication as well as a means for innovation and production. This makes it the perfect method for developing comprehension.

A Model for Comprehension In terms of understanding the elements of comprehension, the tradition of discourse processing provides ample opportunity to look at comprehension as transmedial. Kintsch (1988, 1998), in presenting the Construction Integration Model, suggested that there were three levels of representation of text (see Figure 3).

Figure 3. The Event Indexing Model



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Two additional levels of discourse processing were later added by Zwann, Langston, and Graesser (1995), and account for literary elements often associated with genre and the author’s purpose and style that are used for top-down processing. These levels are: •

•

The text genre level: Accounts for the kinds of information presented, how the information is presented, and the ways in which the information is to be interpreted The communication level: Involves the reader constructing a representation of the writer of the text

The Event Indexing Model, which includes all five boxes from Figure 3, provides insight on events, or situations as portrayed in a variety of media, which are the made up of the interrelated elements. This level can be very useful for teachers to know how to develop comprehension in their students and create transfer between different media experiences; and it is the basis for the transmedial nature of comprehension. If students have struggled to decode, games and film can provide a more accessible entry point at the situation model level (level 3 experiences),

Figure 4. Dimensions of a situation model

0

where they can interact with complex texts and narratives without the cognitive load of decoding text and making meaning from it (bottom-up processing). With games, much of the action, the context, and the actors are depicted (they are shown in pictures), and also described through the action and narrative text in the print and audio of character dialog and narration. This depiction with description allows for clarification for how we should view the context and understand the situation with the directing of our attention (Kress, 2003), and may lessen demand on the propositional level from the text to make a mental image representing what is being described in the text. This contextualization of images with printed traditional text informs and focuses the player, and offers the experience and information to embody the reading and comprehension experientially. Thus, the learner makes a more robust model of the situation to develop and build the representation as the narrative evolves. This might allow for the student to draw from prior experience and use top-down processes to make meaning of the events and comprehend without the taxation on processing from decoding, therefore utilizing and further developing comprehension.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

But How Does This Help Decoding? When a reader has well-developed comprehension skills, he or she can recruit prior knowledge to bootstrap lower-level processes (Stanovich, 2000); this is an important idea for making a case for using more accessible texts that are relevant and interesting to the learner. Once again, the reader can use higher-level process in order to support lower-level process (Stanovich, 2000). What makes teaching with games to develop comprehension meaningful are the second and the third level, called the propositional and situation levels. The propositional level is where we decode communications into the situation level. The situation level is where the reader represents many of the elements and descriptions that go into making a mental model of a situation. On this level, the learner constructs a mental representation of the situation experienced, remembered, read, perceived, or described in a real or imaginary world (Zwann, Langston, & Graesser, 1995; Zwann & Radavansky, 1998). When working to teach reading with this information, it is important to connect to prior knowledge and build and compare the new information to prior situation models or prior experience. Consider a story board or a comic strip where each scene is defined and then the next event is framed. Readers need to learn to create these frames when comprehending text. Each event in a text should then be integrated and developed as an evolution of ideas presented; as each scene builds with new information, the model is updated and expanded. If the event that is currently being processed overlaps with the events in working memory on a particular dimension, then a link between those events is established, then a link between those events is stored in long-term memory. Overlap is determined based on two events shar[ing] an index (i.e., a time, place, protagonist, cause, or

goal). (Goldman, Graesser, & van den Broek, 1999, p. 94) Thus, we must build our understanding. The attributes of a situation model can be made much more robust and much more easily accessible when prior knowledge is recruited and connected into what we already know, and less effort will be made of finding the familiar. Two types of prior knowledge that support this in the Event Indexing Model are: •

•

General world knowledge (pan-situational knowledge about concept types, e.g., scripts, schemas, categories, etc.), and Referent specific knowledge (pan-situational knowledge about specific entities).

These two categories represent experience in the world and literary elements used in defining genre and style as described from the Event Indexing Model. The theory posits that if a reader has more experience with the world that can be tapped into, and also knowledge and experience about the structure of stories, he or she is more likely to have a deeper understanding of the passage.

Genre Expectation It is possible that when we are familiar with “once upon a time,” we will be familiar with the structure and purpose of fairy tale stories. Thus we begin to expect certain events, characters, and settings that we may be able to predict, and can therefore be surprised and entertained when the story has a twist or when an element that was unexpected is presented. Further, van den Broek et al. (2001) report that readers engage in a different style of reading according to genre expectations, and that reading purpose will inform the notion that readers differentially allocate their processing resources according to their expectations about the genre of



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

the text—so when readers have familiarity, they generally have a tactic or strategy for engaging with the text. It would be expected that a reader with little or no familiarity would use a button mashing style of trial and error when playing a game, just as a reader would cast about for meaning when trying to comprehend a passage in a challenging text. To sum this up, comprehenders parse clauses of texts into events on five situational dimensions: time, space, causation, motivation, and the protagonist. There are four central assumptions this model is built upon: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Events are the central units of situation models (the event-centrality assumption). Events can be linked on five dimensions (see Figure 4). Events are either related or not related on a particular dimension. All dimensions are equal.

With this in mind, the Event Indexing Model is an equal opportunity model of comprehension. It works across media and is just as applicable with pictures as it is with text. It is transmedial. It was this exploration of theory that led to the study of struggling readers using video games as methods for observing upper levels in student comprehension.

The Site, the Students, and Observations on their Play The observations and experiences of this study took place at a suburban middle school near Minneapolis, Minnesota. The students in this study had been pulled from regular coursework for reading remediation. In order to explore whether these kids had just disengaged and whether they might display more competence in comprehension with video games, something they all said they liked, we sponsored an after-school video game club to



observe the literate practices of these students as they played video games. Over the course of four months, I helped to sponsor the club by going to the school and spending two hours every Tuesday supervising and supporting students in their game-play. I brought a video camera for recording the sessions. The room itself was a typical middle school classroom, except for there being two teachers during the day, and breakout areas for relaxing and reading on a couch and chairs arranged around a coffee table. On the other side of the room, separated from the relaxation area by six rows of desks, was a large round table with six Apple computers for student use. On a typical Tuesday, I would come into the classroom just after the bell had rung, and a few boys would be waiting to put things together and get started. We would all be small-talking, and it was evident there was excitement about the game club. I had no indication from these students that they were experienced gamers, just that they were enthusiastic. A few of the class members had wanted to talk about their games, and one brought me copies of the game magazine, Game Informer.

Session 1 The video began with the six boys who stayed to participate. I had brought an Xbox and a Nintendo GameCube as well as a few games for each of the systems. The boys were excited to get things going. These boys had been invited, along with 24 other students, from a remedial reading class; we held the activity in the same classroom after school. As we began to get things going, it seemed like a free-for-all. The boys were told where to borrow a television and they went to retrieve it. I began to get out the game systems and create a sitting area for the Xbox and the GameCube. Since this was our first meeting, I was not sure

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

how things were going to work out; so we set up stations: one area for the Xbox and one area for the GameCube. The boys were enthusiastic about creating the play spaces, and this was a very different feel as compared to asking them to get ready to read an assigned book! The area for the GameCube was set up with four chairs since I had multiplayer games for the GameCube; we also set up four chairs around the Xbox. As it turned out, a smaller group of boys, two of them, went to the Xbox and played the Harry Potter game with their regular classroom teacher, while a group of four started making decisions to play the GameCube. What came out of it was that decisions for play were made so that only one person could play. This did not seem like a wise decision, but I sat back and watched to see what would transpire. The benefit of playing a game in single-player mode is that you are more involved in a narrative, where as in multiplayer mode, the players generally tend to more free play, and in some cases, very simple twitch games. Twitch games tend to rely upon fast reaction times and do not necessarily deliver a plotline or character arc, which you would find in a roleplaying or adventure game. For our observation, I tried to encourage the boys towards adventure and role-playing games rather than button mashing and twitch gamesthe difference being that singleplayer games generally have interesting storylines, impressive graphics, and realistic non-player characters and opponents. Notable examples include the Half-Life series and Doom 3. The key is providing a basis for reflection and thinking about what opportunities and constraints provide the outcomes and storyline. This is not so easy with a multiplayer game, as it is necessary to explore the story that was co-created by the players without the benefit of a back story, as the players are put directly into the game with the tools and a simple objectiveoften some variation of steal the flag and remove opponents from the game, or drive.

So the boys got everything set up and ready, and they began. I asked them if they had ever read the instructions to the games they play; all of them said no. They said that they preferred to just figure it out. What followed was a lot of trial and error, and surprisingly, encouragement of the boy with the controller to try different things. These included trying different buttons on the controller and going to different places in the game space depicted from the game console on the television screen, and trying to open doors and move handles, and switch from an armored humanoid to an armored ball rolling around the deck of a spaceship. Since none of the boys had read the instructions or studied the box very intently, they did not know there was a story behind the current situation for the armored humanoid/ball in space. This indicated to me that the boys did not have much experience playing complex games. Most players of complex games understand the importance of the story arc in order to know the strengths and weaknesses of the protagonist, the antagonists, as well as the environment and the goals of the game. In Metroid Prime the protagonist is a she. The boys did not know this. When observing the recording of the play session, they continued to talk to the player as “you,” as in the boy with the controller. What they did not know was that “she” was supposed to enter into a colony that had been taken over by aliens to discover who they were, what they wanted, and to stop and destroy them if necessary. None of the boys knew they were playing a female character because they had not read the back-story in the manual. The manual contains some pretty good tips on how to get started and what had happened in the game Metroid Prime, of which this was a sequel to; none of the boys had played this or the original game, and I do not think they had ever heard of it. My feeling was that they were not as experienced as they had let on and that they were “fronting,” which



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

means putting on a façade in boy/radio/hip hop talkpretending to be more than who you are and what you can really do. There might be a couple of reasons for doing this: •

•

The boys can all claim experience and be a part of the group, and later learn their way, learning on the fly—that is, they will pick it up by watching and learning expertise from what others do and say. They can have access to the game and have some control while they play—thus getting an audience and getting some attention from the other boys and feeling popular.

I cannot be sure that either observation is correct, but it seemed to me that each boy got a turn until they showed that they did not know what they were doing, and then had to step aside and hand over the controller for another boy to try to see if he could get them through the door to the next stage of the game. When a student who is unfamiliar with the game began, the others were less than enthusiastic to watch them learn. They did take turns and offer suggestions as to what might work to move through the puzzle, but really had no success. But with a successful suggestion, one could request the controller and take the lead. The ability to show competence feeds status among the boys. It is probably an entitlement where the more experienced player shows that he can navigate successfully and show the others what to do when it is their turn to play. It seemed like there was definitely an “in” group. Some boys were looked up to, and the others wanted an opportunity to interact with them. The games club seemed to offer the opportunity for kids who typically do not interact to get to know each other based on common interest. This allows for a way for boys who wanted to get to know other boys to be introduced without the awkwardness of professing admiration and desiring friendship. One of the other attractions



for the boys was that certain popular boys were interested in video games and would be coming to participate. This was evident in the talk building up to our session; they would say things like “I heard Darius is coming.” The popular boys are put on a pedestal by the others. In our observation, the popular boys seemed to be given more of a chance to play and show what they knew for the audience. One example of a popular boy was Darius. Darius came in a little late, and the other boys had already begun. They were trying to play Metroid Prime and were not having an easy time of it. Darius sat down and, after watching for a short time, began to tell the boy with the controller how to move through this level of the game. The boy seemed to be excited to be getting help from Darius. As he begins to have success following Darius’ advice, he asks for more help, and the other boys begin commenting in tones and expressions that are complimentary to Darius. They seem to appreciate, if not venerate, his knowledge and are pleased that he has decided to join them. It seems clear that Darius was strategic in the way that he plays video games. After talking to him, I found that Darius clearly read about the games that he plays and made informed decisions on what he would purchase to play, and also bought game guides that helped him to understand how to navigate the games, as well as hidden features that make the games interesting to him and the boys who play with him. Darius suggested that Chris try turning his character into a ball and rolling, and then becoming a human again and pushing a door lock on the wall. Part of what is interesting here is that Chris seems to have had more of an understanding of games than the other boys until Darius came. Darius is content to help Chris. Oddly, Chris was able to get the boys to agree that Metroid Prime was a cool game, but it was clear he does not know how to move around in space or use the controls except for a rudimentary understanding. Chris seemed to have used his status as a popular boy

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

to choose the game, but as I watched, there was clearly evidence that Chris was not an experienced game player. He, like most of the other boys in the group, played games that were easy to learn and were based mostly on hand-eye coordination and were more likely casual players. There was no denying that they were somewhat skilled in navigating, but they were not very quick in figuring out the controls of Metroid Prime. The boys were all looking for a good experience that they would be able to share in, but it was clear that with this game, only one person could play and the rest had to offer suggestions. In the course of Chris learning to play, the other students were having a good time; but as it became clear that Chris did not know how to play, the other boys started asking for their chance to try. Since Darius seemed to know what he was talking about, he went next, and as he played, the other boys watched and were excited with what Darius was able to do. Darius seemed happy to demonstrate what he knew. While I was recording, the boys described Darius’ play and shared ideas enthusiastically about how the game worked and looked forward to their chance to play. As Darius made a move where he showed how to do a double bomb jump, the boys watched intently. The way it was explained was that you lay a bomb, and right before that bomb explodes, set a second one, then set a third just before you reach the very top of the jump. You should fall and land on the second bomb, then ride up to the third. He said the easiest way “is to count out: 1, 2, 3, 4.” And he laid the bombs on 1, 3, and 4. The boys were excited about this, as well as Darius’ willingness to show them. What was clear was that Darius had not only had played the game before, and as I questioned him more later I found that he had read about it and applied what he had read. He had performed a knowledge act demonstrating comprehension. The other boys were eager to try some of the things Darius had shown them, and Darius was happy to relinquish the controller. What happened

from there was that Darius watched for a while and then walked over to the Xbox and then to the bank of computers. I left the camera to record and I walked over to see what Darius was doing. He showed me a site on the Internet where he was reading about the game. He had gone to a fan site where another gamer had written a record of what each section of the game was like, what the challenges were, cool things to do, and cool things to find. I asked him if this was cheating; he said “maybe” and smiled. He said that it made the game more fun and that he could find more “cool stuff” and it helps him to understand how to win easier and what to look for. This idea of secondary sources to better understand the game makes a lot of sense to me. It is a powerful strategy that informs comprehension as described previously in this chapter. The more prior knowledge a person has before reading or playing, the more likely they are to comprehend it fully. Secondary sources can help the player by supporting them in preconceiving the dimensions of Level 3 in the comprehension model, and with that knowledge, the player may have an understanding of what to expect, what to do, and where to focus attention for better success. Darius has clearly displayed evidence that he knows what it takes to be a competent comprehender. He had clearly done the work in looking for secondary sources and was motivated to read with a specific purposeto know what games he wants to try and to be good at those games. His use of secondary sources showed that he was able to draw information from a variety of sources, synthesize them, and apply his conclusion with practice to see if it works. What was clear was that many of the boys were trying to figure the games out with trial and error because they had no clear understanding of how to approach the new game with tactics or strategy, while Darius was clearly accomplished in his approach to the games, and seemed to have knowledge games from a broad range of experience and could actually play in a way



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

that showed evidence of a layered strategy that was built around an aesthetic of game-play and knowledge of genre. The other boys eventually found their way over to where Darius was showing me the Web site. I went over the last of the video from that session, and the other boys were not as successful as Darius was at playing Metroid Prime. As each boy had gone through a section of a game, they were less likely to watch another player go through what they already had. The group splintered; it seemed clear that it was not as enjoyable to watch someone else struggle though the game as they learned. As I stated, the other boys walked over to Darius to see what he was looking at and began to explore different Web sites to find out how to play games they were interested in, while the boys who were last to get the controller played without an audience. Left by himself, Lawrence continued to try and figure out what comes next in the game on his own. He seemed distracted in the way the boys have left him to play by himself. He kept looking over at the other boys to see what they were doing and gave them updates about what was happening. He eventually abandoned this to go to the computers and see what they were doing. This aspect of watching the gaming experience of the boys was very informative in that the boys were pretty specific about what they will participate in and how they will participate. The boys are willing to sit and watch, but prefer to be actively engaged and perform for an audience. When one of the boys was struggling in front of the other boys, learning to play the game, it was clear that the boys lost interest and preferred to engage in activity where they could actively learn and share. The boys were also a little frustrated with Lawrence. Whenever he was supposed to hand over the controller to another boy, he came up with an excuse and continued playing. What came of this was that Lawrence was left playing the game by himself for most of the rest of the session. As noted, he eventually abandoned his



game to go and be part of the group of boys and see what they were doing.

Connections to Reading Comprehension Besides the obvious ways to connect the comprehension model to video game-play, the idea of play as a social discourse and cultural approach to learning can be fruitful in environments for development with learners chosen for remediation. They need feedback and lots of do-overs, and games can provide meaningful practice almost as well as having a private teacher that is sensitive to the Zone of Proximal Development. In addition, it occurred to me was that there seems to be a progression in what I have seen these boys do when they approach a problem and try to solve it. Often a solution involves a lot of experimentation and blind luck for beginners, whereas players that have more experience use their prior knowledge to have a strategy going into the game, and to keep an eye out for the possible affordances and constraints in the environment. In some cases, they may know enough to play with an aesthetic beyond top-sight of the system, and can innovate and create as they gracefully coast through the challenges of the game. This experience relates directly to comprehension from the genre and communication levels (levels 4 and 5). With the less-experienced players, if they were successful with a tool, a movement, or resource in the game, that player tended to use that act as a tactic until the game demanded that they changed their approach. As with Metroid Prime, the boys had no experience, and it also seemed that they had very little experience with the genre. This was surprising since Metroid Prime is a “firstperson shooter,” which is a very common style of game, and rather predictable, so I am assuming that these boys were not experienced, and were stuck in trial and error. Metroid Prime does present puzzles and requires that one learn to use the tools and learn the affordances and constraints of the designed environment.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Often a Well-Designed Game Will Force the Player to Use New Tools and Tactics An experienced player expects this and has looked at the situation and made predictions, or inferences about how they will use the tactics they have learned in the form of a strategy, and eventually as layered strategies as they bring their knowledge of the situation and genre levels into play; this may even be influenced by the communication level (level 5), where experience with games in a series or by the same designer provides an indication of possible challenges and intentions. The key to understanding this idea of the genre and communication levels (levels 4 and 5) are interconnected with the idea of playing with layered strategies (see Figure 5), which would imply familiarity with the games’ design and layout, as well as enough experience to demonstrate skills like a double bomb drop, where more simple tactics would help the player level up (move to the next level). This instructional strategy designed into games demands that the player become capable of creating strategies, and this is what it takes for

people to become successful readers of complex texts: •

• •

They must adjust and try new tactics and perhaps become strategic, as compared to users of strategies, like we teach in many remedial reading classes. They must gather knowledge, act upon it, and adjust and become more efficient. This is the Zone of Proximal Development, and it is the cycle of comprehension.

None of the boys except Darius seemed to be near the communication and genre levels of Metroid Prime for strategies and comprehension. In fact, none of the boys seemed to have any real grasp for playing Metroid Prime except Darius; his understanding of the genre level in the game was shown with demonstrable comprehension by his playing Metroid Prime with an aesthetic.

Session 2 For this meeting, the same group of boys met at the classroom except for Darius. Lawrence has chosen the game Super Monkey Ball, and he

Figure 5. Approaches to problem solving



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

played in a style, as was recorded before, that limited participation. Super Monkey Ball is an easy entry game where you navigate through mazes and puzzles, and you can also play party games. There is a bit of a narrative at the beginning, which I encouraged them to watch, but they went right in to the game. The game seems best to me when it is played with multiple players, but Lawrence set it up in single-player mode. At 5:44 into the recording, he was told that he should step aside so that another boy could play. Instead, Lawrence made excuses and manipulated and changed the game; but in doing so he retained the controller, and he and a new boy played. In the beginning, Lawrence was bragging. He pointed out his own successes, like “I got a star!” And he tended to also diminish the play of the other boy. Later in the game, when the other boys began moving toward the computers and the Xbox, and away form he and Chris, he took a different tactic and began to diminish his own play to try and get the boys’ attention back. Rather than creating group play, it seems like Lawrence was more interested in being in control and having an audience. Lawrence had made agreements to share the controller, but he continually broke his commitments. His style was that of a bully that wanted to be liked, but did not seem to know how to create relationships with others. He did change his tactic. Rather than highlight his play, as mentioned, he began to humble himself, changing his competitive talk to highlighting his lack of success, and praising the success of his competitor. Lawrence seemed to be the kind of boy who wants to be noticed, respected, and belong, but did not have the social skills or the gaming skills to be looked up to like Darius. Chris had also broken his word about sharing game-play. He and Lawrence were extending their time by trying to engage the other boys through discussing their game-play, asking for advice, and trying to entertain the other kids with their successes and then self-deprecation when that



did not work. The other boys soon became tired of being led-on and looked for other things to occupy their time. Chris was one of the popular boys, who was known as someone that was confident and fun. However, he showed that he was not any more skilled than the other boys, but was willing to change the rules to continue playing the game with Lawrence; as Lawrence manipulated the rules so that he could continue to play, Chris went along with him. This was done at the expense of Tony, Stephen, and Craig, who eventually abandoned Chris and Lawrence. When Chris noticed that Tony and Craig were no longer interested in the game, he began to lose interest in playing with Lawrence. Eventually, Chris, Tony, Stephen, and Craig left Lawrence to play by himself; together, they played a game on the Internet called Runequest. Interestingly, Runequest is a multiplayer game that all of the boys can play at once. Lawrence continued to play, and made efforts to try and get the other boys’ attention by calling to them about special things that were happening in the game as he played, but he could not generate interest, as the boys had left him to play by himself. This was completely different from the gameplay observed in the first meeting where none of the boys were left out—where they shared knowledge and took turns trying out the new strategies, watching and commenting on the way Darius played, and how they would try this move or that move. What happened during the first session when Darius was present was very different from what happened the second session. Having Darius there made the boys want to play and willing to wait to try out the game as they learned from watching. When Darius was no longer playing, the group’s interest ended. Darius’ style of play and interaction showed that he was skilled in game-play, and was also willing to take turns to let the other boys try

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

his techniques and also help them navigate the puzzles. From the very beginning, the boys handed off the controllers so that they could all try. This may be because Darius was the most skilled, but also willing to share the experience.

Reflection What became quite clear in reviewing the two sessions was that the boys who struggled to read and comprehend were also struggling with games. In a game like Metroid Prime, where you really needed to have some prior knowledge and experience of the game, and perhaps other games like it, these students really struggled. The one boy who was adept at this game clearly had help and experience shared from playing games with his father. What was very interesting was seeing the boys talking about Darius’ game-play—I am guessing the interest they expressed in Darius’ play was similar to the interest that Darius showed his father when they played at home. As they watched and asked questions, they all had a better idea of how they were going to play the game when they got a chance. They were definitely actively engaged and excited, and wanted to act upon their knowledge. They were watching to learn and sharing ideas about their strategies. This is not something often seen in class according to their teacher when I questioned him on this. The teacher said that the boys tended to be fairly reluctant about learning in school when they were in groups, but tended to want to learn when they worked one-on-one with him. I noticed this same trend when I sat with a few of the boys to listen to them read and talk about a book called “Seed People.” They liked reading to me, and they wanted to tell me about what they knew, but they were a bit more reluctant in sharing with me and making connections about reading when they were in a reading group. Although this is odd behavior, it fits with what I have seen in some of my own classrooms. The

games just seemed to be a thing that they wanted to own, as compared to class work, which was an obligation. What I noticed in talking to them about Seed People was that they would read without stopping. They would just roll right through the narrative until I would ask them to stop and tell me about what they thought was going on, with no thought of looking at the situations and events that framed each major scene, and then connecting these scenes as a coherent whole as is described earlier in the chapter as an act of effective comprehension. In one case Stephen made interesting connections between what he saw with an older boy in the story and the struggles his brother was having in real life. I just wondered if he would have made that connection if I had not stopped at the close of that event to talk about it and make connections. This ability to chunk events and make connections, as situations change and the mental representations are updated, are important transition points in the incremental building of a comprehensive model of a story or experience. A skilled reader tends to be aware of and look for incongruities and frame events into a manageable whole (an event index), where a less-skilled reader may just be trying to move through the text, unaware that the scene has changed. This button-mashing style of reading comprehension resembles trial and error in Figure 5, and seems to be consistent across the way the boys approached game-play and reading to build situation models. They were inexperienced in stopping to update their model of what was happening in the story, much in the way that van den Broek et al. (2001) suggest in the Landscape Model, where readers build to resolve each proposition as they move through a text. In a more challenging text, as are common in eighth grade, a change may occur in the text that is subtle, and the reader may not even know they are in the midst of a flashback, foreshadowing, or narrative change. This maturity in perspective



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

taking, updating and validating a model, and looking forward to reading to resolve questions seems to be lacking in the way some of the boys read, as well as the way they played the games. They seemed to be running in a race, unaware that there were stops along the way to regroup and reconsider their knowledge and strategy, and then to conceive and plan their next knowledge act.

Why Was Darius in Remedial Reading? Darius, like the other boys, was in a remedial reading class, yet he read complex texts to understand complex game environments often designed for adult play. What made his play special is that adults often find these games challenging as well, and will often use the same strategies, although not often with the aesthetic that Darius showed in his play. All of this makes Darius a bit of an enigma, and I asked Andrew, Darius’ teacher, and also the sponsoring teacher of the club, to help me understand about Darius. He told me that Darius was very smart, but really struggled on the standardized tests that inform placement into the remedial reading program.

Darius had Disengaged I was told that Darius tended to freeze up when it came to testing, and the things that he read just disappeared when it came time to answer questions, but yet in regard to games, Darius demonstrated the kind of ability and comprehension that would place him as accomplished. He was able to act on what he read; he utilized prior knowledge of game genre as well as content from secondary sources, as well as experience from other games. Perhaps it was this ability to perform for himself on his own terms, and having the experience of playing and learning from his father. The key here seems to be this issue of play as a discourse and

0

activity, as compared to high-stakes judgments like tests.

Implications Darius’ game-play may have been more than for just the sake of game-play; it may be that his expertise and talent was about pursuing something he enjoys with his dad, emulating his father’s game-play habits, which included gathering information about the game. Csikszentmihaly (1993) makes a case for the importance of this kind of support and interaction from adults in the lives of young people. We need to share, demonstrate, model, and encourage expertise with young people, as well as give them the time and resources to develop real talent and expertise. Darius seemed to play effortlessly and was willing to help others, but he also worked outside of the game. Interestingly, Darius may have been imitating his father, or attempting to take on the role of his father and his father’s work and study habits in the way that he played games. Perhaps this practice and assimilation of his father’s approach to gaming is what made his play effective and look effortless, as compared to the way his teacher described him in relation to test taking and classroom reading—perhaps he did not have a model for test taking. In addition, his effortless play and knowledge of the game gave him status and reinforced his efforts with reward, in that with the other boys, he could demonstrate expertise publicly; further, he shared his expertisegaining credibility both for his prowess in play, as well as his willingness to help others. Clearly, the boys wanted to be like Darius, probably in the same way Darius wanted to emulate his father. Thus, literacy seems to be socially mediated in that the work that he puts into his play may be influenced by activities and values he shares with his father, as well as the credibility and reputation it provides him with the boys. And beyond that, it seems reasonable to

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

assume that people want to be seen as competent (Deci & Ryan, 2002) and prefer to learn quietly until they are confident with feedback from a trusted expert or mentor.

Games and Comprehension Think of comprehension and mental models as entering a maze or labyrinth, working your way through without knowing what could be around the next turn. The more familiar a reader is with the elements of the story, the more likely the reader will have the ability to develop a systems view, and also have a better recall of the story for retelling and imaginative elaboration. If a person has prior knowledge or can accumulate systems knowledge, they can create a flexible model of the situation and create tactics based upon their conception to build strategies—this is called top-sight. Often the systems we present in school are abbreviated because we have great difficulty presenting complex and dynamic systems for study—because often many of our young people cannot decode them! For this reason, we often teach simple stories, and the systems we teach are pale in comparison to the activities available to what students are interested in. They know the world is really complex, dynamic, multilayered, three-dimensional, and relative. If we present this in the form of printed text, learners often are overwhelmed by the sheer complexity. Games might provide an engaging entry point to connect with complex print narratives by using top-down strategies and prior knowledge. I must admit, Metroid Prime was a tough game for the boys to just pick up on, but they had the same difficulty with titles like Pikmon and Tales of Symphonia. Games will generally provide learning on the fly and ease people into the action by building tactical experience that can help the player gain experience in knowing what may come next, and also give them a do-over with hints to move forward, or level up.

Games are designed to provide interactive learning, manageable pieces that can be connected and layered and presented for the learner to have early success to heighten his or her feeling of confidence and engagement, and eventually build into complex approaches to solving problems that seem more like an unfolding than a strategy. Games add complexity little by little and ask us to change our strategies once we become comfortable. A good game will not allow you to do the same thing to solve every problem. If it does, the player will soon put it aside; the same is true if the game is too hard. A teacher, friend, or mentor can provide prior knowledge and support understanding of the elements of a media narrative system, and it is imperative that the student become practiced in becoming able to piece together not only a situation, but to have the ability to stitch these situations together in a hierarchy of first situations, then episodes (strings of situations), and then into a comprehensive model such as a: 1. 2. 3.

Situation model (event-specific) Episodic model (coherent sequences of events) Comprehensive model (a comprehensive collection of episodes)

Transmediality This discussion of discourse processing research on comprehension was intended to show that comprehension should be considered as transmedial. That is, we use the same cognitive and cultural tools to understand across a variety of communication and media experiences, and we can often use experience with one medium to understand one that is new in a top-down fashion. The key attribute here is that we use the imagination and visualize in making representations of an event in order to know how to interact with it—filling in the gaps when we are not certain.



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

The power of video games over the traditional narratives that are described in text and depicted in film are that the player can experience and act within the description and move around in what is depicted, exploring the ideas and rules, experimenting and looking for the limits of the tools and the setting. It does not mean they are any easier, but they are definitely more engaging and interactive than many printed texts when read without support. This ability to act on what we read, hear, and see may prove to be a powerful method for developing recall and flexibility in retell as well as elaboration. The real benefit of looking at comprehension from the perspective of games is that the player must act on their knowledge, and a knowledge act may be a better indication of comprehension than answering a multiple-choice question. This perspective can be taken outside the context of games and applied to reader response, reciprocal teaching, or just a literature circle where the texts are talked about and guiding questions and themes explored. The key is practice with learning to self-monitor, create dialog, and look for incongruities and verification of our knowledge of what we have read or experienced.

Games in the Classroom The obvious opportunity here for teachers is that with games, they can still provide rich learning environments for their students to develop comprehension, even if the students are struggling to decode and use the game to help students build more complex problem solving without the barrier of decoding the text into propositions and events—which is often what makes them disengage. Games provide all of the same elements of a narrative, but the surface level may be more accessible to all students—so kids who might normally avoid the readings can still engage. With video games as the big picture, I found that the students from the games club were more



willing to tolerate my talk about reading and my asking them about their learning. Perhaps it is needless to say here, but the kids were excited about playing video games at school. It was pretty amazing working with those students and having the influence to persuade them to slow down and reflect on their literate practices. What this begins to resemble is a model of literacy that connects new and traditional notions of readingwhere students have access to a variety of Web-based resources like databases, blogs, commercial Web sites, chat rooms, forums, listservs, as well as film, television, radio, telephone, teachers, friends, and parents, and where they can build comprehension through interaction with all of these. Further, through this experience the teacher can support the students in building flexibility in comprehension so that they may become more strategic and adaptive. Teachers need to connect with this and in many ways become more like ethnographers than dispensers of skills and knowledge. The activities discussed in this chapter have been shown to be motivating and engaging, and interestingly and despite our fears, they represent a new way of thinking about literacy, because they are a new form of literate practice. The thing that I saw with these students was that only a few of them had developed the skills we had hoped with the video games, and that students who were poor comprehenders and poor decoders with traditional text also struggled with the games. But they were more willing to explore and learn about games than they were traditional texts, and the games actually provide a level of interactivity that unskilled independent reading cannot. Part of these students’ lack of skill with games may have been because of their lack of familiarity with the games available; it may also come from not knowing what to do when they were stuck, slowing down and being methodical, or their lack of experience in searching for secondary sources to support their play.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

I am much more prone to believe that these boys have not had enough guidance or practice in slowing down to think about the thing they were experiencing and why they were stuck or how to ask for help. Their inability to look ahead and activate their prior knowledge about possible events may be one of the limiting factors in their success as readers and game players. With games, they can make the game react; with a book, they will often put it down. Once we help them learn to deconstruct the possible elements, and make predictions and have ideas about how to solve the problems rather than just reacting and mashing buttons, they will have gained valuable skills for problem solving. In most cases, I would bet that they have not been shown how to problem solve and deconstruct situations into models that they can reason through or use as anchor points as experts do (Chi, Feltovish, & Glaser, 1981).

Video Games as Learning Tools This provides an apt opportunity to build comprehension around high-interest activities that are complex and dynamic like games. Kids are not natural experts at games; they need exposure and experience, and time to figure things out—learning through play. We are all learners, and many of us exhibit the same behaviors in our approach to learning. Do not push games away out of fear that as a teacher you are not a digital native. People who have had experience in the world of typewriters, hand-cranked pencil sharpeners, and phones with dials may have an advantage over those who have never known a different world. They know what to do when the power goes out! We are all learners, and we can all become good at things like video games. In fact, the majority of the young people observed struggled in playing games that were new and required problem solving rather than fast reaction times. This was shown with Metroid Prime. A competent learner

is flexible in their approach to problems and can weigh different solutions through the process of elimination; one solution proves to be the best choice and can be modified on the fly. Comprehension is transmedial. It is not dependent upon a specific medium. It is a cognitive process that is an artifact of cultural and socially mediated cognition. School and academia have their own cultures of cognition, and when we look at school, we need to remember that not everyone uses academic language or has experience with academic cultural values at home. Academic culture at school is another culture with a different language and different values for many people. The more our students have prior knowledge of content, structure, and genre, the more likely they are to have flexible knowledge structures and be strategic in how they approach a situation. This process promotes metacognition, learning to learn, and the ability to self-monitor, and makes adjustments when the text is confusing, leading to greater comprehension of the text or a game. Comprehension translates across cultural boundaries based on the way we share information. In its most basic sense, comprehension is pattern recognition, and this can be found in games, texts, dance, and whatever composed cultural communication and expression exist. The socio-cultural implications of the way these students approached games may be of assistance in helping educators to build upon informal learning to develop traditional academic learning.

REFERENCES Aarseth, E. (1997). Cybertext. Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Allington, R.L. (2006). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research based programs (2nd ed., pp. 121-123). Pearson Education.



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Alvermann, D.E. (2001). Effective literacy instruction for adolescents. Executive Summary and Paper Commissioned by the National Reading Conference. Athens, GA: University of Georgia. Alvermann, D.E., Moon, J.S., & Hagood, M.C. (1999). Popular culture in the classroom: Teaching and researching critical media literacy. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. Bransford, J.D., & Johnson. (1972). Contextual prerequisites for understanding: Some investigations of comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 717-726. Chall, J.S. (1983). Stages of reading development. New York: McGraw-Hill. Chall, J.S., & Jacobs, V.A. (2003). The classic study on poor children’s fourth-grade slump. American Educator, 27(1), 14-15. Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorisation and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press. Crawford, C. (2005). Chris Crawford on interactive storytelling. Berkeley: New Riders. Csikszentmihaly, M. (1993). Talented teenagers: The roots of success and failure. New York Cambridge University Press. Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester: University of Rochester Press. Frasca, G. (2001). Ludology meets narratology: Similitudes and diffrences between (video) games and narrative. Retrieved October 27, 2007, from http://www.ludology.org/articles/ludology.htm



Frasca, G. (2003). Simulation versus narrative. In J.P. Wolf & B. Perron (Eds.), The video game reader. New York: Routledge. Goldman, S., Graesser, A.C., & van den Broek, P. (Eds.). (1999). Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., & Louwerse, M.M. (2003). What do readers need to learn in order to process coherence relations in narrative and expository text. In A.P. Sweet & C.E. Snow (Eds.), Rethinking reading comprehension (pp. 82-98). New York: Guilford Publications. Grosso de Leon, A. (2002). Moving beyond storybooks: Teaching our children to read to learn. Carnegie Reporter, 2(1). Retrieved June 19, 2006, from http://www.carnegie.org/reporter/05/learning/index.html Guthrie, J.T., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 403-422). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Huizinga, J. (1955). Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Boston: Beacon Press. Hutchins, E. (1996). Cognition in the wild. Boston: MIT Press. Kintsch, W. (1988). The use of knowledge in discourse processing: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kintsch, W. & Van Dijk, T.A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363-394. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the media age. New York: Routledge.

Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

Laurel, B. (1993). Computers as theater. London: Addison–Wesley. McDermott, R., & Varenne, H. (1995). Culture as disability. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26, 323-348. Mumford, L. (1945). The myth of the machine: Technics and human development. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World. Murray, J. (1997). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. New York: The Free Press. Narvaez, D., van den Broek, P., & Ruiz, A. (1999). The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 488-549. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read. An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Retrieved from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/ ch4-II.pdf O’Brien, D., & Dubbels, B.R. (Submitted). Reading-to-learn: From print to new digital media and new literacies. Learning Point Associates. The North Central Regional Education Laboratory. Paris, S.G., & Stahl, S.A. (2006). Children’s reading comprehension and assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). The game design reader: A rules of play anthology. Cambridge: MIT Press. Shaffer, D.W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. New York: Palgrave. Stanovich, K.E. (2000). Progress in understanding reading. New York: Guilford Press. Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The ambiguity of play. Boston: Harvard University Press.

Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing schools to life. American Educator, 13(2), 20-25, 46-52. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. van den Broek, P., & Kremer, K. (2000). The mind in action: What it means to comprehend. In B. Taylor, P. van den Broek, & M. Graves (Eds.), Reading for meaning (pp. 1-31). New York: Teacher’s College Press. van den Broek, P., Lorch, R.F. Jr., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers’ goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory and Cognition, 29, 1081-1087. van den Broek, P., Risden, K., & Husbye-Hartmann, E. (1994). The role of readers’ standards of coherence in the generation of inferences during reading. In R.F. Lorch Jr. & E.J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in text comprehension (pp. 353-373). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. van den Broek, P., Tzeng, Y., Risden, K., Trabasso, T., & Basche, P. (2001). The effects of questioning during and after reading on comprehension at different grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 521-529. Zwaan, R.A., Langston, M.C., & Graesser, A.C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: an event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6, 292-297. Zwaan, R.A., & Radvansky, G.A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162-185.

KEY TERMS Button Mashing: A term used in console gaming contexts to refer to quick, repeated, and generally random button pressings. It is a tech-



Video Games, Reading, and Transmedial Comprehension

nique most commonly employed in two genres of game: athletic, where the faster the buttons can be mashed translates into the better the athlete will perform; and fighting, where the technique is used often out of desperation or unfamiliarity with the controls, with players relying on barraging the opponent with random blows (and the occasional accidental special move) to win. Comprehension: Comprehension of an object is the totality of intensionsthat is, attributes, characters, marks, properties, or qualities that the object possessesor the totality of intensions that are pertinent to the context of a given discussion Construction Integration Model: Model that suggests there are three levels of representation of text: surface level, where we decode from words and letters; propositional level, where we make meaning form the words; and the situation level, where a mental image connected to prior experience and what we might predict as coming. Decoding: To analyze spoken or written symbols to ascertain their intended meaning. Event Indexing Model: Made up of interconnected representations of situation models, readers monitor five aspects or indexes of the situation. This can be important for learners who have not had success with complex narratives, and who have struggled to decode complex texts into connected scenes where they can look at causality and interaction.



Interaction/Interactive: A kind of action that occurs as two or more objects have an effect upon one another. The idea of a two-way effect is essential in the concept of interaction, as opposed to a one-way causal effect. Combinations of many simple interactions can lead to surprising emergent phenomena. Knowledge Act: To verify comprehension though an act or performance. Level-Up: When your character in a game gains a level in a class-and-level system. Ludic: Derives from Latin ludus, “play.” Means literally “playful,” and refers to any philosophy where play is the prime purpose of life. Self-Monitoring: The conscious awareness of the reader’s own progress and understanding of a text, marked by rereading and reflection on features of the text needed to communicate. Situation Model: Representations of an event or situation with a mental representation of a described or experienced situation in a real or imaginary situation, using time, motivation, protagonist, and place. Transmedial: Across many types of media like newspapers, dance, video games, and other forms of composed expression. Walk-Through: A thorough explanation (usually accompanied by a demonstration) of each step in a procedure or process.



Chapter XVI

COTS Computer Game Effectiveness Carol Luckhardt Redfield St. Mary’s University, USA Diane L. Gaither Southwest Research Institute, USA Neil M. Redfield John Jay Science and Engineering Academy, USA

AbstrAct This chapter looks at the effectiveness of commercially available educational computer games. It defines what a game is from game theory and what an intelligent tutoring system is, suggests some concepts from these areas to use for game development, and reflects on some surveys of commercial off-theshelf (COTS) educational software, including computer games. Two effectiveness studies conducted at John Jay High School, and the results of the studies are presented on the educational computer game Math Blaster Algebra. One of the studies showed a positive learning increase from using Math Blaster Algebra. Both studies showed no negative impacts on scores and grades with more time playing the game. With lessons learned from game theory, the intelligent computer-based training field, and these effectiveness studies, educational computer gaming can continue to grow, be effective, and be accepted into educational systems.

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

INtrODUctION For centuries, people have played games. Some of the games have been educational. In recent history, games have been made available electronically, on separate handheld devices and on computers, either on standalone computers, networked machines, or over the Internet. There have been a number of books about computer games and learning, including those by Gee (2003), Michael and Chen (2006), and Pensky (2001), but no effectiveness studies have been made available to the public on these commercial off-the-shelf educational computer games. Many educational software title materials say that they help in learning, but do not show any empirical tests. This book discusses the effectiveness of educational electronic games. The objective of this chapter is to present results of some surveys of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) educational computer games, to report on effectiveness studies on one of the COTS games, and to discuss a possibility for improving the effectiveness of learning for students who play these games. The effectiveness study procedures are presented of Math Blaster Algebra with some Algebra 1 students at John Jay High School. The statistically significant results are shown in detail. Hopefully, others will become more interested in making good games and performing effectiveness studies on games by improving on the methods and procedures presented here.

bAcKGrOUND Every game has at least one player, often two, and even more. Single-player games are often called puzzles. Every game has a goal or outcome that a player or set of players is working to achieve. Sometimes the goal is just to score points or collect objects, and sometimes when the goal is met, the game is over. Every game has rules that the players



play by, even if the rules are not well defined or change during game play. In every game, players are making moves where they select actions from a set of possible actions. The moves may be turn-based or simultaneous with other players. In addition to these characteristics of a game, every educational game has an objective to teach or practice some kind of knowledge or skill. The following sections outline some background areas of work that may be useful in the development of educational computer games so that the games can be more effective for teaching and learning. Some concepts are presented from game theory and intelligent tutoring systems that include concepts from artificial intelligence and instructional design theory. These two topics are referred to in the last sections of this chapter to potentially improve the learning effectiveness of educational computer games. There is also a summary of surveys that have been done on commercially available educational software that were used to help select Math Blaster Algebra for the studies.

GAME THEORY The study of games began to be formalized with the mathematical field of game theory (Osborne & Rubinstein, 1994). Players in a game are contenders that can be human, machine, nature, or other entities. The players control some piece of a situation in a game. Games with many players are called n-person or multiplayer. A strategy is a set of rules that a player uses to play the game. A move by a player is given by the player’s strategy. A move determines the next state of the game. Players are contending for various payoffs that are the results or consequences for the players at the end of the game. A player may get a reward or have to give up something. One way to define a game is by the rules of the game, including the relationships between players, who moves when, what information is

COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

available, alternatives available to a player, and the outcomes of each sequence of choices. The extended form of a game from game theory specifies these four things: • • • •

Initial state of the game Admissible moves from one state to another Terminal or end of the game states Payoffs to the players at the end of the game

All the possible strategies for a player i are represented by a set, Si. The normal form of a game is a set of all the strategy sets for each player and the payoff functions for each of the players Pi that map a strategy for each of the players to the payoff for the player i: {S1, …, Sn; P1, …, Pn} A common representation for the play of a game is a game tree. The initial state of the game is represented at the root node. The first moves the first player can make are represented by the children of the root node, and children of those nodes contain the new states of the game for the next player to make a move. Each successive level of children represents the possible moves of the next player and the resulting states of the game, until the end of the game. The leaf or terminal nodes are the possible places where the game ends. In general, game theory tries to find the best or likely end-result as a solution of a game. The solution often depends on the type of game. A zero-sum game is one that has the sum of the payoffs at the end of the game equal to zero. A constant-sum game is a one where the sum of the payoffs is always a specific constant amount at the end of the game. A perfect information game is one where all the players know all the other players’ actions in the game. A cooperative game is one where players are allowed to form

coalitions to work together. Otherwise, the game is non-cooperative. Other game theory classifications include finite or infinite, continuous, probabilistic, differential, Markov, quota, nonatomic, compound, and stochastic. Depending on the classification of a game, different game theoretic solutions apply to the game. The game solutions infer ways to play the game, but game theory solutions are developed from the view of the entire game having been played out. Most educational games have one or two players where the computer may be considered a player. The educational computer games we see are also perfect information, constant-sum, and non-cooperative games. Game theory solutions for these kinds of games are about finding a saddle point where the payoffs are the best for both players given the competitive nature of the game. Multiplayer game solutions, of a similar type of game otherwise, find an equilibrium point where any one player can do no better by selecting a different strategy while all the other players’ strategies stay the same. Other kinds of game theoretic solutions include the Bargaining Set, Core, Kernel, Shapley Value, and Stable Set. When educational computer games have the characteristics of perfect information, constant-sum, and non-cooperative, our games could direct the student toward a saddle or equilibrium point in an interesting and entertaining way. When a game is cooperative, a player will tend to do better when playing with as large a coalition of players that the player can be a part of (Luckhardt, 1989).

Intelligent Tutoring Systems Educational games have been developed that are considered tutors to teach skills and concepts similar to having a person tutor a student. Some computer-based tutoring systems just present a concept or set of concepts, and then the student applies the concept in a testing-type situation that can be part of a game. There are also tutoring games that present material based on how well a



COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

student has performed. Presenting material based on a student’s history provides a more personalized approach to the instruction. When there is a model of the student’s behavior and knowledge that is used by an instructional module to present material to the student, the software is called an intelligent tutoring system (ITS) (Burns, Parlett, & Redfield, 1991). It has been shown that a computer-based tutoring system can be modified to perform as an intelligent tutoring system (Redfield, 1995). An ITS has a student model, instructional module, an interface module to present the information, and an expert model that contains the material or knowledge to be presented. Intelligent tutoring systems are a combination of artificial intelligence, learning theory, and instructional theory. Instructional design theory is based on Gagné’s events of instruction (Gagné, Briggs & Wager, 1992) that include: gain attention, inform objectives, stimulate recall, present content, provide guidance, elicit performance, provide feedback, assess performance, and enhance retention. Many of these ITSs have been shown to be effective including Stat Lady, which was created at Brooks Air Force Base to teach statistics; also, many tutors created with the XAIDA authoring tool (Murray, Blessing, & Ainsworth, 2003). Some of the ITSs that are also games have been shown to be effective. These games were created and tested in research laboratories, and the study results were not always available to the general public. One study showed that an ITSs did not make any more significant difference in learning than just spending more time on the task of learning the subject in other formats (Hall, 1987). A few of these intelligent tutoring system games have been sold to school systems such as ISIS from TutorTek that teaches the scientific method (Steuck & Meyer, 2003) and Cognitive Tutor Algebra 1 by Carnegie Learning (2007).

0

COTS Educational Computer Games Commercial off-the-shelf computer games have been available since the first personal computers could be purchased in the early 1980s. These games started out having the purpose of entertainment. People realized that games could be used to teach subject matter in a way that was different from the classroom setting and perhaps effective in other ways. Thus, “edutainment” and later “serious games” have been the buzzwords. When personal computers became less expensive and easier to use with graphical user interfaces, games for both entertainment and learning became more available. Families, including children, found that having a computer in the home was ideal for many purposes. Computers started to become more readily available for use in schools. Educators found that computers could be used as tools to teach students. A few surveys have been done on existing educational software titles that included computer games. A survey done in 1998 (Redfield, 1999) found around 200 titles for pre-kindergarten to adult. A survey in 2000 (Redfield, 2000) found over 200 titles for just the elementary grades. The surveys considered course content topics from a number of state and national standards and included business, computer literacy, economics, English language arts, fine arts, geography, health, history, mathematics, physical education, Spanish, science, U.S. history, and vocational education. These surveys found that no matter what high-level topic you select, there is some software title that can be purchased that will contain some of the material of that topic. Many of the titles from these two surveys were games or had a game component. In 2005, a survey was performed to gather just educational computer games. A computer game was considered educational if the game

COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

documentation included learning about an area or if the game has been used in a learning situation. That survey resulted in a database of over 1,000 titles (Gaither & Redfield, 2006). The data from this survey at www.wingz2fly.com/GameSurvey is being updated regularly by graduate students at St. Mary’s University in San Antonio, Texas. There is also a database for educational software that can be used to search for games at http://www-ed.fnal. gov/espg. This database contains 127 computer games that are noted as educational (Educational Software Preview Guide Consortium, 2007). Companies that have produced many educational computer games include Funschool, Knowledge Adventure, The Learning Company/Riverdeep, Scholastic/Tom Snyder Productions, and Sunburst Technology.

COTS GAME EFFECTIVENESS Since many COTS educational computer games say that they do teach something or improve learning, it would be beneficial to know exactly what games are available to the public and to note if there is any data to support what the games are purporting. It would also be useful if the games were in an organized system that could be searched to find out what is available and to find games with a specific content or at a certain age or grade level. The survey by Gaither and Redfield (2006) made available on the Internet a searchable database of educational computer games. In the 2005 survey, the subjects taught to the elementary-level students filled the spectrum of educational courseware. Games covering topics from foreign language studies, to science, to typing proficiency were available. The teaching methods that these games utilized varied considerably. Some games were strictly drill and practice, while others used simulations and role-playing. Over 70% of the games in the survey targeted elementary-level students. Approximately 7% of

all the games are targeted toward middle school students, and 14% of the games recorded were targeted to high school level and above. There were many more titles in language arts and mathematics at the elementary level, while there were many more titles in science for middle school and high school. This survey noted the lack of educational games available for the upper grade levels. The educational game industry has a wide open market for older students and higher learning courseware. Table 1 shows a list of some of the COTS educational computer games from the database at www. wingz2fly.com/GameSurvey. This list of games shows the games that say they teach mathematics for sixth grade or higher. Each game title can be selected in the table on the Web page to find out detailed information about the game. The survey did not find any study that measured the effectiveness of any commercial educational game. There have been many studies on the impact and effectiveness of games in education, but none have been made available to COTS educational computer games (Randel, Morris, Wetzel, & Whitehill, 1992). A formal effectiveness study was organized on one educational computer game (Redfield, Gaither, & Redfield, 2007). Algebra was selected as the topic because all high school students must pass Algebra 1, there were students available for the study, and there were a number of existing educational computer games that work with algebra. The Algebra 1 students were made available at John Jay Science and Engineering Academy in San Antonio, Texas, thanks to the principal, Ms. Peggy Greff, and the Algebra 1 teacher, Ms. Monica Gonzales. A number of firstyear algebra software titles were considered for the study including the following products: • • •

Algebra Animator by Riverdeep Algebra Concepts by Ventura Educational Systems Algebra Stars by Sunburst



COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

Table 1. Computer games for math from www.wingz2fly.com/GameSurvey



TitleMath Educational Computer Games

Publisher

2xy Algebra Helper

MathRealm

Accelerated Math

Renaissance Learning

Algebra

BestQuest Teaching Systems

Algebra ‘scool: Module 2

BestQuest Teaching Systems

Algebra ‘scool: Module 3

BestQuest Teaching Systems

Algebra Animator

Riverdeep

Algebra Concepts

Ventura Educational Systems

Algebra Stars

Sunburst Technology

ClueFinders-Empire of the Plant People

The Learning Company-Riverdeep

Crocodile Mathematics

Crocodile Clips

Force Addition & Subtraction

Intellectum Plus Incorporated

Freebody

Physics Academic Software

Geometry Concepts

Ventura Educational Systems

Geometry World: Middle Grades Interactive Explorer

MathRealm

Larson’s Intermediate Math Grade 6

Larson’s Learning Inc.

Math Arena Advanced

Sunburst Technology

Math At Work: On the Fly!

CORD Communications

Math At Work: Train Reaction

CORD Communications

Math Blaster

Knowledge Adventure

Math Express

Aces Research Inc.

Mathville: VIP

Ingenuity Works

Measurement in Motion

Learning in Motion

Measurements & Units

Intellectum Plus Incorporated

Mighty Math-Cosmic Geometry

Riverdeep

Mighty Math: Astro Algebra

Riverdeep

Mighty Math: Calculating Crew

Riverdeep

Mind Power Math High School

The Learning Company

Pre-Algebra World

MathRealm

PrimeTime Math: Cliffbound!

Tom Snyder Productions

PrimeTime Math: Emergency!

Tom Snyder Productions

PrimeTime Math: Fire!

Tom Snyder Productions

The Hidden Treasures of Al-Jabr

Sunburst Technology

The Number Devil

Viva Media

COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

• • • • • •

Algebra World by Math Realm Math Blaster Algebra by Davidson/Knowledge Adventure M ig ht y Mat h: A st ro A lgebr a by Riverdeep Mind Power Math: High School by The Learning Company/Riverdeep Quickstudy Algebra 1 by Selectsoft Publishing Windows Algebra by ProOne

The software product for the study had to run on Windows XP, cover much of the Algebra 1 curriculum, be easy to use, stay within a budget, and provide a game environment. The game also needed to meet the requirements for the TEKS (Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills) standardized curriculum (Texas Education Agency, 2007b). Math Blaster Algebra was the game best suited for the electronic game effectiveness study since it ran on Windows XP, had a usable user interface, and was still available for purchase ($12-30 per CD, depending on how many are purchased).

Math Blaster Algebra and Studies Math Blaster Algebra was originally created by Davidson and later purchased by Knowledge Adventure (Wikipedia, 2007). On the game packaging, the publisher of Math Blaster Algebra says that the game provides tools to succeed and improve skills in a student’s first year of algebra (Knowledge Share, 1998). The skills include • • • • • •

Using decimals, integers, and rational numbers Understanding algebraic expressions and equations Working with ratio, proportion, and percent Plotting points on a graph Factoring polynomials Applying the order of operations

• •

Exploring inequalities and quadratic equations Building and solving equations

Math Blaster Algebra takes a player through an animated adventure on a spaceship. The ship called Nomial has broken down from a collision with an asteroid. The goal of the player is to correct the ship operations before the aliens called the Quadraticas find them. The player solves algebraic problems to gather required resources and fix the ship. There are six different rooms (communications, defender, electrical, engine, strategy, and transporter) plus the control center to work and play on the ship. There are six kinds of activities with three different levels. There is context-sensitive help through a robot assistant called Scully. The help includes information and tutorials about the algebraic concepts. Two learning effectiveness studies were performed on Math Blaster Algebra at John Jay Science and Engineering Academy. The purpose of these studies was to determine if Math Blaster Algebra is effective in teaching and reinforcing algebra concepts. The first study lasted for a fiveweek period and was part of a science fair project. After the first study finished, the second study lasted for 16 weeks of the students playing Math Blaster Algebra. The studies were approved by the school’s Institutional Review Board, which cleared the procedures and ethics of the studies. The procedures and analysis for the two studies were similar. For the first study, the project was presented to three different ninth-grade Algebra 1 classes to a total of 90 students. Of those 90, 42 volunteered to participate in the first study, 37 volunteered for the second study, and 32 were in both studies. With certain limitations such as availability of a computer, parent approval, and willingness to play the game, the students were separated into two groups. The subject or game group students took a pre-test, played the game at their homes in addition to any class work they received, and took a post-test. The control group



COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

Table 2. First study test scores per student Game Group Student

Pre-Test Number

Number

Post-Test Number

Number

Number

Number

Score

Number

Attempted

Correct

Incorrect

Score

Attempted

Correct

Incorrect

2

25

6

19

1.25

24

10

14

6.5

3

12

3

9

0.75

10

4

6

2.5

4

23

12

11

9.25

17

12

5

10.75

5

9

6

3

5.25

7

4

3

3.25

6

12

5

7

3.25

17

7

10

4.5

7

11

3

8

1

19

6

13

2.75

8

11

5

6

3.5

18

7

11

4.25

9

12

5

7

3.25

23

11

12

8

10

25

10

15

6.25

25

13

12

10

11

12

7

5

5.75

12

6

6

4.5

12

18

8

10

5.5

18

7

11

4.25

13

12

7

5

5.75

12

2

10

-0.5

14

17

6

11

3.25

11

7

4

6

15

24

7

17

2.75

11

6

5

4.75

17

7

2

5

0.75

24

6

18

1.5

19

18

9

9

6.75

11

5

6

3.5

20

16

11

5

9.75

25

16

9

13.75

21

21

11

10

8.5

17

10

7

8.25

22

11

2

9

-0.25

3

1

2

0.5

1

15

6

9

3.75

16

4

12

1

16

22

11

11

8.25

5

2

3

1.25

18

12

6

6

4.5

13

4

9

1.75

23

12

7

5

5.75

15

9

6

7.5

24

18

9

9

6.75

23

8

15

4.25

25

8

0

8

-2

12

1

11

-1.75

26

12

9

3

8.25

5

3

2

2.5

27

12

6

6

4.5

10

5

5

3.75

28

10

5

5

3.75

7

3

4

2

29

20

11

9

8.75

17

11

6

9.5

30

21

12

9

9.75

11

4

7

2.25

31

9

3

6

1.5

25

9

16

5

32

25

12

13

8.75

16

12

4

11

33

20

13

7

11.25

21

16

5

14.75

34

13

9

4

8

13

9

4

8

35

15

11

4

10

17

13

4

12

continued on next page



COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

Table 2. Continued Game Group Student

Pre-Test Number

Number

Post-Test Number

Number

Number

Number

Number

Attempted

Correct

Incorrect

Score

Attempted

Correct

Incorrect

36

15

6

9

3.75

9

3

6

Score

1.5

37

13

6

7

4.25

14

4

10

1.5

38

17

11

6

9.5

12

6

6

4.5

39

20

16

4

15

20

16

4

15

40

11

7

4

6

16

7

9

4.75

41

11

10

1

9.75

16

9

7

7.25

42

7

4

3

3.25

14

9

5

7.75

took a pre-test, continued through the year as normal with the same class work, and took a posttest. Before the beginning of each study period, the students took the pre-test that consisted of a 25 multiple-choice-question test, comprehensive for Algebra 1. This test was created by a certified math teacher and reviewed by three other math professors at St. Mary’s University in San Antonio, Texas. The test had to take less than the 50-minute class period to finish and was comprehensive for all of Algebra 1 since Math Blaster Algebra includes concepts from all of Algebra 1. Each game-group student was given a CD of Math Blaster Algebra and played the game on a home computer on their own time. Each student recorded the amount of time they spent playing the game. The students were asked to play the game at least two hours per week. After the study periods were completed, each student took a posttest that was the same content as the pre-test. Both the pre-test and the post-test were graded similar to the SAT’s grading system, where one point is given for a correct answer, and a quarter of a point is deducted for an incorrect answer. The maximum score is 25 and the minimum is -6.25. The data collected included students’ course grade averages; the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), a state-given standardized test in Texas (Texas Education Agency, 2007a)

for the second study; and benchmarks (two for the first study and five for the second study) that were taken throughout the year. The main difference between the two studies was the time the students were able to play Math Blaster Algebra. The analyses for both studies were very similar, although the second study had more data available from school-based scores and grades. The significant data is included here so that people who organize future studies can see what worked and hopefully expand and improve on the study.

First Study Data and Results Tables 2 and 3 show some of the data from the first study, including the individual scores of all students’ pre- and post-tests, as well as the number of questions attempted, answered correctly, and answered incorrectly. These tables show only a portion of the data that was collected. Table 2 contains the overall data for the pretest and post-test that showed some statistically significant results. The last column shows the number of hours each student played Math Blaster Algebra. Summary data in Table 4 show that the range of pre-test scores was -2 to 19.75, the range of posttest scores was -1.75 to 15, and playing time was



COTS Computer Game Effectiveness

Table 3. First study test scores and time played per student Pre- to Post-Test

Time Played in

Subject Number

Pre-Test Score

Post-Test Score

Difference

Hours

2

1.25

6.5

5.25

7

3

0.75

2.5

1.75

18.5

4

9.25

10.75

1.5

52.5

5

5.25

3.25

-2

1.5

6

3.25

4.5

1.25

26.5

7

1

2.75

1.75

27

8

3.5

4.25

0.75

10.5

9

3.25

8

4.75

>2

10

6.25

10

3.75

4.75

11

7.75

4.5

-3.25

9

12

5.5

4.25

-1.25

12.75

13

5.75

-0.5

-6.25

1.5

14

3.25

6

2.75

14

15

2.75

4.75

2

44.75

17

0.75

1.5

0.75

10.5

19

6.75

3.5

-3.25

15.5

20

9.75

13.75

4

9

21

8.5

8.25

-0.25

11

22

-0.25

0.5

0.75

>2

Pre- to Post-Test

Time Played in

Table 4. First study summary data First Study Game Group

Pre-Test Score

Post-Test Score

Difference

Hours

Average

5.887

5.381

-0.506

16.25

Highest

19.75

15

-5.25

52.5

Lowest

-2

-1.75

-3.75

1.5

Table 5. Example t-test results Pre-Test-Two-Sample Assuming Equal: Variances



Game group

Control group

Mean

4.434210526

7.086956522

Variance

9.450292398

20.78186759

Observations

19

23

Hypothesized Mean Difference

0

P(T 30), the t-test was robust to violations of normality assumptions. However, normality was further determined by dividing

the skewness statistic by the standard error for both samples. Using data from Table 3, the treatment group’s skewness ratio was .11 (.048/.427), within the normality range of -2 and +2 (Weinberg & Abramowitz, 2001). The comparison group’s skewness ratio was .509 (.280/.550), also within the normality range. In addition, to determine if the equality of parent populations was normal, a Levene’s test was conducted because the two samples (treatment and comparison) were not equal in size, Ntreatment = 30 and Ncomparison = 17. Results of the Levene’s test indicated p = .433 and alpha = .05. The population variances were not different and the assumption of homogeneity of variance was met for these data, as indicated in Table 3. The results of the independent t-test indicated that the final exam scores of participants in the comparison group (M = 83.29, SD = 6.71) was statistically significantly higher, on average, than the final exam scores of the treatment group (M = 76.47, SD = 7.79), t(45) = -3.03, p < .004 (twotailed). From the perspective of the Confidence Interval (CI), since the value zero (0) was not contained within the 95% confidence interval (11.36, -2.29), the null was rejected in favor of the alternative hypothesis that a difference did exist,

Table 3. Descriptives of dependent variable, final exam score, by group a

Descriptive Statistics N

Range

Minimum

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

Final Exam Score

30

Valid N (listwise)

30

28

62

Maximu m Statistic 90

Std. Deviation Statistic

Variance

Std. Error 1.421

7.785

60.602

Std. Deviation Statistic

Variance

Std. Error 1.626

6.706

Mean Statistic 76.47

Statistic

Skewness Statistic

Std. Error

.048

.427

a. Research Study Group = Treatment Group Descriptive Statistics a N

Range

Minimum

Maximum

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

Final Exam Score

17

Valid N (listwise)

17

24

a. Research Study Group = Comparison Group

1432

72

96

Mean Statistic 83.29

Statistic 44.971

Skewness Statistic .280

Std. Error .550

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

Table 4. Treatment and comparison group performance on final exam Group Statistics Research Study Group Treatment Group

How often do you play video, online, or computer games (excluding games played in this course)?

Mean

N

Comparison Group

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

30

2.4000

1.00344

.18320

17

3.0588

.96635

.23437

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

F

How often do you play Equal variances video, online, or computerassumed games (excluding games Equal variances played in this course)? not assumed

t-test for Equality of Means

Sig. .014

t

.905

Mean Std. Error Sig. (2-tailed) Difference Difference

df

-2.191

45

-2.215

34.433

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper

.034

-.65882

.30066

-1.26439

-.05326

.033

-.65882

.29748

-1.26309

-.05455

Table 5. Frequency of game playing of treatment and comparison groups Group Statistics

Final Exam Score

Research Study Group Treatment Group

30

Mean 76.47

Std. Deviation 7.785

Std. Error Mean 1.421

17

83.29

6.706

1.626

N

Comparison Group

Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

Final Exam Score Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed

F .627

Sig. .433

t-test for Equality of Means

t -3.031 -3.161

on average, for the final exam scores of students taught with a lecture/presentation method and students taught with a game-based instruction method in the 47 students samples for this study (Table 4). The survey revealed that the treatment group’s most preferred method of instruction was instructional games (M = .87, SD = .346), closely followed

Mean Sig. (2-tailed) Difference

df 45 37.653

Std. Error Difference

95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower Upper

.004

-6.827

2.252

-11.364

-2.291

.003

-6.827

2.160

-11.201

-2.454

by a preference for group presentations (M = .80, SD = .407). Lecture was one of the least preferred methods of instruction (M = .37, SD = .490) for this group. In the comparison group, lecture was the most preferred method (M = .94, SD = .236), closely followed by a preference for discussion (M = .89, SD = .323). The comparison group indicated less of a preference for both group pre-

1433

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

sentations (M = .67, SD =.485) and instructional games (M = .67, SD =. 485) than the treatment group. This data may suggest that if students like the teacher they will like her/his method of teaching. This survey also showed statistically significant differences in the frequency of game playing, including video, online, or computer games between the two groups. Participants in the comparison group (M = 3.06, SD = .97) reported greater frequencies of playing video, online, or computer games than the treatment group (M = 2.4, SD = 1.00). The results of an independent samples t-test statistic revealed that a statistically significant difference in game playing frequency was reported by the comparison group, t(45) = -2.19, p = .034 (two-tailed), in Table 5.

discussion Over 90% of treatment group participants responded to open-ended questions on the survey and their responses were highly positive. They used descriptive words of fun, interesting, and interactive when answering the question of why they liked instructional games as a method of instruction. Respondents also indicated that hands-on learning is more interesting to them as a learning tool. They commented that games helped them as visual learners, allowed for practice and review of material, and led to a better grasp of material. One participant noted that they had to think a little bit more to participate and so they believed they learned more. The treatment group suggested these additions to the course content: more hands-on learning activities such as creating their own Web site, increased time for project creation, more in-class discussions, more quizzes, more instruction, and better task explanations. A few education majors requested that the projects be more relevant toward their major area of study. Seventy-two percent of the comparison group

1434

participants responded to the open-ended survey question that asked what they thought could be added to the course in the future. They noted that the lecture discussion method reinforced reading, strengthened interest and was informative. Requests for added course content from the comparison group included a desire for more instruction with the software programs of Publisher, PowerPoint, and Excel and less instruction with Word. One participant requested a desire for more in depth knowledge using Excel; specifically graphing commands showing line equations and intercepts. Statistically significant differences as reported in the results section in game playing frequency of participants in the comparison group may be indicative of their ability to learn course material through a multitude of instructional methods. Perhaps games as a method were more enjoyable for the treatment group participants because it was a novel approach to instruction while game playing was a more common practice for the participants in the comparison group as indicated by their reported frequency of game play. This study explored the value of using instructional games in an educational setting to promote student engagement through a posttest only design. In this case, the lecture/presentation group outperformed the games-based instruction group on the dependent variable, final exam score. Scores on the exam in one class section of the comparison group were unexpectedly high and researchers reviewed exam performance of students in previous semesters. The treatment group in this study performed as well as these students, suggesting that typically students in game-based classes will do as well as students in lecture-presentation classes. Subsequent studies should employ a pretest/posttest research design to assess initial knowledge as well as outcomes of instruction and ensure the groups are equivalent on less obvious variables that could affect outcomes. For example, perhaps students in the comparison group liked to read more, and therefore were

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

more inclined to complete the assigned textbook reading than treatment group participants. In addition, incentives to increase participation in studies should be considered, particularly in cash form (Birnholtz et al., 2004).

conclusion And Future trends The culture of current students who were raised in a world with technology needs greater attention by faculty interested in reaching students via their preferred learning styles and cultural tools. Although it is not the researchers’ belief that games are a panacea, it is apparent from the student survey responses that those in the game-based learning environment valued games as a strategy to help them learn course material. Survey responses indicated that students in the treatment group enjoyed the games-based instructional approach. With increased attention given to this instructional method, more ingenious games could be developed. Perhaps blending the games teaching strategy with lecture-presentation could increase the effects on student learning.

reFerences Bacdayan, P. (2004, September/October). Comparison of management faculty perspectives on quizzing and its alternatives. Journal of Education for Business, 80(1), 5-9. Begley, S., Springen, K., Hager, M., Barrett, T., & Joseph, N. (1990, April 9). Rx for learning. Newsweek, 115(15), 55-64. Birnholtz, J., Horn, D., Finholt, T. & Bae, S. (2004). The effects of cash, electronic, and paper gift certificates as respondent incentives for a web-based survey of technologically sophisticated respondents. Social Science Computer Review, 22(3), 355-362.

Bonwell, C.C. (1999). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. Retrieved September 26, 2005 from www.active-learning-site.com Brountas, M. (1996, Nov/Dec). When first graders go to the polls. Teaching PreK-8, 27(3), 30-33. Cohen, V. L. (2001). Learning styles and technology in a ninth-grade high school population. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 355-367. Doe, C. G. (2005, May/June). A look at…Webbased assessment. Multimedia & Internet@ Schools, 12(3), 10-14. Erwin, J. (2005, January). Put back the fun in classrooms. Education Digest, 70(5), 14-19. Foster, K. (2001, February). Quia. Technology and Learning, 21(7), 20-22. Faculty Survey of Student Engagement (FSSE, 2003). Indiana University. National Survey for Student Engagement. Iding, M., Crosby, M., & Speitel, T. (2002). Teachers and technology: Beliefs and practices. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 153-170. Jones, S. (2003, July). Let the games begin: Gaming technology and entertainment among college students. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved October 20, 2005 from http:// www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=93 Junion-Metz, G. & Minkel, W. (2002, October). Not just fun and games. School Library Journal, 48(10), p. 30. McGraw, C. (1998, February). Teaching teenagers? ‘Think, do, learn!’ Education Digest, 63(6), 44-48. Oblinger, D. (2003, July-August). Understanding the new students. Educause Review, 38(4), 37-47.

1435

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

Pierson, M. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-431. Razen, P. (2005). Game it with word. Bloomington, IL: FTC Publishing. Roethemeyer, G., & Hafer, L. (2005). Game it with excel. Bloomington, IL: FTC Publishing. Shaw, G. (2002). Powerpak for powerpoint. Bloomington, IL: FTC Publishing. Silberman, M. (2006). Teaching actively. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Snider, M. (2005, October 4).Video games actually can be good for you. Home News Tribune, pp. D1. Waxman, H.C., & Padron, Y.N. (2005). The uses of the classroom observation schedule to improve classroom instruction (pp. 72-96). In H.C. Waxman, R. Tharp, & R. Solests Hilberg. Observational research in U.S. classrooms. New York: Cambridge University Press. Weinberg, S., & Abramowitz, S. (2001). Data analysis for the behavioral sciences using SPSS. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Key terms Active Learning: An instructional strategy where learners are actively engaged in the learning process. Browser Games: Browser games are electronic games that are played online via the Internet. They are distinct from video and computer games in that they do not require any client-side software (i.e. purchased CD or DVDs) to be installed. Browser games rely solely on technologies

1436

such as a Web browser and sometimes a common plug-in such as Java or Flash. Computer Games: A computer game or “PC” game is a form of interactive multimedia used for entertainment played on a personal computer. Computer games are usually distributed via standard storage devices such as CDs and DVDs and are usually read-only. Computer games most often require a license agreement. Game-based Instruction: One method of instruction under the active learning strategy where students engage in playing games specifically created for the content under study. Online Games: Online games refer to games that are played over some form of computer network, most often the Internet. Online games can range from simple text-based games to games incorporating complex graphics and virtual worlds populated by many players simultaneously. Video Games: A video game is a computer game designed mainly for entertainment purposes. A video game console is the electronic machine designed to play the games and a video display such as a computer monitor or television is the primary feedback device. The main input device is a controller. A controller can be a keyboard, mouse, game pad, joystick, paddle, or any other device designed for gaming that can receive input. Special purpose devices, such as steering wheels for driving games, light guns for shooting games, and drums for musical games may also be used. Visual Basic for Applications (VBA): An implementation of Microsoft’s Visual Basic event driven programming language that runs code from within a host application rather than as a standalone application, built into all Microsoft Office applications.

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

APPendix A I. Total Class Student Engagement: Scan off-task _____

Time_______Total number of students____Total number

II. Strategy: Whole Group WorkAlone

Small Group Comp

Seat Work

Tell

Read aloud

Demo

Proc

Listen

Org

Asking ?

Discuss

Observe

III. Classroom Observation Schedule: Instructor_______Subject: ___Ethnicity: W B H A O Gender M F A. INTERACTIONS (check one) Total 1. No interaction/independence 2. With instructor—Instructional 3. With instructor—Managerial 4. With instructor—Social, Personal 5. With other students—Instructional 6. With other students—Social, Personal 7. Other___________________________

1

2

3

4

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

B. SELECTION OF ACTIVITY (check one) 1. Instructor assigned activity 1. 2. Student selected activity 2.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

____ ____

C. ACTIVITY TYPES (check as appropriate) 1. Written work 1. 2. Interacting—Instructional (e.g., discussing) 2. 3. Interacting—Social (e.g., talking) 3. 4. Watching or listening 4. 5. Reading 5. 6. Getting/returning materials 6. 7. Painting, drawing, creating graphics 7. 8. Word Processing 8. 9. Using special computer program 9. 10. Viewing videos/slides/pictures 10. 11. Playing games 11. 12. Presenting 12. 13. Tutoring peers 13. 14. Taking notes 14. 15. Not attending to task 15. 16. No activity/transition 16.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 8.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

5

1437

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

17. Other__________________________

17.

___

___ ___ ___

___

____

D. SETTING (check one) 1. Whole class 2. Small group 3. Pairs 4. Individual

1. 2. 3. 4.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

____ ____ ____ ____

E. MANNER (check one) 1. On task 2. On task with enthusiasm 3. Distracted 4. Disruptive 5. Waiting for instructor 6. Other _____________

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

COMMENTS:

APPendix b 1. ○ Male ○ Female 2. Check all methods/materials that your instructor used in the Computer Fundamentals class this semester. □ Case study analysis □ Discussion □ Group presentations □ Instructional games □ Lab exercises □ Lecture □ Problem-solving □ Role-play □ Small groups □ Worksheets □ Videotapes □ DVDs 3. Check all the methods that helped you learn computer concepts in this class. □ Case study analysis □ Discussion □ Group presentations □ Instructional games □ Lab exercises □ Lecture

1438

Appendix F, Selected Readings: Game-Based Instruction in a College Classroom

□ Problem-solving □ Role-play □ Small groups □ Worksheets □ Videotapes □ DVDs

4. Why do you like these particular methods?

5. Is there anything that you would like to see added to the course (content, method, etc.)?

6. How often do you play video, online, or computer games (excluding games played in this course)? □All the Time

□Frequently

□Sometimes

□Rarely

□Never

This work was previously published in Handbook of Research on Instructional Systems and Technology, edited by T. T. Kidd and H. Song, pp. 463-475, copyright 2008 by Information Science Reference, formerly known as Idea Group Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).

1439

1440

Appendix G

Creative Remixing and Digital Learning:

Developing an Online Media Literacy Learning Tool for Girls Renee Hobbs Temple University, USA Jonelle Rowe Department of Health and Human Services, USA

AbstrAct This chapter explores how media literacy education may continue to be responsive and relevant to the continually changing nature of popular culture through the development of innovative online multimedia educational programs. Because pre-adolescent and adolescent girls are actively involved in the consumption of popular music, competitive performance television programs like American Idol as well as online social networks, it is important to examine the constructed nature of these new types of messages and experiences. My Pop Studio (www.mypopstudio.com), a creative play experience for girls ages 9 to 14, was developed by the authors to address the need for media literacy skills among this group. We present a model for assessing the impact of the program on learning that incorporates the dimensions of pleasure, a sense of mastery, participation in an online community, media literacy skills, and other outcomes. Online games that use creative remixing techniques may promote metacognition, reflection, and critical analysis skills. Girls need opportunities to strengthen critical thinking skills about mass media and popular culture and the use of online learning environments may support the development of adolescents’ media literacy skills.

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

introduction An important challenge facing educators today is the need to keep education relevant to the continually changing media environment of the 21st Century. Media literacy education, while still at the margins of mainstream educational practice, has made some significant inroads in a number of nations, as educators develop approaches to strengthen students’ critical thinking and communication skills through activities involving critical inquiry, media production, discussion about media and society, and close analysis of media texts (Dickson, 1994; Felini, 2004; Hart, 1998; Hobbs, 2004). Of course, in some schools, teachers hesitate to explore topics related to popular culture, a phenomenon which may diminish one of the major strengths of media literacy: its perceived relevance in bridging the gap between the classroom and the culture. This problem is challenging to address, because teachers who have fears about the perceived value of popular culture may not want to continually adapt their curricula to match the changing media environment. With the intense schedule of teaching as many as 150 students per day, most teachers do not have the luxury of modifying their curriculum extensively. In some schools, teachers use video and print artifacts that are nearly 10 years old (Hobbs, 2007). There is a need for curriculum resources that can help educators incorporate media literacy into the curriculum with materials that represent the rapidly-changing world of technology, media, and popular culture. Recently, there have been some explorations as to how to help educators introduce media literacy through the use of online media. This chapter explains one example of this new work: the development, implementation, and assessment of My Pop Studio (www.mypopstudio.com), an online creative play experience developed by the author under a contract from the U.S. Federal Government, Office on Women’s Health. This chapter examines how online games can introduce key ideas of media literacy by taking advantage of the

unique characteristics of the online environment’s capacity to blend play and learning in a creative play environment where users can experiment with the processes of creating media, remixing existing content, and analyzing messages. This chapter examines how creative play, combined with metacognitive modeling, may promote learning of key media literacy concepts through activities that include media analysis and media production.

tArgeting Adolescent girls Adolescence is a challenging time of life. Between age 10 and age 15, many girls in both developed and developing nations lose confidence and diminish their health outcomes as they move through puberty. At age 10, girls are confident, spunky, outspoken, and see themselves as healthy, capable, and strong. By age 15, 30% of American teen girls are smokers (Gidwani, Sobol, DeJong, Perrin, & Gortmaker, 2002). Many have chosen to avoid more rigorous courses in math and science, even when they have the capability to perform well in these classes. In the United States, teen pregnancy rates, while declining since the 1990s, are still high, especially among young women living in poverty. Tween and teen girls experience psychological depression. More than 4 million teen girls shoplift. Nutrition and body image create problems for the health of teen girls (Jones, Bennett, Olmsted, Lawson, & Rodin, 2004; Kilbourne, 1999; Lazarus et al., 2000). For girls, life during adolescence can be especially stressful in the intense peer culture of adolescence. Expectations from peers and family, the pressure for material possessions, and social relationships take center stage. An online survey commissioned by Girls Incorporated and Harris Interactive between March 14, 2006, and March 30, 2006, examined opinions of more than 2,000 U.S. youth to focus on the ways gender stereotypes and expectations shape the lives of

1441

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

girls and boys (Girls Inc., 2006). The survey data reveal that there are persistent gender expectations being compounded by a growing emphasis on perfection, resulting in mounting pressure on girls to be supergirls. Three-quarters of girls (74%) in the study agree that girls are under a lot of pressure to please everyone. More than half of girls in grades 6 to 8 say they are under a great deal of stress. The online world of social networking, IM/chat, and cell phones, can be overwhelming, exhausting, and hard on the ego (Mazzarella, 2005). Many adolescents live in homes with parents who have slender knowledge about the complexities of online communication; as a result, many girls navigate the ever-changing waters of online media and mass media and popular culture with little meaningful guidance from teachers or parents. Health communication theory suggests that media messages impact health-related behaviors by fostering knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes that are conducive to behaviors, either desirable or undesirable (Finnegan & Viswamath, 2002). The media-behavior link is well established in the areas of adolescent sexual behavior, aggression, body image, eating disorders, alcohol use, and tobacco use (Brown & Walsh-Childers, 1994). Many researchers attribute these ill effects to the ability of the mass media to act as a powerful agent of social influence—modeling, normalizing, and glamorizing unhealthy behaviors for impressionable young people (Bryant & Zillmann, 1986). Media literacy education can be a means to counter these influences by increasing awareness of media influence, helping young people recognize that media messages are often explicitly designed to make people, products, attitudes, and behaviors (frequently unhealthy ones) appear attractive. A sense of competence is also important for adolescents. Girls can acquire a sense of competence in mastering different challenges of online media. The public health literature informs us that media literacy education can increase a sense of competence among adolescents, which

1442

is considered to be a protective factor (Bergsma, 2004). During a time when feelings of confidence diminish, high-interest technology activities that appeal to girls’ interest in critiquing media and popular culture may help them to continue to see themselves as capable, competent, and part of a creative and critical community, able to make good choices about their lifestyle and health (Hamilton & Hamilton, 2004).

An online creAtive PlAy exPerience For mediA literAcy In 2006, we created My Pop Studio in collaboration with Sherri Hope Culver of Temple University and Dave Shaller of Eduweb, a multimedia production firm in St. Paul, Minnesota. Fifteen different online play activities of My Pop Studio are designed to strengthen media literacy skills, promote positive youth development, and increase awareness of the role of media in health. Highly interactive creative play activities guide users through the process of deconstructing, analyzing, and creating media. Video segments, flash animation, media deconstruction games and quizzes, and moderated blogs make the Web site lively, fun, and educational. Users select from four behindthe-scenes opportunities to learn more about mass media: In the Magazine Studio, users compose a magazine layout featuring themselves as celebrities, exploring the differences between celebrities and heroes. They write an advice column to discover the formulas used in magazines. Girls can also explore the power of digital retouching and reflect on the role of body image in today’s culture. In the TV Studio, users edit a TV show where they can experiment with juxtaposition of images to create multiple storylines. They reflect upon their TV viewing choices and screen use, comment on teen celebrities, and compare their daily screen time with others. In the Music Studio,

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

users create a pop star and compose her image and song to learn about how values messages are communicated through image and language. Girls can explore the power of music in selling a product and search for truth in media gossip. In the Digital Studio, users test their multitasking abilities. They share the challenges of digital life online. They consider the “what if’s” of social networking sites and reflect on the power of media and technology in their social relationships. Iterative prototypes and playtesting are critical to the design of educational multimedia. Playtesting can “help resolve conflicts among pedagogy, content, and gameplay by moving disagreements from theoretical stances to demonstrated success or failure of design concepts” (Winn & Heeter, 2006, p. 1). In developing My Pop Studio, we used formative evaluation with 60 girls ages 9 to 14 from six different geographic regions of the United States to ensure that the learning environment was responsive to the lived experience of this age group. At key periods during the year-long development process, girls participated in a series of meetings where they could offer ideas, suggestions, and feedback about the development of the site. Girls reviewed prototypes and contributed ideas to all aspects of the content and design process; as a result, they developed an intense sense of ownership about the Web site.

bAlAncing PlAy And leArning through creAtive remixing Popular music takes center stage in My Pop Studio because the scholarly literature suggests that adolescent girls are making active use of music and celebrities in their own identity formation (Cashmore, 2006; Marshall, 2005). Among media literacy educators who specialize in skills related to critical analysis of news and advertising, this topic is just beginning to be explored. For example,

British researchers have conducted case studies of girls’ use of online media to explore topics of fashion, beauty, and identity, finding that girls’ interactions with online fashion media can be a site of learning for girls to explore critical perspectives through fantasy play (Willett, 2005). Because girls this age are beginning to read fashion magazines, we wanted to address issues of body image and digital image manipulation. Girls are also actively participating in watching competitive performance television programs like American Idol and So You Think You Can Dance, so we wanted to build upon this interest in introducing media literacy concepts. My Pop Studio uses an approach to creative composition that takes advantage of remixing as a creative aesthetic. Remixing is now an important part of contemporary media production that involves the appropriation of existing cultural products for the development of new creative works (Lessig, 2004). In remixing, media texts get re-interpreted by other creative people through techniques of collage, editing, and juxtaposition (Jenkins, 2006). Remixing can be a vehicle for people to comment upon the role of media and technology in society. From the point of view of media literacy educators, remixing can strengthen media literacy skills because it can deepen people’s awareness of an author’s purpose and context. Through strategic juxtaposition and shifts in context, messages change their meanings. Remixing can also illustrate the function of context in the meaning-making process. For example, in several activities on My Pop Studio, users can select small samples of existing media texts and juxtapose them to create new meanings to experiment with the relationship between meaning and context. In the TV Studio, users can select pre-existing segments of video and edit them together to create original sequences. In the Music Studio, users can select small segments of audio and experiment with how popular music reshapes the symbolic function of various products targeted at girls and young women. With the rise of user-generated

1443

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

content online, remixing needs to be seen as a pedagogy that enables users to fully participate in contemporary culture (Jenkins, 2006). As with much educational multimedia, the balance of play and learning is a complex and delicate one that calls upon and exploits certain expectations about personal and social identity (Hayes, 2005). Because My Pop Studio is designed to be used by girls, with or without a teacher or other gatekeeper, the experience must be inherently entertaining, or users won’t play with it. In the online play environment, play and learning are related, so the format of My Pop Studio exploits the “behind-the-scenes” perspective to offer information about issues in media industries—minus the didacticism or preachiness that can be found on a number of media literacy Web sites that adopt a protectionist stance towards the dangers of mass media. Unlike traditional curricula, My Pop Studio is self-implemented. Users may choose which activities to engage in, to what extent, and how many times to play. These decisions result in

program implementation or “dosage” levels that are likely to vary greatly among users. In evaluating the potential of My Pop Studio to strengthen media literacy skills, we observed users playing with the program in order to develop a model that conceptualizes key elements to guide our current and ongoing research in the assessment of program effectiveness. As shown on Figure 1, there are two cross-cutting media literacy skills activated while playing: critical analysis skills and media composition skills. These two skills are linked to knowledge outcomes, including: (1) awareness of the constructed nature of media texts, and (2) awareness of how values messages are presented in media texts. Constructedness refers to the many choices that are involved in media production and the ways in which message design characteristics can contribute to meaning. Values messages refer to the ways in which messages are designed to convey ideas about desirable lifestyles and behaviors by evoking specific emotional responses. We are now pilot-

Figure 1. A model of program impact for My Pop Studio

1444

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

ing a measure of “media savvy” that addresses these two knowledge outcomes through a simple scale suitable for use with children and teens. We anticipate that users who find the site intrinsically pleasurable will play with the site enough times to develop a sense of mastery and competence, increasing knowledge. Figure 1 also shows secondary learning outcomes that include transfer of skills from the game environment to the home, awareness of media’s role in health promotion, and positive youth developmental outcomes. Youth development researchers, taking advantage of interdisciplinary studies of adolescent health research and educational practice, have identified additional features of various kinds of youth learning environments that contribute to success. These include age appropriate monitoring, opportunities to belong to a group, positive social norms with clear identification of values, and opportunities for skill building (Hamilton & Hamilton, 2004). These perspectives inform the work of the online learning environment we have created and future research will examine how users perceive and respond to these elements in the context of program usage.

metAcognition And immersion in online leArning A sense of competence and mastery are believed to be intricately related to the pleasurable aspects of game environments. Compared to traditional, teacher-centered classrooms, online learning can simulate the processes of meaningful inquiry, presenting the user with increasing levels of challenge. According to James Gee (2003), users begin by mastering the mechanics of game play (what Gee calls the internal design grammars) then learn how to negotiate the context of play, coming gradually to recognize the design choices of its developers, a process referred to as the external design grammars. Video games allow users to

simulate, learn, and manage design grammars, learning how to learn in unfamiliar environments. Users develop strategies for managing complexity and ambiguity. In doing so, they gradually acquire increasing levels of awareness about the constructed nature of the game environment. Our observations of girls using My Pop Studio supports this theory, as girls seem to enjoy the challenge associated with mastering the mechanics of play and gradually gain a sense of the values and critical perspectives embedded in the game. Media literacy depends on the ability to actively control and reflect upon the process of thinking used in various encounters with media messages. Monitoring comprehension, reflection on the learning process, and evaluating the progress towards the completion of a task are examples of metacognition (Solomon, 1998). However, it is not always easy to create a learning environment where children and young people apply metacognitive skills. When presented with a media message about alcohol or tobacco, for example, researchers have found that children ages 10 to 14 are able to critically analyze it, but activation of this ability does not occur spontaneously (Brucks, Armstrong, & Goldberg, 1988). Young people often can demonstrate media literacy skills but often these skills are not evident without explicit prompting. As a result, some types of metacognitive prompting are incorporated into My Pop Studio. For example, when users select music to accompany various types of advertising, a girl guide explains the impact of that choice on the interpretation of a message by a specific target audience. There has been some debate among the development team regarding the extent to which explicit metacognitive prompting should be incorporated into the program, with a solid argument that users should be allowed to come to these realizations on their own in their own time. The developers are considering adding a scaffolding element in the form of a character that “pops up” periodically to simply encourage users

1445

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

to critically reflect on their decisions. Additional elements that increase the variety and depth of the metacognitive prompting are also in development. External prompting may be necessary because of the powerful immersive pull exerted by the “play” component of the online learning environment, which may discourage distancing and critical analysis (Squire, 2005). Of particular importance is the transfer or application of media literacy skills to the real-world media environment outside of the online game. Such transfer of learning is among the challenging of issues in the design and measurement of educational multimedia (Perkins & Salomon, 1988). Participating in an online community provides a means to cultivate transfer of learning. To examine this, we have begun to analyze the comments made by users on the eight different message boards of My Pop Studio. Future research will determine the extent to which users are making connections between the game and their real-life experiences. It will be important to assess the ability to transfer knowledge and skills from an online game environment to other settings, including home, family, and other media consumption experiences.

conclusion Classroom teachers find themselves on a steep learning curve in understanding the students of the 21st Century, whose level of online engagement is unlike that of previous generations. Rather than adopt the stance of the ostrich and ignore how children’s culture has been changed by technology, or simply accede to the problem of young people’s vulnerability to the world of mass media and popular culture, educators are beginning to adapt their own instructional practices to meet the needs of the multitasking, networked young people in their classrooms. It takes a confident teacher to incorporate play into a learning environment. It

1446

can be unnerving for some educators to experience the loss of control that comes from genuine student engagement. And some critics fear that appealing to the media proficiencies of children and young people can “yield the short-term advantages of increased student engagement….[while] catering to those students who seek to complete work with a minimum of effort” (Barnes, Marateo, & Ferris, 2007, p. 1). Certainly there is much we don’t know about the appropriate uses of online creative play experiences as tools for learning in classroom settings. But these fears shouldn’t blind us to the very real educational potential inherent in welldesigned online learning environments. For years, educators have been accommodating children’s learning styles by moving from the traditional lecture to discussion-based classes that allow for more individual expression. They have begun to incorporate mass media and popular culture into the curriculum in order to tap into student expertise and engagement. The use of online games as a means to promote critical thinking and metacognition is just another step forward in developing new approaches that enable girls and young women to thrive in a complex and rapidly changing cultural environment.

reFerences Barnes, K., Marateo, R., & Ferris, S. (2007). Teaching and learning with the net generation. Innovate, 3(4). Retrieved October 9, 2007, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index. php?view=article&id=382 Bergsma, L.J. (2004). Empowerment education: The link between media literacy and health promotion. American Behavioral Scientist, 48, 152-164. Brown, J., & Walsh-Childers, K. (1994). Effects of media on personal and public health. In J. Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

in theory and research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

Hart, A. (1998). Teaching the media:International perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brucks, M., Armstrong, G., & Goldberg, M. (1988). Children’s use of cognitive defenses against television advertising: A cognitive response approach. Journal of Consumer Research, 14, 471-482.

Hayes, E. (2005). Women and video gaming: Gendered identities at play. Paper presented at the Games, Learning and Society conference, Madison, WI. Retrieved October 9, 2007, from http://www.academiccolab.org/resources/documents/gender_and_morrowind.pdf

Bryant, J., & Zillmann, D. (1986). Perspectives on media effects. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates. Cashmore, E. (2006). Celebrity/culture: Taylor & Francis Inc. Dickson, P. (1994). A survey of media education in schools and colleges. British Film Institute & National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales. Felini, D. (2004). Pedagogia dei media: Questioni, percorsi e sviluppi. Brescia: La Scuola. Finnegan, J., & Viswamath, K. (2002). Communication theory and health behavior change: The media studies framework. In K. Glantz, B. Rimer & F. Lewis (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research and practice (pp. 361-388). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Gee, J.P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (1st ed.). New York, Houndmills, England: Palgrave Macmillan. Gidwani, P.P., Sobol, A., DeJong, W., Perrin, J.M., & Gortmaker, S.L. (2002). Television viewing and initiation of smoking among youth. Pediatrics, 110(3), 505-508. Girls Inc. (2006, October). The supergirl dilemma. New York: Girls Inc. Hamilton, S.F., & Hamilton, M.A. (2004). The youth development handbook: Coming of age in American communities. Thousand Oaks, CA, London: Sage Publications.

Hobbs, R. (2004). A review of school-based initiatives in media literacy. American Behavioral Scientist, 48(1), 48-59. Hobbs, R. (2007). Reading the media: Media literacy in high school English. New York: Teachers College Press. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture. New York: New York University Press. Jones, J.M., Bennett, S., Olmsted, M.P., Lawson, M.L., & Rodin, G. (2004). Disordered eating attitudes and behaviors in teenaged girls: A school-based study. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 165(5), 547-552. Kilbourne, J. (1999). Deadly persuasion: Why women and girls must fight the addictive power of advertising. New York, NY: Free Press. Lazarus, M., Wunderlich, R., Gilligan, C., SteinerAdair, C., Dines, G., Steinem, G., et al. (2000). The strength to resist: Beyond killing us softly. United States: Cambridge Documentary Films. Lessig, L. (2004). Free culture: How big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity. New York: Penguin Press. Marshall, P.D. (2005). The celebrity culture reader. Taylor & Francis Inc. Mazzarella, S.R. (2005). Girl wide Web: Girls, the Internet, and the negotiation of identity. New York: Peter Lang.

1447

Appendix G, Selected Readings: Creative Remixing and Digital Learning

Perkins, D., & Salomon, G. (1988). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 46(1), 22-32. Solomon, P.G. (1998). The curriculum bridge: From standards to actual classroom practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Squire, K.D. (2005). Toward a media literacy for games. Journal of Media Literacy, 52(1-2), 9-15.

Willett, R. (2005). What you wear tells a lot about you: Girls dress up online. Centre for the Study of ChildrenYouth and Media, Institute of Education University of London. Winn, B., & Heeter, C. (2006). Resolving conflicts in educational game design through playtesting. Innovate, 3(2). Retrieved October 9, 2007, from http://www.innovateonline.info/index. php?view=article&id=392

This work was previously published in Digital Literacy: Tools and Methodologies for Information Societyt, edited by P. Rivoltella, pp. 230-240, copyright 2008 by IGI Publishing, formerly known as Idea Group Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).

1448

1449

Appendix H

Learning While Playing: Design Implications for Edutainment Games Kalle Jegers Umeå University, Sweden Charlotte Wiberg Umeå University, Sweden

AbstrAct This chapter reports on the initial results of a study conducted in the project FunTain. The main purpose was to identify general guidelines/implications for edutainment games, in order to guide designers of such games as they often lack in design guidelines. Usability evaluations were conducted on an edutainment game in order to find usability problems. These findings were analyzed and used as input in focus group meetings, held with joint teams of game designers and HCI experts. The outcome of the focus groups was a proposal of a list of ten general design guidelines. Findings indicate that users had problems in understanding the underlying model for the game as well as identifying the knowledge related content. Experts, further, gave comments about feedback problems and different types of consistencies. Some of the implications from the findings are guidelines for earning and loosing points, scoring and performance feedback and game object characteristics.

introduction Currently, both research and practice show a great interest in studying and developing ways to use computers in various forms to support and enhance

interaction between humans. Although the issue of human-to-human interaction by use of computers is of great relevance and importance, we still must not forget about the interaction between humans and computers. New factors and aspects, not previously grasped by the Human Computer

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

Interaction (HCI) discipline, are becoming recognized as important in the interaction between users and technology. Aspects such as emotions, experiences and entertainment are more and more frequently considered when designing and developing new computer applications in many different areas. Entertaining experiences is one of these new aspects that today are becoming in focus not only in traditional areas of entertainment, but are currently used in previously non-entertaining contexts as a mean to improve products and user/consumer experiences. Examples of this could be found both in the physical world (i.e., restaurants and theme parks) but also in computer contexts such as on the World Wide Web and in different kinds of software (Pine II & Gilmore, 1999; Wolf, 1999). The application of entertainment in previously non-entertaining environments and contexts opens up new research questions, as entertainment is applied and used with purposes beyond creating plain amusement and fun for the user. One of the areas where entertainment is applied with purposes beyond just creating an amusing experience is the area of edutainment, where entertainment is used in combination with education in order to create a motivating and successful environment for learning. Adams et al. (1996) describe edutainment as a blend of education and entertainment, pursued in multimedia software. The description, or definition, indicates that the two major dimensions of importance in edutainment is some kind of pedagogy (education) and some kind of “fun” or entertaining experience (entertainment). Edutainment is therefore one example where research on new appliances of entertainment in previously non-entertainment contexts may be conducted. Considering the definition of the edutainment concept (as a blend of entertainment and education), we might conclude that design of edutainment includes the design of both entertainment and educational aspects in a design artifact. This may cause some difficulties. The pedagogical aspects

1450

that are of importance for the educational part of the artifact may in some cases be in opposition to the aspects of importance for the entertainment part of the artifact. There seems to be a need for some kind of trade-off to be made in order to achieve a good result in the design of both the entertainment and the education in the artifact. A parallel could be made to Nielsen’s (1999) discussion about content and package of the content in a web page design context. According to Nielsen (1999) the users of a web page are focused on the content of the page and consider the user interface, or package, as a barrier through which they reach for the content they want. Despite a cool, sizzling or ”killer” interface or environment, the usability of a web page would be negatively affected if the content of the web page fails to deliver something to the user (Nielsen, 1999). Therefore, Nielsen (1999) concludes that content is king. There is a need for design guidelines and implications when designing edutainment under these circumstances. This paper reports from an initial study conducted for the purpose of providing guidelines/implications for design of edutainment games (an instance of edutainment), performed within the FunTain project, a joint project between HCI academics and game design practitioners. The purpose of this chapter is to report the findings from initial usability evaluations on an edutainment game in order to provide design implications for design of edutainment games.

Qualities of an edutainment Artifact In related work, suggestions of aspects that are of major importance for educational software and multimedia can be found. These suggestions should be of importance also in design of edutainment artifacts such as edutainment games. Adams et al. (1996) suggest that multimedia products for educational purposes should be designed with the following aspects in mind: effective learning, effective teaching, effective communication of the content and effective use

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

of technology to achieve the previous aspects. In order to achieve effective learning, the artifact, or product, should be simple (explain topics in terms for the user’s already known knowledge), clear (define topics in their entirely) and unambiguous (distinguishing specific topics from others). Effective teaching, they argue, will be achieved by highlighting perspectives needed to master the topic and by providing appropriate feedback mechanisms to the learners. They suggests that effective communication could be achieved by presenting material so as to increase the learner’s understanding of the topic in a monotonically fashion. Technology should then be used to ensure the previously mentioned aspects, and not to obscure them. In design of multimedia for education, the usual human factors must be addressed, and the technology should bring together the benefits that the different media provide. Lin et al. (2001) highlight the possibility to pass control of learning sequences from the program designer to the learner in web-based teaching. Good education software should be active, not passive, in that the learner should be doing something actively and not watching something passively. Adams et al. (1996) seem to agree with this recommendation, and they

conclude by suggesting that active engagement by interaction with multimedia can increase the attention span for learners with positive effects, such as customization of pace and learning style to suit the individual learner’s specific needs. The suggested aspects and factors above all tend to focus on the education dimension of edutainment. When designing edutainment games this dimension is of great importance. However, if the game itself is not considered entertaining, it is likely that users will quit playing the game, with no educational experience as a result. Further, the above suggestions give high-level implications with no specific guidance for designing edutainment games specifically. In HCI there is a long tradition of development of design guidelines and overall these are very much on a micro level and specific on the technology itself.

the edutAinment gAme PrototyPe The game is called “Laser Challenge” and was designed in order to educate the player/user about appliances of laser technique. No specific knowl-

Picture 1. Pre-game instructions screen (the overall goals and objectives of the game is described, as well as the basic game controls)

1451

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

Picture 2. User controlled character to the left, a spinning question mark that leads to a question that must be answered by the user, a CD that must be collected in order to complete the game and a number (250) that represent “free” points to score

Picture 3. Character has touched a spinning question mark, and a question box is shown (The question is multiple choices, and deals with the topic of laser. Correct answer gives the user a high amount of points.)

Picture 4. Character, numbers representing points to score, CDs to collect in order to achieve the game objectives and the antagonist of this game level (the Skateboarder)

1452

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

edge about the laser technique was required for playing the game, but the user was supposed to be inspired by the game to learn more about lasers. The game followed a linear, platform metaphor, and consisted of four episodes with increasing difficulty in the interactive parts. The main theme was intended to be non-violent and the basis was that the user should collect CDs to give a party. The player controlled and steered a character on the screen in order to collect CDs and avoid “enemy” objects in the game environment, presented in the shape of skateboard kids who were trying to steal the CDs from the player’s character. Further, the user got points when answering questions about lasers that were presented in the game. Below, some screen shots from the game are shown.

evAluAtion method When evaluating educational software, learning and usability need to be considered as interacting in order to avoid superficial evaluation (Jones et al., 1999). Given the interaction between learning and usability, usability evaluation methods should be well suited for evaluation of edutainment artifacts in the case presented here, since the methods would capture both design implications (Karat, 1997) and potentially also the interaction between usability and learning. Therefore, an approach based on evaluation methods from the usability discipline was used for the purposes of identifying empirical design implications for edutainment games. This approach would then potentially address the learning aspects and, most importantly for the focus of this case, obtain implications for design. Previous findings in the related area of interactive entertainment evaluation (Wiberg, 2001a) reveals that evaluation of entertainment websites based on methods from the usability discipline, and user testing in particular, tend to provide findings that are focused on basic usability problems concerning navigation, design of menu buttons,

etc. This implies that more subtle factors such as immersion, absorption and engagement, all potentially important to both entertainment and education, are difficult to grasp with the user testing method (Wiberg, 2001b). Several studies reveal that usability inspection methods, such as Design Walkthrough (e.g., Karat, 1997), Cognitive Walkthrough (e.g., Lewis et al., 1994) and Heuristic evaluation (e.g., Nielsen, 1993, 1994) in many cases identifies problems overlooked by user testing, but also that user testing may identify problems overlooked in an inspection (Nielsen, 1994). In this study, we therefore used a combination of evaluation methods including both user testing and inspection methods. A combination of user testing and inspection would provide a broad picture of the important aspects and issues at hand, and seems to be a fruitful approach when generating a foundation for deriving design implications. In order to refine the results provided by the user testing and inspection method and to generate a set of empirical design implications, the focus group method was used. In practical terms, a focus group is a collection of people gathered together at one time to discuss a topic of interest for the researcher. The explicit use of the group interaction provides the researcher with data and insights that would be less accessible without the interaction (Sullivan, 1994). By collaborating the results from the user testing and inspection method in a focus group session, the intention was to create a set of design implications of importance for edutainment games, which is the major purpose of this chapter.

Participants A total number of five (5) subjects were invited to participate in the user testing, of which four (4) actually participated. The subjects performed the test one at a time, and each test took about 30 minutes in all. The user tests consisted of three parts:

1453

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

Table 1.

• •

•

Subject

A ge

Gender

1 2

25-30 25-30

Female Female

3 5

1 5

3 4

50-60 20-25

Male Male

3 4

1 4

C omputer liter acy (1=Novice, 5=E xper t)

10 minutes of free surf with Think Aloud 10 minutes of Walkthrough, performed by the test subject in collaboration with the test leader (collaborative evaluation) 10 minutes of post-interaction interview

In the first part of the session, the subjects played the game without any specific task to solve or instructions to be carried out. They were asked to verbalize their thoughts throughout the interaction, and they finished the session when they wished to do so. In the second part, the subjects performed a Walkthrough of the whole game prototype in collaboration with the test leader. Different aspects of the game were discussed, and the subjects were asked to give their opinions about specific features and parts of the design. They were also able to express any thoughts and comments they wanted to share. The post-interaction interview gave the subjects an opportunity to give comments and thoughts on general aspects of the game, the interaction and the performed test procedure. Here, the subjects could develop or refine their opinions and ideas from the previous parts of the test, and the test leader could follow up on issues that needed to be clarified.

1454

C omputer gaming liter acy (1=Novice, 5=E xper t)

Comment

R esearcher HCI R esearcher HCI E ngineer HCI analyst and lecturer

expert Walkthrough In the design walkthrough, or here called expert walkthrough, the experts investigated and collaborated with the game prototype and made comments on possible problems or design improvements. The comments were written down and discussed in the last part of the evaluation, the focus group. The instructions were very brief, and the experts had a large degree of freedom in the evaluation procedure. In a large extent they relied on their personal experience and opinions in their evaluations.

Focus group When the User tests and Expert Walkthrough parts were finished, the HCI researchers and test leaders from the empirical evaluations, as well as the game designers, performed a joint focus group meeting. In the focus group, the findings from the previous parts of the study were reported and discussed. The first step in this process was to analyze and categorize the different findings from both the empirical and the expert evaluations into problem areas or groups. From the grouped findings, the participants constructed a more general picture of the reported issues in the prototype. This picture was then used to gener-

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

ate a number of implications for the next step in the overall design process; design implications. The general picture was thoroughly discussed, with focus on how the problem picture could be reconstructed into guidelines or implications that designers would benefit from. Each group of problems in the picture were discussed in terms of: which part(s) of the game prototype design that was related to the problems, what kind of more general usability issue the problems could be interpreted as demonstrating different aspects of, and eventually how the essence of the usability problem expressed by the problem group could be formulated into a guideline or an implication for design. Since the study was performed as a collaborative part of the process of designing the edutainment game, implications were kept at a level that was considered to be meaningful for the overall design process in terms of guidance for designers when conducting re-design. That is, implications that would be possible to use as meaningful input to the designers in the next step of the design process.

•

•

•

empirical usability evaluations •

•

usAbility Problems identiFied In order to highlight the research process, some of the usability problems identified are stated below. These are kept short, with the purpose to pinpoint the overall picture of what occurred. Most of the usability problems in the examples occurred both in the expert walkthroughs as well as in the empirical usability evaluations, however not in all the empirical sessions.

•

•

expert Walkthroughs •

It was unclear which actions the player should perform in order to gain points in the game. Strange question marks and other moving objects were confusing, and searching after

hidden objects that gave points was fruitless. It is not obvious what “enemies and dangers” the player should be aware of in the game. What other characters and objects are really dangerous in the game? What actions and objects should be avoided? The skateboard kid seemed somewhat dangerous, however it was not clear at all how and in what ways he could harm the player’s character. Overall, feedback problems occurred in the game. When feedback was expected (when different actions suggests feedback to be expected) it did on many occasions not occur.

•

A lack of interest (from the test players) in reading initial instructions results in frustration later in game when events, objectives and actions become difficult to interpret and understand. Loss of only some game points as a result of an action was confused and mixed up with a total loss of all points earned, which led to unnecessary (and unmotivated by the game) disappointments among the test players. The music in the game is not connected to the actions taking place in the game, which confuses players, as it does not highlight levels of danger (which would be consistent with other games). The level of difficulty in playing the game is by many test players experienced to be to low. The game is too easy and does not have an increasing level of difficulty, which was expected by many test players. Test players reveal frustration over a lack of consistency with other arcade games similar to this game, like for instance the possibility to jump on (and “kill”) “bad guys” in order to gain points.

1455

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

•

•

The lack of possibility to move information pop-up windows, revealed when questions concerning lasers are asked, frustrates the test players. The pop-up windows prevent the players from reading additional information placed in windows hidden by the pop-ups. Test players are frustrated over the fact that some objects, for instance a plastic road cone, do not work/behave as in real life. In real life a road cone could be pushed over, but in the game the player has to go around the cone since the cone behaves more like a fixed object (similar to, for instance, a fire post or a fence).

•

Negative audio and visual feedback should be provided to notify the user when points are lost due to some erroneous action performed by the user.

scoring and Performance Feedback The points should be summarized in a visible and easily interpreted counter, placed at a location in the environment according to conventions in the game genre. The meaning of the sum of points should be unambiguous and clearly indicate what kind of points that are represented, if there are multiple types of points that the user may score in the game.

design imPlicAtions

differences in valuable objects

The above stated usability problems are examples of some of the issues identified in the expert walkthroughs and empirical evaluations of the game. In the focus group session, a thorough discussion of all previous sessions was conducted (see “Focus Group” above for description) and the general list of guidelines/implications below was created. Further, design implications for this specific game was also put forward. These were also implemented in the design process. However, the specific implications are not further discussed here. The general list of guidelines/implications is listed below.

There should be intuitive, easily understood representations of objects and actions that result in scoring points when performed. If there is various levels of points to be scored, the objects used to represent the different levels should be easy to interpret and clearly indicate the value of the specific point represented.

earning and losing Points

In order to achieve good gameplay and competition, a failure to achieve a certain task that successfully performed will result in a large amount of points scored should lead to the disappearance of the opportunity to score that particular set of points.

The overall scoring system should be clear, unambiguous and provide distinct feedback to the user concerning changes in the points scored or lost. •

1456

Positive audio and visual feedback should be provided to notify the user when points are scored.

•

Objects that represent major amounts of points should look more valuable than objects representing minor amounts of points.

task Performance and Feedback

•

If the user answers a question worth a large amount of points incorrectly, the opportu-

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

nity to score that particular set of points by answering the same question again correctly should be suspended (the user should only have one opportunity to score each particular set of points).

Promoting exploration

•

The environment should demonstrate to the user where it is possible and not possible for the user’s agent or character to move around.

real World inheritance

There should be “hidden points” in the game environment to reward the user when exploration of the environment is performed and to provide variation and discrimination in the overall performance of users considering points scored.

When designing objects in the game environment, it is important to be aware of the conventions considering the specific object generated by other similar types of games, but also conventions and affordances provided by real world connections.

•

•

A high score should require a performance above the normal from the user, in order to motivate the users to engage in the game and achieve good gameplay.

game objects’ characteristics The difference between objects that affect the gaming procedure and objects that constitute the background surroundings of the environment should be clear and unambiguous. •

•

•

•

Objects that are “active” and may be manipulated or used by the user should distinguish themselves from the background and from other active objects. “Dangerous” objects that imply something negative for the user in the game should be represented in a way that clearly indicates their negative effect on the user’s performance. Positive objects that imply scoring points or help for the user in the game should indicate their positive attributes by their representation. Obstacles in the environment should clearly and unambiguous indicate that they are interferences that need to be worked around and not objects that may be manipulated by the user.

If an object has a real world counterpart, the designer must be aware of the properties of that real world counterpart and consider them when deciding the properties and function of the game object. Game objects with real world counterparts will, in the user’s interpretation of them, likely inherit the properties and affordances from the real world, with effects on the user’s assumptions of the game object’s properties.

understandable menus Menu buttons and choices should be clear, descriptive and context sensitive •

•

“Back” buttons should link to the section or part previously visited by the user, and never to a sector that is new to the user. Action buttons (that lead to some kind of action) should clearly describe the action they initiate; submitting an answer for instance should be done by a “submit answer” button rather than by a “done” button.

supporting tools and their layout Pop up menus and additional tools for problem solving (i.e., information databases or dictionaries) should never occur on top of the main element (i.e.,

1457

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

a particular question) which they are supposed to support, but should occur beside that particular element. Additional tools offered to support the user in solving a particular task should not hide the description of the task to solve.

game instructions Instructions dealing with basic movements and actions in the game environment should be visually presented and explained in a short and compact fashion. •

•

Instructions on how to control the character and the meaning of different objects in the environment must be kept short and intuitive in order to ensure that the user utilizes them. The main objectives of the game in terms of the overall goal that the user should strive to accomplish and how that goal may be reached in terms of actions should be presented and explained in a short and informative way.

conclusion In this paper we have presented an initial study with the main purpose to find design guidelines for edutainment games. After the evaluation process, where expert walkthroughs as well as empirical usability evaluations were conducted, focus group sessions with HCI experts and game designers were performed. This resulted in a list of guidelines. These guidelines included: (1) Earning and loosing points, (2) Scoring and performance feedback, (3) Differences in valuable objects, (4) Task performance and feedback, (5) Promoting exploration, (6) Game objects’ characteristics, (7) Real world inheritance, (8)Understandable menus, (9) Supporting tools and their layout and, finally, (10) Game instructions. Issues for future research includes further testing of other types of edutainment games in

1458

order to further verify the generality of the above developed design guidelines for edutainment games.

reFerences Adams, E. S., Carswell, L., Ellis, A., Hall, P., Kumar, A., Meyer, J., & Motil, J. (1996). Interactive multimedia pedagogies: Report from the working group on Interactive Multimedia Pedagogy. In Proceedings of the First Conference on Integrating Technology into Computer Science Education. Jones, A., Scanlon, E., Tosunoglu, C., Morris, E., Ross, S., Butcher, P., & Greensberg, J. (1999). Contexts for evaluating educational software. Interacting with Computers, 11, 499-516. Karat, J. (1997). User-centered software evaluation methodologies. In M. Helander, T. K. Landauer, & P. Prabhu (eds), Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction (2n d ed.). Elsevier. Lin, B., & Hsieh, C. (2001). Web-based teaching and learner control: A research review. Computers and Education, 37. Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability engineering. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability inspection methods. Conference companion, CHI’94, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Nielsen, J. (1999, January). User interface directions for the Web. Communications of the ACM, 42 (1). Pine II, & Gilmore. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business a stage. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Sullivan, P. (1991). Multiple methods and the usability of interface prototypes: The complementary of laboratory observation and focus groups. In Proceedings of the 1991 ACM Ninth Annual

Appendix H, Selected Readings: Learning While Playing

International Conference on Systems Documentation. Chicago, Illinois, USA. Templeton, J. (1994). The focus group: A strategic guide to organizing, conducting and analyzing the focus group interview. New York: McGrawHill.

Wiberg, C. (2001b). Join the joyride: An identification of three important factors for evaluation of on-line entertainment. In Proceedings of WebNet 2001, Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Wiberg, C. (2001a). From ease of use to fun of use: Usability evaluation guidelines for testing entertainment web sites. In Proceedings of Conference on Affective Human Factors Design, CAHD. Singapore.

This work was previously published in The Interaction Society: Practice, Theories and Supportive Technologies, edited by M. Wiberg, pp. 122-138, copyright 2005 by Information Science Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).

1459

1460

Appendix I

Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”: Designing Augmented Reality Games to Teach the Critical Thinking of History Karen Schrier MIT, USA

AbstrAct Students need to learn the critical thinking of history, yet they rarely have opportunities to authentically simulate historic inquiry. Research has suggested the pedagogical potential for using augmented reality (AR) games—location-based games that use wireless handheld devices such as PDAs to provide virtual game information in a physical environment. The novel AR game, Reliving the Revolution (RtR), was created as a model for studying how AR games can engage students in interpretive, collaborative, and problem-solving activities. In this chapter, the game is introduced, and main results of the initial iterative tests are discussed, including what went wrong and how the game was redesigned to better support deeper engagement and historical thinking and learning.

introduction There may be at least two versions to every story, but how do you determine the truth when both sides have valid, but differing, perspectives? Active participants in a democracy must be able to question sources, seek out and manage differing viewpoints, and develop their own interpretations of the information they receive. Social problems do not have one clear solution; rather they require the complex consideration of multiple possibilities, prior knowledge sets, and rubrics (Brush & Saye, 2005). Likewise, historians weigh evidence and

decide to emphasize the particular perspectives that they feel are the best representations of the past. K-12 social studies students typically receive a litany of facts, events, names, along with one master narrative; they are rarely encouraged to empathize with alternate views or question the so-called authoritative versions of history. Teaching as though there is only one right way to view history is problematic because students are not practicing the skills necessary for historic inquiry (Hoge, 2003), and also because they are not learning how to unravel the complexity of social problems, nor evaluate the world as an

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

engaged citizen. In this chapter, I present a new augmented reality game, Reliving the Revolution (RtR), as a model for teaching historic inquiry and critical thinking, and for considering how to design engaging educational games. RtR is not envisioned as a standalone educational solution, but as an activity supported by a teacher or mentor, and integrated into a broader history curriculum that incorporates experiential learning, teamwork, and critical thinking skills.

Overview of RtR What better way to prepare students for skills essential to democratic engagement than by immersing them in a time when these democratic values were being questioned? RtR takes place in Lexington, Massachusetts—the site of the Battle of Lexington, which precipitated the American Revolution—and enables participants to simulate the activities of a historian. The game functions as a virtual analogue to the Battle and a practice field for historical methodology; it encourages the collection and analysis of evidence, the testing of hypotheses, and formulation of conclusions,

in the site where this evidence was first generated. Thus, the participants learn about a specific historic place and time, as well as the context for what occurred there, and construct their own views of the past, while considering alternative views of history (see Figure 3 for a detailed list of pedagogical goals). The participants’ primary goal in RtR is to reconstruct the events of April 19, 1775 and decide who they think fired the first shot that initiated the Battle of Lexington. To do this, participants walk around present-day Lexington Common and encounter the physical buildings and sites involved in the Battle of Lexington. They also use a personal digital assistant (PDA) to “interact” with virtual historic figures and gather virtual testimonials, evidence, and items, all triggered by Global Positioning Software (GPS) depending on their specific location. For example, when a player approaches the Buckman Tavern (Figure 1), a historical personality such as Paul Revere appears on the PDA and provides his story of the events at Lexington. These virtual historic figures, also called non-playing characters (NPCs), provide a testimonial (and often a document) based

Figure 1. Image of Buckman Tavern in Lexington, Massachusetts

1461

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Figure 2. Schematic of RtR; The participants first collect evidence during Time 1 and Time 2, and then compare evidence with other roles during the debate

Figure 3. Summary of pedagogical goals for RtR, based on history education standards and John Hoge’s description of historic inquiry (Hoge 2003). The letters next to the goals are referenced throughout the chapter.

(a) Acquire a Meaningful Understanding of Key Historical Themes and People (1) Understand better the people and leaders involved in the Battle of Lexington and the American Revolution [a1] (2) Become more aware of the social, economic, geographic, and political context surrounding the Battle of Lexington and the American Revolution [a2] (3) Learn more about a local historic site and how it functioned in the past. [a3] (b) Build Knowledge of the Methods and Limitations of History (1) Question sources and authorial intent of evidence; identify biases in evidence [b1] (2) Create hypotheses, and draw inferences and conclusions based on historical evidence [b2] (3) Consider the limits of historical methods and representations of the past [b3] (c) Confront Multiple Perspectives and Mainstream Interpretations of the Past (1) Understand and critique master narratives of the Revolutionary War, the Battle of Lexington and history in general [c1] (2) View, seek out, consider and manage multiple views of the Battle of Lexington and other historic moments [c2] (3) Reflect on ones’ own perspective on the past and recreations of events [c3]

1462

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Figure 5. Screenshot of a virtual historic figure (NPC); participants can click on “interview” to receive a testimonial from Paul Revere

on what they think happened before and during the Battle (see Figure 5). The participants play the game in pairs and as one of four historic roles: Prince Estabrook (African-American slave/Minuteman soldier); John Robbins (free/Minuteman soldier); Ann Hulton (Loyalist/townsperson); Philip Howe (Regular [British] soldier). These participants collect differing evidence based on their historic role in the game; for example, an NPC like Captain John Parker, the leader of the Minutemen, provides very different evidence to a fellow Minuteman soldier than to the female townsperson or the British soldier roles. The game also has two time periods: Time 1 in the game simulates the moment before the Battle has begun, and Time 2 simulates the moment immediately after the Battle ends (see Figure 2 for a schematic of the game). The NPCs provide different information in Time 1 and Time 2, and there is a short game break between the two time periods. Then, after the participants gather information in Time 1 and 2, they collaboratively compare their evidence, share hypotheses, and debate who they think fired the first shot.

Augmented reality (Ar) games for education? The development of RtR stems in part from two recent educational initiatives. First, there have been reforms in history standards to include “doing history” activities—such as evidence investigation and validation, exposure to multiple historical views, and narrative creation—and educators are beginning to search for new ways to teach critical thinking as it relates to the study of history (International Society for Technology in Education, 1998; National Center for History, 1994). Simultaneously, video games are gaining increased acceptance as educational tools and supplements to classroom curricula, and wireless handheld devices such as PDAs are becoming more ubiquitous in the classroom because of their low cost, flexibility, accessibility, wireless capability, portability, and ease of use (Dede, 2004; Dieterle, 2005; Klopfer, Squire, & Jenkins, 2003). Although PDAs are the primary devices discussed in this chapter, cell phones should also be studied as potential platforms for educational games, especially because of their already high penetration in the student population. Thus, I wanted to explore the possibility for using augmented reality games for history education

1463

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Augmented reality (AR) games are gaming environments that integrate virtual, locationspecific media within the physical world. To play an AR game, participants might use GPS-enabled PDAs or other wireless handheld devices to access virtual information that has been previously mapped to specific locations. For example, a game designer could pre-program information to appear at specific GPS coordinates, or embed information in a specific location that only can be retrieved by reading an RFID (radio frequency ID) tag. In an AR game, participants can use their PDA to interact with real-world objects or receive data about a particular spot in the physical environs. A building or historic site can suddenly become a game board, and statues or doors can provide virtual clues or act as portals in the context of the game. Thus, AR games may potentially allow students to “do history” situated in a real-world context, rather than passively learn historical “facts” in a classroom. This reflects Brown, Collins, and Duguid’s “situated learning” paradigm, in that the “concept” of history remains married to the activity and culture (1989). AR games may also further encourage collaborative learning because the portability of the devices encourages physical and social interaction, and, for example, the sharing of ideas and collaborative decision-making. Moreover, AR games may motivate those with the increasingly prevalent neo-millennial learning style—learners who favor more experiential, reflective, mentored and collaborative learning, nonlinear expressions of ideas, and individualized learning experiences (Dede, 2005). AR games, however, do not necessarily support learning, collaboration, imagination, or interest. How do we design educational AR games that are deeply engaging and motivating, while also incorporating history pedagogy? How do we use AR games to teach students to consider both the holistic and microscopic, to negotiate multiple viewpoints, evaluate diverse opinions, and, more broadly, to be more democratically engaged?

1464

In the next sections, I provide an overview of the design process of RtR and then explore in more detail nine elements of the game, and how these elements support the game’s pedagogical objectives and provide deeper immersion in the game world as well as the historic moment of the Battle of Lexington.

designing rtr One of the major challenges in designing RtR, and in educational games in general, is incorporating learning goals into the game play: “Play which is not removed from a learning experience, but inherent to it” (Squire, Jenkins, & The Games-To-Teach Team, 2003, p. 19). How do we embed learning within the game in a way that does not water down the educational content or disengage the player from the fun of playing a game (Thomas, 2003)? Even more challenging, perhaps, is how you do all of this with a limited budget ($0), limited resources (just myself), and limited time (less than a year). The simple answer is that I created the game by taking on multiple roles: designer, writer, researcher, tester, and educator. I am not a historian, nor do I have specialized knowledge of the Battle of Lexington, so I immersed myself in the town of Lexington and its lore. The game content—including the testimonials, documents, and game item descriptions were a mix of artistry and historic precision. I needed to balance pedagogical, practical, design, historical, and dramatic concerns to create an engaging experience that was based on accurate portrayals of the viewpoints on the Battle. I also studied current AR games and considered how to translate them to a historical setting. MIT’s Teacher Education laboratory has developed and tested four AR games, each of which invites participants to solve scientific problems from within an authentic practice field. One, “Environmental Detectives,” is an outdoor AR game where par-

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

ticipants work in teams to analyze a virtual oil spill that occurred on the actual MIT campus. The participants navigate a physical location and use a PDA to “interact” with pre-scripted virtual experts and gather information on the toxicity of various predetermined locations around campus (Klopfer, Squire, & Jenkins, 2002). In “Oubreak@ MIT,” an indoor AR game, participants work in teams to investigate a simulated disease outbreak on the MIT campus. To investigate the disease, participants use handhelds to interview virtual people in specific rooms around MIT’s campus, obtain and analyze virtual samples, and medicate and quarantine players who might be “infected” with a disease. Similarly, in “River City AR,” a handheld game based on Dede’s MUVE (a multiuser virtual environment where participants can interact with digital artifacts in a 3-D, networked environment), participants investigate a potential biological epidemic in an outdoor portion of MIT’s campus. A team of participants with

distinct roles must work together and interact with virtual characters to examine a simulated spread of disease. MIT’s Teacher Education Laboratory created a prototype of their AR game editor system, which enables designers like me to modify “River City AR” and create a GPS-enabled, location-based, role-playing AR game with little programming. RtR served as a test case for their in-progress editor system, and future versions have since been used to design other educational AR games.

iterative design In creating RtR, I used an iterative design process, which Eric Zimmerman (2003, p. 176) explains as “a design methodology based on a cyclic process of prototyping, testing, analyzing, and refining a work in progress.” With an iterative process, Zimmerman continues, the product or game develops through a meaningful dialogue between

Figure 4. Summary of game elements for the pilot study and redesign study PILOT

REDESIGN

Locative technology

GPS

GPS

Game infrastructure

XML/.NET (RiverCityAR Engine)

XML/.NET (RiverCityAR Engine)

Instructions?

In-person instructions by educator

In-person instructions by educator

# of time periods

Two

Two

Linearity?

Nonlinear

Nonlinear with more direction (built-in check points)

Goal

Who fired the first shot at the Battle of Lexington?

Who fired the first shot and two minigoals for each role

# of roles played

One out of four

One out of four

Pairs?

Play one role as a pair

Play one role as a pair

Collaborative?

During evidence collection, in pairs; during debate as a group

More inter- and intra-pair collaboration throughout

Length of game

~80 min + debate

~80 min + debate

Game play

Search for location-based NPCs and game items triggered by GPS; interview NPCs and gather documents and items

Search for location-based NPCs and game items triggered by GPS; interview NPCs and gather documents and items

1465

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

the designers and the audience or participants. This means constantly testing and reassessing the game using actual participants, observing their play and asking targeted questions, redesigning the game, and then testing it out again. I began prototyping elements of the game play a full year before finally testing the full-scale game. For the full-scale tests, I ran two phases of trials. The Pilot study included two trials with a mix of graduate students and educators. Following these results, I did an extensive redesign of the game and then conducted another trial of the game (the Redesign trial), which involved eight individuals, ranging in age from 13 to 17, all attending local and regional high schools. The Pilot and Redesign trials included pre- and post-game surveys on game play, attitudes toward history, and knowledge of the Revolutionary War; videotaped and in-person observations of participants’ level of engagement in the game; and a content analysis of the debate, game discussions, and notes. Please see Figure 4 for a comparison of the main game elements in the Pilot and Redesign trials.

results And Findings In this section, I present the major results from the Pilot and Redesign trials of the game. In doing so, I describe some of the initial problems with “Reliving the Revolution,” and how I redesigned the game to better support engagement and learning, as well as the results of these changes. In what follows, brackets referencing Figure 3 are used to match the game’s findings to the original desired learning outcomes. For example, [b2] references the goal: “Create hypotheses, and draw inferences and conclusions based on historical evidence.” Hopefully others will find these helpful as suggestions for how to think about creating engaging educational AR games.

1466

overall results The results of my initial and iterative tests suggest that an AR game such as RtR, if designed appropriately, can engage learners in a historic moment and place, and in the practice of history. RtR motivated discovery and enthusiasm; reflection, collaboration, and teamwork; problem solving, interpretation, and analysis; and the consideration of alternative views of history. The participants enjoyed being in the actual site of the Battle of Lexington—the PDAs afforded them the opportunity to integrate virtual information with a real-world context. The game felt novel and authentic, and the participants felt as though they were imbued with a special responsibility to solve an important “history mystery.” They took this “serious game” very seriously—they embraced its challenges and critically immersed themselves in the game as such. Accordingly, the participants acted in their historic roles, roles as game players, and roles as learners. By trying on these new identities, striving for a common goal, and collaborating with others, the participants were more open to consider new perspectives, re-evaluate their beliefs and values, and create bridges among them (Gee, 2003). Finally, RtR encouraged the participants to reflect on their interpretations of the event, but also to think more deeply about their preconceived notions about the Battle of Lexington and history in general. The participants began to take their more multifaceted conceptualization of the American Revolution and relate limitations in historical understanding to other situations and even global social issues.

goals and motivations Overall, the participants were enthusiastic about the primary goal (who fired the first shot?), and it seemed to motivate their actions throughout the

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

game, structure their navigation of the evidence, and draw them further into the game world. One participant noted that this goal helped orient the way she read and used the evidence, and how she managed a vast amount of game content [a1, a2], saying that “When you have a goal to figure out, you look more.” Her involvement in the game world was more targeted because she had this specific goal in mind. It was sometimes difficult, however, for participants to balance the extensive game information with the requirements of the game play, including the game’s goal: I loved the detail, but I was overwhelmed by it. I wanted to take more time to let it sink in… To me it was a push and pull between getting immersed in the detail, and needing to remember to look around me. … But on the other hand, that is also what makes it rich, because the richness of detail delivers the message that you want—that this is a complex thing, there are lots of points of view, and there was a ton of stuff going on [during the Battle of Lexington]. This comment also points to the difficulty as a game designer in finding a delicate balance between discovery and familiarity. RtR needs to provide enough novelty and a diversity of viewpoints to engage the participants and fit with my educational objectives, but it also needs to imbue participants with a sense of accomplishment. It needs to always be offering new tidbits of data, while also enabling participants to quickly grasp the bigger historic picture of this shared game world, no matter which order the participants actually navigate the game. Thus, to further direct the participants’ navigation of the game and provide more checkpoints in which to measure game progress, I redesigned the game to include smaller objectives—in the form of role-specific secret missions or mini-objectives—which helped the participants break down and compartmentalize the larger historic problem.

Explained one participant, the “secret missions kinda orient you to figure out a certain thing.” Echoing this, one participant thought that the question of “who fired the first shot” was too broad, and felt that even more secret missions would make the game “more definite.” Moreover, to complete the secret missions, participants needed to rely on a piece of information only gathered by a different historic role, so participants were more motivated to collaborate with other groups. These mini-objectives, such as naming the spies in the town, or finding out what was in Paul Revere’s trunk, also helped the participants piece together the events at Lexington and address the broader question of who fired the first shot. Tackling the primary goal was initially very unwieldy; but after investigating the mini-questions, the participants became more comfortable with their evidence, and were better able to back up their claims, and provide counter arguments to other participants’ information [b1, b2].

game Play constraints In any game, it is important for the participant to know how it ends, how success is measured, and what qualifies as “being done.” In “RtR,” the evidence collection period ends when the time runs out, and then the entire game finishes during the debate when the participants agree upon a commonly understood story of the Battle of Lexington and who they think fired the first shot. Thus, it was essential to communicate the time constraints to the participants and ensure that they understood these limitations [b3]. A few participants felt that verbal communication of the time limit was not enough; they also needed visual reminders of the time constraint to motivate them, particularly because they were not competing against each other, but against the clock. Future iterations of this game should have a countdown clock incorporated into the interface of the game or a different visual or audio reminder of time running out.

1467

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

No participant can possibly gather all the available historic evidence in the time allotted. This constraint helped the participants better appreciate the limits of interpreting the past without all the possible evidence, a key learning objective of the game [b3]. Likewise, during the debate period, many participants acknowledged holes in their data or the need for specific material that would help them feel more confident in their conclusions. For example, one Redesign study participant said the following during the game debate: How do we know for sure? I feel like we don’t have enough evidence. Even with all of us finding different stuff, finding different things, pieces of evidence, how do we know who fired the first shot? Of course if you are loyal to British … you are going to say, ‘Oh the Minutemen fired the first shot’ and if you are loyal to America and you are fighting the British, you are going to say, ‘the British fired the first shot.’ So how do you know? As the participants began to reflect on their ability to construct valid narratives of the past, they also grappled with current political issues, and how these issues would be later reflected in the history books [c1, c2]. Said one participant: In America, we have American textbooks and they are written by Americans, so of course you always get that portrayal of the British as being the bad guys and I’m sure the British kids when they learn about this, it’s completely different. ... The same with Iraq, people are going to, in years to come when we read about that in textbooks, it is going to be different. Such a critique on history construction stemmed in part from the lack of constraints in this game: participants were liberated from focusing on the single point of view that is often present in textbooks. I carefully devised the game’s content to incorporate multiple, alternative views of the past instead of one restrictive master narrative;

1468

and I encouraged the participants to create their own interpretations of the past. This freed the participants to try on others’ perspectives of past and current moments, and consider how their own cultural and socioeconomic status affects their point of view [c3].

collaboration and social interaction Almost all of the participants enjoyed playing the game with a partner because they could share ideas and tasks, engage in mini-debates, remember information better, practice decision-making skills, and reflect more deeply on the evidence they gathered. For example, one participant noted that she liked playing with a participant because she “could exchange ideas, notes, plan what to do next,” while another participant noted that, “It was fun to play with others, one, to have someone to help with the handheld/taking notes, and two, just to have someone to bounce ideas/theories off.” Because the game play and collaboration necessitated dialogue and the sharing of evidence, the participants needed to reflect on the evidence and their interpretations, formulate and offer hypotheses, and collectively decide on next steps—all activities related to developing critical thinking, collaborative, and problem solving skills [b1, b2]. During both the evidence collection and debate periods of RtR, the four roles can share information. The relatively compact area of the Lexington Common, coupled with the mobility of the handheld, allowed for physical interactions and the verbal exchanges of evidence among the various roles. Participants in different roles could ask each other for advice, share discoveries, and make connections based on serendipitous exchanges. The mini-objectives in the secret missions also further enhanced inter-role collaboration. Not only did the participants become more deeply invested in the game because of the interdependence of roles and sharing of responsibilities, but also they were engaged in the game

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

play; enthusiastic about its content; and retained, learned, and even taught each other its historical information.

role-Playing In each trial, a pair of participants played one of four historic roles during the game. Based on their role, they received distinct information from the NPCs and accessed unique descriptions of game items. This meant that they received slightly biased accounts of the Battle of Lexington, depending on their historic role. In general, the inclusion of the roles further engaged the participant in a historic moment, and also the game play, because they instilled them with the responsibility of seeing Lexington through the eyes of another. My challenge was designing the game to ensure that the participants were appropriately immersed in their roles, despite the technical limitations of the game system. First, I was restricted by the River City AR game system because although the participants could receive information from NPCs, they could not actively interact with NPCs in their roles. In other words, the participants could not play their role except with each other. This made it difficult to emphasize each participant’s unique role in the game, as they could not fully test out their new identities. Therefore, I needed to design the game content ahead of time and use language, tone, and style to reinforce to the participants the characteristics of their historic role. The initial results were mixed. Some of the Pilot study participants commented that during the game they forgot they were playing a historic role, and felt as though they were instead applying a perspective as a filter on the information they were receiving. Other participants, however, felt that the roles were very dynamic, and felt that having a role helped them better understand alternative perspectives on the Battle. For example, one participant stated that it helped him realize “that you cannot just take one point of view when trying

to understand and re-creating historical events.” Another said it was “interesting to learn the different characters’ reactions to the players’ roles;” similarly, another participant felt that having a role was “engaging, I felt like I got a lot of information from other characters.” Some participants expressed a personal allegiance to the perspective of their historic role, and tended to credit evidence that supported their views. Moreover, during the debate period, when offering evidence to support an argument, each participant considered their role as integral in their analysis and estimation of each piece of evidence [b1, b2]. The participants felt more invested because they had experienced the moment of April 19, 1775 from a distinct point of view, and had gathered evidence accordingly [a1]. They were also more motivated to fulfill the requirements of the game because they had developed loyalty to other game participants and to their role; they relied on each other to interpret evidence or find the next hot spot. Furthermore, sharing a role with a partner provided a point of commonality, compelling them to work more closely together and initiate dialogue for the evidence they gathered. And because pairs needed to compare and corroborate evidence with other pairs, they had to collaborate and collectively seek out other perspectives [c2]. In the redesign of the game, I further incorporated the benefits and limits of each historic role into the game play. For example, the Prince Estabrook role was not able to talk to as many historic figures; however, he was privy to certain testimonials, which emphasized his status as well as his role as a game character. I also created role-specific tasks (the mini-objectives, described previously), in addition to the main objective of figuring out who fired the first shot, to make the roles even more interdependent. Finally, I provided to each participant a physical nametag with the name of the role and type of role to again emphasize that they were playing a role and that this affected their game play.

1469

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

integration of Physical and virtual Worlds The integration of text and images with the physical world of Lexington seemed to help the participants absorb, categorize, remember, and recall the information, and supported multimodal learning styles. The overlap between the physical and virtual seemed to motivate and direct the navigation of the historical content, while encouraging deeper inspection of the physical environment [a1, a3]. When the virtual information supported what was being seen in the environment, it seemed more valid. For example, when participants read John Parker’s testimonial and saw that it was echoed on a small monument on the Lexington Common, they regarded it as more reliable [b1, b2]. The interplay among the real, the virtual, and one’s own imagination also created locationbased mini-stories, which further engaged the participants in the overall “story” of Lexington. Said one participant:

greater retention of information and enjoyment of the game. For example, one participant in the Redesign trial explains why he felt that this game helped him learn about the Revolutionary War better than a traditional history classroom: I re-learned U.S. History One, which is what I took sophomore year of high school, and it was a total waste of my time. And I just re-learned it in three hours,…this recapped it and I re-learned it and now I know more about history… the pictures, and the items [helped make it clearer]. The richness and variety of the game content, coupled with the ability to explore a physical site, contributed to the participants’ interpretive dialogue throughout the game, and especially during the debate period, where they provided detailed arguments and in-depth syntheses of information [b1, b2]. The location-anchored historic data quickly became tangible building blocks with which to construct and share a narrative of Lexington with others. By combining a present-day physical environment with a virtual historic moment, RtR enabled a deeper exploration of the historic site of Lexington, Massachusetts, while effectively conveying the Battle of Lexington from diverse and reflective perspectives. The interplay between the physical and virtual deepened the participants’ engagement with both worlds, while also creating unique connections.

My favorite part of the game was when I found out that John Harrington had been shot in the game. It was neat because you met someone on the street who told you that [he was dead] and then you ran into his wife who was like ‘Oh my god.’ And then you passed his house and you looked at the house and it has the actual plaque saying that this is where John Harrington died in his wife’s arms and it corresponded to the story. And then you saw John Harrington, who was dead and didn’t have anything to say, and it felt like the process of discovering.

Reflection and debate

Thus, participants could access and interact with these spontaneous mini-stories, which were amalgams of physical and virtual narrative threads. This further strengthened the connection between the real and virtual worlds, and also helped the participants to construct rich narratives about their game experience, leading to

In RtR, after gathering evidence for an hour, the participants all come together to collectively debate what they think happened in Lexington in 1775. This debate period is an important extension of the learning because a major pedagogical goal of the game is that participants are not just gathering material, but using it: sifting through

1470

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

it, analyzing it, applying it, talking about it, and showing where they retrieved it. Also important was providing time so that the participants could reflect on their process to solidify new knowledge and further integrate historic methodology and concepts. The debate period was also a motivating factor for the participants in the game, because it further compelled them to learn their roles, thoroughly and intelligently gather evidence, and interact with the game world. It was an important impetus for the participants, because they knew they would have to share their findings and lessons learned with the group later, and that the other participants would rely on them for knowledge. In each of the trials, the participants created unique hypotheses and interpretations of the material; constructed counter arguments; and worked fluidly among multimodal texts. Participants were constantly referencing and questioning evidence—sharing it verbally and physically showing it to each other on their handhelds. They would read aloud pieces of testimonials and offer hypotheses or counter-arguments based on these stories or documents [b2, c2]. When providing evidence, they considered the source of the evidence, as well as their own historic role and his/her relationships with the NPCs [b2, c3]. Each participant seemed fully invested in trying to determine who fired the first shot at Lexington’s battle based on their evidence, and each trial of the game had a distinct final conclusion based on the consensus of the group [c1]. Although the participants were able to grapple with a large amount of information, they sometimes needed targeted questions and suggestions to guide their debate, encourage reflection, or properly contextualize their evidence. The participants needed scaffolding to support their visit to this “practice field” and the incorporation of new epistemic frames, tools, and concepts. This further expresses the need for an instructor or mentor to direct learning in the game and that multimedia platforms are not replacements for teachers.

The debate and collaborative decision-making during the game seemed beneficial to strengthening the participants’ understanding of history, their application of critical thinking skills, and reflection on historical inquiry, but it also made “RtR” sometimes feel less like a “game.” One participant in the Pilot study noted that while she loved the collaborative aspect, she felt like, since there was no competition per se, “we’re all going to just come together and see what we got anyway.” Thus, it did not feel as pressing to gather everything, or to digest all the evidence, since there would be time for sharing later. In the Redesign study, I further emphasized that the participants, and their concomitant roles, were dependent on each other to gather more information or solve the mini-objectives, and this seemed to increase the participants’ motivation to collect and interpret evidence. Overall, the debate period enabled the participants to retrace their steps; review and apply the game’s historic content; and practice teamwork, hypothesis formation, and analytical skills. Moreover, it gave the participants an opportunity to reflect on their own processes of evidence appraisal and history construction, and relate their game experiences to others.

nonlinearity and control The nonlinear structure of the game, which allows the participants to interact with historic figures and access their stories in any order, evokes temporal simultaneity—which I hoped would underscore the idea of multiple truths and possibilities. In other words, the self-guided navigation of the game and open availability of the stories further suggests that one view is not necessarily more correct than another. In the trials, the participants considered alternative perspectives of the Battle of Lexington, for example, said one participant, “I learned about all the different sides. Normally you would just think of the American soldiers and the British soldiers, slaves, the wives, … the

1471

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Minutemen, there are people frustrated here for personal reasons, patriotic reasons … You get a sense of the different roles of that time period.” Furthermore, the game’s nonlinearity also more closely mimics the work of a historian. No historian has a set linear path in which to gather evidence; s/he must navigate a vast archive of historical information and create his/her own version of the past. Some participants, however, desired a more linear game. They felt that because the game was open-ended, it did not feel as goal-oriented. They were unsure of their status in the game as they navigated it because there was little feedback on whether they were gathering enough evidence or finding enough historic figures. Some felt that there were too many choices at once and they wanted more of a progression of events. In the Redesign, I established new mini-objectives as role-specific secret missions (as described previously). These objectives functioned as checkpoints that helped direct the participants’ navigation of the content. Interestingly, the Redesign trial participants especially did not seem overwhelmed or frustrated, but thrived in the nonlinear environment because they liked to “figure something out for [themselves].” These participants enjoyed having agency or control over how they navigated the game world, perhaps because these younger participants appreciated the opportunity to transgress boundaries during learning, since traditional education is usually highly structured (Gee, 2003). For example, one participant liked that in this game, the results were not pre-established and she needed to create the “game ending” herself. Through a self-directed construction of her learning, she was able to delve more deeply into the historic moment, as well as the game itself. She said, “in [this game] you had to put it together, you had to research and then figure something out for yourself. It wasn’t like a set [answer] like ‘you have to click on this conclusion now.’ You have to come up with whatever.” Having the responsibility to perform motivated

1472

her to complete the game and engage in its world (Oblinger, 2004), but then to also question what she received, and devise her own, novel interpretation of the past [b2, c1, c2]. A nonlinear world with well-placed boundaries and sufficient direction seemed to support the pedagogical objectives of encouraging alternative views of history, and also engaged participants by enabling them to have enough control over their game experience to encourage them to use their critical thinking skills as well as their imagination.

mobility and discovery Most participants felt that the ability to wander around the site of Lexington and discover information at particular sites was one of their favorite aspects of the game. One participant noted that walking around made the game “more engaging and more interactive,” and another said that the best part of the game was “getting to know a physical site. To me that is the excitement of the game.” [a3] Being outside in a group playing a game and exploring a site together also facilitated more social interactions, which the participants felt added to their enjoyment of the experience. The physical nature of the handheld game may also have increased the game’s collaborative potential—being close together and crossing each other’s paths encouraged the participants to interact socially. This game was especially appealing to kinesthetic learning styles. Many participants found particular pleasure in moving around the Lexington site and discovering information embedded in the environment, especially as opposed to sitting in the classroom and being taught the same information, as exemplified by the following exchange: Participant 1: Yeah, if we sat in a classroom and did this and I would walk away and be like “Yeah, okay.”

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Participant 2: But when you are actually moving around to do it … I think it’s definitely more interesting to do it this way than to sit in the classroom. In addition, the novelty of watching the PDA suddenly present an NPC or game item “mimicked the process of discovery,” as one participant commented. Another participant noted that, “the thing we had the most fun with on our team was ‘oh we’re getting closer, oh we found one,’ the wandering and finding” of the hot spots, which contributed to greater engagement in the game, and thus, increased curiosity about its content.

Authenticity Integral to simulating and teaching history is the creation of an authentic learning environment for practicing historical methodology. In RtR, the participants were in the place where the Battle of Lexington occurred; they were viewing the real historic buildings and structures mentioned in many testimonials; and they were reading detailed personal accounts of the Battle from actual historic figures—all of which provided a distinct and immersive experience of the historic moment. This feeling of authenticity underscored all of the game’s activities, and strengthened the connection between game play and historical methodology. Said one participant, “[The game] put you in the real place where everything happened. It gave you the real, actual people who were there, like the names and their opinions.” [a1, a2] In RtR, participants are evaluating “real” evidence in a “real” place, and attacking a “real” question based on a “real” battle, which encouraged them to practice and apply critical thinking skills. Almost every participant enjoyed being at the site of Lexington because they felt that it “made history more real” and gave them a better sense of the “history of the site.” [a3] The ability to apply historical inquiry skills in an actual historical site also added to the authen-

ticity of the game’s tasks, their desire to complete them and learn from them, and their willingness to apply this learning to other similar tasks in the future. The participants consistently treated the historical evidence they gathered as valid, and made informed hypotheses, partially because they viewed the historical problem of trying to understand who fired the first shot as authentic. Moreover, the genuineness of their experience further engaged them in the historic moment of the Battle of Lexington, and also in historical methodology and construction. They felt responsible for deciding who fired the first shot, so they were more passionate about playing the game. They felt like historians; therefore, they took the game’s tasks more seriously and performed the related critical thinking skills more rigorously.

design summAry The following is a list of recommendations for educational AR games (and games in general), as derived from my process of simultaneously designing RtR to meet my pedagogical objectives and engage the participant. •

•

Goals: Participants need feedback and “checkpoints” throughout the game, so include both large overarching goals as well as smaller mini-objectives. The large ones guide the game play to the ending and help set boundaries, while the smaller ones can heighten their sense of engagement, responsibility, and accomplishment, and help make the primary one more manageable. Constraints: Provide necessary constraints (and reminders of constraints) to motivate game play, particularly in non-competitive games. Also, consider well-timed or wellplaced open-endedness in the game play to encourage participants to experiment with new ideas or identities.

1473

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

•

•

•

•

•

1474

Collaboration: Enable social interaction by placing participants in groups, teams, or roles and creating tasks that require discussion, debate, or the sharing of resources. Also, provide distinct game content or game play to various teams or pairs, encouraging them to exchange information or allocate responsibilities. Roles: Include roles to further engage the participants in the game’s content, and also increase their investment in the game. Provide distinct information, responsibilities, and goals to each role to create more interdependence among participants and heighten motivation. Integration of Physical and Virtual Worlds: Consider how the real world and virtual information can interact to spark unique connections, enhance learning, and further engage the participants in both the game site and its educational content. Think about how the interplay between the real, the virtual, and one’s imagination can create powerful stories and help participants more fully integrate new knowledge. Reflection and Application: Provide time in the game not only to absorb information, but to apply it in ways that enhance the game’s pedagogical goals. Allow time for reflection; while there should be periods of novelty and discovery, there should also be periods that simply strengthen connections to the new material. Control and Navigation: Find ways to enable the participant to personalize his/her experience and feel a sense of agency over one’s game destiny, while also creating supportive boundaries and checkpoints so that participants are not too overwhelmed. Respect the participant as an equal—encourage them to make their own decisions, test rules, and guide their own game play. Enable unexpected permutations and juxta-

•

•

positions, as you will never be able to design for every possible scenario. Mobility: Particularly in AR and location-based games, find ways to motivate a deeper discovery of a physical site, while also encouraging a “directed wandering.” Consider how mobility and physical interactions can support greater collaboration, and more serendipitous social exchanges. Authenticity: Think about how to create a game environment that appropriately mimics or simulates the processes you want to teach. Provide real data, evidence, sources, names, places, and people when you can, and think of the game as a “practice field” where students can actually perform skills or tasks.

next stePs As I continue to refine RtR, larger questions of choice emerge—how we balance practical, artistic, pedagogical, and historical considerations to create such a game—and what that means for how we represent a historic moment. Taking it to the next level: how do we encourage the metacognition of these educational games, and enable kids to assess a game’s implications for conveying history and historical thinking? My response would be to encourage students to create their own mobile games, and to reflect on their own game design decisions. Using these general principles as guides, they could choose a local and/or personally meaningful site; work together to research historic figures and write testimonials; outline and experiment with the game’s play; and then analyze how these choices affect and reflect our understanding of history. By becoming creators of the medium, they will be even better able to evaluate critically their own and others’ assumptions about history. These learners can then take their newly prismatic eye and apply it to other

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

disciplines—to identify biases in newspapers, consider authorial intent in an essay, privilege information on one Web page versus another, and incorporate other perspectives in a debate. Activities such as RtR are essential for further study because they can potentially engage learners not only as participants in a game, but also as more active participants in society. As Jefferson suggested during America’s infancy, history is integral to citizenship (Carpenter, 2004)—and this has become more important as America becomes more economically, socially, and culturally varied. By understanding the past, people can better evaluate the future; by listening to multiple perspectives, people are more empowered to appreciate a situation, and better equipped to defend their freedoms (Carpenter, 2004).

AcKnoWledgment The author would like to thank Eric Klopfer and Judy Perry and the rest of the MIT Teacher Education laboratory, as well as Henry Jenkins, Chris Dede, Edward Dieterle, Brian Jacobson, Edward Barrett, and Steven and Janet Schrier, for their advice and mentorship.

reFerences Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2005). The effects of multimedia-supported problem-based historical inquiry on student engagement, empathy, and assumptions about history. Paper presented at the 2005 AERA, Montreal, Canada. Carpenter, J. J. (2004). Jefferson’s views on education: Implications for today’s social studies. The Social Studies, 95(4), 140-146. Dede, C. (2004). Enabling distributed-learning communities via emerging technologies. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference of the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education

(SITE) (pp. 3-12). Charlottesville, VA: American Association for Computers in Education. Dede, C. (2005). Planning for “neomillennial” learning styles: Implications for investments in technology and faculty. In J. Oblinger & D. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 226-247). Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Publishers. Dieterle, E. (2005). Handheld devices for ubiquitous learning and analyzing. Paper presented at the 2005 NECC, Philadelphia, PA. Gee, J. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Hoge, J. (2003). Teaching history for citizenship in the elementary school, ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies/Social Science Education. Bloomington, IN: ERIC Digest. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), (1998). National educational technology standards (NETS). Retrieved from cnets.iste. org/currstands/cstands-ss_ii.html Klopfer, E., Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2002). Environmental detectives: PDAs as a window into a virtual simulated world. Paper presented at the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’02) (p. 95). Klopfer, E., Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2003). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. Paper presented at the 2003 AERA, Chicago, IL. Liss, A. (2002). Review: Whose America? Culture wars in the public schools. Social Education, 68(3), 238. National Center for History in the Schools, UCLA. (1994). Standard 4: Historical research capabilities. Retrieved from http://nchs.ucla. edu/standards/thinking5-12-4.html

1475

Appendix I, Selected Readings: Reliving History with “Reliving the Revolution”

Squire, K., Jenkins, H., & the Games-To-Teach Team. (2003, September-October). Designing educational games: Design principles from the games-to-teach project. Educational Technology, 43(5), 17-23.

Thomas, S., Schott, G., & Kambouri, M. (2003). Designing for learning or designing for fun? Setting usability guidelines for mobile educational games. In Proceedings of MLEARN 2003, Learning with Mobile Devices, London. Zimmerman, E. (2003). Play as research. In B. Laurel (Ed.), Design research: Methods and perspectives (pp. 176-184). Cambridge, MA: M

This work was previously published in Games and Simulations in Online Learning: Research and Development Frameworks, edited by D. Gibson, pp. 250-270, copyright 2007 by Information Science Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).

1476

1477

Appendix J

Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games Katia Sycara Carnegie Mellon University, USA Paul Scerri Carnegie Mellon University, USA Anton Chechetka Carnegie Mellon University, USA

AbstrAct In this chapter, we explore the use of evolutionary game theory (EGT) (Nowak & May, 1993; Taylor & Jonker, 1978; Weibull, 1995) to model the dynamics of adaptive opponent strategies for a large population of players. In particular, we explore effects of information propagation through social networks in evolutionary games. The key underlying phenomenon that the information diffusion aims to capture is that reasoning about the experiences of acquaintances can dramatically impact the dynamics of a society. We present experimental results from agent-based simulations that show the impact of diffusion through social networks on the player strategies of an evolutionary game and the sensitivity of the dynamics to features of the social network.

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

introduction We use EGT (Cabrales, 2000; Hofbauer & Sigmund, 2003; Weibull, 1995) to model the dynamics of adaptive opponent strategies for a large population of players. Previous EGT work has produced interesting, and sometimes counter-intuitive results about how populations of self-interested agents will evolve over time (d’Artigues & Vignolo, 2003; Frey & Luechinger, 2002). In our model, at each stage of the game, boundedly rational players observe the strategies and payoffs of a subset of others and use this information to choose their strategies for the next stage of the interaction. Building on EGT, we introduce a model of interaction where, unlike the standard EGT setting, the basic stage game changes over time depending on the global state of the population (state here means the strategies chosen by the players). More precisely, each player has three strategies available (cooperate C, defect D, and do-nothing N), and the payoffs of the basic stage game are re-sampled when the proportion of the players playing D crosses a certain threshold from above. This feature requires long-term reasoning by the players that is not needed in the standard EGT setting. A possible example of a similar real-world situation is a power struggle between different groups. When cooperation drops sufficiently and there are many defections—the situation turns to chaos. When order is restored, that is, when cooperation resumes, the power structure and thus, the payoffs, will likely be different than before the chaos. The payoffs are kept constant while most of the players Cooperate (support the status quo) or do-Nothing, but when enough players are unhappy and choose to Defect, the power balance breaks and a radically different one may emerge afterwards. The available strategies were chosen to abstractly capture and model violent uprisings in a society. Players playing C cooperate with the current regime and receive reward when interacting with others playing C. If a player has a good

1478

position in a regime, it has a large incentive to continue playing C. D is a strategy played to change the payoffs over a long term, but at an unavoidable immediate cost. Intuitively, it resembles resorting to insurgency or other violent tactics to overthrow a regime. When many players play D, playing C can lead to very low payoffs. For example, one can imagine a person trying to run a small business during a violent uprising. If these costs are too high, but the player has no incentive to change the regime, playing N can limit payoffs—both negative and positive, until the situation stabilizes. Intuitively, this might correspond to going into hiding or temporarily leaving the conflicted area. Similar to Nowak and May (1993) and Killingback and Doebeli (1996), we investigate the spatial aspect of the interaction. Previous work has shown that spatial interaction can change which strategies are most effective, for example, in Brauchli, Killingback, and Doebeli (1999) an interaction lattice changed which strategies were most effective in an iterative prisoner’s dilemma game. In our model, the players are connected into a social network, through which the rewards are propagated (Travers & Milgram, 1969; D. J. Watts, Dodds, & Newman, 2002). Thus the players can benefit (or suffer) indirectly depending on how well off their friends in the network are. We show empirically that the connectivity pattern of the network, as well as the amount of information available to the players, have significant influence on the outcome of the interaction. In particular, the presence of a dense scale-free network or small-world network led to far higher proportions of players playing C than other social network types.

gAme detAils We consider a finite population X of players. At each stage all the players are randomly matched in triples to play the basic stage game. Each player

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

Box 1. 0 opponents play D xi’s strategy

1 or 2 opponents play D

C

cci – #i (N)

cd

D

dc

dd

N

thus participates in every stage. Each player has three strategies available: cooperate (C), defect (D), and do-nothing (N) (one can interpret these choices as participating in democratic process, resorting to insurgency, and minimizing interactions with the outer world correspondingly). The payoff pi(k) of the stage k game to player xi is (#i(N) means the number of agents playing N) (see Box 1) where cci – 2 > n > dc > dd > cd. Here is a simple rule for distinguishing between these four variables: the first letter corresponds to x i’s strategy, the second letter is c if both of the x i’s opponents play C and d otherwise. For example, cd is the payoff of playing C given that at least one of the opponents plays D. Note that

n

the payoff matrices for different players can only differ in the value of cci. All the other payoffs are constant across the population. Denote SD(k) the proportion of the population that defected during stage k: SD(k ) =

number of players that played D during stage k , |X|

Before the start of the first stage, ci are sampled uniformly from an interval [CCmin, CCmax]. If during stage k* the series SD(k) crosses a fixed threshold (see the end of this section for the interpretation of the threshold) T ∈ (0,1) from above, that is,

Figure 1. An example trace of an individual run of the system. x-axis is the stage number (“’time step”), y-axis is the proportion SD of the population playing D. The level of threshold T is also plotted for a reference.

1479

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

SD(k * − 1) > T and SD(k * ) < T , then all cci are re-sampled. Otherwise they stay the same as for previous stage. For example, in an individual run plotted in Figure 1, the values of cci would be re-sampled only at point B. One can interpret the previous interaction as a power struggle: If the proportion of players supporting status quo (i.e., cooperating or doing nothing) is high enough, the payoffs for each individual players do not change. When enough players defect, the system “falls into chaos” and after it emerges back from this state, a new power balance is formed and the payoffs change correspondingly. Threshold T in this interpretation is the minimum number of defectors that brings the system into chaos.

networks, such as grids, may be transformed to small-world ones by changing only a small fractions of edges. We followed the algorithm from D. Watts and Strogatz to generate the networks with probability 0.1 of rewiring any edge of the regular structure. In scale-free networks (Barabási & Albert, 1999) the number of neighbors of a vertex is distributed according to a scale-free power law, therefore few highly connected vertices dominate the connectivity. Many real-world networks possess the small-world and/or scale-free properties (Barabási & Albert, 1999; D. Watts & Strogatz, 1998). The impact of both small-world and scale-free networks are explored next.

impact of Social Networks

PlAyer reAsoning

A social network for finite population X is an undirected graph <X,E>. Two players i and j are neighbors in the network if and only if (xi, xj) ∈ E. We investigate the effect of reward sharing in social networks. After each stage k every player xi obtains in addition to its own payoff pi a shared payoff psi:

information Available to Players

psi (k ) = a

∑ p (k ),

j x j ∈neighbors ( xi )

where a∈[0,1] is a parameter of the system. Notice that this does not incur payoff redistribution: The shared payoff is not subtracted from payoffs of the players that cause it. One can interpret this phenomenon as players being more happy when their friends are happy.

Social Network Type The small-world property of the network means that the average distance between two nodes in the network is small. It has been shown (D. Watts & Strogatz, 1998) that regular non-small-world

1480

Before describing the player reasoning algorithm one has to define what information is available to the player, that is, define an observation model. We assume that the players are aware of the overall behavior of the game, but may not be aware of the true values of parameters, such as the proportion SD(k) of the population that played D at stage k. The players only observe the actions of their opponents for the given stage, as opposed to observing the whole population. Therefore, the observations available to i after stage k are its payoff pi(k), shared payoff psi(k), and proportion SC iobs (k ), SDiobs (k ), SN iobs (k ) ∈ {0,0.5,1} of its direct opponents playing C, D and N during the kth stage. Note that the information about the global properties of social network connectivity, such as density or whether the network is small worlds or scale free, is not available to players. Therefore, this global information is not used in the reasoning algorithm.

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

the reasoning Algorithm It is easy to see that for any triple of players, a single-stage game has 2 Nash equilibria in pure strategies: everybody cooperating and everybody defecting. The cooperative equilibrium Pareto-dominates the “all-defect” equilibrium. Therefore, if the “all-cooperate” payoffs cci were always held constant across the stages, one would expect a population of rational players to always play C. However, the payoffs are re-sampled once the proportion of players playing C drops below T and then grows above T again. This provides an incentive for the players that happened to receive relatively low values of cci, to play D for some period of time in order to try and cause the re-sampling of payoffs. On the other hand, if a significant share of the players play D, some of the players may decide to play N, which guarantees a fixed payoff and provides an opportunity to “wait until the violence ends.” A natural way for a player to choose a strategy for the next stage is to compare the (approximate) cumulative future expected payoffs resulting from different strategies. Denote EPi(X) the approximate cumulative future expected payoff for player i and strategy X. Let SXi(k) be i’s estimate of the share of population playing X on time step k. Then the action selection for step k+1 is as follows. If SDi(k) > T, player i chooses action arg max X=C,N EPi(X). Otherwise it chooses arg max X=C,D,N EPi(X). The reason for treating situation SDi(k) > T specially is that once the share of defectors reaches the threshold, reducing the share of players below T is in common interest of all the players, and the approximate computations of expected utilities do not always capture this feature. The previous paragraph assumed EPi(X) to be known. We now turn to their approximate computation. First consider EPi(D). The only incentive for a player i to play D is to try to bring the system into chaos in hopes that, when the system emerges

from chaos, the re-sampled all-cooperate payoff cci for that player will be higher than it is now. Denote TTCi the i’s estimate of the number of stages that it will need to play D before the share of those playing D is higher than T, TCi —estimate of the number of stages that the system will spend above the threshold and finally, TSi the length of the following “stability period.” Then EPi ( D) ≈ (TTC i + TC i ) E [pi ( D)]+ TS i E[ccinew ] CC min + CC max = TTRi E[ pi ( D)] + TS i , 2

(1) where TTRi ≡ TTCi + TCi is “time to re-sampling” and E [pi ( D)]= P (# i ( D) = 0)dc + P (# i ( D) > 0)dd .

Expected payoff for action C over the time period is approximated as EP(C ) ≈ TSi ( pi (C ) + psi ) + TTCi E [ pi (c) ] +TCi (P (#i ( D) > 0)cd + P (#i ( D) = 0)( pi (C ) + psi ) )

(2) where P(#i(D) > 0) = 1 – (1 – T)2 and E [ pi (C ) ] =

P (#i (C ) = 2)cci + P (#i (C ) = 1, #i ( N ) = 1)(cci − 1)

+ P (#i ( N ) = 2)(cci − 2) + P(#i ( D) > 0)cd

(note that the probabilities here sum to one). Finally, expected payoff for N over the same time interval is

EP ( H ) = (TTC i + TC i + TS i )n. One can see that a player only expects to get the shared payoff in case of all-cooperative outcomes. In our model, time of stability TSi and time in chaos TCi are system constants that do not differ across the population.

1481

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

The belief SXi(k) about the proportion of players playing X at stage k is maintained by each player individually. After each stage each player learns about the strategies of its opponents for that stage. SXi is then updated according to

SX i (k + 1) = γSX iobs (k + 1) + (1 − γ ) SX i (k ) (3) where γ∈(0,1] is learning rate. Each player also maintains δSXi(k), an estimate of δSX(k)≡SX(k)-SX(k-1), using an expression analogous to Equation 3 to update it. In the expressions (1-2) P(#i(X)) are approximated straightforwardly using SXi, for example

P (# i (C ) = 2) ≈ SC i2 (k ) Having SXi and dSXi, each player can estimate TTCi using a linear approximation. For SDi < T, we have (TTC is a system-wide constant)

δSDi ≤ 0  TTC , T − SD TTC i =  i , δSDi > 0  δSDi For SDi3T, TTCi = 0.

exPerimentAl results In our experiments the population size was fixed to 1,000 players. The numerical values of payoff constants were dc = –1, dd = –3, cd = –5, CCmin = 3, CCmax = 10 Estimated time of stability was fixed to TSi = TS = 50 stages, “chaos threshold” T=0.3. Initial player-specific values were SCi(0) = 1, δSCi =

1482

–0.02. For each set of specific parameter values the results were averaged over 500 runs. Unless otherwise noted, the players were connected via a scale-free network with average density of 8. We were primarily interested in how different parameters of the model affect the evolution of proportion of players playing C over time. On all graphs x-axis denotes the stage of the interaction, y-axis denotes SC, SD, and SN. In a previous work (Sycara, Scerri, & Chechetka, 2006), we presented results for the case where action N was not available to the players. In each of the following figures we contrast the results when N is and is not available to the players. Note that because the plotted results are averages over 100 runs, averages provide more meaningful information about the influence of the parameters values on the system, than do individual runs which can vary distinctly from run to run. Most parameter values allow the SC to fall below T on some occasions, but what varies is how often this occurs, how rapidly changes happen, and how quickly cooperation resumes. These effects are more clearly seen on graphs of averages than many individual runs superimposed on a single graph. Notice that the fact that the value of SD on the plots rarely rises above T does not mean that payoffs are almost never re-sampled—individual runs have much more variance and re-sampling happens quite often. It simply means that on average SD is below T. Figure 2 shows the baseline configuration, with 2(a) showing the case where N is available and 2(b) showing the case where it is not. In both cases, early in the game many players choose D to either try to change the payoffs or protect against losses. When N is available to the players, many choose this action in response to others playing D. Eventually this discourages the use of D and an equilibrium settles in. While the initial dynamics in both cases are similar, notice that over time the proportion of C is far higher in the case where N is available than when it is not. This may indicate that if players are able to avoid spasms

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

Figure 2. Baseline configuration (scale-free network with density 8) with available action N (a) and with N not available (b).

(a)

(b)

Figure 3. Impact of network density on the players’ strategies. In the top row, the share of players playing cooperate, in the bottom—defect. On the left, the action N is available to the players, on the right—not available.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

1483

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

of violence without getting hurt, the outcome for all will be better. Figure 3 shows the impact of setting the network density to 2, 4, 8, and 16. In general, the higher the average network degree, the more players played C and the more quickly players stopped playing D. For the less dense networks, players often chose D early on, but in the most dense network, the lure of shared rewards was too high for players to have incentive to try to move the system towards chaos. In the less dense networks, the availability of the N action allowed the system to move toward all playing C, but as in the baseline case, without the N action, some level of SD persisted. When the average network density was 4, the system moved back towards SC=1 faster than when the network density was 2. This result may indicate that dense social networks are critical to stable societies. Figure 4 shows what happens when there is no sharing across the social network. The sharp early peak in SD is similar to the sparse network shown above. This is one of the few cases where the availability of the N action leads to a lower SC over the course of the game. However, the option to play N is extensively used and SD is reduced to 0. Over an extended period of time, SC does rise to 1, but N dominates for a long time.

If the type of the network is set to small-world instead of scale-free (with the average of four neighbors), SC stays very close to 1 regardless of the availability of N to the players (there is no plot for this case, because the results are so trivial). This remarkable relative stability is likely due to the very even sharing of reward across all members of the team, reducing the possibility of a cascade towards chaos. This result may suggest that human societies that have a more scale-free nature will be more likely to descend into chaos. Figure 5 shows the result as the learning rate is set to 0.05, 0.1, 0.4, and 0.8. Smaller learning rate means that the players are reluctant to change their estimates of the parameters; the closer the learning rate to 1, the more importance is attributed to the most recent observations. Several interesting effects occur due to the learning rate. Firstly, an intermediate learning rate induces an oscillation in behavior with increasing and decreasing SD. Higher or lower learning rates induce different behavior. A high learning rate quickly settles the population down to playing C, because the players are better able to estimate future rewards which are maximized by a stable society. A low learning rate eventually allows a stable society but not before a large SD has oc-

Figure 4. Results with reward sharing disabled with available action N (a) and with N not available (b)

(a)

1484

(b)

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

Figure 5. Impact of learning rate on the players’ strategies. In the top row, the share of players playing cooperate, in the bottom—defect. On the left, the action N is available to the players, on the right—not available.

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

curred. Interestingly, none of these effects were observed when the N action was not available to the players. With learning eventual behavior (except for the intermediate learning rate) SC was higher when N was available.

payoffs might be higher if the whole society can be forced into chaos, they will accept significant short-term costs and risk, to bring that situation about. The key conclusion from this game is that a society of rational agents who will all gain if they all play cooperative strategies can easily be induced to play strategies that are guaranteed to lead to a negative payoff. Our experiments show that the existence and nature of a social network makes a dramatic difference to the evolution and conclusion of the game. Very dense networks or small-world networks had far higher proportions of players playing cooperative strategies than when there

conclusions And Future WorK This chapter presented an evolutionary game with players connected into a social network, sharing payoffs with their neighbors in that network. If individual players reason that increased long-term

1485

Appendix J, Selected Readings: Insights into the Impact of Social Networks on Evolutionary Games

is a sparse scale-free network. This result has implications for all EGT where interaction occurs between players, but only simple social networks are used. It is possible that such results will change if different interaction networks are used.

reFerences Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999). Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286. Brauchli, K., Killingback, T., & Doebeli, M. (1999). Evolution of cooperation in spatially structured populations. Journal of Theoretical Biology. Cabrales, A. (2000). Stochastic replicator dynamics. International Economic Review, 41(2). d’Artigues, A., & Vignolo, T. (2003). Why global integration may lead to terrorism: An evolutionary theory of mimetic rivalry. Economics Bulletin, 6(11). Frey, B. S., & Luechinger, S. (2002). Terrorism: Deterrence may backfire. European Journal of Political Economy, 20(2). Hofbauer, J., & Sigmund, K. (2003). Evolutionary game dynamics. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 40(4).

Killingback, T., & Doebeli, M. (1996). Spatial evolutionary game theory: Hawks and doves revisited. In Proceedings of The Royal Society (Biological Sciences). Nowak, M., & May, R. (1993). The spatial dilemmas of evolution. International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, 3. Sycara, K., Scerri, P., & Chechetka, A. (2006). Evolutionary games and social networks in adversary reasoning. In Proceedings of the international conference on complex systems. Boston. Taylor, P., & Jonker, L. (1978). Evolutionary stable strategies and game dynamics. Mathematical Biosciences, 40. Travers, J., & Milgram, S. (1969). An experimental study of the small world problem. Sociometry, 32, 425-443. Watts, D., & Strogatz, S. (1998). Collective dynamics of small-world networks. Nature, 393. Watts, D. J., Dodds, P. S., & Newman, M. E. J. (2002). Identity and search in social networks. Science, 296(5571), 1302-1305. Weibull, J. (1995). Evolutionary game theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

This work was previously published in Applications of Complex Adaptive Systems, edited by Y. Shan and A.Yang, pp. 306-323, copyright 2008 by IGI Publishing, formerly known as Idea Group Publishing (an imprint of IGI Global).

1486



About the Contributors

Clark Aldrich, a leader in shaping the future of education, is as an award-winning designer of educational simulations including SimuLearn’s Virtual Leader global product line (the most popular leadership simulations in the world and winner of the “best online training product of the year”); the author of two award-winning books, Simulations and the Future of Learning (Wiley, 2004) and Learning By Doing (Wiley, 2005); creator of the blog/wiki/glossary Clark Aldrich’s Style Guide for Serious Games and Simulations (2007); and founder of and former director of research for Gartner’s e-learning coverage. Mr. Aldrich advises many of the world’s most influential organizations (private and government), and his work has been featured in hundreds of sources, including The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, NPR, CNET, Business 2.0, BusinessWeek, U.S. News, and World Reports, and, among other distinctions, he has been called an “industry guru” by Fortune Magazine. He graduated from Brown University with a degree in cognitive science, and earlier in his career worked on special projects for Xerox’ executive team. Craig A. Anderson, PhD, is a distinguished professor of psychology at Iowa State University. His recently published book titled Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Youth, with co-authors Doug Gentile and Katherine Buckley, includes the first longitudinal study of violent video game effects (Oxford University Press, 2007). Dr. Anderson’s current research focuses on effects of pro-social and anti-social video games on helping and hurting. Mahboubeh Asgari is a PhD candidate in curriculum theory and implementation, and a researcher in the Faculty of Education at Simon Fraser University. She has a number of interests relating to teaching and learning, gaming and simulation for learning, identity and its relationship to learning, and the role of computer and video games in identity exploration and building a sense of self. Youngkyun Baek, PhD, has been teaching at Korea National University of Education since 1991. KNUE is a unique university in Korea, focusing on educating teachers and administrators for elementary, middle school, and high school programs. KNUE provides graduate studies for current teachers and administrators, and supports research in all fields of education. Currently, Dr. Baek’s research interests are on educational games, simulations, and mobile devices in education. His teaching simulations have been published on the web. He has recently published two books entitled Understanding & Applying Game Based Learning in Classroom and Understanding Edutainment in Korea. Sasha Barab, PhD, is an associate professor in learning sciences, instructional systems technology, and cognitive science at Indiana University. He also holds the Barbara Jacobs Chair of Education and

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

About the Contributors

Technology, and is the Director of the Center for Research on Learning and Technology. His research has resulted in numerous grants, dozens of academic articles, and multiple chapters in edited books, which investigate knowing and learning in its material, social, and cultural context. The intent of this research is to develop rigorous claims about how people learn that have significant practical, pedagogical, and theoretical implications. His current work involves the research and development of rich learning environments, frequently with the aid of technology, that are designed to assist children in developing their sense of purpose as individuals, as members of their communities, and as knowledgeable citizens of the world. Central to this work has been a focus on the understanding the value of conceptual play, referring to a state of engagement that involves projection into the role of a character who, engaged in a partly fictional problem context, must apply conceptual understandings to make sense of and, ultimately, transform the context. As one example, the Quest Atlantis project is a learning and teaching project that leverages strategies used in the commercial gaming environment to develop a 3D multi-user environment to immerse children, ages 9-12, in educational tasks (see http://QuestAtlantis.Org). Dennis Beck is a doctoral candidate in educational technology at the University of Florida. He also has over 17 years of experience as an educational technologist in the non-profit industry, focusing on implementing and utilizing basic technologies to maximize training and learning. He enjoys teaching technology and learning classes and is interested in researching social constructs in virtual world environments and the development of narrative identity in virtual world environments. Katrin Becker, PhD, taught computer science (CS) at the University of Calgary for 23 years and is currently completing her dissertation in educational technology, specializing in the instructional design of video games. Her innovations in teaching CS have been internationally recognized, and her current work breaks new ground in the theoretical landscape of digital game-based learning by using a synergy of reverse engineering and ethological methodologies to uncovering instructional design principles in existing successful games. Dr. Becker is uniquely positioned to bring expertise and literacy in both CS and educational research to bear on the question of how and what people learn in digital game-based environments. She’s been using digital games to teach since 1998, designed and taught one of the first digital game-based learning courses for an Education faculty, and has published widely in both CS education and digital game design and use for learning. These days she also spends some of her time helping teachers and others gain games literacy so they can see the educational potential of video games for themselves. James Belanich, PhD, is a research psychologist for the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, researching advanced training methodology. He is currently working on projects trying to improve the effectiveness of game-based training. He has authored/co-authored numerous articles, reports, conference papers, and book chapters on game-based training, distributed learning, instructional technology, and adaptive technology. He received his Ph.D. in psychology–learning processes from the City University of New York. Ahmed BinSubaih is a PhD candidate at the University of Sheffield. He received an MEng in software engineering from the University of Sheffield in 2000. His research interests include game architecture and serious games. He has published widely on this topic, and has acted as a member of the reviewing committee for a number of international conferences.



About the Contributors

Erik W. Black is a doctoral fellow and candidate in the School of Teaching and Learning at the University of Florida. His research blends contemporary psychological and educational theory in the analysis of data derived from virtual and technology-rich environments. Clint Bowers, PhD, is a professor of digital media at the University of Central Florida. He is also chief scientist of the university’s Augmented Cognition for Training in Virtual Environments Laboratory (ACTIVE). Dr. Bowers’ research interests include team training, team performance, and the use of technology in complex workplaces. Andreas Breiter, professor, graduated in 1995 in Sociology and Computer Science from University Frankfurt. Between 1995 and 1997, he worked as a research associate at the Fraunhofer Institute in Karlsruhe, from 1997 to 2000 at the Telecommunications Research Group at the University of Bremen. He completed his doctoral thesis in 2000 in computer science on ICT management in schools from the University of Bremen. After postdoctoral studies at the University of Bremen, Columbia University, and the Center for Children and Technology in New York, in 2004 he was elected assistant professor for information management and educational technologies and was founding member of the Institute for Information Management in 2003. Vasa Buraphadeja is a PhD student in the department of educational technology, College of Education at the University of Florida. His research agenda focuses on assessing quality in asynchronous online education, game in education, and psychology. His URL is: http://plaza.ufl.edu/vasa. Jan Cannon-Bowers, PhD, recently left her position as the U.S. Navy’s Senior Scientist for Training Systems to join the Institute for Simulation and Training and Digital Media Department at the University of Central Florida as an associate professor and research scientist. Her research interests are in technology-enabled learning and synthetic learning environments. To date, she has been awarded several grants to support this work, including two awards by the National Science Foundation. Dr. Cannon-Bowers has been an active researcher, with over 100 publications in scholarly publications. She is on the Board of Directors of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare and advisor to the national Serious Games Initiative. Diane Carr is a research fellow based in the Centre for the Study of Children Youth and Media at the Institute of Education, University of London. The research featured in this article was supported by the Eduserv Foundation. She is a media and computer games theorist who has published analysis of various computer games and game genres, and she is co-author of Computer Games: Text, Narrative and Play (Carr, Buckingham, Burn, & Schott, Polity Press 2006). More information about her work can be found at http://playhouse.wordpress.com/ Cathy Cavanaugh, PhD, is an associate professor of educational technology in the University of Florida. Her research includes studies of classroom technology and professional development in Florida schools, effective practices in virtual schools, online science materials, and online course design. She has published books, chapters, and articles in distance education, primarily virtual schools research.



About the Contributors

Erik Malcolm Champion (B.Arch., M.Arch. (NZ), M.Phil(hons) (NZ), PhD (Melb)) is senior lecturer in digital media at COFA, UNSW. His recent research has been in the design and evaluation of virtual heritage and serious games. His doctoral thesis was on evaluating cultural learning in virtual environments, sponsored by an Australian Research Council Grant in collaboration with Lonely Planet Publications. Yam San Chee, PhD, is an associate professor in the Learning Sciences & Technologies Academic Group and the Learning Sciences Lab at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University. Prof. Chee’s research focuses on new literacies and new media in education, with a special emphasis on serious games and game-based learning. Recent games developed include Space Station Leonis, Escape from Centauri 7, and Ideal Force. He is currently the executive editor of Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, the journal of the Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education. Sauman Chu, PhD, is an associate professor at the Department of Design, Housing, and Apparel at the University of Minnesota. Her research focuses on educational gaming in higher education. Her articles have appeared in Visible Language, Journal of Visual Literacy, Multicultural Education, Journal of Applied Communications, and Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences. Dr. Chu has been practicing graphic design for almost 15 years. Her creative production has received regional and national awards. She teaches courses in graphic design and multimedia and advises undergraduate and graduate (both MFA and PhD levels) students. Jillianne Code is a writer, researcher, and lecturer in the areas of self-regulated learning, agency, and online social dynamics. Her research includes the expression of agency in social networks, strategic membership and dynamics of massively multi-player online role-playing games, and the role of selfregulation in video game environments. She is currently completing a PhD in educational psychology at Simon Fraser University. Richard T. Cole, PhD, is professor and chair of the Department of Advertising, Public Relations, and Retailing at Michigan State University, East Lansing. He returned to the MSU faculty in 2005 after nearly two decades in health care—as an officer of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan and, subsequently, chief administrative officer of the Detroit Medical Center—a nine-hospital, urban, academic hospital system. Earlier in his career, Dr. Cole had served as press secretary and chief of staff to Michigan’s governor James Blanchard. His research and writing interests include children’s advertising and various aspects of public relations history and strategy. Joan M. Davis is a doctoral student in the Learning Sciences program at the University of Washington. She received a BS in computer science from the University of South Carolina and an MA in educational technology from the University of Michigan. She has worked on several educational technology research and development projects. Her most recent project is a Web-based homework environment that takes the form of an interactive game show. Kara Dawson, PhD, is an associate professor of educational technology in the School of Teaching and Learning in the College of Education at the University of Florida. She co-coordinates the face-to-face



About the Contributors

and online programs in educational technology. Her URL is: http://www.coe.ufl.edu/faculty/dawson/ index.html Penny de Byl, PhD, is the lead researcher and manager of the Advanced Learning and Immersive Virtual Environments (ALIVE) research and development laboratory at the University of Southern Queensland (http://www.alivex3d.org). Dr. de Byl and her ALIVE team are researching and developing tools to empower educators to build online multi-user serious games. In 2007 Dr. de Byl won a Smart State-Smart Woman award for her work with ALIVE. Dr. de Byl has written two books and many journal and conference articles based in the areas of game programming and artificial intelligence. She current also holds the position of senior lecturer in games programming and computer graphics at the University of Southern Queensland. Sara de Freitas, PhD, is the Director of Research at the Serious Games Institute at the University of Coventry where she leads an applied research team working closely with industry. The Institute is the first of its kind in the UK, and it is envisaged that it will play a leading role in future developments of game-based learning. Formerly, she worked as lab manager, project manager on development programmes, and senior research fellow at the London Knowledge Lab. The Lab is a collaborative venture between Birkbeck College and the Institute of Education, University of London focusing upon technology assisted learning. She continues to hold a visiting senior research fellowship at the Lab. Rusel DeMaria played his first video game in 1967 and began working professionally as a writer/reviewer in 1981 and soon became a regular contributor to magazines like A+, PC Week, Byte Magazine, Macazine and MacWorld. In 1989 he became the executive editor of Computer Play, and in 1990 he became the senior editor of PC Games and GamePro. Also in 1990, DeMaria founded Prima Publishing’s game strategy guide division and subsequently guided it for six years as creative director. He has also been a games editor and columnist for a variety of magazines in the U.S., France and Japan. DeMaria has written more than 60 game-related books, including the acclaimed history book, High Score, and most recently, Reset: Changing the Way We Look at Video Games, and has also been a consultant for companies like Sega, Mindscape, LucasArts, Maxis, Oddworld, Interplay, and Acclaim Entertainment. He is currently working as assistant director for David Perry’s Game Consultants, Inc. as a writer, designer, consultant and team manager. In addition to his extensive experience with games, DeMaria is trained in a number of communications disciplines, including mediation and NLP, and is a serious student of Chinese internal martial arts. Joseph C. DiPietro is a doctoral fellow in the School of Teaching and Learning at the University of Florida. His research interests include self-representation in online environments and their application to educational gaming and teacher professional development. Meredith DiPietro is a doctoral candidate in educational technology at the University of Florida. Her research incorporates theories of psychology and pedagogy to investigate the integration of digital technologies into online and off-line educational environments. She has extensive experience working with virtual schools and is currently researching the pedagogy of virtual school teachers.



About the Contributors

Mary Jo Dondlinger is an instructional designer at Richland College and a doctoral student in educational computing at the University of North Texas. Her main interests are in the areas of post-secondary education and innovative uses of technology in program development. Brock R. Dubbels has worked since 1999 as a professional in education and instructional design, reading comprehension, exploring new technologies for assessment, delivering content, creating engagement with learners, and investigating ways people approach learning. Dubbels is a former Fulbright Scholar, has worked for Xerox PARC, as a raft guide for the Yellowstone Raft Company, and currently teaches for Minneapolis Public Schools and the University of Minnesota. Shree Durga is a second-year doctoral student, advised by Kurt Squire, in the department of C&I, specializing in educational technology at UW-Madison. Her research interests include video games and learning, game social gaming practices, such as modding and content creation. Currently, she works with Kurt on an ongoing longitudinal study on design and implementation of game-based learning program that uses history simulation games, such as Civilization III to teach world history. Shree focuses on expert game modding practices gained by participants, in this program, as they develop systemic understandings about history and build sophisticated historical models or simulations. Shree’s background is in computer science, and before coming to Madison, she has had substantial experience in software development, consulting and content development for online learning clubs. Erin Edgerton, MA, is the content lead for Interactive Media at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Marketing (NCHM). As part of NCHM’s Division of EHealth Marketing, she develops health communication and marketing strategies to deliver CDC’s science via emerging communication channels, builds cross-agency collaborations for unique presentation of health content, and works with regional and national partners to develop new opportunities for reaching diverse populations. Before coming to government, she had five years of experience as a marketing and PR specialist in the medical community. She earned her Masters of Arts degree in health communication from the Emerson College/Tufts School of Medicine joint program and a Bachelors of Arts degree in public relations from the University of Maryland’s School of Communication. Michael A. Evans, PhD, is an assistant professor in the instructional design and technology program at Virginia Tech. Research interests include human learning theory, and emerging instructional media and technologies. He is currently working on a mobile learning project in Malawi, Africa, using gamebased and Web 2.0 technologies. Before arriving in Blacksburg, Dr. Evans was a research scientist in the Pervasive Technology Labs at Indiana University, where he worked on a three-year tele-maintenance project for the U.S. Navy Smartships Program. Dr. Evans received his doctoral degree from the department of instructional systems technology at Indiana University, Bloomington. Kim Feldmesser has lived and taught in UK Colleges of Further Education and private language schools as a teacher of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) for 16 years. Following his Masters in Media Assisted Language Learning and Teaching Kim worked briefly producing corporate e-learning. He runs a computer repair business for fun. His obsession with videogames continually annoys his wife, so he bought her a Nintendo DS—now she’s hooked on brain-training! He is currently seeking a research position in the no-mans-land that lies between video games manufacture and education.



About the Contributors

Patrick Felicia is a PhD candidate in University College Cork. He also lectures game design, multimedia application, and software engineering at Waterford Institute of Technology. His research interests include e-learning, instructional design, game design, and virtual reality. He is currently investigating how educational games can be tailored to users’ personality and learning style at both emotional and cognitive levels. Brian Ferry, PhD, is a professor in education at the University of Wollongong where he is currently Deputy Dean. His research interests focus on pre-service teacher education and the use simulations and games as authentic learning environments. He teaches science and ICT education and currently supervises nine PhD students. Outside of university he is interested in travel and golf. Paul Fishwick, PhD, is a professor of computer and information science and engineering at the University of Florida. He received a PhD in computer and information science from the University of Pennsylvania in 1986, and has six years of industrial/government production and research experience working at Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Co. (doing CAD/CAM parts definition research) and at NASA Langley Research Center (studying engineering data base models for structural engineering). His research interests are based in modeling, simulation, and computer arts. H e is a fellow of the Society for Computer Simulation (SCS), and a senior member of the IEEE. He founded the comp. simulation Internet news group (Simulation Digest) in 1987. He has chaired workshops and conferences in the area of computer simulation, including serving as General Chair of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference in Orlando, Florida. He has served on simulated-based journal editorial boards and has published numerous books and papers. Aroutis Foster is a doctoral candidate in the Educational Psychology and Educational Technology program at Michigan State University. He has an undergraduate degree in art (computer digital) and broadcast communications (TV/radio production). However, before college, he was a radio disc jockey and technical operator at a radio station for a year. He is a Mellon Mays Fellow, a status that was achieved since his undergraduate years. He is also the recipient of a Spencer Research Training Grant and Robert Craig Fellowship for Psychological Studies in Education. He has been recognized by his graduate student peers at Michigan State University for outstanding contribution to scholarship. Recently, he received an outstanding paper award at the 2007 Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education conference (SITE), and he has presented at numerous conferences such as the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). Adam Friedman, PhD, is an assistant professor and director of Social Studies Education at Wake Forest University. He teaches undergraduate and graduate social studies methods, as well as a course in descriptive research in social studies. His research interests include the effect of technology use on student learning in secondary social studies and the Internet’s impact on citizenship education. He has published his research in various social studies and technology journals and book chapters, and is currently the co-chair of the technology committee of the National Council for the Social Studies. Johannes Fromme, PhD, was born in 1956. He qualified as teacher of English and sport in 1980. He received his PhD (doctorate) in educational science at the University of Bielefeld/Germany in 1985.



About the Contributors

From 1987 to 1990, Fromme was staff member of an independent research organisation. He returned to the University of Bielefeld in 1990 as a scientific assistant for educational science, where he received his postdoctoral lecture qualification (Habilitation) in 1995 and worked as a lecturer in the following years. Since 2002, Johannes Fromme is a professor for media research in educational science at the University of Magdeburg. Diane L. Gaither is an assistant specialist in the Staff Development Office of Southwest Research Institute and resides near San Antonio, Texas. She completed her undergraduate degree in computer science as a distinguished graduate from St. Mary’s University in May of 2007. She is continuing with her master’s degree, setting the example for her four children of the importance of education. She intends to create games that have educational value. She is developing an education space gaming for her graduate work and plans eventually to get a PhD. Martha Garcia-Murillo, PhD, is an associate professor at Syracuse University’s School of Information Studies. She has an MS in economics and a PhD in political economy and public policy from the University of Southern California. She has also worked as a consultant for several international organizations including the International Telecommunications Union in Geneva, Switzerland, and the Economic Commission for Latin American and the Caribbean. She was a visiting scholar at the Internet and Telecommunications Convergence Center at MIT. Elhanan Gazit, PhD, serves as the DiGRA ISRAEL Chapter, promoting the use of digital games and virtual worlds for instruction, learning, and assessment. He is a researcher at the Instructional Systems Technologies Department, H.I.T-Holon Institute of Technology. His research interests include: games-based learning, virtual worlds, and interactive learning technologies. He holds a PhD degree in the learning sciences and a Magna Cum Laude MA degree in science education from Tel-Aviv University. His PhD thesis focused on analyzing interactions in virtual reality environments. Dr. Gazit did his postdoctorate at the LIRT Lab, the Institute for Interdisciplinary Applications of Computer Science, CRI. Douglas A. Gentile, PhD, is an assistant professor of psychology at Iowa State University and is the director of research for the National Institute on Media and the Family. His research focuses on the positive and negative effects of media on children. He is the editor of the book Media Violence and Children (2003, Praeger Press), and co-author of the book Violent Video Game Effects on Children and Adolescents: Theory, Research, and Public Policy (2007, Oxford University Press). David Gibson, PhD, is a research assistant professor in the College of Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, University of Vermont and Executive Director of The Global Challenge (www.globalchallengeaward.org), a team and project-based learning and scholarship program for high school students funded by the National Science Foundation that engages small teams in studying science, technology, engineering, and mathematics in order to solve global problems. His research and publications include work on complex systems analysis and modeling of education, Semantic Web applications and the future of learning, and the use of technology to personalize education for the success of all students. His book Games and Simulations in Online Learning published by IGI, outlines the potential for games and simulation-based learning. He is creator of simSchool (www.simschool.org), a classroom flight simulator for training teachers, currently funded by the US Department of Education FIPSE program.



About the Contributors

He is currently involved in translating simSchool and articles into Korean, Chinese and Japanese. He is founder of CURVESHIFT, an educational technology company (www.curveshift.com) that assists in the acquisition, implementation and continuing design of games and simulations, e-portfolio systems, data-driven decision-making tools, and emerging technologies. Mark Griffiths, PhD, is a chartered psychologist and professor at the Nottingham Trent University, and director of the International Gaming Research Unit. He has published over 170 refereed research papers, two books, over 35 book chapters and over 500 other articles. In 2004, he was awarded the Joseph Lister Prize for Social Sciences by the British Association for the Advancement of Science for being one of the UK’s “outstanding scientific communicators”. Michael M. Grant, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Instructional Design and Technology program at the University of Memphis. He has been working with elementary and secondary educators for over 10 years. His research considers how to best help faculties implement technology integration and how students represent their learning with computer technologies in different ways. Dr. Grant earned his PhD from The University of Georgia in instructional technology and was recently selected for the American Educational Research Association Special Interest Group for Instructional Technology’s 2005 Young Researcher Award. Chad M. Harms, PhD, is an assistant professor at Iowa State University with a dual appointment in the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication and the Human Computer Interaction graduate program. He received his PhD from Michigan State University in communication in 2004. His dissertation work on social presence earned him the honor of being selected to the First Young Investigator’s Forum in Virtual Reality. Dr. Harms sits on the Advisory Council and Education Committee of the Iowa Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. Back in 1994, he was the NCBA National Collegiate Boxing Champion at heavyweight. Richard Hartshorne, PhD, is currently an assistant professor of instructional systems technology at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. There, his teaching focuses on the integration of technology into the educational landscape, as well as instructional design and development. His research interests primarily involve the production and effective integration of instructional technology into the teaching and learning environment. The major areas of his research interest are rooted in online teaching and learning, technology and teacher education, and the integration of emerging technology into the k-post-secondary curriculum. Carrie Heeter, PhD, is professor of serious game design in the department of Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University. She directs development of innovative technology-enhanced learning experiences including interactive video, CD-ROMs, virtual reality, Web sites, and games. She is co-editor of Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat: New Perspectives in Gender, Gaming, and Computing and creator of Investigaming.com, an online gateway to research about gender and gaming. Current design research includes play style and learning, fine tuning player motivation, and creating “mindset” games to empower players to discover and modify beliefs which interfere with health, healing, and well-being.



About the Contributors

Daniel B. Horn, PhD, is a research psychologist with the U. S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. His research focuses on the use of computer technology to support collaboration and training. His current work focuses on understanding the factors associated with effective training games, and applications of social network analysis to individual and organizational performance. He received his PhD in psychology (cognition and perception) from the University of Michigan. Wenhao David Huang, PhD, is tenure-track faculty member in the Department of Human Resource Education in the College of Education at University of Illinois. His background overarches engineering, learning technology design, and business administration. He is interested in refining the e-game design process for the development of complex learning environments across disciplines. Adam Ingram-Goble began his work in gaming research with an MS in computer science where he focused in A.I. and machine learner models of human game play. He is currently a doctoral student in learning sciences at Indiana University, where he has worked on the Quest Atlantis project since 2005. His current research interests include game designs that facilitate critical dispositions, creativity, and programming as social commentary. Christopher L. James is an assistant principal in the Russellville City Schools System in Alabama. Dr. James assists in developing, implementing, and evaluating instructional programs at the school level. He also uses technology resources to facilitate professional development activities for teachers to aid in the effective implementation of technology in the classroom. Tristan Johnson, PhD, is the associate director of research for the Learning Systems Institute and is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Learning Systems at Florida State University. Dr. Johnson’s primary research program studies gaming and simulation, team cognition, team-based learning, group learning processes measurements, and shared mental models measures. Robert Jones teaches at New York University where he is finishing his PhD. His dissertation explores the video game sub-culture of Machinima, the use of video game technologies by gamers to create animated films. As an instance of fan-produced media, Machinima offers an insight into the new ways that gamers perform culture. Additionally his work explores how the video game medium is currently being utilized as a means of political activism. He also teaches a course on Video Game Culture at The New School. His Web site (www.stranger109.org) explores issues in the gaming world and reviews machinima films. He is a musician, digital filmmaker, life-long gamer, and T-shirt junkie. Benjamin Jörissen, born in 1968 in Krefeld/Germany, studied philosophy, educational science and German literature in Dusseldorf, Cologne, and Berlin. From 2000 to 2004, he worked at the Freie Universität Berlin, Dep. for Anthropology and Education, and took part in an interdisciplinary research project entitled “cultures of the performative”, conducting studies in new media rituals. He received his doctorate in 2005 with a thesis entitled “Medium—Image—Reality. The Reality of the Social and the New Media”. Jörissen is currently a research assistant at the University of Magdeburg. Main fields of work are: identity issues, Internet studies, game studies, and film studies.

0

About the Contributors

Slava Kalyuga, PhD, senior lecturer at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, has been involved in research in the field of cognition and instruction and cognitive load theory since 1994. His contribution to the field includes extensive studies of expertise reversal and redundancy effects in multimedia learning, and other instructional consequences of learner cognitive overload. Dr. Kalyuga published results of his studies in many international journals and contributed to a number of books, including Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, Digital Multimedia Perception and Design, and Instructing and Testing Advanced Learners: A Cognitive Load Approach. David Kaufman, EdD, is professor of education, and director of the Learning & Instructional Development Centre at Simon Fraser University. He is the director of Simulation and Advanced Gaming Environments (SAGE) for the Learning project. It is a $3 million, bilingual, Pan-Canadian initiative funded primarily by Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). Dr. Kaufman’s research interests include: educational technology, teaching and learning in higher education, gaming and simulation for learning, problem-based learning, medical education, and continuing professional development. Fengfeng Ke, PhD, is currently an assistant professor of instructional technology in the Organizational Learning and Instructional Technology program, University of New Mexico. Her research has covered a range of topics on designing and developing learning environments using advanced technologies, including computer game-based learning, online learning community, computer-supported intergenerational collaboration, and educational simulation and animation design. Lisa Kervin, PhD, is a lecturer in educational psychology and curriculum at the University of Wollongong. She has worked as a teacher, teaching from kindergarten to grade six, and has been employed in consultancy roles. She has researched her own teaching and has collaborative research partnerships with teachers and students in primary classrooms. Her current research interests are related to the literacy development of children, the use of technology to support student learning and teacher professional development. Eylem Kilic is a PhD candidate in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies at Middle East Technical University in Turkey. She works as a research assistant at the same department. Her research areas are cognitive development, cognitive load, educational software, digital game-based learning, e-learning, and human memory. Castulus Kolo completed a doctoral degree in physics at CERN (Geneva) as well as in cultural anthropology at the University of Munich (Germany). From 1997 until 2001 he worked as an executive in the field of innovation management for the Fraunhofer Society, a leading German research organisation. After that he was responsible for the new media business of a large German publishing house until he founded his own consulting company. In parallel he assumed several positions as a lecturer and since 2007 he has been a professor for media management at the Macromedia University of Applied Sciences in Stuttgart (Germany). Chun Lai, PhD, is an assistant professor at Confucius Institute, College of Education, Michigan State University. Her research interest is to explore the use of technology to facilitate second language learn-



About the Contributors

ing and teaching and to understand the nature of second language acquisition. Her specific research areas are the affordances and constraints of computer-mediated communication and the instructional design in online foreign language learning. She has published several articles on technology-enhanced language learning. Kimberly A. Lawless, PhD, is an associate professor of educational psychology and language, literacy, and culture at the University of Illinois at Chicago. Dr. Lawless studies how individuals acquire and comprehend information from non-linear digital environments, focusing on how aspects of the reader, the media, and the task influence navigational strategy and learning outcomes. David J. Leonard, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Comparative Ethnic Studies at Washington State University. His work focuses on sports, video games, and popular culture as a whole, and has appeared in both popular and academic mediums. He recently published, with C. Richard King, Visual Economies of/in Motion: Sport and Film (Peter Lang Publishing Group, 2006) an edited volume on sports films, and a monograph, Screens Fade to Black: Contemporary African American Cinema, with Praeger Publishers (2006). He is currently working on a monograph looking at race and the culture wars of the NBA (SUNY Press), and another (with C. Richard King) analyzing the production and consumption of media culture within white nationalist communities (University of Mississippi Press). Melissa L. Lewis is a PhD candidate in the Media and Information Studies program at Michigan State University. She holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in mass communication and a Master of Arts degree in communication and multimedia. Her current research focuses on the relationships between individuals and avatars, primarily in the area of video games, as well as how these relationships can impact social, educational, and emotional outcomes. Kenneth Y.T. Lim is a teaching fellow in the Learning Sciences Lab at the National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University. His research interests address the pedagogical applications of multi-user virtual environments and serious games. Dr. Lim developed the curriculum materials for Space Station Leonis. He has also developed several learning installations in Second Life. Ming Liu has been a doctoral student in the Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University since 2004. She received her MA degree in communication from University at Albany, State University of New York in 2004, and obtained her BA in Chinese language and literature from Nanjing University, China in 2001. Her primary research interests lie in health-related electronic games, online gaming addiction, online social support, and communication technologies. Yuxin Ma, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Center for Innovative Learning and Assessment Technologies (CILAT) at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. She has eight years of experience in developing computer-based instructional programs or materials. Her current research focuses on developing and researching the use of computer games and robotics in innovative learning environments. Ian MacInnes, PhD, is an associate professor at Syracuse University’s School of Information Studies. He previously worked at the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Management and has been a



About the Contributors

visiting scholar at Harvard University and the International Telecommunications Union. He received a doctorate from the University of Southern California in Political Economy and Public Policy, offered by the Economics department. He has written about virtual worlds for over five years and has organized conference tracks in areas such as hedonic information systems and digital commerce. Leanna Madill is a doctoral student in the department of Language and Literacy in the Faculty of Education at the University of Victoria. Her research interests include gender and literacy practices, particularly video game learning, assessment, and teacher education. Her doctoral research focuses on providing workshops titled, Debunking video game myths and tapping into the potential of video game play for parents and educators, in which participants will be encouraged to learn and then engage in critical dialogue with adolescents about ideologies encountered in video games and play. Steve Maddock, PhD, is a lecturer in computer science at the University of Sheffield. His research interests include computer facial modeling and animation, human figure animation, procedural modelling, and surface deformation techniques. He received a PhD in computer science from the University of Sheffield in 1999. He is a member of Eurographics and ACM SIGGRAPH. Brian Magerko, PhD, is an assistant professor in the School of Literature, Communication and Culture at the Georgia Institute of Technology. He is a member of the Experimental Game Lab and the Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center at Georgia Tech. He received a PhD in computer science and engineering from the University of Michigan in 2006. Dr. Magerko’s research includes interactive drama, user modeling, and the design and development of digital game-based learning experiences. Barbara Martinson, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Design, Housing, and Apparel at the University of Minnesota. She is currently the Buckman Professor of Design Education and Director of Graduate Studies. Martinson is both a researcher and designer. Research areas include design history concentrating on 19th century illustration, design education, multicultural design, and design process. Recently her research has been published in Visible Language, Journal of Visual Literacy, and FATE in Review. Both her graphic design and fiber work has been exhibited and published nationally, and has received national awards. Michael Matzko received his PhD from the University of Georgia in 2004. He then spent three years as a program analyst at the Naval Personnel Development Command in Norfolk, VA, where his primary role was to develop and oversee instructional guidance and policy during the U.S. Navy’s Revolution in Training. He is currently serving as the supervisor of instructional systems with the U.S. Navy Center for Personal and Professional Development in Virginia Beach, VA. Michael McCreery is a learning and technology doctoral student within the Educational Psychology department at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Currently, he is exploring how human behavior is influenced through interaction with virtual spaces. His background includes over a dozen years of technology experience including fours years as a programmer for the Intel Corporation. Punya Mishra, PhD, is an associate professor of educational technology at Michigan State University. His research has focused on the theoretical, cognitive, and social aspects related to the design and use of



About the Contributors

digital learning environments. He co-developed (with Dr. M. J. Koehler) the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) framework for technology integration. He has received over $4 million in grants, has published over 30 articles, and has edited two books. Dr. Mishra is an award-winning instructor teaching courses at masters and doctoral levels in the areas of educational technology, design, and creativity. You can find out more about him at http://punyamishra.com/. Teddy Moline is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Elementary Education at the University of Alberta. Her research interests are learning resources, effective integration of technology and learning, and digital gaming. She is currently examining how adolescents experience cognitive self-efficacy during digital gaming. Yi Mou received her MA degree in communication from Michigan State University in 2007. She received her MA degree in chemistry from Boston University in 2005 and obtained her BS in chemistry from University of Science and Technology of China in 2003. Her primary research interests include media effects on adolescents, content analysis of video games, and cross-cultural difference of perception on media content. Pollyana Notargiacomo Mustaro, PhD, obtained her PhD in education (São Paulo University, 2003), being specialized on Internet hackers’ knowledge building process. Nowadays, she is a professor at Mackenzie Presbyterian University (São Paulo, Brazil). Her research areas include learning objects theory, learning styles, instructional design, distance learning, social network analysis, hypertext theory, game culture studies, and knowledge representation. Martin Oliver, PhD, is a reader in ICT in education at the Institute of Education, part of the University of London. He is an editor of ALT-J: The Journal of Research in Learning Technology and of Learning, Media and Technology. James Oliverio is a creative artist, educator and producer, and a frequent keynote speaker and consultant to digital media, industry and education programs. He has served as professor of music and digital media and as director of the Digital Worlds Institute at the University of Florida since January 2001. Special recognition includes the Inaugural “Peoria Prize for Creativity” (2005) for producing the globally distributed collaboration entitled “Hands Across the Ocean” and the “Most Courageous and Creative” Award in the High Bandwidth Challenge at the 2001 global SuperComputing Conference. Oliverio holds five Emmy Awards, along with numerous national grants and commissions. Karen Orvis, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Old Dominion University. She is also a senior research fellow in the Consortium Research Fellows Program at the U.S. Army Research Institute. Her research areas of interest include: training and development, with a particular focus on technology-delivered training and self-development; individual difference predictors of human performance; and personnel staffing and workplace diversity. Her research in the area of video game-based training focuses on identifying game attributes and learner characteristics that influence the effectiveness of instructional videogames. She received her PhD in psychology (industrial/organizational) from George Mason University.



About the Contributors

Anthony Papargyris is a PhD candidate in the Department of Management Science and Technology at the Athens University of Economics and Business, Greece. He holds a first degree in business computing (Teesside, UK), and an MSc degree in information systems (AUEB). Since 2001, he is a member of ISTLab/OIS (http://istlab.dmst.aueb.gr). His current research is focusing on collective action and meaning construction, virtual communities, and learning. His general research interests are in online interactive learning games, philosophy of science and information systems, and knowledge management. David Parisi is a PhD candidate in the Department of Media, Culture, and Communication at New York University. His dissertation research focuses on the history of perception, and traces the development of touch as an informatic and semiotic mode of perception from 19th century psychophysics to modern haptic human-computer interfaces. Further information is available on his research blog at www.tactilefutures.org. Yuna Park received a Bachelor’s degree in mathematics from Bryn Mawr College in 2005. She received a Master’s degree in digital arts and sciences from the University of Florida in 2007. As a teaching assistant of Dr. Fishwick for coursework in system simulations and aesthetic computing, she could appreciate the potency of applied computing to aesthetic arts as an advanced sophisticated instructional tool. She created 3-D tools in the virtual multi-user environment, Second Life, to reinforce fundamental concepts in algebra. Her research focus during her Master’s was an application of aesthetic computing to math education. James R. Parker, PhD, is a full professor of computer science now working in the Drama/Fine Arts faculty at the University of Calgary on interactive media, video games, and digital audio. A former specialist in computer vision, he and his teams have developed multiple video games, including most recently the Booze Cruise game on drunk driving, Tibet, a game about the occupied status of that country, and OceanQuest, a game that teaches ocean floor ecology. He’s the author of over 130 articles and three books, including, Start Your Engines: Developing Racing and Driving Games. Matthew Thomas Payne is a doctoral student in the Department of Radio-TV-Film at the University of Texas at Austin. His research focuses on the social impacts of communication technologies and new media, video games, alternative media practices, and teaching film and video production. He holds a Master’s degree in media studies from the University of Texas and a Masters of Fine Arts in film production from Boston University. He has served previously as the coordinating editor for FlowTV (www. flowtv.org), a critical forum for television and media studies. Caroline Pelletier is a research fellow at the Institute of Education, University of London. The research referred to in classrooms was carried out as part of a project called “Making Games”, which was supported by the Paccit Link programme. Pelletier is a researcher whose work focuses on the social and epistemological consequences of technology use in education institutions. Wei Peng, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies and Media at Michigan State University. She received her PhD in communication from University of Southern California in 2006. Peng’s research focuses on the persuasive capabilities of digital media and technology, particularly as applied to pro-social topics such as health promotion. For her dissertation,



About the Contributors

Peng designed and supervised the development of a game-based computer program called RightWay Café to influence young adults’ attitude toward healthy eating. Ian Pitt, PhD, lectures in usability engineering and multimedia at UCC. He took his DPhil at the University of York, UK, then spent a year as a post-doctoral research fellow at Otto-von-Guericke University, Magdeburg, Germany, before moving to Cork in 1997. His research interests include the use of speech and non-speech sound in human-machine interfaces. Jan L. Plass, PhD, associate professor of educational communication and technology at New York University, is interested in how cognitive science and learning sciences can inform the design of educational environments such as simulations and games. His current research projects focus on the design of computer simulations for science education (Molecules & Minds) and on the design and study of game-like environments (RAPUNSEL). Dr. Plass is the director of the Program in Educational Communication & Technology as well as the director of the Consortium for Research and Evaluation of Advanced Technologies in Education (CREATE) at New York University, see createlabs.org. Louise Prejean is an instructor at UL Lafayette. She had over 10 years’ experience teaching elementary and middle school students. While she was a classroom teacher, she developed and delivered studentcentered lessons and materials with the use of a variety of technologies including robotics and educational games. She currently teaches technology integration to pre-service teachers and conducts research in the areas of educational games and robotics. Yufeng Qian holds an EdD in educational technology from Lehigh University. She is currently an assistant professor in the School of Leadership Studies at St. Thomas University, where she teaches educational research and instructional technology courses and has developed the MS in education with a concentration in the instructional technology program. She is also a member of the doctoral faculty in the EdD program in educational leadership. She lives with her family in Miami, Florida. Wei Qiu is a doctoral student in the Program of Educational Psychology and Educational Technology at the College of Education, Michigan State University. Her research interests include game design, digital gamed-based learning community, and the integration of western and eastern educational practices. Elizabeth Taylor Quilliam, PhD, is the first Harrison/Omnicom Professor of Advertising at West Virginia University. Following a career in marketing, she taught courses in the Department of Advertising, Public Relations, and Retailing at Michigan State University while pursuing a PhD in mass media. At MSU, Quilliam was awarded a University Distinguished Fellowship, a Dissertation Completion Fellowship, and a Food, Nutrition, and Chronic Disease research award. Her research focuses on public policy issues including advertising to children, privacy, and corporate social responsibility. Carol Luckhardt Redfield, PhD, is an associate professor and graduate program director for the Computer Science Department at St. Mary’s University in San Antonio, Texas. She was in the computer industry for over 15 years before teaching at St. Mary’s. Her PhD is from the University of Michigan in computer science and engineering in artificial intelligence and game playing. She is the Internet team director for Landmark Education. She serves on committees for the National Space Society and the



About the Contributors

San Antonio Quakers. She loves technology, Ultimate Frisbee, science fiction, her husband, and their two children. Neil M. Redfield is a student at John Jay Science and Engineering Academy in San Antonio, Texas, maintaining an A average. He enjoys computer science and participates in UIL competitions in computers, math, and science. He is part of the John Jay Ultimate Frisbee club. He will attend the National Showcase for the Junior Academy of Sciences, presenting part of the project in this chapter. As a young child, he played with educational computer games such as Cluefinders and ZAP! He enjoys spending time with his family including his “favorite baby sister from China who he loves so much.” Debbie Denise Reese, PhD, is the senior educational researcher within the Center for Educational Technologies® (CET) at Wheeling Jesuit University. She specializes in the application of cognitive theory toward the design of educational technologies. Over the past 10 years, she developed a method for the design, development, and evaluation of metaphor-enhanced, computer-mediated learning objects through applied cognitive science metaphor theory. When NASA eEducation established its Roadmap to enhance the Nation’s learning and practice of science through video games and synthetic worlds, CET appointed Reese to lead its NASA-sponsored Classroom of the Future learning and assessment in video games research for this NASA initiative. Charles Richard is an associate professor of creative writing in the Department of English at UL Lafayette. He has written and produced a long list of educational programs for state and national Public Broadcasting, along with multimedia training materials for various federal agencies. His research concentrates on narrative theory and multimedia design. Lloyd Rieber, PhD, is a professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Instructional Technology at the University of Georgia. He received his PhD from the Pennsylvania State University in 1987 and is a former classroom teacher. He has written extensively on micro-worlds, simulations, games, and play. He designed and programmed the WWILD Team (http://it.coe.uga.edu/wwild/), a Web site/community devoted to experiential learning using existing games and simulations as learning objects. He also directs a project called “Homemade PowerPoint Games” (http://it.coe.uga.edu/wwild/pptgames), which promotes learning through designing games with technology already available in the schools. Daniela M. Romano, PhD, is a lecturer in computer science at the University of Sheffield. Her research interests include the creation of virtual environments for education and entertainment. After her Master’s degree in computer science at the University of Bari, Italy, she has worked in the industry for six years before moving into academia. She has obtained a PhD in computer-based learning at the University of Leeds in 2001 and since she has worked in various academic posts. Currently she leads various projects on virtual reality and serious games using the VR facilities in the Kroto Research Institute. Kathy Sanford, PhD, is an associate dean teacher of education at the University of Victoria and associate professor in curriculum and instruction. Her research interests include gender and literacy, alternative literacies, popular culture, assessment, and teacher education. Current funded research projects include Gender and Literacy Learning through Video Games, and Professional Electronic Portfolios for Teacher Education. She has been working in the area of gender and literacy for the past decade, and is



About the Contributors

now exploring gendered implications of alternative literacies. She is interested in issues of assessment, especially as these relate to feminist and post-structural positions and theoretical perspectives, and in school-integrated teacher education. P. G. Schrader, PhD, is an assistant professor of educational technology at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Dr. Schrader’s recent work involves understanding learning in complex non-linear digital environments like massively multi-player online games and hypertext. In these contexts, he has examined aspects of expertise, literacy, and the dynamic exchange of information. His work has appeared in a number of journals as well as at national and international conferences. While he’s not writing, you might find Dr. Schrader further itemizing his level 70 druid in the World of Warcraft. David Williamson Shaffer, PhD, is an associate professor of learning science at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and game scientist at the Academic Advanced Distributed Learning Co-Laboratory. A former teacher, curriculum developer, teacher-trainer, and game designer, he has taught in the United States and with the U.S. Peace Corps in Nepal. His MS and PhD are from the Media Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and he taught in the Technology and Education Program at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. He is a founding member of the GAPPS research group for games, learning, and society. Dr. Shaffer has a National Science Foundation Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) Award for his work on Alternate Routes to Technology and Science and was the recipient of a Spencer Foundation National Academy of Education Postdoctoral Fellowship. Dr. Shaffer studies how new technologies change the way people think and learn. His particular area of interest is in the development of epistemic games: computer and video games in which players become professionals to develop innovative and creative ways of thinking. Luciano Silva has a PhD in computer science (computer graphics area) since May 2004, obtained from São Paulo University, Brazil. Currently, his research is focused on computer graphics, game design and development, formal methods for knowledge representation and retrieval, and unconventional 3-D interfaces. He also teaches at Mackenzie Presbyterian University and Cruzeiro do Sul University, both in São Paulo, Brazil. Ismar Frango Silveira, PhD, defended his PhD thesis in distributed objects applied to virtual realitybased learning environments in May 2003, at São Paulo University, Brazil. Currently, he is involved with researches in knowledge representation, programming languages paradigms, design patterns, adaptive learning objects, and collaborative learning. He presently teaches at Mackenzie Presbyterian University and Cruzeiro do Sul University, both in São Paulo, Brazil. Peter A. Smith is currently research faculty at the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Simulation and Training. As part of the Augmented Cognition for Training in Virtual Environments (ACTIVE) Lab, he fills the role of resident games expert through his previous experience in serious games working with the Navy’s NETC Experimentation Lab. He is also an avid blogger, with experience writing for the Serious Games Initiative blog and AOL’s Second Life Insider. Jennifer Solberg, PhD, works as a research psychologist at the U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences in Orlando, FL. She studies the personnel selection and training issues



About the Contributors

involved in visual target detection. Additionally, her research included the development of a gamebased training application for night vision technology. She received her PhD in cognitive/experimental psychology from the University of Georgia in 2004. Kurt Squire, PhD, is an assistant professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in the Educational Communications and Technology division of Curriculum and Instruction. He is a former Montessori and primary school teacher and, before coming to Wisconsin, was research manager of the Games-to-Teach Project at MIT and co-director of the Education Arcade. Squire earned his doctorate in instructional systems technology from Indiana University; his dissertation research examined students’ learning through a game-based learning program he designed around Civilization III. Squire co-founded Joystick101.org with Jon Goodwin. Squire is currently director of the Games, Learning, and Society initiative. Colleen Swain, PhD, is an associate professor and the associate director of the School of Teaching & Learning at the University of Florida. Her research, teaching, and service revolve around 21st century educational issues related to social justice in educational setting, specifically those dealing with technology in teaching and learning environments. Edward L. Swing received a BA in psychology from the College of St. Scholastica in 2005 and is currently pursuing a PhD in social psychology at Iowa State University. He is working with Dr. Craig Anderson, studying positive and negative video game effects as well as other aggression related research topics. Laurie N. Taylor, PhD, researches digital media and creates digital projects as an Assistant University Librarian in the University of Florida’s George A. Smathers Libraries. Her articles have appeared in various journals and edited collections, including Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research, Media/Culture, Computers and Composition Online, Works & Days, Videogames and Art: Intersections and Interactions, and The Player’s Realm: Studies on the Culture of Video Games and Gaming, as well as writing about games and digital media in popular venues. Her current research includes studies of horror video games and methods to digitally represent and contextualize archival materials. Alexander Unger, born in 1975, studied educational science, philosophy and sports science in Darmstadt/Germany. He received his MA in educational science and philosophy in 2003 and has been fellow at a postgraduate college on technology and society (“Graduiertenkolleg Technologisierung und Gesellschaft”) from 2003 to 2006, working on a doctorate thesis entitled “Pedagogy and Virtualization: On the technological transformation of pedagogic action”. Since 2007, Unger has worked as a research assistant at the Chair for Media Research and Adult Education at the University of Magdeburg. Main fields of work are: pedagogical and philosophical aspects of virtual environments, e-learning, ditigal game studies. Richard Van Eck, PhD, is an associate professor and graduate director of the Instructional Design & Technology program at the University of North Dakota, and is a board member for the North American Simulation and Games Association. He was on the faculty at the University of Memphis for five years, where he was also a member of the Institute for Intelligent Systems and the committee chair for the Center for Multimedia Arts in the FedEx Institute of Technology. He has taught and published



About the Contributors

extensively in the field of game-based learning and has developed several serious games for adults and elementary/middle-school students. Phillip VanFossen, PhD, is the James F. Ackerman Professor of Social Studies Education and Director of the Ackerman Center for Democratic Citizenship in the College of Education at Purdue University. He is also the associate director of the Purdue University Center for Economic Education. An awardwinning teacher, he has also published numerous chapters and articles on Internet use and economic and social studies education. His research interests include how social studies teachers use the Internet in their teaching, and in 2001 he co-authored Using Internet Primary Sources to Teach Critical Thinking in Government, Economics and World Issues (Greenwood Press). Linda van Ryneveld, PhD, was awarded a doctorate degree in computer-integrated education by the University of Pretoria, South Africa in 2004. She is currently a deputy director in the Directorate for Teaching and Learning with Technology at the Tshwane University of Technology in the same country. Her current interests include educational games and simulations, e-assessment, student hand-held response devices, learning theories, instructional design, cost-effective Web-based applications for teaching and learning, faculty and professional development, and gender issues. She loves living life to the fullest and appreciates humor, passion, and a zeal for life in others. She believes that learners, who take courses that are fun and inspirational, are more motivated to spend time on task. Scott J. Warren, PhD, works as an assistant professor of learning technologies at the University of North Texas. He holds a PhD in instructional systems technology from Indiana University. His current research examines the use of emerging online technologies such as podcasting, immersive digital learning environments, digital video, and open source course management tools in complex systems. Prior to working in higher education as a research, Scott taught both social studies and English in urban and suburban settings. René Weber, PhD (Dr.rer.nat.), is an assistant professor in the Department of Communication at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He holds a Bachelor/Master’s degree in both communication and quantitative economics and a PhD in psychology. In his recent research he focuses on cognitive and emotional effects of television and new technology media, including new generation video games. He develops and applies both traditional social scientific and neuroscientific methodology (fMRI) to test media-related theories. He earned several awards and honors such as Michigan State University’s “New Faculty Award” for the study “Neurophysiology of Entertainment”. Doug Williams, PhD, is the Director of the Center for Innovative Learning and Assessment Technologies (CILAT) at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette and an associate professor of instructional technology in the College of Education. Dr. Williams has more than 20 years experience as a programmer, was a member of the team that developed Alien Rescue, an award-winning multimedia educational program, and was the principal investigator for the PASS-PORT project, a Web-based performance assessment system. Brian M. Winn is an associate professor in the Department of Telecommunication, Information Studies, and Media and Director of the Games for Entertainment and Learning Lab at Michigan State Uni-

0

About the Contributors

versity. Winn’s expertise is in designing engaging serious games that balancing learning, pedagogical, and gameplay. Winn’s award-winning work has been presented, exhibited, and experienced around the world. Winn is a co-founder of the undergraduate Game Design and Development Specialization and the Serious Game Design Masters program at MSU. Mark J. P. Wolf, PhD, is an associate professor in the Communication Department at Concordia University Wisconsin. He has a PhD from the School of Cinematic Arts at the University of Southern California, and his books include Abstracting Reality: Art, Communication, and Cognition in the Digital Age (2000), The Medium of the Video Game (2001), Virtual Morality: Morals, Ethics, and New Media (2003), The Video Game Theory Reader (2003), The World of the D’ni: Myst and Riven (2006), The Video Game Explosion: A History from PONG to PlayStation and Beyond (2007), Of Words and Worlds: The Imagination and Subcreation of J. R. R. Tolkien (forthcoming), The Video Game Theory Reader 2 (forthcoming), and two novels for which he is looking for an agent. He is on the advisory board of Videotopia and several editorial boards including those of Games and Culture, The Journal of E-media Studies, and Mechademia: An Annual Forum for Anime, Manga and The Fan Arts, and is a board member of Christians in the Visual Arts (CIVA). He lives in Wisconsin with his wife Diane and his sons Michael and Christian. Vivian H. Wright, PhD, is an associate professor of instructional technology at The University of Alabama. In addition to teaching in the graduate program, Dr. Wright works with teacher educators, teacher candidates, and in-service teachers on innovative ways to infuse emerging technologies in the curriculum. She has helped initiate and develop projects such as Master Technology Teacher, Technology on Wheels, and Educational Technology Cases. Chong-wei Xu, PhD, is currently a professor of computer science in Department of Computer Science and Information Systems at Kennesaw State University. He received his Master’s in computer science from University of Wisconsin-Madison and his PhD in computer science from Michigan State University. He has been awarded two NSF grants, two state-level Yamacraw grants, and two university-level initiative grants dealing with Internet and parallel/distributed computing systems. His current research interests mainly include Internet and distributed system technologies and gaming technologies. Zahide Yildirim, PhD, is an associate professor in the Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies at Middle East Technical University in Turkey. Her research areas are educational multimedia and hypermedia, instructional message design, technology integration into teaching and teacher education and use of information and communication technologies in constructivist learning context. Panagoitis Zaharias, PhD, holds a first degree in informatics, a Master’s degree in information systems and a PhD degree in information systems (specialization on human computer interaction) from the Department of Management Science & Technology of Athens University of Economics and Business (2004). His main research interests are focused on user-centred design, usability evaluation methods, and e-learning design. Dr. Zaharias has participated in various European-funded and other research projects and he has published more than 25 papers in scientific journals and conference proceedings.



About the Contributors

He has co-organised dedicated research tracks on usability and e-learning design in leading international conferences focused on human-computer interaction. Currently he is a lecturer (407/80) at the Department of Product and Systems Design Engineering of the University of the Aegean, Greece. He is also a research associate of ELTRUN/OIS Research Group of the Athens University of Economics and Business where he is undertaking research and e-learning consulting projects and a member of ACM Special Interest Group on Human-Computer Interaction (SIGCHI). Nicholas Zaparyniuk is a writer, lecturer, researcher, and consultant in the areas of educational engagement, communication, and gaming. His research includes such diverse areas as video games in education, cognitive development, problem solving in complex environments, and educational neuroscience. A hardcore game player his whole life, much of his research is focused on the psychology of games and play and the impact of these factors when games are applied in educational environments. He is currently completing a PhD in educational psychology at Simon Fraser University. Yong Zhao, PhD, is a university distinguished professor of educational psychology and educational technology at the College of Education, Michigan State University. His research interests include diffusion of innovation, teacher adoption of technology, computer-assisted language learning, globalization and education, and international and comparative education. His articles have appeared in American Educational Research Journal, Teachers College Record and Language Learning and Technology. His most recent publications include What Should Teachers Know about Technology: Perspectives and Practices (IAP, 2003) and Research in Technology and Second Language Education: Developments and Directions (IAP, 2005).





Index

Symbols 21st century skills 1402 3-D digital environment 1187 3D educational game development process 331 4C/ID-model 1143

A abstract class, AbsGamePanel 513 abstract class, AbsSprite 514 abstract conceptualization (AC) stage 459, 461 accretion 1115 action buttons 1457 active and reflective learning, and video games 496 active experimentation (AE) stage 459 activity theory 690 actual mechanics 1277 adaptation 1275 adaptive opponent strategies 1478 ADDIE model 1189 adolecent girls, new media and 1440, 1441, 1442, 1443, 1444, 1445, 1446, 1447 adolescents, and video games 345 adolescent video games, emergent themes 349 adults explore skills 1205 advergames, in relation to childhood obesity 358 advertising, how it works 363 advertising to children, historical interest in 359 agency 673, 674, 676, 679, 680, 682, 683, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 690, 691, 692, 696

agent-based simulations 1477 algebraic functional machines, and video games 555 Allakhazam 795 America’s Army: Rise of a Soldier, video game 621 American Revolution 1461 amygdala, definition of 879 Anarchy Online 848 animating the single object 511 anti-social groups 1324 antibiotics 1277 Anytown 1186 AR games for education, implication of 91 arousal, and video games 884 assessment, the grammar of 579 Astroversity and Debating the Evidence 90 Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD) 393 attention deficit hyperactivity (ADHD) 879 attention distraction games 394 audience, COTS GBL 188 augmented reality (AR) 1460, 1463 augmented reality (AR) games 83 augmented reality (AR) games for education 1463 augmented reality games, definition of 83 augmented reality games for learning, review of 86 authenticity 1473 authentic learning 187, 1044 authentic learning environments, characteristics of 747

B “Back” buttons 1457

Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Index

backyard research 639 Battle of Lexington 1461, 1464 bodily interfaces 112 bodily interfaces, aspects of 117 Breakout, video game 509, 518 Breast Cancer Detective Game 395 Broadband Regulation and Modernization (BRM) Bill 493 broadcast media 1292 Bronkie the Bronchiasaurus, video game for children with asthma 392

C Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) 332 case study, Alien Language 1386 case study, Slime Forest 1383 cell phones 1442 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 372 character 1219 character attachment (CA) 593 character attachment, in role-playing games 597 childhood obesity, and video game marketing 358 Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU) 365 Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), 366 children’s digital games interactions, dynamics of 127 children’s games, product placement 360 Chinese Bell, mini game 1043 Chinese communist government 1323 Chinese Language Mini-Game project 1042 Cilati 1225 circumplex model 689 citizenship education, developmental approach to 811 civic participation, on a global scale 240 Civilization, strategy game 1058 Civilization III, historical strategy game 200, 203 claims of games, identifying problems 38 class, as role 852 classifier systems 686



class observation schedule (COS) 1430 ClassSim software 318 ClassSim software, key ideas in 318 coding guidelines 865 cognitive 1402 Cognitive apprenticeship 1130 cognitive growth 1047 Cognitive learning 1152 cognitive load, in learning 722 cognitive load, methods for evaluating 729 cognitive load factors, empirical studies of 727 cognitive load theory 1143 Cognitive load theory (CLT) 1148 cognitive models 672, 674, 675, 677, 678, 682, 684, 685, 686, 687, 688, 693, 696 cognitive skills, use of 785 cognitive variables, and violent video games 883 Cognitive Walkthrough 1453 collaboration 1468 collaborative construction of knowledge, support for 322 collaborative learning 187, 713, 1464 college classroom, game-based learning 1427 Command, Control, Communication, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C3ISR) 60 commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) 131, 278, 423, 894 Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) games 179 commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) games 180 communications technologies 1401 community 688, 690, 691, 692 community-involved online gaming 766 community of practice, definition of 580 component-oriented programming (COP), via gaming 508 computational model of learning 671 computational models 691 computer games 1354, 1372, 1373 computer games, and personal identity 808 computer games, as cultural and educational spaces 759 concept 1464 concrete experience (CE) stage 459

Index

Conquest 1226 Conquest of the Coastlands 1227 content-neutral nature, of many of these claims 41 context-oriented learning, and video games 496 control 1471 COTS educational computer games 280 COTS game effectiveness 281 Counterstrike 766 Coupling Between Object (CBO) 534 critical thinking 1461 cults 1324 cultural capital 348 cultural significance 219, 220, 225, 229 current online educational games, major providers of 70 Cyber-Bullying 1330 cyber-bullying 1326 CyberSurvivor module 561, 563

D Dale’s Cone of Experience 527 Dance Dance Revolution 111, 394 data fusion methods 642 debate 1470 Debugging mode 1283 deep learning 426 Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) 1323 democracy, dispositions that support 238 democratic participation skills 238 descriptors, implications of 663 Desensitization 1331 Design, Development and Evaluation of Educational Software (DDEES) 333 design, play, and experience (DPE) framework 1014 design, play, and experience framework 1010 design-based research (DBR) 1044 designing RtR 1464 design the lesson, how to 191 Design Walkthrough 1453 Deus Ex, video game 423 development goals, video game 1091 development processes, video game 1093

different learning styles, ICT should accomodate 895 digital divide 1323 digital game-based 1274 digital game-based learning (DGBL 97 digital game-based learning, and convergence of mobile devices 96 digital games, eight genres of 69 digital history 220 Digital Media Consumers’ Rights (DMCR) Bill 493 digital natives and nomads, educating 99 digital toys 1290 Digital Worlds (DW) 152 discovery 1472 discovery learning 1045 disease and risk-prevention games 389 distributed learning 1045 domain-based experience, extensive 777 dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) 879 dynamic graphics 1172 dynamic knowledge creation, and social computing 101 dynamic resources, definition of 653

E e-learning software 1379 economic education, and MMORPGs 240 educational games, and play styles 826 educational games, cognitive architecture for 721 educational games, k-12 learners 67 educational gaming, as a new instructional technique 67 educational gaming applications, managing cognitive overload 724 educational system 1402 Educational Testing Service (ETS) 1430 educational video games, design consistent with non-educational 787 Edutainment 1450 Edutainment Artifact 1450 Edutainment Game Prototype 1451 edutainment games 1449 edutainment technology 894 effective cognitive load 1149



Index

effective instructional video game, creation of 1089 effects of instructional gaming, studies on the 20 ELECT BiLAT, video game 1090 electronic game 1127 electronic games, conceptualizing 115 electronic gaming, in Germany 163 Element placement mode 1283 embed content, in design 787 emerging technologies 1417 emotional intelligence 1406 emotions, and video games 893 emotions, using to improve the cognitive process 902 engagement 1147 enhancing intrinsic motivation 833 entertainment education 594 Entertainment Education Paradigm (EEP) 593 Entertainment Software Association (ESA) 758 Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) 645, 1320 entertainment style 1169 environment, COTS GBL 189 Environmental Detective 86 Environmental Detectives 1464 epistemic frame inventories (EFIs) 585 evaluating a game, COTS GBL 190 EverQuest 795 evolutionary game theory (EGT) 1477 existential ludology 621 expecting evaluations 1285 experientially-based variations, in use of cognitive skills 785 Experimental Game Lab (EGL) 1277 expert performance or advice, access to 321 expert walkthrough 1454 Expert Walkthroughs 1455 Exploitation 1331 extrinsic achievement orientation 831 extrinsic games 1380

F face-to-face games, in online educational environment 560 Fair play 1146



fantasy, in video games 1027 Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 366 feedback problems 1449 Fidelity 1331 find a game, how to 189 first-person shooter (FPS) 455 Flow theory 1029 Foley Center 865 folksonomies 1407 foreign language education, challenges 404 foreign language learning environments, optimal 403 formative evaluation 1443 fruit, juice, and vegetable (FJV) 389 functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) 879

G game-based learning environments 1218 game-based, metaphor-enhanced (GaME) design 1104 game-based cognitive or motivation processes, studies on 22 game-based historical learning 219, 220, 221, 222, 227, 228, 230 game-based learning (GBL) 179 game-based learning strategies 1427 game-based pedagogy, studies on 21 game-like learning environments 1357 game-play, historical inquiry in 212 game design 1143 game designers 1449 game design perspective, for people with special needs 141 game elements 1465 game genres 73 GaME instructional design process, key component 1108 GaME method, four design principles of 1111 game object characteristic 1449 game or simulation 671, 672, 673, 674, 676, 677, 678, 679, 680, 681, 682, 685, 686, 687, 688, 690, 691, 696 gameplay 1378 game play, three categories of tasks during 780 game play constraints 1467

Index

game play layer, in video game design 1016 games 1355, 1356, 1357, 1358, 1359, 1365 games, as monolithic entity 39 games, extrinsic 1380 games, four functions enhanced 481 games, in college classrooms 479 games, intrinsic 1380 games, why study them 637 games and assessment, relationship between 577 Games for Entertainment and Learning (GEL) 1277 Games for Entertainment and Learning (GEL) Lab 1020 game theory 278 GAMEWheels 394 gaming, systemic approaches to 211 gaming and play-based virtual environments, as a new educational technology 719 gaming technology, applied to other applications 521 Gee’s learning principles 489 general design guidelines 1449 general learning model (GLM) 877, 881 General Responsibilty Assignment Software Patterns (GRASP) 533 genre baggage 224, 229 glim quest 1227 Global Positioning Software (GPS) 1461 goal-based scenario (GBS) 331, 332 graphical user interface (GUI) 112 Gregorc Learning Style Delineator 482 Grooming 1331 grounded theory approach 1 Guitar Hero™ 111

H Habbo Hotel, video game 494 HandLeR and Mobimissions 90 haptics 119 HCI expert 1449 health related electronic games, review of 389 Heart Sense, video game 391 herald 1225 hermeneutic relations 623 Heuristic evaluation 1453

hidden advertising plugs, aka product placements 360 hidden curriculum, of digital games 1026 historiographic gaming, discussion of 215 history 1460 How People Learn (HPL) framework 672 How People Learn framework 672, 673, 674, 681, 688, 690, 692 human-computer interface (HCI) 112 Human Computer Interaction (HCI) 1449

I ICOMOS Burra Charter 220 iconic skills 1358 IGNITE 381 imaging the participant 612 immersion, in video games 1028 implications of fantasy 1033 implications of immersion 1033 implications of representation and identification 1034 inclusive paradigm, for video game study 1062 individualized learning 1045 ineffective cognitive load 1149 informal and unwritten rules, for games 1059 information age 1402 information technology (IT), undergraduate courses 528 inhibiting intrinsic motivation 833 innovation, the grammar of 580 input design 1294 instructional design/development 1354, 1366 instructional design/development (IDD) 1356, 1360 instructional design/development model 1355, 1365 instructional design/development models 1359 instructional design/development models (IDDMs) 1356 instructional designers, the challenge for 1110 instructional development issues 104 instructional game design, studies on 21 instructional technology 1355 instructional video games, development of 1089 intangible heritage 227



Index

integration of physical and virtual worlds 1474 integration vs. use, COTS GBL 187 intelligent learning games (ILGs) 195 intelligent tutoring system (ITS) 1275 intelligent tutoring systems 279 interactive and reflective learning 1045 interactive history 220, 221, 227 Interactive Story Architecture for Training (ISAT) 1277 Interdisciplinary Research Seminar (IRS) 152 International Game Developer’s Association (IDGA) 640 International Simulation & Gaming Association (ISAGA) 452 International Sports Sciences Association (ISSA) 394 Internet predator 1327 Internet relay chat (IRC) 608 interpersonal circumplex. See circumplex model intrinsic 1280 intrinsic achievement orientation 831 intrinsic games 1380 intrinsic motivation, definition of 182 intrinsic motivation, what it means for COTS GBL 182 ironic play, with in-game elements 764 iterative design 1465

J JIT information 1161 Just-in-time (JIT) 1129 just-in-time (JIT) 1150

K Kid’s Programming Language (KPL) 1262 kids, what gets advertised to 364 Kingdom of Loathing (KoL) 847 Kingdom of Loathing, playing 849 knowledge, skills, and attitude (KSA) 1015

L “Laser Challenge” 1451 Lack of Cohesion Metric (LCOM) 533 language and culture learning, opportunities



414 Language Learning 1380 language learning 1373, 1382 layers, influence between 1019 learner 696 learner, characteristics of the 674 learner characteristics 672, 674, 678 learner characteristics, studies on 21 learning environment, five assumptions of 1044 learning layer, in video game design 1015 learning orientations, and learning styles 830 learning processes, and violent video games 876 learning styles, and video games 893 learning style theories 833 learning task component 1161 Learning tasks 1150 learning through achievement, with video games 499 learning through practice, with video games 498 learning vs. “self education” 758 Lego Star Wars 778 Life Challenge, HIV-AIDS prevention video game 390 Life Preservers, video game 1012 light-emitting diodes (LEDs) 113 local and wide network (LAWN) games 53 location-based 1465 long-term memory (LTM) 721 ludology 1373, 1374, 1387

M magic circle of play, video games 1057 managing cognitive overload, in educational gaming applications 724 Marcel Mauss, concept of bodily technique 111 massively-multi-player online role-playing games (MMORPGs) 1059 massively multi-player online games (MMOGs) 794 massively multi-player online roleplaying game (MMORPG) 847 massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) 71

Index

massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs) 703, 1401 massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMOG/MMORPG) 75 massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG) 53 massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) 235 massively multiplayer role-playing games (MMORPGs) 402 massive multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs) 128 Math Blaster Algebra 283 mathematical formula 1308 meaningful learning 1106 mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics (MDA) framework 1013 mechanistic model 812 media literacy 1440, 1441, 1442, 1443, 1444 , 1445, 1446, 1447, 1448 Mediated Social Environments 1331 Menu buttons 1457 Mertis 1225 meta-gaming Second Life virtual environment, used for algebraic operations 546 metacognition 1440, 1445, 1446 metacognitive modeling 1441 microbe evolution 1277 microscopic 1277 Middle Rhine Eduventure 90 mindset, and self theories 832 MMOGs, and intertextuality 794 MMOPRPGs, and decision-making skills 243 MMORPGs, and social studies 238 MMORPGs, offerings for foreign language education 406 MMORPGs, used to support learning and training 57 MMORPGs for foreign language education, infrastructure of 408 MMORPGs for foreign language education, potential 407 MMORPGs for foreign language learning, designing 409 mobile and personal technologies, as primary platforms for delivery 102

mobility 1472, 1474 mod-making 213 Model-View-Controller (MVC) 532 models 682 model trace 1275 motivation dimension 1280 MUD object oriented (MOOs) 1407 multi-player games, educational impacts of 766 multi-player online games (MMOGs 1204 multi-player online games (MMOGs) 1205 multi-player online role-playing game (MMORPG) 1218 multi-user dungeon (MUD) 607 multi-user dungeons (MUDs) 1407 multi-user virtual environment (MUVE) 1184, 1186 multi-user virtual environments (MUDs) 54 multimedia learning theories 106 multimedia software 1450 Multimodal 1331 multiplayer online games, for school education 57 multiplayer online role-play games, used for military training 60 Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) 898 My Pop Studio program 1440, 1441, 1442, 1 443, 1444, 1445, 1446

N Nabiscoworld.com 361 narrative model 813 Narratives 1374 narratives, four categories of 866 narrative studio 871 narrative vignettes 613 Narratology 1374 narratology 1373, 1387 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) 34, 238 newbie-friendly learning curve 412 new mobile gaming 1294 Newtoon and Mission Simulators 89 Nintendo Wii™ 111 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) 1401 non-playing characters (NPCs) 1461



Index

Non-Uniform, Rational B-Splines (NURBS) 539 nonlinearity 1471 North American Simulation and Gaming Association (NASAGA) 452 NTeQ (iNtegrating Technology through inQuiry) 179 NTeQ Model 183

O Object, View, and Interaction Design (OVID) 92 object-oriented programming (OOP), via gaming 508 Object Orientation paradigm 530 OCEAN model 674 ONLINE CHILDREN’S GAMES 360 online educational environment 560 online games, promoting specific brands or products 358 online gaming, brief overview 54 online gaming, definition of 52 online multiplayer role-play games, for post-16 learning 58 Oregon Trail 1318 Oregon Trail. 1319 organismic model 812 Othello, video game 509 Othello, video puzzle game 519 Oubreak@MIT 1465 Outbreak (online game) 89

P Packy & Marlon, diabetes video game 392 paidea 1374 palette, of play styles 827 palette of play styles and learning 836 parasocial interaction (PSI) 597 pedagogy 1464 pedagogy, of digital games 1025 perceptive capacity 1047 performance feedback 1449 personal digital assistant (PDA) 1461 personality traits 897 personal myth development 862 Phong Reflection Model 540



physical models 676, 677, 678, 691 sensory system 676

physiognomy, definition of 616 physiological scheme, claims of games 36 platform metaphor 1453 play behavior, of the four player types 829 player character (PC) 897 player reasoning 1480 player types, nine used by commercial game companies 828 play style, and reward structure 837 play style and player types 827 play styles, palette of 827 plot 1219 Podcasts 1187 policy issues 103 popular culture 1257 positive impact model 1310 post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and online gaming 61 practice field 1474 Predators 1325 prevalence of food, in console games 361 prevalence of food, in online games 361 principles of advertising and branding 362 problem-based learning 187 problem-based learning (PBL) 1196 problem space 680, 683, 695 processing dimension 1280 product placements, advergames 360 product placements, aka hidden advertising plugs 360 Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation (PEO STRI) 877 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 34 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 169 programming skills 1257 proliferation 1294 propositions, based on self-organizing social systems theory 710 propositions, based on social exchange theory 711 propositions, based on social learning theory

Index

706 propositions, based on social presence theory 708 propositions, based on theories of collaborative learning 704 propositions, based on theories of social suppor 712 psychological models 672, 675, 676, 678, 687 psychological scheme, claims of games 36

Q Q-homomorphisms. See quasi-homomorphisms Q-morphisms. See quasi-homomorphism qualitative meta-analysis 1 quality dynamic resources, descriptors of 656 quality teaching, what do we know about 653 quasi-homomorphisms 685 Quest Atlantis 796 Quia, Website 1429

R RAPUNSEL 720 Re-Mission, video game for young cancer patients 391 reading and comprehension, in schools today 255 real-time strategy (RTS) 1315 reasoning algorithm 1481 reflection 1470 reliving the revolution (RtR) 1460, 1461 representation and identification 1029 Rex Ronan, smoking prevention video game 390 Ridge Walking, mini game 1043 River City 796 River City AR 1465 role, bad citizen 854 role, beneficent demigod 855 role, bugfinder and tester 857 role, clan leader 854 role, good citizen 853 role, mall trader 855 role, virtuoso player 855 role-playing game, learning in 596

role-playing games 1205 Role-playing games (RPG) 1222 Role playing 1147 role playing game (RPG) 1383 roles, and their creation 852 Romance!, pregnancy prevention game 390 rostral anterior cingulate cortex (rACC) 879 RPG (role playing game) 1383 rules and fiction, tension between 765

S Savannah 86 scoring 1449 Second Language Acquisition (SLA) 425 second language learning, several basic premises 403 Second Life (SL) 146 Second Life, a review of 610 Second Life, as a virtual world environment 149 Second Life, video game 494, 547 Selene: A Lunar Creation GaME 1104 self-induced education 757 self-learning, through video games 500 self-management games 391 self-organizing social systems 709, 714 self-regulated learning (SRL) 739, 740 self-regulated learning, and video games 738 self-regulatory processes 738 self and identity, developing notions of 813 serious game 1466 serious games 219, 220, 227, 230 serious games, for police officers 451 serious games movement 1010 sexual conten 1318 simulated worlds 1290 simulation, as a game 316 simulation, in world history 202 simulations 1354, 1355, 1357, 1359, 1364, 1365, 1404 single-player digital games 761 situated learning 1464 situated learning and cognition 181 situated vignettes, examples of 613 SIXAXIS Wireless Controller 112 sketch tool 1137



Index

skill acquisition 780 small-group digital game interactions 133 social cognitive theory 598 social competition 1175 social constructivist classroom 1257 social exchange theory 710, 714 social interaction 1468 social learning, and video games 502 social learning theory 705, 713 social network 1478 social networking 1303, 1442, 1443 social networks (SNW), analysis 132 social networks, impact of 1480 social network type 1480 social presence 707, 713 social psychology 702 social support 712 soft skills 1406 solo vs. paired play 839 Space Station Leonis (SSL) 809 SPACE STATION LEONIS, game based learning with 810 special needs, game design for people with 141 Sprite inheritance hierarchy 514 SPY Act (Securely Protect Yourself Against Cyber Trespass Act) 493 Squire’s Quest! 389 standalone games 53 state-of-the-art learning games 1403 stealth learning, provided by serious game play 1010 story creation mode 1283 Story line 1147 storytelling, two perspectives on 1016 storytelling layer, in video game design 1016 strategic issues 103 Street Fighter, video game 1061 students, have different needs and abilities 894 subject-matter experts (SMEs) 92 Supportive information 1134 suspension of disbelief, in video games 599 Symptom Shock, concussion symptoms video game 391

0

T teams 1405 techniques of the body 114 technological innovations 1403 technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK), and games for learning 42 technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) framework 33, 42 technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) model 1012 technology, pedagogy, and learning-trends in 101 technology layer 1019 Texas assessment of knowledge and skills (TAKS) 285 The Baby Game!, pregnancy prevention game 390 theoretical foundation 1143 theory of mediatization 164 therapeutic and fitness games 393 The Sims 862 The Sims 2, sixty-six narratives 865 The Sims 2, story exchange in 865 The Sims online community 869 thieves 1325 three-dimensional (3D) environment 547 three-layergaming framework 517 traditional instructional methods 1089 transferable schema 1143 transfer of knowledge, through video games 498 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 34 trickster 1225 true game, five elements of 69

U U.S. Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command’s Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC) 1090 U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) 452 unity of opposites 1225 Usability Evaluations 1455 user experience layer 1018

Index

users’ personalities, and video games 893 user tracking 694

V video and computer games, as pedagogical tools 490 video game experience, relationship between cognitive skills and the learning process 776 video game interfaces, whole body participation 111 Video games 1310 video games 1445, 1446, 1448 videogames, "machinema" 1393 video games, "Sid Meier's Civilization" 1392– 1395 video games, "The Sims" 1392–1397 video games, building comprehension skills 251 videogames, educational potential of "Mods" 1393–1397 videogames, educational potential of "Mods", classroom context 1396–1397 videogames, educational potential of "Mods", instructor reactions 1395–1396 videogames, educational potential of "Mods", pupil reactions 1395 video games, measures of commercial success 641 video games, measures of critical success 640 video games, modified (mods) 1391–1393 video games,negative effects 878 video games, positive effects 877 video games, quality of content 501 video games, usage in the classroom 1390– 1398

video games and today’s learners 595 video game soundtracks 1172 violent video games 876 violent video games, and increased aggression 876 virtual communities 1290 virtual heritage 219, 220, 221, 224, 225, 22 6, 227, 228, 229, 230 virtual life 1290 Virtual Reality Modeling Language (VRML) 548 virtual testimonials 1461 virtual world, how to select 494 virtual world environments (VWEs) 146 virtual worlds 1402 Virus (online game) 89 visual attention 1358 Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) scripting 1431 visualizing a single object 510

W Widdershoven’s narrative model 816 Wii Sport 394 wireless handheld devices 1464 working memory (WM) 722 World of Warcraft (WoW) 794 World of Warcraft, video game 1061 Worm, video game 509 WormChase, video game 509

Z zone of proximal development (ZPD) 426, 528, 834, 1259