Relating to a short history of gamified education

Gamified education is near and dear to my heart because I believe in it and it needs to be fought for. Apropos at this point in time, as I write this, the word "gamified" is being tagged red by Blogger's spell-checker as an incorrect word. Seriously? By the way, what does right-clicking suggest instead? "Ramified." Ramified is apparently a more likely word than gamified. Something is wrong here....

After my last blog post, a trip down (game) memory-lane, I studied an infograph on the gamification of education by Knewton. There was a history of it and I'm thinking of how my own life has intersected with it. It begins with Carmen Sandiago in 1985 but where, oh where, is Oregon Trail? HUGE miss! To this day Oregon Trail is a small part of my life. I realize this every time I see a friend at work in his "You have died of dysentery" t-shirt.

Every time I died of dysentery, it really blew!

Mathblasters is accounted for on the timeline coming in around 1987 (did not know that!) and was a big part of my little boy's life. As was Civilization a big part of his and my life, getting started in 1991. One of the best games ever!

The mid-90's sees virtual worlds come along. I remember MUDs but never got into them myself. In the late 90's Ultima Online and then Everquest (which I did play) came along and I'm surprised no specific mention goes out to those because of the big impact massively multiplayer online role-playing games MMORPG's have had on games, and which led to Second Life, which is completely a virtual world that can be used for learning... like my current class on Educational Games & Simulations :)

As we get into the last ten years, there's countless examples we could use and that have played a part of my life. The infograph tries to categorize big developments. One that I would love to see explored further is the convergence of gamified learning with citizen science for social good (for lack of a better way of phrasing it).

A great example of what I have in mind is fold.it. I am in love with the idea of fold.it, and we have explored it some in our family. Wikipedia gives an excellent explanation of it:

Foldit is an online puzzle video game about protein folding. The game is part of an experimental research project, and is developed by the University of Washington's Center for Game Science in collaboration with the UW Department of Biochemistry. The objective of the game is to fold the structure of selected proteins as well as possible, using various tools provided within the game. The highest scoring solutions are analysed by researchers, who determine whether or not there is a native structural configuration (or native state) that can be applied to the relevant proteins, in the "real world". Scientists can then use such solutions to solve "real-world" problems, by targeting and eradicating diseases, and creating biological innovations.

And what more could you ask for....?

Fold.it

Remembering games from my childhood

I watched a video called Pixel Pioneers: A Brief History of Graphics, Part One and it was interesting to learn how early graphics progressed and why, but especially it was interesting how early childhood memories and emotions were yanked up out of the deep recesses of my mind. I took notes while learning from this video and my notes follow the progression of games (as examples of their types of graphics) described.

Below are games I recognized and mostly also had strong feelings for. What is interesting is there were games I like and have played a lot, like Halo and Minecraft, and now looking at my complete notes I wrote nothing about those, but others I went on and on about. I think some of that is the bias toward early childhood memories.


Asteroids (Atari). In the video Asteroids was described as an example of vector graphics, and because of this they shapes are simple but have a charm to them. I always sort of thought that subconsciously - even when little, I didn't know "vector" (cleaner, less versatile) vs "raster" pixels (can't do smooth lines, but can do complexity = they dominated) but knew Asteroids shapes were cool and different.
Streetfighter (arcade)
that Mario race game
Halo (xbox)
Doom (PC)
Minecraft (PC/Xbox)
Pong (Atari)
Space Invaders (Atari) 1978, when it came out this was one of the few games we got when we first got an Atari in our home. Atari & Space Invaders, Asteroids etc. is one of my oldest memories!
Indy4
Boot Hill (Atari). When a cowboy dies it plays an 8-bit sound that it feels like I just heard this last weekend... but I hadn't heard it in over THIRTY YEARS.
Galaxian! I'd still play and enjoy this if I saw an arcade machine of it.
Pacman was so popular that it's like it's culturally ubiquitous. It came out in 1980 and in the video he talked about that by 1908, color graphics were the norm. Did not know that.
Spacewars (1977) was a game that made me a little afraid, like a good but scary sci-fi movie.
Dig Dug (1982) I loved Dig Dug so much, on my Commodore 64!
Super Speed Race - one of the pioneers of scrolling. I don't remember this game by this name but recognize it as being called Spy Hunter, which was awesome goodness at the arcade!Made me feel like James Bond.
Defender (1980) always felt like a "premium" game, like it was top of the line graphics and so smooth. It was such a fast game, it always gave me a rush. I loved the sound effects and graphics made it feel really sci-fi and futuristic.
Xevious (1982) was a long-time favorite of mine in arcades, and I mean long-time, like lasting me into high school or close to it! I cannot believe this game came out as early as 1982 because it was so complex and so utterly amazing to me. It had a blipping noise I liked a lot. I loved it so much. There are few arcade games I loved as much as this one.
Zaxxon (1984) - I don't remember which console I played this one but remember around the time we got it and its novelty and it was like, Wow, so incredible. It felt 3D and epitomized the amazing excitingness of a new game.
Turbo (1981) I remember at the arcade, tho I never loved cars/racing games
Hang-On (1985) was another racer that wasn't really my style, but I can recognize the 16 bit "super scaler" tech that Sega used, as mentioned in the video, was indeed a massive leap forward.
Space Harrier (1985) I also recognize... it's "into the screen" rail shooter style was cool, but that wasn't enough for me to ever like it because of its lack of other elements in the game. It always seemed dull and boring and disappointing to me.
Dragon's Lair (1983) ... OH. MY. GOSH. Dragon's Lair!!!! Like nothing else. I was enthralled like a spell cast on me by this game. I knew that this was one of the coolest things I would ever see in my life. Honestly, when I see it now, I still think it is cooler than pretty much every game out there... its beautiful cartoon graphics > ALL. I like how it's described as an interactive movie. As an unsophisticated kid I thought it was better than being in a movie. The video narrator says, "Too bad it wasn't much fun to play." Uh says who?! Apparently it's a non-minority opinion because these games went nowhere, which always left me wondering why, since obviously I thought it was the pinnacle of fun! I always felt sad I didn't get to play it enough because I couldn't find it in arcades much, or was too expensive.
Donkey Kong, Mario .... all games I appreciated but never got into at all.

I was asked to reflect on the experience I have with each game and graphic type, and put that list here, reflecting on a couple favorites, where I remember playing them, etc. The funny thing is, these were such powerful positive memories that I already began writing them down and connecting them with what I was seeing in the video before I even read those directions to do it (that were written below the video I was watching).

What I find interesting as I note what I am thinking and feeling about these games from my childhood is that it is predominantly FEELINGS that are coming out. It goes without saying there is something powerful here for connecting games with learning....

Understanding Games

At madebypixelate, there is a great exercise on understanding games. Below are my notes of what I learned at the end of each of their four tutorials.

The takeaways for me are that despite the varying philosophies and definitions of games, this is a great framework for me to bundle together a workable understanding of games.

UNDERSTANDING GAMES:

EPISODE 1: (Rules) In this tutorial we played pong.
- Rules of the game define the possible actions of the players. Rules are unambiguous, intelligible and apply to all players.
- No game can be played without the interaction of the player.
- The outcome of a game has to be uncertain, otherwise it loses its appeal.
- Computer games simulate or change properties and processes of the real world.
- Rules & representation of a game are not independent but interact with each other.

EPISODE 2: (Motivation) In this tutorial we played bricks.
- Players require clear & immediate feedback to understand the relationship between action and outcome.
- Players require a clear goal so they can perform meaningful actions within the game.
- Conflict & competition are essential for the player's motivation.
- The challenges of a game should match the skills of the player. Neither too easy (boring), nor too difficult (frustrating).

EPISODE 3: (Learning) In this tutorial we played puzzles.
- Many computer games are playable without having to read the manual. Instead the player learns to play them through trial and error.
- The player performs actions within the game world and observes how these actions change the state of the game.
- The player forms a hypothesis about the meaning of an object or action on the basis of his or her studies.
- The player recognizes and learns fundamental patterns within the game and can apply these to different situations.

EPISODE 4: (Identification) In this tutorial we played tag.
- The game theme has an impact on how the game appeals to different kinds of people.
- The more abstract a game character, the more players will be able to identify with the character.
- The controls of a game character can be direct or indirect and have an impact on the relationship between player and character.
- Often the player can select between different characters, which facilitate different strategies to play the game.

Video Games & Learning

"Video Games & Learning" is a fantastic little video by Daniel Floyd, who works with game designer James Portnow. The entire style of the video - fun, funny, entertaining but educational - accentuates the point they're trying to make: media (or, topic at hand, video games) can iclude learning at no cost to the fun factor. Here's some notes I jotted down to sort of summarize what was presented:

There's a huge chasm between educational and entertainment games, that's been made into two different industries: video games and the "edutainment"industries. Both sides gave up something: education gave up fun, entertainment gave up ability to benefit their audience.

So how do we make games fun without crazy costs?
Answer: not to educate, to enable or facilitate learning .

People best absorb or assimilate information they are interested in, rather than being forced to learn. The problem with the "education" approach is it tries to make interesting a topic that we just don't care about.

Enter tangential learning: Self-educating, not learning by being taught, but learning by being exposed to things in a context in which they're already engaged in. Take, for example, the movie 300. Not "educational" yet now everyone knows who Leonidas is and it got discussion going. People were exposed to something they didn't even know they were interested in... some googled 300 and ended up reading a Wikipedia article on the Battle of Thermopylae, etc. Call of Duty fans deciding to learn about WWII; Guitar Hero fans learning more about music and genres of music previously unknown to them...

How to do this in games (without automatically always defaulting to history retelling):
- setting up a reference in the game story: a name, a place etc. from real life that gamers become curious about
-  to highlight which elements are not fantasy but based in real-life 1) make everything referential (takes lots of effort and planning) 2) highlight names 3) information or quotations during loading screens 4) objects in game that are clearly referential that gives clues others are as well 5) in-game index like Civ's Civilopedia. What if, instead, games linked in-game to Wikipedia. Properly implemented, these things can add to the depth of the game without being something the players feel they *have* to do... enhancing the play experience without getting in the way of the fun.

Games should be fun. But many game designers are missing out on an opportunity to enrich players' lives, too; to extend engagement with the game product at very little additional cost.

For me these ideas are like a missing link/lightbulb. I think that last is the linchpin, that game designers are missing out on an opportunity to enrich players' lives, too; to extend engagement with the game product at very little additional cost. Don't we lack experts in this, that would benefit industry everywhere in this regard? Truly a win-win all around.

King Leonidas? Why yes, he's so cool and that beard... I just had to devour his Wikipedia article!

ACEing Four Horsemen

This week I focused on the ACE, PAT & CARP models for a more effective learning visual design process. After reading and researching I again applied what I learned to developing a lesson to teach my family on better relationships communication. My children are young and new to the world of psychology, so I am keeping it simple.

I created the graphic below to introduce the entire lesson to them, sort of like the cover to a book. Per the ACE process, I did not yet have a larger instructional design to inform this design so I went with what I felt would be a good general introduction. I think it will work because I've kept things fairly simple with minimal graphics - an explicit part of the "P" that Lohr (2008, p. 80) describes in Principles, and I'm not using any more "big words" than absolutely necessary. Yet I also think it's still interesting overall. I am in the love with the idea of CARP (contrast, alignment, repetition, proximity) (Lohr, 2008, p. 84) so I tried to incorporate it into the design: Black, white and red all contrast well (& the red calls out the urgency of the action verb/call-to-action "stop"); everything is lined up, or aligned; I repeated the horse motif as well as the same style of their accompanying descriptors, as I did the black words above and below the stop sign shape; and I maintained appropriate proximity of similar elements.

To evaluate, my wife suggested the whole stop sign shape that originally was not present in the graphic. This was as close to a usability testing as I will get at present. I will make further changes based on any additional feedback I receive.

"Saving the world"... with games

As a TED junkie I was surprised that this Jane McGonigal talk slipped by me!: Gaming can make a better world. Jane begins making the case that games can indeed make a better world by saying that a large number of people play games, a LOT ... globally 3 billion hours per week. Why? Much of it is an escape and goes like this:

In GAME LIFE we often
Achieve more; successful
Become the best versions of ourselves
Help at others a moment's notice 
Tenacious tackling problems, getting up after failure and trying again.

For example: in World of Warcraft there's
1) Epic, important, urgent and inspiring world-saving missions - no sitting around, there's always something specific and important to be done.
2) Perfectly matched with your current level in the game, so you care capable of being successful. They never give you a challenge that you can't achieve. But it is on the verge of what you're capable of.
3) Tons of collaborators ready to help you and be helped by you.
4) Loads of positive feedback.

In REAL LIFE we often
Feel overcome, overwhelmed
Feel anxious, maybe depressed, frustrated or cynical. 

We never have these feelings when we're playing games, they just don't exist in games.

How often in our daily life do we get the things listed above that are in World of Warcraft? So games = an escape from real life

(portrait of a gamer during an "epic win" .... love it! This is the window to a soul at the very moment that SO MUCH GOOD is going on inside of)

We get better at what we spend (lots & lots) of time on. We can achieve mastery of skills. Jane believes that by spending so much time in games we are "evolving to be a more collaborative and hearty species." We are achieving mastery of specific skills. What are they? Jane proposed four:

GAMES MAKE US EXTRAORDINARILY GOOD AT...
1) Urgent Optimism - "the desire to act immediately to tackle an obstacle, combined with the belief that we have a reasonable hope of success"... extreme self-motivation. Gamers believe "it is always worth trying, and trying now. Gamers don't sit around."
2) Epic Meaning - "Gamers love to be attached to awe-inspiring missions to human planetary-scale stories." (I'm unsure what skill this is that Jane is arguing for)
3) Creating a Social Fabric - Gaming builds skills cooperation and bonds of trust ("we trust that they will spend their time with us, that they will play by the same rules, value the same goal, they'll stay with the game until it's over.")
4) Blissful Productivity - We are happy working hard when it is meaningful work. "And gamers are willing to work hard all the time, if they're given the right work."

(Games make us good at these things, according to Jane McGonigal)

Jane says that gamers are "super-empowered, hopeful individuals" who believe that they are individually capable of changing the world... but that the world they try to change is a virtual one, not a real one. And we should therefore make the real world more like a game. Jane creates games that people can play that accomplish good and are meaningful in a "real life" sort of way. And disappointingly by the way, when I googled her games, all of the news and articles go back to the date this TED talk was recorded... 2010. Perhaps they haven't taken off as much as she'd like? But the goal is good, and in my opinion is simply the same thing that I love but in another wrapper: educational games.

Really that's what this talk was about. Educational games are an awesome alternative to "entertainment-only" games because we're motivated to do something good. I would say the same about many citizen science projects. And there are some great reasons that she has researched as to why this is, and what it leads to. Other reasons games are great motivators align, also, with much of how researchers understand motivation work today. Great games have varieties of motivational elements. Jane listed some and there are others and no matter what they are or what package they come in, I heartily agree that they may as well be put to good use to teach us, our children, and help us all make the world a better place.

Shapes

This week the focus was shapes while learning more about graphic design for learning. I found it easier and less information than last week's typography - in fact, a bit too spare - but still useful. I created a slide for a peer at my work that incorporated thoughtful shapes as detailed by Lohr in my textbook.

Specifically, I liked the idea that I should consider more careful the purpose, or role, shapes play (e.g. focus attention, imply harmony, show unity or processes etc.). They are not simply haphazard eye-candy. I loved learning more about the idea of information zones. This is what I tried to focus on when I created this slide (below).

In this slide/image, I created an information zone for the text starting with, "Technical Analysis Trading Room" using a blue rectangle. The rectangle separates and calls it out ("focusing attention," page 252) that important information, and creates another less formal information zone immediately below because the area ends up also being boxed into the same shape. A third information zone of the same shape lies below as a footer with white background, which I used to show unity since without this it would be a jumbled mess, difficult for the eye to sort out. Lohr described information zones on page 249 and I think these effectively organize the information in this manner because they divide everything up neatly without being confusing. All of these I created as rectangular, which seemed to fit the rectangular shape theme of the slide.

Our students are older adults and I know they like to be a bit entertained in their education, so I created this accordingly. Interestingly, when I showed this to a couple peers they loved it, although they thought students may not recognize the instructor (whose face this it, albeit with blue skin and different hair) which I am undecided about changing at this point.

Lohr, L. (2008). Creating graphics for learning and performance: Lessons in visual literacy (Second ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.